17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Nikon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload

2 end

BenFPhotog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #1 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Currently I'm shooting with a D300 and 17-55 f/2.8, and have recently picked up a little 50 1.8, and I have fallen in love with fast lenses. Obviously the next step up would be the 85 1.4, and I'm seriously contemplating selling my 17-55 (don't get me wrong, excellent, excellent lens) to pick up a Tamron 17-50 and 85 1.4 as well.

I shoot a lot of indoor stuff, and find 2.8 slightly slow at times, and the extra 2 stops of the 85 1.4 will come in handy. I'm slightly dubious about the difference between 50mm and 80mm however, as I want to drop the £500 into a lens I will be using a lot, and I'm scared 85 will be a bit niche.

Just wondering really what the ideal set up would be for indoor events, concerts and functions. Sorry if I'm sounding a bit doolally but I love my 17-55 but I read all these great reviews of the Tamron and wonder if the 17-55 can actually be that much better.

Edited by BenFPhotog on Sep 02, 2008 at 08:44 PM GMT

Edited on Sep 02, 2008 at 08:44 PM

Sep 02, 2008 at 08:26 PM

phillip ino
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #2 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Get the Sigma 30/1.4

Sep 02, 2008 at 08:41 PM

panos.v
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #3 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Do not sell the 17-55, if you do you will regret it.

For £500, I'd say dump the 50/1.8 and get a 50/1.4. You can also add a 30/1.4 and if you want a fast tele, look at a 105/1.8 AIS. The 50/1.4 and 105/1.8 are my favourite lenses. If I was to have only one lens, I'd have the 50/1.4.

Sep 02, 2008 at 08:47 PM

Jammy Straub
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #4 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

If you're shooting events professionally there almost no substitute for the 17-55. I tried the Tamron and found it's focusing in low light to be unsatisfactory for paid gigs. I know other people use it and are happy, but I don't see it ever cutting it.

For me, 85mm on a crop body is too long for a lot of the indoor stuff I do. I'm either between 17-35mm's or out around 200mm.

I'd rent the 85 first and see what you think for your intended purpose.

Sep 02, 2008 at 08:55 PM

Andre Labonte
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #5 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

I tested both and went with the Nikon. Better built, better ergonomics, faster focusing and better focusing in low light. You get what you pay for.

Sep 02, 2008 at 11:20 PM

BenFPhotog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #6 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Hmm, I think I may get a 50 1.4, as that will be a nice, useable length for me, and it's not too pricey. Is it actually as sharp as the 50 1.8?

Also, how does the Sigma compare to these two?

Many thanks.

Sep 03, 2008 at 11:16 AM

panos.v
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #7 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

BenFPhotog wrote:
Hmm, I think I may get a 50 1.4, as that will be a nice, useable length for me, and it's not too pricey. Is it actually as sharp as the 50 1.8?

Also, how does the Sigma compare to these two?

Many thanks.

My 50/1.4 was much better than the 50/1.8 it replaced.

Sep 03, 2008 at 11:34 AM

MichaelKirk
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #8 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Follow some of the good advise here.
Keep the 17-55 f/2.8
I've been thru all this......I had the 50 f/1.8 and rarely used the lens - there just wasn't anything exciting about the lens. On a whim I sold the 1.8 and picked up the 50 f/1.4 and it's one of my favorite lenses, just seems to offer a bit more WOW to the images. Plus its a relative inexpensive upgrade to a 1.4 lens.

Save some $$ and if your looking at an 85mm, start out with the 1.8 version as the reviews of this lens vs the 1.4 version are probably 50/50 for each. I ended up with the 85 f/1.4 and it is a great lens, but not sure if it's actually worth the extra $$ over the 1.8 version - not saying its not a "better" lens as it is, you just need to weight if the improvements are worth the extra cost. Also note that 85mm on a DX body is generally to long for indoors. The 50mm is at times to long....I'll be looking at the Sigma 30 f/1.4 as well.

Michael

Edited by MichaelKirk on Sep 03, 2008 at 10:40 AM GMT

Edited on Sep 03, 2008 at 03:40 PM

Sep 03, 2008 at 02:41 PM

grosema
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #9 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

I just sold my 17-55 sharp as a tack it was ........hope I wont miss it
Nikon 24-70 coming tomorrow supposed to be even better
Got to get ready for full frame have you noticed DX lenses going down in price

Sep 03, 2008 at 03:27 PM

mrimpossible
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #10 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

I use a D300. I recently got a 50mm 1.8 but felt it was too soft wide open. That, combined with the softness you get anyway due to the paper-thin DOF meant that I couldn't see it being much use, so I upgraded it to a 1.8 85mm. I'm not sure if this is much sharper wide open, but at least it's a "portrait" lens and so occasionally comes in handy for that, whereas I felt the 50 fell between two stools. Like the others say, the 85 is surprisingly long for indoor use.

Not having used primes for years before dabbling with these two, I have to say that I get well flumoxed in any sort of fast-moving scenario because zooming with your feet is so often not an option. My conclusion is that my 17-55 stays on the camera unless I know there's going to be a period of calm in a place with lots of room!

Edited on Sep 03, 2008 at 03:29 PM

Sep 03, 2008 at 03:28 PM

BenFPhotog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #11 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Like grosema said, I feel as though a D700 might be coming my way when the price comes down, so that's another reason to get rid of the 17-55.

I've looked at the Tokina 16-50, and that seems nice, too. Anyone had any experience or opinions to share?

Sep 04, 2008 at 04:21 PM

VRLR
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #12 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

I have to agree....keep the 17-55.

The 17-55 is a well built heavy lens. Heavy enough that I often choose to grab a prime, or a dx zoom if I'm just out walking around. But sooner or later an assignment comes up, and its is my go to lens. I am always, and I mean always impressed by how well it does.

For no flash low light I tend to use the 50 1.4.

But as long as I have a dx camera in the stable I can't see myself getting rid of the 17-55. It just works.

I used to own the 85 1.8 and have been mulling over getting it again, or the 85 1.4, or the 105 f2.0 dc. But I wouldn't trade the 17-55 for it....

Sep 04, 2008 at 04:44 PM

Smiert Spionam
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #13 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

I own and use extensively the combo you first asked about -- a Tamron 17-50/2.8 and the Nikon 85/1.4. For me, it's perfect, and I would never swap them for a 17-55/2.8 and a lesser fast lens.

The Tamron rivals the Nikon zoom in image quality, and it has the benefit of being considerably smaler and lighter. Mine is quick to focus (on a D80), and handles great. I can't stomach the idea of dropping a grand on a big heavy lens that is, at the end of the day, a not especially fast midrange zoom.

The 85/1.4 is exceptional, and I use it indoors a LOT. I don't have a problem with it being too long, though it is indeed a definite step longer than the zoom. I also have a 50/1.8, and used to have a 50/1.4. Both are fine lenses, but pale in comparison to the 85/1.4. Nothing matches its sharpness, tonal character, and bokeh. It's as close to magic as a hunk of glass can be.

I've considered adding a Sigma 30/1.4 to get something wider that is truly fast, but so far I've held out. I still might get one, though looking ahead to FX, I may just skip it.

Sep 04, 2008 at 04:51 PM

oobie
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #14 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Like many have already said, I'd keep the 17-55. I also have the sigma 30 1.4 and the Nikon 50 1.8 but have come to think of them - well - the 30 in particular more as specialty lenses. When doing wedding work or shooting assignments, the 17-55 is on one of my bodies 90% of the time or more.

Sep 04, 2008 at 06:23 PM

BenFPhotog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #15 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Despite what everyone's saying, I keep leaning towards the Tamron. Tests show no real difference optically, it's smaller, lighter, but the only think I'm curious of is the focus speed.

Sep 05, 2008 at 05:04 PM

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #16 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

You have to make your own choice, of course. I'd keep the 17-55. For fast primes, I'd get the 50/1.4 first, then either the 85/1.8 and Sigma 30/1.4 (buy your preferred focal length first). All three of these primes will cost you the same as an 85/1.4... and you'll be much better prepared to make the call on whether the 85/1.4 is worth $1200 to you.

Sep 05, 2008 at 05:44 PM

Avi B
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #17 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Ben, you clearly still have buyers remorse over that 17-55

Having said that, if you can somehow afford to keep the 17-55 and pick up a fast prime in addition, then that would be ideal. I will say this though, the 85 f/1.4 is just wow. It's a very impressive lens, mine is very sharp wide open, and has great bokeh. Just be sure you focus correctly with it, as the DOF is pretty narrow...

Sep 05, 2008 at 05:50 PM

BenFPhotog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #18 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Ahh! I think I'm just gonna' suck it up and stay with the 17-55. I read a quote earlier that said something like:

If I want a lens that's good for the money, and not for the wows, get the 17-50.
If I want a lens that's good for the money, and for the wows, and that works. And works. Get the 17-55.

Thanks guys.

Sep 05, 2008 at 07:00 PM

phillip ino
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #19 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Ben. You'll regret not getting the 85/1.4

. They don't call it the "cream machine" for nothin'! You can obtain that three dimensional look that Zeiss lenses give you.

Sep 05, 2008 at 07:03 PM

Avi B
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #20 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

phillip you're so mean

egging him on like that...
Ben, any way you can borrow or rent the 85 f/1.4 first?? To see if it's what you really need?

Sep 05, 2008 at 07:15 PM

BenFPhotog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #21 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Why do you do this to me....

Sep 06, 2008 at 10:23 AM

Etienne Otero
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #22 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Ben, I recently purchased both the Tamron 17-50 (new w/ motor) and the Nikon 17-55. If I need 100% reliability I bring the Nikon (most of the time), otherwise the Tammy goes with me just because its light and easy to carry around your neck. Focus speed is a tad slower but it gets the job done none the less. Image quality... well you have read the reviews, I really see no difference between them. If you are doing pro work keep the Nikon, but otherwise I see no reason to spend double the cash when the results can be achieved equally with the Tammy. I have been contemplating selling the Tammy so if you want it PM me and I'll give you a good price.

Sep 06, 2008 at 05:54 PM

BenFPhotog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #23 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

Thanks Etienne, but I've decided to keep the 17-55. In time I can see myself picking up an 85 f/1.4, but the 17-55 is doing great for me at the moment, and it's pretty good if I can mugged (as a weapon, of course.)

Sep 06, 2008 at 09:34 PM

Etienne Otero
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #24 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

haahaahahhaaa...

... I actually smacked some dude on the head with my 17-55 at the airport as he tried to snatch my backpack. He was stunned for about 15 sec., long enough for me and my buddies to hold him down and wait for security. Anyways you will be happy you kept the Nikon in the end.

Sep 07, 2008 at 12:36 AM

jamach
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #25 · 17-55 or 17-50 and 85 1.4

I sold my Tamron 17-50 F2.8 with new motor thing, sure it was sharp, but I got tired of the rotating front ring, a real disturbance for me, and not often mentioned for some reason

Joe

Sep 07, 2008 at 01:30 AM


FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload 1 2 end