keira007 wrote:
So basically, a combo of C/Y 28mm/2.8, C/Y 50/1.7, C/Y 135mm/2.8 Sonnar will be enough for almost all situations then?
This would make a nice \'budget friendly\' tri-fecta set-up. Personally, I use my 35-70/3.4 more than I do my 50/1.7. I prefer a tripod vs. the wider aperture for most things (noted that doesn\'t always work), but keep the 50/1.7 for my \'emergency\' low light lens.
As others have mentioned, there are other lenses that crank it up a notch even more ... but you really can\'t go wrong with the C/Y 28/2.8, 35-70/3.4 & 135/2.8.
However, if you\'re budget will allow (sounds like it will) the Planar 100/2.0 is one not to be overlooked (in lieu of, or in addition to, the Sonnar) ... then it starts to become an issue of how much glass do you want in your bag(s).
If you\'re looking for the macro double duty ... the Contax N 100/2.8 Macro might make sense as well. (drool)
keira007 wrote:
So basically, a combo of C/Y 28mm/2.8, C/Y 50/1.7, C/Y 135mm/2.8 Sonnar will be enough for almost all situations then?
This would make a nice \'tri-fecta\' set-up. Personally, I use my 35-70/3.4 more than I do my 50/1.7. I prefer a tripod vs. the wider aperture for most things (noted that doesn\'t always work), but keep the 50/1.7 for my \'emergency\' low light lens.
As others have mentioned, there are other lenses that crank it up a notch even more ... but you really can\'t go wrong with the C/Y 28/2.8, 35-70/3.4 & 135/2.8.
However, if you\'re budget will allow (sounds like it will) the Planar 100/2.0 is one not to be overlooked (in lieu of, or in addition to, the Sonnar) ... then it starts to become an issue of how much glass do you want in your bag(s).
If you\'re looking for the macro double duty ... the Contax N 100/2.8 Macro might make sense as well. (drool)
Mar 18, 2011 at 07:44 AM
Previous versions of RustyBug's message #9414232 « Lenses for "3D" look? »
