Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I will be traveling to Vegas in October to attend a college reunion and would like to bring the minimum camera equipment I could get away with. For the most part, we would be spending time eating, swimming and walking the strip so I hesitate to take another lens with me (the 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 zoom). I'm thinking that because most of my shots would be of people, that the prime should do it. However, if there are opportunities to shoot the skyline at night or interesting street scenes (and without the benefit of a tripod), I would prefer not to miss those shots as well. Being that the 50mm prime has a wider aperture, would this be sufficient, even if I can't capture very wide scenes that the 15mm could? The event is a casual gathering and I don't want to come off as going there to photoshoot. Besides, I don't want to be lugging around weight while out and about. Thoughts?
Last edited by BagongBuhay; 08-09-2010 at 10:37 AM..
Both comments noted, thank you. I guess my decision (or indecision) is wanting the faster lens for night time, even just shooting us as a group walking the streets, and shooting street scenes at night. Maybe I'll pass up on the big panoramic shots of the city, or maybe I'll just bite the bullet and bring both lenses, but leave the zoom for stationary shots from the rooftops or such, and walk around with the prime.
I've been to Vegas way too many times. On a few occasions, I went there with a 50 and 85 primes (non L of course) on a 40D and 5D. I have the kit zoom, but decided not to bring it because I figured that would be one too many lens.... bad mistake. Though I love the sharpness and bokeh of the primes, they were more of an inconvenience. Because we spent most of our time walking around and we were never in a "controlled environment", the primes were giving me either too close of a shot or not wide enough. And the idea of swapping out lens while walking amongst friends really sucks.
If you're after casual shots, I think the zoom would be a better choice over the prime.
I've been to Vegas way too many times. On a few occasions, I went there with a 50 and 85 primes (non L of course) on a 40D and 5D. I have the kit zoom, but decided not to bring it because I figured that would be one too many lens.... bad mistake. Though I love the sharpness and bokeh of the primes, they were more of an inconvenience. Because we spent most of our time walking around and we were never in a "controlled environment", the primes were giving me either too close of a shot or not wide enough. And the idea of swapping out lens while walking amongst friends really sucks.
If you're after casual shots, I think the zoom would be a better choice over the prime.
You read my mind! That's exactly the type of situation I envision I'd be in...walking around. I guess I'll lug both lenses then, and leave one or the other in the room if it get's to be too heavy.
i just today got a nikon 24mm f2.8 prime to play with... on a dx camera the view looks like something that may serve well as a walk around...
i was thinking about getting the 16-35mm zoom but decided to try the 24mm instead and if i find i need a zoom ill spring for the bucks for the 14-24mm f2.8 which is nikons best but its big and heavy...the 24mm will come in handy for traveling light
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.