[nah]

I'd choose the 50-135 and I have both. I find the 77 too bothersome to use in a lot of situations.

Then again, only time I shoot these days is when I'm travelling.

[myeates]

Originally posted by Adam
77 because the 50-135mm has a pretty useless zoom range. If you want a tele zoom, get a 70-200mm IMO.

The 50-135 is a perfect combination for reportage,portraits or wedding shots its beautifully made and the quality is stunning, the versatility the zoom gives you is excellent.

I would also go for the sigma ex 50mm f1.4 as the perfect combination, this is a stunning lens the bokeh is wonderful. I do have to declare an interest though as they are the lenses I already own.

[Pablom]

77

because I prefer primes, and I've seen what this one does

[manishved]

Its like you are asking me to pick my favorite child....

[dadipentak]

the 50-135mm has a pretty useless zoom range. If you want a tele zoom, get a 70-200mm IMO.

I sort of agree with Adam on that but given the op choice, I'd go with the zoom.

[bushwhacker09]

77 rules the world. I've had both, and I wouldn't trade my 77 for any other lens I've used. Of course, I've never had the pleasure of the 31...

[johnmflores]

Round 1: 50-76mm, DA* beats FA hands down
Round 2: 77mm, FA beats DA*, quite convincingly, but the DA* is no slouch
Round 3: 78mm - 135mm, DA* takes the lead

Looks like the DA* in a split decision!

[NeverSatisfied]

Round 1: 50-76mm, DA* beats FA hands down
Round 2: 77mm, FA beats DA*, quite convincingly, but the DA* is no slouch
Round 3: 78mm - 135mm, DA* takes the lead

Looks like the DA* in a split decision!

Well said!

[ShowMeTheMoney]

I'd go for the 77, simply because of size.

+1 to the disagreement about 50-135 being a useless zoom range on APS-C. For my purposes, I'd take a 50-135 over a 70-200 (105-300mm equivalent) lens on APS-C any day.

In fact, I pity all the CaNikon APS-C shooters who have to use a huge 70-200 VR/IS Full Frame lens, unless they take the Sigma 50-150 or other 3rd party options.

[wlachan]

In fact, I pity all the CaNikon APS-C shooters who have to use a huge 70-200 VR/IS Full Frame lens, unless they take the Sigma 50-150 or other 3rd party options.

On the other hand, the C/N70-200/2.8 are FF with lightning fast AF and superior IS/VR.

[joakimfors]

I chose the 50-135… but that is because I already had the DA 70 Ltd.

[rparmar]

I chose the 50-135… but that is because I already had the DA 70 Ltd.

That means you still need to try the best of the three.

As for previous comments, the FA77 is way more versatile than the DA*50-150, since I have it with me everywhere I go, every day. I simply never miss a shot. No-one could honestly claim the same for the zoom.

[dgaies]

On the other hand, the C/N70-200/2.8 are FF with lightning fast AF and superior IS/VR.

Agreed; I have no doubt a 5DMkII+70-200/2.8 IS or a D700+70-200/2.8 VR is superior in terms of both AF and IS/VR/SR to the K-5+50-135/2.8.

However, the superior performance of the C/N comes in at about twice the price and weight. It's just a matter of choosing a camera/lens/system that works for the individual user.

[SylBer]

To all those who say 50-135mm is a useless range, you must explain to me why. I mean, for decades, the most useful telezoom was the 70-200mm in 24X36 format. The 50-135 provides the exact same FOV on APS-C while the 70-200mm becomes a 100-300mm. Sure, 100-300 is a good range for a telezoom, but it has never been as popular as a 70-200mm in the good old days. There must be something I don't understand. Please educate me.

[dadipentak]

To all those who say 50-135mm is a useless range, you must explain to me why. I mean, for decades, the most useful telezoom was the 70-200mm in 24X36 format. The 50-135 provides the exact same FOV on APS-C while the 70-200mm becomes a 100-300mm. Sure, 100-300 is a good range for a telezoom, but it has never been as popular as a 70-200mm in the good old days. There must be something I don't understand. Please educate me.

I don't know about the good old days I'm just speaking for me, now.