Originally posted by jstevewhite If I could find a ~20-~70 that wasn't obviously inferior to my FA35 and FA43, I might use zooms more. Of course, they can't replace the f1.9 speeds.
I would imagine the Tamron 28-75 would be able to replace that FA 35, although I don't think you will ever find a zoom that renders exactly like the FA 43.
I'd bet you could find one that looks 90% like it, though. However it's always good to keep one fast prime around, no need to own 100% zooms. Also no need to own 100% primes... Generally speaking, thats either going to be less flexible, or much more expensive (because you would have to own so many primes to cover all the ranges).
Think about it:
--- ASPC---
Ultra Wide (x-15) - Wide (16-27) - Normal (28-40) - Short Tele (41-55) - Tele (56-70) - Long Tele (71-x).
You don't need all of these ranges covered, but if you *wanted* that kind of flexibility, you would end up with a kit that looks like (high quality):
DA 15, DA 21, FA 35, DA* 55, FA 77, D FA 100...
I mean, sure, that would nice to own, but not incredibly cost-effective or practical in the field. And I'm sure there are some here that are thinking "put an FA 43 between that 35 and that 55!"
If the purpose is to collect fine objects as well as take photos, then this makes a lot of sense. They are beautiful, and fun, to own. But for the most part, you can get the same results in a much more cost efficient package with 2 zooms and a fast prime in the middle.