Originally posted by deadprez Do I get:
K3
K5iis + 18-135 wr
Or do I sell the Tammy 70-200 and get k5iis with 18-135 wr and fz1000?
i predominantly shoot sports, portraits and landscape.
I have sigma 10-20 and tamron 28-75 as my other lenses.
perspective is appreciated.
I have the 18-135 and the Tammy 70-200, I can't see an either/or scenario with them. The 18-135 is as versatile as they come, my most used lens. I haven't had the 70-200 as long but I find more use for it all the time. There's really not much overlap in the reason I put one on the camera instead of the other. If I'm at a soccer game, I would use the 70-200 to shoot action, maybe the 18-135 for crowd or venue shots. But if you don't use your 70-200, sell it. I had a DFA100 macro WR that was a fantastic lens, but I didn't use it, and I don't regret selling it. That money became part of my DA*300 a little later and I use it a lot more than the macro. A cheap Optec rain sleeve will let you take that 70-200 out in the rain, not as cool as WR, but it works.
Originally posted by JinDesu If you shoot sports and landscapes and portraits, I see no benefit to the 18-135 and the FZ1000 unless you do a bit of traveling or shooting in the rain.
I have a Tammy 70-200 and it is my go-to lens for portraits, and it performs well in sports with my k-3 (it's surprisingly quick to focus and track). I also have a 18-135 and while it is surprisingly versatile and sharp, I wouldn't get it if I had a 17-50 or 24/28-70/75 F2.8 lens. The extra 2 stops at 75mm is worth a lot to me for portraits and indoor shooting.
I agree, imagine if the 18-135 was 2.8!