Is this worth picking up?

If f.3.5 if too slow or not is up to you too decide. For instance, I have a 70-210mm zoom f.4.0, which I have to use at at least f.5.6(wide open causes vignetting). For me this is not too slow a lens, because I seldom use a 70-210mm zoom on interior shots, but rather outside in daylight.
But I also have a 31mm, 50mm and 77mm which have an aperture under f.2.0 which also works in darker environments. It of course depends on what you are shooting and if you carry around a ton of light equipment with you on every shoot.

Find out what you will do the most(night shoots, interiors, daylight etc.) and buy what you think you will benefit the most from. A zoom is handy as it covers a lot of focal lengths, but at the cost of lightloss and image quality. I managed a long time with just a 50mm f.1.4 lens and 28mm f.2.8, as I could obtain a nice image with the 50mm wherever I had have enough space, and the 28mm(while of uglier quality) was handy in tight corners. And now I have bought new glass where I have spent more on the lenses I use more frequently.

Back to your question again, a f.3.5 lens might be enough for someone with an adapter who loose less light than another, everything comes play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top