Great looking images and I'm sure that would work in most cases. However I need to have waterproof and more importantly, dust proof since I shoot the desert allot. Thank you for sharing and commenting :-)
i think you need to define the term "waterproof" as neither combination is. and as to "dustproof" same goes. they are "resistant" and that term is open to a great deal of interpertation by the marketing departments. none of these products make the real world IPX standards for WP. i shoot all over the world in all sorts of environments. there is no reference to their resistance to infiltration.
sjms wrote:
i think you need to define the term "waterproof" as neither combination is. and as to dustproof same goes. they are "resistant" and that term is open to a great deal of interpertation by the marketing departments. none of these products make the real world IPX standards for WP. i shoot all over the world in all sorts of environments.
You are correct, the resistance to both water and dust is still important to me as is the build of metal construction.
don't have your 7K but used one on my D300 as main lens for last three years and loved it,, about 80% of my photos,,
the 17-55 is a gold ring lens and believe Nikons gold ring lens are dust and waterproof (to a degree) have used in rain and considerable dust with no issues,,
I have used the lens on my current 800E and can tell you the lens just keeps giving the quality anyone would expect,, it has recently been replaced by my 24-70,,
if I ever went back to DX the 17-55 would be my first purchase for the camera,,
sjms wrote:
i think you need to define the term "waterproof" as neither combination is. and as to "dustproof" same goes. they are "resistant" and that term is open to a great deal of interpertation by the marketing departments. none of these products make the real world IPX standards for WP. i shoot all over the world in all sorts of environments. there is no reference to their resistance to infiltration.
derry1 wrote:
don't have your 7K but used one on my D300 as main lens for last three years and loved it,, about 80% of my photos,,
the 17-55 is a gold ring lens and believe Nikons gold ring lens are dust and waterproof (to a degree) have used in rain and considerable dust with no issues,,
I have used the lens on my current 800E and can tell you the lens just keeps giving the quality anyone would expect,, it has recently been replaced by my 24-70,,
if I ever went back to DX the 17-55 would be my first purchase for the camera,,
Thank you, Derry! This is the information I'm trying to get. I am done with third party glass, and will only buy Nikon! I do know Nikon makes some entry level glass, but I will not buy that as well.
I use the 17-55 almost exclusively on the D7000.....the 17-55 is a great lens...really a beat in terms of build quality...at 17mm it's so sharp even wide open....sometimes i find it misses focus here and there, but i shoot a ton, and take that possibility into account...the lens is very very sharp.....the lens is far more consistent on my D300 than it is on the D7000, as we all know the D7000 has certain little front/back focus issues here and there, and it's tough to get a zoom dialed in just right..
there is no optics from any manufacturer except the old nikonos UW camera optics that would make the list. putting feather edge seals on a lens and some O rings on a body will not prevent long term infiltration due to the mechanical movement. primes would be the closest due to their very limited external movements but if there is a need to change them out let us say you have to "open that can of worms" when you get to it.
there is a lot to determine like what will be your exposure level and time involvment.
Here are some shots i JUST took with my D7000 and 17-55 combo...these are all wide open, with the exception of like one....most are either at 17mm or 55mm....a couple in between....the metadata is intact, so if you hit info, it'll show my settings...also, they're uploaded 3000pix on the long side, so you can still judge sharpness fairly well if you hit view original...have fun!
I shoot on AF-C, generally either 9 point dynamic, or single point...i use the outside points like crazy....rarely in the center anymore....there are a few where it looks like it missed focus...like the black and white one.....he was running towards me and i barely had time to get the camera up and snap off a shot..and it still only missed focus by like 3"...pretty good for any camera body, let alone a D7000...
NathanHamler wrote:
Here are some shots i JUST took with my D7000 and 17-55 combo...these are all wide open, with the exception of like one....most are either at 17mm or 55mm....a couple in between....the metadata is intact, so if you hit info, it'll show my settings...also, they're uploaded 3000pix on the long side, so you can still judge sharpness fairly well if you hit view original...have fun!
I have the combination, but I can not really say that "I use the combination" yet. I wanted to get the D7000 with glass better than the kit lens and the 17-55 f/2.8 seemed like my solution. I have experienced major back focus to the point that at -20 fine adjustment it still back focuses. I am fortunate that I have Southern Photo Technical 30 minutes away and I dropped the body and lens off two days ago to be callibrated under warranty.
It was disappointing that a D7000 purchased two weeks ago was totally out of spec for autofocus adjustment since the problem is well known. I am optomistic that it will come back callibrated correctly and ready for a small fine adjustment, not the maxed -20 that still was out of focus. I really like the lens and don't think I will go for the variable aperture lenses now; f/2.8 all the way.
I would not be so happy if I had to ship it off to New York for service.
i have never yet had to send my hardware into service except to either get a mod or a clean before sale if needed done. the sig went onto the D7000 and was dialed in using FoCal which took about 20 minutes. i really have no issue with the 2.8-4 aperture. this lens works well.
