Lens Dilema - Nikon 17-55 vs. 28-70

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Nikon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload
end

bmstreeter
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #1 · Lens Dilema - Nikon 17-55 vs. 28-70

Hello,

I am hoping to get some feedback to help me with a lens purchase dilemma. I currently have the 10.5, 12-24, 70-200 and several primes, 50mm, 85mm and have decided to sell my 24-120 because I don't like it. I am looking to replace the 24-120 with either a 17-55 or a 28-70 for use on my digital bodies. From the reviews I have read they both sound like great lenses. I had planned on going with the 17-55 but am now leaning toward the 28-70 which with the 12-24 and 70-200 and a few TC's would cover a larger range vs the 17-55 which would leave me a small gap. Does anyone have personal experience with both lenses and could make a suggestion?

Thank you in advance for your time and thoughts!

Edited on Nov 02, 2005 at 10:09 PM

Nov 02, 2005 at 03:16 PM

Spydweb
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #2 · Lens Dilema - Nikon 17-55 vs. 28-70

I traded my 28-70 for a 17-55, this works better for me and I dont't miss the gap at all, just use my feet. The 17-55 is a little smaller and lighter, and my copy is sharper than the 28-70 was.

Edited on Nov 02, 2005 at 10:09 PM

Nov 02, 2005 at 03:52 PM

Markay
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #3 · Lens Dilema - Nikon 17-55 vs. 28-70

I was in the same boat and originally went for the 28-70 since it seemed to fit perfectly between the 12-24 and 70-200. Unfortunately, I got a bad sample (very soft along the right edge between 45-70mm), so I exchanged it for a 17-55.

Overall, I'm finding I prefer the 17-55 because of it's greater utility with the D2X...the focal range is just about ideal as a general purpose "go anywhere" wide zoom.

The added reach of the 28-70 was still tempting me, so I thought I'd try out the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I was pleasantly surprised at the optical quality of this very inexpensive lens (under $360 after rebate). Sharp as a tack wide open, edge-to-edge. Build-wise it's no match for the Nikkor, but the images are stunning.

So, I ended up with both a 17-55 and a 28-75 for just a couple hundred more than the 28-70 Nikkor alone, and my lens lust was sated

Edited on Nov 02, 2005 at 10:09 PM

Nov 02, 2005 at 04:13 PM

clew
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #4 · Lens Dilema - Nikon 17-55 vs. 28-70

i traded the 28-70 for a 17-55. There is a reason that the 28-70 range was made for film...it's perfect for event photographers who need the wide angle for tight area group shots and it has enough reach to be a slight zoom lens. The 17-55 is the digital equivalent to the 28-70 on film. On a digital body, the 28 isn't even close to being wide enough for group shots (unless you've got a lot of space). I also have the 12-24 and there are MANY instances where I need f/2.8 @ 17mm. I really had no alternative. On a side note, my 28-70 was SHARP and I would eventually like to purchase another one. It is a great portrait lens.

Edited on Nov 02, 2005 at 10:09 PM

Nov 02, 2005 at 06:11 PM

bmstreeter
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.1 #5 · Lens Dilema - Nikon 17-55 vs. 28-70

Ok, you guys have convinced me. I will get the 17-55 and just walk a little more if needed. Thanks!

Edited on Nov 02, 2005 at 10:09 PM

Nov 02, 2005 at 07:02 PM

Qranc
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.1 #6 · Lens Dilema - Nikon 17-55 vs. 28-70

I agree with Chris, I have long since decided not too worry so much about gaps. the 17-55 will be my next lens.

Edited on Nov 02, 2005 at 10:09 PM

Nov 02, 2005 at 07:43 PM

blackfeather
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.1 #7 · Lens Dilema - Nikon 17-55 vs. 28-70

I have the 17-55, and it stays on my main cam...excellent lens.

Nov 02, 2005 at 10:09 PM


FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload end