|
|
FatBoyAl
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 507
|
|
Review Date: May 5, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $900.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, AF speed and accuracy, Image quality, very few bad copies
|
|
Cons:
|
Like most Nikon lenses these days - cost
|
|
This was my first Nikon lens after moving from Canon. It replaced (and surpassed!) my Canon 17-55 EF-S. There's just no real comparison: better build, great IQ, no sub-standard IS unit going out once a year.
On my D300, this is pretty much my go-to lens. I take it most everywhere and I've done all day walkarounds without ever changing lenses. Excellent color, contrast and overall sharpness.
|
|
 May 5, 2009
|
|
Sambru
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 6, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 530
|
|
Review Date: Nov 17, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very Sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit heavy, however balances well on my D300
|
|
I love this lens it lives on my D300. It is so sharp, Quiet and fast.
|
|
|
Nov 17, 2008
|
|
Bara
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 17, 2008
Location: Croatia
Posts: 21
|
|
Review Date: Aug 17, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
build quality, weight(I like when lens is heavy)
|
|
Cons:
|
average optical quality, price, DX lens
|
|
This is very good build lens, but to expensive because it's only DX lens. It's just little better then Sigma 18-50 2,8 and Tokina 16-50 2,8 and same as Tamron 17-50 2,8 in therms of optical quality. Lens is way worse than Tamron 28-75 2,8, Sigma 24-70 2,8, Nikkor 24-70 2,8 and Nikkor 28-70 2,8.
Price in Croatia €1650 and that is to expensive comparing with €420 for Tamron 17-50 2,8 and 17-50 €510 for Sigma 18-50 2,8 HSM. Sigma 24-70 2,8 cost €470, Nikkor 24-70 2,8 €1800 and Nikkor 28-70 2,8 €1950.
|
|
|
Aug 17, 2008
|
|
gfahey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 17, 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 17, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
fast, balanced, build quality, bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
none I can think of
|
|
I sold my 17-55 so I could trade up from my D200 to the D300. I missed it immediately. Within a week I bought a used one for $950. These can be had for even cheaper used. Mine was like new and all I can say is "Yes!!".
It makes me a better photographer. I looked at the 18-200 VR and just couldn't bring myself to buy a toy lens. Alright, the 18-200 VR is OK but, the 17-55 is the Mercedes Benz compared to the Kia. For me anyways, the balance (with the battery grip) with this lens on my D300 is superb. It's a hefty lens but, I feel I am using a pro lens. I get great night concert shots in the pit with this wide open. I go from 17mm to 55mm hundreds of times during events like these and the 17-55 gives me real keeper shots. If you're reading this then you are already considering it. So get it then! With my 85 f/1.4 and 70-200 f/2.8 VR I get all the shots. I've tried the cheaper lenses and there is a huge difference with regards to sharpness and that wonderful out of focus bokeh. If you are willing to pay $700 or so for a 18-200VR then look around and pay another $250 or so and get a good used 17-55. They are out there.
|
|
|
Jul 17, 2008
|
|
September
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 14, 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 9
|
|
Review Date: Jul 8, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, good contrast, clarity.
|
|
Cons:
|
price
|
|
The lens has to be stopped down to give sharp pictures.
The clarity is amazing, you get the feeling you are actualy "in the picture".
This lens is on my d2x most of the time. It can take a beating
(it actualy has several times). Weather proof rubber ring on the mount prevents dust and waterdroplets from entering the camerabody.
In combination with the d2x it takes some time to master it and get excellent results, but its worth taking the effort.
AF is very fast and silent.
At 17mm medium distortion for a zoom.
It can be used on a FX camera (tryed it on a D3) but not below 28mm because of vignetting due to smaller imagecircle.
|
|
|
Jul 8, 2008
|
|
Photobox
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 4, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 6, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great focal length for the DX sensor, pro build, fast 2.8 aperture, excellent focusing speed and overall wonderful output.
|
|
Cons:
|
Reports of distortion at the wide end, though my experience in this is negligible. Expensive, but come on... it's a pro Nikkor. No VR.
|
|
This is a superb optic. It couples perfectly with the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR (forget the 20mm in between) for professional work ranging from weddings to sports.
It's a heavier lens, so fitting on a D40/x/60 or even a D80 can surprise some users by it's weight. I love it though. The metal housing and the heft give this glass a sense of purpose and longevity. This is the perfect lens for wide use on the DX sensor - without question. If you are using a D3 or the new D700 however, you should reconsider as it will not allow you to take full advantage of the FX sensor. The recommended alternative for the full frame line of camera bodies is the awesome new 24-70mm.
I mentioned that no VR is con for this lens. Canon does offer an IS in the same focal range, but it's an EF-S and will only work with the Rebel and the 10/20/30/40D range - not even the EOS 1D which still has a 1.3x crop factor. This lens is a little older now, so it's not surprising that VR is absent, but it would have been a nice feature. I DO wish it had come included on the new 24-70mm however. Nikon has added it to their introductory 18-55mm, but not to their newest pro line. Seems strange that a once up scale feature is being left out of some great new lenses.
Don't not get this lens because of the VR though. It's wicked fast and is a perfect tool for the working professional.
|
|
|
Jul 6, 2008
|
|
Blimey
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 73
|
|
Review Date: Jul 1, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
build quality, optics, zooming length
|
|
Cons:
|
price!
|
|
after dropping close to $2000 on the d300, i opted on a cheaper lens such as the 18-200vr. a plethora seems to be available on craigslist so i took the plunge and purchased one for $550. my first shoot was my friends little cousin's birthday and i was disappointed with the quality of my images. granted there were alot of keepers but i found some with blur on action shot. at f/3.5-5.6 it was definitely not fast enough.
i then had plans to work in singapore for 1 month and i was not happy with the 18-200vr. i sold it immediately while looking for a bargain deal for the 17-55mm (didnt want to pay full price with tax). i searched craigslist for days prior to my departure for singapore. i was lucky to find someone local who was selling his. i immediately contacted him and sealed the transaction.
while using it in a foreign country, the 17-55mm held out well. images are great and most of all i appreciated its build quality. it was raining once and coupled with my d300, i need not worry.
the only thing that bothered my was during night shots. i had a few images with flares from a light source. i shot in manual with f/22 and 30sec exposure and held on a tripod and definitely got some flare. i think is this normal based on what i read on some threads. although, it could just be my technique that needs improvement.
|
|
|
Jul 1, 2008
|
|
wild acorn
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 14, 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 14, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great Boker, Build Quality, Sharpness, Fast Focus, Very Quiet, Very little distortion
|
|
Cons:
|
Price for a DX lens
|
|
I read many reviews for the 18-200mm VR and decided to but this with my D300 -Big mistake!!!
There is no comparison between the two. I've had the 17-55mm for less than two weeks and the images so far are a lot sharper, with less distortion. The Boker wide open is fantastic, something the 18-200 just can't achieve.
THe build quality and handling are also superior, no zoom creap here.
As soon as you handle this lens you feel like its going to achieve more and there's no disappointment.
I do feel the lens is overpriced at £830 UK and now I've experienced Nikon Pro lenses for the first time It's looking like the 70-200mm VR is on the cards. So another £1150 on the credit card.
|
|
|
Jun 14, 2008
|
|
advan031
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: May 26, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 155
|
|
Review Date: Jun 8, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,199.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, FAST AF, Sharp @ f2.8, Tack sharp stopped down
|
|
Cons:
|
Price is a little steep but you get what you pay for!
|
|
I should have bought this first instead of my 18-200VR! I love the sharpness, contrast and color rendition, my 18-200VR pales in comparison.
Not to sound like a broken record but the build quality is TOP NOTCH. The difference between handling a kit lens and pro lens is something I underestimated. It's a joy to use from the zoom ring (a little stiff at first but loosened up quite nicely) to the focus as well.
People have complained about the size/weight but I like it a lot. It's just marginally heavier than my 18-200VR so I barely feel the weight difference between the two. It balances perfectly fine with my D80 though it might be a little big for D40(x)/D60.
If you're thinking about buying this...JUST BUY IT!
|
|
|
Jun 8, 2008
|
|
Hillmont
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 25, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 6, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very Sharp, great build, good quality hood, fast focusing, smooth zoom ring
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy, Cost
|
|
used on a D300, it's pricey but you get what you pay for in performance and build quality, much better built than the Canon version
|
|
|
Jun 6, 2008
|
|
hotline
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 26, 2008
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 5, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,300.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, rock solid, AF very fast
|
|
Cons:
|
not really sharp at f 2.8 ; expensive
|
|
Good built, very sharp if you are at f 6,8 ; built as a tank; the AF is so fast ! the VR is NOT necessary ~ Highly recommended with D300 !
|
|
|
Jun 5, 2008
|
|
kipkeston
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 26, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 99
|
|
Review Date: May 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, contrast, color, focusing, build, probably forgetting something here...
|
|
Cons:
|
distortion, size, flare
|
|
A certain upgrade from the tamron 17-50. An improvement in every way except size. Sits on the D300.
|
|
|
May 28, 2008
|
|
|
