 |
|
|
vhsema
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 20, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 47
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,199.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, excellent build quality, pleasing bokeh and colors
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy, slight distortion on wide end
|
|
|
I really wanted to purchase the Tamrom 17-50 f/2.8 instead, but when I went to a local store and tried it and the Nikon out at maximum aperture, it was no contest. Using my wife as a test subject, her eyes just popped with the Nikon.
That's not to say that the Tamron was bad, because it wasn't. Instead, it was just that the Nikon was that good. If I didn't need the lens for professional work, then I would have bought the Tamrom.
Evaluate your needs, and make your purchase based on that.
|
|
 Apr 1, 2007
|
|
Mono
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 5, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 70
|
|
Review Date: Mar 28, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, speed of lens, optical quality
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, but hey if you want the best
|
|
Could never justify the new price, but then managed to get hold of a decent 2nd hand one. Did some initial tests vs the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 & Nikon 18-200mm lenses. Wiped the floor with the 18-200 & came very close to the prime lens ...which is very impressive for a zoom.
This was the 1st shot I took with the lens, with minimal post processing :- http://www.pixalo.com/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/3108/cat/500/ppuser/164
An excellent piece of glass.
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2007
|
|
stevewest22
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 25, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 25, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Simply superb image quality and build quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive, but well worth it.
|
|
|
I have finally raised and parted with the cash and got this lens. All I can say is it was worth every penny the image quality and build quality are outstanding.
How refreshing it is to be able to shoot wide open and get sharp, well saturated results. This is a lens which performs at all focal lengths and apertures. Sharpness is not at it's best at f2.8 but is still very good indeed, and far better than the cheaper lenses I have used at any aperture. Color and contrast is also top notch the images I have obtained look so so real.
I have traded up from a Nikon 18-70 F3.5 - 4.5 which I got with my old D70 and initially put on my D200 body. Do not let anyone (including that idiot Rockwell) tell you that the 17-55 lens is not significantly better than such lenses - it is simply in a different league. To a partially sighted person on a pogo stick, the images may look comparable - but as for the rest of us......
Yes as others have pointed out, the zoom ring is a bit stiff - It will loosen up in time I think this lens needs some 'miles on the clock' to bed in. Oh yes and it's fairly big and heavy but that's the price you pay for performance.
Yes it's expensive but you won't be disappointed - it will bring out the best in your camera body. You need something of this quality to really see what cameras such as the D200 are capable of.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2007
|
|
HaakenG
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 20, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 53
|
|
Review Date: Feb 16, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,199.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Wonderful image quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
None.
|
|
|
Excellent image quality throughot the range. In the time that I have owned this lens I haven't found anything to complain about. Color and contrast are excellent as well. The 17-55 is a very versatile lens due to its stellar image quality wide open. This lens lives on my camera most of the time.
|
|
|
Feb 16, 2007
|
|
roger.wotton
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 4, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 41
|
|
Review Date: Dec 23, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, colour, contrast, build quality and focus speed are all excellent
|
|
Cons:
|
None I can think of.
|
|
|
I have had this lens for 2 months now and without doubt it's best lens I have ever had, period. It now lives on my D200 all the time. Sharpness, colour, contrast, build quality and focus speed are all first class, but then that’s what you would expect. Ok it’s a tad heavy and a touch expensive, but when you see the results you soon forget those slight cons, and as many have said you get what you pay for. Regrets, only one, I should have got it sooner.
|
|
|
Dec 23, 2006
|
|
Avi B
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 7, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 7107
|
|
Review Date: Dec 14, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast. Sharp, even wide-open. Contrasty. Nice focal length for everyday usage. Great build quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive. Really expensive.
|
|
|
After reading great many reviews, I decided to purchase this lens. In fact it was some photos someone posted on this very forum that convinced me finally. Since it was so expensive (since I bought locally, it cost more than if I had bought from US), I had some buyer remorse. However, after using it for a day, all that remorse went away. The pictures I took were so sharp, even wide-open! In low-light situations, it focuses so fast, and I'm only using a D70s!
The pictures are very contrasty and colourful. The build quality is quite solid. Lives on my D70s as the focal length range is nice for everyday usage. Even used it for portraiture, although I prefer longer FL for that personally.
Buy it and don't look back.
|
|
|
Dec 14, 2006
|
|
Dave_D
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2006
Location: Philippines
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Dec 4, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp wide open to full tele. Very useful focal range for cropped sensors.
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight maybe an issue if used as a walkaround due to the focal range compared to kit lenses. Stiff zoom ring was disconcerting at first.
|
|
|
Coming from Canon L lenses, this was my first try at using Nikon's Pro glass. The first thing I noticed was how stiff the zoom ring was out of the box. It bothered me at first, but I have noticed after a couple of months of use that it's beginning to loosen up quite nicely.
I have shot a lot of indoor studio situations with constant lighting setups and have found it quite good in terms of resolving power, contrast and sharpness.
I know film shooters think 55mm is good enough for portraiture, it's just that I am used to a little more distance between me and the subject since I used a 24-70 F2.8 L in the past. For headshots, I think 55mm is just too close and unflattering for subjects.
For me, a lens only gets a 10 rating if it has excellent performance and value. The score is only dragged down because of it's price. Canon offers something similar in terms of image quality, includes image stabilization and costs nearly $200 less (in Asia where I come from).
|
|
|
Dec 4, 2006
|
|
robinng
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 1, 2003
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 47
|
|
Review Date: Nov 19, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build quality, sharp, fast focus, good color. f2.8 is awesome
|
|
Cons:
|
too heavy for whole day wedding shoot!
|
|
I own this lense for three day only.
but i really love this lense. previouslu i use nikon 18-35mm f3.5.
17-55mm definitely the right choice for me.
i use almost 90% of it during my last wedding.
the color and sharpness is good.
can view my photo taken with this lense at: www.robinng.com/blog
|
|
|
Nov 19, 2006
|
|
Amy Howe
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 15, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 15, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
As sharp as most primes, built well, zoom doesn't slide when shooting downward, awesome color & contrast.
|
|
Cons:
|
Big & heavy. A bit pricey. Very minor chromatic aberration in direct sunlight.
|
|
|
This is my new "everyday" lens. It rarely leaves my D200. I am so impressed with the sharpness of this lens; it can hold up next to many of my primes, which is quite impressive for a zoom. The color and contrast are fantastic.
I have the 18-200 and hated the fact that the zoom would slide out if I was shooting downward. (Thus ruining the shot.) This zoom is solid, almost stiff. Which, to me, is a good thing.
The only flaws I've found are: very minor chromatic aberration in bright sunlight (backlit shots), heavy, and pricey. The price, overall, is most definately worth it. You will get your money's worth.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2006
|
|
sbicakci
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 26, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
wonderfull colors, very sharp, build quality excellent, very fast, (2.8)
|
|
Cons:
|
stiff zoom ring
|
|
|
After reading a lot of review I bought one two months ago. Using with D200 almost all the time. Range is enough for compositions, landscape and potraits. Seems to be expensive but I understood that it absolutely worth when I started to experience the lens. I am very happy with the results and highly recommend.
|
|
|
Oct 26, 2006
|
|
Bryan21
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 12, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 10
|
|
Review Date: Oct 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,199.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great vivid colors and sharp, crisp images. Excellant indoor cadid shots even in low lighting with no flash. Easily out performs the 18-200mm.
|
|
Cons:
|
Cost, the most I have ever paid for a lens thus far. Zoom ring is a bit stiff.
|
|
|
I was very hesitate to sell off my Nikon 18-200 VR to buy this lens, however in low light unless the subject is still the VR is worthless. So I after reading the reviews here I decided to take the plunge...and I haven't looked back since! This lens is sharper, has better color, and obviously much faster than the 18-200 VR. Lens does very well for candids and portraits in any lighting. The hood is a bit large, and the lens a bit heavy, however it feels very nice in the hands. I'm hoping the zoom ring will loosen up with more use. I'm glad I opted to sell my 18-200 VR and buy this lens; it's fantastic!
|
|
|
Oct 9, 2006
|
|
doctordoom16
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 13, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Aug 14, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,250.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality is fantastic, Fast, accurate focus, colors are incredible, sharp out of camera (D200 RAW and fine JPG).
|
|
Cons:
|
Telescoping barrel is a pain if you don't use hood . Otherwisw buy it, you won't regret it
|
|
|
You get what you pay for, and in this case even more. It is a great lense. The portraits are amazing that i have take, colors are well saturated, and shap out of D200. well balanced on D200. I leave hood on at all times, so it telescopes inside hood, not a problem for me 9others complain).
I compared this in the same focal range w/ my 18-200 vr, and it was not until f8 tha the 18-200 even came close (way to flat , unsaturated, and very soft). Don't let others tell you that you can use a 18-200 to take the place of this lense and the 70-200, it is only if you can't afford them should you consider the 18-200 (which is in no way cheap, but still $2000 cheaper than the 17-55 and 70-200 combined).
I love it, and don't take it off my D200.
|
|
|
Aug 14, 2006
|
|
Silent Thunder
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 19, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 92
|
|
Review Date: Jul 16, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness (even at f/2.8), colors, build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
No real cons, just some minor things like stiff zoomring and I wish it would be a bit longer
|
|
This is one of Nikon's best wide-zooms, a joy to use.
See the pros/cons-section for details.
Sample:
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/4260/1pf4.jpg
17mm, f/11
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2006
|
|
pixj
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 20
|
|
Review Date: Jun 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, sharpness, overall useability on a DX format camera
|
|
Cons:
|
price is always negative, but this one will pay for itself quickly.
|
|
|
Stays on the D2X as a catch-all lens.
Would recommend something else for portraits, but it will certainly do, especially if you are not right on top of your clients. Step back once, zoom to about 30mm, then let her rip!
Almost perfect for interior architecturals.
Good color rendition, also.
Too short for sports, but still very versatile, and great for weddings/events/editorial.
|
|
|
Jun 1, 2006
|
|
trox_355
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 27, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: May 26, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,249.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Über-sharp, more reach than the 17-35, fast autofocus, silent autofocus, environmental seals
|
|
Cons:
|
Lens extends during zoom, stiff zoom ring, hood has tendency to detach when in stored position, very slight to slight chromatic abberation
|
|
|
I got this lens after reading many positive reviews and deciding to trade in my trusty Sigma 24-70 and 12-24 to offset the cost of this gorgeous piece of kit. Upon first taking it out of the box, I was impressed with its heft and size for what is a digital-only lens. Build quality on this really does seem to be very high.
Shortly after beginning to play around with it, I realized how much the extending front element began to get on my nerves. Not that it affects me in any appreciable way, but I would rather a lens be without telescoping protrusions.
After taking a test run, I was very pleased with the results this piece of glass was able to deliver. I had been thirsting for some pseudo-wide angle for a while (24mm on a digital body is nowhere near an excuse for wide) and this lens was able to deliver some of what I enjoyed with the Sigma 12-24 at the f/2.8 aperture I needed for my work. The first round of downloads showed great resolving power of this lens on my D100 body (the D200 still fails to out-resolve this lens). In real-world situations, I am yet to be disappointed with the sharpness of which this lens is capable. This lens is gorgeous wide-open and continues to show improvement in sharpness until about f/6.3 for me.
In certain bright situations, I have noticed some chromatic aberration. These can range from very slight (just being able to tell it's there) to slight (I can just begin to make out the lines when looking at actual pixels). This usually occurs when the lens is stopped down quite a way, though.
I had the opportunity to test out the weather seals on this camera shortly after getting my D200 body. I was shooting a baseball game when it began to rain enough for the tarp to be pulled over the field. Normally, I would have put the gear away or at least try to get some shots from under the dugout, but with this lens I felt cavalier enough to yank off the 300 and put this lens on to shoot some fun rain-soaked field frames. The camera and lens continue to work without complaint.
Autofocus is very quick and I appreciate the SWM drive system. The focus ring has a typical "dry" feel to it and the stops at either end have clear tactile feel.
The zoom ring is quite stiff. It has loosened up in the month-and-a-half I've owned this lens, but it still takes some strong finger movements to navigate the long end of the zoom range.
I would complain about the G-type design—a scheme for which I continue to feel wary—but since this is a DX series lens, I don't think a complaint would be warranted. For any lens with a "full frame" image circle, I still would like the backward compatibility that makes the F-mount applicable today. However, since this lens will only fully work on a digital body I can cut the design a bit of slack. I do enjoy being able to set aperture with my left hand using the ring on the lens if available, however.
I have mixed feelings on the size of the lens hood. The length is quite noticeable and makes this already-big lens seem even bigger when attached. I do like the locking button arrangement when removing the hood, but would also appreciate some sort of detent-type retaining mechanism for when this moving part (inevitably) breaks. I have at least twice had the hood come detached with the camera slung across my shoulder when in the "stored" position.
As for the price, I am quite happy with the performance I get with this and feel the price represents par for the course. For most situations, one can easily get away with one Nikon's other, less expensive lenses with a similar focal range. If a fast lens is needed however, this lens is in close competition with the 17-35mm.
|
|
|
May 26, 2006
|
|
max.spencer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,139.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent Pro lens, Tack sharp, Excellent wide open performance, 3D effect, Excellent Nikon value..
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Couldn't be happier. With the Nikon Spring Rebate this lens has cost me $1039. It's a great wide open performer. Rock solid. Silent and fast focusing. Nikon quality. It has that special 3D effect. The Nikon 17-55 is on par with the 17-35, 28-70 and 70-200. These are all the top Nikon contenders and you can't go wrong with any of those. It will all depend on your shooting style and need for wide or tele with the 17-55 being the best low light performer zoom. It's definitely worth the purchase. Highly recommended!
|
|
|
May 9, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
78
|
266687
|
Jun 20, 2016
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
94% of reviewers
|
$1,177.67
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.82
|
8.40
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
