Nikon 17-55 f2.8

Y15HAL

Y15HAL

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2,721
Name
Vishal
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been looking around for a new (used) lens, and have stumbled upon the above - which looks to be a good buy....

I have a D90.....

I started off looking at the 24-70....I know its a stunner of a lens, but money just isn't there for me to make the purchase! :(

I've seen the Tamron 17-50 which looks to be a good buy, but it just doesn't look the part :bang::gag::shake::bonk:

Then was looking at the 'beast' aka 28-70...., but i think i would prefer to have something a little wider....hence thinking about the 17-55.....Reviews seem to be quite good....

Does anyone on here own the lens? What are your thoughts on it? Any sample images?

Anyone have any input on this? :thinking::shrug:
 
I've owned both the Tamron 17-50 and the Nikon 17-55 and to be honest, there isn't a huge difference in image quality. There is, however, a huge difference in build quality, the Tamron feels very light and cheap compared to the Nikon.

Having said that, the only issue I had with my example of the Tamron was the front part (the bit that holds a filter/the lenshood) becoming loose, which is very common, but only takes about 2 minutes to sort- a handy bargaining point if you came across one and the seller didn't realise how easy it was to fix....
 
Always an option: Tokina Also fantastic build quality.

Prices
 
Thanks Graham X2! ;)

Graham #1 do you still own either Tamron or Nikon versions? If so, do you have any pics?

Cheers Graham #2, will look into that....

this_thread_is_useless_without_pics.gif
;)
 
Y15HAL said:
Thanks Graham X2! ;)

Graham #1 do you still own either Tamron or Nikon versions? If so, do you have any pics?

Cheers Graham #2, will look into that....

this_thread_is_useless_without_pics.gif
;)
Click to expand...


I've still got the Nikon, I'll have some pics done with it, somewhere on one of the dead laptops that are littering the house just now :bang: :lol:
 
F*** Sake flash, gonna change your name? I was here first ;) How about Gordon? :naughty:
 
Last edited:
I had one for a while on my D300s, on which it was fairly large - I did try it on the D90 as well but found it a bit too front-heavy.

It was a nice lens, sharp at 2.8 and fast focusing.

Link to a full-size JPG sample shot at 55mm f/2.8 is here (file is about 4mb).

I only got rid when I moved to the D700, and I do still miss it!
 
Thanks for that john, I'll have a look at the image when I'm on the laptop.

What's the difference between 2.8D and 2.8G?
 
Y15HAL said:
I've been looking around for a new (used) lens, and have stumbled upon the above - which looks to be a good buy....

I have a D90.....

I started off looking at the 24-70....I know its a stunner of a lens, but money just isn't there for me to make the purchase! :(

I've seen the Tamron 17-50 which looks to be a good buy, but it just doesn't look the part :

Anyone have any input on this? :thinking::shrug:
Click to expand...

How much are good looks worth to you? I Have recently aquired a second hand Tamron 17-50, it's pin sharp and well balanced on my D300! At a saving over the Nikon 17-55 of some £400.

Are you lokking for a tool to take photo's or making a fashion statement?
 
Last edited:
Nice try Barry! But I need something good in low light and with a bit of reach. Maybe if you've still got it in a couple of years! ;)

anyone know the difference between D and G then?
 
hehe it's amazing how i always think about starting a thread then see someone's started just what i wanted to ask!

i hope the OP doesn't mind me jumping in!

i'm starting to do a fair bit of gig/concert photography and have been using a D90 with a tamron 28-75 f2.8 which is really good.

however sometimes i'd like something a little wider as at some venues i can get quite close and the 28mm is quite close up.

so i was wondering what people would recommend, but has to be a constant f2.8 for the lowlight.

also i understand there are a few variations of the same focal length lenses... for example with the Sigmas. does a lens with an AF motor mean it focuses quicker than a non-AF lens which is driven by the AF in the camera body?
 
Y15HAL said:
Nice try Barry! But I need something good in low light and with a bit of reach. Maybe if you've still got it in a couple of years! ;)

anyone know the difference between D and G then?
Click to expand...

the D lens is an older version and will have an aperture ring. the G lens is an updated version without an aperture ring. it might also mean a new optical design.
 
Thanks alot Steve! :)

So either would be good enough i think....i dont think the aperture ring will come in handy much....
 
Y15HAL said:
Thanks alot Steve! :)

So either would be good enough i think....i dont think the aperture ring will come in handy much....
Click to expand...

you'd only miss the aperture ring if you mounted the lens on a MF film camera. AF film cameras required you to set and lock the ring at the maximum aperture and control the aperture from the camera so should be compatable with AF G lenses.

there are plenty of reviews of the lens on fredmiranda.com and it seems highly rated.
 
I don't own the 17-55G but have used my friends. IQ is good but the zoom ring seems to be a little stiff compared to my 24-70.
 
nickshek said:
I don't own the 17-55G but have used my friends. IQ is good but the zoom ring seems to be a little stiff compared to my 24-70.
Click to expand...


Wow, don`t get the 17-55 then,it is obviously crap...............:lol:


What a nonsense statement,the Nikon 17-55 is a superb DX lens,one of the best, but hey, it has a supposed, stiff focussing ring arrangement. Seems a perfectly good reason do dismiss it forthwith.
 
The Nikon 17-55 is sharp, contrasty and fast to focus in all sorts of light. A big lens but it was superb on my D200 and D300. Haven't used it since getting the D700 and 24-70 (made for each other!) but wouldn't hesitate to go back to it on a DX body. If you can afford it, don't hesitate! :thumbs:
 
Looks like I'll definitely be on the hunt for one now! Thanks for the input everyone!

Graham, I asked because I saw a few ads, sole
stating 2.8G and some 2.8D.....maybe it was a typo :S
 
fracster said:
Wow, don`t get the 17-55 then,it is obviously crap...............:lol:


What a nonsense statement,the Nikon 17-55 is a superb DX lens,one of the best, but hey, it has a supposed, stiff focussing ring arrangement. Seems a perfectly good reason do dismiss it forthwith.
Click to expand...

Stiff zoom ring. It affects the handling of the lens so I thought it was a point worth mentioning. Obviously you don't so I'm sorry.
 
I've recently purchased the 17-55 for my D7000 and I love it! It's so fast with the AF
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top