- 17-35mm wide-angle wizz lens with f/2.8 limit orifice for Nikon digital SLR cameras
- 2 sorts of aspherical lenses (2 molded potion as well as 1 hybrid) as well as 2 ED potion elements
- 9-blade dull diaphragm achieves healthy fuzz for out-of-focus elements
- Silent Wave Motor (SWM) delivers still as well as right high-speed autofocusing
- Measures 3.2 inches in hole as well as 4.2 inches long; weighs 26.3 ounces; 5-year warranty
Product Description
Wide-Angle Zoom Lens from UltraWide to Wide Angle / F2.8 Maximum Aperture… More >>
Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
The picture which Amazon is show is not a Nikon 17-35mm.
Rating: 5 / 5
At $1,500, this lens should be packet right from a factory. My duplicate unsuccessful to auto-focus scrupulously as well as appeared to have critical backfocus issues. Although a “Silent Wave Motor” done for unequivocally discerning focusing times (if a duplicate had been focusing properly), it done a conspicuous metal-on-metal or metal-on-plastic, high-pitched scraping receptive to advice during times. we assimilate this is autochthonous in most copies. Lastly, we did not consider we would skip a combined focal length of a 17-55mm or 18-55mm, though which additional 36mm-55mm operation unequivocally does have a difference, as well as makes this lens reduction serviceable for DSLRs. More importantly, when focused (by chance), a optics did not furnish ill temper nearly higher to my other, reduction expensive, DX lenses.
On a alternative hand, this lens is not as complicated or vast as alternative reviewers have noted. we would have no complaint carrying a 17-35mm all day, each day. Perhaps my examination would have been opposite if we perceived a opposite copy. But for $1,500, this should never happen. We as consumers should not be forced to lapse poor apparatus in sequence to in conclusion get a duplicate which works.
Rating: 2 / 5
Check a peculiarity carry out of this lens when we buy. Mine had serious front concentration problems. Even when i comparison a automobile concentration sensor a lens still had focusing issues . The lens was soothing to F4. At F2.8 a images were incredibly poor. In my 20+ years of photography i have never seen a lens this terrible. To have sure, i borrowed a friends 18-55VR. This $200.00 lens had improved tone saturation, contrariety as excellent as right automobile focus. Not usually that, though it was sharper. To get a 17-35 as sharp, i had to stop down to F8. we attempted to get an additional representation though they were out of stock, so i only returned it. we know a lot of people rate this lens 5 stars, as excellent as i assimilate which ever straight away as excellent as afterwards we get a terrible sample, though this lens had mixed problems. On a certain side, it is not as large as excellent as complicated as a small people claim. It balances excellent upon my D200, as excellent as a autofocus is quick. we will be seeking in to a 24-70 2.8.
Rating: 2 / 5
an ultra tall peculiarity lens distant higher than a criterion counterpart, i essentially have a criterion 16-35L 2.8 II as well as paid for this lens for my crony who has a nikon d700, i am all tender by nikon as well as generally there 5 year guaranty upon many of their lenses. if i did not already own criterion lenses i would have defiantly switched.
Rating: 5 / 5
I longed for to similar to this lens really terrible formed upon what we indispensable in my bag as well as what was pronounced here as well as during alternative sites. Unfortunately we found a lens to be unacceptably soothing in between f/2.8 as well as 4.5. If we would have been a small some-more clever in my investigate we would have beheld this to be a usual regard yet for landscape photographers they do not thoughts as they’re typically stopped down anyway. But for me, to cruise a 17-35mm as a deputy for a pack 18-70 as a near-full time lens we only couldn’t clear a price/quality comparative measure when I’d have to stop a lens down to where a pack lens is to get to a honeyed spot. we theory I’ll have to start seeking for a 17-55mm choice where it is pronounced to surpass during a wider open aperature.
Rating: 3 / 5