My new (to me) Nikkor 17-55 f2.8

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Razeus, Sep 25, 2011.

  1. Razeus macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #1
  2. mofunk macrumors 68000

    mofunk

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    Location:
    Americas
  3. imaketouchtheme macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2007
  4. jvalente macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #4
    Do want

    I've been looking at this lens, I just upgraded from a D40 to a D7000, and it seems like this lens is the upgrade from the 18-55 kit lens from the D40 to the equivalent for the D7k.

    What do you usually shoot? I want to get into weddings and portraiture, and it seems to be perfect for that kind of thing
     
  5. Xeperu macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    #5
    You'll benefit a lot more from fast primes for both of those purposes.

    I shoot portaits on 50 or 85 mm f1.2 (or get an F1.4, it's good enough if money is an issue) and weddings with either that or the 70-200 on a second body.

    The 17-55 is a good walk around every day lens, but not very good for what you mention.
     
  6. Razeus thread starter macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2008
    #6
    Thanks guys. I've been waiting a good "normal" zoom, since I only have prime lenses and this was the only one that Nikon offers that offers f/2.8. So I bit the bullet.

    I also got it for doing weddings (got one in 2 weeks :eek:) so this will serve as my workhorse (the way the 24-70 on a full-frame would be) for the events.

    This lens is terrific. Sharp across the board. Highly recommend it (I got mine used for $999 on eBay from a owner who barely used it - so he said). Nikon has them refurbished for $1299 and new for $1549 :eek:. So ya, I'll be using this lens FOREVER. My poor 35mm 1.8 DX - she's going to be so neglected.
     
  7. jvalente macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2009
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #7
    I just figured that a zoom would be way more versatile. Not every wedding has room for you to be able to be ~4 or 5 metres away from a subject to get all of a dress or two or more people in a shot with a 50 or 85mm, especially on a DX sensor...
     
  8. baboyako macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
  9. initialsBB macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2010
    #9
    I would also neglect the 35/1,8 if I could cough up the cash for the 15-55/2,8 !

    PS I rather like ducks too :p
     
  10. Shacklebolt macrumors 6502a

    Shacklebolt

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2004
    #10
    I have grotesque lens flare issues with this thing on my d300/80. Nooooo idea whaT the deal is. If a really bright light source is in the frame, thing is pretty awful.

    I've run into someone else with one, and she has NOT had similar issues, even when using it on thE same camera body. Don't know what the deal is.
     
  11. baboyako macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    #11
    I don't get lots of lens flare with this lens. In fact, the flare is quite small surprisingly.

     
  12. hansolo669 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2009
    #12
    is their a hood? are you useing it? is the lense second hand? hase it been abused?
    answer these questions and you should have your answer
    or you just got a bad copy :p in wich case i would send it to nikon (or exchange it w/e)
     

Share This Page