Just got the Nikon 17-55 2.8

Started Jun 11, 2009 | Discussions thread
pixelman105 Senior Member • Posts: 1,085

Yes the 17-55 is a fantastic lens and yes it is in the same league as the 70-200. Fact is for use on DX it is the only true pro quality mid range option Nikon offers. Sure you could use a 24-70, but on DX that would be the equivelent of a 36 -105 - not really the most useful range if you dont also carry something to go with it on the wide end.

AS to the 50 I say sell it and pick up a Nikon 35mm f/1.8. This will give you a nice small fast lens that can actually substitute for the 17-55 when you want to go light, but you dont want to sacrifice quality. Don't get me wrong I am sure the 50 is nice, but at the equivalent of 75mm it is a little restrictive as a single lens light weight option IMO

Yakbutter wrote:

This thing is a beast!!!

.....but I am stoked to have it. It will be my new workhorse.

Now this and my 70-200 is all I really need for most shoots.

I recebtly bought the Sigma 50 1.4 and realize I may only need that
sometimes.... should I sell it and just get the Nikon 1.4d to have a
small prime or keep the sigma??

Has anyone ever dropped it or exposed it to any extremes? How did
the lens hold up?

Would it be a good idea to travel with?

-- hide signature --

Way more glass than any normal person needs

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow