Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor Review

For the opportunity Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED IF SWM DX many thanks to the project Photo rental.com.ua. By the way, there you can rent a Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED DX.

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor Review

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor Review

In short

Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED SWM IF Aspherical is great professional universal lens for use on Nikon DX cameras. In fact, it is the best lens in the Nikon DX series.

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G is quite weighty, on camera it 755 grams and huge dimensions immediately make themselves felt. The lens has an excellent plastic lens hood. Nikon HB-31 with a metal lock for mounting, this lens hood can be dressed back-to-front, in this position access to the focus ring is blocked. The hood is fixed using a special lock buttons.

View Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor with hood

View of Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor with lens hood Nikon D80.

Main technical characteristics of Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED SWM IF Aspherical:

Review Instance Name Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED SWM IF Aspherical
Basic properties
Front Filter Diameter 77 mm, metal thread for filters
Focal length 17-55 mm EGF for Nikon DX cameras is 25.5-82.5 mm
Zoom ratio 3.24 X (usually rounded to 3)
Designed by for digital cameras Nikon DX
Number of aperture blades 9 rounded petals
Tags focal lengths for 17, 20, 24, 28, 35, 45, and 55 mm; bayonet mount tag and lens hood mounts. A window with a scale of focusing distances in meters and feet.
Diaphragm From F / 2.8 to F / 22 over the entire range of focal lengths. The lens is deprived of the aperture control ring, control is via the camera menu (G - lens type)
MDF (Minimum Focus Distance) 0.36 m over the entire range of focal lengths, maximum magnification ratio 1: 5
Stabilizer features No stabilizer
The weight 755 g
Optical design 14 elements in 10 groups, including

  • 3 aspherical elements (aspherical elements are shown in blue on the optical diagram). The presence of aspherics is indicated on the case with the inscription 'Aspherical'.
  • 3 low dispersion elements (shown in yellow on the optical diagram). The presence of such elements is indicated on the body by the abbreviation 'ED'.

Optical design Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor

Image of optical circuit clickable

Lens hood Nikon HB-31, bayonet type, plastic
Transportation With a soft cover CL-1120
Manufacturer country Made in Japan
Period From July 2003 to the present day (at least until autumn 2016), in July 2015 supplemented with a similar lens - Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 16-80mm 1: 2.8-4E N ED VR Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF Aspherical.
Instructions View–>
3D view View ->
Real prices in stores

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor uses a 'professional' diameter of 77mm to install filters and has a characteristic gold edging on the case near the front lens. Also, the lens very high quality made. I was very pleased to work with such a lens, shooting on camera Nikon D80. Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G includes 14 elements in 10 groups, and 3 ED element and 3 A.S.P. item. Buying such a lens, you know that money is not wasted, you can compare for yourself optical circuits of other Nikon DX lenses.

Optical design Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor

Optical design Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor is available from the summer of 2003 to this day exclusively in Japan and is the only professional lens specifically designed for cropped Nikon DX cameras. EGF Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor is 25.5-82.5mm, this range of focal lengths makes it perfect for universal shooting. If you exaggerate a little, then the Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G is the equivalent of full-frame lenses Nikon 24-70mm f / 2.8G ED AF-S N Nikkor и Nikon 28-70mm f / 2.8D ED AF-S Nikkor.

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor sample photo

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor sample photo

The lens has a constant aperture at any value of the focal length, moreover, with a value of F / 2.8, you can get good sharp photos. The zoom at the lens is only 3,24 times, the same zoom ratio is available on a simple whale lens Nikon 18-55mm f / 3.5-5.6GII ED AF-S DX Nikkor. The difference between the 18mm whale lens and the 17mm Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G is almost imperceptible. This focal length is the most commonly used for a number of tasks.

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor sample photo

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor sample photo

Focusing on the lens is fast, due to the fact that the lens uses a built-in focus motor SWMThe Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G will focus on any Nikon digital SLR camera... Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G uses internal focus 'IF' (Internal Focusing). Only the 'MA \ M' focus mode switch can be found on the lens. In 'MA' mode, automatic focusing with manual priority is available, which is very convenient, especially for creating focus traps.

In manual focus mode 'M', the focus ring rotates 90 degrees. Manual focus very comfortable, the focus ring is rubberized and has a large grip. With manual focusing, when the lens reaches its extreme positions, an unpleasant sound is heard that is a little unnerving, especially with a sharp rotation of the focus ring.

When zooming, the front of the lens moves in waves and at 17mm the 'trunk' of the lens is lengthened by 3cm, when using a hood, changes in the length of the lens are imperceptible and insignificant. When zoomed in, due to the movement of the rear of the lens, the lens acts as a pump, which creates a 'vacuum cleaner' effect. The minimum focusing distance is 36cm.

Bokeh on Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor

Bokeh on Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor

Image quality
Due to the excellent sharpness, this lens will work well on cameras with a prohibitive amount of megapixels, such as Nikon D3200, D5200 etc. The sharpness of the lens in the center is very high even at F / 2.8, the lens is slightly susceptible to aberrations, the only slight drawback is barrel distortion of 17 mm and vignetting with open apertures. Due to the fact that the lens uses an aperture device with 9 rounded petals, round blur discs are always formed in the blur zone. The bokeh of the lens seemed pretty pretty to me. The lens tolerates backlight well, but slightly worse than its full-frame brothers 24-70 and 28-70. With the color rendering of the lens, everything is in order.

Portrait on Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor

Portrait on Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor

Sample photos on Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor

All sample photos in this review were shot on Nikon D80, JPEG L Fine VI, photos without processing, only reduced to 3mp and imprinted data from EXIF. When shooting was used protective filter Kenko HMC Protector wp 77mm Japan.

Personal experience

To summarize, the Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G - the only professional lens for Nikon DX cameras. I consider it the best universal solution for Nikon DX cameras.

It is believed that for cropped cameras of the Nikon DX line there 4 professional lenses with a gold ring near the front lens and Nikon NPS listings:

But only Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G without a twinge of conscience I can call a real professional lens. As for the other lenses from this list, I have comments:

  • Nikon Fisheye 10.5 / 2.8G - a highly specialized lens, without a built-in focusing motor. This is the only lens from the Nikon DX line that does not have an SWM motor, which is somehow not serious for a professional Nikon DX lens.
  • Nikon 12-24 / 4G - an ultra wide angle lens, generally a great lens. But, f / 4 for a professional lens is not serious, especially when you look at the full-frame analog Nikon 17-35 / 2.8.
  • Nikon 16-80 / 2.8-4E - a bunch of new technologies, but again, F / 4 on the long end is not serious. Moreover, the plastic body, compared to the Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G, does not inspire any confidence. It is strange that Nikon released a new Thai science fiction 16-80 / 2.8-4, but never released a worthy replacement for the hero from this review.

I can highlight only two serious flaws in the Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G:

  1. The lack of updating it. But Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G was developed in the distant 2003 year. At that time, Nikon CZKs had a maximum of 6 megapixels on their sensor, and the first 12 MP camera Nikon D2x appeared only in September 2004. First of all, the Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G lacks a modern built-in image stabilizer. But the version from the rival camp - Canon EF-S 17-55mm f / 2.8 IS USM, has a stabilizer for a long time. In addition, these third-party lenses also have a built-in IS (listed below in the Alternatives section). And a full-length analogue Nikon 24-70 / 2.8E Updated to VR version.
  2. Lack of internal zoom. Unfortunately, during a change in focal length, the front of the frame rises, which can adversely affect the all-weather protection of the lens. For example, Tokina AT-X PRO 28-80 1: 2.8 Aspherical N / AIS, with internal zoom, visually and tactilely feels like a better-made lens.

In fact, the three very first and the oldest lens in the Nikon DX line - is Nikon 10.5 / 2.8G (July 2003) Nikon 12-24 / 4G (March 2003, the first cropped DX lens), Nikon 17-55 / 2.8G (July 2003, from this review) have long been waiting for their update.

If I chose to work professionally with Nikon DX cameras, then the Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G would certainly be among my favorite lenses in my case.

One colleague of mine, an excellent professional photographer, put it very rightly: “Like it or not, but avoiding the purchase of 17-55 / 2.8 for crop, as well as 24-70 / 2.8 for the full frame, will not work".

Prices

Real prices for the lens in popular online stores can see hereor in the price block located below:

All fast universal zoom lenses

Below is a list of all such aperture-type universal zoom autofocus lenses for SLR and mirrorless cameras with an APS-C sensor or less.

Tokina (DX, various mounts)

  1. Tokina AT-X PRO SD 16-50 F2.8 DX Internal Focus, model AT-X 165 PRO DX, for Canon (C/EF version) and Nikon (N/AIS version), from July 2006. Optical design is the same as Pentax SMC DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM

Tamron (DI II, DI III-A, various mounts)

  1. Tamron Aspherical LD ​​XR DI II SP AF 17-50 mm 1: 2.8 [IF], model A16 N / E / P / S (under Nikon [N], Canon [E], Pentax [P], Sony / Minolta [S]), since February 2006. Produced in Japan, China and Vietnam
  2. promaster DIGITAL XR EDO AF Ashperical LD ​​[IF] 17-50 mm 1: 2.8 MACROprevious lens under the brand Promaster
  3. Tamron Aspherical LD ​​XR DI II SP AF 17-50 mm 1: 2.8 [IF], model A16 NII (only for Nikon cameras), since March 2008
  4. Tamron Di II SP 17-50 mm F / 2.8 VC B005, model B005 E / NII (for Canon [E] or Nikon [NII]), from September 2009, Japan or China)
  5. Tamron 17-70 mm F / 2.8 Di III-A VC RXD Model B070, Model B070, Sony E only, from December 2020

Sigma (DC, different mounts)

With constant maximum aperture (DC EX and DC ART series):

  1. Sigma DC ZOOM 18-50mm 1: 2.8 EX (+ -D), since July 2004, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K. The version for the '4/3' system has been available since February 2006 (not mass-produced). The version for Nikon in its name includes the prefix 'D'.
  2. Sigma dc 18-50mm 1: 2.8 EX MACRO, since September 2006, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, 4/3
  3. Sigma dc 18-50mm 1: 2.8 EX MACRO HSM, since June 2007, for Nikon DX cameras only (Nikon F mount)
  4. Sigma dc 17-50mm 1: 2.8 ZOOM EXOS HSM, from February 2010, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
  5. Sigma dc 18-35mm F1.8 A [ART, HSM], from April 2013, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
  6. SIGMA DC 18-50 mm 1: 2.8 DN C [Contemporary], since Oct 2021, for Sony E, Leica L

With variable maximum aperture (DC and DC Contemporary series):

  1. Sigma dc 17-70mm 1:2.8-4.5, February 2006, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
  2. Sigma dc 17-70mm 1:2.8-4.5 MACRO HSM, from July 2007, for Nikon DX cameras only (Nikon F mount)
  3. Sigma dc 17-70mm 1:2.8-4 MACRO HSM OS, from December 2009, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
  4. Sigma dc 17-70mm 1:2.8-4 C, [MACRO, OS, HSM, Contemporary], from September 2012, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A
  5. Sigma dc 18-50mm 1:2.8-4.5 HSM OS ZOOM, from March 2009, for Sigma SA, Nikon F, Canon EFS, Pentax K, Sony / Minotla A

Nikon (DX, F mount)

  1. Nikon DX VR AF-S Nikkor 16-80mm 1:2.8-4E ED N, Nikon F mount, from July 2015
  2. Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G ED IF SWM, Nikon F mount, from July 2003

Pentax (DA, Q, K and Q mounts)

  1. Pentax SMC DA * 16-50 mm 1:2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM, Pentax KAF2 mount, since February 2007. Optical design is similar to the lens Tokina AT-X PRO SD 16-50 F2.8 DX Internal Focus (joint development of Tokina and Pentax)
  2. HD PENTAX-DA * 1: 2.8 16-50 mm ED PLMAW, from July 2021, Pentax KAF4 mount
  3. HD Pentax-DA 1: 2.8-4 20-40 mm ED Limited DC WR, Pentax KAF3 mount, black or silver body, from November 2013
  4. SMC Pentax 1: 2.8-4.5 5-15 mm ED AL [IF] [LENS 02], Pentax Q mount (crop factor Kf=5.53X or Kf=4.65X)

Canon (EFS, EF-S mount)

  1. Canon Zoom Lens EF-S 17-55mm 1: 2.8 IS USM (Image Sabilizer, Ulstrasonic, EFS), Canon EF-S mount, since May 2006

Sony (DT, A and E mounts)

  1. Sony DT 2.8/16-50 SSM, Sony A mount (Minolta A), since August 2011
  2. Sony E 2.8/16-55G (Sony SEL1655G), Sony E bayonet mount, from August 2019

Fujifilm(X)

  1. Fujinon Ashperical Lens Nano-GI XF 16-55mm 1: 2.8 R LM WR, Fujifilm X mount, since January 2015
  2. Fujinon Ashperical Lens Super EBC XF 18-55mm 1:2.8-4 RLM OIS, Fujifilm X mount, September 2012

Samsung (NX)

  1. Samsung lens 1: 2-2.8 S 16-50 mm ED OIS i-Function, Samsung NX mount, since January 2014

Olympus/Panasonic/Leica/Yongnuo (4/3, Micro 4/3, Kf=2X)

Mirrored 4/3:

  1. OLYMPUS ZUIKO Digital 11-22 mm 1:2.8-3.5, from February 2004
  2. OLYMPUS Digital 14-54 mm 1:2.8-3.5, from June 2003
  3. OLYMPUS Digital 14-54 mm 1:2.8-3.5 II, from November 2008
  4. OLYMPUS ZUIKO Digital 14-35 mm 1: 2 ED SWDsince January 2005
  5. Panasonic Lumix LEICA D VARIO-ELMARIT 1: 2.8-3.5 /14–50 ASPH. MEGA OIS, from July 2006

Mirrorless Micro 4/3:

  1. OLYMPUS M.ZUIKO DIGITAL 12-40 mm 1:2.8 PRO, since October 2013
  2. Panasonic Lumix Leica DG Vario-Summilux 10-25 mm f / 1.7 ASPH.since May 2019
  3. LUMIX G VARIO 1: 2.8 /12–35 ASPH. POWER OIS, since June 2012, in March 2017 an improved sub-version is released (outwardly they do not differ in any way)
  4. Panasonic Lumix Leica DG Vario-ELMARIT 1: 2.8-4.0 /12–60 ASPH., since March 2017
  5. Yongnuo 12-35 F2.8-4 STM ASPH, since April 2023

An accurate list of all Nikon DX Nikkor lenses

  1. 10.5 mm/ 2.8G AF Fisheye [gold ring]
  2. 35 mm/1.8G AF-S
  3. 40 mm/2.8G AF-S Microphone
  4. 85 mm/3.5G AF-S VR Microphone
  5. 10-20 mm/4.5-5.6G AF-P VR
  6. 10-24 mm/3.5-4.5G AF-S
  7. 12-24 mm/4G AF-S [gold ring]
  8. 16-80 mm/ 2.8-4IN AF S VR [gold ring]
  9. 16-85 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR
  10. 17-55 mm/2.8G AF-S [gold ring]
  11. 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S [black / silver]
  12. 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6GII AF-S [black / silver]
  13. 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR
  14. 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6GII AF-S VR
  15. 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-P
  16. 18-55 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-P VR
  17. 18-70 mm/3.5-4.5G AF-S
  18. 18-105 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR [Thailand / China]
  19. 18-135 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S
  20. 18-140 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR [Thailand / China]
  21. 18-200 mm/3.5-5.6G AF-S VR [Japan / China]
  22. 18-200 mm/3.5-5.6GII AF-S VR
  23. 18-300 mm/3.5-5.6G VR
  24. 18-300 mm/3.5-6.3G VR
  25. 55-200 mm/4-5.6G AF-S [black / silver, Japan / China]
  26. 55-200 mm/4-5.6G AF-S VR
  27. 55-200 mm/4-5.6GII ED VR
  28. 55-300 mm/4.5-5.6G AF-S VR
  29. 70-300 mm/4.5-6.3G AF-P
  30. 70-300 mm/4.5-6.3G AF-P VR

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.

Results

Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor excellent versatile (medium focus) fast aperture for Nikon DX cropped cameras. Very well made, the quality of the pictures, too, is on top. Perfect for serious work for every day.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment: Dmitriy

 

 

Comments: 260, on the topic: Review Nikon 17-55mm f / 2.8G IF-ED AF-S DX Nikkor

  • Dimon

    I now use 17-55mm on D750. There is no money for 24-70mm yet. There is a question - is it worth buying 35-70mm / 2,8 or using 17-55mm (although only after 30mm) And saving for 24-70mm :)

  • Konstantin

    Good day to all.
    .
    Tell me please. I have a Nikon D 5100 carcass - will autofocus work on it? And as I understand it, this is shirik. Will it be as wide on my carcass or not?

    • Sergey

      17-55 - its viewing angles are almost the same as those of 18-55. The main difference is a large constant aperture of 2,8, while the whale zoom has a small variable of 3,5-5,6.

      • Anonymous # 2

        The main difference is not in the aperture ratio, and not even in the focal lengths, but in the reinforced concrete structure.

        • Ivan

          Hm. These are the main differences in the optical design, probably? And, as a result, in the technical quality of the photos taken?

  • Andrew

    thank you for the information please tell me I have Nikon d 7000 lens sigma 24-70 f 2.8 tell me you can make a high-quality photo on such a lens

  • Konstantin

    Arkady needs your advice! I want to shoot weddings at 5100, I’m looking at the 17-55 lens but expensive infection) and I want to take 50 1.4 + is this enough? And can you replace 17-55 with something worthy but not that expensive? Thank you in advance for your response)

    • anonym

      You can take a bundle of 50 / 1.8G + 85 / 1.8G. Decent glass and inexpensive. Then they will go full frame. And you will go to it anyway sooner or later. Puff, yes, we do. Make a "sweetheart" on it (google) and use the power in manual mode. Shirik will sometimes be needed too. The main thing is to take full-frame fixes.

  • Konstantin

    But what about a regular nikon 17-55 lens or an analog like sigma?

    • photo shooter

      no way !!!! nikon 17-55 bobmba !! there is no alternative! in the reportage on the crop - fly away!

      • Alexander

        Yeah ... Judging by the photos in this review, the 18-55 shoots much better ...

        • Vitaly N

          We are waiting for a photo on the whale 18-55 and aperture 2.8.
          The shots were taken at a wide aperture specifically to see its sharpness and bokeh. Therefore, it is not worth comparing with 3.5 - 5.6. Press it down to such values ​​- the whale will smoke on the sidelines. And indicate which photos are bad.

          • Oleg

            Vitaly, good afternoon!
            But is there a 2,8 aperture on the whale?

        • anonym

          Agree

          • anonym

            With Alexander

  • Vova

    Good day! Is it worth it to change 18-105 to 17-55. Or it’s better to take 24-120. Camera d5200.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, it is. with 24 mm it is not so convenient on a crop as with 17 mm

      • Vova

        Thanks for the answer! You can adjust to the focal length, the image quality is good.

  • Tue

    Hello.
    I took a used lens (nikkor 17-50 2.8, as in the review). The hull shows that he fell or was struck by something. The glasses are clean, no damage is visible inside (as far as possible to see). But the lens has back focus and does not react to fine-tuning in the camera. Plus, it seems to me that the pictures are a little double. Did anyone have such a problem?

    • Tue

      Why can an image double in general and fine tuning of autofocus does not work? The nearest authorized service center in another country. Does it make sense to take him there? Arkady, tell me please, if you have encountered, it may be that the lens is NOT repairable?

  • Ivan

    I bought myself such a used lens. Some time ago, he sometimes began to buzz violently when focusing. And sometimes it can’t focus at all. With what it can be connected?

  • Valery

    Arkady, thanks for the reviews! Thanks to them, I chose some of the technology, including this lens, but this is the first time I regretted it.
    Perhaps this is specifically my specimen, but colleagues write that this is his famous feature.
    At the long end of 55mm, sharpness is just nothing from 2.8 to 5.6. Then (when closing the diaphragm) it improves, but still like through a plastic lens. At 35 mm, with sharpness on the open, everything is already good, and at 17 it is even excellent, even if you shoot industrial landscapes.
    What do you think? I want to rent the same for a day, compare.

    • Denis

      You did not check it at all when buying? Obviously this is not normal

      • Valery

        Checked, but not enough. A gift horse ...
        Yes, even then I noticed that sharpness is not a fountain - but I thought that I was spoiled by fixes, and now I am imagining it from excitement, etc.

        • Denis

          on dxomark approximately as you described, 35 is bad, 55 is very bad. but, for example, my 55-300 by 300mm test is very bad, I also see a drop in sharpness there, but within reason. I saw examples of photos from 17-55 on the Internet, no worse than I had 18-55 by 55mm

          • Denis

            when I tested TTL on the flash, I took a couple of frames from 17-55 on the D5100. Now I looked at the files, there are 17mm and 26mm. sorry, at 55 did not take anything

    • photo shooter

      nonsense is all !!! or such a lens is caught. I’m working as a reporter (my colleagues also have this miracle) - beautiful glass: speed, sharpness, convenience! I will never exchange this glass. even having in the arsenal besides FF also a crop, on which he sits !!!!! 18-55 is also a good glass. but it’s not suitable for professional use (don’t think it’s snickering, it’s a fact)

      • Eugene

        Why is it not good? Can you clarify?

    • Denis

      And how did you cover the diaphragm on the lens with a constant aperture?

      • Valery A.

        Most likely a twist.

      • Oleg

        using the wheel on the camera, you can control the diaphragm, can you imagine? Even if it is a lens with a constant aperture :)

    • Yura

      D5100 + 17-55 / 2.8 Snapshot at f55mm

  • Sergej

    tell me. where and how on this lens is the serial number?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      On the opposite side of the mount mount mark in the same place.

      • Sergej

        such a number, barely noticeable? just do not believe my happiness. not very expensive bought, a little less than 600 euros and the condition is like new. Thanks for your review. I wanted to take the d750, but stayed on the d7200 and decided to buy a lens.

        while I am in awe of the lens

        • Valentine

          The usual price for the secondary market, there are cheaper and skip.

        • Sergej

          and the question is after. like 17-55mm as a portrait on a crop? There is a nickel 50 1.4d, but after buying 17-55 there is still a little money left for a hobby. and it is possible to buy 50 1.8g for 169 euros new or 50 1.4g for 250 bu. what to give preference to? and do i need it?
          Your advice is very important to me.

          • Valentine

            Determine why “I need it”, ie what you want to get, what are the preferences for scenes, pictures, the nature of the image and what is missing. Is it even more interesting to take the 85mm 1,8G?

  • Denis

    Is the Nikon d7000 a good option for this lens?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, it is quite

  • anonym

    Tell me, will the D 3400 work with this lens?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes it will work

  • koba

    Without this lens, you shouldn't buy cropped Nikon cameras at all. And this is a huge plus, even the tauted Ken correctly noted that of all Nikon's zooms, only two have real micro-contrast in the images - this 17-55 and the legendary 80-200.21,8 (D versions!). We can say that among the standard zooms on low-profile cameras, nothing similar exists in nature in terms of the quality of the resulting image, and everything else depends on the photographer ...

  • Andrei

    Hello gentlemen, photographers. I wanted to ask how such a glass will work in conjunction with Nikon d7200?
    The bottom line is that I select a camera for this glass.
    Now I have been using this lens for about 2 years. I can put in my own 5 kopecks: honestly, I don’t understand those people who equate him with the whale, as well as those who have something wrong with the examples of the photo, even if they said they don’t like it, it seems that the examples are shown worthily. 55 by 2,8 is also sharp in the box for the equivalent - this is almost everyone's favorite 85 at FF. I have been working with photography for up to 10 years and during this time I have held many whales in my hands, probably almost all of them (I will highlight 18-70 in a good way, and do not recommend 18-135). Well, let's just say, unlike the whale, IMHO, this is the softness of the picture (bokeh, including super), the absence of distortion is also not an unimportant thing, but the main thing is constant aperture, since working with this glass, you get the same light in the picture at any focal point (this is especially important and visible when shooting indoors).
    At one time, 17-55 replaced me with a couple of fixes 35 and 50, well, the same 18-70.
    If you look at 17-50 sigma, as an alternative - don't look, then it's not equal, I also used it, not at all, the sharpness at 2.8 is not working, up to 4 it really lathers, well, + a lot of focus misses. I think it's better then already tamron. I've already got a full frame, but there is no opportunity to take 24-70 2.8 yet. Therefore, I leave 17 55, but I try to find him a better carcass than d90. Like 7200 is just what you need, or maybe there is a more interesting option for this glass?

    • ExcIIamation

      I think that the more interesting option for this glass besides the D7200 is only the D500, but it costs completely different money!

      • Andrei

        I've heard about such a device. To be honest, if we consider its cost, then for me and for my tasks, then the priority is full frame + full-frame high-aperture staff. The only thing that I will note useful in it is the focus points throughout the matrix, and not just in the center, as on the same 610th or 750th, which of course is very annoying sometimes. As for me, let it be better if there were 2 times less of them, but all over the field of photography, but such technologies, nothing can be done.
        The 500th has a good rate of fire, but by no means always and everyone needs it, what the 610th has to offer is enough.

    • Eugene

      Andrey, please tell us how with the d90 the lens behaves on open apertures from different ends? At 17 there is no back? Barrels? Sharpness zone how? 55 s 2.8 working?

      • Andrei

        Eugene, a couple of years ago I sold 3 lenses, of which a couple of fixes and added money to buy this lens and I didn’t regret it. In principle, in the review of Arkady everything is correctly written. It behaves well in the open, it mainly takes pictures on it, at 55 2,8 good portraits with soft bokeh come out and he paints them really beautifully. Well, his sharpness is not good macaroni of course)), but for portraits it is quite suitable. Regarding distortion, it is not observed at the long end, and at 17 it is not critical, but by itself it is a little present, I think, as with any zoom, wider, the more critical. But in principle, the work is not annoying. In general, the lens is suitable, I tested it a little with Nikon 5200. And personally, I like the output picture from d90 more. More correct light, but sometimes lacks the richness of color, in 5200 it seemed to me excessive. Although this is most likely nit-picking, and my personal opinion, I think you can adapt to any technique. Especially in the editor, everything is corrected as the soul desires.
        I caught fire with a fast 85th for a full frame 1.4, of course not native, there the price tag is not for me, but for example Sigmovskaya, like according to reviews on Nikon 610 and focus misses are uncritical, and even thought to sell 17-55 because of this, but it's a pity so I like him.

  • Abbat

    Greetings, fellow photographers.

    I have a Nikon d7200, I select a lens for it. I stopped at 16-80 and 17-55, which one do you recommend?
    The main tasks are shooting while traveling, landscape shooting. Thanks.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      For such tasks, in general, 16-80 will be better because of the stub and longer focal lengths.

  • Tatyana

    Hello! I have a nikon d3100. There are 50 1,4. And the whale 18-55 is 3,5-5,6. I’m renting 2 years for money, and very disappointed in the whale. What I don't like: aperture, pictures look simple. Compared to portraiturers, they are very losing, not interesting. A group of people do not fit into the portrait. And I need to take general photos often. I want to shoot beautifully, like a portrait, but at the same time there was a zoom. Will this lens fit my preference? Really waiting for answers ..

    • 1Ds_mk3

      Yes, it does. The whole question is whether you can handle it for the money.
      If not, there is a Sigma 17-50 / 2.8 with a stabilizer, it costs much more humane money than a similar version for Canon / Nikon / Sony and is easier to find for adequate money in a used version.

      • 1Ds_mk3

        I sincerely do not understand people buying cameras with trash kit lenses.
        Yes, whales are mostly trash. The exception is Kit for ff cameras, there are some interesting options, but still, in terms of the picture, they are great inferior to high-aperture zooms with aperture of 2.8 or fixes.

        • Valery A.

          Well, for artists, maybe, and rubbish, but for ordinary filmmakers - a suitable means of capturing events. I take the younger crop with a whale to the beach, for a walk - not hard and not a pity.

    • Basil

      If you shoot for money and further, then it is better to stay with old lenses - they still pay and what difference does it make to them than they were removed. If you shoot for the soul, then Nikon 17-55 2.8 is a chic option, better not. Purchase of a similar lens from third-party manufacturers, can lead to mental disorder - the same soul.

      • Alexander

        Very intelligible! :) I agree with you, Vasily.

  • Alexander

    Still, the picture on the crop is not the same. Eh ...

    • Vitaly N

      And what, THIS lens on FF removes better?
      Have you already bought the medium format? Compared to him, the picture on FF is not the same either ...

    • Novel

      “The wrong picture” is from the realm of esoterics. Ringing high, distinct bass, soulfulness, lyricism, that's all. The image has objective, measurable, and most importantly - unambiguous characteristics. There are not so many of them that it would be possible to describe the difference between the two images in such a way that everyone would understand it, not just the initiated and nostalgic.

  • Sergei

    A question to the experts: there is a D500 camera, which lens will be more relevant 17-55 or 16-80 ... Now I shoot at 18-140 ... not that ((

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Both are good. It depends on what to shoot. Under d500, I would still look at 16-80

  • Aleksandr1961

    Hello! I do not want to argue but just express my opinion. Recently I bought a good high-aperture zoom from Tamron 9990-17 (without stabilization) at a low price for a share for 50 rubles. I was completely satisfied with the lens in terms of sharpness and clarity. A little about myself: almost 60 years old. Retired sea navigator. He began to study photography in the 70s of the last century. The first camera Chaika-2M. Now I have 4 DSLRs on my hands (2 from Canon + 2 from Nikon - all middle class). A couple of years ago I bought a Canon EOS M10 UPC for interest. There are different (zooms and fixes) optics. For the sake of interest, I looked at the comparison of my Tamron 17-50 2.8 with a professional high-aperture zoom from Nikon, which is described in the article above. Comparison graphs from the DXoMARK website. According to the graphs in sharpness, the expensive (1329 bucks) loses to the cheaper one (the official price is 459 bucks). My new one with a guarantee (which I issued on the Tamron website for 5 years) Tamron cost me 157 bucks at the current rate. And it's not just huge savings. Yes, I agree that Nikon's optics are better assembled (though it weighs much heavier - 755 grams of Nikon versus 430 grams of Tamron). Okay, to hell with him with the price. In the end, quality comes at a price. But Tamron looks better according to the site charts. I understand that the main thing is the final picture and not the technical parameters. But the quality of the picture is a subjective assessment, while technical parameters and measurements are an objective reality. I am in no way going to do the so-called. technodrocking. The opinion of the author and other photography lovers is just interesting. Thanks for your hopefully tolerant opinions.

    • B. R. P.

      The objectivity of the DXoMARK site raises some doubts.

      • Aleksandr1961

        Maybe you are right. But all the same, measurements and calculations are made there. If you do not take into account the information on the site, then how to evaluate the quality (for example, sharpness and clarity) of optics? Only by subjective assessments? But then all these are sheer conventions. the taste and color as they say ... But what about the laws of physics and optics?

        • B. R. P.

          One gets the impression that some testers are more influenced by the laws of the modern market, for example, whale zooms sometimes outperform fixed lenses, smartphones over system cameras, etc. If you are more comfortable focusing on tests on a site, then be it. Personally, I have never really been obsessed with such information, it seems to me that for the final conclusion on a particular technique, I also need feedback from real, preferably the most open-minded users, rating photos. It is possible that the technique, which did not show the best result in laboratory conditions, in real shooting, including in your hands will give a completely different one. It is necessary to consider the possible differences between different copies, especially the budget segment.

          • Aleksandr1961

            I don’t argue with you, and on the whole I agree. It's just that, in view of the still Soviet engineering education, I cannot focus only on subjective feelings. The technical leaven works inside. And I can't be 100% guided, for example, when assessing sharpness on my own vision, because years still take their own and vision is no longer as sharp as in youth. On the one hand, this may be for the best. I do not see minor flaws in the photo. You can, of course, study photos with a magnifying glass, but this is too much in my opinion. I think the photo has two sides - artistic and technical. On the artistic side - I won't even argue ... And the technical side is in a more rigid framework. And you can be guided by reviews, as they say, but carefully. Moreover, some of the reviews are written emotionally based on some kind of mythical sensations. Sorry for the holivar, but it's like in music - someone's MP3 320 cuts their ears so that they can't listen ... That's why they only listen to uncompressed WAV ...

  • Aleksandr1961

    And it is also very interesting why this Tamron is sold at such dumping prices, I would say ... Cybermall Vladivostok online store. The optics are absolutely new in their virgin factory packaging and with a number that was identified on the Tamron website as official white ... And the last thing is like a cherry on the cake - near the number it is squeezed out in white Made in Japan ... I checked the back / front focus - no comments.

    • Andrei

      And it’s also very interesting why this Tamron is sold at such prices I would say dumping ...
      Serious questions torment.

      • Aleksandr1961

        No, I don't think this is a very serious question ... It's just interesting and that's it ... Thank you for your sarcasm ...

    • Maria

      Did you check his focus on the back-front focus? On the internet? 0_0

      Do you know the average price of it?
      But in fact, 2-3 wonderful lenses could simply be merged at a wholesale price. Or, during the sale-exchange, the price has decreased profitably. And Vladivostok-Japan Well, you yourself understand ...

      You need to look at the price tag only on the manufacturer’s website at the current rate, because we have all the markups due to import and invoices. Many stores (the same Pixel 24) have an office, a large sales staff and a lot of invoices. There is no such thing in the Internet stock.

      Here is the price and "lose weight"

      Plus, lenses now come in “seasons” like fashion clothes. See if this model has a newborn brother with a bunch of extra buns. The price of a senior may drop significantly.

      By the way, a lot of fraudulent sites have sprung up, where a real environment for trading photographic equipment is emulated, with fake reviews and profiles of used equipment. The last one I stumbled upon was “Mir Photo” allegedly in Kaliningrad. I barely carried my legs. The prices were also very tasty.

      • Aleksandr1961

        Thanks for the constructive opinion. I will try to answer your questions.
        Back / front focus was checked at home using tables which are full on the Internet. I don’t want to describe the test procedure - everything is quite simple.
        Actually, if it weren’t for the price (9990 rubles), I would hardly have bought this Tamron. On average, such a new lens (though with a stabilizer and Vietnamese production) costs about 20400 rubles (for example, in our Technopoint online store where the lowest prices are). The fact that there is no stabilization on my lens was even pleasing given the many negative reviews about such a Tamron with stabilization. I have a couple of fast fixes which in the focal length completely replace Tamron.
        Of course, the reviews about the scatter in the quality of the lens and the supposedly not entirely reliable design were a little embarrassing. But I do not shoot much for myself and carefully, so I am not worried about the reliability of the structure. I was also afraid if there would be back / front focus - of course, all this is possible to solve, but I did not want additional fuss. And when, after the checks, I was convinced that everything was in order with sharpness, and after learning that the optics were collected in Japan, I did not mind the money spent at all. Especially considering that a similar used lens at our flea market costs 10-12 thousand rubles
        In general, I bought this Zoom more for the soul (or a little money was lying around in my pocket) and not out of necessity. But emotions are only positive. What else do you need? Life is short anyway - especially when you start looking in your seventh decade. But for example, I am clearly not ready to buy a proprietary high-aperture zoom for 1450 bucks. Even for positive emotions and with the necessary bucks.

        • Denis

          can you take a picture of it? I want to look at the motor tamron 17-50, assembled in Japan. it seems only motorless there collected

          • Denis

            that is, it is believed that the Model A16 N engineless was produced in Japan (maybe in China too)
            and Model A16 N II motorized - only in China

            • Arkady Shapoval

              Everything is more complicated there, the lens was produced in Japan and in China and Vietnam. Directly depending on for which system I did not notice.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Most likely this is a “gray” product, imported in some cunning way. Usually, in this case, the technique itself works as expected, but there may be problems with the guarantee.

      • Aleksandr1961

        The lens number was tested on the official website of Tamron and issued a 5-year warranty.

        • Ivan

          It seems that Arkady is right. In this case, “gray” does not mean bad, low-quality, but simply imported bypassing the official customs clearance. What guarantee did you issue, the official Russian one? Or is it a guarantee in Japan?

          • Aleksandr1961

            The official website of Tamron in Russia. You register and enter the lens number. After checking, they give how they write a 5-year warranty. Therefore, I don’t even know what guarantee it is (Japanese or some other). Repair services are in Moscow (probably unlikely in Vladivostok).

    • Ivan

      Here are just the CyberMall you mentioned in the list of Tamron distributors in Vladivostok:
      http://www.tamron.ru/partners/vladivostok

      • Denis

        yes, it was like a store advertisement)

        • Aleksandr1961

          I did not understand a bit what do you mean by store advertising? I usually buy similar (cameras + optics) products at Technopoint (which is now merged with CSN) because there are lower prices and the same guarantees. I came across Cybermall on the Internet. I looked at the product catalog and found this inexpensive Tamron. The price of course was suspiciously low. I called the store and there they assured me that the goods are new + officially white + guarantees and more. I don’t know where the store gets these goods from. Moreover, prices for other optics were approximately similar to prices in TechnoPoint.
          As for deliveries from Japan directly - we have an Alpha 25 company that deals with this. And by the way, 9 months ago I bought a Canon EF-S 25mm F24 STM in Alpha 2.8 for 9990 rubles (now such a lens in Technopoint costs 11999 rubles). Naturally, this is a completely new lens in its original packaging + Checks + warranty and so on.

          • Denis

            I found it there now for 9990, in stock it is not
            Are you sure you are made in Japan? can you take a picture of it?

            • Aleksandr1961

              At the bottom of the lens near the number (which is, as it were, embedded in the plastic), it says Made in Japan in white on black. Can you take a word for it or do you need some kind of photo evidence? In principle, I'm not critical of where it is assembled - the main thing is that the optics are more or less high-quality and adequate. The fact that the lens was assembled in Japan, I generally discovered only at home when I wrote off the number for registration on the site. And by the way, in the box there is a type of warranty coupon where the name of the product is written in English and Japanese and the same lens number is imprinted. It was the price that prompted me to buy. And even if the assembly would have been in Malaysia, Vietnam, or somewhere else, it somehow didn't bother me in the first place. Believe me. Well, it would be Vietnam and to hell with it. I'm not a super duper photographer to only use Japanese optics. It’s just possible that it’s all lucky. The main thing is not assembly but quality. I think the Japs can make a marriage (only in a smaller amount is possible).

              • Denis

                yes i believe thanks

              • Ivan

                It does not matter at all the country in which the equipment is produced (assembled). Superior control and quality standards. If the Japanese have established the process, then the quality will be at the same level.

              • Denis

                Ivan, the question here is that it is believed that the Tamron motor was not produced in Japan. it turns out there are exceptions. maybe some first parties are very rare

          • Denis

            Of the lenses on Nikon, only sigma 50mm is not art, somewhere they found a junk warehouse, it seems

            • Ivan

              The question is different. How they, not being a direct official distributor, with appropriate partner discounts, were able to officially import them into Russia so that even Tamron in Russia recognizes the goods as official, and can give prices much lower than the official ones. If it was a “gray” import, there are no questions. It smacks of local corruption.

              • Aleksandr1961

                I liked your statement about local corruption. I remember a catch phrase from the film Pokrovskie Gates - Who doesn't drink?

  • Cat pirate

    The key word is Vladivostok, where it is not far from Japan and this batch of Tamrons was brought from the Japanese market.

    • Andrei

      Do not prompt, let him think it over.

      • Aleksandr1961

        Good for you!

        • Andrei

          I know without you.

          • Alexander

            Guys please advise the best zoom lens for portraits and group photos. I go to kindergartens with portable lighting (two monoblocks with umbrellas). Sharpness in group photos does not suit (I use the D7100 and nikkor 16-85).

            • BB

              Try Tamron / Sigma 17-50 / 2,8, or the native 17-55 / 2,8, but the price ...

            • Jury

              Here's a start

            • Jury

              Sorry! Off topic.

  • an256

    Hello, does it make sense to replace Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 35mm 1: 1.8G and Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.8G fixes with this lens? Will I lose or win as pictures?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Lose. Fixes can be as an addition.

  • Sergei

    Colleagues, I ask for advice.
    I am a professional photographer in the past, 20+ years on film, at the beginning of the century I haven’t switched to digital, I went into another business. A year ago, I decided to try to return to the profession after an 18-year break. Three old Nikon glasses have remained from the old days: 80-200 / 2.8, 28-70 / 3.5-4.5 and fifty fifty.
    To begin with, I tried to take my strength 7000 with a screwdriver with a whale of 18-105, I gave the whale to my granddaughter at 5100, she had a very simple 18-55, which was absolutely nothing :), and set my old glasses at 7000. 80-200 simply draws excellent, but with 28-70 photos I do not always like. There is not enough wide angle and either sharpness or clarity. I did an autofocus setting on the carcass. Well, not the quality that I'm used to giving to the customer.
    This is the prehistory, now the actual question. What will give a greater increase in quality, change of carcass to 7100 and temporarily put a whale of 18-105 or change of glass to 17-55 / 2.8 and leave 7000?
    And I won't pull the carcass and glass at the same time now, everything that I earned went to light: 3 AD200pro, racks, software ... and the spring was lost because of the pandemic ...
    Who owned 7000 and 7100 with a whale of 18-105 and worked with glass 17-55 / 2.8, give good advice please.

    • B. R. P.

      Change glass, my opinion.

    • Dmitry

      The D7000 has 16 megapixels, while the D7100 has 24 megapixels and the physical pixel size is smaller. At a smaller pixel, it will be even more difficult to achieve pixel-by-pixel sharpness than at a larger pixel D7000.
      If the glass (even with focus adjustment) could not normally resolve 16 megapixels on the D7000, the D7100 will definitely not get better. I would change the lens: on the film, it may still have nothing, there is not enough resolution on the digit.

      • Sergei

        Yes, Dmitry. On the film 28-70 he painted perfectly, I liked it. I’ll definitely take it off the crop, I’ll leave it in the archive, maybe over time I will buy the FF as well, and I'll try it there again.
        I’ll formulate the question a little differently: which link will give the best result now?
        7000+17-55/2.8 или 7100+18-105?
        It’s just that now there is a zero 7100 with a mileage of 3k for 25 rubles, so I think it makes sense to change the carcass or not.
        And I will take the 17-55 / 2.8 glass anyway, only now it is not available in my region for sane money, and it’s difficult to pick up the optics with the shipment, it’s difficult to check at the pick-up point in 15 minutes.

        • Dmitry

          I am sure that D7000 + 17-55 / 2.8 will give the best result already here and now: the glass is top-end, definitely better and lighter than 18-105 (I have 18-105 even on f8 it does not give the same sharpness as on a half-speed, but 17-55, judging by the examples of the photo, this sharpness will provide).

          On the D7000, a large pixel: it is easier to achieve pixel-by-pixel sharpness, a higher refraction threshold, and there is no problem with pixel by pixel movement. D7100 is not much better than D7000, except for 24 megapixels. ISO and DD are almost the same, the frame buffer is the same, except that the video is slightly better. Both cameras are old. If we change the D7000, then for something newer: the D500, for example, or the D750 / D780.

          Therefore, if your D7000 is not completely in the trash, then I would recommend keeping it for myself and investing in the lens.

        • Stas

          You will see the difference in the photo between 7000 and 71000 only with a close-up))) and the lens is definitely worth changing. buy sigma 17-50 and don't worry)

    • Roman

      Definitely glass. Also, the wide angle of 28mm on the crop is nothing.

  • Oleg

    Hello everyone, please tell me what is better to take a native used 90-17 or sigma 55-18 f50 to nikon d2.8. In the future, I want to buy another d7100 or something newer, if I have enough money. So after reading the comments and reviews, everyone writes that on the native 17-55 there is a drop in sharpness on many megapixel cameras to the d7100 24 megapixels. And the question is whether it is worth buying a native used one, or can buy a new one from analogs of third-party manufacturers. Also, what scares away from the sigma18-50 is a vignette, a stub that simply eats up the battery and rotates the focusing ring during autofocus. Also, many people write that when using an external flash, sigma may miss focus. Thanks in advance for your answers and advice

  • Cat pirate

    Buy a Sigma 17-50 that's enough for 24MP

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2013/01/nikon-17-55-f-2-8-g-ed-af-s-dx/comment-page-3/?replytocom = 381766

Versión en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2013/01/nikon-17-55-f-2-8-g-ed-af-s-dx/comment-page-3/?replytocom =381766