answers: 154

  1. Dmitry K
    27.07.2015

    It's a pity for all the photos with a closed aperture - so it does not differ from 16-35 and 14-24 on the same focal lengths. At 2.8 would. To see what you need to pay extra for in comparison with 16-35 and how much worse than 14-24. I will wait for the promised throwing of photos

    Reply

  2. Denis
    27.07.2015

    Thank you Arkady for the review! Will there be a review from Samuyang, they have very interesting animals)))

    Reply

  3. Stas
    01.08.2015

    Friends, tell me please, how do you get such a rounding of side backgrounds ?? thanks

    Reply

    • anonym
      01.08.2015

      due to the lens))) and it’s called fisheye

      Reply

  4. Star boring. Igor
    02.08.2015

    Arkady, please drop your photos from the review, at least some interesting intermittent aperture to see how it looks,
    with respect.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      18.08.2015

      There are tons of examples on the net, for example here.

      Reply

  5. Star boring. Igor
    18.08.2015

    Arkady, give your photos! :)

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      18.08.2015

      I will give time. Tired already.

      Reply

  6. Star boring. Igor
    18.08.2015

    I know, annoying, I looked on the network, I'm more interested in what you did :) We will wait :)

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      18.08.2015

      Try not to get bored anymore, okay?

      Reply

      • Star boring. Igor
        18.08.2015

        good luck.

        Reply

      • Owned
        28.05.2021

        DO NOT BE ABLE TO THE SUBSCRIBER! DID A PHOTO - DO IT!

        Reply

  7. Serg57
    31.10.2015

    Arkady!
    Took a sample of Sigma AF 17-35mm F2.8-4 EX DG ASPHERICAL HSM.
    Have you worked with this?

    Reply

    • Serg57
      31.10.2015

      I apologize for the photo. It is not with this lens :)))

      Reply

  8. fx
    19.09.2016

    By accident (yes!), Such glass turned up in excellent condition, moreover, from Japan, before the collapse of the ruble.
    I bought it, tried it on the D90, and realized that it wasn’t mine.
    1) The lens is rather heavy and large. It “breaks” hands and a light cropped carcass “bites” with it.
    2) The focal range is not mine.
    3) For some reason I did not like the picture. Then it seemed to me too soft compared to screwdriver fixes.
    4) Glass greatly attracts attention and in the evening / night walk a little dumb with it.
    Glass is great, but not for everyone.
    Under ff 24-70 / 24-75 / 28-80 / 24-120 / 24-85 itp is much more universal, IMHO.

    Reply

    • cad @
      26.08.2019

      And whoever said that this lens is universal, of course it is not, it is "shirik", of course, that on a full frame it cannot be universal with such a focal range. It is universal for landscape, architecture, genre photography such as “street”. The standard zoom ranges from 24mm (moderate wide angle) to 70mm, 105mm, 135mm. (maximum focal telephoto).

      Reply

  9. fx
    19.09.2016

    I sold it in the end and do not regret it. As well as the D90 sold and also do not regret it.

    Reply

    • Nikita
      07.08.2017

      And what did you buy?

      Reply

  10. Sergei
    03.12.2018

    Thanks for the review. After reading, I decided to become a happy owner. He has become. Lens class.
    https://ibb.co/d2pPf52
    A snapshot in the red zone on the light pollution map. Nikon D610 & Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm 1: 2.8D SWM IF Aspherical

    Reply

  11. Ruslan
    19.12.2018

    Good day. Tell me please, have I heard that there are different versions of the nokin 17-35? Is this so and how to distinguish them? It seems like a sore with a motor has been fixed in the latest versions.

    Reply

    • Alexey
      16.05.2019

      SN 200388 - 306273 with sore
      Sn 400485 - 440961 without sore

      Reply

  12. Question
    28.06.2020

    Talking to one of the familiar craftsmen, I found out that the problem is due to the fact that these motors are very sensitive to pollution and from the slightest presence of dust or dirt they begin to 'whistle' or simply stop working. Such an ailment is usually very easy to fix ... And how easy is it to fix? I really want to know

    Reply

    • Pokemon
      28.06.2020

      The motors in 17-35 / 2.8, 28-70 / 2.8 and 80-200 / 2.8 mk4 seem to be the same.
      It is treated by blowing with compressed air, if it does not help, replace the motor.

      Reply

      • Question
        29.06.2020

        Thank you, I sold mine today due to periodic glitches with AF. It's a shame. Almost never used and it was in excellent condition. Probably here we can say that the technician loves work ... During the diagnostics, he revealed several patterns of this miracle of the lens ...

        Reply

  13. Stas
    21.08.2020

    Arkady, good evening. Choice of Nikon ED AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm 1: 2.8D or Nikon AFNikkor 20-35mm 1: 2.8D again for the same price. Or Sigma 17-35mm 1: 2.8-4 EX Aspherical Nikon F- half the price. Not weddings, not a landscape, only group photos of two to thirty people. Camera-d700.

    Reply

  14. Alexey
    26.12.2020

    Arkady, hello, you mentioned in the text about the whistling and failing motor, that "Such an ailment is usually very easy to fix."
    How is it repaired? Do you have any experience? How much money does this operation cost?
    I just wanted to buy 28-70, there the person also had a problem with the motor. As a result, he gave it to the service and the motor was repaired, but the diaphragm stopped closing.
    What easy fix are you writing about?

    Reply

  15. Still
    11.01.2021

    But I've heard that he is parfocal. Well no?

    Reply

  16. Load more comments ...

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer