Reviews and Problems with Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF AF-S
Showing 1-5 of 5
Hey, I found this one from junkyard for $1.
K. Yi, Amazon
14 March 2014
Summary: and the owner said, it's NeCon, probably translated to English as the con artists from Japan, and probably will not work with older Nikon models, but with a plenty of lubrication with oil pumping D6x0 camera, it may work. Why did human invented the word, "caveat emptor?" This word didn't exist before Nikon.
Excerpt: I am an advanced hobbyist so I do not actively look to photography as a source of income. However, I am serious about getting professional looking results. I started with a Nikon F50, to an F100, to a D200 (six years ago). I have an D800e on back order so I purchased the Nikkor 17-35mm f.2.8 ED-IF Autofocus lens to familiarize myself with it on my D200 while waiting for my D800e.
Pros: Easily Interchangeable, It Feels Like Quality, Strong Construction
Cons: Blurry Focus, Heavy, No Better Than My 500 Le
Conclusion: I don't understand why people are so lyrical about; it's just NOT sharp on a dSLR. Probably the sharpest zoom on a SLR, but if you only shoot digital: do not buy this. The focus is right-on tho, but 9 out of 10 times I will end up with an unsharp image; and I'll have to do a lot of post-processing to come up with something useful. Tested it with two copies on two bodies. Also take a look at userpictures @ Pbase.com if you think i'm wrong.
Summary: ich glaube, Nikon hat die Entwicklung verschlafen: Das so hoch gelobte 17-35 / 2,8 ist nicht ein besonderes weichzeichnendes Objektiv sondern meiner Meinung nach ein besonders unscharf zeichnendes Objektiv. Es ist seinen Preis von rund 2000 Euro nicht wert. Auch wenn Nikon selbst etwas anderes behauptet. Ich ärgere mich jeden Tag, wenn ich das Teil in die Hand nehme.