Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35

imar · 23rd February 2006

i'm considering between the two above, the Nikon is very expensive. Is the Nikon 17-35 really worth the $$$ it commands? Thoughts/views of current users on the Nikon 17-35 are much appreciated.

soma · 23rd February 2006

Originally Posted by imar

i'm considering between the two above, the Nikon is very expensive. Is the Nikon 17-35 really worth the $$$ it commands? Thoughts/views of current users on the Nikon 17-35 are much appreciated.

never try nikon but the tamron lens not bad. if you have nikon kit lens 18-70 than don't need it. i post a few picture here http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...179498&page=23 the picture just resize only. using d70 with the tamron lens no filter. speed as good as the kit lens or slight better when light is low.

But for that price you can't ask for more liao.

Cheesecake · 23rd February 2006

Originally Posted by soma

never try nikon but the tamron lens not bad. if you have nikon kit lens 18-70 than don't need it. i post a few picture here http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthrea...179498&page=23 the picture just resize only. using d70 with the tamron lens no filter. speed as good as the kit lens or slight better when light is low. But for that price you can't ask for more liao.

wa, got the kit lens dun need the AFS17-35 f2.8D?

maybe its too costly la... right? and the range almost covered too... but... haha

dunno abt the tamron..

as for the AFS17-35, if u can afford this AFS17-35 f2.8D lens, then go and get it by all means.
what i like abt it... high flare resistance, constant f2.8(good result even at f2.8!), sharp.. and all the jazz...

this question in fact has been asked numerous times. run a search and see how other users of the AFS17-35 has to say abt this superb lens.

rahul · 23rd February 2006

Sorry, what do you mean ?
The Tamron lens doesnt show any better performance compared to the Kit lens ? implying its not worth the buy?

Originally Posted by soma

never try nikon but the tamron lens not bad. if you have nikon kit lens 18-70 than don't need it.

espn · 23rd February 2006

Do a search, there's a thread on the 17-35 and it's images.

TMC · 23rd February 2006

I find it worth every cent. Tamron needs to step down to get better pics unlike the nikon. f2.8 is sharp enough without sharpening in PS. 2nd hand lens prices are getting more affordable too.

Astin · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by imar

i'm considering between the two above, the Nikon is very expensive. Is the Nikon 17-35 really worth the $$$ it commands? Thoughts/views of current users on the Nikon 17-35 are much appreciated.

17-35mm cost abt $3k
For the same money, u can buy:
20mm $830
35mm $500
50mm $170
85mm $620
And use the spare change to buy a 2nd hand 20-35mm
(I am probably the only guy to say it is NOT worth the $$$ for the 17-35mm)

espn · 24th February 2006

That's because you a prime guy

wiz23 · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by Astin

17-35mm cost abt $3k
For the same money, u can buy:
20mm $830
35mm $500
50mm $170
85mm $620
And use the spare change to buy a 2nd hand 20-35mm
(I am probably the only guy to say it is NOT worth the $$$ for the 17-35mm)

not so ex lah ... don't scare him leh

second hand can get for abt $2k or below. Brand new the most $2650

quality wise worth every cent

NikLeica · 24th February 2006

Yes....more so if you travel to the US, Japan or HK where mint used 17-35 goes from 1500 - 1650 SGD and new ones for 2,100 - 2,200 SGD.

nightwolf75 · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by NikLeica

Yes....more so if you travel to the US, Japan or HK where mint used 17-35 goes from 1500 - 1650 SGD and new ones for 2,100 - 2,200 SGD.

yeah... and not forgetting ur airfares (to and fro), hotel stay, currency conversion rates, taxes...

yyD70S · 24th February 2006

Why are lenses so pricy here

???

markccm · 24th February 2006

different class.

shoot at F2.8 & blow up to 100%.
u will be able to tell liao.

espn · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by markccm

different class.

shoot at F2.8 & blow up to 100%.
u will be able to tell liao.

Luval · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by wiz23

not so ex lah ... don't scare him leh second hand can get for abt $2k or below. Brand new the most $2650

quality wise worth every cent

yah . 2nd hand will cost ard 2.2 - 2.5.
Gotten mine @ 1.8

Luval · 24th February 2006

Get the AFS 17 - 35 . If you can afford it .. I was a WA person also .. started with Tokina 19 -35 mm .. Very slow .. next when to nikon 18 - 35 F3.5... ( not bad , faster than the tokina) then later went back to sigma 17 -35 and finally AFS 17 - 35.. you will appreciate it at F2.8.. it just simply irresistable..

espn · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by Luval

yah . 2nd hand will cost ard 2.2 - 2.5.
Gotten mine @ 1.8

Normally, any trinity glass below S2K sold, I'd be wary of it. It's not impossible, but I'd be careful if I were you.

Astin · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by yyD70S

Why are lenses so pricy here ???

Nikon Singapore are u hearing us???

wiz23 · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by espn

Normally, any trinity glass below S2K sold, I'd be wary of it. It's not impossible, but I'd be careful if I were you.

U mean even for 2nd hand? There are quite a number of AFS 17-35 & 28-70 in B&S going for abt $1.9k leh

soma · 24th February 2006

Originally Posted by rahul

Sorry, what do you mean ?
The Tamron lens doesnt show any better performance compared to the Kit lens ? implying its not worth the buy?

Different is not much. (apply to tamron) Nikon kit lens is already very capable lens liao for that range.

never try nikon 17-35 but for that price it should be hell lot of different.

23rd February 2006	#1
imar Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 173	Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35 i'm considering between the two above, the Nikon is very expensive. Is the Nikon 17-35 really worth the $$$ it commands? Thoughts/views of current users on the Nikon 17-35 are much appreciated.

23rd February 2006	#5
espn Deregistered Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Planet Nikon Posts: 22,045	Re: Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35 Do a search, there's a thread on the 17-35 and it's images.

23rd February 2006	#6
TMC Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Beyond Space-Time Continuum Posts: 5,921	Re: Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35 I find it worth every cent. Tamron needs to step down to get better pics unlike the nikon. f2.8 is sharp enough without sharpening in PS. 2nd hand lens prices are getting more affordable too. __________________ Selling: 32GB Thumbdrive - Patriot Xporter XT 120sgd (Price reduced)

24th February 2006	#8
espn Deregistered Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Planet Nikon Posts: 22,045	Re: Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35 That's because you a prime guy

24th February 2006	#10
NikLeica Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Singapore mostly Posts: 298	Re: Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35 Yes....more so if you travel to the US, Japan or HK where mint used 17-35 goes from 1500 - 1650 SGD and new ones for 2,100 - 2,200 SGD.

24th February 2006	#12
yyD70S Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 2,057	Re: Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35 Why are lenses so pricy here ??? __________________ AI 16mm f3.5 \| AiS 35mm f1.4 \| AiS 50mm f1.2 \| AI 105mm f2.5

24th February 2006	#13
markccm Deregistered Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Asylum, Ward 4444 Posts: 2,132	Re: Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35 different class. shoot at F2.8 & blow up to 100%. u will be able to tell liao.

24th February 2006	#16
Luval Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: East Posts: 1,383	Re: Nikon 17-35 / Tamron 17-35 Get the AFS 17 - 35 . If you can afford it .. I was a WA person also .. started with Tokina 19 -35 mm .. Very slow .. next when to nikon 18 - 35 F3.5... ( not bad , faster than the tokina) then later went back to sigma 17 -35 and finally AFS 17 - 35.. you will appreciate it at F2.8.. it just simply irresistable..