Tempting Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens

[rayteong]

Hi dear pals, find the Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 lens pretty tempting but must say its not cheap too. Are there really no equivalent lens or any lens that is as good but price wise lower?

[zaren]

tamron 17-50/2.8. IQ reputedly pretty close, and considerably cheaper.

[Kit]

You asked tons of questions before getting a D300, only to think of selling it 1 week after because you have no money for lenses. Then you asked about the 40D. Now you thinking about a Nikkor lens. Stop thinking about buying without knowing what you need. Its just a waste of money.

[rayteong]

Yap did consider the Tamron model but think every where no stocks. And the newer version don't know when coming in too. Heard with built-in motor so should focus faster too but read some reviews saying the newer one focus slightly slower, how true I also don't know.

[Adiemus]

Originally Posted by zaren tamron 17-50/2.8. IQ reputedly pretty close, and considerably cheaper.

Yes. The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. BUT.... Look for the second version with the built-in motor. It's due to hit Singapore shores soon. I heard it's already available in Hong Kong.

http://www.tamron.com/news/35mm/three_bim_pma08.asp

Model number is: A16NII

[rayteong]

Hi Adiemus, thanks.

[rayteong]

Moving on, as for asking questions, I believe the forum is a place to share, to ask and to learn but I realised at times its getting a bit sensitive which I don't really understand. I mean everyone started off some where, not everyone is born knowing everything. I believe its nice being able to advice people or help others especially when they don't know about something or uncertain over something. Just like when one started stepping into the society to work, one is new and uncertain over many things, can't imagine the bosses and colleagues all firing at the person and assume he/she knows everything. Make peace, keep up the spirit to learn, to share and to forgive. No offence pls.

[rayteong]

I might not sell the D300 as per advised by some members here. Saw from reviews that the sigma one isn't that well received compared to the Tamron model.

[lukesky]

Originally Posted by rayteong I might not sell the D300 as per advised by some members here. Saw from reviews that the sigma one isn't that well received compared to the Tamron model.

Think Kit meant that asking is fine, but do some research b4 asking, then plan beforehand before buying and not buy then ask, which by that time might be too late. I duno the history but if buy body first then no money to buy lens like quite jia lat.. because these things have to go hand in hand..unless the body was a super good deal then grab first then say.

Having said that, if u wana sell yr D300, let me know, I don't mind getting it off your hands.

Lastly the tamron is the best alternative to the nikon, don't bother bout sigma unless u're using D40 family and need the HSM for AF. Anyway the tamron also got a new version with built in motor, but heard it's quite slow though..

[lastboltnut]

I just went to Orient Photo last Fri to buy the Nikon Mount Tamron 17-50 f2.8 with motor.....at $630. There was still 1 pc left that day.

[nemesis32]

i think Tokina has a 16-50mm f2.8.. Should be worth looking at as Tokina is always very sharp and good solid build at a more affordable price.

[sirikin]

Originally Posted by Adiemus Yes. The Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. BUT.... Look for the second version with the built-in motor. It's due to hit Singapore shores soon. I heard it's already available in Hong Kong. http://www.tamron.com/news/35mm/three_bim_pma08.asp Model number is: A16NII

Shashinki got the Tamron 17-50mm... I got one from him last week. If you need any, i know he could send you one from Japan... had no problem buying from him so far... always going the extra mile to make it pleasant for buyer . Furthur more he personally check and test the lens for the customers and his prices are good too.

[iamblurblur]

hmm... just curious... will any one still go for those mentioned compatible 3rd party lenses at the same range over Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 given that budget is not an issue... ?

[sirikin]

Originally Posted by iamblurblur hmm... just curious... will any one still go for those mentioned compatible 3rd party lenses at the same range over Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 given that budget is not an issue... ?

NO not for me

[chongkm]

Originally Posted by iamblurblur hmm... just curious... will any one still go for those mentioned compatible 3rd party lenses at the same range over Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 given that budget is not an issue... ?

Yes, it is still worth considering. The Tamron weighs about 10% of the Nikon. Unless my muscle is not an issue too...

[geraldkhoo]

Originally Posted by iamblurblur hmm... just curious... will any one still go for those mentioned compatible 3rd party lenses at the same range over Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 given that budget is not an issue... ?

If budget is not an issue, why bother with the Nikon 17-55? Go for the D3 + 24-70!!!

[chegr]

Originally Posted by lastboltnut I just went to Orient Photo last Fri to buy the Nikon Mount Tamron 17-50 f2.8 with motor.....at $630. There was still 1 pc left that day.

Do they offer in-store warranty? How long?

[iamblurblur]

Originally Posted by geraldkhoo If budget is not an issue, why bother with the Nikon 17-55? Go for the D3 + 24-70!!!

sorry should make it clearer... what i meant was budget enough to get Nikon 17-55mm f2.8...
besides weight... what else would you let go of Nikon 17-55 and go for 3rd party lens? Overall IQ? Color? Sharpness?

[geraldkhoo]

Originally Posted by iamblurblur sorry should make it clearer... what i meant was budget enough to get Nikon 17-55mm f2.8... besides weight... what else would you let go of Nikon 17-55 and go for 3rd party lens? Overall IQ? Color? Sharpness?

To me, my preference will always be Nikkor lenses... IMHO they give the best color, contrast, saturation and a very natural look to the pictures taken. Unfortunately, they are also more costly than 3rd party lenses.

Having said that, i would not just go out and buy 3rd party lenses just because they are cheaper. I would only buy 3rd party lenses if they give a good IQ and the price is a fraction of its almost equivalent from Nikkor lenses.

So... would I pay 3 times the price for a Nikon 17-55 as compared to the Tamron 17-50? I can give myself all the reasons to buy the Nikon 17-55... e.g. better built, picture IQ, faster AF because of the SWM motor, etc. However, the fact that today I own the Tamron 17-50 and not the Nikon 17-55 does mean that I am very satisfied with the Tamron for now, and I don't see enough reason to pay 3x the price for the Nikon 17-55. Besides, photography is my hobby and not my source of imcome. Pros often go for the best because they make a living from the pictures they take. Of course, there will be others who feel otherwise about these comments...

However, if the 3rd party lenses cannot come close to a Nikkor lens, then my option would be to go for the Nikkors. E.g. Despite good reviews of the Sigma 70-200 lens, a fren of mine owned it and said that at 200mm, the IQ of the pictures changes a lot, and the color cast, contrast and saturation changes as well, and he has to have a different picture setting for the lens at 200mm. To me, there isn't a 3rd party lens that can meet up to a Nikkor lens of that range (i.e. 70-200), so my decision was to get the older Nikkor 80-200 and it has served me well.

Everyone has to process through the pros and cons and other considerations of the lenses they get... and I would think that the following would often be the different various considerations...

1. Cost
2. Picture quality (color, contrast, saturation, sharpness, etc.)
3. Fast lens
4. Zoom or prime
5. Built and weight
6. AF speed
7. VR
8. "Hey look! Mine is an original Nikkor lens with gold ring!"

[lsisaxon]

Originally Posted by geraldkhoo To me, my preference will always be Nikkor lenses... IMHO they give the best color, contrast, saturation and a very natural look to the pictures taken. Unfortunately, they are also more costly than 3rd party lenses. Having said that, i would not just go out and buy 3rd party lenses just because they are cheaper. I would only buy 3rd party lenses if they give a good IQ and the price is a fraction of its almost equivalent from Nikkor lenses.

Carl Zeiss = 3rd party?