View Poll Results: Wide-angle/zoom purchase, which of the two?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • 17-35mm f/2.8

    25 43.86%
  • 16-35mm f/4 VRII

    32 56.14%
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35

Thread: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

  1. #21

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    I just sold my 17-55/2.8 n last night tried one 2nd hand 17-35/2.8 from one snaper. Wat surprised me that comparing with 17-55/2.8, 17-35 image really soft, especially @f2.8

    Not sure problem is from the lens or that is the performance, but indeed that snaper told me lot of ppl claim that 17-35 image softer than 17-55 which I also feel the same.

    Wanna to try 17-35 again in better light condition n also the new 16-35 then I could make decision which one to choose.

  2. #22
    New Member kriegsketten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Southern Enclave
    Posts
    2,560

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by InToTheRain View Post
    I just sold my 17-55/2.8 n last night tried one 2nd hand 17-35/2.8 from one snaper. Wat surprised me that comparing with 17-55/2.8, 17-35 image really soft, especially @f2.8

    Not sure problem is from the lens or that is the performance, but indeed that snaper told me lot of ppl claim that 17-35 image softer than 17-55 which I also feel the same.

    Wanna to try 17-35 again in better light condition n also the new 16-35 then I could make decision which one to choose.
    Wah!!! Don't scare me leh! I'm in the hunt for a used set... Will be interested to know what you've find out...
    Myflickr | Zoom in for the KILL!

  3. #23
    New Member kriegsketten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Southern Enclave
    Posts
    2,560

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    After some time considering and deliberations... i think I might just fall back on the 14-24mm... Seen some DIY type of Filter holders for the lens which led me to think it is not an impossible task to filtrate the lens after all...
    Myflickr | Zoom in for the KILL!

  4. #24
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by kriegsketten View Post
    After some time considering and deliberations... i think I might just fall back on the 14-24mm... Seen some DIY type of Filter holders for the lens which led me to think it is not an impossible task to filtratethe lens after all...
    Interesting term never seen it used as a verb.
    Woah... 14-24 on a DX is really really wasted leh... I know you have your long-term goal and all, but I think these lenses on your shortlist are really wasted for the time being.

    If you're using 60mm micro and find it too tight, is that the only reason for considering these FF UWAs?

    I'm just curious to find out your reasons. Don't mean to try and put you down. Just don't want to see you spend $$ unnecessarily, even though these lenses might be within your budget.
    Exploring! :)

  5. #25
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    by the way, it seems like Lee is designing a filter holder and filter set for the 14-24... but don't expect the prices to be.... affordable
    Exploring! :)

  6. #26
    New Member kriegsketten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Southern Enclave
    Posts
    2,560

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    Interesting term never seen it used as a verb.
    Woah... 14-24 on a DX is really really wasted leh... I know you have your long-term goal and all, but I think these lenses on your shortlist are really wasted for the time being.

    If you're using 60mm micro and find it too tight, is that the only reason for considering these FF UWAs?

    I'm just curious to find out your reasons. Don't mean to try and put you down. Just don't want to see you spend $$ unnecessarily, even though these lenses might be within your budget.
    Nah... I was thinking of replacing the fast primes from 20mm to 50mm with one lens for the DX... I have been looking and reading into the fast primes and feels that they are just not up to the task (I'm a distortion-control freak...)

    Thanks for your concern, I'm not in the rush for the shorter focal lengths anyway - but the 14-24 is tempting in the longer run - serves different purposes for the DX and FX bodies.
    Myflickr | Zoom in for the KILL!

  7. #27
    New Member kriegsketten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Southern Enclave
    Posts
    2,560

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    by the way, it seems like Lee is designing a filter holder and filter set for the 14-24... but don't expect the prices to be.... affordable
    No worries, I'll attempt "modifying from existing products" - DIY instead of getting Lee... It's not impossible, google and you'll find examples.

    Like I've said, no rush man... maybe after all these deliberations, Nikon might surprise us with another shorter focal length lens? (fat hope... LOL)
    Last edited by kriegsketten; 16th July 2010 at 11:42 AM.
    Myflickr | Zoom in for the KILL!

  8. #28
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by kriegsketten View Post
    Nah... I was thinking of replacing the fast primes from 20mm to 50mm with one lens for the DX... I have been looking and reading into the fast primes and feels that they are just not up to the task (I'm a distortion-control freak...)

    Thanks for your concern, I'm not in the rush for the shorter focal lengths anyway - but the 14-24 is tempting in the longer run - serves different purposes for the DX and FX bodies.
    I think 17-50 kind of range is what to get to cover.
    Maybe consider the 'DX-King': AFS DX 17-55mm f/2.8 ??
    Exploring! :)

  9. #29
    New Member kriegsketten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Southern Enclave
    Posts
    2,560

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    I think 17-50 kind of range is what to get to cover.
    Maybe consider the 'DX-King': AFS DX 17-55mm f/2.8 ??
    I did! But considering that it's not going to cost any different than the FF lenses, unless you go second hand...
    Myflickr | Zoom in for the KILL!

  10. #30
    Senior Member ZerocoolAstra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    rainy Singapore
    Posts
    9,523

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    is it? I thought it was a fair bit cheaper than 16-35VR... But since both lenses not on my wishlist (YET), I'm not up to date with prices.

    If you really want wide-ness for DX camera, something like 11-16, 10-24 or 12-24 (all DX lenses) is the way to go
    Exploring! :)

  11. #31
    New Member kriegsketten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Southern Enclave
    Posts
    2,560

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by ZerocoolAstra View Post
    is it? I thought it was a fair bit cheaper than 16-35VR... But since both lenses not on my wishlist (YET), I'm not up to date with prices.

    If you really want wide-ness for DX camera, something like 11-16, 10-24 or 12-24 (all DX lenses) is the way to go
    Well, my pricing is based on the Nikon price list here on CS.

    Yes, if I truly want to go UWA for DX, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 would be right on top!

    PS: Reason for the current search is a photo journal lens for the DX...
    Last edited by kriegsketten; 16th July 2010 at 12:14 PM.
    Myflickr | Zoom in for the KILL!

  12. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,571

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by kriegsketten View Post
    Well, my pricing is based on the Nikon price list here on CS.

    Yes, if I truly want to go UWA for DX, Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 would be right on top!

    PS: Reason for the current search is a photo journal lens for the DX...
    I would also consider 16-35VR f4, you might want to progress to FX later.


    Argh!! i shouldn't view this thread, should be out shooting more...

  13. #33
    Senior Member Hacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Cyberspace
    Posts
    4,239

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    Quote Originally Posted by kriegsketten View Post
    After some time considering and deliberations... i think I might just fall back on the 14-24mm... Seen some DIY type of Filter holders for the lens which led me to think it is not an impossible task to filtrate the lens after all...
    No need to DIY, just get the LEE Filter:

    http://www.cathayphoto.com.sg/offers...50-starter-kit

  14. #34
    Senior Member Hacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Cyberspace
    Posts
    4,239

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    I looked at the LEE Filters adapter for the 14-24mm yesterday, and I must say the quality was top notch. Go for the 14-24mm and need not worry about upgrading anymore (at least until v2 comes).

  15. #35

    Default Re: Nikkor 17-35 f/2.8 or the new 16-35 f/4 VRII?

    17-35mm f2.8. It performs really well on FX body which has higher ISO performance at night. I'm not sure about its performance on DX body. I still think that 17-55 f2.8 is a better choice for DX although it is not cheap.
    I personally don't like the idea of f/4 for photojournal. VR increases shutter delay too.
    Kent Wong Photography |Leica Q & Leica M-P 240 | 75 & 28mm Summilux

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •