Anyone any experience of Nikon 17-55 F2.8 DX?

[Pupp]

Worth the dosh?

[malc350]

Sure is, it's super-sharp, has good contrast and most importantly, performs well at f2.8 which I think is majorly important. I can't see the point otherwise in paying out for a big bright pro lens and then having to stop down for maximum sharpness.

It can be difficult to see enough of a difference between a pro (expensive) lens and a consumer lens if you stop both down to f8.

If your shooting style requires a sharp contrasty image at F2.8 I'd recommend this classic. It's probably still the best "standard" zoom for the Nikon crop-factor D-SLRs.

[RobDickinson]

Or get the Sigma f2.8 variant with HSM....

[Pupp]

RobDickinson said:

Or get the Sigma f2.8 variant with HSM....

Is that available now? Think there's a Tokina equivalent that's well regarded too... anyone tried 'em?

[chris.mapey]

I nearly bought the Sigma one, then found a Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 on ebay for (IIRC) less than £400, so snapped that up instead - mine was boxed, with soft sleeve case & receipt from Nikon for it's service about 5 months earlier...

It's a stunning bit of kit and so much better thahn the kit 18-70 I was using before.

I'd have to say look out for the Nikon secondhand and get one of those, rather than the Sigma / Tokina

Chris

[Simpo Two]

I think so.

[VxDuncan]

RobDickinson said:

Or get the Sigma f2.8 variant with HSM....

Or the Tamron which is laser sharp but a bit slower to focus. Personally I'd buy the sigma or tamron cheap from hong kong, keep the box and use it till Nikon uprate the 17-55 F2.8 with VR / AFS then flog the consumer lens on ebay for pretty much what you paid for it. You'd be amased the fear people have of buying stuff wfrom hong kong - s/h mintlens in the UK can go for more than a new one from HK!