$1000 Nikon Lens?

AlexColeman · Mar 5, 2009

Before I drop another 1k on Nikon, could I get some opinions on the 17-55? I am looking at getting it for the D90? Will this be a good choice?

jlykins · Mar 5, 2009

Listen, I'm not going to tell you that it's not a wonderful wonderful lens. That lens is super sharp, and really solid. I rented and barrowed it to try before I bought it, and during this time I also barrowed the Tamron 17-50. For about a third of the price of the Nikon, you can get the Tamron. It's JUST AS SHARP, and the build is pretty good too. Some people won't use anything but the brand name, but you should give this lens a try.

AlexColeman · Mar 5, 2009

I see your point, but I am investing in my future lens kit, as you can see, so I am going to go big. Thanks for your opinions, and besides the price, what were your feelings on it.

uplander · Mar 5, 2009

Hmmmm. I see your mind was already made up. just needed some affirmations?

Low_AL · Mar 5, 2009

Personally, I don't really see the point in "investing" in DX lenses. The FX format DSLR will just become more affordable before we know it so why not put your money in something a little more sustainable? I'm sure your 16-85mm can hold you over for the time being.

TUX424 · Mar 5, 2009

AlexColeman said:
I see your point, but I am investing in my future lens kit, as you can see, so I am going to go big. Thanks for your opinions, and besides the price, what were your feelings on it.

Sounds as if you dont want to invest in 3rd party glass thats to bad your missing out.
If the glass makes goods photo who cares who it is made by

jlykins · Mar 5, 2009

TUX424 said:
Sounds as if you dont want to invest in 3rd party glass thats to bad your missing out.
If the glass makes goods photo who cares who it is made by

That's my thought on it. But anyway, if you are dead set on it, the 17-55 is a great lens. You won't go wrong with it.

AlexColeman · Mar 5, 2009

Yes, I am set on it. I just want to know what I should expect from it. And yes FX will come down, but this will be a 1k lens, which retains most of its resale value, so yes it is an investment.

No, I don't mind third party glass, but it is even better.

Defy · Mar 5, 2009

i'm with you on the nikon glass and it's probably all mental but i know when i buy it that it's the best. Whereas third party stuff could be just as good but also could be worst.

kundalini · Mar 5, 2009

According to your siggy, you already have the 16-85mm lens. What is the 17-55mm gonna buy you? Apparently from the other thread, you have money to burn. While I applaude you wanting to get top gear, I also caution you not to be stupid with your money.

AlexColeman · Mar 5, 2009

You can't beat nikon's quality control.

Edit: It will replace the 16-85. I can't see a lens investment as a waste of money. Buying bodies like this would be reckless, but lenses I will use will not be.

uplander · Mar 5, 2009

Not picking on you for your choice. I tend to buy mostly Canon L glass because there is rarely a good copy bad copy issue and if there is they stand behind their product and make it right . I will buy third party when it fills a need that Canon doesn't cover like when I purchased a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 because I wanted a fast lens and Canon didn't offer what I whas looking for. I wouldn't turn nose up at Sigma either if the need arised.

Canon and Nikon lenses are the gold standard in quality and backed with assurance to deliver expected quality. resale value is the other side of the equation in my book.

Mitch1640 · Mar 6, 2009

DX glass isnt going to be worth it when FX takes over, so that 1000 dollar investment might not hold its worth as much as you think it will.

dEARlEADER · Mar 6, 2009

I wouldn't dump money into a nikon 2.8 dx .... no way... pricey dx lenses are toast...

get the tamron.... check the mtf charts.... the nikon 17-55 2.8 is good glass.. but it ain't one of their legacy lenses...

if your buliding for the future... get the nikon 24-70 2.8... if you want quality focal of 17-55 get the tamron....

AlexColeman · Mar 6, 2009

uplander said:
Not picking on you for your choice. I tend to buy mostly Canon L glass because there is rarely a good copy bad copy issue and if there is they stand behind their product and make it right . I will buy third party when it fills a need that Canon doesn't cover like when I purchased a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 because I wanted a fast lens and Canon didn't offer what I whas looking for. I wouldn't turn nose up at Sigma either if the need arised.

Canon and Nikon lenses are the gold standard in quality and backed with assurance to deliver expected quality. resale value is the other side of the equation in my book.

Totally agree with you, and I am looking at it as -purchase-use for 1yr- and sell before FF.