Review on Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED Zoom Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLR Cameras - AF-S FX NIKKOR series by Shalom Germann

I needed a wide angle zoom lens for indoor and outdoor use. Based on reviews, I preferred 16-35mm for my D800 and F100, but gravitated towards the venerable 17-35mm. For indoor shots with moving animals, a 16-35 lens would be a poor tool. VR is useless on moving objects in low light. The lens can also be used on my FE. a feature not supported by G-type lenses Needed a rugged lens for photographing horses in indoor and outdoor stables and arenas with color and black and white digital film. The lens has already survived a strong blow without a single scratch. Of course, the lens has also withstood a lot of dust and dirt. The bokeh isn't too bad in close-up close-ups, but it lacks the dreamy result you'll get from the Nikkor 70-200mm, or even the satisfying blur you'll get from the modest E 50mm series. For those considering filters, UV and ND are adequate, but CPL is definitely not suitable when using the widest focal length. The 17-35mm's focus lock is quick, while the 16-35mm is a little wonky in low light. Compared to the optimized AF 16-35mm, the 16-35mm seemed to capture sharper angles; but only until you actually examine the smoothed, distortion-corrected captured images. In addition, the center of 17-35mm wide-open images regularly appeared slightly sharper than images shot at 16-35mm wide-open at comparable focal lengths. A usable image is the end goal, and with DxO the end result becomes clearer. Even without VR, I got some amazingly sharp handheld photos at f/2.8 and a shutter speed of 1/10s. The built-in flash can be a small problem with this lens. At 17mm there is a good chance the camera flash or an attached shielded flash will cast a shadow off the end of the lens. There are workarounds, but this requires additional steps. I can only imagine that a 16-35mm flashlight-like protrusion would be a huge problem in comparable circumstances. Of course, a connected flash can easily solve the problem, but there are times when it's not available. One factor that novice digital users overlook is the need to fine-tune the autofocus. In my case, my D800 body, in combination with this example lens, requires a value of -6 for optimal focus; after Nikon sent my camera to the shop for adjustment. Without adjustment, I would have tolerated a slight loss of detail at low aperture settings. Fine-tuning the autofocus is easy and doesn't require an expensive device. I used the DxO software and a ruler. But just doing this 5-minute exercise once can really improve the performance of this lens. And while I'm not expecting much video footage, the 17-35mm will reduce it, the 16-35mm won't. Buying an underutilized 17-35mm lens at a price below a remanufactured 16-35mm lens was convenient, but the 17-35mm lens' proven build quality and performance in harsh environments led to this one Decision. This is a truly remarkable lens, with a solid feel but reasonable weight for a general-purpose pro lens. In all honesty the balance of this lens is much better than other options like the 16-35mm with a longer front focal length. a slower, albeit newer, lens, similar to mounting a MAG flashlight on the front of the camera. And the 16-35mm uses high tin content solder, effectively limiting the life expectancy of the SWM to around 10 years. The 17-35mm uses old solder. Image sharpness was amazing, although I have to admit I used adaptive interpolation processing to enhance the distant corners in random shots. I hope for a long service from this lens. Yes. I love this lens. ADDITIVE. I got some great non-flash shots at ISO 1200 at Hearst Castle. Another Nikon D800 owner using a 16-35mm lens had to increase the ISO to 6400. Grain and distortion weren't an issue in favor of the 17-35mm lens. And it was great to be able to use the same lens on my FE for black and white photography during the same trip. I'll admit I was tempted by the recent sale of the 16-35mm lens, but I'm glad I gave up. April 8, 2014