The AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm 1: 2.8G IF-ED - "no" standard Zoom:
- Price: The professional DX lenses this generation inherited from a time when there were exclusively or almost only analog full-format cameras. So if you wanted a professional digital photography, photographed DX / APS-C. The "professional quality" cost a premium price - and in times of relatively low-cost full-format cameras and the general sensor Hype (Mirrorless with APS-C sensors ...) few people are probably willing to pay four-figure sums for a DSLR Objktiv that does not works full frame.
- Weight: The Sigma 17-70mm above 2.8-4 is already no lightweight. But here you have again 200-300g longer there with a total of nearly 800g.
- Focal length: Dividing longest and shortest focal length messed up, you come only to 3x zoom. This makes the 10x cheaper Kitzoom already.
- No stabilizer: A typical Kitzoom "needs" an image stabilizer. I thought it was at least still for quite handy - though no longer absolutely essential with increasing time.
Why or why it but an excellent standard zoom is:
- Autofocus: When it comes to speed as soon as the "old" Kitzoom AF-S 18-70, what I would describe as one of the fastest ever. It also very accurate, especially in low light conditions it is true of all previously owned / tested standard zooms the best by far.
- Open aperture to good use. Clearly: Again, the images are (dimmed again) with aperture 4 crunchy, but Aperture 2.8 is here, at least not only a temporary solution, but actually usable.
- Image quality: Although not a great portrait 55mm focal length (whether or not on DX), the crop in Aperture 2.8 is a delight. The bokeh is very nice, the focus later than 4-5 outstanding. Contrasts and the general color rendering (no blue cast as so many Nikon lenses) are very good. Flares there is relatively clear, but you can control it, if you play with the angle.
- Processing: Built like the proverbial tank. Everything from metal, the focus ring running tired, the zoom ring almost too stiff. The front element moves during zooming only about 1 cm back and forth - the (huge!) Lens hood is screwed to the housing and does not move with it.
Conclusion / Use case:
The Nikkor 17-55 course you can use it as a holiday lens, no question - only it's not WORLDS sharper or more contrast than the standard zoom that I had previously. For good weather photos on vacation at f 8 is a 16-85 or 18-55 small well at least as good, if not better, because you dragged less and still has a stabilizer - and all at a fraction of the price.
Why I appreciate it nonetheless: I always take pictures at parties / birthdays (as a hobby!), With and without flash in bad and good light. Although I also use like prime lenses, but when it comes time to go to a moment or spontaneous pictures, you can not get around to a good standard zoom. Good for me is here: Faster and especially more accurate autofocus in every walk of life, light reserve for cropping and less flash demand, high-contrast, sharp images - all this gives me the Nikon 17-55 reliable. I need no longer worry me simply whether the AF is slow (18-55, 18-105, 16-85 in part) or if he is keen on the right motive (Sigma 17-70). And this absolute reliability in the event report distinguishes this objective. In this sense it is not a "real" Always plan but a "Very often it" lens. Tamron and Sigma may have visually open or even exceed it - but be a never give them security.
And the price ...?
... Is steep. I purchased the lens than about 3 years old Used lens of private - for almost exactly half of the original price. And for this price, it is unrivaled in my opinion. For the estimated here four digit price I would not probably buy. Then rather a 16-85 VR or a Sigma 17-70 OS. But since I have tasted at the professional feel and "feel" blood, I do not give the first Nikkor ago. The only worthy replacement would be a Nikon 24-70 that even just the original price comparison of the two lenses a decent alternative if you can do without the wide angle on DX / covers him otherwise. But with the recently published D7100 I am confident that the DX format is far for the scrap heap at Nikon.
