laurents_rupar Posted May 31, 2004 Share Posted May 31, 2004 Dear all, Initially I was looking for a prime wide angle like the AF 20mm 2.8D, but after some time I met several people saying "go for a wide angle zoom!". Well, I know, that there are a lot of prime-lovers out there, but a zoom definitely has some advantages. Now I am having a look at the 17- 35mm and the 20-35mm, whereas I tend to prefer the 20-35mm. Does anybody has some suggestions or comments on this two lenses? Thank you very much for your help, Laurents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaymondC Posted May 31, 2004 Share Posted May 31, 2004 bang for buck would be 18-35. V regarded .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
an grianghrafadóir Posted May 31, 2004 Share Posted May 31, 2004 You got to ask yourself how much will you use this lens Laurents. A lot of people will tell you to go for the 17-35mm, which to me and a lot of forum users is just way too expensive. I just got the 18-35, which I love and it's about one third the price of the 17-35. It's not a very fast lens, which I don't think is critical in this zoom range, and may be a little soft at 18mm in the extreme corners wide open on my film camera, but if you are shooting that wide, your point of interest is generally near the center anyhow. Put it on a digital body and this is no longer a problem, because you are not using the corners anyway. Build quality might be lacking too, but most of us Nikon owners take good care of our gear. For the money it is definitely worth it. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jorgeortega Posted May 31, 2004 Share Posted May 31, 2004 Prices for a mint condition 20-35 are very attractive in the famous auction site. I think it is worth looking for one. I have one and I think is wonderfull!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_schneider Posted May 31, 2004 Share Posted May 31, 2004 It depends what you are using the lens for. The wide angle zooms usually have some pretty noticeable distortion. If you are going any subjects with straight lines this can be a problem. I have the 20mm AF-D and it is an excellent lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert DeCandido PhD Posted May 31, 2004 Share Posted May 31, 2004 Hello, The 17-35mm F2.8 lens is absolutely superb on a film camera. The Sigma 12-24mm is great on a digital camera (and you can use it on a film camera too).<div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael_bradtke Posted May 31, 2004 Share Posted May 31, 2004 I have one question for you Laurents. Are you shooting film or digital?<p> I use a Nikkor 12-24 DX at work and it is a very nice lens but not cheep. We shoot digital at work. My D100 or the companys S-2 For myself I own mostly primes and can tell you that the 20mm D is a very nice lens I use it on my D100 and on my F3 it does a great job. I also have a 14mm for when I need to get very wide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alan_wilder1 Posted May 31, 2004 Share Posted May 31, 2004 If you can afford it, go for the 17-35/2.8. Optically, it's the best in the group and it's close focus is also the best at under 0.28 meters. The 20-35/2.8 closest focus was only 0.5 meters which is pretty long for a 20mm focal length. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurents_rupar Posted May 31, 2004 Author Share Posted May 31, 2004 Hello Michael, I am shooting film. Laurents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nino Posted June 10, 2004 Share Posted June 10, 2004 I use a 18-35 af 3.5 (the latest one) and after using it for a while i got the shits with it being so slow. (3.5-4.5 i think) so i went and bought a 20mm af2.8d prime, i shot some tests with both lenses set at 20mm f4, (sharpness test, falloff test, rectalinear distortion etc..) and i found that the 18-35 actually outperformed the 20mm in nearly all the tests, go figure! and all this after reading that the 20mm was an amazing lens. The 18-35 doesnt feel as meaty as the 17-35 f2.8 but is 1/3 the price. Also the former is a lot slower too, which annoys me for indoor candids (dinner partys etc..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now