re: nikon 17-55mm/ f 2.8

[ramon_v__california_]

directed to shun cheung and to others who almost regularly use this

lens. will i get the full benefit and enjoy it's features on a D70?

i currently just use the kit lens, a 70-210mm AF-D and a 50mm f1.8.

i do street photography and the beautiful sceneries (daytime and

nights) of monterey and carmel. i shoot people and portraits but

mostly of my four grandkids aged 5 to 10.

 

i also do some church functions, indoors and out, days and nights.

some weddings of friends (and their friends) where i am protected

from lawsuits :-)

 

for what i do, the kit lens complemented by the two others mentioned

are actually enough to make me happy and enjoy the hobby.

 

there is little money coming so i thought of getting the 17-55mm

for those instances where i wished i had an f2.8.

 

should i just save more and get the D200 to enjoy fully the 17-55mm?

[chris_leck]

I "enjoy fully the 17-55mm" on my D100. One doesn't need a D200 to appreciate this lens -- there's nothing too esoteric or beyond the point of diminishing returns about it. It's my default lens choice -- nearly always mounted by default.

 

If you need the speed (in terms of large aperture and fast focusing) and the relatively wide angle of view, there really are few alternatives. One alternative is the Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8. Alternately, you might consider a fast, wide prime, particularly if low-light shooting is a major consideration.

[ShunCheung]

I had bought the 17-55mm/f2.8 DX about 8 months before I got a D2X. During those 8 months, I used the 17-55 with my D100 regularly. If you generally like the 18-70 DX kit lens but want something faster at f2.8, the 17-55 DX is a great choice.

 

There is no doubt that the D200 is a "better" DSLR than the D70. However, it doesn't mean everybody should get a D200 instead of a D70. Nikon has sold about 2 million D70/D70s in the last two years and there are a lot of happy owners. If you don't need fast AF and you have good eyesight so that the viewfinder doens't bother you, the D70 could be just fine. If you have limited fund just like the most of us, by all means get the 17-55 DX first and, if necessary, upgrade you DSLR later.

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

I have a D70 and D2X, the "kit lens" and the 17-55. I got the latter because I'm shooting some weddings (second shooter for money). Currently the lens is at Nikon because of distortion issues. It doesn't sound like you have critical needs requiring the fixed f2.8 aperture. If I were you. I'd be happy with the very nice gear you have and invest in an SB600/800 for those occasions when your kit lens isn't fast enough.

 

Paul

[frank_skomial]

"If you don't need fast AF and you have good eyesight so that the viewfinder doens't bother you, the D70 could be just fine"

 

If you do need fast focus, then either D70 or D200 will do about the same job.

 

Unlike D2X the D200 has only one cross type sensor - that same as D70, and that apparently focusing is not as fast as D2X multiple sensors design in D2X.

 

Quoting Ken ROckwell, AF and AF-S speed on D200 and D70 is about the same speed:

 

"I can't detect any speed difference between my D70 and D200 with either traditional AF lenses like my 80 - 400 VR or with AFS lenses."

[ilkka_nissila]

There have been other sources saying that the AF of the D200 is much faster than that of the D70. Ken is the last source I would quote on any information.

 

The D70 viewfinder problem isn't so much about how your eyesight is (mine is close to 20/20 with my glasses on) but which lenses you use. If you shoot with fast wide angles, I don't think many people on this planet could say that they can routinely manual focus the D70 accurately in low light calling for the use of f/2 or f/2.8 on a 20 mm or 35 mm lens, at least not using the stock screen. However, if you just use regular f/3.5-5.6 AF-S zooms, there might not be such a problem.

[ramon_v__california_]

thank you chris, shun,paul, frank and ilkka for my waking up to excellent inputs. you guys covered all the avenues of my concerns.

am not bothered by the tight viewfinder of the D70. it's bright enough for me. and maybe contrary to others' predicament, my wearing glasses eases the use of the D70.....i have acquired the SB-800 months ago to complement my 2-year old SB-600. so i guess after the 17-55mm DX i wll stop buying stuff for a long, long time ;-)

[ilkka_nissila]

Ah, two i-TTL flashes, you lucky one. I'm just starting to play with wireless flash, having two must be nice.

[ShunCheung]

<I>so i guess after the 17-55mm DX i wll stop buying stuff for a long, long time</I>

<P>

Don't count on that. Perhaps you should rephrase your comment to after getting the 17-55 DX today, you would not buy any more lenses for the rest of 2005, US Pacific Time. :-)

[ramon_v__california_]

got me there, shun. last lens alright. am planning on shooting RAW more so i have to invest in a better photo-editing software. i think we were classmates in south san francisco for the CS2 tour. that was fun and learned a lot but will settle for Elements 4 for now (maybe). should be more than adequate for the limited things that i do.

[Jim_Tardio]

If you have a local camera shop that stocks the 17-55, I suggest you handle the lens before you buy. While it's a fantastic lens, it is large & heavy, especially compared to the 18-70.

<p>

I think you'd be better served with a D200 since you already have a very capable kit...perhaps add a fast AIS prime, a 24/2 comes to mind.

<p>

Happy New Years to all.

[patricks]

I'll second Jim's concern. I just got back from a two week trip in Europe, first time I brought my 17-55 along and it is just too heavy for my tastes (at least when you bring along a SB800, a 60 micro, a 50/1.8 and a light meter + laptop + videocamera). I must say I really enjoy the fast and silent AF and who doesn't prefer a constant f-stop, but I haven't carefully inspected the impact on image quality yet. overall, i actually think the 18-70 is an awesome lens. I'd rather spent the money on a D200 if I were you...

[ramon_v__california_]

thanks, jim and patrick. will sure take your suggestions into consideration.

[frank_skomial]

ILKKA,,

I would like to believe what you say:

"There have been other sources saying that the AF of the D200 is much faster than that of the D70."...

 

but except Ken Rockwell's opinion, I have not found any better one yet on the subject of speed of Auto Focus on D200 versus D70 or D2X. If you know better sources, plese let us know.

 

Well, perhaps it will take more time to get down to the real comparison of AF speeds.

 

Thanks for your faith in D200, but I would rather prefer some real tests.

 

As for Ken Rockwell, his opinions are known to be "emotional", and sometimes hastely or too strong (or radical), possibly inacurate but never intentionally wrong. For one thing Ken Rockwell is not paid for his reviews, contrary to some others.

[ming_lin]

I got the 17-55 f2.8 lens two months ago and it is on my D70 since then, I really enjoy shooting with this lens. Before that I had been using the 18-70 kit lens and it is a fine lens (especially for travel due to less weight). Why change? The main reason is the f/2.8. I often shoot pictures at low light condition and it comes in dandy - sharp pictures at wide open.

 

I personally would invest in lenses than another DSLR at this point. Enjoy the D70 and use it more.