Sharpness of 17-55mm

[leonard_forte1]

I am about to purchase a nikon 17-55mm lens. Its costly! Is this lens as sharp

wide open (at f/2.8) as at other paetures. If not then it would not be worth

the price. Also I'm wondering about the Tamron 16-50mm, if that is comparable

in IQ. Thanks

[ilkka_nissila]

The 17-55 DX is quite sharp at f/2.8, but better at f/5.6. Essentially all short lenses improve when you stop them down.

 

The 17-55 is actually a bargain for what it is. There are sharper lenses but none with such a nice range. The lens is excellent for people photography, with its fast focusing and smooth look. The only serious drawback I can see to it is that it's quite a big lens with the hood attached. But it has a good range.

[rombon]

Very fine lens, perfectly usable at f/2.8 and well worth the price, but you must have the hood attached all the time because it is quite prone to flare.

 

And you must be sure that you will stay with dx format DSRL.

 

Regards, Marko

[andrew_cale]

No it is not as sharp at 2.8 as it is stopped down a little, but what lens is? I don't think that should not be your litmus test.

 

FWIW: I consider it to be the sharpest lens in my bag. I long thought the 50/1.4 and 35/2 would best it but that is not the case.

[juanjo_viagran]

it sharp at 2.8 and has a beautiful DOF.

 

IMO is worth the money.. is big, heavy and lovely..

[andrew_cale]

Sorry - typo in my response above. It should say - I don't think that should be your litmus test.

[eric_arnold]

can't comment on the sharpness of the 17-55 because i opted for the 17-50 tamron, which matches up pretty good vs. the nikon (except at 17mm, according to some reviewers). i'd say depends on what you use it for. if you want a big, heavy, solidly-build lens for event or wedding photography, get the nikkor. if you need a lighter wide zoom for walkaround, travel, or hiking, look at the tamron and sigma options, both are great value for the money. the tokina 16-50 is a bit pricier than the tamron/sigma, but also has nikon-esque build quality. i'm sure its good but i dont think its as good as the 17-55, or even the 17-50. only long tele primes will be sharper wide open than stopped down; with most wide 2.8 zooms, f/4 to f/5.6 is where they start to get good, maxing out at f/8-f/11, depending on focal length.

[dcraton]

It's a great lens. But not as sharp as any prime in that range I have including the 50/1.4 and 35mm/2; however, the lens I have is creamy smooth--a good thing and different from the aforementioned primes. And exactly what Ilkka said. It is a fair price for the lens and I use it often. Yes, and do keep the hood on. Besides, on the job people think you are a pro. . .big lens, large hood. And they say size isn't everything.

 

Just make sure you can return it if you are not happy as not all are with this lens. There is no perfect glass. You just have to learn the lens you are using and go with it.

 

Good luck!

[yeux tortu]

Great lens. Plenty sharp wide open.