how about the Nikon 20-35mm 2.8D for FX...?

[juanjo_viagran]

Hi,

 

wonder how the "old" 20-35mm 2.8D will work on FX..?

 

Thinking in the future I bought a 20-35mm tonight from a local and first

impression is how well made it is...WOW.. nothing short than impressive.

I don't think it will get much use with my DX body, but you think is a good lens

to hold on for the FX's..?

 

and if you have or had the lens, how do you like it..!

 

Thanks..

 

 

PS.

I'm selling or trading my 17-55mm for "the beast" (I'm planing ahead ;)

[japheth_storlie]

If you think that is a nice lens, try to pick up a sample of the 17-35mm f2.8 ... costs about twice as much as the 20-35, but well worth the money if you work wide. I managed to pick one up from E-Bay for $550... makes me wonder... how much more are all of my old, fast, film lenses going to be worth once Nikon starts making more FFs...? Thank you Nikon. :)

[juanjo_viagran]

$550 for a 17-35mm or 20-35..??

if the fist you made the deal of the year...!!!

 

I'm also getting a 14mm 2.8D to go even wider..

 

as I said, planing ahead.. ;)

[lex_jenkins]

I've tried one used 20-35/2.8 in good condition. It wasn't very impressive. It was too soft wide open, far inferior to the 35-70/2.8D AF Nikkor, and there was too much variation in the aperture accuracy throughout the focal range. Most f/stops were off as much as 2/3 EV from the nominal setting. Maybe it was a lemon but I'd hold out for something better.

[juanjo_viagran]

well,

 

things didn't work out well with this 20-35mm either, after making some comparative tests with the 35mm 2D and 17-55mm 2.8, on the D200 w/SB800, the 20-35mm was softer than both at 2.8 and f4, I didn't like it..

 

the good new is that the woman in NYC who sold it to me took it back and I got my money back..

Did I get a lemon too or that's how this lens is.!?

[japheth_storlie]

Juanjo

 

The $550 was for the 17-35... deal of the year... maybe lifetime :) The funny thing is that I found it at the "auction house", bid on it and won it with a min. and a half. I was a little excited to say the least. It has a little wear on the outside but the glass is pristine. Hands down the best lens I've ever owned. It stays on the camera at least 95% of the time. It may be a $1500 lens but WELL worth the price if you ask me.

[dan_lindsay]

The 20-35mm is alright but nothing near the 17-35mm Nikkor. First, the min focus is not that great compared to the 17-35, and it's not as sharp as the 17-35. Forget the 17-55. As a DX lens it will hold you back from future capabilities.