JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 242000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Sharpness, Natural Colors, Solid Construction and 77mm Filters
Cons:Unsuitable for night photos (Milky Way), soft at edges, risk of breakage AF motor
Opinion:I bought this lens for my Nikon d750, attracted by the ability to mount 100mm filters and color rendering very similar to Zeiss. RnReals images with little contrast and perfectly workable, the distortion is also contained at 17mm and sharpness at 2.8 is very good.rnThe painful note for my use is excessive fate coma at f2.8 that makes it unsuitable for night photographs ( A solution is to use the astro tracker and take the milky way at at least f4 to reduce this problem), this has brought me to this fantastic lens the Tamron 15 30.rnrnP.S. My exemplar does not suffer from the classic whistle during the use of AF.rn
Pros:Crystal-clear (from F4 on), beautiful colors, good maf.
Cons:If shooting in 35mm of persons, f2.8 known some softness.
Opinion:Bought used 500 €. I honestly did not expect a great quality, and instead has much colpito.Un I bit soft at f2.8, that known only by taking photos of a person (as a landscape I have still a good sharpness). They told me that sometimes the focus is a whistle, but in my case I had no problems. I have rarely that the focus has the wrong size, but it may be that this depended more from the camera body (D600) and not from the lens.
Cons:excessive distortions on edges at 17 with aberrations of all tipi..vignetta 2.8 but for portraits may be an advantage
Opinion:taking lens used coupled with D7000in pending before the passage in fx. now in D600 expresses its real potential .. that dire..veramente multipurpose, made me discover the pleasure of portraits settled, is not crystal clear indeed my tokina 12 24dx seems to have better edges, but the 17 35 has better color fidelity and against the loss in contrast is less obvious but more especially clean, the focal 30-35 more congenial to me has a good three-dimensional (certainly not a 35 1.4) I think for the naturalness that gives the tonal passages, the picture probably accomplice technology of the new CMOS fx, generally does not require big changes if a ritocchino the contrast curve, but then again it is not a lens for fans of pixels 100% for the type of photos they wish to address, the images it produces are seen to what they are, not lines / mm, there are other lenses for it ... I like my cosi.rnp.s is older and not fischia.rnrnrnrn
Pros:Filters 77mm, natural colors, excellent construction
Cons:Chromatic aberrations and made the edges of D750.
Opinion:I own this perspective for several years and has always satisfied on D700. Stopping down to F: 5.6 yield was, in my opinion, good beyond perfect. D750 now on some flaw in most appeared, even at F: 8 edges are not perfect and aberrations, enlarging the photo to 100% are clearly visible, but with a little patience in PP are eliminate.rnIl my AF after a storage period long enough began to whistle but after three years continues to perform well.
Pros:Construction, Excellent Sharpness from f4, Filters 77mm, Colour Rendering, Focal Range
Cons:Sharpness at f2.8 and at the edges up to f5.6, Weakness AF
Opinion:I replaced it with the 14-24 which is objectively superior especially in 2.8 where the 17-35 leaves something 'to be desired, but in some ways I miss: has a contrast much softer and more open shadows, reminiscent 'surrender of Zeiss Distagon T. The rest is built like a rock, mounts 77mm filters instead of plates abnormal, is more compact than the 14-24, reaches 35mm and does it with style. In short, apart from the absence of all AF-S before the series that had the AF which tended to merge after a few years, a lens that I really liked and I prefer to 16-35 today. And who will buy maybe, who knows ...
Pros:Brightness, strength, mount the filters 77, good resolution if closed.
Cons:Weight, soft at the edges at TA
Opinion:And 'perspective as powerful as focal length and brightness accordingly but heavy. The brightness, however, is to be exploited only in an emergency to not undermine the bordi.rnLa distortion is not very high, is barely noticeable and easily corrected in PP.rnLa color rendition is neutral in line with all other Nikon. rnIl weight limits its use, it is a perspective that you are bringing just in case. The door is if it knows of usarla.rnUna is worth mentioning the fact that the mountains are the filters from 77 enough standard.rn
Pros:Weight, focus, sharpness, build, fast autofocus
Cons:Aberrations especially at the edges
Opinion:I've been using this lens for a few months and I'm really satisfied. I find that the range of focal length to me more 'appropriate. Loses sharpness to the extreme edges at 2.8 and 17 mm, but since 5.6 it becomes perfectly clear, a bit 'of aberrations always on the sides but that in most cases do not create problems and are only seen at higher magnification. Found AF used without wheezing.
Cons:Weight, often heavy fringing at the edges in all apertures and focal open.
Opinion:The objective use of more 'not only for its zoom and that' perfect for my kind of pictures, but also for the quality 'constructive and sharpness. A bit of vignetting at the edges and 'normal grand'angoli pushed and 17-35 and not' less. The only drawback, and 'it with my D3 there' sa bit too fringing at the edges, difficult to remove in post. The lens is' very heavy in its kind. Install filters in slim version, leads to greater and sometimes heavy vignetting. After many years of use, the autofocus makes me a metallic hiss.
Pros:Size and weight, sharp, fast AF, optical performance.
Cons:Hard to find, yet expensive.
Opinion:Very versatile lens on FF for his versatility as an optical journey, landscape, ceremony, reports and more. Of robust construction although it is not tropicalized. AF very fast and quiet considering it is not a lens recently. Made the "old way", ie smooth transition between the various shades of color and trend unlike the "N" series latest to open the shadows. Not by chance is still very popular with photographers ceremony. In contrast to the 14-24 can mount filters (for those who consider it necessary) as long thin type as the field angle. Loses detail at the edges at the widest apertures above all to 17mm, but is still very clear in all other focal lengths. Also possess the 14-24 that assures outstanding performance, but I've always resisted selling this lens because of its portability and because covering focal lengths more suited to my needs. Still costs a lot and on the used market if you do not find many. Someone complains about a hissing sound in 'AF after that has not been used for a little time, but in my case I never noticed. For Nikonisti .... a must!
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
