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
The Nikon AF-S DX 17-55mm f/2.8 G ED is a standard lens for APS-C, manufactured from 2003 to 2020 (discontinued). The focus is done by Ultrasonic AF Motor (Ring-USM), it does not have image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 1763 €;
65 users have given it an average vote of 9.4 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Nikon F: this lens is compatible with reflex APS-C Nikon.
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 247000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Opinion:It's absolutely a professional lens. Excellent clarity even at full opening. It's a tank. Impressive feeling of solidity and robustness. I also really like blurry is the color rendering. I sold it because I switched to another system and especially to a mirrorless one. Despite a 2003 target, its validity is timeless. very good! It is clear that it is not a feather but this must be put in the account.
Opinion:I've been using it for a year now on Nikon d7100 and I feel I can make a judgment. I took it used at 500 degrees in my opinion an acceptable figure, new, at the current state of the photo market, it is not worth it. Let's get to the target. The focus for my needs is perfect as everything to do, you quickly move from the landscape to the street to the portrait in the blink of an eye. The focus is quite close and also allows you to create good closed ups or tight portraits. By comparison the 50 F1.8g that I had and sold I preferred the tight portraits this as it will be the 5mm more but the distortions that you notice using a 50 to make a face with this are very small, of course better a long focal but in extremes is fine too. Constructively and how much better you can ask but the price to pay is the heaviness, on average reflex you balance well but already on the d7100 a little unbalances forward. The thing I like the most? that as the focus changes, the focus does not change.... it will be trivial but in most economic goals this happens and I hate it... The distortions at 17mm in my opinion are very small. Autofocus quick and silent on accuracy I have to say that I have a problem, I do fine calibration but every now and then, after a little use I will stand and have to retard it. maybe it's a defect of the lens or the machine but I may have bought (used) a lens with this defect but at the moment I can't give an explanation. The sharpness according to many is not the best, but for me it is great and I use it on a machine very dense of pixels, certainly the Tokina 11-20 and the macro sigma 105 when I enlarge hold better but sincerely all this scarcity that you read around I do not find it... obvious that at 2.8 and 55mm a little loses but in my opinion always in an acceptable way. The only sore note is the lampshade... It will definitely be functional but it is as long as half the goal, for me too big so much that I often use it without.
Pros:Macrocontrast, sharpness, AF, construction, colors
Cons:A little bit of AC, it costs a kidney, weight
Opinion:This is along with the Canon 70-200 2.8 The best zoom lens ever had, it makes the Nikon DX sensor excellent. It Has a very capillary yield, warm colors, all the features of what you resume have repercussions with an unusual sharpness and three-dimensionality for a zoom. Who says that at 2.8 is soft broke it or Starato, is well sharp and contrasted, keeping a good reading shadows, reaches the peak at 5.6, is fine even in landscaping. Heavy, over 800g, Comrie is built a tank, however every time I see what I strive to convince me to leave it on the nozzle. The AF is never wrong, only thing a bit ' of purple AC, in post take off with a click. If you can afford it is to buy.
Opinion:Stunning lens, one wonders why Nikon has made a professional APS-C zoom as well, and the 24-70 Plasticaccia. It is really egregia, starting from the construction, to go to the optical quality, and to conclude with the speed of the AF. It's big, all metal, with a plastic lens hood but really well built. Definitely the best APS-C zoom on the market. The stabilizer is absent, so it is a matter to consider. Obligatory purchase for professionals who use Nikon APS-C (maybe on d500 where it generates a stunning coupled especially as AF speed in the dark), but also for advanced amateurs who want to stay in reduced format. Priced at around €600, it's a must-buy.
Pros:A real Nikon pro at the old. Af. Interesting used if really in good condition not above the 550 euros.
Cons:Dated, lack of stabilizer, price of the new today.
Opinion:I've had this gorgeous optics for a few years on D200 and D300. I think it's fair to pay tribute. Nothing to say. Colors, saturation, contrasts, depth, backlight, typically in the best Nikon tradition. Crystal clear. Fast and high performance AF. The valid Sigma 17-50 2.8 which I also tested for good, simply disappears at the comparison but costs around 250 euros new. Built like a tank, in DX and in zone of war, crawling in the mud at night under the tracers wielding a D500, I would still like him also to use it as improper weapon to the must and I think-but I am not sure-that should be able to solve the sensor. However it suffers from time. Not so much because it is big, imposing and heavy but because it does not have the stabilizer, the distortion is there all even if today it goes to place with a click in zero time. In the years of the Admirals in DX its price seemed more than justified, stabilizer aside, for someone could still be today. Great lens also from portrait, with a blurry to TA that has nothing to envy to its full frame counterparts. Today – Personal opinion – I preferred him the new 16-80 2.8/4. Maybe even a better thread sharpness at the edges, focal length "all do" certainly more comfortable, finally the nanocrystals and the last generation stabilizer have revived my old D300 that I will keep until I can use it only as a door stop. Sure it's plastic, stracosta, it's not weather sealed like the 17-55 but it's much more compact and lighter. With the D500 around, if they made an updated version of the 17-55 maybe 16-58 always 2.8 and built with tank tropicalized, with the latest generation VR around 1500 euros, could make sense. The full format now for me is without mirror, but who had DX-level bodies with a discreet kit of optics, maybe a thought could also make us.
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
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.
