nikon 17-55mm 2.8 vs 28-70mm 2.8

Had a play with something interesting? Got something that we all covet? Found a real lemon? Write a few lines about it, and share your experiences.

Moderator: Moderators

Forum rules
Please ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

nikon 17-55mm 2.8 vs 28-70mm 2.8

Postby RICPIC on Mon Nov 14, 2005 2:27 pm

I have the latter (28-70mm 2.8) which I've been very impressed in terms of performance and results but am wondering how it compares with the 17-55. I like the idea of the shorter focal length of the 17-55. But the 28-70 continues to sell for about $200 more so I'm wondering if there's a catch with the 17-55. Is there no advantage of the DX format over full size lenses in DSLR's? Are folks hedging bets that Nikon will eventually fall into full size sensor DSLR camp?
D200, 12-24DX, 28-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, 105M/2.8, SB800, Rollei 2.8F
User avatar
RICPIC
Newbie
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:54 am
Location: randwick, sydney

Postby MATT on Mon Nov 14, 2005 2:31 pm

Hi RICPIC,

Welcome to the forum. Unfortunatly I cannot comment on the 2 lenses as I have niether. There are some of each here floating around and Im sure youll get a response.

I personally are betting that Nikon go full frame and as such I have not purchsed any DX lenses other than the Kit lens that came with me D70.

Look forward to seeing some of you r pics..


MATT
User avatar
MATT
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1748
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:24 pm
Location: Biloela, QLD-----nikon--D700-----

Re: nikon 17-55mm 2.8 vs 28-70mm 2.8

Postby the foto fanatic on Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:46 pm

RICPIC wrote:I have the latter (28-70mm 2.8) which I've been very impressed in terms of performance and results but am wondering how it compares with the 17-55. I like the idea of the shorter focal length of the 17-55. But the 28-70 continues to sell for about $200 more so I'm wondering if there's a catch with the 17-55. Is there no advantage of the DX format over full size lenses in DSLR's? Are folks hedging bets that Nikon will eventually fall into full size sensor DSLR camp?


You'll find there are always debates about these 2 lenses. You are correct -the 17-55 DX is designed to reduce the image circle and thereby maximise the digital sensors in Nikon cameras. The 28-70 throws an image over the 35 mm (36mmX24mm) format.

I have the 17-55 DX lens, and chose it over the other one because:
- it is smaller and lighter
- it has a 35mm equivalency of 24-80 or therabouts, which is in keeping with the majority of my photography. The other lens would be 40-105 in round terms, a bit longer than I need mostly

There are no problems over the capabilities of the 28-70, it's one of Nikon's best, while there have been grouches over some aspects of the 17-55 DX, mainly consistent build quality.

I probably haven't helped you much. I'd get the one that suits you best both in terms of its physical size and your type of photography.
TFF (Trevor)
My History Blog: Your Brisbane: Past & Present
My Photo Blog: The Foto Fanatic
Nikon stuff!
User avatar
the foto fanatic
Moderator
 
Posts: 4212
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 7:53 pm
Location: Teneriffe, Brisbane

Postby johndec on Mon Nov 14, 2005 6:03 pm

Hi RICPIC and welcome. Just to confuse you a little more and throw up a third option :shock: have a look at this thread:

http://www.dslrusers.net/viewtopic.php?t=11236
If I'm alone in a forest and my wife is not around to hear what I say, am I still wrong ??
User avatar
johndec
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:24 pm
Location: Sans Souci, Sydney...D200....

Postby Onyx on Mon Nov 14, 2005 6:32 pm

I think the price diff is mainly reflecting the perceived uncertainty of the DX format longevity. IMO DX is here to stay, anyone waiting or holding out for "full frame" from Nikon will die forever waiting. <- you can quote me on that and rub it in my face in 10 year's time... (Maybe we should hold off buying F mount lenses too, in case Nikon changes the lense mount in future.) 8)

The 17-55DX is the 28-70 of the digital age. With the crop factor, it's equivalent in range to the latter on film, but both are gold ringed Nikkors so they're both pro quality glass with constant f/2.8 apertures.
User avatar
Onyx
Senior Member
 
Posts: 3631
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 6:51 pm
Location: westsyd.nsw.au

Postby RICPIC on Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:42 pm

thanks for that.

the main reason i'm looking at the 17-55 is because the zoom range is more useable. the 42-105mm equivalent range of the 28-70 on a nikon sensor is a bit nowheresville. but this i already knew and there doesn't seem to be any secret wisdom about DX lenses. i guess it's just that when using film format lenses on nikon DSLR's you don't use all the glass and if Nikon don't go to a full size sensor (which they will resist to the death) you never will.
D200, 12-24DX, 28-70/2.8, 80-200/2.8, 105M/2.8, SB800, Rollei 2.8F
User avatar
RICPIC
Newbie
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Fri Jun 10, 2005 10:54 am
Location: randwick, sydney

Postby birddog114 on Tue Nov 15, 2005 6:19 am

RICPIC wrote:i guess it's just that when using film format lenses on nikon DSLR's you don't use all the glass and if Nikon don't go to a full size sensor (which they will resist to the death) you never will.


Depend on each type of photography you want to do, most of the non DX glasses as the 28-70/2.8 still useable & perfectly on DSLR, I don't see why it's not suitable, I have & use them as the zoom: 17-35, 28-70, 70-200 and prime: 20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/1.4, 35/2.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, 105/2 DC and more......

I tried a 17-55Dx once and ditched it! I didn't like it much and get used with my 17-35 + the range I have above.

The only two DX lenses which I have in my bag is 12-24Dx + 10.5 FE, that's! coz I could not find one same range with non DX.

Nikon full frame is not far away, just save up and ready when it launched.
Birddog114
VNAF, My Beloved Country and Airspace
User avatar
birddog114
Senior Member
 
Posts: 15881
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2004 8:18 pm
Location: Belmore,Sydney


Return to Equipment Reviews