Tests and reviews for the lens Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
Measurements and specifications
| Announced | 1999-06-01 |
| Indicative price (USD) | 1764 |
| Aperture | f/2.8 |
| Focal range (mm) | 17 - 35 |
| Filter diameter (mm) | 77 |
| Max diameter (mm) | 82.5 |
| Mount type | Nikon F FX |
| Stabilization | No |
| AF Motor | SWM |
| Zoom type | Ring |
| Rotating front element | No |
| Tripod mount | No |
| Color | Black |
| Full-Time manual focus | Yes |
| Number of lenses | 13 |
| Number of groups | 10 |
| Diaphragm blades | 9 |
| Circular aperture | Yes |
| Length (mm) | 106 |
| Weight (gr) | 745 |
Certain fields may be left blank. They will be updated as soon as possible.
in P-Mpix
in EV
in EV
in micrometer
Further readings for the Nikon AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED
To provide photographers with a broader perspective about mobiles, lenses and cameras, here are links to articles, reviews, and analyses of photographic equipment produced by DxOMark, renown websites, magazines or blogs.
|
Introduced in 2007 alongside the AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED and Nikon’s first full-frame DSLR – the 12-megapixel Nikon D3 – this lens was a first of its kind and set new standards for image quality for ultra-wide angle lenses. How does this lens perform on demanding high-resolution bodies, such as the 36-MPix Nikon D800? DxOMark has the answer. |
|
Launched in spring 2010, the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR was a very good surprise for Nikon enthusiasts who previously had only a choice between the very good but expensive (and heavy) AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED and the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED. |
Comments
|
Added by Gilgamesh |
March 25, 2012
Puzzled by your data
Hi there,
I can't help but wonder... I shopped around quite a bit before I bought that lens a couple of years ago, and have been totallly satisfied with it so far. As far as I could tell at the time, it was considered an excellent choice, at least before the 16-35 mm lens was available. The information I found at the time was not as technical as what I can find here, but since I'm not a pro nor a technical data specialist, I felt comfortable enough to shell out the 1700-ish $. If the 17-35 mm gets such dismal results with your panel of tests, how could I use any of your data to help me choose new lenses?! I know numbers are not the only means to describe a lens, but still, showing this lens at the poor end of your spectrum is quite disturbing. I won't stop using it, of course, but I will probably more rely on personal opinions than DXO Mark's results to help me choose new lenses. Reply |