Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Chris, Because you say the 17-35 is slower than the 15-55 I assume you're referring to focusing speed (they're both f2.8 lenses). I meant slow max aperture compared to an f2 or f1.4 lens (or a Noct). The 17-55 is a great, I agree. I use mine a lot, most of the time in program mode. I can jack up the ISO on my D200 and make it usable in low light, but I rarely pay attention to DOF. When I use fast (aperture-wise) lenses I'm always acutely aware for DOF and often use them for that reason, even when there's plenty of light. I may use a lens at f1.4 and f2 at 1/500. I'm also more concerned with DOF in BW than I am with color photography. I'll go out on a limb and say that the Nikkor 17-35/2.8 AF may be the best WA zoom available from any manufacturer. I don't own one but a friend of mine does. We compared the 17-35 and 17-55 DX with dozens of tests shots of various (difficult) scenes using a tripod mounted D2x. We also compared them to several primes. The whole exercise made me a believer in zooms, in the Nikon digital world at least. Both performed above my expectations. There was one instance where the 17-35 looked like it performed better than the 17-55. It was a very challenging architectural shot. The difference was in the corner of the frame, had to do with chromatic aberration. Again, it was very slight. It's hardly worth mentioning other than to say it made the 17-35 the winner, optically. OTOH, I could own either and I still choose the 17-55 DX. DaveR -----Original Message----- From: Christopher Williams [mailto:leicachris@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:26 PM To: Leica Users Group Subject: [Leica] Re:Exceptional lenses, and their value today Wait............ your 17-55/2.8 DX lens is slow??? Come on, that lens rocks, speed style heavy metal. 80% of my work comes from that lens. And it's smaller than the slower 17-35/2.8 AF. Chris