"pro" digital zoom??

Anybody who reads my reviews will know that I am an absolute stickler for construction quality ESPECIALLY on equipment that is at the top-tier price levels. It seems that Nikon paid attention to its customers and finally made a DX lens that has the same construction quality as top-tier lenses designed for 35mm film. This is exciting news for me because I often stick with my 35mm lenses DESPITE their massive size and weight because of the incredible construction, weather protection and optical performance.

A good friend of mine who does freelance stock work in Toledo came to visit me over the weekend and we OF COURSE got to talking about gear. He had recently purchased some goodies and this lens was among his new acquisitions. I have to admit I was dying to try it out because this definitely was a lens I had on my "short list" for future purchases. I have a 17-35mm F/2.8 full frame Nikkor and I would be more than happy to trade it in on a 17-55mm F/2.8 if it has the same level of performance and construction...

For those interested in brevity... I'm keeping my 17-35mm

For those who need more info read on...

------------------------------------------------
First off...here are the specs from the Nikon site:

Focal Length: 17-55mm

Maximum Aperture: f/2.8

Picture Angle : 79 degrees 50 minutes- 28 degrees 50 minutes

Lens Construction: 14 elements in 10 groups

Lens Drive: Silent Wave Motor

Extra Low Dispersion (ED) Lens: 3 Elements

Aspherical Lens: 3 Elements All Glass

Focusing Type: Internal Focus

Minimum Shooting Distance: 14.2 in. to infinity

Max. Reproduction Ratio: 1:5 (0.20 at Tele)

Minimum F stop: 22

Aperture Blade: 7 elements (Rounded)

Lens Hood: HB-31

Filter Size: 77mm

Case: CL-1120 Soft Case

Dimensions: Approx. 3.4 x 4.4 inches

Weight: Approx. 26.6 oz.

Included Accessories: HB-31 Hood, CL-1120 Case, 77mm lens cap, rear cap


--------------------------------------------------------

some explanation of the terms and what they mean to a person considering this lens

This is a "G" lens and will only work on cameras that use electronic aperture control. The only current model Nikon camera without this feature is the FM10 manual film SLR

This is a "DX" lens and will only properly work on a digital SLR with an APS-C sensor. The only current models that will not work properly with this lens are the F6 and FM10 film SLR's It is fully functional with ALL nikon DSLR's past and present. It will not work properly on a Kodak DLSR with Nikon mount....It will work with the Fuji S3 and other Fuji DSLR's with Nikon mounts.

This is a constant aperture lens F/2.8 meaning that as you zoom it will ALWAYS keep the same aperture no matter what focal length you set it at. This is not a HUGE deal anymore. It was more of a hassle with manual film SLR's and people who liked to use handheld meters. It costs more to make a lens with a constant aperture...no skimping here. The huge F/2.8 aperture means that you have a nice bright viewfinder. I find that to be a great asset. I also love it because its Nikon's first attempt to make a digital zoom in F/2.8 which is the standard for pro optics. Just about every pro level zoom in any focal length up to about 400mm is available in F/2.8. For some reason the DX lenses have avoided constant apertures and large apertures. It’s more expensive to make them this way.


7 rounded aperture blades is sort of typical for a lens in this range. The rounded blades provide for a more pleasing bokeh in the out of focus areas. Since this lens has a larger aperture than most zooms in this focal length it is easier to achieve out of focus effects with this lens.

14 elements in 10 groups. That's pretty exotic stuff. Typically the more elements the better so long as flaring is controlled. Each element has its own purpose in fine tuning performance. The more elements the more "fine tuned" the performance....IN THEORY. More on that later. In contrast the significantly cheaper 18-55mm F/3.5-5.6 uses 7 elements in 5 groups. ...this is definitely more work and materials required to build this lens...hence the much higher price

ED-IF The lens uses special ED coated glass for improved light transmittance, reduced flaring and better control of color aberrations. This has become so typical on Nikkor lenses that it's almost not worth mentioning anymore. I EXPECT this on any Nikkor lens. This lens has 3 ED coated lenses while the MUCH cheaper 18-55mm has only 1. IF refers to a group of elements inside the lens that are used for focusing. This makes focusing much faster and involves much reduced movements inside the lens. This is typical of medium and high priced Nikkor lenses. ...for instance, the 18-70mm Nikkor ( about $350) does include IF ( and also has 3 ED elements) but the much cheaper 18-55mm Nikkor ( about $200) does not.

77mm filter rings.. if you make a top-tier Nikkor lens it BETTER take 77mm.. It's the standard size. When a B&W polarizer costs $165 you don't want to have to buy one for each filter size...you want one size fits all.. 77mm is that size.

AF-S.. refers to the ability of the lens to be manually focused while the camera is in auto focus mode...due to the fact that the motor is in the lens and not the camera body. The key difference is that you don't need to shift the camera or lens into Manual focus mode via a switch to override the autofocus. This SHOULD be on every Nikkor lens and it is finding its way into most of them. Pretty much all the new lenses Nikon is making include the feature. Some older model lenses that are still being made by Nikon might not. In the old days if you just grabbed the focus ring and started twisting away while the camera was in AF mode ( the focus motor in the camera body would be engaged holding the lens in focus) you risked damaging the motor in the camera. This is good because for the most part you just leave your camera on AF and never change it...just focus any way you please.

Aspheric elements are wonderful computer-designed lens elements that have revolutionized the lens industry. They solve/reduce many distortion problems. They are expensive to design and produce. This lens has 3. In contrast the 18-70mm has one and the 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 has one "hybrid" aspheric element. Some people feel these elements have a negative effect on bokeh. I am indifferent in that debate.

THEORETICALLY. this lens SHOULD be truly amazing....have minimal distortion, no chromatic aberrations, deliver amazing resolution, and be practically immune to flaring.

more on that later...

Construction...

Do you hear that sound? that's me skipping around the room like a little girl singing the praises of Nikon. FINALLY a DX lens that is BUILT like a 35mm film lens. I have been so disappointed with other lenses in the DX lineup that cost just as much as their 35mm cousins, perform very well but are built like cheap toys. Don't believe what you read in Popular Photography or Shutterbug when they talk about the superior construction of DX lenses. They are being nice and they are being paid to say that. DX lenses are built like cheap plastic toys in comparison to even mid priced 35mm full frame lenses from Nikon. THIS IS THE EXCEPTION..

OHH....drooool.... METAL EVERYWHERE!! weather seals, nice wide zoom and focus rings, the focus ring is easy to use and it's positioned where it SHOULD BE...in front of the zoom ring!!... a beautiful heft and weight to the lens (26.6 oz) that really serves a purpose. Heavy lenses attached to heavy cameras are easier to hold steady and allow for better blur control in low light. They also balance nicely with the heavier pro DSLRs. If you attach a heavy lens like this to a D50 it will seem front heavy and unbalance. Attach it to a D200 or D2X and it seems to meld perfectly with the camera creating a beautiful weight balance with the lens. It "feels" right. A nice large lens hood is provided that actually is big enough to do the job.

now here's the hard part... here's where I explain how Nikon really dropped the ball...and why I won't ever buy this lens no matter how well it's constructed.


Performance.....sorry folks..all that glass..all those ED and Aspheric elements, all those elements in all those groups lovingly placed in such a battle hardened exterior perform adequately... and that's the kindest word I can find

Distortion at the widest settings is not only visible..its not even a LITTLE improved vs. the 18-70mm or even the 18-55mm ( 1/8th the price!). I see no visible differences in my images vs. the 18-70mm lens I normally use...and I compared the two very closely for 2 straight days. I so terribly WANTED to see a difference. I can't do it...I can't honestly sit here and say you get ANYTHING for your money other than a stop faster speed and better construction. At $1200+ its is almost impossible to justify the price vs. the $350 18-70mm lens. And the 18-70 has more reach!

Flaring is an issue that is common with less expensive lenses, but one that is normally well controlled in top-shelf glass. This Nikkor has a serious issue with flaring and I have to say that it is NO improvement over the more mundane glass available for Nikon backs. (update june 2007)I can't stress this issue enough... I've been using this lens daily for the last few months and the flaring issue is HUGE with this lens. You cant point it anywhere near a bright light or the sun without introducing evil green flare spots that totally ruin the image. I daresay that my MUCH cheaper Nikkor "kit" zooms perform better under the same circumstances.

I'm sorry...I want to tell you it was worth the money and that I'd hock my kids to own one. I think there's a reason that many people don't even know this lens exists. I've never even SEEN one for sale at any camera store....and I shop at stores that have full lines of Leica and large format gear. The lens just is a big disappointment optically. The 17-35mm full frame Nikkor is so far superior to this lens and shows so little distortion vs., this lens that I say it is the hands-down winner. Don't even consider the 17-55mm if you want ultimate performance...buy the 17-35mm and deal with the 35mm long end. If you want performance but aren't willing to part with $1200 for your basic zoom...then heavily consider the 18-70mm or better yet, buy the 18-200mm and pocket the change. You are NOT losing anything in the distortion department on the wide end. If you are worried about the ruggedness of the 18-70mm then buy 3 and pocket the difference. .... ALL you are getting with the 17-55mm is construction quality.


-----------------------------------------------------------

Update: March 2007.... I finally broke down and actually bought one of these lenses when I had the opportunity to get one at a great price(practically free) from a photog friend who went out of the biz. I've had it for about 6 months now and I have to stick by my guns on this one. The perfromance is no better than the 18-70mm Nikkor other than the constant aperture and superior construction quality. Optical performance is pretty much the same.....AVERAGE. I REALLY hate the flaring issue with the lens. It pops up in every pic I take with a strong light source and its a constant editing issue for me. I often select my Sigma 18-50mm F/2.8 when shooting in strong light because of its better controlled flare. I expect a lot more from a top-shelf Nikon. So far Nikon has made some strong entry-level glass for the APS sensor but the top-shelf glass like the 17-55mm F/2.8 and the 12-24mm F/4 simply fall short of the mark when compared to similarly priced glass designed for the 35mm frame.

and dont forget the flare... wow is it bad.. NOT a lens for the shooter who prefers outdoors shots in unusual light where there is a substantial bright light... sunsets, sillouettes against the sun etc.. OOFAH ..its the worst lens I own for this problem.

---------------------------------------------

update 9/1/07

Now with the reintroduction of FULL FRAME in to the Nikon vocabulary it becomes painfully obvious that this "pro" lens will forever be relegated to the second tier behind the much more competant glass designed for the FX camera backs. Not only does the "pro" glass in that category actually perform to expectations, but is solidly constructed and competitively priced ( within its performance category). DX will merely be a footnote in Nikon's past and all of us who were duped into believing that Nikon was dedicated to the DX sensor size should remember this. Thank God I still have all my old lenses. I kept them because they performed flawlesslly despite their size....Im glad I kept them because now they will have new life on the FX mount.