Nikon Af-S 17-35/2.8D If Zoom Nikkor

I'm using this with a D700 full frame DSLR. Sharpness is good even in the corners when stopped down. Its softer at f2.8 but gets increasingly sharper as you stop down. f8 - f13 produce excellent results - and these are the apertures most landscape photographers shoot at.

Big and bulky but still smaller and lighter than the Nikon 14-24mm - plus it takes filters. Its not unreasonably big on a D700 and not a massive burden.

Biggest issue is with the squeeling sound made sometimes by the autofocus motor. This is quite loud and certainly attracts attention! I thought at first this was a fault but a search on Google for Nikon 17-35 af noise sees quite a lot of other people having the same problems! Some have returned the lens for repair and sometimes this does help - though not always. Doesn't actually appear to cause any other issues or lead to mechanical breakdown - just noise. This is the main reason I knocked off a star from the rating.

There's a lot of rumors this lens is due to be discontinued - and certainly its getting harder to find it new. Possibly the optically superior 14-24mm is its replacement but that's a much bigger and more specialised ultra wide angle. This lens is more general purpose, smaller and lighter. Perhaps Nikon will be releasing a new 17-35 soon....

---- Update April 2010 ----

Nikon did release a new lens - the 16-35mm f4 VR lens. I've now swapped the 17-35 and 14-24 for the 16-35. In comparison shots I did the 16-35mm was either as sharp as or sharper than the 17-35mm at all the settings I tested. The VR ( Vibration Reduction ) feature has let me take shots at 1/4 of a second at 35mm - more than compensating for the loss of 1 stop ( f2.8 vs f4 ). Size wise the 16-35 is 50g lighter but slightly longer than the 17-35mm. Also the 16-35mm AF is silent - no squeaking noises! The 16-35mm is also dust sealed.

I can't honestly think of a reason for having the 17-35mm over the 16-35mm.

I bought this lens for my Nikon D700 and did a lot of legwork beforehand. I was apprehensive before it arrived (the hype about this lens included 'just get it' from Ken Rockwell) and waited with baited breath to shoot my first photo. I was not dissappointed. I keep it at 17mm (the widest setting) and have taken some superb sharp fully colour rendered (true to scene as I have ever seen) pics, one of which my wife had blown up and sprayed onto a canvass. What a lovely surprise!

Negatives: It is heavy (got good musculature so it is ok, but with the equally heavy D700, it is quite a package), expensive (got mine for about £970 in total), doesn't like shooting into light source (but who does!), and a tad bulky to carry around.

Positives: Sharp, beautiful wide angle, lovely colours (vibrant autumnal calours without the murkiness that my kit lens gave - 24-120mm), great all purpose lens to some extent.

Overall though, in the imortal words of a Nikon guru (KR) '...just get it...'

Nihal Fernando

Update: I added at the end of my review that this lens of mine had to go in for repair. Five weeks later (at least a week was spent as I had put a ceiling of £200 on it; the quote Nikon UK made was £240, which I accepted), I've now been re-united with my favourite lens and instantly fell back in love with it - and got superb results once more. On my Amazon 'Listmania' titled 'A semi-pro snapper's most used stuff', this 17-35 comes in at no.2, after my D700 DSLR. I used the lens with my (film) F100 prior to the D700.

I might as well give a full countdown of the costs, so anyone with such a lens, maybe ten years plus old, in daily, semi pro use can expect and what they should do with theirs if something similar happens to theirs.

The problem was a sticking zoom ring, which eventually jammed. I went for a complete overhaul and service too, as the main cost is usually the skilled labour costs and so whilst it is in the hands of a Nikon appointed expert, I'd add to the value of the lens as well as the life expectancy of it and they would test it to full spec. I did it through my local, friendly, independent camera shop, as I want to support them too and the carriage costs etc would all be taken care of and should further problems arise.

Here's what they did: 'Dismantle lens to un-jam; service as necessary; replace outer tube, bayonet mount, two rubber rings (the focus and zoom on outside). Re-assemble and test.' Labour charges £124; Parts £78; VAT £26

The zoom action now is well-weighted, v. slightly stiff but SO smooth. No mention of the AF which I've never had a problem with. The optics are also fine but no problems of mould or aperture blades etc. So, a well used secondhand lens that cost me £695 five years ago, from LCE has now cost £935 in total. An excellent S/H model can still go for as much as £1300 (Grays of Westminster) and new RRP is £1800. Consider how much a complete replacement in the form of a new/different model would have been.

My Previous Points:

Having owned two ultrawide zooms before this (Sirius 18-28, when I was an enthusiast) the Nikkor 18-35 f3.5-4.5 (see my separate review on this), this 17-35mm f2.8 lens was held in very high esteem by all. A constant, fast aperture, good close focus and quite handsome, it is also the widest lens that a polariser filter could be fitted onto. It has a decent lenshood, which is often essential as that largish front element (due to the large aperture) can more susceptable to flare. I used it a great deal on my F100, before I went digital.

The guys on the paper I sometimes work with still use one. They use DX Nikon DSLRs, so it's less wideangle for them. I use a FX full frame D700, so get its full range. It's absolutely great in confined situations and spaces and a cinch to use with flash, due to the constant aperture. It can be relied on to give the sharpest results of any lens of such, or similar design, whether f2.8, or f22. Get a bad picture and chances are, it won't be down to the lens.

I prefer not to use AF anyway, but in any case, I've never had any noise problems. It's built like Nikon used to make 'em, so chunky and tough. It handles perfectly with the D700 and a Nikon speedlight and while that's a fair bit of kit, it looks the part and does the job. I back it up with a 70-200mm f2.8 when on a news photoshoot. I also love using it for both industrial and natural landscapes.

In my review of the Nikkor 18-35, I wrote how marked barrel distortion in that lens moved me to this one. Whilst not being totally eradicated, this ugly distortion is just evident but doesn't jump out at you.

Unlike some other reviewers, I'm happy to use this for as long as, well...This remains an honest, unpretentious lens that is known and trusted all over. It's taken me over 30 years as a photographer to afford one and remains an essential piece of kit to me.

I'm adding this some months after my main review. I should now add that the zoom ring has jammed and that it's now been shipped back to Nikon UK for repair. Has this potentially costly fault clouded my feelings toward this lens? On the contrary - the fact that financially it makes good sense to do so is testament enough. Especially for a ten year old lens that will have its S/H price potential reflected by the service that Nikon are also carrying out. I have every confidence that it'll soon be back to being one of my most used - and best quality lenses.