Lens choice

[giantcanopy]

I would second the Nikon AFS 17-55mm, the last I tried I got good impressions
With a budget of 3k, u might have abit left for something else.

Ryan

 

[mikestrok]

hmm, how a bout Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and a Nikon 70-200mm VR??
Total cost will be how much??

 

[luntut]

hmm, how a bout Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 and a Nikon 70-200mm VR??
Total cost will be how much??

tammy - S$650
70-200VR - S$2950.

 

[Omega23]

The tamron 17-50mm if you manage to get a sharp copy it is freaking sharp.. almost unbelievable:bigeyes:

 

[thotshouse]

The tamron 17-50mm if you manage to get a sharp copy it is freaking sharp.. almost unbelievable:bigeyes:

I have been seeing this quote ... can someone explain in more detail? What do you mean by "if you manage"? If your copy is not sharp, can you send in for replacement/repair?

Also, how do you define sharp? Zoom in 100% and still very sharp? Got any sample of a "freaking sharp" photo taken by a sharp copy of the lens?

 

[virus530]

I think 17-55 is Great For D300.
No regrets.
But Get 2nd Hand is my Advice.
I think can get around 1.5K for good condition one.
You still have 1.5K to spare. Keep it and save it for rainy day.

Forget about the DX or FX Thing.
Unless you are very sure you will upgrade to FX in the near future.
If not then get the DX in my own view. No use foresee future too much.
By the time you wan to upgrade then decide.
Cause before you upgrade, you will know how much cash you have spare to burn, then from there you decide.

In my own view 24-70 although is good, but for DX, it simple not wide enuff. For 17-55, at least I find the range for usable in DX format. But like many say, go find out your most shot range and that will be your answer to your own question.

 

[virus530]

I have been seeing this quote ... can someone explain in more detail? What do you mean by "if you manage"? If your copy is not sharp, can you send in for replacement/repair?

Also, how do you define sharp? Zoom in 100% and still very sharp? Got any sample of a "freaking sharp" photo taken by a sharp copy of the lens?

I suppose there was once a thread mention about front and back focusing issue. I think they referring to that. However if they read on, its user problem. the front/back focusing mostly apply to Sigma.

 

[Omega23]

I have been seeing this quote ... can someone explain in more detail? What do you mean by "if you manage"? If your copy is not sharp, can you send in for replacement/repair?

Also, how do you define sharp? Zoom in 100% and still very sharp? Got any sample of a "freaking sharp" photo taken by a sharp copy of the lens?

Shoot 45 degree downward at newspaper place on a table and focus on a row of words all at f2.8 at 17mm and 50mm then same focal and aperture at a distant subject. I helped 2 friends to get this lens and on the first occasion i tested 3 copies of the same lenses and one having front focusing at 17mm and another one very bad rear focusing for both 17 and 50mm. The last copy is perfectly focus at the area i want for all focal length. On the 2nd occasion the first copy i tried is perfect. So up to you to "test" or not. Usually for all third party lenses i would test.