Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Wide-Angle
17-35mm F/2.8D Nikkor vs. 14-24mm F/2.8G Nikkor lens
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="DW_" data-source="post: 47485" data-attributes="member: 8667"><p>I have an opportunity to purchase a beautiful 17-35mm lens that looks like it's never been used at all for $1300 and has approximately 2.5 yrs left on the warranty. It comes with this incredible felt-lined case that looks like it would survive a tactical nuclear strike. There's not a mark or scuff anywhere to be seen on the lens. The seller claims he's not used it nearly as much as he thought he would and instead uses a 35mm F/1.4G.</p><p>Here's my problem. I have been on the fence as to whether my next lens should be the massive 14-24mm wide angle or this not-so-wide angle 17-35mm. On the positive side, the 17-35mm has less elements, which equals less reason to need repair, however the lens squeaks when focusing, something these lenses are notorious for. </p><p>So what do you think? Should I go ahead and make the jump on this lens or wait and pick up a 14-24? And what to make of the squeakiness? Is that a signal of bad things ahead? Is it something that a trip to the repair shop can fix?</p><p></p><p>Ah...decisions, decisions.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DW_, post: 47485, member: 8667"] I have an opportunity to purchase a beautiful 17-35mm lens that looks like it's never been used at all for $1300 and has approximately 2.5 yrs left on the warranty. It comes with this incredible felt-lined case that looks like it would survive a tactical nuclear strike. There's not a mark or scuff anywhere to be seen on the lens. The seller claims he's not used it nearly as much as he thought he would and instead uses a 35mm F/1.4G. Here's my problem. I have been on the fence as to whether my next lens should be the massive 14-24mm wide angle or this not-so-wide angle 17-35mm. On the positive side, the 17-35mm has less elements, which equals less reason to need repair, however the lens squeaks when focusing, something these lenses are notorious for. So what do you think? Should I go ahead and make the jump on this lens or wait and pick up a 14-24? And what to make of the squeakiness? Is that a signal of bad things ahead? Is it something that a trip to the repair shop can fix? Ah...decisions, decisions. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Wide-Angle
17-35mm F/2.8D Nikkor vs. 14-24mm F/2.8G Nikkor lens
Top