Nikkor 18-35 G

I have to admit, this lens has got my attention, It appears to have corrected the flaws of the ealier ED version, and provides a really nice value/dollar and meets my criteria of not too large for a walkaround.

I have been debating the 14-24, 16-35, 17-35, and this now 18x35,, and I am leaning toward the 18x35,,

now a used 17-35 2.8 is almost the same price as a brand new 18x35, for a faster lens, most likely better build quality, but opticially, I am not so sure, and definitely heavier.

So.. has ANYONE had any real time with the new 18x34 G lens?

I have not seen it yet, but it will be my next lens. Researched as much as possible, from everything I have read, it will blow away the expensive 17-35.

Yes,,, that is what I am hearing, I might pull the trigger any day now.

I had the older 18-35 and I now have a 16-35 f/4. The 16-35 is womderful in every aspect. If I would ever lose it, I'd buy another one immediately.

Yes,, the 16-35 is the other choice, about 50% more money too!,, just finished up my taxes, and well, after I write the check to the govt, I'll have to wait a while before buying any lens

If I had a "do-over" I think I would opt for the 17-35mm f/2.8G instead of the 14-24mm so I would have access to a Cokin filter system, in addition to saving a couple bucks.

stmv said:

Yes,, the 16-35 is the other choice, about 50% more money too!,, just finished up my taxes, and well, after I write the check to the govt, I'll have to wait a while before buying any lens

Click to expand...

It is strange for me to read this since I was just discussing a similar topic with my co-worker. He was asking me why product "A" is 3 times more expensive than product "B". I told him that this is not limited to photography equipment but just about most products.

For example, why buy a Nikon 35mm f1.4G that cost around $1,800 where you can buy a Samyang 35mm f1.4 lens for $480? Buying Mercedez benz over Honda? Why not just use your iPhone instead of buying a D800? Why buy a beach front property where you can buy a mansion somewhere in Nevada for example?

Some user reviews from amazon:

Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5G ED AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLRs

gqtuazon said:

It is strange for me to read this since I was just discussing a similar topic with my co-worker. He was asking me why product "A" is 3 times more expensive than product "B". I told him that this is not limited to photography equipment but just about most products.

Click to expand...

And every once in a while a product comes along that costs a fraction of the more expensive option while delivering the same quality. In the case of the 18-35, you essentially give up constant aperture and heavy build quality without sacrificing optical quality. For some, build quality is right up there with the most important qualities of a lens, for others optical quality and weight are more important.

The cost difference here lies primarily in lens technology and construction. A fixed aperture lens array is on a zoom is historically more expensive from both an R&D and production point of view. What you also have in the 16-35mm is a lens with no external length change across the zoom, with all movement internal. These types of lenses tend to be a little sturdier and less impervious to dust and moisture getting in. So there are trade-offs, but they're not as obvious or relevant straight out of the box.