17-55mm 2.8 or ??

[n00g33]

Hi

I've got a d90 and want to get a fast zoom. Need it mainly coz I'm planning to get into wedding photography among other things so I was thinkin about the nikon 17-55mm 2.8. Price is the main issue at the moment but am I right in saying theres no upgrade coming with VR in the near future?

I was also eyeing the tamron 17-50 2.8 which is much cheaper but I'm afraid of a bad sample...

The faster more reliable focus and minimal chance of a dudd lens makes me want the nikon.

What do you guys think?

[old dog]

Timmay.....I got the tamron and it was alright but decided to get a s/h 17-55 of ebay and it is better IMHO. I think the new tammy with VC could be a good economical option though.

[kiwi]

timmary, since youve only just started photography, I'll respectfully suggest buying a pro zoom such as a 17-55, or even better a 24-70 2.8 for weddings is a bit ambitious. I think learning for a year or two before rushing about spending $2K on a lens is a good choice

In saying this, great lenses live forever

But I wouldnt bet on Nikon ever putting VR on the 17-55 or 24-70

[Wayne]

If price is an issue for what can be had used and mint for <$1K, then the Tamron may be your best bet. Shooting weddings will be very costly capital wise to obtain the required gear if that is what you intend to do, and I wouldn't really be relying on Tamron to deliver with that lens.

2nd body, lighting, lens for 2nd body etc etc all adds up.

[campo]

timmary, since youve only just started photography, I'll respectfully suggest buying a pro zoom such as a 17-55, or even better a 24-70 2.8 for weddings is a bit ambitious. I think learning for a year or two before rushing about spending $2K on a lens is a good choice

In saying this, great lenses live forever

But I wouldnt bet on Nikon ever putting VR on the 17-55 or 24-70

I second this, wedding photography is not easy, in fact it's probably one of the hard disciplines as, you need to be quick, know your gear backwards, know how to manage people, know how to shoot in constantly changing lighting conditions and realise when it all boils down (and you remove your expenses from what you might be charging), there's not half as much money in it as most people believe!

getting back to lenses, I shoot weddings with a d300 and a 17-55. It's a great combo and very versatile. I would only buy the 24-70 if I had a full frame body, because 24 on a cropped sensor body is not wide enough for the way i like to cover weddings.

[n00g33]

I've had my d90 for a yr now. I'll just be shooting for friends weddings as a 2nd shooter - nothing paid or pro. was considering it more seriosly but doesn't seem to be worth it for me. But I've got a the kit 18-105 and a 50mm and just wanted a faster lens.

Hows the quality of tamrons? I've heard a lot that they vary in quality?? I'd rather get nikon if it gauranteed a good product. I don't mind the cost.

[Wayne]

You will certainly have greater chance of obtaining a good copy of the 17-55 Nikkor first time round as quality issues seem less prevalent. Tamron make a few great lenses, but some people either have to get adjustment made to them after purchase, or they return one copy for another.

[ronaldhw]

if you want the lens to last, get the nikkor one, nikkor lenses are investment

[gerry]

I personally would go teh nikkor, especially if cost is not an issue - I have the 17-55mm nikkor and bought is secondhand for a good price, from what I have heard IQ wise there is not a huge difference between the two, however there are a couple of other factors in it. The nikkor is big and heavy and teh build quality is much better imo. I actually find this lens a bit too short for portrait stuff, especially when compared to the 24-70, which imo is a dream lens for portraiture on DX.

This lens for me, has seen more landscape shots then anything else, if you are not bothered by the size and weight I think its a great landscape option too.

[kiwi]

well, not really, they depreciate slower than 3rd party lenses, but, Id still prefer shares as an investment

[n00g33]

Thanks for the help guys! I finally got the 17-55mm. and it IS heavy.. my arm got tired after an hr.. cant really go around holding it with one hand anymore...LOL! but its very very sharp all round! I can definately see the improvement to my kit lens.

[campo]

Thanks for the help guys! I finally got the 17-55mm. and it IS heavy.. my arm got tired after an hr.. cant really go around holding it with one hand anymore...LOL! but its very very sharp all round! I can definately see the improvement to my kit lens.

i thought that of the 17-55, but after a heap of weddings and shoots with it, i got used to it and besides, it's light compared to the 70-200 and i have taken shots with the 70-200 with one hand