I've been considering the new Nikon AFS 17-35 zoom. However, I've seen conflicting reports of its optics. Some say its the best performing wide angle zoom on the planet(in those words), that it shows no color fringes whatsoever, is as sharp as zooms get, and have no distorion to speak of, while other compares it unfavorably to the Nikon's own 20-35, refer to serious distortion at 35mm, and softness wide open. Does anyone have any experiences with it?

-- chuck fan (chaohui@msn.com), February 11, 2000

Answers

Possibly you will get similar information having low reliability because of:

1) Sample variations 2) Subjective and differing quality criteria of users 3) Differing expertise of users 4) Insufficent evaluation depending on limited usage 5) Totally junk info to bias potential buyers

I saw conflicting reviews of ALL lenses I am interested in. However David Rueter's evaluations of Nikkors at http://www.ferrario.com/ruether/articles.html seem trustworthy to me, I share his conclusions about the equipment I own. Unfortunately his list does not include 17-35 yet.

-- Umit Dincel (umyth@mailcity.com), February 11, 2000.

Chuck, the AF-S 17~35mm is basically a good zoom lens. It can't be worse than the 20~35mm although I originally thought it was. It is true that pincushion and barrel distortions are very well controlled with this lens. But the lens is definitely soft in the corners at f2.8 - just like most wide zoom lenses. IMO, a good buy if the price right.

-- Alan Yeo (nature_sg@yahoo.com), February 11, 2000.

Thanks guys.

-- chuck fan (CHAOHUI@MSN.COM), February 11, 2000.