Nikon AF-S 17-35mm f2.8D, your experience, opinion on IQ: Thinking about getting used Nikon 17-35mm f2.8D to go with my D700. I played with it a little, it’s quite heavy, built quality...

dandi Loc: near Seattle, WA

Thinking about getting used Nikon 17-35mm f2.8D to go with my D700. I played with it a little, it’s quite heavy, built quality is excellent. I like Nikon D lenses. The focusing and zooming are internal.
The lens was introduced in 1999 and is still available new for $1952.
There are many different reviews and opinions on line. Would like to hear about your experience with the lens. Thank you.

nikonbrain Loc: Crystal River Florida

I was looking for a used one like you are . I was offered one from a friend for $800.00 , he said it squealed now and then , and when I looked on ebay a lot that I looked at said that they occasionally squealed so I called Nikon repair in south Florida because I live down here . They said not to buy it if I didn't want to replace the motor soon that the squeal was a sign the motor was failing , I bought the 12mm - 24mm f 2.8 Nikkor instead . My experience only ...good luck. Cost of motor replacement was $550.00 and shipping I would have bought it if he would have sold it for $400.00 . I didn't want to low ball a friend so I passed on his offer...

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Ken Rockwell also mentions the motor issue in his review.
Just following this out of interest...

dandi Loc: near Seattle, WA

Yes, I read about it too. The one am looking at is focusing okay: almost instant and quite.

Bill_de Loc: US

I have owned one since they first came out and still have it. I did replace the AF-s motor after about 9 years of use. It still worked but the squeak was getting loud. It is extremely sharp in the center but that diminishes as you move toward the edges. There is some vignetting @ f/4.0 and wider.

I imagine some of the newer lenses are better at a lower price. However, I have no intentions of replacing mine. If buying used at a good price go for it.

--

dandi Loc: near Seattle, WA

Bill_de wrote:

I have owned one since they first came out and still have it. I did replace the AF-s motor after about 9 years of use. It still worked but the squeak was getting loud. It is extremely sharp in the center but that diminishes as you move toward the edges. There is some vignetting @ f/4.0 and wider.

I imagine some of the newer lenses are better at a lower price. However, I have no intentions of replacing mine. If buying used at a good price go for it.

--

OpticalLimits (used to be photozone.de) confirm what you said: center sharpness is excellent with very good corners. I can live with very good. Newer lenses could be better, but this old lens works very well with D700 and feels great while shooting. Thank you for your input.

https://www.opticallimits.com/nikon_ff/672-nikkorafs173528ff?start=1

cameraf4 Loc: Delaware

dandi wrote:

Thinking about getting used Nikon 17-35mm f2.8D to go with my D700. I played with it a little, it’s quite heavy, built quality is excellent. I like Nikon D lenses. The focusing and zooming are internal.
The lens was introduced in 1999 and is still available new for $1952.
There are many different reviews and opinions on line. Would like to hear about your experience with the lens. Thank you.

"Go wide or go home." I like the look of 17mm for big scenics. But if you want to drop a little weight, check out the Nikkor 16-35mm. That is pretty much my Super-wide of choice these days.

John Howard Loc: SW Florida and Blue Ridge Mountains of NC.

nikonbrain wrote:

I was looking for a used one like you are . I was ... (show quote)

I ave one also but have not used it in years because it also makes a noise when the focus ring turns both MF and AF. Not sure I would call it a squeal maybe more like a scratch. Have not wanted to pay for service so been using the 16-35 F4. Both are sharp lenses and for landscape I don’t miss the F stop.

Eric Bornstein Loc: Toronto Canada

I purchased a Nikon 20-35mm f/2.8, a D Lens, some months ago. I have used it on my crop sensor D500 and will soon use it on my full frame Z6. I love the lens. It was replaced by the 16-35mm and from my readings of reviews, the 20-35 is every bit as good or better than the 16- 35mm. It is also less expensive. By the way, the build quality is fantastic (solid).

colt4x5 Loc: Central Connecticut

cameraf4 wrote:

"Go wide or go home." I like the look of 17mm for big scenics. But if you want to drop a little weight, check out the Nikkor 16-35mm. That is pretty much my Super-wide of choice these days.

Good choice! I had the 16-35 for several years, and loved it. Sharp, rich colors, not too heavy. Very nice lens, if you can manage with f4. I only sold it because I turned more to primes, mostly for the speed.

Leon S Loc: Minnesota

I have and use the 17-35 as well as the 20-35 on both the D700 and D810. Exceptional captures with either camera. Personally I prefer the 17-35. My copy had the motor replaced a week after I bought it so squeaking is not a problem.

photoMark Loc: South Texas

I love mine! It is my "go to" lens for landscapes and Milky Way photography. I purchased mine refurbished from Nikon, and it looked brand new. I have not had any motor noise issues!

jeryh Loc: Oxfordshire UK

I still have mine- I keep it mounted on a D300s; brilliant lens, and a fine walkabout combination.

silver Loc: Santa Monica Ca.

dandi wrote:

Thinking about getting used Nikon 17-35mm f2.8D to go with my D700. I played with it a little, it’s quite heavy, built quality is excellent. I like Nikon D lenses. The focusing and zooming are internal.
The lens was introduced in 1999 and is still available new for $1952.
There are many different reviews and opinions on line. Would like to hear about your experience with the lens. Thank you.

I had the 17-35 and I found some sharpness issues at the edges. I decided to get rid of the lens and I bought a Tamron 15-30 2.8. This is a very superior lens to the 17-35 in all ways.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

I owned this lens during my film days and found it to be a very good lens. I ended up replacing it with a 14-24 but I did enjoy the range of the 17-35. Doesn't have the latest coating, but a great lens. Best of luck.