Hi,

I have a D300 here along with some lenses, among them the 17-55 2.8. While it is a good lense and all, I am reading a lot about the 24-70 2.8. I am really tempted to get this lens and sell my 17-55.

Does this make sense, give the fact that the D300 is a crop body?

Originally Posted by cryptochrome Hi, I have a D300 here along with some lenses, among them the 17-55 2.8. While it is a good lense and all, I am reading a lot about the 24-70 2.8. I am really tempted to get this lens and sell my 17-55. Does this make sense, give the fact that the D300 is a crop body?

What is your goal in making that lens swap (the 24-70mm over the 17-55mm)?
Do you shoot much at the wide end of the Nikkor 17-55mm, f/2.8G AF-S DX IF-ED?

I haven't really analyzed my shots, but out of feeling I would say I use more of the mid to long range on the 17-55. I also have a separate 11-16 2.8 (Tokina) for the wide end.

I can't really tell. My focus on picture taking is fading away from landscapes to more portrait/people stuff. I find myself often using my 70-300 to get up close to people (using the 70 mm end).

And from the reviews I read, the 24-70 seems to make very sharp and good pictures. The 17-55 is not bad, but it never blew me out of my socks, if you know what I mean.

On a crop camera I would be lost without a "standard" zoom, and the Nikkor 17-55mm, f/2.8G AF-S DX IF-ED certainly fits that category. It's just a very handy range especially event stuff which includes indoor family events. It is also a pretty good range for many outdoor activities, aka "walkaround" applications.

If those applications do not apply to your use then the Nikkor 24-70mm, f/2.8G AF-S ED is a very nice lens and capable of professional results (but, so is the Nikkor 17-55mm, f/2.8G, normally.)

You might also consider a prime lens for portraiture and if you found the 70mm focal length appropriate the Nikkor 85mm primes, either one, might be appropriate to your needs.

I have a 24-70 on my KM 7D and it is not wide enuff for me a lot of the times and I also shoot from the mid to long end more but when Iwant wider I do NOT have it.....my thoughts were ....when I change camera brands to go with the Siggy 17-70 which is a variable aperture (2.8-4.5 i believe)......but if I go Oly then it will definitely be the Oly 12-60...................

Originally Posted by ziggy53 On a crop camera I would be lost without a "standard" zoom, and the Nikkor 17-55mm, f/2.8G AF-S DX IF-ED certainly fits that category. It's just a very handy range especially event stuff which includes indoor family events. It is also a pretty good range for many outdoor activities, aka "walkaround" applications. If those applications do not apply to your use then the Nikkor 24-70mm, f/2.8G AF-S ED is a very nice lens and capable of professional results (but, so is the Nikkor 17-55mm, f/2.8G, normally.)

That's what I was thinking too, and those applications definitely apply to some of my usage. I was just wondering if the 24-70 would really take away a lot of that. I mean, we are talking 7 mm here. I just don't know if I would really miss them.

I guess I will have to borrow one for a couple of days and see for myself.

Originally Posted by cryptochrome That's what I was thinking too, and those applications definitely apply to some of my usage. I was just wondering if the 24-70 would really take away a lot of that. I mean, we are talking 7 mm here. I just don't know if I would really miss them. I guess I will have to borrow one for a couple of days and see for myself.

You can set your existing lens to both 17 and 24mm and gauge the difference it makes. It is a substantial difference to me.

Why get rid of the 17-55mm? I totally agree with adding a 24-70mm as this is a pretty good lens from what I have read.
I personally hate having gaps in my range. It always seems like at one time or another you will end up needing it.

I have a 24-70 on my D80 and for the type of shooting I do, it's a perfect match for me. Most of my shooting is in the 35-70 range. I hated the high end of my kit lens because I was always bumping up against the upper limit. My biggest complaint is that it doesn't go all the way to 80 to cover the gap between it and my 80-200 2.8. I guess I'm just going to have to give in and get the 70-200 VR. But I really love the sharpness and focus speed of the 24-70.

it absolutely makes sense on a crop body. I don't conisder it a "waste" because you don't lose anything. In fact in some ways the IQ is superior on a crop due to less edge effects.

I love this lens and use it on my DX bodies all the time with no problems.

Personally, this is my favorite zoom in the Nikon line-up.

I prefer shooting wide and long. For everything in-between, I have a 50. If you're into portraits then I second the recommendation for an 85 1.8. It's inexpensive and a good deal faster than the 24-70. Other options include a 105 VR 2.8 and the 135 2.0 DC.