I bought this lens yesterday and works soooooooo well on my D7500. I couldn’t believe how much photo changes when you change lens. Unbelievably good
@CapturedByKen
5 жыл бұрын
It's crazy how in 2019, I'm looking to buy this lens and this video came out yearsssss ago
@MrYankee853
5 жыл бұрын
yep...same here
@sikam2006
5 жыл бұрын
Same here I have order him and I ll have it in one month! I am very curious if I ll be satisfied or not! I am afraid very much the weight!
@petrikokko1441
5 жыл бұрын
I'm also in the same boat. It has never been superceded no matter how much they promote the 16-80 it's not the same.
@400hpmustang
5 жыл бұрын
Looking for a lens to shoot bands in low light environments and a bit of zoom. I can get within 10ft of the stage generally, is this the lens I need? Has to be better than my 3.5-6.3 Sigma.
@mst7806
5 жыл бұрын
Yep, I just bought one for my D500, it's an amazing lens that was way ahead of its time when it was released.
@LeighAndRaymond
12 жыл бұрын
@anaemik It's not quite as sharp as a prime, but it's darn close throughout the entire zoom range. I shoot it quite often at aperture priority f4. That's a good setting for this lens as it is still good in low light at f4 and is approaching the sweet spot in sharpness for this lens.
@Warongpustaka
9 жыл бұрын
Hi +[TheSnapChick] , may i ask ? is it still worthed to buy this lens in 2015?
@jacobl6572
10 жыл бұрын
I had a Nikon 16-85, 17-50 Tamron and now have the 17-55. It is a high performance lens that will focus fast and well in low light, great for weddings. Much better than pro consumer lenses. Even at F2.8 it is sharp so you can be confident with it for portraits giving you nice boka. I wish I had bought it years earlier thinking VR was a real need...A pro lens in every way, well sealed better than the rest but it is a heavy metal tank.
@JimiHendrix998
5 жыл бұрын
I use this lens on my D7200. It works very well as a goto for travel photos.
@MegaBertelsen
3 жыл бұрын
And now in 2021 - it´s still my favourite lens. Just amazing. I had it repaired for 400 Euro, but it works again like new.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@Giannibike Hi! I don't really get into "better," etc... use what works for you. The reasons why I typically opt for Nikon are the image quality and build quality of their lenses and the excellent support I have received from Nikon. In the comparison you describe, I have not used the Tamron 17-50, so I cannot compare from my own experience. Although a friend had a negative experience with her 3rd party 18-200, I do not interpret that to be representative of all 3rd party lenses.
@MarcoACasco
9 ай бұрын
You really do know what you are saying !!! Really appreciatte you sharing your professional experience !!!!
@roybixby6135
6 жыл бұрын
One of the few "Must Own" nikkor DX lenses. I even prefer it to my 24-70 nikkor on my FF nikons...
@LeighAndRaymond
11 жыл бұрын
I'd shoot portraits with the 17-55 all day.
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@Flante Yes, that depends on how long you would see yourself with the D300s. Mitigating factors to buying the 17-55 now would be - 1. Resale value on ebay is between $800 and $1,000. 2. Assuming you bought a future full-frame camera with the same resolution of the D3x, the 17-55 would operate at 10.5mp. This may or may not be acceptable to you.
@LeighAndRaymond
11 жыл бұрын
Overall, the 17-55 will produce sharper photos in more lighting situations. The 18-200 is more versatile from a wide-angle-to-telephoto perspective, but does not handle darker conditions as well as the 17-55.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@NAGULNR2 The D7000, the bigger brother of the D90, is not sealed as well as the D700. The 17-55 is well sealed for a zoom, but water can harm any lens. Sports photographers, etc... use plastic bags for their gear when the weather gets wet. FX format will give you better high ISO performance and wider angles on the same lenses.
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@kumarramachandran Yes, there is a drawback... the full-frame camera will crop the image down to DX size when you use a DX lens like the 17-55, as the image circle from the 17-55 will not cover the entire sensor in a full-frame camera. I think you'd end up with something around a 5 megapixel image. Personally, this would not bother me as long as the image is sharp. For many folks, though, this would be a deal breaker.
@LeighAndRaymond
12 жыл бұрын
@anaemik My D2x is a DX body and many folks use grips - both scenarios are a bit annoying with this lens. Regular cameras with added grip will often be a bit taller than the D2x. FX cameras will automatically crop their sensor area with this lens, but that can be overridden, as many DX lenses will produce a full image circle. I'm not suggesting people do that, but it's an option.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@deadkrusty6 I am a BIG fan of the 17-55. Some people avoid it because they may go for an FX sensor in the future, but I'm more oriented toward using the best gear for the camera bodies that I have today. It's a great lens. Franky, with the 17-55 and the 70-200, there isn't much else you would need to "get the shot." I do love the 18-200 and the 35mm f1.8, but the flexibility of the 17-55 combined with the f2.8 throughout the zoom range make it a real winner.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@TheMiszerak It's all a matter of what you like to shoot. I use the wide end on this lens quite a bit, so it serves my needs well.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@9unslinger You can use it with the marking up or the marking down with no issues. You can disconnect and re-orient the hood at any time by pushing the button on the hood and twisting it off - it should twist off easily, with virtually no effort.
@MrOnegesius
4 жыл бұрын
She's a bit confused 1) At 2:00 she says the Focusing is done in-camera. 2) "Focusing Ring" complaint at 4:50 is talking about the Zoom Ring, not the Focus Ring. This is still the BEST DX lens today (Dec 2019). It is the equivalent lens for use as the FX 24-70 lens which nobody complains about or questions the relevance of.
@sexytasmin
10 жыл бұрын
Hi Snapchick the zoom ring is nearest to the lens mount not the focussing ring as stated in the video.
@Clint_the_Audio-Photo_Guy
10 жыл бұрын
This was my favorite lens back when shooting DX. Only problem I ever had was when it stopped focusing for about 5 minutes during a big family shoot. I got 2 blurry shots that I had to show the customer and was pretty embarrassed. Otherwise a very good DX lens. Shot many weddings with it.
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@hurcell1 It may be painful to consider if you've customized many options, but you could do a factory reset on the camera to make sure that one of your other settings is not taking priority... though few come to mind.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@voiceinyourdream I can't speak for my audience, but I think a lot of people like to see the operations of something that they might buy. With online buying becoming a primary form of camera/lens purchases, videos are the next best thing to picking up and handling a lens in a camera shop.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@magvek It should be! Note that I have not used a D7000, but the 17-55 is great on any of the bodies that I have used it on - D60, D70, D80, D90, D2x, D300s... I would bet it is stellar on the D7000!
@anaemik
12 жыл бұрын
@TheSnapChick Oh, that's very encouraging! I didn't expect it to be quite as sharp as a prime, but anything close is definitely making this look more tempting by the minute. Thanks again for all your swift responses - really appreciated :)
@paganphil100
4 жыл бұрын
Its now 10 years since this video was made and this is still my "carry everywhere" lens :-)
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@RobertVelascoA Generally speaking, you should use the hood that is matched to the particular lens. The hood must be out of the field of view of a zoom lens at the widest angle.
@hurcell1
14 жыл бұрын
No, I had it set on AF-A. However I tried AF-S and AF-C but to no avail. I'll keep working on it to see if I'm creating this challenge (user error) lol. Please share any other ideas you may come up with. Thanks
@LeighAndRaymond
11 жыл бұрын
It's very good in low light. Focusing is quick. For nightclub photography, you could also consider something like the 35mm f1.8DX or one of the 24mm or 28mm offerings. The 17-55 is more expensive than those, but would give you the most flexibility.
@corykphotography
Жыл бұрын
What about concert photography? I am shooting with a D5300
@corykphotography
Жыл бұрын
I just picked up a used and working one off of ebay for 150!!! My bday was 2 days ago and they gave me an amazing deal
@PetrLunak
13 жыл бұрын
@Giannibike I had the same opinion 3 years ago. That's ok. When it comes to prize/performance, the Tamron is winner. No doubt about it. But in my Tamron there are after 3 years of shooting many dust dots, which is not ..lets say..nice:/ I also bought a new camera, D7000, so now I'm deciding which better build objectiv to choose. My final choice is the new Nikkor 16-35/4, which is optically better than 17-55/2,8 and cost less money. And it has VR, which somtetimes comes handy.
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@hurcell1 Depending on how low the light is, the camera may "hunt" for focus. Some camera models will do this more than others. If you have other lenses that don't exhibit the problem in the same lighting then there may be an issue.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@Metalshad0 Pics coming this week of Nicole on my site were done with this lens. Very easy to get sharp shots with this lens.
@hurcell1
14 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the reply and idea. I tried a 105 2.8 and duplicated the same available light and got the same thing. The AF assist illuminator would not come on in any mode setting other that Auto. When I used auto, the illuminator was actived. The flash popped up and it took an acceptable photo in the low light area. This is a D90. Not sure of how this works with other models.
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@zeyshaan Although I don't have the 24-70 f2.8, I'll say this - 17-55 is great for an DX camera, like the D300s and 24-70 is great for FX cameras, like the D700/D3 series. Either would work fine for sports. On a DX camera, the 24-70 would get you a little bit closer on the long end of the zoom.
@LeighAndRaymond
11 жыл бұрын
This is true with many larger lenses. However, the lens opening up to f2.8, and therefore, focusing at f2.8 allows for strong focusing performance even if the assist light is blocked.
@LeighAndRaymond
11 жыл бұрын
It would feel like a very large step down from your D7000 for high ISO photography. For speed of outdoor photography at ISO 100, the D2xs is lightning fast, though.
@LeighAndRaymond
11 жыл бұрын
Yes, I would not use this lens with the hood with the popup flash. I rarely use the hood and I recommend an external flash for most use of flash.
@LeighAndRaymond
12 жыл бұрын
I have always shot for the best focal lengths that will work for me now. For me, that was the DX 17-55. If you're planning on switching to FX in the near future, you might make a different choice.
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@iSpinify In low light where you want to preserve a natural look, the f2.8 of the 17-55 can make the difference between having a shot and not having the shot. 90% of the time, I don't need the wider constant aperture. The 10% where I do need it is where it pays off :)
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@aarmington I can't think of too many disadvantages to VR lenses. VR will consume some of the camera's battery life, but VR can be disabled if that is a concern.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@corelmanjim As far as I know, this lens is not available with VR.
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@socalrun81 Both are very capable. If I wanted to be super-picky, I'd say that the 18-200 can be prone to color fringing in high-contrast, bright outdoor conditions. Both are capable of terrific images. I own and use both frequently. I purchased the 17-55 specifically for its durability and f2.8 throughout the zoom range.
@shamshermann
4 ай бұрын
Seeing you evolve over so many years and so nice to see this lovely one from the yesteryears. Nice haircut! Great advice. Am buying this for my d500 which needs a good lens to work with
@LeighAndRaymond
12 жыл бұрын
@in2coming For me, I would not like 24 as the widest angle on a DX camera. The bokeh on the 17-55 looks fine to me. If it's something you are unsure about, head to a shop and try one out. :)
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@MJmichand Typically a UV filter, but I generally bring a circular polarizer to enhance the sky and reduce glare I'm going to be shooting landscapes. I use cheap filters, but I remove them if I'm in a situation where I could end up with direct light on the lens. Ever since I smashed the front of my 18-200 (just smashed the filter), I make sure I keep them protected.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@echopark78 Hi! The 17-55 would behave about like a 24-70 typically would on 35mm/FX. I have not used the 24-70 2.8, so I cannot compare directly. What I do know is that I use the 17-55 at 17mm A LOT. So for me, I would not want a mid-range zoom that only started at 24mm on my DX cameras. I pretty much buy for the bodies I have now, so for a DX camera, I would buy the best lens for my purpose on the DX camera.
@anaemik
12 жыл бұрын
Nice review, but I didn't really understand why you would point out the shortcomings of the lens when attached to a full-frame (FX) body, given that the lens is designed specifically for DX bodies and will vignette heavily on FX cameras. Were you doing so to illustrate some problems you might run into if using a body like a D300 or D7000 with an added grip? Even so, wouldn't those cameras still be somewhat smaller than something like a D2x?
@AWagnerPhotography
11 жыл бұрын
I also looked into getting that camera for my sports photography. What I would recommend you doing is wait a little while, get a little bit more money, and then get something more along the lines of a D300s with a battery grip to get 8 fps, or even a second D7000, because in the long run, when you need to do a party or game in low light, both of those cameras will not only have the ISO range you need, but will certainly perform better than the D2xs, even if it was once a pro body.
@didierlassus
13 жыл бұрын
@lepermessiah01 I just bought the tamaron 17-50. I shot an event with it & ~60% of my shots were out of focus. AF-Assist with SB-900 in low light made me lol as to how poorly the lens focused. On top of that the quality of the shot did not impress me nor my client. Returned the tamaron in exchange for the nikon.
@sunlite585
12 жыл бұрын
@anaemik I was referring to the 24-70 that Snapchick was talking about. But yes, i'm not that bad at simple math, you're right :P
@AEDigitalProductions
14 жыл бұрын
Hello I a TV & Film Producer, Director & Photographer. I bought the 17-55 and a 35mm f1.8 & the 50mm f1.8 lenses a few years ago with the S3Pro body and I'm in love with it. I have pro HD video cameras too but want to jump in DSLR HD video shooting to get more shallow depth of field. Do you have the new Nikon D7000 to test with the 17-55 f2.8 and your 35 or 50mm F1.8 lenses in both photos and video at 1080P 24fps ?
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@sl1cktofu It depends what you are used to. Going from something like the 18-55 or 18-70, it is going to feel a lot heaver. But, the advantages of image quality and f2.8 throughout the zoom range are worth it to me. When I pack light, I take the 35mm f1.8
@sunlite585
12 жыл бұрын
@TheSnapChick There's going to be a loss of quality though, for example the 12mp D700 drops down to less than half i think, because of the reduced usage of the sensor
@LeighAndRaymond
11 жыл бұрын
My SB-800's tend to overexpose, so I use -2/3rds of a stop of flash compensation. You may find this helpful no the SB910 as well.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@viperman73 When you say "different results," do you mean color and contrast? The D300 does have a downloadable "D2x mode" which will get the cameras to match output.
@LeighAndRaymond
11 жыл бұрын
I probably messed up. The zoom ring is closest to the camera body and it can be awkward to use, depending on the camera body.
@Alexander84001
2 жыл бұрын
Please tell me what you think about field curvature of this lens? How you shooting the group portrait to avoid the bluring faces near the right and left border of frame?
@LeighAndRaymond
12 жыл бұрын
@janinedoha It sounds like you are talking about the self timer
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@hurcell1 I was thinking the reset might get the AF Illuminator working in more than just Auto.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@rkorczeniewski It holds up fairly well in harsh conditions, but with this lens and L-lenses, you want to keep them from getting soaked.
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@solidstream13 I have not used the Tamron. I think if I did use it, I would like the large zoom ring that it appears to have. It seems like a good deal.
@mikesmultimedia
6 жыл бұрын
My D500 with Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 came in the other day. Camera is super, lens is solid as well. I got the 17-50mm (APC) because none of my FX lenses would come close to 17mm wide. So it was a backup lens for that focal length. I have the Sigma 18-35mm /50-100mm combo f/1.8 DC HSM Art Lenses coming in as well to try those out as dedicated APC/Crop sensor lenses. The D500's build is super, and similar to D800 and a bit smaller but as a plus, not too small as a minus. I see no issues thus far with the D500 with the few shots I've taken thus far. All functionality is there like an FX look and feel. Looking forward to the smaller RAW file sizes as well as the autofocus and low light and speed of the D500. If it works out, I may get a 2nd body and shoot on them vs the FX cameras for a while.
@aarmington
14 жыл бұрын
i recently had the opportunity to rent this lens and i LOVED IT!!!...man is it fast...plus the fact that its a constant f 2.8.....my other lens is the 18=200 vr.......in your opinion what is the DISADVANTAGE to a VR lens????
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@chino1127 It doesn't bother me. I just spent the last few days doing casual photos of all different subjects with just my 50mm. Normally, it seems I'm shooting between about 20mm - 40mm or 125-175mm on DX
@khoaanhbui
13 жыл бұрын
i just got the 24-70 today...SO SO SO AMAZING !!!
@memphianmike
12 жыл бұрын
I rented one this weekend for upcoming wedding to shoot. It just gives you more flexibility with Reception shots. My 35mm fixed is smallest focal length I have and while I love it...you never know when you have a large group to shoot at the spur of the moment and you may or may not have the option to back out and step back....Letcha know my take on it!
@jcord1111
6 ай бұрын
Help me guys.. Tamron 24-70 2.8 or this 17-55 2.8? How about image quality? And performance? Forget the focal length.
@chino1127
13 жыл бұрын
Hi thesnapchick - how do you cover the gap in focal length between this lens and the 70-200 f2.8 which is effectively 105mm on the shortest end for dx cameras. Theres a whole range of 55-105 that doesnt seems to be covered for dx cameras without having to buy the 24-70 which overlaps with the 17-55.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@pottymaster98 They are very different cameras, both extremely capable. The D2x cannot hold a candle to more recent models for high ISO photography. The D2x shows high noise at and above ISO 400, with the highest official ISO available being ISO 800. The D300s has significantly better high ISO performance. Both are great for daylight and studio photography. The D300s has a clear advantage in low light.
@anaemik
12 жыл бұрын
@sunlite585 17mm x 1.5 = 25.5mm. This is the 17-55 f2.8, not the 24-70 f2.8.
@socalrun81
14 жыл бұрын
Thank you for the review. There is no question that the 17-55 is an outstanding lens. Do you see much difference in color/contrast between the files you get with the 17-55 and the 18-200? What are differences that you see (if any) in your pictures taken with these two lenses?
@stucker5860
3 жыл бұрын
Wow I just found this video because I saw a used 17-55 for sale. I have the 18-55 cheap kit lens and landscape is what I enjoy. Do you think this lens is a good buy in 2021 used for $290? Thanks and great video!
@solidstream13
14 жыл бұрын
Have you had a chance to use the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8? I know it's not a pro build but I am not a pro, photography is just a hobby for me. The Tamron is about $400 and seems to have favorable reviews.
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@NAGULNR2 Personally, I would get the D7000 if given the choice between those two. Part of the reason is that I have many DX lenses which are better suited for the D7000 than the D700.
@LeighAndRaymond
12 жыл бұрын
They are both great lenses. For the way that I shoot, I much prefer to have the 17-55 on DX cameras so any subtle sharpness differences are irrelevant to me.
@AjalaKingsGreenstream
3 жыл бұрын
I think i have a defective version of the lens that suffers from back focusing. and no matter what i try only about 60% of the shots come out in focus. so unfortunately i cant rely on it for a paid shoot.
@hurcell1
14 жыл бұрын
Hi, enjoyed your vid. I have this lens and use on a D90. I have had some issues with it not doing an auto focus in some low light situations. I will do some research to determine what I'm doing wrong but thought you may know right off hand. Thanks
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@geckocraze Sorry, no 18-105 on my shelf to make a comparison :(
@neilpiper9889
4 жыл бұрын
I use a 1980s 55mm 2.8 ais macro lens which so sharp and sturdy. Worth about £120 now. I use it on my old Nikon D300s manual focusing.
@FinlandApollo
13 жыл бұрын
@Norv08 Yeah, you can almost get a 24-70 f2.8 with same price...and that fits to D3 and produces very sharp pics...IMO this lens too expensive, under 1000$ would be good price...
@MsPawanSingh
8 жыл бұрын
Very good review.... however just wanted to check if we can use this lens for landscape and star photography .... please advise...
@LeighAndRaymond
12 жыл бұрын
@theizza68 The majority of pics on my site are taken with this lens.
@ungavaproductions
5 жыл бұрын
I also own this lens since many years and I love it. It's a true professional lens. Agree with you 100%. Little thing I'd like to tell, you are beautiful in this video. Hope it's correct to say that
@00769bond
12 жыл бұрын
I got the 17-55 lens after watching one of your video's. I 've been using it with my D7000! I have have a problem getting the focus right! Some pictures not sharp! I wanted it for low lights pictures! Have heard anyone have a problem with this lens! I have had people om Amazon ask me about this lens! Thanks Skip
@Triplebuc50
6 жыл бұрын
When using this lens, must you consider the Crop factor of 1.5 for Nikon DX Lens and Camera?
@jjmp1106
11 жыл бұрын
expensive lens, but it's a FULL PRO lens for crop sensor, it's the equivalent of the 24-70 f/2.8 FX lens...and you could get it, until you go FX in the future, if you want, if not, stick with DX
@ManOfDeath567
11 жыл бұрын
You can get this lens but I'd also recommend a macro to get close ups of the baby's hands or feet.
@boisetkai
12 жыл бұрын
It all depends.... basicly they made the D7000 as a killer for D300s... But if your shooting sports, D300s is the best choice because of super fast auto focus and its weather sealed.... But if your not gonna shoot sports ,D7000 will be the besy choice cuz of new sensor and higher pixel and it shot more clear image than D300s....
@LeighAndRaymond
14 жыл бұрын
@hurcell1 Is your autofocus mode set at AF-C (continuous servo)? This may be why the illuminator is not working. On the Nikons that I have, it only works on AF-S (single servo).
@orkodan
12 жыл бұрын
Haha thanks. I was actually in a stupid daze when I wrote that. The whole fx,dx fov makes sense to me now :) But which should i get? Sigma 24-70 f2.8, Tamron 24.70 f2.8, Tamron 28-75 f2.8 or Sigma 17-70 f2.8 - 4
@ivaylommm
12 жыл бұрын
so which one is the focus ring? the one that is closer to the body, or the one that is further ?
@manumanishk
8 ай бұрын
I recently bought Nikon z7ii and using with adapter. Can you please tell few good setting for portrait
@anaemik
12 жыл бұрын
@TheSnapChick lol, I'll keep my fingers crossed for you! I'm definitely thinking long and hard about this lens, and I'm mainly curious about its sharpness. The sharpest lens I currently own would probably be the 50mm AF-D f1.8. I don't suppose you'd have a similar prime that you would be able to compare it to from a sharpness perspective?
@Sigfofosauer
12 жыл бұрын
Ok... The Nikon 17-55 or the Sigma 24-70?? I own a DX format D7000, but eventually I would like a FX format... Should I go with the Nikon DX lens or the FX format Sigma lens?? Any advice will help. Thanks!
@1972myc
Жыл бұрын
I just ordered this lens on eBay. It's my first professional lens, and the most expensive one I ever bought. I wanted excellent lens I can keep on my camera most of the time, so I don't have to switch lenses so often for general shooting. I have an 300mm zoom lens for far away shooting and a 50mm f1.8 for real good depth of field photographs. I am not a professional, so this purchase of the 17-55mm f2.8 DX AF-S lens is a big deal, and hope it will be my gem.
@pjos111
12 жыл бұрын
Would this be a landscape lens also?
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@inwoodboy1 Correct. Not VR.
@johnmcelhenny5730
Жыл бұрын
I recently bought this used from KEH (still have time to send back). The pictures aren't quite as impressive as I expected, but I wonder if it's because of the lack of VR that I'm used to with the previous lenses I've used. My question to you is about the zoom. At the ends, it's a little tough to adjust the zoom, but around the middle it moves almost way too easily. Do you experience this too?
@NormanZealandMalana
13 жыл бұрын
@ny1fanta The D2X is a DX format camera
@LeighAndRaymond
13 жыл бұрын
@sonikku10 I've run into no issues in practical use (or impractical use) with this lens. Talk is cheap... rent for the range you will think you need and have a great time!
Пікірлер: 338