Nikon 17-55 2.8 - too heavy

Reel To Reel

Active Member
I have a D200 with the above lens. I find the the whole combination a bit heavy.

I'd appreciate suggestions for a lighter lens that does not compromise too much on quality - mainly happy snaps.

:)
 
V

vulkan75

Guest
Unfortunetly fast glass is always going to be heavy...so it depends whether you are prepared to sacrifice and get A slower lens(F3.5 and above).

I have a 18-200vr if your interested in a trade;) Itll save you 200 or so grams:D

Maybe something like A 16-85 vrDppreview
 

Radiohead

Well-known Member
Pros - lighter, cheaper, smaller
Cons - slower to AF, build quality, extends when zooming.

Optically there not much in it, although the Nikkor offers far nicer transition from in to out of focus.
 

Tobers

Well-known Member
Its the price you pay for quality. I remember getting my Canon 17-55 2.8 and being amazed how heavy it was. Lots of glass is why. Stick with it - you'll get used to it.
 

Spooky

Active Member
I have this on my D300 and love it, dont even think of the weight but my fiancee says its a tad on the heavy side.
 

onefunkypenguin

Active Member
its available for cheaper from onestop, thats where i got mines.

obviously the nikon lens is by far better built and superior in every way but at 4 times the price it bloody well should be! id love it and when i upgrade my camera il hopefully be able to get one of them but for now the tamron does the job way better than the kit lens does.
 

Reel To Reel

Active Member
Unfortunetly fast glass is always going to be heavy...so it depends whether you are prepared to sacrifice and get A slower lens(F3.5 and above).

I have a 18-200vr if your interested in a trade;) Itll save you 200 or so grams:D

Maybe something like A 16-85 vrDppreview

Thanks for the offer:thumbsup:, but not at this stage whilst I do more research
 

Reel To Reel

Active Member
Pros - lighter, cheaper, smaller
Cons - slower to AF, build quality, extends when zooming.

Optically there not much in it, although the Nikkor offers far nicer transition from in to out of focus.

Thanks for the summary - most helpful. :smashin: I will go into a shop and see how it feels, and if the weight difference is sufficient to justify the change
 

Reel To Reel

Active Member
Its the price you pay for quality. I remember getting my Canon 17-55 2.8 and being amazed how heavy it was. Lots of glass is why. Stick with it - you'll get used to it.

Will try it again on my next long holiday. Thanks
 

Reel To Reel

Active Member
Thanks everyone - I shall do more research and try and work with the lens for a couple of more months. I like the sound of the 16-85...
 

The latest video from AVForums

Star Wars Andor, Woman King, more Star Trek 4K, Rings of Power & the latest TV, movies & 4K releases
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom