Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF Lens

My first zoom lens in the extreme wide angle was the Nikon 20-35mm f/2.8D. For me, it was a dream lens. When I bought the 20-35mm lens, the 17-35mm zoom had already been introduced. At the time, I thought a difference of 3mm in focal length was not much. As the old saying goes, "Be content with the lens you own and use it to the fullest and at all possibility." True; my uncle still uses the same camera and 50mm lens for over twenty years, and with it he still makes excellent photographs.

Prior to owning the 20-35mm zoom, the widest angle of focal length in my lens was 24mm. After being exposed to the wide-angle world with the 20-35mm lens, I often wondered how advantageous and useful it would be to have an extreme wide angle (wider than 20mm) readily available at my fingertips. Recently, I started to contemplate about adding the Tokina 17mm f/3.5 AT-X lens to my 20-35mm zoom. I also thought about the Nikon 18mm f/2.8D lens (not to mention the desire to own the Fisheye 16mm f/2.8D lens). But these extreme wide-angle lenses are very expensive. For example, the Nikon 18mm f/2.8D alone is listing at over $1000.

Currently, Nikon offers quite a number of excellent fixed focal length lenses. In the wide-angle range, these are 14mm f/2.8D, Fisheye 16mm f/2.8D, 18mm f/2.8D, 20mm f/2.8D, 24mm f/2.8D, 28mm f/2.8D (not to mention 28mm f/1.4D) and 35mm f/2D. The 17-35mm f/2.8D can almost easily replace five of these primes, namely, the 18mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm f/2.8D and 35mm. These five primes can add up to at least $2400. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to own the 17-35mm in one complete package and at half the cost.

I have shot with the 20mm and 24mm fixed focal length lenses during the time I owned the 20-35mm zoom. In a number of occasions I had compared images produced by these two lenses to the 20-35mm zoom, and quite frankly I could not tell any optical differences between them. In the case of the 17-35mm, I am convinced that sacrifice in optical quality is very minimal, if any, and as I will show below there are no sacrifices but benefits. The ability and convenience of carrying all five lenses in one zoom, in addition to having continuous focal range from 17mm to 35mm, are far more advantageous both in terms of photo opportunity and portability. With the 17-35mm zoom, all these five lenses can be changed instantly without interruption.

Well, these are my justifications for owning the Nikon 17-35mm zoom and for replacing my 20-35mm lens; and I have decided to go ahead and forget about the old saying and simply enjoy the benefits that new technology has to offer. Now I will discuss the optical performance and handling of this new dream lens.

Nikon produced the AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF with the effort to provide users of digital SLR Nikon D1 (and subsequently D1H, D1X and D100) the benefit of the wide angle in compensation for the 1.5x factor loss (or gained?) in focal length. For 35mm SLR users like myself, this has become a delightful treat, the benefit of an even wider angle in a zoom lens.

Having handled this lens for the first time, I was overwhelmed by its appearance. The first thing I did was placed the 20-35mm next to it. A side-by-side comparison shows that there is a clear distinction between the two lenses in terms of size. The 17-35mm is bigger and 0.5 inch longer than the 20-35mm lens. The 20-35mm fits very nice and comfortably in my hand, while the 17-35mm is bulky and hefty. Even though it is merely 6 ounces heavier than its predecessor, the entire body of this lens is purely metal. It is a super-solid and super-tough lens all right. Like the 20-35mm zoom, the 17-35mm also uses a 77mm filter size. But what makes the 20-35mm zoom to appear quite small is the fact that its body gets big only at the tip of the barrel. As for the 17-35mm, half of its body is as big as the front barrel. Understandably, it has to do with the extra 3mm in focal length and the built-in Silent Wave Motor that makes the 17-35mm to acquire such an enormous size.

The next thing I did was mount it on my camera, went outside and started running the zoom range from one extreme-end to the other, while looking through the viewfinder. I think the closest word to describe it is "phenomenal." In terms of numerical values, a few millimeters in focal length does not seem to matter much, but in the viewfinder and subsequently on film it makes quite a dramatic impact both in terms of perspective and advantage. A 20mm focal length can cover 94 degrees in angle of view, while a 17mm focal length can do 104 degrees. Ten degrees difference with a mere 3mm in focal length! Just to give an example, my 75-300mm zoom has an angle of view of about 8 degrees at 300mm and 12 degrees at 200mm. Only four degrees difference for a full 100mm increase in focal length. In the wide-angle range, however, every millimeter increase or decrease can affect the field of view quite significantly.

The markings of the focal lengths in zoom range (17, 20, 24, 28 and 35) are engraved on the metal zooming ring, not spray-paint like those on the 20-35mm lens. However, the finish on the body appears to be matte coating or black paint. I personally like the finish of the 20-35mm zoom, which is in black crinkle enamel (armalite), characteristic of a superlative lens.

In addition to the useful extra 3mm in the wide-angle focal length, there are notably three things I am immediately impressed with this zoom lens. First of all, this lens handles flare and ghosting much better than the 20-35mm zoom. It does a marvelous job at resisting flare when the bright sun is in the frame, virtually no ghosting in most situations. Secondly, this lens produces excellent contrast, exceptionally high, even when looking through the viewfinder. Finally, this lens has a very close focusing distance. A minimum focusing distance of 0.28 m or 11 inches compared to the 1.7 ft of 20-35mm zoom is a technological breakthrough.

In spite of its bulky size, this zoom lens yields quite an excellent balance, with its smooth zooming and focusing. Photographing handheld is quite a pleasure. Since this is an AF-S lens with a built-in silent wave motor, AF operation and response are extremely fast and accurate. It operates in almost total silence. It has two selection modes for focus operation: M/A for manual override during autofocus and M for complete manual. Like all AF-S lenses, when the selector switch is set to M/A mode, manual focus override can be done by simply turning the focusing ring at any time during autofocus. The great advantage of this operation is that manual override is instant. For complete manual focus, the focus selector switch on the lens should be set to M.

Being an AF-S lens, its full functionality and compatibility is limited only to newer Nikon SLR bodies. It will permit full AF and metering operation with the following bodies: N65, N70/F70, N80, F90/X, N90/S, F100, F4, F5, D1-series and D100.

The big front optical element of the 17-35mm zoom is an Aspherical type, and possibly the most expensive assembly in this lens. Therefore, putting a high quality UV protective filter on this lens is not such a bad idea. I have decided to permanently put a B+W MC UV filter on this lens, and will take it off only when I have a reason to shoot without it. With the B+W UV filter on, working under snowfall is very comforting. The B+W filter has quite a thick metal ring. However, even at the extreme wide angle (17mm), there is no vignetting. This lens is a real pleasure to work in the field.

In terms of image quality, this zoom lens is a first rate. I live in western Michigan near the lake, and I have been waiting almost a month for a sunny clear sky in winter to try out this lens on the frozen lakeshore. My first field test with this lens was with Kodak Ektachrome E100VS slide film. I also shot with Ektachrome E200. The third film I tried was Fujichrome Velvia. I wanted to test the lens for its sharpness and light fall-off, so I securely mounted my camera on my tripod and used cable release to trip the shutter. Before this field test, I have also shot a few rolls of Fujicolor film and was already amazed with the optics.

Everything about this zoom lens is phenomenal -- exceptionally high contrast, crisply defined image and color fidelity. Even with a lousy shot, this lens can still produce quite a good-looking photograph. That's what its extraordinary color fidelity means. Images of frozen ice and the texture of snow and snowflakes as well as colorful buildings are crystal clear. This lens is extremely sharp!

The ultra-wide angle and close focusing capability together can provide such a great and wonderful advantage. At the Holland State Park Harbor, I crawled under the pillars of a light pole (about three feet high when covered with ice) to get some extreme-tight shots of the ice-covered pillar against the bright blue sky with the lighthouse at a distance behind the frozen lakeshore. The pillar was about a foot in front of my lens. I really don't think any zoom lens can do this, offering such great flexibility and advantage. With a focal length of 17mm, I was able to frame my composition to include the pillar, the distant lighthouse, the bright blue sky and the other light pole (that, together with the one I was under, helps guide a boat through the canal).

Distortion is kept at minimum in this lens, even at the extreme wide angle. Barrel distortion at 17mm is visible but completely gone by 20mm. At 35mm, I can hardly see the pincushion distortion. I would say it is almost non-existence. Between 20mm and 28mm, the optics of this lens is simply perfect.

I have made quite a few photographs with the lens wide open at 17mm, 20mm and 24mm. In terms of sharpness, color definition and contrast, this lens is still at its best. It is not easy to see any softness near the corners, detail sharpness is excellent at 17mm at f/2.8 throughout the film plane. For flat-field subject, softness on the edges is visible. It gets sharper all the way to f/5.6 and throughout its aperture range, only a slight softness at f/22. And because of the greater depth of field at 17mm, f/22 (even f/16) would not pose any real problem. I think f/4 - f/8 would be the highest performance of this lens at 17mm. However, at 17mm, with a vast expanse of space, light fall-off on the corners is visible, but minimal.

I seemed to have shot a lot with this lens at 17mm. Nevertheless, its performance at other focal lengths and apertures is extremely high in optical quality, very consistent throughout its focal range and at all aperture settings, with virtually no light fall-off at wide open.

I did not get to conduct a side-by-side optical comparison with the 20-35mm zoom. However, based on the images gathered so far, I believe the 17-35mm zoom is extremely sharp, sharper than the 20-35mm zoom. The Nikon 20-35mm f/2.8D zoom is already a very sharp lens in its class. But what makes the 17-35mm more desirable than the 20-35mm is a combination of its superior features, including close focusing capability, excellent control of flare or ghosting, high contrast, and of course, super sharp image.

In addition to flare, color fringing is another small problem inherent in the 20-35mm's optics. In the case of the 17-35mm zoom, flare is very well controlled (even without its HB-23 lens shade), and color fringing is well corrected, even diffraction is kept minimal. This superior color correction must be due to the 2 ED optical elements that Nikon has put in this lens. The Nikon AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF uses both ED and Aspherical optical elements in its lens construction. ED glass is used to correct optical color defects that can arise from chromatic aberrations -- a problem that normal glass behaves, by not bending light of different wavelengths to the same focal point. With ED glasses, these wavelengths of different color light will be brought into focus at the same point. The use of Aspherical elements help reduce and correct distortion. The results are amazing sharpness, stunning contrast and low distortion, and with neutral color.

Technically, it is very difficult to produce an extreme wide-angle zoom lens to maintain high optical quality. In addition to the problem of flare, ghosting or color fringing, as in the case of the 20-35mm zoom, there are other numerous problems, such as bad optical distortion, weak field curvature, heavy vignetting or light fall-off at maximum aperture, and most importantly, loss of sharpness outside the center. And this may explain why Nikon is not quick to produce extreme wide-angle lenses like other lens makers. But, in this particular lens, Nikon has eliminated such known problems altogether, yielding result with unsurpassed optical quality. The Nikon AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF is truly remarkable. I would like to call it "the perfected Nikon 20-35mm f/2.8D IF" with a bonus on the 3mm focal length. Its close focusing range, AF-S operation, excellent balance, built quality are all the added features of bread and butter.

In terms of price, if you are into Nikon high quality optics, you will realize that this lens is not that expensive at all…although it is "expensive." Furthermore, if you reason based on the money spent on purchasing Nikon fixed focal length lenses to cover all the 17-35mm focal range, then it's even crystal clear to see how affordable this zoom lens is. The price of this lens is more to the whole performance than just high optical quality; it is the built quality, handling and feature.

If you still think this lens is too high in price, Nikon also offers a low-end zoom lens non AF-S version, Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D ED that probably shares a few best quality traits of the 17-35mm. But, like most low line lenses, including third-party lenses, optical distortion in addition to other weak characters will be the compromise in price. Thus far, the Nikon AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF does not yet have a competition from any independent lens maker, for example, Sigma, Tamron or Tokina. Even though, each of these lens makers already offers their own line of lenses: Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX, Tokina 20-35mm f/2.8 AT-X PRO, Tamron 20-40mm f/2.7-3.5, not one can compete with Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 due to incompatible focal range and aperture. Tokina 20-35mm f/2.8 AT-X PRO has been regarded as the alternative to the Nikon 20-35mm f/2.8D IF.

Sigma has recently introduced its new breed of lenses, such as the Sigma 15-30mm f/3.5-4.5 EX DG and 20-40mm f/2.8 EX DG aiming at digital SLR users (by their designation DG). Still they cannot be an alternative to the Nikon 17-35mm zoom, simply due to variable aperture and differing focal range. Needless to mention, all the three Sigma lenses use an unusually large filter size of 82mm. I personally think that a 77mm filter size is already very large but acceptable, and therefore 82mm is less desirable.

The Nikon AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF being the first of its kind is truly a zoom lens for Nikon users who want nothing less but the very best that money can buy. Its superior performance truly justifies the expensive price tag. I think the high price will be long forgotten after you start appreciating and enjoying the quality optics that this lens can offer.