Not to long ago I received an email from a reader and for some reason my reply did not get delivered. So I thought I would post their question here and do my best to answer in the hopes they will visit my blog again in the future. Here’s the email:

Dear Jim,
I am considering purchasing several lenses for my wedding work. I realize you are not a wedding photographer but you have the two lenses that I am considering. I would appreciate your opinion as to which one would serve my purposes best as a mid range low light wedding lens. The two lenses are Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 and the Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8. The other lenses I now have are 24-120mm f/3.5, 50mm f/1.4, 70-200 f/2.8. I am also considering the Nikon 12-24mm f/4.0. Any advice will be greately appreciated.
Thanks, David

Of the two lenses that were mentioned in the above email, I would have to say my favorite is the Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8 lense. There are several reasons for this which are as follows:

1. I’ve rarely experienced any flaring or color fringing.
2. My percentage of keepers is very high with the Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8 lense.
3. I like to fill the frame as much as possible which is easier with the 28-70mm for me.
4. The sharpness and picture quality just seems better to me.
5. The color is also very nice and a little on the saturated side which fits my style.

The Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8 is also a great lense and I often take it out when I quickly need a lense for events or nothing in particular. The problem I have with this lense is that I tend to get more flaring and color fringing on sunny days. Plus the color cast seems more apparent than the 28-70mm. If I were shooting a wedding on a sunny day with the 17-55mm I probably would be worried a little bit, but in the hands of an accomplished photographer, that may not be a problem.

I first bought the Nikon 17-55 back in January of 2006 right after Christmas. The lense was pretty hot back then and without much research I decided to buy it in my hometown of Seattle after receiving my new Nikon D200. Later, I had the opportunity to splurge and buy the Nikon 28-70mm f/2.8 and almost instantly I noticed the difference in picture quality. At least with my copies of both lenses, the difference was apparent which really surprised me. This lead down the path of curiousity about the Nikon 17-35mm lense and it’s supposed legendary status. Not too long thereafter, I purchased an $800 dollar copy from Ebay in California. WoW! The 17-35mm was suddenly the best lense I had ever owned. The color and sharpness was astonishing. Thus I settled on the Nikon 17-35mm and Nikon 28-70mm has my mid-range lense setup. Hands down, I feel the 17-35 is much better than the 17-55mm, however there is a loss of range which is a problem for some. In addition, I don’t think the 17-35mm makes a very good portrait lense because of some slight barrel distortion around 17mm. However, the real glory of the legendary Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 is when shooting Landscapes and not Weddings of course.

Also mentioned in the email is the Nikon 12-24mm f/4 lense. I have this one too and in addition just recently acquired the Nikon 10.5mm Fish eye lense. Truthfully, I haven’t done much work with the 12-24mm but it is a good wide angle lense. It does have some distortion on the wide end at 12mm, but that is to be expected. The Nikon 10.5 Fish Eye is just awesome. I love this little lense and highly recommend it for those times when you’re bored and want to try something different. I acually find myself not leaving home without it now because it is so much fun. There is obvious barrel distortion with this lense, but that is supposed to happen so I just make it work… and boy does it work! You can’t really compare the Nikon 10.5 with the 12-24mm in my opinion because they are two different styled lenses for different purposes. If I did have to make a choice between the two wide angle lenses though, I would definitely buy the Nikon 10.5mm Fish Eye. It’s just a fun little lense that makes photography much more enjoyable.

Please note that these comments are not technical, nor are they from an individual who pretends to be any sort of professional photographer. Photography is a both a hobby and a profession for me, but most of all I am about having fun with my camera. My comments about the lenses above are based on my style and the limited experience I have with the equipment and for that matter photography itself. However, I do strongly believe that all of my Nikon Lenses are in excellent working order with the exception of the Nikon 17-35mm purchased brand new. So, if I say the Nikon 28-70mm looks better than the 17-55mm, I don’t think that means I have a bad copy of the 17-55mm. They are both good, I just seem to think my pictures look better most of the time when produced with the Nikon 28-70mm or 17-35mm lenses.

Thanks for the email David and my apologies for the not being able to get my reply through. Hopefully you’ll be able to read this blog post in time to help with a very difficult decision indeed. They are all great lense thats for sure. Enjoy!

Related posts

  • No related posts.

Our Random Articles

More Links