10 out of 10 points and recommendedVery sharp, fast, very reliableKind of heavy
I bought this lens six years ago and it performs now like it did the day I bought it. I bought this to use on my F100 and was a great wide angle lens for film. I'm shooting a D200 now and the 1.5 magnification factor has taken away some of the drama I could create with the 17mm focal length on film. It's still the lens I use 50 percent of the time.reviewed December 13th, 2006 (purchased for $1,100)
This lens has never disappointed me. Images are sharp. The 2.8 aperture lets me shoot at 1/25 with no trouble. It's great for groups, travel, and event photography when you're in tight spaces. I love this lens.
10 out of 10 points and recommendedVery versatile, durable, excellent imagesBig
This is the lens that's on my camera 70 percent of the time. The focal length is great for medium-sized groups, portrait work, and most of my photojournalism assignments. I've had this lens five years and it's never given me any trouble. Images are always sharp. It focuses very quickly. The size of the lens can be a little intimidating to my subjects (they think you're pointing a telephoto at them), but that's a small price to pay. This is a great all-around lens.reviewed December 13th, 2006 (purchased for $1,550)
10 out of 10 points and recommendedVery sharp images, image stabilization works great, like the extra range over the 80-200none
I sold my 80-200 f2.8 to buy this lens and have never regretted it. It focuses very quickly. I use it for most of my high school sports photography assignments (football, basketball, volleyball, wrestling). I shoot dark gyms and the 2.8 speed is great to have. The VR is very effective. I've shot plays and band concerts hand-held at 1/50 and gotten great shots. I was lucky that my subjects weren't moving fast, but I have no trouble shooting hand-held at 1/125 with this lens. I can't think of a single negative with this lens.reviewed December 13th, 2006 (purchased for $1,575)
10 out of 10 points and recommendedVery sharp imagesNone
I've had this lens for six years. I use it for high school football and some wildlife shooting. In terms of sharp images and quick focusing, it consistently beats my Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR. I shoot digital, so this lens is the equivalent of a 450mm lens; so I have limited opportunities to use it. I'm very happy with this lens and have no regrets about losing the two stops over the 300mm 2.8. In my opinion it's a great value and a great lens.reviewed December 13th, 2006 (purchased for $600)
10 out of 10 points and recommendedSharp images, great focal lengthNone
This is the lens that opened my eyes to wide angle photography when I bought it 10 years ago. As a news photographer, this lens was on my film body 90 percent of the time. I got some of my best shots with it. When I don't want to intimidate a group of schoolkids or at a social event, I will use this lens in manual mode on my D200 or D1. It's a reliable, durable lens. Excellent image quality. I won't part with it.reviewed December 13th, 2006 (purchased for $100)
8 out of 10 points and recommendedvery useful focal lengthbarrel extends a long ways, too much plastic
This was my first lens when I upgraded to a Nikon F100. I did so because the focal length covered a gap between my 20mm and my 80-200 zoom. I have no complaints about its image quality; I always got good shots. When zooming to 105mm, the barrel will extend several inches. After using it for five years, I was a little concerned about the "play" in the lens when it was fully extended. Also, the lens would sometimes extend on its own when I was carrying the camera on my shoulder. The autofocus is slower than Nikon's silent wave lenses--and much noisier.reviewed December 13th, 2006 (purchased for $800)
Because of my durability concerns and the tendency of the lens to extend itself, I ended up buying a 28-70 Nikon zoom to replace it.