Love the quality of this product! Keep it up | Concrete forming

None so far

So if you can't come to the groomers, www.royaltygrooming.com the groomers is coming to you!

none so far

Contstant maximum aperture! If you use manual settings on your camera this doesn't affect exposure when zooming. | Stamped Driveway

None so far

I bought this lens a year ago on eBay. Used, but in great shape. I use it on a Nikon D810. I love it. For a professional ultrawide lens, it is small, light, and cheap on the used market. Great vacation lens. Great for landscapes. Great for family pictures around the house. Impressive central sharpness at all focal lengths, even wide open at f2.8. Corners and edges are soft wide open. At 20mm, the corners never really get sharp and are as good as they are going to get by f11. But how often do you put important things in the corners of your photos? And how often are the corners in focus anyway? This len is an old design, but it can still make outstanding photos, even on a 36MP D810. It's almost all metal, built like a tank, and is smaller and lighter than other Pro-level zooms. There are some ghosts when shooting into the sun, but I have shot many sunrises and sunsets with it with good results. The lens suffers from chromatic aberration in the edges and corners. It's very evident on a 36MP D810 if you are looking at raw photos shot wide open at 100% magnification. However, you will never see it when shooting JPEG because Nikon cameras automatically correct for CA. And if you shoot raw, correcting it in Adobe Lightroom is as easy as checking a box. So the CA is non-issue for me. Autofocus is instantaneous. No expensive AF-S motor or VR system to break. I've own/have owned the following lenses I can compare it to: * Nikon 24mm 2.8D - The 20-35/2.8 is sharper across most of the frame from f2.8-f4, but the corners on the 24/2.8 are better. The 24/2.8 has fewer ghosts. I sold the 24/2.8. * Tamron 15-30/2.8VC - The Tamron is an amazing lens and goes wider. It is not much better in the center than the 20-35/2.8, but but outside the center region it is sharper at wider apertures. Stopped down to f8 and smaller, there isn't much difference, other than in the corners. The VC on the Tamron is nice, but it's not a necessity for me. The Tamron is big and heavy. I was afraid to carry it much because I just knew I was going to scratch that huge bulbous front element. You can't use filters with it. I sold the Tamron. * Nikon 24-70/2.8G - Amazing lens. at 24mm, it is better than the 20-35/2.8 in almost every respect, except central sharpness where the 20-35 is not far behind. And as usual with almost all lenses, once you stop down to f/8, most of the sharpness differences are gone. The 24-70/2.8 has better flare resistance and fewer ghosts, plus less CA.

As mentioned above, corner and edge performance is not the greatest at wider apertures, especially at 20mm. Suffers from a fair amount of CA outside the central region. Multiple ghosts when shooting into the sun. Nevertheless, for all the reasons I've listed above, this is one of my favorite lenses.

la interpretación del color, una gran riqueza cromática, el contraste impresionante...

colores cyan en esquinas, pero eso ocurre en todos los grandes angulares, también en objetivos muy luminosos que he probado, a excepción del nuevo sigma 35 F/.4

Bueno.. tengo muchos objetivos nikon, tanto de focales fijas como algunos zooms. Tengo que decir que cuando compre el 20-35 F/2.8, quedé tan impresionado, que rompió todos mis esquemas. El 20-35, supera a las focales fijas en riqueza cromática sobre todo, sus colores son de bell epoc, tiene además muy buen contraste, la construcción es muy buena, lo único es que hay que probar varias muestras, todos no sacan la misma calidad cromática, cada zoom es un poco diferente, en objetivos de focals fijas casi no existen estas diferencias

Similar Products Used:

Nikon AIS 25-50 F/4, Nikon AIS 28-50 F/3.5, Nikon AFS 28-70 F/2.8

sharpness built like a rock and very solid low distortion great colors

not to have a full frame to shoot this beuty

i recently got this lens and all my images are great even at low light,
built is excellent too i tried it on my d700 and my d90 and this lens really let me very impressed in comparison with the 17-35mm 2.8 nikon/ images are pretty much the same,if you do not have the 1000 dls to buy the 17-35 used off second hand store,this is a great lens for your pictures if you get this one you don't need the 17-35 unless you want the extra 3mm if you shoot full frame forget about it and get this one instead,i can shoot anything i want with no problems at all,low distortion easy to handle and lightter than the 17-35,pictures come pretty sharp this lens never leaves my bag

Similar Products Used:

nikon 17-35mm 2.8

Solid as a rock, probably outlives me

Very good in low light conditions

Very sharp. Appereantly the 17-35 is bit sharper but dont want to pay 4 times for a new lense

I could say flare, but hey I do like flare in my picture :-)

Bought this lense last year with the 35-70 second hand to replace the 18-70 kit lense. I already had the Tokina 12-24 but figured Nikon would release a full frame I could buy in a few years. (D3 is just too expensive for me :-)

I believe the best pictures I made thus far are from this lense, and use it very often unless I must go really wide on the small frame.

Excellent color rendition
Sharpness
Contrast
Build quality
Fast with f2.8 constant.
Very sharp wide open.

Lack of AFS
Manual override of AF focus
Both these downsides are OK for me. Compared to what I paid for this and what optical quality I get I don't mind lack of AFS. Also since I exclusively shoot at AF mode 90% of times i don't mind the instant override of af mode.

After a ton of research on the web and a visit to B&H in NYC and being confused between the 35-70mm f2.8, 24-85 (f2.8-3.5) and a few others I finally decided to buy this great piece of glass. Let me point out that this lens was not available at B&H so I tested all lenses except this one. 35-70mm f2.8 was great optically but not sufficiently wide. 24-85 f2.8-3.5 produced great colors but results were a bit distorted and the lens was not fast enough as such since the f2.8 was lost as soon as you went above 24mm. I already have an 18-70mm the kit lens so I needed something much better that that. The kit lens is great as long as there is enough light and you stop it down. So finally after reading old reviews and seeing that a lot of pros use it (or have used it) in the nikon legends site I finally decided to buy a second hand (excellent rated) one from KEH. I had heard that this is the best place to buy used equipment. This was my first purchase through them and I must agree that these guys surely have a strict rating system and excellent customer service. As soon as I put this lens on and shot some pictures I was impressed by the color rendition and the excellent contrast this lens offers at all f stops and all focal lengths. For me colors and contrast is the most important aspect of any lens. This lens proves its worth in both these areas. The build quality of the lens is among the best of the best- all metal, internal focus and 77mm filter size. I have already shot more than 500 pictures with this lens and I really know now what I was missing all this while. Since this lens is out of production please get a used one as soon as you can. You basically sacrifice about 3 degrees on the wide end compared to the bigger brother 17-35f2.8 and save about $800. The price of about $600 for a second had lens might seem a bit steep to some but once you shoot some colors with this and feel the build quality of this once most desirable lens you will happily give away $600 and still feel lucky.

Customer Service

excellent

optical quality !!!, built quality

Maybe the price could be a issue but it is worth every cent.

Bought mine yesterday and did some shots with a NIKON D1 for first impressions of that lens. Let me say it in one word GREAT. It has very low distortion and excellent contrast. Can't wait to shoot some color slides.

Similar Products Used:

NIKKOR 24-85

construction, image-quality especially from 24-35mm Lens could be used wide open. Altough not in critical situations.

as most zooms not very suitable for astroshots.

Very nice lens, little distorsion even at 20mm so horizons stay straight, sharpness wide open is ok except for the far corners at the whole range. I did a critical test by photographing stars on Kodak VS 100. The earth-rotation was compensated. In de corners stars got a bit blobby due to some field-curvature and coma. At f/5,6 problems were gone. The ilumination the corners is no problem at all probably only at 20mm f2,8. Mechanically spoken this is a great lens, One minor point is that de lenselement at the back sticks out of the protecting body at 20mm. So its a bit vulnerable to scratches. Optics are on par with the nikkor mf 24mm and the sigma 15-30mm which I compared lately. BUt the Nikon 20-35mm is far better in backlight-situations even with the sun in the image, relatively little flare.

Customer Service

none

Similar Products Used:

sigma 15-30, nikkor 24mm, Tokina 17mm ATX