11-03-2011, 08:24 PM
[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1320248207' post='12629']
Thanks Markus, I'm looking forward to reading your review of the Sig 17-70.
Darn, I wasn't aware the Nikkor 17-55 had such bad QC especially for such a higly priced lens!
Looks like none of the mainstream manufacturers are immune to it regardless of the lens price. One would assume cheapo lenses don't get extensive QC, but pro-grade ones do. I guess this assumption is plain wrong <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
[/quote]
Yes....
And out of my bagful of Nikkors, the most expensive - 70-200VR2 - had to be swapped after purchase due to decentering. Klaus/Markus would blame the VR unit, I expect. I bought all the others new also, and they're all fine
I also quite fancy a 17-55, and like you I find the reported QC issues offputting.
Thanks Markus, I'm looking forward to reading your review of the Sig 17-70.
Darn, I wasn't aware the Nikkor 17-55 had such bad QC especially for such a higly priced lens!
Looks like none of the mainstream manufacturers are immune to it regardless of the lens price. One would assume cheapo lenses don't get extensive QC, but pro-grade ones do. I guess this assumption is plain wrong <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />[/quote]
Yes....
And out of my bagful of Nikkors, the most expensive - 70-200VR2 - had to be swapped after purchase due to decentering. Klaus/Markus would blame the VR unit, I expect. I bought all the others new also, and they're all fine
I also quite fancy a 17-55, and like you I find the reported QC issues offputting.