On Sun, 07 Jul 2002 22:11:28 -0700, Kev wrote:

>I am looking to buy a wide angle lens ASAP. I have a 24mm 2.8 now but
>it just isn't wide enough anymore.
>
>I want a sharp lens.
>
>Sharpness is extremely important to me.
>
>I am considering one of these primes, a 20 2.8 or a 17-35 2.8
>
>I would like to hear from people that actually own one of these
>lenses.
>
>I also shoot film and will not be going to digital for some time. I
>use Nikons, F4 and F5.
>
>My subject is range is very wide.
>
>I realize the price of the 17-35 and that doesn't bother me but I just
>want a sharp lens without fall off and a hell of a performer. I am up
>close to action quite often that is why the 24 just doesn't seem to
>cut it these days but I will also shoot architecture and landscape
>with whatever lens I decide on as well.
>
>Is the zoom the way to go or the fixed 20?

See: http://www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/wa-zooms.htm
I just compared the Nikkor 17-35, 18-35, 15 f5.6,
20 f2.8, 24 f2.8, and 35 f2(AF) lenses, so this
should be perfect for you. Be aware that lens
samples vary - but with a good-sample 17-35, the
performance differences between it and a good 20
f2.8 sample are minimal... Consider also a 28mm PC
for both architecture and landscape (and I like my
16mm f3.5[MF] Nikkor fisheye for both, also...;-).