New Nikon lens AF-S 17-35 f/1.8D IF ED? (busted)

Update: here is the source. OK, this one is busted and I probably should not have published it. Sorry that I took 10 seconds of your valuable time with this typo. Lesson learned. End of discussions. Let's move on.


This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Anonymous

    Most probably a typo.

  • myname


  • No way nikon will release a 1.8D lens now, I think its the old 2.8 17-35 with a typo…

  • shant

    Looks like a typo… the hood numbers (HB-23) and case number (CL-76) match with existing 17-35mm f/2.8 AF-S IF ED.
    CL-S3 is a generic nikon pouch.

    Also, IMO it doesn’t make sense to have a f/1.8 version of the f/2.8.

    But who knows, between rumors of the f/2.8 being discontinued and all, this may be an awesome new lens!

  • Also, th model number of the existing 17-36 is 1960, and I see that as part of the text above.

  • Sorry, “existing 17-35” has a model number of 1960

  • Interesting that it is in dutch.

  • corinthian

    A 17.35mm f/1.8 zoom with a 77mm filter? That’s the same filter size as the old f/2.8 isn’t it? Lot of bottle for a 77mm filter, I reckon – I say typo. And then they’re the same cap and case as for the old model too. Doesn’t necessarily mean anything one way or the other, but I just don’t think this is the sort of lens Nikon is heading toward in the next 12 months. Then again, if they do bring this out think what it will mean to photojournalists, and to the DX format. This would be a lens people would change systems for.

    • PeteC

      You mean change to DX for?

  • corinthian

    Oops too slow

    • Anonymous

      JAA-770-DA is the part # for the current 17-35/2.8

  • hmmm

    did anybody notice how close the 1 and the 2 are on a keyboard? you could almost mean 2.8 but end up typing 1.8…..hmmm.

  • anonynous

    c’mon, no need to strecth it. a zoom lens at f/1.8???? not needed plus cost will go skyrocket…$4000 for 17-35 f/1.8…

  • Bendy

    Forget all the 1.8 vs. 2.8 stuff. It’s entirely possible (although not very realistic) that nikon would release a 1.8 zoom if it were physically and financially possible, but it’s wildly improbable that they’d release a new D lens. If they actually built this, it would most certainly be a G lens, like all of the lenses they’ve released in the past several years (with the exception of the new T/S lenses).

  • wh

    If it were a new lens it would be “G” — and if you were a “real” rumor site, you would cross-check and get two sources BEFORE posting. The reason being that, in order to protect your sources, there need to be at least two unrelated sources for the same information. Otherwise, a company can plant false information with someone it suspects as being a leak and then trace back to the source when the bogus information becomes public.

    You site can be a lot of fun, but it is often just too much noise. Get your act together and make it fun and informative instead of tedious and useless.

    • Don’t like it? Don’t read it. That’s pretty easy, eh?

  • Zoetmb

    Tangney has it right:
    A Nikon 1960 is the 17-35 2.8 D ED-IF AF-S. So it’s most definitely a typo.

    And Bashar has it right as well:
    Nikon is never again going to release a D lens.

    The only possible exception being if they release a 50th Anniversary edition of the Nikon F, but in this economy, I doubt very much that’s happening, even in Japan. And if they did, I bet it would be with a 50mm (or 5cm, as they used to denote the lenses in those days) prime.

  • Anonymous

    why do admin ALWAYS put rumors up and say “RUMOR! RUMOR! RUMOR!” based on a freaking typo?

    admin, you need to get a clue, read the item name carefully.
    1) the manufacturer number matches the 17-35mm f/2.8D AF-S ED-IF perfectly.
    2) the 17-35mm lens uses 77mm filters as obvious
    3) the supplied case for the lens happen to be a CL-76, too
    4) the only new D lenses in the nikon’s lineup are those PC-E lenses. “G” replaced the old “D” as obvious
    5) “1” key is right next to “2” key and anybody could have press “1” key while running low on energy drinks
    6) the 17-35mm is long discontinued for over an year now because the new 14-24mm and 24-70mm replaced it.
    7) you gotta stop posting rumors based on typos.
    8) if someone from nikon finds this rumor, she / he will laugh “wow, some idiot posted a rumor based on a typo”

    wake up and smell coffee.

    p.s. oh yeah, i know you’re going to delete this post to hide your shame.

    • Wrong anon – I will keep your post, because you defended your opinion instead of just cursing – big difference, right?

  • Alain2x

    Nikon biggest shop in Paris showed me yesterday the latest price list from nikon-France : 17-35/2,8 is presented as a “re-issue”of the old well known version, and will be released now.

    By the way, why not, since it doesn’t have to blush in front of the youngest 24-70/2,8

  • D

    stop your joke. it’s a fake ! same hood, same filter as old f/2.8( but very good)

  • Marc W

    2nd website to confirm …. er… Rumor 🙂


    Must be a typo. Nikon does not make “D” lenses anymore.

  • C

    If it were (reasonably) possible to make a faster zoom lens than f/2.8, I’m certain that somebody would have made one already. I don’t think there are any, and I think that this lens would be optically and financially unfeasible to make. Not even a 17mm f/1.8 prime exists!

    This, in addition to all the stuff others have pointed out (same front element size, etc), makes it very likely that this is a typo.

  • I have the 17-35 2.8. It is VERY large. If this is 1.8, you will need a truck to carry it.

  • rwpl

    ble… I would expect something a bit more realistic on this site before PMA but….

  • Dogsandcats

    “Don’t like it? Don’t read it. That’s pretty easy, eh?”

    Um, no. wh actually makes some very good points, improving the site and adding professionalism and respect to its reputation. However, wh is wrong about what makes a site tedious. It’s the little petty sniping people take at each other clogging forums and comment sections with put downs instead of engaging in productive and reasoned debate.

  • Back to top