QUOTE(Everdying @ Jul 22 2011, 12:48 PM)
comparing 17-55 with 3rd party?
well, u are paying extra for focus speed, focus accuracy, built quality, etc.
plus, i dont see why is there a need to differentiate a buyer based on whether its a hobby or for work.
just buy what makes them happy, its their money afterall.
there are plenty way more expensive hobbies than dslr anyway...like car modifications

Added on July 22, 2011, 1:00 pmalso, as always buy for what u need now, not later.
btw, 17-55, as for a few DX lenses can be used on FX bodies...so its not a total waste should u go to FX later down the road...
ignoring the DX mode on the bodies, the 17-55 essentially becomes around a 28-55.
u could also enable DX crop mode, and it may probably a waste as ppl think DX lens on FX bodies are...
anyway current DX bodies crop mode is only around 6mp...unless you got a D3x that has 10mp in crop mode.
its still more than enough mp provided you frame right.
or wait for the new estimated 30mp FX body, in crop mode that should get 15-16mp

Why not, it's just comparison. You might already known that many DX users are actually using 3rd party equivalent for Nikkor 17-55 even Pro Wedding Photogs; As I said, there's no wrong or right.
As for buyer differentiation, I'm just saying as example; Please don't be sensitive, it's not about "putting people at different level" kind of thing. It's very normal or common question, there're people who just use for hobby; Even hobby, there're people who earn little and earn a lot, or simply have $$ OR willing to spend more, while there're those that not willing to spend too much; We can't generalize and category everyone and expect everyone to pay for the best.
I didn't say they should buy this or that either, I'm just giving "alternatives" and then explain why I suggest this; I hope it's clear, some people prefer to say "go for this" but don't mention why, but there're people who don't care why or they prefer simple and straighforward answer, while there're those prefer to know the details and reasons. I'm simply sharing my point of view, the buyer can decide based on "everyone's" feedback, not just me, plus I'm nobody.
Besides, I also specifically mentioned the weakness of the "alternatives", I didn't try to hide it or saying the 3rd party is how great to how great.
Many hobbies are expensive, but not everyone spend the same; Some willing to spend more, some less; Some earn a lot, but spend little on the hobby, while some earn little, but willing to spend a lot on the hobby (even saving for years just to own 1 lens). For work, it's again different, if the job is going well, the cost can be cover back and the lens is actually important as it will help out on the job.
Not sure how many people will use the 17-55mm on FX; I see more people selling and lower resale value compare to many others. Plus, for many other lens, their 3rd party counterpart don't give so much difference; As I said, 17-55mm Nikkor is around 4 times more expensive than it's 3rd party counterpart, and each TIMES, the amount is RM1200; It's not small amount difference. For people using for hobby (shooting indoor, kids), they may not necessarily need such expensive lens, plus it's big and heavy; Plus, I also mentioned shooting at "extraordinary" angles, and the need to move a lot when following kids around, shooting in tight spaces, going down, low, shooting between chairs/objects, etc.
Of course, I'm not saying that's not possible or not good, just an "example" of convenience and whether is it really a need for it; Everyone has their own preference, if I have the luxury to own it, I don't mind it
This post has been edited by Andy214: Jul 22 2011, 03:57 PM