Do i really need a 16-85mm VR?

[OlyFlyer]

Which 18-55mm are you referring to? Version 1 (D50), 2 (D40/x) or 3 (D60, VR)?

If you are referring to the D50 or D40 kit lens I beg to differ when you refer to sharpness and CA. the 18-55mm is sharp, real sharp. So sharp I bought it as a backup (of course, price factored in).

CA wise, I do not believe it lags behind the 16-85mm by much either.

Better optical quality - what do you mean by this? Sharpness or CA?

Btw, better coating i.e. SIC in your case, does not mean better quality, in all seriousness. So you cannot look at that factor at all. If you want to compare the 2, then you would have to compare on the points of coma and flare instead. Not the coating.

As for the rest of your points, I'd agree with you.

The 16-85 is just simply better than any of the 18-55 ever made. Never the less. if you find the 18-55 is enough for you, it is fine. It's a light weight small lens, but that is all where the 18-55 is better, it is definitely not an alternative to the 16-85.

 

[roaringflamer]

save money if the difference to you is negligible

 

[rcavt231]

bros drooling, any 16-85 sample photos?

 

[johnhunter]

Yo Ts,

No need to think, go for 16-85 Vr, this serve a very good walk around lens.
As I use it, seen I have trade my D90 kit with 18-105 updrage to D300s.
It also serve a wide-angle purpose if u are into secenary too......!

I also use it as a bluff(marco) if zoom to a still object like flowers set to F8 is still acceptable.

Go for it and start ur shoots.....enjoyz,cheerz!:thumbsup:

 

[earthling82]

Hi

For a beginner a 16-85mm VR is considered a very good lens liao. I think a 18-55mm kit lens is already good enough.

My personal walk-about is the 18-105mm. I own the D300 and D90. However different from others i use my zoom lens like a prime. If I want to shoot wide, I would zoom to 18mm and walk front/back to compose. If I were to shoot portraitures, I would zoom to min 50-85mm and again, walk front/back to compose.

Knowing how to use a zoom lens is an art! :thumbsup:

I personally own the 17-55mm and i would not sell it for any price (even if u offer SGD$10k). It is my "Holy Wedding Lens" and has been with me through thick and thin across many weddings already. :thumbsup:

 

[Sol81]

I personally own the 17-55mm and i would not sell it for any price (even if u offer SGD$10k). It is my "Holy Wedding Lens" and has been with me through thick and thin across many weddings already. :thumbsup:

I will sell it for 10k without a blink.....

16-85 is a good lens.. no doubt... especially the extra 2mm at the wide end. But i still like my f2.8 better ..... especially indoor...

 

[CTN]

Hi

....

I personally own the 17-55mm and i would not sell it for any price (even if u offer SGD$10k). It is my "Holy Wedding Lens" and has been with me through thick and thin across many weddings already. :thumbsup:

For 10k , I will sell and then buy another one + some other stuff.
But I don't own one

 

[proteonXPR]

Has anyone using 1.4x teleconverter with the 16-85..

dont try, cuz on the tele end you may be able to mount the converter, but when you are at 16mm, the rear element will hit the front element of the teleconverter... ouch

 

[aspenx]

i stand corrected. thanks!

My manual focus Nikon 2x teleconverter will take ANY lens, provided that it's F mount of course.

 

[proteonXPR]

that is a very interesting teleconverter you have. what model is it? you sure it works with DX lenses?

anyway a manual converter wont work either, cuz there's no aperture control?

 

[lsisaxon]

Hi

For a beginner a 16-85mm VR is considered a very good lens liao. I think a 18-55mm kit lens is already good enough.

My personal walk-about is the 18-105mm. I own the D300 and D90. However different from others i use my zoom lens like a prime. If I want to shoot wide, I would zoom to 18mm and walk front/back to compose. If I were to shoot portraitures, I would zoom to min 50-85mm and again, walk front/back to compose.

Knowing how to use a zoom lens is an art! :thumbsup:

I personally own the 17-55mm and i would not sell it for any price (even if u offer SGD$10k). It is my "Holy Wedding Lens" and has been with me through thick and thin across many weddings already. :thumbsup:

Using zoom lens allows you to shoot at a certain perspective.. There are times when I'm near a subject and I move all the way back and zoom in for a shot, at other times, I would move closer and zoom out for more background.. It's not about being lazy but it just pens up more possibilities.

I have the 17-55 too but if anyone offers me S$10k for that lens, I will gladly sell it and go FX with D700 and the 24-70/2.8, and another 17-55/2.8 for the DX system as backup. ;p

 

[chanjyj]

Using zoom lens allows you to shoot at a certain perspective.. There are times when I'm near a subject and I move all the way back and zoom in for a shot, at other times, I would move closer and zoom out for more background.. It's not about being lazy but it just pens up more possibilities.

I have the 17-55 too but if anyone offers me S$10k for that lens, I will gladly sell it and go FX with D700 and the 24-70/2.8, and another 17-55/2.8 for the DX system as backup. ;p

saxon, aren't you using FX

As far as I know you collect every single camera that Nikon produces

 

[earthling82]

For 10k , I will sell and then buy another one + some other stuff.
But I don't own one

oh man thats because most of us see the lens as another piece of hardware.

I have "personal relationships" with all my gears esp my 17-55mm. Even my camera gear are blessed by religious priests fyi and my 17-55mm is only used exclusively for weddings. Thats why it is my "Holy Wedding Lens".

Yes i can use SGD$10k and buy another FX + another DX backup, but it wun be the same lens anymore.

 

[lsisaxon]

saxon, aren't you using FX

As far as I know you collect every single camera that Nikon produces

I am but I seldom use it because I don't have a convenient general purpose zoom to go with it. DX (D90) is still lighter and already gives me what I want..

Anyway, it's a hypothetical question, so I gave a hypothetical answer too.

 

[chanjyj]

I am but I seldom use it because I don't have a convenient general purpose zoom to go with it. DX (D90) is still lighter and already gives me what I want..

Anyway, it's a hypothetical question, so I gave a hypothetical answer too.

Remember the old AF 28-200mm? Only problem is its bokeh was terrible.
I sold that damn lens away when I though FX was a gone case years back :mad2:

 

[lsisaxon]

Remember the old AF 28-200mm? Only problem is its bokeh was terrible.
I sold that damn lens away when I though FX was a gone case years back :mad2:

I never had that lens. But I would think that it's not worthy of the FX bodies. I don't have a chance to compare but I suspect 18-200 on D90 would probably be sharper. ;p

 

[deepanshus]

Hi all, after reading all the posts on this forum, i have decided to get a nikkor 16-85mm VR as my walkabout lens. I need your opinions to see if i have made a decent decision based on my needs. Here goes:
What i like to shoot and improve on: Urban Landscape, architectural, abstracts (basically things tat do not move) esp during sunrise and twilight
What i do not shoot: People (still shy to 'sneek up' on ppl). But in the 'long' future when money allows,hahhaha, i plan to get a 50 f1.4 for portraits. Have tried and sold my 50 f1.8. But meanwhile i really hardly shoot portraits.
I only shoot indoors during friends' gatherings so i intend to get a SB600 to solve the low light issue and to try out flash photography.

Have considered 18 - 200 but more expensive and rather use the extra money to get a SB600. Also read in this forum tat 16 - 85 offers better IQ over the 18-200 and less distortion. I value sharpness and clarity over the extra zoom that a 18-200 offers.

Have considered tammy 17-50(very tempting) but read tat it offers equal IQ as the 16-85, cost slightly more if i want the version 3, n i dun really want to sacrifice the 35mm.

So conclusion is, did i make a good decision based on what i need? haha gonna cost alot so i really wanna seek some opinions from everyone here. thanks!!! N i do not mind any other suggestions!

i have a 16 - 85 and it suffices for most of the shots, i coupled it with 35mm and it works out well.
The lens is quite good with a decent range for normal walk around lens.

 

[wmayeo]

i have a 16 - 85 and it suffices for most of the shots, i coupled it with 35mm and it works out well.
The lens is quite good with a decent range for normal walk around lens.

agreed. but i havent own a 35mm yet.

 

[CTN]

Last few years, been using the 50mm 1.8, 85mm 1.8, 18-70mm and the 18-200mmVR on the D50 with a SB-600.

I just bought the 35mm 1.8DX, any idea how much is the 16-85mmVR?
Thinking of getting a SB-400 with the D90 replacement when it is out to form my new kit.

 

[poseidon61]

If there is only 1 lens that I can have, it will be the 16-85.
Coupled with a flash, its quite sufficient for me.
I sold mine many months back and since then I have been contemplating to buy it again.

Its very sharp and the color is nice but the bokeh not very nice though.