16-85: Sharper, lighter, better build, wider, but less range
18-200: Less sharp, heavier, slightly worse build, much longer and more versatile, a prima donna
pros vs cons, you choose
ha, judging by ur comparison, all signs point towards me getting 16-85mm
I had both lens before, IQ of 16-85 is better, 18-200 is quite soft at the telephoto range and I can't stand its lens creep.
i rented the 18-200mm before for my overseas trip, the creep didnt affect me much, probably because i almost never had to point vertically upwards or downwards. the only problem i have is that at night im almost totally unable to shoot. even with flash, the lens is so long it blocks part of the light.
the 18-105 is certainly a great lens for its price considering its performance. the 16-85 is better than the 18-105 in terms of
1) build
2) distortion at the widest focal length
3) VR (16-85 has VR II while 18-105 has the older generation VR I)
another attractive point in my opinion is tat it is the only variable aperture lens with the nikon tag that is 2mm wider than the other DX travel lenses like 18-200, 18-135, 18-105 and 18-55 at the widest focal length
how much difference is there between the vr1 and vr2? ive only used my kit lens, 55-200mm, and rented an 18-200mm. the 18-200mm has vr2 isnt it? but i cant really tell the difference.
and irvine, when u say better in terms of distortion, do u mean the distortion is more/less obvious, or more pleasing to the eye or sth?
For u to decide on which lens to bring, I think u need to answer 2 simple questions.
a) are you a fussy photographer who cares every bit about sharpness? If you are, then I think it's logical to bring the 16-85. But you have to know that though 16-85 is optically sharper than 18-200, it does not make 18-200 a lousy lens that is not usable. Sometimes that little bit of difference in sharpness is not really that visible to human eyes unless u really blow up the pictures.
b) do you need that 85-200 of focal length? Sharpness can be achieved with the correct techniques and settings but for focal length, there are some situations where u cant really zoom with your legs.
Personally, i will bring the 18-200 with a 35 or 50 prime. For max sharpness, i will use the prime else use the 18-200 for max usability.
fussy is pretty subjective imo. but i think i am, frequently zooming at various zoom levels to look at the details. i do 4R prints and occasionally larger
as to your second question, i dont think i really need, but when i rented the 18-200mm, theres quite a number of the pictures taken at the tele end, although some of it is because i was lazy to move myself closer to subject. not moving also makes me feel less intrusive when i take street photog.
the 2mm wider is really attractive.. however the $550++ price different is much more attractive.. and if you really go pixel peep.. the 18-105 is sharper across the fl also.
18-105mm is sharper than 16-85mm?!
anyway you can't go wrong with 16-85 
