Nikon 16-85VR? Worth It?

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by iflynething, Jan 21, 2009.

  1. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I'm looking for a walk around lens to stay on my D300. I have the D80 and shot a 18-135 on that but now use the 18-135 on the D300. I don't think the 18-135 is right to have on a D300 body....

    I am contemplating buying a $400 16-85VR. The only reason I'm contemplating this is becuase I wanted fast glass. I was looking at a 17-55. I only have 3x (roughly) zoom but it's a 2.8 lens. With the 16-85, I gain VR (which I rarely use) and 2mm more of a wide angle. The same guy selling the $400 16-85, has his 17-55 2.8 for $800. Expensive, but great, sharp, and fast lens and about $500-600 cheaper than buying new.

    I may seem like I have already answered my question, but I don't know how good of a lens it is compared to the 18-135 as far as optics. I'm sure I would and could use the VR since it would be there.

    ~Michael~
     
  2. Joves

    Joves No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,399
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Flagstaff/Az
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Well here is a site where this guy rates all sorts of lenses. He gives some good short reviews of them.
    Zoom Lenses For Nikon 'F' Mount. Overview The two lenses you are looking at are in the same area. He gives the 17-55 a real high rating but, the 16-85 is at a 4 out of 5.
     
  3. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Thanks for that site. I have bookmarked it. Nice and short reviews. Straight to the point. Something I like

    ~Michael~
     
  4. JerryPH

    JerryPH No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,111
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    The Sigma 18-50 CD EX HSM F/2.8 Macro beat the Nikkor 17-55 in 3 out of 3 professional photography magazine shootouts.

    It is a LOT cheaper than the Nikkor and tons better. It also has a free 3:1 macro and it is a fixed F/2.8 lens. Very sharp, very clear, minimal CA, flare and distortion in comparison with near ANY lens in this range on the market today.
     
  5. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Hey Jerry. Thanks.

    I REALLLLLLY want to have a 2.8 lens on it. After reading alot of other reviews, I think the Nikkor 17-55 2.8 has the flare and other issues that I don't want to have a problem with all the time.

    I like to stay with Nikon lenses but keep thinking about other branded lenses. They are so much cheaper and are optically about the same.

    ~Michael~
     
  6. kundalini

    kundalini Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    13,601
    Likes Received:
    1,929
    Location:
    State of Confusion
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    For my walkabout lens, the 24-70mm is mounted 90% of the time. I can usually work around with that lens, but keep a few others at hand. I can't say one way or the other about Sigma or any other third party lens. They may be fantastic.

    Check out reviews on photozone.de, fredmirander, dpreview and thomhogan, just to name a few.


    Of course..... and my apologies for neglecting the photographers bible of equipment reviews.... the enlightened ken russell. (for some reason, my CAPS lock seemed to malfunction in the previous sentence..... Hmmm, most curious )
     
  7. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I might have to consider not as much a wide angle. I think what I'm really wanting is a fast lens. I don't know why exactly right now, i just not I want a good short telephoto of at least 2.8. I'm sick of zooming in on subjects and using flash and having to vary the output (I shoot manual flash) all the time. It would be nice to have a constant exposure whether I was at 17, 24 or 85 mm

    ~Michael~
     
  8. Sw1tchFX

    Sw1tchFX TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Messages:
    7,500
    Likes Received:
    478
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Get the 17-55, I owned it at one point in time and it was one of the best photographic purchased I ever made.
     
  9. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Would you elaborate please a little bit. Comparing to what other lenses and what did you like best about it?

    ~Michael~
     
  10. shivaswrath

    shivaswrath TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    302
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Norwalk, CT
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I'm kind of confused - how are we comparing the venerable 17-55 f/2.9 to the 16-85 f/3.5-5.6?

    VR is great, but nothing overcomes how fast your lens is. . .I'd opt for the 17-55 f/2.8 or even the 17-35f/2.8 if you have an FX future in the horizon. . .
     
  11. iflynething

    iflynething TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    South Carolina USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Yeah. Not really comparing the two lens. Of course the 2.8 would be faster and optically probably sharper.

    I just am wondering about if it would be worth. It. I'm actually loosing reach (compared to my 18-135) but they're actually the same apreture rating. Would I gain anything is what i"m wondering

    ~Michael~
     
  12. AlexColeman

    AlexColeman TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,732
    Likes Received:
    1
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    All depends on how much money you have to spend.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page
16-85vr
,
buy nikon 16-85vr
,

ken russell nikon

,
macro with nikon 16-85
,
nikon 16 85 macro
,

nikon 16-85 macro

,
nikon 16-85, dpreview
,

nikon 16-85vr

,
nikon 16-85vr used
,
nikon 17-55 vs 16-85vr