Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 19, 2011, 5:31 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Tywyn
Posts: 105
Default Thinking of a Nikon 16-85 with D90

I currently have a nice setup with Nikon gear. My current gear consists of

Cameras
Nikon D90
Nikon F100
Nikon F90

Lenses
Sigma 10-20mm
Tokina 20-35mm
Nikon 18-55mm VR
Nikon 50mm 1.8
Nikon 85mm 1.8
Tamron 70-300mm DI Macro

I have the Tokina 20-35mm purely for my film camera it's not something I would use on my D90. I'm considering selling my 18-55VR to get a 16-85VR. I'm really wondering is the 16-85VR significantly better than the 18-55VR to warrant me investing around 360. I'm probably looking for people who used both lenses in the past to really help out with the answer.

I like the idea of the 16-85VR as it probably covers around 90% of my style in photography. I've been pretty happy with the results when I've used the 18-55VR and for a kit lens it does remarkably well.

Any help or advice will be greatly appreciated.

Howie

Last edited by howiem; Jun 19, 2011 at 6:01 PM.
howiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jun 19, 2011, 5:50 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,571
Default

The 16-85 is a DX (APS-C) lens, so it won't work (very well) on your F100.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 19, 2011, 6:01 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Tywyn
Posts: 105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TCav View Post
The 16-85 is a DX (APS-C) lens, so it won't work (very well) on your F100.
I should have said I'm buying it to use with my D90, won't be using it on my F100. I have the Tokina 20-35 to use with my F100.

Thanks,

Howie
howiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 19, 2011, 8:40 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Bob Nichol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Eastern Ontario Canada
Posts: 822
Default

I use the 16-85mm as my normal range lens. It's nice as a walk-around lens when playing tourist. The 16mm end gives you that extra width and the VR keeps things stable.
Bob Nichol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2011, 12:49 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
banksy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,144
Default

I agree with Bob. The 16-85 is a very useful lens. I can't comment on the 18-55 lens but we researched well before purchasing the 16-85, which we both have.
banksy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2011, 3:10 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Tywyn
Posts: 105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Nichol View Post
I use the 16-85mm as my normal range lens. It's nice as a walk-around lens when playing tourist. The 16mm end gives you that extra width and the VR keeps things stable.
Thanks Bob.

It's mainly for a walkabout that I want it and if I travel light on family days out etc. 16mm is a pretty good wide end if I want to shoot architecture or landscape and 85mm is a decent portrait length. How does sharpness shape up and is there much barrel distortion at the wide end?
howiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2011, 3:11 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Tywyn
Posts: 105
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by banksy View Post
I agree with Bob. The 16-85 is a very useful lens. I can't comment on the 18-55 lens but we researched well before purchasing the 16-85, which we both have.
Thanks for getting back to me. From most people's reviews it seems a very good walkabout lens but always nice to get feedback from people on here that actually use the lens.
howiem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2011, 8:08 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Bob Nichol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Eastern Ontario Canada
Posts: 822
Default

I have no complaints about sharpness or distortion with this lens. The reviews are very positive about it also: http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1177/cat/13
Bob Nichol is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2011, 8:47 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,093
Default

The thing that would give me pause about the lens is that it seems too dark for general-use. If you can anticipate when you would need to use your walk-about lens indoors or in deep shadow, you could plan on leaving this at home. But, for me, a walk-about lens needs to be able to get by in the unexpected conditions. I would worry that this lens might not be up to that.
tclune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jun 20, 2011, 3:51 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Bob Nichol's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Eastern Ontario Canada
Posts: 822
Default

Although I try and keep the ISO to 200 I have no problem jacking it up to 1600 if required to get the shot and I know my D300 can deliver the goods. I've even resorted to 3200 or 6400 if absolutely necessary and IQ wasn't a priority. Most modern DSLRs can deliver high ISO photos with barely perceptible image degradation so we should consider ISO as a variable like white balance, not a constant.

While I agree the lens may not be suitable for indoor or night sports I also don't have to put up with the cost and weight of a faster lens the rest of the time.
Bob Nichol is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:03 PM.