Based on the great responses I received to my last question, I thought i'd try this one out. I bought the 18-105 vr with my D90 and it keeps coming with this F-- error which I've read is likely related to the plastic mount and a loose connection. I have the option to send it back for a new copy or perhaps exchange for a new lens, would I be a lot happier with the 16-85 ? I haven't seen myself stray from the 16-50 range too often on the 18-105, but I haven't had any issues with the IQ.
Overall, I'd bet on the 16-85 to give you higher quality images, as long as you won't miss the extra reach too much. That being said, 20mm on the long end is not a huge deal... you can always crop a little bit. And 2mm on the wide end is not a huge deal either, but it is a marginal benefit.
My personal bias is to go for the 16-85. I always err on the side of image quality unless I have specific and strong reasons to do otherwise.
I have the 16-85VR, 18-200VR and the 17-55 f2.8
Most of the time the 16-85VR is on my D300 unless I need the extra speed of the 17-55. The 18-200VR has found itself on the D40 I use at work so my vote would be for the 16-85. I really like that lens!! I have never used the 18-105 so I can't make a call on that one.
The 16-85's better built, offers Full-Time Manual focus, a more useful range (24-127mm-e vs 27-160mm-e) and has better optics. But the 18-105 is quite good.
I'd recommend getting your 18-105 fixed or replaced. It's a good lens and you already have it.
After getting home and comparing even my 18-55 kit lens from my d40, the plastic mount on the 18-105 is incredibly shaky. I am not surprised at all that it keeps throwing the error that it is loose. It is just as loose on my d40 for reference sake and both my 18-55 and 55-200vr are far more solid even though they have plastic mounts. I'm guessing this much weight in a lens is asking for metal. I'm thinking seriously about the 16-85 because I'd hate to look back and wish I had a sharper lens in a couple of months.
The 18-105 is quite sturdy on my D40 and never an error code or any looseness.
What are you guys doing with yours, using it as a hammer?
I`ve also used the 18-135 for 2 yrs steady and never had an error code.
I`ve had the 16-85 on my D40 and obviously it`s made a bit better but I couldn`t see any significant difference in the images especially at twice the cost.
No, I owned it for a whole 7 days and it throws codes like no other, especially in colder weather, and thats not an option when you live in Canada
This decision is very difficult, not sure if I should try for a tighter batch at the store or just step up for the 16-85
dano8369 wrote:
No, I owned it for a whole 7 days and it throws codes like no other, especially in colder weather, and thats not an option when you live in Canada
This decision is very difficult, not sure if I should try for a tighter batch at the store or just step up for the 16-85
On the other hand if I changed lenses often I`d probably have to reconsider the plastic mount myself.
Photozone kinda gave the 16-85 a good review.
