 |
|
|
Bernie
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3939
|
|
Review Date: Jan 6, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
build quality,IQ
|
|
Cons:
|
f5.6 on the long end / focus required fine tuning
|
|
|
I recently graduated to the 16-85 VR having used the 18-70 for 7 years. As good as the 18-70 is, the 16-85 is even better as a walk around lens. I wanted the additional reach at both ends, but especially the VR since I do a lot of shooting in the woods handheld where DR can go to extremes from shot to shot.
I bought the Nikon new. The build quality is superior to the 18-70, but am expecting to eventually use the warranty since I made use of it on the 18-70 at 4 years/11 months (had it back in a week).
Also the 16-85 focus required some fine tuning which is easy in a D300 (once you can find & follow the instructions). Also, I didn't want to have to deal with the possibility of having to rechip a 3rd party lens when I upgrade to a new body.
|
|
 Jan 6, 2013
|
|
Barry Prager
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Aug 9, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
The zoom range is right where I like it.
|
|
Cons:
|
nothing really
|
|
|
I was using this lens on my Nikon D200 and then my Nikon D300 and I was happy with the lens. After applying a little digital magic via DXO/Photoshop I would rate the lens as very good. Then I started to use the 16-85 on my Nikon D40X, which I had converted to B&W Infra-red. The lens and camera combination was nothing short of incredible. I took a photo of the Golden Gate Bridge from Baker Beach in San Francisco. Included in the photo was a popular bridge overlook in the Marin Headlands 2.1 miles away from where I stood according to google maps. When blowing up the picture 200 percent (or so) I could clearly see 5 people standing at the overlook with one of the people holding the hand of a child. Wow! I think the lens was just plain better than the resolving power of the D300.
|
|
|
Aug 9, 2012
|
|
ivofreriks
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 27, 2012
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 25, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Practical zoom range
Low chromatic aberration
Decent construction
|
|
Cons:
|
Moderate optical performances in corners and at 85 mm in centre and corners
Sensitive to backlight
High recommended retail price
|
|
On paper, the Nikon AF-S DX 16-85 mm seems very interesting. The zoom range is 2 mm larger at the bottom, where every millimeter counts, than the zoom range of the Nikkor 18-105 mm and the Nikkor 18-55 mm. The 16-85 mm feels more solid than the other two and the purchase price is considerably higher. Optically, the 16-85 mm performs little or no better than the much cheaper Nikkor 18-105 mm. The price/quality ratio of the Nikon 16-85 mm therefore receives an inadequate.
See overall review at:
http://www.camerastuffreview.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=75:nikkor-16-85&catid=12:objectieven
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2012
|
|
jbirdfl
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 25, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 27
|
|
Review Date: Jan 8, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
useful zoom range
|
|
Cons:
|
wish it were sharper. had one mechanical issue
|
|
|
I've used this as my main "walk-around" lens for a few years now. I wanted the 24mm equivalent on the wide end and some telephoto (wish it had a little more, actually, like the Sony). Sharpness is average for this design and price range (less at some settings than the "kit" lens that came with the camera, though). I did have one mechanical failure with a cam in the zoom mechanism jamming near the full telephoto end. A bit of jiggling and cussing would eventually work it free until I could send it back for repair. Evidently it is a "known" issue with this lens, though maybe not prevalent enough to warrant a recall. Overall, a good zoom range with adequate performance.
|
|
|
Jan 8, 2012
|
|
victorpetcu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 28, 2010
Location: Romania
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely useful range
Good contrast, color and sharpmness
Good VR
|
|
Cons:
|
Expensive
Vignetting at extreme telephoto (85 mm)
|
|
This lens is my only used lens although I still have Nikkor 18-55 mm II.
After more than 2 years of quite extensive use (around 20.000 photos) it has some zoom creep.
Excellent all around lens with very good image stabilization so I can get 1/4 s with the 16 mm and 1/15 s with 85 mm with more than 90% success.
It is about the only lens you need on travel. Sometimes it's a little short but the sharpness allows you to crop extensively.
Some pictures can be found in my galleries:
http://picasaweb.google.com/v.petcu.gci
http://picasaweb.google.com/victorpetcu69
http://picasaweb.google.com/vpetcu/Viena
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2010
|
|
roar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 58
|
|
Review Date: Sep 3, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $513.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Range, weight, relatively sharp, fast focusing, fairly close focusing, low distortion for its class. An excellent value.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not quite as sharp as its higher priced, much heaver siblings.
|
|
|
My standard walk around lens now. Not as sharp as my 35-70 2.8D, but much more versatile because of its wider zoom range; plus, because of its lighter weight, it is far easier on the wrist. Mine is nearly two years old now, with moderate use, and I see no zoom creep. Overall, an excellent lens at this price point.
|
|
|
Sep 3, 2010
|
|
koenigsegg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 15, 2010
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Aug 23, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Range (wide), weight (light)
|
|
Cons:
|
Zoom creep, not that sharp.
|
|
|
My standard walk around lens, useful range but I find my 70-300 sharper but that's due to the sweet spot on DX. After a year my copy suffers lens creep and I do not use it that much.
|
|
|
Aug 23, 2010
|
|
Kimborg
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 3, 2010
Location: Denmark
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 3, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $395.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, fast, manual override, less distortion than 18-200mm
|
|
Cons:
|
None so far
|
|
|
Just got this lens, so I'll be back in a week or so with more info.
But It's feels great and is very sharp, even wide open and with less distortion at 16mm compared to my 18-105 VR at 18mm.
Perfekt match with my 35mm f/1.8 and 70-300mm VR.
|
|
|
Aug 3, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
8
|
24647
|
Jan 6, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$454.00
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
7.75
|
7.00
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
