 |
|
|
HmJ_FR
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 15, 2013
Location: Japan
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: May 15, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Takes standard 77mm filters, good balance with D800, weight, not sharpest but good all-rounder, VR
|
|
Cons:
|
Weakest at 35mm
|
|
|
Coming from the 10-24mm in DX, this 16-35 has a better performance on the full range. Hesitated for months with the 14-24, but the issue with filters got me this one. Now I can pile up polarizer with ND grad regularly without much penalty on vignetting.
I wish it was sharper, crispier especially at 35mm, but then it's really a professional lens that will gives perfect result anyway on post. Just take time to sharpen a tad more. Also VR can help, but it's a lens i mostly use with a tripod.
|
|
 May 15, 2013
|
|
Dpedraza
Online
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 8, 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 46
|
|
Review Date: Apr 29, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $900.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, size, VR, constant f4, filters, fast af
|
|
Cons:
|
kinda wish is was 2.8
|
|
|
the lens is an excellent lens on my D800. the fast quiet AF is excellent and spot on. the lens is very sharp and the VR is an excellent feature on a wide angle zoom.
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2013
|
|
f8andshowup
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 23, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent sharpness, excellent micro-contrast, capable of incredible detail, one of the best W.A> lenses made
|
|
Cons:
|
Won't stop action in low light, extreme corners a bit soft, lots of geometric distortion at 16mm
|
|
|
My old wide angle setup was a D300 with the Nikkor 12-24. Going from that to this lens with my D800 is like a revelation. Stopped down to f8 or so, landscapes printed at 17x22 have seemingly microscopic detail right across the frame. This lens has such incredible micro-contrast that I sometimes use a bit of negative clarity in Lightroom just to make images look a little less "hyper-realistic".
This lens delivers a knockout punch- absolute pro quality images. You can get slightly better performance in the corners, and go wider, with the 14-24- IF you feel like lugging around all that weight. Even so, in landscape shooting situations this lens will provide more than enough sharpness. With my D800, all I have to do is frame the shot, shoot the lowest ISO I can, and stop down to f/8 or 9, and the results always amaze me.
There is lots of geometric distortion at 16mm, but Lightroom lens profiles automatically remove it for me, so I could care less. Of course photoshop can do this too.
I highly recommend this lens. I think it has not quite gotten the attention it deserves yet, but it will soon.
|
|
|
Apr 23, 2013
|
|
Trevorma
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Mar 11, 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 257
|
|
Review Date: Mar 25, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, light, filters, 35mm focal length
|
|
Cons:
|
16mm focal length, distortion
|
|
|
I love this lens. My buddy has the 14-24 and is almost fearful to take it out due to the bulging front element. The 16-35 is light and can accept filters without spending a fortune on adapters.
I see this as a great walk around lens on any camera. It's sharp, easy to cary and I love the wide look it gives.
|
|
|
Mar 25, 2013
|
|
barisaxer
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Feb 21, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 375
|
|
Review Date: Jan 7, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,250.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Takes filters. 16 is wide enough for me. Sharp. Use 35mm alot so this is on the camera.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as quite as sharp as my 14-24
|
|
|
I have had this lens since it was released. I am very pleased with it. It is very close in sharpness to the 14-24mm and with the ability to take filters and the range to 35mm it is on my d700 alot. The vr does help some so the f4 hurts less. The size makes it my go to travel lens and I find I shoot at 5.6 to f11 alot for depth and it shines here. I still have the 14-24 but often ask myself why. Nikon has two winners in the wide zoom range here and the choice is hard but for me if just one this would be it.
|
|
|
Jan 7, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
5
|
4325
|
May 15, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$1,075.00
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.00
|
8.60
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
