 |
|
|
jyo1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 2, 2013
Location: United States
Posts: 59
|
|
Review Date: Sep 8, 2015
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $325.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
I was looking for an all-around shorter lens to ride along with my 70-300 VR lens and this was it---bought used but mint for very decent price---over the last couple of years, I've shot many events, concerts, festivals, etc.---it has served me well...
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing really sticks out---happy with this lens
|
|
|
Been glued to my D7100 (and sometimes D300 back-up body)---taken very nice, sharp pictures with this lens---good range for everyday lens---no real issues---lightweight (something I've come to like as I grow older)---very convenient---match with 70-300 VR for a traveling kit...
|
|
 Sep 8, 2015
|
|
sgupta
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 11, 2015
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 11, 2015
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $549.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp across the range, good VR, light, great walk around lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Poor bokeh, slow.
|
|
|
Its a great walk around lens capable of taking a variety of shots. This lens has been with me since my D90 and has travelled with me to Italy, France, China, UK, Indonesia, Philippines, Switzerland and in the US and Canada. It probably has a million air miles on it. The point is that its robust with a metal mount and has held up well. It produces crisp sharp images, have a couple in my office that are testaments to the lens. It won't do justice to portraits, being as slow as it is, gets to f/5.6 quickly, but does group photos well. I do not regret having it along instead of faster, better but a heavier lens.
Suppose the option now is the new 16-80 but this lens will make a fine couple for a used camera like a D90 or other that will not work with the E series of lenses.
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2015
|
|
oldshutterhand
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 24, 2012
Location: Hungary
Posts: 0
|
|
|
Jan 10, 2014
|
|
Bernie
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 24, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 4788
|
|
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
|
|
11
|
53235
|
Sep 8, 2015
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
100% of reviewers
|
$445.50
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
7.64
|
7.56
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
