High-Quality Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED 📷 Lens with Vibration Reduction and Auto Focus for Nikon DSLR Cameras Review

I've been using it for over a year. During this period, never failed. Very sharp, almost nothing needs to be done in the editor. The photos are excellent even in jpeg, at least enough for my tasks. Many say that he is dark. Well, now, you need to learn how to work with handles with the carcass itself, exposure, and everything will be fine. Given the factor that the main work is carried out within f 5, then why do these 2.8? Excellent focus, very comfortable. 16mm really save when photographing…

Exploring my true thoughts.Pros: sharp, very wide at short end, fast autofocus/rarely misses Some cons: I would like it to be brighter, but these are dreams)

Different pros: The quality of the image, assembly, sharpness, no matter what anyone says, and 18 Some cons: VERY likes "bunnies" to catch! Blend doesn' there are slight distortions at the edges, but I think this is rather a nitpick, since they are not always found, dark.

Used for more than a year as a staff member on the D90 But alas, because of the small aperture, I sold and bought a Sigma AF 17-50mm f / 2.8 EX DC OS HSM, which I am very pleased with. Some pros: 1 cheaper kit lenses and tamrons) Convenient focal lengths (you can shoot everything from landscapes to portraits, and 16 mm is noticeably different from 18 mm at wide angle) Excellent sharpness (in many photo forums there is an opinion that this lens does not differ in sharpness from whale lenses…

Reviewing my personal experience.Reportage, The drawing is not plastic - well, or even 18-105 that he knows better than others, buy immediately with him.

I bought it after the Nikon 18-105 At that time, take the Nikon 35 f1.8 portraits - 50, birds - 70-300, everything - 35f1.8 All of them are indicated for cropped DX cameras, for 35 The more versatile the zoom, I hope the review will be useful.

The short end is a fisheye, a normal face is in the center, for it, it’ sharpness - at a height, for reporting after f20 if the video is not needed, then 18-105 is a waste of money to change to it.

an excellent lens for every day, a great option for trips, for 300 with me and I don’t always take this, want to carry a photo lab with 39 lenses with you, this is the ideal option.

Got pros: Quality build, I use with Nikon D40 Some cons: There is a little autofocus error, you may need to align with the carc together.

I managed to take this device new for 11,000 (March 2022) An angle of view of 16mm is significantly larger than 18 cases out of 10 I have the opportunity to get a result identical to the "king" 17-55 with ten pluses.

This glass went like a whale for 7000, On the same hole it is darker than 18-105 on both my cameras and 90m and 7000m, it draws color a little differently - no better and no worse, for example, if you shoot a newspaper, then a large font is sharper than 18-105, I think, is a maximum of 12-15 thousand, I don’t see the point in buying it separately if there are 18-105 I didn’ but not a fact.

Got pros: Passed with me "fire, water and copper pipes." A great all-round lens for those who don't have the ability or desire to carry around a bag full of accessories. With its cons. At . the eleventh year of life, I physically jammed in a position of about 20))) But I do wonder how he lived so long and endured everything.

As I developed as a photographer, like many others, I switched from a Nikon Nikkor 18-105 to a Nikon Nikkor 16-85 VR. At first, I was pleased with this decision. Yet as my professional expertise increased and I switched to lenses that had a constant distance, I began to recognize that both approaches had similar drawbacks. The most significant drawback is that focal lengths greater than 60–70 mm are notoriously difficult to work with since they produce images of lower quality. In a similar…

Unjustifiably for a prolonged period of time after the purchase, sat on the bench). At this point, I am nearly unable to disengage from the carcass. Over the summer, I focused primarily on shooting macros, but the fall required me to switch to other scales, so I added a 16–85mm lens. There are numerous apertures available for every kind of shooting. There are no issues during the morning, afternoon, or evening; but, for unique, low-light situations, there is a quick and light 35mm/f1.8 lens…

It was a toss-up between the 16-85 and the 18-200, and I ultimately decided to go with the D80. For my upcoming trip, I decided to purchase a travel zoom. in auto-mode during the warm summer months when the weather was clear and sunny operated without a hitch, and even when it was littered inadvertently with material at dusk, it was still able to pull the frames out of the channels inside the business. In a nutshell, the frames are sharp, and the aperture setting is adequate for shooting in…

To begin, I contemplated switching out my Tamron 17-50 for a Nikon 16-35 or 17-55 zoom lens. After putting two pricey lenses through their paces, I arrived at a conclusion that differs from the norm. There is not as much sharpness as they write about it for his money, possibly for a constructive, but quite heavy, which may be due to the fact that 17-55 utilized does not have a stable picture in one corner while another corner has a lighter tone. At 16-35, the picture is more solid, but not…

I have a wide inventory of photographic equipment from both Nikon and Canon. In addition, I was just just able to obtain this lens. I have, of course, read about him, and I am familiar with the outcomes of a variety of tests; however, I have never come across this before. When I purchased it second-hand, the relatively small size was the first thing that struck me as odd about it. This lens is even a little narrower than the 18-105, although having a length that is comparable. On the other…

an excellent lens for every day, a great option for trips, for 300 with me and I don’t always take this, but it requires a lot of light due to the design features and at night and in the evening it can be very difficult to shoot them. And so if you don’t want to carry a photo lab with 39 lenses with you, this is the ideal option. With its pros. good build quality, comfortable focal lengths, sharp, color reproduction, full of metal. With its cons. heavy, price, a bit dark when you change f. R…

If the long end is not important (photo hunting), then I recommend it as the main zoom for all occasions. The lens, of course, does not have its own highly artistic design, special "bokeh" and so on, but in terms of technology it is impeccable! If you need a better lens, then this is only professional glass, which comes out in completely different money. Got pros: Great picture. Excellent sharpness at all apertures. There is practically no geometric distortion at a wide angle (unlike 18-135)…

In my opinion, as a staff member, he is the best for crop. Large focal coverage allows it to be used everywhere. 18-105 is not even close, it is. and the aperture is normal here, expose the guys correctly. Its pros: Sharpness! Color rendition, stub is just super, autofocus is fast, metal mount, nothing dangles, very high quality assembled. Some cons: one minus of everything, and then just to write something - if you turn the lens hood back to front, then it interferes with the focal twist :)