where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
I'm looking to upgrade from my kit lens to something with better image quality. I like the range of the kit lens, but can't afford to get the 17-55mm f/2.8.
Would upgrading to the 16-85mm bring a noticeable improvement, or is my money better spent on something else?
I am also very pleased with my 16-85, by the way the VR is also very effective
Pete
The AF-S DX 16-85mm VR lens is far superior to the AF-S DX 18-55mm VR lens. It has more features and is better made. In some ways when you consider the cost it could even be considered better than the AF-S DX 17-55mm lens since it is several years old now and does not have VR.
Upgrading 18-55 kit lens to 16-85 would bring very noticeable improvement.
Thanks for your comments everyone. I think I'm sold on the idea. :-)
The only other option suggested in another forum was the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 EX DC Macro HSM (I would need that version as I've got a D60), and I'm going to give it some thought before pulling the trigger, but I think I'm leaning towards the Nikon.
I really wish the 16-85 was at least one stop faster than it is... then I wouldn't mind picking it up and putting my old 18-70 to rest, but I really really enjoy how fast the 18-70 is for a "cheap" zoom...
:(
-- Dave
18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED-IF AF-S is no faster then 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S, and for the price f/3.5 is as fast as you could expect from Nikon.
No, the 18-70 is a full stop faster than the 16-85 at 70mm...
They are about the same at their widest, but by 70mm, the 18-70 is at f/4.5, while the 16-85 is at 5.6...
-- Dave
@ acquaCow.. : I know what you mean.. I have the 18-70 and at 4.5 and 70mm its nice.. (but 4.5 is not a full stop faster than 5.6) 16 is a significant difference to 18mm.. sigh ...
I have been wanting to get the 16-85 for a while now.... but still cant justify the price and the overlaps( I have the 18-70 and the 18-200VR. and the 35-70f2.8 and 50mm 1.4 Ais)
Bah, it's close enough to a stop, lol!
I do want the 16-85, but I think I will end up with something faster...and heavier =P
-- Dave
16-85 is a bit better lens than 18-70 but not much (though a bit slower at 70 I know that).
If you want something really fast go for primes, they are a couple of really full stops faster.
Yeah, I have a 28/2.8, 35/2, and 50/1.8... I use them heavily.
But for lit scenes, I can't really justify purchasing the 16-85 when I already have the 18-70, even if I sold the 18-70... I don't think there's much of a benefit for me to do that. The few added mm in the zoom range just isn't enough of a feature to sell me, and the VR really isn't needed at 18-70...
-- Dave
You have 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX, 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF AF-S or 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S to chose from, all more than twice the price of 16-85 but if you need them it is not too much.
Hi all, just thought I'd check back in to say that I picked up the 16-85 this morning and I'm really happy with it. :-)
Now if only I had more time to get out today to play with it! :-D
You are good, yes you are ... now go and shoot something for crying out loud!
You must log in to post.
