Opinions/advice on the Nikkor 16-80 f2.8-4
Nov 23, 2016 13:48:54 #
I have a D7200 and D500 and looking for a walk-around and family photo portrait lens.... eight grandkids! My walk-around has been the Nikkor 18-300 but have noticed the "soft" focus inherent in the wide to telephoto lenses. I have the Nikkor 200-500 (use with my D500) and find it to be incredibly sharp, and would like to duplicate that IQ for family photos and the like and have the versatility that a prime lens does not offer. Any advice, including other lens options, would be appreciated. Thank you fellow hoggers!
Nov 23, 2016 14:05:18 #
On my DX Nikons I use the Nikkor 18-55 G VR II and it is small, light and very sharp (and cheap too!). chase
Nov 23, 2016 14:10:48 #
Dr J wrote:
I have a D7200 and D500 and looking for a walk-aro... (show quote)
The Sigma 17-70 is 1/2 the cost of the Nikon with same f-stops. I am also sure the Nikon is a tick better.
Nov 23, 2016 14:36:22 #
Nov 23, 2016 14:41:26 #
Nov 23, 2016 14:53:42 #
Nov 23, 2016 15:31:58 #
I have and use this lens a lot on my D7200 and find my copy incredibility sharp, with great color rendition and good contrast...would highly recommend it especially with the possibility of a Black Friday discount.
Nov 23, 2016 16:13:34 #
Thank you jederick! I like the 2.8 and 16mm option. A 24 just isn't quite enough wide angle that I like at times.
Nov 24, 2016 06:09:32 #
I had the Nikon 16-80mm f/2.8-4. It had a severe back focusing issue on all of my Nikons DSLR cameras. I dialed in -15 AF fine tuning and that still wasn't enough. All of my other Nikon lenses need only small AF fine tuning adjustments of around -3 units. I use the DataColor SpyderLensCal to check for back or front focusing issues and take test photos to double check. A review that I read in a photography magazine mentioned the back focusing issue. That's due to manufacturing tolerances and might not affect all lenses. If you get one check it right away. It seems overpriced also. I can't see how it's worth its price. I ended up returning it. I now have the Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 lens.
Nov 24, 2016 06:10:48 #
Nov 24, 2016 07:06:59 #
Nov 24, 2016 09:43:19 #
Nov 24, 2016 10:06:32 #
Nov 24, 2016 19:17:59 #
DVZ
Loc: Littleton CO
I've been very happy with my Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 non-vr. I've had it for about 10 years now. When I first got it it had back or front focus issues as other lens I've had, sent it in got it back tack-stinking-sharp. With that said, if I was going to replace it it would be the Nikon 16-80 because of the extra reach. I also started with the 18-200 on my D300 and found it soft, hence the Tamron. Good luck.
Nov 25, 2016 00:19:29 #
For a DX walk around lens, I find the Nikon 18-140mm to be pretty solid. Not quite as wide as the new 16-80, but with much better reach. Basically, a 210mm on the long end for an FX equivalent. I think this lens gets overlooked a lot but it is pretty sharp and I think better than the other and longer super zooms for DX. I often print at up to 10 x 15 and place in a 16 x 20 frame. It looks pretty good at this print size. The longer reach allows for some nice out of focus area for portraits which you might not get with only an 80mm at the long end. With your 200-500mm you have the long end covered. For when you need to go really wide, you might consider a Tokina 11-16mm. That combo should be about the same all in cost as the 16-80mm and give you much more on the wide end.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.