keywest305 Loc: Baltimore Md.

I have the Tamron 15-30 2.8 g2 and it is very very good

jbk224 Loc: Long Island, NY

I can only reply regarding my use of the 16-35 with my D810. It was tack sharp and I could use an 82mm polarizer. I always had a B+W UV filter to protect my lens. My travel kit was the 28-300 and 16-35.

Warhorse Loc: SE Michigan

Call me snobbish if you will, but I have a D5600 (not a snobbish camera), and believe that camera brand lenses are usually the best choice.

colt4x5 Loc: Central Connecticut

Used to have a 16-35 f4. Loved it. Smooth zoom, fast focusing, and (for me) nice and sharp. I would still have it, but I switched to the 17-35 f2.8 (which I got used). A stop faster, a bit more solid (and thus heavier). It's the lens I leave on my camera day-to-day.

Blair Shaw Jr Loc: Dunnellon,Florida

Yeahhhhh....that might be a problem...????

Photojoe1

If you can find a Nikon 17-35/F2.8 thus is the one great lens! Still the clearest, the sharpest and the best

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

This is my personal opinion. Each one of us is different and recommendations to your questions will be based on each one experience. It will be your job to decide from the different answers which one will be your best option.

I have always favored the lenses made by the manufacturer of the camera. I only use Nikon lenses with my Nikon bodies. I have no complaints in the rendering of my images. I have no issues using my Nikon lenses with my cameras and I am still using lenses made in the 60's, 70's and 80's with no issues. Those lenses had to be AI converted for use with my digital cameras.

My wide angle zoom for my DX body is the Nikon DX 12-24 f4 AF-S. I happen to use that lens with my FX body also from 18-24 mm without vignettes. I have not used their FX 14-24 f2.8 lens, an expensive but fantastic lens for astrophotography and landscapes. There are other wide angle lenses for amateur use made by Nikon to fit your DX body but I have no experience with them.

Doc Barry Loc: Huntsville, Alabama USA

May I suggest that you consider the AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR rather than the Tamron. It has excellent MTF over the central 2/3 of the FOV in the wide setting. If you are serious about making great landscapes, this lens on the D810 can make excellent pano images if you overlap about 30%. In the tele setting it is almost as good and hence you can have some flexibility in your final framing. Of course, you should have the pano gear on a good tripod.

rfmaude41 Loc: Lancaster, Texas (DFW area)

I have (and use) the Nikon 16-35mm and "love it" on my film cameras (F6, F100, And others). It was the first WA that I bought, and will keep it forever.

Bonsai123 Loc: Puerto Rico

My D810 always have the 16-35 f/4 on great lens also considered the 20mm 1.8 prime lens is marvelous

Paradise Pirate Loc: Cape Coral, FL

Thanks again to all for the advise. Looks like 16-35 will be my choice.

nikonbrain Loc: Crystal River Florida

I bought The Nikon 14-24 f2.8 nikkor and love it , but does need a Haida M15 filter holder and it rotates will also hold 3 filters no vignetting . Takes 150 mm glass filters . I like the extreme wide and the 2.8 for astrophotography. I had to make the same choice you are considering now ..I have the D810 also...This kiteboarder was literally 3 feet in front of Me and tracked from 30 yards to this point ..The sunset was also with this lens I believe both around 14mm or 15mm not sure without going back to see . Both images were hand held ..

(Download)


(Download)

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

No, it's not. The Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8 is a full frame capable lens ("FX" in Nikon-speak).

Plus, the original poster has BOTH a full frame and a crop sensor Nikon, so can pick and choose if they want an FX or a DX lens. Some DX alternatives may be smaller, lighter and less expensive. (Nikkor AF-P 10-20mm DX, for example... though folks need to confirm their particular camera will fully work with AF-P lenses. The original poster's D7500 will be fine with it.)

Personally I have little need for f/2.8 on an ultrawide lens. For me the Nikkor 16-35mm f/4 would be a top choice. I don't know the 18-35mm some others have mentioned, but a variable aperture lens can be a budget alternative that's smaller and lighter too, with few drawbacks.

But it depends upon what you shoot.

Someone planning to do astrophotography or anything else in particularly low light conditions might want f/2.8 (or even larger). Photojournalists also may feel the need for speed.

On the other hand, for someone shooting landscapes and architecture - particularly if using a tripod a lot - a large aperture lens is a lot less important. In fact, often lenses with more moderate max apertures have better sharpness across the frame as well as more even illumination (i.e., less vignetting). However, check out each lens carefully for yourself, to decide.