61jhawk Loc: Tarrant County, Texas

I shoot one on a D500and am very satisfied with it. I wore out a 16-85 so can compare the two and prefer the 16-80 for the following reasons. I use this size lens for shooting flowers, portraits and street shooting. The f 2.8 is an advantage when shooting in low light or when I want to really limit dof. I find that the bokeh with the 16-80 is more attractive, softer. It quickly focuses, seems to be faster than the 16-85. I used the 16-85 for years until the autofocus became unreliable but don't miss it at all now that I have been shooting the 16-80 for well over a year.

AlanW Loc: Upstate NY

My 16-80 was my go to lens when I shot exclusively with my D7200. I found it to be sharp and auto focus was quick and accurate. Is it overpriced at $1100? Probably. Build quality seems fine to me but I never owned a 16-85 to compare it to. I haven't used it since I got my Z6 2 years ago and will be selling it shortly for a steep discount. PM me if you decide on a 16-80 and are interested in buying used.

Alan

FreddB Loc: PA - Delaware County

No idea if other responders have a different version. Mine is AF-S NIKKOR 16-8mm 1:2.8-4E - DX version. Just took 5 shots of my Christmas tree, aperture priorty. At 16mm, f/2.8 of course; 24mm = 3.0; 34mm = 3.3; 48mm = 3.5; hit 4.0 at 62mm, not 24mm as some have said.
Best advice I’ve ever seen here is to get one in your hands (local store or rent one), and take a test drive.

augieg27 Loc: Central California

Thank you Alan for you comments, but I can afford it.

augieg27 Loc: Central California

Thanks.

Vanderpix Loc: New Jersey

I bought one used about two years ago and it is my primary walk around lens. If I know I will be in constant lowlight situations I will switch to a Tamaron 17-70 constant 2.8, but otherwise this is my everyday lens. I find it sharp and very versatile in range. Look for used or refurbished if you want to save a bit

photoman43

When I had DX lenses, I had the Nikon 16-85mm DX lens. It cost a lot less that the 16-80mm and since I would be using it mostly outdoors with good light, I felt I did not need a faster lens. Its image quality was more than acceptable and I likes its smallish profile and low weight.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...I am considering the Nikon 16-80mm lens..." And a very Happy New Year to you augieg27!

That said, without knowing what Nikon Camera you are using and/or what genre you are primarily working in I can not really provide any meaningful guidance.

So far in this thread you've received lots of opinions which UHH is notoriously "famous" for...
However some folks thoughtfully posted imagery they captured with the Nikon 16-80mm lens (Kudos to them!)

Best I can do is sharing my experience with that focal range on my DX Nikon D7200 where I shoot the "Pro-Build" Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Nikon which is appropriate and germane for my needs involving Fashion & Beauty Editorials.

However I noticed that you've already tried Sigma 17-70mm DC Macro HSM - (for Nikon DX) and recently sold it here on UHH on November 3, 2021 so I assume/believe you are not impressed with Sigma optics at this juncture, correct?

btw, Nikon has only produced one Professional Grade DX lens in the focal length you are interested in.
That being the venerable AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED
It is still available from Nikon USA for only $1,449.99
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/camera-lenses/af-s-dx-zoom-nikkor-17-55mm-f%252f2.8g-if-ed.html

Best I can do is share Nikon's MTF curves for the Nikon 16-80mm lens... See Below
Hope this helps... Wishing much success in 2022 augieg27!

Nikon 16-80mm VR f/2.8~4 DX AF-S E N ED at 18mm


Nikon 16-80mm VR f/2.8~4 DX AF-S E N ED at 80mm

2435marty Loc: Berks County Pa

I have a 16/85 for D7200 along with several other lenses. I use 16/85 as my walk around lens and as we all know photography is a personal art. I'm perfectly happy with what it does. Until I contract GAS, it's a keeper for me. Good luck with your search and Happy New Year

nimbushopper Loc: Tampa, FL

I also have that Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and can say that it is a very sharp lens.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I am glad that your copy of this lens delivers more respectable aperture performance than the one (new in box) that I tried in 2019. Perhaps that was a faulty lens, and I should look again. I already have, use, and love the 17-55mm lens mentioned by Thomas for serious work, but prefer to have smaller and lighter options available for all-day outings.

I still believe that the $1100 price is $4-500 too high for this lens, and used ones still commanded very high prices in my market area at the time I was looking. May have to see what's going on now. Anyway...thanks for your report.

augieg27 Loc: Central California

Thank you Thomas902 for your input.
I have a D5500 and a D90
Nikon 18-55 AF-P, which a use as my walking lens.
Nikon 35mm
Nikon 18-200mm
I mainly use above lenses in landscapes/nature.
I am thinking in replacing the 18-55 and 18-200 with the 16-80mm
Does it make sense?

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...I am thinking in replacing the 18-55 and 18-200 with the 16-80mm
Does it make sense?" For landscapes/nature? The focal length(s) work (however there are issues with your D90).

I actually shot the first version of AF-S 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 for many years until the Focus Motor started squeaking.
Sold it for a major loss... I understand the II (second) version of this optic is better.

As for the Nikon 18-55 AF-P? Yep I have this lens, it's reasonable good albeit it's incompatible with your Nikon D90.
Also the Nikon 16-80mm VR f/2.8~4 DX AF-S E N ED uses an electronically controlled aperture and isn't compatible with your D90 either. (the 16-80mm lacks an aperture control ring and will stay wide open on a D90.

Something to carefully consider...

Hope this helps augieg27...

FreddB Loc: PA - Delaware County

I don’t remember paying that much. Have to dig up the receipt to be sure.

augieg27 Loc: Central California

Thank Thomas902,
I use the 18-55 in the D5500