Nikon 17-55mm v 16-85mm

bemcsa

bemcsa

Messages
657
Name
chris
Edit My Images
Yes
I am considering upgrading my 18-105mm kit lens to either the Nikon 17-55mm or 16-85mm. The 18-105 seems to be the lens that stays on my camera most of the time so it is seems to be the best place to start on the upgrade path.

The 17-55 has the advantage of being an f2.8 and better build quailty, but the 16-85 has a more useful range, is lighter and cheaper and has VR to partly compensate for the slower max aperture.

If anyone has owned and compared these lenses, I would be interested to know if there is much difference in IQ and if they are a worthwhile improvement over the 18-105.

Thanks,
Chris
 
Only got the one, the 16-85mm and I love the range of the lens. The quality on my D40x was really good, cannot wait to get out with it on my D300.

I have loads of pics on my flickr from the D40x & the 16-85mm.
 
Image quality :).

I have 50mm and 90mm primes when I really need larger apertures, so I guess the bigger range would preferable. However, for the lens that I carry around all of the time I would like the best image quality that I can get within reason. That's why I was wondering if anyone had compared the 18-105, 17-55 and 16-85.
 
bemcsa said:
Image quality :).

I have 50mm and 90mm primes when I really need larger apertures, so I guess the bigger range would preferable. However, for the lens that I carry around all of the time I would like the best image quality that I can get within reason. That's why I was wondering if anyone had compared the 18-105, 17-55 and 16-85.
Click to expand...

The image quality of the 16-85 is very good, no worries there, have a look on pbase LINK

Here is the pbase 'Nikon' home page, just scroll down the list until you come to lens you want to see images from LINK

If you were shooting weddings I would say get the 17-55, for general photography the 16-85 is the way to go.
 
I had a 16-85 for a while, and although in nice light it,s good (very sharp), I found it wanting in lower light situations. No bokeh as such either. It really depends on what you want to use it for. I now have a 17-55 and love it. It is pretty heavy though compared to the 16-85. If you can try both, or as an alternative there's the tamton 28-75 or sigma 24-70 for the longer ranges, and a couple in the wider too at f2.8 if you want fast glass.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top