Unhappy with 16-85 unsure of 16-35 f4

Msmoto

@MikeGunter

I am LOL about the "unsteady old men" comment. One of the venues I like requires a three story walk down stairs to get to the outside of a turn at Road America…..fine, going down….but coming up with the 30 lb backpack and using the carbon tripod as my "walking stick", I usually stop twice to catch my breath.

Yup, age happens, but…..much better than the alternative.

Now, as this is about the wide zooms…. I love my 16-35mm f/4 VR Nikkor. I find it an excellent walk around event lens where one is in the face of the participants.

TaoTeJared

@TaoTeJared: It seems such a good buy - even new - that I could get it just for low light use if there is a problem with edge softness or whatever. As a bonus, I see LR and PS support lens corrections for Tamron too - that was a strong reason for buying Nikon before.
I'll see what I can find....

You won't find a lens without some drop in edge sharpness. I almost always shoot on the "thirds" of my lenses and that one was pretty good or better put, never noticed any "lack" of sharpness.

Here is one shot I found on an archive disk - It is not a great shot but I knew where the disk was for an event I did when I had the lens. It is edited but the settings match close to what you are probably experiencing.

D300 • Tamron 17-50 VC @ 20mm • ISO 3200 • F 2.8 • 1/80th

full size http://www.flickr.com/photos/taotejared/11266261474/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Note the settings and that it is at 3200 on a D300 - something I rarely ever did. It probably did have LR 3 adjustments so the NR wasn't the greatest at that time so some detail was lost.

spraynpray

Like all of the Hi ISO shots I am seeing lately, that looks fine at normal size/viewing distance but definitely 'last generation' for noise when pixel peeping.

Anyway, the Tammy looks pretty good Tao, but I am wondering if the VC will make up for the apparent poor edge definition of the VC version. Do you have anything to say about that? The reviews have been quite scathing about that point.

Photobug

You asked...It is between the 18-35/1.8 Sigma and the 17-55/2.8 Nikkor at the moment for me.

I looked at Tamron and Sigma and bought the 17-55/2.8. Have shot with it for over 6 years and I love this lens. Super dependable and no issues with the quality of the images. After a few years I realized that it would be nice to have the VR feature and I took a look at the Sigma and used it at an outdoor workshop for one hour and hated the lens. When the camera was pointed down the lens would zoom out. Not enough friction to hold it in place. A pain in the rear!

Now I realize VR works great for tele lens but do I really need it for what I shoot? My conclusion was NO. As I tell my friends, "IT DEPENDS" what you shoot. Also agree that Nikon needs to update many of their DX lens.

spraynpray

Thax for that Photobug.

I'm not normally indecisive but I have been on this topic. I actually ordered a Tamron VC but after reading all the reviews I could find I decided that if I were to make a change, it should be the Nikon so I cancelled that order and have bought the Nikon. Hallelujah!

Thank to all, esp @TaoTeJared and @tcole1983 for taking the time to post images too.

I will follow up on my findings by next weekend.

Photobug

Thax for that Photobug.

I'm not normally indecisive but I have been on this topic. I actually ordered a Tamron VC but after reading all the reviews I could find I decided that if I were to make a change, it should be the Nikon so I cancelled that order and have bought the Nikon. Hallelujah!

Smart move. We look forward to your comments with your new tool.

TaoTeJared

Like all of the Hi ISO shots I am seeing lately, that looks fine at normal size/viewing distance but definitely 'last generation' for noise when pixel peeping.

Anyway, the Tammy looks pretty good Tao, but I am wondering if the VC will make up for the apparent poor edge definition of the VC version. Do you have anything to say about that? The reviews have been quite scathing about that point.

Note that the shot I posted was at f/2.8 - that's not a lack of edge definition, it's DOF

I think you will like the lens.

spraynpray

Ok, the verdict is in: The Nikon 17-55 is better than my 16-85 in terms of potential sharpness and colour rendition. First snapshot does not show the sharpness off as it was taken in the mist this morning:



The lack of VR does require me to focus especially on hand holding with care (as TTJ said 2 x 1/fl as a shutter speed as a minimum).

Photobug

Ok, the verdict is in: The Nikon 17-55 is better than my 16-85 in terms of potential sharpness and colour rendition. First snapshot does not show the sharpness off as it was taken in the mist this morning:

Of course the 17-55mm is better than the 16-85.

mustangdaren

I used a Tamron 17-50VC on both a D90 and D7000 before moving to FX. It is a very very sharp lens with some slight edge softness. It was sharpest above F4. It was probably the sharpest lens I had before I bought a Nikon 24-70. One thing you should check on the D7000 is the focus fine tune. The D7000 I had required fine tuning all lens for best results. The Tamron was around a -18. You can buy and focus calibrator from Adorama pretty cheap. It makes a difference. The D7000 was the only camera I really needed it for and the larger the aperature the more the miss calibration shows up. It didn't matter if it was a Nikon or aftermarket lens. Did a lot of research on the issue and found it was a known issue with the D7000. My D600 seems pretty accurate and I haven't had to calibrate the focus adjustment on it. If the 16-85 is not sharp I would definitely check the focus calibration because it should be one of the sharpest consummer lens Nikon offers. Also try a smaller aperature setting. My 28-300VR is terrible until I get around F8 then it is decently sharp.

spraynpray

I have checked the focus before on my 50/1.4 and others and yes, they did benefit from calibration, although not by so much. I just lay a steel ruler out at a 45 degree incline to check focus. Good reminder to check the calibration on the Nikon though.

All that you said about the Tammy plus the less than robust build quality is why I cancelled the order and bought the Nikon and WOW - what a beast it is. I'm waiting for some better weather to see the full potential, hopefully some street photography in London this weekend.