NR Blog NR Forum ebay Finds Nikon Deals Nikon Buying Guide Leica Rumors Pentax Rumors Photo Rumors Contact NR
›

16-80 f/2.8-4 vs. 16-85 vs 18-140?

One_Oh_FourOne_Oh_Four Posts: 70Member
in Nikon Lenses
How does the new 16-80 perform compared to the old 16-85? And the newer 18-140? And then mainly on a 24 MP camera? I very much like the 16mm wide end compared to 18mm but I find the 16-80 a tad expensive. I don't know if the old 16-85 is in the same league or not on a high resolution camera?
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Comments

  • PistnbrokePistnbroke Posts: 2,444Member
    I have used acouple of 18-140 for a couple of years and had no image quality issues. If you look at the 16-85 on DXO its not good
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • IronheartIronheart Posts: 3,017Moderator
    edited November 2015
    The 16-80 is worth every penny on my D7200. You are paying for the f/2.8-4. If you don't need/want that get the 18-140. I agree w/ @pistnbroke, the 16-85 is less than exciting on a 24mp sensor.
    Post edited by Ironheart on
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,545Moderator
    I found the 16-85 to be disappointing on both 12 and 16mp bodies so I can see that it would be at least the same on a 24mp body. The extra 2mm at the wide end is well worth having over the 18-140.
    Always learning.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • One_Oh_FourOne_Oh_Four Posts: 70Member
    Thanks for your input, guys! Guess it is going to be the 16-80 since I think I will miss the extra 2 mm at the wide end. A D7200 with 16-80 and 80-400 AF-S should be a nice combo to take on summer holiday as opposed to the D800 + 24-70 +80-400... I stil hope (against hope) for a D400/D500 but if that camera would see the light of day I'd want to wait at least 6-12 months to see if there are any issues.... ;)
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • DaveyJDaveyJ Posts: 1,090Member
    The 16-80 is maybe the best Nikon lens I have used.....and I have owned way more Nikon lens than maybe I should have! It does though have a zoom range and I would want other zoom ranges covered as well if I were taking a big crucial trip. There are times a tele is NEEDED. That new 200-500 looks good to me.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • BabaGanoushBabaGanoush Posts: 252Member
    I owned the 16-85mm and used it for a while as the walk-around lens for my D7000 (I no longer own either of them). It was a very decent lens in the mid-range, from around 35mm to around 70mm, but had pronounced front/back focussing issues at both ends of its focal range. After making the necessary micro-adjustments, I found my copy of the lens to be quite sharp across the entire range of FLs. The problem with it was having to remember to apply the appropriate corrections in the field. I found this annoying since my memory for detail isn't the best and when I was in a hurry I often forgot to take the time to change to the right micro-adjustment setting. Tired of waiting for the mythical D400, I've just bought myself a D7200, which was on sale, and I'm about to buy the 16-80mm lens to replace the 18-140mm kit lens that came basically for free with all the "flash" discounts. I've had the camera for only two days so I haven't had a chance to do any tests of it yet.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,545Moderator
    I predict you will be blown away Baba.
    Always learning.
    Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.