I am thinking to sell my Nikon&Acirc;&acute;s 16-85mm to buy this lens, but I wonder if this lens worths the change (not only in terms of focal range but also in IQ)?
1049466
It depends on what you use the lens for. The Tamron will give you a much larger zoom range in a very lightweight lens. But the Nikon will give you better performance over the 16-85mm range. If you mostly use the 16-85 range or make enlargements you may be better off keeping the Nikon. If you want to take more telephoto images and don't need the sharpest possible images and don't shoot a lot in low light you will probably enjoy the Tamron.
1402683
It is a good lens for portrates I am not sure which I like most the 85 or the 35, I seem to get more room around the subject on the 35 for the full frame printing but both are good lens.
759247
Even better. The 1.4 is rock solid compared to the flimsy 1.8, and slightly faster. Ten times as expensive, but may be worth it. If you're still thinking of adding a new zoom to your arsenal, look at the 24-105L, as well. It's pretty much a coin toss, as far as IQ, with the 24-70L, but it adds IS. So, it's one stop slower, but it gains about 3 stops due to the IS, so it's actually better for low-light than the "faster" lens. And longer, too.
1312204
This is the first 10-100mm lens I have ever bought and I purchased it specifically for a Nikon 1 J3 so I did not 'shop it' at all. I am very happy w/the lens but am not conversant enough to explain why. Sorry.
1150052
Yes, it worth it. Have far less chromatic aberrations, more definition across all the frame, and weights far less. This lens is very good starting F1.8, but at the range F4-F8 it shines, even better than Nikkor 105 mm F1.8, which was my previous sharper lens
1927445
Jen, I don't recommend this lens. I owned it for a short while when I was new to photography, and was disappointed with its IQ. Zoom lenses that cover this long of a focal length generally sacrifice image integrity to do so. This lens was no exception with heavy barrel distortion on the wide end, and it was very soft when zoomed even when stopped down. I would recommend getting a lens that does less, but does it better. This lens would not be any better than your kit lens. I would recommend the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for its value and IQ.
767796
Before answering, I tried the lens on a D70s. The lens works perfectly. I would, however, bring to your attention that this is an FX lens and the D70 has a DX crop sensor. As a result, this lens has will be closer to a 35mm field of view on a DX camera. The description indicates 84 degrees FX but about 60 degrees DX. If you do not need the features of this lens (aperture ring, etc.) and are simply seeking a 35mm lens, consider the 35mm 1.8 DX for about 60% of the price. Otherwise, I use this lens a great deal and my only real frustration is its tendency to ghost. It ranges from F/2.8-f/22, is metal and is small enough to drop into your pocket. Before answering, I tried the lens on a D70s. The lens works perfectly. I would, however, bring to your attention that this is an FX lens and the D70 has a DX crop sensor. As a result, this lens has will be closer to a 35mm field of view on a DX camera. The description indicates 84 degrees FX but about 60 degrees DX. If you do not need the features of this lens (aperture ring, etc.) and are simply seeking a 35mm lens, consider the 35mm 1.8 DX for about 60% of the price. Otherwise, I use this lens a great deal and my only real frustration is its tendency to ghost. It ranges from F/2.8-f/22,... » Read More Before answering, I tried the lens on a D70s. The lens works perfectly. I would, however, bring to your attention that this is an FX lens and the D70 has a DX crop sensor. As a result, this lens has will be closer to a 35mm field of view on a DX camera. The description indicates 84 degrees FX but about 60 degrees DX. If you do not need the features of this lens (aperture ring, etc.) and are simply seeking a 35mm lens, consider the 35mm 1.8 DX for about 60% of the price. Otherwise, I use this lens a great deal and my only real frustration is its tendency to ghost. It ranges from F/2.8-f/22, is metal and is small enough to drop into your pocket. « Show Less
1351158
I used the 55-200mm/4-5.6 lens on my DX format D200 and thought that it was an excellent lens. There are two things that would make me prefer it to the excellent 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 in your case. First, you would probably be using the lens at longer focal lengths, in which case both lenses would be operating at f/4.5 to f/5.6, so there is no advantage to having the 24-85mm in terms of low light capability. Second, the 24-85mm is designed for the FX format, so you'd be paying for a wider field lens than you need on a DX camera.If you ever go to FX format, the 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 is a real jewel to own. I used the 55-200mm/4-5.6 lens on my DX format D200 and thought that it was an excellent lens. There are two things that would make me prefer it to the excellent 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 in your case. First, you would probably be using the lens at longer focal lengths, in which case both lenses would be operating at f/4.5 to f/5.6, so there is no advantage to having the 24-85mm in terms of low light capability. Second, the 24-85mm is designed for the FX format, so you'd be paying for a wider field lens than you need on a DX camera.If you ever go to FX format, the 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 is a... » Read More I used the 55-200mm/4-5.6 lens on my DX format D200 and thought that it was an excellent lens. There are two things that would make me prefer it to the excellent 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 in your case. First, you would probably be using the lens at longer focal lengths, in which case both lenses would be operating at f/4.5 to f/5.6, so there is no advantage to having the 24-85mm in terms of low light capability. Second, the 24-85mm is designed for the FX format, so you'd be paying for a wider field lens than you need on a DX camera.If you ever go to FX format, the 24-85mm/3.5-5.6 is a real jewel to own. « Show Less
1786217
Thanks for the information. I'm definately looking to unload the 28-80. I hadn't thought about third party lenses. I was always told to stick with Nikon. I'll check out the Sigma.
845651
Hello!!, I'm not am expert but my lens Nikkon 18-140... I have not any trouble with it, the pictures are grate, and the best is that I don't need any other lens for my regular picture.
678605
In my opinion it depends on what your main reason for using the lens is. If you don't NEED the 2.8 then go with the 4, I don't think IQ is dramatically better or worse. Unless there was ever a time while you were using the f/4 that you were like "man I wish I could stop down to 2.8," I would just stick to the f/4.Edit: Just saw on another reply you said something about portraits, if you are going to use the lens for portraits at all the 2.8 is amazing, the bokeh is simply stunning.
916479
So despite it being a macro there's no problem with regular focusing?The 50mm 1.8 is really shoddy build quality, I think you're thinking of that. The 50mm 1.4 (3 times the price) is quite sturdy.I use the 28-105mm (the cheap one, not the L glass) I got this around the same time my friend got the 28-135, which looks like a better lens on the surface, yet he hated his and sold it. It's a much larger lens physically, while the 28-105 is really small, so that's something to consider. I also felt like mine focused better, although that wasn't an objective test. And it's half the price, which is nice. Something to consider So despite it being a macro there's no problem with regular focusing?The 50mm 1.8 is really shoddy build quality, I think you're thinking of that. The 50mm 1.4 (3 times the price) is quite sturdy.I use the 28-105mm (the cheap one, not the L glass) I got this around the same time my friend got the 28-135, which looks like a better lens on the surface, yet he hated his and sold it. It's a much larger lens physically, while the 28-105 is really small, so that's something to consider. I also felt like mine focused better, although that wasn't an objective test. And it's... » Read More So despite it being a macro there's no problem with regular focusing?The 50mm 1.8 is really shoddy build quality, I think you're thinking of that. The 50mm 1.4 (3 times the price) is quite sturdy.I use the 28-105mm (the cheap one, not the L glass) I got this around the same time my friend got the 28-135, which looks like a better lens on the surface, yet he hated his and sold it. It's a much larger lens physically, while the 28-105 is really small, so that's something to consider. I also felt like mine focused better, although that wasn't an objective test. And it's half the price, which is nice. Something to consider « Show Less
2281138
See if you can find this particular lens with the "AF-D" designation (vs plain old "AF"). On this particular lens model Nikon changed the AF gearing resulting in autofocus that's much faster. (D does not signify an AF speed increase on other Nikkor lenses, just this one -- it's a designator that indicates that distance info is passed to the camera.)
604837
Hi Jack - to be honest I've not had hands on with this lens. It was bought for my Son for his birthday. And from what I do know about it it is smaller and with the Macro capability - a more useful lens, also the 18-200 has less focal range then the newer Macro Lens. Seems to have pretty good reviews and as my son uses it for digital video - he's pretty happy thus far. Sorry I can't be of more help.Chuck
1773171
I agree with Patrick as far as the tilt and shift lens goes and I would agree that it would be a good idea to rent it rather than buy it. I have the 28mm. in question and I love it although it is a bit long on a DX body. For me it is fine on a FX body. The optical quality of the lens is superb as is the clarity and color saturation.I have had several 28's and this is by far the best I have owned.
1429333
This is a good lens. If you are urgent to have it for business or travel, I would suggest you to buy it immediately. Otherwise, I would suggest you to buy one during holiday season, e.g., Thanksgiving. This lens is very sharp and its IQ is pretty good to focus on the object. Good luck and enjoy using it.
241544
I have the 85 f1.8D and 35 f2D and they are fantastic. The two lenses you mention should be even better. The 35 is such a versatile focal length, I have been using as my all purpose lens.