AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR
This is a superb wide angle zoom, priced more reasonably than the 14-24mm, and in a package that is more friendly to the photographer. Although not great for architecture photography at its widest setting due to distorted lines, this limitation is easily corrected for in imaging software.
July 30, 2010
This lens is a very good Value for the Money. Even though I don't use Ultra Wides in my normal jobs, this lens is a great Landscape Lens. I have used it for some Architectural Interiors too.
July 30, 2010
A Gem of a Lens
I picked up this lens primarily for office interiors but now I use it all the time. It is sharp, sharp, sharp! It has great color, great perspective and seems brighter that I expected. The VR seemed overkill but now I love it, popping off razor sharp images at 1/4 second without a worry at weddings or location portrait sessions. Put this lens on a D3 and go shoot in a pitch dark room and wow yourself.
July 30, 2010
Excellent value and quality
Purchased for landscape and general purpose photography for use with my D800. Focus is instant and accurate, images are exceptionally sharp. Barrel and pin-cushion distortions are linear and easily correct. Construction quality is superior, handing ergonomics very comfortable. Excellent value and quality.
August 1, 2012
Fantastic lens with great build quality. Relatively light for the size. Great aperture as I feel there is no need to own a f2.8 wide angle lens as I rarely shoot at this focal length in low light conditions requiring a faster lens. Only complaint is the length as it would be nice if it were a bit more compact allowing it to fit easier in the bag.
June 11, 2011
Good wide angle lens!!
I have been photographing weddings for almost eigth years now and I was waiting for a good, wide lens. I shoot different cultures weddings and some of them their families are huge! With -many times- being at a confined space a good wide is a must. Definetly a keeper. What I also like is that it forces you to change lenses if you want to shoot a portrait. You can distor your subject with this lens. I gave it a 4 star rating because it doesn't focus fast enough. But I can live with that.
October 13, 2010
I obtained the 16-35mm f4 VR a few months ago for use with my D700. This lens has been getting very good reviews and I agree with most everything I've read about it. I haven't used the 17-35 at all, and have only briefly used the 14-24, but it seems most of the comparisons are probably right on. This 16-35 is sharp beginning at f4, has a great zoom range, is built well, and handles great. Every lens has drawbacks and the only issue with this one is the well-documented, fairly extreme barrel distortion at the wide end. Overall it rocks and deserves 5 stars otherwise.
August 2, 2010
good prosumer lens, overpriced
distortions at wide end, field curvature, corners are soft, needs to be closed to f8.0 to be acceptable.
July 30, 2010
First, I want to begin by saying that all my experiences are based on using this lens as a FX lens on either a D3 or D3x. I also base my review in light of my results with other Nikon lens, a 14-24; 24-70; 24 PCe; 20 mm and 60 mm.
My 14-24 is a terrific lens, but as Thom Hogan says, its my favorite lens I never use. For most uses, its just a little too short. The 16-35 fills that gap for me as an everyday lens for someone who like wide angle work. The lens is much lighter than the 14-24 and if your walking around all day with a D3, the weight adds up.
On the down side, there is some angle bending at 16 mm, in particular, the horizon, much more so than the 14-24. I have been doing correction with NX-2 and CS5, but there is no current lens correction profile for this lens yet in the Adobe profile list (July 2010), once that profile is out there, this should be less of an issue.
I find the lens sharp and color great, especially if used at f8.
Overall, good value and a good addition to any wide angle lens inventory
July 30, 2010
Lens flares a lot
I'm still scratching my head over how I got here. I was shooting with a D7000, but I really wanted, or thought I wanted, some N series lenses because of the supposed promise to eliminate lens flare. And since all the N lenses are FX, I thought I should have an FX camera to use the lenses at the length they were designed for. So I talked myself into a D600, and I bought the 16-35mm as my first N series lens to go along with it.
But here's the thing ... I go out to the beach to shoot some sunsets, and I discover that this lens flares more than any lens I have ever used in my life, completely negating the entire reason why I bought the lens and the D600 in the first place. I've got one shot where the entire field of view is plastered with flares all over it. Now I don't know what to do. Should I go back to the D7000, should I buy some prime lenses? I'm now disillusioned by the promise of the N series lenses.
Other than the flare, I think it's the best and sharpest lens I own.
February 23, 2013
Soft off center axis
I returned this lens because it was unacceptably soft off center axis on my D300. At 16mm even when stopped down to f5.6 off center image quality was soft. I also compared it to my excellent Nixon 24-70mm f2.8 at both 24mm and 35mm. The 24-70 was far superior off center axis at both 24mm and 35mm to the 16-35mm both at f4 and even when the 16-35mm was stopped down to f5.6. There was something very wrong with this lens either in design or manufacture.
March 6, 2011