Does 16-85mm VR consider a good lens, how does it perform, im using d7000. Is it good lens?
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
#1
Posted 09 April 2018 - 01:28 PM
#2
Posted 09 April 2018 - 02:26 PM
As long as you're referring to the Nikon AFS 16-85G VR lens, then yes, this is a very good lens and would work very well with your D7000. I have one that practically lives on my D7000.
--Ron
#3
Posted 10 April 2018 - 02:56 AM
#4
Posted 10 April 2018 - 03:20 AM
It is a very good lens, and the extra 2 mm at the wide end makes it much more versatile than the 18-xx lenses.
- Ron likes this
#5
Posted 11 April 2018 - 03:27 AM
It is a good lens - sharp, good VR, not too big, well built, great all-rounder. They used to go for about £250 used a couple of years ago in the UK, but are about £350 now. There must be a demand for them.
https://kenrockwell....kon/16-85mm.htm
#6
Posted 11 April 2018 - 03:59 AM
- Ron and dcbear78 like this
#7
Posted 11 April 2018 - 12:28 PM
So overall is it better than the 18-200 i know it is zoom lens but still, is it sharper and faster?
#8
Posted 11 April 2018 - 02:13 PM
So overall is it better than the 18-200 i know it is zoom lens but still, is it sharper and faster?
"better" depends on what your priorities are. 16-85 is better for me because it is smaller, has better IQ and the extra 2 mm on the wide end are more important to me than the extra 115 mm on the telephoto end. Like Mr Rockwell, I value convenience over quality and I also like numbers. Yet my preference goes to the 16-85 rather than the 18-200.
"sharper" - yes, the MTF curves and photo samples are available online.
"faster" no, both lenses are 3.5-5.6 except they reach the same aperture at slightly different focal lengths. Shall we say they are about the same?
#9
Posted 11 April 2018 - 02:32 PM
"better" depends on what your priorities are.
...
has better IQ ...
Those two pieces of dem's post sum it up for me...really depends on the individual but I would take better image quality pretty much every time.
- Ron likes this
#10
Posted 12 April 2018 - 05:26 AM
#11
Posted 19 April 2018 - 06:07 AM
#12
Posted 19 April 2018 - 06:11 AM
Could you show us a sample and show us the shooting data from the EXIF information?
#13
Posted 19 April 2018 - 06:21 AM
#14
Posted 19 April 2018 - 06:36 AM
That depends on what editor you use, and what OS.
Some applications say EXIF, some say Metadata and some say information.
On a mac, the easiest, most universal way is to open the file in Preview and press CMD+i.
In Photoshop, you open the file and press CMD+Alt+Shift+i.
#15
Posted 19 April 2018 - 06:49 AM
#16
Posted 19 April 2018 - 11:23 AM
#17
Posted 20 April 2018 - 03:17 AM
here is some photos that i just took from my balcony,
Firts pic is f8 second is f11 a third is 5.6
for me at second picuter the trees are not that in focus.
#18
Posted 20 April 2018 - 12:23 PM
#19
Posted 21 April 2018 - 06:39 AM
f/11 will have the slowest shutter speed.
If you handheld the camera, this can be camera shake.
Also, the framing (and focal length?) are different in these three shots.