16-85 vs. 18-105

Started 6 months ago | Discussion thread
Brian
Regular MemberPosts: 190
Like?
Re: 16-85 vs. 18-105
In reply to ErikkaSmith, 6 months ago

ErikkaSmith wrote:

These two lenses are comparable also in image quality. I've read threads here on comparing these 2 and experienced forum members suggest getting the 18-105 if you are on a budget and would need more telephoto.

I own a 16-85mm and use it with my D3100 and D7000 and have tried an 18-105mm on both these cameras when I was deciding which I should buy. In practical terms (that is, since I plan to use it as a walkaround travel lens than for portraits/sports/etc.), I found essentially no difference between them. Sure the 16-85mm has VRII and a wider end, but I don't really see it useful for me even now since I shoot with it in daylight (shutter speeds of >1/250 sec).

This lens replaced my 18-55mm VR kit lens but I barely use it (the 16-85). When I need a wide angle, I use the 10-24mm, when I need a fast lens, I get the 35mm f/1.8 or 17-55mm f/2.8.

What does VRII add?  Are you saying you don't find the VRII useful or the 16-85 lens?  What made you go for the 16-85 if you felt they were the same?

--
Brian Miller
Nikon D3100 and Canon S100
(Used to own: Nikon D40 and Canon S30)

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow