D-90/Nikkor 16-85mm VR-II Commentary

Started Mar 18, 2010 | Discussions thread
myzel Senior Member • Posts: 2,075
Re: other options

BillCarr wrote:

And some compromises offer similar image quality and lower price without specific compromises of other lenses.

Sure. The AF-S 35 mm f/1.8 is smaller, costs much less, has very similar image quality is much faster and has almost the same build quality.

For example Tamron's image-stabilized 17-50mm f/2.8 is a bit cheaper than the Nikon, holds that f/2.8 across its range, and has been rated quite highly.

I have the old screw drive version. It's a good lens, but it has it's own limitations. If I have the option I don't use it at 50mm and f/2.8.

Before I bought the 16-85 mm I used the Tamron most of the time at f/4-5.6, often switched to other lenses to get 16 mm or 60-85mm and used primes to get shallow DoF. Now I use the 16-85 mm and the primes without missing reach, shallow DoF and low light options. I use the Tamron only in situations where I really need a zoom at f/2.8 without needing a telephoto lens and without flash - not something I do very often.

This doesn't turn the Tamron into a bad lens or the 16-85mm into a better lens, the later is just the better compromise for me.

I'd rather use the 50mm at f/2.8 and take a few steps forward and be able to isolate my subject than use the Nikon at 85mm and f/5.6 and have a busy background.

Isn't it nice that there are so many different lenses so everybody can choose the lenses that fits his needs?

I would rather use a slower lens at 85 mm than a 50 mm lens, simply because I don't like the perspective I get when I have to take a few steps forward.

 myzel's gear list:myzel's gear list
Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 Nikkor 10mm f/2.8 Nikon 1 Nikkor 18.5mm f/1.8 Nikon 1 Nikkor 32mm f/1.2
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow