| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/29/2013 12:59:08 PM · #1 |
I can usually answer questions like this for myself, but I'm on the fence about this one...
I have an opportunity to get a pretty good deal on a barely used Nikon 16-35. However, I already have a 17-35 that I also got a good deal on a year or so ago. The images I get out of the 17-35 are really, really good (no complaints), but the 17-35 is 12 years old, and in less good condition. I could probably resell it for about $200 less than the 16-35 will cost me.
I know this is more of a philosophical question than anything, but should I buy the 16-35?
|
|
|
|
10/29/2013 01:33:21 PM · #2 |
I have it...it's a very sharp lens, and has VR. It's not too heavy, though it is pretty BIG.
I always thought my Sigma 10-20 was sharp, but it doesn't compare to the 16-35. On the other hand, it does have quite a bit of distortion at 16mm. Unless you need the VR, if the 17 is very sharp, probably not worth it.
Looks a bit better than yours in the test specs but may not be worth it...OTOH the new 18-35 looks even better (except it starts at 18).
Message edited by author 2013-10-29 13:33:34. |
|
|
|
10/29/2013 02:46:20 PM · #3 |
I like my 12-24/D7000 better than my 16-35/D600 as far as my ability to take advantage of a wide-angle lens, but I haven't really gone out of my way to put my new 16-35 to the kind of wide-angle shooting I like. It *is* sharp.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2013 04:09:32 PM · #4 |
I have the 16-35, and I also can confirm this is a sharp lens.
I am very spoiuled by the sharpness of the Nikon 24-70 and Nikon 70-200 VR, and I was expecting this one to perform a bit worse due to the price difference, but in plactical you cannot see the difference.
There where two things that hold me from getting the 14-24 (I still drool each time I see it): the price, for a not so used lens, and the ND9 B&W filter that at the time didn't had any way of getting that result with the 14-24.
|
|
|
|
10/29/2013 05:30:41 PM · #5 |
| I know they are both good lenses, but I would never, never, sell a 2.8 for a 4 :D |
|
|
|
10/29/2013 08:29:09 PM · #6 |
| just make sure you test out the copy before you buy it, and compare it to other copies. i eventually ended up taking my 16-35 back to nikon for servicing, because i know it's definitely softer than other versions of the same lens. they just cleaned it and said they couldn't do anything further because it was "in spec". |
|
|
|
10/29/2013 09:51:08 PM · #7 |
I love DPC...I asked a yes or no question. 5 different people gave 5 different answers, and all of the answers were correct, in their own way.
Anyway, I've made a good deal on price, and if it's what he says it is, I'm going to go ahead and get it, and sort out which one to keep later. This is a guy I know, so it's not some sketch backalley craigslist purchase... |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/07/2025 05:25:48 PM EDT.
