Search results
17 lis 2012 · Yes, the 16-85 is a bit sharper but the 18-105 VR is a very good lens. If you're on a budget, get the 18-105 VR, you can't go wrong. Figure the 16-85 is going to cost at least twice as much and that's why I sold it and kept the 18-105.
Nikon 16 85 vs 18 105 - sharpness, usability, build quality, price, landscape, portrait, stabilizer, Nikon Dx lens review, strengths, weeknesses
3 sty 2012 · The only thing you get from a 18-105 is a distance scale in/on the lens but give up 85 -105 at twice the price. I doubt if there is much difference in weight. Both the 18-105 & 16-85 share the same 67mm filter size.
29 gru 2008 · I had a chance to compare 18-105 with 16-85 and found that 16-85 was MUCH superior to 18-105 in all aspects: sharpness, contrast and colors. 18-200 is also better 18-105 as I recall. 16-85 is the best consumer lens for now, I believe.
27 kwi 2013 · However, the 18-105 shot is at least a 1/3rd of a stop exposed more to the right--this may be what your eyes is seeing. I believe, @ 70mm, the 16-85 loses some of its advantage (in sharpness) over the 18-105--look @ Photozone MTFs for example. 16-85 is clearly optimized for 16-24mm.
If you have the $600 or so to spend that the 16-85 costs, then you should compare it not to the 18-105, but to the 18-200VR or to the 18-105 with an additional 50mm/1.4 lens that you can get for the same total price. That being said, the 16-85mm will have better build quality and slightly better image quality than the 18-105.
9 maj 2013 · In my opinion, the 16-85/18-105 is about as sharp as it is going to get with a f/3.5-5.6 crop frame lens. As for better overall IQ the FF 24-70 f/2.8 is about as good as it will possibly get with a zoom but, it has a rather limited range and hefty price tag.
