Search results
4 cze 2010 · Na Twoim miejscu 70-300 uzupełniłbym 16-85, darując sobie 18-105. Chodzi właśnie o ten szeroki kąt, te dwa milimetry od dołu wbrew pozorom robi różnicę. A górny zakres i tak Ci pokrywa trzysetka.
17 lis 2012 · The real actual visable difference is that the 16-85 is wider and that last 2 mm is significant for some people (me for instance), just as the extra reach is of the 18-105 is for others. This summarizes one of the claims why 18-105mm wins in Cost-to-Image-Quality ratio over the 16-85mm, and why the 16-85mm wins with its wider end over the 18 ...
Simply stated, my 18-105 is exceptionally sharp at all focal lengths and apertures; even more than my 16-85. The 16-85 is built better, has a metal mounting ring, and is slightly faster focussing. I realize that these lenses have some sample to sample variation but my questions are as follows;
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. Handy when you have a 70-300 VR lens so you can share filters between lens.
Nikon 16 85 vs 18 105 - sharpness, usability, build quality, price, landscape, portrait, stabilizer, Nikon Dx lens review, strengths, weeknesses
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.
I think it more or less comes down to versatility and build quality, which the 16-85mm lens wins in. Even though the 16-85mm has a shorter max focal length, it makes up for that with a wider wide-angle, which in my opinion makes a much larger difference than having a bit extra for telephoto.
