Search results
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.
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.
The 16 85 has better build quality, but if we see the price difference the 18 105 is ok as well. The 18 105 is bigger, but if we don’t consider price the 16 86 is much better build.
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.
The only reason to get the 16-85 over the 18-105 is if you value the 2mm on the wide side. Otherwise no real reason to spend the extra money on a pretty expensive slow lens. Why does everyone have a speed obsession? Sharpness, contrast and VR all matter as well.
The 16-85 costs about twice as much as the 18-105, so i think you're comparing apples and oranges. 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.
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.
