Search results
3 sty 2012 · I had the 18 - 105 and then bought the 16-85 because of all the favorable reviews. Other than build quality, the 16-85 did nothing more, and was no better, than the 18-105. The fact is the 18-105 kit lens is a good zoom lens on dx cameras.
17 lis 2012 · I read a number of reviews yesterday and I am considering the 16-85 or 18-105. From what I read, it would seem the 16-85 has a slight edge in sharpness and has less barrel distortion. I wonder how much difference this amounts to in real world shooting of family pictures.
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;
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.
22 gru 2009 · I've read conflicting comparisons between these two lenses. In most cases, the 16-85 is touted as being a great lens; very sharp except for some softness at 85mm. The 18-105, which I own, is described similarly but without the softness at 85mm and is still sharp at 105mm.
29 gru 2008 · Optical performance of 16-85 is noticeably better than 18-105 on my D80. I returned 18-105 when I returned D90. 18-105 may be sharp but its contrast and colors are not very good in my eyes.
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?
