JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
The Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f/4 G ED VR is a wide-angle lens for FF and APS-C, manufactured from 2010. The focus is done by Ultrasonic AF Motor (Ring-USM), it has image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 1152 €;
142 users have given it an average vote of 9.2 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Nikon F: this lens is compatible with reflex fullframe and APS-C Nikon.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 202000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Weight but above all, for those who use filters, diameter from 77 (which saves a lot considering the prices of Nisi slabs)
Cons:not relevant
Opinion:I waited months before giving an opinion on this goal, and reading even before the purchase of the MTF tests. It is incomprehensible in my modest opinion how it is by many photographers (amateurs or professionals who are) underestimated. I had the pleasure of being able to compare it with 14/24 2.8, 24/70 2.8 and 24/120 f/4, and as fussy as it is, in view of the considerable difference in price to purchase (with the exception of 24/120 f/4) I would not give up at all 16/35 in favor of the others mentioned above. The mtf speak clearly, to very open diaphragms limps but from the f/6.3 the gap with the much "decanted" 14/24 f/2.8 (reference point of the Nikon wide-angle category) is narrowing. The vignette that many highlight is in my opinion completely irrelevant given the possibility with Ps to eliminate it (for what little it highlights) in a blink of an eye. The sharpness at the edges, on the open diaphragms, is certainly not that of 14/24 but moreover the price is not and, as it closes at f/7.1 the difference disappears. In my opinion, it is an excellent optics, due to the fact that, using it exclusively in the mountains for landscapes, my diaphragms always range from f/8 to f/13 thus eliminating that "limp" of his to open diaphragms. Moreover, I do not have the problem of holder and slabs, being able to use Nisi filters on all the wide angles I own, which is a nice saving of both weight and euro! I link with the test for those interested: https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-16-35mm-f4g-vr/2
Opinion:Good morning, you read several conflicting opinions on this optics, I report my photo-amateur from excursions and trips. The optics are perfect for my needs: optimal focal excursion, VR doing its job, acceptable weight and above all 77mm filters so I can do long exposures without bleeding out with slab filters. The sharpness at F 4 is ok in the center and enough at the edges, diaphragm at 5.6 and 8 becomes homogeneous throughout the frame. The distortion for me is acceptable, just be careful when shooting and avoid several problems, also if you want to eliminate distortions you have to use the decentralizables, otherwise there are always... New costs a lot (too much), I took it used at a reasonable cost.
Cons:disastrous angles at 16 mm, water infiltration
Opinion:after a year of use I can say that the defects outweigh the merits. The focal range is excellent the weight quite contained although not the stated one (720 gr with lampshade) combined with an exceptional VR for freehand photos that I regret very much. Unfortunately, the lens is only tropicalized on paper, following a trip to Iceland with frontal spray from a waterfall (not direct water on the target) and dried immediately were formed concentric rings inside the lenses, perhaps remnants of limestone/ dirt as a result of drying forcing me to sell it at a price to say the least ridiculous. Disastrous 16 mm angles, in some cases you are forced to cut them from how opaque and insharp they are.
Opinion:This is an exceptional lens for me. Gifts colors and super sharpness and above all it is a wide-angle pushed, just as I like it. Among my best shots, many were made with this lens. The only downside is the weight and size that are remarkable (unfortunately), otherwise it is a lens that I love and that I recommend. I didn't find any defects in hallucirate lenses or anything like that. For me a 9.5 as a grade (the half point is only for weight/clutter, but I also understand that the project - to include VR - probably could not allow smaller dimensions).
Pros:Clarity across the field already from f4 (excluding 35mm), distortion noteworthy only at 16mm (corrects in the room), discreet resistance to flare, use of 77mm filters, VR, color yield, minimum focus distance, weight and quite modest size, versatility, zoom and AF INTERNI (it does not rotate anything, nothing comes out, no dust comes in), tropicalized.
Cons:At 35mm as sharpness drops a bit to f4 and you have to close to f5, 6-f8.
Opinion:Great beautiful lens, with a very versatile range of focals, fantastic the zoom and af interior mechanism. Ideal for landscapes and architecture (most obvious distortion at 16mm,solvable directly in the room). With a small minimum maf distance, it can also be used for close-up and creative shots. Coupled with 70-200 f4 is an exceptional combination. Personally I mount the 16-35 on the Nikon D850 (where thanks to the high number of Mpixels I can crop in the room or in pp to get the focal points between 35mm and 70mm) and the 70-200 on Nikon D600. If you do not want to complicate life with a 14-24 f2.8 (unmanageable by weight, clutter and impossibility of easy use of filters) and you can give up an f2.8, this is the right lens.
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
