|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on May 27, 2021 Pros: Versatile, crisp, beautiful yield on all focal points, light and compact, bright although not constant aperture, stabilized, AF fast and responsive. Cons: 16mm distortion corrected in pp, bulky lampshed Opinion: It's an excellent point of view for me. It is practically always mounted on my D7200 with which it manages to bring out excellent, sharp images, with beautiful colors and contrasts. In my opinion, it is a lens that DX camera owners should take into account for the versatility of optics and quality. The only "sore" note is the light screen... an obscene thing..... large, square.... makes the camera s stocky and really visible. I don't know if there are any technical reasons, but they should have made it a "normal" one. It was one of the best purchases made in the photographic field. I highly recommend it. |
  | sent on April 24, 2021 Pros: Sharpness, great all do Cons: price Opinion: On the D7500 fits perfectly. The colors are crisp and great combinations of lights and shadows are made when applied to certain iris aperture parameters and exposure times. It is very convenient on any occasion since it is obviously a zoom lens. It excels in landscape photos as a wide angle. Unfortunately it sins on price, but quality must be paid especially in nikon house. |
  | sent on August 12, 2020 Pros: valid for all occasions, high general quality, nano cristal. Cons: of course the price, but quality costs, and applies to a lifetime. Opinion: for me that I love to shoot landscapes, villages, villages, it is the maximum, I also own the 10/24, another tank nikon, another thousand euros in nital, but as they say in manythe quality you pay, but it is forever. lens that works well at almost all the focal points, at 16 suffers a little but always remains extremely valid, if it happens used is to be taken on the fly. |
 | sent on April 10, 2019 Pros: Adequate focal excursion, excellent lens treatment, sharpness, color rendition, stabilization, overall quality. Cons: Price, Lens Hood questionable. Opinion: I bought it on the Asian online market (where the price is more humane than Italy) to replace the 18-55 kit lens of my D5500. This excellent 16-80 is a bit wasted compared to the camera body I have, but in view of a future upgrade to D7500 I wanted to take it. I Agree with the merits already mentioned by others and I am not here to repeat them. With My D5500 Maybe I can not pull out the best that this optics can give but I must admit that the "modest" 18-55 of the kit beats well in front of the Big Brother. The differences are there (of course for the better for 16-80) but the little guy makes his figure. Of This 16-80 I really like the color rendition, the sharpness, the stabilization. The Hood is very bulky; I took an alternative rubber lens hood (not bad). The Nittal price list is in my opinion out of my mind, while the about €600 online are tailored to the quality. A great all-do. |
user111807  | sent on February 03, 2019 Pros: Focal excursion, VR, good sharpness. Cons: Price Opinion: Taken in kit with the d500 with which it works fine autofocus fast and precise very efficient the 16 mm VR I took pictures freehand at 0.4 seconds without movement. It distorts maybe a little too much to 16mm better keep the camera in the bubble. Apart from the oversized hood it is compact and light. Finally the price sore note over a thousand euros nital list is meaningless, in kits with the camera costs much less, until some time ago it was rare to find used, but lately they find enough and you bring home a good all to do. With the price of the new instead there is better in the universals. |
 | sent on January 20, 2019 Pros: Lightweight, compact, fast AF, crisp Cons: Lens Hood too large Opinion: I bought this lens mainly to replace the already excellent 16-85. Right from the start I noticed a distinct difference. Much sharper at all focal, fast in focus and in my opinion produces raw more workable. I fully share the choice made by Nikon to work with plastic materials that make it light and compact. For me it was crucial since I don't like to go around with the ballast. Despite these materials the impression it is from me is of general robustness and good solidity. The additional brightness compared to the 16-85 is felt throughout, allowing shots in unreachable conditions with the latter. Let's not talk about stabilization: wonderful. I have taken firm and sharp pictures at 1/15 Freehand. Never succeeded before. The only thing I don't like is the size of the lens hood, though of course there will be a reason. I'm used to reverse it on the lens to have it always available to need. In This resting position, however, it is not possible to get to the zoom ring and therefore it is mandatory to remove it all the times. On the price I do not pronounce although I think it is not so disproportionate to the overall quality (I mean the online offers and not the full price list). |
 | sent on January 03, 2019 Pros: Right focal length excursion, lens treatment, supplied lens hood Cons: Distortion over 16 mm (I believe higher than the same focal as the 16-85 had previously) Opinion: Since about 3 weeks I have taken D7500 + 16-80 and I am trying to understand the rendering of the system. I ask the community what do you think of the focus at 16 mm in Live view, I'm doing so for photos on tripod to which I request precision and is not convincing me much. Try to photograph the stones of a trullo or a dry wall in a situation of diffused light, maybe backlight, and then give me feedback. I am not so satisfied. I do not by visual satisfaction just the optimization phase in live view of the fire, I do not spout the right sharpness |
 | sent on November 11, 2018 Pros: Stabilizer, sharpness, semi-pro handyman Cons: Distortion at wide-angle focal lengths and of course the price Opinion: Taken to replace the excellent Sigma 17-50 f2.8 I was intrigued by the good reviews. Very good handyman to keep assembled for the most varied needs. Covers the most common focal lengths. The VR is sensational, nothing to say, as on the other hand the sharpness (Acceptabilissima even at full aperture). Sore notes, in my opinion, the saturation of the colors, too, too much charge. In fact, I have to set the picture control to neutral or uniform or reduce the saturation manually. Then the distortion to 16, 18, 20, 24... All of course correctable in PP and nothing tragic but annoying to see. Obviously I do not dwell on the price, a topic already stressed by many. I can only say that I associate myself with the choir, unjustifiably dear. But this does not mean that it is not a good goal, with its character, incisive, fast and well-constructed. Definitely recommended but if possible to find at the price of the used. |
 | sent on October 08, 2018 Pros: Great sharpness, colors "35mm 1.8 DX", Absolute resistance to flare, awesome VR Cons: vignetting, Plasticose Construction Although better than the kit lenses Opinion: I was really wary of this lens for everything I had read and especially thought I would regret the 24-120 F/4 which I was slightly too long in wide angle but constructively more robust, solid and heavier. Past to try it a little ' and driven by the curiosity of this 16-80 (which is the perfect equivalent for aps-c size of 24-120mm) I had to deeply recreate its capabilities. It has really faithful colors, it is very sharp at any focal length at f/4, at 16mm open to 2.8 it is still really sharp (a hair below the edges but we are talking about levels of excellence). I have yet to put it to the whip in really difficult situations that can happen to a professional photographer in the newspaper but I already realized that "pasta" is Made. The idea that leaves you is that it is the nerdy but super technological and intelligent brother of the biggest and muscular 17-55, classic so many muscles and little brain. Can you shoot without moving up to 1/8 sec without choppy! It has a really awesome VR, try to believe it. Therefore do not regret the focal of a fixed f/2.8 because he even when it is at F/4 it makes you recover light thanks to its technology. It has an almost annoying anti-glare treatment from how effective it is.... even when you'd like the flare by shooting it against the sun he doesn't want to know. It also manages to eliminate haze given by UV rays when you point away in sunny days. Focal length I would say perfect multipurpose, maybe a short hair if you are accustomed to something more Lunghino type 18-105 or simili....ma on the other hand.... the quality you pay. Could it be considered a professional aim DX? Yes certainly, although I find it unlikely that for the needs of a professional you go to consider this lens for a sensor little resistant to iso, maybe for sporty use.... but in that case is usually preferred something more specific, a 80-200 For example. Anyway if you are amateurs and want the top of the top, reluctantly... I must admit that is the lens you Seek. |
 | sent on October 07, 2018 Pros: Very fast and perfect Autofocus, excellent engraving and colors and three-dimensionality, a loyal companion! Cons: none, It is a optics for professionals the high price is adequate to the Performance. Opinion: Tested with the d7200, compared with the younger brother 16-85 that I use for years for work every day, the 16-80 is another planet, it is the optics that saves the Professional. It's a vision that makes you take your job Home. I read plague and horns on this lens, I tested it thoroughly and I realized that those who criticize... maybe do another job. The 16 -80 is a professional goal, and only those who use it for work can understand the very high quality of this optics. The price is to a professional optics, even if it looks like a plasticone... With this optics (in my Opinion) Nikon a brought the DX format to levels of the FX. Just look and compare the files...;) |
user65640 | sent on September 03, 2018 Pros: stabilization, colors Cons: Weight, cost, yield and general (in proportion to cost) Opinion: I played a lot with the 16-80VR. I was one of the first to take it, paying him if the memory does not deceive me on €1,000, of course nital. Today however I use a Sigma 17-70 C that here on Juza ironically has the same final vote. Probably absolute, those 2 times on 100 really difficult the 16-80 the tick on the rival Sigma, the other 98 but you have half-encumbrance, much less weight and €600 in the purse. The 16-80VR, and I speak for myself, was the latest faux-Pro Nikkor optics I've ever purchased for the simple reason that it should cost just over a 16-85VR (I've had 2) and no more than double. In short, the price is insane and absolutely not justifiable. |
 | sent on September 03, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, sharpness, sharpness. Bright. High-level general color rendition. Well-controlled aberrations. Awesome stabilizer. Af. Caruccio the Blur to TA from 50 to 80mm. It would probably solve a 40mpx sensor if it existed on Aps-C. Compact, lightweight and well built but is not the 24-70 2.8 VR. Amen. Cons: Price exaggerated beyond the absurd but if it was weather sealed, would be worth the current full price with official guarantee. Opinion: I had no intention of taking it after reading around, even here on Juza, discordant and overall negative opinions. It's going to be a bottle foundation, I thought. Much better than the Sigmino 17-50 2.8 that I was going to take at a quarter of the price (and that I tried to pretty well borrow). With Sigma I have always had quite positive experiences. Instead, I happen to be in my hand by chance on 16-80. I look inside waiting for an embarrassing distortion from Plasticone prosumer. But no: Considering the excursion from all to do "perfect", the distortion is in the norm and more than acceptable. Who like me started with film and experienced the transition to digital, will remember the suffering in the management of the zoom also Super Pro. More than barrels were carboys of Barbera and cushions on the teeth. Since on Dia there was no way to correct the distortions in post, he learned to compensate them and exploit them in recovery. Not to mention the cartoons, together with the goals they gave you the almanacs of Alan Ford. However, a click on NX-D, problem solved. Maybe, indeed without perhaps, the best Nikon Dx handyman ever. Better even than the 17-55 2.8 I've had for years in his time. Optics of great quality, built like a tank, but the 16-80 seems to me more defined at the edges, in the center are substantially equivalent and to TA the 16-80 is not bad at all. All the new treatments of the lenses are made to feel. The stabilizer has revived my old D300 and allowed me to shoot in critical conditions up to 1/8 seconds at 200 Iso. Unthinkable when I had the 17-55, whose distortion is not at all so inferior to the 16-80, we are there instead. I wanted to cry with joy. Imagine what happens if you mount it on a D500: Hello Hello tripod. It's a blade, no way. I paid him dearly. But I remain in Dx until I move to ML to which I will leave the full format of which I got rid years ago. Who knows, I could put in a D500 in the meantime because, in my useless and absolutely unreliable opinion, with this 16-80 there I could do some portraino in decency-maybe a fifty super bright apart there is-the feeling of depth for Being Aps-C is remarkable. Format with which we make the cinema moreover (Super 35), certainly with superlative optics, but it is not lacking the sensation of depth and three-dimensionality to the cinema eh, despite the sensorini from a small handful of MPX. [Posthumously Edit]: Although FF and Aps-C are not comparable (different technologies/different uses), coupled D500/16-80, in terms of practical field use, in my opinion could be a viable alternative to D5/24-70VR at less than a third of the price, both for The amateur evolved that for the professional "smart". Now the big difference between the two is that the second makes the bills. Who is really capable-it is not my case-with D500/16-80, experience and handle, could bring out large images not only in sport and wild life, containing much of the costs of management. |
 | sent on August 21, 2018 Pros: Versatility, stabilization, general yield, precision and AF speed Cons: Lens hood, Price (if purchased out of kit) Opinion: Excellent lens, best compromise for those who, like me, does not love the fixed and does not want to give up quality. Used on d500 and d7500, it is already good at full aperture, a blade if diaphragmed one or two stops. Straconsigliato, in lieu of any zoom ' sta dard ', I recommend buying in kits to contain the outrageous price |
 | sent on May 04, 2018 Pros: Focal length, sharpness, VR, AF Cons: Price, inconvenient lens hood Opinion: By buying this Nikon 16-80 I think I finally have found a quality zoom after testing 3 lenses that I have never met at 100%. Over time I had the Nikon 18-105, unpretentious lens (but still amply enough seen the price) purchased along with the D7100. Held only a few months I sold it to buy, given the excellent reviews on the net, the Sigma 17-70. Well with this optics never tripped the spark and I was deeply disappointed to the point that I thought it was my problem that the photos came out without character, washed out and difficult to improve in post production. I tried then the Nikon 18-140 of my wife and to my surprise it proved to be significantly better than the Sigma which was definitely shelved and sold. About three months ago I decided to buy the Nikon 16-80 and what about: perfect focal length, superior sharpness (already very good at TA), silent and high-speed VR, fast and precise AF even in low light conditions. Only drawback (and that NEO!!!) the price: I paid €693. Including shipping costs in a well-known store in Ferrara where I usually buy photographic material. In conclusion if this lens cost 150/200 euros less I would recommend it with eyes closed! |
 | sent on March 17, 2018 Pros: clear, good relative opening, effective stabilizer Cons: price, lack of tropicalization Opinion: It's a little "cicciotta" optics to be a standard zoom for DX format, but it's the price to pay for a relative opening a little wider than the classic kit zoom (f / 2.8-4 instead of the more classic f / 3.5-5.6) .rnThe mechanical construction, although good, is certainly not on the nikon "pro" standard. It 's the classic zoom that extends into three sections, it reminds me a lot of 18-70, always Nikkor, which I have since the days of the D70.rnThe results in the field are excellent, the shots are very clear and almost all optical aberrations are reasonably contained. Distortion quite evident, but comes away well in post-production. The stabilizer works fine.rnAF not very fast, but acceptable for general use. For sporting or naturalistic photography, you would probably need something more "sprint" .rnComunque the AF is very precise on my machines, I did not have to make compensations.rnRubber gasket apart, it is not sealed(tropicalized) against atmospheric agents. Too bad, since Nikon this lens if he does pay a lot'.rnVolevo standard zoom lens good for the DX and in the end I took this, even though it has variable opening relative. It seemed to me the best compromise currently on the market between size, performance and versatility, with reference to this type of objectives. |
 | sent on February 05, 2018 Pros: Excellent image quality Cons: Exaggerated price, to the point of being ridiculous. Opinion: It is sold -Nital- for over 900 euros (January 2018) and is not worth all that money; among the 'universals' (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina) you can find viable alternatives at a much more realistic price. However, buying a Nikon optic is always a guarantee of the quality of the result and, in my experience, those that boast the golden ring around the barrel are practically a certainty. I bought it to garnish a D7200 (on the second-hand market... otherwise I wouldn't have spent all that money...). From the very first shots, looking at them on a 4K monitor, it shows remarkable sharpness and strong resistance to flare (not for nothing has the 'N' of surface treatment with nanocrystals). The detail on the most minute details (hair, hair, feathers) is remarkable; looking at magnification at 300% and above, it demonstrates a sharpness that goes beyond the resolution capacity of the 24 mpix sensor. even highlighting aliasing issues on the smaller details of a bird's feathers. Objectively, I do not find major qualitative differences between the focal 16 and that 80mm. The quality is excellent at f5.6 but also everything open is fine. The stabilizer is very effective and quiet, as well as the focus that is very fast (on my specimen I did not have to perform autofocus calibrations). Versatile optics, which is appreciated for its lightness and that does not disfigure next to my most titilated lenses and - albeit with all the limitations - also with respect to the plasticity of the blurry full frame (opinion of my wife who knows nothing about photography but judges an image just as much as she likes it). MY VALUTATION: 8 (3rd stars in the scale used by Roslett), but, if I were to consider the plethora of 9 grades given on these reviews, which sees an upward compression of the rating scale, then it deserves a 9. Very advisable but... not at the indicated price (Nital: who has ears to mean...) |
 | sent on August 17, 2017 Pros: All Cons: Maybe the price Opinion: I bought it about a year ago together with the D500, Perfect Coupled! Optics I think professional, great in almost all situations. In the past on dx I had the Sigma 17-50 f / 2.8 OS I'd preferred to Nikon 17-55 f / 2.8. This is superior in all, sharpness, VR, AF speed and blurry. I'm completely satisfied |
 | sent on April 07, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, fast AF, Bright colors, awesome bokeh for an all-purpose zoom and lightness. Cons: Hood uncomfortable, not weather sealed. Opinion: Bought a few days ago, I did test shots and I must say I was very surprised, positively. I looked at a lot of reviews and photos made by users before buying it since it's not exactly cheap. I found 700 online and I took a chance. rnSono especially surprised by the sharpness and bokeh, which is really impressive for a zoom. A 80mm f 4 really gives a bokeh with a creamy and nice blurred to watch, prenso it's a great alternative for ritrattti.rnIl then Vr is really effective, the old 16-85 did not help me that much, but this is really migliorato.rnL'AF combined with my D7200 is a splinter, I dare not imagine what on D500! |
user78019 | sent on December 07, 2016 Pros: Cons: Opinion: |
 | sent on September 21, 2016 Pros: Versatility, overall quality, excellent resolution at all focal lengths, good boken is light enough Cons: Price, not weather sealed Opinion: I bought this lens to match my body D7200 and I have to say I made a good buy, contrato good and excellent color and high definition make this lens a wonderful traveling companion, then I take it with me in motion, the focal length it is very versatile and allows you to do almost tutto.rnMiglioramento natural 16/85 .rnOttimo the blurred and the focus with the 7200 is perfect .rnLo'm still trying, but I must say I very pleased with this goal, I have not posted photos but those of Angelo Butera speak for themselves rn |
 | sent on February 19, 2016 Pros: I do not know what Cons: exaggerated price, too high for amateurs, not professional certain goal. Opinion: But it has an exaggerated cost !!! It is neither fish nor fowl; exaggerated for amateur, not by prof. But substantial difference can have from 16-85, that diaphragm more? It costs twice !!! And do not talk about a special blurry possible, in a zoom. The only lens nikon off parameter. I repeat it is neither flesh fish |
 | sent on September 29, 2015 Pros: light just 480 grams. good construction is virtually the pocket Cons: not weather sealed Opinion: I state are five days that I own, I still have to squeeze it to give an accurate definition; I consider it a good target for photojournalism, I would say perfect seen its lightness, to take in nature hike in the mountains, sharp and crisp throughout the range, lighter and much cheaper than the equivalent FX, combined with the Nikon D7200 is a perfect match at the time I am satisfied. agg.to ... https://www.camerastuffreview.com/nikon-lens-review/nikon-dx-16-80-review |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
