Not just Nikon

Moderated by: chrisbet,

Nikon 16-35mm f4VR

Author	Post

Posted by jk: Sat Apr 14th, 2012 13:32

1^st Post

I was discussing with Rich Whetton and he mentioned he needed a wider wideangle.
I immediately thought of the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 but then the 16-35mm f4 sprung to mind but initially I though no that is a DX lens but in fact it is an FX lens.

I know I dont like Ken Rockwell's style of reporting but......
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/16-35mm.htm

Seems like a great lens and it takes a 77mm filter. The Nikon 14-24 cannot use a filter as its front element is so curved.
Seems to me the 16-35mm has everything going for it.

____________________
Still learning after all these years!
https://nikondslr.uk/gallery_view.php?user=2&folderid=none

Posted by Gilbert Sandberg: Wed Apr 18th, 2012 09:48

2^nd Post

JK,
you are right about the 16-35 being full-frame.
Have you seen Ken's remards on distortion at the wide end? (Spectacular!, I have fisheye lenses with less distortion :-O)
I would rather consider the older 17-35 2.8 af-s lens.
Note the 17-35 can be made compatible with almost any Nikon SLR camera, by adding a meter-coupling-prong.
Regards, Gilbert

1st new

This is topic ID = 70
Nikon DSLR Forums > Camera and Lens Forums > Lenses > Nikon 16-35mm f4VR	Top
Users viewing this topic

Current theme is Blue

A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you.