This Nikon 16-35mm Bundle comes with $14.95 worth of free accessories including a Vivitar 3-Piece 77mm UV/CPL/ND Filter Kit, and Shipping is free! . Bonus: No sales tax either, unless you live in New York or New Jersey. Test 1
Skilled photojournalists and talented amateurs have grown increasingly appreciative of the visual versatility afforded by ultrawide- to-wide-angle zoom lenses. These focal lengths broke new ground in the 1990s with offerings such as the AF Zoom-NIKKOR 20-35mm f/2.8 and its advanced amateur counterpart, the 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D IF-ED.
Now, an all-new ultra-wide zoom featuring a fixed f/4 maximum aperture, Nano Crystal Coat, ED glass and Nikon VR II (4-stop) image stabilization offers discriminating Nikon digital SLR photographers an ideal blend of versatility and high performance priced well below its "pro" equivalent.
The AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR is sure to satisfy the needs of a broad range of shooters and, therefore, is poised to build sales and profits.
Designed to meet the performance demands of the larger Nikon FX format image sensor. It is, however, fully compatible with Nikon DX-format digital SLR cameras.
The Nikon 16-35mm is commonly used for Landscape/scenery, Low light, Night photography, Video, Weddings and more.The Nikon 16-35mm is most used by customers who consider themselves to be a Photo enthusiast, Pro photographer, Semi-pro photographer among others.The Nikon 16-35mm is popular because customers like the following qualities of the Nikon 16-35mm: Consistent output, Durable, Easily interchangeable, Fast / accurate auto-focus, Lightweight, Nice bokeh, Rugged and Strong construction
Most Liked Positive Review
Almost every serious photographer has or had an ultra-wide in their DX kit. For most of us it was something close to a 10-24 zoom. The first and one of the best of these is Nikon's pro-level 12-24 f/4 DX lens. This new 16-35 f/4 lens is close to the exact same thing but made for your FX camera. It is the perfect compliment for your FX kit filling in an important range. . My sweet spot for an FX wide is 24mm as determined by a search through my keepers over the past 5 years and also including ...View full Review
Almost every serious photographer has or had an ultra-wide in their DX kit. For most of us it was something close to a 10-24 zoom. The first and one of the best of these is Nikon's pro-level 12-24 f/4 DX lens. This new 16-35 f/4 lens is close to the exact same thing but made for your FX camera. It is the perfect compliment for your FX kit filling in an important range. . My sweet spot for an FX wide is 24mm as determined by a search through my keepers over the past 5 years and also including DX at 16mm. Given that, a perfect solution is a lens with room on each side of that 24mm to preclude the need to change lenses if you need a little wider or longer. Other pro-level zooms tend to end or start at that 24mm which can be somewhat inconvenient in the field. My choice was the venerable 17-35 f/2.8 or this new 16-35 f/4. I chose the new model for several reasons. . One, with Nikon's FX cameras and their dim light capabilities, the need for that extra stop at f/2.8 is not as critical as once was. Two, the newer lens has VR for camera motion. Three, I intended to use it as a scenic and landscape lens where stopping down is typical. Four, most of the time in landscape a support system is used for night and late evening shots. . I felt the advantages of the better value, Nano coating, magnesium body with weather sealing, and newer optical design outweighed the one stop advantage for the 17-35 f/2.8. Moreover, I had often used the 17-35 f/2.8 and though it was a superb optic, I wanted maybe better. . I ordered this new 16-35 f/4 amid initial amateur naysayers claiming soft corners and less than perfect performance. Some even claimed it had a plastic body. One famous website even claimed this. Again, I reasoned that if it performed like the DX 12-24 f/4 and had the equivalent build and price, the new lens would still be what I needed. . I was both surprised and amazed by what I received. I can only say that some of these early complainers must not have really owned this product, especially with the obvious magnesium body being so easily distinguished. It exceeded my wildest expectations. On my D700, this lens required zero focus fine tuning and is razor sharp edge to edge from its widest to its longest, even wide open. The color and micro contrast is superb and has been almost glued to my camera on a recent 10 day shoot in the Grand Tetons. It was a wise and lucky purchase. . IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m somewhat surprised that a few people are concerned that this lens tends to have strong barrel distortion at 16mm. I agree that it does, but find it trivial. One, itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s very easy to fix during the processing of the image. Two, I sometimes enjoy a little barrel distortion in some images. ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s why I also own a couple of fisheye lenses. Three, you canÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t notice it unless there are straight lines in the image, and finally it is pretty much gone at 17mm. If you donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t process your own and if you donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t like and donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t know how to correct barrel distortion, consider this lens a 17-35 f/4 pro-level zoom. For me, IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ll keep the 16mm range. I would imagine that people who purchase an FX camera and quality optics ought to be able to develop their own images and would feel similar to me that barrel distortion is trivial. . I have a fairly large collection of Nikkors as well as a few third party optics going back to 1968, when I switched from another brand. Of that collection, I have four or five of what I call "Magic" lenses. These are lenses that continue to amaze me year after year. One of these is my pre-AI, now converted 105 f/2.5. Another is my newer Nikon 300 f/2.8 AFS VR as well as an old 55 f/3.5 Micro Nikkor. My wonderful 85 f/1.4 AFD also falls in this category. In my heart of hearts, I believe this new 16-35 f/4 AFS VRII will be another addition to my "Magic" collection. . Finally, serious Nikon users have been demanding that Nikon provide us with a series of professional high quality f/4 constant zooms for quite a while. A Ã¢â‚¬Å“thank youÃ¢â‚¬ï¿½ to Nikon for the first of this excellent series. We await the rest.
Most Liked Negative Review
Soft off center axis
I returned this lens because it was unacceptably soft off center axis on my D300. At 16mm even when stopped down to f5.6 off center image quality was soft. I also compared it to my excellent Nixon 24-70mm f2.8 at both 24mm and 35mm. The 24-70 was far superior off center axis at both 24mm and 35mm to the 16-35mm both at f4 and even when the 16-35mm was stopped down to f5.6. There was something very wrong with this lens either in design or manufacture.
Reviewed by 104 customers
I have been using the 15 - 85mm DX lens prior to this one. I find that this lens is just as sharp with the advantage of being full frame. The only negative is the size and weight.
Sharp edge to edge. VR works great when shooting video.
Perfect for FX, super sharp zoom.
I used the lens for architecture and landscapes, for near and for far distances. The angles are great, the handles is fine. I've really disappointed about sharpness, maybe it was a bad piece of the glass - sorry Nikon!
USES: It's a versatile ultra-wide lens for that wide perspective for travel, landscapes, group photo's, and architecture photography. COMPARISON: The build quality is excellent, for being made of plastic (I miss the old metal bodied lenses). The zoom and focus ring feels smooth and is precise, but not as good at the 14-24 and the 16-35 lens is longer, but lighter, and about half the cost price of Nikon's 14-24 flagship ultra-wide lens. PROS: An advantage over the 14-24 is the ability to attach filters to the front end of the lens with a 77mm filter thread. The lens is the first ultra-wide lens made by Nikon that came with VR and Nikon claims that VR "enables handheld shooting at up to 4 shutter speeds slower than would otherwise be possible." The lens has a very usable zoom range and the close focusing allows you to capture some unique perspectives. Even though the lens is somewhat expensive, around $1250.00, it still brings value for the money. CONS: In my opinion, the sharpness of this lens is slightly sharper than it's older cousin 17-25 but not as tack sharp as the 14-24. Like most ultra-wides, you notice distortion: wide arms, Frankenstein head, and barrel distortion at the widest settings. I've also noticed vignetting, softened images around the corners and a lot of lens flare when used in direct sunlight. The lens is fast but again, not as fast as the 14-24. BLUF: The lens is sharp compared to other lenses (unless you're a professional or make large prints-you probably won't notice sharpness variations), the lens has a more usable focus range, and the VR allows one to take videos and photos on the move. It may not be the best contender in each separate category but overall it's an excellent, versatile, ultra-wide lens for the money. MYSELF: This lens stays close at hand for landscape photography when I travel. I've used this lens with my Nikon D600 and D750 and sold my other ultra-wides and have this as the only "go to" lens for the wide perspectives.
This Nikon ultra wide angle zoom lens has exceptional resolution and an excellent focal length range. Its wide breath of focal length is well suited for landscape images without having to change lenses. Attached is a photo of the North Rim of the Grand Canyon, taken at a shutter speed of 1/250, an aperture of f/4.5, an ISO of 100, and a focal length of 16mm, taken with a Nikon D800 camera body.
This is my 1st ultra wide lens, and it has opened up so many new shot ideas that cannot be done with a normal or wide angle...I find myself using the 16mm more than anything as I explore how I can use the lens.
This is a great lens in many respects, but I can't bring myself to give it 5 stars. As background on myself, I have owned in the past the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8, Nikon 24mm f/1.4G, as well as the Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f/2.8 for Sony A-mount cameras, and I've had the opportunity to use or try a number of other ultra-wide lenses as well. I'll go into drawbacks first. First off is the oft-mentioned strong distortion at 16mm. This is true. It's also true that most post processing software (Lightroom, Capture One, DxO, etc) allow you to correct this distortion, and for many subjects you will want to. Bear in mind, however, that you are effectively cutting off edges of the frame and subtly changing your composition when you make these corrections in post, as well as causing some loss of resolution on those edges. I personally try to correct the distortion only when necessary, for these reasons. Additionally, the lens build quality is only 'good' as opposed to great. It lacks the solidity of feel that other Nikon gold-ring professional lenses have, much less offerings from Zeiss in the ZF line. Finally, for negatives, is the persistent feeling I have (with my D800E) that the transparency or 'brilliance' of this lens is lacking in comparison to the 14-24mm or Nikon 24mm f/1.4G or the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8. Those lenses seem to transmit image info to the camera in a way that renders the scene like a clear window onto the world, pulling me in with an almost three-dimensional effect; the Nikon 16-35mm f/4, in contrast, seems to distance me from the scene, almost like there is a thin veil over the end of the lens. This results in more time in post, playing with clarity and saturation and contrast and levels, in order to punch up the image to get close to what the 14-24mm and Zeiss 21mm provide from the start. Now for the positives. This is a very sharp lens, and the colors are rendered in a generally pleasing, Nikon-esque way. Contrast is usually pretty high and it is much more resistant to flare than the 14-24mm f/2.8. It focuses quickly and, for my copy, accurately, although this slows down at night (thanks to the slower max aperture of f/4). The VR system works very well and is a great addition to wide angle lenses that traditionally many thought wouldn't benefit from VR. And this lens accepts(and works very well with) filters, giving you a greater range of creative options. It is also lighter and somewhat easier to carry than the 14-24mm. In short, this is a 4 star lens. It's priced right for the performance it gives you. However, the 14-24mm f/2.8 is a 5 star lens, particularly with regard to it's lack of distortion and the clarity of the images it renders. If you are trying to decide between the two, it comes down to this: if you are looking for ultimate image quality or need low distortion (e.g. architecture work), and/or need very high quality straight out of the camera (e.g. reportage scenarios where you have to shoot JPEG and then immediately upload your shots) and you have the money, get the 14-24mm f/2.8. If you need a slightly lighter lens that will be easier to handhold thanks to the VR (e.g. for hiking/travel), and that will more easily accept filters without an expensive third-party add-on, and can spend some more time in post getting the images to look the way you want, get this lens.
I have owned the 14-24 and 24-70 f/2.8 for years now. I bought the 16-35mm speculating that it might replace one or the other for me: the 14-24 for the obvious applications, replacing 24-70 as the lens on my 2nd body, paired with the 70-200mm f/2.8. What everyone else has written is true: the distortion on the short end is really severe, the outer edges are soft compared to the other zooms, the center is sharp, the VR is useful, the handling is nice, the weight is nice, the filter ability is really nice. I'll say that even with all that, it is finding a place in my bag. I like it better than the 24-70mm when shooting events as it goes shorter and has VR and if I'm shooting past 35mm, I'll use the 70-200mm and compose by moving in or out as appropriate. It's lighter and takes filters so it may replace the 14-24mm as well; not for sky but for running water, wet leaves and the like. I'll also say that having 77mm filters is really nice when placing the lens on a blackmagic camera via the metabones adapters. I don't want to buy more than 1 Singh-ray vari-nd or mor-slo. It's short enough to be useful in a lot of situations with the adapters.
Althouge it is not F2.8, the build is solid and the image is shaper than the old 17~35mm F2.8. VR is also usefull in low light conditions. Operation is sliky smooth. It is a good landscape lens over all. My only concern is the design of the rear lens element -- it is easy to collect dust and moisture.