New nikon 16-80 f2.8

S

SpikeyLemon

Senior Member
Not really, the old 17-55 has both of those properties and "only" US$1400 new. Half that used, which is a bit of a bargain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
R

rocketman122

Senior Member
captain birdseye said:
if it had a constant f2.8 and a 9 bladed aperture then yes.
looks like another overpriced mainly plastic offering from nikon.
the only other thing that would disappoint me further would be if it is made in china.
Click to expand...

I agree. nikons lenses seem to come down in quality. the build looks horrible and cheap. it probably is made in china. china made products isnt the problem. nikons problem is QC. 7 8 or 9 blades wont really affect its performance. 9 is best but this isnt a pro level lens. not build & not specs. not in my eyes though. others might say yes. the 24-120 F/4 is no elite performer. this may be better because newer tech in coatings. but $1100 is high for this lens. id buy a used 17-55 AFS for $800 over this. I had the 17-55AFS. elite in every way.


Rick M said:
16-80 is a huge difference over 17- 55. 75% more range!
Click to expand...

but IQ? ill guess well wait and see. build-same cheapy plastic. and AF speed? nikons lenses as of late are slower SWM inside. id prefer IQ over range anyday. no mfr, till now, has been able to make a zoom thats 3x plus in zoom ratio that performs really well. its decent but nothing jaw dropping. 2.5 times is the maximum zoom range where IQ is still very high. many zooms today are such short ranges. 14-24 AFS tamron 15-30VC sigma 18-35 art and now 24-35 ART also. you get limited range but IQ is not compromised. I prefer to loose some range and have IQ.
 
C

carguy

Senior Member
singlerosa said:
The 17-55 2.8 costs more than any DX body. And, many FX lenses cost more than the bodies (like the two announced with this DX model). Nice thing about good glass is that you don't have to upgrade it every 3-5 years and it tends to hold value (unlike bodies).
Click to expand...
Being the 17-55 is a 2.8 lens, that makes sense.
Which other variable aperture DX glass costs that much?

Also, you don't 'have' to upgrade a body every 3-5 years. Most people choose to, some people reach body limitations up to certain body models :)
 
R

Rick M

Senior Member
Ultimately IQ will determine it's value. If nikon pulled off great IQ in that range it's fairly priced. I agree the chunky plastic builds had really turned me off. After shooting the new Oly pro lineup it would be hard for me to return. While plastic does have some positive aspects, there's nothing like handling a highly refined metal barreled lens!
 
Last edited:
Top