Nikon 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S VS Nikon 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S

[Mycenius]

Looks nice and sharp! Sometimes you get miss-fires with wide apertures.

Yeah - I got a lot of these sorts of shots when I first got it new and was playing around just taking shots of odd things and doing a bit of semi-macro shooting with it...

...actually that reminds me - I do normally have a UV Filter on - maybe that's contributing to the occasional soft shots...? I wonder if Dennis (above) usually has a filter on too?

 

[Rick M]

Yeah - I got a lot of these sorts of shots when I first got it new and was playing around just taking shots of odd things and doing a bit of semi-macro shooting with it...

...actually that reminds me - I do normally have a UV Filter on - maybe that's contributing to the occasional soft shots...? I wonder if Dennis (above) usually has a filter on too?

Filters can sometimes create internal reflections (among other things), not sure if it would throw of the AF system. I only use filters for effect, but that's a personal choice. Try shooting for awhile without it and see if your keeper percentage increases.

 

[cadomniel]

I sent the Sigma back due to some minor compatibility issues I was having with the D7100.
I am exchanging it for a 50mm/1.8G and 85mm/1.8G.

Eventually I'll get the 17-55mm/2.8 but I think the 16-85mm VR is a great focal length for my preferred shooting travel/landscapes.

I have both the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS and the Nikon 16-85mm VR.
I bought the Sigma 17-50/2.8 new and then bought a new in box D7100 and 16-85mm VR for a good discount so now I have both.

Not sure if I'm going to keep the 16-85mm yet but I can how it would be useful to have both. For outdoors/landscapes it is a bit lighter for hiking with and has a bit more useful range.

 

[cadomniel]

Well, I had the Nikon 17-55mm just over a month but I have put it up for sale. Its a great lens and I keep thinking about keeping it but I know it won't get used a ton because for me I am more into travel/landscape photography and the 16-85mm VR is just fine. For indoor stuff I have the Fuji X100 and a bunch of primes on my Nikon so the f2.8 just isn't necessary and the Nikon 17-55 is big and heavy and takes up too my space in my camera bag!

 

[RON_RIP]

Well I could have told you so, but you needed to see that on your own. The 16-85 continues to shine for many of us. Is it fast? No. But I can work around that given the great latitude the 7000 affords me.