Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Wide-Angle
Nikon 16mm-35mm f/4 vs. 18mm-35mm f/3.5-4.5
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marcel" data-source="post: 384349" data-attributes="member: 3903"><p>If you want wide, the best is the 14-24. Less wide, the 16-35 which is constant f4 and has VR and will take 77mm filters. Then there is the 18-35 which is lighter and has VR. I can't speak for the 18-35 but I have both the 14-24 and 16-35 and I can tell you that the quality is very very, did I just write very very close... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>I think as fas as quality, they are not far from each others. When you listen to all the test, they usually agree that the center sharpness is almost equal but it's the corner sharpness that will be improved with the better lenses. But on the other hand, then you look at a photograph, do you just stare at the corners to see if they are sharp or not? I think that getting a few mm wider can be more important than sharper corners, and so is using regular filters.</p><p></p><p>But hey, we're all allowed our own opinion, and this is just mine.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marcel, post: 384349, member: 3903"] If you want wide, the best is the 14-24. Less wide, the 16-35 which is constant f4 and has VR and will take 77mm filters. Then there is the 18-35 which is lighter and has VR. I can't speak for the 18-35 but I have both the 14-24 and 16-35 and I can tell you that the quality is very very, did I just write very very close... :) I think as fas as quality, they are not far from each others. When you listen to all the test, they usually agree that the center sharpness is almost equal but it's the corner sharpness that will be improved with the better lenses. But on the other hand, then you look at a photograph, do you just stare at the corners to see if they are sharp or not? I think that getting a few mm wider can be more important than sharper corners, and so is using regular filters. But hey, we're all allowed our own opinion, and this is just mine. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Wide-Angle
Nikon 16mm-35mm f/4 vs. 18mm-35mm f/3.5-4.5
Top