Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR Lens on a FX Camera

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
Great sharp lens as far as I'm concerned. Only little drawback is distortion that can easily be dealt with in post production, and corner sharpness wide open. But for the price and size, it does the job for me.
 

muthaa

New member
Great to hear about it! I was just confused between the tokino 16-28mm f2.8 and this one! I didn't consider 14-24mm f2.8 for it is being costly and a very narrow focal range.

I agree, if you take shoot @ 16mm f4, it is expected to have a softness around the corner. But I would expect it to give a sharper image when I step down to f8 and more... In some reviews, they had mentioned at 16mm f16, the images are softer at the corners. How about Chromatic Aberration?

Is it easier to correct the distortion using LightRoom 4? I need to learn about it, since I don't do much post processing except for the cropping and the color saturation.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
I wouldn't get too turned off by reviews concerning distortion and soft corners. These are physical properties concerning all ultra-wide lenses, especially if they zoom and cover a significant focal range. This lense can probably only be beaten in those catagories by the Nikon 14-24. At f16 you will start to see the effects of sensor and lens diffraction which will create softness with all UW lenses.
 

Mestre

Senior Member
Just had a chance to test the 16-35 VR tonight on a turistic site, although at this time noone was near :)

View attachment LMT_0039.jpg


Both shots were handheld, jus to test ISO and VR. There are a couple spotlights that make managing light a bit difficult but in the end the first shot was ISO 3200 and 1/25 while the second one was ISO 800 and 1/6 shutter speed.

There is a light blur that can be a bad sign regarding flare but I must shoot in sunny conditions to see the impact. Both pics are just jpeg converted to 1400k to fit the forum, there is no PP in either pictures.

View attachment LMT_0040.jpg

I don't see any big differences but please share your thoughts on this.
 

Rick M

Senior Member
The last shot really shows the perspective I like with wide angles. Where was the focus point?

How do you feel about this lens compared with an UW on Dx?
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
The last shot really shows the perspective I like with wide angles. Where was the focus point?

How do you feel about this lens compared with an UW on Dx?


Same as the ultra wide on DX Rick. 12-24 X1.5 = 18-36 for FX.
It's a great lens that I really enjoy using.
 

Mestre

Senior Member
As i used a sigma 10-20 it's almost the same (15-30 vs 16-35). This lens, however, is great to use handheld, as it is longer than the Sigma.

Pity that the sky was not that great but there'll be another day :)
 
Top