Nikon 16-35mm f/4G ED VR II AF-S IF SWM Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
by Nikon
Our Price: $1,599.00
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Buy Used: from $1,049.00 (click here)
Category: Digital Camera
See more product details
Customers in the UK,
buy this product at amazon.co.uk
for British Pounds
Digital Photo Product Details
Manufacturer: NikonAudio: English (Unknown); English (Original Language); English (Published)
Model: 2182
Product features:
- AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR lens
- 24-52.5mm effective focal length with APS-C sensor cameras
- Ideal for wide-angle and "normal" shots
- Maximum aperture: f/4
- Lens construction: 17 elements in 12 groups
- AmazonBasics Lens Pen Cleaning System
- Corel Photo & Video Pro X3 Bundle [Old Version]
- AmazonBasics Camcorder/Camera Bag with Shoulder Strap (Black)
- AmazonBasics Universal Camera Case for Digital Cameras HF (Black)
- Tiffen 77WIDEFKit 77mm Wide Angle Filter Kit
Digital Cameras Photo Reviews of Nikon 16-35mm f/4G ED VR II AF-S IF SWM Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
Customer Review: GREAT Lens for FX - Get the 16-85mm VR instead for DX
Summary: 5 Stars
I knew the moment I heard about this lens that I'd need to get one. The chief problem I have with every other FX/film-sized wide angle lens is that they are either immense, heavy and extremely expensive; or quite mediocre* and not as wide as I'd like (and a few lens-generations old by now, as well). I had no doubt, given the excellence of nearly every recent Nikon lens, that it would be superb in terms of color, sharpness and focus performance - and only really wondered, before I'd seen it in person, whether its size would be appropriate for my use as a casual amateur photographer.
It is, almost, perfect.
First, though, having shot with it a fair bit now on both FX and DX, I can see that to convey an understanding of this lens and how it fits into the Nikon lineup it's helpful to have some understanding of the difference between the design requirements of FX and DX lenses. This is something I've been writing about a bit in my recent reviews as I keep noticing the misperceptions implied by a lot of comments I'm noticing. I'm seeing comments already in reviews of this lens, for example, that it is bigger than it needs to be as a wide-angle f/4 zoom. I see comments in reviews of DX lenses that they should have been designed as FX lenses, so that they could work on both formats. And I see comments about nearly all zooms that they should have been designed with larger max apertures, even if it would have made the lens slightly more expensive.
All these comments reveal a lack of understanding about the inherent physics of optics and the design and manufacture of lenses.
For an FX lens to have exactly the same optics on FX as an equivalent DX lens would have on DX, the FX lens would need to be 3.4 TIMES BIGGER than the DX lens. This is because the FX format is 1.5 times larger in linear terms, meaning that the identical lens would need to be 3.4 (1.5^3) times larger in volume. If made of exactly the same materials it would weigh 3.4 times more than the DX lens and be 1.5 times larger in every dimension. This is a theoretical approximation: the lens mount itself would have to be the same size, and the two lenses would have to be built slightly differently for various reasons, but the general reality is that it would need to be approximately 3.4 times larger and heavier. Obviously, FX lenses aren't usually 3.4 times bigger than DX lenses. This is because the design of any lens is a careful compromise between many factors, most importantly sharpness, zoom range, max aperture, build quality, size and weight, price, and projected image size. By lessening the requirement for any one of these characteristics, the others can be improved; while increasing the requirement for any one characteristic will require compromise among the rest. DX lenses have a major inherent size advantage, which allows them to be made with broader zoom ranges while still retaining excellent optics and still being small in size and relatively inexpensive. FX lenses, on the other hand, are limited to narrower zoom ranges, must be relatively much larger, or must give up important aspects of performance: distortion control, sharpness, and so on. Alternatively they can be made with more complex optical formulas, using more expensive aspherical elements or very expensive low-distortion glass; and therefore be very expensive. In reality, design goals usually demand compromise among more than one area, so we wind up with FX lenses that are significantly larger and heavier than DX lenses, that have relatively narrower zoom ranges, and that still give up some degree of performance in other areas.
In the case of this 16-35mm f/4 VR, what we have is a lens that is optically excellent, with some compromise in terms of distortion control, a fairly narrow 2.2:1 zoom range, an unimpressive constant f/4 max aperture, and moderately large physical size - and unfortunately, still quite a high price.
It works beautifully, however. It is - a first in my opinion - a wide-angle FX lens that can be left on the camera nearly all the time one intends to shoot wide. It's not enormous like the 14-24/2.8 and 17.35/2.8 (actually not that much bigger, but so much larger in diameter that it FEELS huge), it is very sharp, it is stunningly contrasty, and it spans a very useful zoom range from an almost-ridiculous (until you need it) 16mm to a "normal-wide" 35mm. Its size is not dis-similar to the popular old 35-70mm f/2.8 Nikkor when that lens is fully extended, and its weight, on my scale, is within an ounce of that lens' weight. Other similar-sized lenses would be the mediocre 24-120mm VR (this lens is FAR better in the overlapping part of the range), the 70-300mm VR (another excellent lens and a great complement to this one) and the very nice 180mm f/2.8 AF or AF-D.
For the first time in the digital era, it is possible to carry an FX camera with a relatively compact, somewhat-affordable kit that spans the range from ultra-wide at 16mm to long telephoto at 300mm and to have excellent image quality throughout the range. I would suggest this lens, the 50mm f/1.4G and the 70-300 VR. Substitute the 35-70/2.8 or one of the 24-85mm zooms if you want zoom in the middle.
I am not going to go into great detail about this lens' specific performance capabilities. I test my lenses semi-formally, shoot them informally, and look closely enough at the results to see whether they are good enough for my purposes. I care more about whether a lens gives snappy color rendition than how sharp it is at the pixel level, but I still frequently run into lenses that I don't think are sharp enough. This is not one of them. It is VERY sharp, sharp enough that I will shoot it at any aperture, at any focal length, and not be at all concerned about whether the results will be satisfactory. I'll let other people nitpick corner sharpness at 16mm and f/4. Its only noticeable optical drawback in my opinion is distortion. This is unfortunate, as it is more than I would like to see, but it isn't enough to detract from my overall favorable view of the lens. For architectural subjects, especially interiors, where a very wide angle of view is typically necessary, you will need to either use another lens or correct the distortion using software. For most other subject matter the distortion is not really going to be a factor. In particular, for landscape and most other outdoor photography, which this lens seems ideally suited to, it shouldn't even be noticeable.
I find the lens very pleasant to use. It's large, but I don't find it overly conspicuous (I want to be able to move around inconspicuously when I photograph), and it fits easily into any normal compartment in a camera bag. It has a nice, well-positioned zoom ring and a focus ring out towards the front of the lens, where the lens widens, making it both easy to find and to use with the hand in the shooting position. I don't anticipate doing a lot of manual focus with this lens, though, and the lens lacks any depth-of-field markings at all, even the vestigial ones found on some similar designs. The focus gearing seems very fast, to me - probably a compromise in favor of AF function above manual function, and I won't complain about that in this case. Small tweaks, when needed, can be made easily.
Conclusion:
This lens becomes the obvious choice among Nikon's wide-angle lens options for the vast majority of amateur FX shooters. Pros will undoubtedly be able to use this lens as well, although the particular subject matter will determine whether the f/2.8 max aperture or better distortion control of some of the other lenses will necessitate their use instead. For event photography, the 17-35 may remain the better choice. The 14-24 is the obvious choice when its particular abilities are needed, but not without serious compromises (size, weight, cost, vulnerability of front element, incompatibility with filters). For everything else, this 16-35mm adds VR, gives surpassingly excellent image quality including outstanding, snappy color rendition, and is sized much more appropriately for any type of casual use. I call it a five-star lens.
Notes:
- f/4 vs f/2.8 Max Aperture: Some have commented that it's unfortunate this lens wasn't made as an f/2.8 lens. Aside from the fact that Nikon already has two f/2.8 ultra-wide FX zooms from which to choose, both larger and more expensive than this lens, just do the math: at f/4, this lens needs an 8.5mm effective light-transmissive opening (35mm/4). To max out at f/2.8 it would need a 12.5mm effective light-transmissive opening. Square those numbers to get area, and it's apparent that it would need over double the diaphragm area and over double the glass area at the front element. Any minor spherical aberration would be magnified, so it would need additional optical correction, as well; either in the form of a more complex optical formula or additional expensive aspherical elements. It's a safe guess that to retain the same optical quality it would need to be at least two times the weight and sell for at least two times the price, and that's probably a conservative guess on both counts. Suddenly the 14-24/2.8 looks small and reasonably priced! The compromise of an f/4 max aperture gives this lens a tremendous advantage that can be applied to every other area of performance. Keep in mind that as partial compensation for that smaller max aperture, it has:
- VR: VR is less important on a wide lens than on a telephoto. It's not just a matter of shutter speeds being less critical at wide angles: it's also a consequence of the time function of the normal vibrations a hand-held camera will encounter. At some point after the shutter opens, camera movement is going to exceed what any VR implementation can compensate for, and blur will result. In most cases, the practical limit to VR effectiveness seems to be somewhere between 1/8 and 1/2 second, regardless of focal length. That is tremendously useful in a telephoto but less useful at 16mm, where 1/8-1/30 might be a usable non-VR shutter speed, depending on the circumstances. Even so, it's a very significant improvement. At the margins, VR improves the sharpness of most photos: where shooting at 1/16 and 16mm will result in some blur in nearly every shot for most photographers, 1/16 with VR will give perfect sharpness almost every time. Anywhere near the range of marginal shutter speeds, VR will allow the camera to be held with slightly less care, allowing shots to be framed and taken more quickly, and allowing shots under imperfect conditions (camera held in awkward position such as above head, or in a moving vehicle, etc) to be much more likely to turn out sharp. And over a couple of stops of shutter speeds, VR will make shots possible that would not have been possible at all without it. Diminishing this range of substantial benefits into a simple "x-stop advantage" doesn't really give it full credit. I find VR to be a tremendously helpful tool in many types of photography, even at wide angles. If nothing else, VR does at least compensate for this lens' f/4 max aperture under most conditions. Why have a fast max aperture on a wide lens, anyway? -- Subject isolation? Better save up for the 24mm f/1.4 and 28mm f/1.4 lenses; you're not going to get much background blur at f/2.8. Stopping motion? -- What sports are you going to be shooting with this lens? Event photography, with a combination of moving subjects and low light, is about the only use I can think of in which the f/4 max aperture is a real disadvantage. For everything else, I'd rather have f/4 with VR than f/2.8 without it, but that's just me. Still, on any FX body, this lens will be an outstanding tool for low-light photography.
- For DX: All the careful compromises inherent in making this lens excellent on FX are wasted when using it for DX. While that is the case with every other FX lens as well, in many cases there is no good DX substitute and the FX lens remains the best choice. In this case there is a perfect substitute. The 16-85mm VR is smaller, lighter, much cheaper, and superb. The chief complaint with that lens - its slow f/5.6 max aperture at the long end - is moot in comparison to this lens, as they are equally fast or slow in the 16-35mm range. The 16-85mm VR has a tremendously versatile zoom range, an equally good VR implementation, and is to my eyes just as snappy and contrasty in terms of color rendition as this lens. The real surprise is that the 16-85, at least my copy, is just as sharp as the 16-35. A bit of informal testing on a D300S had me finding the 16-85 just barely sharper, in fact, at 16mm, 24mm and 35mm; either wide open or at f/5.6. The 16-85 is an exceedingly sharp lens, so perhaps that isn't all that surprising after all, but the point is that for shooting on DX the 16-35 is not the best tool for the job. The counter-argument might be that unlike many FX lenses, this 16-35 actually gives a reasonably useful focal range on DX: the equivalent of 24-53mm, or usefully-wide to normal. Really, though - who would buy a 24-53mm f/4 lens for thirteen hundred bucks? The 16-85 VR is an excellent lens that is a far better complement to a DX camera than this 16-35. If you must spend more money, or really just want to get a bigger lens, get the 17-55mm f/2.8. It's not any sharper and it doesn't have VR, but at least you'll get the f/2.8 max aperture.
* The "affordable" predecessor to the 16-35 is the old 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D, one of the less great Nikkors I've used. It's problem is consistency, rather than a lack of sharpness at all settings. At 18mm, for example, mine is excellent in the center - but it falls apart at 24mm, where I can't think of a lens that would not perform better. At 35mm it is, again, very good in the center, less so towards the edges. It is a perfectly serviceable FX ultra-wide zoom for most purposes, but today's digital cameras reveal its flaws just too easily. Is the 16-35 worth the extra $900 it will cost you? If that $900 is not a serious impediment then unequivocally I would say yes. On a tighter budget, I would suggest that a DX body with any of the better DX wide zooms would be the better choice. For what it's worth, the DX alternative is my personal preference.
More Nikon 16-35mm f/4G ED VR II AF-S IF SWM Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras reviews:
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 2 3 4 5 6
Description of Nikon 16-35mm f/4G ED VR II AF-S IF SWM Nikkor Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras
The AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Lens 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. With an 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. FEATURES: Definitive Wide-angle Zoom Lens - Versatile wide-angle lens, perfect for travel, land and cityscapes, and general photography Nikon VR II (Vibration Reduction) Image Stabilization - Vibration Reduction, engineered specifically for each VR NIKKOR lens, enables handheld shooting at up to 4 shutter speeds slower than would otherwise be possible, assuring dramatically sharper still images and video capture. Nano Crystal Coat - Further reduces ghosting and interior flare across a wide range of wavelengths for even greater image clarity. Extra-low Dispersion (ED) Elements - Offers superior sharpness and color correction by effectively minimizing chromatic aberration, even at the widest aperture settings. Aspherical Lens Elements - Aspherical lens elements virtually eliminate coma and other types of aberration,even when shooting at the widest available aperture. Internal Focus (IF) - Provides fast and quiet autofocus without changing the length of the lens, retaining working distance throughout the focus range. Exclusive Nikon Silent Wave Motor (SWM) - Enables fast, accurate andLenses
Digital Cameras and Photo Categories
Bestsellers in Lenses
Sigma 180mm f/ 3.5 EX IF HSM Macro Lens for Canon SLR CamerasSIGMA; Digital Camera
Price in other shops:
Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO Macro Super Lens for Pentax-AF CameraSigma Corporation; Digital Camera
Best price: $239.00
Price in other shops:
Sigma 300mm F2.8 EX APO HSM Lens for Pentax-AF CameraSIGMA; Digital Camera
Price in other shops:
Tamron AF28-200 f/ 3.8-5.6 Super II Macro Minolta Mount Lens (Silver)Tamron; Digital Camera
Price in other shops:
Tiffen 72mm Wide Angle Rubber Lens ShadeTiffen; Digital Camera
Price in other shops:
Pentax SCMP-FA, 100-300mm Autofocus Zoom LensPentax; Digital Camera
Price in other shops:
Pentax SMCP-FA 35-80mm Autofocus Zoom LensPentax; Digital Camera
Vivitar 75-300mm Manual Focus Zoom Lens for Pentax/ Ricoh CameraVivitar; Digital Camera
Price in other shops:
Vivitar 28-210mm Manual Focus Zoom Lens for Nikon CameraVivitar; Digital Camera
Best price: $325.00
Price in other shops:
Minolta Maxxum 24mm-85mm f3.5-4.5 Zoom LensKonica Minolta; Digital Camera
Best price: $399.00
Price in other shops:
Similar digital cameras and accessories
B+W 77mm Kaesemann Circular Polarizer with Multi-Resistant CoatingB + W; Digital Camera
Best price: $155.00
Price in other shops:
Nikon EN-EL15 Rechargeable Li-ion Battery for Nikon D7000 and V1 (Retail Packaging)Nikon; Digital Camera
Price in other shops:
Nikon 85mm f/ 1.8G AF-S NIKKOR Lens for Nikon Digital SLR CamerasNikon; Digital Camera
Best price: $496.95
Price in other shops:
Nikon 77mm Screw-on Neutral Color FilterNikon; Digital Camera
Best price: $66.96
Nikon D700 12.1MP FX-Format CMOS Digital SLR Camera with 3.0-Inch LCD (Body Only)Nikon; Digital Camera
Best price: $2,199.00
Price in other shops:
Nikon D800E 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)Nikon; Digital Camera
Best price: $3,299.00
Price in other shops:
Nikon 70-200mm f/ 2.8G ED VR II AF-S Nikkor Zoom Lens For Nikon Digital SLR CamerasNikon; Digital Camera
Best price: $2,396.00
Price in other shops:
Nikon 50mm f/ 1.4G SIC SW Prime Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR CamerasNikon; Digital Camera
Price in other shops:
B+W 77mm Clear UV Haze with Multi-Resistant Coating (010M)B + W; Digital Camera
Best price: $65.99
Price in other shops:
Nikon D800 36.3 MP CMOS FX-Format Digital SLR Camera (Body Only)Nikon; Release date: 2012-03-20; Digital Camera
Best price: $2,999.00
Price in other shops: