www.testfreaks.com

Reviews, reviews, reviews...

Nikon-af-s-nikkor-16-35mm-f-4g-ed-vr.8835438
9.5 out of 10

Nikon 16-35mm f/4G ED VR AF-S

Ultra wide-angle 16-35mm FX-format-compatible zoom lens with bui Read more

Great Deal: $996.95

Reviews and Problems with Nikon 16-35mm f/4G ED VR AF-S

Showing 1-10 of 15
Overall 6
6.0

At least I can use 77mm filters

dennis, Amazon
3 January 2015
  • Summary: Quality wise it's not like the 14-24 or 24-70 Nikon lens. However, I can use 77mm filters like the rest of the Nikon lenses I have and my 4X6 GND filters. Unlike using the 14-24. I tried the Lee kit for the 14-24 and it's a pain to use and overpriced as well. Not to mention another set of even larger filters to lug around. Sharpness is good with a very slight blurring at the edges. With all my wide angles usually I shoot landscape or travel shots.
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

Beware the corner sharpness!

jcozn2, B&H Photo
10 June 2014
  • Excerpt: I bought this lens as an alternative to buying a 14-24, which is just a little out of my price range. I had read some great reviews on this lens and tried it out shortly at a local camera store. After owning it for a week, I had to return this lens... maybe I got a bad copy, but my corner sharpness was abysmal.
  • Pros: Fast / accurate auto-focus, Good contrast, Good Lens Flare Control, Good VR, Relatively light
  • Cons: Heavy Distortion, Very Weak Corners
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

cannot stand the distortion

RT, B&H Photo
11 May 2014
  • Excerpt: Bought this len and used on D90. Plan on using it on D610 by Thanksgiving. The images are sharp and color reproduction are very good. Both are quite similar to 35mm 1.8G. It is light considered the size of the len. I took a few pics. indoor at 16 mm. The pics were great except the walls started to curve in at the corners. I know it can be fix in post process, but I sure don't want to do correct them on every shot taken with this len.
  • Pros: Fast / accurate auto-focus, Lightweight
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

User Review

FlarePhobia, Adorama
23 February 2013
  • Excerpt: I'm still scratching my head over how I got here. I was shooting with a D7000, but I really wanted, or thought I wanted, some N series lenses because of the supposed promise to eliminate lens flare. And since all the N lenses are FX, I thought I should have an FX camera to use the lenses at the length they were designed for. So I talked myself into a D600, and I bought the 16-35mm as my first N series lens to go along with it. But here's the thing ...
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

Good not Great

David-eye, B&H Photo
6 March 2012
  • Excerpt: Having had the Nikon 14-24 and the 17-35, the 16-35 seemed like a great choice with the newer design than the 17-35 and the ability to use filters and not be concerned about the unprotected condition of the enormous front element on the 14-24. The lens has a great "feel" and quality to it after shooting with it for a few days and being fairly happy, but not overly impressed, I decided to test it against my 18-105 VR.
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

Mushy and soft, poor AF accuracy

karlotto, Adorama
10 December 2011
  • Excerpt: Geat pictures are coming from the photographer not from the lens. But this has limitations being very soft at f>4 and inconsistent AF due to the used plastic rings. The VR is very useful for Christmas nights in town. Made still spectacular pictures with it and D700. But a few great shots had to be discarded due to above limits.
  • Pros: Lightweight
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

User Review

karlotto, Adorama
10 December 2011
  • Excerpt: Geat pictures are coming from the photographer not from the lens. But this has limitations being very soft at f>4 and inconsistent AF due to the used plastic rings. The VR is very useful for Christmas nights in town. Made still spectacular pictures with it and D700. But a few great shots had to be discarded due to above limits.
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

Compared to the 17-35 2.8........

bossman1969, Adorama
7 September 2011
  • Excerpt: I really wanted to like this lens. I compared it with my 17-35 f.28 Nikkor and they were virtually identically matched in sharpness. Maybe I had a bad copy. I ended up returning it. I also found this lens to be obnoxiously long. This is a wide zoom that looks almost identical to the 24-70. Psychologically, I feel this lens is intimidating- especially when I'm trying to make candid photos of groups of people.
  • Pros: Easily Interchangeable, Fast / accurate auto-focus, Lightweight
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

User Review

bossman1969, Adorama
7 September 2011
  • Excerpt: I really wanted to like this lens. I compared it with my 17-35 f.28 Nikkor and they were virtually identically matched in sharpness. Maybe I had a bad copy. I ended up returning it. I also found this lens to be obnoxiously long. This is a wide zoom that looks almost identical to the 24-70. Psychologically, I feel this lens is intimidating- especially when I'm trying to make candid photos of groups of people.
  • Read full review
Overall 6
6.0

Huge Distortion

Tim, B&H Photo
10 July 2010
  • Excerpt: Nice lens, sharp, fast etc. but..... the distortion is awful! All ultra wide angle lenses usually show a considerable amount of barrel distortion but this lens at 16mm is too much for its price. It only gets better above 20mm. The pincushion distortion at 35mm is not great either. The most surprising of all is that the 'Auto Distortion' correction is not available in Nikon Capture NX2 (2.2.4) while NEF files photographed with other lenses do.
  • Pros: Fast / accurate auto-focus
  • Read full review
Next page >>