I am thinking to sell my NikonÂ´s 16-85mm to buy this lens, but I wonder if this lens worths the change (not only in terms of focal range but also in IQ)?
1049466
It depends on what you use the lens for. The Tamron will give you a much larger zoom range in a very lightweight lens. But the Nikon will give you better performance over the 16-85mm range. If you mostly use the 16-85 range or make enlargements you may be better off keeping the Nikon. If you want to take more telephoto images and don't need the sharpest possible images and don't shoot a lot in low light you will probably enjoy the Tamron.
1276204
I love the lens, only issue is on some pictures there's a slight bend to straight lines in the picture. This is the only lens I use now.
1276205
The IQ of the Tamron lens is typical of super-zooms, that is, a compromise at all focal lengths. The Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85 is generally well-regarded and is probably sharper over much or all of its range. I would recommend adding the Tamron to your kit for its unbeatable versatility but keep the Nikkor for its better optics.
1414089
Honestly, you would be better of with something like new nikon 20mm 1.8 if you are looking to do wide angle astrophotography. This lens is a fantastic all around landscape lens, but for that application you want as muchligjt as possible, and the extra couple stops means a lower iso is possible
449342
This lens works great at F8 or more. Hand-holding is possible if you have good technique.I have tried using TC's on this lens, but to be honest, you are better off not bothering. If you want a bit more reach, get closer to your subject and use an extension tube. For some sample images, check out the recent section of my website www.nicksaundersnature.com
2054213
The 85 has an even tighter angle of view than the 50. It's a great portrait lens, as in you can get a good head and shoulders shot and put the background nicely out of focus, but I suspect you want to get more in your pictures, not less. The lower the number of a lens's focal length, the wider angle of view it has. Didn't your camera come with an 18-55 zoom? If not, look for one on eBay. That's the normal "kit" lens for cameras with the Rebel's sensor size. You can find them for under $100 there. Make sure you get one with the "IS" designation. That means it has image stabilization which will help keep shots sharps during hand-held exposures. The 85 has an even tighter angle of view than the 50. It's a great portrait lens, as in you can get a good head and shoulders shot and put the background nicely out of focus, but I suspect you want to get more in your pictures, not less. The lower the number of a lens's focal length, the wider angle of view it has. Didn't your camera come with an 18-55 zoom? If not, look for one on eBay. That's the normal "kit" lens for cameras with the Rebel's sensor size. You can find them for under $100 there. Make sure you get one with the "IS" designation. That means it has image... » Read More The 85 has an even tighter angle of view than the 50. It's a great portrait lens, as in you can get a good head and shoulders shot and put the background nicely out of focus, but I suspect you want to get more in your pictures, not less. The lower the number of a lens's focal length, the wider angle of view it has. Didn't your camera come with an 18-55 zoom? If not, look for one on eBay. That's the normal "kit" lens for cameras with the Rebel's sensor size. You can find them for under $100 there. Make sure you get one with the "IS" designation. That means it has image stabilization which will help keep shots sharps during hand-held exposures. « Show Less
1850113
Yes, is it worth it. My opinion is no. I actually returned my lens and purchased 3 primes for around the same price range. I had the lens for about 2 weeks and returned it for a 50mm1.8, 85mm 1.8 and 28mm 1.8 and do not regret it at all. Total for all 3 lens 1410.85. And I love them.
1414086
I have used mine for astrophotography but it is on the slow end if what is possible. For occasional use it is fine, but if this will be its main use you may well get frustrated. How well does your camera handle noise at high ISO? I don't think 1/3 stop should make enough difference for you to change your mind if this is the lens you prefer. It is very light and the IQ on full frame is fantastic. I have since bought a 24 - 70 f2.8 and despite the longer focal length I use this at night for the extra speed. So for dedicated astrophotography lens consider something faster. For occasional use it will do the job. I have used mine for astrophotography but it is on the slow end if what is possible. For occasional use it is fine, but if this will be its main use you may well get frustrated. How well does your camera handle noise at high ISO? I don't think 1/3 stop should make enough difference for you to change your mind if this is the lens you prefer. It is very light and the IQ on full frame is fantastic. I have since bought a 24 - 70 f2.8 and despite the longer focal length I use this at night for the extra speed. So for dedicated astrophotography lens consider something faster. For occasional use... » Read More I have used mine for astrophotography but it is on the slow end if what is possible. For occasional use it is fine, but if this will be its main use you may well get frustrated. How well does your camera handle noise at high ISO? I don't think 1/3 stop should make enough difference for you to change your mind if this is the lens you prefer. It is very light and the IQ on full frame is fantastic. I have since bought a 24 - 70 f2.8 and despite the longer focal length I use this at night for the extra speed. So for dedicated astrophotography lens consider something faster. For occasional use it will do the job. « Show Less
2272680
I've tinkered with star trails using this lens and I did notice some coma (although it seemed better than my 11-16). That said, with ultrawide lens' general propensity for aberrations, I would expect it to be an issue with any of the lower cost options. However, even my Nikkor 16-35 (as good as it gets) exhibits a little if you are looking for it under the right circumstances, but for trails it is moot. Also, it will depend some on whether or not you get a "good" copy; lens characteristics can vary somewhat between copies, so when I can find a particular lens locally, I'll test a few copies and keep the best one.
357725
To my understanding it is usually believed that 2470 is a better version than this one in the same focal length range. But there are other things to consider. How important is it for you to have the extra versatility, that is, the focal length of 70 to 120? How much do you care about the lost of aperture range? (And that depends on what you plan to shoot most often.) How important is the price difference to you? And weight differs, too. Actually, I envy the newest 750 model so much! lol. It certainly deserves good lenses.
759247
Even better. The 1.4 is rock solid compared to the flimsy 1.8, and slightly faster. Ten times as expensive, but may be worth it. If you're still thinking of adding a new zoom to your arsenal, look at the 24-105L, as well. It's pretty much a coin toss, as far as IQ, with the 24-70L, but it adds IS. So, it's one stop slower, but it gains about 3 stops due to the IS, so it's actually better for low-light than the "faster" lens. And longer, too.
1838717
This lens is quite shart at it's focal length. Not take away from this lens but I have actually started to favor the 135L prime lens in terms of sharpness. It obviously requires much more room to get your subject in range (outdoors generally) but the picture come out sharp with a nice Bokeh.As you mentioned, the 35mm is a must have focal length and the sharpness of this lens won't disappoint. I would post an example but I am responding by mobile. You can probably find examples with a quick google image search.
616752
First, it's not a Nikon. There is a chance that it may not fully functional properly on future Nikon models. The new Sigma ART series can have firmware updated after release, this could solve the problem. Secondly, I have had slight out of focus problems. But this might not the problem of the lens: the camera has to detect the focus difference and send a signal to the lens. If the camera fails to detect the difference at a particular point, it will not send any signal to the lens. And you will have a focus problem for that shot. Therefore, the problem might not relate to the lens after all. Overall I have 99% positive experience. As for the rest of 1%, I would argue that's is true for any lens you purchase, even for a $1,500 Nikon lens.
1773126
Nikon 85mm f/18.G is really a great lens . I really enjoy , specially in low light condition . It gives so much details . In this price its really good. I'd say its one of the best lens of Nikon if we consider Quality:price .
1150129
Thanks for your thoughts, Ken; I own the 24-105mm f/4L, but am looking for the best option for the extra focal length that makes portraits and candids really pop! As far as I can tell, even though the 200mm f/2.8 is well-built, people seem to have an almost religious zeal for the 135mm, making it all the more attractive.
464336
Yes! Tokina actually provides a setting so that the focus range is limited to portrait distances. Its a Bokeh master and just overall an impressive lens. I wouldn't trade this for anything. Took back my Nikkon 85 mm 1.8g because this out performs it!
1190458
They're right sir. It is SUCH a superb lens (for the D7000 and D7100) I sold it and now regret it. I'll repurchase it soon. I can't even begin to tell you the "wow" photos I've taken with it. Make sure to get the B+W UV lens filter to protect it. Great for indoor and outdoor use too.
1429333
This is a good lens. If you are urgent to have it for business or travel, I would suggest you to buy it immediately. Otherwise, I would suggest you to buy one during holiday season, e.g., Thanksgiving. This lens is very sharp and its IQ is pretty good to focus on the object. Good luck and enjoy using it.
1239597
Mindy, so far the pictures I've taken have been good, crisp and clear pictures. I'm sure it would depend a lot on various factors especially light and distance. I have this lens on my Nikon 5000 all the time. It has replaced my 18-55 kit lens. I brought it with me walking around in a recent vacation to Maine and when we went sailing. It is a little heavier than the kit 18-55 lens but not as heavy as the 55-200 lens. It is so much more versatile. It has a wide angle and zoom. I'm no pro. Just an amateur who takes pictures of family and sights when on vacation. I love this lens. I hope this helps. Good luck. Mindy, so far the pictures I've taken have been good, crisp and clear pictures. I'm sure it would depend a lot on various factors especially light and distance. I have this lens on my Nikon 5000 all the time. It has replaced my 18-55 kit lens. I brought it with me walking around in a recent vacation to Maine and when we went sailing. It is a little heavier than the kit 18-55 lens but not as heavy as the 55-200 lens. It is so much more versatile. It has a wide angle and zoom. I'm no pro. Just an amateur who takes pictures of family and sights when on vacation. I love this lens. I hope this... » Read More Mindy, so far the pictures I've taken have been good, crisp and clear pictures. I'm sure it would depend a lot on various factors especially light and distance. I have this lens on my Nikon 5000 all the time. It has replaced my 18-55 kit lens. I brought it with me walking around in a recent vacation to Maine and when we went sailing. It is a little heavier than the kit 18-55 lens but not as heavy as the 55-200 lens. It is so much more versatile. It has a wide angle and zoom. I'm no pro. Just an amateur who takes pictures of family and sights when on vacation. I love this lens. I hope this helps. Good luck. « Show Less