Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising
MotoMannequin

Livermore, CA, US
8582 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to send message via AOL IM

"RE: 18-105 vs 16-85"

MotoMannequin Awarded for his extraordinary skills in landscape and wildlife photography Registered since 11th Jan 2006
Thu 13-Sep-12 10:34 PM

I've owned both and while I give the edge to the 16-85 in image quality, that aspect of these lenses is actually pretty close. The 16-85 is of course wider and the 18-105 longer so which is better for you depends on your shooting habits.

The real difference between these, and a big part of what you pay for, is build/features. 16-85 has a metal lens mount, M/A focus mode, and focus distance scale (and the lack of the last one on the 18-105 makes it a really poor choice for all kinds of night photography).

Does that make the 16-85 worth the extra money? IMO yes but these differences may not matter as much to you.

BTW your 70-300 is an FX lens.

Larry - a Bay Area Nikonian
My Nikonians gallery

www.tempered-light.com

A general, generic topic 18-105 vs 16-85 [View all] , SabreFlyr Gold Member , Thu 13-Sep-12 11:18 AM
Subject
ID
Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
1
Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
2
Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
3
Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
4
Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
6
     Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
7
Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
5
     Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
8
          Reply message RE: 18-105 vs 16-85
9