Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G vs Tammy 17-50mm f2.8

[maiyadidi]

hello guys,
i'm a newbie here, hopefully I didn't posted this question at wrong section
i'm in the midst of choosing between this 2 lenses, and i had read through some reviews on the line but still cannot make up my mind.
forget about budget (as i'm choosing between this 2 lenses), how about the performance (indoor, outdoor) ?
i'm sorry if this a repeating thread, but i do need some advice from the prossss
i'm buying the lens just for general purpose (e.g travelling, landscape, portrait).
for me, focal length for nikkor 16-85mm is more suitable for me but tammy 17-50mm have constant aperture at f2.8 that makes my heart feels itchy (more bokeh from nikkor 16-85mm, if i'm not mistaken).
any comment on this 2 lens ? hope you guys can enlighten me which one is more suitable for me. thanks !

[ojtee]

hi DD,

from my experience with the 16-85mm
IQ is superb, sharp all round with my D300s. This is the resident zoom i have on my camera.
About the FL 16mm gets you enough wide angle for most WA shots, 85mm gets you the portrait, bokeh is acceptable as this is to be a general zoom lens. Now if I know i'm going to shoot alot of portrait and i want a good bokeh, i'd put on the 85mm prime and leave the 16-85mm at home.
VR really helps a good deal, I have ever got a perfectly focused shot down to 1/2 sec click, but of course the camera body press to my body/shoulders for a frim hold - try that with the 2.8 tammy and see!
I actually sold off my 55-200mm after getting the 16-85mm, due to the fact I don't need the longer FL, and with an 85mm FL end, and a damn good IQ, I can always crop the picture if I wanted a closeup.

Lastly, I have read issues about AF accuracy with the tammy, not sure how true, and if some of the VC functions and sometimes doesn't, so in terms of reliability the nikkor to me would be the better choice - no point of f2.8 when the pictures all comes out out of focus ( and i dont mean the background here ).......hehe

btw if you are looking for a good used unit pm me

[maiyadidi]

hi ojtee,

thanks for your sharing ! how do u find nikkor 16-85mm performance under low light condition (e.g indoor, in restaurant etc) ?
as i'm not investing on flashgun yet, so hopefully the lens of my choice won't dissapoint me

[Bassraptor]

If you're going to be doing mostly outdoor shooting, the Nikon zoom is fine.
If you think you may want to trade up to a better lens in future, the Nikon could be an easier sell.
If you're going to be shooting indoors a lot, the nikkor 35mm f1.8 DX lens is cracking choice; in fact, good idea to keep one of these in your bag always. I've had excellent results shooting bands in restaurants with this. No flash.
If you want an f2.8 zoom, and budget no issue, there's the nikkor 17-55 ... I've done an A/B with the Tamron and the Nikon focuses much faster. I use a D5100...

Just my humble sens ...

[maiyadidi]

hi Bassraptor,
thanks for sharing !
nikkor 17-55mm is over my budget, if not i also will opt for that lens, no hesitation..

[andythung's]

17-50 tamron is really ncie bokeh lens , u will no regret to get it ... for me , it is better then 16-85 nikkor

[maiyadidi]

hi aиđчтнuиg's,

thanks for your sharing.
i knew it will give better bokeh compare to 16-85, but maximum focal length at 50mm will it be a little bit short for general usage ?
for example you bring this lens to travel, i think 50mm will have some limitation, right ?

[ojtee]

with that budget , you could get a 50mm f/1.4, bokeh wise will beat all the lens mention on this above........

Back to topic, as a travel lens, you would normally want a larger zoom on a lens as you are not sure what pictures you are gonna take, a larger zoom range focal length wins this argument hands down. But if you going to go specific functions and picture genre , i.e. landscape, group photos, low lights etc,etc, then both has its good and bad points, you will have to decide which of these factors matters to you most and what you want out of your pictures

[idiker]

Ok.. u may have known Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 has 3 versions for nikon mount.

1) First generation (A16 ) filter size 67mm, no VC & no built in motor - Very sharp lens even at f/2.8, focus faster among these three lens. To me this lens is as sharp as Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 except slower focus speed. Highly recommended but may only available in used market.

2) 2nd generation (A16 N2) filter size 67mm, no vc but with built in motor- Same optical quality as A16 but noisy & slower focus. Still available for new set

3) 3rd Generation (B005) filter size 72mm, with VC & buit in motor - not sharp even stopped down to f/4, slow focus & hunting at low light. VC is suck on this lens better off it all time & heavy. After i tested A16 i sold off this lens cheap2. Not recommend at all.

[maiyadidi]

with that budget , you could get a 50mm f/1.4, bokeh wise will beat all the lens mention on this above........

Back to topic, as a travel lens, you would normally want a larger zoom on a lens as you are not sure what pictures you are gonna take, a larger zoom range focal length wins this argument hands down. But if you going to go specific functions and picture genre , i.e. landscape, group photos, low lights etc,etc, then both has its good and bad points, you will have to decide which of these factors matters to you most and what you want out of your pictures

thanks ojtee ! currently i only use camera for general usage, just hope that either one of the lens mentioned above won't perform too bad under low light condition.
mind to share your experience under low light for nikkor 16-85mm (without external flash) ? appreciate that very much !

[maiyadidi]

Ok.. u may have known Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 has 3 versions for nikon mount.

1) First generation (A16 ) filter size 67mm, no VC & no built in motor - Very sharp lens even at f/2.8, focus faster among these three lens. To me this lens is as sharp as Nikkor 17-55 f/2.8 except slower focus speed. Highly recommended but may only available in used market.

2) 2nd generation (A16 N2) filter size 67mm, no vc but with built in motor- Same optical quality as A16 but noisy & slower focus. Still available for new set

3) 3rd Generation (B005) filter size 72mm, with VC & buit in motor - not sharp even stopped down to f/4, slow focus & hunting at low light. VC is suck on this lens better off it all time & heavy. After i tested A16 i sold off this lens cheap2. Not recommend at all.

nice comparison you have, idiker ! thanks !
any idea or sharing on 16-85mm ?

[ojtee]

thanks ojtee ! currently i only use camera for general usage, just hope that either one of the lens mentioned above won't perform too bad under low light condition.
mind to share your experience under low light for nikkor 16-85mm (without external flash) ? appreciate that very much !

for low light, the lowest i have gone down to is 1/4 s, pictures are sharp and clear, the VR can really do wonders
i can shoot at 1/15s or 1/30s without any blur or shake, even at the 85mm end

[maiyadidi]

for low light, the lowest i have gone down to is 1/4 s, pictures are sharp and clear, the VR can really do wonders
i can shoot at 1/15s or 1/30s without any blur or shake, even at the 85mm end

wao ! that's sound not bad !
u must be train hard to achieve 'metal arm' level..
anyhow, really appreciate your sharing !

[andythung's]

hi aиđчтнuиg's,

thanks for your sharing.
i knew it will give better bokeh compare to 16-85, but maximum focal length at 50mm will it be a little bit short for general usage ?
for example you bring this lens to travel, i think 50mm will have some limitation, right ?

erm, if 28mm is ok for u ,tamron 28-75 F2.8 would be nice too... can solve low light prob ,, =)

[maiyadidi]

yeap, i thought of that before too, but i prefer to have wide angle, so its either nikkor 16-85mm or tammy 17-50mm for me at this moment.
thanks for your suggestion !

[loveshots]

The 16-85mm is a solidly built consumer grade lens. The VR works between 3 - 4 stops.

I happened to post a related topic here:
http://www.photomalaysia.com/forums/...ent-with-D7000

[maiyadidi]

The 16-85mm is a solidly built consumer grade lens. The VR works between 3 - 4 stops.

I happened to post a related topic here:
http://www.photomalaysia.com/forums/...ent-with-D7000

yes, saw your sharing there before, nice sharing you have !
but i would like to know more about low light condition performance, did you done any testing on this ?
hopefully it won't too bad, so that it will be a suitable anywhere-to-go lens for me.

[ojtee]

f(3.5-5.6)=>f2.8 , about 1-2 f/stops difference, VR can go down to 3 stops, 4 stops if your technique is right

is that good enough an answer for you?

if you are talking about low light photography, for static subjects, you can play around with the fstop/shutterspeeds/ISO, but for life subjects, flashlight is essential

[maiyadidi]

f(3.5-5.6)=>f2.8 , about 1-2 f/stops difference, VR can go down to 3 stops, 4 stops if your technique is right

is that good enough an answer for you?

if you are talking about low light photography, for static subjects, you can play around with the fstop/shutterspeeds/ISO, but for life subjects, flashlight is essential

thanks for sharing again, ojtee !
i'm not focusing on low light photography, just in case i want to take photos inside a restaurant (e.g dinner time), just hope that this lens won't perform too bad.

[nyosteve]

Vote for Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 instead of Tamron...