- Get 90 DAYS FREE of Amazon Music Unlimited with purchase of an eligible product. Listen FREE for 90 days. Learn more here.
Nikon AF-S 16-35mm f4G ED VR, Black
- Nano Crystal Coat
- Filter/attachment size: 77mm
- Vibration Reduction
- Sleek, modern, and durable design
Product detailsStyle:Lens Only
- Is Discontinued By Manufacturer : No
- Product Dimensions : 12.5 x 8.3 x 8.3 cm; 680.39 Grams
- Date First Available : 30 November 2017
- Manufacturer : Nikon Australia
- ASIN : B0037KM0XA
- Item Model Number : 2182
- Best Sellers Rank: 35,370 in Electronics (See Top 100 in Electronics)
- Customer Reviews:
Frequently bought together
Customers who bought this item also bought
Have a question?
Find answers in product info, Q&As, reviews
Your question might be answered by sellers, manufacturers, or customers who bought this product.
Please make sure that you've entered a valid question. You can edit your question or post anyway.
Please enter a question.
77mm thread / HB-23 hood supplied Nano Crystal Coat Filter/attachment size: 77mm D2.Excellent choice for travel and architecture, landscape and everyday photography as well as HD-Video applications.
From the manufacturer
Nikon AF-S FX NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED Vibration Reduction Zoom Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLR Cameras
Landscapes, cityscapes and interiors often require an extra-wide-angle lens to capture the complete picture. With the AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR, you not only get focal lengths that cover a remarkably broad range, but your images will also benefit from the handheld steadiness of Nikon’s VR (Vibration Reduction) image stabilization (2.5 stops*), sharp focusing and rich color rendition. Additionally, you will love having an f/4 fixed aperture lens that covers the focal range without sacrificing brightness or depth of field.
Nikon VR II image stabilization
From daylight to low light, inside or out, near or far, your creative bases are covered with the astonishing versatility of the AF-S NIKKOR 16–35mm f/4G ED VR. Nikon VR image stabilization provides 2.5 stops of blur free handheld shooting. You can leave the tripod at home and create with spontaneity and confidence, even when lighting is less than ideal.
Superior stills and HD video in any setting
AF-S NIKKOR 16–35mm f/4G ED VR includes some of Nikon’s most advanced lens technologies for exceptional performance in a broad range of shooting situations. From its flare and ghosting reducing Nano Crystal Coat (N) to its ultra-fast, ultra-quiet Silent Wave Motor (SWM) internal focusing motor, the AF-S NIKKOR 16–35mm f/4G ED VR is an advanced lens for today’s advanced DSLR cameras.
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
What other items do customers buy after viewing this item?
Review this product
Top review from Australia
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
This was replacung my 18 35 nikon, but my experience witht his lens was pretty bad.
I got horrible corner sharpness. It looked as if it was shaken. So i replaced the lens assuming its a bad copy.
However doing some more research i came to know the way this 16 35 is designed cause this issue. And the way to get aroubd this is to go for hyperfocal length always.
However i returned the lens because this didnt feel premium compared to the af 18 35.
Corner sharpness of Af 18 35 at 18mm is way better than 16 35 at 18mm.
Top reviews from other countries
I had intended going for the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8, I already own the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 so it seemed at first to be a no brainer given the 14-24mm's reputation for image quality.
Then I did some online research, a whole day in the end, and the choice became increasingly less obvious. Opinion was pretty much divided, no one argued the quality of the 14-24mm but in other areas the choice was less clear cut.
I decided to go back to the drawing board and re-evaluate how I would be using the lens.
The lens was for intended for landscape so the 16-35mm on an FX body was a good focal length for this.
I like to shoot in inclement weather, the Nikon 14-24mm's inability to accept filters so having the front element exposed to wind, sand, sea spray and rain without the protection of a UV filter would have been a major concern.
The 16-35mm is an f4, so down a stop on the 14-24mm, and unlike many landscape photographers I rarely use a tripod as I find it gets in the way. Photographing whilst standing on slippery wet boulders can be tricky enough without a tripod to send you flying, so I tend to opt for a monopod or hand hold. So the Vibration Reduction had appeal.
Also the for me focal length had an advantage, 16-35mm covers a good spectrum of wide angle use. I try to plan for the lens I need before I go out and shoot. Changing lenses in rough weather is not a good idea to me, not only the risk of unwanted debris entering the camera or rear of the lens, but also the risk of dropping it.
On this basis I opted for the 16-35mm f4. So how have I found performance?
I ran some tests as far as I was able against my Nikon 24-70 f2.8, I took some shots at 24mm and 35mm on both lenses at the same f-stops, f4 and f8 with my Nikon D800 mounted on a tripod. I then blew these up to 300% in PhotoshopCC on a 27 inch monitor. This way exceeded what I would require of the lens.
At 35mm the Nikon 24-70mm appeared to have the advantage in terms of edge to edge sharpness, also for some unknown reason the the 16-35mm seemed to loose colour saturation compared to the 24-70mm. At f8 the 16-35mm was better though not the colour. This was simply adjusted in Photoshop.
At 24mm the situation reversed and the results were very noticeably better than those from the 24-70mm at both f stops. The colour saturation problem also disappeared.
I also ran some tests at 16mm, though I could not make any direct comparisons, the shots were taken in a conservatory with white chairs that had a wicker pattern on them. At f4 there was no real detail on the chairs at the image edges, at f8 the image improved very dramatically with good detail across the entire frame. This improved still further at f11.
All images taken at on the Nikon 16-35mm at f8 and viewed at 100% in Photoshop were impeccable.
In the field.
If I was still having doubts about my choice these did disappear once out in the wilds. This is a lovely lens to use. At first I thought it felt bit light and plastic for a pro Nikon lens, but once on the D800 it felt very well balanced and a very comfortable weight. It is fully weather sealed and suffered no mishaps when shooting close up to water falls despite getting fairly wet.
The quality of the images has not disappointed in any way. I think what counts are the results you get in the field, and this lens really delivers, also I experienced no issues at 35mm.
Also there is a significant price difference between the 14-24mm and the 16-35mm, large enough in fact to buy another piece of kit.
Perhaps if I ever take up interior photography I will take another look at the 14-24mm.
There are far more detailed reviews here as well as on the net; so I'll keep it simple:
1) the 16-35mm is lighter (680g versus 1000g) than the 14-24mm. One can argue that if you're shooting landscape and the lens is mounted on a tripod, the weight doesn't matter. Well, who's going to carry it there? :)
2) the 16-35mm is cheaper (£829 versus approx. £1200) than the 14-24mm. That's highly subjective to your budget, but £370 is a considerable sum which can be invested back in your photography gear.
3) As if the 14-24mm isn't bulky enough, please Google pictures of the 14-24mm with the Lee filter system; it's an absolute behemoth.
4) The 16-35mm range on this is far more practical allowing it to act as a landscape/street photography hybrid. The 2mm loss on the wide end is considerable but at 16mm you are already quite wide. If you are going to lose sleep over the 2mm, then get the 14-24mm, simple as.
5) F2.8 to F4 is a full one stop reduction... that's definitely a big deal if you're considering this for night sky photography; if that's the primary use then by all means grab the 14-24mm! However my hypothesis is this is a primarily a landescape lens in which case you'll have a lot more in focus wide open at F4 than at F2.8. It terms of light loss, given that both are likely to be mounted on a tripod (see point above), then really the F2.8 is no longer as a big loss at it first appears (no pun intended).
6)The addition of VR may encourage you to use this handheld, a far more enjoyable experience than a tripod/cable release combo.
I hope I have convinced you to save yourself and your wallet some serious cash which you can spend on some filters, etc
I'll be posting some sample photos following the bank holiday weekend so you can judge the lens sharpness, distortion for yourselves etc
The lens is quite long, almost as long as my 24-70mm f2.8 Nikkor but it is light as it has a plastic outer case but it doesn't feel cheap and feels well made.
I think it was a good decision,I previously owned a Nikon 14-24 which is a very good lens but I found that its not a very practical lens for lugging around - its heavy, the glass protrudes past the casing and the lense cover is huge, I was constantly worried about damaging it.
The 16-35mm is in my opinion far more practical and I cant tell the difference in the quality.