16-35 and D80

[roy_s4]

<p>Hi all...I just received a second copy of the new 16-35 f4 VR lens and I'm again underwhelmed. Perhaps it's because I'm using it on my old D80. However, the 24-70 2.8 is incredible on that body. Am I missing something? I have tried every imaginable setting and I cannot approximate the IQ of any other Nikon lens including my old 50mm 1.4D or 24-85D. I have a D800 on order (who knows when in the world that will show up) and I'm wondering if this is a camera or lens issue, although I think I already know the answer. Should I keep this and wait until the D800 arrives or just live with what I think is less than stellar sharpness compared to my other Nikkor lenses?<br>

Does anyone else use this lens on a crop sensor camera, and if you do, what is your opinion?</p>

<p>Thanks in advance for yet another lens question...</p>

[cyrus_procter]

<p>I've used both the 16-35mm F/4 & 24-70 F/2.8 on the D7000 body. The 24-70 is truly an amazing lens, on par or out resolving primes in its range. The 16-35mm, while not as impressive, I never had any complaint with, expect that it was very difficult to get to focus properly. Perhaps your having focus issues? And remember a lens that wide has a tenancy to "throw off" the AF system.</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>hmm, ken rockwell really likes that lens... idk, maybe post some samples so we can see what it is you're doing?</p>

[roy_s4]

<p>thanks Skyler and Eric...the focus is instantaneous on the 16-35...when I enlarge the image in Aperture, it seems to lose clarity but most of the images have been handheld just wandering through the yard. I put it on the tripod with VR off and tried shooting some of my work (art) and it was better, but no match for the 24-70...</p>

 

[cyrus_procter]

<p>Yes Roy, you see ultra wide angle lenses bend the image so much, that what the AF point "thinks" its seeing is really a bit over one way or the other. So focus would be instantaneous, but the AF point you used to focus could in fact be to the left or right on the actual image, and especially at wider focal lengths especially at F4, it would simply appear that the lens is a bit soft. If you were shooting the 85mm @ F/1.4, you would know right away if your focus was off, of course its a tele lens, so you wouldn't have the above described issue. When at 18mm & F/4, it would be very difficult to see exactly where the lens focused, because almost everything is in focus, yet if focus hit on the background your subject would be ever so slightly soft, just enough to make the lens look weak. This is what I experienced frequently. If the lens nails focus you should get very good results (at most focal lengths at least). </p>

[roy_s4]

<p>thanks Skyler..this is very useful but my next question is how to nail the focus. I would hate to have to manually focus and I have the camera set on a single focus point. Any suggestions would be much appreciated.</p>

[cyrus_procter]

<p>I'm afraid I'm not much help there, my D7000's AF is significantly different from you D80s Honestly I would just guess, and try to view the image on my LCD blown up to about 1:1 to see if it hit focus or not.</p>

[roy_s4]

<p>you have already provided help...thanks...I'll keep playing with it and keep looking forward to getting the d800, which I suspect has a much better af system...</p>

[elliot1]

<p>Roy, can you get high quality images if you manually focus?</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>need a little more info about what the issue is other than lack of sharpness...</p>

<p> </p>

[tom_mann1]

<p>SP: <em>"... you see ultra wide angle lenses bend the image so much, that what the AF point "thinks" its seeing is really a bit over one way or the other. ..."</em></p>

<p>Can you cite a credible source who also makes this claim and actually explains in detail why the proposed effect might occur? Consider this in light of the fact that the diameter of the rear lens element in all lenses never exceeds a fraction of the diameter of the lens mount, so the maximum angle that light hits the sensor is never greater than a given number of degrees, independent of whether the lens is a tele or wide angle.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

 

[cyrus_procter]

<p>Nope, actually I don't when I had a 16-35mm a little over a year ago and consistently missed focus shots, I read that on a forum, but I'm afraid its been a while.</p>

<p>I had quite a bit of trouble getting the 16-35mm not to focus on the background rather than a subject, and that's what a attributed it to, but honestly I have no evidence to back up my proposed theory.</p>

[tom_mann1]

<p>FWIW, I have had the 16-35/f4 VR since it first came out and have been very happy with it. Most people would consider me a stickler for sharpness. It is currently one of my most used lenses and many images from it have appeared in high quality glossy publications put out by my employer. </p>

<p>WRT focusing on the the "wrong" part of the scene, I also occasionally experience this with my 16-35, but also with my older 14/2.8 and my 20/2.8 AFD lenses (on my d700's). I've always attributed this problem to the fact that it's a lot easier to get extraneous "stuff" (ie, at different distances) inside or near a focusing square with a wide angle than it is with a longer lens. Whenever there is a somewhat larger area with sufficient contrast and texture available to focus on, this never seems to happen. I don't think the explanation is any more complicated than that.</p>

<p>Cheers,</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

[roy_s4]

<p>Elliot...have not tried mf yet...will today...</p>

[allan_jamieson2]

<p>I had thought of getting this lens for using on a D800 but online reviews are very mixed, which may be down to sample variation, some people are suggesting that you return even a new 16-35mm to Nikon for adjustment before you even use it, which is not very encouraging. In the end I decided to stick with primes as they are easier to focus manually with the depth of field scales on the lens barrels through hyperfocal focusing with a bit of Live View for fine tuning. </p>

[roy_s4]

<p>no, not encouraging to hear that Allan...I'll keep playing with it until I get it right. I would hate to have to send it to Nikon for adjustment..I sent the first copy back. This one seems better, but not great...</p>

[ant_nio_gomes]

<p>Roy,<br>

Can you please elaborate a bit more on the way you're using AF? <br>

Do you use the AFL/AEL button to fix focus or just the half pressure on the shutter release button?<br>

Are you using AF-S or AF-C? If you use AF-S, how do you select the focusing point(s)?<br>

I didn't use the lens with a crop factor body but I have not such focusing problems with the D700.</p>

[roy_s4]

<p>Antonio...I use AF-S with a single point for focusing. 1/2 pressure...</p>

[ant_nio_gomes]

<p>Roy,<br>

It should work, but you could also adjust AEL-AFL button to lock focus leaving 1/2 pressure to block just exposure and see if it makes any difference.<br>

Just a suggestion, even if it ends up working the same way you loose nothing giving it a try. </p>

[john_hawley4]

<p>I noted the reference to future prchase of a D800, but maybe too high expectations for an ultra-wangle on a crop-sensor camera - even if the 16-35 is the best FX UWA ever designed, the inevitable compromises are going to handicap it against, say, the 16-85 DX lens overpriced at half the cost (and less weight) and while not constant aperture still f/4.5 (vs. f/4) at the longest focal length of the 16-35 and a much more "useful" zoom range.</p>

[roy_s4]

Thanks Antonio...will try that...John, I think you are right..this copy behaves exactly like the one I

returned...very hit and miss, so at this point, I will keep it and wait for the phantom camera (D800). I

looked at Ken Rockwell's preferred D80 settings and it seems better at AF-A with single point. I

normally use AF-S with single point...will keep messing around...yes, I do have some dx lenses that

are far sharper than this, but the literature keeps referring to the 16-35 as and fx lens..so good idea to

keep it and wait.