Nikon 17-55mm or 16-85mm?

Techy Guy

Techy Guy

Suspended / Banned
Messages
489
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
No
Hi, shortly going to buy either a Nikon 16-85mm or a 17-55mm f2.8 for my D300. It'll be a general use, walk about lens for me but I also shoot a few events and gigs so the f2.8 is quite tempting for that reason.

Anyone used both and compared them? Comments?

Thanks
 
really it all depends what's going to be more use to you?
the 85mm long end or the f/2.8 aperture..

only you can really answer that :thumbs:
 
Hi,

I would go for the 17-55mm f2.8.
It's a incredible pro lens.

Riz :)
 
Not a huge difference in focal length range at least IMO. I would %100 go for the 17-55mm F2.8 in this case
 
Owned the 17-55 and had extensive use of a 16-85. If I were taking one lens on holiday with a D300 it would be the 16-85mm simply because it is lighter and goes a little wider. But I bought the 17-55 because of it's performance, if you need f2.8 you need it!
 
17-55.

You can always zoom with your feet.
 
You already know, what you want! :D

Can't speak for the 17-55, but say the 16-85 looks very good on the D300s :thumbs:

I chose it for wider and more reach.




Unfortunately couldn't get it wide enough... but that's another story :gag:
 
Apples and Oranges then! Looks like the 17-55 may be superiour but Heavy and no VR ..

Decisions, decisions! Looks like having both would ideal but that's not going to happen just now. Shame there isn't a camera shop left here anywhere that I can try them out :(

I'll report back when I get to the end of the hunt :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top