Nikon 16-85 or 18-200?

[Cam]

Hey Guys

I'm looking at adding to my lens collection and am at a crossroads. Both lenses are around the same price and I already have a 70-300 which I don't plan on giving up.

I've seen test shots with both and they are very near each other. The 16-85 looked a tad bit sharper but I don't know if it would be worth it over having a little more leg room with the extra distance.

[Diezel]

Hey Guys

I'm looking at adding to my lens collection and am at a crossroads. Both lenses are around the same price and I already have a 70-300 which I don't plan on giving up.

I've seen test shots with both and they are very near each other. The 16-85 looked a tad bit sharper but I don't know if it would be worth it over having a little more leg room with the extra distance.

I own both and can tell you that the 16-85 is superior to the 18-200 in all aspects except the range. As you allready have the 70-300, going for the 16-85 would be a no brainer for me

In my opinion the 16-85 is one of those underrated, affordable but really great lenses that come up once in a while. (Just like for example the Nikkor 300mm/F4).

Roel.

[chris78cpr]

I'm a canon shooter but have used the Nikon 18-200 and find it a great lens to use and it produces great results.

However i agree with Roel, with you having a 70-300 you should get the 16-85!

[sluger020889]

I agree with Diezel, the 16-85 is a great lens.

My friend has one and I've done a bit of shooting with it, it's a fantastic lens.

Joey