Compared with Nikkor AF-S 18-200 mm

I had bought the 16-85, because I had a significant improvement in quality to my Nikkor AF-S 18-200 on my Nikon D7000 expected. This has been confirmed for the most part. For landscapes, under identical conditions, and in each case the same focal length, there are quite apparent sharpness advantages in the border area for the benefit of 16-85. The difference is greater, the more you are traveling to Tele. Especially at 85 mm, the difference is striking. Sheet structures appear as the 18-200 more or less muddy. In contrast, forms the 16-85 from very differentiated and relatively clear.

Of course, the universal 18-200 is applicable. But the picture quality is in the middle and upper focal length ranges but quite a compromise. And at a D7000 with 16 megapixels remain sufficient reserves for an enlarged detail from the 85 (130s) focal length. Thus, I do not really miss the extended telephoto range. For the 16-85 offers more wide-angle, one also not to be underestimated advantage.

What could be more negative for 16-85 commitments? Not much, except for the visible vignetting at 16mm and maximum aperture. And then maybe the noise of the autofocus and the image stabilizer. Which are more pronounced than in listening to the 16-85 18-200. The distortions are limited and are less pronounced than at 18-200. In addition, these are deducted from the D7000 anyway.

Conclusion: The acquisition of 16-85 as a higher-quality alternative to the 18-200 has largely paid off for me, at least for high-quality landscapes. Visually appealing, there are no differences for 18-200, except that the 16-85 one track is more compact.

To get the optimal picture quality from the 16-85 mm, you should know the optimum aperture values. This I found out for myself in various tests:

Focal Length 16 mm (24 mm): F 5.6
Focal Length 24 mm (36 mm): F 5.6
Focal Length 42 mm (63 mm): F 6.3
Focal Length 85 mm (127 mm): F 8.0

These values ​​have nothing to do with the maximum depth of field, but with the optimum resolution within the focal plane. Maybe to get depending on the subject and distance in a slightly different values. This brings me anyway very good results. When it comes to depth of field, must be further abgebelendet according to telephoto focal lengths of course. Where F11 - F16 should not be exceeded, because then diffraction blur noticeable.