First I noticed the solid feel on '- in the price range I would definitely expected something to get less. But even at 85 mm with fully extended Dual tube wobbles almost nothing! Zoom and focus ring can be cleanly and accurately operate, although the rotational resistance seems to be a bit high and the focus ring part a little bit "scratchy" acts. In everyday use of the lens, however, is neither one nor the other really disturbing - rather as shaky. The materials used seem robust and are joined together cleanly. All you pay is certainly a comparison with classic 18-55mm kit lenses, high weight. I can well imagine that the unbalanced feel to a D40 or D3100, the D7000, it is perfect in my opinion.
Another, unexpected for me feature is the bayonet-sided rubber seal. Although this is not a sealed lens (so far as I know - you may correct me if I'm wrong here), this is in this price range also not common. However, the bayonet, even on a sealed camera like the D7000 always an Achilles' heel, which was considered laudable here by Nikon engineers. Wunderbar! This is precisely one of the many little things that inspire me to Nikon and have turned their backs on me in my decision, Canon, confirm. The standard supplied lens hood is one for me also.
But now the most important thing, the picture quality. Comes to mind only one word: great! I have already done with this lens a lot of pictures that have just brought me only stressed literally amazed. Sharpness, contrast and detail rendering are on the D7000 the hammer! One must always remember that we are dealing with a faint Forest and meadow Zoomabjektiv, that's not really cheap but far away from the price tags of professional lenses though. That what you get for your money here is really second to none.
But there are also downsides. On the one hand would be, as I said, the small maximum aperture of f / 3.5 to f / 5.6. Even the (really good, more on that later) Bilstabilisator is only a small consolation, ultimately benefits the only with steady images. Nevertheless, this can hardly be a point deduction, because in this price range (Nikon) is not get brighter. Sure, from Sigma, there is the 17-50 f / 2.8 a the for a very similar price, but we have one hand a much smaller zoom range and on the other hand was for me the test on Photozone sobering 'Thank you, I would rather take up in edges sharp lens and allow myself additionally one or two bright fixed focal length. I had before anyway.
The Image Stabilizer has but still a nice effect: The lens detects camera movement and then stabilized just the vertical plane. Thus after only a relatively short exercise succeed beautiful Mitzieher, also quite without monopod!
The second negative point is there already serious: Flares. More specifically, extremely ugly flares! Against the light, especially dimmed produces very unpleasant green and orange-yellow artifacts in the image, which can be removed according to background digital only with much effort. So if you want to make, for example, coherent landscapes at dusk with backlight and a long exposure time at high depth of field gets under certain circumstances a proper spanner in the works done! For me it was definitely has often so 'where I now of course is fair to say that in such circumstances each lens produces flares' just not as ugly caves!
The rest is rather unspectacular 'CA? Yes, moderately. Vignetting? Yes, also there is moderate. Distortion? Sure, always, especially at the short end (but equally moderate in comparison). For Pixelpeeper, Testchart fetishists and Tageszeitungabfotografierer there is to find some. But honestly you should not really do with his camera other images? Yes. And again: can you ask for the price more? Not really. All I can say for my part, that this is all absolutely does not bother me in everyday use. The Lens Correction the D7000 I have shut down because I first want to have as the image exactly as it comes from the camera. Exclusively as RAW of course. If I want, is corrected by Lightroom 3 and behold, everything is perfect. Nothing here to worry and artificially inflate the blood pressure in the height.
The autofocus does not work completely quietly, I have to say 'it produces a high-frequency noise that a little like a bad oiled hinge squeaks. At first I was a little worried, but it seems to be normal. In addition, you actually hear it only in fairly quiet location, outside one gets away with anything. It is also generally much quieter than the micromotor in the camera in conjunction with an older AF lens. The difference to my 85er 1.8 D is clearly there for sure!
More important is of course the speed and there's really nothing to complain about. Who should have it faster, can indeed love at least three times to spend on a professional lens. Also on the accuracy I can not complain absolutely. Of course, one can always manage to overwhelm the AF and make blurred images. In most situations, the AF is nice but fail and let if required yes anytime via focus ring in M / A mode correct. Niceness!
One note I would have to zoom range 'if one of these is like course subjective. I think he's perfect. Almost a little too long, because I love to take pictures of in wide angle. Inside, the 16 mm are great, thanks to the weak f / 3.5 maximum aperture, however, you should have a flash when Bock on ISO has not exactly 1000+. For the way you have almost everything here: beautiful wide-angle Landsachfts- and architectural shots, over the normal range to mild to moderate telephoto, anything goes. But 'the 18-105 and the 18-200 mm can mainly here but more? Why not take one of these, especially since the 18-105 also is still cheaper? All I can say is, you should not compare apples with pears here! The 18-105 is a class under the 16-85, which relates to processing and image quality and in my opinion more suitable for entry-level models. In the totality of the 16-85er is simply a perfect unit with the D7000. However, this also applies absolutely to the 18-200er to 'would you not buy here the 11-times zoom even at the expense of image quality. As an objective for the journey of course handy, but many other reviews, go here already sufficiently on the comparison 16-85 / 18-200 a 'and they largely correspond with my impressions.
In summary, we have a terrific, all-purpose lens with unexpectedly high imaging performance here. Nevertheless, it is of course no panacea. Who searches something it will never find in any case, even if he spends ten times. One should always know the limits of his equipment and not be angry about perceived weaknesses that technically, depending on the budget are inevitable. I can clearly say that here, especially in combination with the D7000, some limits are further pushed forward for me though. This is all the more noteworthy, because so the amateur photographer gets a tool in the hand, which can keep up on the results of her absolute professional photos' at a price which was unthinkable a few years ago.
