More Image Samples from Nikon 16-35mm VR

It is taking me a long time to sort through the images and pick the ones I like the most, so I decided to post three quick samples from my last trip to Utah where I shot with the Nikon 16-35mm f/4.0G VR lens. I haven’t had a chance to do any post-processing on these images, so they are exported from Lightroom with the default settings (standard Lightroom sharpening is applied).

If anybody is doubting the sharpness of the Nikon 16-35mm VR, take a look at the full versions of the below images and see for yourself. The images are razor-sharp from center to corner and the very slight amount of softness at 16mm does not bother me at all. Either way, it is way better than the Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8D and the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G.

All images are shot on FX (Nikon D700) and the corners will be even better on a DX body.

Nikon 16-35mm VR Sample 1 Resized

Window Arch Sunrise - Nikon 16-35mm VR @ 35mm, 1/200, f/10

Click here to download the full version of the file in JPEG format (4.5 Mb).

Nikon 16-35mm VR Sample 2 Resized

Tree - Nikon 16-35mm VR @ 32mm, 1/250, f/11

Click here to download the full version of the file in JPEG format (5.2 Mb).

Nikon 16 35mm VR Sample 3 Resized

Formations - Nikon 16-35mm VR @ 16mm, 1/640, f/11

Click here to download the full version of the file in JPEG format (4.9 Mb).

Comments

  1. 1
    ) Joel
    March 18, 2010 at 2:36 am

    Hi, are these pictures from a DX or FX camera? Thanks!

    • March 18, 2010 at 8:57 am

      Joel, all images were taken on FX (Nikon D700). Expect corners to be even better on DX…

  2. March 18, 2010 at 3:14 am

    I downloaded the full-res version of Window Arch Sunrise and was stunned at the clarity and sharpness of the photo. Too bad that lens isn’t available in Malaysia yet. Nor the Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8D and the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G.

    • March 18, 2010 at 9:00 am

      Mimi, I’m glad you liked the photo. It is strange that the 17-35mm and the 24-70mm are not available in Malaysia – they have been out for a while now (the Nikon 17-35mm has been out for years).

      Is there a Nikon authorized dealer in KL? I would call and ask them…

  3. 5
    ) KL
    March 18, 2010 at 2:31 pm

    I like the last two images compared to the first one because of the sky. Sky is more detailed in the last two images. And, yes, I can see the sharpness. What happens if you really blow the picture much larger, say those large prints that are entered in the competitions? How does the lens hold up to then?

    • March 18, 2010 at 4:37 pm

      KL, the downloadable versions of the images right below each image are full 12 Megapixel images that you can print crystal clear at 18×24 inches. Obviously you can print as large as you want, but you would lack some detail when viewed very closely.

      For larger print size much more megapixels are needed – that’s when those 24 Megapixel sensors have an advantage :)

      This lens would hold up very well with a larger sensor size though.

  4. 7
    ) lkunl
    March 19, 2010 at 4:12 am

    Nice image. I like composition. Good color & contrast.
    I agree with you. This lens have very good sharpness.
    The very slight amount of softness at 16mm not bad as the other said.

    Thanks!

    • March 19, 2010 at 12:22 pm

      lkunl, thank you!

      Yes, the slight amount of blur in the corners is not bad at all and I find that the 17-35mm and 24-70mm actually produce more soft corners on the wide end.

  5. March 19, 2010 at 7:13 am

    Is is possible to take bad pictures of such beauty? Yours are spectacular!! The color is amazing.

    • March 19, 2010 at 12:22 pm

      Deana, I have a lot more pictures from Utah coming up soon (hopefully better ones than the above).

      Thank you and I am glad that you liked the pictures!

  6. 9
    ) Игонин Алексей
    March 19, 2010 at 7:27 am

    Насим, как-то я поначалу не очень оценил сэмплы с данного объектива, но когда скачал их полные версии, то слегка обалдел. Такая чистая и четкая картинка. Теперь очень сильно колеблюсь между 16-35 и 24-70:) В чем вы проявляли РАВ-файл?

    • March 19, 2010 at 12:25 pm

      Алексей, да, без полного размера трудно оценить четкость оптики :)

      RAW проявлял с Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 2.5, практически ничего не менял.

      • 14
        ) Игонин Алексей
        March 20, 2010 at 2:50 am

        Насим, не ожидал такой резкости от Lightroomа. По-крайней мере с Е-3 РАВы проявляю или в родной олимпус-студии или бибилией или капчур-оне. Чего то Lightroom на олимпусовских РАВах мылит.
        Но вы, думаю немного цветности добавили. Ведь все говорят о бледных цветах Никона.

        • March 20, 2010 at 3:20 am

          Алексей, в Lightroom’e есть “Camera Profiles” – я просто меняю его на “Standard” или даже иногда на “Vivid” и все цвета сразу становятся сочными.

          И еще, оказывается резкость стояла на 50 а не 25 (по умолчанию) – забыл что я поменял на все новые импорты. Так что чуток резкости Lightroom все-таки добавил.

  7. 15
    ) Pasquier
    March 24, 2010 at 8:21 am

    Thanks for your helpful blog and review – it convinced to go out and buy this lens!
    Keep up the good work – I’ll b trying quite a few of those recipes as well – love the combination.

    • March 24, 2010 at 11:19 pm

      Pasquier, you are most welcome! I’m sure you will love the lens as much as I do :)

      Thank you for the feedback, we work hard on this website and I’m glad that you like our work :)

  8. 17
    ) Lanshen Tale
    April 19, 2010 at 9:22 am

    I finally got a 16-35 for my D700 today. A quick test confirms that the 16-35 is ways sharper at 35mm than my 24-70 at the corners. Yes, I guess I will rest my 24-70….

    Many thanks! Your review really helped me deciding on the 16-35 over the old 17-35.

    • April 22, 2010 at 6:11 pm

      Lanshen, you are most welcome! I will soon post some comparisons between the Nikon 16-35mm VR and Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G.

      I’m glad that you are enjoying your new toy! :)

Leave a Comment