Benjamin Golub’s blog

There are pretty solid rumors out there about Nikon releasing a new AF-S 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6 VR lens.

I have been very pleased with my 18-55mm kit lens that came with my D40. It is, without a doubt, the best kit lens across any brand in this price tier. The Canon 18-55mm does not hold a candle to Nikon’s. You can see all the photos I’ve taken with it here. The problem is that, while indoors, I sometimes find myself wanting both a little bit wider shots and a little more range in the same photo shoot. Outdoors this isn’t a problem; I just keep my 55-200mm VR on and, if I have to back up, then so be it. But indoors I can only backup so much. I also find myself wanting a bit more range indoors for taking photos of Loki. It is very difficult to get photos of her using the 55-200mm indoors because once she gets too close (3.5′) I can’t focus on her (the 55-200mm VR has a very large minimum focus distance).

So when I heard about the rumors of a new 16-85mm VR lens I got excited. The benefits are numerous:

1. VR technology covering my entire range. Some say that VR is not helpful at wider focal lengths; I disagree. With my 55-200mm VR I have been able to take photos (of still scenes) down to 1/4 of a sec at 200mm. If I could do that at 16mm it would mean being able to take photos indoors (of art perhaps) regardless of lightning conditions. The VR is the better version that has “normal” and “active” modes. Nikon claims it provides 4 extra stops (versus 3 stops on my 55-200mm VR).
2. Extra 2mm on the wide end. This is huge; 2mm does not seems like much but, on the wide end of the spectrum, every mm counts. This will be great for architecture and indoors.
3. Extra 30mm on the tele end. While this isn’t something I’d consider taking to the zoo; 30mm will come in handy on walk abouts. Megen and I go for walks with Loki frequently and I usually bring my camera and nearly always keep the 18-55mm on. Most of the time that range is perfect but there are some opportunities I miss; for instance just yesterday some ducks flew in and landed on the frozen Erie Canal. With some extra range I would have gotten the shot (or at least something I could crop).
4. A much more solid build than that 18-55mm. Pictures show it with a metal mount and construction similar to the 18-70mm or 18-200mm VR.
5. It should be pretty cheap. I expect it to be less than $400; maybe as low as $300. This is a consumer lens so it needs to be acquirable by hobbyists who don’t spend thousands of dollars on their equipment. If the cost gets anywhere near the 18-200mm VR then nobody will buy it and it will be a failure. So it must stay well below $650.

Assuming the details are correct, there are some issues with it:

1. It’s pretty slow on the tele end, but that’s to be expected with these consumer lenses. Keeping it at f/5.6 at 85mm means lighter glass and lower cost. Adding the VR means that you can still use the tele end without requiring perfect light; so I’m not concerned with having f/5.6 at 85mm (actually all my lenses are at f/5.6 at their tele end and I don’t complain).
2. Nobody knows what the minimum focus distance is; but if it doesn’t match or better the 18-55mm then I won’t purchase it. Since this lens would replace my 18-55mm in most situations (I won’t sell the 18-55mm ever; it is extremely light and useful at times) it needs to match it.

I’m excited at the opportunities a lens like this could open up to my photography.