Nikon 16-35 or Tamron 15-30

[mortalitas]

Hi All,

I am in the market for a new ultrawide zoom on a full frame camera. i have heard great things about both of these lenses, and was wondering if anyone had either/both and had any suggestions?

The VR on the Nikon isnt as appealing as the fact that it goes to 35mm. (plan on using ultra wide, 50mm prime and 85mm prime for pretty much everything) but i dont think i would really lose much if i were to go with the Tamron.

anyway i would love to hear everybody's opinion.

hanks in advance

[NQWombat]

Hi,

I personally have the Nikon 18-35 and find it wide enough for capturing office or house room with no vignetting when not stopped down. I have used it also for fireworks and find it good. If I was in the market for a wide lens I would go for the Nikon for the range and the fixed aperture.

Regards

Mark

[Lance B]

The Tamron seems to be an excellent lens and gets good reviews. Here is a good one from Photography Life by Mansurov, a very well respected photographer and reviewer:

https://photographylife.com/reviews/tamron-15-30mm-f2-8

I have the 16-35 which I think is an excellent lens also, but if I had my time over, I may give the Tamron serious consideration. The only drawback is that it doesn't have filter thread

[Cage]

Both seem to get excellent reviews but for me the extra 'f' stop would make the Tamron hard to pass up.

The Tamron is on my wish list. ( I already have the 24-70 and the 70-200 and if it is up to the same standard as those two it will be a ripper)

[ameerat42]

Hi,

I personally have the Nikon 18-35 and find it wide enough for capturing office or house room with no vignetting when not stopped down. I have used it also for fireworks and find it good. If I was in the market for a wide lens I would go for the Nikon for the range and the fixed aperture.

Regards

Mark

Hi Mark. Thanks for posting your experience, which is always good to have first hand.
But I just have to point out that it is not "fixed aperture" in the case of this lens but instead a "constant f-stop".
That feature does indeed make the aperture quite variable throughout the focal length for this lens while maintaining the same "f-stop".

Technically - for the sake of terminology for less-experienced users than yourself - "aperture" is an actual distance measure, while
an "f-stop" is a ratio of focal length to aperture.

Am.

[cupic]

A glance at price seems to put the tamron slightly ahead on price of the nikkor that being a bit more expensive


cheers

[oneeyedphoto]

Late to respond here Steven & not sure if you've already bought? I have had the 16-35 for a few years know and toyed with the idea of selling it to get the Tamron 15-30 after its great reviews, but stuck with the Nikon purely on the filter issue. I just couldn't be bothered mucking around with filter kits for it, when all my other lenses share the 77mm thread. More expensive, less convenience etc. I'm happy with the 16-35 with the VR as it opens up many more opportunities at slow speeds too. I used the same rationale for the 20mm Nikon 1.8 after having already purchased a used, but mint 24mm 1.4.

[MissionMan]

How are you finding the 20 f/1.8? I love mine