Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Lens Price in India, Specifications, Reviews & Offers. Buy online at TATACliq Flipkart Amazon . Compare Prices and Save!

Thanks for the detailed review, specially on the “buy” & “don’t buy” section which is very helpful for me.
Highly value your video! THANK YOU VERY MUCH! Very helpful and on experience-based one! Only what I have to say about 16-35 f4 is thumbs-up! I am using this one on d700 and d750 down to 1/25 with VR, and got sharp images. Have used in the dust, wet weather and snowy days - no problems at all.
Hey, thanks for educated sharings. İ have a question and need your help tamron 17-35 f2.8-4 or this nikon which one to choose?
It is good for wedding events, with dx body?
Hi is this lens good for videography?
Thanks for buy it & don't bui it. Agreed!
hi I am thinking of shooting landscape photography, may I know is it suitable for my fx d850? still considering between 16-35mm and 14-24mm
thank you so much for ur video, it is so clear and so versatile. cheers
Loved your review. Which would be your recommendations for street photography lenses for Nikon D5000. I have an 18-55, a 35mm and a 70-300mm.
Is this good for real estate photography? also, good for video?
What about focus breathing and sunburst? Missing such a critic points in this review
Excellent informative and useful review. Thank you
you can get a specialist filter holder for the 14-24 but after forking out £1000 for the firecrest ultra filter system im in no hurry to upgrade to 150mm for one lens . i cant see myself selling my 14-24 either.
Excellent. It was really helpful
I have been using the Nikon 16-35mm lens for the past five years and have always had good feedback on my images. I have used it for night photography and yes there is some distortion but I was able to correct it without any problem. I am amazed at how tack sharp this lens is.
Witch on best lens for landscape photography?
not as heavy as the 14 -24 2.8 which doesnt take filters
Hi guys, one thing I mentioned in the video, and took it out for some reason was this lens's comparison with Nikon's 14-24 mm f2.8. Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 was my first choice but I didn't buy it because firstly it was expensive as compared to 16-35, but most importantly, the glass bulges out which makes it impossible to put normal circular filters and normal filter holder kits. You have to buy a special filter holder set for 14-24mm lens. I prefer using filters for my landscape photography, and Nikon 16-35mm is a good choice if you want to invest in different types of filters.
I would spend the money on the 20mm F1.8
IMHO, this lens with its larger range and its 77mm filter mount is more convenient than the 14-24mm for serious landscape photographers .(with the 14-24mm you have to add a cumbersome filter mount and 150x150 filters which double the lens price.)
If i'm not expecting to need ultrawide - then I'll take the 16-35, otherwise I'll take the 14-24mm. The 14-24mm is a fantastic lens but too heavy if you dont need it. The 16-35 is pretty average but nice and light.
Can you say "UNBELIEVABLE DISTORTION" ? I knew you could.
Bán bao nhiêu vậy
Great lense for portraits We were very happy with the results. I haven't liked it as much for landscape because I like to zoom in here or crop something out there, but for the price it's been a great addition. As I said, in particular for more up close portrait work.
i want one , and il have a lens as well
cool Sòph just what im after replace my 14-24 . i believe its as sharp as a tack
There is just something very primitive watching a female taking off an almost see through protective covering with her hand
I just got my lens. What I found on it? Cheap, sick lens. Cheap because it's plastic and this time nikon gives a cheap sack for the lens. Sick because it is sick, did she mention the distance scale for the lens. No wonder so many claim the sharpest lens, no way. I went right away to test the lens and is not sharp at all for the price. I have a d810 and the results make me sick, not even one picture came sharp, I mean, sharp. No, not to me. Sunday I will deside. Keep it or send it back, for now all I can think is, I hate it.
This review was far too technical for me to fully appreciate.
pretty face
This was supposed to be a review not a fucking in boxing
I swear to god I thought I was watching a fleshlight ad.
Between the music, the caressing and soothing/alluring voice and demeanor, this was a somewhat surrealistic experience for me. Somehow takes me back to a mushroom farm I visited in the 80's.
the teleprompter or whatever is there instead for reading the lines, is in very bad place. it's so obvious and distracting
You are HOT :-)
she s hot.
what an awful cheesy review
What's with the 80's porn music?
music too loud.great review
I love her huge beautiful eyesreal cute girl I think that god made his big effort for that good job! ^.^
love her eyes!
I’ve been using that lens professionally for the past decade. One of my favorite lenses. It replaced the Nikon 17-35mm 2.8 I’ve been using for a decade before that. Even used it today to shoot Ash Wednesday at what use to be called the Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove.
Thank you
Hi is it good for videos with Z6 || body?
Nice video, does it has rubber gasket and weather sealing?
I'm not far off as I have the nikon Z 14-30mm F4 s and I believe that I can get the same results
Great review. I disagree that one only uses this at 16mm. I think I would buy this one because of the flexibility zoom gives you. Especially between 16 to 20mm, but also 20 to 28mm. It covers a lot of focal lengths. It's also a great option for people who have an APS-C camera as a secondary camera, it gives you 24-52mm kind of lens.
Only buy for 16mm? Why not just buy the 16mm 2.8 prime? Small, solid and better quality overall?.