Other similar-sized lenses would be the mediocre 24-120mm VR (this lens is FAR better in the overlapping part of the range), the 70-300mm VR (another excellent lens and a great complement to this one) and the very nice 180mm f/2.8 AF or AF-D.For the first time in the digital era, it is possible to carry an FX camera with a relatively compact, somewhat-affordable kit that spans the range from ultra-wide at 16mm to long telephoto at 300mm and to have excellent image quality throughout the range.

35mm is awesome for weddings, you get a bit more context of the hotel, the scene, the crowd but not too much, and distortion isnt so pronounced yet at 35mm

but I prefer the older 17-35mm.

I noticed that the Nikkor 24-70mm at 35mm is better than the Nikkor 16-35mm at 35mm.3

The Nikkor 16-35mm also has the advantage of being lighter than both the 17-35mm and the 14-24mm

Before purchasing, I've debated between this lens and the legendary 17-35mm.

Although I lost 5mm, I decided to go with this over the 14-24 due to the cost, bulbous front and I can use filters with this lens

The 16-35mm f/4 is incredibly sharp on a DX shooting wide-open pretty much from center all the way to the corners except at 35mm where shooting at f/4.0 can get a bit soft at the corners.

The 16-35mm is much more usable

The 14-24mm is also 2mm wider and faster.

The 16-35mm is also lighter, less vulnerable as its front glass element can be filter-protected (when necessary in some instances), less expensive and is more useful for general use with its longer reach.

35mm is not very sharp

It will still work on a DX body, although the "ultra wide" will be diluted to just "wide" (becomes 24-52mm), but ultra sharp

Its IQ is almost comparable to the mighty 12-24mm without the bulkiness and weight

Other similar-sized lenses would be the mediocre 24-120mm VR (this lens is FAR better in the overlapping part of the range), the 70-300mm VR (another excellent lens and a great complement to this one) and the very nice 180mm f/2.8 AF or AF-D.For the first time in the digital era, it is possible to carry an FX camera with a relatively compact, somewhat-affordable kit that spans the range from ultra-wide at 16mm to long telephoto at 300mm and to have excellent image quality throughout the range.

at f/4, this lens needs an 8.5mm effective light-transmissive opening (35mm/4).

The hood of the Nikkor 16-35mm is not as effective in shading this lens on a DX boy

So what are the good things about this lens?-The sharpness, this lens is very sharp at any focal length, some claim it's even sharper than the phenomenal Nikon 14-24mm, even though I haven't tested this claim myself, but I don't have a problem believing it.-The price is right

I think the sharpest I own...though I don't hold the best collection of lenses, I like my lenses, and i think I like this the best (14mm 2.8

The improvement in corner-to-corner sharpness against the Nikkor 17-35mm is considerable

If you can master the wide end, then you may step up to the "overwhelming" 14mm from 14-24mm

The 14-24mm is truly amazing, but it's honestly a scary lens to use sometimes