Recommendation for a zoom a little wider than Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR lens?

By all accounts the 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 VR lens is optically very good but for my purposes I need something slightly wider. I think 18mm DX equates to 27mm FX but I would like an optically very good DX 'standard' zoom that will go to the perspective equivalent of 24mm (FX).

I think the 10-24mm (15-36mm) might be a little wider than I need and f3.5-f4.5 variable aperture is not ideal, although I could overlook that if it's optically very good.

Although it's a bit bulky and pricey (and for FX) would the Nikon 16-35 f4 lens (24-52mm equivalent) be a good choice?

This should give an equivalent of 24-52mm but I've seen mixed reviews.

Ken Rockwell raves about it -

http://www.kenrockwell.com/...6-35mm.htm

But photozone thought it mediocre -

http://www.photozone.de/...ff?start=2

I don't mind paying a lot more for the Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED, (21-36mm equivalent) which by all accounts is optically impressive, my main gripe being that there's no protection for the front lens element, unless there's a third party solution? I also like 'VR'.

Any recommendations?

I would slow down a bit! I sounds as though you are trying to second guess a great deal here, and I honestly believe that you could end up making a costly mistake if you are not careful!

What do you want the lens for? Sure the 16-35mm lens is a nice range for a wide zoom on an FX body, but on a DX body it's not that much wider that the 18mm end of your existing lens. Seriously for most of the reasons you would buy a wide zoom (large vistas or to exaggerate perspective) you'll find most people are using 10-20mm ish lenses close to their 10mm end.

Why is f/3.5 to f/4.5 not ideal? Because of the perspective distortion you don't really want to be using such a lens for photographing people indoors, so low f/numbers so that you can work without flash indoors are a non issue.

Lens protection on wide angle lenses is real tough, as the front element has to be very rounded, so adding flat filters will usually degrade image quality too much to be useful.

My suggestion: Find a dealer who carries stock, and try the lens there, if you get the right lens then buy it! Believe me it will be cheaper to spend a bit more with a dealer than to buy on-line and get the wrong lens!

Reviews can be a mixed bag, get a photographer who's at home with a particular lens range and they'll make it sing, but if it's reviewed by someone outside of their comfort zone that same lens could be labeled a dog!

Sorry if that's all a little long winded, but there's enough material in your question for an answer several pages long!