Sony AF DT 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM  reviews

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Feudalac   review date: May-15-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-55 SAM,Sony 18-70, Minolta 50 1.7, ...

price paid:

Kit lens

positive:

Sharp, sharp, sharp!

negative:

Not much.

comment:

This lens is a mass produced, because it is a kit lens. This is a reason why different samples can vary in quality. I was pretty lucky when I received one with a Sony a230 couple of years ago. Latter I bought a55 and received another 18-55 kit lens. My brother and one good friend of mine owns that lens too, but none of them is even close to this first sample. First sample is just unbeatable in any sense. It is razor sharp, very good flare control, no trace of CA... I really love it, and image quality can't be beaten even by some much more expensive lenses. So, when buying the camera or this lens separately, just pray for a good copy and you will be very happy.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: M.Wells   review date: April-22-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

useful length range
quiet
light

negative:

time will tell
plastic mount

comment:

I am more familiar with a couple Pentax and Nikon MF lenses. This being my first AF lens I am very pleased with the function and versatility. The plastic mount is slightly concerning, my MF lenses are older and all metal, but I plan on babying this lens and camera so it doesn't keep me up all night. I've attempted some quasi-macro shots with this lens and get a nice bokeh. I've seen slight distortion when shooting up close at 18mm, which I liked. All in all, I'll be holding on to this lens. I plan on picking up one other lens, somewhere in the 70-300 range or 70-210, so this nice kit lens will come in handy for family events.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: MarsX   review date: April-21-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-105/3.5-4.5 RS
Tamron SP 28-75/2.8

price paid:

<100 $

positive:

compact, light weight
very Sharp!
fast focus speed
inexpensive
great focal range for most situations
short focal distance, macro

negative:

plastic mount
zoom ring moves not so fluent

comment:

Best kit lens, for this price. If stopped down, this lens is very, very sharp! If you want a cheap lens, with great IQ, reasonable fast focus speed and not to worry about break-it or lose, SAM 18-55 is your lens!

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Bobrej   review date: April-20-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta AF 28-105 F3.5-4.5
Minolta AF 50 F1.7 RS

price paid:

Kit lens (A55)

positive:

-Weight

negative:

-plastic mount
-CA
-rotating front element
-no hood
-Zoom ring scrubs.
-Veiling haze at 55mm (must be stopped down to avoid this).
-Soft corners at wide angle.

comment:

This lens came to me together with my A55 (Kit lens). I stopped to use this lens immediatelly after I bought an used Minolta AF 28-105 F3.5-4.5. I must rate sharpness only 3.5 because my copy has really soft borders at wide angle (must be stopped down to avoid this). I've also noticed CA that can be very disturbing under some light conditions. I didn't have any problems with flares like the other users.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: faceless_el   review date: April-06-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

0 USD (kit lens)

positive:

-A good starter lens. Usually comes as part of a kit or can be had for cheap
-great for videos as lens is silent when focusing

negative:

Plastic lens mount
poor on low light situations

comment:

btw I had two of these as they came with the a230 and a37 kit.
there was a slight difference in picture quality from the lens that came with the a37, i noticed the lens from the a37 was a bit sharper.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: Smegenai3000   review date: February-26-13  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

25 usd used

positive:

Good lense for start

negative:

comment:

Well its very good for the price,autofocus prety fast and quiet,much less noisy that 18-70 one.Very light.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: zastavia   review date: December-16-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-105

price paid:

0.0

positive:

-Sharp, especially at 55
-Minolta colors
-very good flare control
-superb close-focus ability
-compact & light-weight
-fast, accurate focus in good light
-cheap if you have to buy

negative:

-obvious distortion of vertical plane at wide end (mostly close objects such as lamp posts etc, but easily corrected in lightroom)
-somewhat plasticky build

comment:

Had this lens come with my a33 and also my a57. My newer version has a smoother zoom barrel, while the older one was a bit sticky half way. Very plastic design and build, and rather loose focus ring at front. Aside from this, this is actually a very good kit lens, known to be greatly superior to its Canon counterpart. I have always liked this lens a lot, especially its beautiful colors, focus accuracy and very good level of sharpness. When shooting at 55mm, gives superb IQ, especially as a macro-lens. I use this for flowers and insects, and with a Raynox 250 on the front, it becomes a razor sharp microscope lens surpassing £600 macro lenses. I cant ever see myself buying a more expensive 18-55, because all other lenses do not have the fantastic close-up ability.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: michalm2   review date: December-07-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SAL18-70
Minolta 28/2.8
Minolta 28-80
Minolta 28-100
Minolta 35-80 II
Sigma 55-200 DC

price paid:

40 EUR (new)

positive:

very sharp
nice colours
weight

negative:

little flare
distortion on 18mm

comment:

This lens is very sharp wide open, razor sharp when stopped down. It has very low weight so it's good for longer walks and trips. It has visible barrel distortion at 18mm, but it can be repaired in editor. Distortion is very good between 24 and 55 mm. I really like this lens.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: taztonio   review date: November-10-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony SAL-1855
Minolta 28-80 II 3.5-5.6
Sigma 28-80 3.5-5.6 Aspherical
Minolta 50mm 1.7

price paid:

50 USD (kit)

positive:

light weight
better than 18-70 kit lens
fairly inexpensive (used)

negative:

build seems very cheap
noisy
slow
only 3.5

comment:

1st of all I'm a newbie, I've only had my camera for less than a week and I'm trying out different lenses.

I must admit after reading so many reviews of this lens I was a little disappointed. I received mine as part of a used kit, but estimate it added $50 onto the cost.

I can't believe Sony was charging $200 for this. I would want my money back if I bought it at that price. The range of 18-55mm is a good, so I want to keep lens for its versatility but I think I'll grab something else as a everyday lens.

Mine is used and seems have some trouble going out past 35mm on auto focus. If I put it on MF move it to 55mm and then switch back to AF it does fine. Maybe my lens is damaged maybe this is the design. I haven't seen anyone else complain about it so I'm thinking its just mine.

Really I don't have much experience but if I was only going to carry two lenses (one in the bag and one on the camera) I would carry my Minolta 50mm prime and my Sigma 28-80mm and leave the SAL1855 at home. I only have one longer lens (sigma 70-210), and I'm not that excited about it.

This lens isn't listed as a macro but does almost as well as the Minolta & Sigma 28-80mm "macro" lenses. I took some close up pictures of a $5 bill and it did very well, but its just lacking on the far side.

I might just keep the SAL1855 for my wife, so nothing that I actually want gets messed up.

I could love this lens if they took the build style of the Maxxum kit lenses added a macro switch and kept the 18-55 focus range with the same sharpness at a min 3.0 aperture. But, I guess that's a $400 lens that everyone would want to buy.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Vultite   review date: June-06-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

came with camera

positive:

Great images, especially stopped up.
Lightweight.
Cheap.
Very good color rep.
Pretty decent flare control

negative:

A little distortion, especially at 18mm (which can be fixed).

comment:

I wasn't expecting much out of the kit lens, but I sure was surprised. This lens does have a cheap feel to it, but it does what it's suppose to do. Pretty good colors, flare control and sharpness. But, there is some distortion...especially at 18mm which I use LR4 to fix. Other than that, this is a pretty good kit lens.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: cleoo   review date: May-29-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70mm SAL1870

price paid:

80.00

positive:

Compact, light
Internal motor

negative:

Zoom ring is jerky and catches.

comment:

I used this with my Sony A55. It's okay, but not really as sharp as my Sony 18-70mm. The jerky zoom ring was a big turnoff. The SAL1870 was much better in that regard. It was smooth.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: bulletroll   review date: May-16-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 50mm 1.7
Sigma 70-300mm

price paid:

Around 150 USD

positive:

Zoom range
Focus range
Colors

negative:

Full of plastic
Focus ring isn't the best

comment:

Really cool effects with a film camera. On a 35mm film this lens could be called an ultra wide, but 35mm Sony DSLR's have this thing that they crop the image with a APS-C size lens. But still a very good lens.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: milav   review date: April-22-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 18-125

positive:

sharp
color
compact

negative:

plastic
in set is not hood

comment:

For this price is very good lens

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: kije   review date: April-13-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

Cheap
not heavy
good range (even on APS-C)
good beginner lens
minimum focus distance
sharp
beautiful colors

negative:

distortions on high contrast
plastic
focus-ring has no grip, so its not very usable for manual focusing

comment:

I'm a beginner, and this is my first lens (was in the Sony alpha SLT-A35K kit).
The lens is very good for beginners, it's cheap but sharp and makes good pictures. Positive is also the very small minimum focus distance. 0.25 m are very near for taking beautiful photos of flowers etc.

The only thing I think is bad is that when you take photos from a high-contrast motive (for example a tree's branches in front of a very bright, cloudy sky), the edges are not really sharp.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Ago   review date: April-02-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony AF DT 55-200 F4-5.6
Sony AF DT 55-200 F4-5.6
Sony AF DT 50 F1.8
Minolta AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D

price paid:

110

positive:

good alternative for a wide lens
sharp (especially stepped down)
cheap
weight
good AF
nice color
flare is well controlled

negative:

focus ring can be jerky

comment:

I can't believe people give this kit lens such bad reviews. Its miles better than the old kit 18-70 in every way. I think it is sharp even at max wide open aperture at all focal lengths, in the central portion of the frame. Yes, corner sharpness is not great at larger apertures but the corners sharpen up quite considerably at one stop above max aperture. Nothing new, I'm pretty sure most zoom lenses have similar performance characteristics.

Great little performer and useful when I want a lighter, smaller standard zoom.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Thatguyfromvienna   review date: March-22-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-55 Canon kit

price paid:

Kit

positive:

Really sharp, not very heavy, nice all around range on APS-C, good AF speed.

negative:

Feels cheap (well - it is!), could use just a tad more range.

comment:

Actually, this little thing is a gem. Compared to my former Canon 18-55 kit lens, this thing is sharp as hell. Never had the AF hunt. It does indeed feel really cheap with all the plastic but then again, it IS cheap.
Value for money is hard to beat.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Freddan_6   review date: February-05-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-80 4.5-5.6, Minolta 35-70 4. Minolta 50 1.4, Minolta 75-300 4.5-5.6.

positive:

Sharp, lightweight, range.

negative:

Plastic mount, feels cheap. No rear lens cover.

comment:

Sharp through the range except for left edge at 24-28mm, and then only at f=4-4.5 (fully open). Flare control better than minolta, colors worse. Build is a little cheap, but so is the Minolta kit lens 28-80. Nice walk around lens, perfect range will keep it until I buy Sony 16-50 2.8.
Bought it as part of kit together with camera.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: SonyA580   review date: January-24-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 17-50

price paid:

£0.00

positive:

Sharp
lightweight

negative:

Plastic

comment:

For a starter lens, this is more than adequate, My copy is sharp and it was made in china, ;-)

Cheap secondhand.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: boyzone   review date: January-18-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SAL 1870

price paid:

-

positive:

- Light

negative:

- SAM is a bit noisy

comment:

Kit lens from A550 and A33. Besides the range, overall performance is much better than SAL1870.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: derekw   review date: January-14-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX DC

price paid:

39 GBP mint

positive:

Sharp!!!
Colours
Light
Accurate AF

negative:

Build
Distortion at wide end

comment:

This copy is very sharp across the range and at all apertures. Better than the Sigma at all focal lengths below f5.6. At 18mm f3.5 it blows the Sigma away.

Light, portable and probably wouldn't suffer much damage if dropped.

If you don't need the larger apertures a f2.8 lens gives, recommended IF you can get a good sample.

This sample was made in Thailand.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: lam409   review date: January-08-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Quantaray (Sigma) AF 24/2.8
Minolta Af 28-85/3.5-4.5
Tamron AF 28-200/3.8-5.6 Aspherical
Minolta AF 35-80/4-5.6 silver
Minolta AF 50/1.7

price paid:

kit ($50)

positive:

A good kit lens
lightwieght
quick auto focus

negative:

plastic
add-on pricing

comment:

Nice kit lens that come with the package but I certainly wouldn't pay the "separate price" for one if I had body only. I use it mainly as a walkabout lens in situations where I need the wider end than my Tamron 28-200. I use these 2 lenses only in situations where changing lenses is a hassle. I compromise a bit of quality for convenience.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: Pavel S   review date: December-28-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 17-70mm 2.8-4 HSM OS
Tamron 70-300 mm 4,5-5,6 USD
Tamron 70-300 mm 4-5,6 LD Macro
Tamron 60 mm 2 Macro
Sigma 105 mm 2,8 Macro

price paid:

kit lens new

positive:

center sharpness
fast and accurate AF
good colours
small and lightweight

negative:

corner sharpness
distortion 18-25 mm
noise
rotating front element
no hood

comment:

I found in one Sony shop a55 with this lens in the price that was cheaper than any price in that time only for the a55 body so I took it - it was January 2011 so I have now one year experience with this lens.
It looks like a toy but I was amazed by the sharpness and colour spectrum. But after deeper exploration I have noticed that there is small difference in my copy in sharpness in the corners on the right side i.e. to be really sharp at 18 mm left side need F11 and right side F16, at 55 mm left side is OK from F5,6 but right side need F9. Just to be fair and precise this is valid mainly for shots for short distance where some sharp edges are in the corners - for landscape shots and "infinity" shots it is not recognizable but still is valid to get sharp photos F9 or better F11 is a need = so not the best option for low light photography.
I don't mind it's plastic - after one year it works without problems and on the other hand I like it is small and lightweight.
The second reason to find another all-around basic zoom was taking movies / the noise and clicking of the AF is annoying and destroying result of very high quality video.
Final words - taking into consideration I got it for free and I have a lot of very nice A4 prints taken by this lens I keep it as a spare basic zoom and I think it is good "starting point" with APS-C cameras - great value for the spent money.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: hrstrat57   review date: December-06-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Maxxum 35-105, 35-105N, 28-85, 24-105, Sony 35 1.8 other Maxxum glass.

price paid:

65 USD (used)

positive:

Nice range, MFD, quick and accurate focusing

negative:

build, slow

comment:

Picked up a Japan made version of this lens from KEH in mint like new condition. I am quite frankly so far astounded at how good it is. Fast and accurate focusing on A 700 / A100 and great, sharp images so far......same exact colors as my Sony 35 1.8. Not "Minolta magic" colors but very good.
Did I get lucky and snag a sweet copy?
Maybe, but it sure is good! Very pleased. Has put the 24-105 on the bench.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: GlassEye   review date: October-15-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

50-1.8 SAM

price paid:

with kit

positive:

Good all-around range.
Inexpensive.
Sharp if you are careful!
Light weight.

negative:

Slow. Front element exposed.
Lots of flare and CA wide open.
Zoom ring sticky.

comment:

This lens will give sharp results if it is stopped down to f8 or better.
Colors seem true w/ no cast stopped down.
Build is not pleasing. The zoom ring sticks and drags a little. There is no damping in the focus or zoom rings. Yet, I have no reason to think it will not last with non-pro use. Focus is quick and not all that noisy,IMO.
I liked the way the wide end showed very little distortion.
Light on the front element is an issue. It will mess up your shots. Contrast is shot when this happens and some ghosting is very visible. With care, though, it will give very clear and sharp results.
All in all this lens is fine for the money. If you can afford a faster, better mid-range zoom, get it. If not, just be careful, stop down and don't point it at a light source!

11-21-2011 Update:
Just a note on the 'plastic fantastic' aspect of this lens. The other day I dropped this one. It was one of those when you reach for it you really smack it a good one. So instead of landing gently on carpet, I slammed it into some furniture. Man, I thought it was a goner. But it showed not sign of impact or damage. I've used it since then and it is just fine. I have to wonder how a metal lens would have done. Might metal have dinged instead of bounced? I'll never know, but it's reassuring to know that it's not as fragile as it looks.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Introspect   review date: October-11-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

minolta AF 35-105 N
minolta AF 50 1,7
Beercan

price paid:

nothing (kit lens)

positive:

very cheap for a wideangle lens (range)
nice colors, more blue than the minoltas
light weight
versatil

negative:

flares to much
don't have a rear cap (kit lens)
haunt's to much in low light
very plastic

comment:

Today I used this lens again, since I buyed the minolta 35-105 it hasn't seen much action, but it's a good lens, very useful especially for panoramics and street photography (with good light), it's the widest that you can go for such a low price, the problems are in low light, especially in doors (to much noise and become very slow) and also flares to much (the kit lens doesn't have a hood)... with this lens and playing with the sharpness, contrasts and saturation in your camera can give you some amazing results, some of my favorites photos were taken with this lens, worth keeping...

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: MedsRX   review date: September-18-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

1 USD (with a33 kit)

positive:

Cheap. Acceptably sharp. Light. CA and Fringe control is decent. colors aren't "minolta" but they do have a certain appeal.

negative:

Needs to be stopped down to achieve true sharpness. Range is ok.

comment:

I may adjust my review as i expand my collection. The Lens performs pretty reasonably as kit lenses go. you could get worse glass for a much higher price. some of it's sharpness is lost at it's maximum app. just for it's fairly wide start point it can be quite useful. it's range is kind of strange. but i am not one for "one lens does all" i'm more for "a lot of groovy lenses makes a kit". . it's aps-c angle is useful.
as for video use (given that it is the kit lens on my a33) it's zoom is as jerky as a jr high bully. CAN NOT BE USED FOR ZOOM SHOTS! that is a build problem hence my lower build score. the plastic build is not a fault to me: i have average hands and a small camera.
Flares like crazy. get a good hood. sony not including even the little one for this lens is an obvious marketing move and not very nice ;)
i will keep it, even as my glass expands.
building a nice range of budget-minded lenses is my goal. so look for my reviews with this idea behind them. i shall be focusing on light-weight '88 minolta glass as a start.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Velectron   review date: August-06-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Various Minolta primes and zooms that cost much more

positive:

Very sharp kit lens especially when stopped down
Small and light

negative:

Poor build quality
Plastic mount
Rubber grip is a dust magnet

comment:

This Sony kit lens is pretty much an overlooked and belittled lens that actually could stand on its own against "better" and more expensive lenses. I myself was guilty of that too until I compared control pictures taken with this lens against my array of Minolta glass. Wide open or stopped down a little, the sharpness of this lens could easily match many of the Minolta primes I have - 24mm, 28mm & 50mm. The only downside of this lens is in low light situations, where the weakness of the small aperture shows up quite evidently, especially when used without flash.

Built quality is pretty bad. My lens broke down just after 6 months of usage. The focal length was reported wrongly and hence the aperture was off too. Resulted in many over-exposed pictures. Luckily it was within the warranty period so got it fixed for free by Sony.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: almassengale   review date: July-27-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

16-80

price paid:

150 NZD

positive:

Sharp, compact, quiet, and light.

negative:

Could focus faster. Range is limited. Bokeh isn't great.

comment:

Just took it on a big trip and this lens really surprised me. I bought it the first time my 16-80 was out of commission just to have a back up. When my 16-80 again broke before a big trip to the South Pacific and the American West it was my fall back. I've just poured over the results and have been extremely impressed by what i've seen. Kit lenses are much better than they were a few years ago and this thing, at a reasonable aperture, is capable of pictures so sharp and pleasing that unless they were blown up to a large size would be indistinguishable (from a sharpness perspective) of those from my unreliable 16-80. I missed the range of that lens but I really don't feel like my results took that much of a hit. The 18-55 is a keeper and an absolutely great starter lens.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 5 

user: Tudor   review date: July-27-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70 F/3.5-5.6

price paid:

60 EUR (as new)

positive:

Sharper than the old kit lens

negative:

Build is worse

comment:

The zoom ring squeaks on my copy. You can feel parts rubbing on each other when moving it.
The distortion at 18mm seems negligible in reviews but it's noticeable enough to bother.
This didn't seem to happen with the old kit lens.
Since I use it mostly at 18mm, I actually lose a part of the image at the extremes when correcting distortion.
I like the colors of the old one more, too.
My advice is to keep the Sony 18-70 if you think about changing it.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Skidog2k3   review date: June-20-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

16-105mm
18-70mm kit

price paid:

Kit

positive:

-Nice and sharp up close
-Close focus on the wide end
-Lightweight

negative:

-Filter ring moves while focusing (polarizer)
-Plastic mount

comment:

It has much better control over flare than the 18-70 kit lens... much better lens overall in my opinion.

I really liked the close focus ability of this lens, and used it almost exclusively for that purpose until I was able to afford a real macro lens. It is now part of my son's kit.... I actually kind of miss it, but after the purchase of my 16-105mm and 30mm macro, I never used it.

This lens does a lot of things okay, but doesn't really shine in any area, which is I guess why it is kit lens, but there are much better options out there.

If you are looking for somthing better than the 18-70 kit lens, or a good close focus lens, at a cheap price, grab this up off of ebay for next to nothing used.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Blitzkri3g   review date: June-19-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 10-24mm Ultra Wide Lens.
Sony 18-70mm Kit lens.
Tamron 55-200mm F5-5.6
Konica Minolta 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D

price paid:

Kit Lens (Sony a550)

positive:

-Sharpness esp. at F8+.
-Light.
-Compact.
-Cheap.

negative:

-Not so great at F4.5.
-All around plastic (mount too).
-Small range.

comment:

Well,It s really sharp for a kit lens and cheap too.
Not so great because the range is limiting to say the least.
Feels so fragile because of the plastic materials used.
Still,its ages in front of the old kit lens.
More than reasonable resolution and sharpness for its class.
N.

PS.No hood with the lens.Come on Sony. Ridiculous!

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: sonya300   review date: June-15-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 17-50

price paid:

0.00

positive:

Sharp
Lightweight

negative:

Plastic

comment:

A sharp kit lens, a great improvement on the old 18-70, but alas at a price,the range.
Ive got a very sharp copy, almost as good as my tammy 17-50.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: paulevans   review date: June-02-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70 KM
16-105 Sony

price paid:

37 GBP (as new)

positive:

Sharp at all apertures
Light
Light zoom control
Very fast AF
Focusses to 10" across the range

negative:

Zoom motion a bit graunchy, but for the price, not a problem

comment:

To be frank, this little lens is very close to the 16-105 in quality, though of course lacking the range. The 18-55 improves on the KM 18-70 that came with the KM 5D - it's sharper in all circumstances.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: revdano1   review date: May-08-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sigma 17-70
sony 18-70

price paid:

110 usd

positive:

Generally sharp, light, nice colors

negative:

soft bottom right corner

comment:

This is a very decent lens. Most overlook this lens as it's a kit lens, however, they are missing out on what this lens is capable of doing , and spending extra money on lens that they don't need to spend.


I mainly used it as a general lens to walk around with. It does a very good job as it is mostly clean, crisp and I am very pleased with the color it produces.


If you have this lense don't be in too much of a hurry to brush it off, as it is a good lens and esp. for the price.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: filipescu1007   review date: April-20-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

other kit lenses

price paid:

kit

positive:

good alternative for a wide lens
sharp (especially stepped down)
cheap
weight
good AF
nice color
flare is well controlled

negative:

focus ring can be jerky

comment:

As far as I'm concerned, and it's not just me, I really enjoy this lens. Its versatility isn't universal but it goes from a nice wide-lens alternative, to a pretty good portrait lens when needed. It might be slow but with nowadays cameras, higher ISO isn't a problem anymore. If you are careful enough about what you do in MF, your shots will be sharp, with very nice colors, and flare shouldn't be such a problem. It is sometimes soft around the corners but the center is very nice.
It is a kit lens, don't expect the moon from it, but it is a very good kit lens, it might be in plastic, but it's not weakly build as some said. I travel a lot and it never leaves me even though I have other lenses that cost much more.
The IQ is good and given this lens' price, why would you even bother complain! I admit that I wouldn't have bought it on its own, but as a kit lens, go for it. Hopefully, you'll get a good copy. They do exist!

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: nicols   review date: April-19-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

Came with camera

positive:

Its very cheap.
IQ is actually a cut above the average kit lens.

negative:

Plastic mount.

comment:

This lens is getting a bad press here but really its not as bad as some say - its a reasonable kit lens, better than the old Sony kit lens. Nothing stunning or outstanding but with a little care it can take reasonably sharp pictures, colours are good and its plastic body means its a compact and light lens to carry. I still dig it out and stick it on my a55 when weight is an issue - I have a choice of better zooms that all costs 100s of pounds more but they are all heavier. My only complaints are that the mount is plastic and Sony didn't supply a proper rear cap in the kit.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Tuck Loong   review date: April-18-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

* 18-70
* 28-80
* Tamron 17-50

price paid:

40 USD

positive:

* Sharp
* Cheap
* Ultra Sharp from f8-f11

negative:

* Not that sharp wide open

comment:

Had this lens for some time. Gotten some nice pictures and got them published. Recommended if u gotten a good copy...only bettered by more expensive lenses such as the Tamron 17-50mm

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Effstop   review date: April-10-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

0 (kit lens)

positive:

Lightweight
Compact

negative:

Slow - f5.6 at 55mm? Give me a break!
Plastic lens mount

comment:

This one came with my a55 and has been a bit of an orphan since it arrived. Range is too short to be very useful and f5.6 at 55mm doesn't do it any favours. Colour, sharpness etc are OK - nothing special but nothing to complain about either.

I still have it (virtually no re-sale value) but have "replaced" it in my bag with the CZ 16-80

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: maraten   review date: April-09-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

-Minolta 28-80
-Sigma 70-300

price paid:

Came with kit

positive:

+Range
+Versatile
+Colors
+Accurate focus
+Build
+55mm filters

negative:

-Sharpness
-Prone to flare
-A F3.5-5.6
-MFD at long end

comment:

Came with the a230, with lens was actually cheaper then without.

Overall build is good for plastic. But I personally have no problems with plastic, never heard of anyone breaking a plastic mount.

I like the wide angle of this lens, with not much distortion. 55mm end is nice for portraits, but too bad it's a F5.6 there, that means it doesn't produce the best bokeh, but it's acceptable though. My Minolta 28-80 does a better job here.

Colors are okay, bit Minolta. It perfomances the same as the 28-80 over here. Focus is fast under good conditions, acceptable under a little worse conditions.

Then the worst of this lens, sharpness, f11 is the sweet spot? And even then it's still soft in the corners, centre sharpness is good from f6.3 to f11 but corner sharpness, always lets me down. I think it's because of the aps-c coverage of this lens, my Minolta is already good from f4.5
That one covers full frame.

This lens is also quite prone to flare, no hoods were delivered...

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 2 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: blek   review date: March-31-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta AF 35-70 F4
Sony AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 (previous kt)

price paid:

IDR 500.000 new

positive:

Acceptable Sharpness
Acceptable Bokeh
Nice Flare Control
Nice CA control

negative:

Bad Build
Sony Colors, not to my liking, but you may like it
Useles AF/MF Switch on lens

comment:

Ok, this is the secondary kit for the Sony Alpha Series after the 18-70. The sharpness and bokeh may be exciting but not for me. However, it has such a nice flare control, but again, flare and CA control are normal for the lens nowdays, it is not surprising.

100% plastic, what do you expect for such price from Sony? What I hate most is the AF/MF switch. It looks like I need to break my on body AF/MF switch for make this useful. Whats more, even you switch it to MF from body, if the switch on the lens still point to AF, you can't rotate its focus ring.
To avoid this, just make sure you always use MF on the lens.

Perhaps this 18-55 and his predecessor, 18-70 both have bad quality controls. Well, after using this lens now I kinda miss my 18-70. At least the range is better and although 18-70's hood is useless, it boost its appearance. Sony sold separated hood for 18-55, it is not included.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 2 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Robin   review date: March-10-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony DT 18-70mm f3.5-5.6
Minolta 35-70mm f3.5-4.5

price paid:

75 USD (new)

positive:

- very nice color, contrast
- sharp from f4
- good price
- usefull range
- no CA
- light
- decent bokeh

negative:

- horrible build!!!
- nothing more in this price

comment:

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 3 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: crappybokeh   review date: March-06-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

positive:

negative:

comment:

Not overwhelming but decent.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: 12AMS   review date: March-06-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 28-85mm f/3.5-4.5
Minolta 35-105mm f/3.5-4.5

price paid:

kit lens

positive:

No CA
Sharp when stopped down a little
Light
Flare control

negative:

Poor build
Terrible at 18mm

comment:

Overall, I like this lens. It is my most-used lens because of the convenient focal range. I have never seen any CA of any type in the images from my copy, and the sharpness is quite acceptable when stopped down 1-2 stops from max aperture. My copy tends to be a bit more blurry on the right side of the image, so I might try to get Sony to replace it under warranty, just to try another. But even with this little problem, it still is a great, light, walk-around lens.

It is much sharper than my copy of the Minolta 28-85mm, but the Minolta 35-105mm is that much sharper again than the Sony lens. The modern coating on this lens make it much better than the Minolta lenses at flare control. In fact, I don't think I have ever seen any contrast-destroying flare in any of the pictures with this lens.

I'm quite happy with this lens and will keep it even if I get a better performing replacement because it is sometimes good to have an "expendable" lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ratboy   review date: March-02-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Old Sony Kit 18-70
Sigma 17-70 2.8-4 DC OS HSM

price paid:

Part of kit

positive:

Sharp
Light

negative:

Zoom not too smooth

comment:

I can't believe people give this kit lens such bad reviews. Its miles better than the old kit 18-70 in every way. I think it is sharp even at max wide open aperture at all focal lengths, in the central portion of the frame. Yes, corner sharpness is not great at larger apertures but the corners sharpen up quite considerably at one stop above max aperture. Nothing new, I'm pretty sure most zoom lenses have similar performance characteristics.

Great little performer and useful when I want a lighter, smaller standard zoom.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: sOniboy   review date: March-01-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Canon EF-S 15-85mm
Lumix G Vario 14-45mm

price paid:

kit lens

positive:

Sharp when stopped down
Lightweight

negative:

Soft at edges
Zoom ring turns jerkingly

comment:

It is very unusual for a lens to show optimal sharpness at f11 to f16 but that is what I find about this lens. Most lenses are optimal near f5.6 but at this aperture this lens is unusable in my opinion. It is a good thing I mostly shoot in bright daylight so I don't have to discard it. When stopped down, image quality is quite good except for getting soft towards the edges.

Contrast may be a bit low for this lens. No noticeable distortion when wide. Color fringing at the edges can be corrected in Photoshop.

The zoom is jerky when you extend or retract it. This is ok for still photography but in videography your zooms in videos will look amateurish. I wouldn't use this lens to shoot video.

I am one who goes for an ultra light weight system so I can't complain about the plastic construction. In fact I think the external design is befitting a modern age product.

sharpness: 3 

color: 3 

build: 2 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: imaginas   review date: March-01-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

came with body

positive:

lightwait

negative:

Very soft

comment:

Tested with A300 and A550

sharpness: 3 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: br127   review date: February-17-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

16-105

price paid:

kit lens

positive:

+ price
+ size
+ weight
+ build quality (for plastic)

negative:

- plastic feel
- awkward noise
- sharpness

comment:

Got this as kit lens with my A33, but sold it soon. The image quality did not convince me, especially the sharpness was very bad. Maybe I had a bad sample.
If you are looking for a cheap lightweight zoom for simple outdoor shots and no large prints, this still might be worth to consider.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: olegoo   review date: February-09-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

75€

positive:

light & small
AF accurate
Min. focus distance
Excellent quality considering its price
Sharp when stopped down

negative:

- Plastic feel
- None for the price

comment:

It's good as Kit and usefull for walk around.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: dcisive   review date: February-09-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-55vr Nikkor

price paid:

100(new)

positive:

remarkably sharp for it's price. Fairly fast focus response providing accurate focus with a minimum of noise. Excellent color rendition. Allows for very close focus (near macro)

negative:

very inexpensive plastic casing, not meant for tough treatment. Focal length adjustment isn't butter smooth but gets the job done

comment:

For it's price this lens provides a remarkable level of performance. It seems that around the internet it is trashed by many who have nothing creative to say about it. it is plenty sharp, provides excellent results in the end. It is very lightweight which in many cases makes for a more pleasurable travel companion. All in all for someone not requiring the ultimate performance all around it is more than up to the task, and will provide superb large prints in the end. Suitable for landscape, portraiture and semi macro up close shooting of flowers and such. An example can be seen at:
http://www.pbase.com/traveler/image/131764119/original.jpg

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: sungeunbae   review date: January-31-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- 35-105 Minolta (New)
- 24-105 Minolta
- 18-70 Sony
- 50 F1.7 Minolta

price paid:

100 USD

positive:

- Excellent quality considering its price
- Sharp when stopped down
- Light!!

negative:

- For the price, I think I can't complain.
- Plastic feel

comment:

I think this lens is very underated. I think this 18-55 F3.5-5.6 out-performs Sony's old 18-70 lens and other similar offerings from Canon and Nikon.

This one has less distortion and sharper at corners. For landscape and normal shooting conditions, I think, in bang-for-buck terms, you'll be hard-pressed to excel this one.

It's very very light, which is a big bonus too. Build quality could be better, but good iq and lightness compensate plastic feels.

sharpness: 3 

color: 3 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: gunnarganzer   review date: January-28-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony AF DT 18-70 (kit lens)

price paid:

60 (used)

positive:

weight, price, size, relatively close range focus.

negative:

build quality, sharpness,

comment:

I know that reviewers here usually tend to hype their latest buy, possibly due to not being able to admit that their latest buy might not have been as awesome as they had hoped, but I am not going to do that.
I had heard so much good things about the new Sony 18-55 kit lens, compared to the older kit lens (18-70), that I finally decided to buy one. What a mistake that was! The build is flimsy (worse than my old 18-70), picture quality also inferior to my old 18-70.
I might have gotten a bad example of the new kit lens (Sony 18-55), but if the difference in quality between examples of what essentially should be the same product is THAT big, then that in itself talks AGAINST buying one.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: aplmike   review date: January-22-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

50 f1.7, 35-105 old-style, 18-70 Minolta kit lens

price paid:

Kit

positive:

Sharp
Useful wide end
Low CA and fringing
Focuses close enough for casual close-ups
Lightweight

negative:

Construction, I have doubts about long-term durability
APS/C so not usable should I move to full-frame

comment:

IQ is close enough to the 50/1.7 prime and to the 35-70 zoom that this stays in the backpack while the 35/105 (a bit sharper) is now if-needed. For me, even with anti-shake and moderately fast shutter speeds, I get more IQ improvement from a tripod or clamp than from switching to one of the older lenses.


ENORMOUSLY better than (my) 18-70 that came with a Maxxum 5D.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: FogoGirl   review date: January-15-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Any other kit lens out there today

price paid:

$100

positive:

Very Sharp for a "kit" lens
Lightweight plastic does NOT mean cheaply built

negative:

None

comment:

I am appalled that some (recent) reviewers have had the gall to say that this lens is best avoided. This is total nonsense. If your lens is that bad, take it back to where you got it from for refund/repair. I have three of these, and all are extremely sharp. For some reviewers to give it a 1 or 2 for build quality is ridiculous. Just because these lenses are constructed nowadays with plastics and don't weigh a ton, does not mean a poor build. Come on people, they can't all be built like the old Minolta tanks! I have NEVER heard of one of these lenses breaking... ever! They are tough indeed.
One person on here went so far as to say that anyone giving this lens a good review simply doesn't know anything about photography! Get serious! As a pro photographer since before most of you were born, believe me when I say that this is the best "kit" lens out there today!
Let's face it; if it were not for so many people automatically assuming that a plastic build means poor quality, this lens would have a very high overall rating. It pains me to see the score drop as a result of such misinformation! If it takes incredibly clear and sharp photos, with extremely accurate colour reproduction, who gives a hoot that it "feels plasticy"? Sheesh!

sharpness: 2.5 

color: 3 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Zony   review date: January-11-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

100.

positive:

It's cheap
It covers a heavily used field of view (FOV)

negative:

Might break if you look at it hard
Needs tiny aperture to look ok

comment:

If you want sharp, you came to the wrong place. Crank the aperture to a pinhole and you can settle for not-blurry.
Why couldn't Minolta cop this kind of flare control years ago? All of this family of plasticoid Easy Choice lenses give the sun a beat-down.
And why are these other reviewers going on about the 18-70 ? That lens is finished. Don't worry about the Sony 18-70.
As soon as you are financially able, try to get a better lens immediately like the Easy Choice primes, once you can afford to go beyond this kit lens. Better yet, skip this lens and get one of the Easy Choice line-up from the get-go. If you must have this zoom, then keep this lens for the wide setting when you have some better lenses in the future.

sharpness: 2.5 

color: 4 

build: 1 

distortion: 2 

flare control: 4 

user: Torchwood   review date: December-06-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70, NEX 18-55 OSS

price paid:

£40

positive:

Well, errr its Small... (Its also NEX compatible if desperate and have the converter)

negative:

No better than the 18-70 but shorter - way softer than the NEX 18-55 at 55mm , not as smooth or solid in build as even the 18-70

comment:

I found this lens a severe disappointment after the superb 18-55 OSS NEX kit lens. I expected it to be equal to the old 18-70 at 18mm (which it is) but also expected it to perform a lot better at 55mm than it does, in fact it`s as bad or worse than than the 18-70 is at 70mm so you`re gaining nothing and losing reach . the NEX 18-55 OSS is tack sharp at 55mm F5.6 ..... Could be sample variation of course.

Sharpness rating is taking the horrible 55mm performance into consideration hence the poor score

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: mydarkstars   review date: December-02-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Min 28-85mm f3.5-4.5
Min 35-70mm f4
Sony 18-70mm f3.5-5.6

price paid:

came with body

positive:

Compact, cheap, bokeh

negative:

Small range, no supplied hood, plastic build, zoom not smooth

comment:

Not sure this is the huge improvement over the Sony 18-70 kit lens people say it is. I prefer the range of the older Sony lens. Would use the Minolta lenses more if they were wider but have to stick with the Sony's for everyday shooting.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 2 

user: Mink   review date: November-25-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 17-35G
Sony 24-70CZ
KM 28-75D
KM 18-70 kit

price paid:

Free with cameras

positive:

Amazingly sharp across the frame - if you get a good copy

negative:

Very pronounced barrel distortion
Bad flare - even in interior shots!
Plastic lens mount
Inconsistent quality control
Noisy AF

comment:

I got two copies of this lens with different cameras, so I decided to test them against each other and the lenses listed above, on my A55. Both of the 18-55s were de-centred, producing different results on the left and right of the frame, but this was barely noticeable for one of them. The other lens also had a rough and uneven feel to the zoom, so I got one peach and one lemon!

From the reviews, I was expecting this lens to comfortably outperform the old 18-70 kit, and the peach did - but not by much. In fact the 18-70 has much less linear distortion, but this is not an issue with LR3 of course. The big surprise was that the peach comfortably out-performed the 17-35G at the edges of the APS-C frame (and was about the same in the centre) and compared favourably with the CZ24-70! I realise this is sacrilege, but the results were quite clear and consistent at various apertures and focal lengths, so I feel duty-bound to give it a full score for sharpness.

Of course there's more to life than resolution, and the 18-55 doesn't compare with professional glass in terms of build, speed, distortion or flare (which is quite bad) but it's pretty amazing for what it is - if you get a good copy.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: fute77   review date: November-12-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

KM 17-35/2.8-4
Tamron 28-75/2.8

price paid:

kit

positive:

light
SAM Motor
weight

negative:

entry level zoom

comment:

nice to have as included in a kit
would not have bought it alone

however I let it for my daughter on the sony Alpha 350

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: derekw   review date: November-05-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tokina 20-35 f3.5-4,5 (2nd Version)

price paid:

£51 (GBP) mint

positive:

Light
Very sharp across the range
Good colour

negative:

Sample variations, this copy much better than my first one.

comment:

Not as sharp as Tokina but still very good. Much more portable tan the Tokina.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: eLCee   review date: November-05-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Min 35-70/4

price paid:

kit lens

positive:

light & small
AF accurate
Min. focus distance

negative:

AF noisy
no hood
MF ring
distortion on the wide end

comment:

This was included as a Kit lens with my A330. I still use this when i want a compact lens. While all plastic the lens feels, the only thing im missing is a hood.

On the wide end this lens has a noticeable distortion.

Still i use this quite often with my 330 when i want something compact with as few lenses as possible (adding a 55-200 or 70-300 tele to my bag). Or i use this when i don't want to look after my gear all the time, wouldn't hurt that much if this was lost/broken/stolen.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: rcolman   review date: October-28-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

100 USD (kit lens)

positive:

negative:

comment:

I have gone through several Minolta lenses trying to find a combination
that works in terms of desired zoom range, image sharpness and pricing.
As with the old engineering adage, you can usually have two out of the
three - go ahead and pick. So, I needed to go up in price to see if a
more modern Sony APS-c lens would give me better performance.

Anyways, my latest iteration involves the very low-cost 18-55mm vs. the
expensive 16-105mm zoom. The kit lens is an additional $100 when you buy
the body. The 16-105 costs six times as much when purchased stand-alone.
Is it six times better?

The answer is no, not really. If I had to guess, it is may "two or three
times" better. Too bad it costs $600. Diminishing returns strikes again.

It may be I may have a particularly good copy of the 18-55 kit lens, but
it is really quite excellent. Testing center and corner sharpness only,
through a range of 18-55mm and through f-stops from 5.6 through 11, the
16-105 is generally better at 35 and 55mm focal lengths, often MUCH
better in the corners. However, at 18mm, it is really a toss up.

I am going to keep the 16-105 because i really need the extra reach for
much of my work, and it really is a sharper lens. However, the 18-55 is
decent and makes a great all around lens at a very low price.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: 3up1down   review date: October-20-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Min 35-70, Min 100-200, Tamron 20-40, Min 35-105 (old)

price paid:

90.00 USD

positive:

Good sharpness
Price
Light
Focus

negative:

Build

comment:

For gear heads this is not the lens for you, everybody else will find this to be an excellent little performer without a big price tag. I recommend this lens for general use, its easy to slip in a pocket to use where a longer lens would not be appropriate. If you are just starting get the lens it will not let you down. Compared to the lens listed I would give the 18-55 a seven on a scale of 10.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: DarkScribe   review date: October-19-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 16-105, Sony 18-70, Minolta 17-35, Minolta 20-35, Minolta 24-50

price paid:

kit lens

positive:

Very cheap kit lens, light weight. Colours reasonable, can focus quite close.

negative:

Very soft in the corners at all apertures. Extremely poor auto-focus (slow and unreliable in anything but good light), very noisy, flimsy plastic in build, including the mount, very difficult to use manual focus, ring too small and stiff, range too brief to get accurate focus easily. Obvious CA at both wide and long ends, distortion and flare when close to 18mm.

comment:

This is a lens that typifies the worst of kit lenses. It came with a second-hand A700, I would never buy such a poor performer deliberately. I am selling mine currently. This is yet another of those lenses where any good reviews seem to be from people with no experience of good glass.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: danny001   review date: October-15-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 10-20 F4/5.6
Sony 70-300g
Sony 500mm Reflex
Sony 16-50/2.8
Sony 85/2.8

positive:

Sharp enough at 18-35mm
AF speed is ok

negative:

Build quality
Noisy AF

comment:

This lens came with my A550. And there is not much to complain about it. I made nice pictures of it without having the need for a better/pricier lens.
This lens is sharper than the Sigma 10-20 whitch costs a lot more. The 70-300g has the advantage in terms of sharpness.

Update 2/11/2012 : Sold the A550 + 18-55 and have an A77 + 16-50/2.8. I thought the 18-55 was good but this combo is so much better. The lens is sharper, especially at 35-50mm and better contrast/color.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: 495   review date: October-10-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

none

price paid:

came as kit lens

positive:

light
small
pretty sharp
good colors
decent bokeh

negative:

poorly built
slow to almost none af in low loght
very small and hard to work with focus ring
mf is hard to achieve, the ring doesnt stop "on the spot" easily

comment:

Bought this as a kit lens to sony a230. Pretty happy with IQ but hope to get a zoom pretty soon. I will keep this, as my only wide lens, for now. SAM is nothing.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: camperbc   review date: June-19-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70mm kit lens

price paid:

110 new

positive:

- excellent clarity and sharpness, right to the sides and into the corners
- even performs well in low light
- 110% better in every way than the original kit lens

negative:

none to speak of!

comment:

What a breath of fresh air this lens has turned out to be! I have taken a few incredible shots with the original kit lens, but it took a lot of work to get there. With the 18-55mm, it is hard to take a bad shot. Really. For the price, this lens cannot be beat for clarity and sharpness. The 18-55mm should be in everyone's bag!

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 5 

user: Bill73   review date: June-13-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SONY CZ 16-80/f3.5-4.5
Tamron 90mm/f2.8 Macro
Sony 18-70 kit
Sony 50/f1.4
Sony 75-300/f4.5-5.6(kit)
Tamron 18-200/f4.5-6.3
Sigma 28-200/f3.8.5.6

price paid:

kit

positive:

Light and compact (plastic construction a plus I would argue)
huge improvement over 18-70mmSOny
Great lens!
Nice (but not perfect) color rendition and sharpness.

negative:

Not a thing.

comment:

I really like this lens! I believe it is better than either the Canon or Nikon kit lenses. It is a very significant improvement over the 18-70Sony - even though shorter. Shooting at 55mm and cropping produces a sharper/better image than shooting at 70mm with the 18-70mm! All-in-all a very convincing kit lens that will cope (and cope well!) with what is was designed for.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Thelone   review date: May-25-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

- Minolta AF 35-70 F3.5-4.5

price paid:

59.99€ (new)

positive:

- Cheap
- Light
- Sharp
- Short MFD

negative:

- Not much

comment:

A great kit lens. For the price, you can't really go wrong with this little guy. Sure, it's all plastic and SAM is kind of a joke, but who cares ?

The lens can also be used for proxy/macro shots.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: atmaan   review date: May-20-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony DT 18-70
KM 18-70
Km 24-105

price paid:

$100, (as a kit)

positive:

Light, accurate AF, Sharp, Close focusing, nice colors

negative:

Somewhat loud AF, not the most pleasant bokeh

comment:

This lens came as a kit, so I will compare it to other "kit" lenses I have used or own. It is of a all plastic/polycarbonate construction, so will feel awkward on heavier cameras, but mates nicely with the a2...5 Sony alphas. Capable of some reasonable macro type shots, but Bokeh is not the most pleasing. Very light, and is sharper than both the 18-70 lenses. Nice, light, very usable travel lens, definitely not a "body cap only". Does not come with a hood, but I have not noticed any flare to speak of. Usual,(expected) distortion at wide end only, as with most cheap zooms.
This lens finally lets alpha mount Kit owners take pictures equal or I dare say better that Cannonites and Nikonians with theirr 18-55 kits.

sharpness: 4 

color: 3 

build: 2 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: brororn   review date: March-13-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

K-M 17-35/2.8-4
Sony Zeiss 16-80/3.5-4.5

price paid:

69 EUR (new)

positive:

Small and lightweight, close focusing, cheap

negative:

Mechanics not so good

comment:

Not perfect but best buy because it is so cheap, focusing not so fast and very noisy.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: warriors.photo   review date: March-12-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony DT 18-70

price paid:

With kit

positive:

Small lens

negative:

Color distortion

comment:

I like this lens more then the Sony DT 18-70, for its color rendition. I do like that lenses extra reach though.
The colors are sometimes off, I don't really get sharp images like I though I would with this lens.
It does have the AF/MF switch on it. Its small.
I sold it already and didn't really look back.
Just my .02 on this lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: the_fat_zebra   review date: February-20-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

Kit Lens

positive:

Very sharp for a kit lens.
Lightweight.

negative:

It hunts, hunts, hunts in anything other than ideal lighting conditions. It's making me look for a replacement such as the 17-50 tamron.

comment:

For a kit lens, this is an excellent performer. The focal range is useful, although maybe a tad short, but I've managed to get some amazingly sharp pictures from this. As for build quality, I don't mind modern plastics at all as they are light.
The main thing I don't like is that it hunts a lot in low-light shooting, but that may also be the alpha 230 on which I use it.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: harbinger   review date: January-25-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70
50mm 1.7
50mm 1.4
135mm 1.8
70-210 F4

price paid:

$90

positive:

Good center focus
Sharp edge to edge starting at F7.1
Acceptable group shots at F5.6
small lightweight and new constructs

negative:

i still hate the rubber area, its a dust magnet
Just a little short on the 55mm

comment:

Truly an amazing gem released by Sony. Comparing it to the 18-70mm, this one starts to get sharp even at f4 for group shots.

A more accurate lens in terms of getting the right mix of sharpness across the range.

Combined with a powerful flash and my A200, its so amazing how pictures come out sharp edge to edge

Not something you should pass up especially if you want a casual day to day lens. it won't compare to the 18-250 in terms of versstility but think about where you will most cry when you drop the lens?

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: ScYcS   review date: January-20-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70mm Kit
Canon 18-55mm IS
Canon 18-55mm non IS

price paid:

$100 US

positive:

Cheap kit lens that actually delivers. Fabulous for the price. Useful range on APS-C.

negative:

Plasticky....

comment:

Great lens for a kit lens. There really isn't much to complain about and i would even consider buying it for $100 seperately. It delivers and delivers well.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: gancho   review date: January-02-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 28,2.8
Minolta 50, 1.7
Minolta 35-70
Sigma 70-210
Tamron 80-210
Sigma 105 EX macro

price paid:

L67

positive:

Great quality for the price, Very good macro which surprise me. Excellent sharp and good colours. Wide on my Sony A 200.

negative:

Plastic built is the main negative.

comment:

Much, Much better than 18-70 sony lens. The macro function is something I did not expected. I am pleased with the range 18-55 which is the best for camera from this sort. Well done for Sony. I will keep the lens defenitely.

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: use_ran86   review date: November-30-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sony dt 18-70
minolta 35-70 f4
sony 50 f1.8

price paid:

nzd 160

positive:

sharp
nice color
cheap
light weight

negative:

slightly noisy
build quality

comment:

this lens is really sharp for a kit lens.

i use it on my a200 replacing the original kit lens. center sharpness is amazing. it feels quite cheap but i like the new look. much better than the 18-70 kit lens. i think, optically it can easily match to canon or nikon kit lens.

SAM doesn't give much advantage..

recommended!! go get one for you.

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: otamcnet   review date: November-25-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70 Kit
Minolta 50 1.7
Tamron 55-200

price paid:

77 USD

positive:

Sharp
Lightweight

negative:

SAM is noisy
Oter than that - None

comment:

Nice Lens - compared to the 18-70 kit lens its a monster. I got a good deal on ebay but would have spent the 2 bills if I could have found it local. Excellent, nice and sharp, lightweight. Some say the build is off, but I think its fine - I think the days of the heavy metal monsters are over. The lens is so good, I will wait for a bit to get the Minolta 28-85.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Derek   review date: October-20-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta 18-70
Tokina 20-35 f3.5-4.5

price paid:

L65 (mint)

positive:

Lightweight
Sharp
Colour
Cheap

negative:

Could be sharper at the wide end

comment:

Nice lens, build surprisingly good considering the weight.

No major faults but it is definitely sharper at the longer focal lengths which is dissappointing as I bought this lens to cover focal lengths up to 24 mm until I can find (and afford) the Sigma 15-30.

Interestingly, when at 55mm the exif data records 50 mm

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: jarnoshen   review date: October-14-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Minolta AF 35-70/3.5-4.5

positive:

Kit lens (cheap)
Good build, very fast focus on my Sony A500.
Sharpness is fine for its price.
Color is nice in low light environment (especially with red lights).

negative:

Distortion is a little too large in 18mm end.
Color is too blue in shadow.
Sometimes, flare remains.

comment:

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Henryk   review date: October-04-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70mm, 16-105mm

price paid:

40GBP

positive:

Very light, reasonably sharp centrally, much better edges than 18-70, very good from 35-55mm, extremely cheap.

negative:

Build quality, noise, edges at 18 and 24mm when wide open, but at this price this nit-picking!

comment:

A great budget buy. I got mine on eBay and it is surprisingly good. It focusses very close and will double up as a flower close-up lens for me.

sharpness: 5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 4 

user: ksat90   review date: September-06-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SAL1870DT
SAL75300

positive:

Sharp... possibly outresolving the 10MP sensor at most centers wide open. Also, very sharp wide open. very little flare or vignetting. Distortion is correctable. Focusing is decently fast and accurate...

negative:

Build quality is so-so... SAM whines a lot...

comment:

I think this is possibly the most bang for buck lens that Sony has ever come up with. It's really sharp at any focal length at most apertures, and the contrast and color rendition definitely beats the old Minolta-based 18-70 design.
The only gripe I have is that the SAM motor is rather high-pitched and although it doesn't seem noisy in usual environments, it is quite obtrusive in quieter environments such as theaters or plays...

sharpness: 4 

color: 4 

build: 2 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: perslucht   review date: August-31-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70mm f3.5-5.6
Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5

price paid:

49 Euro

positive:

Sharpness

negative:

Build quality
No lens hood
It feels very cheap
Plastic lens mount

comment:

I like this new kit lens very much. I may look cheap and plasticly but the image quality is very nice.

In low the light conditions it is not a good performer, but when there's enough light the images are very nice!

I don't think the SAM makes much difference, it's just a kind of marketing trick. Canon and Nikon also sell build-in-focus-motor-kit-lenses so Sony also had to.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Doc_KoMi   review date: August-21-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony/Minolta DT 18-70

Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 DC

price paid:

35 Euro

positive:

Surprisingly sharp!

negative:

the missing lens hood

comment:

A very nice new "kit lens"! Surprisingly sharp, nice minimum focus distance, in my onpinion a big step ahead compared to the old 18-70, this cheap lens is almost as good as the Sigma 17-70. There is simply no reason why not to have it. Someone who is willing to buy a new entry level Alpha 230, 330 or 380 should also buy this kit lens! You really would miss out a good and affordable lens.

Well, this lens may have a plastic feel (when you touch it), but it has a good look and an even better performance.

SAM ist not really faster or even quiter than internal camera motor driven AF is, I guess upcoming new entry level Alphas will not have any internal AF motor... this is the beginning of something new, look at the small Nikon DSLR cameras. Well, but even that is nothing to complain about!

The only bad thing that really annoys me is the missing lens hood (for god´s sake the 18-70 hood suits!) and the very cheap cap for the mounting bayonet. This was the first thing I changed when I bought this lens! I got myself a good and trusty hard plastic cap from an old Tamron... :)

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: terrylloydsmith   review date: July-28-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

18-70 kit lens
17-50/2.8 Tamron

price paid:

$199.99 new

positive:

Very Sharp
Light Weight
Close focus ability
Low cost

negative:

Slightly noisy
No lens hood included

comment:

This new kit lens from Sony is much better than the old 18-70. Sharpness is excellent, even wide open. Color is nice too. Lots of plastic but the build quality is top rate. Sony hit a home run with this lens, however why no lens shade?
I purchased this for my daughter but I may have to get one for myself as well. Way to go Sony.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 3 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Paul07   review date: July-01-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-70
Sony 18-250
KM 28-75

price paid:

€59

positive:

compact and light
color and sharpness
flare well controlled

negative:

cheap build quality - plastic mount (although way better than former kitlens !)

comment:

Compared to the previous kitlens, about everything has improved: i.e. better built, easy to use manual focus ring, better image quality (sharpness wide open has improved considerably and flare is very well controlled).
AF performance is good, definitely fast enough, and accurate.

Compared to the 28-75: sharpness is not up to the level of this f/2.8 lens (as expected), but colors of the 18-55 are nicer i.m.o. (a bit warmer). Obviously build quality of 28-75 is at a higher level, but so is price, weight and size ;-).

And finally, compared to the 18-250, the 18-55 shows less distortion, and sharpness wide open is better. AF is a bit faster and more silent also (although not much).

In summary, I think Sony did an outstanding job, redesigning the next generation kitlens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: CC   review date: July-01-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

CZ 16-80

price paid:

€ 49

positive:

Color
Price
Weight

negative:

Missing hood

comment:

Fast AF. Fantastic image quality for € 49.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Ivanhoe   review date: June-24-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

16-105
70-300G

price paid:

EUR 49

positive:

Price
Weight
Distortion

negative:

Construction
No hood
Plastic lens mount

comment:

This replacement of the 18-70 kit lens holds up very well. Image quality is quite good for a lens of this price range. The construction is very light. There is no hood supplied, the lens mount is plastic and the extending barrel shows some play, but you get what you pay for. There is some barrel distorion at 18mm but it is not too bad. The length of the lens does not change much when zooming.

The autofocus motor in the lens does what it has to do. Autofocus speed is pretty fast, but I don't really see the advantage compared to a screw driven lens: speed and noise are about the same. An SSM lens is vastly superior. I cannot escape the impression that the SAM is primarily for marketing purposes.

All in all a very good beginners lens or nice backup lens.