Sony DT 16-50mm F2.8 SSM A-mount lens reviews
 Bodian#45625 date: Dec-23-2020 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 3 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-50 Sony Kit Lenses Quite a lot of Minolta lenses. |
| price paid: | £175 |
| positive: | Sharp Sharp |
| negative: | White Balance needs to be set as Auto in lightroom - bit too cool otherwise |
| comment: | First review on Dyxum. Used on A77ii When I bought my first DSLR 11 years ago it came with the Sony kit lens (18-55 or something). Which was 'okay'. I then bought the Tamron 17-50 and was amazed at the difference in sharpness. But, I have felt an odd feeling of something 'not quite as good as it was' since I upgraded from the A580 to the A77ii. It's taken me a long time to 'upgrade' to the SAL1650. Although only an amateur, without any scientific analysis - this lens is pretty amazing. Just enlarging images to 1:1 in Lightroom and comparing the sony and tamron (photos taken of the same thing at same focal length, seconds apart) shows that the sony is sharper in every single photo (I did quite a lot). Not so sure about the WB colours, but if you set your import preset in Lightroom to auto, it sorts it out. Bit bigger and heavier - makes it more difficult to fit in my bag - but then I love buying new kit bags, so I'll just have to do that!! Still not quite convinced it's 'better' than my Minolta 35-105, but I think I have an especially good copy of that lens, and the improvement in reach from 35 to 16 is immense. |
| A68noob#45619 date: Dec-5-2020 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Zeiss 16-80 |
| price paid: | 200€ |
| positive: | + center sharpness is always epic across the entire FL even at F2,8 (on par even with minolta 50mm macro - sick!) + very useful range + fast AF + best standard zoom for alphas (considering the price to zeiss) + good portrait potential at 50mm F2,8 and in general very good to isolate objects, thanks to 2,8 (most important thing to me) + zoom lock.. but why? + thanks to F2,8 also very usable at overcast weather + especially 2nd hand, even in mint condition, very good price/performance + good, solid build |
| negative: | - 50mm feel like 45mm (certainly a very noticable difference compared to 50mm primes) - strong focusbreathing (a 50mm macro is highly recommended in your lineup to overcome this, as the magnification is poor) - often unreliable AF to lock on targets (even at good light and landscapes - especially at 16mm [maybe it is caused by SLT, as testing on older DSLR went better]) - some purple CA wide open and stopped down to F8 it will turn into red abberations (not as horrible as a beercan ofc, but often still noticeable) - questionable bokeh in some ways (i would call it mobilephone bokeh to a certain degree) - very questionable flare control at lower FL - corner sharpness not the best, considering of how sharp it is in center - not the lightest standard zoom, but tolerated considering build and F2,8 |
| comment: | I'm torn. On one hand this is the best standard zoom you can get, but on the other one you can still expect quite some (heavy) flaws. I own two examples and both of them are identical.. and both of them make me laugh. Why? Because this lens features a zoom lock. Great, isnt it? Well.. both lenses are stiff (not in a bad way) and therefore dont need any lock whatsoever.. but meanwhile huge lenses like 70-300 & 70-400 SSM dont have one. Sony'd once again.. Tested on A68 & A77ii - great pictures on both. On A580 it seems like a kit lens to me (IQ wise).. maybe the 16MP sensor is just poor. The only reason not to choose this over the CZ1680 is the loss of ~35mm FL, as it is quite short at 50mm - otherwise better in every regard. I wish i would have never bought the Zeiss and went straight to this lens - many opportunities wasted. The useful range of this lens eliminates wide-angle and multiple primes from your lens bag. Pair it with a decent 70-200 + a small macro and you are able to have a lot of fun and cover almost all needs without much trouble. Recommended! |
| Kopipapa#45587 date: Sep-17-2020 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | KM 18-70, Sony 18-55 SAM2, Minolta 35-70F4 |
| price paid: | 300 USD |
| positive: | Color, sharpness. |
| negative: | Zoom ring, hard to adjust. |
| comment: | It produces the best color of my lenses. Sharp is fine. My sample suffers with the zoom ring, a little hard to zoom with. A bit too large for a A58. |
| MarkoB#44416 date: Nov-10-2019 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony - AF DT 16-105 F3.5-5.6 (+ A700, 12MP) Sigma - 10-20 F4-5.6 EX DC (quite good lens, too) Sony - AF 70-400 F4-5.6 G SSM (not so good...) |
| price paid: | 600 euros (as a kit) |
| positive: | Quite compact size for a F/2.8 zoom. Sharpest zoom lens I have ever used. One of the very few lenses capable of taking sharp photos with the SLT-A77 (24 MP APS-C). Very useful zoom range (24-75 mm equivalent) - it covered about 90 % of my needs and I never really missed the longer range of the 16-105 mm I previously owned. |
| negative: | The usual stuff, the lens hood does not help much, there's a little bit of distortion and vignetting. Build could also be better - it does not look or feel like a top quality lens. |
| comment: | Much better lens than the 16-105. Faster, sharper. |
| Dotsch#44298 date: May-18-2019 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 24/2,8 Minolta 28/2,8 Minolta 50/1,7 Minolta 100/2,8 Macro Sigma 300/4,0 Minolta 28-35/3,5-4,5 Minollta 35-70/4,0 |
| price paid: | unknown |
| positive: | - Good build quality - Sharp |
| negative: | - Heavy |
| comment: | Good lens |
| Jack-Eden#44259 date: Apr-17-2019 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Zeiss Pancolar 1.8/50 Zeiss Tessar 2.8/50 Pentacon 2.8/135 Tokina 2.8/11-16 Sony 2.8/16-50 Sony DT 1.8/35 Sony DT 3.5-6.3/18-200 Minolta 1.4/50 Minolta 1.7/50 Minolta Macro 2.8/50 Minolta 35-70 f4 Minolta Beercan 28-135 Minolta Beercan 28-85 Minolta 70-210, 3.5-4.5 Minolta 100-300, 4.5-5.6 APO Minolta 100-400, 4.5-6.6 APO |
| price paid: | 450 Euro |
| positive: | Very sharp, great Colours, water protected, fast |
| negative: | Weight, at higher temperatures stiff zoom through seal, expensive |
| comment: | The best walk around lens which I have. The Tamron 2.8/ 17-50 is nearly good and lens expensive. |
| Milan33m#44242 date: Mar-14-2019 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | MAF 28-70 F 2.8, MAF 28-135 F. 4.0-4.5, SAL 18-55 SAM, |
| price paid: | ca.280 EUR |
| positive: | Well built, not so heavy, SSM motor, sharp, wide range angle view, nice colours. F 2.8. |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | Nice everyday walkaround lens, not so heavy, with SSM very useful, wide range angle view. Even more sharp and useful than MAF 28-70 F 2.8 and MAF 28-135. Very usefull on A77. Try to get your example and try. |
| Phil Wood#44136 date: Sep-25-2018 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Zooms: Sigma 10-20, Tamron 16-300, Sony DT18-55 SAM (I & II), DT18-70, DT18-250; Minolta 24-50, 24-85 and many more; Primes: Minolta 20, 24, 28, 50 f1.4, 50 f1.7, 50 f2.8, 50 f3.5, Sony DT30, DT35, DT50. |
| price paid: | GBP 240 |
| positive: | Sharp, great auto-focus (quick & quiet), price, f2.8, weather sealed. |
| negative: | A bit short, a bit heavy |
| comment: | I love this lens, the only real drawback is the relatively short tele end, it would be so nice to go to 85 or 105 - but the quality of images I get make it worth carrying another lens on walkabout. My copy came from ebay with a set of Hoya filters (UV, CPL, ND2, ND4, ND8, ND16 & ND100) - the filters alone would have cost more to buy new. In comparison with my other lenses it is the 16mm end that makes it stand out - it's amazing how much 2mm at that end transforms the usefulness of a lens, but it also blows away any opposition from the other Sony kit lenses on image quality (and the 18-55 II is a pretty good lens). I still need the Sigma 10-20 from time to time, but it cannot match the 16-50 so it's become a 10-16 for me. The only other zoom I have that gets as much use is the Tamron 16-300, which is also a very fine lens - its extra reach makes it my holiday lens of choice. Comparing the 16-50 against primes is more of an even field - it is hard to see much difference in sharpness at 24 and 28mm (but they do have Minolta colours), it is better than my 50 f1.7 (not a great copy), similar to the DT50, not quite as sharp as the DT30, 50 f2.8 and 3.5 macros and the DT35 f1.8 has it beat for speed as well as being slightly sharper. I still like to shoot with primes, it concentrates the mind more, but lenses like the 16-50 make a very strong case for zooms. Macro performance is nothing special, but it's not bad. If Sony's more expensive zooms are better than this lens then I can only wish that I could afford them! I have given this lens 5 in all categories, not because it is perfect, but because it is the best I have seen. It's sharpness is close to or better than many primes, it clearly deserves '5 for a zoom'; its colour may not be 'Minolta' but it's pretty accurate; it may not be built to last in the manner of the beercan era, but it seems robust and the weather sealing is a big plus; I have seen reports of irregular distortion, which would be a worry if I had seen it (perhaps the A58 & A77 bodies I have used it on correct it - I shall try it on earlier bodies and update this review), regular distortion is a) expected at wide angle and b) so easy to fix in PP that I don't worry about it; it is possible to get flare with the sun in frame, I would have put 4.5 if I could. UPDATE 11-8-19 Having adjusted microfocus my 50mm f1.7 is able to challenge this zoom for sharpness, whereas further experience with the 28mm f2.8 has convinced me that it is no match for this zoom. |
| sonysnob#43015 date: Feb-14-2018 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | CZ 16-80 |
| price paid: | included in kit |
| positive: | Very sharp lens, even stopped down. Fast and quiet SSM motor, pretty usable range (24-75 equivalent). Accurate autofocus |
| negative: | heavy |
| comment: | This is my favourite lens for the sony alpha a-mount system. Although the lens is fairly heavy it does balance well on the Alpha 77 ii. |
| keith_h#43012 date: Feb-11-2018 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 16-105, Sigma 8-16 (borderline) |
| price paid: | aud$500 -ish |
| positive: | Sharp, fast. |
| negative: | None I can think of. |
| comment: | This is Steve's old lens and I agree with his assessment. I'm using it on an a700 as a companion to either 80-200 or 70-300 (I use two cameras at a time). It's used primarily for events where it replaces the 16-105 and so you really need to pick the moment to use it. With the 16-105, the additional length improved versatility - but this is a thing I will get used to no doubt. On the other hand when the light is bad, this lens will get better shots than the 16-105 even with a flash. I did take it on holidays for a few weeks where the extra stops made it possible to take images hand held that would not have been possible with the 16-105, and there is no vignetting at the wide end. I like it a lot, its getting plenty of use and the images it creates are great. |
| steve14#39916 date: Aug-10-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-55 Tamron 28-75 2.8 Minolta 35-105 |
| price paid: | $500 used in 2012 |
| positive: | Fast f2.8 Very sharp Quiet and quick focusing Great color and contrast Weather sealed Built like a tank |
| negative: | Distortion in portraits Sometimes tricky flare Nothing else! |
| comment: | This is a great lens that served me well for five years. I was always happy with the sharpness and contrast, the images just had a real nice look to them. Worked great on my a55, a77, and a77ii, but I had trouble with focusing accuracy on my a580. The weather sealing is excellent, it held up through downpours, use on the beach and on sand dunes without major issues. I notice quite a bit of distortion on the wide end which even when "fixed" in body or in lightroom still isn't perfect, especially if people are in the shot. Not as much of an issue at 50mm. The bulk of the lens actually feels good, not too much and good balance on the a77. I would buy it again if I went back to aps-c. |
| Munofoto#39910 date: Aug-6-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | None |
| price paid: | 600 $Can |
| positive: | Great lens! I use it as a complement to a Sigma 24-70 f2.8. Not a cheap lens (almost 1 000 $Can). Cost less if bought as a bundle with an a77 MKII (-300 $Can). Distortion normal for a wide lens and easily corrected with Lightroom. |
| negative: | None |
| comment: | A must have for events photographer. |
| Afzal Khan#38893 date: Jul-1-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-55mm and 18-70mm |
| price paid: | 550 |
| positive: | Versatile, well build and good image quality. |
| negative: | Stiff zoom, heavy and distrotion in 16mm also bit soft in 50mm. Wish it made for Full Frame. |
| comment: | Must buy day to day lens for every crop user. |
| Afzal Khan#38892 date: Jul-1-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-55mm and 18-70mm |
| price paid: | 550 |
| positive: | Versatile, well build and good image quality. |
| negative: | Stiff zoom, heavy and distrotion in 16mm also bit soft in 50mm. Wish it made for Full Frame. |
| comment: | Must buy day to day lens for every crop user. |
| Gerrold#38864 date: May-21-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 35mm f1.8 Sony 50mm f1.8 Minolta 35-105mm Minolta 100mm f2.8 Tamron 70-200mm USD f2.8 Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 Minolta 70-210mm f4 |
| price paid: | 600 |
| positive: | Very sharp, very fast, very accurate, very solid. |
| negative: | Noticeable barrel distortion at short end, but corrects easily in Lightroom. |
| comment: | This is a high performing and very well built lens. It stays on my A77 ii most of the time. It's very sharp, so much I often have to soften portraits. I use it for landscapes, the occasional portrait, and for walking around. For Sony cropped sensors, I consider this lens essential. It does have significant barrel distortion at the short end, but Lightroom easily corrects. I rarely if ever have any chromatic distortion issues. This is a terrific lens, one of my favorites. |
| wiewior#36819 date: Apr-4-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | s18-55 |
| price paid: | 400 |
| positive: | build, sharpness, colors, AF |
| negative: | sharpness at 45-50/2.8 |
| comment: | great lens, great sharpness at 16-40/2.8 in center, quick and accurate AF, good colors and contrast |
| Litejk#33750 date: Jan-9-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-55 kit KM 18-70kit Tamron 28-75 F2.8 Sigma 18-50 F2.8-4.5 |
| price paid: | 270 |
| positive: | Very sharp Fast AF Quiet Nice and big Locked aperture |
| negative: | Extends during zooming Maybe a bit heavy(But that feels good) Some AF hunting Not for FF(obviously) |
| comment: | Love it. Almost makes the 50mm F1.7 useless(I use it only when the extra light is needed) Good build quality with weather-sealing. ANd it looks awesome. Shame the equal lens for FF(16-35) cost incredible money. When I get a FF I will actually use this in APS-C-crop mode with the FF. |
| amarston22#30696 date: Oct-2-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina AT-X Pro II 11-16/2.8 Tokina AT-X 17/3.5 Sony DT 18-55/3.5-5.6 Minolta 35-70/4 Minolta 50/1.4 Minolta 50/2.8 Macro Sigma DC HSM II 18-200/3.5-6.3 Sigma EX DC 30/1.4 Various vintage M42 lenses |
| price paid: | $315 used |
| positive: | Exceptionally sharp Constant 2.8 SSM focus 24-75mm equivalent full frame range Build quality |
| negative: | Not internally zooming Wasn't free |
| comment: | This lens is my savior! I do nightlife photography on the weekends, and have been using my Tokina 11-16/2.8 in combination with a Sigma 30/1.4 on my a77II, and being limited to either super-wide or near-portraiture views was killing me. This lens has provided the very handy and very needed 24-75mm range that is so hard to get with APS-C. The results were nearly astounding. This lens is surprisingly sharp, even wide open. On par with my primes, and outperforms any other zooms I own, with the exception of maybe the Tokina 11-16. The only prime I own that I can say is definitively sharper is the 50/2.8 Macro. There is little chromatic aberration, but some. Distortion is noticeable, but easily corrected in post, and the ACR/Lightroom correction profile is spot on. Color rendition is beautiful, and contrast is so much better than anything else I've owned. Bokeh is smooth and pleasing, with rounded aperture blades. The image quality overall is something like I'd expect from a G lens, or at the very least, a Sony Zeiss lens. I have only owned this lens for a few days but I am already in love with it. SSM focusing is very fast, accurate, and much quieter than any screw-drive lens. I have seen people complain about the noise of it, but my Sigma HSM lens is no better. I have had backfocus issues with the Tokina while I'm shooting in the extremely low light, and so far I have not had any such issues with this lens. A common complaint about this lens is that it is heavy, and it is. Significantly heavier than the Tokina, which is all metal construction as well. This is not a con to me. In this case, weight = quality, and this lens screams quality. It is solid and does not rattle. Zoom and focus rings are well damped and secure. The zoom ring is a bit on the tight side for my preference, but it's certainly not bad, and I will never worry about zoom creep. The focus ring is geared (not at a 1:1 ratio with the focus itself), and does not rotate with SSM focusing. There is not much bad to say about this lens. I do wish it was internally zooming, but it doesn't extend much and it doesn't really bother me. Hmm, what else? It isn't f/1.2 and it doesn't spit money out at me I guess, but I have nothing to truly complain about. In short, BUY THIS LENS! |
| QuietOC#30688 date: Sep-24-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony E 16-50 F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony DT 16-80 F3.5-4.5 Vario-Sonnar Sony DT 16-105 F3.5-5.6 Sigma 17-50 F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Tamron SP 17-50 F2.8 XR Di Sony E 18-55 F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony DT 18-55 F3.5-5.6 SAM I/II Sony DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 Sony DT 18-135 F3.5-5.6 SAM Canon EF 22-55 F4-5.6 USM Sony FE 24-105 F4 G OSS Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 Di III RXD Sony 28-75 F2.8 SAM Tamron SP 28-75mm F2.8 XR Di Tokina 28-80 F2.8 AT-X Pro |
| price paid: | 298 USD (used) |
| positive: | Internal focus Non-rotating filter/hood Non-rotating focus ring in AF Good contrast Very sharp even in the corners on the wide end In-body lens compensation Fast communication with A77 and newer bodies |
| negative: | Size and weight Clutched manual focus control Fairly heavy and uneven zoom mechanism Extends with zoom Weak at long end Distortion at wide end Focus drift with zoom Focus breathing Minor AF noise Expensive hood |
| comment: | A very clean copy with both original caps but no hood purchased from another forum member. I found a used hood and added it to the cost. This lens is currently on sale for $750 new and is one of the kit lens options for the A77 bodies. The optical design is similar to the older Tamron SP 17-50 mm F2.8 XR Di-II LD SP Aspherical. "MADE IN CHINA" It is a bit strange this lens didn't get the G designation. Not only is this the best normal APS-C zoom. It is also one of the best wide angle lenses. It is sharper the the E-mount 16, 19, and 20 F2.8 primes. It is sharper than the Minolta 20, 24, and 28 mm primes. It is pretty much as sharp as the DT 30 F2.8 and 35 F1.8 lenses. It is even sharp wide-open at the long end, though it has more optical problems on that end. It seems to be very similar to the Tamron SP 17-50 F2.8, but the differences make a better lens. This lens is much sharper wide-open and the focus plane is much flatter at the wide end. It is wider than the Tamron on both ends--more like a 15-48 mm. The field-of-view at the long end is similar to the DT 50mm F1.8 prime. It does often show lateral CA in the corners, but that is easily corrected. The distortion at the wide end is similar to the 16-80 and 16-105 lenses. The actual focal length of all of these seems to be less than 16 mm, perhaps to allow for the cropping involved in the distortion correction. Like other cheap zoom lenses the focus drifts a bit with zoom action, so it is not perfectly parfocal. The SSM clunks into position a little un-silently. Like the Sony 18-135 the AF switch on the lens is redundant. Sony could have put a focus hold button and/or a range limiter or something useful there instead. There is also a Tamron standard issue barrel lock switch. Overall a very nice kit lens and a great reason to own an A-mount APS-C camera. Image quality is better than the little primes with the size and weight being the drawback for the convenience of zoom. This is also one of only two DT lenses with a lens profile in Capture One 8. Test chart comparison with Tamron 17-50 F2.8, Carl Zeiss 16-80, Sony DT 18-135 SAM, and primes. |
| Dena#26573 date: May-4-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 18-270mm, Minolta 50mm f1.7, Sony 35mm 1.8 |
| price paid: | $300 USD (used) |
| positive: | Sharp, Fast, Well Built. Very sharp for a zoom. |
| negative: | Some distortion at the wide end, easily corrected in post. Some flare. |
| comment: | Sharp lens that focuses fast, even in low light. Wonderful on the a77ii. I took some photos of my dogs playing ball at 12fps. Lens had no trouble keeping up with focus during fast action. Flare is definitely an issue if pointed near the sun. If a UV filter is used, make sure it's of good quality. I bought this used and it had a Hoya UV filter. Flare was nothing short of atrocious. I got a better filter and the flare was greatly diminished. |
| jacksprat#26569 date: Apr-27-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] Autofocus Lens |
| price paid: | $389 in 2015 |
| positive: | Nothing else to add that hasn't already been said |
| negative: | Perhaps a bit heavy on the A77 |
| comment: | It's a better lens overall than the Tamron 17-50. Plus when shooting jpeg, corrections are made by the camera. HOWEVER, I've had this lens over a year and the zoom ring has not loosened up ; it's stiff - and even after hundreds of intentional back and forth movements, it's still so stiff as to 'bind' during slow movements. I am not able to smoothly zoom while taking a video - there are several spots where the zoom ring is 'sticky'. Since this was a white box special at a good price, maybe that was the reason for the deal.. I've tried a touch of lubrication under the rubber zoom ring and at the back end of the lens where the zoom cover meets the inner mount of the main tube. That has helped some, but overall, this really detracts from an otherwise great lens. If you're buying one, beware.. |
| Montago#25513 date: Mar-1-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 2 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony Carl Zeiss - 16-80 F3.5-4.5 Sony 50 F1.4 |
| price paid: | 4000 DKK |
| positive: | - RAZOR SHARP from 2.8 at 16mm, and F3.5 at 50mm - Anti creep lock - Fast SSM focus motor - Near silent focus - VERY close focus distance (10-15cm) !! - Bokeh is quite nice |
| negative: | - A little heavy (compared to Zeiss 16-80) - Flare is bad (based on reviews, i've only shot 500 photos so far) |
| comment: | I don't know if I'm just lucky, but this lense is razor sharp from 2.8 and onwards. My Zeiss 16-80 broke after aprox 30.000 photos, the focus simply cracked inside the lens :( - so i went out and bought this lense as a replacement, I'm sad i didn't do so sooner :( This lens is MUCH MUCH better than my Zeiss, i usually had to stop down the zeiss so much that it was unusable in low light - typically 4.5 at 16mm to get really sharp, and F7 at 80mm :( Bokeh is excellent.. I fear that i'll never use my 50/1.4 again :-/ |
| Collingsandheal#20385 date: Oct-18-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF20. Sigma super wide 2. Minolta AF28f2. Minolta AF35f2. Zeiss FE2,8/35. Minolta AF50. Sigma 50mm f1:4. Zeiss FE1,8/55. Sony 2.8/85 SAM. Minolta AF135. |
| price paid: | £360.00 |
| positive: | Sharp, fast and looks great. Very well built. Sharp everywhere. Weather proof. |
| negative: | not full frame. Not really any sharper than 16-105 |
| comment: | I love this lens but not as much as I would if it was full frame. |
| Reinhold_1#12213 date: Mar-28-2015 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Various Minolta and Sony lenses. |
| price paid: | 529,00 € |
| positive: | Sharp, quieter and faster AF thanks SSM, useful initial aperture (f2.8), protected from the weather, good addition to a telephoto zoom. |
| negative: | A little bulky, be restricted to FF. |
| comment: | Very useful lens on the go, thanks to the relatively large maximum aperture very versatile. The slight weakness in the distortion is compensated by the automatic correction of the camera! Overall: Highly recommended! |
| ifreedman#12058 date: Dec-12-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-135, Tamron 17-50, several prime lenses, etc. |
| price paid: | 440 |
| positive: | Great images, especially for a zoom. Fast f/2.8 aperture. Good zoom range, especially on the wide end. Weatherproofing. Awesome SSM focusing - quiet and smooth and includes DMF, which I love. It's also really good for video b/c of quiet motor. |
| negative: | It's size and weight. It's not huge, but it's bigger than most walk-around zooms. It also has some distortion on the wide end. |
| comment: | I don't review lenses as often as I should, but I feel a compulsion to review this one because it's such a great lend! This is the best walk-around lens I've found, and quite honestly one of the things keeping me with an APS-C camera instead of going to FF. It's not perfect, but it's really good for so many things. Renders images really quite nicely -- not as good as some primes and not quite as nice as some of the Zeiss zooms, but really excellent overall, especially given its max aperture and the fact that it's a zoom. I've stopped using the Sony 35 1.8 altogether because of this lens. In terms of IQ, it's a little bit better than other options like Tamron 17-50, but not hugely better. However all the little things -- the extra range, the awesome focusing, weather proofing, etc. -- make this really worthwhile. I use this a lot for indoor shots, family shots, portraits, landscapes. It's good for almost anything. The f/2.8 aperture is awesome and makes this lens so versatile. I like rotating lenses, so I'm sometimes disappointed that I'm so drawn to use this lens so often. |
| jkp1#11932 date: Aug-3-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 1 flare control: 4 overall: 3.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 17-35 minolta 16-35 Zeiss AF28-75f2.8 and others |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Weight and size is good, so is sharpness. AF is good and noiseless |
| negative: | Colors are ok, but not like good old minolta-ones. Build quality is lacking. The use of focus and zoom ring goes too stiff, make subtle adjustments somehow hard, as the rings sticks/release. The lens was made also for video use, but the stiff and sticky rings makes it troublesome to use either manual AF and zoom during video recording. The fact that somebody invented in-body lens corrections made the reason for this lens to be awkward in the distortion across all focal length. Distortion is well handled if - and only if - you happen to have a camera with in-body correction, but/and only if you are a jpeg-shooter. RAW-shooters are left in the shadow. And do you know what ? Sometimes the in-camera correction makes a mess. Somebody is of the opinion, that the distortion is easily handled in post processing, but no. Not many softwares make the correct correction, and it takes power out of your expensive computer and give us less freedom to choose software for pp. About noise...the aperture is noisy, easily shadows the sound of the shutter itself. Just compare noise at f2.8 and fx. f16 ! Sharpness with small apertures is devastating. |
| comment: | I really hope Sony would make a lens like this, but without this complex form of distortion. Good old barrel or pincushion is hand-able, but not this complex wavy distortion. I gave the lens low score for the build quality due to distortion, the sticky adjustment rings and the noisy aperture, and the lack of sharpness in smaller range of aperture is making the whole build quality wacky. And a question: For what use is a lock-lever on a lens, if it can only lock it in wide ? If the lens have creep it could be useful, but for only locking wide ? Usable if it was possible to lock in any position. |
| stavros78#11904 date: Jul-14-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina 11-16mm F2.8 AT-X 116 PRO DX-II Sony Carl Zeiss 16-80 F3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | 400 euro used |
| positive: | f/2.8, sharpness, build, fast focus |
| negative: | distortion in raw but easily corrected in post processing |
| comment: | excellent lens,very good sharpness at 2,8 sharp at 3.5 - 5.6 ,distortion in raw but easily corrected in post processing , perfect on a77 ,lens correction +1 |
| Mark_k#11771 date: Apr-15-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 3.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 16-80ZA |
| price paid: | 600 |
| positive: | Sharp, inexpensive, low profile |
| negative: | Nobody knows it |
| comment: | Came as kit and is a super buy. Unless you are buying a Sigma 18-35f1.8 |
| kankushok#11761 date: Apr-13-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17-50mm Minolta 50mm f1.7 |
| price paid: | with kit |
| positive: | -well built -fast and silent focus -lovely colors and 'rendition' -sharp |
| negative: | -distortion in raw was a problem (LR5.4 now has a profile so it's not an issue any more) -a little drop off in sharpness in the corners -significant vignetting at 16mm f2.8. |
| comment: | This lens replaced my tamron 17-50mm. The sharpness is on par with the tamron, which is already good. However, bokeh, color, build, and af are all much better than the tamron. The sharpness on the lens is pretty good. I'd say it's on par with the minolta 50mm at f2.8. This lens has basically replaced the 50 mm prime, because I like it's renditions for portraiture better, and the 50mm isn't really sharp until f2.8 anyways. The distortions and vignetting are really its only weakness. However, LR5.4 now has profiles to correct them. |
| JimmyMelbourne#11683 date: Feb-6-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tamron 17 - 50 2.8 |
| price paid: | 390 CHF (Used) |
| positive: | Sharp wide open Sharper at 3.5 SSM Weather resistant In body distortion corrections for A77 Great for video, silent Fast AF |
| negative: | Distortion without corrections can be heavy on the wide end |
| comment: | The Sony is sharper wide open compared with the Tamron. The Sony is fast to AF, almost silent. Colours to me seem better than the Tamron. Tamron is also sharp but needs stopping down to 3.5 - 4. My feeling is the sony is sharper. Add to the Sony SSM, weather sealing, video support, it is a worthy upgrade to the Tamron. Great lens. |
rating summary
- total reviews: 101
- sharpness: 4.74
- color: 4.68
- build: 4.83
- distortion: 4.13
- flare control: 4.44
- overall: 4.56
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login