Hi. I’m super confused with this and Tamron 17-70 but Sony wins for all around purpose right? Good for travel? Or should I go straight to tamron for my first lens?
Me too. My conclusion is that the Sony is more suited to video shooters (power zoom, fixed lens extension for gimbal balance and fixed F 4.0, better AF iteration). But the Tameron is sharper and faster (F2.8). That said I still didn't make my mind on purchasing
Wow....just amazing. I brought a sony 6400 and was searching for a all rounder lence in a moderate price. Now I think i have found my go to go lence. ❤️
I recently bought the 18-105 mainly for photography. I loved the tele range, however I had to return mine as I was not happy with the sharpness of the images. I could not understand as I saw so many positive reviews on the internet. However, when I researched more I discovered that people are divided about the sharpness of this lens. What a pity, as this could have been my favourite mid tele. I also had the chance to use the Tamron 17-70. The pictures are much sharper and crisper. If you go into photography, I would recommend the Tamron. However it is 100 grams heavier.
Thank you Amanteyy, much appreciated! Most of the video was filmed with the Sony lens and the settings were Auto ISO, F4, 1/125. Thanks for watching! 👍🙌
hello I own the sigma 16&56 and I rarely use the 1.4 on my sigma 16 coz I shot most of the time landscape with this one, do you recommend me to switch for the 18 105 and sell my sigma 16 ? the quality of video and photo is good enough for you compare to the sigma 16 ? and last question 😅 do you fell 18 enough wider for landscape photography ? thank coz im bit confused 😀
Hi, this is a tough question to answer because the Sigma lens is so sharp and clear. I personally will be keeping both lenses because the Sigma does Amazing quality landscape photos and the Sony 18-105 does decent quality photos but not as crisp and clear as my Sigma.. but it's also much more versatile. As for the 18mm for landscape ..I personally think it works fine for landscape photography. Overall, I think both of these lenses are worth having in your collection. Hope this helps and thanks for watching!
Hi CJ7, for the Sony lens the lens hood model is ALC-SH128 and as for the Sigma lens hood the model is LH716-01. Hope this helps and thanks for watching!
Hi Paul. Great video. The 18-105 is sharper than I would have expected considering its quite an old lens now. Quick question. When the camera is pointing at your head, are you using and uplight or reflector out of shot? At around 01:00 your neck and under your chin is as bright as your forehead. It's a great look. Just wondering how you achieved it? - Peter. Subscribed to you today.
Hi Peter. Thanks for the sub and the kind words! Yes, it is a Very impressive lens for its age. I'm actually standing on a patch of dried yellow grass (in the sun) but my face is in the shade. This allows for the sun to reflect upwards off the grass and give me a free natural mother-nature light reflector, lol. You can see the grass and shade of my filming spot at 06:12 . Hope this makes sense. Thanks again
@@paulspursuit7650 Hi Paul - Yes that makes perfect sense and thank you for coming back to me so quickly. One last question (sorry).Firstly, I have watched many reviews on lenses that can work with the the Sony a6400 which I also own - (along with the Sigma 16mm). The 18-105 is most probably going to be my next purchase for when out and about. I notice the majority of other reviews are recorded in some kind of LOG profile for that "Cinematic" look and in my opinion get it so wrong when colour grading.. So, did you use the standard picture profile from within the camera and/or some special tweak in post production? Thanks again, Peter.
@@PeterMossUkulele I messed around with the different picture profiles in the beginning, but it just added too much work when it came to color grading. It already takes a really long time to make/edit a video and the last thing I want to have to do is spend more time editing, lol. So I am currently just keeping the picture profile off and doing minor color adjustments in Sony Vegas. Ill save the LOG Profiles for future video projects, maybe.
Would you say this lens is a worthwhile upgrade over the 16-50 kit lens. I have seen videos that say the two lenses are almost identical in terms of image quality so the main benefit would be the extra range and the constant f4. Appreciate your thoughts.
Hi Deric, I have owned both of these lenses and I would side with the 18-105 G-Series lens. The Sony 16-50 kit lens does have its benefits (small, zoom, OSS, price, etc.) but I feel the Sony 18-105 F4 G-Series is a much better all-around lens. I believe it is made of much higher quality components, it offers a much better focal range, and it is also a constant F4 aperture. I personally was not that impressed with the photo quality of the 16-50 kit lens, but I was with the 18-105 G-Series lens. I would consider the 16-50 a (2-in-1) lens, but the 18-105 is a (3-in-1) lens.. with much more to offer. Although it is still pricey, you can still find them for a good price on the secondary market. I purchased mine in MINT condition for $400 and I am very happy with my purchase. Hope this helps and thanks for watching!
I only have both 1650 and 18105. I found 18105 has inconsistent AF. Always focus on unwanted objects or just miss focus. I found 1650 kit lens more consistent in AF. I cant deny that 18105 stick on my camera most of the time due to the constant F4 and the zoom range it offer.
Thanks SK! I currently don't use any PP settings on my camera for my photos or videos. I don't want the extra color grading to deal with while editing my videos. I will use it if I end up creating any cool b-roll footage though. I do shoot all my photos in RAW and edit in LR. Hope this helps and thanks for watching!
Yes, this lens is good for street photography. I personally prefer my Sigma lens for street photography, but this lens would still work great as well 👍
The big trade-off that anyone buying this as an "all rounder" should be aware of is that f4 isn't quite good enough for indoor and low light photography. The determining factor should be whether you need that wide zoom range. If its a no, then there are much better options out there - like the Tamron 17-70mm or the Sony 16-55mm - both of which come with a faster f2.8 aperture and are much sharper than the 18-105. Personally, I don't see it as a good choice for your main lens or as a "do it all" all rounder kit lens replacement. F4 on a APSC crop factor just isn't good enough for those roles. Where it excels is as a lens that fills in gaps in your line-up. I like to shoot with primes but am a "hobbyist" so don't have the budget for more than 5 or 6 lenses (if you count the crappy kit lens), and have primes going from 9mm-50mm. Very few of my shots go beyond that range, but when I need it the 18-105 is a great "gap filler" - also its a great backup when I can only bring 2 or 3 lenses with me or if I stumble on a great shot that I didn't bring the right focal length prime for.
Hi. I’m super confused with this and Tamron 17-70 but Sony wins for all around purpose right? Good for travel? Or should I go straight to tamron for my first lens?
Me too. My conclusion is that the Sony is more suited to video shooters (power zoom, fixed lens extension for gimbal balance and fixed F 4.0, better AF iteration). But the Tameron is sharper and faster (F2.8). That said I still didn't make my mind on purchasing
Wow....just amazing. I brought a sony 6400 and was searching for a all rounder lence in a moderate price. Now I think i have found my go to go lence. ❤️
Yes it's a great combo! 😀
@@paulspursuit7650 Mine is Zve10. it doesn't have in body stabilization but this lens has oss which is great for the camera
I recently bought the 18-105 mainly for photography. I loved the tele range, however I had to return mine as I was not happy with the sharpness of the images. I could not understand as I saw so many positive reviews on the internet. However, when I researched more I discovered that people are divided about the sharpness of this lens. What a pity, as this could have been my favourite mid tele. I also had the chance to use the Tamron 17-70. The pictures are much sharper and crisper. If you go into photography, I would recommend the Tamron. However it is 100 grams heavier.
thank you, great review. hope the flies taste good at 5:39
have you used it for Live streaming. i got the Sony ZV E10 camera yesterday and planning to use 18-105mm f4
Sony 18 - 105 👍💜
Hi sir pls reply for me
Which lens is best for photography and videography
18-105 f4 sony
Or
Tamron 18-300 f 3.5-6.3
Great review. How is it in low light conditions?
Sir which camera u use in this video ? Pls reply. I am gonna purchase a camera.
nice and detailed in depth review.. good luck
Thank you! Much Appreciated
love this video, great review!! id like to ask what settings you used to shoot this video,
Thank you Amanteyy, much appreciated! Most of the video was filmed with the Sony lens and the settings were Auto ISO, F4, 1/125. Thanks for watching! 👍🙌
Nice review!, i also own a sony a6400 and i was planing in buying this lens, your video was really helpful!
I really like your review! The best is when you changed the camera to show us the difference
I just got the 18 105 and loving it!
Congrats on the new lens! Great choice 👍
hello I own the sigma 16&56 and I rarely use the 1.4 on my sigma 16 coz I shot most of the time landscape with this one, do you recommend me to switch for the 18 105 and sell my sigma 16 ? the quality of video and photo is good enough for you compare to the sigma 16 ? and last question 😅 do you fell 18 enough wider for landscape photography ? thank coz im bit confused 😀
Hi, this is a tough question to answer because the Sigma lens is so sharp and clear. I personally will be keeping both lenses because the Sigma does Amazing quality landscape photos and the Sony 18-105 does decent quality photos but not as crisp and clear as my Sigma.. but it's also much more versatile. As for the 18mm for landscape ..I personally think it works fine for landscape photography. Overall, I think both of these lenses are worth having in your collection. Hope this helps and thanks for watching!
@@paulspursuit7650 thank you so much for your honest answer !
Sony 18 105 is good for wedding photography?
Thanks
Hello Paul, I'm wondering what is the name of the lens hood models that you're using for both lenses?
Hi CJ7, for the Sony lens the lens hood model is ALC-SH128 and as for the Sigma lens hood the model is LH716-01. Hope this helps and thanks for watching!
Can I use this sony 18 105mm lens for vlogging , travel.video as well short film making ??
Yes, I think it works Great for all the filming that you mentioned. It's an excellent all around lens and very versatile.👍
Make a comparison video this lens with tamron 17-70 f2.8 . I am really confused to what should buy zoom lens.
Will do.. if I ever buy the Tamron lens in the future 👍
I'm super satisfied with beginning
Hi Paul. Great video. The 18-105 is sharper than I would have expected considering its quite an old lens now. Quick question. When the camera is pointing at your head, are you using and uplight or reflector out of shot? At around 01:00 your neck and under your chin is as bright as your forehead. It's a great look. Just wondering how you achieved it? - Peter. Subscribed to you today.
Hi Peter. Thanks for the sub and the kind words! Yes, it is a Very impressive lens for its age. I'm actually standing on a patch of dried yellow grass (in the sun) but my face is in the shade. This allows for the sun to reflect upwards off the grass and give me a free natural mother-nature light reflector, lol. You can see the grass and shade of my filming spot at 06:12 . Hope this makes sense. Thanks again
@@paulspursuit7650 Hi Paul - Yes that makes perfect sense and thank you for coming back to me so quickly. One last question (sorry).Firstly, I have watched many reviews on lenses that can work with the the Sony a6400 which I also own - (along with the Sigma 16mm). The 18-105 is most probably going to be my next purchase for when out and about.
I notice the majority of other reviews are recorded in some kind of LOG profile for that "Cinematic" look and in my opinion get it so wrong when colour grading..
So, did you use the standard picture profile from within the camera and/or some special tweak in post production?
Thanks again, Peter.
@@PeterMossUkulele I messed around with the different picture profiles in the beginning, but it just added too much work when it came to color grading. It already takes a really long time to make/edit a video and the last thing I want to have to do is spend more time editing, lol. So I am currently just keeping the picture profile off and doing minor color adjustments in Sony Vegas. Ill save the LOG Profiles for future video projects, maybe.
@@paulspursuit7650 Just keep doing what you are doing........
Would you say this lens is a worthwhile upgrade over the 16-50 kit lens. I have seen videos that say the two lenses are almost identical in terms of image quality so the main benefit would be the extra range and the constant f4. Appreciate your thoughts.
Hi Deric, I have owned both of these lenses and I would side with the 18-105 G-Series lens. The Sony 16-50 kit lens does have its benefits (small, zoom, OSS, price, etc.) but I feel the Sony 18-105 F4 G-Series is a much better all-around lens. I believe it is made of much higher quality components, it offers a much better focal range, and it is also a constant F4 aperture. I personally was not that impressed with the photo quality of the 16-50 kit lens, but I was with the 18-105 G-Series lens. I would consider the 16-50 a (2-in-1) lens, but the 18-105 is a (3-in-1) lens.. with much more to offer. Although it is still pricey, you can still find them for a good price on the secondary market. I purchased mine in MINT condition for $400 and I am very happy with my purchase. Hope this helps and thanks for watching!
@@paulspursuit7650 yes this definitely helps and I appreciate the feedback. Looks like I’ll be making a purchase soon haha
I only have both 1650 and 18105. I found 18105 has inconsistent AF. Always focus on unwanted objects or just miss focus. I found 1650 kit lens more consistent in AF. I cant deny that 18105 stick on my camera most of the time due to the constant F4 and the zoom range it offer.
@@junyangchin8162 because of your camera?
@@MobileCanal no... I do have other lenses as well
Nice.. Can u please share what is the pp setting of the photos please.
Thanks SK! I currently don't use any PP settings on my camera for my photos or videos. I don't want the extra color grading to deal with while editing my videos. I will use it if I end up creating any cool b-roll footage though. I do shoot all my photos in RAW and edit in LR. Hope this helps and thanks for watching!
did you consider the sony 18-135? some reviews say it has better sharpness
Hey, when I zoom my focus lost place and didn't fit. Even with Follow Focus. Any suggestions?
What's the camera that you use in this video
Hi Yousef, I'm using the Sony A6400 camera. Thanks for watching!
Can I use this for sony 7m4??
Is it a good lens for street photography
Yes, this lens is good for street photography. I personally prefer my Sigma lens for street photography, but this lens would still work great as well 👍
Cool!
The bird was bumping along to the tune.
Saludos,
Tengo una Sony A6000, ¿alguien puede confirmar que esta lente sony 18-105 f4 no permite compensación de lente/distorsión?
Gracias.
good video bro keep going
Thanks man! Much Appreciated!
Vivid?
Yes 👍
Sony colors are much better
I Agree 👍
The big trade-off that anyone buying this as an "all rounder" should be aware of is that f4 isn't quite good enough for indoor and low light photography.
The determining factor should be whether you need that wide zoom range. If its a no, then there are much better options out there - like the Tamron 17-70mm or the Sony 16-55mm - both of which come with a faster f2.8 aperture and are much sharper than the 18-105.
Personally, I don't see it as a good choice for your main lens or as a "do it all" all rounder kit lens replacement. F4 on a APSC crop factor just isn't good enough for those roles. Where it excels is as a lens that fills in gaps in your line-up. I like to shoot with primes but am a "hobbyist" so don't have the budget for more than 5 or 6 lenses (if you count the crappy kit lens), and have primes going from 9mm-50mm. Very few of my shots go beyond that range, but when I need it the 18-105 is a great "gap filler" - also its a great backup when I can only bring 2 or 3 lenses with me or if I stumble on a great shot that I didn't bring the right focal length prime for.
Wow
so distracting that you're looking at the screen instead of the lens