Regardless of feelings about this lens, the format of this review is very well done. Rather than filming his own talking face for 80% of the review (like most reviewers) Mr. Frost choose to voice over actual supporting evidence of all the points he was making. I think other RUclips Reviewers should take note.
I used this lens in few years now and i must say that there is nothing like it for travel and video on the go. I really love this lens. With Sony fantastic digital zoom you can go to 300mm eq with this little lens. Which is 12x zoom. There is no smartphone that can do that at this quality.
While unlike the general "hate" for this lens, I think it's small size is a bonus that enables you to be compact and lightweight. I mean is that the reason why to shoot mirrorless in the first place?! I know it may not win awards but the 16-50 kit lens is pretty unique in its portability and practically.
Mike D better access to af tech (hybrid solutions), evf, large raw buffer, image stabilization, better access to video centric tech. I personally like dslr sized mirrorless cameras. Dslrs just feel nicer in the hand
It's not a perfect lens if you look at the individual features but it's a perfect lens overall. You really do everything with it without having to change lenses and without carrying around a backpack full of stuff. I will never sell it!
Great review. Sums up why I find the lens both indispensable and why I don't use it much. I really wish Sony had a kit lens alternative for E-mount without going to the $$$$ 16-70 Zeiss and absurdly large 18-105PZ. It is excellent for video and travel though, but I tend to use my Sigma 19mm+FE 28/2+50/1.8 OSS combo more often due to the 1650PZ's sacrifice in image quality.
I am also puzzled by why Sony hasn't seen fit to update the 16-50, as its design dates back to the earliest NEX-series cameras, which had maximum resolutions of 14 and 16MP. But I guess there's no money in do-it-all pancake lenses, Sony would rather position itself as the Mercedes or BMW of the camera world and charge big dollars instead.
This lens may not be the greatest, but for me it is really useful to have. On those occasions when you are just taking casual JPEG shots (family and friend gatherings etc) it transforms the a6000 or a6300 into something akin to an easy to carry around compact point and shoot and is less intimidating to people than something like the 18-105. In those circumstances some corner softness is usually not significant in practice and, since distortion is handled in-camera, it's a non-issue. Practical lens for amateur casual use.
Your thoroughness and insight are brilliant, good sir. Thank you, kindly... the info you've painstakingly provided is super valuable to people like me who are researching this very subject... Thanks again!
The point about this lens to me is that it makes for a pretty incredible pocket camera. It's just tiny yet performs well in both photo and video with very few fatal weaknesses. EVERY SINGLE supposedly better lens than this one is 2, 3, 4, 5 times as big. And that just ruins the pocketability of the package. I mean, by all means, get a nice fast prime or a big old honking zoom, but I will still geek out at having a phenomenal capable camera that can get the shot making a small bulge in a coat pocket.
I have S23 ultra and have just ordered a6700 with this kit lens. Well, the reviews in looking at web , I would guess, is on par with s23 ultra. Will do comparison pics after I recieve the camera. I do want to keep the lens because of its size. But if it's just equal to my phone than not worth it.
Very good and to the point clear review. Thanks for this. And its nice to see that you traveled to Turkey and get a beautiful shot of Izmir from the ancient lift.
I owned and tried into total 9 lenses, both for Canon EOS R10 and a6700. I can say without doubt this is the lens I have had the most fun with. It's crazy light, thanks to the PZ it "remembers" the focal length if you turn on/off the camera. Also because of the lack of a separate zoom/focus ring it also makes me shoot manual which makes me more mindful about composition and such. This is a lens that only leaves my bag when it's on my camera, unlike the heavier lenses I own
You should test also this first copy of your lens, becouse in my opinion this model has really problem with quality (5 different lenses will have 5 different images quality). My lens has image quality similar to your first copy, so it was immposible to use it becouse of images quality. Your second copy of this lens looks really good as a kit lens, I am really surprised that this model can produce such nice and sharp images. I bougth sigma 18-50 2.8 and now my pictures are always clear and sharp:). Your youtube channel is really valuable.
Very nicely done. Specially the part where you talked about why the corners were very soft. I haven't seen that in any review. Thanks for the tip on what f stop to use on close up.
Well the copy I have of this lens is great. I don't take pics of brick walls and often add vignettes to most of my images anyway. It's all good here. Its a fab go anywhere lens for a stunning little camera ( A6000)
Thanks for the review, Sony have recently made the mark II of this lens with the ZV E10 Mark II, I hope that you review the second version this lens to see is there any optical improvements.
Hey, just wanted to say I'm super looking forward to your review of the mark II of this lens! Will we see it soon after it releases with the ZV-E10 II?
As my first camera a friend of mine (an experienced engineer photographer) suggested me to buy an Alpha 6400 but he told me to avoid the SEL1650 in kit, for this reason I bought a SEL18135. Thanks for this useful review
When I bought it a month ago body+lens was only €25 more than just the body. That's ridiculous. I think it's a great all-round lens, not because it's that good, but because it's hella tiny and has fast autofocus and if you steer clear from landscape photography and step down to more typical apertures it's sharp enough. I kinda like it for street photography. But yeah I'd definitely love to upgrade to the 18-135. And for full retail (€299) I couldn't recommend it though.
The 16-50mm is the 24-75mm (35mm equivalent) which is similar to the 24-70mm classic focal length range of zoom lenses. Usable for landscape/architectural photography at around 16mm and for portraits at around 50mm. I know this lens and it is very soft at all focal lengths with unacceptable vignetting at 24mm. The internal software of the e-mount cameras solve many disadvantages and the lens is good for amateurs. With RAW photos all problems are obvious. Sony shouldn't sell its more expensive cameras like a6300 and 6500 with this kit lens. These cameras deserve something better. However this lens is cheap and keep the whole camera price low. For 150$ this light, retractable, power-zoom lens with optical image stabilization is phenomenal. Maybe it is one of the factors for the Sony e-mount success. It is the jack of all trades and the master of none though.
barrel distortion means the lens is capturing wider angle than the 16mm one. As all the lenses with a design based on the corrections at the wider end , you cannot conclude that they don’t cover the format based on uncorrected results. This lens is capturing probably the field of a 14 or 13mm. The excellent FE 24/105 has excatly the same issue at 24mm. Uncorrected the corners are simply black ….but we don’t use them.
I, too got one of these with my a6300 and I cannot complain too much about it. I'm amateur when it comes to photos and I use mine mainly for video. The native AF is very nice, but the vignetting is terrible. I tend to shoot outdoors at 7.1/8/11. It's really difficult to get any sort of bokeh, like you said. This lens is good but no great for video, and kind of poor for images. Great review, Christopher.
The fact that it is sharp at the dead center and middle area is great. The softness on the corner might be preferred by some people rather than sharp corner.
Hmmm, I wonder why you mostly choose use your A5100 over your A6300 when reviewing your more recent Sony lens review videos 🤔 Awesome video though, looking forward to more Sony lens reviews!
So stick to f8 or f11 and try to avoid 16mm.... still getting it as the size is a massive plus for me as I tend to shoot at wider angles as I take a lot of travel / adventure photos and don't like bulky lenses, time to buy that travel tripod I have been meaning to get, thanks for the great review
I'm pretty make-do about lenses, if I want sharp, bright corners I'll go manual & mount a Mamiya 645 55/2.8, or for pretty bokeh & no vignetting then a Nikkor pre-AI 50/1.8, etc. No doubt this 16-50 is inferior in IQ, & Clear Image Zoom probably won't carry the day on an A7r, but then we won't be afraid to carry it around in rough conditions either. Sometimes what you want is a beater, and this this cheap little pip'll fit in your pocket.
I like this honest lens review. I have plan to buy Sony a6300, but now I know that I should to spare more money for better lens, especially for 4K filming.
I agree with the conclusion of this report. This lens has been tested many times and nobody tells what is the minimal focal lens to get corners with some sharpness. So it is just another review.
whether you have a a6400 or a6300 won't change the blurryness, that's the lens. It will look very much the same as the photos and videos in this video! Both the lenses you're referring to only goes down to f/3.5, so their ''blurryness'' is the same!
Thanks for sharing your experience. I also did a short video with sample shots made with the kit lense. But i did my shots more cinematic. The lense isn´t that bad for starting but i prefere my sigma 16mm 1.8
This lens are great for video average for photo. I didn´t use them for many years, but have bought them with my old A5100. As I was making photos mostly I have bought another lenses. But I have bought ZV-E10 a week ago. It has amazing video. I have higher quality prime lenses with 35 and 50 mm focal lengths but they are too narrow. So I gave the kit lens another chance for video. And they are amazing for video. Sharp like crazy and you have IOS and zoom in light and small package :). I am always using them right now as I am recording video more.
The 16-50PZ is all about appealing to what people want: small size. The 18-55 OSS makes more sense to me with the A6x00 series, but that is not a kit option. The A3000 is the only camera to come with the 18-55 OSS since the 16-50PZ came out with the NEX 6.
For this size paired with an A6xxx you get a mighty performance in a small package for everyday use, despite it's problems. If you get a decent one that is.
Think you sum up this lens very well! I find my copy really inconsistent and frustrating. Every now and then get really soft images or it will just miss focus. Obviously very different cameras but can't help thinking maybe something like an RX100 would be sharper than a A6000 and this kit lens.
You'd be right about the RX100, I bought my a6000 without the kit lens because its quality is so damn bad. I snagged a pile of old canon FD primes and an adapter for 50 bucks and they blow it out of the water.
It's an ok lens. Good for travel to keep your kit compact. It's pretty good for 1080p video. It definitely does not bring out the best of my A6000 sensor. It's a handy lens to have but don't expect to be dazzled by it. Build quality is poor. I'll keep mine as it is useful at times.
@@JeremyGalloway I doubt it matters (unless you go into conspiracies and think that there's 3d party software that adds distortion for photos on that lens/sony, lol) - any raw processing tool would show same picture, Adobe Camera Raw for example.
@@JeremyGalloway With my kit lens I see much less barrel distortion, similar to the sigma 16mm that according to his review have much less distortion comparing with the kit lens. Its strange.
For green screen you shoot at f/5.6 anyways and just turn up the lights, but even with focus breathing compensation that would not be sharp enough for a clean green screen key. I really wish the Sony 10-20mm f/4 PZ G lens was a 10-24mm lens. That lens also has a lot of barrel distortion but the lens compensation just crops in. They just make the lens wider than marketed. For a 24MP APS-C it's not big deal because it's 6K down--sampled anyways.
Great info. So what do u suggest, whether we should go with the kit lens or not for the begginer, starting videography with Sony zv-e10 TO SHOOT head on YT VIDEO wide angle. Or should we buy additional or replacement lens?
Hello Christopher, I notice when comparing this video to the video of the Nikon Z 16-50 that the colors of your test board look much more washed out through the Sony lens. Is this because of the lens? Or did you change something in your setup in the 2 years between the reviews?
great video as usual. my girlfriend has this combination as well and I didn't know what to think of the lens as it didn't seem bad but also doesn't really impress me. your review was on point about the shady stuff sony is doing behind the screens to disguise the poor performance on 16mm
Which lenses do you recommend for a6400. Let me be very clear the quality of image that I got of animals was so so so dissatisfying! Everything felt flat and soft
I know there are drawbacks, but the size and performance of the lens means its a compromise. There are better lenses for more money. 'Compromise' is the word here. It is a nice lens to carry around. Besides, composition is everything. 99% of people I know never look at the edges of pictures because the subject is usually more toward the center.
Looking at purchasing the a5000 and 16-50mm lens as a start up for my frequent traveling. Is this a good entry level package? what else would you recommend?
Hello Christopher, thank you for the video. I will be a new parent and this will be my first camera more impressive than iPhone 7 Plus. Even as a complete newbie, I’d like to ensure my lens is not decentralized like your first one.. in BHphoto (NYC) the a6300 w this lens set me back $925 (just for your data). A dumbed down process of checking would be appreciated. I can imagine it starts with taking pictures :)
Christopher Frost Photography wife and me laughed. Love the dry delivery. Will be watching the videos for entertainment. Though I’ve been warned that getting too much into this hobby gets real expensive, real fast 🙈 I think I understand what I need to do. Brick wall and then look at the corners. Hope that softness/sharpness will show even absent text/detail. Cheers!
I'm a little confused by some comments that allude to the fact that this lens is better for video than photos. You commented that this lens is "quite nice" for video. Why wouldn't it have the same quality flaws regardless of the use? Thanks.
![Eminem - Fuel (feat. JID) [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/t5H_CewqpKA/mqdefault.jpg)
Regardless of feelings about this lens, the format of this review is very well done. Rather than filming his own talking face for 80% of the review (like most reviewers) Mr. Frost choose to voice over actual supporting evidence of all the points he was making. I think other RUclips Reviewers should take note.
i agree
Which one is better: Sony 16-50mm in this review, or Sony 16mm f/2.8?
For daily photography. Landscape, or street photography.
totally agreed, very informative and clear supports & evidence of the len!!
Well said.
Could not agree more
Quite simply the best made video I’ve watched. No waffle, just facts, facts backed up by images. You’ve got a new subscriber
one more because of that.
I used this lens in few years now and i must say that there is nothing like it for travel and video on the go. I really love this lens. With Sony fantastic digital zoom you can go to 300mm eq with this little lens. Which is 12x zoom. There is no smartphone that can do that at this quality.
I own sony a6000 and i am using the same lense, i am very happy with the picture and video quality, its best recommended for the beginner 😇
i just got one this a6000 morning with this lens for $500 bucks only done 900 shots, sweet deal!
While unlike the general "hate" for this lens, I think it's small size is a bonus that enables you to be compact and lightweight. I mean is that the reason why to shoot mirrorless in the first place?! I know it may not win awards but the 16-50 kit lens is pretty unique in its portability and practically.
I note that as a strong positive thing in this review
Vintage Pictures There are a bunch of other reasons to shoot mirrorless other than “size”
Mike D better access to af tech (hybrid solutions), evf, large raw buffer, image stabilization, better access to video centric tech.
I personally like dslr sized mirrorless cameras. Dslrs just feel nicer in the hand
My guess is that at this size, only the Olympus and Panasonic collapsible kit lenses are better. It is time for version 2 of this lens.
I've actually been looking for something like this for a while.
No-one cuts the cake like Christopher Frost!
I love the way you talk man! It's so calm 😂
This explains everything all along about the lens. However, the dynamic range and details of those pictures are impressive. Thank you.
It's not a perfect lens if you look at the individual features but it's a perfect lens overall. You really do everything with it without having to change lenses and without carrying around a backpack full of stuff. I will never sell it!
Thanks so much for revealing the actual appalling barrel distortion at the wide end! Not nice of Sony to try to conceal it!
Great review. Sums up why I find the lens both indispensable and why I don't use it much. I really wish Sony had a kit lens alternative for E-mount without going to the $$$$ 16-70 Zeiss and absurdly large 18-105PZ. It is excellent for video and travel though, but I tend to use my Sigma 19mm+FE 28/2+50/1.8 OSS combo more often due to the 1650PZ's sacrifice in image quality.
I am also puzzled by why Sony hasn't seen fit to update the 16-50, as its design dates back to the earliest NEX-series cameras, which had maximum resolutions of 14 and 16MP.
But I guess there's no money in do-it-all pancake lenses, Sony would rather position itself as the Mercedes or BMW of the camera world and charge big dollars instead.
This lens may not be the greatest, but for me it is really useful to have. On those occasions when you are just taking casual JPEG shots (family and friend gatherings etc) it transforms the a6000 or a6300 into something akin to an easy to carry around compact point and shoot and is less intimidating to people than something like the 18-105. In those circumstances some corner softness is usually not significant in practice and, since distortion is handled in-camera, it's a non-issue. Practical lens for amateur casual use.
Your thoroughness and insight are brilliant, good sir. Thank you, kindly... the info you've painstakingly provided is super valuable to people like me who are researching this very subject... Thanks again!
The point about this lens to me is that it makes for a pretty incredible pocket camera. It's just tiny yet performs well in both photo and video with very few fatal weaknesses. EVERY SINGLE supposedly better lens than this one is 2, 3, 4, 5 times as big. And that just ruins the pocketability of the package. I mean, by all means, get a nice fast prime or a big old honking zoom, but I will still geek out at having a phenomenal capable camera that can get the shot making a small bulge in a coat pocket.
My cellphone makes a pretty capable pocket camera and it's sharper than this lens.
@@webdaddywhat phone
I have S23 ultra and have just ordered a6700 with this kit lens. Well, the reviews in looking at web , I would guess, is on par with s23 ultra. Will do comparison pics after I recieve the camera. I do want to keep the lens because of its size. But if it's just equal to my phone than not worth it.
@@sidha22 only the main camera would compete well, Samsung has quite bad secondaries
@@sidha22 only the main camera would compete well, Samsung has quite bad secondaries
Thanks for uncovering the truth about this lens! Very detailed review.
Very good and to the point clear review. Thanks for this. And its nice to see that you traveled to Turkey and get a beautiful shot of Izmir from the ancient lift.
The little kit lens is a very useful lens. It is a perfect focal length for vlogging, and is a very versatile lens for riding a gimbal. Good review!
Fantastic review, love the details you put in. Your hard work is greatly appreciated!
I owned and tried into total 9 lenses, both for Canon EOS R10 and a6700. I can say without doubt this is the lens I have had the most fun with. It's crazy light, thanks to the PZ it "remembers" the focal length if you turn on/off the camera. Also because of the lack of a separate zoom/focus ring it also makes me shoot manual which makes me more mindful about composition and such. This is a lens that only leaves my bag when it's on my camera, unlike the heavier lenses I own
You should test also this first copy of your lens, becouse in my opinion this model has really problem with quality (5 different lenses will have 5 different images quality). My lens has image quality similar to your first copy, so it was immposible to use it becouse of images quality. Your second copy of this lens looks really good as a kit lens, I am really surprised that this model can produce such nice and sharp images. I bougth sigma 18-50 2.8 and now my pictures are always clear and sharp:). Your youtube channel is really valuable.
Very nicely done. Specially the part where you talked about why the corners were very soft. I haven't seen that in any review. Thanks for the tip on what f stop to use on close up.
Well the copy I have of this lens is great. I don't take pics of brick walls and often add vignettes to most of my images anyway. It's all good here. Its a fab go anywhere lens for a stunning little camera ( A6000)
you really make great and very clear reviews about lenses
One of the best lens review formats. Wow.
I have this lens with sony a6000, I'll just try to use this lens at f8 and between 20-40mm
Thanks for the review, Sony have recently made the mark II of this lens with the ZV E10 Mark II, I hope that you review the second version this lens to see is there any optical improvements.
Hey, just wanted to say I'm super looking forward to your review of the mark II of this lens! Will we see it soon after it releases with the ZV-E10 II?
As my first camera a friend of mine (an experienced engineer photographer) suggested me to buy an Alpha 6400 but he told me to avoid the SEL1650 in kit, for this reason I bought a SEL18135.
Thanks for this useful review
"softer than a Pillsbury doughboy" :D . For non-UK people like me: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillsbury_Doughboy
i eat pilsbury .flower
Many people actually forget the fact, that we are talking about financially very $ cheap lens, so for the price it performs well. Very nice review.
When I bought it a month ago body+lens was only €25 more than just the body. That's ridiculous. I think it's a great all-round lens, not because it's that good, but because it's hella tiny and has fast autofocus and if you steer clear from landscape photography and step down to more typical apertures it's sharp enough. I kinda like it for street photography. But yeah I'd definitely love to upgrade to the 18-135. And for full retail (€299) I couldn't recommend it though.
Just about exactly my thoughts about the lens.
The 16-50mm is the 24-75mm (35mm equivalent) which is similar to the 24-70mm classic focal length range of zoom lenses. Usable for landscape/architectural photography at around 16mm and for portraits at around 50mm.
I know this lens and it is very soft at all focal lengths with unacceptable vignetting at 24mm. The internal software of the e-mount cameras solve many disadvantages and the lens is good for amateurs. With RAW photos all problems are obvious.
Sony shouldn't sell its more expensive cameras like a6300 and 6500 with this kit lens. These cameras deserve something better. However this lens is cheap and keep the whole camera price low.
For 150$ this light, retractable, power-zoom lens with optical image stabilization is phenomenal. Maybe it is one of the factors for the Sony e-mount success. It is the jack of all trades and the master of none though.
Doesn't lightroom correct the problems in post for RAW photos?
I don't understand many people hate this lens, well I use for my contents and it's fantastic
barrel distortion means the lens is capturing wider angle than the 16mm one. As all the lenses with a design based on the corrections at the wider end , you cannot conclude that they don’t cover the format based on uncorrected results. This lens is capturing probably the field of a 14 or 13mm.
The excellent FE 24/105 has excatly the same issue at 24mm. Uncorrected the corners are simply black ….but we don’t use them.
I, too got one of these with my a6300 and I cannot complain too much about it. I'm amateur when it comes to photos and I use mine mainly for video. The native AF is very nice, but the vignetting is terrible. I tend to shoot outdoors at 7.1/8/11.
It's really difficult to get any sort of bokeh, like you said.
This lens is good but no great for video, and kind of poor for images.
Great review, Christopher.
The fact that it is sharp at the dead center and middle area is great. The softness on the corner might be preferred by some people rather than sharp corner.
Hmmm, I wonder why you mostly choose use your A5100 over your A6300 when reviewing your more recent Sony lens review videos 🤔
Awesome video though, looking forward to more Sony lens reviews!
Always a great video. The 16-50 isn't perfect, but I think it fills a nice niche for those who are looking for a decent video lens at a low budget.
Brilliant reviews just what I needed thanks.
So stick to f8 or f11 and try to avoid 16mm.... still getting it as the size is a massive plus for me as I tend to shoot at wider angles as I take a lot of travel / adventure photos and don't like bulky lenses, time to buy that travel tripod I have been meaning to get, thanks for the great review
I'm pretty make-do about lenses, if I want sharp, bright corners I'll go manual & mount a Mamiya 645 55/2.8, or for pretty bokeh & no vignetting then a Nikkor pre-AI 50/1.8, etc. No doubt this 16-50 is inferior in IQ, & Clear Image Zoom probably won't carry the day on an A7r, but then we won't be afraid to carry it around in rough conditions either. Sometimes what you want is a beater, and this this cheap little pip'll fit in your pocket.
This was such a good video good catch with the 16mm distortion
Whoa, you’re doing Sony now?? FINALLYYY!
He has already been doing Sony lenses.
I like this honest lens review. I have plan to buy Sony a6300, but now I know that I should to spare more money for better lens, especially for 4K filming.
I agree with the conclusion of this report. This lens has been tested many times and nobody tells what is the minimal focal lens to get corners with some sharpness. So it is just another review.
Can I get blurry background in videos with A6400 with 16 -50mm? *Please reply* . I very confused between 16 -50mm and 18 -135.
whether you have a a6400 or a6300 won't change the blurryness, that's the lens. It will look very much the same as the photos and videos in this video! Both the lenses you're referring to only goes down to f/3.5, so their ''blurryness'' is the same!
@@junkmansobbligato Thanks!
I bought A6400 with 18-135.
Very detailed review. Thanks! I believe I am willing to trade-off the image quality at the corners for its compact size.
Thanks for sharing your experience. I also did a short video with sample shots made with the kit lense. But i did my shots more cinematic. The lense isn´t that bad for starting but i prefere my sigma 16mm 1.8
This lens are great for video average for photo. I didn´t use them for many years, but have bought them with my old A5100. As I was making photos mostly I have bought another lenses. But I have bought ZV-E10 a week ago. It has amazing video. I have higher quality prime lenses with 35 and 50 mm focal lengths but they are too narrow. So I gave the kit lens another chance for video. And they are amazing for video. Sharp like crazy and you have IOS and zoom in light and small package :). I am always using them right now as I am recording video more.
Man i love your voice its perfect for photography reviews I dont mean it in a weird way :)
Thank you for the review. I am going to buy the lens for my Sony-s.
Nicely done. Thanks I would like to see some examples of INTERIOR shots of houses ... since that is my main need for a {inexpensive} 16mm lens.
Very interesting! I can’t wait for your upcoming review of Samyang’s latest 35mm f1.4 for e mount
^^^^I second^^^^.
The 16-50PZ is all about appealing to what people want: small size. The 18-55 OSS makes more sense to me with the A6x00 series, but that is not a kit option. The A3000 is the only camera to come with the 18-55 OSS since the 16-50PZ came out with the NEX 6.
For this size paired with an A6xxx you get a mighty performance in a small package for everyday use, despite it's problems. If you get a decent one that is.
Think you sum up this lens very well! I find my copy really inconsistent and frustrating. Every now and then get really soft images or it will just miss focus. Obviously very different cameras but can't help thinking maybe something like an RX100 would be sharper than a A6000 and this kit lens.
You'd be right about the RX100, I bought my a6000 without the kit lens because its quality is so damn bad. I snagged a pile of old canon FD primes and an adapter for 50 bucks and they blow it out of the water.
It's an ok lens. Good for travel to keep your kit compact. It's pretty good for 1080p video. It definitely does not bring out the best of my A6000 sensor. It's a handy lens to have but don't expect to be dazzled by it. Build quality is poor. I'll keep mine as it is useful at times.
That's a lot of barrel distortion. Wow.
The GeForce, I’m curious what “3rd party software” he used here, and how it can be trusted
@@JeremyGalloway I doubt it matters (unless you go into conspiracies and think that there's 3d party software that adds distortion for photos on that lens/sony, lol) - any raw processing tool would show same picture, Adobe Camera Raw for example.
@@JeremyGalloway With my kit lens I see much less barrel distortion, similar to the sigma 16mm that according to his review have much less distortion comparing with the kit lens. Its strange.
I wonder how lens compares to the Sony kit lens 18-55, please make a review :)
Love you’re reviews, my go to before choosing lens.
I'd love to see you test the Sony 28-60. I think it's in a different league to its apsc brother.
Great Review. Very informative. Thank you.
Very good and deep review!
Your reviews are amazing.
F/8 make, sharp image for this lens.. thank you so much 🙏
Very good your videos! How do you achieve so much sharpness with such different lenses? This is incredible!
Thanks for posting reviews! Sony 10-18 review would be great!
Very interesting and revealing review. Thanks.
Wait for meike 35mm f1.7 review! Good review!
Agung kumala me too
Great video man love it❤️
07:41 the cat tho, says it all 😅. Nice video btw, mate.
08:04 Izmir Turkey
glad to see you reviewing sonly glass
Honestly, the fact that this lens costs only 86€ used rn makes this almost a no-brainer. Especially when you are new to photography.
For green screen you shoot at f/5.6 anyways and just turn up the lights, but even with focus breathing compensation that would not be sharp enough for a clean green screen key. I really wish the Sony 10-20mm f/4 PZ G lens was a 10-24mm lens. That lens also has a lot of barrel distortion but the lens compensation just crops in. They just make the lens wider than marketed. For a 24MP APS-C it's not big deal because it's 6K down--sampled anyways.
I like this lens for family travel. I can work around it's limitations.
Great info. So what do u suggest, whether we should go with the kit lens or not for the begginer, starting videography with Sony zv-e10 TO SHOOT head on YT VIDEO wide angle. Or should we buy additional or replacement lens?
Hello Christopher, I notice when comparing this video to the video of the Nikon Z 16-50 that the colors of your test board look much more washed out through the Sony lens. Is this because of the lens? Or did you change something in your setup in the 2 years between the reviews?
A very useful video - thanks!!
Great review! Thankyou
Really nice review!
great video as usual. my girlfriend has this combination as well and I didn't know what to think of the lens as it didn't seem bad but also doesn't really impress me. your review was on point about the shady stuff sony is doing behind the screens to disguise the poor performance on 16mm
Which lenses do you recommend for a6400. Let me be very clear the quality of image that I got of animals was so so so dissatisfying! Everything felt flat and soft
Wow, I think I learned a lot from this.
I know there are drawbacks, but the size and performance of the lens means its a compromise. There are better lenses for more money. 'Compromise' is the word here. It is a nice lens to carry around. Besides, composition is everything. 99% of people I know never look at the edges of pictures because the subject is usually more toward the center.
I'd agree with you here - but at wider angles like 16mm, corner sharpness is more important than you think if you're doing landscape photography
This was an excellent review.
Exceptional video
hi- would this fit with my camera
Sony a6500? if yes do u recommend this lens to a6500? and would that cause
any serious vignette?
cheers
Looking at purchasing the a5000 and 16-50mm lens as a start up for my frequent traveling. Is this a good entry level package?
what else would you recommend?
F8 is mostly the sweet spot of any lens.
Lmaooo at 7:41. That cat 😂😂😭😭
Great review!
Wow! Fun investigation :) I was happy to get rid of my copy.
Thanks. Very useful and we'll done review.
Very good vid. Thanks!
Hello Christopher, thank you for the video. I will be a new parent and this will be my first camera more impressive than iPhone 7 Plus. Even as a complete newbie, I’d like to ensure my lens is not decentralized like your first one.. in BHphoto (NYC) the a6300 w this lens set me back $925 (just for your data).
A dumbed down process of checking would be appreciated. I can imagine it starts with taking pictures :)
Take a picture of something flat, like a brick will :-)
Christopher Frost Photography wife and me laughed. Love the dry delivery. Will be watching the videos for entertainment. Though I’ve been warned that getting too much into this hobby gets real expensive, real fast 🙈 I think I understand what I need to do. Brick wall and then look at the corners. Hope that softness/sharpness will show even absent text/detail. Cheers!
Sony needs to re-design its standard kit zoom lenses.
Thank you for this enlightening review.
I have quite a few lenses for various systems. This is the only lens I own that I would say is a "bad" lens.
I'm a little confused by some comments that allude to the fact that this lens is better for video than photos. You commented that this lens is "quite nice" for video. Why wouldn't it have the same quality flaws regardless of the use? Thanks.
greAT review.... loved it!