Reluctantly returning 16-50 (not a short post)

A few days ago I started a thread asking if anyone had compared the new 16-50 kit lens on both the 5N and the N7

There's bee another discussion running comparing the 16-50 and the 18-55.

Whilst there have been some good examples posted for debate, as ever there have been some happy to hypothesise (with conviction!) without ever having seen the lens.

I have a 5N and an N7, two 18-55 kit lenses (both good copies), Zeiss 24mm, Sony 50mm 1.8, Sigma 19mm, Sigma 30 and Sony 55-210mm.

So why would I want another kit lens? Well like many others I'm looking for a good compact wide to medium zoom to put on the 5N as a pocketable camera. (Not a 'walkaround', I'll use the N7 and Zeiss 24mm for that.)

So Wednesday I put the lens on my 5N with a positive attitude, really wanting it to be good.

The build quality is good, the zoom takes a bit of getting used to, but the option to use the ring or rocker is useful. The manual focus is silky smooth but when the same ring is used for the zoom I found it a little rough. I'm not sure how videos are going to cope with the sound that comes from the zoom motor.

The front element is quite small and quite forward with little protection. Putiing a filter on will just make the lens longer, somewaht aginst the objective. The lens cap is small and fiddly. I've dropped it twice and it is easy to try and put on reversed and in contact with the front element of the lens.

The startup/extension time of the lens is good. The close down however is very slow and over the last couple of days has gone from being an irritation to a real pain. If you are in the habit of switching off your camera then the 4-5 seconds it takes to shut down and the fiddly lens cap is going to be an issue. I realise that the camera is going through it's sensor cleaning etc. but the lens motoring back is the last operation.

At 16mm the vignetting is apparent in the viewfinder on both cameras, as is some quite severe barrell distortion.

I only shoot RAW and somehow hoped that the cameras would adjust this. Neither do, even the N7 with the new firmware.

This how it looks.

EDIT: Apologies but the EXIF isn't on the photos, I need to examine why.



I took the lens out for a walk yesterday and just used it as I would normaly, accepting that I would have to play with PP afterwards.

A couple of before and afters....

Out of the camera

Processed in LR

Processed in LR

These aren't specially setup photos for peepers, but just normal photos of the type I would take with a cemera in my pocket.

The results are 'OK' and I was sort of coming to terms with the limitations. I then started to realise that to get rid of the distortion in LR I was having to pump up distortion correction to about +76. When the resulting image is cropped I'm losing a chunk of the image that seems to equate to about 18/19 mm focal length .

The resolution is what I would expect from a kit lens and the contrast/colour I think better than the 18-55. The Zeiss and Sigma's are all in another league however.

These are some (processed) 'normal' photos taken yesterday.(all PP'd in LR)

So why is it going back? Well I slept on it and realised that this is a so, so lens with some issues that I'm potentially going to find more and more irritating. The size isn't a small as I'd hoped for.

The latter is an interesting one as I put the Sigma 19 on the N5 today and went to the same place to shoot the canal lock.

Sigma 19 (LR PP)

The Sigma is not much larger, produces beautiful images and is no hassle to process. I do appreciate that it is a prime and not a zoom!

This is first lens I have ever returned. I've just sold nearly £10k of Canon L lenses and never had a lens which has irritated me enough to return it. The Canon EF 14 2.8 has distortion and horrible CA, but it just seemed easy to fix and was fun to use,even knowing it was a bit of a dog.

This new 16-50 lens just doesn't do it for me and I so want it to do so. The handling is not to my liking and the shut down is a pain. I'd rather use my trusty Pany LX-3.

Lastly, I know it's a kit, but this is not a cheap lens. In the UK it's 30% more than the 18-55 and similarly the 50mm 1.8. The latter is an excellent lens.

The above is a personal view and probably won't satisfy those who want to disect pixels.

I take photos and a lens is a piece of equipment that just needs to work.

Laurie

--

Laurie