A very negative review of Sony 16-50mm

Started 5 months ago | Discussion thread
quezra
Contributing MemberPosts: 538
Like?
Re: re: should the overall volume be deemed a good criterion, then...
In reply to jpr2, 5 months ago

jpr2 wrote:

quezra wrote:

In terms of other examples, the Panasonic pancake zoom does pretty much the same things as Sony's 16-50 (severe distortions at the wide and long ends), and the distortions are even visible in the camera corrected JPEGs on several m4/3 cameras. But as a result you can slap it on a GX1 and fit that in your pocket. Well some people are happy with that compromise, indeed I would say they are a greater proportion of camera users than the purist IQ-is-the-only-thing-that-matters group.

...just cellphone cameras dwarf the "smallness-is-the-king" camp of NEX'ers by a huge margin, and the combined volume of cell cameras + P&S + compacts... pushes such a tiny market into non-existence


Sure, I was simplifying for the sake of argument, but as you yourself are alluding, there's users all along the spectrum with different tastes in what are acceptable compromises for the balance of things like IQ, DoF control (big sensors), compactness, ergonomics, etc

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow