Just how crappy is the 16-50 kit lens? Test vs 17mm prime & 11-16 Tokina

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Discussions thread
cptrios
Senior MemberPosts: 1,347
Like?
Re: Just how crappy is the 16-50 kit lens? Test vs 17mm prime & 11-16 Tokina
In reply to temama, Mar 31, 2013

I kind of hate to make this post, because I also detest the negativity on this forum...but really? Both the 16-50 and Tokina 17mm samples look pretty bad to me. The centers are fine but the borders are soft enough that it's very visible even at the small in-post size. (I've briefly owned a Tokina 17mm before, and it seems pretty much in line with my copy.) The 11-16 looks good at 16mm, except it seems either decentered (much softer on the right) or perhaps the adapter is a touch uneven (even the slightest misalignment can screw everything up). But it looks just as bad as the other two at 11mm...which is odd, since it seems to perform about 500x better on dSLRs.

I think the 16-50 is a perfectly decent lens for many situations, but it doesn't really do any good to pretend it's something it's not. Same with the 16mm pancake...you want a small lens, you accept the compromises. Nothing wrong with that!

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