Review of 10-18 is up at photozone.de

Started Apr 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,625Gear list
Like?
Re: Context: size and weight vs performance
In reply to TrojMacReady, Apr 24, 2013

TrojMacReady wrote:

viking79 wrote:

Faketastic wrote:

Which cheap UW zooms can match this?

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 (was around $450 new) is pretty comparable, and I prefer my Samsung 12-24mm f/4-5.6 ($600 or $450 when bought with a camera and if the $150 lens deal is running).  The Samsung doesn't go as wide, but has more range.  I find the 18-24mm range is actually very useful (don't have to change as often).

Tamron 10-24mm seems pretty comparable, Nikkor 10-24mm is about the same price.  The point is the Sony seems to be priced up there with the likes of Nikkor, Canon, etc.  Nothing wrong with it one way or the other, just expensive.  It does well enough stopped down.  My point is I don't disagree with what PZ wrote in the conclusion section, doesn't mean I don't like the lens.

If I were to buy a NEX again I would certainly buy that lens, but it is kind of pricey for a 10-18mm f/5.6.

Eric

-- hide signature --

I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)
See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)

The DXOmark review shows its only real sharpness "issues" to be in the corners at the widest angle wide open. Other than that, it keeps up or beats the highly praised Panasonic 7-14.

And none of the other lenses you mentioned are anywhere near as compact or lightweight, which should be the main appeal for this system.

Actually, the Samsung is quite a bit smaller and lighter, but doesn't go quite as wide (still f/4.5 at 18mm though).

I reviewed the Samsung here, (MTF20 numbers are probably closer to Photozone's MTF50 numbers): http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=3124  Photozone might test the Samsung at some point too.

I don't have a formal review of the 10-18mm, but tried it out on a NEX 7.  I wasn't too happy with the corner performance until f/5.6 to f/8, but it does get nice and sharp (the Samsung is much better in the extreme corner at larger apertures though).  The Samsung performs a bit more harmoniously but isn't as extreme of focal length.

So looking at Photozone's data for 10-18mm, it looks good except at f/4, where it is okay, and only in the center.  So the lens maybe should have been a 12-xx or something instead, or maybe given up fixed f/4 aperture.  It is fine though, step down, but I would have preferred more range to fixed f/4 (say to 24mm f/5.6 instead).  Most people shoot ultra-wide stepped down.  Again, my point is it is a fine lens, but really expensive.  The smaller, lighter, better performing Samsung with 2x zoom range is a better buy.  If I shot primarily NEX now I would certainly buy the 10-18mm if I didn't have a NEX 7, and with the NEX 7 I would think about it.

Eric

-- hide signature --

I never saw an ugly thing in my life: for let the form of an object
be what it may - light, shade, and perspective will always make it
beautiful. - John Constable (quote)
See my Blog at: http://www.erphotoreview.com/ (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/28177041@N03/ (updated daily)

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Samsung NX30 Samsung NX1 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA +6 more
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