Sony NEX-6 Benchmark Test?

Started 11 months ago | Questions thread
nevada5
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,462Gear list
Like?
Re: Sony NEX-6 Benchmark Test?
In reply to Mel Snyder, 11 months ago

Mel Snyder wrote:

nevada5 wrote:

justincarlson wrote:

I've got a Sony NEX-6 with the 16-50mm kit lens, and I've really been having difficulty getting good quality shots from it. I know the 1650 isn't the sharpest of lenses in the least, but my photos seem to be coming out with way more blur (I'm not sure if blur is the right word) than you should expect with an $800 camera. If I'm working with a lot of light I seem to be able to get o.k. shots.

I'm wondering if there is some sort of benchmark at standardized focal length/aperture/ISO that DPreview has to test if I have a bad lens copy or if there is even possibly something wrong with my camera's sensor. It seems more likely that it would be the lens. I've had the camera for about a month and a half, purchased from Amazon.

I've attached an image I shot today, perhaps it's not the best sample image because of the low light and high ISO, but it seems like the lower-lit areas are just not as clear as they should be. I can provide other samples as well if it's helpful.

Some people have posted some very nice images from the SELP1650. Others, like me, have not had positive experiences with the lens. I've come to believe there are serious fluctuations between various copies. Mt experience was that I purchased two NEX-6/SELP1650 kits. In both instances the lens performed very poorly and I sent back/sold the lens.

I decided to go with the SEL1855 for the times that I want a standard zoom. The first one I bought was no better than the 1650's I had. The second one is a very good copy - images taken with it are as sharp and contrasty as any kit zoom I've had. Again I was taught first hand that with Sony's inexpensive lenses, quality control is lacking.

I would not be pleased with the image you posted either. If you are within a return period, I might suggest putting the lens through some more testing, especially at lower ISO settings. I don't shoot JPEG so I can't say that the camera isn't using some heavy-handed noise-reduction at ISO 3200.

If you can't get substantially better IQ from the lens, it's quite possible you have a poor copy and you might think about returning it. You may or may not get a better one in an exchange.

Good luck.

-- hide signature --

Life is short - drive a convertible.
Tolerance is the last virtue of a dying society. Aristotle

There's nothing wrong with his lens, and possibly, nothing was really wrong with yours. In his case, as an earlier poster pointed out, he shot at too high an ISO and the in-camera noise reduction killed the image.

This poster actually showed an image that he thought demonstrated a lens issue, and we were able to analyze it and save him a snipe hunt for a better copy.

What too many people fail to realize is that modern lenses are designed by computers and matched to in-camera software. They aren't turned out like souffles, where one made with the same recipe can be different from the ones made before and after. I know it's comforting to many to believe that myth, but like so much on this forum, it's pretty easy to slay some beautiful hypotheses with an ugly fact, if we're just shown the images.

Which few posters who complain about a "bad copy" rarely do.

Maybe you're overdue for a little vacation there Mel.  Some place quiet.  Maybe write some new lines.

-- hide signature --

Life is short - drive a convertible.
Tolerance is the last virtue of a dying society. Aristotle

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