Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful

Started Jan 21, 2013 | Discussions
WoodWorks
Senior MemberPosts: 1,324
Like?
Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
Jan 21, 2013

Taken last Saturday in northern California.

Mt. Shasta, 14,162 ft (4,317m)

David

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows --Epictetus

DFaulkner
New MemberPosts: 2
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

No offence, but at that size this could have been taken with an Iphone. Post the full size image & we can make a fair assessment

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mbonsack
Junior MemberPosts: 45
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

La Jolla Shores, CA. Jan 20. 70 degrees.

Yup; totally agree...

The gorgeous Shasta shot and this one, taken in the same state within a week of each other in the winter, make dealing with high California taxes well worth it

-mark

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,160Gear list
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

Nice composition, but as stated, shows nothing about the 16-50mm as promised in the title.  Really need a full resolution image to make any judgments about it beyond color/contrast.

I see you are also at 18mm, which will avoid most of the dark corners in the RAW

From what I have seen of the lens it is great for a wide/standard focal length of 24 or 35 or so, weaker at either end.  Definitely a travel lens where you want compact size, and maybe best if you shoot with corrected JPEGs or one of the newer cameras that will handle it okay.

Your point that composition is more important than lens performance holds true, and that for most people the performance of the 16-50mm will be fine for what they do, but the sarcastic title is misleading as the image you show doesn't have much to do with the lens.  For me, the 16-50mm interrupted my work flow too much for the cameras that I used it with.  If I bought a 6 or something I would definitely get it with that lens though.

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 NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DFaulkner
New MemberPosts: 2
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to mbonsack, Jan 21, 2013

mbonsack wrote:

La Jolla Shores, CA. Jan 20. 70 degrees.

Yeah, it sure is...

-mark

Mark,

Viewed full size, there is a LOT of softness & mush on the left had side of this shot. I sold this lens for this reason.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WoodWorks
Senior MemberPosts: 1,324
Like?
Full-size image
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

Wow, tough crowd. 



Full-size image

David

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows --Epictetus

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,766Gear list
Like?
Re: Full-size image
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

WoodWorks wrote:

Wow, tough crowd.



Full-size image

Not so - you have to enable '100% viewing allowed' in your profile ...

David

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows --Epictetus

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,160Gear list
Like?
Re: Full-size image
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

WoodWorks wrote:

Wow, tough crowd.

The title didn't help.  BTW, it is a great shot, where is that at?  I love those lonely mountain scenes.

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 NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mbonsack
Junior MemberPosts: 45
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to DFaulkner, Jan 21, 2013

This is one of the reasons I posted.  It was simply a gorgeous day; hard to take a bad photo with an iPhone as someone previously mentioned.  But I wanted to get an idea of what the lens was capable of, and have it critiqued by those with more experience than I.  It definitely captured the tone of the day in my view, but as you say it is certainly not the end-all in resolution.  This photo was also *not* the OOC jpeg; but rather one that I tweaked myself in LR 4.3 to be pleasing.  I upped the sharpness and clarity to something reasonable but not overwhelming, and brought up the shadows, but that's about it.  So maybe the mushiness is my fault, so any PP criticisms are welcome as well.

Thanks for your comments!

-mark

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WoodWorks
Senior MemberPosts: 1,324
Like?
Re: Full-size image
In reply to blue_skies, Jan 21, 2013

blue_skies wrote:

Not so - you have to enable '100% viewing allowed' in your profile ...

Done.

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows
--Epictetus

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,160Gear list
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to mbonsack, Jan 21, 2013

mbonsack wrote:

This is one of the reasons I posted. It was simply a gorgeous day; hard to take a bad photo with an iPhone as someone previously mentioned. But I wanted to get an idea of what the lens was capable of, and have it critiqued by those with more experience than I. It definitely captured the tone of the day in my view, but as you say it is certainly not the end-all in resolution. This photo was also *not* the OOC jpeg; but rather one that I tweaked myself in LR 4.3 to be pleasing. I upped the sharpness and clarity to something reasonable but not overwhelming, and brought up the shadows, but that's about it. So maybe the mushiness is my fault, so any PP criticisms are welcome as well.

Thanks for your comments!

-mark

Also, try not to go above f/8 or so unless you need the depth of field, f/11 generally is fine too.  F/16 is bordering on decency levels, and for your shot you were at f/13 so it will show pretty severe diffraction already on APS-C, so that is part of the softness issue with this photo.

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 NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WoodWorks
Senior MemberPosts: 1,324
Like?
Re: Full-size image
In reply to viking79, Jan 21, 2013

viking79 wrote:

The title didn't help. BTW, it is a great shot, where is that at? I love those lonely mountain scenes.

Sorry. Sometimes I just can't help myself, what with all the needle-nosed pixel peeping that goes on here.

The mountain is Mt. Shasta, in northern California, about an hour away from where I live in southern Oregon. There are some isolated dirt roads in the flatlands north of the mountain, and you can stumble on views like that quite easily.

David

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows
--Epictetus

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bvalenzuela
Forum MemberPosts: 56
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

I agree, the kit lens is just awful. I ended up returning the NEX6 with kit lens and got just the body. After getting the 50mm 1.8 (SEL50F18), it was just no comparison. I actually was dissapointed at first with the NEX6, but then realized that it was the lens. The pictures I took with the 50mm, was just super sharp, colors were vibrant, and videos just were amazing... To get the best out of the NEX6, I definately recommned getting one of the primes to see what the camera is capable. I ended up getting the 35mm 1.8 since the 50mm is a bit tight indoors, so still waiting... I am pretty sure it will deliver...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,766Gear list
Like?
Re: Full-size image
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

It is a good pic, but I would have pulled more of the details out of it.

It also appears to be a bit back-focused, the foreground could be sharper?

JPG image sharpening should be done as last step, there are some artifacts visible at 100%.

Here is a different result:



Left: as uploaded, Right: LR processed JPG



Processed



Original

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
blue_skies
Senior MemberPosts: 6,766Gear list
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to bvalenzuela, Jan 21, 2013

bvalenzuela wrote:

I agree, the kit lens is just awful. I ended up returning the NEX6 with kit lens and got just the body. After getting the 50mm 1.8 (SEL50F18), it was just no comparison. I actually was dissapointed at first with the NEX6, but then realized that it was the lens. The pictures I took with the 50mm, was just super sharp, colors were vibrant, and videos just were amazing... To get the best out of the NEX6, I definately recommned getting one of the primes to see what the camera is capable. I ended up getting the 35mm 1.8 since the 50mm is a bit tight indoors, so still waiting... I am pretty sure it will deliver...

You missed the entire point of the OP, did you?

The PZ1650 kit lens is limited - JPG is better than RAW, aperture is limited, extreme focal ranges are not superior. But otherwise, it is an impressive little lens, and quite convenient.

Yes, a 50mm at f/1.8 runs circles around it, so what?

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Canon PowerShot S95 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony Alpha 7 Sony a6000 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Grumpyrocker
Regular MemberPosts: 179Gear list
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to blue_skies, Jan 21, 2013

JPG is not better than RAW if you use the right software to correct.

It's a great little lens that's good at its job - being a neat little allrounder that lets you put the camera in your pocket.

Comparing it to a fast prime is plain silly. You may as well apples are better than oranges.

Pixel peepers may not like the 16-50mm, but then they tend not to be a very happy bunch at all.

 Grumpyrocker's gear list:Grumpyrocker's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 27mm F2.8 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bvalenzuela
Forum MemberPosts: 56
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to blue_skies, Jan 21, 2013

blue_skies wrote:

bvalenzuela wrote:

I agree, the kit lens is just awful. I ended up returning the NEX6 with kit lens and got just the body. After getting the 50mm 1.8 (SEL50F18), it was just no comparison. I actually was dissapointed at first with the NEX6, but then realized that it was the lens. The pictures I took with the 50mm, was just super sharp, colors were vibrant, and videos just were amazing... To get the best out of the NEX6, I definately recommned getting one of the primes to see what the camera is capable. I ended up getting the 35mm 1.8 since the 50mm is a bit tight indoors, so still waiting... I am pretty sure it will deliver...

You missed the entire point of the OP, did you?

The PZ1650 kit lens is limited - JPG is better than RAW, aperture is limited, extreme focal ranges are not superior. But otherwise, it is an impressive little lens, and quite convenient.

Yes, a 50mm at f/1.8 runs circles around it, so what?

-- hide signature --

Cheers,
Henry

I didn't miss the point, as if you go back to the OP, all he put was a picture to speak for itself (I got similare results). In any case, I never said that I am expecting Prime results from a kit lens, I am totally aware; however, the type of images that I was getting (totally not sharp, mushy, colors flat), was not worth not even the $150 they charge for the kit, for me that is... I understand some folks will be happy with sup par images. All I am saying is that if a beginner that don't know much about lenses and quality, will automatically think that they are not getting great images from this camera and knock the camera down right away... My iphone pictures are sharper than the kit lens for crying out loud or maybe i just got a defective one... Either case, I will use my feet to zoom and get quality images that this camera can produce...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dpyy
Contributing MemberPosts: 805
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to WoodWorks, Jan 21, 2013

It really is awful though because every raw you take needs to be heavily corrected. Just feels wrong, sticking with my z24/e50.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WoodWorks
Senior MemberPosts: 1,324
Like?
Re: Yeah, the 16-50mm kit lens is awful
In reply to bvalenzuela, Jan 21, 2013

bvalenzuela wrote:

My iphone pictures are sharper than the kit lens for crying out loud or maybe i just got a defective one

That's what I enjoy so much about this forum. I mean, someone here might actually believe that you're being serious, and it will start a 150-post conflagration about it. 

I enjoy shooting with my iPhone too, but sheesh...

Either case, I will use my feet to zoom and get quality images that this camera can produce...

I would have enjoyed seeing you zoom with your feet past the barbed wire fence and No Trespassing signs that were between me and the subject in the photo. The rancher that owns the land probably would have a thing or two to say about that.

David

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows
--Epictetus

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WoodWorks
Senior MemberPosts: 1,324
Like?
Re: Full-size image
In reply to blue_skies, Jan 21, 2013

blue_skies wrote:

It is a good pic, but I would have pulled more of the details out of it.

Thanks Henry. Mine was just a quickie development in Lightroom, as I was pleased enough with what the lens delivered. But you're right, there's certainly more to extract from it, had I been in the mood.

Of course, these things are a matter of taste (and intention). I find your development of the shack a little bit too far towards the HDR look for my taste, for instance. But I'm sure there are plenty of viewers who will prefer yours.

As Mao said: Let a hundred flowers bloom!

David

-- hide signature --

It is impossible for a man to learn what he thinks he already knows
--Epictetus

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads