New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises

Started Dec 11, 2013 | Photos
MBider
Junior MemberPosts: 37
Like?
New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
Dec 11, 2013

I just got my new Nex-6 + 16-50. I am trying to understand the way the camera fixes the lens' aberrations. And I am not liking a bit what I am seeing. Here is two trims of the upper left corner of a photo taken with the lens at 16mm, wide open. One is from the camera jpeg. The other one is from an uncorrected raw. I don't know which one is worse, if the fish eye effect of the uncorrected one, or the skewed shapes of the corrected one. I didn't know that the price for in camera lens corrections was introducing a different type of distortion, in this case skewing what should be square lines. Does this look normal to you? Is it avoidable? Is there a way to actually stop the camera from performing the lens correction? Does the softness in these samples looks about average for this lens at f3.5 to you?

The biggest reason for me to choose the NEX-6 over other mirror-less cameras was precisely the specs of these lens (retractable compact size, 16mm wide). But now I am not sure if I made a big mistake, given that the lens doesn't seem very usable at 16mm, and having to shoot at f8 to make those corners acceptably sharp.

Another surprise with this lens is that when it wakes up, it forgets about where it was before falling asleep. Do you know of any way to make the lens remember the zoom position, and go back to the same focal length when it wakes up? It is incredibly inconvenient not to be able to hold a certain composition (on a tripod), without having to tweak with the zoom lever (and focus) every time it goes to sleep.

Also, is there any way to stop the lens from constantly auto-focusing?

And a question about the camera: is there any way to keep the histogram visible while applying exposure compensation? When I do it, the histogram  disappears from the screen or viewfinder.

Finally, any advice about which specific auto-focus mode you find most reliable?

Thanks!

camera jpeg

uncorrected raw

Comment & critique:
Please provide me constructive critique and criticism.
Sony Alpha NEX-6
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
SimonOL
Contributing MemberPosts: 911Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to MBider, Dec 11, 2013

I think possibly you are expecting too much from what is essentially a cheap kit lens. Just look at the size of the thing; it's tiny and it's design is more geared towards convenience rather than absolute IQ. A consequence of the tiny size is quite pronounced distortion at the wide end. In camera correction is pretty decent IMO but you have the option of using a lens profile in Lightroom when shooting RAW.

There are few (if any) UWA lenses that will give you sharp corners wide open and that includes expensive prime lenses many times larger than your kit zoom. It is 'normal procedure' to stop down a wide angle lens to f/5.6 to f/8 to get good corner sharpness.

You can turn in-camera distortion correction off - it's in the 'Setup' menu. Not really advisable IMO.

The lens will always return to 16mm when it wakes up. This can be annoying!

I find 'Flexible spot' AF the most reliable setting. Turn off the AF assist light.

I use the lens on an NEX7 (so can't help with Nex6 specific questions) and personally find the output from the lens quite acceptable - but I don't use it wide open when edge and corner performance matters to the image.

If you take the lens for what it is - a cheap kit lens - don't expect it to work really well in low light (it's too slow) and don't pixel-peep the corners, I think you will find it quite capable when you learn to work with it's limitations. But if you don't like the lens, you are certainly not alone as you will discover if you search this forum.

 SimonOL's gear list:SimonOL's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony E 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 OSS Sony E 16mm F2.8 Pancake Sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS Sigma 19mm F2.8 EX DN +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sonyshine
Senior MemberPosts: 5,661Gear list
Like?
Work with it - not against it.
In reply to SimonOL, Dec 11, 2013

If you want a top quality wide angle lens then pay for a 10-18.

The 16-50pz is still great little lens but as you have discovered it has limitations too.

if you play to its strengths though it is nice and sharp.

Some rather OTT work in Snapseed so don't judge the lens by my processing!

 Sonyshine's gear list:Sonyshine's gear list
Nikon AF-S DX Micro Nikkor 40mm F2.8 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-QX10 Nikon 1 V2 Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di VC USD Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 30-110mm f/3.8-5.6 +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kirino
Junior MemberPosts: 44Gear list
Like?
Re: Work with it - not against it.
In reply to Sonyshine, Dec 11, 2013

Sometimes pictures do look better without distortion correction on. I would just keep distortion correction on in the camera. If you want to adjust, that's what raws for.

In my experience, F3.5 is quite bad on the 16-50. F4.0 is quite a bit sharper and you're only losing one thirds of a stop of light. Just set it at f8 unless you're in a low light situation.

 Kirino's gear list:Kirino's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E 35mm F1.8 OSS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
120 to 35
Senior MemberPosts: 1,044
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to MBider, Dec 11, 2013

MBider wrote:

I just got my new Nex-6 + 16-50. I am trying to understand the way the camera fixes the lens' aberrations. And I am not liking a bit what I am seeing. Here is two trims of the upper left corner of a photo taken with the lens at 16mm, wide open. One is from the camera jpeg. The other one is from an uncorrected raw. I don't know which one is worse, if the fish eye effect of the uncorrected one, or the skewed shapes of the corrected one. I didn't know that the price for in camera lens corrections was introducing a different type of distortion, in this case skewing what should be square lines. Does this look normal to you? Is it avoidable? Is there a way to actually stop the camera from performing the lens correction? Does the softness in these samples looks about average for this lens at f3.5 to you?

It would be better to include the full frame picture so we can see what perspective you are taking.

The distortion correction is mathematically correct and the results look like photos taken with a 16mm prime that does not distort the picture. With a wide lens, you will get objects elongated in the side areas of the frame. If you take a group photo with a 16mm lens, the faces on the sides will look wider. There is another type of correction that you can apply to images in post processing. This will compress the sides to make the faces or objects look more natural. Some image processing software can do this.

The biggest reason for me to choose the NEX-6 over other mirror-less cameras was precisely the specs of these lens (retractable compact size, 16mm wide). But now I am not sure if I made a big mistake, given that the lens doesn't seem very usable at 16mm, and having to shoot at f8 to make those corners acceptably sharp.

This lens is quite good for what it is. If you want a better lens at 16mm, get the SEL 16 lens.

Another surprise with this lens is that when it wakes up, it forgets about where it was before falling asleep. Do you know of any way to make the lens remember the zoom position, and go back to the same focal length when it wakes up? It is incredibly inconvenient not to be able to hold a certain composition (on a tripod), without having to tweak with the zoom lever (and focus) every time it goes to sleep.

Just increase the go-to-sleep "Power Saving Start Time" in the menu to something more convenient for you.

Also, is there any way to stop the lens from constantly auto-focusing?

Use manual focus, especially on tripod. Set "MF Assit Time" to No Limit.

And a question about the camera: is there any way to keep the histogram visible while applying exposure compensation? When I do it, the histogram disappears from the screen or viewfinder.

Not while changing the compensation. The histogram reappears once you have change it.

Finally, any advice about which specific auto-focus mode you find most reliable?

They are designed for different types of scene. The continuous autofocus of for changing scenes. If you are asking about the autofocus area, then the two spot areas are good for focusing on specific objects while the multi mode is good for multiple objects or people in the frame.

Thanks!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GaryW
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,258Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to 120 to 35, Dec 11, 2013

120 to 35 wrote:

MBider wrote:

I just got my new Nex-6 + 16-50. I am trying to understand the way the camera fixes the lens' aberrations. And I am not liking a bit what I am seeing. Here is two trims of the upper left corner of a photo taken with the lens at 16mm, wide open. One is from the camera jpeg. The other one is from an uncorrected raw. I don't know which one is worse, if the fish eye effect of the uncorrected one, or the skewed shapes of the corrected one. I didn't know that the price for in camera lens corrections was introducing a different type of distortion, in this case skewing what should be square lines. Does this look normal to you? Is it avoidable? Is there a way to actually stop the camera from performing the lens correction? Does the softness in these samples looks about average for this lens at f3.5 to you?

It would be better to include the full frame picture so we can see what perspective you are taking.

The distortion correction is mathematically correct and the results look like photos taken with a 16mm prime that does not distort the picture. With a wide lens, you will get objects elongated in the side areas of the frame. If you take a group photo with a 16mm lens, the faces on the sides will look wider. There is another type of correction that you can apply to images in post processing. This will compress the sides to make the faces or objects look more natural. Some image processing software can do this.

This is the correct response.  A "perfect" lens for architecture will have straight lines even to the edges, but people's faces will be stretched and distorted.  Either way is correct for different subjects, but the camera doesn't know what you intended, so it defaults to the "correct" way.  You can undo the effect in software and fix people's faces.

Without lens correction, the 16-50 is going to have more of a "fish eye" effect, I think?

The biggest reason for me to choose the NEX-6 over other mirror-less cameras was precisely the specs of these lens (retractable compact size, 16mm wide). But now I am not sure if I made a big mistake, given that the lens doesn't seem very usable at 16mm, and having to shoot at f8 to make those corners acceptably sharp.

This lens is quite good for what it is. If you want a better lens at 16mm, get the SEL 16 lens.

I'd agree.  As much as people complain about the 16mm lens, it does alright stopped down a bit.

Another surprise with this lens is that when it wakes up, it forgets about where it was before falling asleep. Do you know of any way to make the lens remember the zoom position, and go back to the same focal length when it wakes up? It is incredibly inconvenient not to be able to hold a certain composition (on a tripod), without having to tweak with the zoom lever (and focus) every time it goes to sleep.

Just increase the go-to-sleep "Power Saving Start Time" in the menu to something more convenient for you.

Then it uses more battery power.  Just can't win on this one.  

Also, is there any way to stop the lens from constantly auto-focusing?

Use manual focus, especially on tripod. Set "MF Assit Time" to No Limit.

Buy a camera with an OVF and don't use "live view" or CDAF focusing?  

If it didn't constantly adjust the focus, then when you tried to look through the viewfinder/LCD, you'd complain that it was always blurry.

And a question about the camera: is there any way to keep the histogram visible while applying exposure compensation? When I do it, the histogram disappears from the screen or viewfinder.

Not while changing the compensation. The histogram reappears once you have change it.

Finally, any advice about which specific auto-focus mode you find most reliable?

They are designed for different types of scene. The continuous autofocus of for changing scenes. If you are asking about the autofocus area, then the two spot areas are good for focusing on specific objects while the multi mode is good for multiple objects or people in the frame.

Thanks!

-- hide signature --

Gary W.

 GaryW's gear list:GaryW's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Sony Cyber-shot DSC-V3 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5 +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
joe6pack
Senior MemberPosts: 1,198Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to MBider, Dec 12, 2013

Agree with others about it is what is expected from distortion correction. I believe the in-camera correction also fixes chromatic aberration as well? I suspect the camera also apply sharpening.

In some cases, especially when subject involves a lot of people. I found the uncorrected RAW gives the most "natural" look.

As far as not remembering where it was. I think this is the downside of power zoom. Even if the camera restore the lens position, the focus will have to be redone.

The 16-50 is an incredibly compact lens and its usefulness cannot be understated. In fact, I read a comparison of SELP1650 and SEL16F28 and favors the kit zoom for it being wider (in RAW). I can't find the site now. It includes pictures taken from top and there is a white car on the edge and it is pretty clear that the SELP1650 is wider and maybe even sharper than the SEL16F28. If someone found the site, please reply.

 joe6pack's gear list:joe6pack's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Sony Alpha NEX-3N Corel Aftershot Pro IrfanView
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
richiemccaw
Regular MemberPosts: 433Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to MBider, Dec 12, 2013

I like the 16-50 a lot for what it offers, such as size, weight and quality on a budget. It turns in pretty decent pictures when stopped down. In fact I've been using it a lot on my tripod for landscapes. Sure, the resolution can probably be better but it checks many boxes for me.

If you can see it and appreciate it for what it is then it really is a jack of all trades rather than the imperfection it may be!

 richiemccaw's gear list:richiemccaw's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Sony Alpha NEX-6 Olympus PEN E-PL5 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
paulcraig
Regular MemberPosts: 332Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to richiemccaw, Dec 12, 2013

On the NEX-6 with the SELP1650, distortion correction cannot be turned off in the menus. Seems to only affect JPG files not RAW.

It's a useful lens when used within its limits. It's no Zeiss, but far more versatile.

I find the 35mm prime makes a good companion to the 16-50, when I need sharpness or a bright aperture.

 paulcraig's gear list:paulcraig's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sony RX100 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 OSS LE Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Greynerd
Senior MemberPosts: 3,849Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to SimonOL, Dec 12, 2013

You cannot turn it off in mine with the 16-50 on and I have read that is the norm. It is a great lens I think as it is so compact. The only real problem I have had was when someone's head stretched a bit at the mid edge of an image but I put that right in photoshop.

I will post a screen picture G1X Raw image read by a windows photo viewer which has no image correction which shows what is really coming off the sensor with these software corrected folding lenses. I can assure anyone you that what you see in the official Raw converter at default is at best only medium rare.

Edit: In fact it is amazing that the G1X is only 28mm equivalent so what Sony are doing getting what they do out of such a wide 24mm equiv 3x pancake zoom on full aps-c is amazing IMHO.

SimonOL wrote:

You can turn in-camera distortion correction off - it's in the 'Setup' menu. Not really advisable IMO.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GaryW
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,258Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to joe6pack, Dec 12, 2013

joe6pack wrote:

...

The 16-50 is an incredibly compact lens and its usefulness cannot be understated.

It's compact and convenient and gives good results.

In fact, I read a comparison of SELP1650 and SEL16F28 and favors the kit zoom for it being wider (in RAW).

If you're looking for a wider view, I guess it could be handy, but then you have to deal with the distortion.  I recall that some people were able to correct the distortion and still obtain more detail. I haven't played with it enough to see what is possible, but it could be handy.

I can't find the site now. It includes pictures taken from top and there is a white car on the edge and it is pretty clear that the SELP1650 is wider and maybe even sharper than the SEL16F28. If someone found the site, please reply.

Stopped-down, I prefer the 16/2.8.  Yeah, I know the corners are a bit soft, but the 16-50 seems to always have poor corners at 16mm.  The center is sharp, but then, I find my 16/2.8 to be sharp in the center as well.

But, for convenience, I'll generally use my 16-50 and not worry about it.  I compared against my 18-55, and at 18mm, the 18-55 seems to have weaker color.  Odd.  Anyway, the result is that better results in general are probably going to come from the 16-50 than the 18-55, at least at wide angles.  I need to do further testing, but need more time....

-- hide signature --

Gary W.

 GaryW's gear list:GaryW's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Sony Cyber-shot DSC-V3 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5 +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,786Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to MBider, Dec 12, 2013

The skewing is normal for rectilinear lenses (optically corrected lenses do it too).

However, the 16-50mm is a mediocre lens at best. It is small when powered off, and good in the 20-50mm range, but if you want 16mm it is not so good. The Fuji 16-50mm is much better at 16mm, but is much larger and  it only comes on the X-A1/X-M1 kit which have no viewfinder. If you want a viewfinder you have to get the X-E1 or X-E2 and they aren't offered with the cheap 16-50mm.

Tradeoffs.

Eric

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Samsung NX1 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
bill hansen
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,227
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to MBider, Dec 12, 2013

There's a lot of good advice in the posts above this one. I'll only add that you will feel much better after you've read a number of posts on this forum and/or elsewhere about the strengths and limitations of the 1650 lens, and then adapted the way you use the lens to it limitations. I'm surprised at how good this lens can be when it's used within its limitations. Rather than go out and buy a better lens right away, if you take some care with a number of photos using the 1650, you'll see that it can do a very good job.

On the other hand, it's possible that your expectations are such that you'll never be content with the 1650. In that case, sell the 1650 and keep the body, buy a "better" lens such as one of those recommended above.

To that list of recommended lenses, I'll add the Sigma E mount 19 and 30mm primes. They're relatively inexpensive and they're among the sharpest lenses at those focal lengths, with excellent color and contrast as well.

-- hide signature --

Bill Hansen
Ithaca NY, USA

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Russell Evans
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,571
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to viking79, Dec 12, 2013

viking79 wrote:

The skewing is normal for rectilinear lenses (optically corrected lenses do it too).

However, the 16-50mm is a mediocre lens at best. It is small when powered off, and good in the 20-50mm range, but if you want 16mm it is not so good. The Fuji 16-50mm is much better at 16mm,

I'm looking at photozone's testing of distortion and the Fuji at 16mm measures -7.18. The Sony at 16mm measures -7.66. Do you really see that much difference between the two below? I can't make out the -0.48 difference myself.

http://www.photozone.de/sony_nex/842-sony1650f3556oss?start=1

http://www.photozone.de/fuji_x/853-fuji1650f3556?start=1

Thank you
Russell

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
GaryW
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,258Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to viking79, Dec 12, 2013

The skewing is normal for rectilinear lenses (optically corrected lenses do it too).

However, the 16-50mm is a mediocre lens at best. It is small when powered off, and good in the 20-50mm range, but if you want 16mm it is not so good. The Fuji 16-50mm is much better at 16mm, but is much larger and  it only comes on the X-A1/X-M1 kit which have no viewfinder. If you want a viewfinder you have to get the X-E1 or X-E2 and they aren't offered with the cheap 16-50mm.

Tradeoffs.

Eric

And yet the 16-50 can be good at 16mm.... as long as you don't need too much quality in the corners. It seems good to me in the center. One review site said that this is its best focal length! I've gotten some nice results. Good color and contrast. Odd bokeh. Can't have it all.

I think it's a good kit lens. Generally good results with some quirks. If you want better, try prime lenses or the new zoom (that people still complain about).
--
Gary W.

 GaryW's gear list:GaryW's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Sony Cyber-shot DSC-V3 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5 +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,786Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to Russell Evans, Dec 12, 2013

Russell Evans wrote:

viking79 wrote:

The skewing is normal for rectilinear lenses (optically corrected lenses do it too).

However, the 16-50mm is a mediocre lens at best. It is small when powered off, and good in the 20-50mm range, but if you want 16mm it is not so good. The Fuji 16-50mm is much better at 16mm,

I'm looking at photozone's testing of distortion and the Fuji at 16mm measures -7.18. The Sony at 16mm measures -7.66. Do you really see that much difference between the two below? I can't make out the -0.48 difference myself.

The Fuji is a much better lens. The image circle at 16mm is large enough to cover the sensor, unlike the PZ 16-50mm. Besides, if you shoot Lightroom you won't ever see the distortion with the Fuji, only if you shoot dcraw or something will it be visible. Photozone appears to penalize the Fuji based on its software distortion/vignetting correction, but the numbers are actually quite good.

Here are my lens reviews for both the PZ 16-50mm and the Fuji 16-50mm:

http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=3618

http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=3790

And here is a comparison of the Fuji 16-50mm with the Samsung 18-55 and Sony PZ 16-50mm:

http://erphotoreview.com/wordpress/?p=3745

The Fuji 16-50mm is far superior to the PZ 16-50mm from 16-20mm or so, above that not as much difference.  I am not against the PZ16-50mm, it is a very small lens, but also not very good at 16mm.  For making small prints or even viewing on HD TV or something it should be fine.

Eric

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Samsung NX1 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
GaryW
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,258Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to Russell Evans, Dec 12, 2013

There you go, bringing facts into it! Maybe the Fuji is sharper or has some other unmentioned advantage. As I said, I think the Sony is actually pretty sharp and with good color, but the corners are weak and I'm not happy with the bokeh. But, overall it's good and convenient and cheap as part if the kit.
--
Gary W.

 GaryW's gear list:GaryW's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Sony Cyber-shot DSC-V3 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-HX5 +12 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Russell Evans
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,571
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to viking79, Dec 12, 2013

viking79 wrote:

The image circle at 16mm is large enough to cover the sensor, unlike the PZ 16-50mm. Besides, if you shoot Lightroom you won't ever see the distortion with the Fuji, ...

Does the Sony 16-50mm need to cover the whole sensor at 16mm when the distortion correction is going to push the affected areas out of the final photo? If you are going to accept software correction in one lens, why would you not in the other, especially when it appears that the correction was taken into account in designing the lens as small as it is?

I personally like the small size of the 16-50mm and it is one of major reasons I bought a Nex camera. I bought a small mirrorless camera for a reason, uh, it's small, so there you go. If I wanted a better larger 16-50mm I'd buy the Sony 16-50mm f2.8; at least it can be used on the Sony cameras this forum is dedicated too.

Thank you
Russell

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,786Gear list
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to Russell Evans, Dec 12, 2013

Russell Evans wrote:

viking79 wrote:

The image circle at 16mm is large enough to cover the sensor, unlike the PZ 16-50mm. Besides, if you shoot Lightroom you won't ever see the distortion with the Fuji, ...

Does the Sony 16-50mm need to cover the whole sensor at 16mm when the distortion correction is going to push the affected areas out of the final photo? If you are going to accept software correction in one lens, why would you not in the other, especially when it appears that the correction was taken into account in designing the lens as small as it is?

The Sony you have to use cropped if you use it uncorrected. I am saying the Fuji 16-50mm does software correction right, and the Sony 16-50mm does software correction wrong (from an engineering perspective, not marketing).

The Sony FE 28-70mm is the same as the Fuji 16-50mm, where the software correction is done "right" in that it offers sharp corners if left uncorrected and covers the entire frame.

I personally like the small size of the 16-50mm and it is one of major reasons I bought a Nex camera. I bought a small mirrorless camera for a reason, uh, it's small, so there you go. If I wanted a better larger 16-50mm I'd buy the Sony 16-50mm f2.8; at least it can be used on the Sony cameras this forum is dedicated too.

I like the size too, that is a strong point of the lens. I didn't bring up the Sony 16-50mm f/2.8 as it is huge, much larger than say a Fuji 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6, and this forum is not dedicated to Sony A mount and as you point out that is a separate forum, just as the Fuji is. The Fuji 16-50mm is priced in about the same class as the Sony PZ 16-50mm so they are naturally comparable.

The reason I brought up the Fuji is the OP was questioning whether they bought the right mirrorless camera and were unhappy with the performance of the PZ 16-50mm. Since Sony offers nothing else compact at 16mm that performs well I mentioned the Fuji.

I shoot with Sony so don't think I am trolling. I like Sony fine, but I am not going to say the corners on the 16-50mm are good when they are not, I am saying if lens performance for a small and inexpensive 16-50mm class lens is important, the OP would probably be more satisfied with the Fuji 16-50mm if they value optical performance more than turned off size.

Eric

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Samsung NX1 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
Russell Evans
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,571
Like?
Re: New Nex-6 plus 16-50 user surprises
In reply to viking79, Dec 12, 2013

viking79 wrote:

Russell Evans wrote:

viking79 wrote:

The image circle at 16mm is large enough to cover the sensor, unlike the PZ 16-50mm. Besides, if you shoot Lightroom you won't ever see the distortion with the Fuji, ...

Does the Sony 16-50mm need to cover the whole sensor at 16mm when the distortion correction is going to push the affected areas out of the final photo? If you are going to accept software correction in one lens, why would you not in the other, especially when it appears that the correction was taken into account in designing the lens as small as it is?

The Sony you have to use cropped if you use it uncorrected. I am saying the Fuji 16-50mm does software correction right, and the Sony 16-50mm does software correction wrong (from an engineering perspective, not marketing).

The Sony FE 28-70mm is the same as the Fuji 16-50mm, where the software correction is done "right" in that it offers sharp corners if left uncorrected and covers the entire frame.

I personally like the small size of the 16-50mm and it is one of major reasons I bought a Nex camera. I bought a small mirrorless camera for a reason, uh, it's small, so there you go. If I wanted a better larger 16-50mm I'd buy the Sony 16-50mm f2.8; at least it can be used on the Sony cameras this forum is dedicated too.

I like the size too, that is a strong point of the lens. I didn't bring up the Sony 16-50mm f/2.8 as it is huge, much larger than say a Fuji 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6,

There was a constraint on size? I just figured as the Fuji is much larger than the Sony 16-50mm, that size no longer mattered in the direction you were taking the conversation.

and this forum is not dedicated to Sony A mount and as you point out that is a separate forum, just as the Fuji is.

Is English a second language for you? If you need help, "at least it can be used on the Sony cameras this forum is dedicated too" means that the Sony A 16-50mm can be used on the Nex and A7 series camera and they are the cameras this forum is dedicated to. You could even imply the unstated that the A 16-50mm is fully functional on the Nex and A7 series cameras if you wanted to read into what I posted.

The way you are reading what I posted is just wrong and since you aren't a native English speaker, can be forgiven. If you grew up speaking and writing English people would accuse you of spin for what you posted. "Spin" meaning trying to make something else out of what was actually posted for your own purposes, i.e. you would be acting like a prick.

The Fuji 16-50mm is priced in about the same class as the Sony PZ 16-50mm so they are naturally comparable.

I guess. I don't own a Fuji and I don't read this forum for information about Fuji, and as there is a Fuji forum, I probably would go there if I was interested; it just seems like your bringing up the Fuji 16-50mm here is sort of stupid and doesn't really add anything to the conversation. If we were all in the same room talking about the same, I think if you started blurting on about the Fuji, that an awkward silence would have followed.

The reason I brought up the Fuji is the OP was questioning whether they bought the right mirrorless camera and were unhappy with the performance of the PZ 16-50mm. Since Sony offers nothing else compact at 16mm that performs well I mentioned the Fuji.

Really? Seems illogical to think he's looking for advice on Fuji in this forum to me. Why would one post, "I'm looking for something else besides Sony", in a Sony forum? Doesn't seem very logical does it? I don't go into the Levis store looking for Wrangler jeans, do you?

I shoot with Sony so don't think I am trolling.

I didn't mention trolling. I just like to read things that are pertinent to what I own and didn't really think much of the logic of your post once I looked at the test data. I actually thought your post was misleading after looking at the distortion measured at photozone. That seems what the OP is interested in, lens distortion and correction, and what I thought was mostly under discussion. He also had some interesting observations about the camera which was nicely replied in other post. Really a great read of a thread, until your post took me off to the bushes.

I like Sony fine, but I am not going to say the corners on the 16-50mm are good when they are not, I am saying if lens performance for a small and inexpensive 16-50mm class lens is important, the OP would probably be more satisfied with the Fuji 16-50mm if they value optical performance more than turned off size.

I'm sure the OP would be happy with the Fuji 16-50mm if the OP owned a Fuji. I think I read that the OP has a Nex-6 though, so I don't really know what to say.

Thank you
Russell

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads