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

Started Mar 31, 2013 | Discussions thread
GaryW Veteran Member • Posts: 8,617
Re: Just how crappy is the 16-50 kit lens? Test vs 17mm prime & 11-16 Tokina

Keit ll wrote:

I'm not sure why the OP when posting to show how good the kit lens is didn't bother to use distortion correction as the image shown was definitely faulty ?

As others have said lenses can vary in quality but often value judgments are made soon after purchase in a bad fit of buyers remorse & before the user has learnt how to handle his new camera efficiently. Jpegs are shot in a hurry , often indoors in poor light , & no attempt is made to apply any corrections or tweaks to colour or sharpness etc.

But at least JPEGs would get distortion correction (at least on newer cameras).

Most results can be improved with a little care & attention but no lens is going to equal another which may cost 3X as much !

It might, particularly if you're willing to use a slightly more narrow aperture.  Take the Sigma 30, selling for $150.  But in general, I agree, you get what you pay for, to some extent. But we quickly run into a case of diminishing returns.

The supplied kit lenses are good value for money but if you want better than you are going to have to pay much more & this is one area where Sony fails as other options are thin on the ground. 

Sony is failing because they're not taking your money for an expensive zoom?  Probably so!  I think they'll get there, soon....

-- hide signature --

Keith C

-- hide signature --

Gary W.

 GaryW's gear list:GaryW's gear list
Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Sony E PZ 18-105mm F4 G OSS Sony Cyber-shot DSC-V3 Sony Alpha DSLR-A100 Sony Alpha NEX-5 +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow