how does the 16-50 PZ lens compare to the 18-55 kit lens on the NEX 5N specifically?

Started Apr 12, 2013 | Discussions thread
blue_skies Forum Pro • Posts: 11,532
Re: how does the 16-50 PZ lens compare to the 18-55 kit lens on the NEX 5N specifically?

Rickj23 wrote:

Myth about US made BMW cars exists as myth only in USA, in  UK, it is called a reality ....  By mistake [not checking with BMW UK, prior to purchase?] I have bought 3.0L BMW Z4 with a complete spec ... and within it's 3 years usage, the vehicle spent at least 4 months in BMW workshops, had new wiring loom, new Carver, new soft top, drive shaft, starter motor, gasket etc. It was mostly driven on motor way and over the period of 3 years done only 36k miles.  Every time I hit the workshop, I've heard the comments like ... not another one ! A friend of mine had similar problems with US made X5 ...

My comment was about Honda. BMW has another reputation, both here and in Europe. Sorry about your experience.

So where it is made does matter.  Perhaps not to you ... but it does to me.

Well opinions and facts. Myths are born from taking past experience and treated as fact for new experiences.

With regards to garden shots with SEL1650PZ lens?  They were done in day light and with 200 ASA. But that is another story.

But they were the basis of your opinion of this being a dismal lens. So show us!

As you are trying to convince everyone how great the new kit lens is, should it not be up to you to upload some of your shots with this lens?

As I have done, repeatedly, comparing the lens with other lenses. Plus, I am not alone in my findings, I see many sharing similar comparison shots. I am not trying to convince anyone of anything, only sharing observations here.

Personally, I don't really care about any of the plastic barrelled mickey mouse lenses that I generally bundled with cheaper range of cameras.

Yeah, Mikey Mouse experience says it all - see your Z4 experience.

Fwiw, the 1650 was bundled with the Nex-6 camera first, mostly because of timing and availability. Given its compactness, it makes sense making it available for all cameras, especially the smallest ones. I see no Mickey Mouse attempt here.

I have bought the NEX 5N/5R cameras to use with my old manual Nikkor lenses, that I have bought way back in seventies and eighties to use with Nikon F2S and later with F3 and F4.  The possibility to use the old Nikkor lenses got me to buy the NEX cameras, it was not the love of Sony products.

So, these works great, right?

The compact cameras that I have used prior to NEX purchase, were all Canon made, hence G7, G9 and G12.  I have initially purchased NEX 7, didn't like the menu, didn't like the general setup e.g. size, weight etc. so when NEX 5R came out, I have sold one and bought another.  I liked the NEX 5R so much, that when opportunity came by to buy the NEX 5N twin lens kit at GB £225.00 [US $330 or there around] in the local electrical goods superstore, I bought two NEX 5N twin lens kits.

We both love the Nex cameras, that is a good thing.

As far as I am concerned, I will use the kit lenses only for holiday snaps ... and probably keep only the one SEL1855 and sell the other two and sell both SEL16/f2.8 pancake lenses as well. My approach [or philosophy] when it comes to photography is that at least 60% of picture quality is down to equipment, the 20% is probably down to opportunity / luck and 20% down to persons ability.

I don't know, I believe it to be 100% subject matter.

I have seen great pictures made by beginners using  Hasselblad  or SL66, I haven't seen that many great pictures made by accomplished photographers equipped with APS film cameras.  I realise that with digital imaging, you can do lot in CS5 or CS6 Photoshop, but that I consider cheating.

As have others done with iPhone. Example is Chase Jarvis - he started out with and iPhone.

Back to SEL1650PZ ?  If you like it so much ? Great, buy it ...

I did.

in UK that lens is £100.00 [$150.00 US] more expensive than SEL1855 e.g. nearly a double the price of the older lens.

Yep, same here.

Do I think the PZ lens is worth it ? I don't.

No, you pay for compactness, not for IQ.

Do I think the PZ lens is better than the older 18-55 lens? Definitely not on stills.  Looking at the "sympathetic" combination of the PZ lens with the NEX 3N .... it makes me think that this kit lens was designed to be used with camera like NEX 3N !  It was definitely "not designed" to be used with NEX 5R or \NEX 6 camera.  But that is my "personal opinion".

This I just don't get. You made this point earlier, but I do not follow your line of thought. Small lens on small body and large lens on large body. That part I got. But then small lens with bad IQ and large lens with good IQ. That part is lost on me. How about newer designs being more advanced than older designs? Or how about engineers now given a larger budget to create better IQ lenses? Or how about Sony committing to the E-mount roadmap?

Yes, everything you have said so far has been your personal opinion. That is why we react to your comment. It would help you a lot if you substantiated your opinion by sharing your facts.

The E1650PZ lens got a bad wrap early on, mainly due to the uncorrected distortion. Corrected, it cleans up remarkably well, as some of us have noticed. I think this is something to be shared.

You simply go on a rant and tell us that this is impossible, that this 'Mickey Mouse' lens is trash, and that you evaluated it yourself. Well, surprise, others evaluated this lens as well, and our findings disagree with yours, and the images are uploaded here for others to see.

-- hide signature --


 blue_skies's gear list:blue_skies's gear list
Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sony a6000 Sony a5100 Sony Alpha a7 II Sony Alpha a7R II +36 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow