Review of 10-18 is up at

Started Apr 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
TrojMacReady Veteran Member • Posts: 8,729
Context: size and weight vs performance

viking79 wrote:

Faketastic wrote:

Which cheap UW zooms can match this?

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 (was around $450 new) is pretty comparable, and I prefer my Samsung 12-24mm f/4-5.6 ($600 or $450 when bought with a camera and if the $150 lens deal is running).  The Samsung doesn't go as wide, but has more range.  I find the 18-24mm range is actually very useful (don't have to change as often).

Tamron 10-24mm seems pretty comparable, Nikkor 10-24mm is about the same price.  The point is the Sony seems to be priced up there with the likes of Nikkor, Canon, etc.  Nothing wrong with it one way or the other, just expensive.  It does well enough stopped down.  My point is I don't disagree with what PZ wrote in the conclusion section, doesn't mean I don't like the lens.

If I were to buy a NEX again I would certainly buy that lens, but it is kind of pricey for a 10-18mm f/5.6.


-- 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: (bi-weekly)
Flickr Photostream: (updated daily)

The DXOmark review shows its only real sharpness "issues" to be in the corners at the widest angle wide open. Other than that, it keeps up or beats the highly praised Panasonic 7-14.

And none of the other lenses you mentioned are anywhere near as compact or lightweight, which should be the main appeal for this system.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow