why has the 16mm f2.8 got such a bad rep?

Started Jul 29, 2013 | Discussions thread
Keit ll Veteran Member • Posts: 4,247
Re: You need to know the history

Mike Fewster wrote:

This lens was released with the very first Nex cameras. On those models, the lens had very soft corners. The reviews of the new camera and Nex at the time duely pointed this out and marked the lens down, although most said it was very good in the centre. Those reviews are still the reviews that people read when they look for evaluation of this lens.

These reviews are less than accurate on two grounds. The lens had highly variable performance with some copies much better than others. Clearly a quality control issue at Sony. Later releases of the lens tended to be considerably better. More importantly, on later Nex models, Sony changed the micro lenses in the camera and this made a significant difference to the edges.

There you have it, a later build lens on one of the later Sony models is much better than its reputation and an absolute bargain.

You are probably right in saying later productions of the 16mm are better than earlier models but when the first 16mms were said to be discarded because of faults how was it that Sony were able to supply kits onto the market literally weeks later with up to date 16mm's ?

I takes time to produce kits & ship them to foreign markets. How is the average buyer to know what is new & old ? Does anyone have serial numbers which indicate when properly QC'd models came onto the market ?

-- hide signature --

Keith C

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