NEX 18-55 lens test (bad score)

[dule]

What do you think about this test Sony NEX E-mount 18-55 lens?
On this forum I've seen mostly positive comments, but here is a very bad score.

http://www.photozone.de/sony-alpha-aps-c-lens-tests/543-sony1855f3556nex

 

[egarc]

My copy is awesome. From what I've read here, the 18-55 that comes with the 5N is possibly an upgrade or at least, manufactured with higher quality control.

 

[rbmorse]

The score isn't all that bad for a kit lens. What do you expect for the price?

 

[davect01]

Does anyone actually read these or care?

You have to understand the customer base these reviews are aimed at. The individual who actually reads these and cares about them is your higher end experienced photographer.

For the rest of us, you will never know the difference between a 3 star and a 4 star rated lens.

I have seen enough images here and else where to know great images can be taken with this lens, even if it is not a "perfect" lens.
--
Novice photobug, proud NEX-3 owner
http://davesnex-3photos.blogspot.com/

 

[Pocobear]

First of all, note what camera body he's using, the NEX-5, no internal correction for CA or distortion in this camera. Most of these complaints are easily correctable in Post Processing (PP), or the NEX-5N in camera. It's a $250 lens. Want the perfect lens, it doesn't exist. However starting around $1000, you can start to find a few that are a tiny bit closer to perfection, and go as high as you can afford. For $250 and a Nex-5N or PP, you can get awfully close for a whole lot less. Pixel peeping will drive you crazy, and won't create one decently composed picture. Quit worrying about the small easily corrected thing and start taking pictures. They may not be technically perfect, but if they are interesting enough, done well, and people like them, no one will notice the small technical flaws, except pixel peepers, and they don't count much.

 

[Dan Seely]

For some good examples of actual photos from this lens (and others), see the on-going review of the NEX-7 at:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/index.shtml

--
Dan Seely

 

[ChapelThrill23]

I don't see that as a bad review for a kit-lens. In fact i'd say the review was complementary. The reviewer praised the lens' build quality, praised it for having a great price/performance ratio, and said some nice thing about the images. You cannot expect the cheap lens that comes with a camera to get the same type of scores as a $1000 prime. You have to remember that even an ordinary SLR lens is a capable lens and that not rating this as the equal of a 85mm Zeiss doesn't mean that it is a bad lens. The 18-55 is not the equal of a high quality and expensive lens but it is still capable of great images and you cannot beat it for price/performance.

 

[Enir4]

It's a $250 lens. Want the perfect lens, it doesn't exist. However starting around $1000, you can start to find a few that are a tiny bit closer to perfection, and go as high as you can afford. For $250 and a Nex-5N or PP, you can get awfully close for a whole lot less.

This does not make sense to me. In the first place, there are kit lenses head and shoulder above Sony's E 18-55, like the Panasonic 14-45. Second, the sad truth is that this is the only lens in this focal range available for the NEX that will AF. NEX are great bodies. The kit lenses are well under par, a royal shame.

By the way, I do own a C3.

Enrique

 

[ttan98]

It's a $250 lens. Want the perfect lens, it doesn't exist. However starting around $1000, you can start to find a few that are a tiny bit closer to perfection, and go as high as you can afford. For $250 and a Nex-5N or PP, you can get awfully close for a whole lot less.

This does not make sense to me. In the first place, there are kit lenses head and shoulder above Sony's E 18-55, like the Panasonic 14-45. Second, the sad truth is that this is the only lens in this focal range available for the NEX that will AF. NEX are great bodies. The kit lenses are well under par, a royal shame.

By the way, I do own a C3.

Enrique

You need to compare the NEX 18-55mm to Pany 14-42mm both are comparable(my subjective visual examinations of their images), be aware the Pany 14-45mm is no longer offered as kit lens, can be bought as add on. I agree the 14-45mm is by far superior to the other 2 kit lens.

Possibly Sony should come out a "pro series " of the 18-55mm lens comparable in image quality to 14-45mm lens. Everyone will flock to buy them.

BTW I own all three lenses.

 

[franzel]

Test is from August .

Any reason you post it now, after it's been discussed to death already in the meantime and before ?

 

[Jerry R]

The Nikon 18-55 got 4 stars. I don't see much of a difference to justify a 1.5 star difference. The scores for the 16 mm and 18-200 mm also seem low. The 16 mm has a flatter field than most other lenses 16 mm lenses.
--
Canon A2E, Sony R1, Panny TZ5, & Nikon D5000.

 

[Enir4]

I wish they would provide the NEX version of the Sony R1 Zeiss 24-120 (equivalent). I don't understand what's stopping them from offering a good quality walkaround zoom.

Enrique

It's a $250 lens. Want the perfect lens, it doesn't exist. However starting around $1000, you can start to find a few that are a tiny bit closer to perfection, and go as high as you can afford. For $250 and a Nex-5N or PP, you can get awfully close for a whole lot less.

This does not make sense to me. In the first place, there are kit lenses head and shoulder above Sony's E 18-55, like the Panasonic 14-45. Second, the sad truth is that this is the only lens in this focal range available for the NEX that will AF. NEX are great bodies. The kit lenses are well under par, a royal shame.

By the way, I do own a C3.

Enrique

You need to compare the NEX 18-55mm to Pany 14-42mm both are comparable(my subjective visual examinations of their images), be aware the Pany 14-45mm is no longer offered as kit lens, can be bought as add on. I agree the 14-45mm is by far superior to the other 2 kit lens.

Possibly Sony should come out a "pro series " of the 18-55mm lens comparable in image quality to 14-45mm lens. Everyone will flock to buy them.

BTW I own all three lenses.

 

[BayAreaWZ]

This is what I've read here on this forum and elsewhere, the newer manufactured kit lenses perform better even on older Nex bodies without correction. Combine that newer lens with the corrections that the 5n makes and it's a different ballgame.

I've owned great kit lenses before like the Nikon 18-55 and Panasonic 14-45mm. I'm getting the best results out of the 5N kit lens.

There are a ton of great samples of the 5n plus kit on this forum.

My copy is awesome. From what I've read here, the 18-55 that comes with the 5N is possibly an upgrade or at least, manufactured with higher quality control.

 

[Enir4]

I think that the alleged difference between new and old 18-55mm lenses is an urban legend. I have both and see no improvement of any kind. As for corrections, PS and DxO offer them for this lens and many others. Conclusion: old and new are just the same very mediocre lens.

Enrique

This is what I've read here on this forum and elsewhere, the newer manufactured kit lenses perform better even on older Nex bodies without correction. Combine that newer lens with the corrections that the 5n makes and it's a different ballgame.

I've owned great kit lenses before like the Nikon 18-55 and Panasonic 14-45mm. I'm getting the best results out of the 5N kit lens.

There are a ton of great samples of the 5n plus kit on this forum.

My copy is awesome. From what I've read here, the 18-55 that comes with the 5N is possibly an upgrade or at least, manufactured with higher quality control.

 

[Jerry R]

--
Canon A2E, Sony R1, Panny TZ5, & Nikon D5000.

 

[zackiedawg]

What do you think about this test Sony NEX E-mount 18-55 lens?

To be totally honest...I couldn't care less.

I couldn't care less about any good or bad review of this lens.

Nor do I care whether anyone here thinks the lens is junk, or awesome, or anything in between.

The truth is that I have MY 18-55mm lens already, so what a review thinks no longer has any relevance to me. My copy is very good, very reliable, and an overall solid performer. I do not rank it among my best lenses, which have 4-figure price tags, but I count it among several lenses that deliver an excellent bang for the buck. And I routinely use this lens in a variety of situations and get very good results from it.

So reviews, and other peoples' experiences with their 18-55mm lenses, don't have any personal impact on me. I offer opinions on the lens when asked, and am more than happy to try to help anyone with questions, but in the end, I have my lens, know my lens, and it is good.

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

 

[Dennis]

What's the "bad score" exactly ? (is it the "stars" on optical quality ?)

Anyway, look at the Nikon 18-55 VR on a 16MP sensor and look at the lp/mm that it's resolving. The NEX lens on whichever camera they tested matches that.

One thing to keep in mind is that the charts show "excellent" and "good" measures based on the maximum resolution the sensor shows in their tests. So while the optical quality of the lens may show as "good" beyond the sensor, on a 14MP sensor in a NEX body, it's recording as much detail across the frame as the CZ16-80 does on an A700. At least to the extent the tests are accurate. And indeed my shots taken with the 18-55 on the NEX rival what I've shot with the 16-80 on my A700. Maybe it's a subpar lens and it's a sharp camera doing the trick and maybe if I put that CZ lens on my NEX-5 I'd be blown away by the detail, but at the end of the day, the 18-55 on the NEX-5 gives me 14MP pictures with plenty of detail that I could be happy printing to 20x30 with no problem. (Extreme corners tent to never get that terribly sharp, so I'd want a better lens for serious work, but for a cheap kit lens, it's fine).

• Dennis

--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

 

[Adam-T]

sample variation is Rife with this lens - my first one (NEX5) was as good as 18-55 kit lenses generally get - the one which came with my NEX5N was a total Stinker at 55mm and not great at 18mm (though amazingly it wasn't decentered) , the replacement one I have now is even better than the NEX5 one I had at the wide end but not as good at the edges at 55mm .......

these things are a total lottery as is the 16mm (and cheap Alpha mount lenses too) and Photozones ONE COPY (two at most) testing regime is just as much of a lottery for that reason, if they get a Dud then the lens gets a dud review - DPR are just as bad and probably why they don't seem to test lenses anymore (though they hardly make a career of reviewing anything thesedays)

--
A Problem is only the pessimistic way of looking at a challenge

 

[fermy]

these things are a total lottery as is the 16mm (and cheap Alpha mount lenses too) and Photozones ONE COPY (two at most) testing regime is just as much of a lottery for that reason, if they get a Dud then the lens gets a dud review - DPR are just as bad and probably why they don't seem to test lenses anymore (though they hardly make a career of reviewing anything thesedays)

Actually it's only fair. Who cares if there are good copies somewhere, if your particular lens is a dud? Maybe after getting several such reviews on photozone, Sony will do something about their QC. Here's hoping.

 

[KingDon]

these things are a total lottery as is the 16mm (and cheap Alpha mount lenses too) and Photozones ONE COPY (two at most) testing regime is just as much of a lottery for that reason, if they get a Dud then the lens gets a dud review - DPR are just as bad and probably why they don't seem to test lenses anymore (though they hardly make a career of reviewing anything thesedays)

Actually it's only fair. Who cares if there are good copies somewhere, if your particular lens is a dud? Maybe after getting several such reviews on photozone, Sony will do something about their QC. Here's hoping.

The problem is that the kit lens got a very good review. Read the review. Maybe Sony won't care now since it got good review?