A personal Samsung 16-50 PZ f3.5-5.6 Review plus comparisons

After NX1 hit the market Samsung has to offer more S lenses and especially in longer focal length if they wane play a role in professional businesses.

So I don't think new kit lenses will be seen soon.

As you know (perhaps based on my posting on that forum in the past), I enjoy the Canon M series 18-55.  It's built like a tank, has a metal mount, and can capture wonderfully sharp photos (but on a Canon, its wide reach becomes only 29 MM).  But I have to say - thanks in part to being able to shoot with so many different cameras - that with regards to image clarity (I'm hesitant to use the term "clinical"), the Samsung 16-50 PZ bests it (IMO, that is).  Perhaps I should preface my remarks by using the phrase, "with my copy ('cause there can be copy to copy variations in quality, you know).

This is not to denigrate the Canon M series 18-55 lens at all because it holds it's own.  For what it is - meaning design (Power Zoom type of kit lenses - which typically aren't the best) - this Samsung 16-50 leads that genre by a long shot.

Another kit lens that I found fascinating (albeit shorter in the longer end of the focal reach) is the Panasonic 12-32 (equivalent to a 24-64 MM zoom).  I became so impressed with that lens that I purchased two of them - one to be kept on my Oly E-PL7 and the other for my Panasonic GF6.  The clarity of that lens (although not a Power Zoom lens), along with the compactness can be astounding at times.

Paired with the NX1/NX500 the 16-50PZ gives you the freedom to crop away up to 40% of the image while still having a resolution advantage over MFT.

The flexibility is unprecedented and makes the wide end of the lens pretty addicting. I personally have no desire in the 16-50S now.

The s lens is a totally different 'beast', much faster and sharper, but also much bigger and more expensive. So it's a trade-off, where on one side you get good quality and great portability for a great price, while on the other side you get outstanding quality and speed for a high price.

Interestingly the only publication I could find that has tested both (i.e. for consistent methodology) seems to suggest that the S is not really sharper, especially not so in the edges at the wide-end:

S: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2458708,00.asp

At 16mm f/2 the lens betters the 1,800 lines per picture height we used to mark an image as sharp by a wide margin. Its center-weighted score is 2,248 lines, although the edges and corners are a bit fuzzy, showing just 1,529 lines. There' s improvement at f/2.8 (2,498 lines) and f/4 (2,551 lines), but it's not until you narrow the aperture to f/5.6 that the very outer part of the frame sharpens up. The center-weighted score stays about the same at f/5.6 (2,572 lines) and dips a bit due to diffraction at f/8 (2,492 lines), but edges improve to 1,852 and 1,890 lines, respectively.

PZ: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2462581,00.asp

At 16mm it records 2,327 lines per picture height on a center-weighted sharpness test, which is better than the 1,800 lines we use to mark an image as sharp. The outer edges of the image are often a problem area with compact zoom lenses like this, as we've seen with the Sony 16-50mm Retractable Zoom and Olympus M.Zuiko ED 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 EZ. But even at f/3.5 it scores 1,962 lines. There's a moderate improvement in sharpness at f/4 (2,402 lines) and resolution peaks at f/5.6 (2,552 lines).

Notably the 16-50S is tested on the NX30 and the 16-50PZ on the NX3000, but I don't think that should help the PZ much as they have the same sensor resolution.

At the very least with the tested samples the 16-50PZ seems to be the better performer for corner-to-corner sharpness at the wide-end. There is no question that the S is significantly faster at all points in its focal range.

Initially, the zoom ring will feel a bit "tight" (for lack of a better word), but as time goes on - in particular, when you use the zoom ring exclusively - it will loosen up a bit.  So I don't know what "loose" means here, but if it's wobbly, then that may be a another matter that may require sending in for evaluation/repair.

Talking of the zoom ring sometimes this works to zoom and sometimes it doesn't. Are there certain conditions where it won't work for zoom?

Hi there!

Thx for gr8 review. It was one of the points which convinced me to buy NX3000 in kit with these lens.

However back to my problem/finding:

After "unboxing" I've made all the updates (body + lens). Using these lens just for a week and I have noticed that if I turn ON the camera the lens starts to make realy qiute noice/sound. It sounds like buzzing or whirring. You have to be in really quite room to hear it.

Have you noticed same sound / noice on your piece?

Thx for reply.

It's optical image stabilization, it works by moving a part of the lens as it detects movements. It works in two modes, one where it's active the whole time (your case) and it sucks the battery faster and other mode where it's active only while taking a shot (it's actually activated by half pressing the shutter button). You can change it in the menu (mode 1, 2, off).

I find ois to be much more effective in mode 2. Perhaps mode 1 requires too much time for being activated properly.

I still have to update my lens. Did this improve with latest fw?

I`ve owned the Fuji XA1 with it`s 16-50 kit lens and the EOSM with it`s comparable kit lens and both were very good lenses but the Samsung 16-50pz is at least as good a kit lens. It`s also , lighter, and smaller. IMO it is built a bit better since it has a metal mount . And isn`t size and weight two of the most important reasons and supposed benefits of mirrorless?

Personally any of the 3 would do me well and each have their strong suit but of the 3 my favorite is the Samsung .

Just my experience...I have arrived from vacations at Spain. Only took NX300M with 30 mm lens, 50-200 mm and the Power Zoom 16-50 ... were done 4,500 clicks .... 95% with Power Zoom ... and, 5% to 50-200 mm. Just missed in 5% of clicks of a viewfinder ... Summing up the PZ 16-50 mm perfectly met the needs of this trip under all conditions ... day, night, indoors or outdoors ... Good camera and lens. ...

tecnoworld wrote:

I still have to update my lens. Did this improve with latest fw?

It's somewhat better, but it is still not parfocal. Some zooms are ok, but you cannot count on it not shifting focus. Sometimes the shift is so quick it is not really distracting (in and out).