20-50mm or 16-50mm lens

Hi, i am interested to buy a samsung camera. possibly an nx3000 because of the low price.
I shoot 99% oudoors, mostly landscapes and videos. can you please recommend or comment on 20-50mm and 16-50mm?

Thanks in advance

Personally I'm a fan of the 18-55 among the kit lenses, not sure if it is offered as kit with that cam though. The general consensus I believe will favor the 16-50 PZ kit lens. Need to be a little careful saying 16-50 because there is also the 16-50 f/2.8 S lens. The PZ is nice for a kit lens, decently sharp, light, and compact. Also offers that wider view that the 20-50. I haven't owned a 20-50, so I won't day much there. I know the dpreview search is bad, but there have been many threads on this before that you can probably find for a more detailed read.

I've got the NX500 with the 16-50 PZ kit lens. It's very good for the price, and fine for landscapes etc in good light, and whenever you can stop down a bit. It's also light and easy to handle. For low-light conditions I have the 30 mm prime as well: everybody loves that one.

David

nikolasph wrote:

Thanks everyone who participated so far.
i have the option to buy a kit lens.
It is either the 16-50mm or the 20-50mm. there is no mention of "PZ" on the lens specifications.
I wouldnt buy a secondary lens because samsung withdraws from the camera market.
those you would like to advice me, please keep in mind that i shoot outdoors.
street photography, landscapes and videos.

Thanks so much

If you shoot videos then definitely go for the 16-50 as it has ois.

I wouldn't rule out getting a second lens. The 30mm plus the Nx3000 would be an awesome compact camera.

The 16-50 is as good as it gets , unless you have extra cash  and / or a specific need for something marginally better. Honestly under the conditions the OP mentions it`s going to be hard to see better IQ even when spending much more cash.

I can't compare the two cameras. but everything I've read suggests that the Sony kit lens is far inferior to the Samsung's, with serious vignetting.

David

nikolasph wrote:

Thank you,
Guys,I have been adviced to look fora second hand Sony a5000, too.

It is 50Euros more expensive than the Nx3000 (kit lens is included).
do you think it worths the extra 50Euros?

Thanks

If a kit lens is important to you, stay off Sony, its kit lens is the worst of the brands. I would take NX 16-50 PZ over the 20-50mm because of the wide end which is better for landscape, if you use 20mm on the 16-50pz, the edge will be better than the 20-50mm. But even at 18mm it is very good. 16mm is still very very usable.

I`ve got both lenses , a top copy of the 20-50 and I`m sure a very good copy of the 16-50 (because it is not decentered)

the 20-50 is perfect everywhere at 20mm even wideopen for sharpness, there`s minimal CA too , it betters the 20mm prime by a margin both lenses at F3.5 and is as sharp as the prime !

the 16-50 needs to be stopped down to F5.6 to be good, it`s pretty soft all around the edges (top and bottom as well as sides) wideopen and the lens never gets as sharp as the 20-50 does too even at F5.6

at 50mm both lenses suck big time, very soft if shot further than garden distance .. at infinity , they`re that bad that I`m sure with an NX500 you`d not lose anything shooting at 16mm / 20mm and cropping and upsizing !! . I`d say class these as 16/20mm primes which zoom if absolutely desperate or doing closeups

I have used drastically decentered samples of both , sadly Samsung seem as bad as Sony for sample variation .

Build is a sure fire win to the 16-50, the 20-50 feels like its going to fall to bits and I`m sure mine is on the verge of just that, I`ve had it since the NX200 days as it`s a top sample so has been hammered , also its a pain having to "open" it before using it - the 16-50 extends on switch on and the electric zoom, on the ring is just fine . the 20-50 not having OIS isn`t a biggie, the OIS on the 16-50 seems pretty useless anyway (as it is on the Sony 16-50) , it`s nothing like the OIS in Panasonic kit lenses by any stretch .,