Joined in 2023 
82 
63 About this deal
The small, non-foldable viewfinder is bright and sharp, and the fast motorised zoom is adjustable. There is room for improvement when it comes to video recordings. The quality of the images with detailed and sharp photos is convincing. Also the easy handling can be named as the strength of the device. On the other hand, it was viewed more critically that the flash is a bit weak on the chest and red tones in videos are sometimes over-saturated. Cheap Sony A6000 Camera in the UK
As a kit lens, the Sony SELP1650 performance is still acceptable. It is compact, lightweight, and has a decent appearance. Although it suffered a lot from barrel distortion and light fall-off (vignetting/shading) at the wide-angle (at 16 mm), but if you only shoot in JPEG format, then the problems would not bother you at all. Its power zoom offers a smooth zooming experience for video recording. At the same time, the OSS is useful for shooting in low light condition and help a lot for stable video recording. The sharpness of photos may not please everyone here, but it won’t let you down (so much) neither. Lens design is a juggling act, and optical engineers have to decide how to trade off between sharpness, CA, shading (“vignetting”) and distortion. The ability to correct for some of these shortcomings in the camera, post-capture means that lens designers can allow some parameters to drift, and in the process achieve better results in the other areas. This is common practice for Micro Four Thirds lenses, but the Sony 16-50mm is the first example of this at work we've seen in an E-mount lens, however it probably won't be the last. The uncorrected RAW files show really dramatic amounts of geometric distortion, that's corrected-out by the NEX cameras in their in-camera JPEGs. The lens is DURABLE. I was skeptical about the build quality of such a lens. But it took a tough test pretty well. My camera was splashed by a big icy wave on a glacier lake with this lens on when I was traveling in Argentina. Water immediately went into the lens, but caused no malfunction. After a while, some vapor started to form inside the frontal element, but a night on a heater solved the problem. For a full electronic lens, that was a quite respectable result. And who cares if it really breaks? It's only 150 dollars after all. The Sony SELP1650 covers a 24mm – 75mm focal length in 35mm equivalent which is enough for the basic daily shooting. The maximum apertures are F3.5 and F5.6, and the minimum focus distances are at 25 cm and 30 cm on the wide-angle and telephoto side, respectively. It comes with the power zoom feature, which provides highly smooth zooming during the video recording. A focus/zoom ring is found at the front of the lens, it is smooth to turn, and there is no endpoint to stop turning the focus/zoom ring; it also has a built-in OSS, which is great and powerful for low light shooting or video recording. The Sony 16-50mm is equipped with Sony's Optical SteadyShot image stabilization technology, which worked quite well. See our IS Test tab for more details on this.
The other option would be to forgo the zoom lens, and buy a set of prime lenses. Sigma makes a set of E-mount prime lenses: 19mm f/2.8, 30mm f/2.8 and 60mm f/2.8, and there's also the recently announced (as of this writing) Carl Zeiss Touit series of primes: 12mm f/2.8, 32mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/2.8 (not yet released). These would allow you to have a similar range of focal lengths with much wider apertures, but at the expense of more lenses to carry and a much higher price. The lens is not compatible with a lens hood, but does accept 40.5mm lens filters, and ships with front and rear caps. So, if you are going for a new zoom lens anyway, why not get a really good one? It will cost you a bit more, yes, but it will feel like you've got a completely new camera. I've searched the internet and the best price I could find was here: http://www.eglobalcentral.eu/sony-af-e-16-70mm-f-4-za-oss-objektiv-sel-1670z.html
This lens isn't a ''constant'' lens, in that as you increase the focal length, both the maximum and minimum aperture sizes decrease. The following table reflects the aperture changes as you zoom: Focal length This lens isn't specifically built for macro, with maximum magnification of 0.215x and a minimum close-focusing distance of around 9.8 inches. This is my first Nex lens and camera. It was part of the Nex 6 kit. I have experience with both Canon and Nikon DSLRs and this kit lens ranks well with those. I went to primes instead, giving me the sharpness and better apperture, just to find me carrying 4 lenses around and getting more and more annoyed with changing lenses on the go. I agree that neither lens is perfect, but if you are deciding between only those two lenses I have to say that the 18-55 has a slight edge in IQ. While the 16-50 has an advantage on the wide end, the 18-55 is a slightly better lens. You can get some pretty good shots with both lenses. There are much better lenses out there but if these are your only two options and the larger size does not really bother you, I would go for the 18-55.Chromatic Aberration appears very well-controlled on the Sony 16-50mm. At both 35mm and 50mm, there is very little difference between CA in the extreme corners of frame vs. the overall average. We do see more CA in the corners at the 16mm focal length, with a slight increase at f/8, but the CA is still quite low for a wide-angle zoom lens. CA is however suppressed by the camera body by default in JPEGs, and during RAW conversion via an embedded lens profile which cannot be disabled in Adobe Camera Raw. Does anyone know if this is compatible? It seems to be cheaper. Are there differences? Is it still compatible with my A6000? Do you prefer size or traditional zoom ergonomics? Besides that, there is not a whole lot of difference in IQ. I've had both, prefer the 16-50 due to it's size and 16mm wide setting. If you stop this lens, and use it in good light, it does pretty good. Corners at wide angle are not great, but the 18-55 is very good as well. The 18-55 does take 49mm filters which is pretty common for Sony APS-C lenses. That being said, you can grab a 40.5-49 step up ring and an extra 49mm cap and leave that on the 16-50 when you think you are going to be using filters. This lens is retractable like a point-and-shoot camera. When the camera is powered on, this lens will need a few seconds to extend itself before being ready to use. It collapses itself when it is not in use, and the height is only around 3 cm! It’s so compact and looks like a pancake lens. It makes the NEX camera more compact and portable without having a cheap feel.However, the lens is criticized for its fish-eye-effect-like barrel distortion on the wide-angle side before being officially available on the market. So how is its optical performance? Is it worth your money to buy it for the compactness? Let’s look at the following review. Key Specification
Sharpness and contrast are on par with the best lens I have used through 30mm (e.g., I have used Nikon 14-24mm Sigma 17-50mm, and Canon 10-22mm). However, at 50mm, look elsewhere for critical shots. Sharpness and contrast drop off considerably, and the difference from primes at the FL is substantial. However, it is still serviceable. For most shooting at normal (non-pixel peeping) sizes, differences are acceptable.I loved using my 16-50. I took a lot of greatphotos with it, because it was portable enough for me the bring everywhere. But the issue I have moving forward is if I buy another kit lens, will it be a problem when using it incold weather again? I love using my prime lenses, but I find zoom lenses to be very versatile especially whentraveling.
I got my original NEX-6 with the 1650. I love the range, size, and feel of the lens. I like that it has OSS. Again, shooting macro, I use an off camera flash with diffuser but would expect to use the A6500 in good light for the most part.The sharpness is on par with the much more expensive 10-18 and focusing speed is yet to be beat among other E-mount lenses. The level mechanism is very handing for video. Going slightly of subject here, but I think it's worth a mention, as you are looking for an 1650 replacement. I have the 1855, always had it, never used it, for several reasons. Most of what I shoot is macro but with my A77ii rig. I got the A6500 to try and move into other areas. Strangely, at 16mm at f/8, we saw the largest difference between sharpness at the center vs. the corners. The center of the frame was quite sharp, but the corners, conversely, were very soft. This is unusual in our experience; normally sharpness becomes more uniform across the frame as you stop down. Inside the barrel sit 9 lens elements in 8 groups, with one ED and four aspherical elements. The aperture mechanism has 7 blades for a fairly circular aperture.
Great Deal 
New Comment