Home
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Distortion sony 16-50 kitlens
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2016 3:19 pm    Post subject: Distortion sony 16-50 kitlens Reply with quote

The distortion is insane at 16mm Shocked
Looks like I shot this with a fisheye


#1


Final image:

There is light... by K a r 3 n, on Flickr


PostPosted: Sun May 01, 2016 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On what camera? If remember well ,on the nex3 it appears like this indeed but in the alpha a5000 it's corrected in camera and it is ok in real life .


PostPosted: Mon May 02, 2016 4:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A6000
It's corrected on the jpeg but I always work on the raw file


PostPosted: Tue May 03, 2016 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

!Karen wrote:
A6000
It's corrected on the jpeg but I always work on the raw file

Bad luck ! Wink This is a great excuse to go for some MF


PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2016 7:11 am    Post subject: Re: Distortion sony 16-50 kitlens Reply with quote

!Karen wrote:
The distortion is insane at 16mm Shocked
Looks like I shot this with a fisheye




Yep, before buying a simple standardlens for the Sony i actually read this somewhere at that time, and it did make me decide not buy the 16-50.
Our daughter now uses the 18-55 (besides manual lenses) on her A3000.


PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2016 7:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is the 18-55 better when it comes to distortion?
Because the 16-50 is a great lens. Besides the distortion at close distance on the wide end I really have no complaints about it.
I am now looking at a wide angle prime.


PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2016 8:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's been a while when we bought the A3000. Back then we had the choice between the 16 and the latest OSS version of the 18 zoom.
At that time i've been reading lots of reports and reviews about both lenses and the 18-55 came out as the better choice. I didn't use it a lot myself, at some point i bought the A7, but when i did i must admit that it often surprised me in terms of image quality, for a kitlens it really is a very nice piece of optics.
Some other complaints about the 16-50 were it's handling, the 18-55 feels more like a real lens and can be used manually as well, although i cannot judge that fact myself, i've never used the 16-50.

Our daughter is very happy with it, although she keeps grabbing my Konica lenses more and more..... Wink

Cheers, René!


PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2016 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I use it and have no problems ( jpeg output) Good for a kit . Fits into a larger pocket with the a5000
The distortion in jpeg output is quite normal for a 16mm wide . Very handy lens to carry and use when you want to travel light , not to attract attention , or you're not in a special photo trip and want someting small ,fast, snappy,good enough.
I am using it much too much Wink because all these reasons.The OSS works great!


PostPosted: Fri May 06, 2016 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's well corrected on the jpg but as I said, I only shoot RAW Wink
I am going to look out for an alternative. I am researching the Samyang 12, 14 and 16mm.


PostPosted: Sat May 07, 2016 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

!Karen wrote:
It's well corrected on the jpg but as I said, I only shoot RAW Wink
I am going to look out for an alternative. I am researching the Samyang 12, 14 and 16mm.

I am very curious about the alternatives ....
I have a Vivitar 17 wich didn't gave too much satisfaction in low light wide open the last time I used it , but maybe I made some mistake . In good light it is ok . I am curious about AF also . What about the Sigma 19 ? Any experience?

In fact , I didn't used it for a long time , looking at some pics I made with it in 2011 it's not bad at all for indoors architecture .I have to use it more often