The lens I have does have the querk of being softest in the exteme corners wide open and at F8 as per the review but it is quite tolerable and f5.6 gives good performance. Monochrome, Posterisation, Retro, Toy Camera Effect, Dynamic Tone, High-Key, Soft Focus, HDR Painting, Miniature Effect, Watercolour, Illustration, Sepia, Partial Colour

As I am not a "portrait" lover, I often don't take portraits and I like to walk, so I don't really need the extra 5mm that the 18-55 givesme. But it's up to you. I recently (unfortunately) broke my SELP1650. To make a long story short, my A6000 stopped being able to recognize the lens. I sent it in to Sony and they said it was physical damage and therefore would not honor the warranty. It's fine, I'm over it. I rated it a 10 on all counts because the "competition" is other kit lenses I've used from Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony...so keep that in context. It's not a Canon 24-70/2.8 to be sure, but it's the best kit lens I've ever used.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 Wide open at 16mm, the Sony lens suffers from pretty severe vignetting, with the corners being more than 1-stop darker than the center of the frame. At f/16-22, we still saw light loss in the corners, at just shy of 0.75-stops. At 35mm and 50mm, vignetting levels are almost identical, with less than a half-stop of light loss in the corners at f/5.6. At all focal lengths, as the aperture is stopped down, vignetting decreases.

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. 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 There are very few other options for E-mount lenses, particularly those that feature similar specs to the Sony 16-50, such as autofocus and electronic controls. There is the Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 Di III VC, which provides a similar wide-angle focal length, but offers a much higher telephoto range (as well as size, weight and price). It also features image stabilization technology.This appears to be a common problem with the SELP1650. Sony needs to make the internal barrel from metal, and perhaps some of the internal levers and gears. 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. For the price it is definitely worth it and does not deserve the negative press. In the past I have had two NEX kit lenses and it is better in my opinion, RAW aside, and has a really useful 24mm wide end. It seems to be the Sony lottery Rebecca. I've had a couple 18-55s and 3 x 16-50PZ. Both 18-55s were marginally softer than the 16-50 only one of which I would say is good enough for regular use. It is handy for discreet shooting. So of these two, I would lean toward the 16-50. I do note that you have to watch its AF though. Mine sometimes focuses long when using spot focus for some reason. Easily overcome with DMF. 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.