Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Forget Dpreview's B.S., "diplomatic language" NEX 16mm lens is notgood

Reply
Thread Tools

Forget Dpreview's B.S., "diplomatic language" NEX 16mm lens is notgood

 
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-07-2010
http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp

The kit lens however seems reasonably good, or about as good as one
can expect for an 18-55mm kit lens.

http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page7.asp
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-07-2010
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp


Tested it yourself, did you?

--
Ray Fischer
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-07-2010
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 09:50:47 -0700 (PDT), RichA <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp
>
>The kit lens however seems reasonably good, or about as good as one
>can expect for an 18-55mm kit lens.
>
>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page7.asp



You obviously didn't read the comments about distortion.

"Distortion is unusually high. At wideangle we measure 2.6% barrel
distortion, which is complex in character with strong re-correction
towards the corners (making it relatively difficult to correct in
software when required). At longer focal lengths the distortion
changes to the pincushion type, and reaches a whopping 2.4% at 35mm,
which sets a new record for the strongest distortion of this type
we've yet measured."


Wavy line (or "moustache") distortion at the wide and? That's very
bad news. 2.4% pincushion distortion at 35mm? Only cheap and nasty
Cosina wide angle zooms approach this level of distortion. There is
really no excuse for it.

A camera is only as good as its lens(es). NEX will not be worth
buying unless Sony offers better glass. *Much* better glass.

 
Reply With Quote
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2010
On Jun 7, 1:36*pm, (E-Mail Removed) (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> RichA *<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp

>
> Tested it yourself, did you?
>
> --
> Ray Fischer * * * *
> (E-Mail Removed) *


Yes, I did. In fact, I was probably one of the only people in North
America to have gotten shots through it before the crackdown. And
guess what? The pre-production lens was the same optically as the
production. They didn't change anything, they just panicked.
 
Reply With Quote
 
RichA
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2010
On Jun 7, 1:54*pm, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 09:50:47 -0700 (PDT), RichA <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
> >http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp

>
> >The kit lens however seems reasonably good, or about as good as one
> >can expect for an 18-55mm kit lens.

>
> >http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page7.asp

>
> You obviously didn't read the comments about distortion. *
>
> "Distortion is unusually high. At wideangle we measure 2.6% barrel
> distortion, which is complex in character with strong re-correction
> towards the corners (making it relatively difficult to correct in
> software when required). At longer focal lengths the distortion
> changes to the pincushion type, and reaches a whopping 2.4% at 35mm,
> which sets a new record for the strongest distortion of this type
> we've yet measured."
>
> Wavy line (or "moustache") distortion at the wide and? *That's very
> bad news. *2.4% pincushion distortion at 35mm? *Only cheap and nasty
> Cosina wide angle zooms approach this level of distortion. *There is
> really no excuse for it.
>
> A camera is only as good as its lens(es). *NEX will not be worth
> buying unless Sony offers better glass. **Much* better glass.


Distortion should be the LAST thing on anyone's mind. The real
problem is terrible resolution and omnipresent CA.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2010
RichA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Jun 7, 1:36*pm, (E-Mail Removed) (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>> RichA *<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> >http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp

>>
>> Tested it yourself, did you?

>
>Yes, I did. In fact, I was probably one of the only people in North
>America to have gotten shots through it before the crackdown.


Where are your test results?

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ray Fischer
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2010
Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> RichA <(E-Mail Removed)>


>>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp
>>
>>The kit lens however seems reasonably good, or about as good as one
>>can expect for an 18-55mm kit lens.
>>
>>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page7.asp

>
>You obviously didn't read the comments about distortion.


Sony is an electronics company. Should anybody be surprised that
they're not good at optics?

--
Ray Fischer
(E-Mail Removed)

 
Reply With Quote
 
Mark L
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2010
On 08 Jun 2010 05:42:35 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) (Ray Fischer) wrote:

>Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> RichA <(E-Mail Removed)>

>
>>>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp
>>>
>>>The kit lens however seems reasonably good, or about as good as one
>>>can expect for an 18-55mm kit lens.
>>>
>>>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page7.asp

>>
>>You obviously didn't read the comments about distortion.

>
>Sony is an electronics company. Should anybody be surprised that
>they're not good at optics?


By that reasoning, Canon and Nikon are optics companies. Should anyone be
surprised that they're not good at digital electronics?

Go crawl back into your Troll-Hole, FOOL.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2010
On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 17:48:08 -0700 (PDT), RichA <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>On Jun 7, 1:54*pm, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> On Mon, 7 Jun 2010 09:50:47 -0700 (PDT), RichA <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp

>>
>> >The kit lens however seems reasonably good, or about as good as one
>> >can expect for an 18-55mm kit lens.

>>
>> >http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page7.asp

>>
>> You obviously didn't read the comments about distortion. *
>>
>> "Distortion is unusually high. At wideangle we measure 2.6% barrel
>> distortion, which is complex in character with strong re-correction
>> towards the corners (making it relatively difficult to correct in
>> software when required). At longer focal lengths the distortion
>> changes to the pincushion type, and reaches a whopping 2.4% at 35mm,
>> which sets a new record for the strongest distortion of this type
>> we've yet measured."
>>
>> Wavy line (or "moustache") distortion at the wide and? *That's very
>> bad news. *2.4% pincushion distortion at 35mm? *Only cheap and nasty
>> Cosina wide angle zooms approach this level of distortion. *There is
>> really no excuse for it.
>>
>> A camera is only as good as its lens(es). *NEX will not be worth
>> buying unless Sony offers better glass. **Much* better glass.

>
>Distortion should be the LAST thing on anyone's mind.



On the contrary, moustache distortion, especially of this degree of
severity, is something that should cause you to run a mile. Unlike
pure rectilinear distortion, it is not something that is easily
corrected in post-processing.


>The real problem is terrible resolution and omnipresent CA.



The resolution and CA of the 18-55mm lens are both in the expected
range for a cheap kit lens. The distortion is not.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-08-2010
On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 05:29:07 -0500, Mark L <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:
>On 08 Jun 2010 05:42:35 GMT, (E-Mail Removed) (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>>Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> RichA <(E-Mail Removed)>

>>
>>>>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page8.asp
>>>>
>>>>The kit lens however seems reasonably good, or about as good as one
>>>>can expect for an 18-55mm kit lens.
>>>>
>>>>http://dpreview.com/reviews/SonyNex5Nex3/page7.asp
>>>
>>>You obviously didn't read the comments about distortion.

>>
>>Sony is an electronics company. Should anybody be surprised that
>>they're not good at optics?

>
>By that reasoning, Canon and Nikon are optics companies. Should anyone be
>surprised that they're not good at digital electronics?
>
>Go crawl back into your Troll-Hole, FOOL.



Poor Ray, he talks such nonsense.

Whatever Ray may think about Sony, the company does make (or at least
puts its name on) some excellent optics. The 16mm and 18-55mm for the
NEX series just aren't among them, that's all.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tamron releases Sony NEX lens, costs more than equivalent Nikon!!! RichA Digital Photography 2 12-09-2011 03:22 PM
Re: Sony NEX 5 telephoto lens SEL 18200 Bruce Digital Photography 0 09-18-2010 11:17 AM
It sure ain't no NEX lens!!! RichA Digital Photography 1 07-27-2010 10:05 PM
It's official! Sony couldn't fix the NEX lens problem. RichA Digital Photography 15 06-05-2010 04:46 PM
Re: Can film scanners do 16mm? Paul Bartram Digital Photography 0 09-04-2003 06:13 AM



Advertisments