Sony 18 105 Pillow OSS F4 Zoom
If you want to learn mroe about the new and first Sony powerzoom E-mount lens here are some recent tests to read:
ePhotozine (Click here) posted the full 18-105mm G lens review:
Clearly, as this lens is aimed at video shooters, some of the optical issues may not be a concern for people recording moving images with this lens on an NEX camera. In fact, it is very good for this job.
Those shooting stills may be wary of the poor performance towards the edges of the frame at the telephoto end of the zoom, and the wild distortion that is present, as well as the high levels of fringing present. These issues make the lens difficult to recommend to those who may shoot stills with this lens.
Usinglight (Click here) first impression is:
As a photog it was the constant aperture and zoom length which draw me to this lens. From what I have seen until now it could be a good travel lens or even used for portraits.
The Japanese site Kasyapa (Google translation here) also posted firts image samples and impressions
Satva: I was about to get this new Sony Lens for my FS100 but it looks like it has issues. Do you have any idea if Sony will fix the issue with this new lens they just launched: http://www.nextwavedv.com/gear-review-sony-e-pz-18-105mm-f4-g-oss-lens-with-the-fs700fs100/“
0 Responses
I was thinking of buy this lens, but after seeing the distortion on this video, i think ill go for the 18-210mm
You may be able to correct it in the post but you shouldn’t have to – and it’s never really the same. And it’s certainly not just still shooters that won’t like the distortion, that distortion shouts out, it’s ugly – if it was like a wide angle one, it could look like an effect, but not even that. LOL. Way to go Sony, even more for a G lens, way to go Sony.
Yes, huge fiasco from Sony. Why put a zoom rocker on the FS700 and then release an incompatible lens? Had this been a good lens with no such issues I’m sure it would sell like hot cakes to FS100/700 users (me included).
Who would wanna put such a lens on their tiny NEX 3/5/6/7?
I guess that leaves the VG20/30 and EA50 owners as the only potential customers.
+1
I am fs100 user . I am very ,very disappointing . I did not believe distortion can be so bad until I order it . I send it back next day . Nightmare !!!!!!!!!
Shame Sony , how they can call G CLASS ?????
now the G brand seems to mean Garbage instead of Gold. Way to go Sony… =(
Is it just me, or is the E-mount dead? I have a feeling Sony’s not going to give much thought to the future of E-mount and crop-sensor mirrorless while focusing on the A7/7r and the likes…
Of course not.
But is it really necessary to develop expensive premium lenses for APS-C when an A7 can be found for $1400, and there’s probably a cheaper EVF-less model around the corner?
Good god. What a HORRIBLE lens. And they call this “G”? I could have come up with a better design, and I work on cars for a living.
Why is Sony so inconsistent delivering products. Some are exceptional like A7, A7R, 55 1.8, 35 2.8, 135 1.8 and some are mediocre at best but comes with higher price tag. If this is the way they want to do business, people will move to other camps like Canon, Nikon, Fuji, etc.
People would pay the premium if the product is perfect, rich in feature, etc.
I was thinking to move on to A7R from my A900(Which is again one of the better products from Sony). But looks like I need to hang a little bit more to see how things are moving in ILCE world.
Sony is in financial trouble, they cannot afford to demand a Sony tax unless it is really a WOW thing
Nikon and Canon are not consistent either. People just don’t talk about it.
I can’t speak for Canon but the Nikon 35/1.8G DX, 50/1.8G, 50/1.4G, 12-24 f/4 DX (gold ringed), 18-105mm DX, 55-200mm DX, 70-300mm, etc… have all been duds in my experience. The lackluster performance of the standard primes is what eventually made move away from Nikon. I shoot 50mm eq. about 90% of the time. The Panasonic Leica 25/1.4 is leaps and bounds better than the Nikon 35/1.8. The Nikon 50mm lenses are a joke compared to the Sony Zeiss FE 55/1.8.
But yeah, forget about Sony catering to the high end APS-C E-mount in the future. Look how much Canon did for EF-S, or Nikon for DX. Same will happen for Fuji when they inevitably release a full frame X camera.
For a G lens its a fiasco… What were the Sony engineers thinking of?
Premium ain’t premium any more. If they continue like this, they are doomed. Or at least Sony photo is doomed!
Do people even read the test ? From what I see center performance is rated excellent on all three test parameters. Border performance is not so great but thats more to do with the 24 MP NEX7 sensor design more than anything else. Border performance should improve on a 16 MP sensor.
The tester complains that the power zoom is slow but guess what for video you don’t want jerky movements. For photo applications there is a manual zoom ring to use.
Seriously biased review. To me it seems like an excellent lens on an unforgiving sensor.
This lens was aimed toward videographers. If they can’T offer full compatibility with let’s say, FS700 or FS100, then why don’t they make a firmware right away after the lens was released? This only puts Sony in shame. G brand was supposed to mean superb optical quality, and all I see here is distorsion and many other complaints. And this is a G lens…can’t imagine what to expect from non G lenses other than the great 50mm f/1.8.
Sony was never a lens maker, they make mediocre lenses and charge a premium by calling it a Gold class. Minolta was never like that, Minolta G was really a Gold class like Canon L. Only due to Zeiss, Sony boat is still sailing. But those are niche product, average Joe will buy G or non-G Sony lenses but just to find his friend’s Canon/Nikon non premium lens is better. On top of it lack of consistency, some lenses are good, like 16-50 2.8, E 50 1.8, 85 2.8 but look at this one, horrible.
Sony’s imaging division needs four wheels, good sensor(which they have), good reliable ergonomic body(some are good, some downright junk, again lack of consistency), good optics(lack of consistency, ZAs are superb, rest okay) and good speed light system(huge gap here). Sony has only 1 good wheel, rest are punctured or broken. How long will they run?
A900, 135 1.8, and some Minolta glasses are the ones that forece me to stick to Sony. I really like the photos that come out of that combo or A7R and 35 2.8 combo(I rented). But these are not enough to make it No2 brand. Fuji has started with right strategy, soon they’ll surpass Sony in mirrorless and not to mention DSLR segment is already showing a global decline in demand.
None of my friends will buy a Sony despite the fact that they admire my work, this is bandwagon effect, they see canikon in every Joe’s hand and thinks that is THE one that they need. Similar to iPhone craze. Mirrorless is the last chance for Sony to bounce back (A6000 is a great product at right direction) and eat Canikon’s lunch,
Let’s hope they understand
The frustrating thing is Sony can make good glass when they try. For a-mount the 16-50 is a cracking premium kit lens and the easy choice primes definitely take some beating optically… They need to expand the range though – G primes would be nice to see, especially more macro options. Failing that, open the a-mount spec and get buy in from companies like sigma.
Here you can watch my test of these lens on Sony EA50. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7ghsnCwu7k
It seems to work well with the EA50. I have both an EA50 and a FS700. The lens doesn’t work on the FS700 and I’m not very eager to spend money on a lens that only work on one of my cameras. Especially if that camera is my b-cam.
This lens is usless on ea50 either. Focus is not as smooth as it should be. On the tele end of the lens is very difficult focus right becouse focus “jumps.” Its like it focus in segments. Also its not smooth in autofocus. You can all see in my video. I’m not recommend this lens for video. Optic quality is fine i think.
Correction applied is effectively
stretching the centre of the frame, this will result in greatly reduced
resolution in JPEG images.
SONY SHAME ,SHAME,SHAME
For God’s sake it is G CLASS LENS
SONY SHAME ,SHAME ,SHAME
Have you guys actually used the lens?. I own this lens (it is mounted on my NEX6 most of the time). Properly corrected (in software), you don’t get greatly reduced resolution. The video is corrected in the NEX6 (and probably other cameras), resulting in minimal pincushion distortion. The JPEG engine also corrects for this. Adobe ACR and Lightroom has built in profiles for the lens. Here are some examples:
Highly cropped image (not in the center of the original, larger image), as well an image taken from a recent walk (after a recent snowfall).
As a fairly large lens with a power zoom, the lens seems geared mostly towards video use. And releasing a video lens not compatible with their top of the line NEX video cameras is a very retarded move by Sony. People using more expensive cameras are probably more inclined to spend money on lenses as well, generally.
Maybe a firmware revision is in order (for the currently unsupported E mount cameras). For the vast majority of NEX users, however, the lens is something that they should consider.
How many of you, blaming this lens and Sony are using it? I´m using it on my NEX-5R and for stills, it´s just amazing how good the results are. It rivals my 70-200 G SSM, even at 105mm. So, everybody of you never tried it…don´t talk crap.
The biggest issue is that it’s incompatible with the FS100 and FS700. And it would have been a perfect lens for video use, had it worked on those. And people owning those cameras are more probable to spend the money on a fairly big power zoom lens than people with tiny still cameras, I would presume.
Also, Sony put a zoom rocker on the FS700 (which is a €8000 camera) and the first lens with a power zoom they release after that is incompatible with it. Brilliant move, Sony!
I could live with the soft corners but the optical distortion on a lens clearly meant to be a video/still cross-over is crazy. This would have been so great on an FS body!
Every superzoom lens out there has tons of distortion even some of the best lenses like the Canon 15-85mm IS. Never heard of a non distorting lens of this type.
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/canon-ef-s-15-85mm-f-3-5-5-6-is-usm-interchangeable-lens-review-13347
Agree on the lens compatibility but honestly complaining about distortion on such a type of lens is ridiculous.
Good point but it is a questions of degrees as well. The distortion here is so bad it needs NEEDS digital correction for even the untrained eye to not be bothered by it.
How does this compare with the 18-200: http://www.amazon.com/Sony-SEL18200-E-mount-18-200mm-F3-5-6-3/dp/B0042GFYLI/ref=cm_cd_al_qh_dp_t in image quality? (Note that there are two versions of the 18-200, and I’m talking about the bigger, more expensive one.) Thanks.
I’m so disappointed. As an FS100 owner I would have no doubt bought this lens. Don’t understand why Sony won’t release a firmware update fixing this issue, maybe they can’t fix it? Our only other choice as FS owners are to get the SELP-18-200 3.5-6.3 it’s basically the same lens as the kit one but with a built in zoom rocker, but damn that constant f4 woulda been nice ;(
Using 18-105 for about a month now
(on NEX-6 and A6000), I can only confirm that it is one fabulous lens,
both in terms of image and build quality. For stills and shooting jpg – no need to worry about distortions (corrected by
camera), with raw you would just apply the correct lens profile in
software. Believe me, there is no “stretching” effect in corrected pictures, at least nothing that deteriorates sharpness or geometry. I cannot comment the uncorrected distortions in video – not my
cup of tea. I mostly make architectural pictures and I’m more than
happy with the output, however for optimum corner performance the lens needs
to be stopped down to f/5.6. “Shooting” anything else, especially
portraits, I never ever go beyond f/4 – really, it is THAT sharp wide
open, everywhere but the far corners! Build quality wise, once you get
used to “power zooming” idea, the lens feels pretty solid and a joy to
handle – noiseless, quick AF, OSS. The biggest advantage in the field:
during the operation, the lens does not change size nor rotate – all the
focusing and zooming action is internal – the reason why 18-105 seems
so bulky, at the first sight. BUT in reality it is much shorter than Zeiss 16-70 when extended! And although it lacks environmental sealing,
it sort of looks more sturdy than the zeiss, actually. For me, it feels
like a big prime lens. The biggest annoyance: the lens resets to
18mm focal length every time the camera is switched off/goes to sleep
mode. Also, when you turn off the cam, the 18-105 goes to approx.50 mm
inside its tube, probably a safe “transport” position for the
optics – meaning that on start-up it needs some good 1 sec. to
get back to 18mm and be ready for you. Those are the effects of “power zoom” concept, love it or leave it. Other than that, I think this lens presents really good value for the current price. Do not get distracted by “theoretical” reviews by some old fashion “experts” who never layed their hand on the 18-105, yet they claim “the G is not what it was in Minolta time” – go and try the lens by yourself. Trivial but true.