Image courtesy: Photozone
Quick note for US readers: $100 savings on the NEX-6 with kit lens that now sells for $799 at [shoplink 18017 ebay]CameraLand (Click here)[/shoplink].
Our friends at Photozone (Click here) tested the Sony E 10-18mm f/4 OSS lens. And they actually like the lens: “Upon first contact, you are positively surprised about the high build quality. All-metal lens body are fairly rare these days. The lens is capable of delivering sharp results at medium aperture settings.” But they also shared their thoughts about one quality issue: “while the build quality of the lens is very fine, we continue to be concerned about the centering quality of Sony products. Ever since we started the NEX tests, we are either terribly unlucky or the centering is as bad as it is”
I hope Sony is reading this…and improves the mentioned issue.
10-18mm price check at [shopcountry 14170].
37 Responses
not too impressed by the average performances of the last 3 lens Sony released, the 35mm, 11-18mm, and the 20mm
Why average? The 35mm is quite good and tests well. Same for the 10-18mm.
The 20 is quite good if you consider its size. I don’t like the 35mm bokeh. The decentering problem on the 10-18 seems to be everywhere. I read it both in german, english and japanese forums. It’s ridiculous for its price point.
One user even got told that his copy is in working order when his images showed very obvious decentering. I got both kit zooms and one sigma and I’m quite certain I’ll never buy any more native E mount lenses. People that want APS mirrorless with modern lenses should stick with Fuji. Samsung seems to have the same problems.
well, i’ve had all the other e-mount primes except the 35 macro: 16, 19, 24, 30, 35, 50. none of them have quality control issues. i’ve even had two sharp copies of the much maligned 16mm.
the 30, 35, and 50 in particular are great performers. the zeiss 24 is overpriced and imo the only one that’s not worth it. and for me their ease of use and portability make them superior to larger and perhaps technically superior lenses, of which i also have plenty.
You can’t say Zeiss 24mm is overpriced if what you mean is Zeiss is overpriced. The 24mm E-mount is not overpriced compared to other premium Zeiss lenses.
Its “worth” is also rather subjective. If you want the best 24mm AF lens available and money is not an issue, then by all means it’s definitely worth it.
By your logic nothing would be overpriced.
Agreed. I am particularly happy with my 50F18, the 35F18 is also nicely sharp and the 10-18mm is the same price as any other brand APS-C wide angle, but weighs only 225 grams and is stabilized.
Thanks for that. I just ordered my Sony E 35mm f1.8 through Amazon Japan a couple nights ago. Should be arriving this afternoon. Will use with the Sony NEX-6. Although 16-50mm pancake zoom covers pretty much most shooting situations, the 35mm f1.8 will fill a nice niche for when I want to shoot in subdued lighting conditions…. at a pub, birthday party, whatever.
Only thing I don’t like and can not understand is why the 35mm f1.8 E-mount is about double the price versus the equivalent A-mount 35mm f1.8. I’ve since sold off my Alpha system (A65) and lens, but it strikes me as odd why the E-mount version is about double what I paid for the A-mount.
TokyoJerry, answer to your question: oss, build quality, size.
Of course it’s not like every 2nd lens got issues. The number of people complaining esp. about this lens (other offenders are the 16 and the kit lens) is relatively high still. While you seem to be doing well, there are others out there that needed several returns to get a decent copy.
As regards the size advantage, I only see them in the pancakes and the sigmas. The size of the other lenses isn’t really different from a legacy lens with an adapter. There is the advantage of AF and OSS though.
I am quite happy with my 55-210(and my friend’s copy), the kit lens and my 16mm(though I mostly use the Sigma 19). There might be a higher than acceptable rate of failure, but only people who experience the failure complain. I have no interest in the 10-14 zoom, at that price, but many review it highly. There was no need to add OSS to that lens(and drive up the price), and their QA should be stellar(again considering the price). NEX lenses, while built well, are pretty darn expensive(Perhaps the cost of making short registration distance lenses). My 16 and UWA converter works well enough for when I shoot ultra wide.
Size and weight advantage of the 10-18 is quite sizeable, 225g and a pretty small body – you will not find another APSC UWA like this, they’re all fat and heavy. It’s even lighter than the m43’s 7-14.
A good copy of each can hold their own against anything in their price class.
I agree. The 10-18 seems to have phenomenal flare resistance for such a wide angle lens. A huge plus if you consider its area of application. Sadly, most people only care about test charts and brick walls…
The 35/f1.8 is far from mediocre. I’d say the 35/f1.8 is up there with the 50/f1.8. Both are superb lenses. The price may not be justified to some, especially considering how good the Sigmas are, but I haven’t regretted getting both. My samples have no de-centering that I could see. Sad to hear that some are experiencing this. At this price point they should be perfect.
Good encouragement. Thanks for the comment. I just ordered my Sony E 35mm f1.8 through Amazon Japan a couple nights ago. Should be arriving this afternoon. Will use with the Sony NEX-6. Although 16-50mm pancake zoom covers pretty much most shooting situations, the 35mm f1.8 will fill a nice niche for when I want to shoot in subdued lighting conditions…. at a pub, birthday party, whatever.
One thing I can not understand is why the 35mm f1.8 for the NEX E-mount is about double the price versus the equivalent A-mount 35mm f1.8. I’ve since sold off my Alpha system (A65) and lens, but it strikes me as odd why the E-mount version is about double what I paid for the A-mount. Have any idea why the price is about double? Same focal length, f-stop, etc.
It has OSS built in, probably unnecessary for the focal length(but nice). The build is much better than the alpha equivalent, it might cost more for the design to work on a short registration camera, like the NEX; and probably because they can charge that much. NEX is cheaper than the Fuji, it’s only real competition(APS-C).
At a sale once I found two coats. They were identical except for the colour. The black hade the price tag $90 while the darkblue was $150! I asked the seller about the remarkable price difference. Was it only because of the colour? Yes, was the answer! Blue is more attractive!
Jerry, like the others say, it has OSS and slightly better build, but in the end, I think they priced it this way, because they can. Comparing to Alpha mount or another brand leads you nowhere. In every mount or brand there will be cheaper or more expensive equivalents, but in the end it all turns out to be roughly the same. You liked it, you bought it, now just use it. You won’t be disappointed, it is almost as sharp as the 50F18, which is rather excellent on my NEX-7 and also makes for a very compact setup, I manage to put it in my jacket pocket without problem.
The reason for high price, as I see it, is aluminium body, image stabilization, and overall good build quality. Also, a 35mm/f1.8 is more complicated than a 50mm/f1.8, so that explains the price difference there. If you compare e-mount lenses to equivalent lenses for other mirrorless systems, you will find that the e-mount lenses are competitively priced. Example, the Panasonic 25mm/f1.4 on MFT system is equivalent to the 35mm/f1.8 and costs $500.
I’ll pass.
what do they mean with “centering”?
On their site:
Q: What is a centering defect ?
A: A centering defect originates in a misaligned lens element or lens group. The result is a blurry corner, an off-coplanar projection (symmetrical blur) or object edge shadows. A centering defect is normal to some degree – there’s simply no perfect lens out there, not even a Leica. Generally centering problems are more obvious with large aperture lenses and they’re more frequent with budget (third-party) lenses.
wait a second please…anyone complaining about the Sony/Zeiss 24mm f1.8 ought to read the very scientific comparison of that Zeiss e-mount 24mm with the Leica 21mm done by Luminous Landscape…both lenses were tested on a NEX-7…the Zeiss was right on the heels of the $15,000.00 Leica lens and, guess what, the Zeiss EXCEEDED the the Leica 21mm on the edge sharpness tests…anyone who complains about the Zeiss e-mount costing, roughly one grand, doesn’t know a bargain when they see it
Well said. I find it often that people complaining about the zeiss are the sort of people that know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Haha you using that quote to describe a material possession? Oh the irony.
I don’t know if the Zeiss is overpriced or not because I haven’t got to use it myself but that comparison doesnt tell you as lot as it seems. It is scientific but at the same time too limited to make generalizations. The Leica lens wasnt designed for the NEX-7. The Zeiss is. Actually, many RF wides have problems on APS, esp with the NEX-7.
Its overpriced. Some people act as if nothing on E-mount comes close to this the 24 cz quality but the sigma and the 35 1.8 comes very close. I said this before that the price should be about 799.99 not almost 1,200. I returned mine and for that price you can get a sigma 19mm, sony 35mm 1.8 sony 50mm 1.8 and still have lots of money left. It is a wonderful lens but after comparing it to the sigma I could not justify keeping it.
The LL comparison isn’t scientific at all and there are several factors you should be care about:
1) The Leica Summilux 24 (not 21) ASPH doesn’t perform well on NEX-7. In fact it has better edges on Type 240 than on the NEX.
2) Inspite the #1 the summilux actually was better on edges than NEX-7 from wide open to f4 and being the similar after that on NEX-7. Plus, summilux has much better CA control
3) The Sonnar 24 ZE is just 35/2.8 equivalent of full frame. So, I don’t care about how it compares to even more overpriced leicas but to available 35mm lenses, such as new sigma 35/1.4 or canon 35/2. So, both lenses are sharper than than zeiss even wide open and much sharper at f2.8 (compared to “zeiss” f1.8). They both costs less (although the Canon is definitely overpriced as well, compared to Sigma).
So I can only state: the so called “zeiss” (which isn’t CZ designed in fact) doesn’t worth its price. Its quality is somewhat overwhelming (for this price range), and the optical performance rather suits $500 lens, not $1000 ($1300 in europe).
Just curious: do you get paid for every negative contribution, or do you get a monthly fee? BTW, you forgot to mention the keyword ‘mediocre’, so maybe this time you won’t get paid at all?
Hahahaha! +1
-1
It was an argument, not opinion. Be fair.
It’s rather you who is being paid. I hust cannot get if anyone like poor and soft 35/2.8 equivalent for the higher price than superb 35/1.4, which is obviously more expensive to produce.
Interesting review but sadly no sample pictures that give an idea about real life performance. I am also a bit surprised to read “The corners are sort of soft at f/4 but improve to decent quality at f/5.6 and f/8”.
For myself I was impressed by the performance of this UWA zoom even in the corners at 10mm F4. If you are interested in real life samples (including an edge test with crops at 10mm F4) you may take a look at:
http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=133&catid=40&Itemid=2
Agreed! I read your lens test before and I think it is one of a few good lenses for the NEX. Your test is much more realistic and helpful.
Another of the pathetic Photozone reviews….why bother read them when they are very far from reality. Does this guys even test the lenses?
Unfortunately I just returned this lens wich coupled with nex 7 gave horrible results (very soft)on the corners.Mine at 10 mm gave very bad results ,at 14 mm it was ok and at 18 mm it was again not so good. Of all the lenses I had or tried only the zeiss 24 ans the sony 50 1.8 give good results with such a demanding sensor. Still waiting for a great wa for the nex system.