Photoclubalpha

Just looking for recommendations on a replacement for the stock 18-55 lens. A comparable zoom with better build quality for under $700, like something from Sigma or Tamron. Thanks in advance! (Apologies in advance for my noobishness).

how about the Sony 18-135 or the 16-105?

Hi,

It all depends on what you want to use it for.

I own and like the CZ 16-80 mm a lot. Although more expensive new than the options Pako mentioned, it has been a perfect standard zoom for me. It's not that fast, but sharp en good contrast which I want for my landscape shots.

Also, the Tamron 17-50 and Sony DT 16-50 are rather popular model. Never seen or used these before, but read a lot of good reviews. These are faster lenses than the other mentioned options. Build quality of the Sony is better than the Tamron, but the price is much higher.

Mark

Thank you, gentlemen. After checking all suggestions, the Tamron and Sony DT 16-50 are the frontrunners so far.

My vote goes to the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 used it on various mounts and always been happy with the lens.
Very affordable, not too heavy and compact enough for most bodies...most importantly good optics.

bfitzgerald wrote:My vote goes to the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 used it on various mounts and always been happy with the lens.
Very affordable, not too heavy and compact enough for most bodies...most importantly good optics.

Thanks. How does the Tamron compare with the Sony at almost half the price, I wonder?

I've only had a grab of the Sony lens so cannot really say how it stacks up optics wise. The build is obviously better on the Sony, it is SSM v screw drive, it has sealing too and it's a bit bigger and a bit heavier, and slightly wider at 16mm. I did not have a chance to take test shots with one (shop play around)
Photozone have reviews for both as do others, going on that and other ones I'd say they are pretty close performance wise on optics with an edge to the Tamron at the 50mm mark (but copies vary on lenses)

Being fair to Sony the 16-50mm f2.8 is priced quite well (for once) v other brands who tend to have rather pricey lenses similar to this (with more pro like build etc)
I'd narrow it down to do you want/need the things the Sony offers and if not go for the Tamron. I can't really knock the Tamron the price is good and it's mostly a well liked lens bit of a bargain really.

Both are clearly going to be a decent step up v the kit lens

DK did a write up for the lens here this might help
http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2012/02/1 ... -f2-8-ssm/

Thanks, bfitzgerald. Leaning toward the Tamron for price now.

the Sony wins for build, quietness of operation, slightly wider & in-body support e.g. lens correction. That of course can also be done in PP especially if shooting RAW but if Sony has things like AF-D planned to trickle down to APS-C on future bodies then the 16-50 has a far, far higher chance of getting support than the Tamron.
Depends upon your needs, future plans & budget though - the choice is ultimately yours.

My first upgrade from the kit lens was the Tamron 17-50/2.8 and I agree it is a cracking lens. I have subsequently also acquired the Sony 16-80 Carl Zeiss and the Tamron no longer gets a look in. The range is great and I have never missed 2.8 for my style of shooting. The down side is the price. I payed 400 gbp second-hand. The build quality is no improvement over the Tamron, but I think image quality is a smidge better. As said above, in the end it is a personal choice; at least we alpha mount users now have three such lenses to chose from (and there is a Sigma in this range with a strong following too!).

Different lenses really. The 16-80mm is good optically, but IMO it's rather overpriced and whilst the build is "ok" it's not really up to what you expect for the outlay (currently around £550 odd) It's a prime candidate for an update to SSM and improved build. I have used a few and one suffers from lens creep quite a bit (hint needs a lens lock the Tamron has one)

I can't really recommend it at it's current price
The idea of the Tamron is lens speed and f2/8 across the somewhat shorter range is my personal preference. It varies depending on your needs.

Tamron 17-50 gets my vote. It's a great budget lens. It's pretty much permanently attached to the A57.

Thanks so much to everyone for their input. I'm gonna nab a mint condition used one on eBay for about $350 all inclusive.

Sorry I'm late to this topic, but I haven't got a very complimentary report of the Tamron, so I'm glad your copy didn't set you back much. The Sony lens (I own both) performs almost exactly the same as the Tamron, same CA corrections in LR, except a little more on the wide end due to the wider focal length. My Tamron basically fell apart--its front element historically gets loose with the front bezel, and mine had some kind of perfectly concentric deposit (or was it wear?) on some inner lens group that caught flare pretty badly, as well. After I attempted to tighten the front bezel down, following seemingly well-reviewed tutorials online, my lens couldn't get a sharp image outside the spot metering circle at any aperture.

Thats really good advice, Asher. Personally, I only need the 60 mm right now. The problem is that the "spousal unit" affectionate nickname only has the 18/55 right now. Id like him to have something a bit better than that because it just...isnt a great lens.