Sony SAL-16105 AF DT 16-105mm f/3.5-5.6(D)

[stevecim]

Does anyone here know if the Sony SAL-16105 AF DT 16-105mm f/3.5-5.6(D) is worth the US$600.00 price tag.

I'm looking to upgrade my glass, sony's prices are really steep in Australia.

At present I have the following

Minolta 50mm 1.7

tamron 70-300mm LD II

Sigma 18-50 DC

Thinking of the Sigma 70-200 2.8 HSM II (would love to get the Sony 70-400G but at AU$3000.00 it's not going to happen) to replace the tamron but I don't know what to replace the 18-50 sigma with.

Cheers, Stephen

[PhotoTraveler]

Wow, I didn't realize it cost that much. I'm pretty shocked it cost that much.

I don't think it's considered bad. It's just that for a bit more money (and if your spending that much, a bit more isn't a big deal) just get the 16-80ZA. You loose a bit of tele, but make it up in optical quality.

It's a lens that it's a shame sony didn't try harder to make very good. As it could be really something. But as is, I'm fine with giving up that 25mm, It really isn't that much of a loss. Just a hair of cropping will get you there with the 16-80.

Right now I'm doing a major system overhaul. After my D700 test, I've decided to stay with Sony. So that means time to address my lens lineup other than just selling. And right now it basically means the 17-35 is going away, maybe even the 2.8/28-75. And some others. The 16-80 will come in place of those. I hated the 16-80 when it came out cause the build was awful, but after trying one again recently, it's clear they have made some real build improvements, it doesn't clunk-rumble when manual focusing any more.

The 70-200 is probably going away too. And will be replaced by the 70-300G. To get me down to a smaller well matched kit. I'm giving up on a 4/70-200G happening anytime soon.

I think the biggest question is sony plotting a re-work for the 16-105 or 16-80. Both are still very young, but if Sony is now going to in-lens motors, maybe they want to update some of the current, sony designed lenses. But still, such thing is not easy, especialy if you do SSM and not SAM. A SAM version would be bad. So I think the 16-80 will stay as is for now. A SSM version would be an all new ground up lens, so shouldn't be a priority.

If the 16-80 is out, the 2.8/17-50 Tamron is an option too.

You didn't say what sigma 18-50 you have.

[stevecim]

Sigma 18-50 DC 3.5-5.6 the cheapest one they used make, only cost $165 it was old stock and orignal made for Minolta AF, it does not seem to work very well with the a350.

[PhotoTraveler]

Ah yes, I know thy lens well. It was the second A mount lens I ever owned. Didn't last long, the 17-35 replaced it.

Honestly, I think you could replace it with the new Sony 18-55 and be better off. The sigma barely worked with the 6MP 7D, let alone a 14MP A350.

I think given you have an A350, which is demanding on lenses, the 16-80 is the answer, or the 2.8/17-50 if you want to keep your ISO speed down maybe a notch for some shots. The 16-105 would probably be fine too, but for 150 more, you can have a much nice lens in the ZA.

Sigma 18-50 DC 3.5-5.6 the cheapest one they used make, only cost $165 it was old stock and orignal made for Minolta AF, it does not seem to work very well with the a350.

[Dr. Harout]

I wouldn't complain of the 16-105. I have it, it's quite a nice lens, but cannot compare it with the 16-80 (never tried it).
Wide open, you might notice a bit of softness around the edges, but the center is sharp. If you're using using on a very sunny day, with just more than f/5.6, than it's very very very sharp.
Color rendition is great.
Some might even suggest the 18-250, but beware of the pink fame issue.
I haven't encountered a problem with the 16-105, except for the ring behind the hood attachment getting loose (no problem with that, you just glue it).
CA is easily fixed.

[Heidfirst]

When I bought my A700 I ended up with the body+16-105mm kit as I was offered a particularly good deal on it & I thought that I would resell it & hence end up with an exceptionally cheap A700 body.
18 months later I still have the 16-105mm as imo it's actually very good for what it is & suits my needs for 90% of the time that I'm not using a tele (most of my photography is done 300mm+ though) - but my needs may not be the same as your needs.

I think that it's worth the ~£250 or so that it usually adds to a kit but probably not the £400 or so that it usually retails for on it's own here.
Maybe see if you can find somebody splitting a kit?

[TomB]

I use the 16-105 as my main glass on my A350. I'm happy with the picture and build quality and with the zoom range too. I like the focus ring not turning when the camera is set to AF. I can imagine a better lens but for its price I don't complain. All common imperfections except slightly lower corner sharpness are easily corrected using software. I use my other two prime lenses just in low light (Minolta 50/1.7, Sigma 30/1.4), usually I try to avoid lens swapping.
If it should get broken I would buy it again.
Some Sony users I know are happy with Tamron 17-50/2.8 - it is sharp and it gives you more light. I prefer the wider zoom range with reasonable quality.

[Richard T]

I've had mine for just over a year, bought for the wide angle mainly as I missed my old Sigma 24 - 70 from film days. Points to note IMV are 1) Its heavy, certainly makes my A100 feel very nose down 2) Zoom ring is too close to the body for my comfort, was quite stiff to start with now it runs out while walking along with it over the shoulder. 3) I tend to use 100ASA, therefore usually quite wide open - so notice the lack of corner sharpness more than possibly others - UK climate being what it is. But can be stunning in the right light. I haven't conducted any kind of formal lens test. 4) Very useful zoom range is a huge advantage.
Summary - Most of the time it's fine but I still have a nagging feeling I should have spent the extra £100 & got the CZ 16 - 80 ( What £500 for a lens - Scrooge lives !)

[bossel]

Some might even suggest the 18-250, but beware of the pink fame issue.

Darn - I have the 18-250 and didn't even know there is a pink fame issue. Do I miss something ? Is my lens obsolete know?

[stevecim]

Thanks all, I think I need to save a few more dollars, the SAL-16105, sell for around $1100.00 Australian. looking at Sony RRP they don't have many lenses under $1000.00 in Australia