Sony 18-250 vs 28-75/70-210

[bakubo]

I will probably also take my Tamron 11-18. The new Tokina 11-16 is tempting with its constant f2.8 maximum aperture, but I'm not sure how much I would use the lens wide open--and I suspect I can find other uses in Italy for its $599US purchase price.

Yes, I have found that for very wide angle lenses like these I pretty much never need to shoot them at wide apertures, usually at f5.6-f11. David reports that with the f2.8 aperture though the AF is a bit more accurate though.

[bossel]

My wife and I will be visiting Rome, Florence and Venice in September.

That's really a great trip, we have seen Venice and Florence. You're going to love it. Also its better to go in September and not in July/August when it's too hot. If you can spare a day (I doubt though), Pisa is close to Florence in case you want to climb that famous tower!!

[Andy B]

My wife and I will be visiting Rome, Florence and Venice in September.

That's really a great trip, we have seen Venice and Florence. You're going to love it. Also its better to go in September and not in July/August when it's too hot. If you can spare a day (I doubt though), Pisa is close to Florence in case you want to climb that famous tower!!

We're going on a guided tour (celebrating our 40th wedding anniversary), so I don't think we will be able to get to Pisa. Other stops on our tour include Sorrento, Amalfi, Pompeii, Orvieto, Assisi, San Gimignano and Cinque Terra. I think my aching knees will have all they can handle without climbing any towers! We were originally planning to go in October before we learned that our first grandchild is due on October 12. This will be a fall to remember!

[WaltKnapp]

For me the question was if it would be worth getting the CZ16-80, 28mm on APS-C being soooo long . The 18-250 got lots of praise when it was released, and I love it's versatility, but this test showed me it's drawbacks.

I got the CZ16-80 to try instead of the 18-250 for travel. In a two month foray out west last spring the 16-80 failed. I shot the rest of the trip with the 18-250. The 16-80 is better IQ when it's working, but when it's not the 18-250 is a way better lens. I've made extensive use of the 18-250, not so sure your examples are all that indicative, seem much worse than what I get from the lens.

The 16-80 loosened up and could not hold focus. Sent into Sony, twice, it's still somewhat loose, and zoom is sticky, I gave up on sending it in again. I did buy a second 16-80, which is also loosening up. I'll not be buying a third.

I will in appropriate situations continue to use the 18-250, which with extensive use still performs like new.

I did get the Zeiss 16-35 new off ebay a couple days ago at a extreme bargain. Eventually I'll add the 24-70 when I find a bargain. That is if the 16-35 is ok build. But those two don't exactly constitute a light travel solution.

Walt

[bakubo]

Although I have never done any real testing of my Sony 18-250mm, my feeling was that generally I get a bit better results that you did. I haven't made any shots that more or less try to duplicate yours, but here is a 24mm f8 shot. By the way, I used smart sharpen (250, 0.2, lens blur) on the image.

Whole image:

DSC02343.jpg

(182.99 KiB) Downloaded 1979 times

Center 100% crop:

DSC02343_center.jpg

(216.64 KiB) Downloaded 1979 times

Right bottom crop:

DSC02343_right_bottom_corner.jpg

(78.18 KiB) Downloaded 1979 times

Next post will have other corners.

[bakubo]

Right top crop:

DSC02343_right_top_corner.jpg

(101.08 KiB) Downloaded 1982 times

Left top crop:

DSC02343_left_top_corner.jpg

(112.88 KiB) Downloaded 1982 times

Left bottom crop:

DSC02343_left_bottom_corner.jpg

(88.13 KiB) Downloaded 1982 times

Of course, generally using a FF lens on an APS-C body will do better since you are only using the center "sweet spot" of the lens.

[bossel]

On first sight, yours seems definitely sharper in the corners! But then, I didn't test at 24mm and I was at infinity focus (you seem to be close - I reckon this changes the optical formula) and we have no picture by another lens to compare to. Hard to tell.

In any case, my 18-250 is as it is, I have to live with it. I like it as walkaround lens but it is softer in the corners and at longer FL. I do think the CZ 16-80 will do me a better job in Rome (2mm wider and I can shoot at F4 instead of F8). Compared to the overall price of that holiday, it's an acceptable expense. And yes, I will miss the 80-250mm (will probably take the 70-210/4 with me to compensate).

[bakubo]

On first sight, yours seems definitely sharper in the corners! But then, I didn't test at 24mm and I was at infinity focus (you seem to be close - I reckon this changes the optical formula) and we have no picture by another lens to compare to. Hard to tell.

Yes, this isn't directly comparable. I just went back and tried to find a photo at the same aperture and focal length that had detail in all the corners. Couldn't find one in about 10 minutes of looking and didn't feel like looking any more than that. This was the closest I could find in the 10 minutes though. I just wanted to see if I saw the same results you got. When I get a chance I will try to shoot 3 at 28mm, 70mm, and 200mm at f8 and infinity to see how my lens does.

In any case, my 18-250 is as it is, I have to live with it. I like it as walkaround lens but it is softer in the corners and at longer FL. I do think the CZ 16-80 will do me a better job in Rome (2mm wider and I can shoot at F4 instead of F8). Compared to the overall price of that holiday, it's an acceptable expense. And yes, I will miss the 80-250mm (will probably take the 70-210/4 with me to compensate).

How is your new 16-80mm looking with comparable shots?

[bossel]

How is your new 16-80mm looking with comparable shots?

Hope to get it today!! However when I tested it recently, it was much better, so I hope mine will be as well.

[bossel]

I got it!!! Just had a few mins after work to rush out and take a few test shoots - preparing the crops would take me some hours, so just some words based on my first pixel peeping: Wow!! Even wide open the CZ16-80 beats the Sony 18-250 at F8. In the center the Sony defends itself very well, the more you get away from it, the Sony looses, the CZ much less. Also I find the contrast of the CZ higher. A bush in my testshoot is a rather mushy mass with the Sony, with the CZ you can see different nuances of green.

And thats with a 2 stop advantage for the Sony!! Stop the CZ down to 5.6 and its a complete massacre for the Sony (or do I just have a bad copy?).

Concerning build quality, I was prepared for the worst, but its ok. I got a used one (saved > $300) and its like new. Only 1 year old so probably a newer build and it's not worse than the 18-250 or the KM28-75/2.8. It feels sturdy and zoom and focus action feel smooth and solid. Only a minor wobble at 80mm when I force it.

[roysmith]

Glad you got the CZ16-80, sounds like a great lens. However I too found that your Sony 18-250 pictures look too soft in comparison with my copy of the lens. But maybe is just my imagination. Anyway, will try to make some tests when I have some free time and post the results to compare.

[Dr. Harout]

Congrats Thomas.

[Birma]

I got it!!!

Congratulations on the new lens Thomas. A good price I think. Glad you have a good copy, I am always nervous of second hand lenses until I have them in my hand. Especially as the CZ has had some bad reports.

[aster]

Congratulations!

Definitely looking forward to your photos taken with this lens.

Enjoy!

Yildiz

[bakubo]

Yesterday I was walking around and it occurred to me I hadn't made any quick shots with my A700 + 18-250mm to see how it compares to yours at infinity -- you mentioned that my earlier 100% crops were not applicable since the photo was not at infinity. Handheld with SSS and ISO 160, but good light. Here are some 100% crops.

In this post there is the center, 28mm at f4 (wide open) and f8. More in following posts.

Center_28mm_4.jpg

(140.74 KiB) Downloaded 1893 times

Center_28mm_8.jpg

(130.32 KiB) Downloaded 1893 times