|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on March 31, 2022 Pros: Quality at 7.1/8 , really good and stable zoom Cons: Wide-angle error but negligible in post-production Opinion: Decent quality , sin the error in wide angle the sensor is not covered and there is a strong distortion ... is correctable in post production if you shoot in jpg the error is automatically corrected ..... used over aperture of 7.1 or 8 has a good yield, at more open focal lengths you can also make a fairly good blur but there is not the sharpness of a wider closure |
 | sent on February 25, 2022 Pros: Sharp, lightweight, robust, AF, wide focal range, stabilized Cons: Dark, high price if not purchased bundled. Opinion: Purchased with a 6400 kit after seeing a comparison with two other Sony APS-C zooms, the 18-105mm and the 55-210mm on which he won hands down on both. He is a great all-rounder, the images he produces are very sharp and well detailed. In my opinion it is better to take it only if purchased in a bundle, otherwise at the same price you can find other all-rounder optics certainly better and brighter at Sigma or Tamron. |
 | sent on February 16, 2022 Pros: Sharpness, portability, autofocus (Sony rarely disappoints in this respect) Cons: Dark (but you already know before buying it), not exceptional build quality (also predictable given the price), vignetting (unpredictable and therefore more serious) Opinion: Very compact and lightweight all-rounder, which in optimal conditions reaches the sharpness of the fixed. The bezel of the MAF is a bit plastic but we are seeing the price. The maximum aperture 3.5-5.6 makes it usable only in satisfactory light conditions. Defect that I notice most is the vignetting at TA at any focal length; I doubt that the problem is more intrusive in my specimen, I do not have the counterproof. In some photos you notice more in others less, but it is a defect that is not expected before the purchase so just report it. However, I gave it a high rating because as a kit lens to start it is more than good, and also because it has proven to be a very valid travel lens. |
| sent on February 16, 2022 Pros: Sharpness, portability, autofocus (Sony rarely disappoints in this respect) Cons: Dark (but you already know before buying it), not exceptional build quality (also predictable given the price), vignetting (unpredictable and therefore more serious) Opinion: Very compact and lightweight all-rounder, which in optimal conditions reaches the sharpness of the fixed. The bezel of the MAF is a bit plastic but we are seeing the price. The maximum aperture 3.5-5.6 makes it usable only in satisfactory light conditions. Defect that I notice most is the vignetting at TA at any focal length; I doubt that the problem is more intrusive in my specimen, I do not have the counterproof. In some photos you notice more in others less, but it is a defect that is not expected before the purchase so just report it. However, I gave it a high rating because as a kit lens to start it is more than good, and also because it has proven to be a very valid travel lens. |
 | sent on September 13, 2021 Pros: Lightweight, compact, portable, also good for daytime street. Cons: Don't expect a zoom much above average. Opinion: It is the only lens to which I combined the a6400 that I resold after 8 months. All in all he does his duty well to be a handyman, but only during the day. Sometimes it loses fire. Sharp the right, even at 135. It does not excel in anything except portability. It is in fact light and compact compared to the focal range, so in the daytime street it can entertain a lot with more than satisfactory results. |
  | sent on May 27, 2021 Pros: Focal excursion, weight, autofocus. Cons: Plastic construction, sharpness, 18 mm that do NOT cover the sensor frame Opinion: Good lightweight and versatile travel zoom. Used for panoramas from the best to F8 and is ideal for generalist use. Unfortunately, from the idea of a low-robust and plastic zoom and, above all, at 18mm it highlights a clear design error: the lens does NOT cover the size of the sensor and in raw format leaves the four edges out of the frame. |
user215492  | sent on March 02, 2021 Pros: Weight, sharpness, compactness Cons: raw at 18mm Opinion: had the metal barrel and focal range 24-135, it would have been the almost perfect zoom. From 24 to 135 it has very little geometric distortion, little chromatic aberration and sharpness is that of fixeds. Most likely optical engineers would be able to build almost perfect goals, but they don't because then the market would stagnate. Otherwise you don't explain the vignetting that never disappears and the geometric distortion from fish eye to 18 mm |
 | sent on October 11, 2020 Pros: Good all-rounder, solid, sharp enough with good af. Cons: 18mm vignette ,resolvable quietly in post production. Opinion: Good all-rounder lens for Sony aps-c, from the best from f8 to f13,of course does not have the detail of a fixed lens but, if used in the right way with the right times, it may surprise. Great as the only lens to take on holiday. Taken used by Rce with 2 years of warranty I would recommend it to those who, like me, prefer to reduce weights, costs and changes of optics when on vacation and photograph to have a memory. For more demanding outings or for a photographic "project" there are better performing lenses. |
user210403  | sent on September 23, 2020 Pros: Very sharp, light, autofocus... Etc.. Cons: Nothing?? Opinion: Really a great zoom, higher than the competition. Quite small and light. Good materials. It is very sharp in the center already at full opening, the edges a little less (but they are not even evil), closing to f7, 1 you get a very high sharpness all over the frame. has little to envy even the brightest fixtures. He beats me with my sigma 30 1.4 dn. For still life and portrait the difference with my nikon 18-140 is abysmal... Yet outdoors, and even in sports photography, the differences are very thin and even the Nikon is doing great. Nothing to say about autofocus and stabilization. They work great. |
 | sent on September 22, 2020 Pros: Lightness, autofocus, versatility, sharpness (for lens type) Cons: Plastic, 18 mm vignette (automatically corrected) Opinion: I bought this lens almost a year ago and but I use with satisfaction in coupled to my a6400, as I mentioned in the pros has an enviable sharpness to be a superzoom, the autofocus is fast and quiet. Purchased as a kit is definitely to have, buy it individually for 600 euros even not. The construction is a bit too plastic, it should not be tropicalized but I used it in Norway in the pouring rain for several days and did not give me any problems. The 18 mm vignette in the elaborate raw nn shot is exaggerated it seems like a design error, but still with a click it solves everything |
| sent on December 04, 2019 Pros: Sharpness, perceived quality, IQ, compactness, versatility, quality/price Cons: at the moment nobody Opinion: Purchased from about ten days with already black friday discounts (449 euros) and tried in various conditions with already 5-600 shots. I wanted something more performing than the 16-50 especially for the trips to be flanked by the SEL 50 f1.8 as a luminous optics for shots in low light conditions for my A6000. The build quality looks great and I find it difficult to understand what material is made (metal alloy? high tech plastic?). Compared to the 55-210 it is slightly less bulky but has practically the same weight, of course it also has 100 mm less focal but a sharpness and a much higher versatility. The advantages over 16-50 are obvious: quality and focal excursion but the footprint is considerably superior so maybe the tiny pancake continues to play its role. As for corrections and vignettes, corrections are automatic, in the camera, if you shoot in JPG while for RAW corrections are part of the lens profile when developing with Lightroom.... so you don't see them. Frankly I did not notice anything strange at the corners even expanding the image, except a slight decrease in sharpness that I would define physiological lysdropping on a superzoom that in all respects costs less than 500 euros. Surely a triad of fixtures would offer even more sharpness and brightness, but thinking of making continuous changes of objectives outdoors, maybe with wind is absolutely unthinkable while the focal range of this lens allows you to do almost everything in perfect peace with a limited economic investment. Excellent stabilization and FAST AF. Overall I would say that it is a very good versatile lens to use mainly outdoors but that with the right lighting can say its even indoors. Recommended. I inserted a gallery of photos taken in difficult conditions with this zoom: https://www.juzaphoto.com/me.php?pg=283621&l=it |
 | sent on November 08, 2019 Pros: Exceptional sharpness, weight and small size, reduced lengthening, LIGHTNING AF. Cons: Brightness just enough Opinion: I have owned a Sony A6400 for three months that I had purchased with the 16-50 kit lens to make mostly videos, since I already own a Canon reflex for photos. I made beautiful videos, but when I dared to take pictures, I immediately noticed the bad quality, enlarging even to 100% I noticed "heartosiness" of the images and total distortion at the edges, which seemed blurry. Very disappointed with the photographic aspect, however important to me, and after hearing various opinions, both online and personal, which attributed the very poor quality to the lens, I determined to replace the optics, and I bought the 18-135 f. 3.5/ 5.6, however, which everyone said was inbright. As if by all, everything changed! Little on the video side, cmq improved, but hugely from the photographic side. Unprecedented image quality and definition, exceptional sharpness, amazing details, autofocus so fast to another planet. The qualities of the machine were "castrated" by the bad optics kit, and the new lens allows you to make the most of the qualities of the A6400. Light and solid optics, stabilized, and low brightness and compensated by the possibility of climbing with iso to at least 2500 without any problem. I also purchased the lens during an offer at a considerable discount. I am very satisfied, great purchase, what a tip. |
 | sent on April 06, 2019 Pros: Sharpness Compact Versatility Cons: Price.... Not very bright Opinion: I State that I prefer the maximum sharpness and consequently I always try the objectives that reflect this feature without getting too economically. I have owned the fixed Sigma 28 F 2.8 and Sigma 30 f 2.8 of which I was fully satisfied, later I switched to the Sony 18 105 F 4 with which I had a contraked relationship as to sharpness never convinced me too much..... And hence the breakthrough, I managed to regain the clear clarity I was looking for, I absolutely regret the two fixed Sigma indeed.... Comparing and crossing shots the Sony I find it much sharper. MTF tests are always sharper than the Sony Zeiss 16 70 and Sony 18 105 F4. As if not enough has a focal range of all respect that allows you to leave the other lenses at home. Its little brightness has never created me any problem as I prefer panoramas and in low light conditions at the lower focal length is still maintained on a value of 3.5-4 plus being stabilized allows me to shoot with relatively low times . Very Compact and what not just has the switch on the AF/MF barrel. Only downside I think is actually the price definitely high. |
 | sent on August 06, 2018 Pros: Compact and light for its focal length; Materials and sensation to the touch; sharpness and colour rendering; Autofocus and OSS very efficient. Cons: Soft angles to the minimum focal; Chromatic aberration at TA, but correct in the room (or in post production). Opinion: It is the lens that I expected as a travel handyman, I would say that for this use is perfect. It is very well coupled, and balanced, like weight and clutter to my A6300, I can literally carry them "around my neck" for a whole day without fatigue (together with two spare batteries and a CPL filter). Excellent image quality, much higher than the two kit lenses. Absolute practicality. I highly recommend to those who like me prefer not to change too many optics during the exits with the machine, without sacrificing the final quality. |
| sent on July 01, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, great versatility, construction, compactness Cons: Price Opinion: The community despises this goal, but in my opinion it is wrong. For the use that one makes it: an excellent all do without having claims in low-light or portrait (there even if you have a fixed F4 you can not do both). Excellent stabilization and contrast. The focal equivalent (27-200) allows you to essentially make the composition you want. Very solid, compact and light. The variable aperture is not a problem also because it is difficult to use the lens at minimum apertures (less than very special cases). Only real flaw is the cost-considerable-but there the only one is to wait and look for a good deal. If one only takes pictures, this whole life compared to the Zeiss 16-70 and the Sony 18-105. |
 | sent on June 17, 2018 Pros: Detail at the remarkable center (even at the extreme Tele), versatility, solid mechanical construction, limited protrusion of the barrel to the maximum tele Cons: Brightness (but for that there are the fixed), detail in the suburbs (but that you can ask for more at a handyman zoom?) Opinion: Here he is here in my hands this handyman Buietto, which so little enthusiasm aroused at the time of the announcement. In fact, the numerical characteristics do not tickle the most impelled fantasies of the amateur (f 3.5 to 18 mm, but then just put your hand on the zoom ring to see the entire upper right away), but you also have to consider the general role of This lens. Taken in hand the 18-135 from an idea of solidity and construction well realized. It seems sturdier than the ultra-light Zeiss 16-70, not so much for the heavier weight (however well balanced on the A6500) as for the good feeling it returns by rotating the focal ring. Rotation all in all limited, since in a quarter turn you move from maximum wide to maximum tele. Of reflection also the elongation of the barrel is limited; Even null until 24mm! Very convenient (for those who use it) the AF-MF switch button on the lens. For me this zoom replaces the Zeiss 16-70, which I greatly appreciated, but which I always used as a travel handyman. Handyman for handyman, better one with greater excursion and that maybe allow to leave at home even the 55-210. The only perplexity was the surrender regarding contrast and tightness to the backlight, but sincerely in these very first releases, I did not notice any glaring differences. Also with regard to the definition I think two similar objectives: detailed in the center and much softer in the periphery. Of the 18-135 I was favourably impressed with the surrender even to the extreme tele. In the end I am well satisfied with the change and versatility of this 18-135. |
 | sent on March 01, 2018 Pros: Clear lens, excellent, light, small, travel optics and handyman. Cons: Distortion, a bit dark and maybe the price. Opinion: I have owned it for a week now .. rnI really like this goal, it's really small and light! It is sharp in the center and slightly soft on the sides. Oss very efficient. rn Good construction quality, it is not tropicalized.rnIf taken in raw, you will see a little distortion and vignetting at 18-19mm which will then need to be corrected in post. If you shoot in Jpeg will do all the car and you will not notice anything.rnI use with a sony a6500, it seems the perfect combination! RnEsing a zoom of course the quality is not that of a fixed.rnrnThis opinion will be updated as soon as more time passes and I will know the lens thoroughly. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
