|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on March 14, 2021 Pros: Cost, size, weight, autofocus, sharpness in the center and stabilization Cons: Sharpness at the edges, variability perhaps in the quality of the specimens Opinion: I had two examples of this objective kit taken with a second-hand A7S. The first one was not good having differences between the right and left edge, with the left less sharp. Given back the first one that was made in china (but it is only a note not to say that all those made in China can be defective) I recently bought back a second always second hand and very little used that turns out to be made in Thailand and that instead does not suffer from this defect at just over 100 euros. Noticing that it is a kit lens and that you can not compare it to Zeiss or G Master I do not find it as poor as we read in many reviews, unless the negativity of some comments is due to poorly released specimens and therefore to poor quality control of the manufacturer. As a lens to be used every day, without pretensions of super brightness of the diaphragm and resolve at the edges, because in the center it is more than good, it does its good work coupled to the A7S sensor and you can get great results. I believe I will not sell it but I will keep it paired with the 7S because on certain occasions I can get good shots without loading my back, waiting to take an A73 or rather an A9 and flank it with a glass corresponding to the potential of the machine. |
 | sent on February 02, 2021 Pros: cost, weight and size, stabilization, maximum aperture, autofocus Cons: Are there really any? Maybe the optics that do not retract completely setting to 28mm but halfway through the stroke. Opinion: But do you really think this lens is so horrible? I bought it in kit with the A7III although almost totally convinced to resell it shortly afterwards. I totally believed it. GIVEN the PRICE at which it is located/sold, I think it is an excellent optics: STABILIZED, bright at 24mm, sharpness not bad at TA especially in close-ups. I believe that for the price it has, it is worth buying and keeping it in the backpack both as a backup and for the exits without obligation, given the weight and the zero dimensions. Even for autofocus I found myself well: he chased a subject fast approaching through the trees without missing a single shot. Absurdly enough for most of the work on commission and especially for an amateur who can't even set sony menus, going to criticize a 150 euro lens is simply R-I-D-I-C-O-L-O. |
 | sent on November 09, 2020 Pros: Kit optics. Remarkable optical quality with intermediate diaphragms (f8-f11). Good zoom feed ring, in grip and smooth but not too much in scrolling. Flare. Cons: Feeling of excessive plasticity. Lampshed all too thin and light. Flare. Opinion: I'm not a professional photographer, but I'm not a rookie either. I have had experience in the past as a photographer and as an assistant in the professional field. This review is therefore based on personal sensations and experiences and as far as I am concerned, it is based on values of optical quality and perceived use, therefore not based on calculations coming from tools. I purchased this lens with an a7 ii as an offer in kits at a price. The great surprise that was in the optical rendering, I repeat, perceived as sharpness, to intermediate diaphragms (f8-f11). I consider it remarkable and unexpected, compared to what I read around. Experience teaches me, however, that from the same perspective, but different matches, there could be qualitative differences. That's not bad in my possession at all. All in all for a handyman's perspective, I think of trips, Sunday trips and any other unprofessional playful activities, it will definitely stay in my kit. I wanted to include the flare both negative and positive aspects, for the simple reason that certainly as far as optical correction is concerned, due to the flare, you see the limits of the project. Flare, however, when used intelligently can add a touch of creativity to our images. My last point is this. The construction quality of the barrel and the lampshed is quite economical with a fairly light wide use of plastic (value for overall objective weight). Nevertheless, the zoom ring gives a good feeling of solidity and the movement is always sweet and fluid, which is not so obvious. In conclusion if you have to buy this new lens in my opinion I would say that at the selling price of the optics outside the kit, you can find better. However, if you have thought of buying a camera with this lens in kits, do it with your eyes closed, or alternatively, by turning to the used market you can find it at hundreds of euros, which for the purposes I have described above you surely you will find yourself well. For all these reasons, I have decided to give a vote of 9 for this objective. |
 | sent on November 01, 2020 Pros: stabilized, autofocus, used price Cons: nobody considered the price of the used Opinion: Recently purchased used for 120 euros with one year warranty. I use it on the Sony Alfa 7 in addition to nikon AI manual focus fixed lenses. The sharpness in the center is good and discreet at the edges. Autofocus is precise and fast, a remarkable convenience. With the Sony A7 it adds stabilization that is not present in the machine body. Recommended for all those looking for a light optics and handyman |
  | sent on September 14, 2020 Pros: Autofocus,dimensions,cost Cons: Missing tropicalization Opinion: A good kit lens, it performs its dignified ness, it is versatile, light, not very sharp at full opening but improves a lot to f5.6 or f8, fast autofocus and excellent in tracking. Despite many negative reviews I consider it great to begin with, if in kit with the machine body it has a low price, I do not recommend buying apart, of course. |
 | sent on September 14, 2020 Pros: Autofocus Cons: All Opinion: An indecent target. Corners few sharp at all openings, is quietly surpassed by vintage optics that cost very little. Useful perhaps to take souvenir photos without bokeh... unfortunately it's not even sharp even at f8. A bottle bottom. It makes little sense to put such a lens on expensive, state-of-the-art full-frame machines. |
| sent on July 24, 2020 Pros: Cost together with the kit, made discreet but closed by a couple of stops is fine, light and versatile Cons: For what is the concept of the lens I do not see any particular flaws... Don't get me wrong the yield even from closed is not comparable to more expensive goals but for what it costs and for its weight is more than good. Opinion: As already written in both pros and cons, it is a discreet lens in the absolute sense, but if we look at it in relation to price and lightness it becomes a valid goal! In fact I read many negative reviews maybe exaggerated. In my opinion, if you want to stay ultra light and carefree this combined with a lightweight fixed can be a valid alternative. In the evening of course the limit of brightness comes out and there it becomes even more complicated to bring out something good but during the day it goes more than well (always compared to its target). |
| sent on July 12, 2020 Pros: Relatively cheap, good mechanics, light. Cons: Nothing. Opinion: I believe that the relatively lower cost of other Sony targets greatly influences the judgment towards this goal. It's certainly not a super lens (I'm not going to list the flaws) but it still allows you to make good quality photos and videos. Particularly good mechanics, fluid movement of manual focus, zoom, excellent focus speed |
 | sent on March 20, 2019 Pros: Cost, weight, lens hood, resolution at 70mm Cons: Edges, sharpness at any aperture especially at the wide focal Opinion: Coming from Fuji (XF 18-55) I can only define "bad" this plasticous zoom from kit. If at 70mm The yield is more than dignified, in the more wide focal lengths, the edges are to say the least unwatchable, even diaphragming. I do not understand how it can be sold (and purchased...) in kits with a Sony A7III! The thing that most baffled me is that, absurd, at 28mm the resolution at the edges is better to TA than to F8... Inexplicable! Taken used "new" by Kit, tried on A7 and A7s and resold immediately. Rated 5. |
 | sent on March 20, 2019 Pros: lightweight - precise operation despite economic construction Cons: dimly - made modest at the edges and with open diaphragms Opinion: I make a premise: each object must be evaluated on the basis of cost. The 28-70 Sony is the classic kit lens, cheap and plastic. If you demand better results, also in Sony House, there are the 24-70 f 4 Zeiss and the 24-70 f 2.8, the first travels from the part of the 800 euros, the second passes the 2000. To think that an opticthat that you buy in kit often costs less than 150 euros, can compete with the other two, is utopian. Buying it by purpose, paying 300 euros, does not seem like a good idea, but if as in my case it is almost given to you in the kit, it can come in handy, as an all-rounder in less demanding situations, or as a spare wheel if you have the "good" lens in service. The first impact is a bit disconcerting: very light, to the point that the A7 II is slightly unbalanced towards the back. However, the operation is precise, without games and mechanical indecisions. It's a "smart" lens, because in the middle the resolution is always more than acceptable, so the photos give the impression of good sharpness, but then you look at the edge at full opening and understand why it is cheap. The ideal would be to use it a little diaphragm, which is not always possible, given the not exceptional brightness. The maximum variable brightness with the focal is not pleasant, but it is the price to pay to reduce weight and size. It is not without distortions but these are always lurking with zooms, even the most expensive ones, you can always intervene in post production or, if you often take photos of architecture, better take a fixed wide angle. The backlit behavior is not bad. Considering the lower magnification required by the FF sensor, the quality at the top is certainly not noticeable less than in APSC devices. EDIT: Rereading the other reviews I thought a little bit. It is clear that this is not a memorable optics, but the difference in judgments, between those who find it acceptable (like me), and those who consider it unwatchable is strange. In particular I was impressed by the review of a person who at 28 mm finds the full opening yield better than at 8, when absolutely the opposite happens to me. I have no reason to doubt the veracity of this person's claim, as I am absolutely certain that MY exemplary behaves in the opposite way. At this point I begin to think that the tolerances of optical fabrication are a little too "tolerant", and that someone "comes out well" and others "come out bad", this would explain many things. |
 | sent on February 20, 2019 Pros: Cost, AF, compactness. Cons: Edge sharpness, microcontrast, distortion. Sony should make an updated version and take it out of circulation. Opinion: Ok is the classic cheap kit goal. I'll say, there's some upside. The negative ones are soon said: drop in sharpness at the sides, moderate distortion at 28mm, zero to 35mm and remarkable at 50-70mm and microcontrast not quite by record. Positives: very sharp in the middle and also on the sides at short distances. At medium and long distances there is a field curvature that sends the sides out of focus. This is the biggest annoyance. In landscapes, if you find the sides you'll face, the problem is the point of fire. try to focus on an edge and not in the center; f11 diaphragm and you'll find a good yield. AF, it's quiet and fast. He doesn't suffer particularly from the backlights. The construction, which is plastic, but is tight, that is, it has no parts that have games, neither the barrel, nor the ghieres of MaF and zoom. In addition, the length remains practically constant from 28 to 70mm. A couple of examples: https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=3094340&l=it https://www.juzaphoto.com/galleria.php?t=3094316&l=it |
 | sent on February 04, 2019 Pros: Compact, light, stabilised, reactive, definite, economical. Cons: Variable aperture... in the video is kinda a problem to manage Opinion: I know, it's a cheap lens, often sold in kits, but I never like to stop at appearances let alone then if we talk about equipment then I gave him a chance! If you want to make a better opinion I invite you to watch a test photo and video on the field, honest and real: Https://youtu.be/tOO2cgj9XMA I tested it in different situations and I think some skeptic maybe recreates:) |
 | sent on January 08, 2019 Pros: Little bulky as weight, good autofocus response and Bokeh effect. Cons: New entry level of the lenses, manual a bit plasticoso, which certainly does not push further to enhance the characteristics of a Sony alpha III. Marginal sharpness drop at 70mm. Opinion: I make a premise: I own it for an early choice and economic restriction in purchasing. I've owned it for almost a year. In the landscape photo where you need the sharpness of the whole field, you notice that the marginal areas suffers a bit. Seldom two or three times gave me hint of vignetting, without the understanding why. It was at least a 24-70, but from here you understand that already exists (but the Gold series) f/2.8 and the economic leap is high. All in all for the cost of the lens, if the photographer, does not have big demands, does his. To me, I personally do not meet for what I want to get from a lens. |
 | sent on December 14, 2018 Pros: Cost if taken in kit (since usually the difference is paltry), weight. Cons: It doesn't make any sense to pair it with Sony a7 for photos Opinion: Purchased only because the body-only version and the one with this kit lens cost the same (Sony a7M3), time 2 photos and already has the dust above: it is a lens to be mounted on an entry level of 200-300 euros, not on a higher end. The quality is low, really too low: in addition to being plastic (which, for what it costs I would not expect), as you might expect it is unluminous, unclear, little three-dimensional, little everything. I really can't make sense of this optics for photos: mounting such a lens on a Sony a7 II/a7 iii and the R sisters, it's like buying a Ferrari and mounting on Chinese tires bought at a discount at the mall. I am not a fanatic of the equipment, in fact, however, I admit that this lens almost makes me miss the desire to photograph, for this is closed in the box. With regard to the videos, I do not know too much about it, but from what I have experienced/discussed with acquaintances who attend the scope, it is not so bad in this area to begin: it has optical stabilization, the dimensions at the various focalties do not change so much that you have to recalibrate a possible gimbal and the AF, although it is not lightning, thanks perhaps also to the Sony bodies, if it gets away; so, in this field maybe it is a little more usable, although a fixed goal, even the most scranided and economical, I am sure it is 100 times better. |
 | sent on November 01, 2018 Pros: Lightness, Price (€50. Difference between camera new only body and new camera col 28-70), Lens hood, stabilization, possibility to use it also on the Sony APS-C mirrorless e-mount. Cons: brightness, general optical rendering at Extreme diaphragms and "long" focal lengths (better on APS-C). Opinion: Light, but plasticous and not very performanant. I got it paired with the Sony Alpha 7 for only €50. of difference in more than the machine body alone. The yield is dignified only at the intermediate apersions (8, 11, 16) and at the short focal lengths, but between 60 and 70 mm the edges suffer from sharpness, distortions and aberrations (partly correctable in PP). The low light is not noticeable in the monitor or viewfinder but it is to invalidate the blur that is not very pleasant. Good for general use and as a travel optics. There is a minimum "macro" focusing distance, so it is impossible or difficult to photograph small objects (flowers, etc.). It works great and makes it much better with the Sony e-mount mirrorless APS-C cameras (alpha 5000/6000 etc.) as the reduced-size sensor only exploits the most central area of the lens and no sharpness problems at the edges of the frame and Even obvious distortions to both the short and long focal lengths (on Sony APS-C The angle of field is equivalent to a 42-105 in F.F.). |
 | sent on October 14, 2018 Pros: economical, light, all-rounder, good value for money (since it is at 200 Euro new), made discrete to TA, at least to the minor focal. Cons: Sharp loss of sharpness at the edges and, at 70 mm, across the frame, automatic MAF sometimes inaccurate. Opinion: It was bundled with the A7 II, at the moment is the only optics I have that allows all the automatisms, absolute allows to take pictures dignified but, comparing the results obtained with this and those obtained with the old lenses Rollei qbm (most of which Zeiss), The comparison is Mercileful. I snapped three sets of images at 28, 35, 50 and 70 mm with aperture 5.6, 11 and 16, with this and with the old zoom Rolleinar MC 28-80 f = 3.5-4.5; The first thing that catches the eye is that the old zoom at the edges is infinitely sharper than the sony, in the center in some conditions the Sony looks like a better skin, but it could also depend on the imperfect MAF with the old (the system of help of the manual MAF with The analogue lenses do not allow to enlarge the image on the screen, so you have to use focus peaking, which is far from accurate); At 50 and even more at 70 mm instead the old is clearly superior to the NEW. Comparing the result between the zoom Sony at 35 mm and the very old Distagon 35 mm f = 2.8, The old far exceeds the new, but very much! Unfortunately zooms and modern fixes with comparable quality cost an eye of the Head. |
 | sent on August 31, 2018 Pros: does not explode Cons: All Opinion: I wonder people like face to advise such an optics. I wrote a more thorough review about it, but I try to summarize. How is it conceivable to use such a lens on camera bodies that at least cost €800? I don't understand, it really goes against every basic logic of photography. You buy yourself a A7R2, and then you put yourself to save on a lens, buying this bottle bottom? The kit optics are born to take the first steps in the photograph. What is the point of making a FULL FRAME view? Who spends so much on a camera body what is it doing with such a lens? The only positive note of this lens is how sharp it is in the center, fine. It is not uniform, it is not bright, the construction makes you laugh, the bokeh pulls it out by entering practically with the lens in the subject you want to photograph. I wonder why here on Juza are the 90% misleading reviews about the lenses. It's okay that you've spent money, but that doesn't imply that you have to invent things that don't exist. This is a lens without meaning, it is as if tomorrow Pirelli made a tire train only for Porsche 911 from €30 each, and people started to say "eh but cheap, however their duty they do, will not be great but for the price are good". If you don't have the money for the tires, you don't buy a PORSCHE 911. |
 | sent on May 23, 2018 Pros: Value for money, Nitidetta, light Cons: A little dark, a little plasticky Opinion: Honestly at the price I bought it (180) I do not find any particular flaws. Excellent kit lens. It's also sharp enough at all apertures. If it had been a 24mm instead of a 28 it would be perfect. I think it will be a lens that I'll bring forward in time, it's fun and especially proportionate for the mirrorless body. As everything is done since the Sony F4 24 70 (tried) in the corners I find it considerably less sharp becomes ideal if you do not want to spend too much on the 2.8. |
 | sent on November 14, 2017 Pros: Value for money. Everything to do. Stabilizer. With light Gusta offers good shots. Cons: All plastic. Opinion: Frankly, I have a lot of fun. For price below 200 euros a good buy. Coupled with A7R I can get good results. Not then expect from a KIT that much. But with the right light you can bring home great results. Speech of the dark with SONY and relative. Having a sensor that supports high ISO well is not a problem. |
 | sent on February 17, 2017 Pros: Price in kit form; decent sharpness (if closed); resistant to flare as required; few chromatic aberrations, even in critical situations; zoom and focus rings rigid the right; I find it rather elegant, yet modern ... almost "nice." Light and pleasant to use, the manual I am comfortable. The goal does not have almost no hiking or with the zoom or with the focus, always remaining the same size, a nice convenience. Cons: dark; cartoon; distortion; standard range too limited; lens hood plasticaccia; lack of values ??on the bezel of the MAF; lack switch af / mf. Bokeh evident onion. the autofocus is loupe and sometimes blatantly wrong. Opinion: I bought it as a kit with a7, whereas the difference between the kit and one body was only 50 Euros !!! For the money is great ... in general, is fairly good. Range of standard diaphragms, is not bright at all. As a standard zoom lens sincerely I am expecting worse: the sharpness is decent stopping down and many clicks are easily usable with important crop, even on the sensor of the a7. We do not rely on AF, which in bright conditions is just decent but after dark it becomes unusable and frustrating; on the other hand the ring of maf is a true wonder, soft to move already with your little finger, but not strong enough to move by itself even while walking and sballonzola the camera around his neck. Like other sony objectives, the modern choice to run in full the ring of maf is questionable and points for and against: never having a fixed point it is not very certain of maf focused on infinity, because & eacutis; there is nothing written on the dial. However, the focus peaking in this case comes to the rescue and I must admit that set to a minimum, allowing you to focus one thousand times faster auto focus lens .... this new tool is a real WONDER and is the true why in the end I chose sony, in addition to unconditional love I had and I have for the EVF (today I could not do without it, SLR viewfinders make me feel almost uncomfortable: D) .rnL'obiettivo cartoon a little 'ta to, but especially a lot distorts images ... nothing that we can not solve in pP, it is important to always remember. sad note ... the sharpness in TA is really poor, the lens produces smooth images, and (few) times presents chromatic aberrations in particular on the frame edges. The flare there is, but it is not too invasive, it is sometimes useful for producing "artistic" shots, you can dosare.rnL 'goal has not af / mf switch, which in other standard sony kit like the old 18-55 instead there and I personally find very handy ... You earn a one-touch button more on the body macchina.rnInfine, the the fact that the lens does not stretch focusing or zooming makes me appreciate a little 'more, usually economic kit zoom odioso.rnDetto have this problem all this .... I buy back? kit in 1000 and over again. Alone? ...... Think not, then now the price has even gone up on 500 and until last month was the 350, which I think is however still too much for a goal like that, to be considered - maybe- below 200 Euros. For me, better focus on two fixed as 35 + 85, or even just have a good 50cc, which will take soon to replace this "morbidone". Better less range of focal lengths, but images still usable! |
 | sent on December 29, 2015 Pros: Weight, decent build quality, stabilization Cons: Photo quality, sharpness, color. Opinion: A feeling of embarrassment. is the effect it gives me this lens. I took it as a kit with a7 and sold shortly after. rnUsata in a couple of releases, including as a main lens, I noticed a poor photo quality rn (I never took home the pictures so bad even with the old aps-c with the SAM 18 to 55, which I consider a superiore..e lens and it's small I liked). rnAbituato then the Sony SSM 16-50 APS-C is really a throwback notevole.rnrnQui feels the sensation of plastic to keep it in hand and also to look at the shots (in fact he was nicknamed plastic8) .. something fake , not well definito.rnUsata once in the studio, I found myself pretty well, but we took F8 / 11 flash lights etc. rnil all very controlled and defined by the "supporting cast" .rnrnPosso suggest it only if you really do not want to do without using the adapter and EA4 abbinara to Tamron 28-75 or an old Minolta 28-70.rnOvviamente not worth what coast, suggest not gutted beyond 200 euro, and still be preparati to worse) rnrnPS: The FE 24-70 that I took after a lens is not particularly powerful, and also certainly not worth what it costs. |
 | sent on June 03, 2015 Pros: Weight; 7-blade rounded diaphragm; stabilization; bayonet metal; resistant to dust and moisture; hood included Cons: Optical quality discreet but consistent with being a zoom lens kit; plastic construction Opinion: Often there is some sort of "hate" towards the goals "kit" or "standard" forgetting to parameterise all on the approach that should be approaching these lenses, which obviously are not born to be "excellent" but to offer a decent quality / price ratio to use a little 'more disengaged the mezzo.rnL'ottica in question is a zoom "standard" for mirrorless Sony FF. Its use is not recommended with a sensor such as the 36mpx A7R, because it would too much to whip the limits of such a view (in fact, the Sony offers it in kit with A7R), while it may make sense combined to the sensors from 24mpx and 12 mpx.rnLa construction, while being in plastic (with metal attack), is good, inter alia resistant to dust and moisture; the weight is contained in less than 3 ounces; This is the stabilizer; the front lens does not rotate, and thenIt is usable with circular polarizers; of note is the presence of paraluce.rnLe optical performance is decent (better than the classic 18-55 for APS-C, for instance); distortion and vignetting present the wide angle (in jpeg automatically corrected on-board, easily correctable in the RAW profile through the lens), good sharpness in the center and the edges Scarsini wide open, it becomes high at the center and the edges good stopping down. For a classic landscape photos, for example, which closes the diaphragm, the performance is more than sufficient. Used a 70mm still it allows you to have a focus in discreet portraiture thanks to a 7-blade rounded diaphragm ensures that the points of light form circolare.rnSe think about maximizing the quality forget about this lens. If you need a practical goal, lightweight, outputs a bit 'more disengaged with your mirrorless Sony FF, the 28-70mm in question can be a good choice. |
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
