Sony Sony 16mm f2.8 on NEX C3, better than old 3 or 5?

Sep 8, 2010
123
London UK
Andy
I used to have the 16mm f2.8 on an old NEX 5 and it wasn't a nice lens. I have recently seen images from this lens on the 5n and 7 and the images look much much better. I'm asuming the images would be the same on my C3 as they are on the 5n as they are both basically the same camera. Reviews are very positive out there! Anyone got any C3 samples?
 

lattiboy

Regular
Mar 6, 2011
68
Can't speak to the differences between bodies, but....

I bought the 16mm on a lark for a cheap price on ebay. I was not expecting much.

On my 5N center sharpness is really, really good. The corners are a little "meh" until f/4-5.6, but unless you're buying a much slower Skopar or much more expensive Leica, I think that's what you would expect. Not to mention the the OOF rendering is actually nice and it focuses VERY close for a WA.

Really can't find much to fault it, especially considering it runs about $150-160 used.
 

Biro

Super Moderator
Aug 7, 2011
124
Jersey Shore
Steve
I don't know if this matters... but I understand the 5N corrects for distortion and CA in Sony lenses while the C3 does not. I'll be reading the answers to the OP's question because I'm trying to decide whether to get into a small NEX system. I can now buy the C3 with the 16mm for $499 or the 5N body-only for $599. If I picked the second option, I could perhaps go for the new Sigma 19mm and 30mm primes for NEX that are due out shortly.
 

pictogramax

Top Veteran
Aug 18, 2011
103
Belgrade, Serbia
I don't know if this matters... but I understand the 5N corrects for distortion and CA in Sony lenses while the C3 does not.
If that is the case, you might want to spring for 5N, because the distortion on my C3 is horrible.
Corners are ugly also, but distortion definitely steals the show (in the negative way, of course).
 
Sep 8, 2010
123
London UK
Andy
How daft is that, not having distortion and CA correction in the C3.:doh:

I'm interested in the Sigma 19mm, hopefully it will be better than the Sony 16mm.
 

Country Parson

Top Veteran
Apr 5, 2011
103
North Carolina
Dan
I don't understand the problem with the 16. This pic was taken with the 16 on a NEX5 last summer. OK, it was at f5, but the rose was at f3.5.

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 

madmaxmedia

Veteran
Nov 10, 2010
43
Los Angeles
If that is the case, you might want to spring for 5N, because the distortion on my C3 is horrible.
Corners are ugly also, but distortion definitely steals the show (in the negative way, of course).
The CA bothers me the most on the Sony 16mm and kit zooms, I personally never liked these lenses. But with the 5N it's like they're brand new lenses (subjective impact to me), I actually enjoy them now.
 

nexolino

New Member
Aug 22, 2012
1
Don't understand what's the fuss with CA... shoot RAW and get rid of it in PP... it's one of the lens flaws that are easily corrected.
 

madmaxmedia

Veteran
Nov 10, 2010
43
Los Angeles
Don't understand what's the fuss with CA... shoot RAW and get rid of it in PP... it's one of the lens flaws that are easily corrected.
That's totally valid if you always shoot RAW anyway, but not everyone wants a 'RAW only' lens. So it's just something to know about the lens going in, not something to automatically exclude it from consideration.
 

S Noel

All-Pro
Oct 5, 2010
124
Casey County, KY (Liberty)
Stephen Noel
I rarely shoot raw, so good lens and jpeg, IS important for me. I understand that others do it differently. And that is one of the things that makes photography so adaptable to everybody, no matter what their desire or skill level. (or software ability)
 

camram

New Member
Sep 21, 2012
1
Same here with me. I hardly shoot raw. I am starting to play with my camera a little bit more. So I am not clear what makes the CA different in 5N, I thought they both use the same lens
 

madmaxmedia

Veteran
Nov 10, 2010
43
Los Angeles
The CA is technically the same, but the 5N removes it automatically in-camera. So it's largely absent from the actual images you get.

It can be removed on your computer anyway, but it's nice to have the auto-removal if you shoot JPEG.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom