Sony 16-50mm f/2.8 DT A-Mount Zoom Lens

2021-10-13T20:00:00

A bit bulky but I guess that's what you get if you want a F2.8 aperture. Love the zoom range for the low light capture. I'll always have this in my camera bag when I'm out shooting.

100625

Originally posted at

2020-12-14T19:00:00

Perfect upgrade over my kit lens a Sony 18-55 sam II which at the time was ok but noisy when filming. This lense with 2.8 constant aperture is a dream to use, heavier than my old 18-55 but feels just right in the hand, on my a57 it feels well balanced with the body. Came without a UV protection filter and genuine Sony lens hood both of which are now resolved it looks the business. This is my first SSM lens from Sony and now will not be my last, it just sucks in the light and focuses quickly in almost silence. I say that because I have filmed with this lens and I cannot hear it change focus. Overall I love this lens and without a doubt this will be my most used glass in my kitbag.

Rayzee

Originally posted at

2020-03-03T19:00:00

I've had this lens over a year now and even though it's for APS-C cameras - on my full frame A99II it is superb, really sharp images and near silent focusing. I use this for YouTube work, interviews, landscapes, portraits and general walking about lens. It's one of my best purchases to go with my A99II.

SCPH1000

Originally posted at

2019-06-19T20:00:00

i BOUGHT THIS 1 YEAR AGO. Its OK.. Need to try it with my old A55 to confirm quality.

skred

Originally posted at

2017-05-25T20:00:00

For many the choice boils down to this or the Zeiss 1680. I have been using a Zeiss 1680 first on an A300 and then A77 for the past 5-6 years. While the Zeiss has excellent image quality, a couple of things bothered me. First was the lens creep and second was the relative small aperture. I have been using the Sony 16-50 for the last few weeks on my A77 and my impressions are: 1. The overall image quality in terms of sharpness, color and distortion are identical to the Zeiss, with a slight edge to the Sony. The Sony performs much better in low or more challenging lighting situations. 2. The build quality of the Sony actually seems a shade higher than the Zeiss in all aspects. 3. The ability to lock the zoom is a nice feature. 4. I do miss the extra 30mm of reach. Doesn't seem like a big deal, but once you're used to the reach even missing 30mm is inconvenient. 5. The Sony focuses faster and more silently. Again, I thought this would not be a big deal for me, but it makes a difference (in favor of the Sony). Overall, I prefer the 16-50 to the 16-80 Zeiss. Clearly, Sony limited the reach to make space for the more expensive 16-80 which the Sony outperforms in every respect. Here is a photo comparing the relative sizes of the Zeiss and Sony.

jaffreywali

Originally posted at

2017-05-25T20:00:00

For many the choice boils down to this or the Zeiss 1680. I have been using a Zeiss 1680 first on an A300 and then A77 for the past 5-6 years. While the Zeiss has excellent image quality, a couple of things bothered me. First was the lens creep and second was the relative small aperture. I have been using the Sony 16-50 for the last few weeks on my A77 and my impressions are: 1. The overall image quality in terms of sharpness, color and distortion are identical to the Zeiss, with a slight edge to the Sony. The Sony performs much better in low or more challenging lighting situations. 2. The build quality of the Sony actually seems a shade higher than the Zeiss in all aspects. 3. The ability to lock the zoom is a nice feature. 4. I do miss the extra 30mm of reach. Doesn't seem like a big deal, but once you're used to the reach even missing 30mm is inconvenient. 5. The Sony focuses faster and more silently. Again, I thought this would not be a big deal for me, but it makes a difference (in favor of the Sony). Overall, I prefer the 16-50 to the 16-80 Zeiss. Clearly, Sony limited the reach to make space for the more expensive 16-80 which the Sony outperforms in every respect. Here is a photo comparing the relative sizes of the Zeiss and Sony.

InDC

Originally posted at

2017-05-25T20:00:00

For many the choice boils down to this or the Zeiss 1680. I have been using a Zeiss 1680 first on an A300 and then A77 for the past 5-6 years. While the Zeiss has excellent image quality, a couple of things bothered me. First was the lens creep and second was the relative small aperture. I have been using the Sony 16-50 for the last few weeks on my A77 and my impressions are: 1. The overall image quality in terms of sharpness, color and distortion are identical to the Zeiss, with a slight edge to the Sony. The Sony performs much better in low or more challenging lighting situations. 2. The build quality of the Sony actually seems a shade higher than the Zeiss in all aspects. 3. The ability to lock the zoom is a nice feature. 4. I do miss the extra 30mm of reach. Doesn't seem like a big deal, but once you're used to the reach even missing 30mm is inconvenient. 5. The Sony focuses faster and more silently. Again, I thought this would not be a big deal for me, but it makes a difference (in favor of the Sony). Overall, I prefer the 16-50 to the 16-80 Zeiss. Clearly, Sony limited the reach to make space for the more expensive 16-80 which the Sony outperforms in every respect. Here is a photo comparing the relative sizes of the Zeiss and Sony.

Salute2030

Originally posted at

2017-05-25T20:00:00

For many the choice boils down to this or the Zeiss 1680. I have been using a Zeiss 1680 first on an A300 and then A77 for the past 5-6 years. While the Zeiss has excellent image quality, a couple of things bothered me. First was the lens creep and second was the relative small aperture. I have been using the Sony 16-50 for the last few weeks on my A77 and my impressions are: 1. The overall image quality in terms of sharpness, color and distortion are identical to the Zeiss, with a slight edge to the Sony. The Sony performs much better in low or more challenging lighting situations. 2. The build quality of the Sony actually seems a shade higher than the Zeiss in all aspects. 3. The ability to lock the zoom is a nice feature. 4. I do miss the extra 30mm of reach. Doesn't seem like a big deal, but once you're used to the reach even missing 30mm is inconvenient. 5. The Sony focuses faster and more silently. Again, I thought this would not be a big deal for me, but it makes a difference (in favor of the Sony). Overall, I prefer the 16-50 to the 16-80 Zeiss. Clearly, Sony limited the reach to make space for the more expensive 16-80 which the Sony outperforms in every respect. Here is a photo comparing the relative sizes of the Zeiss and Sony.

jaffreydc

Originally posted at

2017-03-17T20:00:00

Bought this in a package with A77II. I would have ordered this one anyway. Good Sharp and Bright Color. Enjoy in Low Light.

Jcbett

Originally posted at

2016-07-14T20:00:00

4/5 because it's an awesome lens but it developed a fault just within the year. This being that the focus ring became a bit loose and could make the photo out of focus. Up until this point, I had used it all the time and will still use it all the time when it comes back (hopefully fixed in warranty.) Great lens though.

Itfcsam

Originally posted at

2016-01-28T19:00:00

This gives me such a good range on my camera I'm sure it will be the most common I use. Lovely handle and excellent results.

MikeCL

Originally posted at

2015-09-03T20:00:00

I bought this lens 6 weeks ago. So far had excellent results with it. With aperture of 2.8f it is fast, it renders the colours beautifully. As mentioned in other reviews it is slightly heavy than 100 mm 2.8f lens. It balances in the hand well, I have stopped using a tripod, it is so easy to hold steady. Only grumble I would have is the lens hood that has been supplied. Cheap and very thin plastic. One slight drop and it cracked, had to be repaired by sellotape. I have not been able to bye a new one, it does not seem to be stocked any were. Sony please do sort the problem out.

Darky

Originally posted at

2015-05-03T20:00:00

My wife is very pleased with the portraits I get with this lens. It keeps up well with the grandchildren when I have the A77M2 in AF-C mode. It's brighter than the DT18-55 (mk 1) that came with my A55. The colours are good, and I haven't had any trouble thus far with ghosting. No zoom creep to report, either.

DutchMikeM

Originally posted at

2015-03-15T20:00:00

This lens is fast and sharp. I have done whole days crowd shooting after forgetting a flash gun. Silent focusing means you can use this lens for video. The weather sealed lens means you can have fun, its solid build makes it a little heavy, but f2.8 throughout its focal length makes up for it . My everyday lens and I will live with it forever.

Angelladee

Originally posted at

2014-11-06T19:00:00

So far only used occasionally but offers fast autofocus, build quality and images

Goredolf

Originally posted at

2014-09-24T21:00:00

This was the kit lens that came with my Alpha 77. The lens is equivalent to the super expensive $1998.00 Sony/Zeiss 24-70/2.8 but at a very reasonable price. The 16-50 is a APS-C/Crop sensor lens and it's the full frame equivalent of a 24-75/2.8. The lenses focus speed is very fast, the images are nice and sharp and best of all the SSM motor is silent making it perfect for pictures and ditigal. I also like the fact that it uses less expensive 72mm filters while other lenses in this class use 77mm filters. If you're looking for a fast Professional f/2.8 lens for your Sony dSLT body consider this lens.

MARK S.

2014-08-08T20:00:00

In January I upgraded from an a65 to an a77, and the SAL1650 kit lens. I had used the a65 exclusively with a SAL18250 and kept that lens for my new purchase. The SAL1650 is an exceptional lens matching the optical performance of earlier Minolta lens. Constant f2.8 aperture and a silent efficient focus motor make this lens a joy yo behold.

Tiny

Originally posted at

2013-07-11T20:00:00

simply put...this lens was the reason that i went with the A77 (came coupled with camera body)...and i wasn't disappointed...fantastic sharp results and lightning quick focus...takes a little bit getting used to the weight, but you can't go wrong at all...worth every cent...would give it a sixth star if allowed!!!

deltadave44

Originally posted at

2013-06-27T20:00:00

I've just shifted from Canon to Sony. I am very please with the results for this lens equipped with my new A-77. the results are is better than I've expected. I was using Canon 60D and 5D with my amazing Canon 24-70 f/2.8 and I have to admit that this lens is an equal for that expensive 24-70. Amazing focus due to (SSM), the sharpness is very good as well as the contrast. Overall, it is a very very +very good lens to have.

Ghuraify

Originally posted at

2013-04-28T21:00:00

sharpest images, very fast auto focus, quality build is always little heavy, no play in manual focus so you can get right on image. large filter size 72mm for easy handling…….constant f2.8 aperture…….on sony/nikon new full frame cameras becomes 24-75mm f2.8 which knocks out need for 24-70mm f2.8 lens….best lens on the market in it's class at any price……..

None

2013-04-19T20:00:00

Cant complain with this lens. I use mine with a a77, a65, and a300

FotoJunkie

Originally posted at

2012-09-18T20:00:00

I have two G lenses and two Zeiss lenses, and, subjectively, this lens is sharper. It is a perfect match to the A77, which needs the large aperture and super-sharp optical performance. When I bought the A77, I worried that the detectors (pixels) were so tiny and that a lens would have a tough job being sharp enough to take advantage of the sensor resolution. The A77 performance with this lens wildly exceeds even my wildest hopes! I recently took a shot across a wide bay with this lens on the A77. Later I blew it up on a big monitor and zoomed in to see how much detail was there. There was a diagonal white line representing a roof. The line was a perfect stair-step series of white pixels on a dark background. This was a RAW file. There was no visible spillover: just white pixels. I was astonished. I've seen no problems with chromatic aberration. Colors are strikingly vibrant. Contrast is superb. Also note that it is sealed and less vulnerable to internal dust than most lenses. A lens like this with F/2.8 across the full zoom range is almost too good to be true. The only imperfection that I've been able to find is some geometric (barrel-like) distortion that is primarily near the center of the image. The A77 completely removes this automatically for jpeg output. You only see it when you shoot jpeg and RAW and compare them. I didn't list it as a con because the A77 cleans it up with no loss of resolution. My only complaint is that there is no way to output a corrected image in a lossless format, which is a complaint on the camera, not the lens. I get around this by running RAW images through DxO software. Bottom line: if you're buying an A77, you have to buy this lens. If my only Sony camera were the A77, and I could only have one lens, this would be it, REGARDLESS OF PRICE. I'm about to sell my A77 to buy an A99. My one regret is that I can't keep this lens. I believe that for pure optical performance, the A77 with this lens is as good or better than a full-frame camera with the Zeiss f/2.8 24-70mm; and that is a state-of-the-art combination. If you're considering buying just the A77 body and a cheaper lens, take my advice and don't even think about it. This lens will be a sound investment if you take care of it. And money is among our few renewable resources.

TheEnthusiast

Originally posted at

2012-05-21T20:00:00

One Month experience with this SAL1650 lens on both the a580 and a100 There are a lot of 5 star reviews on this page for the lens. I guess it is justified if you compare this lens to the other low to mid range zooms Sony produces. As a Zoom lens it is very very good especially at f/9 to f/11. However from 16mm to 24mm at f/2.8 it is a soft, but then again, we have to remember it is not a wide angle prime but rather a zoom lens. At 50mm f/10 the lens is very sharp, in fact i would say it is as sharp as my old Minolta 50mm prime.

OldNoob

Originally posted at

2012-04-07T20:00:00

Got mine off Ebay right after price increase. Got lit for lees than the old full price. Works great and very quiet. No focus noise at all and works great on my a65.

A65MACGuy

Originally posted at

2012-02-08T19:00:00

Honestly, the quality of this glass is amazing. Because I always use cameras with crop sensors anyway, this is a perfect addition to anyone's collection. Constant 2.8 aperture is great for video. Couldn't ask for more.

markrathgeber

Originally posted at

2012-01-28T19:00:00

This is a wonderful piece of glass. The feel of it in your hand is great, and it is better built than the CZ 16-80mm. If you don't need the extra reach, I definitely suggest this lens over the CZ given that it's faster and has the SSM in it. A little on the hefty side, but it's a fairly large lens but the build quality of it is outstanding. Only thing that I found cumbersome is the 72mm diameter for filters; given that filters are fairly expensive these days. Overall, this was a great purchase and it's becoming one of my favourite lenses!

Successful

Originally posted at

2012-01-07T19:00:00

We've had our SONY 16-50MM 2.8 lens since the beginning of October. We are sooo happy that we bought ours as part of the 2nd SONY SLT-A77 we ordered as a kit. This lens is our main lens in our wedding photography and concert photography business. We've now taken over 20,000 excellent photos with it. This lens goes with the SONY SLT-A77 like peanut butter and jelly! When it arrived it was our intention to put it in a head to head test against the MINOLTA 17-35MM 2.8-4 lens that my wife loved so much and sell the loser. When the 2nd shot with the 16-50 appeared on the LCD screen I went back inside the house and prepared my wife to say goodbye to her favorite lens as no head to head test was needed. We were the official photographers on the Rock Legends Cruise in December and I was a little concerned that she wouldn't be able to zoom in close enough because the stage for one of the venues was a good 30' from front row. The crops were excellent so I'll never have to worry about her distance shots again! his lens could have easily been labeled a "G" lens and sold for $1000 more and nobody would have complained. We have lots of photos posted and an in depth review under the SONY|MINOLTA tab on our site. http://www.abetterdj.net

ABETTERDJ

Originally posted at

2011-12-15T19:00:00

This is a beautiful (albeit not light or cheap) partner for the Sony Alphas, esp. the new A77 and A65. It might be the sharpest of any 16-50 2.8 on the market right now, and it is even sharper than the very pricey alpha mount Carl Zeiss 16-80mm, but of course without the reach at the telephoto end (but balancing that, it is significantly faster). After surfing through many dozens of lens reviews at the phenomenal ImagingResource.com collection of lens tests, not only is this the sharpest 3X zoom range lens for Sony alpha cameras, it right now is the sharpest 16-50 2.8 lens available on any DSLR, full frame or APS-C, for any manufacturer. It is not an overstatement to suggest that this might be one of if not the finest general purpose lens that anyone has ever made for a digital camera. If you're skeptical of such a claim (and certainly I would be skeptical myself of such a claim without proof), take a close look at the dozens and dozens of lens tests at imaging resource. No zoom lenses even comes close, and it beats many prime lenses (yes, including the prime lenses of those highly touted competitors Canon and Nikon). Given that Sony Alpha 65/77 firmware now corrects all the classic optical distortions (chromatic aberration, vignetting and barrel/pincushion) for lenses that the new firmware has corrective algorithms for (and this includes many of the popular lenses sold by Sony including this one), this lens becomes perhaps the best optical value in digital photography. Again I know that sounds like a grandiose claim, but please, if you're skeptical, look at the testing. This lens is simply a technical tour de force in photographic optics. Pros: 1) sharpest zoom lens of any kind in the Sony alpha A-mount group - in fact, it is sharper than several of the Sony prime lenses at its best apertures (f4-f5). Sharpest lens of its kind right now for any digital camera. 2) Not bad CA, distortion and vignetting, and close to zero in those problem areas with the A65/A77 firmware corrections. 3) Fast focusing 4) Decent range (3.5X) that covers about 85% of what most people shoot. Perfect for portraits and decent wide angle for landscapes/scenery. 5) Fast - even minimally stopped down to f4 (where it is sharpest), it is faster than many other zooms are wide open (and WAY sharper). 6) Great value when priced against the Nikon/Canon competition (cheaper than any of their glass of even close to this quality). Cons: 1) Big and heavy (that's what to you have to concede to get a constant aperture 2.8 zoom lens) 2) Not cheap compared to the standard kit lens (a decent 15-55mm option but not nearly as fast or as sharp) 3) Can't be bought with the Alpha 65 as its kit lens (why does Sony do that?) 4) Wish it just went to 65mm. Overall, this is a killer deal - given that it is as sharp as many prime lens - it offers a no-compromise option for the highest quality images your Sony SLT/DSLR can generate, without having to carry more than two lens - this and a telephoto. Highly, highly recommended.

TechnoGuy

Originally posted at