06-16-2015, 04:23 AM
I think you hit the problem of the systems ... :-)
You have 4-6 options depending on how you look at it.
From my perspective the Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-70 are sub-standard and shouldn't be considered seriously .
The 18-55mm OS isn't terrible but it certainly requires that all auto-corrections are active.
We haven't tested the 18-105 G yet but it seems to be better than the 16-70 at least. Auto-corrections are also strictly required here (massive distortions at 105mm).
And then you got the three 18-200mm lenses. They aren't so bad in the lower range I'd say.
I would probably prefer the Tamron 18-200mm VC based on what I have seen out there. The corners seem to be soft at 200mm but otherwise it's quite good it seems.
You have 4-6 options depending on how you look at it.
From my perspective the Sony 16-50 and Zeiss 16-70 are sub-standard and shouldn't be considered seriously .
The 18-55mm OS isn't terrible but it certainly requires that all auto-corrections are active.
We haven't tested the 18-105 G yet but it seems to be better than the 16-70 at least. Auto-corrections are also strictly required here (massive distortions at 105mm).
And then you got the three 18-200mm lenses. They aren't so bad in the lower range I'd say.
I would probably prefer the Tamron 18-200mm VC based on what I have seen out there. The corners seem to be soft at 200mm but otherwise it's quite good it seems.