answers: 35

  1. Bavitli
    28.03.2013

    I use this lens, a noticeable drawback is the aperture at the long end. And since it’s quite for a whale)

    Reply

    • Nina
      28.03.2013

      Is Nikonovsky better?

      Reply

      • Bavitli
        29.03.2013

        I don’t know with Nikon. At work, I use Kenon. It seemed a little worse, but it can be such an instance!?!

        Reply

      • Sergey.
        28.03.2018

        I agree!

        Reply

      • Vladimir Lvov
        20.10.2018

        This, depending on which lens to compare. The other day I came across such a lens in conjunction with Alpha 450, then at first it seemed to me that it was broken. But after a little poyuz, I realized that he works like that.

        Reply

  2. AM
    29.03.2013

    It focuses faster than the complete Nikon 18-55, but the sound is louder when focusing. I must say that for a whale it is quite sharp in the center. It is inconvenient to focus manually - the focusing ring not only has a small stroke, but also moves back and forth. In comparison with the old complete 18-70, the CA is much better adjusted. Lightweight, compact, not bad optically - that's what you need to start. Not so long ago, the 2nd version of this lens was released - the autofocus motor (SAM 2) has been significantly improved, and the work in backlight has been improved.

    Have a nice shot!

    Reply

  3. Aleksey
    29.03.2013

    his bokeh is very colorful, in connection with which you need to carefully choose sn, the sharpness is not bad, and in my opinion this is the only advantage of this device. however, the color rendition is also nothing))) many leave him as a staffer, and some even buy them for filming feasts) I personally had enough for a month to play enough until I bought a half-speed, then the devil parted

    Reply

  4. Wiseman
    29.07.2013

    “Quote:“ 18-55mm focal length due to the crop factor gives an EGF of 27-82,5mm. ”
    This information is not true.
    The presence of the letters DT in the name indicates that the focal lengths are converted to crop, i.e. 18-55mm.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      29.07.2013

      Nothing like this. The focal length for all lenses is a physical quantity, it is indicated without conversion. Do you really believe that this cheap lens can provide a real super wide angle of view at 18mm? :)

      Reply

    • NX6
      26.09.2013

      DT in the name means Digital Technology, that is, a DSLR lens, not a SLR.

      Reply

  5. Eugene
    21.09.2013

    The lens for the whale is really good. However, after buying the SAL35F18 and comparing it with the 18-55 kit at a focal length of 35 mm, the difference in sharpness and clarity is noticeable “to the naked eye”. Now lying around as unnecessary, tk. 35F18 and Helios 44m7 replaced it with an advantage. Plus the whale 18-55 in its price, and if you have the means, in my opinion, it is better to buy 35 (or 50) F18 or Helios.

    Reply

    • anonym
      02.08.2014

      Yes. SAL35F18 will be something better than 18-55 mounted on 35 mm. But only 35 mm. And just something. And in my opinion it is better to buy 18-135 or 18-150. But the 35 mm fix should be left for shooting in the interior. There he really will be better with something. The special is always something better than the universal. But it replaces the universal only in its application range. Helios 44? Thank you, smiled.

      Reply

  6. Dmitriy
    09.03.2014

    I used this for half a year with Sony A37 until I purchased Sigma 24mm F2.8 and Minolta 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D. You can get acceptable shots, but it will not work for the landscape, its resolution and sharpness in the corners are very far behind . There is not enough aperture in the shooting room. The lens is only good perhaps in the open air with good lighting.

    Reply

  7. Alexander
    21.04.2014

    Sorry for trolling (easy), but from what language is the word Thailand (seen in the picture) translated as Japan?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      21.04.2014

      Fixed I had two models on the review, and the first, on which the text was written, was made in Japan.

      Reply

  8. Dim
    08.08.2014

    on this lens it is impossible to set F less than 5.6. Are these features of optics?

    Reply

    • anonym
      13.08.2014

      at the long end of the zoom, yes. on short it should allow a setting of 3,5. but this is only if the shooting conditions allow, that is, the fastest shutter speed at the set sensitivity can provide the correct exposure when the aperture is open wider than 5,6. otherwise, the camera will not allow you to set a different aperture and do not need to interfere with it.

      Reply

  9. anonym
    13.08.2014

    Compromise lens.

    Cons:
    -the rotating front component. which means that the hood is only round. sadness ...
    -the wavy course of the trunk (although, it may be "into the stream" for someone)
    -plastic. all plastic to the bayonet mount. plastic does not happen.
    ugly edges on any FR (can be used as an artistic device)
    - aperture ... (and where did you see the constant 2,8 for that kind of money?)
    -assembly. The chassis are staggering too much.
    - no “trunk” lock
    Focusing is not internal.

    pros:
    - so fast focus
    -light (due to plasticity)
    - sharp in the center (say, sharp enough)
    -short trunk travel (a consequence of the "wave" and focusing specifics)
    quiet when focusing (SAM II)
    -on the “tail” rectangular hood (SAM II)
    -very good macro (... surprised!)
    -very good bokeh, does not ripple, does not twist, without any-sen (... surprised again!)
    -Excellent keeps back and side light (... surprised again!)
    -good MDF
    -with a camera costs 20 bucks.

    Conclusion: for printing from 10x15 to A4 it will go “with a bang”, even more so for viewing on a monitor. For a magazine cover, you would have to look for something else as well as in the case of a craving for telephoto. Better here 28-135. But it costs money. The wide angle is slightly less than 27mm in full frame. Something with the crop factor. When shooting, it's better to turn on the automatic distortion correction in the camera. Otherwise, the "barrel" will be noticeably visible at the wide end. In general, it will do for every day. On the other hand, I think that Sonya's cropped cameras are unlikely to be taken by those whose photos go on the covers of Cosmopolitan, and therefore we think first of all in the direction of price / quality, but here everything is in order.

    Reply

  10. Vladlen
    22.10.2014

    In addition to sharpness and contrast (for its class) - Everything is bad. Do not take!

    Reply

    • anonym
      03.01.2015

      so no one takes a staff separately \ if they provide a wide choice - in such stores they charge at the very least so as not to be clever and not to consult with sellers \ if you make a purchase for labor not superfluous find a photographer a hard worker with a recommendation give 500 rubles for a chat, he will tell you how much and where pour more help and buy sony with its picking does not need a staff at all \ immediately adapters and ... a sea of ​​optics \ well, if you shoot the movement then 55-200 for a price and not bad

      Reply

  11. anonym
    03.01.2015

    worse than the regular canon, I didn’t see the lenses especially which made in vietnam / nikon are slightly better than the canon. beautiful pentax then sony + incredibly interesting technically really innovative cameras.sony is making a revolution in photography in front of it all the leading companies are buying the matrix and hasselblad and leika insert the canonists all hold on to their canons. Yes, the price of Sony's top models is high, but for what \ the canons and Nikons have nothing worthless besides noiseless

    Reply

  12. Eugene
    08.05.2015

    Compared Sony DT 3.5-5.6 / 18-55 SAM with Sony 1,4 / 50 SAL at a focal length of 50mm by photographing a test target. At diaphragms 5,6; eleven; 11 - Sony DT 16-3.5 / 5.6-18 SAM could not please. But at aperture 55, much to my surprise, the center showed sharperness higher than Sony 8 / 1,4 SAL. But I emphasize - only in the center of the frame. There is nothing to compare on the rest of the field and on the edge.

    Reply

  13. Alexander
    11.12.2016

    Tell me, is it possible to use this lens with a Canon 60D, the thread diameter it has, what kind of adapter is needed for this. Thank you in advance.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      11.12.2016

      Yes and no sense.

      Reply

  14. anonym
    16.08.2017

    Pluses: Lightweight, relatively compact, fast focusing, good bokeh. The zoom is “wave”, but this can be a disadvantage. Not bad for macro. In portraits, you can make him nicely soft and smooth corners. Perfectly holds back and side light.
    Disadvantages:
    A lot of. First of all, plastic from A to Z. Especially the plastic bayonet. An unimportant picture at an open aperture and at apertures higher than 16. And this is further exacerbated by the nonlinear distribution of sharpness across the field when zooming. Focusing with a rotating front component, because of which the hood on it is only round, from which there is zero sense, except that there is no physical protection.
    It’s bad in the manual focus mode because of the small angle of the front element it’s difficult to get into focus, it is exclusively sharpened for autofocus. But easier if you focus on the lens hood.
    Aperture? Have you ever seen a constant 2,8 zoom for the price of a beer? In addition, this is not a disadvantage on cameras with EV. This is on SLR cameras with an optical fiber at such aperture, wedges and raster do not work, give one and a half or two, and here - no problem, you can also turn on the magnifying glass.
    A comment:
    So is it that bad? Not really. I learned to deceive him. We work in aperture priority (letter “A”), and set the aperture to 8-9. Here it is tolerant of resolution throughout the entire zoom range and fully justifies itself for reportage photography. In all other cases, “zeroing” is required.
    If you are shooting for them, then you need to study it thoroughly in the necessary modes and scenes. It comes with experience. First, take takes in different modes at different apertures and focal lengths. In general, if this consoles anyone, other KIT manufacturers are absolutely no better. There are, of course, alternatives, but they cost money. Considerable. A little better behaves 18-135. But it is larger in size and quite expensive for its characteristics. And the DT 18-55 SAM II is a rather compromise option, although it requires a thoughtful approach to use. Then the complaints will be reduced in many ways.

    Reply

  15. a lion
    15.09.2017

    Here's what's interesting - I came across a camera (to try) a sony a290 with a Sony DT 3.5-5.6 / 18-55 lens - and so, it turned out that the lens focuses to infinity only in the focal range of 24 - 35 mm. On other focal lengths focusing only up to distances of about 5 meters. No one will tell me if I got such a lens or someone else faced such a problem? Sharpness, in general, is mediocre, the picture, too, expected more. My old Canon 300D with an EF 28-90 mm lens from a film camera takes pictures much better.

    Reply

  16. a lion
    15.09.2017

    Well, in pursuit of the previous comment about the Sony A290 camera (it is not here in the reviews). I put I-50-2, Helios 44-2 and Zenitar-ME1 1,7 instead of the staff, as soon as I didn’t go out of my way, but on Canon the picture is much better with them. Some kind of adapter, possibly crippled, was caught too - the shanks of the Helios and Zenitar, when screwed into the adapter, abut against the circular shelf and do not screw up to the end - as a result, there is no infinity. It is necessary to measure with a barbell - maybe this is protection against snagging by a mirror?

    Reply

  17. Novel
    01.10.2018

    I tested the lenses from Minolta 65-28 mm F135-4 on SONY A4,5, the legendary “Old Man”, 35-70 mm (kid) and “Beer Can” 70-210 mm F4. understand nothing ..
    The "old man" turned out to be less sharp than the whale 18-55 mm 3,5-5,6 SAM II (the second version of the whale). I wanted to replace the whale with it. My copy of the Minolta 28-135 mm 4-4,5 clearly did not stretch the 24 megapixel matrix. Keith, however, was noticeably sharper. Colder in color than Minolta. Minolta 28-135 can be good up to 16 MP on A57 and the like. The drawing is interesting, some kind of retro. The corners are heavily soaped at a wide angle. Maybe an unsuccessful copy just got caught.

    "Kid" 35-70 mm - very good, sharp, contrasting, colorful, but inconvenient FF on crop.
    Beer can 70-210mm Ф4 is a very good lens. 24 MP covers. Sharp, draws well, colors are good. Left him.

    I'll try another 24 mm 2,8 and 50 mm 1.7

    Reply

    • Novel
      01.10.2018

      Minolta 70-210mm Ф4 is a very good lens.

      I will compare 135 mm with Jupiter 37A ..

      Reply

  18. Novel
    01.10.2018

    It would be interesting to compare this KIT with the second version (and add an additional paragraph to the review).

    Reply

  19. Novel
    01.10.2018

    Sony DT 3.5-5.6 / 18-55 SAM II is clearly better than the whale Kenonovsky in picture quality. I have both.)

    Reply

  20. Vladislav
    02.11.2019

    Hello Arkady.
    A little overdue remark on lens construction. It does not have its own motor, that is, the translation of “Smooth AF Motor” is a little inaccurate, “Smooth Focus Drive” would be correct. This lens is powered by a motor in the camera, that is, like a screwdriver.

    Reply

    • Paul
      30.12.2019

      There is NO screwdriver in this lens, do not confuse people please

      Reply

  21. Vladislav
    02.11.2019

    “Smooth Autofocus Drive” is more accurate.

    Reply

  22. Matthew
    11.05.2022

    I think I will soon become the owner of this lens)))

    Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer