Love your videos! I don’t know why UA-cam just recommended your channel to me! I like the pace you talk and everything becomes crystal clear after you explaining it. I just start out my food cooking UA-cam channel and I use Sony A6400 as my main camera. I watched many of your videos on camera and lens comparison and that helps a lot in terms of what the next lens to get. Thank you so much!!!!
@@bowloflatte Okay,Thank you for quick reply. Now my query is that : is it better than any sigma lens ? Can Sony 50mm f1.8 offer good 4k during night shot ? I mean is it better than Sigma lens in every respect ? Thanks
IRFAN I’m not exactly sure as I don’t own a Sigma lens. But I think the Sony lens perform great under low light situation. I took it to a pretty dark restaurant and the video turns out great.
55-210 is decent enough. I've been looking at sample photos taken with it on Flickr and they are so, so good. With an extension tube, 55-210 is perfect macro lens.
Great video. I've had all three lenses on my a6000, including the 18-105. Sent the 18-135 back because I was disappointed in the picture quality. Also no longer have the kit lenses, but kept the 18-105 (best bang for the buck). I found the colors were better on the 18-105 and a more clean picture, plus I can do excellent videos too. So now I have the Sigma 16mm 1.4 lens (one of my favorites), the Sigma 30mm 2.8, vintage lens (helois 44mm, 1.2), the Sony 85mm 1.8 and the 18-105. Have one or two other vintage lenses, but for my purposes those lenses pretty well do it for me. You are one of my favorite reviewers. Thanks again.
The SEL18135 convinced me so I think about buying it for my upcoming holidays in Greece. But I‘m still not sure if the Tamron 18-200 also is a good alternative (it‘s cheaper). Or would you recommend that for me as a newbie to photography I should first try the kit lense? Do you have any experience in this? I want to have beautiful photos in Santorini.
Just joined into Sony Alpha, glad I paid slightly extra for a6400 18-135 kits lens instead of the original kits lens, in here we also have the bundle for a6400 body and 18-105 f4 but it cost more than the 18-135. Can't wait my camera coming in April.
Thanks for your videos. I can see a little difference in central sharpness between the 18-135 and the kit lenses closing to 8 or 10. But you didn´t compare them closing in the large range 135 vs. 210 mm.
Hi! If only you could make such a test with the 16 50 vs 18 55. I have the 16 50 sel kit lens but dont like the power zoom and build. Im hasitating if i should sell it and change to 18 55. Are the images of the 18 55 also soft at the edges? Im afraid if i make some landscape photos with the kit i can throw them in the trash bin. What do you think? Thanks
Great review. I would also like to see a comparison to the older kit lens the “18-55 f3.5-5.6” (Model SEL1855). This lens is almost the same size as the new lens but you can get it now for about $150. I have found it to have slightly better quality of pics then the smaller 16-50 kit lens but not by much. Thanks for what you do.
@@ArthurR It really depends on the lens. I had alltogether three 1855s in my family. When I bought my current Alpha 5100 it came with a 1650. Since I did not like the motorzoom I thought about keeping one of the 1855s and startet comparison. It turned out that two auf the 1855 were visibly better than the 1650. One was significant worse. The good ones were a black Japanese and a newer silver Thai. The bad one was an old Thei version, that came with the Nex-3 of my doughter.
The kit lens (16-50) is no slouch! I can't say much for the 55-210 because I haven't tested that lens much but great for the price. Sometimes all you need is a simple and cheap setup. Both kit lenses fit the a5100/a6000 nicely.
Would love to see a comparison of 18-135 (and/or the 18-105 F4) vs. the Rokinon 21 F1.4 for wide-angle shots. Taking a year-long trip through SE Asia and wondering if the medium tele's are good enough at landscapes to eliminate the "need" for a dedicated wide-angle.
Excellent videos! I just discovered your channel and I love your content! I shoot on a 6500 and have tried many lenses, the new 18-135 looks appealing because of its versatility. I have gotten great results with my copy of the 55-210, do you think I should keep it for the extra reach or just crop in on the 135 zoom?
Thanks for the video…I have those 3 Lenses by the way…but I have a problem with the 18-135mm… When I take a photo with my Sony A6400 at 18mm in Raw format…at the corners appears a shadow…..is that normal?….
Can you use the 18-135mm lens with A6400 and a Weebill Lab gimbal? Are there any issues or do you have to remove the eyepiece to make it work? I read Weebill Lab’s compatibility document but it looks like it was published before A6400 came out.
Hello, Arthur: I recently bought a used copy of the 18-135mn lens based on your informative reviews. My copy does not show the focal dustance setting on my a6000 evf or on the image exif data. (That information is available with my kit 16-50mm power zoom lens.) Does your copy show focal distance information? Thanks in advance (and keep up your good work).
Is (are) there any acceptable zoom lens (lenses) for the a-6000? I've seen the reviews on the 18-105/f4 and the 18-135 here, but none have glowing reviews to motivate me to replace the two kit lenses. Appreciate all the Sony lens videos. Thank you!
On a budget: would you choose Sony a6000 + 18135 lens, Sony a6000+16-50+ 55-210 lenses, Sony a6100+16-50 lens, or Sony a6400 + 16-50 lens? Having a baby soon, so thought professional camera could be nice to save money in the long term on professional photoshoots, and eventually could take photos of clients. I was really wanting the front facing flip screen so we could take our own family portraits, but it seems like starting with the nicer lens and the 6000 might be worth it and maybe adding an external monitor?
Is there any chance you could do a comparison video of the 18-135 vs Sony 20mm f2.8 at the 20mm focal distance? Would love to see a prime vs zoom for a standard lenses.
Thanks for the nice video comparison. I was and am thinking about getiing a6500 with kit lens but after watching this video i guess i wont. You kept sayin 18-135 is ok! Can u pls tell me which lens is sharp enough in your opinion for a6500?
What would you do? I purchased the a6400 which came with the 18-135 lens for $1300 but I haven't open it yet so I can still exchange it. Would you keep it or go with the a6600 for $1199 body only but add the 55-210 for $349 (Best buy charges $149 for this lens when purchased with a camera) for a total of $1349 ($50) more than the a6400.
Thats the only part I miss too. The building detail comparison between the 210@210 and the 135@135 looks very impressive or the 135, but in a way its unfair. One should compare the 210@210 with a 210 adquate crop of the 135.
How about a comparison with the 18-104mm, F4? That is the one I have with my a6300 and it seems to do a good job when there is enough light. I use my 35mm or 50mm f1.8 for low light w/o a flash. I did a comparison between the 50 and the 2 kit lenses and saw a slightly better performance with the 50mm.
I know that these lenses are made for digital cameras but I shoot my minolta lenses on what is my first new to me digital a77ii and I would say there all sharper than bother kit lense. Thank you for posting this video because I was going to get the kit for my first digital lense. I just assumed it would be better than my old film glass. Any advise on sony a mount glass would be appreciated by anyone who may know.
Hi Arthur, many thanks from Germany for your tests and comparisons throughout the Sony fleet. I have just sold my a6000, kept the 1650 and 55210 lenses and I am looking forward to buy the Sony SEL 35f1.8 addionally for portraits and street photography for the a6400 . Currently this cam is about 970 Euros and I hope to get it at a nice price in fall/winter this year. What do you think about these investments? Have a nice weekend and best wishes to your wife.
I’m seeing some bundle deals with these lenses, should i buy those (extra lense and a bunch of other things like extra battery). Or go bare and buy stuff later? I’m new to these btw thanks
In my opinion it depends what you want to shoot. Portrait, landscape, wildlife or sport. 16-50 is a good range for landscape and portraits (even though when you want ultra-wide shots you might look at the great Samyang 12mm). I myself bought this bundle aswell, but did not ever use the 55-210, as I don't need sooo much on the far end. One year ago, I wanted to upgrade on image quality and flexiblity (as 50 are a bit short when you hike and want to catch a detail in the far or changing lenses can be very annoying) and got the 18-135. I would recommend you - if you're not a bird, wildlife or sport enthusiast or on a tight budget - to only buy the 16-50 first - there are always bundles with the A6000. These days you get the body+kit lens for 100€, on sale for 50€ more. Then you can find out if you need more focal lenght or it suits your needs. I don't know if you're new only to sony apsc or photography in general, but when it's your first step in this 'world' I would recommend you to buy a prime lense extra (f.e the inexpensive Sony 50mm F.1.8). It helps a lot for improving your photography skills and eye to have a set lenght, so you have to move and find the best spot for your photo, and don't machine-gun-zoom-and shot while only staying still. Hope this helped you a bit, have a great new years eve tomorrow, mate! :)
@@nordishtm949 thank you for the response. I don't think I would need the range right now. I'm looking to get either the a6400 or go cheaper with the m50. I have been doing my research and I do want a prime lens. Although I don't know which (too many choices). Will a 50mm be enough (I always see nifty fifty for some reason). Main use would be videos (I have a 2yr old kid), some pictures (I love bokeh). But I don't think I need the range now. Maybe 2 lens to start, a prime and one for general use. What is a good prime lens? I know it's not a simple question as there are a lot of factors, but for example what can a 50mm handle? Is it enough if subject is 3 feet from it?
Great I can help! I really can't say much about the M50. I only used Sony APSC cameras before (currently owning a A6400). As I see (only overflying, from the comparison here: mirrorlesscomparison.com/preview/sony-a6400-vs-canon-eos-m50/) on the data sheet, the M50 has significant lesser autofocus points (143 vs. 425 from the A6400). More autofocus points mean more 'hits' (right focused pictures). In this case, I can speak from my experience (I owned the A6000 with ~143 autofocus points before) and can say that in comparison with the A6000 the A64000 nearly never messed up the focusing, while the A6000 (with ~143 points) quite commonly misses the autofocus. Many professional reviewers I follow label the A6400 as 'the best camera to shoot family, especially little kids with'. You have to decide if that 'extra' is worth you more money. I am too biased as I am totally amazed with the hits of the A6400. As you say that you like to shoot videos, both cameras record in 4K, but the M50 does it in crop mode (*1.5), while the A6400 samples 6K into a 4K video, which means you get no crop (aka a 'fullframe' lenght look) and a better video quality. When we come to lenses, the canon apc lense-line-up is really small, as the sonys is more bigger (especially with 3rd party lenses from Sigma) For lenses: If you want to shoot indoors, a prime-lense between 16-50mm would be ideal (Remember: APSC means, that the images are cropped with the factor 1.5 - aka 30mm have the 45mm picture frame, 56mm = 84mm picture frame, etc). 16mm, if you want to shoot your kid with what she's doing (f.e his/her toys), 30mm for maybe a shoot where he/she plays with a single object. Around 50mm when you want to do only show your kid. Of course you can get the picture frame that you want by moving, but it is depending on how big the room is you planning to shoot. When you got a small living room/room of your kid, you might want to go wider (f.e 16 or 30mm.) If you got a big room, you can go with 50mm. (It's especially great, because you get more authentic shots of your kid, because you don't get too close with the camera up do his/her nose. :-) : Btw: both of your camera candidates have a silent shooting mode, which is great for not disturbing playing kids ) For getting a nice bokeh a lense with a wide aperiture is great (in my opinion everything under 2.8 is great, but it's gets creamier with even lower aperiture: But that's a question of taste) I can personally recommend the Sigma trio prime's - 16mm 1.4 - 30mm 1.4 - 56mm 1.4 - for most situations with your kid (and if you not have a really small room) - I would recommend the 30mm 1.4 for more flexibility or the 56mm for more distance and less disturbance. They are not cheap, but definitley worth the buck, (between 270-370€) as they are the sharpest lenses for sony apcs you can get. As an alternative, the Sony 50mm 1.8 is much cheaper (around 150€), a bit less sharp, but I think a great lense to begin with. For video (if you want to move and have a 'professional look', and don't have really non-shaky-hands) a lense with oss (opctical steady shot) would be optimal. The kit-lens (16-50) offers this. But it only has a aperiture of 3.5-5.6 - that means you won't get a really good bokeh with it.) If you want to go with the A6400 i might recommend you to buy it with the kit-lens for videos (must be in daylight, or with good light, because it's minimum 3.5) plus the 50mm 1.8 Sony (if you don't want to spend more money on the Sigma 30mm 1.4 or Sigma 56mm 1.4 - for portraits - or video by not moving much and non-shaky-hands) My optimal setup (if you don't need to think about money) would be buying the A6400 + the 18mm-105mm for video (oss, constant aperure of 4, motored zoom) witht the Sigma 30 or 56mm. But you can of course first buy the A6400 with the Kit-lens and see if it just fit your needs (needs a well-lighted room, doesn't have a really nice bokeh - but has OSS and a good range of focal lenght). You can buy it in a bundle for max. 100€ more with the A6400, or if it's in sale, even for only 50€ more. It's not a bad lense, has a fair image quality, and when you can live with the downsides, it might be enough. If not, you can still buy the Sony 50mm or one of the Sigma trio. My last recommendation is - if you haven't done that already - to just go to a near electronic market and try both cameras - maybe you really like/dislike one of them just by the touch. Also you can test, what prime you want to get - almost all of the cameras there have a zoom lens attached to them. Go to 16 - 30(35) and 50mm - and think about which lenght will suit your needs! My text may have many grammatical mistakes in it - it's late and english is not my native language. :) If I am wrong somewhere, everyone, be free to correct me! Also this is only from my knowledge and information, you might check other sources as well! Have a nice eve!
@@conraddevera To your question with the 50mm and the 3 feet distance - I think the 50 would be too close for it. Maybe a 30mm or I think around 16mm would be better in this case. I don't know much about the exact distance - but I recommend you to go with your partner/ a friend / your kid to the electronic market and try your desired camera (they got the kit-zoom lens on it most of the time) and zoom to 16, 30, 50mm - and let your companion go to the distance you think you will shoot the most at. At this you can practically decide, which focal length will fit your needs most of the time. :)
Christopher Burress Challenge extended... Waiting on Player 2 to accept. But seriously. It would be awesome to see a mafia/burress photo showdown someday.
Hi, I think it would be interesting to continue this comparisons and reviews with the sony 18-200mm and facing it with the sony kit lenses (16-50 + 55-210). What do you think? I hope you find it interesting :D Nice videos, before buy I always look your reviews. I didn't found other channels that expose and compare so honestly and well organized! ^o^
Great comparison. But you made my mind up the 16-50mm with 55-210mm combo of lenses is better value for money than paying $350-400 for the marginally better 18-35mm. Added bonus, the 16-50mm makes the camera a much better pocketable take anywhere shooter.
Thanks for the video! Just got a 55-210 used and have been running it through my own tests. Very similar results to yours. Reassuring to know the softness seems standard and not a fluke with my used lens. Oh and 911 hands down. Lambos have always reminded me of high speed doorstops.
Thanks to this video i've saved myself from a disaster purchase earlier this month. Without this video i would have lost a €150 on a 2nd hand purchase 55-210mm. For double the price i've bought a really good occasion 18-135mm lens at my favourite camera store here in The Netherlands. I've made already some great photo's with my 18-135mm and it's my favourite allround/travel lens in my collection. Sony zoom lenses are great if you stay around 100 or 135mm. For further reach you're better of with a decent telelens.
I never go below 11.0 on any lens for landscapes or higher than 13.0. So, I will have to go to my photo store to see how they perform, I guess. Thanks for the review.
If the 18 135 had existed when I bought the 18 105, it would have been a hard decision. The a6000 was needing such a compact all around lense. The 18 105 is sometimes too big for those who jumped into a6000 coming from point and shoot and travel a lot.
Ironically both lenses are Kits for the Sony APS-C! There are bundles with the Kit 16-50 + 55-210 and there is one Kit with the 18-135. As far as I saw the 18-135 Kit was slightly cheaper but these Kit offerings are basically the same prize! :D
No, so few are talking about the APS-C while so many are are mentioning the FF cameras and your public will be deleted or left you.. Please, stay with APS-C!
Thank you so much your comparison reviews for Sony are soooo useful! Well I already have the 18-135 so I can save myself some money and not bother with 55 to 210...
For the 55-210 it’s better to use f8-f11 than f6.3 f7.1 what start to be really soft around 150-190 (I usually don’t take pictures at up to 190mm) but I would be really interesting by a comparison with another telefoto lens if you do purchase one in the future (135 Samyang) or 70-200/300 👌 to see how can perform the a6000 Line with more expensive material
That's it... looks like I'll score the 18-135 for my a6300 soon! I was looking at the 18-200, but the telephoto end is soft on that one as well, just like the 55-210 shown here. Also, it still manages to be compact enough to fit in a day pack, which I like. Does anyone know if the digital zoom crops work with the 18-135? If I use any of those in a pinch, it's the ClearImage 2X mode. I sometimes turn that on with the 16-50 lens. This would be great with my 16mm f/2.8 lens to tote along. (I know the pancake 16mm is not seen as good to some, but I landed a decent one, and it's perfect for the old school film look + some low light capability.)
Great video - very useful. The Sony a6400 comes with either no lens, the 16-50, or the 18-135. I was wondering about the difference between the three lenses you showed so the video was an excellent answer to what I needed. Only, now I'm not sure what I should do! I like the compact size of the 16-50 lens, and it makes the camera great for travel.
The difference is not that overwhelming as I thought it would be. The bokeh of the 18-135 in portraits is disappointig in comparison to the 55-210 which is not really shown in this video. As you are more on the tele side with the 18-135 this point was a no go for me. A real step forward in sharpness you only get with a sigma prime. Or 1655G.
Great review as always. Thanks so much for following your followers' wishes. 210 seems like a poor lense all around. Fully zoomed in it's even worse than the 18-135 cropped. Looking forward to the 18-200 vs. 18-135 comparison ;) Btw. definitely 911. It's made just around the corner here.
this is exactly the kind of comparison i was looking for, very informative and shown side by side lets you decide much easier, thanks!
what program is he using?
Love your videos! I don’t know why UA-cam just recommended your channel to me! I like the pace you talk and everything becomes crystal clear after you explaining it. I just start out my food cooking UA-cam channel and I use Sony A6400 as my main camera. I watched many of your videos on camera and lens comparison and that helps a lot in terms of what the next lens to get. Thank you so much!!!!
So which lens you have for a 6400 ?
IRFANI use the Sony 50mm f1.8 lens with optical stabilization most often now because I shoot indoor and also need background to be blurry.
@@bowloflatte Okay,Thank you for quick reply. Now my query is that : is it better than any sigma lens ? Can Sony 50mm f1.8 offer good 4k during night shot ? I mean is it better than Sigma lens in every respect ? Thanks
IRFAN I’m not exactly sure as I don’t own a Sigma lens. But I think the Sony lens perform great under low light situation. I took it to a pretty dark restaurant and the video turns out great.
These comparison are honestly so relaxing
Ordered the 18-135mm. New price for 55-210mm is running new for $350 at BB and Amazon. Love your channel.
55-210 is decent enough. I've been looking at sample photos taken with it on Flickr and they are so, so good. With an extension tube, 55-210 is perfect macro lens.
I hope you will compare the 18-105mm vs the 24-105mm when used on the a6xxx cameras.
WHY HAS NO ONE DONE THIS YET?!?!?!
Can you also review 18-200 vs 55-210mm ??!
Thank you so much. This and your comparison to the 18-105 was soooo useful to me. Thank you, Arthur.
Great video. I've had all three lenses on my a6000, including the 18-105. Sent the 18-135 back because I was disappointed in the picture quality. Also no longer have the kit lenses, but kept the 18-105 (best bang for the buck). I found the colors were better on the 18-105 and a more clean picture, plus I can do excellent videos too. So now I have the Sigma 16mm 1.4 lens (one of my favorites), the Sigma 30mm 2.8, vintage lens (helois 44mm, 1.2), the Sony 85mm 1.8 and the 18-105. Have one or two other vintage lenses, but for my purposes those lenses pretty well do it for me. You are one of my favorite reviewers. Thanks again.
Sounds like an awesome setup! How is the Sony 85mm? That is one I want to check out soon.
I actually love it! Great bokeh and it's good for more than just portraits. I would love to see you review it.
Would really like it if you did. I'm between the 85 and the sigma 16 as my next lens...
I had the 10-18...nice lens but I sold it once I got the Sigma 16mm. The 16mm surpassed the 10-18 in my book.
@@martin9410 Surprised you found the 18-105 better than the 18-135. I had the exact OPPOSITE experience. Had them both, ended up selling the 18-105.
The SEL18135 convinced me so I think about buying it for my upcoming holidays in Greece. But I‘m still not sure if the Tamron 18-200 also is a good alternative (it‘s cheaper).
Or would you recommend that for me as a newbie to photography I should first try the kit lense? Do you have any experience in this?
I want to have beautiful photos in Santorini.
Just joined into Sony Alpha, glad I paid slightly extra for a6400 18-135 kits lens instead of the original kits lens, in here we also have the bundle for a6400 body and 18-105 f4 but it cost more than the 18-135. Can't wait my camera coming in April.
Thanks for your videos. I can see a little difference in central sharpness between the 18-135 and the kit lenses closing to 8 or 10. But you didn´t compare them closing in the large range 135 vs. 210 mm.
Hi! If only you could make such a test with the 16 50 vs 18 55. I have the 16 50 sel kit lens but dont like the power zoom and build. Im hasitating if i should sell it and change to 18 55. Are the images of the 18 55 also soft at the edges? Im afraid if i make some landscape photos with the kit i can throw them in the trash bin. What do you think? Thanks
Thanks for the comparison! Got the 18-135, was a great lense for travel.
now i save my money for a better zoom lense than the 55-210.
55-210 is a great lens for 150-200 bucks
18-135 vs 18-105 please
Thanks for the compare. Could you please share the maximum aperture at each focal length?
9:15 How did you get such beautiful skin tones from Sony crop with their chip lenses?????
5:15 even the top of building looks different 😯
Wtf. Why is that 😐
wtf....
the sun has moved, or there is a cloud blocking it. making the dip in the top of the building hidden by shadow in one image.
uhhh I think you found a glitch in the simulation. Hopefully they didn't come for you in the time since you left this comment...
I like the fact you use your wife's photos as examples to show the lens quality.
Ruthless Bone Yes he seems too proud of his wife which is so lovely .. I respect men like him
The wife is much better than the two lenses!
@@RG-jl6lt priceless
Will we ever find out her name though?
@@BleakVision 💀
Great video, thanks. I bought this lens with the Sony a6600. What lens would you recommend for low light?
Nice comparison Sir, I am getting a6400 with Sony 18-135mm , Do you recommend that ? which one other lens for steady 4k video for a6400. Thanks
Great review comparison. however, as I have the 55-210mm. At what focal length is the best sharpness achieved using the kit lens. Thanks in advance.
Great review. I would also like to see a comparison to the older kit lens the “18-55 f3.5-5.6” (Model SEL1855). This lens is almost the same size as the new lens but you can get it now for about $150. I have found it to have slightly better quality of pics then the smaller 16-50 kit lens but not by much. Thanks for what you do.
I have tested the 18-55, and in my comparison the quality was WORSE than the 16-50mm.
@@ArthurR It really depends on the lens. I had alltogether three 1855s in my family. When I bought my current Alpha 5100 it came with a 1650. Since I did not like the motorzoom I thought about keeping one of the 1855s and startet comparison. It turned out that two auf the 1855 were visibly better than the 1650. One was significant worse. The good ones were a black Japanese and a newer silver Thai. The bad one was an old Thei version, that came with the Nex-3 of my doughter.
The kit lens (16-50) is no slouch! I can't say much for the 55-210 because I haven't tested that lens much but great for the price. Sometimes all you need is a simple and cheap setup. Both kit lenses fit the a5100/a6000 nicely.
You must be used to absolute garbage if you say what you say.
I`ve never seen a worse lens it takes pictures far worse then your phone.
Hi, great channel. Maybe sometimes you can review the 18-200 LE lens, against this new 18135. Thanks!
If you shot the pics today with the A6700 and 18-135 do you think they would be better when compared to the camera you used?
Would love to see a comparison of 18-135 (and/or the 18-105 F4) vs. the Rokinon 21 F1.4 for wide-angle shots. Taking a year-long trip through SE Asia and wondering if the medium tele's are good enough at landscapes to eliminate the "need" for a dedicated wide-angle.
Hi, nice comparison at all. But near minute 10, why did you ignore that the tree is much sharper at the 55210? That doesn't seem to be fair...
Excellent videos! I just discovered your channel and I love your content! I shoot on a 6500 and have tried many lenses, the new 18-135 looks appealing because of its versatility. I have gotten great results with my copy of the 55-210, do you think I should keep it for the extra reach or just crop in on the 135 zoom?
These comparisons that you're doing, not only these but also the adapted lenses, will be the same on the Sony A5100 correct?
Thank you very much for the comparison, very useful, definitely will wait for a better option or save a little more $ for a better lenses...
Thanks for the video…I have those 3 Lenses by the way…but I have a problem with the 18-135mm… When I take a photo with my Sony A6400 at 18mm in Raw format…at the corners appears a shadow…..is that normal?….
Can you use the 18-135mm lens with A6400 and a Weebill Lab gimbal? Are there any issues or do you have to remove the eyepiece to make it work? I read Weebill Lab’s compatibility document but it looks like it was published before A6400 came out.
Hello, Arthur: I recently bought a used copy of the 18-135mn lens based on your informative reviews. My copy does not show the focal dustance setting on my a6000 evf or on the image exif data. (That information is available with my kit 16-50mm power zoom lens.) Does your copy show focal distance information? Thanks in advance (and keep up your good work).
Is (are) there any acceptable zoom lens (lenses) for the a-6000? I've seen the reviews on the 18-105/f4 and the 18-135 here, but none have glowing reviews to motivate me to replace the two kit lenses. Appreciate all the Sony lens videos. Thank you!
Which software is used here to compame pictures side by side?
On a budget: would you choose Sony a6000 + 18135 lens, Sony a6000+16-50+ 55-210 lenses, Sony a6100+16-50 lens, or Sony a6400 + 16-50 lens? Having a baby soon, so thought professional camera could be nice to save money in the long term on professional photoshoots, and eventually could take photos of clients. I was really wanting the front facing flip screen so we could take our own family portraits, but it seems like starting with the nicer lens and the 6000 might be worth it and maybe adding an external monitor?
Are you gonna get the a7iii and start reviewing fe lenses??
Hey! Have you selled the 18-105 and kept the 18-135?
Is there any chance you could do a comparison video of the 18-135 vs Sony 20mm f2.8 at the 20mm focal distance? Would love to see a prime vs zoom for a standard lenses.
The Sony 20mm isnt much sharper than the 16-50mm kit lens at 20mm. The 18-135mm will be sharper.
Exactly the review I needed! Thank you!
Can you make a review on the SELP18200, it's different from the SEL18200 and is quite expensive and rare. Thanks
Lambos are a generic dream car answer, A 911 is a refined enthusiasts choice lol
Thanks for the nice video comparison. I was and am thinking about getiing a6500 with kit lens but after watching this video i guess i wont. You kept sayin 18-135 is ok! Can u pls tell me which lens is sharp enough in your opinion for a6500?
Как на счёт стабилизации? Использовалась ли она в эксперименте?
What would you do? I purchased the a6400 which came with the 18-135 lens for $1300 but I haven't open it yet so I can still exchange it. Would you keep it or go with the a6600 for $1199 body only but add the 55-210 for $349 (Best buy charges $149 for this lens when purchased with a camera) for a total of $1349 ($50) more than the a6400.
Could you send a link of the sample images so I can compare them myself as I want to see which is better 135 cropped into 210 equiv or the 210
Thats the only part I miss too. The building detail comparison between the 210@210 and the 135@135 looks very impressive or the 135, but in a way its unfair. One should compare the 210@210 with a 210 adquate crop of the 135.
Another great video for the people who own A6000 and can not afford A7RIII. Great job, thank you!!!
How about a comparison with the 18-104mm, F4? That is the one I have with my a6300 and it seems to do a good job when there is enough light. I use my 35mm or 50mm f1.8 for low light w/o a flash. I did a comparison between the 50 and the 2 kit lenses and saw a slightly better performance with the 50mm.
For sure the 50mm is the sharpest out of the bunch. It is better than the 35mm in sharpness, but not as usable.
Hey there My friend! Is there a Manual Zoom lens option for E-Mount? Thanks
Carlos Castillo Meike, Kamlan, 7artisan. Just to name a few.
I’m tired of dragging the 210 around. Getting the 18-135 and keeping the kit 16-50 for when I want it pocketable.
same same, i hate carrying around a tonne of gear, these 2 are best of both worlds
Do you live in Austin? I can recognize this skyline of the downtown lol
could you send a link ore something to those raw pictures?
I know that these lenses are made for digital cameras but I shoot my minolta lenses on what is my first new to me digital a77ii and I would say there all sharper than bother kit lense.
Thank you for posting this video because I was going to get the kit for my first digital lense.
I just assumed it would be better than my old film glass.
Any advise on sony a mount glass would be appreciated by anyone who may know.
Great work. Your reviews have really helped me make an informed decision.
Thanks for the video! We are all waiting for a comparison sony and tamron 18-200, sony 18-135, 18-105 !
Hi Arthur, many thanks from Germany for your tests and comparisons throughout the Sony fleet. I have just sold my a6000, kept the 1650 and 55210 lenses and I am looking forward to buy the Sony SEL 35f1.8 addionally for portraits and street photography for the a6400 . Currently this cam is about 970 Euros and I hope to get it at a nice price in fall/winter this year. What do you think about these investments? Have a nice weekend and best wishes to your wife.
What is the software for image comparison?
Why didn't compared with night photography?
Why don't you have an IG account?
Great comparison, dude. Do you forsee them using this new one as a kit lens on whatever the next crop e-mount is, be it a6700 or something new?
I don't think it will be a standard kit lens, but I can see them charging an extra $300 for the "upgraded kit" haha
Is the 16-50mm OK for corporate video?
Were these shot with 16:9 ratio?
Compared to my old 55-210, my new copy is way sharper than the old one, they improved it optically.
hi could u do a review for 18-200?
Love your analysis/review of Sony crop lenses. I have tried a good many of the lenses but have yet to find a better zoom than the 18-105 f4 PZ.
Im new to this and a little bit confused. So can someone please explain me how that lens can take f10 pics while its mentioned that its F3.5 to 5.6.
I’m seeing some bundle deals with these lenses, should i buy those (extra lense and a bunch of other things like extra battery). Or go bare and buy stuff later?
I’m new to these btw thanks
In my opinion it depends what you want to shoot. Portrait, landscape, wildlife or sport. 16-50 is a good range for landscape and portraits (even though when you want ultra-wide shots you might look at the great Samyang 12mm). I myself bought this bundle aswell, but did not ever use the 55-210, as I don't need sooo much on the far end. One year ago, I wanted to upgrade on image quality and flexiblity (as 50 are a bit short when you hike and want to catch a detail in the far or changing lenses can be very annoying) and got the 18-135. I would recommend you - if you're not a bird, wildlife or sport enthusiast or on a tight budget - to only buy the 16-50 first - there are always bundles with the A6000. These days you get the body+kit lens for 100€, on sale for 50€ more. Then you can find out if you need more focal lenght or it suits your needs. I don't know if you're new only to sony apsc or photography in general, but when it's your first step in this 'world' I would recommend you to buy a prime lense extra (f.e the inexpensive Sony 50mm F.1.8). It helps a lot for improving your photography skills and eye to have a set lenght, so you have to move and find the best spot for your photo, and don't machine-gun-zoom-and shot while only staying still.
Hope this helped you a bit, have a great new years eve tomorrow, mate! :)
@@nordishtm949 thank you for the response. I don't think I would need the range right now. I'm looking to get either the a6400 or go cheaper with the m50. I have been doing my research and I do want a prime lens. Although I don't know which (too many choices). Will a 50mm be enough (I always see nifty fifty for some reason). Main use would be videos (I have a 2yr old kid), some pictures (I love bokeh). But I don't think I need the range now.
Maybe 2 lens to start, a prime and one for general use. What is a good prime lens? I know it's not a simple question as there are a lot of factors, but for example what can a 50mm handle? Is it enough if subject is 3 feet from it?
Great I can help!
I really can't say much about the M50. I only used Sony APSC cameras before (currently owning a A6400). As I see (only overflying, from the comparison here: mirrorlesscomparison.com/preview/sony-a6400-vs-canon-eos-m50/) on the data sheet, the M50 has significant lesser autofocus points (143 vs. 425 from the A6400). More autofocus points mean more 'hits' (right focused pictures). In this case, I can speak from my experience (I owned the A6000 with ~143 autofocus points before) and can say that in comparison with the A6000 the A64000 nearly never messed up the focusing, while the A6000 (with ~143 points) quite commonly misses the autofocus. Many professional reviewers I follow label the A6400 as 'the best camera to shoot family, especially little kids with'.
You have to decide if that 'extra' is worth you more money. I am too biased as I am totally amazed with the hits of the A6400.
As you say that you like to shoot videos, both cameras record in 4K, but the M50 does it in crop mode (*1.5), while the A6400 samples 6K into a 4K video, which means you get no crop (aka a 'fullframe' lenght look) and a better video quality.
When we come to lenses, the canon apc lense-line-up is really small, as the sonys is more bigger (especially with 3rd party lenses from Sigma)
For lenses: If you want to shoot indoors, a prime-lense between 16-50mm would be ideal (Remember: APSC means, that the images are cropped with the factor 1.5 - aka 30mm have the 45mm picture frame, 56mm = 84mm picture frame, etc).
16mm, if you want to shoot your kid with what she's doing (f.e his/her toys),
30mm for maybe a shoot where he/she plays with a single object.
Around 50mm when you want to do only show your kid.
Of course you can get the picture frame that you want by moving, but it is depending on how big the room is you planning to shoot. When you got a small living room/room of your kid, you might want to go wider (f.e 16 or 30mm.)
If you got a big room, you can go with 50mm. (It's especially great, because you get more authentic shots of your kid, because you don't get too close with the camera up do his/her nose. :-) : Btw: both of your camera candidates have a silent shooting mode, which is great for not disturbing playing kids )
For getting a nice bokeh a lense with a wide aperiture is great (in my opinion everything under 2.8 is great, but it's gets creamier with even lower aperiture: But that's a question of taste)
I can personally recommend the Sigma trio prime's - 16mm 1.4 - 30mm 1.4 - 56mm 1.4 - for most situations with your kid (and if you not have a really small room) - I would recommend the 30mm 1.4 for more flexibility or the 56mm for more distance and less disturbance.
They are not cheap, but definitley worth the buck, (between 270-370€) as they are the sharpest lenses for sony apcs you can get.
As an alternative, the Sony 50mm 1.8 is much cheaper (around 150€), a bit less sharp, but I think a great lense to begin with.
For video (if you want to move and have a 'professional look', and don't have really non-shaky-hands) a lense with oss (opctical steady shot) would be optimal. The kit-lens (16-50) offers this. But it only has a aperiture of 3.5-5.6 - that means you won't get a really good bokeh with it.)
If you want to go with the A6400 i might recommend you to buy it with the kit-lens for videos (must be in daylight, or with good light, because it's minimum 3.5) plus the 50mm 1.8 Sony (if you don't want to spend more money on the Sigma 30mm 1.4 or Sigma 56mm 1.4 - for portraits - or video by not moving much and non-shaky-hands)
My optimal setup (if you don't need to think about money) would be buying the A6400 + the 18mm-105mm for video (oss, constant aperure of 4, motored zoom) witht the Sigma 30 or 56mm.
But you can of course first buy the A6400 with the Kit-lens and see if it just fit your needs (needs a well-lighted room, doesn't have a really nice bokeh - but has OSS and a good range of focal lenght). You can buy it in a bundle for max. 100€ more with the A6400, or if it's in sale, even for only 50€ more. It's not a bad lense, has a fair image quality, and when you can live with the downsides, it might be enough.
If not, you can still buy the Sony 50mm or one of the Sigma trio.
My last recommendation is - if you haven't done that already - to just go to a near electronic market and try both cameras - maybe you really like/dislike one of them just by the touch. Also you can test, what prime you want to get - almost all of the cameras there have a zoom lens attached to them. Go to 16 - 30(35) and 50mm - and think about which lenght will suit your needs!
My text may have many grammatical mistakes in it - it's late and english is not my native language. :)
If I am wrong somewhere, everyone, be free to correct me!
Also this is only from my knowledge and information, you might check other sources as well!
Have a nice eve!
@@conraddevera To your question with the 50mm and the 3 feet distance - I think the 50 would be too close for it. Maybe a 30mm or I think around 16mm would be better in this case. I don't know much about the exact distance - but I recommend you to go with your partner/ a friend / your kid to the electronic market and try your desired camera (they got the kit-zoom lens on it most of the time) and zoom to 16, 30, 50mm - and let your companion go to the distance you think you will shoot the most at. At this you can practically decide, which focal length will fit your needs most of the time. :)
@@nordishtm949 good idea (so simple, why didn't I thought of that lol)
I don't know why but your kit lenses are much softer than mine
I'm surprised that your 18-135 has so much fringing. Mine doesn't seem to have nearly as much as yours does.
Christopher Burress Challenge extended... Waiting on Player 2 to accept.
But seriously. It would be awesome to see a mafia/burress photo showdown someday.
Sample variation can cause differrent amounts of fringing.
We tossed around the idea of a collab one time I was down in Texas, but the hurricane kinda stomped that in the dirt.
True story.
What software you use to compare photos quality?
He's using Lightroom.
Do you have a plan to make a comparison between sigma 16mm and rokinon 21mm ?
Dont,T forget the Sigma 19mm! A superb lens! (Less expensive)
Always great videos. I love my 18-135 and use it almost all the time.
Hi, Good Day , I am getting a6400 with Sony 18-135mm , are you completely satisfied with this lens ?
Hi, I think it would be interesting to continue this comparisons and reviews with the sony 18-200mm and facing it with the sony kit lenses (16-50 + 55-210). What do you think? I hope you find it interesting :D
Nice videos, before buy I always look your reviews. I didn't found other channels that expose and compare so honestly and well organized! ^o^
Great comparison. But you made my mind up the 16-50mm with 55-210mm combo of lenses is better value for money than paying $350-400 for the marginally better 18-35mm. Added bonus, the 16-50mm makes the camera a much better pocketable take anywhere shooter.
Hey, man, I'm new to the channel. Love the videos! Have you compared the 50mm lens options?
Thanks for the video! Just got a 55-210 used and have been running it through my own tests. Very similar results to yours. Reassuring to know the softness seems standard and not a fluke with my used lens. Oh and 911 hands down. Lambos have always reminded me of high speed doorstops.
Thanks to this video i've saved myself from a disaster purchase earlier this month. Without this video i would have lost a €150 on a 2nd hand purchase 55-210mm. For double the price i've bought a really good occasion 18-135mm lens at my favourite camera store here in The Netherlands. I've made already some great photo's with my 18-135mm and it's my favourite allround/travel lens in my collection. Sony zoom lenses are great if you stay around 100 or 135mm. For further reach you're better of with a decent telelens.
I never go below 11.0 on any lens for landscapes or higher than 13.0. So, I will have to go to my photo store to see how they perform, I guess. Thanks for the review.
If the 18 135 had existed when I bought the 18 105, it would have been a hard decision. The a6000 was needing such a compact all around lense. The 18 105 is sometimes too big for those who jumped into a6000 coming from point and shoot and travel a lot.
Also powerzoom is not fun when you're making photos
very good comparison! thank you for this video!
Please compare these with the 18-200
Ironically both lenses are Kits for the Sony APS-C! There are bundles with the Kit 16-50 + 55-210 and there is one Kit with the 18-135. As far as I saw the 18-135 Kit was slightly cheaper but these Kit offerings are basically the same prize! :D
You're definitely the guy for Sony apsc E-mount. Hey Tech, do you have any plans to move to Sony FE?
Im tempted with the A7III, but I dont know if there is enough demand/support for it.
TechnologyMafia Same here too and the prices for FE glass scares me!
No, so few are talking about the APS-C while so many are are mentioning the FF cameras and your public will be deleted or left you.. Please, stay with APS-C!
Love these comparisons. Help me decide on a couple of lens choices. Keep it up!
Thank you so much your comparison reviews for Sony are soooo useful! Well I already have the 18-135 so I can save myself some money and not bother with 55 to 210...
do you use a tripo
For the 55-210 it’s better to use f8-f11 than f6.3 f7.1 what start to be really soft around 150-190 (I usually don’t take pictures at up to 190mm) but I would be really interesting by a comparison with another telefoto lens if you do purchase one in the future (135 Samyang) or 70-200/300 👌 to see how can perform the a6000 Line with more expensive material
That's it... looks like I'll score the 18-135 for my a6300 soon! I was looking at the 18-200, but the telephoto end is soft on that one as well, just like the 55-210 shown here. Also, it still manages to be compact enough to fit in a day pack, which I like.
Does anyone know if the digital zoom crops work with the 18-135? If I use any of those in a pinch, it's the ClearImage 2X mode. I sometimes turn that on with the 16-50 lens. This would be great with my 16mm f/2.8 lens to tote along. (I know the pancake 16mm is not seen as good to some, but I landed a decent one, and it's perfect for the old school film look + some low light capability.)
Great video - very useful. The Sony a6400 comes with either no lens, the 16-50, or the 18-135. I was wondering about the difference between the three lenses you showed so the video was an excellent answer to what I needed. Only, now I'm not sure what I should do! I like the compact size of the 16-50 lens, and it makes the camera great for travel.
The difference is not that overwhelming as I thought it would be. The bokeh of the 18-135 in portraits is disappointig in comparison to the 55-210 which is not really shown in this video. As you are more on the tele side with the 18-135 this point was a no go for me. A real step forward in sharpness you only get with a sigma prime. Or 1655G.
Please compare 55-210mm and 18-105mm sony
Great comparison thanks! Well done.
Thank you for your dedication and comparation. Good Channel. Congratiolations 👍
Nice vid as always ;) Apparently Tamron are bringing out a native sony 28-75mm f2.8 lens which I'm very intrigued about...
That is awesome news! About time Tamron starts doing native Sony mounts!
yeah fingers crossed it's the lens we're waiting for! ;)
great comparison , very helpful knowledge!! You Do Great work!!!
ok. i think i will go with the 18-135 as my new kit lens
Great review as always. Thanks so much for following your followers' wishes.
210 seems like a poor lense all around. Fully zoomed in it's even worse than the 18-135 cropped.
Looking forward to the 18-200 vs. 18-135 comparison ;)
Btw. definitely 911. It's made just around the corner here.
nice job im getting the 135 thanks
Really helpful video!! Thanks