Excellent video, you have a wonderful voice that is so easy to listen to. I would add that the PZ zoom allows this lens to work with the Sony shooting grip and you can control zoom, start, stop with thumb switches. And the grip adds some stability too.
I have a problem with the autofocus of the 18-105 lens and Sony A6300. Autofocus pulsates in the background. No one knows why this is happening. I think the matter is in the firmware I have version 4 of the lens and 2.01 camera firmware.
I've heard more reviews on UA-cam saying that the fixed size is good for gimbal balance but that is not completely true. The optics inside move quite a bit when changing focal length so the balance still changes.
Great review. But it always gets under my skin when people say fast aperture/ bokeh/ shallow depth of field is the "cinematic look". No Hollywood focus operator is racking at a 1.8 etc. The cinematic look is tons of location scouting and set design to show where the subject is. Which actually would make this a perfect starter cinema lens. Aside from that, great video.
Hi im a new suscriber, and i like how your videos are succinct with real life examples so we can see what we came looking for. Big contrast w a lot youtubers. Thanks!
Damn your video is amazing, just so so descriptive and informative, damn. Talked about the autofocus, the OSS, compared it to the 35 1.8. thank you so much haha
Great review. I shoot mostly video on a 6400 with Sigma 16, and I’ve been debating between this and the Tamron 28-75. I think I’ll go with the Sony since it seems like a better fit for my camera. Thanks, man.
Man, I am no photographer, I'm really new to this. But, have to say, those view.. The nature.. I really appreciate these. So pleasing to look at, nature!
Heya Werner, thanks for this review of this 18-105, i have it too and it changed a lot of things for me ! you're so right cuz i've been also amazed by his size about his zoom and the simplicty to use it, very smooth i'm very foun dof landscape too and this let introduce me to the 70-350, like a big bros of the 18-105 hehe well i'd like to go in mountain to see what you can catch with it, what a luck in a the pure and fresh air !! :D have fun Werner and get health ! =)
nice info in your review, i'm willing to buy this lens the only doubt i have is about the distortion on vertical lines when you zoom in. Did you notice this kind of problem with the a6300 or the firmware of the camera compensate? (you can answer in italian if you prefer)
The problem is it's huge, it isn't fast, and it doesn't offer that much better IQ (if any) vs. the kit. So why again are we buying this thing? Why not just stick to the kit at that point.
constant aperture f4 (just perfect), smooth zoom control (excellent feature), 105mm vs 50mm kit lens, power zoom (perfect for gimbal) i only bought the camera body, and many more things @@RageCage1701
Hi - great video. I have a quick question. I currently have a Sony a6400 and a sigma 16mm 1.4. I generally make talking head style videos but I want to get outdoors and try videoing in woods, lakeside, country trails etc. The zoom lens featured looks great. With my Prime lens it is possible to zoom in slightly with a clear image zoom. Can I operate the zoom lens featured from a button at the back of the camera or do I have to slide a switch on the lens? I keep thinking it must have one such as found on most camcorder zooms. You answer would be much appreciated. Cheers, Peter.
Got one on the way, will be doing mostly street photography. I think the advantage is the zoom but the disadvantage like you said is being discreet. I guess I could just shoot from afar. :P
You mean the 10-18? I would get the 18-105. It is more versatile, suitable for close ups and creates a nice and cinematic shallow depth of field at 105. But it depends of course on your needs. 10-18 would be the better vlogging lens..
@@MountMediaChannel Thanks buddy, I did mean the 10-18 haha, I'm not a vlogger so I think your right with the 18-105, I could always get the other lens later on down the line but as you say , it's a good al rounder. Cheers :-)
Hi I'm buying the A6400 with kitlens 16-50 and sony 18-105 f4. i want to buy one more lens but I'm confused whether i should go with the sigma16mm f1.4 or the sigma 30mm f1.4. My use is travel vlogging so what should i choose. Please let me know. Thank you
@@MountMediaChannel I know it sounds weird, but I just saw quite a few reviews where people said they had problems manually focusing with that lens. Didn't really make any sense to me, but I feel like you're very knowledgeable. Much appreciated
hi thank you very much for the review , i have a question do you consider Sony 18-105 as a basic lens for Sony 6400 , im going for sony6400 +16-50mm +w/ 18-105mm the purpose just vloging and some times taking picture for practice learning , thanks
Hi, do you break 180 degree rule by making your shutterspeed higher than twice of its fps? like 120fps at 1/500 to get sharper footage? does slowing the footages down mask the juddery effect cause by high shutterspeed? thanks
I sometimes break the 180 degree rule just because I am not a big fan of filters (I recently made a video about it). And yes, in slow motion it is almost not noticeable.
What are the alternative lenses i could get? I need a lens that's an all-rounder, portraits and mainly for videography. I do have a 50mm but swapping lens for certain shots is often is hard.
@@MountMediaChannel i did check that out and i did find tamron 17-70 to be an amazing lens but I'm concerned about using it on a gimbal as sony 18-105 got that power zoom tech and i wouldn't have to worry about balancing it
Sony 's low light performance and background separation good enough at 18mm? I have a6300 and sigma 60mm f2.8. What should I buy next for video? Sony 18-105mm f4 or sigma 16mm f1.4? I love 18-105mm versatility and stabilization but I also need low light performance and bokeh?
@@AlexRusdy sony 35 mm. The size, the price (got it second hand) + I got feyutech g6 plus stabilizer - it can manage 800 gramm kit only. 18-105 is better than sony 35mm, but for my needs 35mm suffices.
@@Weird_Quests I am on the same boat. I think that you sohuld not bu the sigma 56mm, but this (or much higher lens than the 56 mm. At least a 85mm lens.)
This one or the sigma 16mm 1.4 one for cinematic filmmaking? You made a video about both and I watched them so I'd like to hear your conclusion in comparison:)
Well, the Sigma will give you better results. And if it is ok for you shooting with just one focal length and if you don't need OSS then get the Sigma. The Sony is just the much more versatile lens. If I personally could just get one lens, I would buy the Sony.
You didn't mention one of the biggest advantages of that lens : the zoom mechanism is internal, the lens doesn't change length when you zoom, unlike every other DSLR zoom. Unfortunately it does have its issues. For one thing, when you turn the camera off the zoom resets to 18 mm. Also, I've always found its focus-by-wire dodgy : it's like it's really meant for autofocus. But for the price it's unbeatable. Forgetting the rare features like power zoom, any lens that comes close to this one will easily cost 50% more. I've had this zoom for five years and it's one of the reasons I may be upgrading my a6000 to the a6600 even though I would have preferred a different camera, like a GH5 : there's just no lens for MFT that can replace this one.
Great video, thank you for sharing. I’ve just bought 18-105 for my A6300 and have been struggling a bit since my footage seems to be grainy/noisy even when using quite low ISO and in good lighting conditions. Do you know what could be the reason? I shoot either 4K or HD..
Thanks! You just taught me a few things about a lens I already own. I also really appreciate the non-existence of the usual "Hey, what's up UA-cam" shit. Hitting subscribe now.
Man, this or sigma 16? I know, very different, but I don't plan on buying too many lenses. How is this lens on wide (compared to 16mm sigma)? I like the versatility
I'm choosing between 18-105 and 16-55 f2.8. What are advantages for video schooting for 18-105 concerning powerzoom? Does it work zooming with Gimbal Weebill S connected by cable? And will be zzoming on gimbal work also with 16-55 without powerzoom? Thank in advance for your help
Yes, because when I think "best lens" I think "a giant zoom lens that defeats the original purpose of the APS-C sensor system (portability), starts out narrower than the kit lens at 18 vs. 16, isn't really fast enough to work low light at f4, and doesn't offer much better (or any) IQ over the kit lens anyway." The sad truth is that Sony has neglected its e-mount aps-c glass for years at this point. I don't fault people for clinging to this lens as they search around trying to find something that works and is a good all-arounder, but if we're being honest with ourselves, we're settling for something that's mediocre due to Sony's neglect.
I bought this lens about ten months ago, and it has allowed me to do things I couldn't do otherwise with the not-great-slow-original-18-55 kit zoom nor with my outstanding primes. It's that simple. When using only one camera at say a school concert, if the stage is fairly well lit, you can shoot 4k video at about 1/125 f4.5 and iso 640, which is all right at the margin of what is acceptable, but that shutter is fast enough to extract sharp stills from the 4k video in-camera. The video and extracted stills are still quite excellent at iso 640, and f4.5 sharpens the lens up a hair from its fastest f4 aperture, but you can use f4 if needed. The super smooth and slow (when you want) power zoom enables you to take a wide view of the stage/scene and then super slowly zoom in very tightly to faces on stage. The OSS works great. And for say-a kids soccer field, which isn't nearly as large as a pro field, you can shoot 1/1000 of a second f 5.6 and iso 200, and get great results. The advantage of this zoom range is that if you are shooting video and zoomed in tight but the kid group with the ball runs toward you, you can zoom out wide as fast as needed to keep the action comprehensible even if they get very close, which you can't do with say a 50-100 zoom, meaning 75-150 with aps-c. Of course you have to anticipate the action. Keep in mind that with video, you are not going to be super-cropping the image, and the lens is quite sharp if you don't chimp/pixel peep, which nobody normally does with video. Finally, for any decently lit outside event like a street festival, carnival , kids outside birthday or even a well-lit indoor birthday, it is still just really versatile and quite sharp. And the flashes available today with high speed synch for cheap (like Godox) further enhance the usability of this lens for daylight fill or dimmer events where you need to run and gun. So I admit I'm lusting for the just-today announced new Sony 16-55 f/2.8 G lens, but keep in mind that is basically just half the reach of the 18-105, so not as great for some outdoor sports or large auditoriums if stage is well lit, and the new lens is currently introduced at $1400; the 18-105 is only $599, and sometimes there is a $50 rebate. So the 18-105 is not a lens I would use for nighttime or dusk street photography. I would use the Sigma 30 1.4 or Sony 24 1.8. I wouldn't haul the 18-105 into a dim pub at night. It's not particularly discrete, (but in some ways it actually is because since it is an internal zooming lens, nobody knows if you are zoomed in tightly on somebody in a group or not.) You have to know what you are doing with this lens, but if you do, it is almost a dream lens for many situations. Some people don't like the power zoom. I love the power zoom because of what it allows me to do with long subtle smooth video zooms at events. The lens is only about 13 ounces because it uses some exotic elements and takes advantage of in-camera digital correction of distortion, which I also think is fantastic. Can any of you imagine from the film days what the cost and weight of a lens like this with 27-155mm range and constant f4 would be? Answer was it probably wasn't even feasible 20 years ago, and nobody offers anything like this even today. Nikon had a 18-105, but not with constant f4 and power zoom. Bottom line is this would not be my first lens, and it would certainly not be my only lens, and I love super fine primes, so it doesn't really replace those accept at the long end maybe (105 at f4 is very sharp in center but not edges), but it does things those primes nor most zooms can do.
@@markfleming9253 I hear you and I appreciate the detailed write-up. It sounds like you use the 18-105 a lot for video, and, in my experience, people who are primarily using it for video are much happier with it than hybrid shooters or primarily photographers. The smooth zoom + OSS + constant aperture make it a good lens for using the 6xxx series as a video platform, as long as the camera cooperates and doesn't overheat on you. But I still stick with my original observation that the 18-105 gives off the vibe of Sony trying to do a little bit of everything, slightly on the cheap, and coming up with something that is beset with a lot of compromises and mediocre characteristics. You aren't getting super sharp IQ with the lens; you aren't using it in low light given its only hitting f4; its glass creates hugely distorted images / video absent using in-body correction or post-processing; it really changes the character of the camera because of its absolute size--you aren't running and gunning with a 6", 1 lb lens sticking off the front of your camera!; and while the focal length range is certainly versatile, it also strikes me as sort of occupying the same middle-focal-length ground that plenty of other zooms and primes do with much better IQ--it's not like you're getting landscape or super zoom out of this lens. The problem for APS-C shooters is that, until now, there really wasn't a better zoom option other than sticking with the kit lens (which I'll argue with anyone is a damn fine lens for the price and is arguably the most underrated aps-c e-mount lens made by Sony). Zeiss screwed the pooch with the 16-70's quality control issues, so you either stuck with the kit or grabbed the 18-105 and just lived with the compromises and mediocrities in order to get yourself into a wider range of shooting situations, as you've described. (Or else you gave up the zoom pursuit entirely and just resorted to a bag full of primes.) I've always wanted to love the 18-105, but it just seems half-baked to me in final analysis--like Sony gave up half way through the design process because they realized that they could only do so much while coming in around a $600 price point. Regarding the just announced 16-55 lens you refer to in your comment: I'm quite excited for it, to be honest. That 16-55 f2.8 seems, by contrast, to be exactly what the doctor ordered. It's what many, many aps-c shooters who don't want to resort to a bunch of primes have been begging for literally for years. A fast, ostensibly high IQ, nicely ranged (16mm is an appreciated starting focal length), constant aperture, 9 blades for good bokeh, compact, linear response manual focus lens, etc.--the list goes on and on. I acknowledge that it would have been nice to get more zoom, but presumably the economics (and weight / size factor) just didn't make sense to go beyond 55. Regardless, assuming the reviews bear it out, I'll be buying this lens in the fall.
HI.
This lens with sony a7 III, even in low light conditions, even an F4, the results are excellent.
Can you zoom while filming on a Ronin SC gimbal?
Love using 18-105 f4 with my a6500 for video, constant f4 is a must for me....best combination EVER!
Yes, a great lens!
I have gone around the houses and always come back to the lens. I guess I need to buy it at some point. Thanks for the smooth production
3:05 that's all I wanted to hear!!! THANK YOU!
I am looking for a lens for a6000 primarily for video and after this video my search for the one seems over. Thanks
Man, you have no idea, how I become jelous heraing you say "I live in Italian Alps" :)))
👍😀
Excellent video, you have a wonderful voice that is so easy to listen to. I would add that the PZ zoom allows this lens to work with the Sony shooting grip and you can control zoom, start, stop with thumb switches. And the grip adds some stability too.
Thx for your feedback Paul and the additional info!
Always love to watch your videos. All the info in a short vid.
I have a problem with the autofocus of the 18-105 lens and Sony A6300. Autofocus pulsates in the background. No one knows why this is happening.
I think the matter is in the firmware I have version 4 of the lens and 2.01 camera firmware.
@@InfinitelyQurious Do you have a Sony a6300 camera?
thanks man. good review
Have had mine for 2 years. I liked it so much, I bought it's own body. It also works great on a gimbal. Good review. Cheers
Best review bro. I'm going for it thanks 👍
Good talking voice. Straight to the point. Excellent review.
Thx Adrian!
I've heard more reviews on UA-cam saying that the fixed size is good for gimbal balance but that is not completely true. The optics inside move quite a bit when changing focal length so the balance still changes.
Great review. But it always gets under my skin when people say fast aperture/ bokeh/ shallow depth of field is the "cinematic look". No Hollywood focus operator is racking at a 1.8 etc. The cinematic look is tons of location scouting and set design to show where the subject is. Which actually would make this a perfect starter cinema lens. Aside from that, great video.
Amazing.....i have a6400 and 18-105 but how to ON OSS and how to shot above 105 to 200+ range? Please help me
what is your lens firmware version?
Thanks for the honesty!
Excellent review. I'm aiming to pick it up soon.
Hi im a new suscriber, and i like how your videos are succinct with real life examples so we can see what we came looking for. Big contrast w a lot youtubers. Thanks!
Thank you Troy!
im going for this lens nice review
Damn your video is amazing, just so so descriptive and informative, damn. Talked about the autofocus, the OSS, compared it to the 35 1.8. thank you so much haha
Life goal: Buying a house in Italian Alps. What a beautiful landscape with the villages surrounded by those incredible mountains. Heaven on earth.
Yes, so true
Great review. I shoot mostly video on a 6400 with Sigma 16, and I’ve been debating between this and the Tamron 28-75. I think I’ll go with the Sony since it seems like a better fit for my camera. Thanks, man.
Yes, it's really a nice lens
Short, but very effective. A 1,000 thanks!
Very good review and beautiful location, thanks a lot''
Thank you! Great review!
Easy video, fast description and your english is perfect
Thx Alessandro!
bravo! greetings from Mexico.
Man, I am no photographer, I'm really new to this. But, have to say, those view.. The nature.. I really appreciate these. So pleasing to look at, nature!
Yes, so true!
Heya Werner, thanks for this review of this 18-105, i have it too and it changed a lot of things for me !
you're so right cuz i've been also amazed by his size about his zoom and the simplicty to use it, very smooth
i'm very foun dof landscape too and this let introduce me to the 70-350, like a big bros of the 18-105 hehe
well i'd like to go in mountain to see what you can catch with it, what a luck in a the pure and fresh air !! :D
have fun Werner and get health ! =)
very straight forward. thank you for the video
nice info in your review, i'm willing to buy this lens the only doubt i have is about the distortion on vertical lines when you zoom in. Did you notice this kind of problem with the a6300 or the firmware of the camera compensate? (you can answer in italian if you prefer)
Thx and no I didn‘t notice this problem. But there is some distortion on the wide side (as you may expect)
I use this lens a lot on my a6500. It's neither sharp nor fast/low night but is a good all around lens.
Yes, that's exactly how I see it
The problem is it's huge, it isn't fast, and it doesn't offer that much better IQ (if any) vs. the kit. So why again are we buying this thing? Why not just stick to the kit at that point.
constant aperture f4 (just perfect), smooth zoom control (excellent feature), 105mm vs 50mm kit lens, power zoom (perfect for gimbal) i only bought the camera body, and many more things @@RageCage1701
I use SELP 18-200 even if between 115-200mm is at f6.3 but i like that it has 3 zoom speeds and better zoom range.
Good zoom range is great - especially for travel
Hi, would this lens be better on the a6400 than the silver SEL18-200? Does that 85mm extra reach make much of a difference?
Hi - great video. I have a quick question. I currently have a Sony a6400 and a sigma 16mm 1.4. I generally make talking head style videos but I want to get outdoors and try videoing in woods, lakeside, country trails etc. The zoom lens featured looks great. With my Prime lens it is possible to zoom in slightly with a clear image zoom. Can I operate the zoom lens featured from a button at the back of the camera or do I have to slide a switch on the lens? I keep thinking it must have one such as found on most camcorder zooms. You answer would be much appreciated. Cheers, Peter.
There are two ways to operate the zoom: a classic zoom ring and a switch on the lens to zoom in and out.
@@MountMediaChannel Thank you - As you can tell I am completely new to this. Much appreciated. Peter.
Got one on the way, will be doing mostly street photography. I think the advantage is the zoom but the disadvantage like you said is being discreet. I guess I could just shoot from afar. :P
Very informative.. keep it up! :)
Thanks, great video, I'm torn between the 10-28 or this lens for video, if you could get get one lens what would you get?
You mean the 10-18? I would get the 18-105. It is more versatile, suitable for close ups and creates a nice and cinematic shallow depth of field at 105. But it depends of course on your needs. 10-18 would be the better vlogging lens..
@@MountMediaChannel Thanks buddy, I did mean the 10-18 haha, I'm not a vlogger so I think your right with the 18-105, I could always get the other lens later on down the line but as you say , it's a good al rounder. Cheers :-)
We have a Sony a6400 and a sigma 30, we are wondering if we should get this lens or the 24-105 version for video etc
Really great review!! thanks for sharing :-)
Hi I'm buying the A6400 with kitlens 16-50 and sony 18-105 f4. i want to buy one more lens but I'm confused whether i should go with the sigma16mm f1.4 or the sigma 30mm f1.4.
My use is travel vlogging so what should i choose. Please let me know.
Thank you
is it hard to manually focus with this lens?
No, that's not a problem
@@MountMediaChannel I know it sounds weird, but I just saw quite a few reviews where people said they had problems manually focusing with that lens. Didn't really make any sense to me, but I feel like you're very knowledgeable. Much appreciated
Thank you. Very interesting🎉
This was a nice video if only u had more sample videos and pics, u gotta do that next time. good luck
hi thank you very much for the review , i have a question do you consider Sony 18-105 as a basic lens for Sony 6400 , im going for sony6400 +16-50mm +w/ 18-105mm the purpose just vloging and some times taking picture for practice learning , thanks
Yes, absolutely. For vlogging you could also have a look at the 10-18
@@MountMediaChannel thanks
Excellent review, covered everything I needed to know. Thank you so much, liked and subscribed! :)
Thank you!
It was useful information for me. thank you.
and thanks to your fluent English, I understood very clearly with youtube automatic translation.
Thanks!
Hi, do you break 180 degree rule by making your shutterspeed higher than twice of its fps? like 120fps at 1/500 to get sharper footage? does slowing the footages down mask the juddery effect cause by high shutterspeed? thanks
I sometimes break the 180 degree rule just because I am not a big fan of filters (I recently made a video about it). And yes, in slow motion it is almost not noticeable.
you just convinced me to get this lens
Very very expressive
What are the alternative lenses i could get?
I need a lens that's an all-rounder, portraits and mainly for videography.
I do have a 50mm but swapping lens for certain shots is often is hard.
Check out the video on my channel about the best lenses for video - and there is a new alternative - the Tamron 17-70 2.8
@@MountMediaChannel i did check that out and i did find tamron 17-70 to be an amazing lens but I'm concerned about using it on a gimbal as sony 18-105 got that power zoom tech and i wouldn't have to worry about balancing it
Man I'd kill to live in an area like that good for video brother
Yes, that's true
what is the slowest you can zoom in? I'm wanting to use it for some very slow cinematic zoom ins, would that be possible?
Check out the review by Christopher Frost, he demonstrates the zoom speeds in his video
Sony 's low light performance and background separation good enough at 18mm?
I have a6300 and sigma 60mm f2.8. What should I buy next for video? Sony 18-105mm f4 or sigma 16mm f1.4? I love 18-105mm versatility and stabilization but I also need low light performance and bokeh?
At 18mm and F4 there is very little background separation.
many thanks
A very useful review, thank you. I'm currently choosing a lens (mostly for making videos) for my 6300 - I want some upgrade for the kit lens.
Thx mate
Глеб Рябов what did you end up getting? I making a decision between 24-70 f2.8, 18-105 f4, sigma 16mm f1.8, or 35 sigma art f1.4
@@AlexRusdy sony 35 mm. The size, the price (got it second hand) + I got feyutech g6 plus stabilizer - it can manage 800 gramm kit only. 18-105 is better than sony 35mm, but for my needs 35mm suffices.
How bad is the distortion sir (i just read it somewhere). Planning on getting this so i could have some range
There is obviously some distortion on the wide side but imo it is acceptable
@@MountMediaChannel hi, thanks, sorry I am new to this and I made the comment early into the video. I'll pick one up soon
I currently own the sigma 30mm and sigma 16mm lenses - would you recommend this as a good all-rounder for video production?
Yes, absolutely. It is just slightly bigger than the Sigma 16mm but extremely versatile.
@@MountMediaChannel Not sure what to do now - was thinking of the Sigma 56mm next, but thinking of this too... hmmmm..
@@Weird_Quests I am on the same boat. I think that you sohuld not bu the sigma 56mm, but this (or much higher lens than the 56 mm. At least a 85mm lens.)
@@MountMediaChannel Is this lens also better for video then sigma 16mm 1.4?
This one or the sigma 16mm 1.4 one for cinematic filmmaking? You made a video about both and I watched them so I'd like to hear your conclusion in comparison:)
Well, the Sigma will give you better results. And if it is ok for you shooting with just one focal length and if you don't need OSS then get the Sigma. The Sony is just the much more versatile lens. If I personally could just get one lens, I would buy the Sony.
@@MountMediaChannel true but I also have the kit lens xd so I guess I should go with the sigma(architecture photography and landscapes)
Planning this or sigma 56mm
Nice vid!
In these Clip, What lenses do you use to shoot videos in your studio?
The talking head part was shot on the Sony 35 1.8mm (APS-C)
What about the 18-135mm? Will this be good for filmmaking?
I think it's a good lens. I would just prefer the 18-105 - internal zoom and constant aperture. Two advantages for filmmaking.
You didn't mention one of the biggest advantages of that lens : the zoom mechanism is internal, the lens doesn't change length when you zoom, unlike every other DSLR zoom. Unfortunately it does have its issues. For one thing, when you turn the camera off the zoom resets to 18 mm. Also, I've always found its focus-by-wire dodgy : it's like it's really meant for autofocus. But for the price it's unbeatable. Forgetting the rare features like power zoom, any lens that comes close to this one will easily cost 50% more. I've had this zoom for five years and it's one of the reasons I may be upgrading my a6000 to the a6600 even though I would have preferred a different camera, like a GH5 : there's just no lens for MFT that can replace this one.
Great video, thank you for sharing. I’ve just bought 18-105 for my A6300 and have been struggling a bit since my footage seems to be grainy/noisy even when using quite low ISO and in good lighting conditions. Do you know what could be the reason? I shoot either 4K or HD..
did u buy new? if so, then check all your settings.
try setting it to auto, and check your f stop
I like your video. Perfect. Efficace (in french)
Thx Juan!
Can I use it on M3?
best tutorial ever
Thanks!!
Thanks! You just taught me a few things about a lens I already own. I also really appreciate the non-existence of the usual "Hey, what's up UA-cam" shit. Hitting subscribe now.
Man, this or sigma 16? I know, very different, but I don't plan on buying too many lenses. How is this lens on wide (compared to 16mm sigma)? I like the versatility
This is way more versatile than the Sigma and it has OSS. But the Sigma is of course a great lens. It really depends on your needs.
What about this lens on a A7iii for 4k video?
This is an APS-C lens. It works but, only in crop mode. I would buy another lens for the A7iii
Great thanks for the video.
Are you using the 18-105 to shoot the video?
The sample shots of course yes. The talking head shots were taken on the 35 1.8
can i use this lens on a full frame like the sonya7ii??
Yes but only in crop mode
what about 18-135 ? is it good for filmmaking too ?
The 18-105 has a few advantages: internal zoom and a constant aperture of F4. But I think that the 18-135 is a good lens too.
Very good vídeo!!!
Thx mate!
Thanks robot
The lens is mostly made of metal instead of plastic.
Is it much sharper then the kit lens?
No, check out my channel for a comparison with the Kit Lens
@@MountMediaChannel that's actually devastating for the price.
Excelente 👏🏽
Gracias
How did you go for 210mm?
Clear Image Zoom
@@MountMediaChannel can u explain? I going to buy this one. The lens able to do that? Or u did in program?
@@MountMediaChannel Can you explain me?
@@laczadesign Clear Image Zoom is a feature of the Sony cameras. It's a digital 2xZoom that works only in 4K. Works with all lenses.
@@MountMediaChannel Thank you! I just bought that lens.. Do I lost lot quality and steadshot if I use it? Thank you! Also I saw only available jpg..
This one or 70 200 ??
Better thann Sigma 16mm 1.4 when it comes to filmmaking?:0
Not better but more versatile. It depends on your needs
@@MountMediaChannel When it comes to cinematic videos?
I'm choosing between 18-105 and 16-55 f2.8. What are advantages for video schooting for 18-105 concerning powerzoom? Does it work zooming with Gimbal Weebill S connected by cable? And will be zzoming on gimbal work also with 16-55 without powerzoom? Thank in advance for your help
You'd have to rebalance your setup everytime with the Sony 16-55
Wait until you see the size of the Sony 16-55 2.8 or Tamron 17-70mm ; )) this pales in comparison.
спасибо тебе мужик ! поздравляю - ты продал мне этот обьектив ! 💯💥👍👍👍
Yes, because when I think "best lens" I think "a giant zoom lens that defeats the original purpose of the APS-C sensor system (portability), starts out narrower than the kit lens at 18 vs. 16, isn't really fast enough to work low light at f4, and doesn't offer much better (or any) IQ over the kit lens anyway." The sad truth is that Sony has neglected its e-mount aps-c glass for years at this point. I don't fault people for clinging to this lens as they search around trying to find something that works and is a good all-arounder, but if we're being honest with ourselves, we're settling for something that's mediocre due to Sony's neglect.
I bought this lens about ten months ago, and it has allowed me to do things I couldn't do otherwise with the not-great-slow-original-18-55 kit zoom nor with my outstanding primes. It's that simple. When using only one camera at say a school concert, if the stage is fairly well lit, you can shoot 4k video at about 1/125 f4.5 and iso 640, which is all right at the margin of what is acceptable, but that shutter is fast enough to extract sharp stills from the 4k video in-camera. The video and extracted stills are still quite excellent at iso 640, and f4.5 sharpens the lens up a hair from its fastest f4 aperture, but you can use f4 if needed. The super smooth and slow (when you want) power zoom enables you to take a wide view of the stage/scene and then super slowly zoom in very tightly to faces on stage. The OSS works great. And for say-a kids soccer field, which isn't nearly as large as a pro field, you can shoot 1/1000 of a second f 5.6 and iso 200, and get great results. The advantage of this zoom range is that if you are shooting video and zoomed in tight but the kid group with the ball runs toward you, you can zoom out wide as fast as needed to keep the action comprehensible even if they get very close, which you can't do with say a 50-100 zoom, meaning 75-150 with aps-c. Of course you have to anticipate the action. Keep in mind that with video, you are not going to be super-cropping the image, and the lens is quite sharp if you don't chimp/pixel peep, which nobody normally does with video. Finally, for any decently lit outside event like a street festival, carnival , kids outside birthday or even a well-lit indoor birthday, it is still just really versatile and quite sharp. And the flashes available today with high speed synch for cheap (like Godox) further enhance the usability of this lens for daylight fill or dimmer events where you need to run and gun. So I admit I'm lusting for the just-today announced new Sony 16-55 f/2.8 G lens, but keep in mind that is basically just half the reach of the 18-105, so not as great for some outdoor sports or large auditoriums if stage is well lit, and the new lens is currently introduced at $1400; the 18-105 is only $599, and sometimes there is a $50 rebate. So the 18-105 is not a lens I would use for nighttime or dusk street photography. I would use the Sigma 30 1.4 or Sony 24 1.8. I wouldn't haul the 18-105 into a dim pub at night. It's not particularly discrete, (but in some ways it actually is because since it is an internal zooming lens, nobody knows if you are zoomed in tightly on somebody in a group or not.) You have to know what you are doing with this lens, but if you do, it is almost a dream lens for many situations. Some people don't like the power zoom. I love the power zoom because of what it allows me to do with long subtle smooth video zooms at events. The lens is only about 13 ounces because it uses some exotic elements and takes advantage of in-camera digital correction of distortion, which I also think is fantastic. Can any of you imagine from the film days what the cost and weight of a lens like this with 27-155mm range and constant f4 would be? Answer was it probably wasn't even feasible 20 years ago, and nobody offers anything like this even today. Nikon had a 18-105, but not with constant f4 and power zoom. Bottom line is this would not be my first lens, and it would certainly not be my only lens, and I love super fine primes, so it doesn't really replace those accept at the long end maybe (105 at f4 is very sharp in center but not edges), but it does things those primes nor most zooms can do.
@@markfleming9253 I hear you and I appreciate the detailed write-up. It sounds like you use the 18-105 a lot for video, and, in my experience, people who are primarily using it for video are much happier with it than hybrid shooters or primarily photographers. The smooth zoom + OSS + constant aperture make it a good lens for using the 6xxx series as a video platform, as long as the camera cooperates and doesn't overheat on you. But I still stick with my original observation that the 18-105 gives off the vibe of Sony trying to do a little bit of everything, slightly on the cheap, and coming up with something that is beset with a lot of compromises and mediocre characteristics. You aren't getting super sharp IQ with the lens; you aren't using it in low light given its only hitting f4; its glass creates hugely distorted images / video absent using in-body correction or post-processing; it really changes the character of the camera because of its absolute size--you aren't running and gunning with a 6", 1 lb lens sticking off the front of your camera!; and while the focal length range is certainly versatile, it also strikes me as sort of occupying the same middle-focal-length ground that plenty of other zooms and primes do with much better IQ--it's not like you're getting landscape or super zoom out of this lens. The problem for APS-C shooters is that, until now, there really wasn't a better zoom option other than sticking with the kit lens (which I'll argue with anyone is a damn fine lens for the price and is arguably the most underrated aps-c e-mount lens made by Sony). Zeiss screwed the pooch with the 16-70's quality control issues, so you either stuck with the kit or grabbed the 18-105 and just lived with the compromises and mediocrities in order to get yourself into a wider range of shooting situations, as you've described. (Or else you gave up the zoom pursuit entirely and just resorted to a bag full of primes.) I've always wanted to love the 18-105, but it just seems half-baked to me in final analysis--like Sony gave up half way through the design process because they realized that they could only do so much while coming in around a $600 price point.
Regarding the just announced 16-55 lens you refer to in your comment: I'm quite excited for it, to be honest. That 16-55 f2.8 seems, by contrast, to be exactly what the doctor ordered. It's what many, many aps-c shooters who don't want to resort to a bunch of primes have been begging for literally for years. A fast, ostensibly high IQ, nicely ranged (16mm is an appreciated starting focal length), constant aperture, 9 blades for good bokeh, compact, linear response manual focus lens, etc.--the list goes on and on. I acknowledge that it would have been nice to get more zoom, but presumably the economics (and weight / size factor) just didn't make sense to go beyond 55. Regardless, assuming the reviews bear it out, I'll be buying this lens in the fall.
Better then the 18-135?
I think for filmmaking/video it is the better choice - constant aperture - internal zoom.
@@MountMediaChannel ok thx then i buy the 18-105 because so much youtubers and friends said its better
@Bikechanic no
But i get it at April or may
@Bikechanic yes🤣🤣
This music though.
Not the best for the new a6400 handheld vlogging as the MFD is terrible, infamous distortion and all combined into a lens that is heavy and big.
How about its kit lens?
Bokeh Shmokeh.