SELP18105 vs SELP18200

O

orfeas76

Member
Just bought an NEX-EA50 to fill my DSLR range
Which lens do you consider better in terms of resolution, focus accuracy and/or color fringing/halos etc ?
the 18-105 PZ or the 18-200 PZ ?
As far as I know distortion is electronically corrected on this camcorder.

But is there a sharpness difference ?
Is the 18-200 more expensive just because of its range (which I don't need) ?
Do they both feature smooth, slow, stepless p-zoom ?
 
ofcourse I 've read every related thread.
Also I 've seen images on the net, ensuring that pincushion is not an issue with nex-ea50
But can't find a real comparing test between those two
 
morgan_moore said:
Im sure the shorter zoom is better - the long one is pretty horrid
Click to expand...
I dunno about that. I had the 18-105 for a couple days before I sent it back.
I have some footage that I shot with it on my VG20 where the distortion isn't
bad like it is on my FS 700. Not sure it is any better than the 18-200. I can post
test footage if anyone is interested.
 
Last edited:
So, I don't have much, I only had the lens for a day, as I sent it back for a refund
because of the distortion it had on my FS700. On my VG20, it was much better.
I really only tried a few shots with it, just to see if it distorted on the VG20 at all.
Anyways, you can see it here:
http://youtu.be/3pTopn8g8Ao
 
morgan_moore said:
Im not talking image quality im talking that the fly by wire focus when used in manual on the longer lens is so delayed as to make the lens basically useless..
Click to expand...

The 18-105 has basically the same fly by wire focus system as the 18-200.
It has normal steady shot but does not have 'active' steady shot like the 18-200.
Autofocus was actually pretty good. Constant F4 was nice, plus the lens did not
extend when zoomed. It worked with the power zoom on the FS700. 'Tap
to focus' also worked on the FS700. But oh, that distortion......
 
So the focus is a week late too?

I like the AF on the 200mm but every interview shot I frame is 1/3 off centre rendering AF useless..

S
 
morgan_moore said:
So the focus is a week late too?

I like the AF on the 200mm but every interview shot I frame is 1/3 off centre rendering AF useless..

S
Click to expand...

I think the focus is just a touch better on the 18-105 in that it responds just a little bit quicker
than it does on the 18-200 when in manual focus mode. But not that much (say 5 days late instead
of a week). And it's the same strange 'focus by wire' system. Of course I was thinking of it as
the new 'do a little of everything' lens.....better than the 18-200 in that it stays at a constant F4
and does not extend out when you zoom. For slower paced stuff, I'll throw on the Sigma 18-35 F1.8
or the 50-150 F2.8 or the 50 F1.4. But for grabbing a wide, medium and tight quickly, I was
thinking I might just barely be able to get all three shots with the 18-105 and use it as the
'poor man's' version of the 19-90. So close, yet so far........

For interviews when I am using the 18-200, I usually either set focus manually
(I don't need to rack focus during an interview and so the 'focus by wire' isn't annoying because
once you set it, there it stays), or I use 'tap to focus' mode where I just tap the screen to focus,
or I use Face detection autofocus. Because, as you say most of the time you want to frame an
interview on 1/3 of the screen and leave the 'look space' which is not conducive to normal autofocus.
 
Last edited:
alaskacameradude said:
Autofocus was actually pretty good. Constant F4 was nice, plus the lens did not
extend when zoomed.
Click to expand...

For these exact reasons, plus I think the zoom is faster, I like the 18-105 on the EA50 better than 18-200. I can't stand the variable f/3.5-6.3 because, when I need the whole zoom range, I have to choose between shooting auto or manual at f/6.3.

I bought the EA50 and 700R at the same time. Got the EA50 with the 18-200 and the 700R body only. Ordered the 18-105 and was very disappointed when I learned about the image distortion on the 700. But it's pretty good on the EA50. So, now the 18-200 travels (rarely used) with my 700 for the rare occasion where I need the auto-focus. And the 18-105 travels with my (rarely used) EA50 b-cam. Neither lens is great, but sometimes I need the auto-focus.
 
Is the 18-200 any good for a gimbal use? I am about to receive a defy G5 and am wondering if I would need to buy the 18-200 for instances when the camera op is running behind an actor .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top