For a collapsable kit lens that finally delivers on the Nex promise of compactness, I am extremely happy with this lens. It is stellar over the focal lengths that are most important to my shooting. YMMV. I suspect you're right. I'm not personally a fan of the SELP1650 and prefer to mostly use primes with my a6000 or my 18-105G lens when I need a versatile zoom. However, my wife isn't really into photography, beyond some casual stuff, and really likes how tiny and compact the 16-50 zoom is. I don't think she would be happy with something like the larger 18-50 kit and she doesn't do enough photography to spend the money on the 16-70z either. Also, when I've tried to introduce her to primes she keeps asking how to zoom and doesn't appreciate the response, "With your feet". Multi-Language Menu, Power Save Mode, Self Cleaning Sensor, Self Timer, App Functionality, Noise Reduction

Most of what I shoot is macro but with my A77ii rig. I got the A6500 to try and move into other areas.

Offers User-Friendly Operation

The sharpness is on par with the much more expensive 10-18 and focusing speed is yet to be beat among other E-mount lenses. The level mechanism is very handing for video. Chromatic Aberration appears very well-controlled on the Sony 16-50mm. At both 35mm and 50mm, there is very little difference between CA in the extreme corners of frame vs. the overall average. We do see more CA in the corners at the 16mm focal length, with a slight increase at f/8, but the CA is still quite low for a wide-angle zoom lens. CA is however suppressed by the camera body by default in JPEGs, and during RAW conversion via an embedded lens profile which cannot be disabled in Adobe Camera Raw. I went to primes instead, giving me the sharpness and better apperture, just to find me carrying 4 lenses around and getting more and more annoyed with changing lenses on the go. The lens I have does have the querk of being softest in the exteme corners wide open and at F8 as per the review but it is quite tolerable and f5.6 gives good performance. The zoom/focusing ring is about 3/8th inch wide and has an array of small ribs for texture. Very little force is necessary to turn the ring; it's easy to rotate with one finger. The zoom/focus action is very smooth, and rotates indefinitely, as zooming and focusing are electronically controlled. While focusing or zooming, the front element of the lens doesn't rotate, so filters such as circular polarizers work fine. The lens does extend during zooming, though, about 1/4th of an inch.

The lens can achieve a blur-free image easily at 1/10 second. Taking 1/6 second blur-free image is still possible if your hand is firm and steady enough. 1/5 and any slower shutter speed are challenging for me to take a blur-free image even though the OSS is on. More handheld night shots can be found in the bottom line section below. Bottom LineThe lens is DURABLE. I was skeptical about the build quality of such a lens. But it took a tough test pretty well. My camera was splashed by a big icy wave on a glacier lake with this lens on when I was traveling in Argentina. Water immediately went into the lens, but caused no malfunction. After a while, some vapor started to form inside the frontal element, but a night on a heater solved the problem. For a full electronic lens, that was a quite respectable result. And who cares if it really breaks? It's only 150 dollars after all. It seems to be the Sony lottery Rebecca. I've had a couple 18-55s and 3 x 16-50PZ. Both 18-55s were marginally softer than the 16-50 only one of which I would say is good enough for regular use. It is handy for discreet shooting. So of these two, I would lean toward the 16-50. I do note that you have to watch its AF though. Mine sometimes focuses long when using spot focus for some reason. Easily overcome with DMF. Auto, Daylight, Shade, Cloudy, Incandescent, Fluorescent Lamp, Fluorescent Light, Flash, Custom, Underwater x 4.000 (3:2), 4.240 x 2.832 (3:2), 3.008 x 2.000 (3:2), 6.000 x 3.376 (16:9), 4.240 x 2.400 (16:9), 3.008 x 1.688 (16:9)

Do you prefer size or traditional zoom ergonomics? Besides that, there is not a whole lot of difference in IQ. I've had both, prefer the 16-50 due to it's size and 16mm wide setting. If you stop this lens, and use it in good light, it does pretty good. Corners at wide angle are not great, but the 18-55 is very good as well. The 18-55 does take 49mm filters which is pretty common for Sony APS-C lenses. That being said, you can grab a 40.5-49 step up ring and an extra 49mm cap and leave that on the 16-50 when you think you are going to be using filters. AFS (Single), AFC (Continuous), Direct Manual Focus (DMF), Hybrid AF, AF Phase Detection, Eye-Start AutofocusThe camera received high praise for its excellent features, including WiFi and NFC, for the great image quality and fast operation (6/2014). Once again, the image results paired with the Carl Zeiss Vario Tessar 4/16-70 mm OSS are praised, while the 3.5-5.6/16-50 mm kit lens shows clear weaknesses. All in all, the Sony 's good price-performance ratio met with great satisfaction. It is a fantastic entry model for anyone looking for an SLR, even years after its release. Pair it with the Sony Vario Tessar T E 16 70mm lens for even better performance. Offers User-Friendly Operation I agree that neither lens is perfect, but if you are deciding between only those two lenses I have to say that the 18-55 has a slight edge in IQ. While the 16-50 has an advantage on the wide end, the 18-55 is a slightly better lens. You can get some pretty good shots with both lenses. There are much better lenses out there but if these are your only two options and the larger size does not really bother you, I would go for the 18-55. Well you seem to have the 50s covered . I find the SEL 50 1.8 OSS to be a good lens for low light and portraits. I use the Sigma 60/2.8 for a lot of things. For jobs that require a macro I use the Sony FE 90/2.8 G Macro OSS, but for my personal casual closeups I'll use an achromatic closeup lens on whatever lens I happen to be using. I also make frequent use of the Sony 20/2.8 for wide angle close-ups for it's short minimum focus distance and DOF that's deeper than my macro or the closeup lens.