BIG ROB wrote:
I have the 16-50 mm, and the 55-210 mm lenses, and I'm very happy with both of them! The 16-50 is almost universally downgraded on many of these Hog posts. Yet, I've found that it provides me, with consistently, nice crisp, sharp, color rich, saturated images; having only some expected distortion at the 16 mm end of its zoom range!
Rob, I just got my a6000 kit from Costco, why Costco-the 90 day return policy with no questions asked. It came with the 18-55mm instead of the 16-50 so I am wondering it the 16-50 would be better for its smaller size.
But with a lot of the poo-pooing of the lens there are also a lot of youtube photo denizens saying that the lens is good as long as you are not a pixel peeper whichseems to be the trend now-a-days. There are some excellent photos out there with this lens. If you look at some of the great BW photos of the 60s, they are all very soft yet convey tremendous story though the image. So it all depends on what you intend to shoot in the end.
As I do not have a lot of money, I am going to give the old college try as I have a 90 day return window.