Which is the better lens?

[sduk]

I have a Sony A77 DSLR and the lens I use when shooting car shows etc is my 18-135mm f3.5...

https://www.google.co.uk/shopping/p...9.3&ei=H1EkVObTIcGf7gb1loCgAg&ved=0CHsQpiswAA


I was looking at getting the 16-50 f2.8 lens mainly due to the f2.8 and the wider angle...

https://www.google.co.uk/search?saf....1.9.486.j3a6OmG1xpo#spd=15888259887784282039


Would either lens be "better" than the other? Would the quality of shot differ between them much?

Would it be a worthwhile change or would you not notice much difference between f2.8 and f3.5?

thanks for the help

Sammy

 

[sduk]

I should say the 18-135mm is about £100 cheaper but not sure why that is?

 

[simonblue]

Me i would go for the 16-50 F2.8, the 18-135 has variables apertures at the tele end its F5.6

 

[sduk]

think there would be much difference in the image quality?

Not sure if there is a better alternative of lens for me to go for? already have a 50mm but too tight for using during car shows/events

 

[LongLensPhotography]

covenience vs. quality. Take your pick

 

[sduk]

convenience is not really an issue but would like the improved quality. Think there would be much of an improvement between the two?

 

[simonblue]

Should not be a lot,the 18-135mm is great walkabout lens in good light,but for car show indoors the the 16-50mm to me would be much more useful with its constant aperture

 

[sduk]

okay thank you

 

[Paul-H]

There is the old buying equipment golden rule to apply here as well

When ever you have a choice of things to buy, whichever one you buy the other will turn out to the better item, that the law which is why you always have to buy both

 

[Brazo]

The Sony 16-50 2.8 is a very good lens and is better than the 18-135.

The Sony zeiss 16-80 is an even better lens optically than the 16-50 but has variable aperture and poorer build quality.

 

[pingu666]

look on dyxum? The 16 50 is a great lens, I have one