Viltrox makes some great lenses. I have the 85mm f1.8 FE and it's my favourite for portrait shots. 3'rd party lens support is one of the Sony advantages.
I’ve been wanting a wide lens for my a7S III for a while but rarely shoot anything to justify the price of something like the Sigma 16-28, Sony 16-35, etc. But this, this can be justified. lol
I hate the digital display. Its just going to die, and there is no advantage to it, a gimmick, marring the lens. 16mm is useful. But what I really can't find from Viltrox is a standard 24mm equivalent for APSC.
I was very excited about this lens untiil your revview. I wanted it for astro as I'm having a tough time justifying the Sony 14/1.8 at it's price point. Bottom line is you get what you pay for I suppose. You don't buy a lens like this to stop it down, you buy it to shoot wide open. If you plan on stopping down then might as well give up the aperture speed and af and invest that money in the actual optics. Perhaps something sharp and slow like a voightlander prime which will have better image quality for landscape and real estate where stopping down is the norm. You just saved me some money for now but cost me in the long run as the Sony 14 is likely in my future. Thanks for the info, Keep up the good work.
Good review, thanks. Sharpness results are interesting. Having read and watched a lot of reviews, most are saying it has excellent sharpness from f1.8. Personally, I think sharpness is an overrated characteristic for a lens these days. Lens flare also interesting as many reviews saying this is a weakness.
Yes, some people are overly optimistic 😏 But also most other reviews I saw of this lens were video-centric, and what is sharp for 4K video (about 8mp) is not necessarily sharp enough for 33mp photography.
And as far as lens flaring goes, it’s significantly better than any lenses in it’s price range/focal range. And it’s an ultrawide, so that has to be taken into consideration as well. It has very comparable flaring to the 16-35GM at 16mm!
It does ruin the point. As such I wouldn’t really consider this a great Astro lens. Lots of coma and softness wide open. It fixes up really fast though. Even at f/2.2 it’s Significantly improved.
It’s not going to be as good as 20G for AF. Wide open it focuses the best. BUT at 1.8 it’s a bit soft. I usually use it at 2.0 or 2.2 as the best balance of AF and usable sharpness.
@@WesPerryIf the AF is still reliable at 1.8/2.0, probably I will get one bcoz GM 14 1.8 price high. I'm running A7 IV, I guess the AF will manage to working after I set the speed to fastest.
Really hoping they issue a firmware update soon that makes the AF just a Little better. The 75 1.2 is So Good for AF, I feel like they must have the ability to iron this one out.
@@WesPerry The 75 1.2 with the same STM focus was slow too on the original firmware 1.0 but after updated firmware the speed greatly improved now. I wish the same case will happen on 16 1.8, the Sony 14 1.8 is too expensive and I don't need to shoot such wide shot often, so it has no point for me to buy one though I've the budget(barely) to get the GM.
So if I take my sony 16 to 35 f4, focus it at 16mm vs this 16mm 2.8 fixed, what advatages does this viltrox give me? Viltrox- more bocca blur, slightly sharper image? Gary
@WesPerry thanks we do model trainboard videos and shots of models, never outside, never portraits. We have both lense, will try some shots, likely return the viltrox fixed lens. Gary
@@WesPerryHmm you’re right. It would have been an excellent Lumix S 18mm f1.8 alternative! But i think i would have stick with the Lumix S series, since they’re truly amazing and unique for the price.
Once you get that wide, 2mm Can be a lot. That’s a 13% change in field of view. Whereas going from say 50 to 52mm is only a 4% change in field of view. How is the focus breathing on the 18? I failed to mention in my video that it’s very well controlled here, which can have a significant change on field of view as well. At many focal distances the 16-35GM is Not 16mm anymore due to a fair amount of focus breathing (which can be controlled in-body with some Sony cameras fortunately, but it does lose you some width).
My copy is sharp wide open within a good portion of the center and only starts to soften up a touch on the edges and in the corners, but I certainly wouldn't call it "soft" as a blanket description of the overall character of this lens wide open. But by f2.8 and even f2 its overall corner to corner performance dramatically improves as pointed out in this review. But I find its overall sharpness wide open for the majority of cases to be perfectly acceptable.
You Panasonic shooters have to email Viltrox in huge numbers! They just don’t think there’s a big enough L-mount market at the moment. With the modifications they have to make to get it to fit on the Z mount, the barrel shape would be about the same at least. I don’t know what the L-mount licensing scheme is like, though…
@@WesPerry We have some nice primes but every lens is like 30% more expensive than other brand. A big plus is that we can use Canon lenses but if you own the S5 and not S5 ii, the auto focus is almost none existent.
Thank you for the video. I love your chart and based on my experience, it seems to be very accurate with the exception of Tamron duo. I own the Tamron 70-180 and the 28-75 G2 along with other Tamron zoom lenses. I am surprised that they scored so low as the 70-180 was my go to long lens for a project I just finished. I am pleasantly supervised that Viltrox lenses are so high up on your chart. I borrowed the Sony 35 f1.4 GM and the Sigma 85 f1.4 from my cousin who did extensive research before buying those lenses. He was telling me that they are the best of the best in their respective focal lengths. I shot more with the Sigma 85 and less with the Sony 35. The project I was shooting, called for wide open apertures. I must say both Sigma at 85 f1.4 and the Tarmon 70-180 at f2.8 delivered the goods. I would love to get my hand on the Viltrox 16mm to test. I think it might become my go to lens for all my wide shots. I am using the Tamron 17-28 f2.8 to fill that role right now.
I haven’t used the G2 Tamron 28-75, but have Extensively used the 70-180 and 28-75 since they came out. I ended up lowering my scores on them in the years since video reviews (most of the scores have been changing in the chart, to account for changing competition). My main issue with the 70-180 is that in a lot of situations the bokeh is just a disaster, and can be very distracting. While the original 28-75 has such unreliable AF I’ve lost So Much footage and so many shots it’s incredibly frustrating.
And yep, the Sony 35 1.4 and Sigma 85 1.4 are both Stellar. In a whole other league from the Viltrox. Seems like it might be a while before they make something razor sharp wide open and/or near instant AF speeds.
@@WesPerry Hi Wes, Thank you for the lightning response. Oddly enough the 28-75 G2 is my least used Tamron zoom lens. I agree on the autofocus as the 28-75 G2 and my 17-28 are simply not acceptable when it comes to autofocusing. When the subject is at or near the center, they seem to be ok. But as soon as the focus point moves closer to any of the corners or edges, both lenses refuse to lock focus. My Sony 24-105 (which I sold) had no such issue. For the project that I mentioned, my subject was landscapes and trees in particular. I had to isolate the trees so they stood out from the mountains in the background. The Sigma 85 at f1.4 is simply magical when it comes to bokeh. I am surprised at your Tamron 70-180 disaster comment about the bokeh. The Tamron 70-180, mostly used between 100-135 at f2.8 gave me a lot of keepers. Now I am wondering how much better they could have been say with the Sony 70-200 GM II? In any case, choosing the Tamrons was for zoom capability, weight saving and budget reasons. For the project, I shot manual and used focus peaking for focus accuracy and max sharpness. Autofocus was simply not acceptable.
Nitecore are the only ones I’ve found that aren’t completely awful. They’re fine. The rest that I’ve tried (RAVPower, Neewer, SmallRig, etc) are absolutely garbage 🤦🏻♂️
nitecore or sony original battery will you recomment ? if nitecore i can buy 2pcs but if sony original i can only buy 1pcs. . btw i use my camera mostly for wedding job video and picture.
Nitecore is about 85-90% as good as the Sony battery. It’s just a matter of what that’s worth it to you! Where I live the Nitecore is about 75% the price of Sony, so it’s a tough call.
I don’t care for that one, and couldn’t find anywhere/anyone to borrow it from. I find the character of that and the 85 1.8 to be grating, so I haven’t gone too far out of my way to get my hands on either.
Hello, good video, the sony 11mm f1.8 could give the same viewing angle as this viltrox 16mm, do you know or could you make a comparison of vignetting, deformation and sharpness of them? Thank you so much
Sortof? The 11 1.8 being an APS-C lens, it’s kinda hard to compare apples to apples. But the 11 has Enormous distortion, a bit more vignetting, but more consistent sharpness.
Sony is just winning right now with all these cool 3rd party lens options
Yeah, the range available now is kindof dizzying.
its available for other mounts now including nikon z
Viltrox makes some great lenses. I have the 85mm f1.8 FE and it's my favourite for portrait shots. 3'rd party lens support is one of the Sony advantages.
I’ve been wanting a wide lens for my a7S III for a while but rarely shoot anything to justify the price of something like the Sigma 16-28, Sony 16-35, etc. But this, this can be justified. lol
A little too easy to justify this one by comparison!
I hate the digital display. Its just going to die, and there is no advantage to it, a gimmick, marring the lens.
16mm is useful.
But what I really can't find from Viltrox is a standard 24mm equivalent for APSC.
I was very excited about this lens untiil your revview. I wanted it for astro as I'm having a tough time justifying the Sony 14/1.8 at it's price point. Bottom line is you get what you pay for I suppose. You don't buy a lens like this to stop it down, you buy it to shoot wide open. If you plan on stopping down then might as well give up the aperture speed and af and invest that money in the actual optics. Perhaps something sharp and slow like a voightlander prime which will have better image quality for landscape and real estate where stopping down is the norm. You just saved me some money for now but cost me in the long run as the Sony 14 is likely in my future. Thanks for the info, Keep up the good work.
The Viltrox 16mm is sharper wide open than the Sony 14mm. Check out Dustin Abbott's review of it and comparison to the Sony 14mm.
Great Review! thanks for it very much :)
Some beautiful images in this one.
E-Mount keeps giving gems that rival top tier native lenses of any mount.
Tried to scratch it with a razor blade LOL! Not something you hear on most lens reviews. Sounds like a great lens and thanks for the information!
Hey, if it’s glass, it’s harder than steel so nbd right? Haha
Hopefully they will come out with one for the Nikon Z cameras.
I think it won’t be long.
Great review, another fantastic lens.
Good review, thanks. Sharpness results are interesting. Having read and watched a lot of reviews, most are saying it has excellent sharpness from f1.8. Personally, I think sharpness is an overrated characteristic for a lens these days. Lens flare also interesting as many reviews saying this is a weakness.
Yes, some people are overly optimistic 😏
But also most other reviews I saw of this lens were video-centric, and what is sharp for 4K video (about 8mp) is not necessarily sharp enough for 33mp photography.
And as far as lens flaring goes, it’s significantly better than any lenses in it’s price range/focal range. And it’s an ultrawide, so that has to be taken into consideration as well. It has very comparable flaring to the 16-35GM at 16mm!
Does anybody know how this preforms wide open with stars? Coma? Everyone says just stop it down to 2.8 but that ruins the point.
It does ruin the point. As such I wouldn’t really consider this a great Astro lens. Lots of coma and softness wide open. It fixes up really fast though. Even at f/2.2 it’s Significantly improved.
@@WesPerry Thanks. I’m tracking now so I can actually stop it down but my Sony 20mm 1.8 spoiled me.
Curious this on SONY ZVE10
Probably a bit big for that camera, being an APS-C body.
The Sony 11 1.8 is very nearly the same focal length and 1/4 the size and weight.
And for something much more similar, the Viltrox 13 1.4 is a better choice for APS-C
Hi Wes, please compare this lens to sigma 16-28 @ 16mm.. thx
a tank, I already have it, thanks to this video I took it, and for an affordable price,, greetings
I would like to know how bad of the AF with wide open F1.8 at low light since I'm considering to get it to replace my 20G 1.8
It’s not going to be as good as 20G for AF.
Wide open it focuses the best. BUT at 1.8 it’s a bit soft. I usually use it at 2.0 or 2.2 as the best balance of AF and usable sharpness.
@@WesPerryIf the AF is still reliable at 1.8/2.0, probably I will get one bcoz GM 14 1.8 price high. I'm running A7 IV, I guess the AF will manage to working after I set the speed to fastest.
Really hoping they issue a firmware update soon that makes the AF just a Little better. The 75 1.2 is So Good for AF, I feel like they must have the ability to iron this one out.
@@WesPerry The 75 1.2 with the same STM focus was slow too on the original firmware 1.0 but after updated firmware the speed greatly improved now. I wish the same case will happen on 16 1.8, the Sony 14 1.8 is too expensive and I don't need to shoot such wide shot often, so it has no point for me to buy one though I've the budget(barely) to get the GM.
👍
👍🏻
@@WesPerry 👍🏻
💖💖🔝🔝
So if I take my sony 16 to 35 f4, focus it at 16mm vs this 16mm 2.8 fixed, what advatages does this viltrox give me? Viltrox- more bocca blur, slightly sharper image? Gary
Stopped down yeah this would be sharper than the f4 zoom. Having a lot more light is the biggest advantage to me, not so much about bokeh.
@WesPerry thanks we do model trainboard videos and shots of models, never outside, never portraits. We have both lense, will try some shots, likely return the viltrox fixed lens. Gary
I saw another review that shows that the second function button sets focus points that you can use in manual mode
I saw in another review that the focus distance display is pretty inaccurate. Can you confirm?
I never use it but yeah it’s pretty unpredictable
oh yeah! Loving the intro images.
They HAVE to make a L-Mount version of it!!! Excellent review Wes, thank you!
As of right now they only seem to have one L-mount lens, so unfortunately the odds don’t appear to be very good 😬
@@WesPerryHmm you’re right. It would have been an excellent Lumix S 18mm f1.8 alternative! But i think i would have stick with the Lumix S series, since they’re truly amazing and unique for the price.
@@davidmultimedia2024 Yeah the 18mm 1.8 is so good I'm not sure there's much of a point, unless you're particularly desperate for 16mm
Once you get that wide, 2mm Can be a lot. That’s a 13% change in field of view. Whereas going from say 50 to 52mm is only a 4% change in field of view.
How is the focus breathing on the 18? I failed to mention in my video that it’s very well controlled here, which can have a significant change on field of view as well. At many focal distances the 16-35GM is Not 16mm anymore due to a fair amount of focus breathing (which can be controlled in-body with some Sony cameras fortunately, but it does lose you some width).
@@WesPerry Good point, i’ll have to take a look
My copy is sharp wide open within a good portion of the center and only starts to soften up a touch on the edges and in the corners, but I certainly wouldn't call it "soft" as a blanket description of the overall character of this lens wide open. But by f2.8 and even f2 its overall corner to corner performance dramatically improves as pointed out in this review. But I find its overall sharpness wide open for the majority of cases to be perfectly acceptable.
Perhaps I have a sub par copy 🤔
@@WesPerry Anything’s possible, but the f1.8 shot of your cat looked sharp to me. Does that shot look soft to you?
So disappointing with af in lower light. Reason to use lens.
Fingers crossed it improves with firmware updates!
What image editing application was that? Doesn't look like Lightroom...
Capture One Pro
@@WesPerry Awesome. Thanks! I'll check it out...
As a Panasonic shooter, im crying
You Panasonic shooters have to email Viltrox in huge numbers! They just don’t think there’s a big enough L-mount market at the moment. With the modifications they have to make to get it to fit on the Z mount, the barrel shape would be about the same at least. I don’t know what the L-mount licensing scheme is like, though…
@@WesPerry We have some nice primes but every lens is like 30% more expensive than other brand. A big plus is that we can use Canon lenses but if you own the S5 and not S5 ii, the auto focus is almost none existent.
and sony is eating your tears my friend
Thank you for the video. I love your chart and based on my experience, it seems to be very accurate with the exception of Tamron duo. I own the Tamron 70-180 and the 28-75 G2 along with other Tamron zoom lenses. I am surprised that they scored so low as the 70-180 was my go to long lens for a project I just finished. I am pleasantly supervised that Viltrox lenses are so high up on your chart.
I borrowed the Sony 35 f1.4 GM and the Sigma 85 f1.4 from my cousin who did extensive research before buying those lenses. He was telling me that they are the best of the best in their respective focal lengths. I shot more with the Sigma 85 and less with the Sony 35. The project I was shooting, called for wide open apertures. I must say both Sigma at 85 f1.4 and the Tarmon 70-180 at f2.8 delivered the goods. I would love to get my hand on the Viltrox 16mm to test. I think it might become my go to lens for all my wide shots. I am using the Tamron 17-28 f2.8 to fill that role right now.
I haven’t used the G2 Tamron 28-75, but have Extensively used the 70-180 and 28-75 since they came out. I ended up lowering my scores on them in the years since video reviews (most of the scores have been changing in the chart, to account for changing competition). My main issue with the 70-180 is that in a lot of situations the bokeh is just a disaster, and can be very distracting. While the original 28-75 has such unreliable AF I’ve lost So Much footage and so many shots it’s incredibly frustrating.
And yep, the Sony 35 1.4 and Sigma 85 1.4 are both Stellar. In a whole other league from the Viltrox. Seems like it might be a while before they make something razor sharp wide open and/or near instant AF speeds.
@@WesPerry Hi Wes, Thank you for the lightning response.
Oddly enough the 28-75 G2 is my least used Tamron zoom lens. I agree on the autofocus as the 28-75 G2 and my 17-28 are simply not acceptable when it comes to autofocusing. When the subject is at or near the center, they seem to be ok. But as soon as the focus point moves closer to any of the corners or edges, both lenses refuse to lock focus. My Sony 24-105 (which I sold) had no such issue.
For the project that I mentioned, my subject was landscapes and trees in particular. I had to isolate the trees so they stood out from the mountains in the background. The Sigma 85 at f1.4 is simply magical when it comes to bokeh. I am surprised at your Tamron 70-180 disaster comment about the bokeh. The Tamron 70-180, mostly used between 100-135 at f2.8 gave me a lot of keepers. Now I am wondering how much better they could have been say with the Sony 70-200 GM II? In any case, choosing the Tamrons was for zoom capability, weight saving and budget reasons. For the project, I shot manual and used focus peaking for focus accuracy and max sharpness. Autofocus was simply not acceptable.
How's it look shooting real estate interiors or video walk through. I'm looking for a wide angle lens for my real estate photography. Thank you!
yes
Haven’t had a chance yet! Real estate shoots keep getting cancelled. Haha
Any update on real estate? Great review!
sir any recomment 3party battery for a7iv ?
and love this video btw tq for the info . .
Nitecore are the only ones I’ve found that aren’t completely awful. They’re fine. The rest that I’ve tried (RAVPower, Neewer, SmallRig, etc) are absolutely garbage 🤦🏻♂️
nitecore or sony original battery will you recomment ?
if nitecore i can buy 2pcs but if sony original i can only buy 1pcs. .
btw i use my camera mostly for wedding job video and picture.
Nitecore is about 85-90% as good as the Sony battery. It’s just a matter of what that’s worth it to you!
Where I live the Nitecore is about 75% the price of Sony, so it’s a tough call.
no sony 35mm 1.8 in your list??
I don’t care for that one, and couldn’t find anywhere/anyone to borrow it from. I find the character of that and the 85 1.8 to be grating, so I haven’t gone too far out of my way to get my hands on either.
Hello, good video, the sony 11mm f1.8 could give the same viewing angle as this viltrox 16mm, do you know or could you make a comparison of vignetting, deformation and sharpness of them? Thank you so much
Sortof? The 11 1.8 being an APS-C lens, it’s kinda hard to compare apples to apples. But the 11 has Enormous distortion, a bit more vignetting, but more consistent sharpness.
@@WesPerry thanks so much, si it's really worth it Buy a Sony 7c ando this one and sell the zve10 and 11mm.
@@mazzfotovideo an update to the a7C is expected soon so that makes it even harder 😏