I had this lens (my first paired with a Sony A7iii) and used it for over two years before selling it recently. I find that I miss it more than I thought I would! They can be had for very cheap used and the build quality and results you get are simply fantastic. I especially love how the lens renders color. Someday I see myself buying it again. It is a phenomenal landscape lens.
Hi, I have an Enquiry, I recently purchased this lens pre owned, and it slightly vibrates while I start the camera. It happens every time. The auto focus and the lens works fine. I want to know if it's normal or not. Thanks in advance.
Excellent review. I purchased this lens last year, then sold it. Few weeks ago, I bought it again. As you said, it is a very good lens, with limitations. (Bokeh, close-up, corner sharpness at F4)
I've used this lens since 2015 and found it to be very valuable lens for my photography, certainly my most used lens for landscapes. The colors are great as is the sharpness (landscapes I shoot mostly f5.6-f11 all good). The lens is a bit bulky and heavy (very strong build), I use it on a Sony A7 II and A6600. On the A6600 it is front heavy and I cradle the lens in my palm and don't really hold it by the camera grip. Not the best combination but the images are nice. Since I don't do much street photography with it the speed is ok but not a lens if you want to do much selective focus with nice bokeh. Good fair review of a good lens.
Got the lens and I'm super happy with it, but of course a 2,8 would've been great. That said, I couldn't justify more than double the price to get the G-Master lens that Sony offers. This will do more than well in most situations paired with both IBIS and OSS as you said! Great review as always!
PLVLOG If autofocus speed isn't too vital (as in landscape photography), you could pick up a used Canon 16-35 f2.8L II plus an adapter for the price of this lens - paired with IBIS and you've got a stabilized 16-35 f2.8! Caveat: The Canon doesn't do too well in the extreme corners
@@Laserpico1985 that's true! I do enjoy the native AF speeds in the FE lenses for both photos but mainly for video. I guess it's more of a matter what fits your needs the best :).
Any chance I could rent out a Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM for you to review/compare? It's a very expensive lens but I'd love to see what you get for that money, especially when comparing to this.
Expensive, but what else could I get? Nothing matches this for video work for sure. My personal list: Pros • Combination image stabilization (in body and lens) • Autofocus • Way sharper than my old Canon 24-105L • Wide-angle (and all around) • Reliable (doesn't stop recording or inoperable aperture without warning) • Smaller than current setup (currently with Metabones adapter) Silent AF and OIS also great.
If you have one of the A7R series bodies, A7R, A7RII, A7RIII, I think you can enable crop mode which would make this lens a 25-52mm effective focal range. You could then use the 35-52 effective part of the range to get a better result than 35mm normal mode. With the A7RIII cropped mode is approximately 18MP images, which is still pretty good quality. This is all a compromise, but may be useful for someone who owns or is thinking of owning this lens. HTH
Thank you so much for these kind of reviews Christopher! Bought this one last year and had no idea 35mm f/4 was so soft since I don't do much pixel peeping myself! Cheers from Sweden!
I disagree about the apsc comment. It’s a perfect walk around mid zoom. I like using full frame lenses on apsc for panorama and night photography as the edges and corners are cut anyways. Although yes the lens is bigger and weighs more than the camera
Thanks for this honest and objective review. I have been considering getting this lens but just can't get excited about it. I am hoping that Tamron might develop an nice wide angle for the Sony full frame after the success of their 28-75 f2.8 lens ( the price of that lens has just gone up!)
another great review. I would love to see how it compares against the f/2.8 GM version (although I know that the GM is excellent, I'm curious to see if it is worth paying for the price difference)
I bought a scratched up version with perfect optics of this lens for $300 USD. And at this cost it is amazing and great value for money. If you want this lens, look for an ugly copy like I did and you will find an amazing lens for cheap. Love this lens.
I picked up an ex-display copy of this lens for £245 from John Lewis. A great lens for the price. It's in absolutely mint condition. Very happy with the purchase.
I own the Canon 16-35 L F4 and the Zeiss and the Zeiss is a blast at 16mm even at F4 compaired to the Canon. It turns to be the direct opposite, when compaired at 35mm F4, when the Canon show it's strength. What my lens doesn't show is that ghosting that's going on in the copy, which was tested here. I Use the A7RIII and the A7RI with that lens and it was always some kind of perfect match, but I would say I have an almost perfect sample of the lens. Christpher said, it's a perfect build quality and at this point I have to say, definitly not. All 16-35mm F4 Zeiss lenses look like crap after some years and that isn't acceptable in my opinion and part of the build quality. The paintwork needs a better coating. What the most of you don't consider, ultra wide zoom lenses where always a compromise. I owned some of them, because it is the most important focal lenght for my work. They improved significant in the last years with lenses like the Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 or something like the Sony 16-35mm F2.8 GM, but those are also a compromise because of it's size. So it really depends on your needs, what to go for and for it's imagequality, size and weight, the Zeiss is a good lens. Try it, before you jugde it and you will see, how good it really is. The only thing, that doesn't match is the price. I payed 850€ for the Canon and 1250€ for the Zeiss and both are on one step to each other.
Hi Christopher, any advice on an ultra wide FE lens (let's say max 1000-1200 bucks)? If I understood correctly you say the 16-35 F4 isn't good value for money? Any alternatives?
@@christopherfrost That's exactly what I've been looking into last week. Very interesting choice, should be coming out soon and first reviews are excellent. Thanks!
that is a great review, currently looking to upgrade to 4k video and this lens looks very promising. Every time I look at Sony video, it always looks so impressive.
Hey, abit late to your video on this lens, just upgraded from Nikon to Sony A7iii with a kit lens was looking at replacing the kit lens for something better, i do a lot of abandoned building photography (urbex) and wondered if this lens would be good for this ? I seen two youtubers that do abandoned building exploring with it but wanted to know thoughts !
I sold the lens and I bought it back. I mainly use this lens for family photos so I would stop down to f8 at least anyway. And it's less heavy than the GM version
Debating between the Zeiss 16-35 f/4 and Sigma 14-24 f/2.8. Using it mostly for Vlogs and mini-documentaries. I occasionally do real estate photography. Both lenses have their unique advantages over the other, and with the price difference being only $300, it's taking me a while to decide. Any suggestions?
I have the same camera and lens and I have an issue .. The video I am getting is very poor it looks like very unsharpen... I shoot in 50p with all the rules ... please help me
Thank's for the review! I'm going to buy this lens because it's the most appropriate variant for my photo and video work. If you need a full frame wide angle zoom lens for sony camera, unfortunately, you don't have an alternative on the market. It isn't a large piece of glass but as I understood the image quality isn't so good for the money((( I'm curios about OSS, my camera has in body stabilization and as I know if you connect a lens with OSS, pitch and yaw stabilization turns off in the camera, it stabilizes by the lens..So the question is: is this any difference when use lens with OSS and when you don't it? Does the camera stabilization perform the same as OSS?
Wesley Chapman Yes if you want kit lens like quality. The 18-105 is a good allround first lens. It may be expensive depending on your budget but value for money wise it’s excellent.
@@wesleychapman9001 ??? The price of the 18-105 f.4 is not bad at all , around the same as the newer 18-135 and it has a constant aperture, unlike the 18-135. I own the 18-105 f.4 and can recommend it. The 18-135 was released as an upgraded kit lens for the aps-c cameras.
I have recently bought a sony A7s after 1 year with a Nikon D3500. I have a Sigma 18-35 f1.8, do you think it would be worthy to sell the Nikon D3500 + Sigma 18-35mm in order to buy the Sony 16-35mm? The Sigma is the only reason why I haven't sold the Nikon yet. Any suggestion would be appreciated!
Did you every buy the 16-35mm f4 for your A7s?? Wondering because I've got the A7s and am looking to pickup the 16-35mm also. Wondering about auto-focus ability in video and how well the OSS works during video..
1ROAD hi! Eventually I picked up the Samyang 18mm because of f2.8 for Astro and Chris review was amazing! Some people say that some copies are even sharper than the Sony 16-35mm.. even though autofocus is pretty noisy so idk if it that’s good for video
I really onyl need a lens like that to get rid of the last bit of jitter introduced by walking with a gimbal so I don't have to do the full ninja walk. This would work as a secondary to my Sigma trinity for my a6400.
very good performance, f4 at 35 is low contrast but the details are pretty good. i might be buying this used after i switch to sony to compliment the 35-150 f2-2.8 i want OSS for some specific jobs and wide angle i generally won't need big apertures
Thanks for this video! I was seriously considering this lens as I wanted a nice wide-angle lens, but I might rethink my purchase now... perhaps I'll go for the Samyang 14mm F2.8 AF instead, haha
I only own an aps-c until now. It's a Canon 80D and I bought a Canon 16-35 f/2.8 III (I get it at a good price but it's still really expensive). Yes this is not the best zoom range on an apsc and a sigma 18-35 f/1.8 would cost almost 1/3 of the price. But I would like to upgrade to FF in the next 4 years without having to buy an all new set of lenses (I'm scaring about the transition to a new mirrorless mount that would break all my plans...). I also own a 24-70 f/2.8 II but with a 38-112 you don't get the wide angle end. That's why I get the 16-35...
Dont worry about having a huge lenses gear for canon as when you do change your mind in future for any Sony E mount FF camera - you can use the metabone lens adapter to use your canon lenses
If I had the money I'd buy an ultra-wide Sony GM with the widest aperture I can get (f/1.2? on a Sony A7Rx) for night photography and astro-photography. I'd also like a inexpensive fisheye (manual focus and aperture is fine - that's what I have now with my crop sensor Canon). And a third lens I'd like is the 70-200mm f/2.8 GM. Photography is just a hobby. I like to shoot architecture, nature, and night photography (i.e. light streaks, and other Fine Art type abstract shots.)
Great appraisal Christopher, again. Thank you! There were some lovely images obtained but being crappy at wide open 35mm doesn't convey street fast. Hard to know who would want it at £1000. Serious F/F videophiles?
this lens is quite interesting because it is really sharp wide open at 16mm but it is not that usable at 35mm especially when you shot on a 42mp camera, but if you zoom out a little bit to 32mm the sharpness improved
Yeah but what else could you get? Nothing matches this for video work for sure. My personal list: Pros • Combination image stabilization (in body and lens) • Autofocus • Way sharper. • Wide-angle (and all around) • Reliable (doesn't stop recording or inoperable aperture without warning) • Smaller than current setup (with Metabones adapter) Silent AF and OIS also great.
I thought at least the two rings were plastic covered and could not see how rubber gets so banged up until I got the lens, and then realised even the knurling on the rings is metal, and because it is a sawtooth pattern, the paint comes off the top ridges easily. If you are someone that puts your camera on the ground a lot, you need to either keep the lens hood on or put a wide elastic band around the front of the lens. Both give you enough clearance to avoid most of the scratches you see in the video.
I shoot both Sony and Canon. This lens can not be compared to the Canon 16-35 F4 IS. The Canon lens is far superior. The Sony has horrible corners and CA.
I had this lens (my first paired with a Sony A7iii) and used it for over two years before selling it recently. I find that I miss it more than I thought I would! They can be had for very cheap used and the build quality and results you get are simply fantastic. I especially love how the lens renders color. Someday I see myself buying it again. It is a phenomenal landscape lens.
What would you class as a great deal for this lens in 2022?
@@AngelInTheDesert 600-750 USD depending on condition
Hi, I have an Enquiry, I recently purchased this lens pre owned, and it slightly vibrates while I start the camera. It happens every time. The auto focus and the lens works fine. I want to know if it's normal or not.
Thanks in advance.
Excellent review. I purchased this lens last year, then sold it. Few weeks ago, I bought it again. As you said, it is a very good lens, with limitations. (Bokeh, close-up, corner sharpness at F4)
I've used this lens since 2015 and found it to be very valuable lens for my photography, certainly my most used lens for landscapes. The colors are great as is the sharpness (landscapes I shoot mostly f5.6-f11 all good). The lens is a bit bulky and heavy (very strong build), I use it on a Sony A7 II and A6600. On the A6600 it is front heavy and I cradle the lens in my palm and don't really hold it by the camera grip. Not the best combination but the images are nice. Since I don't do much street photography with it the speed is ok but not a lens if you want to do much selective focus with nice bokeh. Good fair review of a good lens.
^5 to Matt. Good call on the lens test.
^5 to Chris for the review.
Got the lens and I'm super happy with it, but of course a 2,8 would've been great. That said, I couldn't justify more than double the price to get the G-Master lens that Sony offers. This will do more than well in most situations paired with both IBIS and OSS as you said!
Great review as always!
PLVLOG If autofocus speed isn't too vital (as in landscape photography), you could pick up a used Canon 16-35 f2.8L II plus an adapter for the price of this lens - paired with IBIS and you've got a stabilized 16-35 f2.8!
Caveat: The Canon doesn't do too well in the extreme corners
@@Laserpico1985 that's true! I do enjoy the native AF speeds in the FE lenses for both photos but mainly for video. I guess it's more of a matter what fits your needs the best :).
Any chance I could rent out a Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM for you to review/compare? It's a very expensive lens but I'd love to see what you get for that money, especially when comparing to this.
Expensive, but what else could I get? Nothing matches this for video work for sure.
My personal list:
Pros
• Combination image stabilization (in body and lens)
• Autofocus
• Way sharper than my old Canon 24-105L
• Wide-angle (and all around)
• Reliable (doesn't stop recording or inoperable aperture without warning)
• Smaller
than current setup (currently with Metabones adapter)
Silent AF and OIS also great.
If you have one of the A7R series bodies, A7R, A7RII, A7RIII, I think you can enable crop mode which would make this lens a 25-52mm effective focal range. You could then use the 35-52 effective part of the range to get a better result than 35mm normal mode. With the A7RIII cropped mode is approximately 18MP images, which is still pretty good quality. This is all a compromise, but may be useful for someone who owns or is thinking of owning this lens. HTH
Thank you so much for these kind of reviews Christopher! Bought this one last year and had no idea 35mm f/4 was so soft since I don't do much pixel peeping myself! Cheers from Sweden!
Thanks for all the video tests ;)
a trick: you can watch series on flixzone. Been using them for watching a lot of movies recently.
@Hugh Ace definitely, have been watching on flixzone for since december myself :)
@Hugh Ace yup, been using Flixzone for since november myself :)
I disagree about the apsc comment. It’s a perfect walk around mid zoom. I like using full frame lenses on apsc for panorama and night photography as the edges and corners are cut anyways. Although yes the lens is bigger and weighs more than the camera
Thanks for this honest and objective review. I have been considering getting this lens but just can't get excited about it. I am hoping that Tamron might develop an nice wide angle for the Sony full frame after the success of their 28-75 f2.8 lens ( the price of that lens has just gone up!)
There is a 17-28 announced!
@@Francisco_Otero yep, and it's only 17-28, that's why it became uninteresting for me right away
@@WuschelofDespair can't please everyone.. ;-)
Thank you, Matt and Chris.
another great review. I would love to see how it compares against the f/2.8 GM version (although I know that the GM is excellent, I'm curious to see if it is worth paying for the price difference)
what about the weather sealing?
3 years later still a fantastic lens.
Thanks, exactly what a lot of people have been waiting for!
Zeiss lenses are incredible and sharp for their fixed lens , but not the zoom lens. Very nice video
I bought a scratched up version with perfect optics of this lens for $300 USD. And at this cost it is amazing and great value for money. If you want this lens, look for an ugly copy like I did and you will find an amazing lens for cheap. Love this lens.
The Fujifilm 10-24mm f/4 zoom has an equivalent focal range but is considerably larger. The Sony Zeiss is relatively compact.
Thanks for the review! Thanks! Do you know if with the A7SIII or A7III you can use the OSS on the lens and ibis on the camera at the same time?
Also what iso and shutter speed were you using on your test sheets.
Your lens review is the best!
I picked up an ex-display copy of this lens for £245 from John Lewis. A great lens for the price. It's in absolutely mint condition. Very happy with the purchase.
Thanks for the great review. At what focal length does the lens sharpness get better at f4?
Would you recommend this for real estate photography?
I recently returned this lens. Compared to the Canon 16-35 f4, it was noticeably inferior. I regret selling the Canon when I switched to E mount.
Adapting Canon lens on Sony occurs major loss in corner sharpness. You can watch Tony northtup's channel about this
I totally agree with you. This lens is rubbish if you compare it with Canon 16-35 f4
binaryblog Sony FE lens mount is 46.1mm. It’s too small to allow sharp corner wide angle lens. This is why Nikon Z is 55mm
But 16-35 f/2.8 G master has the sharpest corners, lol
Clearly you have never used the 16-35 2.8 GM. It's like having a bag of primes. My copy is freakishly sharp.
Is it good also for stars photos?
This lens performs better with the a7iii or the a7riii
I own the Canon 16-35 L F4 and the Zeiss and the Zeiss is a blast at 16mm even at F4 compaired to the Canon. It turns to be the direct opposite, when compaired at 35mm F4, when the Canon show it's strength. What my lens doesn't show is that ghosting that's going on in the copy, which was tested here. I Use the A7RIII and the A7RI with that lens and it was always some kind of perfect match, but I would say I have an almost perfect sample of the lens.
Christpher said, it's a perfect build quality and at this point I have to say, definitly not. All 16-35mm F4 Zeiss lenses look like crap after some years and that isn't acceptable in my opinion and part of the build quality. The paintwork needs a better coating.
What the most of you don't consider, ultra wide zoom lenses where always a compromise. I owned some of them, because it is the most important focal lenght for my work. They improved significant in the last years with lenses like the Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 or something like the Sony 16-35mm F2.8 GM, but those are also a compromise because of it's size. So it really depends on your needs, what to go for and for it's imagequality, size and weight, the Zeiss is a good lens. Try it, before you jugde it and you will see, how good it really is. The only thing, that doesn't match is the price. I payed 850€ for the Canon and 1250€ for the Zeiss and both are on one step to each other.
Hi Christopher, any advice on an ultra wide FE lens (let's say max 1000-1200 bucks)? If I understood correctly you say the 16-35 F4 isn't good value for money? Any alternatives?
The new Tamron 17-28 FE should be pretty good
@@christopherfrost That's exactly what I've been looking into last week. Very interesting choice, should be coming out soon and first reviews are excellent. Thanks!
@@christopherfrost glad i came by this video. i was looking for an alternative lens too
On your black and white test sheets , what did you use to print them with and what was the quality of the paper? Did you use manual or autofocus.
You mean the distortion and vignetting test sheets?
that is a great review, currently looking to upgrade to 4k video and this lens looks very promising. Every time I look at Sony video, it always looks so impressive.
I ordered a copy of this lens today :D
Thank you so much for close up and aps-c tests!
It's a common lens for vloggers who use the a7s ii.
I cannot find your review of the Sony E 16-35 F2.8 GM.
Is this lens weather sealed? I keep finding people say yes and no, so confusing lol Thanks!
I talk about that in the video
@@christopherfrost i re-watched the video twice just now and i still cant find it!
Hey, abit late to your video on this lens, just upgraded from Nikon to Sony A7iii with a kit lens was looking at replacing the kit lens for something better, i do a lot of abandoned building photography (urbex) and wondered if this lens would be good for this ? I seen two youtubers that do abandoned building exploring with it but wanted to know thoughts !
I sold the lens and I bought it back. I mainly use this lens for family photos so I would stop down to f8 at least anyway. And it's less heavy than the GM version
Is this lens obsoleted by the newer 16-35 PZ f4 ?
Debating between the Zeiss 16-35 f/4 and Sigma 14-24 f/2.8. Using it mostly for Vlogs and mini-documentaries. I occasionally do real estate photography. Both lenses have their unique advantages over the other, and with the price difference being only $300, it's taking me a while to decide. Any suggestions?
Sigma. Only downside is that its heavier.
I have the same camera and lens and I have an issue ..
The video I am getting is very poor it looks like very unsharpen...
I shoot in 50p with all the rules ... please help me
Please, can you review sony g master 16-35 f/2.8? I want to buy one, so i would be gratefull to have your opinion.
Maybe one day :-)
Thank you, Christopher. May you share please, with which camera did you make the footage @ 1:55?
Sony a7R II
Thank's for the review! I'm going to buy this lens because it's the most appropriate variant for my photo and video work. If you need a full frame wide angle zoom lens for sony camera, unfortunately, you don't have an alternative on the market. It isn't a large piece of glass but as I understood the image quality isn't so good for the money((( I'm curios about OSS, my camera has in body stabilization and as I know if you connect a lens with OSS, pitch and yaw stabilization turns off in the camera, it stabilizes by the lens..So the question is: is this any difference when use lens with OSS and when you don't it? Does the camera stabilization perform the same as OSS?
My camera only gave me two options: OSS 'off' or OSS 'on' (i.e. with both stabilization systems combined)
As soon as either Tamron or Sigma makes an equivalent at the same (or cheaper) price I'm ditching this lens.
Excllent review, thanks for your time with these!
does this lens focus breathe? I want to use it for focus stacking. thanks
Your focus stacking software should take care of that anyway.
I think that the, 12-24 SONY G F4 is a much better option to buy, it's wider and more useful.
no filter thread though.
gotta see the distortion on that beast though
Yeah, 12-24 is the way to go
If i control the camera via the sony imaging edge app, can i still use the zoom function via the app with this lens?
No
@@christopherfrost thank you👍🏻
Would the 18-105 F4 G not be a better alternative - at least for APS-C?
have you seen the price of that beast? If shooting apsc just get the 18-135 for a fraction of the price.
Wesley Chapman Yes if you want kit lens like quality. The 18-105 is a good allround first lens. It may be expensive depending on your budget but value for money wise it’s excellent.
The 18-105 & 18-135 is around the same price.
indeed. don't know what they're talking about
@@wesleychapman9001 ??? The price of the 18-105 f.4 is not bad at all , around the same as the newer 18-135 and it has a constant aperture, unlike the 18-135. I own the 18-105 f.4 and can recommend it. The 18-135 was released as an upgraded kit lens for the aps-c cameras.
I have recently bought a sony A7s after 1 year with a Nikon D3500.
I have a Sigma 18-35 f1.8, do you think it would be worthy to sell the Nikon D3500 + Sigma 18-35mm in order to buy the Sony 16-35mm? The Sigma is the only reason why I haven't sold the Nikon yet. Any suggestion would be appreciated!
Did you every buy the 16-35mm f4 for your A7s?? Wondering because I've got the A7s and am looking to pickup the 16-35mm also. Wondering about auto-focus ability in video and how well the OSS works during video..
1ROAD hi! Eventually I picked up the Samyang 18mm because of f2.8 for Astro and Chris review was amazing! Some people say that some copies are even sharper than the Sony 16-35mm.. even though autofocus is pretty noisy so idk if it that’s good for video
Is this lens good for Sony a6400?
Hope you can review the Sony 16-35 F2.8 GM
Would you recommend it for the interior photography?
It'd not bad
I can see a picture from Polperro:)
I bought it for my A6000 which was dumb since it's a crop camera but ah well.
beautiful town, mate.
i see so many lenses for Sony and Cannon not for the ohter 2 systems on your chanel
I really onyl need a lens like that to get rid of the last bit of jitter introduced by walking with a gimbal so I don't have to do the full ninja walk. This would work as a secondary to my Sigma trinity for my a6400.
always love your review
Love Your Reviews... Have been here since 2015.
Cool! Hopefuly they've improved since 2015 - I hate looking back on my old videos
@@christopherfrost Don't worry, your old videos are the reason most of us started watching. Always relevant and informative.
@@JADanso Thanks!
should i sell my 24-70zeiss and buy this lens?any suggestion??
It depends what focal length you want.
very good performance, f4 at 35 is low contrast but the details are pretty good. i might be buying this used after i switch to sony to compliment the 35-150 f2-2.8
i want OSS for some specific jobs and wide angle i generally won't need big apertures
@MyOwnSoul: Did you go forward with your plan? Or did you choose another lens? I'm in that same spot you describe.
Please test the GMaster Sony lenses
Thanks for the review..renting one next week for my Sony A7Mk3. Eagerly awaiting the Tamron 17-28 E mount lens! Hope you get to test it early ;-)
17-28 is pretty much useless.
That focal range is not good enough, you'll be switching lenses very often.
A good 21mm or 24 prime will be better.
oh man, i want to visit that town! where is this?
Llangrannog, Wales, UK
For landscape shooting around 5.6 to f11 around 16 mm, what do you think would be a better value?
Yep thanks Matt!
Very expensive considering the optical performance. I did see lovely Llangranog - thanks for that! Wonderful memories.
It's one of my favourite places for testing now :-)
Your voice sounds a bit raspy, are you doing ok? Maybe a bit of a cold? If so I hope you get better soon!
I own this lens and I love it,it’s great with my A73, I find it very sharp,maybe iv got a good one.!!!!
Thanks Matt!!!
This lens has served me well..until now. The focus motor makes a rasping sound and stops working. A common problem with this lens.
HI
Big fan of your work!
Can you compare this lens with the 16-35 f/2.8 GM?
One day, when I test that lens, I'll share my thoughts
Thanks for this video! I was seriously considering this lens as I wanted a nice wide-angle lens, but I might rethink my purchase now... perhaps I'll go for the Samyang 14mm F2.8 AF instead, haha
That's a great choice I think he have reviewed 14 f2.8 also. Its a great combo 14 f2.8 with Samyang 35 f1.4 gives outstanding result.
I only own an aps-c until now. It's a Canon 80D and I bought a Canon 16-35 f/2.8 III (I get it at a good price but it's still really expensive). Yes this is not the best zoom range on an apsc and a sigma 18-35 f/1.8 would cost almost 1/3 of the price. But I would like to upgrade to FF in the next 4 years without having to buy an all new set of lenses (I'm scaring about the transition to a new mirrorless mount that would break all my plans...). I also own a 24-70 f/2.8 II but with a 38-112 you don't get the wide angle end. That's why I get the 16-35...
Dont worry about having a huge lenses gear for canon as when you do change your mind in future for any Sony E mount FF camera - you can use the metabone lens adapter to use your canon lenses
It looks like an ultra-wide PRIME would be far better.
Thanks for the review! And thanks to the dude who paid for the rental.
Which prime you have in mind?
If I had the money I'd buy an ultra-wide Sony GM with the widest aperture I can get (f/1.2? on a Sony A7Rx) for night photography and astro-photography.
I'd also like a inexpensive fisheye (manual focus and aperture is fine - that's what I have now with my crop sensor Canon).
And a third lens I'd like is the 70-200mm f/2.8 GM.
Photography is just a hobby. I like to shoot architecture, nature, and night photography (i.e. light streaks, and other Fine Art type abstract shots.)
I'm baffled! When you turn it to 16 mm the lens extend and when you turn it to 35 it get shorter?
Why?? Isn't 16 mm is wider than 35 😅
Great appraisal Christopher, again. Thank you!
There were some lovely images obtained but being crappy at wide open 35mm doesn't convey street fast.
Hard to know who would want it at £1000. Serious F/F videophiles?
Probably - it is a very nice lens for video (although a wider max aperture would have been nice)
Does anybody knows what DIM CŴN at 7:30 means? Is it Chinese?
It's Welsh. It's also written right next to it in English. Dim = No, Cŵn = Dogs
Chinese?! Nope, it's Welsh for 'No dogs'
this lens is quite interesting because it is really sharp wide open at 16mm but it is not that usable at 35mm especially when you shot on a 42mp camera, but if you zoom out a little bit to 32mm the sharpness improved
It used for sony a7r4 body
I have this setup. The first ring doesn’t do anything tho
It's for manual focusing, as I said in the review
can you please give us top 10 sharp lenses again
In 2019 I will, yes (or at the end of this year)
SonyAlpharumors is also posting some rumors:
Before Photokina:
(SR3) Sony A7sIII with 4k60p, 10bit 4:2:2, 5.6 million dot EVF
FE 16-35 GM pls ^^
A grand for this mediocre effort. Ouch.
Yeah but what else could you get? Nothing matches this for video work for sure.
My personal list:
Pros
• Combination image stabilization (in body and lens)
• Autofocus
• Way sharper.
• Wide-angle (and all around)
• Reliable (doesn't stop recording or inoperable aperture without warning)
• Smaller
than current setup (with Metabones adapter)
Silent AF and OIS also great.
Can’t wait
the lens seems pretty beat up !
It's a rental.
The key thing for me was that its optics were properly centered for acceptable test results - which they certainly seemed to be
I thought at least the two rings were plastic covered and could not see how rubber gets so banged up until I got the lens, and then realised even the knurling on the rings is metal, and because it is a sawtooth pattern, the paint comes off the top ridges easily. If you are someone that puts your camera on the ground a lot, you need to either keep the lens hood on or put a wide elastic band around the front of the lens. Both give you enough clearance to avoid most of the scratches you see in the video.
I shoot both Sony and Canon. This lens can not be compared to the Canon 16-35 F4 IS. The Canon lens is far superior. The Sony has horrible corners and CA.
I can hardly bellieve it. This glass is somehow faulty, because of the @35mmm.
Damn that lense looks like it's been around LOL Great Video thanks
Why don't they just make it a prime lens?
Because having a zoom range is pretty useful and makes it far more marketable
im getting one tnx
Ein Objektiv mit jeder Menge Licht und Schatten
Thnks
Sigma 18-35 f1.8 is much more cheeper, and sharp. But, is there such Sigma for sony E mount?
I don't think there are Sigma zoom lenses for the FE mount, only primes, if I'm not mistaken...
Kevin Ye a lot of the art lenses are available for E mount
WuschelofDespair I know, and none are zoom lenses
Kevin Ye missed the word zoom, my bad
WuschelofDespair No problem
Can anyone explain it to me how a £1000 lens is not sharp at the 28/35mm range? Crazy, isn't it?
I know