Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Sony 16-35G f2.8  (Read 1451 times)

jhemp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 89
  • Glad to be alive and a photographer
    • Jay Hemphill Photography
Sony 16-35G f2.8
« on: August 25, 2017, 04:20:42 PM »

I had to post to communicate how wonderful this lens is!  I received it in the mail a few days ago and quickly compared it to my Batis 18,  Batis 25mm lenses, my loxia 35mm(My loxia 21mm is currently in for repair) and the Sony16-35 F4.  I can say that I will be selling my Batis 18,  and Sony 16-35 F4.  The New Sony 16-35 G series lens is sharper(Not by a ton) than all the wide angle primes I listed.  I'll keep the Batis 25 f2 because it's faster and great for low light events and I'll keep the Loxia 35 and 21 because I like them for video and they are such well made lenses that it would be very hard to part with them.  The 16-35GM will now by my main wide angle landscape lens. 

hogloff

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #1 on: August 25, 2017, 10:30:09 PM »

It looks like a great lens, but for me the weight is twice that of the Batis 18 or 25. For street / travel, that extra weight just does not work for me. I travel with the Batis 18, 25 and 85 along with the Sony 35 2.8.
Logged

jhemp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 89
  • Glad to be alive and a photographer
    • Jay Hemphill Photography
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #2 on: August 28, 2017, 12:44:31 PM »

It's true the new 16-35 is heavier than the primes and to me doesn't feel balanced on the camera.  The batis and Loxia lenses feel perfect on the A7 series cameras.  For me it came down to convenience while out hiking/backpacking without sacrificing image quality.  Generally I'm not concerned with a fast lens and shallow DOF when shooting landscapes.  I also would lose sleep before trips, especially backpacking trips(lol).  When I only have room for a couple of lenses I would go back and forth about my setup!  Do I bring the 18 batis and forgo the 21 and 25mm lenses?  I know I'm bringing a 35 and 50mm so I would just struggle on what to do at the wide end???  Now I can have it confidently covered from 16-35mm with one lens.
Oh first world issues! 
Jay

FabienP

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #3 on: August 29, 2017, 05:15:36 PM »

Jay, I was wondering how this lens performs at 35mm. There seem to be high variations in quality between samples at that focal length and some people have expressed views that one might be better served by the tiny FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA prime coupled with the FE 12-24 f/4 G zoom for the other FL. How does your copy of this lens perform at 35mm?

Thanks,

Fabien
Logged

jhemp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 89
  • Glad to be alive and a photographer
    • Jay Hemphill Photography
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #4 on: August 30, 2017, 07:47:19 PM »

It performs well stopped down(f8) at 35mm.  At 2.8 it is sharp in the center but definitely is a little soft in the corners and edges wide open.   For me the Sony/zeiss 35mm f2.8 is a great street lens for walking around because it's great at f2.8.  That said I have a real tough time getting the far distant objects at the edges of the frame to sharpen up with that lens, even stopped down to f11.  It's definitely field curvature at work.  I'd be happy to send you a Drop Box link to some RAW images I took comparing the lenses.
Jay

FabienP

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 75
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #5 on: September 02, 2017, 05:44:24 PM »

It performs well stopped down(f8) at 35mm.  At 2.8 it is sharp in the center but definitely is a little soft in the corners and edges wide open.   For me the Sony/zeiss 35mm f2.8 is a great street lens for walking around because it's great at f2.8.  That said I have a real tough time getting the far distant objects at the edges of the frame to sharpen up with that lens, even stopped down to f11.  It's definitely field curvature at work.  I'd be happy to send you a Drop Box link to some RAW images I took comparing the lenses.
Jay

Jay, it is good to know that the edges of the zoom lens at 35mm improve when stopping down. I would definitely be interesting in seeing your comparison shots with the smaller prime! Thanks!

Cheers,

Fabien
Logged

jhemp

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 89
  • Glad to be alive and a photographer
    • Jay Hemphill Photography
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #6 on: September 18, 2017, 03:21:50 PM »

Here is a batch of comparison shots of the 16-35 2.8 GM against Batis 18mm, Batis 25mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sony/Zeiss 16-35 F4, Sony/Zeiss 35mm f1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art w/ Sony made adapter, Sony/zeiss 35 2.8, and the Sony RX1RII(LPF setting on normal)
The EXIF data will tell which lens is what file.  I'm not going to defend or argue testing methods. 
I will basically be selling all my Loxia and Batis primes because the 16-35 at least matches all the primes. 
follow this link below to RAW files.  You might need to copy and paste the link.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wktj1abj07pktut/AAD_bfWbKcAEU_4mdYU8U4z6a?dl=0

Jay

davidgp

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 467
    • davidgp fotografia
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #7 on: September 18, 2017, 04:47:40 PM »

Here is a batch of comparison shots of the 16-35 2.8 GM against Batis 18mm, Batis 25mm, Loxia 21mm, Loxia 35mm, Sony/Zeiss 16-35 F4, Sony/Zeiss 35mm f1.4, Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art w/ Sony made adapter, Sony/zeiss 35 2.8, and the Sony RX1RII(LPF setting on normal)
The EXIF data will tell which lens is what file.  I'm not going to defend or argue testing methods. 
I will basically be selling all my Loxia and Batis primes because the 16-35 at least matches all the primes. 
follow this link below to RAW files.  You might need to copy and paste the link.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wktj1abj07pktut/AAD_bfWbKcAEU_4mdYU8U4z6a?dl=0

Jay

Thanks for this Jay, I will take a look

E.J. Peiker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 682
    • http://www.ejphoto.com
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #8 on: September 18, 2017, 05:32:09 PM »


I will basically be selling all my Loxia and Batis primes because the 16-35 at least matches all the primes. 

That's exactly what I did, the differences, if there are any quantifiable ones or so small that it's hard to justify carrying many lenses and making many lens changes when a lens like the 16-35GM is available.
Logged

hogloff

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 349
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #9 on: September 18, 2017, 07:22:13 PM »

That's exactly what I did, the differences, if there are any quantifiable ones or so small that it's hard to justify carrying many lenses and making many lens changes when a lens like the 16-35GM is available.

The primes are 1/2 the weight of the 16-35GM...that counts a lot for my type of photography where I'm walking around with a camera on my wrist. My travel setup is the Batis 18, 25, 85 and the Sony 35 2.8...all excellent lenses that don't weigh much. I really don't care if combined weight is more in the pack...it's the weight hanging off your wrist all day long for a month that counts.
Logged

E.J. Peiker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 682
    • http://www.ejphoto.com
Re: Sony 16-35G f2.8
« Reply #10 on: September 18, 2017, 09:47:08 PM »

The primes are 1/2 the weight of the 16-35GM...that counts a lot for my type of photography where I'm walking around with a camera on my wrist. My travel setup is the Batis 18, 25, 85 and the Sony 35 2.8...all excellent lenses that don't weigh much. I really don't care if combined weight is more in the pack...it's the weight hanging off your wrist all day long for a month that counts.
For sure it depends on your usage model.  In my case I was traveling with a Voigtlander 15, Batis 18, Loxia 21, Batis 25, Sony 28, Loxia 35 and then there's all the lens choices...
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up