Your lens reviews are perhaps the most comprehensive on UA-cam. I always hope you have gotten to a lens I am thinking about buying or in need of re-appreciating a lens I have taken for granted owning. On the flip side, you see someone like the Angry Photographer spewing vitriol for Sigma lenses without ever furnishing his opinion with pictures like you do.
Thank you for your good work with this. I own the lens and am happy to learn more about it from your review. I enjoyed looking at all those outdoor shots!
Hi Dustin. Thanks for the great review. I will be buying this lens because of this review. Just a quick query however, what ND filter were you using with the day time pics and pics at the sun. Thanks so much
Hi Dustin... ... just curious... at 03:15 you say, ' I use mirror lock-up' ... but isn't this a lens that's only available for mirrorless cameras ??? so how do you do mirror lock-up on a mirrorless camera ? :-) ( no offense :-) )
When I put this lens on my sony a6400 will it be 24mm equivalent? Am I right? Because I've been searching a 24mm lens to my camera, but I didn't find, just find this 16mm... and I'm gonna get it if it is 24mm equivalent!
I finally got this lens and I'm super excited to use it, but the rubber focus ring is slightly misaligned on my example. I'm maybe really picky but the rubber isn't perfectly set. Seems like it's very slightly twisted. Is your like that as well? Is it common or should I change mine? I might be super picky lol.
Thanks for this video! I have one question if you don't mind: I have the A6000 which has no in-body image stabilization. Will the footage be smooth when I shoot video with this lens attached to my A6000 and Zhiyun Crane v2? I don't like micro-jitters so it's really important that the footage will come out smooth. Does the a6500 stabilization help much, or is it negligible? Do you recommend this lens for A6000 -users? Would love to see a comparison with this lens and a gimbal, where you show us how much difference the IBIS does.
I will be showing some gimbal footage in the final review, which will cover video more, as that is a real strength of the lens. IBIS does make a big difference, but it's not as good as a gimbal.
in my a6500... ohhhhhhh emmm GGGGGG at night with my gimbal (zhiyun crane v2) shooting 4k @ ISO 200-640 f1.4 very impressed with this lens... even in full hd 120fps.. u will just use around ISO 1000 @ f1.4... footage is so clean.. i cant say negative on this lens but very2x good in video workx
ohhh really? so ur saying if i shoot in a6500 f1.4 @ iso 640 ... its the same video clean footage i get if i shoot in a7rII f2.8 with @ ISO 2560? thats 2 stop difference.. i dont think so..
Sammy Diaz Yes just like 2.8 on a medium format is like a 1.4 on a FF (I don’t know the exact math but it’s based on Sensor of course) - Which is why full frame has shallower depth of field then let’s say super 35, which has shallower depth of field than micro 4/3 etc - The sensor is getting smaller so less light can hit it... the ISO part is different so no that’s no the same, that’s a standard and ISO is ISO no mater the camera (Film camera ASA)
I believe the multiplying factor for APS-C is 1.6x (Sony says theirs is a 1.5x) which makes a 16mm = around a 24mm. You also multiply the aperture by this factor as well. So an f/1.4 aperture on APS-C is around f/2 on Full Frame.
I think you must have me mistaken for someone lose. I haven’t actually used the Sony 85mm f/1.8. I’m normally very meticulous with gear, and in years of using many, many loaners have only returned one other lens with any kind of mark on it.
Dustin, could you give this one a try on your new A7R III? Due to the conspicuous lack of moderate weight, tote-able, fully modern and 'affordable' prime lens options at a circa 20mm FL, I would definitely consider this one a viable option as an effective 19.2mm FL prime on a FF sensor, with a modest 1.20x crop -- that's still 29+ mp of resolution on an A7R II/III body. Numerous tests online show the FF Voigtlander 20mm you have reviewed to trail my own vintage Nikkor 20mm/2.8 AI-S in resolution across the frame from f.5.6 - f.16, for one example to support my reasoning. I use both FF and APS-C bodies, making dual use a cost effective and practical option, assuming that this lens's image circle and light fall-off characteristic are up to supporting a 1.20x - 1.25x crop. THANKS!
Are you looking for video? The APS-C/Super 35 crop mode is 1.5x, I believe, which gives this lens a FOV of 24mm. It works well there, but in APS-C mode will only have 18 MP of resolution (which is fine, in many situations). If you manually turn off APS-C mode, you will definitely have some shading.
No, I have no interest whatsoever in what the manufacturers say I should be doing with their lenses. I'm just interested in what actually works. I am curious about the image circle thrown by this lens on FF with a crop taken to about 19mm effective FL... which would be a 1.20x crop from a 36mm x 24mm [full] frame. As I stated originally... As to "shading" or vignetting around the periphery, you tested the 18-35mm/4.0 L IS Canon, didn't you? And liked that. See my point, Dustin? Let's put it another way: What modern 18mm to 21mm prime lens can YOU name to use **right now** on a Sony A7R III which will plainly best the usual vintage suspects for border to border sharpness and rendering... which doesn't cost around $1,900 U.S. (Zeiss Distagon)... and isn't a boat anchor like the Sigma 'Art'? A still very large & weighty $799 Tokina Firin... with the typical Tokina coatings performance (👎) and dubious resale value after awhile, maybe? And having looked at quite a number of online comparisons, I can't say much myself for the CV Skopar you kind of like since the old Nikkor 20mm seems sharper everywhere I've compared online from f.5.6 (I think the Skopar IS better at wider apertures). K. Rockwell's results are pretty much what I've seen elsewhere. And, Dustin, I can see the rather soft character of the CV pancake in your own image gallery on every tablet device I own. I'm going, well gee, that's not sharp. So until and unless somebody like Irix or Venus Optics comes out with a physically well-scaled, truly MODERN 20mm prime for mirrorless (or DSLR, for that matter -- I have the Irix 15mm Blackstone)... I am stumped, and I think you'd have to be, too. The modern Nikkor 20mm/1.8 AF-S -- price-y for THAT build quality -- is pretty much a mess to manually focus adapted to a Sony. I could live with the awkward aperture adjustment via adapter, but not with the sloppy focus ring. By comparison with the above options, settling for 29+ megapixels of rez at a moderate 1.2x crop doesn't sound screwy to me, if the Sigma 16mm would throw an adequate image circle to cover... and we don't know about that, one way or another, until some responsible and credible person tries it and reports. I'm making no predictions, just asking. Numerous DX lens options in the super wide zoom category HAVE supported FF operation in the 18mm and over FL range (so 'they' say) -- the fairly uninspiring Sony E 10-18mm is widely reported to be one of them -- so I think the question is worth asking of this new, highly touted, moderately priced and FAST prime lens. Thank you!
do you think it can hold up on a full frame crop mode against 24m 1.4 sigma art? i mean probably that lens should work better but based on the price 900$ vs 450$ do you think as a 24mm it can be a reasonable choice for a fast video lens or you rather buy full frame lens for full frame only?
I think it is probably close, though the ART lens will be a little better corrected for chromatic aberration. You will get lower resolution compared to a full frame lens if you are shooting on an a7R body because the crop mode is lower rez.
for stills yes but does the sharpness effect the video work? because if it doesn't that much there's a lot of other things like light and stuff that the 450$ can buy if we give up on ff lens
Thank you for that link. With all due respect, I don't think comparing vignetting on Sony APS-C to Sony full frame (even down sampled) is a fair comparison because of the fourth point in the following article: www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sigma-interview-mirrorless-is-growing-and-we-will-make-more-lenses-for-it/
I would say the answer is yes in that specific application. More coma, a narrower angle of view, and, for astro, the manual focus nature of the lens is an asset rather than a liability. For everyday use, however, the Sigma is the superior lens.
Great review Dustin. I have to say that I have never seen a lens get better reviews than I have seen with this lens thus far, including some other reviews with image comparisons to the Rokinon 12mm, which showed the Sigma having an edge in most regards(not to mention that finding a good copy of the Rokinon is a bit of a dice roll). Your review of the Sigma 16mm is the only one thus far lacking excitement. I got the sense that you feel it is good enough to buy, but a bit mediocre overall. Perhaps there is some product bias from the other reviewers? Any idea why this lens has so much positive hype and rave reviews? If I shoot w/ the Sony a6500, I just cant see any other sweet options at this price point with this much sharpness and this same autofocus performance, and certainly nothing at F1.4. Perhaps I am missing something? Thanks again Dustin!
Hmmm, I wouldn't say that my review is lacking excitement (I purchased a copy of the lens myself), but I think that I tend towards being a little more objective than many reviewers and point out both strengths and weaknesses in all the gear I review. I don't think the coma performance is amazing, and so I said so. There is definitely some CA wide open, so I said so (the Rokinon suffers from lateral CA, BTW).
You are definitely more objective without a doubt, and you had two copies of the lens, so it's hard to disagree with anything you said. In some other reviews the CA seemed less noticeable. I suppose I was just hoping it would live up to the hype ;-)
I think it is an excellent lens, but I’m not surprised by the axial CA at wide apertures. That’s not unusual for wide aperture primes. PS. A lot of reviewers use test charts rather than three dimensional objects, and axial CA doesn’t really show up on test charts. That’s a bit of why I do what I do.
Dustin - sorry for pestering...when you have the A7R3, would you be able to do a three way comparison on color science among C, N and S? There is already a wealth of info out there on DR, ISO and feature comparisons, but I see very little on mfg differences on color science. Thanks.
You're right. There are things I prefer about mirrorless, and things I prefer about DSLRs. The new a7r3 is the closest thing I've seen to a DSLR replacement.
The lens marries well with the a6500 and is nicely balanced. If you think that this lens is too big please don't try to put the 70-200 f.4 on your camera but then you will miss out on some beautiful shots. Sometimes you do have to take in other considerations than size alone.
Your lens reviews are perhaps the most comprehensive on UA-cam. I always hope you have gotten to a lens I am thinking about buying or in need of re-appreciating a lens I have taken for granted owning. On the flip side, you see someone like the Angry Photographer spewing vitriol for Sigma lenses without ever furnishing his opinion with pictures like you do.
Thanks for the nice feedback, Daniel.
Thank you for your good work with this. I own the lens and am happy to learn more about it from your review. I enjoyed looking at all those outdoor shots!
My final review comes next week.
This bokeh actually looks really nice and smooth in my opinion! :)
All that matters is you are happy with it
Hi Dustin. Thanks for the great review. I will be buying this lens because of this review. Just a quick query however, what ND filter were you using with the day time pics and pics at the sun.
Thanks so much
That was just the bare lens - no ND filter.
Nice, thanks!!
You’re welcome.
Hi Dustin... ... just curious... at 03:15 you say, ' I use mirror lock-up' ... but isn't this a lens that's only available for mirrorless cameras ??? so how do you do mirror lock-up on a mirrorless camera ? :-) ( no offense :-) )
That was probably a matter of using more familiar DSLR language. What I was referring to was a 2 second delay to assure there were no vibrations.
Nice review. can you kindly share which lens and camera you used to shoot this video? Thanks.
Hi there - you can always find that information in the screens at the end of my videos.
Imagine a Full frame version of this lens 😋
Well, technically one exists - the 24mm f/1.4 ART
When I put this lens on my sony a6400 will it be 24mm equivalent? Am I right? Because I've been searching a 24mm lens to my camera, but I didn't find, just find this 16mm... and I'm gonna get it if it is 24mm equivalent!
That's correct. With your a6400 you need to multiply the focal length on the lens by 1.5x with EVERY lens you put on it.
Dustin Abbott Even if the lens is made for cropped sensor? Thank you 🙏🏻
That's correct. It's an often misunderstood topic.
Dustin Abbott thank you so much ❤️
I finally got this lens and I'm super excited to use it, but the rubber focus ring is slightly misaligned on my example. I'm maybe really picky but the rubber isn't perfectly set. Seems like it's very slightly twisted. Is your like that as well? Is it common or should I change mine? I might be super picky lol.
I've handled two copies, and that wasn't the case with either of them.
Thanks for this video! I have one question if you don't mind: I have the A6000 which has no in-body image stabilization. Will the footage be smooth when I shoot video with this lens attached to my A6000 and Zhiyun Crane v2? I don't like micro-jitters so it's really important that the footage will come out smooth. Does the a6500 stabilization help much, or is it negligible? Do you recommend this lens for A6000 -users? Would love to see a comparison with this lens and a gimbal, where you show us how much difference the IBIS does.
Adrian D IBIS is amazing - it’s like IS, but on any lens, a three Axis GYMBAL like my MōVI M5 is way different
I will be showing some gimbal footage in the final review, which will cover video more, as that is a real strength of the lens. IBIS does make a big difference, but it's not as good as a gimbal.
Adrian D upgrade to A6500
Nice reviews.!!! Im curious how well this lense would do with the panasonic G85 ? Have you tried it on the G85? Thank you
I have not tested it on the G85
in my a6500... ohhhhhhh emmm GGGGGG at night with my gimbal (zhiyun crane v2) shooting 4k @ ISO 200-640 f1.4 very impressed with this lens... even in full hd 120fps.. u will just use around ISO 1000 @ f1.4... footage is so clean.. i cant say negative on this lens but very2x good in video workx
It's great to suck in the light.
Sammy Diaz It’s nice but 1.4 on that size sensor is really about 2.8 on a FF
ohhh really? so ur saying if i shoot in a6500 f1.4 @ iso 640 ... its the same video clean footage i get if i shoot in a7rII f2.8 with @ ISO 2560? thats 2 stop difference.. i dont think so..
Sammy Diaz Yes just like 2.8 on a medium format is like a 1.4 on a FF (I don’t know the exact math but it’s based on Sensor of course) - Which is why full frame has shallower depth of field then let’s say super 35, which has shallower depth of field than micro 4/3 etc - The sensor is getting smaller so less light can hit it... the ISO part is different so no that’s no the same, that’s a standard and ISO is ISO no mater the camera (Film camera ASA)
I believe the multiplying factor for APS-C is 1.6x (Sony says theirs is a 1.5x) which makes a 16mm = around a 24mm. You also multiply the aperture by this factor as well. So an f/1.4 aperture on APS-C is around f/2 on Full Frame.
I was there when he dropped the sigma and the bridal party went “ooooohhhhhh” - 😂. Fortunately , it held it up! Great review, Dustin!
Yes you were!
Hey Dustin how often do you drop lenses? Didn’t you tell us you also dropped your Sony FE 85mm 1.8 lens too?
I think you must have me mistaken for someone lose. I haven’t actually used the Sony 85mm f/1.8. I’m normally very meticulous with gear, and in years of using many, many loaners have only returned one other lens with any kind of mark on it.
I think because I’ve been looking at videos on this lens and the 85, I’m getting them confused.
Dustin Abbott old age is kicking in buddy Dusty!
Dustin, could you give this one a try on your new A7R III? Due to the conspicuous lack of moderate weight, tote-able, fully modern and 'affordable' prime lens options at a circa 20mm FL, I would definitely consider this one a viable option as an effective 19.2mm FL prime on a FF sensor, with a modest 1.20x crop -- that's still 29+ mp of resolution on an A7R II/III body.
Numerous tests online show the FF Voigtlander 20mm you have reviewed to trail my own vintage Nikkor 20mm/2.8 AI-S in resolution across the frame from f.5.6 - f.16, for one example to support my reasoning. I use both FF and APS-C bodies, making dual use a cost effective and practical option, assuming that this lens's image circle and light fall-off characteristic are up to supporting a 1.20x - 1.25x crop. THANKS!
Are you looking for video? The APS-C/Super 35 crop mode is 1.5x, I believe, which gives this lens a FOV of 24mm. It works well there, but in APS-C mode will only have 18 MP of resolution (which is fine, in many situations). If you manually turn off APS-C mode, you will definitely have some shading.
No, I have no interest whatsoever in what the manufacturers say I should be doing with their lenses. I'm just interested in what actually works. I am curious about the image circle thrown by this lens on FF with a crop taken to about 19mm effective FL... which would be a 1.20x crop from a 36mm x 24mm [full] frame. As I stated originally...
As to "shading" or vignetting around the periphery, you tested the 18-35mm/4.0 L IS Canon, didn't you? And liked that. See my point, Dustin?
Let's put it another way: What modern 18mm to 21mm prime lens can YOU name to use **right now** on a Sony A7R III which will plainly best the usual vintage suspects for border to border sharpness and rendering... which doesn't cost around $1,900 U.S. (Zeiss Distagon)... and isn't a boat anchor like the Sigma 'Art'? A still very large & weighty $799 Tokina Firin... with the typical Tokina coatings performance (👎) and dubious resale value after awhile, maybe? And having looked at quite a number of online comparisons, I can't say much myself for the CV Skopar you kind of like since the old Nikkor 20mm seems sharper everywhere I've compared online from f.5.6 (I think the Skopar IS better at wider apertures). K. Rockwell's results are pretty much what I've seen elsewhere. And, Dustin, I can see the rather soft character of the CV pancake in your own image gallery on every tablet device I own. I'm going, well gee, that's not sharp.
So until and unless somebody like Irix or Venus Optics comes out with a physically well-scaled, truly MODERN 20mm prime for mirrorless (or DSLR, for that matter -- I have the Irix 15mm Blackstone)... I am stumped, and I think you'd have to be, too. The modern Nikkor 20mm/1.8 AF-S -- price-y for THAT build quality -- is pretty much a mess to manually focus adapted to a Sony. I could live with the awkward aperture adjustment via adapter, but not with the sloppy focus ring.
By comparison with the above options, settling for 29+ megapixels of rez at a moderate 1.2x crop doesn't sound screwy to me, if the Sigma 16mm would throw an adequate image circle to cover... and we don't know about that, one way or another, until some responsible and credible person tries it and reports. I'm making no predictions, just asking.
Numerous DX lens options in the super wide zoom category HAVE supported FF operation in the 18mm and over FL range (so 'they' say) -- the fairly uninspiring Sony E 10-18mm is widely reported to be one of them -- so I think the question is worth asking of this new, highly touted, moderately priced and FAST prime lens. Thank you!
do you think it can hold up on a full frame crop mode against 24m 1.4 sigma art? i mean probably that lens should work better but based on the price 900$ vs 450$ do you think as a 24mm it can be a reasonable choice for a fast video lens or you rather buy full frame lens for full frame only?
I think it is probably close, though the ART lens will be a little better corrected for chromatic aberration. You will get lower resolution compared to a full frame lens if you are shooting on an a7R body because the crop mode is lower rez.
for stills yes but does the sharpness effect the video work? because if it doesn't that much there's a lot of other things like light and stuff that the 450$ can buy if we give up on ff lens
It should be excellent for video.
Excellent review, Mr. Abbott. How is the vignetting in the uncorrected RAW files from this lens? I am sorry if I missed that in your review.
That's covered in the image quality video, but it definitely exists. Not extreme, but it's there until between f/2.8 and f/4
Thank you for your quick reply. Is this the “image quality video”?
That's correct. You can see a comparison in the text review, too. bit.ly/sig16DN
Thank you for that link. With all due respect, I don't think comparing vignetting on Sony APS-C to Sony full frame (even down sampled) is a fair comparison because of the fourth point in the following article: www.mirrorlessrumors.com/sigma-interview-mirrorless-is-growing-and-we-will-make-more-lenses-for-it/
How do you rate this lens compare to Sigma 18-35 F1.8 in terms of sharpness and the image quality? Thanks
It’s been too long and too many lenses since then; I don’t feel like I could even venture a guess. They are both very sharp lenses
So Dustin you would say this lens even at f2 is inferior to the Samyang 12mm f2 wide open for astro? Is this because of the greater coma?
I would say the answer is yes in that specific application. More coma, a narrower angle of view, and, for astro, the manual focus nature of the lens is an asset rather than a liability. For everyday use, however, the Sigma is the superior lens.
Great review Dustin. I have to say that I have never seen a lens get better reviews than I have seen with this lens thus far, including some other reviews with image comparisons to the Rokinon 12mm, which showed the Sigma having an edge in most regards(not to mention that finding a good copy of the Rokinon is a bit of a dice roll). Your review of the Sigma 16mm is the only one thus far lacking excitement. I got the sense that you feel it is good enough to buy, but a bit mediocre overall. Perhaps there is some product bias from the other reviewers? Any idea why this lens has so much positive hype and rave reviews? If I shoot w/ the Sony a6500, I just cant see any other sweet options at this price point with this much sharpness and this same autofocus performance, and certainly nothing at F1.4. Perhaps I am missing something? Thanks again Dustin!
Hmmm, I wouldn't say that my review is lacking excitement (I purchased a copy of the lens myself), but I think that I tend towards being a little more objective than many reviewers and point out both strengths and weaknesses in all the gear I review. I don't think the coma performance is amazing, and so I said so. There is definitely some CA wide open, so I said so (the Rokinon suffers from lateral CA, BTW).
You are definitely more objective without a doubt, and you had two copies of the lens, so it's hard to disagree with anything you said. In some other reviews the CA seemed less noticeable. I suppose I was just hoping it would live up to the hype ;-)
I think it is an excellent lens, but I’m not surprised by the axial CA at wide apertures. That’s not unusual for wide aperture primes. PS. A lot of reviewers use test charts rather than three dimensional objects, and axial CA doesn’t really show up on test charts. That’s a bit of why I do what I do.
this lens useful for wedding video shoot
Is that a question or a statement?
Good job
Thanks!
Just ordered my Sigma 16mm f1.4! Anyone know what the "sweet spot" aperture is?
@Vincent Tu. It's VERY sharp even at 1.4 but I think it's at its sharpest around 5-6 (like most lenses)
3:12 mirror lock up? on mirrorless?
I used the wrong term. I meant a two second delay.
Dustin - sorry for pestering...when you have the A7R3, would you be able to do a three way comparison on color science among C, N and S? There is already a wealth of info out there on DR, ISO and feature comparisons, but I see very little on mfg differences on color science. Thanks.
I can compare the Sony and the Canon, but I don't actually have the Nikon on hand.
what was that weird buzzing and humming sound all throughout the video?
Some mic issues.
Mr. Abbott, you must still be used to the DSLR world, referring to "mirror lockup". How are you liking mirrorless?
You're right. There are things I prefer about mirrorless, and things I prefer about DSLRs. The new a7r3 is the closest thing I've seen to a DSLR replacement.
+
I used this exact lens. My fav. This video was filmed entirely with the Sigma 16mm 1.4 and turned out gorgeous: vimeo.com/274422370
It's a very nice lens.
Christopher R.
Fantastic work with the Sigma!
Too big for the mirrorless camera.
I don't find that, actually. It's not overly heavy and the weight balances fine.
The lens marries well with the a6500 and is nicely balanced. If you think that this lens is too big please don't try to put the 70-200 f.4 on your camera but then you will miss out on some beautiful shots. Sometimes you do have to take in other considerations than size alone.