Sony 16-25mm F2.8 G Review

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 18 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 78

  • @falcongunner33
    @falcongunner33 7 місяців тому +26

    Always love your perspective on things man. You never forget the level that is “good enough” for hobbyists, which most of us are.

    • @Edwin--
      @Edwin-- 7 місяців тому +2

      Yes, I appreciate that too. Especially now that they start building lenses to shoot 120 frames per second. That is a very specific use, but I am sure you pay a premium for such focus systems that don't really translate to image quality (just speed) for the slower paced shooter.

  • @albedo0point39
    @albedo0point39 7 місяців тому +11

    I had the 20 f1.8 for photography; it’s an incredible piece of glass. As a walk around lens though… it was always either too short or too long. With this one, 16 at the wide end and 25 at the narrow will hopefully give me that ‘red riding hood’ just right experience.

    • @Criticalhitkoala
      @Criticalhitkoala Місяць тому

      Is there a Litle Red Riding Hood Just right? I thought that was Goldilocks.

  • @Loutchianooo
    @Loutchianooo 7 місяців тому +4

    I agree with the last point, one would probably benefit more using a prime wide angle which will open wider

  • @supermanlovers
    @supermanlovers 7 місяців тому +8

    I prefer to use the Tamron 20-40mm for filming.
    20mm is not enough for vlogging (which I don't do), but the image is less distorted. If necessary, you can zoom in quite well with 40mm.
    It's also small, light, quiet and cheap.

  • @timfop
    @timfop 7 місяців тому +4

    Pumping out the reviews, love it!

  • @MollyFitzBrown
    @MollyFitzBrown 6 місяців тому +2

    Looks like a great lens! I wish it was a tad lighter than my 20mm but I think I need this!

  • @randallbrander8157
    @randallbrander8157 7 місяців тому +4

    10-20mm and 20-60mm makes the lens smaller and gets most of the important focal range that I need. Telephoto Zoom side is another story. Tamron 17-28mm, 28-75mm and the 70-180mm f/2.8 hit it out of the ballpark for me. Nikon has those ranges also, but under the Nikkor Brand name not Tamron. Those three lenses you pay a third compared to the 14-24mm, 24-70mm & 70-200mm trifecta of most camera brands. I have the G lenses and they are great. Cheers!

  • @KevinG-159
    @KevinG-159 7 місяців тому +1

    Nice lens but I bought a 24mm G for my new A7C II. Any wider I'll let my Fuji 10-24 fill in. Totally agree with your assessment of this lens. Thank you Arthur. You are the go-to-guy for Sony reviews!

  • @kdtheporchpodcast5785
    @kdtheporchpodcast5785 7 місяців тому +3

    I want to see a review of a sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 vs the new 16-25mm f2.8 .

  • @yannguerin3164
    @yannguerin3164 7 місяців тому

    So excited for this lens, day 1 buy for me, I’ve been waiting and telling my friends I wanted this for the past 6 years or so.
    And also watching your channel for as long as I can remember, thanks Arthur for amazing format review you’ve been putting out consistently for so long 🔥

  • @tinplater
    @tinplater 7 місяців тому

    I love my Sony 16-35 f4.0. If you don't need the 2.8 to 4.0 range, it is a great lens and has power zoom as well which some may find important. With my Tamron 28-200 I pretty much cover 99% of what I am likely to shoot. I do carry a 24mm 1.4 GM for those other special moments.

    • @jorgea.ramosv.1603
      @jorgea.ramosv.1603 7 місяців тому

      Love Mine too and enjoy it all the time, but having the 20-70 F4, I have to let it go.

  • @edwardlee4029
    @edwardlee4029 6 місяців тому

    I am using the A7CR and I mainly take travel and street photos. I am interested in this lens and the new Sony 24-50 2.8. It will be a nice travel photography combo. I have tried them both in Sony showroom and I like them both. Then, an idea suddenly come up in my mind, i.e. if I get the 16-35 2.8 GMII instead, then the only focal range difference between the GMII and the two G lenses is 35-50mm. I can use APSC mode or the clear image zoom function on the GMII to reach the 50mm. That will cover the entire16-50mm range provided by these two G lenses.
    If I need to take portrait photo, I can add a 50mm 1.4(use APSC mode or the clear image zoom can achieve a 85mm 1.8) lens to my combo and I can have a true potrait lens instead of using the long end of the 24-50 2.8. Wouldn't it be more flexible and useful than the two G lenses combo?

  • @calmcruiser
    @calmcruiser 7 місяців тому +1

    Great review Arthur, You’re the one

  • @tonyslander1
    @tonyslander1 7 місяців тому +5

    I just got the 24-70 gm ii
    And this is just perfect instead of the 16 35

  • @shem44
    @shem44 7 місяців тому +4

    Is sony going to release a 50-100 f2.8 soon?

    • @enjoygary
      @enjoygary 6 місяців тому

      I hope so but I think it’ll be more like 50-80 f2.8 so it can be small and light

  • @Edwin--
    @Edwin-- 7 місяців тому +1

    Thanks for the nice review! How you would you see it as a lens to be jointly used for full-frame and APS-C? Would you say it outperforms the Sony 16-55mm f.2.8 G for APS-C on the corresponding focal lengths?

    • @nicholassmith7723
      @nicholassmith7723 7 місяців тому

      I have the A7Cii, but if I were to buy an A6700 companion camera I'd probably leave that 16-55 on it and never take it off. The only other aps-c lens that's really interesting is the 70-350 for a lightweight tele zoom.

  • @WatchesCanBeFun
    @WatchesCanBeFun 7 місяців тому +2

    Great video. I wanted to know if your opinion changed, would you recommend a6400 or a6600? Budget is not an issue. Thanks.

    • @ArthurR
      @ArthurR  7 місяців тому +3

      A6600 is better, but you’re so close in price to the much better A6700. On a budget, the 64/6100 are great.

    • @pmart17
      @pmart17 7 місяців тому +3

      I saw the A6600 on sale for $1000. Thats a lot of camera for that price. A6600 has the z battery and bigger grip. All depends on what you are willing to pay

    • @WatchesCanBeFun
      @WatchesCanBeFun 7 місяців тому +1

      Thank you :)

    • @funnybeingme
      @funnybeingme 7 місяців тому

      @@pmart17 Yup. Z battery alone is enough to pick the A6600 over the A6400.

    • @pmart17
      @pmart17 7 місяців тому

      @@funnybeingmeplus IBIS and at the time the best Autofocus. Still a great camera for a beginner.

  • @subxis
    @subxis 2 місяці тому

    great job! did you use any nd filters with that lens? i've tried several and they all destroy the image at 16mm.

  • @howardhdavidson
    @howardhdavidson 7 місяців тому +3

    Two zooms to get you from 16-50mm I prefer the G 12-24 and G 20-70 both f4 not 2.8

    • @Edwin--
      @Edwin-- 7 місяців тому

      Makes perfect sense. With the current ISO performance of cameras, you hardly pay a penalty image-wise, while the lenses are sharp, more affordable and easier to carry.

  • @Kevodabomb_Media
    @Kevodabomb_Media 7 місяців тому

    Huh, might be a good combo with a 24-105. 24-105 for day time all day stuff and 16-25 for night time walking around and interior stuff

  • @_sk_videos
    @_sk_videos 7 місяців тому +1

    Something bigger than f2.8 would be more interesting. 16-25 F2 would be an awesome companion to 35mm F1.4

  • @pw5391
    @pw5391 25 днів тому

    Hi 👋👋 how is the photo sharpness compare to 16-35mm GM ? thanks 🙏🙏

  • @stevenwaldstein2249
    @stevenwaldstein2249 7 місяців тому +1

    Thank you for your video. Very attached to these smaller G zooms and wondering if I should sell my 16-35/2.8 GM II and my Sigma 16-28/2.8 DG DN Contemporary and just buy this and use it on both my A7CR and A7RV? We will see. Small and compact has lots of advantages. Take care.
    Follow-up: what do you think about the Sony FE 12-24/4 G filling this space? It’s a little bit bigger but gives you an extended range to a wider 12mm even being a stop slower. Please share your thoughts. Picked up this lens in a trade at almost the same price. Take care.

    • @stevenwaldstein2249
      @stevenwaldstein2249 3 місяці тому

      Follow up: One comment about the Sigma 16-28/2.8 DG DN Contemporary. It’s really not bigger because it’s internal zoom with zero size change when zooming across its range. Take care.

  • @ClumsyAI
    @ClumsyAI 7 місяців тому

    Hi, Can you please, Do a review for A6700 vs Aiii camera I can't find a descent video here,
    Great Contants by the way

  • @guangjoe
    @guangjoe 7 місяців тому

    Hi - I found you by looking at my subscribers - I love the channel! You'd love the camera market I just checked out. If you ever come to China, let me know and I'll show you around there (I don't know what I'm looking at!)

  • @benuovir
    @benuovir 5 місяців тому

    What’s your go to FF lens for interior real estate photography

  • @c09yc47
    @c09yc47 6 місяців тому

    Could you please upload sirui 23 mm vs sigma 16mm comparison video

  • @benedictoreyes8222
    @benedictoreyes8222 7 місяців тому

    I’m guessing Sony will complete a new trinity of compact 2.8 zooms which are meant for the A7C series. So maybe a telephoto of 50-105 or 70-135?

    • @kookaburra574
      @kookaburra574 5 місяців тому

      Compact 200-600mm, im tired of carrying around that glass 🤣

  • @edan6521
    @edan6521 7 місяців тому +3

    Nice

  • @RecWaltfilm
    @RecWaltfilm 3 місяці тому

    How this lens perform on a apsc camera? You have any disavantage?

  • @johnnybravo3732
    @johnnybravo3732 7 місяців тому

    I just bought a Sony a6400 kit that is due to be delivered tomorrow. I'm new to this and wondering what's your thoughts using this on the sony a6400. I plan to get a full frame in the near future.

    • @bondgabebond4907
      @bondgabebond4907 7 місяців тому

      I have a comparable lens, the 17-28mm 2.8 Tamron. I use it on my a6700 all the time. It's nice to have the ability to use it on both full frame and crop-sensor camera. I just got through taking some pictures of my wife picking fruit and pictures of a number of plants with the Tamron and they came out with exceptional detail. Whether you use crop sensor or FF, all these lenses will work. I am finding ways of using FF lenses on an aps-c camera that is better than on a full frame camera, like macro photography. And, of course, the opposite is true.

  • @mrmonday42
    @mrmonday42 7 місяців тому +2

    The question for me is whether to sell my 20mm G for this. It's a tough decision

    • @robertjpayne60
      @robertjpayne60 6 місяців тому

      I am wondering the same thing! I am not a vlogger but I do take landscapes so wanted something wide to go along with my Sony 50mm f1.4 GM.

    • @mrmonday42
      @mrmonday42 6 місяців тому +1

      @@robertjpayne60 You can't go wrong with the 24mm GM. I think it's the logical pairing with the 50mm GM. I'm a 35mm GM shooter, so the 20mm G makes the most sense for my wide angle. I thought about selling it for this zoom but at the end of the day I prefer the brighter aperture over this small zoom range. However, if I wasn't using it so often in dimly lit interiors or for astrophotography I would go for the 16-35mm f4

  • @Armbrust210
    @Armbrust210 7 місяців тому +2

    I wouldn't call a lens with alternatives available at ~2/3 the cost and that's... well 1.200$ "budget"

  • @HagaishiSama
    @HagaishiSama 7 місяців тому +1

    Why would anyone get this when you have the Sony FE 16-35 F/2.8 GM ii?!?!
    Makes no sense at all🤦🏿‍♂️
    Could you do a Sony 16-35 vs Sony 16-25
    And great video as always

    • @funnybeingme
      @funnybeingme 7 місяців тому +1

      Because not everyone wants to spend an extra $1000 for the overlapping focal range of 26-35 if you already have a 24-70 f2.8.

    • @HagaishiSama
      @HagaishiSama 7 місяців тому

      @funnybeingme The Sony FE 16-35 F/2.8 GM mii is only 1800 while this is 1200. Plus it's way sharper. But I have to keep reminding myself that there are some people who live by zooms. I feel you can't avoid the over lapping of focal lengths.
      But for the price, I rather get a GM than a G. But to each it's own. This would be a great kit lens. And I wish they make a FE 24-125 F/2.8 or faster like they have for aps-c. And would love to see how the 16-35 blows the 16-25 away in a comparison video. But to each it's own.

  • @RickSanchez__642
    @RickSanchez__642 7 місяців тому

    hm still in the return window of my 20mm 1.8. Not sure if I should instead get this zoom lens. It is at least 500$ more expensive.

  • @SaptarshiiRoy
    @SaptarshiiRoy Місяць тому +1

    I want FE 14-30 f2 G lens 🥹😭

  •  7 місяців тому +1

    Why not 16-17

  • @GuitarRJP
    @GuitarRJP 5 місяців тому

    Sony 16-35mm GM ii rotates the same way, getting longer for the 16mm size!

  • @enjoygary
    @enjoygary 6 місяців тому

    On a gimbal, this would be great

  •  7 місяців тому +1

    I make documentary work and corporative videos... other than interviews this lens make a lot of sense to follow actions, show small spaces... i dont want to change lenses every second. :)

    • @Edwin--
      @Edwin-- 7 місяців тому +1

      The 16-35mm f4 powerzoom is excellent for video too. I pair it with the Tamron 35-150mm f2-2.8. Allows me to do everything I need with 2 lenses.

    •  7 місяців тому

      @@Edwin-- great combo

  • @bondgabebond4907
    @bondgabebond4907 7 місяців тому

    The outer barrel is made of composite material. but what about the inner frame? Is that metal? That info is always missing.
    This lens competes against the excellent Tamron 17-28 f2.8 lens. Too bad I bought one months ago.
    You ask if that extra sharpness is necessary, and the answer is always yes. Why pay the bucks for an inferior lens?

  • @duvalpenny100
    @duvalpenny100 7 місяців тому

    I have the Sigma 14-24 and it's a great lens but it is literally double the size of this lens.
    I'd grab this one over the 14-24. The size difference is insane. Not worth the 2 extra mm at the wide end.

  • @ridwancandra534
    @ridwancandra534 7 місяців тому +1

    it is, that sharp

  • @jaysison6987
    @jaysison6987 7 місяців тому +1

    Woah hoovie???

  • @jigjitsu5599
    @jigjitsu5599 7 місяців тому

    Waiting for the 15-17mm F2.1

  • @sawgrass7477
    @sawgrass7477 7 місяців тому

    I love these useless zoom ranges! Can’t wait for the Sony 16-17mm f/2.8 G!!!!

  • @proksalevente
    @proksalevente 7 місяців тому +1

    The 20mm 1.8 provides so much better value, it's astonishing. Also, the reverse zoom gets me on my sigma 24-70 every time I put it on, so I dislike sony going this route.

    • @Edwin--
      @Edwin-- 7 місяців тому

      That's an excellent lens, and as it is on the market for some time you see good deals on them too.

    • @z352kdaf8324
      @z352kdaf8324 Місяць тому

      No it doesn't. Depends on your needs. It's your better value, not the rest of us. thanks

  • @陈一峰-y1r
    @陈一峰-y1r 7 місяців тому

    EXTERNAL ZOOM? F

  • @hohoho9939
    @hohoho9939 7 місяців тому +25

    why not 15 -25

    • @JF..
      @JF.. 7 місяців тому +19

      Then you would say why not 14-25 😂. But i got your point tho ..

    • @yannguerin3164
      @yannguerin3164 7 місяців тому +1

      @@JF..so good hahaha

    • @waverunneradventuregfx
      @waverunneradventuregfx 5 місяців тому +2

      Why not 10-11 😂

    • @jasoncanshoot
      @jasoncanshoot 4 місяці тому +1

      If it’s 14-25 I am getting it

  • @ryzenbiel4145
    @ryzenbiel4145 7 місяців тому

    Canon ?? 😂 stock up doin lens too slow to release .. .🥴 the focal length is limited for not L series lens and Aperture 😪

  • @tek_soup
    @tek_soup 7 місяців тому

    Aww C'Mon ... Turn that Frown upside Down. funny how "Affordable" glass and plastic is $1200 , yeh 14-24 would of been better.