It Zooms 9mm... Just Get a Prime LOL (Sony 16-25mm f2.8 Dangerous Trend)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 вер 2024
- In a dangerous trend, Sony released the 16-25mm f2.8 G lens. A zoom with only 9mm reach. At that point, just use a prime. Sony is turning the trinity into a quadrupily. What's next a 191-200mm f2.8? Why make this lens? So many overlapping lenses, 16-35mm f2.8 GM, 16-35mm f4 PZ, Sigma 16-28mm f2.8, Tamron 17-28mm f2.8... Why not at least make it different? 15-24mm for the wider reach? Or innovate with a 15-24mm f2? 16-30mm f2.5? Just get a prime lol...
If you buy today's gear through my affiliate links, you'll have the first lens in a set of 20 zoom lenses that get you up to 300mm.
Sony 16-25mm f2.8 bhpho.to/3W1Nl3p
Zeiss Batis 18mm f2.8 amzn.to/3W2Z8OJ
Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 amzn.to/3xyd5Kk
DJI Action 4 amzn.to/3xMWe6x
Movo mic adapter amzn.to/3W1QlNa
Azden EX503 lav mic amzn.to/3vWIOo8
All my gear and recommended products can be found in my affiliate shop, thanks for shopping around! www.amazon.com...
Instagram / vegetablepolice
Topaz Video AI for enhancing and slowing down footage! www.topazlabs....
Remove Mucoid Plaque in 1 DAY to improve digestion! zencleanz.com/...
My Monkey Strength ebook payhip.com/b/VyEG
My Music from videos! Entire Discography 15% off vegetablepolic...
Patreon for Monthly Q&A Videos / vegetablepolice
T-shirts and merch! vegetablepolic...
Random ass donations to paypal.me/vegetablepolice Thank you!
Q-Link Products changed my life! share.shopqlin...
My Health Channel Vegetable Police / @vegetablepolice
My MMA channel UFC Conspiracies / @ufcconspiracies
If you buy today's gear through my affiliate links, you'll have the first lens in a set of 20 zoom lenses that get you up to 300mm.
Sony 16-25mm f2.8 bhpho.to/3W1Nl3p
Zeiss Batis 18mm f2.8 amzn.to/3W2Z8OJ
Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 amzn.to/3xyd5Kk
DJI Action 4 amzn.to/3xMWe6x
Movo mic adapter amzn.to/3W1QlNa
Azden EX503 lav mic amzn.to/3vWIOo8
All my gear and recommended products can be found in my affiliate shop, thanks for shopping around! www.amazon.com/shop/vegetablepolice
Agree. Whats the point of 16-25 i don't understand?
Rumor is Sony is coming out with a 24-25mm f0.95 zoom lens.
Wow, that would be awesome!🤣
I’ve been asking for one for decades
Hope it is a power zoom. Hate zoom rings that rotate only 3 degrees.
@@sbeckmesser I don't know being f0.95 adding power zoom might make the lens bigger? LOL
If it's full frame I would buy it
They've already made a 85-94mm when you consider focus breathing
I should know better than to watch your channel in a public place. “Hipster lesbian” just made my drink go out my nose! Lololol
If he lost the glasses he'd look more like the NYC hipster lesbians I know. He can keep the beard.
Like every one else is saying. You are the first one of the first big youtubers to say it how it is. That's why you won't get a sample and it's sad. I hope you find a good sponsor
It's a conspiracy, the goal is to confuse people so badly with the odd numbering schemes that we buy lenses that are essentially the same as ones we already have
Totally agree, but Sony has so many lenses now, they can try new options. Unlike Canon sadly…. They are missing so many standard lenses…😢
2:49 this part was deep! 🤣
A zoom needs range (and / or) fast constant aperture.
- Canon got it right with the 28-70 f2, the 24-105 f2.8 and 100-300 f2.8
- Tamron and Samyang with the 35-150 f2-2.8
- Sigma could revamp the old EF 18-35 f1.8 and the 50-100 f1.8 for full frame mirrorless trying to close the gap between them and even extend the range something like 16-35 f1.8 and 35-135 f1.8, a pair of zooms that covers from 16 to 135 at f1.8 is possible and could make sense to replace all 1.8 primes (16, 24, 28, 35, 50, 85, 100, 135). Sigma, you can do it!!
Ok, maybe not 135, but a 16-35 and 35-100 is possible.
but none of the lenses you mentioned can do what this 16-25 can do. just because something isnt made for you, doesnt mean it shouldnt exist.
The continual CNN reports, comedy right there lol
for instances where stepping backwards 2.23 inches is out of the question! yes!!
I pre-ordered all lenses from your announcements :D
No kidding. This has to be the dumbest zoom "range" ever. For $1200 lol.
I agree with most of what you’re saying here but just to clarify (and I know you were likely being facetious), you can’t simply say that since there’s only a 9mm difference between the wide and long end, it’s the same as a 591-600mm lens. It’s the percentage of zoom. 16 is 64% of 25, so that would equate to a lens that’s 384-600mm. Still, that would not be a lens I would ever buy but it’s not quite as shockingly narrow as 591-600mm. 😳 The lens does perform very well by objective measurements but I guess Sony was able to achieve the performance level by limiting it to such a narrow range. Just go prime.
Excellent. Best lens. Best value. Can´t get anything better. Perfect lens... You were right about other reviewers. "Made of plastic and glas and it FEELS perfect. ... perfect... best one ... perfect BLABLABLA! " Saying that the design of plastic and glas was perfect well- I think a reviewer will have to use the word "perfect" at least 50 times.
Right now, I'm videoing everything with my iPhone 10. Should I upgrade to the iPhone 15 for my videographying? The GiV uses an iPhone for all his videos, and they seem to turn out OK. 😃
Every KOL puts "best xxx lens ever made" in the title, which starts to become cringy and stale.
I am on Team Color Science, but I never regret watching your Sony rants, I mean content! - Frank
Good job Kasey. I see what Sony was shooting for here but think they missed again.
Most of the big UA-camrs are overhyping this. It's the best ever. A game changer. So stupid. I did preorder the 24-50. That appeals to me.
Well, what if you want an f2.8 wide angle zoom but can't afford the 16-35, but would prefer a native lens for superior autofocus? Yeah, this lens is a compromise. It isn't a 14-24. Yes, the two primes you mentioned have superior image quality, but what if you don't want to change lenses when you want to go from a 107 to 82 degree field of view?
Sony is not focussed on releasing complete useful products.
They slice as much as they can funcitonallities and the put it into different bunch of hardware to sell more pcs and sell it at gold price.
Just look that they release new mark II cameras with worse specs than the MK1 versions.
Video crops on A7 and A7R cameras. No firmware upgrades to get latest functionallities. Pixel-Shift only on a7R cameras.... everything super sliced.
turns out youre my new favourite dude
Im always looking forward to your vdos man , here and vegetables police 💪🙏
Not to be THAT guy... but, it's less about the absolute mm range, and more about the percentage of mm range.
In other words, yes, 16-25mm is 9mm zoom range, but that difference is MUCH larger than a hypothetical 191-200mm range (which would also be 9mm)
Yes it's true. But still, it's a 1.5x zoom. Not exactly mindblowing. Some Sony primes have a bigger range than that just with focus breathing ! 😋
prime all day errday
Waiting for 16-17 f4
Idk man. 16mm is pretty different than 25mm.
This ain't like 50mm-59mm
I think this lens or the 20mm 1.8 are both great options for a wide travel lens. And your suggestion of buying 2 primes can be applied to replace any zoom lens lol.
I think you missed the mark on this one.
Sony announcing 5 useless lenses just during this video says everything about their style 😂
9mm is a lot in a wide angle lens. If you need more range the 16-35 it's still there for you. Why are you complaining for having options?
I'm just giving people better options than this terrible expensive lens.
Hipster lesbian ..... don't hoardthe p
Completelt agree such an useless release. COmplete waste of time
This was hilarious
I watched a load of youtubers talk about this lens, you are the only one to mirror my opinion that a prime would do better in almost ever case. The sane insanity is why I subscribe.
Feartubers. Afraid to anger the company that feeds them.
You should consider it Puppet. Sony said it helps with spelling.
@@mavfan1 dyslexic
@@petrub27 I have a background in physics, I'm likely better than you :p
"game changer bro" every youtuber
So true. It's a laughable cliche at this point.
@@david.stachon its as aggregious as the word cinematic
I love that I fall into watching all of these reviews to convince myself that I want that specific thing, then I come across your video and BOOM. I question what the hell I'm doing.
Haha same for me. Wanted to return my 20mm 1.8 for this new zoom. Not any more ;)
companies lies all the time in the markting material and exaggerate their product to sound better than it is , and Zeiss not a single time mention that their lenses has 3d pop and micro contrast and you mention it in every video , they should hire you in their markting department , the only company that you don't diss
3D micromarketer pop will be had.
24-50mm is ok as a zoom range - but it should be smaller, lighter and cost less than half it costs to be a good option. 16-25mm is just stupid. A zoom lens needs to FEEL diferent enough at each end to be justified. And although 16mm fits a lot more in the frame than 25mm, it usualy doesn't feel that diferent.
Just get the tamron 20-40mm for 43% of the weight and 31% of the cost of the 16-25mm and 24-50mm together.
Seeing how large & heavy a typical 14-24/2.8 is, that’s ‘just’ 10mm zoom. So deviating from the 16-25 range with a 2.8 aperture would have likely resulted in a much heavier lens. This lens is meant to just be light and compact, which it is for a full frame lens.
true af. just buy a wide angle prime and crop it later, most cameras nowadays have high megapickles anyway.
and those fake lens announcements are killing me lmao.
Feels like getting a 16mm or 20mm prime and then walking in or out would have made more sense than one with such a narrow zoom range.
Plus for video a lot of sony FF cameras do APS-C crop mode too. I use that with my 20 1.8 on my a7IV and it's great.
Totally agree the 20mm f1.8 is a killer lens.
This is why youre one of the only camera channels i still watch.
Everyone knows we judge photos only by 400% enlargements
I feel bad for all the UA-camrs who have to pretend this a good deal so Sony will keep sending them products early. I would rather buy a used 16-35 GM mk1 for basically the same price.
If they try and strike a copyright against you claim it was Canadian News Network.
Meanwhile Markus is over there giving away pants.
And socks 🧦🤦🏻♂️
The worst reviews are those from insta360 😂😂😂 Today makes no sense too watch reviews! They are just commercials.
2:20 The recent GM lenses focus breath so much, that they are basically like mini zoom
Like the 33-40mm f/1.4 GM 😂
Finally someone said it, my thoughts exactly. Love the absurd focal length news headlines you threw in too. 😂
The music was exciting. It doesn’t take much to excite me. I’m keeping Sigma 16-28.
i was thinking this today as well. my viltrox 16 1.8 is so much cheaper and its fast and same size. why not just get a prime.
Omg can't wait for the 24-27mm to match the Tamron zoom
You can never have enough Tonehs.
The quality of the toneh too
It's about the percentage of mm difference, not the mm them selves. For example a hypothetical 1-2mm lens would be an equivalent to 85-170mm zoom range, not 85-86mm...
Its good and i want it because the reviewers are telling me i need it
Always love the humor you bring to these topics! Just to get super nerdy for a second, there's a big difference between 9mm on the wide end versus 9mm on the tele end of a lens. Pull up a field of view calculator and see the differences from 16mm to 25mm in terms of the actual field of view (degrees) that you're getting versus the example you gave (591mm to 600mm). The tele side is only a 1 degree difference (talking about full-frame) where the new Sony lens gives you 81.5 to 106.8 degree difference (25.3 degree difference). I too had this idea at one time that 9mm isn't all that much on paper and was taken to school by a lens designer on how it all actually works😂Keep up the great content!
Why are people taking my CNN reports seriously? Sony zoom is 1.56x and my ridiculous telephoto examples are only like 1.01x zooms lol. I thought they were so absurd that people would just smile and enjoy the joke.
You can crop into apsc mode and get the same effect though
@@LTPottenger APSC mode = lost pixels. If you're on a 20-24mp camera you're going to lose a lot of megapickles. :)
Hundred percent man, I own the 16-35 g, super useful lens for video, but I have to carry the 14mm prime just in case. I wish Sony make something like the canon 14-35 (but more compact) that'd be awesome
I’ll stick to my sigma 18-35mm f/1.8
lol nailed the douchetuber video reviews of this lens.
I thought this lens would be perfect for you
Nothing short of an EF Leica Zeiss 11-24 t1. 2 will suffice.
I saved lots of money watching this channel! I wonder where you're heading to every day.
Love the hipster lesbian look!
This lens is making me wanna buy Tamron 20-40... even despite I already have one.
Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 was very popular when it came out in 1999. Crazy 20+ years later and less zoom range.
Can there be beauty in a 2D, 3D popless world...?
i love this guy
Dude this might be the funniest video about camera gear I’ve ever watched
9-85mm f1.2 OSS 1-2-3 with macro would've changed the game lol.
Exactly. This was my immediate thought after this released. 1.57x Zoom range is very little. You can crop into APSC mode on most cameras and get the range with a 16mm prime like the viltrox while getting 1.3 stops more light.
You can crop from any focal length to make it another longer focal length in post, doesn't have to be APS-C mode. But it won't have the compression effect.
@@funnybeingme I'm talking about video, where you can shoot in APSC crop to get a longer focal lengths. And no, compression is not an effect of focal length, it's an effect of subject distance and FoV
The lens might be stupid but comparing 16-25 with a 191-200 is equally stupid.
Besides: The trinity was 16-35, 24-70, 70-200, so there was always an overlap between the first two. The new lens is lighter than the GM and brighter than the F4 and you can still cover the whole range with three lenses.
No, I won't buy it, I don't even have a Sony camera anymore but I don't see the "dangerous trend" at all.
I think the reason for this lens is all the Sony fangirls who can't carry an extra 100 grams...
The assertion that a 9mm focal change is insignificant overlooks the non-linear relationship between focal length and field of view (FOV) due to lens geometry. While minor focal length adjustments like 190-199mm are actually negligible, wide angles (such as 16-25mm) experience drastic FOV shifts. For instance, consider a scenario where the focal length changes from 16mm to 25mm: the FOV narrows significantly, capturing less of the scene. This change represents approximately a 10x greater alteration in FOV compared to the change from 190mm to 199mm, where the difference is significantly more subtle.
Additionally, the pairing of a 16-25mm lens with a 24-70mm GMII offers several advantages over a 16-35mm GM. Not only is it more cost-effective, but it also boasts a smaller, lighter design and less overlap with the 24-70 GM II. This reduction in redundancy, weight, cost, and size makes it ideal for travelers. Furthermore, with crop mode, users can still achieve a 35mm focal length.
The additional 10mm on the 16-35mm GM comes at a significant cost of approximately $1000 more, as well as added weight and size. Moreover, this portion of the focal range overlaps with the 24-70mm lens. So maybe the new "Trinity" doesn't include a 16-35mm, at least for some people who want to reach 200mm without redundancy, added cost, weight, and size.
Radio commentator Rush Limbaugh used to talk about illustrating absurdity by being absurd. This video is a great demonstration of that principle. Loved the "breaking news" lines with zoom lenses with a 9mm change in focal length. That was brilliant. 🤠
Hey...where's the affiliate links to the new Sony telephoto zooms? I'm very interested in the 791-800mm f6.3. But wait, the 1015-1024mm f6.3 is even better!!! Though, I think you made an error in your description of the incorporated teleconverter. It's not 1.1x. I'm pretty sure it's 1.01x.
I did watch one video for the 16-25mm delayed April's fool joke lens. Your buddy, Gerald Undone says it is so nice because it has no noticeable loca. However, he also found the flare resistance was pathetic. Do not point that lens anywhere near the sun.
I have the Tamron 28-200 which has been amazing so any of these short range zooms covers the wide and ultrawide
9mm on the wide end is not the same as 85-94 but you already knew that. It isn’t a versatile zoom like all the UA-cam fuss is making it seem to be but it does have a market. 16-25 is the range I use for real estate on my 16-35 f4 pz. The pz is slightly smaller and weighs 50ish grams lighter with an internal zoom but the 16-25 may as well be internal zoom (it’s not but barely extends). I don’t need the 2.8 so I won’t make the switch but it’s an option for real estate. It’s 1600CAD before tax not 1800. I would have much preferred it to be 15-24 to be honest. I say they dropped the ball on the 24-50 cause a 20-50mm compact lens would have been perfect for people that carry a 85mm prime.
You kept talking about how bad the zoom range is and then you didn't zoom it
I wanna see how bad the zoom is
I could only afford a Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 anyway
When you have facial hair that cool.. why would you ever shave? You have beautiful coloring. Unfortunately.. part of why you deal with skin issues. We know in Ayurveda.. those with most beautiful skin/hair coloring tend to also have very sensitive skin. But really Brother.. you are a handsome person despite how you like to make fun of yourself…😅 You grew up in a strange world where Neanderthal looking beasts who work out at Gold’s Gym were deemed “cute” 🤮… but as you know full well… that’s all nonsense. You and your precious fiancé are the epitome of true attractiveness and what REAL mental health and personality ought to be. Also… on another note… Stay close to Jesus, by the way! (I died many years ago and He is 100% real and The Way!!)
What do people think of the tiny PZ 16-50 OSS?
haha i’m sure someone said this but you probably should consider the percentage zoom rather than the absolute. yhe cnn announcement would be more like 85-132mm. still tiny and stupid though
its a good workaround lens for cameras like a7iv.
Where you want the same focal lenght for 24 and 60fps because of 1.5x crop to be able to get everything at 24mm.
Anyway. Got myself 16-35 gm2. Looks great gives insane anmount of versatility to a7iv. Now the trinity is complete.
Only downside to 16-35gm2 is that it is not f1.8. Well maybe 10 years down the line.
It would be interesting to see you review samyang 35mm 1.4 mk2.
one of my friends have sony 35mm and another has sigma, my ipinion is samyangs 35mm f1.4 mk2 is the best 35mm lens for sony out there.
I have the 24mm f1.4 and the 55mm f1.8 so the 16-35mm never made sense. I wish Sony would have made a compact 16mm prime. I'm still torn between the Viltrox 16mm or the Sony 14mm.
They're for taking a picture of 50 people in a small room. You zoom until all the people are in the picture.
Eh just go wide and crop in a bit if you really need to.
Using a 50mm and pano stitching would look way better. Steve on the far left won't be like half the size of Sarah in the middle.
It is SO refreshing to watch your videos instead of the endless sea of paid commercials made for these new products by those other youtube 'photographers'. Donkeys, the lot of 'em
This is why you are the review master. Thanks for this.
Wish they'd make a 100~109F2.5. It'd kill the classic Nikon 105f2.5
Why not just make a 16mm f1.8 then this 9mm lens virtually no one will buy. The 16 would've sold like hot cakes or at least snickers where as this lens? Meh.
You look like Gordon Freeman with this outfit. :) Well every mm count on this side of ... sizes. :P
The 9mm f1.7 Leica Pany-boy for $600 CAD would be a better choice.
Seems like they're made to be better fit on the compact FF bodies, like the A7C2, et al. The 16-25 & 24-50 are 33% and 50% lighter, respectively, than their GM counterparts and probably balance much better on those compact bodies - especially without the grip extension. And you can get both of these for the price of either the 16-35GM or the 24-70GM with pretty similar image quality.
Exactly. Yes, Sigma and Tamron have similar offerings, but native lenses have better autofocus capabilities, and this lens is a nice middle ground between the more expensive GM offerings and the Third=Party lenses.
You'd get even better results for less money with the 3 Zeiss lenses I mentioned. Like night and day difference.
Thank You for expressing my thoughts 💭 💭💭….i was like but why ??? WHY ? Sony … 14-28 mm IS F2 🎉 now that would have been something to consider … jus saying
Why doesn't DJi just make a sweet point and shoot with 4k and rocksteady and just dominate the industry. Could you imagine an apsc or full frame osmo action with interchangeable lenses?
Never bothered watching a review on it either. It would impress me if it was F2. but at F2.8 its incredibly overpriced.
Yes, a dumpster vlog....almost! Gotta bring them back.. LOL! Do I see a mullet happening here? Are you making a movie? I love your point about a 9mm variance on the long end. That puts it into perspective very well. Hey, you said photography life... LOL! Man, that firmware rant was epic! Thanks for the laughs and fun! Have a great day.
I always hated that the 16-35mm lenses were more overlap than new focal length (since many people have lenses that start at 24mm), and I would have preferred more wide end and less tele. Now they took away the overlap but didn't give anything in return. Everyone else has a zoom that starts at 14mm and takes filters, come on Sony!
I mean 16, 18, 20, 24mm. That’s multiple primes
In ultra wilde every mm charges the perspective dramatically, unlike with tele range where 9mm doesn’t change anything
Can wait for a 75- 210 F2.8
Viltrox 16mm 1.8 with clear image zoom for the win
Just walk a few steps forward or backward and thats your zoom range.