- If you're looking for a 16 to 35 millimeter lens
for Sony E-mount full frame,
there are only really a couple of options,
and they all come with their own pros and cons.
The Tamron 17 to 28 is great value,
but it's limited by its shorter focal range.
The Sony G Master is incredible quality,
but it is really big and really expensive.
And the Zeiss 16 to 35 F4 has stabilization,
but it's still pretty heavy.
It's only F4,
and in my opinion,
it's a little bit expensive for what you're getting.
And as for Sigma,
we're still waiting for Sigma
to do a 16 to 35, someday.
But today, we're gonna be talking about a new option
to throw in the mix as Sony just announced
their brand new power zoom 16 to 35 F4 G lens.
As someone who owns both the G Master and the Tamron,
I really didn't expect this to do much for me,
but I was pleasantly surprised.
Sony is billing this as the world's lightest
constant F4 wide-angle power zoom lens.
And I must admit that the size
and weight of this lens are a huge part
of what I like about it,
but it's definitely got a lot more up its sleeve as well.
So in this video, we'll talk about build and features,
size, weight, and price,
quality and functionality.
We'll compare it a little bit to the G Master
and the Tamron.
And as always,
I'll show you photos and videos shot with this lens
so you can see for yourself how it performs
in a practical situation.
First things first,
I put together a short example video using only this lens.
So secure the cup, check that out,
and we'll come back and talk more afterwards.
The following video is shot entirely on the Sony FX3
and the power zoom 16 to 35 F4.
(lighthearted music)
(water streaming loudly)
(lighthearted music)
(waves crashing loudly)
(lighthearted music)
(stones rattles loudly)
(waves crashing loudly)
(lighthearted music)
(man walking loudly)
(waves crashing loudly)
(lighthearted music)
(stones rattles loudly)
(waves crashing loudly)
(lighthearted music)
(waves crashing loudly)
All right, I hope you enjoyed that.
We're gonna take a look at some photos in a bit as well.
But first, let's talk about build quality
and features on this lens.
(upbeat music)
The materials that they used
on this new 16 to 35 seemed to be similar
to all the newer Sony lenses.
Everything on the lens felt good and functioned smoothly.
This lens is weather-sealed,
so as someone who just moved out to the Pacific Northwest,
I felt pretty confident taking it out for a rainy shoot.
We've got an autofocus toggle switch,
a custom button that you can use
for pretty much whatever you'd like,
and then we've got one of the unique features of this lens,
the power zoom rocker.
This allows you to do smooth and consistent zooms
without having to turn the zoom ring
so you're less likely to bump or shake the camera.
If you've ever tried to do a dolly zoom effect manually
with a zoom ring,
you'll know how difficult that is.
Having a zoom rocker makes this way easier.
Inside the camera menus,
you can program the speed of the zoom
for both standby and recording.
So in standby, you can have it move quickly
to get it set up for the shot,
but then when you start recording,
have it move slower to get your push or pull.
If you have a camera like the FX3
with the zoom rocker on the body,
you can use this to zoom the lens as well.
And as if that's not enough ways to zoom already,
you can also zoom using a connected camera control app
or Bluetooth remote.
So if you're filming yourself
or if you're unable to reach the camera position,
you can still do some zooms.
If you like to use Sony's clear image zoom,
you can use this with any of the different zoom methods,
including the zoom ring itself,
effectively making this a 16 to 52 millimeter.
Part of the reason that you can do this
with this lens is because the zoom ring
is not directly physically connected
to the zoom mechanisms inside.
The same way that we know focus by wire
on so many mirrorless lenses,
this lens functions similarly for zooming.
So the zoom ring will actually turn endlessly,
and it just sends a message to tell the lens
which direction it's going and how fast.
This may be a little bit weird at first,
but it's not so bad to get used to.
And I think part of the reason that it works as well
as it does on this lens is because this is the first lens
to use Sony's XD Linear Motors for zoom,
as well as the focus.
These electromagnetic motors make
the operation super smooth, quiet, incredibly accurate,
and I'm pretty sure this is part
of how they got the size and weight down as well.
And all of the zooming is internal on this lens
so the barrel doesn't extend.
This is great because, obviously, it doesn't get any bigger.
But also, it's great for gimbals
because you're not shifting the balance as much.
Okay, I think I've talked about zooming enough.
This new technology is pretty neat,
and it definitely adds some functionality,
but it's not necessarily something
that would personally make or break a lens for me.
So back to the other functions of this lens.
We've got a dedicated aperture ring at the back of the lens.
It has the ability to lock in the A position
to give control to the camera.
Or you can set the aperture straight from the lens.
There's an iris lock switch that'll stop you
from being able to go between the two aperture ring modes,
but it doesn't actually stop you
from changing the aperture itself.
There's also a switch to de-click the aperture ring
if you wanna do more smooth aperture changes.
The manual focusing on this lens is linear
so you can do repeatable moves,
which is great for pulling focus in video mode.
And the focus and zoom rings are super smooth.
I feel like they could have been just a bit more dampened,
in my opinion,
maybe just a little bit more force-required to move them.
But I do like how smooth they are.
As I mentioned before, for me,
one of the most important features
of this lens is just how small and light it is.
Literally, the only reason that I held
onto the Tamron 17 to 28 is so that I had a smaller
and lighter option from my G Master.
So let's talk size, weight,
and price compared to the other options in this category.
As far as weight goes,
the new 16 to 35 F4 comes in at 353 grams,
making it the lightest of the bunch compared
to the Tamron at 420 grams,
the Zeiss at 518,
and the G Master coming in at 680 grams,
nearly double the weight of the new lens.
For size, again,
the power zoom lens is the smallest at 88 millimeters long,
the Tamron is 99,
the Zeiss is 98.5,
and the G Master is 122.
Though it should be noted
that the Tamron is actually the slimmest of the bunch
with its 67 millimeter filter thread.
As for price, the new 16 to 35 is $1,200 US
as compared to the $900 Tamron,
the Zeiss at 1,350,
and the G Master at $2,200.
So if budget is your main deciding factor,
you're probably eyeing up that $300 gap
between the Tamron and the Sony
and wondering what could make it worth it.
So let's talk about image quality
and my experience with the functionality of this lens.
Whenever I get a new lens,
the first thing that I look for
in image quality is the wow factor.
I try my best to kind of turn off
my analytical pixel-peeping brain,
and I just take a couple of photos
and see if they make me say wow.
And this new 16 to 35 F4 definitely gave me some wow vibes
right off the bat.
Even just looking at the screen on the back of the camera,
I could tell right away that this is a super sharp lens.
The images have nice color,
it's got good looking contrast,
and overall, I was really happy
with the images that it produced.
But just outta curiosity,
I did some tests next to the Tamron and the G Master
to see if there was a noticeable difference,
and I was a bit surprised with the results.
(upbeat music)
Warning, the following is pixel-peeping like crazy,
and all of the hairs are about to be split.
But we're all nerds here,
so it's okay.
At 16 millimeters, or 17 on the Tamron,
in the center,
the new F4 lens was not only the sharpest
of the three wide open,
but even when I stopped down the 2 F2.8 lenses to F4,
it still remained sharper.
Moving out to the corners was basically the same story.
The new Sony lens was the sharpest as far as I could see,
and the 2 F2.8 lenses were quite a bit softer
when wide open but still didn't even catch up at F4.
I then repeated the test
at the longest focal length for each lens.
And at the center,
the Tamron closed the gap a little bit at F4,
though I think the Sony lens was just,
just a little bit sharper still.
The G Master, on the other hand,
seemed to struggle a little bit at 35 millimeters,
especially at F2.8.
Once you stop it down to F4,
it was much better, though.
In the corners, however,
the Tamron got quite a bit softer
where the G Master held up pretty well.
Still, though, the new F4 stayed on top.
So overall, if you need eye-piercing sharpness
from corner to corner,
this new Sony is the winner.
Next, I grab some of my marvelous friends
to help me do some tests on color.
And honestly, I am hard pressed to find
any significant color difference
between the three lenses compared side by side
and zoomed in as far as I could stand it.
Of course, the new Sony is only an F4
so the depth of field doesn't quite get as shallow
for those out-of-focus backgrounds.
When you do get some shallow depth of field on this lens,
the bokeh is nothing to write home about.
I found that the out-of-focus areas
didn't look super smooth.
There was almost kind of a blocky quality to them.
But for practical uses of an ultra-wide zoom,
I'm not too worried
about getting super shallow depth of field personally.
As for focus breathing,
looking at the Tamron or the G Master,
breathing is pretty noticeable,
especially at the long end.
With this new Sony, however,
it is really well-controlled
and definitely the best performer of the bunch.
I didn't run into any significant issues
with chromatic aberration, flare,
or issues with high-contrast areas.
The close focus distance
on this lens is actually really interesting
because unlike the other options,
it actually gets closer when you zoom in.
So your minimum focusing distance is actually
at the long end of the lens.
I personally found this more useful
than having a short close focusing distance at the wide end.
Now something that is completely unsurprising
about this lens is that the autofocus is fantastic.
Those XD Linear Motors paired with Sony's autofocus system
in their bodies is yet to disappoint me.
For video, it was smooth and accurate.
And for photos, it was super fast
and barely ever missed.
So who is this lens for?
(upbeat music)
The decision-making process on whether or not
to purchase this lens is a super difficult one.
On one hand, it performs incredibly well.
It's super sharp.
It's the lightest and smallest option in the category.
It's got some fun zoom features,
the most up-to-date focus mechanism,
and basically just all of the newest bells and whistles
that you can get from Sony.
But on the other hand,
the F4 will deter a lot of people
because it makes it feel
like you're missing out on something,
either for depth of field
or for that extra stop of light that you get at F2.8.
And on top of that,
the Tamron is $300 US less expensive.
So here's where my brain is at right now.
If your number one goal is to get
a good quality wide zoom lens
for as little money as you can,
the Tamron is gonna do the trick for you,
and you'll most likely be happy with it.
However, when I shoot with these two lenses,
I enjoy using the Sony more than the Tamron.
So if I were choosing between the two
and I had the extra $300,
I would probably go Sony, here's why.
(upbeat music)
First off, at this wide of a focal length,
F4 is generally fine.
A lot of what I'll be shooting are landscapes
or maybe vlogging,
and at no point did I find myself missing having F2.8.
Also, on Sony full frame cameras,
the low-light performance is so great that losing
a stop of light didn't really get in the way for me.
Another big one for me is the focal range.
I know it might not seem like much,
but every time I shoot with the Tamron,
I always find myself hitting that 28 millimeter mark
and wishing that I had just a little more reach.
I can almost always get by with it,
but it feels much nicer to have the full 16 to 35 range.
Physically, I much prefer the way that the Sony feels,
the zoom and focus rings are nicer to use,
and it feels like a higher quality lens,
which just makes me wanna pick it up and shoot with it more.
And image quality wise,
in my opinion, the Sony wins as well.
Not by a huge margin necessarily,
but the Tamron never quite had the same wow factor.
And now I have the unfavorable task of trying to decide
whether to keep my Tamron that I already have
or sell it to get the Sony.
But as always, I wanna hear what you think.
Is this new 16 to 35 something that you're excited about?
Were you surprised by the performance?
And which one would you choose of the ones
that I showed in this video?
Leave a comment down below.
And on your way down there,
make sure to hit that like and subscribe button.
Hit the bell notification
so you don't miss out on future reviews and tutorials.
Thank you so much for watching,
and I'll see you next time.
Ugh, ugh, ugh, did my screens go to the screen saver
in the middle of that?
How long was it just saying hello behind me?
(upbeat music)