Is the Sony 16mm/F2.8 really that bad?

Started Nov 7, 2013 | Questions thread
Habs Fan27 Contributing Member • Posts: 734
Re: Is the terrible Sony 16mm/F2.8 really that great?

It has field curvature and light fall-off in the far corners (= soft) which is more obvious at wide apertures and gives poor test results shooting brick walls etc. But even the terrible reviews show its sharp centre. At optimal f6.3 it's a great, cheap, light, tiny, fast-focusing, flare-resistant, fun wide-angle, that adapts to ultra-wide 12mm!

-- hide signature --

Regards,
Alan
my Flickr

The fact that it has field curvature is a very important thing to note.  It does not mean you can not get good results.  Flat stuff in the corners will not look good at 2.8 unless you move yoru focus point there but then the centre will be soft.

In the real world where you probably have something closer to you in the lower corners, it probably won't show up or you can use it to your advantage.

The main problem I find with this lens is that while on a 5N the combo is very pocketable, 16mm is too wide for every day use.  I'm thinking about trying out the 20mm as this would be a more usable every day focal length and can still get 15mm using the wide angle adapter.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow