Sony 20mm F1.8 first experiences (compared to 16-35 GM)

Started 8 months ago | User reviews thread
OP arneh Regular Member • Posts: 156
Re: Sony 20mm F1.8 first experiences (compared to 16-35 GM)

After the flawed first comparison of the 20mm G and 16-35 GM, I have tried to reproduce the bad results to see what may be the cause. I've made numerous comparisons, trying to recreate the same circumstances, but never gotten anything near as bad performance for the 16-35 as in the first test, neither with or without filter.

Here is what I got when I tried to reproduce the first test as best I could, with similar back lighting. This is the worst difference I could get in this test:

16-35 GM to the left, showing a bit more CA and worse contrast. But clearly no way near as bad difference as first test

This was without filter on either lens. Here is the same part comparing with and without filter. Here you can see that in these conditions the filter does make a difference.

16-35 with filter to the left, without to the right. More CA with the filter

Here is another part of the image, where the filter makes no difference:

16-35 with filter to the left, without to the right

So here are the new comparisons to the 20mm, this time without filter on the 16-35. All of them are 200% crops from the a7R3.

Both wide open in center. 20mm appears a little sharper and a little more contrast

Both at F2.8 in center. Here the 20mm is clearly better

Both stopped down to F5.6, where it is closer again, but the 20mm still a little better

Both wide open at the edge. The 20mm a bit sharper

Both at F2.8 at edge. 20mm is clearly sharper here

Both stopped down to F5.6 at edge. Much closer, but 20mm still a little sharper

In conclusion the big difference in contrast and colors of the first test seem to be have been caused by some unfortunate, rare circumstances, which I have been unable to reproduce since. The filter seems to have been part of the cause, but even with the filter I have not been able to get anywhere near as bad results since.

The 20mm still seems to be a little sharper and in backlit situations it seems to behave a bit better. But I'm happy to say that the 16-35 is still capable of making great images, and most often the difference can only be seen when pixel peeping, or in specific circumstances. Particularly if shooting stopped down.

So sorry for the confusion my first flawed test created!

 arneh's gear list:arneh's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R III Samyang 8mm F2.8 UMC Fisheye Sony FE 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 G OSS Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow