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

Started 10 months ago | User reviews thread
PWPhotography Forum Pro • Posts: 10,807
Re: Sony 20mm F1.8 first experiences (compared to 16-35 GM)

joger wrote:

mick232 wrote:

arneh wrote:

Plenty of sharpness for both lenses wide open in the center. But contrast and colors are clearly superior on the 20mm

The difference (low contrast) is so striking that I find it hard to believe. I would not expect (and have never seen) such a bad performance even from a low-end lens, let alone the 16-35 GM.

I once owned a defective Sigma 70-210/2.8 which had some oily residue on an internal element, and the results were similar. Very low contrast in certain lighting conditions, normal contrast in others.

Are you sure your copy is ok? Lens hood attached?

I have tested two copies of the GM 16..35 vs my G 12..24 and in the overlapping zoom range up towards 20 mm focal length the G 12..24 is easily on par with the GM 16..35 at the same aperture and stopped down to f/7.1 it easily outperformed them.

LOL, we all know your confirmation-bias tests In all creditable reviews, 16-35 GM is sharper than 12-24 G that is particularly weak at 24mm side.

TDP 16-35 GM vs 12-24 G @16mm

TDP 16-35 GM vs 12-24 G @24mm

Here is an owner who I believe is creditable.

He said,

I've been debating the need for keeping both the 16-35 GM and the 24-70 GM. I've pretty well established with testing that the 12-24 G is a keeper and will be my ultra-wide from 12mm - 16mm, the 16-35 GM tests slightly better than the 12-24 G from 16mm- 24mm (and has f/2.8 for Astro work), but what about the 24-35 focal length range versus the 24-70 GM? There is much debate given the MTF's and testing done by Roger and Fred about the variability of 35mm focal length on the 16-35 GM lens. So, I decided to do some infinity test to see how my copy of the 16-35 GM compares to the 24-70 GM at 24mm and 35mm. I also wanted to see how good my copy of the 24-70 GM is at 50mm so I tested it against my 50mm f/1.4 ZA lens. I found the results very interesting.

I am surprised about the perceived quality of the GM 16..35 - for me the stopped down performance at the wide en counts - I can see the reason for the OP to favor the G 20 f/1.8 - especially due to that aperture ring on top - which is additionally to the wide open performance the icing on the cream.

Again, here is my above full size samples of 16-35 GM @f2.8 wide open. Go check if you have not seen them. It's certainly sharper than your 12-24 G. Among 12/14-24mm zoom, Sony new FE 12-24/2.8 GM and Sigma FE 14-24/2.8 Art clearly beat 12-24 G in entire FL range, as a matter of fact, they are sharper at f2.8 than 12-24 G at f4.0, just as 16-35 GM @f2.8 beats 12-24 G @f4.0 as shown below.

16-35 GM at f2.8 vs 12-24 G at f4.0 @16mm

 PWPhotography's gear list:PWPhotography's gear list
Canon EOS-1D Mark III Sony a7R IV Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS Macro HSM +16 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow