Practical Benefits of Sony 20mm f/1.8 G vs. 16-35mm f/2.8 GM

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Platographer Contributing Member • Posts: 652
Practical Benefits of Sony 20mm f/1.8 G vs. 16-35mm f/2.8 GM

I have both the Sony 20mm f/1.8 G and the 16-35mm f/2.8 GM. For my Lake Tahoe trip, I didn't even bring my 20mm. I have actually never used it for serious photos. My testing indicates it has improved corner sharpness relative to the 16-35mm at 19mm (where the field of view roughly matches the 20mm). But, unless I can benefit from the larger aperture (I virtually never shoot wide open), I just don't foresee ever feeling compelled to change from my 16-35mm to my 20mm. In fact, as I mentioned in another thread, my go-to lens is shaping up to be the Tamron 28-200mm and I am finding that I rarely desire an UWA lens at all. I'm curious to hear the thoughts of others who have the 20mm and 16-35mm. Do you ever find yourself using the 20mm instead of the 16-35mm when you don't need the larger aperture? If so, why and under what circumstances?

ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
i8z
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow