16-35mm f/2.8 GM vs wide angle prime(s)

[jiulin]

I've been reading on the 16-35 GM. The versatility is advantageous, but it's obviously not the solution to every problem:

• Weight can be higher compared to a single wide angle prime
• Panorama can give better results (resolution, flexibility [even over 180 degrees])
• 2.8 aperture may not be necessary (but the Zony supposedly is worse?), and when large aperture is desire not enough
• Currently still 1.8k+ EUR grey market and over 2.5k on Amazon

Suppose that the usage would be between daytime shots at f/8 and nighttime shots handheld, landscape + old cities / villages, how would you personally choose?

Please share your personal opinions. I'm not basing my purchase decision on the poll; rather, I'm interested in learning how others approach the few use scenarios I mentioned above.

Thanks

--

Personal blog: https://www.jlteng.com/

 

[moficera]

With the Batis 18 and f4/16-35 in my bag Captain Hindsight states that the GM would have been the better choice. But the 1.4/24 GM which is about to be my next acquisition has it's own designation the 16-35 GM could not cover.

 

[PWPhotography]

I own FE 16-35 GM which is very sharp and versatile in a very useful FL range. It's the default lens on A7r III in trips now. Sharpness wide, it is basically as sharp as any prime lenses in the range.

But I also own a few prime lenses in the FL range - Loxia 21, Loxia 35 and Sigma 35/1.4 Art for dedicated purposes. Loxia for sunstar (which is a weakness in most Sony lenses) and pleasing color rendering and Sigma 35 Art for portrait and shallow DOF street photos. I also own CV 12mm/F5.6 for super UWA and sunstar.

 

[richj20]

Suppose that the usage would be between daytime shots at f/8 and nighttime shots handheld, landscape + old cities / villages, how would you personally choose?

Please share your personal opinions. I'm not basing my purchase decision on the poll; rather, I'm interested in learning how others approach the few use scenarios I mentioned above.

I checked "others."

For the scenarios you mention, FE 4/12-24 G and FE 2,8/35 do the job.

I tried FE 4/16-35 and was always wishing for wider, when close in for landscapes and architecture.





The 35mm has worked well for me at night.



- Richard

--
http://www.rsjphoto.net

 

[Robjwilli]

I'm in the process of switching a few primes for the 16-35 f2.8 so that is the option I voted for. After returning from a recent trip to India I have realised I am definitely a 'zoom guy' and although expensive, the 16-35 gives me the focal length range I want combined with a reasonable speed for indoor use as well.

One of the things I realized while traveling is that if I'm bothering to take my camera out with me I might as well have the lens on it I want. Carrying a single focal length lens to save a few hundred grams/get a bit more light isn't worth it to me.

It is expensive and a bit heavier but I'm getting 16mm, 18mm, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm and 35mm F2.8s all in one handy package.

I did consider the upcoming 17-28 from Tamron but prefer the wider FL range of the Sony as I can easier pair with a 70-200 for events.

-
www.robjwilli.com

 

[tonyz1]

Had the loxia 21 for 2+ years, then sold it for 16-35mm gm, then sold the GM and bought a used loxia 21. The main issue is the size and weight of the GM for me. I can’t bring it along unless I knew I had a specific need for it. The loxia 21mm I can toss into my camera bag for when a uwa opportunity pops up.

The only issue is manual focusing so you would have to be comfortable with that. The lens is very sharp and has great sunstars. If I need to go wider than 21mm, I would buy either the 12-24mm f4 or 16-35mm f4 on an as needed basis and sell afterwards.

I've been reading on the 16-35 GM. The versatility is advantageous, but it's obviously not the solution to every problem:

• Weight can be higher compared to a single wide angle prime
• Panorama can give better results (resolution, flexibility [even over 180 degrees])
• 2.8 aperture may not be necessary (but the Zony supposedly is worse?), and when large aperture is desire not enough
• Currently still 1.8k+ EUR grey market and over 2.5k on Amazon

Suppose that the usage would be between daytime shots at f/8 and nighttime shots handheld, landscape + old cities / villages, how would you personally choose?

Please share your personal opinions. I'm not basing my purchase decision on the poll; rather, I'm interested in learning how others approach the few use scenarios I mentioned above.

Thanks

 

[jiulin]

It seems that the GM zoom remains the overwhelming favorite. Perhaps when the Tamron 17-28 finally comes out this choice will be more interesting.

 

[LenRivers]

I've been reading on the 16-35 GM. The versatility is advantageous, but it's obviously not the solution to every problem:

• Weight can be higher compared to a single wide angle prime
• Panorama can give better results (resolution, flexibility [even over 180 degrees])
• 2.8 aperture may not be necessary (but the Zony supposedly is worse?), and when large aperture is desire not enough
• Currently still 1.8k+ EUR grey market and over 2.5k on Amazon

Suppose that the usage would be between daytime shots at f/8 and nighttime shots handheld, landscape + old cities / villages, how would you personally choose?

To this is the important part. My personal preference in this case. I want fast glass. Zooms will always be more versatile to a prime when it comes to speed and last minute decision to get a shot. Landscapes are not moving so again personal preference and how much you want to change lenses or be confined to see the World in only one way. Internal cropping I like to do. With a zoom I can hit all the focal lengths in a range in seconds

If you cant use flash to help has to be made up some place.

The only other thing I consider is when F 2.8 or 1.4 is not needed. The best photography is sometihng that is locked down. I mean use a tripod or monopod (tripod is better) remove the slightest movement variable so you know the image is sharp.

the rest is the composition and exposure.

Then how much stuff do you need to travel with from camera to lens to lighting to filters to supports etc. How do you like to work out of your camera bag or backpack etc.

If I was strictly doing landscape I would want a zoom lens or multiple lenses. Everything does not look good at 16 mm or 12 mm.

If you are working a vast area you really should have a 70-200 or 70-300 just a telephoto for compression and not get the viewer lost in too much scene.

It does not have to be the typical lens for the typical use. Most times you just do not know till you are there.

*

I forgot, my point about F stop. 95% if the time my landscapes are stopped down I never ever shoot wide open. I would want a slower shutter speed before I have to open. IF the scene has motion like running water that is a whole different thing.

Please share your personal opinions. I'm not basing my purchase decision on the poll; rather, I'm interested in learning how others approach the few use scenarios I mentioned above.

Thanks