Best Sony Wide Angle Lens: Sony 16-35 f2.8 & f4 PZ/G/GM/ZA comparison

Sony 16-35mm F2.8 GM ($2200): SDP.io/16GM
Sony 16-35mm F4 ZA OSS ($1400): SDP.io/16ZA
Sony FE PZ 16-35mm f4 G ($1200): SDP.io/16PZ
Tony Northrup compares Sony's three 16-35mm zoom lenses, perfect for wide-angle landscape photography and general/travel photography. The Sony 16-35 f/2.8 GM is the standard wide-angle for professionals, but it's VERY expensive and it lacks some features like a declickable aperture ring. The oldest lens, the Zeiss 16-35 f/4, is... old.
The newest lens (brand new!) is the 16-34 f4 PZ, with power zoom. It's small, light, zooms internally, and it has a declickable aperture ring. How does it perform in our tests?
0:00 Introduction
2:01 Video Autofocus
2:33 Gimbal Test
3:42 Dolly Zoom Test
4:37 Handholding long exposures
5:37 Maximum magnification / minimum focusing distance
6:22 Bokeh
7:13 Sharpness
8:57 Low-light and noise
10:28 Declickable aperture ring
10:56 Summary

[@_eddiefrank]

Great review Tony! Thank you for taking the time to make this video!

[@SlotCarNewsOfficial]

The 16-35pz was the lens that got me to switch from Fujifilm and Canon to Sony. The zoom and quality and size of that lens is a massive help for my video and photo work for my newspaper (full time job shooting video and stills). Even though it's not seen by many as a "pro level" lens it totally is. This lens is such a perfect tool for nearly all my work (and my own channel videos) that I have no issues at all suggesting it for nearly any normal use-case. Certainly for most hobbyist shooters is MORE than adequate.

[@arfmf]

I have only to congratulate you Tony on this one you demonstrate real life differences that are extremely meaningful

[@pattypotratz]

Thank you for the thorough details of the 3 lenses. Very helpful to making a good decision on our projects.

[@gregscarcella519]

Great review of all three. It helped me decide. I’m probably going with the F2.8. Thanks Tony

[@phoenixvette]

Been watching Tony for years but this is the most goofy I've seen him. How Fun! Thanks for the info!

[@DirtMcLurch]

I own the Zeiss Batis 18mm 2.8. It's super lightweight and compact, well balanced on my A7RIII. No gripes with the results. As a bonus, the lens hood is removable so I can use a 10 stop ND for daytime long exposure landscape photography. Definitely recommend.

[@CypiXmusic]

I just wanna give you a big compliment for the most technically proficient comparison/review type of video I've seen to date. No bells and whistles, just very technically sound comparisons visually properly prepared. Kudos! Edit: Only slight heads up, at the lightness test it would have been good to also see the SELP 16 35 G (to compare corner darkening)

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@waleedibb]

Thank you Sir. Awesome review and very informative

[@JessDemant]

It was a really informative video, so please continue in the same track going forward in your videos!

[@MollyFitzBrown]

Wow, I can’t wait for the pz lens to release! Thanks for this comparison.

[@eddthirty4065]

Great review - very relevant to base it on true-to-life scenarios of budgets for each type of photog as non- commercial are usually budget constrained.

[@FilmJunkieOutdoors]

holy crap i love tony. This jsut fixed my issues and to see the options of exactly what i was looking at being compared is just a cherry on top. i’m serious i love you TONY 😂😂👏🏽

[@nickschulman986]

Great video tony.

[@petersvan7880]

Great video, thank you Tony! Probably will get the new F4 PZ.

[@muhammadluthfikholid9938]

Good reference 👍 thank you so much!!! I really help me

[@dbpodz9234]

Best comparison video on earth

[@paulconway1176]

Thank you for making me happier about a lens I already purchased :-D the Sony F4 PZ - for low light I purchased a Tamron 35-150mm

[@RoyzNL]

ohhh cant wait to watch this comparison

[@SteveKershaw]

Excellent as always It would be nice to see a sharpness comparison to the 14-24-35GM lenses at respective apertures, Also you didn’t elaborate the form factor, I found the GM was too heavy as a walk around lens, the centre of gravity has the camera tilting forward, makes it noticeable on longer walks, the PZ is lighter and smaller than most primes and would be a perfect walk about lens, The 1 stop difference between the GM and the PZ is huge when you need it, as you say it can’t be understated, personally I would go for the PZ and a 1.4 prime, the cost difference between the GM and PZ gets you half way towards the 24mmGM

[@NativeExplorer]

Amazing video. What would you recommend for underwater videos? The 2.8 is too expensive. So between the other two? And do you know if the new power lens will fit the SeaFrogs housing?

[@derrick9903]

thanks for the review and detailed testing and summary. Love your content keep it up. One thing I have to criticize is the pricing listed in this video... Right now in Europe (new) are ZA > 750, PZ - 1200, GM > 2500 if you buy second hand...the ZA ("like new") for 535,- and the cheapest used version of the PZ I found was (very used condition) for 800,- not to talk about the GM. So for me, the budgeted aspect was the deciding factor as to why I went for the older model. Especially as I rarely work as a videographer which in my opinion the PZ was primarily designed for.

[@metphmet]

I have the ZA since 2014 , It is very nice lens . It is a really sharp lens especially slightly stopped down ( 42Mpx) . I can only recommend it from the used market. I don’t see any reason to change it for the new G.but if I had to buy one today it would be the G for sure because of its performance at 35mm. which makes it a real versatile lens.

[@budowaambrozji]

same here, i still love this lens and been rocking it for years and selling my pictures on stock - I would also get GM lens if i had to change but for now , after using Zeiss for 7 years I stick to it

[@__Mr.White__]

16-35F28II is better

[@philipk4475]

@@__Mr.White__ Sure, but it's also larger, heavier, and considerably more expensive!

[@gillesmatheronpro]

That was a great one, so useful for those of us who still hesitate on investing. When creating 50% in photo and 50% in video, "choice" can be a painful concept !

[@driliagor]

2.8 is still not enough for a astro. So the correct combo is 16-35 PZ for general landscape since most of us use f8-11. And get a dedicated astro lens like 20 mm 1.8.

[@princeharbinger]

Well, you'll be shooting that 20mm stopped down anyway if you care about coma.

[@martinruiz398]

I agree, also the savings from not buying the GM will give you the money to buy the 20mm G lens.

[@rickymcc9072]

Yes me too. I like that idea. I already own the GM 16-35mm f2.8 as well as G/GM primes 14mm, 20mm, 24mm and 35mm. Thinking about buying, DIY testing then maybe selling my GM zoom. All my primes are keepers.

[@zigzagger7893]

Come on man...do you really think Tony doesn't know what works or not for astro photography... ???

[@goingforebirdie]

I shoot astro with a Zeiss Batis 18mm 2.8 😂😂

[@MyPortugueseCulture]

I love your videos. I feel like I’m in a photo learning g class

[@joashha]

I think that the ap ring on the new pz is also a good and a welcome bonus - something that brings back the old days shine (left aside the function button)

[@ryukiT3]

16-35 GM mk ii has to be coming soon.

[@anulearntech]

I love my Tamron 17-28 f2.8 pocket zoom. Light weight internal zoom. 67mm front filters. Great IQ, weather resistant.

[@patmcshane8976]

Tony a good balanced review for a wide audience of users. My only suggestion would have been to compare the sharpness at a smaller aperture such as F8, which for many lenses is the great equalizer. I own the Zeiss and while I have no doubt that the corners wont hold up as well as the other two, as you point out, it is a very good lens when purchased used and used at landscape apertures.

[@bardascardosas7052]

Thank you for the video. Didn’t see your comparison of the night/low light shot comparing the pz new lens only saw the GM and the Zeiss. Did I miss something?

[@rickymcc9072]

Hi Tony, thanks for the informative video. As a long term stills photographer who loves wide, but now seeking to develop cinematographer credentials I'm extremely interested in this and will probably buy. I'd ideally like to know how it compares to the APS-C PZ 10-20mm too since crop factor video is now becoming 'a thing' - e.g. with a7iv or FX30 bodies. Also creamy background blur (less good with APS-C) isn't really a big concern with wider optics. Can you test? My first Sony wide was the Sony Zeiss f4 16-35mm - good for travel but 'iffy in corners at f4. Tried a Tamron 17-28 f2.8 - amazingly at f2.8 17mm it was way better in corners than my Zeiss set at circa 17mm, f4 on architecture test shots. But then bought and tested a GM, which was better again. Like you I love my GM f2.8 zoom, so sold Zeiss and Tamron I had tested alongside it. I use the GM zoom for travel but wish it was less hefty (two lenses sold were better travel company). Apart from low light capability it seems the PZ is pick of the bunch and might yet be the best travel-friendly option. I'm lucky to also now own many fast Sony wide primes too, so could pack one of those alongside a new PZ for similar travel weight to the hefty GM zoom, maybe yielding both versatility and low-light or astro landscape capability. I'm lucky to own G/GMs 14mm f1.8, 20mm f1.8, 24mm f1.4, 35mm f1.4 as well as 35mm f1.8. I briefly tried a 28mm f2 for travel along with my first 16-35mm f4, but it was soft so got sold on. For specific use cases each prime is optimum, even 35mm f1.8 (ultra light, discrete street, gimbal). 35mm f1.4 - environmental portraiture. 20mm - my 'go to' for light, fast versatility and astro. 24mm - for astro and less extreme w/a. 14mm - for dramatic views and astro. If I could carry all my wide primes and have immediately available then I'd never need/want/use the hefty GM zoom. But for versatility the zoom wins so is first packed for travel and 'uncertainties'. Now I'm thinking ..... buy a PZ 16-35mm f4 and test against every other wide. Reflect on my real world use over 3-6 months, then maybe sell my much loved GM f2.8 zoom. All the primes are keepers anyway. I was unsure what to do as another reviewer kept his GM zoom after buying a PZ zoom, then bought a new GM zoom when his first got damaged. Do you really need two wide zooms? It seems hard to justify even for a 'glass nut' like me? Who really can justify both? I don't have a good track record selling on little used lenses, often suffering regret when I do as each lens can be good in it's own way. So nowadays I buy a new optic then only occasionally sell one if I never use in 12 months. Having shunned the original GM 24-70mm, for a lighter G24-105 f4, I recently bought the excellent mkii GM 24-70. It's an obvious first pick travel lens and sharp enough at all settings to be a delight. But I still have my original G 24-105mm, so do I sell it on or not? It's a dilemma and why I now wait at least 6 months before deciding as I have previously re-bought sold lenses after missing them. The mid-range G 24-105mm be better for mainstream video use and for a minimal 'one lens only walkabout' but alas it's also lso 'a master of none' and generally bettered by other options in nearly every use case. I'd never pick over the GM or faster prime unless I could only carry just one lens. So it's probably going to find a new owner in 2023. Jesting aside I could use a lens caddy, so I don't have to make hard choices for extended travel use where uncertainties lie ahead.

[@Thiran]

I need an image stabilization review on these lenses :d

[@travellingdoctorsaab]

Hey, thanks for the wonderful review. I am a travel Vlogger with run and go style vlogging. I need to have my face as well as a clear background in my frame while shooting. Considering I’m going to use this on Sony A74 with Gorillapod attached (Gimbal very less frequently), which of the three lenses would you suggest me, considering stabilisation is an important factor as well! Also, 4th option that I have is of Sigma 16-28 f2.8. Thanks already!

[@gregwarson3483]

Always thorough and complete; thanks Tony. I'm wondering if there is any reason to consider moving from the Tamron 17-28 f2.8 to the new Sony 16-35 power zoom lens? I don't do a lot of astrophotography (Tamron has been good so far); I think I would miss the f2.8 aperture but curious if a head-to-head compare between the two would surface anything that would push me toward the new Sony 16-35?

[@digitalclips]

All I can think of is 8mm.

[@MisterBigDave]

20 1.8 G on Riii and Nikkor on 780, light fast and really sharp. Nice gimbal you use !

[@bondgabebond4907]

Great review. I would think in low light situations like you demonstrated, it is time to pull out a 35mm 1.4 prime. Even the 2.8 zoom doesn't look too good.

[@seanmann9229]

Slow zooms and fast primes are definitely the way to go IMO

[@brianmckeever5280]

I was just imagining how often you had to clean your home to use it as a studio! The kitchen is immaculate!

[@80-80.]

Or just use a wide aperture lens and blur out the background.

[@rbonacic]

I have the PZ and I love it! I thought I would be restricted by the f4 and that has def not been the case, even in low light

[@michaeljmachado]

I just bought the new power zoom. So amped to try it with my a7riii

[@humansrants1694]

I use Sony 24mm 1.4 love the sharpness and focus speed.

[@TTmeowamine]

Do you have an update on the Galaxy S22 Ultra color issue? Thanks Tony!

[@jennifercall9014]

I would love to see some reviews on camera monitors like the ninja. And gimbals would be nice. I myself am in the Sony full frame system.

[@saldebeer3496]

Whenever I'm about to get a new lens, I will Drop by In the Northrup's channel to find out my best option. I fully trust their reviews

[@officialbrandoncoleman]

Can you do a wide-angle lens shootout

[@atholbayne9605]

Hi good review but how about compare to nikon P1000 or Nikon B600 as I find having the lens built in better for me since my stroke .

[@mandatovipcasasdepartament1720]

Thanks and please tell us wich one do you recommended for Real STATE VIDEO & Photo

[@PhotoTrekr]

I recently upgraded my 24-70mm GM and 70-200mm GM to the new versions. I expect a new 16-35mm GM next year. But, in the mean time, I'm thinking about selling my 16-35mm GM and buying the FE PZ 16-35mm to play around with until the new 16-35mm GM is released.

[@thilinaalagiyawanna3680]

Thank you

[@danielbogos263]

I wish I could see how GM performs at f4 as well when it comes to sharpness. Its a bit unfair despite the PZ having the f4 as lowest.

[@lylekrannichfeld9634]

Can't wait to see how this PZ lens stacks up against the (rumored to be upcoming) 16-35 gm ii!

[@michaelroach3553]

12:33 - Just picked up the Zeiss 16-35 used for $500😅real estate is generally F7.1 or up, so I'm not really worried about sharpness at f4

[@davidligon6088]

Very informative review. I tried three copies of the Zeiss 16-35 and returned them all. The center was plenty sharp, but the corners were very mushy, like it was designed for an APS-C sensor. I ended up getting the 16-35 GM. The GM corners are pretty good, but could use improvement (unlike the 14mm GM, which is amazingly sharp!). I would argue the new PZ lens may be better for Milky Way shots than the GM because the sharpness in the corners would likely produce better results. The noise produced by one stop of light would not be that degrading between ISO 3200 vs 6400 on my A7RIV, especially if images are stacked.

[@zacharypump5910]

Thoughts on whether the power zoom would be incredibly annoying if I’m a 100% stills photographer ? I’m so used to being able to see the zoom level on the lens barrel and hate having to eyeball the rear LCD for settings (even though you need it for iso, shutter etc for Sony)… Ironically having that manual aperture ring is what attracts me to this lens… but giving up a manual zoom ? Thoughts on how this felt / getting used to as a still shooter ? Thanks in advance !

[@adamh8140]

Lightweight and useful!

[@naeemalmalek3925]

Tony which lens is bast for wedding cinematography.......?

[@richbottarini86]

How about a comparison between the new 16-35 and Tamron 17-28

[@jokwonpope1561]

One is full frame one is crop

[@richbottarini86]

Actually, both are full frame, the 16-35 is a f4 and the 17-28 is a f2.8.

[@stephenpartridge686]

Would be interesting to see the Canon 16-35 F4L in this comparison on the MC11, I use one on my A7Riv and it works very well...

[@Jonathantuba]

I have the 16-35 GM2, but am still tempted by the new PZ lens for it lightness, compactness, apparent greater sharpness and the power zoom when using for video. I think this new 16-35 paired with my 70-200 GM2 would make great travel set up to cover virtually anything

[@rollymartha]

totally agree 👌

[@Zebsterr]

Excuse my ignorance, but is there 16-35 GM mk2? I can't find any info on that

[@illoquint]

@@Zebsterr Maybe he meant he has the 16-35 GM..."too" lol

[@peterthrun2768]

Thanks for having clean finger nails. I don't know how many times I've seen dirty fingernails on close up of hands in videos.

[@archascents5157]

Do an F4 and F 2.8 ultra wide mirrorless comparison between RF Z and Sony lenses.

[@Lofote]

G is also in the professional lineup. "Professional" means, that Sony gives worldwide PRO support for this lens (and any G, GM and ZA lens), meaning they have worldwide a few of those lenses ready for quick replacement if you need them as a professional photographer for a job when your own lens has failed. GM just means "special round bokeh" additional to the other things. It is not more or less professional per se when it says "GM" over "G". By the way I love how Chelsea looks possessed in the dolly zoom test :-D

[@MrKreweesti]

GM stands for 'Gold Master'. Equivalent to Canon's 'L' and Nikon's Gold or 'S' series.

[@Lofote]

@@MrKreweesti I know that, but that has nothing to do with what they are intending with it and whether G is also considred pro (=available in Sony PRO service) or not ;)

[@placesonthelist]

What about the Tamron 17 - 28 2.8?

[@otrocorreo7275]

Which one do you recommend for architecture and real estate photography? Thanks in advance

[@joshuakarp2586]

what I will want to see is a comparison between the PZ f4 and the UPCOMING 16-35 f2.8 GM II.

[@medicine3d]

What about OSS of Zeiss glass in video shooting? Does it helps? Is it combines with sensor stabilisation?

[@pub_lexx524]

Does the PZ lens reset the focal length when camera goes in power saving mode or when is turned off ?

[@lilei911]

Hi Tony, can you please review Sony E PZ 18-105 f/4 G OSS? Thanks

[@Wha2les]

Would the f4 pz vs f2.8 GM low light be noticeable in night city scape and landscape?

[@heissodexter]

I’m currently using Sony aR7iii with lens of Sony 24-70 GM and Sony FE 35mm F1.8. I’m mainly doing videography and still new in this field. Should I get this Sony 16-35mm f4 pz lens or Sony 55mm F1.8 zeiss lens. Hope to get more advice/guidance. Thank you.

[@KingAzion1232]

Hey! I'm debating between a 16-35 f2.8gm (used $1,370) vs 16-35 f4 (new $1,183). All of your info was useful, but, I'm using it on a zv-e1. It will be for a mix of vlogging, "low light" video in tokyo and new york, and short films. Would the second baseline ISO be enough to counter the f4 low light lacking of the PZ and make it as good as the GM looks in the video? Cheers

[@brucedowsing5982]

Tony; why didn't you test the new PZ lens against the GM lens in the low light, given its superiority over the Zeiss lens.

[@phillipjolly6287]

I was wondering exactly the same but I suppose he answered that in the conclusions for low get the GM, for video the powerzoom. I am more into stills so would choose the GM anyway

[@User-pq2yn]

Hitchcock Zoom effect at 4:01 is amazing

[@kingfisher111]

i wudve prefered tamron 17-28. no gimbal balance issues

[@gamebuster800]

So the F4 PZ for filming and daylight photography and the 24mm F1.4 (or 14mm / 20mm) prime for low light

[@meltysundae4540]

Hiii.. Thank you for sharing your thoughts, and I finally buy sony 16-35 pz.. Because I interested with the zoom option with djo rs3.. Can I know how to activate it from the gimbal dial? Because I search everywhere for the tutorial and I found nothing.. I just can control iso, speed diafragma and else except zoom control.. Thank you

[@Vet-x]

Went with the 14mm 1.8 gm absoulty stunning lens

[@MR-AK]

Is that Sony or some other brand?

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Yeah that lens is amazing.

[@MR-AK]

@@TonyAndChelsea that lens is too heavy for vlogging.

[@wl5609]

Doesn't 14m have too much distortion on faces?

[@bondgabebond4907]

@@wl5609 If you have a friend you want to irritate, take that 14mm and get as close as you can and fire away. It won't be as bad as a fisheye, but you will give that person a bigger nose. That's why I love super wide lens.

[@ivankiefer3886]

I get a vibe from Chelsea that she is not very excited to be doing that video. Like "are you done Tony, i would like to be going"

[@pawejurkiewicz3010]

I feel like in the summary it should be mentioned that because of its sharpness and half the weight f4 is also perfect for landscape photographers who would rather take some prime lens for a nightscapes. It may not be marketed as professional but I don't understand why not if the sharpness is better than gm. For me 2.8 is a minimum when it comes to low light and I think most professionals would agree that getting a brighter prime lens will be essential here.

[@mahoningvalleysports]

Any news on the new Nikon 800 Z6.3 ?

[@abhishekbanerjee3214]

I want to see what is in your camera bag video for Sony ecosystem 😅 which Sony lenses you paid money to buy. Thanks in advance Tony

[@anthonyc1883]

I'll second that. Definitely time for Tony to make a video covering that. Thank you!

[@basgestel]

hi, with which lens do you make the dolly zoom? and how can you do an internal zoom and operate this on your gimbal? so without touching the zoom lens? like to hear!

[@pizzomedia7261]

The 16-35 GM is also 5 years old. It’s hard to justify buying one at this point given that’s it’s almost due for an update, like the 24-70 GM2. The 2.8 is nice, but it’s big and heavy. Hopefully sony cuts size and weight in the version 2 like the 24-70

[@Macros1971]

I love my 16-35 GM! I mostly do photography with friends at karaoke, so in bars, with low light, and often moving subjects. I have a portable photo printer that I use to print photos on the spot for people who want a hard copy, and this lens creates some pretty awesome low light images in this setting. Really, my favorite lens next to my 55mm F1.8 Zeiss lens.

[@harryseabrook]

What kind of portable photo printer do you think does the best job?

[@Macros1971]

@@harryseabrook I use the Canon Selphy CP1300. No ink cartridges, the prints are waterproof and the prints are 4x6, which is a good standard size. It can be used wirelessly or via USB, so it's pretty versatile. Also, you can insert a memory card into the printer and print from that, if you prefer 😃

[@theeventguru]

@@Macros1971 hi which method do you use? Which is fastest?

[@davemorrison3705]

Is that A7R IV an A1? I wish I could do that with my A7RIII

[@ajschot]

Ehh the new pz here is €400 more expensive then the Zeiss new. I have the Tamron 17-28 however i like that one. I want something for travel and changing lenses less. When i was on Canon i had the 17-40 f4 L not great but on f8 more then good but the zoom range was why i loved it! I miss that, i still have it but on my a7Riii it is really bad looking it just can not hold up on so many pixels. So i am thinking to replace the canon for this pz lens. Perfect for travel small, light but still great sharpness. On the a9 the canon still holds up OK on f8 but i think it is time to say good bye and get the pz. I was doubting a bit between the gm because with the new mark II i see second hand prices here already with a €200 more then the f4 pz new. But your video did me convinced that the f4 is better for me because for other things i have the Tamron 17-28 2.8, man if that one was doing to 35 i would be so happy. When travelling and visit a city or do a long hike i find my self just switching too much most of the time just to be on 17 and then on 35, i know you can zoom with your feet but when hiking with kids you don’t always have time and i like to use full potential and not crop that much in the end. Too bad that it is so much more expensive then the ZA new.

[@tommyliu1210]

I want get 16-35gm but it doesn’t have OSS. Do I need OSS if no how to set my A7mk1 with no ibis for landscape and video please give me a recommendation? I will get a A7iv after I get the lens.

[@youuuuuuuuuuutube]

Why was the sharpness comparison done at 35mm? It would have been nice to also see it at 16mm and 24mm.

[@80mike]

Tony, I'm trying to decide on a wide angle lens for my sony A7riv. I am looking at the 27-70 F2.8 and also F4 vs the smaller zoom range from 16-35, basically the lenses you're reviewing here. What would you recommend? What do you have or use the most of these two sizes?

[@forrestgalt2832]

You can auto zoom with Sony wireless remote with the new 16-35 f4 PZ.

[@idol031808]

I find I use 24 f1.4 more often for Astro and street. Zoom with my feet

[@gordonyz4]

Is the PZ's zoom controllable via control buttons on gimbals? if it is, fantastic

[@TonyAndChelsea]

Yes but at least on my DJI it's not smooth. Still it's useful for adjustments when not filming.

[@vanjasimunko708]

My setup of Sony a1 - points at Riv 😁

[@ibrahimtahir7799]

I got my first gears. Sony a7iv with sigma 24-70 2.8 Thinking to get Sigma 14-24 2.8 How u compare sigma lens . I am just hobbiest. Cheers

[@pacificmediaco]

Where's the video for the item mentioned around 10:40???

[@wakeywarrior]

I wanted the PZ but we are ripped off here in the U.K. and it’s £1299. Managed to get the Zeiss OSS for £450 second hand which is much more palatable. I got it for run and gun video and had to get a Sony lens as they work so much better with Sony IBIS cameras.

[@bradl2636]

Are any of these zooms parfocal?

[@larsandreas2045]

The 16-35 GM is known to be weaker at 35mm than 16mm. Would like to have seen a sharpness comparison at 16mm f4 to the PZ.

[@RemiManWithVan]

How to control the power zoom from the gimbal? Rs3 tried but not working. I can change other settings but not power zoom ? Any help please

[@ctr_fashion]

10:28 how to that circle?!