Sony 16-35 f/2.8 GM II Lens Review: Worth Upgrading?

Рет қаралды 46,254

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 94

@harryhuang1999 Жыл бұрын

If they made the 16-35 GM 2 have internal zoom I would switch immediately. I have the 16-35 F4 PZ which has the aperture ring, internal zoom, and much smaller and lighter. Yes, it is F4 but this lens is a landscape lens. I always trust the dust and sealing of internal zooms much better

@SimplestUsername Жыл бұрын

The potential for improved dust sealing is a really good observation.

@lightexplorer Жыл бұрын

The weight savings is worth switching through. Anytime you can have the same or better optical performance that’s lighter, that’s a win. In an ideal world, Sony keeps pushing to reduce weight so we can carry more.

@sashinger5230 Жыл бұрын

Way too much distortion on the wide end for landscape photography imho.

@Eikenhorst 3 ай бұрын

Well, it only gives you a weight advantage if you don't ever shoot nightscapes or astro and you need another lens just for this. For me personally I would say 1% of my shots would benefit from this extra stop. The fact that this one is 2.5 times as expensive as the 16-28 f/2.8 Sigma is more my problem. For what I do, the Sigma is plenty sharp enough, but at 35mm and the 61MP of the A7R, you can bridge the gap to a 50-400mm and have a 2 lens setup that is actually lighter than my current 3 lens DSLR APS-C setup (which doesn't really allow for Astro well and only goes to 300mm).

@jswalk4 9 ай бұрын

The old 16-35 2.8 GM is the most unreliable lens I have ever owned. Sony has even extended their warranty repair if you are lucky enough to own a lens with the right serial number. I'm an architectural photographer and I love this lens so much I own two. I travel with two in my kit because I know the iris or other internal mechanism is going to eventually fail and need another $791 trip to Precision Camera. Being able to shoot with this lens professionally over the last 3 years has been super expensive and a pain in the but(t). That said I do think I will buy the new version used and bring it into rotation and see how long she last. I absolutely love having the physical aperture ring on the 135 GM, I'm glad to see it made it on this next generation. Thanks guys for another great review and fingers crossed this next version will be more reliable.

@leapinto Жыл бұрын

Sick intro and helpful review, thanks guys. Just sold all my DSLR gear and a small part of my film gear to finally delve into mirrorless. Am now in the process of getting of getting glass for my A7 IV (just bought it last week). First lens I got was the 20mm f/1.8 and am looking to slowly add glass overtime. Stuff is so expensive, these reviews really help out. Also Day 1 of asking the Northrup power couple to bring back T&C live, a separate channel with a low stress/janky setup would still fill the void in my heart. Cheers.

@denizahmet2299 Жыл бұрын

The only 'disappointing' part of this lens is that the frame centre barely improved in resolution - but that is the engineering price to pay for the consistency of resolution now achieved across the whole frame and each focal length, better CA and flare control. Still waiting for someone to compare it with the 12-24GM at equivalent focal range.

@aldente2011 Жыл бұрын

However, if the frame centre is supposed to be better in resolution than the 1st gen, it would be way above the money we can buy this lens at. Unless the frame centre is a downgrade, it is acceptable in my view.

@mauriciolee7349 7 ай бұрын

Your video is UNIQUE in the sense that it DEMONSTRATES how big a subject LOOKS (magnification rate) when this lens get closest to it and still focuses. You have the 2 photos comparing this features of the 2 versions of this lens. Out of 6 review videos of this lense, your is the ONLY ONE does this. Thank you.

@markharwood Жыл бұрын

It's great to see a husband and wife working in a business so happily together that is also a passion for both of you. My wife and I were able to work together in our business, but it's not always possible so don't take it for granted!

@tylerdoestech Жыл бұрын

Thanks for the great comparison of these two lenses. If I was a Sony shooter, I would probably keep the old one in my kit, too. Your videos are consistently fun to watch!

@kilik92 Жыл бұрын

Interesting to see that the new lens is slightly brighter than the old one. It’s a more true 2.8. Have you ever done this comparison on the big 600 f4s? Someone said that the canon 600 f4 is slightly brighter than the sony 600 f4, could you test it and watch the histogram ?

@harryhuang1999 Жыл бұрын

I have the Sony 600F4. It is sharper, faster focus, and lighter than the Canon one. People using 600F4 would weigh these qualities much much more than the one tenth or quarter of a T stop difference. People use 600F4 for the separation.

@Toglander Жыл бұрын

I would love to see a sharpness comparison to the Sony 16-35 PZ f/4.

@tomi6261 Жыл бұрын

Pre-ordered mine at 10:02am!!! Can't wait for it to come in. Great video T & C!!!

@petercharles6652 Жыл бұрын

Many of us would say that the 12-24mm f2.8 is the wide zoom choice in the holy trinity. After all, you already have 24-35mm in the 24-70mm, which is significant overlap...

@EH-pm1ke Жыл бұрын

Brilliant to use pixelshift on your lens reviews to ensure you’re getting the limits of the glass rather than the body. Most other reviewers are using 40mp.

@TonyAndChelsea Жыл бұрын

Thank you!

@tcteam9661 Жыл бұрын

Thank you for this video. Started this Hobbie 6 months ago and your videos are a great source of info. Really appreciate both of you and all your knowledge.

@Fessoid Жыл бұрын

They give away for free Photography Course a few months ago. Many hours video

@hikertrashfilms Жыл бұрын

A1 & R4/5 owners should upgrade, other users wouldn’t see enough improvements to make it worth the upgrade as opposed to investing that money in a faster or higher resolving body. 16-35GM was soft on A1 & A7RIVa, 20G is wicked sharp and it’s sharper than 16-35GMII. For video, 16-35GMII is the best glass till 2029

@Oakley5100 Жыл бұрын

Depends on your use case. I do landscapes so upgrading for me makes zero sense since I’m always stopped down anyway.

@brunkosaurusrex Жыл бұрын

so with the a1, would you rather a 16-35, 16-35 ii, or a prime?

@hikertrashfilms Жыл бұрын

@@brunkosaurusrex Primes...no question about it... 2.8 zooms are 87 octane gas. primes are 93 octane. For video the zoom is good but for Reference Grade Photography...Primes destroy the 16-35GMII

@jamesbell8730 Жыл бұрын

Stuck with the old 16-35, some of the old lens might have a problem, my serial number is in that group, it’s never had the problem in fact Sony will still fix it if the problem pops up. I doubt KEH would even take it, and I wouldn’t want to pass a possible problem to someone else. So I’ll hang on to it, I also have the 12-24GM , besides the old 16-35 was considered a really good lens in its day, and it still is.

@sgpork Жыл бұрын

Hoopefully the third version will have internal focus and oss. The same for 24-70. I will buy straightaway.

@Im_A_Banana Жыл бұрын

at that wide I don't think you need oss, it will make the lens heavier and more expensive, and the camera does a good job already inside for that wide of a lens... just my opinion

@HK-NYC Жыл бұрын

Would this 16-35 GM II be a good lens for Fireworks HDR videos? Thanks

@happypandastudio337 Жыл бұрын

I love you but KEH is a scam.... I made test selling my 100 mm STF GM new condition .... they buy it for 300 euros ... I try to buy same lens same condition.. they sell for 1000 euros !!! what justify 700 euros ???

@smlhtr Жыл бұрын

Yeah, you’ll have better luck selling locally and only buying on these websites

@chrissan6015 6 ай бұрын

It’s a business not a scam

@OceanicNASA 5 ай бұрын

Yup. Reminds me of the dealership. They buy your car for less and then mark it up higher to sell.

@happy1wandering 3 ай бұрын

Capitalism justifies

@astrayproductions Жыл бұрын

1:17 what lenses was this scene used for? The GM?

@vipinvince 15 күн бұрын

Yeah now I’m curious too 😅

@e.miller.photos Жыл бұрын

Great review! Would love to see a comparison between the new lens and the F4 PZ!

@vonwolfersdorff Жыл бұрын

Why isn't the trinity 12-24, 24-70, 70-200? The only down-side of the 12-24 is that it cannot take front filters.

@TonyAndChelsea Жыл бұрын

It's just tradition. But when we tested the 12-24, I didn't want it. I found I never used the 12-16 range, and it was quite a bit heavier. Also you don't want to have to switch lenses going from, say, 20mm to 35mm, because so much of event shooting is zooming within the 16-35 range.

@vonwolfersdorff Жыл бұрын

Thanks @@TonyAndChelsea ! I was wondering because I have the 16-35 PZ G, the 24-70 GM 1 and the 70-200 GM 1 and sometimes for video in tight spaces and dark environments I am using the 14mm GM. Greets from Berlin!

@RokDAWG1 Жыл бұрын

I may have to grab a lot of my new gear & use your codes. I love that it helps you two out & definitely helps us out as well

@PixeloProGear 4 ай бұрын

Were you filming on the 16-35mm GM ii for the “why you would want one” section of the video? Bokeh looked great so just wanted to check. If so I’m sold!

@Zap09060 Жыл бұрын

It would be interesting to see comparison of 16-35 F2.8 GM II with Sigma 14-24 F2.8 and Nikon Z 14-24 F2.8 lens … which one would be sharpest overall corner to corner 😁

@LEARNINGCHORDS 11 ай бұрын

the thumbnail photo on this video is incredible..

@paulydltvideos Жыл бұрын

What camera are we watching this video from? This footage looks amazing!

@dellmingo14 Жыл бұрын

Also interested

@TonyAndChelsea Жыл бұрын

Sony a7S III + 24 f/1.4 and 35 f/1.4 GM.

@inspirephotography14 Жыл бұрын

Is it good to carry both lens 1635mm gm f2.8 and tamaron 28200mm f2.8 ?

@RichardsWorld Жыл бұрын

I have too many lenses. I'll go with one of these and keep my Tamron 35-150mm. Might keep my Sony 24mm f1.4, and might keep my Sony 90mm macro lens. The rest can go.

@keglerx Жыл бұрын

Hi, how is this compared to the recent released viltrox 16mm?

@loustravels5858 Жыл бұрын

I would be interested in your comparing the Sony 16-35 f/2.8 GM II Lens to the Sigma 24mm f1.4, Sony 24mm f1.4 GM and Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 G2. What I am really interested in hearing is can I use the Tamron for everything in this video i.e. vlogging and night photography. I am thinking to purchase the Sigma, but not sure I need to. Moreover, I only have one camera so I would basically use one lens at a time or event. Shooting inn the city or nature for a few short hours with a group such as a 2 hour excursion complicates lens changing. You will say the Tamron is best for most applications because of its zoom capabilities, etc.

@pascualcolendres9477 Жыл бұрын

How does this compare (sharpness) with the Sigma 16-28 f/2.8? or with the Sony 16-35 F4 PZ?

@movieman2009 Жыл бұрын

Cost and sightly wider focal length aside, this Sony 16-35 GM ii vs Sony 16-35 mm f4 PZ vs Sigma 14-24 mm DG DN 2.8 ?

@Zap09060 Жыл бұрын

What aperture does the sun stars start appearing on this new 16-35 GM II LENS ??

@sherryhill1476 Жыл бұрын

Will Sony 16-35 f2.8 GM II work with Sony 7CR or Sony 7R V better? Is 7CR too light to hold? Thanks.

@TonyAndChelsea Жыл бұрын

The 7CR would be a little unbalanced but it's fine.

@ginoandamanda Жыл бұрын

Hi. What lens are you using for the talking headshot down the sidewalk? Thanks

@dellmingo14 Жыл бұрын

Also interested

@travissmarion Жыл бұрын

We could be asleep... But instead we're watching our favorite family couple review the latest Sony lens. 👍🏻 Keep up the good work. Looking to complete my holy trinity with this lens in the next few months.

@juanmm9297 Жыл бұрын

Right now the price differential between mark 1 and 2 is only $100, might as well buy mark 2

@lucas_92 Жыл бұрын

Any recommendations for an equivalent lens for APSC?

@brafman1 Жыл бұрын

Tamron 11-20 is quite sharp.

@User-pq2yn Жыл бұрын

What about image stabilization?

@forrestgalt2832 Жыл бұрын

Great review! Compare it to the 16-35 Sony PZ f4

@JmackJah Жыл бұрын

What lens did you use to shoot this review? The bokeh is AWESOME. I want that lens!!! Oh… and the gimble also. Thx 😮

@xhenriquefps Жыл бұрын

Question. Shouldn’t shooting at the sun be dangerous for the sensor? Specially because a lens focus light on the sensor

@dfj555 Жыл бұрын

Sony 16-35 f/2.8 GM II VS Canon RF 15-35 f2.8 VS Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art

@hanslind6842 Жыл бұрын

why is the second lens in the holy trinoty 24-70?

@TonyAndChelsea Жыл бұрын

That's just how it's always been

@hanslind6842 Жыл бұрын

what photos do u take whit does lenses?@@TonyAndChelsea

@paulofthepeak Жыл бұрын

Great review, punchy and informative 👍 I'd love to upgrade if I had the money but at the moment it just isn't enough of an upgrade to warrant it, one day though 😊

@Wash-g6u Жыл бұрын

Terrific review, very useful.

@TonyAndChelsea Жыл бұрын

Glad it was helpful!

@matfen7978 Жыл бұрын

Amazing people, helped me with so many things

@dwightlooi Жыл бұрын

Why 16-35/2.8??? As a companion to the 24-70/2.8, you are better off with the 12-24/2.8. If you simply want a walkabout lens with a convenient focal range, you'll go with the 20-70/4.

@glennn.3464 Жыл бұрын

So now we’re at the point that you need to pixel peep at 800% (!) to see any real difference?! Never going to see that at 100 or probably 200%. And since the zoom extension is so small why didn’t Sony just make it internal with better weather sealing? I guess that will be in the next update as one of the small reasons to entice people to lay down some cash again.

@rickymcc8624 Жыл бұрын

Ha ha, I thought this might be coming so recently sold my mk i GM, whilst I could still get a better price. Had to fall back on using excellent primes (I prefer primes really, but they take up too much bag space when travelling) Looks like a useful addition to Sony's range and I'm pretty sure it's a buy from me. Now when is the 85 GM ii coming to market??