The Sony Lens We've Been WAITING For!!

This video is brought to you by SQUARESPACE! Visit www.squarespace... to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain.
Click Here for More Info!
16-55mm f/2.8 G Lens (Oct 11, 2019)
Amazon geni.us/UuV1Q4W | BH bhpho.to/30GpYwx
Sony a6600 Body Only (Nov 2019):
Amazon geni.us/5UZ5CAN | BH bhpho.to/30HT3I7
Sony a6100 Entry Level APS-C:
Amazon geni.us/WhcOi | BH bhpho.to/30Gq7jz
My FAVORITE Camera Gear Kit!: geni.us/2sn6B
Follow Us on IG! @jasonvmedia & @hellovivienne
Music from Epidemic Sound (Free 30-Day Trial!) share.epidemics...

[@JasonVong]

The Sony 16-55mm f/2.8 Lens for APS-C is finally coming! The question is... Were you waiting for this lens?! If so... what the heck took so long? 🤷 16-55mm f/2.8 G Lens (Oct 11, 2019) Amazon geni.us/UuV1Q4W | BH bhpho.to/30GpYwx Sony a6600 Body Only (Nov 2019): Amazon geni.us/5UZ5CAN | BH bhpho.to/30HT3I7 Sony a6100 Entry Level APS-C: Amazon geni.us/WhcOi | BH bhpho.to/30Gq7jz

[@kirankiranmishra]

Should I get this lens for my new a7 iii Cause it’s light Weight for my gimbal And it’s f2.8 ??????

[@trym2121]

I waited but didn't enlist for that price. I wonder why the price is so high. I hope it is tariff. If we assume there's 20% extra then the real price is around $1166. Then wait for usual sony discount, maybe I can snag it at around 900

[@user-lj6is5kn8o]

A6600=A6300=A6500=Rolling shutter

[@damaster692]

yea same sitution. Waiting for 4k 60 or bust.

[@Photomeike]

16-55mm for $1400.. hmmm. Sony isn’t keeping APSC alive.. Sigma is.

[@JasonVong]

I am hoping Sigma is gonna continue making APSC lenses. Their trio of 1.4 primes are excellent!

[@Ad3vodE]

What lens would you recommend instead of 16-55mm sony?

[@realgrapedrop]

I am not sure how Sigma is keeping the Sony APS-C alive since they only have 12 APS-C e-mount lens, 19 if you count the e-mount full frame. Where Sony has also 19 APS-C e-mount and if you count the full frame e-mount you can double that number. That said, I think I would agree Sony adds a lot of little features most will not use that jack the price up. Sigma is for sure a good alternative to Sony. Tamron has a APS-C 17-28mm F/2.8 for $879, that gives you an extra $520 for a good prime. ;-) But it is nice that the Sony has such a wide focal range with the constant F/2.8 for a pretty good all purpose travel lens. That seems like a fair value.

[@romanbardon6419]

you can buy superb 18-35 + 50-100 f1,8 for this price :D and get true 2,8 on APS-C

[@stantheman3674]

@@realgrapedrop lets put it this way... if the sigma 1.4 trio didn't exist, theres no reason anybody should pick Sony apsc over Fuji apsc....

[@chuiwyjustin]

The tariffs effectively make it more expensive for US companies to import certain goods (in this case, electronics) from China. That increased cost is eventually passed down to the US consumer since companies will not let their baselines / profits be impacted.

[@willj476]

The annoying part is it affects the prices in the rest of the world as well

[@oneheadlight8000]

@@willj476 The more annoying part is that China effectively rips off everything we design and attempt to make with a Chinese Manufacturer. If the tariffs are a temporary but necessary evil to work towards keeping our designs more confidential then I think everyone wins in the end.

[@noisackda2564]

Just bought it 👌 Love it so far. Performs like a prime with a very useful zoom range. Amazed by its sharpness actually. Right up there with my sigma 16mm f1.4.

[@realgrapedrop]

I guess what brings the value is the wider range at a constant F2.8. I think this would make a great all purpose travel lens. For a travel camera and the person who is just an avid photographer I think ASP-C is great. Packing small is always better over lugging bags of equipment.

[@nightryder21]

Finally, someone with some common sense.

[@tanman99]

@@nightryder21 And a lot of cash to burn.

[@kareemwalid]

i've been Waiting for the lens but not the price

kareem walid And no OSS for such a price

[@kareemwalid]

@ Sigma who is keeping the aps-c alive

[@caldera878]

Yes and it's a shame on behalf of Sony applying this salt to the burn for APS-C users.

[@Beezzzzy_]

A Sony a7iii + Tamron 28-75 costs the same as an a6600 + 16-55 G lens. Plus the Full frame ecosystem is better IMO. 2 card slots, battery grip. So much more options on the full frame side

[@greenricky82]

Hi Jason. Love your videos. I wasn't that in love with my Zeiss F4 and didn't use it at all. I found myself using my 35mm 1.8 lens because of the aperture. Literally couldn't sleep because of it. So I went back to the store today and luckily was able to exchange my Zeiss for this G lens (with additional money spent of course). It is a big canon, but I'm in love with it already!! Keep up the good work man. Greets from the Netherlands

[@nightcoder5k]

I'm happy with my Sigma 16mm f/1.4, Sigma 30mm f/1.4, and SEL50F18.

[@Princeton_James]

Those are hard to beat.

[@mrfotos]

No OSS, too expensive. I will keep the 16-70 Zeiss

[@CarthagoMike]

I agree, the 16-70 Zeiss is an amazing lens! Although the recently released Tamron 17-70mm is a worthy challenger to it, it still holds its own against this overpriced Sony 16-55mm.

[@catfish457]

Think will just stick to my 1650 kit lens after seeing the price.🤣 Will just use prime lenses for low light capabilities.

[@8bitofit359]

The kit lens is not even that bad. I saw some amazing pictures taken with it....well, time to accept the challenge and try to shoot some amazing ones as well with it. I used the sigma way too long😂

[@azvisuals]

The compactness of the kit lens is unmatched! It's def an underrated lens and worth keeping. Esp compared to the $$$ of this one.

[@Garbid]

@@azvisuals tried today to shoot in lowlight, school disco (new year) of my son. No chances with f4-5,6 in low light with a6000. Luckely had a manual speedlight with trigger and diffusor. But yes, I would rather go with 3 prime lenses of sigma (16, 30, 56mm) they are 1.4 and also sharp.

[@ArissaHa]

I was SO NERVOUS about you throwing that lens around. It’s legit giving me anxiety just thinking about it.

[@cweb1988]

I was REALLY hoping it would tow the 900-1100 dollar line. 1400 is REALLY pricey.

[@JasonVong]

Well between you and me, if you wait long enough, you can snag it at that price albeit slightly used.

[@josephcoatar]

For a cheap hold-over, get the Sony 16-50mm f2.8 A-mount, and LA-EA2 adapter, for about $350 eBay, great quality!

[@jeffsiemens4485]

Well a lot of this has to do with tariffs so don't blame Sony.

[@caldera878]

Sony missed the ball here with this long overdue, underwhelming and overpriced lens. No wonder APS-C users are leaving for FF.

[@youuuuuuuuuuutube]

Do you live outside the USA? If yes, then I have good news for you.

[@movieman2009]

Fuji X did it first, 16-55 mm 2.8 years ago...

[@stevenwaldstein2249]

Canon did it with the EF-S 17-55/2.8 10 years ago?

[@movieman2009]

@@stevenwaldstein2249 did Canon have a mirrorless body 10 years ago... right ....

[@tnbtech5436]

You guys are missing the point. Small size and weight - APSC plus G quality optics & weathersealed. If you dont' care about portability/compactness then go FF. But for kids, family, & travel this is the price you have to pay for compactness AND quality!. Look at fujifilm's 16-55 / 2.8. After three years, it's still $1200 - and NOT stabilized! Sony is merely matching the market. If fuji can sell expensive APSC lenses...why not Sony? I think many of your expectations are out of whack with reality.

[@NMEdiary]

The G lens isn‘t stabilized as well.

[@NMEdiary]

+ fuji has a lot of cashback sales (were already 3 this year) where they sell this one for 1000$. Thats one f2 prime more if you match it with the price of the sony g.

[@tnbtech5436]

Ultimate Luck I never said it was. You need to read what I write.

[@tnbtech5436]

Ultimate Luck Again, the point is Sony’s lens is NEW. After 2-3 years it may be discounted as well. You can’t compare a new lens to one that’s been in the market for years. You guys need to have some sense of perspective. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. The price will come down, but if you want it now, that’s the list price now. It’s basic product management. And Sony is masterful at that.

[@leeger1204]

Guess you haven’t heard about the Fujinon XF16-55mm f2.8 which has been available for more than 4yrs now.

[@ruechel]

does it have the same autofocus capabilities? how much is it?

[@leeger1204]

Nick Ruechel The fujinon is for fujifilm’s x series aps c cameras. So it wont be compatible with Sony. But Im pretty sure the fujinon is cheaper, i think its around $1200.

[@ruechel]

Lee Asid why would you even mention it then? we are talking about Sony here! what does an incompatible lens bring to the table or add to the discussion??? Smh

[@leeger1204]

Nick Ruechel because Jason said there hasn’t been an aps-c lens like the Sony’s. He was definitely not talking just about the Sony but rather the entire APS-C market. Go try and listen to him again. Smh also.

[@saminekunis8680]

For me since i primarily am a musik producer, the production of a making of and possible the video of the first single is kind of expected of most indie labels. And then i have to film a whole band i like to get some different flavors, that goes for Cameras and kenses too, thats why i have the Sony A 6600, the A 7 C, the Lumix S 5 and yes the Canon R 5 bc the natural colors you get with this camera are just mindblowing and sets it apart from the more steril A 7 S III. Of course you could argue while blending the fottage with the recorded video i could color grade the A 7 S III to look like the Canon, but i honestly don’t have the time for unnecessary color grading then i am pushing already nost days a 16 hour work day, and thats why i try to cut as much as unnecessary work from my daily schedule. And yes the A 6600 paired with the 16/55 G master lens is simply killer, i truly love the combo of both of them

[@hasbeenbowler]

For e-mount no, but the 16-50mm f2.8 SSM for A-mount was the a77 kit lens and it was outstanding!!!

[@MarlonKingShow]

Nice video dude. This lens would have been perfect, but no OSS and a price tag over £1000, might as well save for full frame. I don't think Sony was thinking about its core audience. As a crop sensor camera user, lenses over £500 are a no no. Don't get me wrong, so cool to see this, hope it works well for video. But this will be a hit in 5 years time probably, for now, its a wasted opportunity.

[@JetBen555]

I will stick to my 10-18 and 18-105, glorious combo for A6300/6400 shooter!

[@TheDetouristGuide]

Same setup. It's great!

[@charlespangilinan6351]

The main reason I went with Sony in the first place was to get the lightest package a "DSLR-quality" camera could achieve. Now with my obsolete α5100 and my 18-105mm f4, I'm super happy. But seeing the α6600 and the 16-55mm being announced made me go back to my first love: low-light versatility. Since I went to search in-depth for Sony's camera system, I've heard the praises for the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, so I wanted that lens at first. But knowing that it cannot cover the wide end on APS-C (which is the only system I could afford as a broke college student), I hesitated on it and went instead with the Sony 18-105mm f4 (thanks to my Dad). But now that I'm earning on photography, I'm absolutely getting the 16-55mm f2.8 and the α5100, and no one may stop me.

[@JasonVong]

Thanks for sharing your story! 18-105mm is still a heavy hitter! You can still consider it and maybe throw in a few primes instead of going for the 16-55 G Lens unless you just a one and done lens.

[@charlespangilinan6351]

@@JasonVong I like being a one and done guy lol. Yes, I like having a prime or two in my bag for that super clean and super sharp low-light output, but I like versatility more than anything. So after having the 16-55mm f2.8 in the future, I want to buy the Sigma 30mm f1.4. That's next in line. Btw, people always tell me to go for primes after my 18-105mm. But hey, this was a second option to the then-fabled 24-70mm equiv lens. Oh, and the 18-105mm is a perfect lens for events work. Boi, I could talk all day about this lens. I just like to have that 16-55mm f2.8 now lol

[@charlespangilinan6351]

@@JasonVong and the Majestic Jason Vong actually replied and "hearted" my comment! I can die happily now!

[@trym2121]

Or you can just get sigma 16mm and call it a day. You got 24mm and all around f4 zoom lens.

[@charlespangilinan6351]

@@trym2121 I don't shoot wide that often lol. But I really need and want that versatility of a bright zoom. And yes, I like the Sigma 16mm f1.4 as well. I want a collection of those, in fact lol. #YouCanNeverHaveTooMuchLenses

[@BRCPres1]

Finally upgraded my a6000 to the a6600. So happy 🤪. Now I need this new 16-55G. Will likely sell my 18-105 f4 and my 16-70 f4. Thanks for the great review. Peace ✌️

[@fjhphoto]

You're back! 😁

[@JasonVong]

I didn't realize people noticed! I blame World of Warcraft Classic!

[@SUDEEPSFILMSbySudeepGowda]

Hi Jason!! nice video... very useful one!!! happy weekend!!! one new thing I noted.. APSC lens are doing a great gob with a73 !!! I am loving it

[@JasonVong]

That's the part where I'm thankful for Sony cameras. Even when you transition to FF, your APSC lenses are not useless. They are still very usable! Albeit the MP drop... just dont crop!

[@SUDEEPSFILMSbySudeepGowda]

@@JasonVong you are right!!! but I love the pics!! I have GM lenses.. but sometimes these cheap lenses are doing better ;)

[@mariuszuk79]

One thing is certain. If you were carrying cash to the shop to buy this lens you would definitely be two handed 🤣🤣🤣 Great review. Seems like ideal small travel lens with pro results 😩😒

[@ToneFuentes]

It's too much money for an APS-C lens. I want to upgrade to Full-Frame soon. So I'll pick up the Tamron 17-28 and use it on my a6500 along with the Sigma 56mm.

[@TVe200]

Tamron is cheaper but it ends at 28 at the long end. That's not versatile at all.

[@ToneFuentes]

@@TVe200 I know, but I'm not ritch. The ideal purchase would be the 16-35 G. But... $$$$

[@SidneyDiongzon]

Lighting and colors look dope in this one! :)

[@JasonVong]

I need me some Sidney Diongzon Lighting Setup!!

[@GenesisJLopez]

What PP and settings are you using brother? I love the colors.

[@waltervanlille2263]

I was really excited about this lens, and then I saw the price.

[@docfmf8404]

There's the Fuji 16-55mm f2.8, been out for years

[@jochenkraus7016]

Same applies for Sony A-mount. I think it's 16-50/2.8

[@Thunderbird1337]

Yea, but it's 170g heavier and afaik the image quality is not on this level. The Sony 16-55G is on prime lens level with the smallest weight and size which is truely amazing.

[@Thunderbird1337]

@1Energine1 Jup. I have the brilliant Sigma trio, too. The 16-55G is in many areas on the same level. It's valid to say it's (almost) on prime lens level.

[@pawelsaracen]

For me the price and that it can’t be used with Ronin SC is a blocker. I own already sigma 16 mm and Sony 35 mm 1.4 and Sony 18-105 f4. I could sell 35mm and 18-105 add some $ and buy 16-55 f2.8 but but also I could just buy sigma 56 mm 1.4 and have more light, more bokeah etc. I know that I will end up with 4 lenses to change each time. What do you think? P.s. and I am waiting for a6600 to upgrade from a6000 :)

[@shanespafford8283]

Paweł Żukiewicz I always carried two cameras with each having my favorite lens on them. So that way always ready. Prime on one telephoto on the other. I used Nikon apps-c cameras then. I often had 17-55 on one and 70-200 on the other.

[@3treesphotography62]

I’m just glad Sony finally added 4K 60. Oh wait.

[@mariuszuk79]

Was waiting for this lens for eternity but the price has killed my joy 😆

[@abymathew295]

I wish sigma make a 18-55 f1.8E mount lens for Sony Apsc camera systems...

[@rofi3930]

Well i wish, but f2.8 is enough bcs if bigger than 2.8 i think it will be expensive

[@buzzj89]

That would be a dream come true, but even if 2.8 it would be worth it

[@aenarra]

A silly question... what are thore little red rings attached to every camera i see on youtube? Like those on the a6400 on 2:21

[@reddawn87]

They're Anchor Links from Peak Design, look them up! I use them as well, makes for really convenient strap swapping.

[@Bit85]

Just picked this lens up! Very happy with it, and I was able to order it for just under $1000 out of Canada!

[@rjacob06]

This lens is really good but I am more of a prime lens kind of guy. Also, I am now thinking about switching to full-frame. I even ordered my first full-frame lens, the Sony FE 85mm F1.8.

[@JasonVong]

Nice! Welcome to Full Frame!

[@rjacob06]

@@JasonVong Slow down lol. I haven't ordered a full-frame body yet. I'll start with full-frame glass first.

[@JasonVong]

@@rjacob06 I know you. You will get it.

[@rjacob06]

@@JasonVong I have been shopping around for full-frame bodies. Do you think the A7RII is worth buying? The camera is within my budget and I like the high MP count.

[@Gionimo]

Rae Jacob good choice

[@youreal6]

What do you mean at 00:11? There’s been many standard zoom f2.8 apsc lenses out for a long time. Canon, Tamron, Sigma, Fuji, Nikon.

[@martinweber3859]

Why comparing it to the 24-70/2.8. The equivalent would be the 24-70/4 instead.

[@tylrwnzl]

Came here to say the same thing.

[@shanespafford8283]

Sounds like it will be a great lens. No ibis doesn’t bother me. If you shoot stills you can hand hold with faster shutter and in low light I use a tripod. Of course I started in the business when I had film in my camera. So no ibis no auto focus. I have the a6400 and if I am doing a video I use a tripod or monopod. With all the equipment we have at our disposal these days I love it. Would have loved to have had this kind of equipment back when I started. We live in exciting times and so much equipment we can choose from. So while everyone is debating over this I am out taking pictures. I agree price is a factor. Even while running my business I didn’t buy a ton of lenses or cameras. I used Nikon D200 and D300. Those were aps-c and I did weddings families babies and senior pictures with them and what lenses I did have I bought the best glass I could for them.

[@ryanvalorflamevisuals9690]

A6600 all the way!

[@richardpcrowe]

I have an A6400 and an A6500. I was hoping for a really top-line upgrade for the A6500 but, the A6600 isn't it. I decided to get the A7iii and a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lens instead of the A6600 with the 16-55mm f/2.8... I carry my A6500 and a 12mm Rokinon in tandem with the A7iii + Tamron if I need a wider view. I have pre-ordered the 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 for use on my A6400 when I need a longer reach. I can also carry a combination of A6400 and A6500 with a couple of primes and the 70-350mm lens for a very lightweight but, comprehensive kit.

[@ericbjerkesr.5797]

I am very excited about this lens. Pretty just waiting to see how the detailed reviews on it turn out. I travel a lot and have been taking my a6500, leaving my FF at home. I hope it turns out to be pretty sharp in the corners compared to what I have been using, my trusty Tamron 17-55 2.8. Hopefully, it should be a massive upgrade image quality wise. This would be my first e or fe lens, so I am excited to finally use the AF.

[@ArifKhan.]

Generally speaking, a 24-105 F4 on a FF (any brand) should be a better buy no? A Canon RP with the 24-105 RF F4 can be had for pretty cheap...much cheaper than a A6600 + this lens. (Disclaimer: I own an A6600...so not Canon fanboying here. lol)

[@Thunderbird1337]

Comparing this combo with a 24-70GM or tamron 28-74 is nice, but I hear fullframe users saying all the time that the Zeiss 24-70 f/4 would be the right comparison to the 16-55G f/2.8 because it's comparable in terms of DOF AND fastness (due to the better ISO performance of FF) and then there is no real weight and price advantage of the APS-C solution anymore. Although I doubt that it's on the same image quality level as the excellent 16-55G.

[@LegacyGuitars]

There is a Sony 18-105mm constant F4, a very nice lens for video and gimbals.

[@richardpcrowe]

I am quite happy with my 28-75mm Tamron on my A6600. Since I shoot mostly people - the 42mm equivalent short side is wide enough while the 112.5mm long end is absolutely great! Since I can also use the Tamron on my A7iii body, I get an extra bang for my buck...

[@Goodman-4525]

I just got the ol' Sigma 17-50 f2.8 (it's cheap and practically no one makes a new one of the same focal length) for my new-to-me D300S

[@rsmith02]

I adapt that to my a6500 and it works well.

[@AdrianLardPhoto]

Great review. Love the range and the 2.8 aperture, but that price is too much.

[@dlovisuals]

Welcome back Jason! Great informative video, so awesome to see APS-C alive and well. Do you think Sony will make something like a 10-22 f2.8 for APS-C in the future?

[@JasonVong]

That would be nice!!

[@trym2121]

Only if this sells well. This is also indication of how the market behaves with a higher priced on lens for the apsc system

[@CHRISTRINH4490]

I'd totally pick up this lens if it had image stabilization, but since I'm still shooting with an a6000, I need the OSS from the 16-70 f/4. But! I might pick this up along with the a7iii or a6600 for my girlfriend. Haven't decided yet.

[@JasonVong]

If it makes the lens heavier, then I'm ok they left OSS out. IBIS has been doing a good job replacing the need to get OSS lenses but IBIS has to become a default thing imo. Hopefully in the near future that feature doesn't have a $500 mark up

[@CHRISTRINH4490]

I think it will down the road. I find it difficult to believe that they will release future cameras without IBIS.

[@gabithemagyar]

I'm the same. I would have bought the lens if it had OSS as well (I shoot a6000 and a6300).

[@gabithemagyar]

@@JasonVong I agree that IBIS should be standard, like it is on Olympus cameras. I don't, however, understand SONY's reasoning in not including OSS on the 16-55 when 2 of the last 3 APS-C cameras they released don't include IBIS !! It really limits the usefulness of the lens for the bulk of existing A6xxxx owners (those not owning an a6500). Sends mixed messages. Would have been more consistent to release all the new cameras with IBIS or to have released both of the new lenses with OSS.

[@itsgerardchin]

It is super expensive, but unless a third party comes out with a similar lens, I don't think I have a choice. I currently have a a6400 and I don't see myself switching to full frame anytime soon

[@Azzurro650]

Price is to high for a lens which is APS-C only. BUT: Nice review - Thanks a lot!

[@reimonandisuwa]

i'll go to full frame lens whenever i can. I do this since I was still using Nikon APSC. The glass quality don't lie, and it's a good investment if you ever think to move up to FF camera body. and now being FF user, there's a point that you can't look back. especially in sharpness and low ISO performance.

[@colinsnowphoto]

I just got one for use on my a6500 and promptly returned it. The vignette at 16mm is huge - complete with black corners in RAW. The jpegs have black corners too. Also, there is no Lightroom lens profile yet. So to correct for it you have to crop. I am very disappointed.

[@flyinb45]

Would you say that this lens negates the usefulness of having the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 in your kit?

[@billx4266]

I have a a6600 and a A7RIV, i have this lens, and im in the return window. Should i bring the 16-55 back and get the hold on..... 24 GM? An answer is very appreciated Jason, thanks!

[@richardpcrowe]

I opted for the A7iii and Tamron 28-75mm lens instead of the A6600 and 16-55mm OSS lens. However, the 70-350mm f/4.5-6.3 lens is tweaking my interest, I think it would be a nice combination with my A6400 to shoot in tandem with the A7iii and Tamron lens... I wish it had an f/5.6 at least aperture at the longest focal length but, I can live with f/6.3 at that weight and reach. A thousand bucks isn't too bad if the lens is as good as Sony is touting...

[@ChrisParayno]

Obviously Jason has never drank the Fuji Koolaid Juice when you said APSC is dead🤣

[@hiwng]

a6600+ 16-55 G vs a7III + tamron 28-75mm? fullframe more than better :))

[@BarefootMediaTV]

upgraded to the a7iii from the a6500 because the lack of 2.8 lenses. I might have stayed with that setup if this came out sooner. Although I would love to see some talking head interviews with the 70-350 and how the shallow depth of field looks at 200mm, might be a good b-camera interview lens!

[@NinhNguyen2]

this 16-55 F2.8 during the day, and the Sigma 16, 30, 56 F1.4's at night....basically same focal ranges and basically have a daytime setup and nighttime setup.

[@its_xabes6376]

I might pick up the a6600 because I do want a lighter load from the a7iii when I’m traveling or I might just get the a6400 instead. The lens I’ll pick it up for sure but the price is 🥴

[@bobcrocker1521]

I have the a6500, will not upgrade until Sony improves the view finder resolution. Yes, I have been waiting for a lens like the 16-55mm. Would like it better with OSS, even better if it went out to 70mm, and surely if it was $400 cheaper. But I will probably get it - when it goes on sale. haha

[@DerKrazyKrautGaming]

Why not just get a FF zoom lens equivalent? Price point and weight aside? Or are those the only defining factors?

[@PeterPing]

Coming from ex A6000 user, just buy A7III and you won't regret it.

[@mrflibble244]

Lack of OSS really kills this lens for me. They are directly targeting this lens only to a6500 and a6600 users, leaving a6000, a6100, a6300, and a6400 still without a decent option. I'll be sticking with sigma 16 and 30, and the sony 18-135 (with OSS).

[@shanespafford8283]

Michael Adelsheim depends on how you shoot. Photos fast shutter hand hold low light use tripod. Worked this way for years as a working photographer.

[@caldera878]

There was photography *way* before any form of optical or sensor stabilization.

[@mrflibble244]

@@caldera878- true, and I grew up shooting 35mm film, so I get it. But, as an analogy, why would I, today, buy a car without airbags for the same price as a car with airbags?

[@CreativeTechLab]

First "smooth balls" bokeh reference on the Tamron vs Gmaster video, and now this debacle at 4:09 It's getting out of hand! 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I'm dying. (had to edit, I finished watching and it got worse 😂)

[@jimmeyer4530]

I'll probably bite the bullet and get the a6600 and the 16-35 2.8. Definitely expensive, but this combo will be all I need for quite a while. I love the light weight of APS-C, and the image quality is great. I need to upgrade my a6000 and Sony Zeiss 16-70 4.0, so this is pretty easy for me. I can stop carrying my 35mm 1.8 for indoor work, since the new zoom will be fast enough. For making panoramas, I will continue using my 55mm 1.8, and I can get by with just two lenses for landscape work. I don't know if I will ever go full frame.

[@amitkrupal1234]

@7:17 Why compare an APSC lens 16-55 f/2.8 which is giving full frame equivalent of 24-82.5 f/4.2 lens with an 24-70 f/2.8. Facts: A6600+16-55 f/2.8 G weighs 997 g A7III+24-70 f4 weighs 1,076 g (just 79g more than above) A7iii+28-75 f/2.8 weighs 1,200 g (+203g) A7iii+24-105 f4 weighs 1,313 gms (+316)

[@whfowle]

Just one stop from the F4 mid range zoom doesn't make hardly any difference with modern sensors. What is lacking for the APS-C alphas are fast primes. Where are the F1.4's, 1.8's and F1.2's that Fuji has for their X-T line?

[@joaocoelhas6886]

Hey Jason. Since I change my equipment to Sony I became a fan of your videos. I own a a6000 with kit lenses only and I'm a photographer, so I'm wondering... Should invest and some lenses or it's better if I save the money and switch to full frame? What do you think?

[@videoart1496]

1400$ for a lens without even OSS ? No Sony ! No Way.

[@JonathanBarrow]

I shoot on an a6000. I think will get the a6600 because I want the ibis (even though I know it isn't the greatest), the flip screen, and the battery. Then wait to find the 16-55 2.8 grey market like I have with all my apse lenses beside my kit lenses

[@goodlifecookin]

Super thorough coverage vid as always !!

[@elknights2675]

#APCisDead

[@TheDeadTexan]

I'd love to have some of what Sony's smoking when they landed on these prices. Why drop all this money for APS-C when you could buy an a7iii with Tamron zooms for about the same?

[@trym2121]

When the user have a bad back and every gram is precious. Old person system

[@caldera878]

Old folks here usually have a smartphone comfortably and readily on hand so I don't see the existence of APS-C.

[@tggentil]

What about the Sony A73 with the 24-105 F4? You get the same amount of bokeh, it’s stabilized, you get an extra reach and it’s not much heavier (300g/10 oz)

[@sydbailey1320]

If this lens was priced under 1k then it'd be a great option. Their competitor fuji has the excellent 16-55 2.8 selling for alot less and even their 18-55 2.8-4 is amazing for the price of 200 when buying the bundle. I guess sony just wants us to move over to full frame since you can buy an a7iii + tamron 28-75 2.8 for around the same as the a6600 and the 2.8 zoom

[@odljorel]

Use my tamron 17-28 f2.8 on both my a7iii and a6400. Cheaper and more money for primes IMO

[@kevinmorgan7085]

The a6000 + 24-105 F4 combo is my front drag of choice... awww yiss, wrist cramps....

[@SynysterNick]

You should use the lens on the A7RIV. I know it’s very silly, but why not?! S35 mode and 24-82,5 f4! Not bad at all

[@royzargo8642]

It's not compatible with FF cameras.

[@cj64films]

So what you’re saying is I should get the Tamaron 17-28 🧐

[@DanLadiezMan]

No stabilization on the 16-55 lens with that price tag? Hard pass..

[@andrewfreeman88]

This is the all in one Travel lens...think about it you don't really need to bring anything else at F2.8 it's great for day and night..I would rather have this than the Sigma Trio easy to carry.

[@blackjohnny0]

Nope. I will never get this 2.8 zoom lenses for aps-c. Pretty much no bokeh, so why not 4.0? Cheaper and lighter. But then... why not just compact camera? For me APS-C has sense mostly with primes - 16/1.4, 30/1.4, 56/1.4. Or maybe zoomes like 18-35/1.8.

[@richystar2001]

I should never have bought a Sony... Lenses are crazy expensive.

[@boycie18]

Only for full frame. Apsc cameras are affordable...

[@AngeloDau]

@@boycie18 but the lenses are priced too much

[@jeveetsoibam]

See the price for that APSC lens..... With that I'd better buy a a7iii+tamron24-70

[@MJAdams-js7np]

I need Monday live back in my life. Please?

[@JasonVong]

Me too!

[@DJNibz]

Great review, looking for a versatile lens like this for travel! Do you think this lens is worth it when paired with a Sony a6100 for solely photography?

[@sergiogabrielfilho8966]

Jason, i have an a6300, and I'm strugling about what camera should I upgrade. Most of the reviews talk a lot about vídeo, but my interest is just photos. I tought about the a7iii, but i like the lighter option of the aps-c. Should I get the a6400 or the a6600? I worried about lenses like this, whitout stabilization. I know that for videos this is a big deal, but, what about photos?

[@LexTNeville]

If you haven't got the $$$ for good APS-C glass, how are you expecting to get any better from the FF glass? Many people printing large enough to notice the difference, or just pixel peeping?

[@CarthagoMike]

Although amazing, I am glad I didn't go for it in the end. Now I can invest in the recently released Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 instead.

[@MccRus]

great video man! always love your content, engaging and insightful! thanks

[@aaronstaana]

HEY, love your content. can you do a review on Tamron 18-200mm f3.5 on a Sony a6600/6400? how does an old apsc lens stack up in 2019?

[@EPeltzer]

I have not been waiting for any lens that costs $1400. If it had OSS, a bit longer zoom range like 16-70, and were less gigantic, then it might be worth considering, because then it means that maybe you don't have to buy a set of primes or something. Think I would rather have a nice compact OSS zoom for a fraction of this, a longer zoom at f4, and a prime all for the same $1400 or less. The whole lens situation with Sony a6 cameras (holes in the lineup, outrageous prices on the better glass) makes me want to switch to Fuji.

[@BRCPres1]

Recently bought the a6600 as an upgrade from my a6000. I also purchased the 16-55 G lens. Loving both, but I do see an increase in grain in low light shots. Good light takes care of that condition. Will it replace my a7riii with my 24-70 GM? No, I will likely use the aps-c when traveling and street photography.

[@Murphyyangster]

How about a Sony A7iii + 16-55 2.8? Instead of the 24-70mm 2.8 Gmaster?

[@ZombieTechie]

I'm rather new to cameras. I currently have the a 6300, sigma 16mm, and the g lens 18 to 105 which is usually my go to lens for video since it doesn't extend and makes it perfect for gimbal work and has ibis. No ibis and telescoping makes me not like it as much as well as the price of this new lens.

[@joseppacheco3700]

Hello, one question. Normally I use my sony 6700 with the screen opened to control the overheat. If i use an external monitos like Atomos the overheat is diferent? Can I close the screen of the camera or i must record the videos with the screen opened too? thanks in advance

[@seydaelias226]

Would you use this lens on the a6100? I’m new to photography and looking to buy the a6100 and seems this lens would cover the bases of having to buy multiple lenses within that range. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated

[@maf3695]

If an APSC 16-55 equals 24-82.5 mm full frame. Then is what does f2.8 equals?

[@JasonVong]

That's... a tony northrup question haha

[@romsky]

The equivalent would be approx. F4.2 on full frame

[@maf3695]

Jason Vong 😂

[@maf3695]

Romsky thanks

[@romsky]

Getting a 24-70 f4 with an a7iii would essentially cost you the same amount of money.... But you have a full frame camera with a newer sensor. Or you could get the tamron 28-75 at 2.8, then the a6600 would need an f1.8 lens to compete with it