|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
Ellepi65 www.juzaphoto.com/p/Ellepi65  |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator. | Sony E 16-55mm f/2.8 G Pros: Sharpness, uniformity of yield, size, weight, construction quality Cons: Price, lack of stabilizer, distortion and 16mm vignette Opinion: Excellent goal, fantastic sharpness from the maximum opening, uniform on all focal points and all the frame from the center to the edges. At 16 mm, the raw file has a very obvious vignette and distortion, but only if the file is opened with programs that do not have the built-in profile of the lens. With Capture One for Sony (free version) the fix is automatic, as well as for the Jpeg file of course. Light and small, it is perfectly balanced with the A6300 or similar. I hold the A6300 in my hand with a padded side strap and even after hours I do not feel any fatigue. I compared it with the Canon 16-35 F4 IS zoom and the 24-70 F2.8 II mounting the two Canons on the A6300 through the Sigma MC11 adapter. At the same focal points the Sony is sharper than 16-35 and equivalent to 24-70 in the center, but higher than the edges. However, the 24-70 is more lively and contrasted in the shooting at close range (around the meter). Then I made another interesting comparison. I compared the files obtained with the Canon 5DS R equipped with the 16-35 and the 24-70 with those obtained from the A6300 equipped with the Sony 16-55 in the equivalent focalpoints. The comparison is very significant because because the pixel density in the two cameras is very similar, the size of the objects photographed is almost equivalent (slightly larger than those of the Sony sensor which, if it had the full size, would have about 56 megapixels compared to 51M of canon). Obviously the image provided by Sony is only a part of that provided by Canon, namely the central part that corresponds to the size of the aps-c sensor. Again the Sony, at 16mm, 24mm, 35mm is higher than the 16-35 Canon and is instead equivalent to the 24-70 II (also compared to 55) lens, the latter, which I consider excellent and which for me is a reference since it is one of the best objectives that i've ever tried. I can add that the images provided by Canon, while showing the same resolution (in the case of 24-70 II) are much more contrasted and therefore more lively but at the expense of a reduced and sometimes annoyingly poor laying latitude. In conclusion I would say that, although there is no stabilization, this was precisely the lens that was missing and that everyone was waiting in the Sony aps-c kit, I think that for the owners of a machine body of the A6 series... , especially the professionals, it is a purchase Essential. By the way, if you want to go light, even mounted on the new A7R IV you would take advantage of the splendid yield because, even using only one part of the sensor, this part would be the equivalent of an aps-c sensor of more than 26 megapixels, that is, to put it mildly, like the recent Fujifilm. In short, I foresee a great success for this lens, even more if, predictably, the price should fall. sent on February 19, 2020 |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
