Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM : Specifications and Opinions

Reviews

What do you think?

Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 259000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.

Seo Photo

sent on 27 Maggio 2023

Pros: GMaster quality, construction, speed

Cons: If I really have to find one, no stabilization

Opinion: GMaster lens wonderful and sharp at all focal lengths, I was skeptical for those who criticized the sharpness at the edges but I can confirm that it is absolutely reliable and sharp at all apertures and focal lengths. Also excellent on important sensors such as A7RIII, it returns all the detail you look for in such a sensor. The cost is not indifferent but the quality is really up to par. Even the af, as much as it may be worth on such a perspective, does not disappoint and is very precise. Tropicalized to be able to shoot in all conditions. In short, the top. Rating: 10

Floki Vilgerdarson

sent on 16 Luglio 2022

Pros: Quality, sharpness, tropicalization

Cons: Nothing, maybe the price

Opinion: I have owned it for about two years, I consider it one of the best lenses in the Sony house (and perhaps unbeatable in the wide-angle category, nothing to envy to canon or Nikon). I shoot there of any category (dayscape, night landscape, astrophotography/aurora, etc.) and it never disappointed me. I combine it with the A7R IV (light noises, but it is for 61MP of A7R IV, there is, correctable in Adobe, in question the optics have nothing to do with it). I love her. It costs, yes, but we are talking about a very high quality. I will not go into details because others, here in the reviews, have already talked about it. I associate them. Take it and you will not regret it. I will probably take the Sony 14 1.8 to match this 16-35 2.8 for greater aperture (mm and aperture).

Just_Peppe_Proto86

sent on 29 Dicembre 2021

Pros: The wide angle par excellence

Cons: Good stuff costs!

Opinion: Of the Sony lenses I own and those I owned, this is by far what I love deeply, more than its older brother 24-70GM. An exceptional lens both for its compact size and for the build quality. The use of this jewel is not only for landscape photography, it is a lens that has exceptional versatility in any photographic situation (ceremonial, travel, street, architecture, portraits). The sharpness levels are very high and holds up well even with mirrorless like the a7R3 and R4, always sharp from the center, at the corners it is a soft hair but the yield levels are high, even at closed apertures f11/13. the various defects are well contained, obviously greater eye to the 16mm focal length where it distorts and vignettes in an evident way but it manages well, The chromatic aberrations hold well, The only defect is the tightness of the flares (especially a Rainbow flare). It has good bokeh great for portraits and other various contexts. Of all that I wrote the real flaw is the price, but basically the good stuff costs! Mistake?

Okpj

sent on 21 Febbraio 2021

Pros: Weight, resolution, flexibility, blurry, build quality, lampshed, effective tropicalization

Cons: Important price, front width

Opinion: I'm enjoying the 16-35 GM for a year and a half. I took everything: morning landscapes, architecture, milky way but also portraits set thanks to the excellent blurry that the 11 slats create at 35mm. It produces a good star at f/16 and the solvence is excellent at all focal points, even at 35mm. is the smallest and lightest 16-35 f/2.8 on the market. Nevertheless, it has a slightly conical shape that causes the end part to be a little too wide. The diameter of the filters is still 82mm (like the other 16-35 2.8) so you can find all brands and types. The construction quality is excellent, very nice the lampshon with velvety interior and unlock button. The excellent resolution on the canvas side allows you to avoid the purchase of a "bridge" lens: I traveled through Italy, Peru, Jordan, Ireland, France, Holland with the 16-35 combined with an 85mm (which I only recently replaced with a 70-180 f/2.8 for an even more versatile combo) and I never felt the lack of something that filled the gap. It handles the A7RIV's 60mpx great and I've tested its tropicalization on a couple of occasions, brilliantly passing the test. I don't see a single reason to prefer it to the f/4 model unless you have to save money at all costs, or you've had an unmissable opportunity, or you still don't have an extra cm of space in your bag. Or if you only take a closed diaphragm.

Sout87

sent on 27 Ottobre 2020

Pros: Construction, Optical Yield, Distortion, Star, Screw Filters

Cons: Clutter, price on the new ("the good stuff costs")

Opinion: Taken used to replace the tamron 17-28 that did not satisfy me both in terms of excursion and optical yield... well I have to say I made the best purchase ever. I also read reviews on other platforms that find it little engraved at 35mm... I honestly find it a blade in all contexts! already at F4 you reach a sharpness equal to some fixed. It returns faithful colors and an excellent microcontrasto.... on the other hand, just look at the MFT. It solves all 42Mpixels of my RIII very well. At closed diaphragms it returns an unparalleled star. I don't know what else to say... I find it great. Great for those who, like me, were often on out-of-the-door trips to constantly change the lens between 35mm and wide angle. Now I have one less lens and so much more quality!

Vocelibera

sent on 25 Aprile 2020

Pros: Sharpness and image quality at the top of the category, low distortion to all focal points, contrast and colors, construction and resistance, excellent response of the dials, flare resistance, versatility

Cons: weight, price but you know the quality it costs

Opinion: objective with an indisputable image quality that is ideal for interiors, streetphoto, even night views until the release of the canon series 3 was the top on the market source analysis: DxoMark and Dpreview, today if they play it at even arms) surely another world for those like me came from the canon 16-35 f4 (excellent lens but lower especially in the distortion that is too pronounced on the canon) the classic focal distance 16-35 allows a good flexibility of use. Opening 2.8 on a lens like this can be useless for the most. but with this lens you can safely do streetphoto and wanting to go further in the even astro and some portrait (at 35mm clearly) the limits are the weight definitely important and the price but on the other hand this lens is worth what it costs and and in line with rivals Canon Nikon alternatives for those who want to experiment and and very good in composition composition I suggest to consider the 12-24 Sony that compared to the competitors in the same focal costs about the meta competition. for us look for lightness can consider the Tamron 17-28 that costs less but and much more sacrificed in the focal range, in my opinion too much in both sides, and qualitatively does not exalt me, rather flat photos less rich in detail and contrast... on the other hand it costs hundreds of euros less...

Kobezzz

sent on 23 Maggio 2019

Pros: Construction, sharpness, Blur, AF

Cons:

Opinion: And built impeccably with excellent materials. Fantastic sharpness at 2.8 with a blurry creamy, but the best from when you close with 11 to 22. It does not suffer from flare ne from sunlight that artificial. I would have preferred a focal start to 14 with a greater field width because at 16 in some contexts it is long.

MicheleCT

sent on 27 Settembre 2018

Pros: Light, small, excellent build quality, good image quality.

Cons: The resolve, especially at the extremes, at full aperture and in particular at 35, is not the best.

Opinion: Beautiful lens, comfortable, light, practical and well built. Little bigger than a similar zoom but F4. The quality of image is high, but unfortunately nothing to do with fixed the caliber of Art, despite what is alleged by advertising. But on the other hand, the 42MP sensor does not forgive any smearing. I doubt that there is better on the market at certain focal lengths and openings, in fact of zoom.

Francesco Tommasini

sent on 07 Luglio 2018

Pros: Construction, image quality throughout the frame, focus and handling FANTASTIC... Perfect lens and with a stunning boker thanks to its 11 slats and incredible quality thanks to the optical structure made from aspheric lenses, and it is above all 2 lenses XA

Cons: None other than the price, but of course the quality G MASTER you pay, although not far from competitors Canon and Nikon

Opinion: WONDERFUL GOAL, I RECOMMEND IT TO EVERYONE... DON'T LISTEN TO US WHO HAVE IT, TRY IT TO BELIEVE... it's been a long time since I wanted an optics like this and thanks to Sony it came. I own an A7III and it's gorgeous, I dare not imagine on an A7RIII. I think we have arrived at a new standard of quality and Sony, as in all its departments and areas where it competes, Sony stands out and offers an extra edge, just think about the mirrorless system

Francesco Ciardi

sent on 11 Novembre 2017

Pros: Sharpness, construction, fast focus, chromatic rendering, bokeh

Cons: Price, footprint

Opinion: I had the Sony / Zeiss 16/35 f4, and for me it was a blade, I took this to have the 2.8 aperture ... bhè are 3 blades! Crazy, very sharp lens, fluid rings, great chromatic rendering, amazing detail, a nice bokeh to be a granddaughter ... so say a sign zoom.rnAbblined to the A7RII is a joke ... the only flaw is the price!