Sony 16-25mm f/2.8 G Lens Review: Best Ultrawide Angle Sony Lens?
Visit our sponsor Adorama at sdp.io/adorama to buy your cameras, lenses & more!
Buy the Sony 16-25mm f/2.8G for $1199 at SDP.io/S1625
Buy the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 for $799 at SDP.io/T1728
Buy the Sigma 16-28mm f/2.8 for $899 at SDP.io/S1628
Tony Northrup reviews the new Sony 16-25mm f/2.8 G lens, a great walking-around, travel and video/vlogging lens that gives you super-wide angle, fast f/2.8 performance for great low-light images, with a lower price and light weight that makes it comfortable to carry around all day.
Tamron and Sigma have competing lenses, and they're both a little bit longer: 28mm vs 24mm. That extra length can really make a difference; using this lens I constantly found myself wanting to zoom in further. However, the Sony lens does have some advantages, including a physical aperture ring and the ability to support up to 30 FPS on the Sony a1 and 120 FPS on the Sony a9 III... on the Sigma & Tamron lenses, Sony artificially limits their performance to 15 FPS.
0:00 Introduction
1:01 Adorama Promo
1:44 Sony 16-25mm vs Sigma 16-28mm vs Tamron 17-28mm
2:21 It has an aperture ring
3:03 Build quality
3:25 Why you want f/2.8: Better low-light performance
4:33 Should you get a 16-35 instead?
4:57 Video performance (vlogging)
6:18 Autofocus & FPS
6:45 Sharpness vs Sony 16-35 f/2.8 GM & Sony 24mm f/1.4 GM
8:20 Starburst
8:59 Summary
these new series of G lenses are really nice for the C series cameras.
These new compact lenses are a great complement to the new A77CR and A7CII. You can now build a great travel system with smaller lighter gear.
Great on the A7IV too. I’m happy for the C cameras and lighter lenses. Made for you used by me 😅
Again, another great video. Would like to see the sharpness comparison of 12-24gm vs this new lens😊
This lens re-defines the holy trinity concept: 16-25, 24-70, 70-200 @ f2.8
Great video! I’d love to see a comparison of this lens and the 16-35 f/4 PZ.
I would have bought this instead of the 16-35 GM if it were available. 16-25 G + 24-105 G + 100-400 GM would be a great trio. I am currently using the 20-70 G + 70-200 Macro G II + 1.4 TC, so it does not really fit well in my arsenal right now. If I need wider, I add the 14 GM, or if I need longer I swap out the 70-200 for a 100-400 GM.
I am curious if next time, for example, there will be a 50-100mm.f.2.8 lens in the same size as the first two in the series?
I HATE my 16-35mm f2.8 gm 1. I've always thought it was quite soft and focus never seems to hit very well. Would be very tempted to swap it out for this
I already own the Tamron 17-28 lens so of course this lens makes no sense for me but I am always glad for more choice. I love that we have a bunch of different options when we go with Sony. I think if this lens was available when I was looking for a wide angle lens, I might've gotten it.
Tony, but isn’t the Sony 20mm f1.8 a better choice?
Tony, great review and has me thinking. I want to have a zoom I have the 50mm F1.4 GM already and want something as a walk around for my A7Siii and Sony A74. I just do this as a hobby, so another GM is not what I can afford. I am debating between the 24-50mm F2.8 G and this new 16-25mm F2.8 G. I just got the 20mm F1.8 G (though I have about a week to change my mind and send it back). I think I want one prime and one zoom as a lightweight travel kit for both video and photo. I have always loved the 50 over the 35, so that is why I wanted one GM lens in a prime, and went that way. I am trying to justify the 24-50 over this new one, but I think, as you said, more people are shooting wide now, I don't know that I need "faster" than the 2.8 at this focal range.
Hi Tony, great video indeed. How would you compare this lens against the much heavier Sony wide lense 12.24mm. Would it make sense to trade in my 12-24 for this new 16-25? Pros and cons?
The Sony 12-24 is in another world vs this lens… if you can live with this lens then do that! Why spend 3k if you don’t need to… if you are selling the 12-24 let me know, I’d love one
how would this be for real estate photography on the sony a7iv?
I have a quistion for you. I have just bought a Canon R7 (much from watching you two). I do a lot of wildlife-photography of mostly deer and smaler animals and I have a Sigma 70-300 1:4-5.6 on the camera now. Sometimes I need to take pictures from 200-250 meters and that lens wont quit make it then. What lens would you recommend for such distance (without ruin a persons economi totally) ??
Tony and Chelsea, I have had 2 Sony A1's in a row that eventually end up having severe issues shooting birds over water. The focus either gets obsessed with the water, or just can't get anything in focus, or looks like a distorted filter. If I am not shooting over water, no problem. After 2 cameras having this same issue, only after using each for a few months, I don't know what to do. Have you heard of this issue? MPB refuses to acknowledge the problem for warranty. Thanks
Does anyone have opinions on this lens vs the Sigma 14-24mm F2.8 since they are very similar in price when the sigma is on sale?
Rather just keep my 16-35mm GMii. Better glass. Please do a 16-35 vs 16-25 comparison video
I want to see a review of a sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 vs the new 16-25mm f2.8 .
I was planning on getting the Sigma mainly for real estate photography and some video. But with the smaller size of the Sony I’m now leaning toward that.
14mm vs 16mm is a big difference
@@RicanStudioYeah but I think I can make the 16 work.
I have the Sigma 14-24 and I'll probably sell it for this lens. It's an great lens but I mainly shoot for travel. The Sigma 14-24 is literally double the weight of this lens. I'll sacrifice the 2mm on the wide end for a much smaller lens.
@@duvalpenny100 That's not true. The Sigma is 248g more but also has 2mm more wide angle which is a lot in that range. The GM II is nice though.
Great video. I am impressed by the sharpness of the new Sony lens. Would you place the Sigma 14-24 in the same category as the new Sony 16-25, or does the weight difference separate them too much?
For a single walking around lens, what about the 20 mm F1 .8 G? It’s pretty close to the middle of the zoom range of the 16-25. It’s also faster. And cheaper. And a little lighter. And a little smaller.
Indeed, lots of advantages with the 20 mm prime.
This is a... strange lens from Sony because the 16-35mm f/4 G lens exists and is awesome for outdoor vlogging and occasional low light shots. I used it to vlog my trip to Scandinavia and I loved the light weight and great optical performance. I don't have a good reason to get this. I wish they would've made it a 10 or 12-25mm range. That extra mm doesn't sound like much but it's a noticeable difference when it comes to ultra wide focal lengths. That would've been nice for vlogging.
Quick question. Comparison with 24 1.4 was done at 1.4 or 2.8 aperture?
For sure f1.4. At f2.8 the corners of my 24mm are much better.
Still happy with my 24 1.4
Am considering buying this lens to replace the 16-25 GMI as the weigh is significant. Have the 24-70 so the loss of the upper end of the focal range is not a problem. Has been given good reviews by Petapixel and Gerald Undone too. However won’t be buying using Adorma to purchase as they don’t ship to the narrow but historical streets of the UK….Wont be using KEH either to trade in old gear either 😂 I did fin on my Sony R5 that using the handheld remote it would zoom in on a non powered zoom, guess it is using the crop factor to do that.
Hugh Brownstone, @3BMEP, just released his review of this lens, and he thinks the correction profile for the lens is not ready for prime time. He shoots a lot of urban landscape, and the distortion was noticeable and un-correctible, manually. If you're looking for a walk-around lens that's good for shooting architecture, you might want to keep looking.
Sigma 20mm f1.4 splits the difference in focal length, is two stops faster, costs a lot less, but weighs a bit more at 620g
Sharper than my 24GM? Jeez :( I just got it. At least i still have 1.4!
I think Tamron 20-40mm 2.8 may be a better buy. With Tamron 35-150mm combo, one is pretty much all set. 20mm is wide enough for most situation and Tamron lens is small and light too.
I've got the sony 12-24mm gm and tamron 35-150mm combo.
the Sony w 20-70mm f4 is the ideal walking around lens, IMO. 20mm is wide enough for most things and you get a reach out to 70mm. The slower speed is fine for most occasions.
All set... until u try to shoot over 15fps
I’ve bought the tamron 20-40 f2.8 and have the Samyang 35-150 f2-2.8 for the longer end . Cheaper than tamron version . When I shot landscapes with my old Olympus I used 7.5mm Laowa and 7-14mm and always found my shots at 9 and 10mm so when I went Sony a7 full frame I got the 20mm prime tamron . Never feel I want wider . Hence why I went 20-40mm and as a carry around on holiday I did want longer zoom with me too. Maybe the Sony 20-70 would be better choice but it’s much more expensive ! .
@@RyanREAX 95% Sony users don't shoot A1 or A9.
Tony Technique : Take an exquisite wide angle shot and then put a beautiful Porsche in it just to flex 💪
Sony Zeiss 16-35mm f4 OSS is what I got. Its beat up, cost me like $300USD and its really good for the price and for a guy who does not shot a ton of wide shots. This is a cool lens though! Nice review Tony.
I like the size but it doesn't cover enough of a range to be worth it to me. If it went up to maybe 28 or 30 at that size it might be the move
Another amazing video, thanks!
If I don't have my 20 mm 1.8 I would definitely consider this lens.
How does it compare with Sony G 16-35 f4 ?
It beats the 16-35GM...it will surely best the 16-35 f/4.
@@JACKnJESUS "surely" based on what assumption? Both the 16-35 and 16-25 are G lenses with f4 aperture. The 16-35 is a very recent lens, only 2 years old.
@@oriomenoni7651 For one, based on how this lens just bested two GM lenses...and the other reason would be...typically...if a lens starts at f/2.8 and is sharp (like this one), it will be razor sharp at f/4...easily. The other lens starts at f/4...it will be bested.
@@JACKnJESUS You haven't understood what I asked him, haven't you. I suggest you to re-read attentively. I asked him a comparison between two f4 lenses.
@@oriomenoni7651 That's fine...sorry. head to head the sony f/4 is excellent
Great review! Would love to see a video comparing the 3 Sony lenses most people are now going to consider: 16-25 f/2.8 + 16-35 f/4 PZ + 16-35mm GM ii. They all seem to have their unique strengths from a usability and practicality standpoint.
IMO, the Sigma 14-24 or Tamron 17-28mm are better focal lengths.
Is this lens compatible with A6600? Or A7 II?
It should work great on the A7ii since this is a full frame lens designed for full frame cameras. The A6600 is crop sensor camera, so while this lens will work, it will give you a focal range of 24-38mm....so maybe not as useful. Bottom line though is that it is "compatible" with both cameras.
@@tedbowling5036 Thank you :)
Great video, Tony how would this lens be for Astro landscape photography.
I’m looking at upgrading my old rig.
Is that a uv filter i see on your 16-35 gm?😏
Great review! My first thought as a Canon shooter is ‘why don’t Canon have anywhere near the selection that Sony shooters get?!’ 🙈
Because Canon is not Sony. Go figure. Sony is the company making lots of moves. Might be time to join them. I love their cameras. I also love my Nikon F2, but that is from another century. Sony FF cameras have a similar feel of the old Nikons and that is a good thing.
did adobe just raise their prices? It wont let me on lightrrom
@4:30 f1.4 example does not look clearer. It's obviously not clearer
Why did I have to go and buy the 16-35mm F4 G :(
Might be the ultimate boat lens. As a fishing writer/photographer I do a lot of stuff in small boats (15' to 20'). A wide-angle zoom is a no-brainer, but anything over 24mm is an overkill for that work. But Tony, the narrow streets of Europe?
The F2.8 is so much better in museums than F4.
ISO performance on Sony cameras is so good that it doesn't matter all that much. I have the 16-35 f/4 G and used it indoors+outdoors low light and for video and it's great. For photography, just add a little noise reduction. Wish this lens was a 10 or 12-24. Would've got it if it was!
Distortion throughout its range?
Sooo, nothing visible, but it has a built-in profile that automatically corrects the distortion. So if there's optical distortion you don't see it in the results.
@TonyAndChelsea 👍🏻 Hugh Brownstone saw some crazy distortion shooting buildings in NYC. Stuff that he couldn't correct. Wonder if he got a wonky copy.
Please stop uploading HDR videos, somehow my youtube app doesn't display the colors right when the video is in HDR. Also, I can't turn the HDR off in the settings.
Tony, are you grading your HLG3? content? Did you make a video about HDR video? thanks.
16-25 F2 would of been enticing to switch from the 20G. This lens is a downgrade from the 20G. Need a 24GMII or 24mm F1.2
Nice car Chelsea
go for the 16-35mm, no reason fot this lens
Prime lens is better option than this. Terrible focal length. It’s like getting a 91-100mm 2.8 😂.
...and they still shoot average photos.
That’s user error buddy
Still cant beat the 10mm of rf lens hahaha
10mm Full Frame?
@@Deathignator yes RF 10-20 f4.0 rectilinear lens
@@mbismbismb impressive
Zoom range for clowns
16 to 25 lol. I can cover that range in a few steps. Another useless G product. When is it gonna end?
My thoughts as well, 16-35 is great but 16-25 seems useless.