My Sony a7iv and Tamron 17-28mm got stolen 2 weeks ago so I need to buy new gear (worst feeling ever!) I think I am getting the fx3 and sony 16-35 f4 pz. To all fellow Creators Keep you gear safe 💚
Hey Dunna! did you ever notice if the 16-35 gm was better with active stabilization on? cus i feel like the sigma isnt as good with active stab with the sony a7iv. i have both lenses but sigma isnt as good with active on but the gm was pretty stable. making me want to sell the sigma and keep the gm
I have the Tamron 17-28mm lens and always find that I want to go longer so the 28 mm limitation is not for me. Actually, I am waiting for the new Tamron 20-40 f2.8 to be released and reviewed as I could see that being a valuable addition to my kit. Good comparison, Dunna!
Then there are those like me that just don't find this lens wide enough!. It's all but impossible to please everyone . Though in the not so very distant past, virtually everyone made do with a body and the standard 50 1.8 lens that came with it.
@@robertcudlipp3426 I hear you. I wish they made a 14-30 or 14-35 like the Nikon Z or Canon RF lens. But then people will dislike the fact that it isn't F2.8 :P But 14mm with front filters is something I really would like to see on Sony.
I have the GMaster 16-35 and it's spectacular but using it as a vlog camera, on my gimbal. Let's just say, my vlogging arm is getting bigger than the other one :) This looks like a nice way to go. Fantastic video, thank you for SHOWING rather than just telling. Much more fun to watch and seeing so much footage from the Sigma really gives so much info even in itself. Thank you.
Looks like an amazing budget wide angle lens for Sony. Sold my 16-35 gm for the pz and no regrets here. So light and versatile. Sure I lose the 2.8 but haven’t found myself needing or missing it. Great video!
I've had the Tamron 17-28 and the Sony 20mm f/1.8. Both great lenses, especially the Sony 20mm, but just wasn't using the Sony that much...collecting dust. Just got the Sigma 16-28mm...love it so much that I sold the Sony and the Tamron. The Sigma is sharp corner to corner...great contrast, and I like the AF/MF button. My favorite wide angle lens for my Sony a7riii.
@@cuorebiancorossoo Actually I fix the distortion in post. Plus, most of my shots are landscapes where distortion doesn't play as large a role as when taking close up images of buildings, etc.
We are waiting for sigma 16-28 f2.8 DG Dn vs Tamron 20-40 f2.8 vs sony 16-35 f4 PZ G comparison on your channel sir . hope u will you make & post video thank u 🙂 !! Great video as always... 🇳🇵
I've got the Sigma 14-24 and love it, but ugh the weight is killing me. I tried out the Sony PZ 16-35 in my local camera shop and was not particularly impressed. This new Sigma 16-28 looks like a real winner!
I was between the 16-28 and the 20mm 1.8. I have the Sigma 28-70 2.8 and really like it. I wanted to get the 16-28 to pair with it, but two things pushed me to the 20mm 1.8. 1. Your gorgeous review of the 20mm where you went on that epic hike, showed me the 20mm can get that "produced feel" of the bokeh. Feels a bit more "cinematic" and dreamy. And because of how light it is - it's easier to hike with. 2. I wish Sigma had made the 16-28 with a 67mm filter thread to match the 28-70 so I could use the same filters and not need step up rings. The 20mm 1.8 has the 67mm filter thread (and my most used kit is the 28-70 and 35GM 1.4 that also has the 67mm filter) so that pushed me over the edge to get the (really lightweight) 20mm 1.8.
Glad to read this post. By coincidence, I too am trying to compare whether to get a 20mm prime or this 16-35mm. I already own a 24-70mm for my R6ii but I have no lens yet for my newly used A7iii and then search for a portrait lens also making my Sony body strictly used for primes. 📸💪💯
I love your walk abouts, and admire all the b-roll footage that you manage to grab on them. I guess your 2 hour hikes must turn into 5 to 6 hours with all the stops for various shots of you climbing up that hill and then back down again to grab the camera! Do you use multiple cameras on these shoots, like a dedicated b-roll and then whatever kit you are talking about? I would love to see a video on how you manage these solo shoots, assuming you don't have a sherpa going with you ...
Duna Please i need your help i want to pick up one of these Sigma 16-28 f2.8 - Sony 16-35 f2.8 - Sigma 14-24 F2.8 am shooting interior design photos and price doesn't matter for me all i want is sharpness and contrast so which one is the sharpest specifically on F8 and F11 across all focal range . thank you duna for your great videos
Unfortunately I haven't done direct sharpness tests comparing those 3 at those apertures, so I couldn't tell you for sure but I have always been super happy with my sony 16-35 F2.8 and it's sharpness. Whenever I'm unsure, I can always count on a GM.
Great video, but it makes me wonder ... I already have the Tamron 17-28,, f/2.8 lens. Would you say that there is enough difference between these lenses that you would recommend selling my Tamron to get this lens? (Or as a more expensive option saving my pennies and getting the 12-24mm f/4 G as my wide angle zoom option?) Thanks.
I'm curious about whether or not your particular copy of the Tamron just had some QC issues. I own that lens, and I don't see the same sharpness issues with it that you encounter (I'm shooting on an a7rIV). I've also seen other comparisons of these two lenses that have shown the Tamron to be sharper in some instances. That's not a knock on the Sigma: it looks phenomenal, and since my wife and I both shoot Sony and would occasionally both want to shoot wide, we might pick up the Sigma as our second wide-angle zoom. But I'm wondering of *every* Tamron falls short like yours does, or if maybe another copy of that lens might perform better for you.
Nice overview, though I do wish you would have included more comparisons with the PZ. After many months of debate, I finally chose the 16-35 PZ over this one because of two reasons: size and focal range. The difference between f2.8 and f4 isn't HUGE, and I even used it indoors in relatively low light with pretty good results. When I do need a better low light lens, I find myself reaching for a 1.8 or 1.4 prime instead of f2.8 anyway. It also helped that I picked up the PZ used for the price of a brand new Sigma ;-)
Yeah, unfortunately I didn’t have the PZ to test against so all I could do were the spec comparisons. Though I have used and reviewed the PZ and it’s definitely solid! Size and weight wise it can’t be beat if you’re looking for compact!
@@dunnadidit all good man. Would be great to have em all, eh? Lol I've been thinking about literally buying every lens in a given category just for the kick of doing a comprehensive comparison (say all the 24mm primes) but I just know that as soon as I order them, a new one will be released 😂
I was really worried that while I was editing this one, either Tamron would gone out with the 17-28 g2 or Sony would release the 16-35 GMii. Both companies have been updating their zooms haha
Great video as always. Ya I would take the sigma over my 17-28mm for sure. I think I am holding out for a Sony 16-35mm GM ii (and my wallet lol)….unless I vlog I don’t use the 17-28mm that much, but my 24mm 1.4 GM has been living on my camera. I now also have the 12-24mm f4 Sony for real estate. I have lots of wide options lol
I love it, I was about to pull the trigger on the Sigma 14-28mm when Sigma announced this. So I decided to go for the 16-28mm and I'm glad I did, lighter smaller, cheaper and I can use std filters!
Looking for the perfect lens to compliment the fantastic tamron 35-150 f2-2.8. This looks to be a strong contender so I don't have to carry too many lenses or having multiple cameras
I’m in the same boat. 28mm is my favorite focal length, so it’s nice having a stop there. The range between 28-35 is strange and i don’t think you’d be missing anything interesting there
Im in the L Mount ecosystem. Should I get this one or the Lumix S Pro 16-35 f4? I already own the Lumix 24-105 f4 and I never ran into problems with apperture but faster is better right? Price difference is around 300€ if I buy used.
I'm on the fence. I've had the g master for years, but am starting to value size and weight a little more. Thinking of selling my G master to pick this up.
I’m in the same boat, I love my GM but I’ve been doing more hiking and travelling again and I want a lighter kit without sacrificing quality. I probably won’t sell my GM but I do think I’ll pick this one up for a lighter option.
I’m struggling, do I get this sigma 16-28 or do I get the Sony 16-35 F4. Please help!!! We make close range action reels and want a good lens that can keep up.
im not sure about best because have sony 12-24 zoom that can be best i think !!! if you will do video about wide angle prime lenses then best is 14mm gm 100%
I don't have any of those lenses. But that the Tamron's inner movement on the front end doesn't neccessarily translate into more gaps to invite dust to go inside. Inside or out, those gaps are there for dust to go in if the sealing is not good.
Smashed it again, D! I am having a real affinity for Sigma! They have really upped their game. Even when I did an A/B with the new 28-70mm GMII and the Sigma 28-70mm, for me the Sigma won. I think this may be one I will pick up for the FX3 I have. Side note, loving the fact you're out of the studio creating your content. I KNOW it's hard work to create something as inspiring and smooth as what Dunna creates, but you continue to push me yo up my game. LOVE your work, Bro. Thankyou for what you do. I'm fo shoa, a D-Fan! 👍🏾😁
I love my sigma lenses. I'm planning on getting this one some time this year. Sony and Sigma both feel like companies that hire photographers to make lenses for photographers. Tamron seems to just have engineers that are trying to solve a set of concrete problems as cheaply as possible.
how can it be better if it only goes to 28mm????? 16-35 2.8 is the perfect landscape/street lense!!! you can even do story telling portraits with the 16-35. its just stupid for Sigma and tamron to cut corners by just going 28mm, whats the point of that???
I’m pretty sure I talk about this in the video. But stopping at 28mm allow them to make the lenses much smaller and lighter (and cheaper potentially) the 16-35 is fantastic and I’m not getting rid of mine any time soon, but I can do pretty much everything I can do with the GM with this lens and it’s a lot easier on the back and the wallet.
Wow this is the only video I’ve seen on which you say The sigma is sharper than the tamron. Loads other do tests and say tamron is sharper in the middle sigma catches up at the edges. I’d keep that copy if I was you. It’s a one off
Looks really compelling but weather resistance (or the lack thereof) is a concern… sealed gasket but not the zoom/focus rings, buttons or the front like in the Art line… not cool Sigma, not cool at all.
How come there’s no focus breathing in the shots between 2’17” and 2’25” (and 11’02” - 11’11”) when you say “there’s definitely some going on with this lens” and you can’t use breathing compensation on the Sony A7IV ?
Is super 35 really a way to transform this into a 35mm? My experienced friend “no super 35 is not a way to get more zoom!” But idk people’s videos seem to say it is. Noob here thank u
The "I don't know where I'm looking at in the end" made me burst into a big laugh🤣🤣 Thanks for this mate, it seems like a great option for who like me is taking ages to buy the Tamron😆
Thank you SO much for making this Dunna! I've been looking for a comparison for these lenses and I KNEW that you would eventually get around to this lens. 🥰 This is likely going to be my next lens purchase since I have no wide angle lenses yet. 📷 I also loved the views form your hike as I've been stuck at home due to Hurricane Fiona, and have been stuck at home since Friday while the city cleans up downed trees and power lines. 😅
I have that lens and I love it, took it with me to Northern Norway and it almost didn't leave my camera. Also worked perfect at night when photographing the Aurora Borealis.
hey!! than you for this video! i am a videographer and looking for a good wide angle lens to film danceperformances/crews/dancers... can this be a good one for a sony a7iv?
It definitely has some vignetting going on. Unfortunately, it was something I noticed a little later on so I didn’t mention it, but that also shows how little of a difference it made in a practical sense.
If the Sigma lens is brighter than the other two, doesn't that more to do with the electronics inside the lens, not the glass? That needs to be investigated. How can lenses rated at f2.8 let in more or less light? could be the Sigma is not accurately reporting its true f-stop? What's going on?
There are two different measurements that are similar. F-Stop and Transmission (or t-stop if you'd like) F-stop, in my understanding is more of a physical measurement of the aperture. But the transmission will have to do with the amount of light that still gets let in at any given aperture and is affected by the coatings and the glass inside the lens. As far as I'm aware, the T rating is always higher than the F-stop. So an f/1.4 might be t/1.9 or something like that. You'll see the T marker on cine lenses rather than an F-stop so that they In this case, I'd imagine that the sigma just has slightly better transmission. Hopefully that makes sense!
Very interesting. I never really look at the Contemporary range, only the Art series. But this has me intrigued. Adding it to the list of things to save up for. :)
Why they didn’t make it 16-35mm f2.8 is beyond my comprehension. The PZ 16-35mm f4 G is actually compelling in comparison that extra on the long end is very useful. Not to mention the pretty much complete lack of focus breathing.
For what I do, I might have to go with Tamron for that focus distance. Do you think Sigma could get the job done for my close up product shots? Currently my iPhone gets SUPER close. Without using macro lens. Might be because it’s cropping on the sensor? Does that sound right? Couldn’t cropping in create the appearance of better min focus distance? Idk moving from iPhone will be an adjustment. But I need aperture control cuz iPhone is way too shallow. It’s not capable of just recording an entire controller. It has to focus on either the buttons, or the control sticks. Or the handle lol. It’s pretty wild it can’t just have the whole product in focus which is ridiculous. Maybe it’s BECAUSE I’m holding it so close? Idk but if I’m not close I can’t see it.
Is there a standard adjustment I could make in Lightroom to counter the warmth from sigma lenses? In other words when adjusting white balance to match, is there a standard “amount” for that adjustment to get it to match every time
I could easily see this replacing my 20mm f1.8. I nearly never NEED 1.8 on it and the ability to go 4mm wider and then have just a touch of zoom is nice. All that and it’s barely more. That 20mm f1.8 is pretty awesome thoigh
This Sigma would be good for Sony A74 ( in both Full Frame and Crop mode for filming,) Nikon Z5,Nikon D780 Nikon D5600, Canon 90D and Canon R7 and Panasonic S1h and Panasonic S5 and Fuji XT4 and any other Fuji Camera
If you could ONLY have either this or the Sony 20mm f/1.8 G, which would it be? Dumb question I know, but let's say you're going on a trip and space is limited and you could only take one
I had a problem with the 16-35 gm flat cable, they say it's a chronic problem for it to break. Does the 16-28 sigma have any chronic problems? Can you tell me if its focus is mechanical or electronic? When the flat cable on the 16-35 broke, it didn't even work in manual focus.
Great great review man the product shots are good too. People tend to record some very blurry footage of the product. Shallow depth has a time and place..
The new Tamron 20 - 40mm is the one for me, it covers my most used prime lenses. Its small lightweight and covers my 20 24 35 and 50 (with a small crop in - or clear age zoom)
this sigma is a direct competitor to its own 14-24 f2.8 that was less than 2 years old. the new one being so cheap, that it destroyed used prices of the 14-24 overnight. I had to sell my 14-24 so fast, I only had a few days of cloudy nights to never use it. Really, its been so cloudy that I havent needed to replace it. Bonus
I’d love to see Sigma (or anyone) make a full frame prime 17 or wider, f2.8 or faster, that’s tiny, light and accepts standard filters. If I shoot wide, I go all the way wide. Although the idea of having another zoom is somewhat appealing, they are a waste of space for me. My current 35 and 18 fit in the same lens pocket right now.
