Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 ZA OSS lens review with samples (Full-frame & APS-C) 

I had this lens (my first paired with a Sony A7iii) and used it for over two years before selling it recently. I find that I miss it more than I thought I would! They can be had for very cheap used and the build quality and results you get are simply fantastic. I especially love how the lens renders color. Someday I see myself buying it again. It is a phenomenal landscape lens.

Got the lens and I'm super happy with it, but of course a 2,8 would've been great. That said, I couldn't justify more than double the price to get the G-Master lens that Sony offers. This will do more than well in most situations paired with both IBIS and OSS as you said! Great review as always!

Excellent review. I purchased this lens last year, then sold it. Few weeks ago, I bought it again. As you said, it is a very good lens, with limitations. (Bokeh, close-up, corner sharpness at F4)

I've used this lens since 2015 and found it to be very valuable lens for my photography, certainly my most used lens for landscapes. The colors are great as is the sharpness (landscapes I shoot mostly f5.6-f11 all good). The lens is a bit bulky and heavy (very strong build), I use it on a Sony A7 II and A6600. On the A6600 it is front heavy and I cradle the lens in my palm and don't really hold it by the camera grip. Not the best combination but the images are nice. Since I don't do much street photography with it the speed is ok but not a lens if you want to do much selective focus with nice bokeh. Good fair review of a good lens.

Expensive, but what else could I get? Nothing matches this for video work for sure. My personal list: Pros • Combination image stabilization (in body and lens) • Autofocus • Way sharper than my old Canon 24-105L • Wide-angle (and all around) • Reliable (doesn't stop recording or inoperable aperture without warning) • Smaller than current setup (currently with Metabones adapter) Silent AF and OIS also great.

If you have one of the A7R series bodies, A7R, A7RII, A7RIII, I think you can enable crop mode which would make this lens a 25-52mm effective focal range. You could then use the 35-52 effective part of the range to get a better result than 35mm normal mode. With the A7RIII cropped mode is approximately 18MP images, which is still pretty good quality. This is all a compromise, but may be useful for someone who owns or is thinking of owning this lens. HTH

Thank you so much for these kind of reviews Christopher! Bought this one last year and had no idea 35mm f/4 was so soft since I don't do much pixel peeping myself! Cheers from Sweden!

^5 to Matt. Good call on the lens test. ^5 to Chris for the review.

Any chance I could rent out a Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM for you to review/compare? It's a very expensive lens but I'd love to see what you get for that money, especially when comparing to this.

another great review. I would love to see how it compares against the f/2.8 GM version (although I know that the GM is excellent, I'm curious to see if it is worth paying for the price difference)

Thanks for all the video tests ;)

that is a great review, currently looking to upgrade to 4k video and this lens looks very promising. Every time I look at Sony video, it always looks so impressive.

Thanks for this honest and objective review. I have been considering getting this lens but just can't get excited about it. I am hoping that Tamron might develop an nice wide angle for the Sony full frame after the success of their 28-75 f2.8 lens ( the price of that lens has just gone up!)

Thanks, exactly what a lot of people have been waiting for!

I disagree about the apsc comment. It’s a perfect walk around mid zoom. I like using full frame lenses on apsc for panorama and night photography as the edges and corners are cut anyways. Although yes the lens is bigger and weighs more than the camera

what about the weather sealing?

Thank you, Matt and Chris.

Thank you so much for close up and aps-c tests!

The Fujifilm 10-24mm f/4 zoom has an equivalent focal range but is considerably larger. The Sony Zeiss is relatively compact.

Thanks for the review! Thanks! Do you know if with the A7SIII or A7III you can use the OSS on the lens and ibis on the camera at the same time?

If i control the camera via the sony imaging edge app, can i still use the zoom function via the app with this lens?

I bought a scratched up version with perfect optics of this lens for $300 USD. And at this cost it is amazing and great value for money. If you want this lens, look for an ugly copy like I did and you will find an amazing lens for cheap. Love this lens.

I picked up an ex-display copy of this lens for £245 from John Lewis. A great lens for the price. It's in absolutely mint condition. Very happy with the purchase.

Would you recommend this for real estate photography?

Thanks for the great review. At what focal length does the lens sharpness get better at f4?

I recently returned this lens. Compared to the Canon 16-35 f4, it was noticeably inferior. I regret selling the Canon when I switched to E mount.

Your lens review is the best!

Hi Christopher, any advice on an ultra wide FE lens (let's say max 1000-1200 bucks)? If I understood correctly you say the 16-35 F4 isn't good value for money? Any alternatives?

On your black and white test sheets , what did you use to print them with and what was the quality of the paper? Did you use manual or autofocus.

Zeiss lenses are incredible and sharp for their fixed lens , but not the zoom lens. Very nice video

3 years later still a fantastic lens.

Hey, abit late to your video on this lens, just upgraded from Nikon to Sony A7iii with a kit lens was looking at replacing the kit lens for something better, i do a lot of abandoned building photography (urbex) and wondered if this lens would be good for this ? I seen two youtubers that do abandoned building exploring with it but wanted to know thoughts !

Is this lens weather sealed? I keep finding people say yes and no, so confusing lol Thanks!

This lens performs better with the a7iii or the a7riii

Is this lens obsoleted by the newer 16-35 PZ f4 ?

Also what iso and shutter speed were you using on your test sheets.

I sold the lens and I bought it back. I mainly use this lens for family photos so I would stop down to f8 at least anyway. And it's less heavy than the GM version

Is it good also for stars photos?

Excllent review, thanks for your time with these!

I have the same camera and lens and I have an issue .. The video I am getting is very poor it looks like very unsharpen... I shoot in 50p with all the rules ... please help me

Debating between the Zeiss 16-35 f/4 and Sigma 14-24 f/2.8. Using it mostly for Vlogs and mini-documentaries. I occasionally do real estate photography. Both lenses have their unique advantages over the other, and with the price difference being only $300, it's taking me a while to decide. Any suggestions?

I cannot find your review of the Sony E 16-35 F2.8 GM.

I own the Canon 16-35 L F4 and the Zeiss and the Zeiss is a blast at 16mm even at F4 compaired to the Canon. It turns to be the direct opposite, when compaired at 35mm F4, when the Canon show it's strength. What my lens doesn't show is that ghosting that's going on in the copy, which was tested here. I Use the A7RIII and the A7RI with that lens and it was always some kind of perfect match, but I would say I have an almost perfect sample of the lens. Christpher said, it's a perfect build quality and at this point I have to say, definitly not. All 16-35mm F4 Zeiss lenses look like crap after some years and that isn't acceptable in my opinion and part of the build quality. The paintwork needs a better coating. What the most of you don't consider, ultra wide zoom lenses where always a compromise. I owned some of them, because it is the most important focal lenght for my work. They improved significant in the last years with lenses like the Tamron 15-30mm F2.8 or something like the Sony 16-35mm F2.8 GM, but those are also a compromise because of it's size. So it really depends on your needs, what to go for and for it's imagequality, size and weight, the Zeiss is a good lens. Try it, before you jugde it and you will see, how good it really is. The only thing, that doesn't match is the price. I payed 850€ for the Canon and 1250€ for the Zeiss and both are on one step to each other.

Please, can you review sony g master 16-35 f/2.8? I want to buy one, so i would be gratefull to have your opinion.

Thank's for the review! I'm going to buy this lens because it's the most appropriate variant for my photo and video work. If you need a full frame wide angle zoom lens for sony camera, unfortunately, you don't have an alternative on the market. It isn't a large piece of glass but as I understood the image quality isn't so good for the money((( I'm curios about OSS, my camera has in body stabilization and as I know if you connect a lens with OSS, pitch and yaw stabilization turns off in the camera, it stabilizes by the lens..So the question is: is this any difference when use lens with OSS and when you don't it? Does the camera stabilization perform the same as OSS?

I have recently bought a sony A7s after 1 year with a Nikon D3500. I have a Sigma 18-35 f1.8, do you think it would be worthy to sell the Nikon D3500 + Sigma 18-35mm in order to buy the Sony 16-35mm? The Sigma is the only reason why I haven't sold the Nikon yet. Any suggestion would be appreciated!

I ordered a copy of this lens today :D

Is this lens good for Sony a6400?

does this lens focus breathe? I want to use it for focus stacking. thanks

I really onyl need a lens like that to get rid of the last bit of jitter introduced by walking with a gimbal so I don't have to do the full ninja walk. This would work as a secondary to my Sigma trinity for my a6400.

Thank you, Christopher. May you share please, with which camera did you make the footage @ 1:55?

beautiful town, mate.

It's a common lens for vloggers who use the a7s ii.

Would the 18-105 F4 G not be a better alternative - at least for APS-C?

Yep thanks Matt!

I'm baffled! When you turn it to 16 mm the lens extend and when you turn it to 35 it get shorter? Why?? Isn't 16 mm is wider than 35 😅

should i sell my 24-70zeiss and buy this lens?any suggestion??

Hope you can review the Sony 16-35 F2.8 GM

Would you recommend it for the interior photography?

Thanks for the review..renting one next week for my Sony A7Mk3. Eagerly awaiting the Tamron 17-28 E mount lens! Hope you get to test it early ;-)

I think that the, 12-24 SONY G F4 is a much better option to buy, it's wider and more useful.

always love your review

For landscape shooting around 5.6 to f11 around 16 mm, what do you think would be a better value?

As soon as either Tamron or Sigma makes an equivalent at the same (or cheaper) price I'm ditching this lens.

oh man, i want to visit that town! where is this?

i see so many lenses for Sony and Cannon not for the ohter 2 systems on your chanel

Love Your Reviews... Have been here since 2015.

I bought it for my A6000 which was dumb since it's a crop camera but ah well.

I can see a picture from Polperro:)

Does anybody knows what DIM CŴN at 7:30 means? Is it Chinese?

I have this setup. The first ring doesn’t do anything tho

This lens has served me well..until now. The focus motor makes a rasping sound and stops working. A common problem with this lens.

very good performance, f4 at 35 is low contrast but the details are pretty good. i might be buying this used after i switch to sony to compliment the 35-150 f2-2.8 i want OSS for some specific jobs and wide angle i generally won't need big apertures

Very expensive considering the optical performance. I did see lovely Llangranog - thanks for that! Wonderful memories.

Your voice sounds a bit raspy, are you doing ok? Maybe a bit of a cold? If so I hope you get better soon!

Please test the GMaster Sony lenses

I own this lens and I love it,it’s great with my A73, I find it very sharp,maybe iv got a good one.!!!!

I only own an aps-c until now. It's a Canon 80D and I bought a Canon 16-35 f/2.8 III (I get it at a good price but it's still really expensive). Yes this is not the best zoom range on an apsc and a sigma 18-35 f/1.8 would cost almost 1/3 of the price. But I would like to upgrade to FF in the next 4 years without having to buy an all new set of lenses (I'm scaring about the transition to a new mirrorless mount that would break all my plans...). I also own a 24-70 f/2.8 II but with a 38-112 you don't get the wide angle end. That's why I get the 16-35...

HI Big fan of your work! Can you compare this lens with the 16-35 f/2.8 GM?

Thanks Matt!!!

Great appraisal Christopher, again. Thank you! There were some lovely images obtained but being crappy at wide open 35mm doesn't convey street fast. Hard to know who would want it at £1000. Serious F/F videophiles?

Can’t wait

It looks like an ultra-wide PRIME would be far better. Thanks for the review! And thanks to the dude who paid for the rental.

Damn that lense looks like it's been around LOL Great Video thanks

Can anyone explain it to me how a £1000 lens is not sharp at the 28/35mm range? Crazy, isn't it?

Thanks for this video! I was seriously considering this lens as I wanted a nice wide-angle lens, but I might rethink my purchase now... perhaps I'll go for the Samyang 14mm F2.8 AF instead, haha

It used for sony a7r4 body

Sigma 18-35 f1.8 is much more cheeper, and sharp. But, is there such Sigma for sony E mount?

this lens is quite interesting because it is really sharp wide open at 16mm but it is not that usable at 35mm especially when you shot on a 42mp camera, but if you zoom out a little bit to 32mm the sharpness improved

can you please give us top 10 sharp lenses again

I can hardly bellieve it. This glass is somehow faulty, because of the @35mmm.

Why don't they just make it a prime lens?

FE 16-35 GM pls ^^

A grand for this mediocre effort. Ouch.

Big man khayna

Thnks

Ein Objektiv mit jeder Menge Licht und Schatten

SonyAlpharumors is also posting some rumors: Before Photokina: (SR3) Sony A7sIII with 4k60p, 10bit 4:2:2, 5.6 million dot EVF

I shoot both Sony and Canon. This lens can not be compared to the Canon 16-35 F4 IS. The Canon lens is far superior. The Sony has horrible corners and CA.

How is low light offset by OSS? One is light the other is stabilization, I don't get it.