Sony FE 16-35 F2.8 GM II Lens Review

Sony FE 16-35 F2.8 GM II Lens Review
The Mark 2 version of Sony's Ultra Wide-Angle Zoom lens offers several performance improvements over the Mark 1 version. This includes improved sharpness at the 35mm focal length. The Mark 2 is also smaller, lighter and faster focusing and features an aperture ring on the barrel of the lens.
In this review I also look at the alternative lens options for someone looking for an ultra wide-angle lens.

Mark Galer is a Sony Alpha Ambassador for Australia.

#SonyAustralia #SonyAlpha #SonyAmbassador #sonyalphaanz #sonydigitalimagingambassador

[robscott]

Thank you for your candid evaluation of the new 16/35 GM II

[WebWay]

When I want a review I always come here for Sony gear. Thanks Mark

[aldente]

Thank you for your post with a comprehensive look at the long-awaited Sony 16-35mm GM II. I was a bit surprised to see Tamron 20-40mm F2.8 A062 missing from the alternative options (which I would have chosen to buy if the 2nd generation had not come out in time). It turns out that PZ 16-35mm F4 G is not for my use because it is too clumsy even for small fingers to operate, more suitable for videography in the first place. This GM II seems to surpass the 1st generation and PZ 16-35mm F4 G in many aspects. I'm looking forward to upgrading to this one.

[starskymedia]

I've got the 16-35 PZ and 24 1.4 GM, which I much prefer as a combination to spending so much money on this single 16-35 GM lens. The PZ is great for video, sharp as a tack, focuses just as fast as the GMII since it has the same linear motors. When it is night time, the 1.4 gives even better low light capability and more interesting bokeh. I do agree that carrying 2 lenses is not always easy, but that combination is STILL cheaper than the single GM2! Thanks Mark for another great video

[TW-iuzy]

… definitely the actual best zoom for photojournalism. I instantly bought the lens for my work – great review Mark! 👍🏻 Hopefully we will get soon a new 85 GM. It’s time for the M II version.

[robscott]

Thank you Mark for your concise evaluation of the new 16/35 MkII

[rickymcc]

Thanks Mark, a useful vid to re acquaint myself with. I sold my mk i original GM 16-35 about 4 months before this was announced. I always intended to buy the mkii which I felt, at the time I sold my original, would likely soon be announced given mkii offerings in the 70-200 and 24-70 'trinity' set.

I'm pretty much deciding to buy this lens now, although I had been hesitating since I had bought the smaller PZ f4 16-35mm on selling my original. Much to like with that lens. Like you I also appreciate and use primes, owning the 14, 20, 24, 35 and 50 primes as well as the mkii 'Trinity' improved 24-70 and 70-200. So, 'wide' wasn't really a hole in my collection. But given how well this mkii wide performs I think it might enable me to go lighter on occasion. Not least as it can be pushed to a 52mm (APS-C cropping 26Mp on an a7Rv body) meaning I might be able to just pack this and my 70-200 for most situations. Or if I need faster on occasions, just also pack my 50 f1.4 (or maybe lighter 55 f1.8) prime to bridge the gap between 35 and 70mm?

I personally gravitate towards wider or longer rather than mid-range focal lengths. For this reason I had also hesitated in buying the 24-70mm mkii (quite excellent and used more than I thought I would). But owning this wide Trinity zoom might permit me to leave my mid-Trinity behind when seeking smaller/lighter (but then again I'm not very good at doing small/light in practice - usually packing lenses that I rarely use - maybe a case of FOMO?).

Anyway I now plan to buy and test alongside my PZ and possibly sell the PZ within a few weeks.

[stevenwaldstein]

Thank you for your video. Will be purchasing the new 16-35/2.8 GM II to go with my GM II trinity. Like that my bag is getting lighter. Plan to use it mostly on my A7RV and A1.

[denizahmet]

is it sharper than the 12-24GM at overlapping ranges?

[Parkhill]

I've been using my Canon 16-35 2.8 L USM on my Sony, and have been very happy with it at various shows. I'm interested in the Sony light weight and getting rid of the lens adapter. I'm torn between the 2.8 versus 4.0. I don't seem to use DOF in my shots these days but appreciate having the ability to knock out the background. I've used the Canon lens since my 20D days, so I am comfortable with its heavy weight.

[PhotoTrekr]

I will be buying this lens. I never liked the original lens at 35mm. I regarded it as a 16-28mm lens where it was excellent in that range. I always used my 24-70 if I wanted to shoot at 35mm. Hopefully the new lens will be great throughout it's entire focal range.

[bertraml]

Hey Mark, can You tell us please, which DOF calculator app/program you used here at 10:33?
THX.

[DavidWood]

I deliberately opted for the FE PZ 16-35 F4 G shortly after release. I really don't feel the need for f/2.8 in an ultra-wide, and the size and weight savings are worthwhile. The power zoom is useful for video.

I take your point about the trinity - I've just upgraded my FE 70-200 F2.8 GM (mark 1) to the FE 70-200 F2.8 GM II, and I've bought the FE 24-70 F2.8 GM II. However, I think I will be keeping my hand in my pocket this time; I certainly will not be placing a pre-order at full price.

If I spend any more money on wide-angle lenses in the next two years, I will probably buy the FE 20 F1.8 G to use alongside my FE PZ 16-35 F4 G.

[lee_michae]

Really good review. Strictly for photography, would you say this produces a better picture than the 16-35 PZ? Some are saying this GM II isn't as sharp.

[sundeepsembi]

Why do they have two buttons on the lens, but the Sony menus only recognises the buttons as one button. This means you can only assign one function eg, focus hold to both buttons. It would be really nice if you could set each button separately so you could for example have camera set memory 1&2 . Or am I missing something?

[goodwolf]

Everyone always forgets about the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8. Not as much reach obviously, but as many people already carry a standard zoom anyway, the extra 2mm on the wide end may make the sacrifice on the long end worth while. And bonus, 14mm really is ideal for astro, if that’s something that matters to you. Sort of a compromise between the regular 16-35mm and 12-24mm Sonys, at a substantially lower price. Super sharp and with typically excellent Sigma Art build quality. Worth a look, perhaps.

[meditationdaily]

This one or 24-70 gm ii for street/travel - what is your opinion Mark?

[adrianahenao]

Thanks so much for this review. I’m switching from Nikon to Sony and I’m hesitant between the 12-24 f2.8 and this one. I’m a landscape photographer. I own the Nikkor Z 14-24 f2.8 from Nikon (a monster), however it’s a bit big. Thanks so much

[peterschulte]

Dear Mark, thx for this video. May i ask you the following? thx: What is the sweet spot of the 16-35 gm 2. If i am shooting with f8 or higher it looks less sharp as expected. A specialist told me, it will be something inbetween 4 - 5.6. for best results but that cannot be, can it be? Thx for answering me. Greets Peter from Germany.

[hidaven]

Not worth the extra $ IMO over the ultra-sharp PZ 16-35 which is much lighter and smaller. Also, the PZ can be used for smooth transitional video capture. F2.8 is becoming less of a need these days as post processing noise reduction software is top notch. Lastly, the PZ offers a much easier and productive experience if you gimbal mount. With this Gen. 2, the weight distribution will require re balancing. The PZ with an internal zoom will eliminate most dust. Minimal focus breathing is also a plus. : )