Excellent Video, Excellent Photography, and Excellent Night Time Photography. Your Volume Level Dropped After The Into Portion of Your Video. Thank You Jake.
Nice review Jake. I have loved putting the PZ on the AF-on (for +) and AEL (for -) buttons. Full range zooming with those two buttons, plus with CIZ you can get all the way to 50mm in video.
Great comparison video Jake! Brand new follower loving the content. Been very helpful on your guides and looking forward to visiting Alaska next year for vacation. Off the wall question here the orange north face jacket you wear on your videos which one is it? Looks very comfortable want to get one for my trip next year 😹 Thank you again!!
Excellent review. Nice to see you in the wild and not behind a desk in a dark room for most of your video. One lens that might work well with the Sony is the Tamron 11-20 2.8 for those in the dark shots. I have the Sony 18-105 aps-c lens for my Sony a6600 and it is fun with the power zoom. I am going to give this Sony PZ a good look at for my A7RIII. That small size makes it a nicer lens to carry around and not be too obvious and it weights less than the larger Sigma 24-70 2.8 I like to use. Even the 10-20 PZ for the aps-c looks interesting, making it a great replacement for the much older 10-18 lens. Thanks for making me feel colder with those Alaska outdoor shots. It's getting cold now where I live, dipping into the mid 60s. Yeah, I know it's not bad when others are looking a snow and we have a clear blue sky in the desert.
I really wish Sony had a 16-35m2.8 with the form factor of the f4. This was an absolutely awesome comparison! I’ve been considering the Tamron, but seems like it’s a good idea to wait.
Jake, You had me a "G". 🤣 And of course any lens looks like it provides great results when shooting that gorgeous background. Thanks for the review and it was a pleasure meeting you in Chicago at the meetup. Stay safe and remember, 7 inch quads don't like hitting hard ground. 🥴
I sold my Tammy 17-28 to buy the pz. For me it was a perfect switch, love the new pz lens with my a7siii and a74 . F4 is not an issue for me. If I need good low light I have several other Sony primes including the GM 14mm 1.8.
@@JakeSloan when I listed mine about a month ago seems like there was a flood of Tammy 17-28 lenses on eBay. Finally got mine sold on Gear Focus for less than I was expecting. Now for the first time ever I only have Sony glass.
Well done. Although the Tamron product is costs less the Sony product offers more control as you stated. I really did not detect any image differences on RUclips. 16-35 is on my wish list.
Just got my Sigma 16-28mm f2.8...love it. Like it so much, in fact, that I sold my Sony 20mm f/1.8. I hardly ever used that lens because it was rare that I only wanted to take a 20mm shot. Had the Tamron 17-28, but like the Sigma so much better!
@@SebastianWorldwide Of course these conclusions are due to whatever copy that you get of the lens and also you own personal preference. I just found the Sigma to be a better feeling lens with richer colors. To me, it seemed a little bit sharper and even more so in the higher range...but again, maybe the copy of Tamron I had wasn't the best one, etc. I've read opinions of reviewers that have gone both ways. I think bottomline, you can go wrong with either.
Great review, Jake. This really emphasizes the smart play by Sony by allowing 3rd party players like Tamron to quickly build an extremely varied, high quality lens portfolio. And Tanron simply has knocked some home runs like the first gen 17-28 that competes solidly in 2023.
I just scooped this up and I love it. I’ve been using sigma for financial reasons, but every time I use a Sony lens I’m just so much happier with the quality of the photos. I’m saving up to transition the rest of my kit to Sony glass!
I absolutely agree with you. I am also in the process of switching to Sony lenses only. We humans are emotional creatures. I just have a much better feeling which is hard to describe when I have Sony lenses on my great Sony camera.
Actually controlled tests show Tamron has slightly more resolution and contrast, so you can crop it more if necessary, which negates the difference at the long end. Tamron is also pretty well optically corrected unlike Sony, which shows huge distortions and unusable without software correction, which is a problem of itself. So unless one needs that powerzoom, I would definitely recommend Tamron.
You have a link comparing the Tamron at 28mm vs the Sony at 35mm? Ohhhh, you just made that up? I don't think you should be recommending anything to anyone.
I used this lens a lot but ultimately I use the 20-40 more since it has better low light. Lately I have been using the 17-50 f4 from tamron and loving it (except in low light of course)
The new Sony trio are lighter and smaller, but I think 17-28 is very good plus it is much cheaper if u buy all 3. For northern light do you think 17-28 is enough or I need to bring prime for that ? With gimbal ,tripod and drone there isn’t much space for backpack.
Okay, you just answered my question. I thought I was going absolutely nuts because I hate my Sony 16-35mm f/4 original Zeiss, because it isn’t sharp, it sucks!!! I will check the new one out or the Tamron, thanks. The zoom feature is of interest due to the purpose being video work and being used on a gimbal.
If I take night city skyline and night landscape shots, will the f4 hurt me? Can't decide between the f4 vs GM f2.8 Would love to save a buck so that I can get the f2.8 GM II whenever they get to it if quality is pretty much the same?
So this new Sony 16-35 f4, if I’m doing bracketing and or using flash indoors for real estate, this will work fine right? Not gonna miss 2.8 since it’ll be mostly around f4 or higher anyway? Thanks
Do you think the f4 is acceptable as a travel UWA zoom? I own the 16-35 GM but tempted to move to the PZ and pair it with a 24-70 f2.8. it feels like f2.8 is more useful in this range. I just don't want to regret it!
@@JakeSloan perfect, thank you! Additionally I felt like a) you don't aim for bokeh at ultra wide and b) you can have much lower shutter speeds at say 16mm
I'm planning to get a Sony A7C but still deciding which lens to buy for vlogging. Do you recommend Sony FE PZ 16-35mm F4 G, Sony FE 14mm F1.8 GM, Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN or Tamron 17-28mm F2.8. What's your take?
Thanks for this video Jake. I've been on the fence but after using the Tamron i wasn't super impressed. I think i'd rather take 1 stop of extra noise over lesser performance throughout the rest of the range. Like at 9:15 that difference between contrast when there's a lot of light...that might seal the deal for me
I shoot a fair amount of stills and I haven’t found it to be annoying. It responds really well to the zoom ring and pretty much feels like a manual zoom once you ge true speed set where you want it
ive had both. sonys picture was underwhelming and very dull; where it excelled was the AF. the tamron had a better picture and color, but AF was atrocious. i ended up returning both
Great review, informative, to the point and crystal clear. Appreciate the guidance. I think I'm going to pull the trigger
Thanks!
Excellent Video, Excellent Photography, and Excellent Night Time Photography. Your Volume Level Dropped After The Into Portion of Your Video. Thank You Jake.
Thanks Doug!
Great review Jake. Thanks . It’s was an awesome time hanging out with you my brother. 👊🏻👊🏻 I’m always learning from Jake the master 🤪👊🏻👊🏻
I had a blast too! Thanks for welcoming me into the group.
Thank You for all of your videos that you did.
You’re welcome
Nice review Jake. I have loved putting the PZ on the AF-on (for +) and AEL (for -) buttons. Full range zooming with those two buttons, plus with CIZ you can get all the way to 50mm in video.
That’s a fantastic idea!!
Great comparison video Jake! Brand new follower loving the content. Been very helpful on your guides and looking forward to visiting Alaska next year for vacation.
Off the wall question here the orange north face jacket you wear on your videos which one is it? Looks very comfortable want to get one for my trip next year 😹
Thank you again!!
Thanks! That’s the northface futurelite soft shell jacket. I love it!
😍❤Your channel is literally my comfort place. You make me so happy. ❤😁❤
Thank you
Excellent review. Nice to see you in the wild and not behind a desk in a dark room for most of your video. One lens that might work well with the Sony is the Tamron 11-20 2.8 for those in the dark shots. I have the Sony 18-105 aps-c lens for my Sony a6600 and it is fun with the power zoom. I am going to give this Sony PZ a good look at for my A7RIII. That small size makes it a nicer lens to carry around and not be too obvious and it weights less than the larger Sigma 24-70 2.8 I like to use. Even the 10-20 PZ for the aps-c looks interesting, making it a great replacement for the much older 10-18 lens.
Thanks for making me feel colder with those Alaska outdoor shots. It's getting cold now where I live, dipping into the mid 60s. Yeah, I know it's not bad when others are looking a snow and we have a clear blue sky in the desert.
Thank you!
"When I'm not standing on a glacier." :)
Hahahahaha you watched to the end! Thanks Kevin
@@JakeSloan Always! :)
I really wish Sony had a 16-35m2.8 with the form factor of the f4. This was an absolutely awesome comparison! I’ve been considering the Tamron, but seems like it’s a good idea to wait.
I 100% agree Tom! I would wait just a bit. Rumors are a new version of the 17-28 is on the way and who knows what Sony has planned!!!
If you wait, that may come out soon ha ha
I wish i had a few million dollars
I don't have any cameras but still like to view your channel.
Thanks Jim!
I met u the other day n u were wearing the same shirt. I'm glad u washed it 👍🏽🤣. Cool meeting n rippin with u 🤘🏽🤝🏽
Great review on the lense 👍🏽
Dude that was so fun to meet you and hang out with everyone!!!
Jake, You had me a "G". 🤣 And of course any lens looks like it provides great results when shooting that gorgeous background. Thanks for the review and it was a pleasure meeting you in Chicago at the meetup. Stay safe and remember, 7 inch quads don't like hitting hard ground. 🥴
Hahahahaha it was so much fun meeting you and hanging out!! Thanks for welcoming me
I sold my Tammy 17-28 to buy the pz. For me it was a perfect switch, love the new pz lens with my a7siii and a74 . F4 is not an issue for me. If I need good low light I have several other Sony primes including the GM 14mm 1.8.
It’s a great lens. I feel like the colors and contrast are just slightly better on the Sony too. I’ll probably be listing mine for sale soon lol
@@JakeSloan when I listed mine about a month ago seems like there was a flood of Tammy 17-28 lenses on eBay. Finally got mine sold on Gear Focus for less than I was expecting. Now for the first time ever I only have Sony glass.
Very well put together. I am window shopping for lense.
Thanks!
@@JakeSloan I have sony a7iii, can I use rocker zoom, I dont exactly what it is called, using camera switch to zoom.
Well done. Although the Tamron product is costs less the Sony product offers more control as you stated. I really did not detect any image differences on RUclips. 16-35 is on my wish list.
Agreed and thank you
Just got my Sigma 16-28mm f2.8...love it. Like it so much, in fact, that I sold my Sony 20mm f/1.8. I hardly ever used that lens because it was rare that I only wanted to take a 20mm shot. Had the Tamron 17-28, but like the Sigma so much better!
Nice!! I’ve been testing the next 20-40 from tamron and I think I may be selling my 17-28 lol
@@JakeSloan 20mm is not wide enough for my interests, but it sounds like the 20-40 will appeal to a lot of folks.
Could you please give me further informations why you like the Sigma more than the Tampon? Is it sharper?
@@SebastianWorldwide Of course these conclusions are due to whatever copy that you get of the lens and also you own personal preference. I just found the Sigma to be a better feeling lens with richer colors. To me, it seemed a little bit sharper and even more so in the higher range...but again, maybe the copy of Tamron I had wasn't the best one, etc. I've read opinions of reviewers that have gone both ways. I think bottomline, you can go wrong with either.
@@martin9410 thank you 😊😊🤝
Maaan, thanks to your IG....the background in your intro got my boy Frank stuck in my head again lol
Hahahahahaha awesome!
Great review, Jake. This really emphasizes the smart play by Sony by allowing 3rd party players like Tamron to quickly build an extremely varied, high quality lens portfolio. And Tanron simply has knocked some home runs like the first gen 17-28 that competes solidly in 2023.
agreed!!
Hello,
Thanks for the great review !
Could you elaborate more on the sharpness differences between the lenses ?
Thanks
They are very very close, I'd say possibly the sony is slightly better sharpness overall but they are extremely close
@@JakeSloan Thanks !
@@JakeSloan Thanks !
I just scooped this up and I love it. I’ve been using sigma for financial reasons, but every time I use a Sony lens I’m just so much happier with the quality of the photos. I’m saving up to transition the rest of my kit to Sony glass!
Awesome
I absolutely agree with you. I am also in the process of switching to Sony lenses only. We humans are emotional creatures. I just have a much better feeling which is hard to describe when I have Sony lenses on my great Sony camera.
Ok, i'm in love with those....not sure what to call em....ice caves? Freakin' gorgeous man.
Yeah they are carved into glaciers by water over many years.
Actually controlled tests show Tamron has slightly more resolution and contrast, so you can crop it more if necessary, which negates the difference at the long end. Tamron is also pretty well optically corrected unlike Sony, which shows huge distortions and unusable without software correction, which is a problem of itself. So unless one needs that powerzoom, I would definitely recommend Tamron.
Agreed and especially for the extra stop of light
You have a link comparing the Tamron at 28mm vs the Sony at 35mm? Ohhhh, you just made that up? I don't think you should be recommending anything to anyone.
Please review the upcoming tamron 20-40 f2.8....considering to get that over the Sony 16-35 F4 PZ.
I am working on that!
Hi Jake, which lens do you now use more the Tamron 20-40mm 2.8 or this Sony 16-35 F4. I'm still on the fence on which lens to get. Thanks!
I used this lens a lot but ultimately I use the 20-40 more since it has better low light. Lately I have been using the 17-50 f4 from tamron and loving it (except in low light of course)
The new Sony trio are lighter and smaller, but I think 17-28 is very good plus it is much cheaper if u buy all 3. For northern light do you think 17-28 is enough or I need to bring prime for that ? With gimbal ,tripod and drone there isn’t much space for backpack.
Agreed!!
Okay, you just answered my question. I thought I was going absolutely nuts because I hate my Sony 16-35mm f/4 original Zeiss, because it isn’t sharp, it sucks!!! I will check the new one out or the Tamron, thanks. The zoom feature is of interest due to the purpose being video work and being used on a gimbal.
Awesome glad this helped.
If I take night city skyline and night landscape shots, will the f4 hurt me?
Can't decide between the f4 vs GM f2.8
Would love to save a buck so that I can get the f2.8 GM II whenever they get to it if quality is pretty much the same?
If you are only doing photos then it won’t hurt you much. Video it will make a big difference
So this new Sony 16-35 f4, if I’m doing bracketing and or using flash indoors for real estate, this will work fine right? Not gonna miss 2.8 since it’ll be mostly around f4 or higher anyway? Thanks
thats correct, with f4 and doing stills work you won't miss 2.8 especially if you are bracketing
@@JakeSloan thanks. Now i know what I’m getting next 😂.
Do you think the f4 is acceptable as a travel UWA zoom? I own the 16-35 GM but tempted to move to the PZ and pair it with a 24-70 f2.8. it feels like f2.8 is more useful in this range. I just don't want to regret it!
I do unless you film a LOT in very dark locations.
@@JakeSloan perfect, thank you! Additionally I felt like a) you don't aim for bokeh at ultra wide and b) you can have much lower shutter speeds at say 16mm
I'm planning to get a Sony A7C but still deciding which lens to buy for vlogging. Do you recommend Sony FE PZ 16-35mm F4 G, Sony FE 14mm F1.8 GM, Sigma 16-28mm F2.8 DG DN or Tamron 17-28mm F2.8. What's your take?
I would get the tamron 17-28 out of those choices
@@JakeSloan Thank you!
I love internal zooming lenses!
Me too!
Thanks for this video Jake. I've been on the fence but after using the Tamron i wasn't super impressed. I think i'd rather take 1 stop of extra noise over lesser performance throughout the rest of the range. Like at 9:15 that difference between contrast when there's a lot of light...that might seal the deal for me
Agreed. The Sony has slightly better contrast and colors
Can you compare the new sigma 16-28 vs the PZ?
if I can find one to test sure
If astro really is your focus, then you should be on a prime. That 1.4/1.8 is a much bigger difference to 2.8 than 2.8 is to 4.
Exactly right
First air2 s army out
you are almost always first Mike!! Cheers
Anyone here mostly a stills shooter and using the new 16-35mm pz? I don’t do video and I’m worried I’ll get really annoyed by the electronic zoom.
I shoot a fair amount of stills and I haven’t found it to be annoying. It responds really well to the zoom ring and pretty much feels like a manual zoom once you ge true speed set where you want it
Would you take the Sony 16-25 or the Sigma 16-28 if the Sigma was 400 USD cheaper?
I haven't used the sigma so I can't say but I know sigma makes great glass so if it fits your budget then go for it
"It's very responsive the way it responds."
It is very responsive
Did you pilot the helicopter? It’s very cool of you, living in Alaska and drive your own helicopter.
I did pilot it but it’s not my helicopter! I wish lol.
ive had both. sonys picture was underwhelming and very dull; where it excelled was the AF. the tamron had a better picture and color, but AF was atrocious. i ended up returning both
interesting my experience with the tamron was always great
@@JakeSloan perhaps i got a bad copy, but i did pick up at 20-70 F4 G, which is a spectacular lens on all metrics