Nice photos! Thanks for the review. Seems like an amazing lens, but a little too rich for me :( You definitely need to incorporate some super slow mo in your videos. Especially for marshal arts footage. Would look so awesome and would add another level to your stories.
Thanks for reviewing this with the A6400, pretty much all other reviews have it on the stabilized 6600. I am selling off all my Canon gear in hopes of getting smaller and lighter to encourage me to take my camera more and shoot more often. I've settled on buying the A6400 for the bang for the buck. Getting a "do it all" zoom lens like this one totally fits the bill for me to take my camera out more often in that I can just grab a single lens when I go out. I don't do video and only shoot photos. Looking for something that will work for grabbing family photos when we are together but also something I can travel / hike with and get a little more creative. Do you think in real world use I will have poor results without IBIS or OSS? Thanks again for the great reviews!
In the real world I think you will be fine John. The stabilization is only needed when you have slower shutter speeds and want to hand hold. WIth this lens being a constant f/2.8, you really should not have a problem for most things. Extreme low light you would want to use a tripod and low ISO for the cleanest image possible no matter what camera body you were using. Slower shutter hand holding is where the A6600 and A6500 are a better option.
@@Jason_Hermann thanks so much for your quick and thoughtful response. Follow up question: I can currently pick up a used A6500 for cheaper than a used A6400 body. So for use with this lens if my goal is sharp handheld photos do you think I'd do better with the IBIS in the 6500 or the improved auto focus and color science of the 6400? The eye tracking seems quite helpful for taking photos of kids. Thank you again.
@@MPD90 thanks Mike. I originally bought this lens with a used A6500 and to be honest it would have been a great pairing but I was able to snag a great deal on an A6600 so now I've got the perfect combo ❤️
Great review! While this is pricey, I think it might be the one for me. My main concern is the lack of OSS. I won't shoot at a low shutter speed often, so I 'm really only concerned about it with videos. Is there an equivalent range lens with at least the same quality of sharpness at a wide open aperture (F2.8 or wider) that does have OSS?
Looking for a decent gimbal for A6400 + 16-55 combo. The one you show in this video looks interesting, wich one is it? And does it a good job? Is there a review for it?
The one I used is no longer made and I never reviewed it, because the app to control it did not work. However, the current equivalent would be the FeiyuTech Feiyu AK2000 here: amzn.to/2YXCWYo Now, if you have the extra money and knowing what I know now, I would highly recommend getting the DJI Ronin-S here: amzn.to/3f3sxzW
Great review, looking for a versatile lens like this for travel! Do you think this lens is worth it when paired with a Sony a6100 (no IBIS) for solely photography?
@@Jason_Hermann Many thanks , I am very new to camera things started my channel , got a6600 it have some kind of body stabilisation . Initially I purchased sigma 16mm f1.4 but it had no zoom a friend suggested this lens . If there is any other suggestions I can still replace this but if it does serve the purpose then considering it an expensive investment for channel I will keep this .
The one I used is no longer made and I never reviewed it, because the app to control it did not work. However, the current equivalent would be the FeiyuTech Feiyu AK2000 here: amzn.to/2YXCWYo Now, if you have the extra money and knowing what I know now, I would highly recommend getting the DJI Ronin-S here: amzn.to/3f3sxzW
Thank you very much Camila for the comments and feedback. I was trying to go with the beat of the music with the clips, but agree it is to fast. I really appreciate the feedback!!
Nice video, but wish could add more slow motion shot. Fast action is better view in slower motion. The transition of each clip seems too sudden. Well, I prefer the smooth feeling.
I totally agree, but you do get the same total range, great overall optical quality, and a pretty fast aperture all in one unit... Sony Is really making you pay top dollar though, no question! I have a feeling Sony might lower the price after the holidays, because it's pretty much across the board unanimous, "everybody" thinks it's to much money...
I recently got this lens and when I take pictures with the flash on its like black distortion at the bottom of the picture how can I solve that problem ?
Yes, that is the lens getting in the way of the on camera flash. There is not much you can do about that other than get a hot shoe flash that sits much higher up off the camera. Large lenses block the on camera flash, especially when close to your subject. Removing the lens hood might give you a little less shadow, but ultimately, the flash needs to be raised up. The kit lens is much smaller and does a better job with the on camera flash.
Yes it will work on the A6000 camera just fine and the images can look pretty much identical to the A6400 which is what I used for the review. Basically the same sensor as far as image quality goes, with a very slight edge to the a6400 because it it newer...
Jay, big decision for me. Thinking of downsizing my A7RII with 24-105mm f4 G to an a6500 with the 16-55mm f2.8. What are your thoughts on what I will gain/lose on such a switch as far as image quality between the two? Getting up there in age and I'm reaching the point of wanting to lighten up the kit bag, but, I don't want to lose image quality. From your review it looks pretty good but would really appreciate your input on this. Thanks, as always!
Hard decision for sure Steven. You are going to lose some range with the 16-55mm lens, but the overall IQ will be fairly close I would say in regular lighting conditions. Higher ISO and lower light situations is where you would see more noise on the smaller sensor images. I know you are looking for a lighter set-up, but a better all in one zoom lens in my opinion would be the Tamron. 17-70mm f/2.8 VC Lens: geni.us/d3s70B You get more range, image stabilization, and a reasonable price point as well. Another great option with less range, but excellent image quality would be the small lightweight Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Lens: geni.us/OXPD6 Also, If you look for used items, you can save a decent amount on BHPhoto as you can see here for the E 16-55mm lens your considering: bhpho.to/3F1kmCx I hope that helps and all the best, Jay
@@Jason_Hermann Thanks Jason! Just what I needed to hear. I have a chance at the 16-55 for $800 used. Would you still go with those other options considering that price point?
@@stevenguzy570 I would rather have the Tamron for the extra reach if I had just one lens. This 16-55mm lens offers great IQ, excellent sharpness, contrast, and color, but no stabilization and some significant distortion.. Top choice would be the Sigma Primes Trio consisting of the 16mm f/1.4 DC DN lens, 33mm, and 56mm prime lenses. Primes are not early as versatile though as I'm sure you know... I hope that helps and all the best, Jay
Hi there, Do you have an idea of how this lens compares to the previous A-mount version 16-50/2.8. This new version has crazy distortion to be honest, but could be interesting to know how they compare side by side considering that none of them have optical image stabilization but one will be 3 times the price of the other... 🙄🤔
Hello and sorry for the delayed reply! I have not compared it directly to the A-mount 16-50mm lens, but I have used it in the past and the lens coatings are not as good on the A-Mount, so slightly less puchy contrast. The A-Mount lens does offer better distortion control at 16mm though for sure! The aperture diaphragm blades are 7 vs 9, so the new lens will have better out of focus bokeh ball renderings at higher apertures. The A-mount lens does not have the focus hold button. The A-mount lens is about 100 grams heavier and a larger diameter which will require 72mm filters as opposed to 67mm. E-Mount lens offers slightly more reach as well. With the A-Mount, you will also need a lens adapter like the LA-EA3 which will increase the size and weight if that matters. The focus for video and sports will not work as good with the LA-EA3 as it will with a straight up mount to the camera either, although it will work good overall. The A-Mount lens goes for ~800 retail, so it's more than 1/2 the cost of the E-Mount 16-55mm @ $1400 Retail, plus you need the Adapter. Used of course you will find a way better deal though ;) I hope that helps! Jay
The one I used is no longer made and I never reviewed it, because the app to control it did not work. However, the current equivalent would be the FeiyuTech Feiyu AK2000 here: amzn.to/2YXCWYo Now, if you have the extra money and knowing what I know now, I would highly recommend getting the DJI Ronin-S here: amzn.to/3f3sxzW
Very pricey indeed, and I would also opt for the Sigma f/1.4 DC primes before investing in this. However, this is the perfect lens for some people wanting that on demand versatility and fast aperture. You really have the shell out some cash for it though Mark ;)
Probably needed to have a direct comparison between this new E-mount version vs the older A-mount version. I don't recall the 16-50/2.8 A-mount version to be so crazywith distortions. On the other hand the older version doesn't have a gasket on bayonet side to prevent from dust and moisture... Well I hope someone will do this side by side comparison. None of the lenses got optical stabilization. One is way more expensive than the other...
I’m on the fence, I need portrait lenses. I currently have the Sony 85 1.8 and the Zeiss 16-70 4.0 on my a6500. I was thinking of getting the Sigma trio or should I sell my Zeiss 16-70 4.0 and get this Sony 2.8 lens???
Jay SonyAlphaLab thank you so much for the feedback. I might go with the sigma 56 for starters then. Have you tried the 24-70 2.8 G-master and how it compares to this 16-55?
I have the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 and it's awesome! Also, yes I have reviewed the the FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Lens and it is better I would say, but it's optimized for a full frame camera so you would be carrying a lot of extra weight. Check out my FE 24-70mm GM Lens Review here: ruclips.net/video/I91_woHnSjM/видео.html
The lens is pretty good in low light, because it has a fast f/2.8 aperture throughout the entire range and the lens has a dust- and moisture-sealed design, along with a fluorine coating, to help support shooting in inclement conditions.
@@phplaw Which Sigma lens is better and cheaper? Now if you mean the faster prime lenses I would agree, but you would need all three lenses as opposed to just this one. Mind you I would rather have the SIgma trio myself for the record, but if you want the fastest APS-C all-in-one solution, this is the best option currently available if you can deal with the very high price point.
Jay SonyAlphaLab I mean Sigma trio better, I have Sigma trio and this lens also. This lens work badly in low light, super noise compare to Sigma trio. In daylight It works really well, produces sharp photo. I bought It just because of It is more convenient and faster than Sigma Trio but for me It is not worth of money for buying. Sigma Trio can produce better photo quality with a reasonable price.
@@phplaw Thank you for the reply and I agree. It's only worth it if you have the money first of all, and if you need that fast all-in-one convenience factor. The Zeiss 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens would be a much better option for most people, but the f/4 is clearly not the best for low light and background separation. The convenience factor, Image quality in good light, and range is awesome though!
For the Sony Fanboys - A7 II and all-new Sigma ART 24-70/2.8 FE is as combo way cheaper than this A6600/16-55 2.8 G, is Fullframe, not APS-C, and better Lens, and Image Quality. F2.8 on APS-C is just DoF like F4 on Fullframe. AF Speed is worse, but overall IQ better.
Great point Marc! That new Sigma has really made it easier to go full frame for sure :) Sigma should consider making one for the APS-C cameras as well I'm thinking!!
How do you know image quality is better between lenses? a6600 sensor has improvements over the a7III, esp with autofocus. 35mm isn't much different from APS-C.
I have had 5 copies of the SONY 16-55mm F2.8 G with a problem of double imagen in the bokeh, please see the examples photos.app.goo.gl/kfcikGsZvQyLzV876, the last two pictures are very clear. I have made a lab test (square black lines out of focus) with the same result: double verticals black lines bokeh. Can you check this problem? I would like to know if is an early batch manufactured problem or if the lens is super sharp (more than sigma trio) but with a horrible double bokeh for longer focal length than 30mm (very noticeable at 55 mm). I checked everything with and without camera corrections, with exactly the same result. The sharpness is amazing but the bokeh is not at the same level. Please check your copy, this could be the perfect lens for me, but not with this bokeh.
Yes, I tested it and my copy of the lens does the same thing, but I don't see this as a problem like you do. Bokeh comes in different flavours on various lenses, and I think the way this lens creates that double vertical depending on the focal range, distance and so fourth is just not for you. I believe that is how the lens is engineered however, and I would recommend looking for a different lens at this point Francisco.
@@Jason_Hermann thank you very much for the answer. I also tested the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 for FF and it has better contrast, similar sharpness and much better bokeh. With the same price no big difference in quality (except the bokeh), the problem is obvious, the size and the weight of the combo Camara+lens, the A7III+Sigma 24-70 F2.8 vs A6500+16-55 F2.8 is much bigger and heavier, everybody look at you. At this point, I am returning to the sigma trio with a lack of flexibility.
That is not the lens Herfried, I added that for effect when I was manually zooming the lens in my hand. This lens has no power zoom, it's a manual zoom, therefore it has zero noise when zooming in and out ;)
Awesome job man. Thanks for the review!
Thank you very much kenneth for the kind comments ;)
thank you so much for this video, has been so helpful!
You're very welcome Fran!
For what you shot with the Sony a6400 the 18105G lens would have been a much better tool.
Nice photos! Thanks for the review. Seems like an amazing lens, but a little too rich for me :( You definitely need to incorporate some super slow mo in your videos. Especially for marshal arts footage. Would look so awesome and would add another level to your stories.
Thanks for reviewing this with the A6400, pretty much all other reviews have it on the stabilized 6600. I am selling off all my Canon gear in hopes of getting smaller and lighter to encourage me to take my camera more and shoot more often. I've settled on buying the A6400 for the bang for the buck. Getting a "do it all" zoom lens like this one totally fits the bill for me to take my camera out more often in that I can just grab a single lens when I go out. I don't do video and only shoot photos. Looking for something that will work for grabbing family photos when we are together but also something I can travel / hike with and get a little more creative. Do you think in real world use I will have poor results without IBIS or OSS?
Thanks again for the great reviews!
In the real world I think you will be fine John. The stabilization is only needed when you have slower shutter speeds and want to hand hold. WIth this lens being a constant f/2.8, you really should not have a problem for most things. Extreme low light you would want to use a tripod and low ISO for the cleanest image possible no matter what camera body you were using. Slower shutter hand holding is where the A6600 and A6500 are a better option.
@@Jason_Hermann thanks so much for your quick and thoughtful response. Follow up question: I can currently pick up a used A6500 for cheaper than a used A6400 body. So for use with this lens if my goal is sharp handheld photos do you think I'd do better with the IBIS in the 6500 or the improved auto focus and color science of the 6400? The eye tracking seems quite helpful for taking photos of kids. Thank you again.
@@MPD90 thanks Mike. I originally bought this lens with a used A6500 and to be honest it would have been a great pairing but I was able to snag a great deal on an A6600 so now I've got the perfect combo ❤️
Great review! While this is pricey, I think it might be the one for me. My main concern is the lack of OSS. I won't shoot at a low shutter speed often, so I 'm really only concerned about it with videos. Is there an equivalent range lens with at least the same quality of sharpness at a wide open aperture (F2.8 or wider) that does have OSS?
Thank you and there's no other equivalent option....
Great video, does it have a nice smooth hand zoom for video?
Looking for a decent gimbal for A6400 + 16-55 combo. The one you show in this video looks interesting, wich one is it? And does it a good job? Is there a review for it?
The one I used is no longer made and I never reviewed it, because the app to control it did not work. However, the current equivalent would be the FeiyuTech Feiyu AK2000 here: amzn.to/2YXCWYo Now, if you have the extra money and knowing what I know now, I would highly recommend getting the DJI Ronin-S here: amzn.to/3f3sxzW
Great review, looking for a versatile lens like this for travel! Do you think this lens is worth it when paired with a Sony a6100 (no IBIS) for solely photography?
Yes, it is a great option although very expensive...
Can I use this lens for all rounder purpose , shooting indoor videos for youtube , photography etc assuming its wide angle zoom lens .
Yes, absolutely but keep in mind it does not have optical stabilization ;)
@@Jason_Hermann Many thanks , I am very new to camera things started my channel , got a6600 it have some kind of body stabilisation . Initially I purchased sigma 16mm f1.4 but it had no zoom a friend suggested this lens . If there is any other suggestions I can still replace this but if it does serve the purpose then considering it an expensive investment for channel I will keep this .
What gimbal did you use?
The one I used is no longer made and I never reviewed it, because the app to control it did not work. However, the current equivalent would be the FeiyuTech Feiyu AK2000 here: amzn.to/2YXCWYo Now, if you have the extra money and knowing what I know now, I would highly recommend getting the DJI Ronin-S here: amzn.to/3f3sxzW
Your images on the waterfall were amazing! As for the video I think at the beginning the changing of scenes happened too quickly.
Thank you very much Camila for the comments and feedback. I was trying to go with the beat of the music with the clips, but agree it is to fast. I really appreciate the feedback!!
Nice video, but wish could add more slow motion shot. Fast action is better view in slower motion. The transition of each clip seems too sudden. Well, I prefer the smooth feeling.
I appreciate the feedback, thank you!
Fantastic lens; wish it was cheaper. I can buy literally all three Sigma 16, 30, and 56 mm *f/1.4* lenses for this price...
I totally agree, but you do get the same total range, great overall optical quality, and a pretty fast aperture all in one unit... Sony Is really making you pay top dollar though, no question! I have a feeling Sony might lower the price after the holidays, because it's pretty much across the board unanimous, "everybody" thinks it's to much money...
@@Jason_Hermann Unfortunately, the lens is selling very well. Where I live, you cannot find them anywhere :\
I recently got this lens and when I take pictures with the flash on its like black distortion at the bottom of the picture how can I solve that problem ?
Yes, that is the lens getting in the way of the on camera flash. There is not much you can do about that other than get a hot shoe flash that sits much higher up off the camera. Large lenses block the on camera flash, especially when close to your subject. Removing the lens hood might give you a little less shadow, but ultimately, the flash needs to be raised up. The kit lens is much smaller and does a better job with the on camera flash.
Great work ...enjoyed the Light ...Aloha
Glad you enjoyed it ;)
is there any friction sound when opening the zoom out and in or is it completely silent?
There is a little friction sound yes. If you want a silent power zoom the E PZ 18-105mm f/4 OSS Lens geni.us/x0pL is a great option!
Thank you for the quick reply and suggestion, Cheers@@Jason_Hermann
Would This work for the sony a600 camera ? if so will it be great quality like the camera used in this video?
Yes it will work on the A6000 camera just fine and the images can look pretty much identical to the A6400 which is what I used for the review. Basically the same sensor as far as image quality goes, with a very slight edge to the a6400 because it it newer...
Jay, big decision for me. Thinking of downsizing my A7RII with 24-105mm f4 G to an a6500 with the 16-55mm f2.8. What are your thoughts on what I will gain/lose on such a switch as far as image quality between the two? Getting up there in age and I'm reaching the point of wanting to lighten up the kit bag, but, I don't want to lose image quality. From your review it looks pretty good but would really appreciate your input on this. Thanks, as always!
Hard decision for sure Steven. You are going to lose some range with the 16-55mm lens, but the overall IQ will be fairly close I would say in regular lighting conditions. Higher ISO and lower light situations is where you would see more noise on the smaller sensor images. I know you are looking for a lighter set-up, but a better all in one zoom lens in my opinion would be the Tamron. 17-70mm f/2.8 VC Lens: geni.us/d3s70B You get more range, image stabilization, and a reasonable price point as well. Another great option with less range, but excellent image quality would be the small lightweight Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 Lens: geni.us/OXPD6 Also, If you look for used items, you can save a decent amount on BHPhoto as you can see here for the E 16-55mm lens your considering: bhpho.to/3F1kmCx I hope that helps and all the best, Jay
@@Jason_Hermann
Thanks Jason! Just what I needed to hear. I have a chance at the 16-55 for $800 used. Would you still go with those other options considering that price point?
That is a great deal for $800 Steven, I would be tempted yes!
@@Jason_Hermann
But what is your top choice, not considering price?
@@stevenguzy570 I would rather have the Tamron for the extra reach if I had just one lens. This 16-55mm lens offers great IQ, excellent sharpness, contrast, and color, but no stabilization and some significant distortion.. Top choice would be the Sigma Primes Trio consisting of the 16mm f/1.4 DC DN lens, 33mm, and 56mm prime lenses. Primes are not early as versatile though as I'm sure you know... I hope that helps and all the best, Jay
Hi there,
Do you have an idea of how this lens compares to the previous A-mount version 16-50/2.8.
This new version has crazy distortion to be honest, but could be interesting to know how they compare side by side considering that none of them have optical image stabilization but one will be 3 times the price of the other... 🙄🤔
Hello and sorry for the delayed reply! I have not compared it directly to the A-mount 16-50mm lens, but I have used it in the past and the lens coatings are not as good on the A-Mount, so slightly less puchy contrast. The A-Mount lens does offer better distortion control at 16mm though for sure! The aperture diaphragm blades are 7 vs 9, so the new lens will have better out of focus bokeh ball renderings at higher apertures. The A-mount lens does not have the focus hold button. The A-mount lens is about 100 grams heavier and a larger diameter which will require 72mm filters as opposed to 67mm. E-Mount lens offers slightly more reach as well. With the A-Mount, you will also need a lens adapter like the LA-EA3 which will increase the size and weight if that matters. The focus for video and sports will not work as good with the LA-EA3 as it will with a straight up mount to the camera either, although it will work good overall. The A-Mount lens goes for ~800 retail, so it's more than 1/2 the cost of the E-Mount 16-55mm @ $1400 Retail, plus you need the Adapter. Used of course you will find a way better deal though ;) I hope that helps! Jay
what name of the gimbal did you use on your video?
The one I used is no longer made and I never reviewed it, because the app to control it did not work. However, the current equivalent would be the FeiyuTech Feiyu AK2000 here: amzn.to/2YXCWYo Now, if you have the extra money and knowing what I know now, I would highly recommend getting the DJI Ronin-S here: amzn.to/3f3sxzW
GOOD STUFF
nice pricey though for me as a hobbyist would look at the Sigma lenses as alternative
Very pricey indeed, and I would also opt for the Sigma f/1.4 DC primes before investing in this. However, this is the perfect lens for some people wanting that on demand versatility and fast aperture. You really have the shell out some cash for it though Mark ;)
Probably needed to have a direct comparison between this new E-mount version vs the older A-mount version.
I don't recall the 16-50/2.8 A-mount version to be so crazywith distortions. On the other hand the older version doesn't have a gasket on bayonet side to prevent from dust and moisture...
Well I hope someone will do this side by side comparison. None of the lenses got optical stabilization.
One is way more expensive than the other...
I’m on the fence, I need portrait lenses. I currently have the Sony 85 1.8 and the Zeiss 16-70 4.0 on my a6500. I was thinking of getting the Sigma trio or should I sell my Zeiss 16-70 4.0 and get this Sony 2.8 lens???
I would go with the SIgma Trio ;)
Jay SonyAlphaLab thank you so much for the feedback. I might go with the sigma 56 for starters then. Have you tried the 24-70 2.8 G-master and how it compares to this 16-55?
I have the Sigma 56mm f/1.4 and it's awesome! Also, yes I have reviewed the the FE 24-70mm f/2.8 GM Lens and it is better I would say, but it's optimized for a full frame camera so you would be carrying a lot of extra weight. Check out my FE 24-70mm GM Lens Review here: ruclips.net/video/I91_woHnSjM/видео.html
Great lens.
Thank you for the comments and I agree ;)
How is it in low light? Is it weather sealed?
The lens is pretty good in low light, because it has a fast f/2.8 aperture throughout the entire range and the lens has a dust- and moisture-sealed design, along with a fluorine coating, to help support shooting in inclement conditions.
@@Jason_Hermann thanks!
Nice glass
Thanks for the comments and I agree, although expensive!
How many meals do I have to skip to buy this lens? I.must.have.it!
A lot of meals Mark!!
Sigma lens are better and cheaper than this one
@@phplaw Which Sigma lens is better and cheaper? Now if you mean the faster prime lenses I would agree, but you would need all three lenses as opposed to just this one. Mind you I would rather have the SIgma trio myself for the record, but if you want the fastest APS-C all-in-one solution, this is the best option currently available if you can deal with the very high price point.
Jay SonyAlphaLab I mean Sigma trio better, I have Sigma trio and this lens also. This lens work badly in low light, super noise compare to Sigma trio. In daylight It works really well, produces sharp photo. I bought It just because of It is more convenient and faster than Sigma Trio but for me It is not worth of money for buying. Sigma Trio can produce better photo quality with a reasonable price.
@@phplaw Thank you for the reply and I agree. It's only worth it if you have the money first of all, and if you need that fast all-in-one convenience factor. The Zeiss 16-70mm f/4 OSS Lens would be a much better option for most people, but the f/4 is clearly not the best for low light and background separation. The convenience factor, Image quality in good light, and range is awesome though!
Is the AF quiet?
Yes sir ;)
A7iii+24-105=1300g, a6600+16-55=1000g. (A7iii+24-105=1300, Significantly better for almost the same money.)
Yes, or you could even go with the Sony A7 III and new Sigma FE 24-70mm f/2.8 lens ;) Certainly heavier and larger though...
What about it is significantly better? Looks largely the same as 35mm isn't much of a step up from APS-C.
The zooming noise you added is confusing
For the Sony Fanboys - A7 II and all-new Sigma ART 24-70/2.8 FE is as combo way cheaper than this A6600/16-55 2.8 G, is Fullframe, not APS-C, and better Lens, and Image Quality. F2.8 on APS-C is just DoF like F4 on Fullframe. AF Speed is worse, but overall IQ better.
Great point Marc! That new Sigma has really made it easier to go full frame for sure :) Sigma should consider making one for the APS-C cameras as well I'm thinking!!
How do you know image quality is better between lenses? a6600 sensor has improvements over the a7III, esp with autofocus. 35mm isn't much different from APS-C.
Is this a water / dust resistant model?
Yes!
I have had 5 copies of the SONY 16-55mm F2.8 G with a problem of double imagen in the bokeh, please see the examples photos.app.goo.gl/kfcikGsZvQyLzV876, the last two pictures are very clear. I have made a lab test (square black lines out of focus) with the same result: double verticals black lines bokeh. Can you check this problem? I would like to know if is an early batch manufactured problem or if the lens is super sharp (more than sigma trio) but with a horrible double bokeh for longer focal length than 30mm (very noticeable at 55 mm). I checked everything with and without camera corrections, with exactly the same result. The sharpness is amazing but the bokeh is not at the same level. Please check your copy, this could be the perfect lens for me, but not with this bokeh.
Yes, I tested it and my copy of the lens does the same thing, but I don't see this as a problem like you do. Bokeh comes in different flavours on various lenses, and I think the way this lens creates that double vertical depending on the focal range, distance and so fourth is just not for you. I believe that is how the lens is engineered however, and I would recommend looking for a different lens at this point Francisco.
@@Jason_Hermann thank you very much for the answer. I also tested the Sigma 24-70 F2.8 for FF and it has better contrast, similar sharpness and much better bokeh. With the same price no big difference in quality (except the bokeh), the problem is obvious, the size and the weight of the combo Camara+lens, the A7III+Sigma 24-70 F2.8 vs A6500+16-55 F2.8 is much bigger and heavier, everybody look at you. At this point, I am returning to the sigma trio with a lack of flexibility.
On a limited budget you buy a 1400 dollars lens
I did not buy anything if you are referring to me. I reviewed the lens and sent it back sir ;) I can't afford such gear these days...
The noise at the beginning of the video is an absolute no go for buying this lens ...
That is not the lens Herfried, I added that for effect when I was manually zooming the lens in my hand. This lens has no power zoom, it's a manual zoom, therefore it has zero noise when zooming in and out ;)