Sony 16-50mm Kit vs 16-70mm Zeiss Comparison
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- Find the kit lens on Amazon here: amzn.to/2m4fHGV
Find the Zeiss here: amzn.to/2mPaPFO
M Y G E A R :
Cameras -
📷 WHAT I USE TO RECORD: geni.us/qEib
📷 BACKUP CAMERA: geni.us/eWBG
📷 BEST STARTER/BUDGET CAMERA: geni.us/Ujn1TC3
📷 BEST FULL FRAME FOR THE $$$: geni.us/8PxAj
Lenses -
❤️ MY #1 MOST RECOMMENDED LENS: geni.us/BbGlnB
❤️ BEST PORTRAIT LENS: geni.us/bvwq
❤️ BEST ULTRAWIDE LENS: geni.us/ARXj
❤️ BEST DO-EVERYTHING LENS: geni.us/dDLwY
❤️ WHAT I FILM MY VIDEOS WITH: geni.us/ojGKI
❤️ MY FAVORITE CHEAP/MANUAL LENS: geni.us/cQoztp
Accessories -
🔋🔋 CAMERA BATTERIES: geni.us/TXaeo3B
🎤 AUDIO RECORDER: geni.us/L5dejj
🎤 MICROPHONE: geni.us/O8UzW
⚙️ BEST CHEAP TRIPOD: geni.us/4uf5
⚙️ BEST GIMBAL: geni.us/iYiy
⚙️ SD CARD: geni.us/7BhUrBj
🛒 SHOPPING ON AMAZON? geni.us/yn7t0 (Paid Amazon Link)
🌍 OUTSIDE OF THE US? USE THIS LINK: geni.us/ezoD (Paid Amazon Link)
🎦 MY E-MOUNT PAGE: www.amazon.com/shop/technolog...
👧🏼 MY WIFE'S RUclips: goo.gl/P7D5RW
🖼️ INSTAGRAM: / arthur213
DISCLOSURES:
I participate in the Amazon Affiliates Program, where I earn a small commission if you decide to purchase an item at no cost to you.
I participant in the B&H Affiliates Program, an affiliate advertising program in which I earn commissions by linking to bhphoto.com at no cost to you.
What an honest review, free from any manipulation of sponsors. Now I can concentrate more on taking photos and adore my kit lens and A6000. Once again, you showed unimportance of the expensive gears. You made a lot of people to save hundreds of dollars. Thanks...
I wouldn't agree with that conclusion. The Zeiss is better in nearly all areas and you can see the difference on the pictures. Maybe not if you have small pictures in your hands, but on the screen you see the difference in terms of sharpness, colours and contrasts. I have both lenses. But the Zeiss is not only sharper, the other big advantage is that you have 70mm f/4 instead of 50mm f/5.6 which is much better for portraits and give you better bokeh and flexibility. The kit lense is quite ok, but more expensive gear is not useless or unimportant.
Thunderbird1337 if you shoot portraits at 70mm f4 you wouldn't impress clients would you... that is not the purpose of the lens... portraits look good at wider apertures
There is also other option less expensive that are also 70mm f/4
Tuca Martins There is just no alternative zoom lens for E-mount existing with the same flexibility, weight and size. Sure, whenever I can I use prime lenses. But such a compact zoom lens is made for holidays/ trips when you can't or don't want to carry around heavy gear. I just came back from holidays in Sicily yesterday and I only used the Zeiss although I had some prime lenses with me. It's just way too uncomfortable to carry around more than just the camera and one lens when you are walking hours in the heat of the sun. And you don't want to change lenses when everything is full of sand, dirt etc. That's what a flexible zoom lens is perfect for. And it must be small and lightweight. A 18-105 is no alternative in terms of weight and size, and the kit lens has noticeably worse image quality, so it's no option either.
Varun Kamal That absolutely depends on the situation. F/4 for portraits can be absolutely fine. Depends on how far your object is away from the background etc. Sometimes you need a higher DOF as f/1.8 can offer, or in bright sunlight you can't just use wider apertures without using filters. We are talking about a small and lightweight zoom lens for trips/ holidays, so handling with filters is no option in many cases. And of course, nobody would use such a compact zoom lens for portraits whenever there is a possibility to use an adequate prime lens. Unfortunately there is not always the possibility. That's where zoom lenses come in, offering a compromise.
The video is helpful to me. The result is surprise to me. I am the user with kit lens in A6000 and have a urge to buy the 16-70mm Zeiss. The review remind me that the difference between two lens is not massive and the expensive lens don't improve the quality of photo. I will learn more knowledge and skills about taking photo rather than buying more expensive lens.
陈小伙 smart decision.. keep on 🙂
A very clever decision.
Indeed you're so right! I have the same issue. Recently bought the A6000 with two kit lenses, wanting to buy a Zeiss prime/zoomlens, but after this review I have to reconsider my 'wanting'. So like you, I am going to spend more time to improve my technical and photografical skills.
I think he has a bad copy of the Zeiss lens
I liked this review a lot. Many years ago I had a Leica M2 and loved it. It supported 35, 50, and 90 mm lenses, which I also loved. It was stolen and I got out of photography. Now 45 years later, I live in the mountains of Western Colorado. It seemed so senseless to be taking beautiful hikes and just taking pictures with my cell phone. So I bought a Sony a6000 with the Sony-Zeiss 16-70. It more or less exactly mirrors my old camera in terms of capabilities. The mountain landscapes as well as the mountain flowers come out extremely sharp and with beautiful colors, both better if I use my tripod and shudder release cord. I'm totally happy with this combination. I'm also happy that the kit lens is also excellent.
Pretty much one of the most honest reviews.. Excellent job. Thank you for sharing valuable information
Excellent! Thank you, been waiting for this comparison.
Man, I just love your reviews... so extremely clear and objective. TechnologyMafia is my #1 Go-To for all a6000 lens and accessory reviews, research and information. Thanks for making this so easy!
Thanks for the video! Surprising result. I haven't been able to find a comparison b/w the 18-105 and the 55-210, especially interested in the telephoto end. Would love to see it on your channel if you get a chance.
Thank you so much for a completely unbiased review. I got a used a6000 with kit lens, and was considering the Zeiss. I won't bother now 😁
Just getting into Sony mirrorless world and I bought a cheapo, used A6000 which did not come with a lens. I started looking for lens that would suffice me for some time and this review helped a lot. Appreciate the honesty, and quite obviously a LOT of efforts have gone into making this video. Kudos. We actually need reviews from people who are doing honest testing and don't call themselves pro. All the best. I am subscribing to your channel!
After 4 years do you have any lens advice based on your real world experience with the A6000? I just bought an immaculate used 5T with the kit lens but I might upgrade the lens it if it's worth it. Im a novice shooter. Thanks
Thank you for creating such a great comparison. I have been debating on which lens to purchase without having to spend to much for quite a while. This helped me much.
Thanks for this review. Guess I'll stick with my kit lens which I have been happy with as a holiday walk around combo.
Oh boy, did NOT expect that result! Very nice with a comparison like this, thanks again for a great video!
Thank you for this great review. I recently bought a kit lens off eBay, mostly for its portability. Good to know, I can expect decent quality as well.
Hi, thank you for this detailed report, well done I think.
You continue to have a good light.
Alfred from Germany
Great review, as always. It eased my anxiety using the kit lens for travel, I'll switch to the prime lens in the night.
Thank you for the video! Just received Sony A6300 body and thinking for the Zeiss, but now i go for the kit. For amateur use is very good, pocket portable, taking photos anywhere...perfect. I have read many opinions and results even on Amazon about the Zeiss, surprisingly many people are not satisfied even have returned it...
Like and congrats for your work.
Great job with all the videos. You have given me a lot of value. Recently changed from Canon to Sony. Thanks a lot!
Thanks for sharing really helpful videos! Your videos made me buy a sony camera. Been putting it to good use. Saving up for a better lens. Keep it up!
Thanks for this comparison! That settles it. I was contemplating to upgrade to the Zeiss for my RUclips videos, but the marginal improvements do not justify the investment for me. If I did not have the kit lens and I had to decide between the two, I'd probably go with the Zeiss for it's better resell value. But if you already have the kit lens then buying the Zeiss is a harder decision.
Keep up the great work!
wow! pretty awesome review! I have the kit lens and the 18-105mm. your preview for the 18-105mm is just as awesome!
I don't know if it's been said already but you need to make sure that your focus point is the same for both images (preferably manually) and that you don't have subject or camera movement between lenses changes. Both could explain the vast difference in sharpness in your last photo comparison.
bahamakyle thought the same here...
Well said! Just purchased the 6000 as well, and I ended up arriving at the same conclusion from watching this. Thanks for all the videos so far they're helping me out a ton.
I agree but across multiple photos...not sure
Yes, he does not address differences in focus point at all.
It makes the whole test completly unreliable in my opinion.
The ZEISS consistently has superb sharpness in the center. The one photo that has the Kit Lens beating out the ZEISS is obviously not focused on the eyes. The ZEISS is definitely better than the kit but it is just a question of correct focus. Now in 2023 you can get the mint ZEISS for $300 used. The kit for about $100.
Thanks for the great review. I was one of those that specifically asked for this comparison. I've been very happy with the kit lens and suspected there wasn't the difference between it and the 16-70 wasn't worth $800. Your test confirmed it. I'm putting the $$ towards primes. In your comparisons, do you always use just one image for each lens? Might be useful to take 2 or three images for each and defocus and refocus each time, just in case focus was slightly different e.g. eye vs eyebrow. Great work. Thanks.
Thanks for this great comparison. It really helped me.
Very good review. You're a better photographer than some of the youtubers who claim to be pro photographers. I have both the 18-55mm and 16-50mm kit lenses. I like both of them. Unless you blow up images the kit lens seems to work fine in well-lit scenes. I'd take the kit lens and save $800 for the next camera.
Thanks for the compliments! I agree with you about the money savings. Next camera or a prime or 2 or 3 haha.
Perfect example of what I am trying to get my head around. In many of these photos the Zeiss was sharper in the very far corners, but the cheap little kit lens was equal or close and a few times sharper in the center. With all of the talk about great bokeh, is it really that necessary to have it completely sharp in the far corners? Or, can that out of focus be considered a type of bokeh? Think about it... I am taking a photo of my subject in the center of the frame...It is perfectly focused there...in the corners, like in these photos, there are some tree branches...they are a little out of focus with the kit lens, but here's my point...Do I really care?!! My center subject is sharp as a tack! Are 99% of the people viewing this image going to see the corners are a little blurry, or if they do, care?
So, if the corners of some trees off in the distance are out of focus, is that not a form of bokeh? And do I really want those branches to be IN FOCUS? Or, is it OK if they are a little blurry? Call me crazy, but I really don't care. As long as my subject is sharp and 90% of the rest of the image is pretty darn sharp, I say who cares if the far corners, I mean the far 5-10% in the very corners, is soft. If anything, doesn't that put more emphasis on my subject?! Become a form of bokeh? Is this not considered a form of bokeh because some lenses do keep that in focus? Is that the only reason?
And, is it really critical that a tree's branches be sharp way out there in the far corners? Not to me anyway...I say who cares if, when I blow it up 100x, it's not sharp way out there. Aren't we splitting hairs and being awfully picky? This is pixel peeping after all...and my problem with it! ;)
Now, look at the difference in price to get those 5-10% of the far corners in focus. Utterly and completely NOT WORTH IT!
I agree! Heck forget the camera and save for a vacation!
I prefer that most of my landscape photos are tack sharp corner to corner. Bokeh is nice, but bokeh isn't appropriate for scenic pictures.
@@scottrostad1137 this comes down to really buying lenses to fill very specific shooting roles. Every scenic shooter is shaking their head going you so crazy... pictures of buildings?
Like the flexibility of your kit lens but shoot those kinds of things and you'll be looking for a different lens.
Big on Bokeh? You'll probably want a different lens eventually. Personally I'd put the money into paying off debt or investing and save it for when there is an affordable camera as good as the 6400 that has IBIS. Then I'd sell my 6400 and buy the IBIS camera and stop buying lenses that are OSS.
One of the reasons I keep a completely different brand older camera around is in body stabilization on non stabilized lenses.
Unfortunately the 6500 and a7ii cant compete with the 6400 in so many other areas. But even then... I'd rather spend that $800 on a A7II because it's like having 2 lenses for every lens you own. Part of owning different sensor sizes is that your lenses now fill 2 different rolls.
Eventually I'll probably get an A7ii or a7iii for that reason. So I can IBIS and full frame to take advantage of different lenses and or use existing lenses in different ways.
This is a lot of work! Thank you for doing this for free! Oh my god! This is very valuable and professional review!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you for a really great review. It's very useful indeed!
This video confirms my feeling, I had a a5000 with "kit lens" I sold that to buy a a6000 with a zeiss lens. The truth is I am missing my old lens, Im sensetive to cromativ aberration and I think the Zeiss is awfull. After seen your video Im convinced to sell the zeiss and go find a kit lens from ebay and save some money. I have taken some amazing portraits with my old a5000 (and the kit lens) and have not had the same feeling with the zeiss. Great Video!!
Wow I wouldn't have believed it if I hadn't seen it my-self . . . I've never used the kit lense that came with my A6000 but I'm going to have to dust it off and check it out my-self after watching your video. Cheers!
Hey! Can you please see which lens is better in low light?
Which lens do you use ?
Thank you for this video! For my travel video channel, I am trying to save up for a sony a6500 (because of the IBIS), but in my country (Spain) the a6500 is not offered with the kit lens, but you convinced me to buy it separately instead of the Zeiss. I need it to be light and portable, probably for vlogging and the kit lens just suits me better. You convinced me that the image quality is good enough to keep shooting until I can upgrade lenses :)
Outstanding comparison. Results were surprising. Thanks.
Very well done ! It's refreshing to see reviews done by a self-proclaimed amateur since the perspective is closer to what other amateurs look for (as opposed to pros who make a living from their gear). I have the old 18-55 kit lens which came with my original NEX 5 as well as the 16-50 kit which came with my A6000. I guess my view is not that the 16_70 is poor for the money ... it's more that the kit lenses (despite some awful reviews) are actually quite good and represent great value. Of these lenses, I tend to use the 16-50 for casual shooting where the small size is handy (carry the camera in a dust cover) and the 16-70 for more serious wide to short telephoto shots. the zeiss is pricey but, the fact is that I like it and use it a lot so I'm not upset at all at the price I paid. It"s more that I'm really happy that kit lens is so good :-)
Perfect! I'm looking into trading my OMD for an a6000 and this was the comp I was looking for. The Zeiss looks to have better colour and slightly (if erratic) better sharpness but not enough for me to justify an additional GBP 600.
After 5 years do you have any lens advice based on your real world experience with the A6000? I just bought an immaculate used 5T with the kit lens but I might upgrade the lens it if it's worth it. Im a novice shooter. Thanks
SUCH a helpful review. I agree that for an amateur, the Zeiss (sp?) doesn't seem worth the extra cost at retail, but maybe if you can get it used and in good condition, it might be worth the upgrade. About the sharpness in the portraits and especially the last photo, how can you be 100% sure the focus was on the same spot? Maybe it's due to the depth of field and Zeiss focused on her nose or something? But maybe not since the last pic was f8. Again, so helpful. Thank you so much!
well done man love your compare so much
Thank you!
What a good job you've done there !!! Thanks a lot !
A thousand thanks for taking the time to do this review....
Youre welcome, I am glad it is helping people!
Thank you for this great comparison!
I just came across this and it is sound advice. I have the 24-70 Zeiss for my full frame and have the same exact experience vs. the 24-70 kit lens. After picking up an a6100 to travel with, I naturally was looking at the 16-70. People forget that the only people who will pixel peep is yourself.
Thanks, V helpful, I use the kit lens for travel because it is so compact and I generally stop it down and find it reasonable sharp. My camera fell off the tripod on to the rocks in Newfoundland smashing the kit lens. A couple of days and 100 dollars and I had a replacement and didn't shed a tear. It's just not great for portraits but my old Nikons primes fit nicely on the A6000 but are a lot more work.
After several reviews,i recently bought sony a5100 with with 16-50mm lens kit. it exceeds my expectations with that budget. Great picture quality.
Nice comparison, only one small correction if you buy the kit lens separately the price is $350 right now $298 on special at B&H 👍
Great review. Now I am sticking with my kit lens. It gives me a lot of good results. And its light and portable at the same time.
Same here👍
Great review! I was really expecting the Zeiss lens would be better as well.
Is the international version of the Zeiss 16-70 F4 any different?
Great video. I've been hesitant in getting the Zeiss because it's an f4 lens that is priced like an f2.8. It seems to be $200 more than it should be. You have convinced me to continue to wait. Sony has alluded that this year will be a year of lenses. Let's hope for a good f2.8 zoom!
I just bought a 5T with the kit lens but Im looking to replace it with something affordable that performs better in low light, mostly for recording. Any advice? Im a novice shooter. Thanks
Thank you so much for this video!!! Helped a lot.
Surely, Tech- M, you are returning the Zeiss and keeping the 18-105 f.4! Wow, this plus your comparison video between the 16-70 and the 18-105 have been real eye openers!
I am so glad that I opted for the bigger lens- no regrets now, thanks to your stellar comparisons. Like you, I am super shocked!
That's about what I would expect too. Did a brief test on the zeiss demo set at sony centre and was surprised at how blurry it was when AF-C is switched on. When switched to AF-S, it's sharper, but can't help but noticed it ain't expensively sharper than the kit. Try to do multiple shots cause the AF tends to mis-focus which could explain the varying results. That was few years back so not sure if the firmware update fixed the AF bug. Kind of makes you ponder that just cause it's 10x expensive, doesn't necessarily mean it's 10x better.
Very helpful comparison.
Thanks.
Such a great review. You save me!
Subscribed! Great work. Appreciate your efforts 😊
Some differences could be due to how well you focused the two shots. Also, you need to label which is the zeiss photo and which is the other.
Thank you for this comparison!
while watching the video, i was like... whaaaaaat??? i was planning to save up for the 16-70, but i think i will just go for the 18-105 after watching this review. thanks for the great comparison review. wish you could do a same comparison between the 18-105 and the kit.
AndrewStar I have! 5-6 videos ago.
Well, the Zeiss is better than the 18-105 at almost all FL's, so there's your answer. It is cheaper though.
This is forever be the best lens comparison Video 🙏
Subscribed!The perfect channel for sony camera users!
Man I love your objective reviews!!!!!!
Exactly what I wanna know. Especially for me as a newbie
You are very humble man, stay true to yourself!
Can you please compare the two lenses in low light?
I've tested also these 2 lenses and i think that for the price difference stay with the kit lens is better :(
I hate the 16-50 3.5/5.6 but for the price is the best
I love the composition at 11:55!
Thank you for your review I was thinking about buying the Zeiss lens this week. I bought the kit lens yesterday. And it seems to be very sharp not too bad for a cheap lens. I've been using my G Master 24 1.4 of course that's always better but I thought I'd get something that's made for the APS-C camera. I don't think I'm going to buy the Zeiss lens now it seems to be a lot of problems with focusing I hear. Thank you for your review
That zeiss lens it's been around for a while now maybe a revised new version might be worth the high price. Thanks for the good info!
Awesome video what I was looking for
How about the sound noise when zooming in and out when recording video, thank you...
Thanks for that review. This is the exact dilemma I have had.... A6300 with lens kit or a6500 with Zeiss.
There are some things in your test which I would photograph completely different.
I always try to photograph a portrait with a low f-stop. The portrait at the end with f/8 is very interesting. I'm curious what it would look like with f/4 or f/5.6.
But for Landscape or travel I would take the Zeiss because it's sharper in the corners with the aperture closed to 5.6 or smaller.
Last I would say it's not a Zeiss only lens, it's a collaboration between Sony and Zeiss.
Great comparing. Thanks
I had very similar results, however, I notice that you didn't address the fact that the sel1650 renders colour quite differently where light hits a surface. For instance, you'll notice that on your wife's face, the 1650 has more white spots, and less colour detail and contrast as a result. You can get around this by turning down highlights in post process. I ended up keeping the 1670z because it was overall a sharper lens with more reach. If the 18105G was a retractable zoom, I'd probably have bought that instead.
Good review, last picture seems to be a tad out of focus on the zeiss. But I think you have an excellent point, is it really worth it?
I love the kit lens. No way would I replace it with that huge Zeiss. Optically it may be better but it won't fit in my pocket. I have had some crazy sharp stunning images from the kit lens. No complaints from me.
Good review mate, thanks.
You doing it good.
i'm a street photography and sometimes I do landscape or portrait. so technically it is abit of everything. is it worth the upgrade from a6500 to a7ii ?
You have really sold me on this kit lens honestly. I'm a photographer for a while now, and i'm changing to sony from nikon because i want to go in depth to video and my D7000 is not very good at it. Also it's a heavy beast with my Sigma, while i want to go light now...
This lens is not bad. I am going to buy a lot of old primes, but this will be my go-to lens when i want AF all purpose. Thank you very much.
can you compare between sony 16-70 vs sigma 17-70 ,17-50?
We can say that it is the same story for Video performance as well ?
After watching this I will be sticking to fixed primes for pure sharpness and the kit lens for portability. Another great video.
12:25 is outstanding, don't know if there was something weird in the settings but look at the sharpness on that kit less or - better - that softness on the Zeiss...and it's 800$!
there's a lot of processing done by the camera to reduce barrel distortion, chromatic abbreviation, etc. when the kit lens is used. Therefore, more differences can be seen when photos are taken with raw.
Can you make a comparison between Zeiss 16-17 and Sony 18-135 please?
thank you for this review
Very honest comparison, I saw the 18-105 PZ comparison also but I have a question: I want something like these lenses but with great photo quality, what about E 18-200 or E PZ 18-200?
I have 16 - 50 kit and 35 mmf1.8 sony lens.. I need one more lens which one should I buy for my new sony a6500
did not see this coming, could you do a similar comparison (if you have the lens) with the 55 FE 1.8 Zeiss?
I'd love to see you do a vintage glass comparison
Thanks for great videos man! I like your style!
I have bought this lens used for 480 EUR, in a perfect state. The street price is for sure too high, but it has nothing to do with the kit lens. Sharpness is one of many things that matter and to me the ergonomics and build quality are more important. With this lens the camera is so much easier to hold, the mechanical zoom ring is a pleasure to use, the materials feel so much better and it also looks great on A6300. Kit lens looks like a toy when you compare it. It may not be terrible in terms of image quality but for me it is terrible to use, because my hand has nothing to hold on and I hate the electronically coupled zoom, not even speaking about this wobbly lens barrel and overall cheapness. The constant aperture is also an important feature of 1670. It was driving me mad when I was zooming the kit lens and the aperture was changing. Ahh..an the autofocus is just instantaneous on 1670.
It's just my opinion but I have realised long ago that performance is not always the most important thing when you buy equipment. It is the pleasure to use it that makes you want to use it more and more instead of getting frustrated. Cheers!
Would you ever review the Sony SEL2870 prime lens? I cant seem to find a decent comparison to the kit lens or any budget prime lens.
Nice review. I would have also guessed the Zeiss to blow the kit lens right out of the water. If you aren't pixel peeping the images aren't that far off at all. I could totally see the purple in that tree top shot before you even zoomed in. Nice to see the kit lens did a good job. I will save my $$$.
Go with the kit for video rather than the Zeiss though right? If you're cropping in for video the edge clarity isn't so much of an issue, plus the kit lens has the ability to zoom remotely which is great for video, especially on a gimbal.
thank you for your review
So when you get the camera to correct for lens distortion, does that only work in .jpg mode and not in RAW?
Can you compare the kit lens and the Rokinon 12mm f2.0?
I suggest to compare at higher ISO. Using ISO 100 is the same as driving on slicks / winter tires on perfect road. Compare them on snow and you see...
Hey very informative video, but how did you manage to shoot such sharp pictures with the kit lens(like the last one)? No matter how hard I try i can't shoot a picture that's nearly as sharp as the last one you took. Is my lens maybe a bad copy?
thanks for your efforts and great information. I have one question I am panning to buy sony a6300 and not sure to buy the body only with 35mm f1.8 lens or buying the body with kit lens and then buying the 35mm . I am interested in landscape and street photography and taking photos for friends and family . whats is the best choice for me that consumes money and gives me the decent photos. please give me your opinion and if there are any other choices let me now thankssss
I wasn't thinking of buying the Zeiss but I regret selling my kit lens now. I'm getting the prime sigma 30 2.8 instead and I think that will help me feel better :) thank you for the nice videos and shots man!.
I do like your videos, congrats. As few other comments, the comparison for this Zeiss is not about what you compare! I have used this lens as my main one, originally in A6000 for a year and now another year with A6500. Always stills, night and day, warm and cold, every situation and it is great, very sharp, excellent colors and the f/4 helps to get the correct exposure every time. Just because of this and the 4/10-18 lens, I will not go full frame, rather wait for the A7000!
I am having the same problem with Sony A7RIII and GM 16-35mm above 20mm... did you found any solution?
Great comparison!