Đánh giá cz 16-35 f4 năm 2024
Many months ago I had a chance to try this lens for the first time, which was my first wide angle I used since purchasing my Sony 10-18mm f/4 lens during my switch to Mirrorless in January 2015. Show Many who follow me may remember that not that long ago I was TOTALLY against this lens! Why you may ask? One was that it simply wasn’t wide enough for me to justify using it and second being that I had used a bad copy of this lens and my thoughts were based on that. It wasn’t until later it was noticed it was a bad copy of the lens and my other times with this lens were perfectly fine and that made it grow on me quite a bit. What’s really brought me to seeing myself ultimately switching to this lens from my Sony 10-18mm is my use of only Carl ZEISS lenses for my full frame usage. Originally I was using the Sony 10-18mm lens for full frame usage, as it could be utilized between 12-18mm in the full frame mode just fine, but I’ve wanted to go entirely ZEISS for my work this year. Carl ZEISS 16-35mm Specs & Images
Most of my images with this lens have been landscape and architecture, but you’ll also find that I’ve used this lens for worship and events. I think it’s a very well rounded wide angle, because of it’s range. Something to note is that this lens is a Full Frame (FE) lens for Sony’s Mirrorless E-Mount cameras, but it can be used on the cropped APS-C cameras, which will give you a 35mm equivalent focal range of 24mm - 52.5mm. What I think about the 16-35mmAs mentioned earlier I was not convinced at first about using this lens. I don’t know why! As you can see from the examples I have in this review you’ll see that it really is exceptionally sharp and really is a fantastic lens for the Sony Alpha 7 series! Now grant it I still don’t think it’s a match for the ZEISS 35mm f/2.8 ZA SONNAR and ZEISS 55mm f/1.8 ZA SONNAR lenses I use, but it’s a very solid lens choice and offers quality you’d expect from a lens with the ZEISS name badge on it. Many will fault this lens for being only an f/4 aperture lens, as opposed to an f/2.8. Honestly, on Mirrorless I’ve found the f/4 to be VERY adequate (unless you’re doing astro-photography and the f/2.8 is actually the better option). Some have chosen to use the Sony adapter with the A-Mount lenses but please note in doing so you’re NOT gaining f/2.8 there either, as the LA-EA 2 and 4 adapters have mirrors, so the light hitting the sensor is cut by about 30%, which in turn is still giving you about an f/4 aperture reading anyways. Only way to avoid this is using an adapter without a mirror in it. For the work I do f/4 is perfectly fine, even in low light. You’ll see that I have a few hand-held worship images here that were wide open at f/4 and it worked out perfectly for me. What makes the 16-35mm great?
What makes the 16-35mm not so great?
Why the Carl ZEISS 4/16-35mm over Sony 2.8/16-35mm G Master?This has been a HUGE question and a big debate online, especially since I purchased this lens. I’m going to put to bed why the ZEISS for me was my choice and not the Sony lens.
Conclusion: Who is/isn’t this for & what other options are there?This is a very solid wide angle lens and one that’s not overly expensive either. It’s the quality you’d expect from a lens with the ZEISS name badge on it. If you want a faster lens then check out the Sony FE 2.8/16-35mm G Master lens. This is the most expensive of the available wide angle lenses but gives you a win win for having a wider aperture and great image quality. If you want wider then check out the Sony FE 4/12-24mm G lens. This fits in between the other two in terms of price and gives you a much wider angle of view compared to the other two. If you’re wanting the best available Sony E-mount wide angle FE lens then it doesn’t get better than this at the moment for zooms. As a lover of the Sony 10-18mm I truly miss using that lens, but I’m happy with my upgrade and switching to full frame and this lens for my wide angle work. I think it’s going to bring forth even more awesome work that many of you all have enjoyed from my previous work. |