I've only used the Sigma a couple of times - it was free so I can hardly complain, but OTOH it just lacks resolving power, contrast, clarity. I have just one image online taken using it, but it took a lot of work to get the suck out of it.
I’m having a real first world problem deciding on lens choices. As some may remember I bought the 16-35mm f/2.8 GM II a while back but returned it as it was decentered, Panamoz wouldn’t offer an exchange so Ive just kept using the 16-35mm f/4 ZA which I’ve been happy with on the whole.
However, thanks to the unexpected opportunity of the Northern Lights last week and realising I don’t really have a suitable wide lens for it I’ve been mulling over my wide angle options again.
Over the last few months I’ve been giving serious consideration to the 16-35mm PZ due to it being lightweight and optically very good , however not great for astro if I ever decide to do this or happen to stumble on the northern lights again. So that brought the GM II back into the equation, however yesterday I started giving thoughts to the 16-25mm f2.8.
Initially I dismissed this due to the focal range but then I’ve been thinking if I use it in crop mode on the A7R V it’s 37.5mm and still 26mp. Of course if I used the 16-35mm in crop mode it would give 52.5mm BUT it’s heavier and twice the cost of the 16-25mm (grey prices). I can’t decide whether the extra cost and weight of the GM II is worth it for the extra 10mm
I’ve also looked at the Sigma 16-28mm but the extra 3mm over the 16-25mm is not worth the lack of aperture ring for me.
Sorry for the ramblings, kinda just thinking out loud, but if anyone wants to share an opinion I’d be happy to hear it
I’m having a real first world problem deciding on lens choices. As some may remember I bought the 16-35mm f/2.8 GM II a while back but returned it as it was decentered, Panamoz wouldn’t offer an exchange so Ive just kept using the 16-35mm f/4 ZA which I’ve been happy with on the whole.
However, thanks to the unexpected opportunity of the Northern Lights last week and realising I don’t really have a suitable wide lens for it I’ve been mulling over my wide angle options again.
Over the last few months I’ve been giving serious consideration to the 16-35mm PZ due to it being lightweight and optically very good , however not great for astro if I ever decide to do this or happen to stumble on the northern lights again. So that brought the GM II back into the equation, however yesterday I started giving thoughts to the 16-25mm f2.8.
Initially I dismissed this due to the focal range but then I’ve been thinking if I use it in crop mode on the A7R V it’s 37.5mm and still 26mp. Of course if I used the 16-35mm in crop mode it would give 52.5mm BUT it’s heavier and twice the cost of the 16-25mm (grey prices). I can’t decide whether the extra cost and weight of the GM II is worth it for the extra 10mm
I’ve also looked at the Sigma 16-28mm but the extra 3mm over the 16-25mm is not worth the lack of aperture ring for me.
Sorry for the ramblings, kinda just thinking out loud, but if anyone wants to share an opinion I’d be happy to hear it
I’m having a real first world problem deciding on lens choices. As some may remember I bought the 16-35mm f/2.8 GM II a while back but returned it as it was decentered, Panamoz wouldn’t offer an exchange so Ive just kept using the 16-35mm f/4 ZA which I’ve been happy with on the whole.
However, thanks to the unexpected opportunity of the Northern Lights last week and realising I don’t really have a suitable wide lens for it I’ve been mulling over my wide angle options again.
Over the last few months I’ve been giving serious consideration to the 16-35mm PZ due to it being lightweight and optically very good , however not great for astro if I ever decide to do this or happen to stumble on the northern lights again. So that brought the GM II back into the equation, however yesterday I started giving thoughts to the 16-25mm f2.8.
Initially I dismissed this due to the focal range but then I’ve been thinking if I use it in crop mode on the A7R V it’s 37.5mm and still 26mp. Of course if I used the 16-35mm in crop mode it would give 52.5mm BUT it’s heavier and twice the cost of the 16-25mm (grey prices). I can’t decide whether the extra cost and weight of the GM II is worth it for the extra 10mm
I’ve also looked at the Sigma 16-28mm but the extra 3mm over the 16-25mm is not worth the lack of aperture ring for me.
Sorry for the ramblings, kinda just thinking out loud, but if anyone wants to share an opinion I’d be happy to hear it
20G
20G
I learnt a new acronym today
I'm not looking at primes as it'd primarily be a landscape lens, I just thought as I'm looking if I could also get one that could do astro should the want or opportunity arise it would make sense rather than getting another f/4
David what's FLA?
Interesting thought. I ruled out the Sigma aboveI learnt a new acronym today
If I had to buy a f2.8 zoom I'd get the GMii. The rest are not so useful IMO.
May be sigma 14-24mm if you can find a good copy and don't care for circular filters.
Might be worth considering sigma 16-28mm to i guess.
With 16-25G and tamron 17-28mm the long end is pretty much a 1.5x crop of the short end which could do on A7RV. At which point I rather buy a prime and crop.
If you are happy with the size of 16-35Z, the GMII isn't a much bigger or heavier. So you are already used to the size.Interesting thought. I ruled out the Sigma above
This is my indecisiveness:-
16-35mm f/2.8 GM II £1449 and 547g
16-25mm f/2.8 G £779 and 409g
I'm in no rush so will sit on it for a while, if I decided on the GM II I'd not be able to afford that yet anyway
Well I've been 'happy' with the weight of the 16-35mm ZA but I'm always looking to go lighter, hence been looking at the 16-35mm PZ for a while. I've ruled that out for definite though as I've been using the 10-20mm PZ for the past two outings and I'm not a fan of the power zoom.
I don't know about the compatibility but to update the lens you need the samyang dock.
Many thanks guys - that's confirmed what I'd heard. I may need to rethink this.
The docks are only around £30 used
Has anyone using the newer bodies the A9III, A7R5 and the A1 had the battery drain issues that seems to be a thing mentioned a lot on the Facebook groups at the moment? Apparently although the camera is switched if it continues draining power at an accelerated rate. Some are blaming it on recent firmware update's.
Not had it with my A9III. Apparently camera and battery’s gets very hot and may be a fire hazard.
I've seen this mentioned a few times on FB, I've not had an issue myself but have just updated the A7R V this morning so will keep an eye out.Has anyone using the newer bodies the A9III, A7R5 and the A1 had the battery drain issues that seems to be a thing mentioned a lot on the Facebook groups at the moment? Apparently although the camera is switched if it continues draining power at an accelerated rate. Some are blaming it on recent firmware update's.
Not had it with my A9III. Apparently camera and battery’s gets very hot and may be a fire hazard.
That’s teeny
That's what Mrs Sprout said when I showed her.That’s teeny
Not had an issue on the A1 with either 1.32 or 2.02 firmware but i take the battery out anyhow when not going to be used and regards battery life when used it's the same as before but i have always used in airplane mode silent shutter and the evf is off unless i press the control wheel.Has anyone using the newer bodies the A9III, A7R5 and the A1 had the battery drain issues that seems to be a thing mentioned a lot on the Facebook groups at the moment? Apparently although the camera is switched if it continues draining power at an accelerated rate. Some are blaming it on recent firmware update's.
Not had it with my A9III. Apparently camera and battery’s gets very hot and may be a fire hazard.
Could be a while before I even get round to using it. Lost interest lately and haven't been out with a camera for weeks.
June 2024-117 by Ben Cheneler, on Flickr
June 2024-120 by Ben Cheneler, on Flickr
June 2024-128 by Ben Cheneler, on Flickr
June 2024-132 by Ben Cheneler, on Flickr
Colours from the Sigma are horrible though. It ain’t that fast either. I will be ditching the Sigma for the new G.M at some point. I actually prefer the old G.M to the Sigma I really regret changing.
I don't agree the colours from the Sigma are horrible, but of course these things are all personal. I've never had an issue with speed, but it doesn't track as well as GM lenses. I understand for professional work you're best having something that's 100% reliable, and produces colours that are similar to the rest of your lenses, but for me I can just choose on which I prefer the rendering of and not worry too much about the rest
