Sony FE 16mm F1.8 G Review | All the Wide Angle You'll Need!

0:00
[Music]
0:10
hi I'm Dustin Abbott and I'm here to
0:12
give you my review of the Sony 16mm
0:16
F1.8 and this is from their G series now
0:20
Sony's 20mm f1.8G 8G lens had the
0:24
misfortune of releasing just about the
0:26
time that the pandemic was picking up
0:28
across the globe and so in some ways I
0:30
think it maybe didn't get as much
0:32
attention as it might have might have
0:34
under different circumstances but even
0:36
still today in 2025 I think it remains
0:39
one of Sony's hidden gems a really
0:41
really excellent lens sony has built on
0:44
that formula by going even wider from 20
0:46
mm to 16 mm even smaller and about $100
0:51
cheaper and while the Sony FE 16mm f1.8
0:54
does have one significant optical flaw
0:57
that I will highlight in this review it
0:59
is otherwise a really really fantastic
1:01
lens so we're going to explore why this
1:03
$800 wide-angle prime probably should be
1:06
at the top of your list if you're
1:08
looking for a wide-angle prime in
1:10
today's review it's very interesting i
1:13
actually got two Sony lenses at the same
1:14
time for review one of them was this
1:16
lens the other was the 400 to 800 mm G
1:20
lens and as you can see there at two
1:22
extremes of Sony's design spectrum but a
1:26
probably more likely comparison is going
1:28
to be this lens which is Viltrox's
1:30
autofocus 16mm f1.8 it's obviously a
1:33
very natural competitor same focal
1:35
length same maximum aperture and really
1:37
the price is not radically different
1:39
about $250 between the two and yes for
1:42
those of you that are so interested I
1:45
will do a full comparison video where I
1:47
break everything down side by side of
1:49
these two lenses watch for that it will
1:51
be upcoming but what is one thing that's
1:54
really interesting to me that quickly
1:55
stood out to me as I started to do side
1:57
by side tests is that while they're both
1:59
16 millimeter lenses the Sony's actually
2:01
significantly wider than what the
2:02
Viltrox is now there's maybe a little
2:05
bit of give and take with that that I'll
2:07
explore here in just a moment but it is
2:09
wider is 107° versus
2:13
105.6° now the one thing that's you
2:16
probably already noticed is that the
2:18
Sony lens manages to be much much
2:20
smaller than what the Viltrox does it is
2:22
only 73.8 mm in diameter by 75 mm in
2:27
length or
2:28
2.91x 3 in it weighs in at just 304
2:32
grams or 10.7 ounces which means that it
2:36
is a full 246 grams less than what the
2:39
Viltrox is i'm getting pretty close to
2:42
half the weight which is really quite
2:43
impressive that it is so small and so
2:46
lightweight up front we've got 67 mm
2:49
filter threads and you may not be able
2:51
to see it but on also on that front
2:53
element is a flooring uh coating and
2:56
then throughout the lens to the actual
2:58
mount there are 10 different uh weather
3:01
sealing gaskets as you can see here
3:02
around all the switches and all of the
3:05
rings and so it is a thoroughly weather
3:08
sealed lens it also has a very thorough
3:10
and robust feature set despite being so
3:13
small we've got Sony's full complement
3:15
of approach to aperture here and so that
3:18
starts you can have it clicked and the
3:20
clicking is on definitely on the firm
3:22
side and so when you switch into the
3:24
D-click mode it's surprising how little
3:26
resistance there is there they've also
3:28
got an iris lock that will allow you to
3:30
either lock into or out of that manual
3:33
aperture ring if you maybe if you want
3:36
to make sure you don't go into automatic
3:37
or if you're someone who doesn't like an
3:39
aperture ring you have the option to
3:40
lock right out of it altogether now on
3:43
the dclicked side I did note I I find
3:45
some lenses some cheaper lenses even if
3:47
they have a dclick click option you
3:50
still see very visible steps as you go
3:52
throughout the aperture so it doesn't
3:53
really work for aperture racking very
3:55
smoothly it's not the case here and as
3:57
you can see I was able to do a pretty
3:59
smooth aperture rack without any kind of
4:01
issue and so a kudos to them for uh
4:05
making sure that this actually works and
4:07
so it's not kind of just a wasted
4:08
feature now one thing you may also have
4:11
noticed in that test is that there are
4:12
11 rounded aperture blades and they do
4:14
really a very good job of maintaining
4:16
nice circular shape to the specular
4:18
highlights and we are actually able to
4:20
get a little bit bigger highlights than
4:23
what you might expect from a 16 mm lens
4:25
for the simple reason that this lens can
4:26
actually focus down very closely if
4:29
you're using autofocus you can focus as
4:31
closely as 15 cm however if you manually
4:33
focus you can actually move 2 cm closer
4:37
up to 13 cm and so your maximum
4:40
magnification is 0.25 if you're using
4:42
autofocus but all the way up to
4:44
0.30 times if you're using that manual
4:47
focus to get a little closer now
4:49
downside of that is as you can see here
4:51
this is how close I had to be to this
4:54
chest piece to produce this image right
4:56
here and so obviously you're going to
4:58
have to get really really close to your
4:59
subject you're almost certainly going to
5:01
need to remove the lens hood to avoid
5:03
shading it or interfering with your
5:05
subject and if you're happen to shoot a
5:07
two-dimensional subject as you can see
5:09
here like from my test chart the plane
5:11
of focus is anything but flat it almost
5:14
seems three-dimensional as you look at
5:16
this image here now Sony's able to
5:18
achieve that close focus capabilities by
5:21
putting some floating elements in the
5:23
design so just so you know with floating
5:24
elements if you have the lens off like
5:26
this and you rock it back and forth
5:28
you'll feel a little bit of a clunk as
5:30
if things are moving back and forth
5:32
inside that's because they're they are
5:34
your lens isn't broken but it is it has
5:36
those floating elements but you can know
5:38
that nothing is wrong because if you
5:40
mount it to the camera and you turn the
5:41
camera on you can do that same thing and
5:43
nothing is moving because now those
5:45
elements are energized it is a purpose
5:47
purposeful part of the design and it's
5:49
what allows it to work so well up close
5:52
the manual focus ring moves very
5:54
smoothly it's on the light side however
5:57
uh the focus motors are nice and quick
5:59
and so there's no lag and so you do have
6:02
a good overall focus experience as noted
6:05
there is a lens hood it's shallow it
6:07
locks into there's no lock but it
6:09
bayonets into place with a good definite
6:11
click and so it holds into place nicely
6:14
no issues there it's shallow enough that
6:16
it shouldn't interfere with using
6:17
filters up front and rotating them so
6:20
obviously this is a very wellexecuted
6:23
package very featurerich and extremely
6:25
compact i love a compact lens like this
6:27
because it just means it's far more
6:29
likely it's going to make it into my bag
6:30
and come along with me when I travel so
6:33
how about the autofocus sony is doing
6:36
probably a better job than any company
6:38
I'm aware of in really nailing autofocus
6:40
at this point and that is that they
6:42
don't really skimp on using their focus
6:44
motor so here even though this is a a
6:46
wide lens we have two of their XD linear
6:50
motors high-owered linear motors that
6:52
are driving autofocus and so that means
6:54
that if anything the focus system is
6:56
overpowered here and so focus is
6:58
extremely fast extremely quiet and as
7:02
you can see whether we're shooting
7:03
indoors or outdoors it just basically
7:05
zips back and forth and so no issues
7:08
with that um and so it it does a great
7:11
job indoors or outdoors and what's more
7:13
because it's a native Sony lens you also
7:16
get the advantage of being able to
7:17
unleash the full burst capacity of your
7:20
camera and so when I'm shooting on a
7:21
camera like my Alpha 1 that means I'm
7:23
getting 30 up to 30 frames per second if
7:26
you're shooting on something like the A9
7:27
Mark III that could be all the way up to
7:29
120 frames per second whereas with a
7:31
third party lens you simply can't do
7:33
that because of an artificially imposed
7:35
limitation from Sony and so uh great to
7:37
be able to have that full capability you
7:40
can also see here that eye tracking it
7:42
works quite well but just understand
7:44
that that's only going to work when
7:46
you're at close focus distances because
7:47
the eye becomes too small in the frame
7:49
with a wide-angle lens to track that and
7:51
so it will switch from the eye to the
7:53
face and after a while it'll switch to
7:55
the body which is all fine because
7:57
everything is going to be in focus at
7:58
that point anyway so for stills I had
8:01
zero issues with autofocus it worked
8:03
really really well so how about the
8:05
video side of things again this lens has
8:08
got plenty of power and so you would
8:09
expect that it performs well and that's
8:11
exactly what it does focus pulls are
8:13
fast and you're they're smooth no issues
8:15
there there's no visible steps there's
8:18
no pauses or hesitations what's more you
8:20
can see that focus breathing is fairly
8:22
minimal and so it's not going to be any
8:24
kind of issue and of course because it's
8:26
a Sony lens you will have the advantage
8:28
of Sonus Sony's focus breathing
8:29
compensation to further smooth things
8:32
out if your camera is so equipped i
8:34
found with my hand test that it was
8:36
mostly good there was a few times where
8:38
it stuck on my face rather than
8:41
transitioning to my hand but frankly I I
8:43
blame that more on the fact that because
8:45
of being such a wide angle even putting
8:48
my hand forward you can a lot of times a
8:50
little bit of my face is left unblocked
8:52
and so I think it stayed locked on that
8:54
but again the when it does transition
8:55
back and forth those focus transitions
8:57
are really nice and smooth and so uh and
9:00
I think fairly cinematic and so I don't
9:02
see any kind of real issue there now in
9:04
this clip I had Nala kind of move
9:06
towards me and what I found is that
9:09
focus was moving along with her however
9:11
it's not nailing on her eye all the time
9:13
i think you would have to turn up focus
9:15
speed right now it's it's d-tuned a
9:17
little bit to allow it to be a little
9:19
bit more cinematic if you're wanting to
9:21
track track persistent action I would
9:23
turn up the reactiveness a little bit
9:25
more in camera and so I'm getting that
9:27
get that kind of focus point from like
9:28
her shoulder or neck level up to the eye
9:31
level where it's keeping up there but I
9:33
think I see enough there to understand
9:35
that this lens is going to do fine even
9:37
if you're tracking things that are
9:38
coming towards the camera itself we'll
9:41
take a look now at the image quality and
9:43
I will have my deep dive optical
9:45
breakdown at the end of the video for
9:46
those of you interested in that this is
9:48
an optical design of 15 elements and 12
9:50
groups by the way that's identical to
9:52
what the Viltrox's design is sony's
9:54
design here has seven different exotic
9:56
elements different kinds of aspherical
9:58
elements different kinds of you know
10:01
extreme low dispersion elements of
10:03
different varieties that are in there
10:05
you can see that the MTF it looks really
10:07
really excellent and there's the vast
10:10
majority of the performance all across
10:13
the frame is above the 80% margin and in
10:15
some cases highly above that in fact if
10:18
I did do this comparison chart between
10:20
the Sony and the excellent Viltrox lens
10:23
you can just see how much better the
10:24
Sony lens is there's just a lot more
10:26
above that 80% threshold than what there
10:28
is on the Viltrox however this lens does
10:32
have one fairly huge optical flaw and
10:36
that is that it has a massive amount of
10:38
barrel distortion and part of the reason
10:40
why I think it's a little extra wide is
10:42
that there's extra that's left there to
10:44
give room for correction and then so
10:46
that's just a factor that has to be
10:47
taken into consideration it requires a
10:50
plus 30 to correct for the barrel
10:52
distortion and as you can see if I'm
10:54
manually correcting it doesn't correct
10:56
all that well it's still quite a complex
10:58
mustache style pattern there in fact if
11:01
looking at this there's more distortion
11:04
left after correction than what there is
11:06
before correction on the Vtrox and so
11:08
this is an area where the Sony is just
11:10
way behind the Vtrox this is obviously
11:12
the place where uh Sony's engineers
11:15
compromise to allow us to get such a
11:17
small package there now if you look at
11:19
the JPEG of that which has the in camera
11:22
corrections on you can see that it does
11:24
a fairly good job of correcting for it
11:26
and if I look at this kind of real world
11:28
comparison with some walls you can see
11:31
with the uncorrected RAW it looks
11:32
terrible the corrected JPEG it looks
11:35
good enough that I suspect people won't
11:37
notice and so I wouldn't even rule out
11:39
this lens for doing real estate type
11:41
work i think as long as you're getting
11:42
the correction it looks okay there's
11:44
probably better choices but I think I
11:46
can make do with it in a pinch if
11:48
necessary fortunately everything else is
11:50
quite good vignette is to the low to
11:53
moderate side particularly for a wide
11:55
angle compact lens i used a plus 52 to
11:58
correct for it but I didn't really
11:59
notice it being much of an issue even in
12:01
uncorrected um images and by the way
12:03
that's an area that definitely excels
12:05
over the Viltrox the Viltrox has about
12:07
double amount of vignette there i also
12:10
found that while there isn't a complete
12:12
lack of longitudinal chromatic
12:13
aberrations they're very very minor and
12:15
obviously with wide-angle lenses there's
12:17
not really a lot of real world
12:18
situations where you end up with that
12:20
kind of fringing anyway far more common
12:22
is the lateral style chromatic
12:24
aberrations that come near the edges of
12:25
the frame and this lens handles that
12:27
like a champ and either on my test chart
12:29
or out in real world results I saw no
12:32
frringing there and so contrast and
12:34
detail right off into the corners is
12:36
looking really quite
12:37
excellent speaking of that sharpness
12:39
this lens is fantastically sharp and
12:42
particularly in the center and the
12:43
mid-frame and as you can see here even
12:45
at f1.8 contrast and detail is fabulous
12:48
in the center of the frame mid-frame
12:50
looks excellent and there's just a
12:51
little bit of falloff into the corners
12:54
and I think a lot of that has to do with
12:55
the amount of correction that's needed
12:57
there in the corner however if you start
12:59
to you know stop down a little bit by
13:03
f2.8 the corners are looking quite good
13:05
and they're excellent from f4 to f8 kind
13:08
of your prime landscape apertures they
13:10
look really really fantastic i found
13:12
that real world detail and contrast just
13:15
looks amazing and definitely comparing
13:17
side by side side I would say that the
13:19
contrast is a little bit better on the
13:21
Sony lens than what it does on the
13:22
Viltrox vtrox is a great lens but the
13:24
Sony lens is better still in those
13:27
metrics defraction is going to start to
13:30
creep in at f11 still looks okay there
13:32
but by f-16 and then particular f-22
13:35
which is the minimum aperture you can
13:36
see that defraction has really softened
13:38
the image now because you can get so
13:41
close to your subject you will be able
13:42
to create some defocused background the
13:45
bokeh is okay it's uh it's not like
13:48
particularly creamy or anything like
13:50
that um it can be a little bit busy in
13:53
certain situations specular highlights
13:55
mostly look okay though they do have a
13:57
little bit of concentric rings inside of
13:59
them and will have a little bit of
14:01
deformation into the corners overall
14:03
however it looks pretty good and again I
14:05
appreciate the fact that you can get
14:08
close to your subjects and gives you
14:09
just some more creative options for
14:11
composing out there flare resistance
14:13
overall is quite good uh there's very
14:16
good contrast there is some mild
14:17
ghosting i actually noticed it less at
14:20
wide open or small apertures and more in
14:22
the middle of the range f5.6 f6.3 you
14:26
see a little bit more of a ghosting
14:27
pattern here but overall looks pretty
14:29
good sun stars I find look nice you get
14:32
a 22-pointed star and they have pretty
14:34
nice definition certainly could add to
14:36
an image and then finally I tested for
14:39
shooting coma and there is some coma
14:41
estigmatism in the corners where those
14:44
uh those star points starting to look a
14:46
little bit like flying insects it's not
14:48
terrible but it's not great either the
14:50
Viltrox is a hair better in that regard
14:52
but of course the Viltrox also has uh
14:55
much more vignette which means that
14:57
towards the corners of the frame you
14:58
have a a different issue to have to
15:00
correct for and so it's wouldn't be my
15:02
top choice for shooting astro but
15:04
certainly it works and it's anything but
15:07
terrible for that so overall outside of
15:09
that barrel distortion optics are really
15:11
quite good despite it being so compact
15:14
here so my conclusion is this i feel
15:16
like an f1.8 lens to me for wide angle
15:19
kind of hits the sweet spot sure there
15:22
are f1.4 options out there but they tend
15:25
to be much much larger um you know weigh
15:28
a lot more cost a lot more i love that
15:30
we can get this compact a package and
15:33
really get a very decently bright
15:35
aperture and of course it's much easier
15:37
to get handholdable shutter speeds with
15:39
a wide-angle lens than what it is with a
15:41
longer lens anyway so I feel even then
15:43
that the bright aperture is a little bit
15:46
less necessary and so to me f1.8 is
15:49
bright enough and it allows you to
15:52
continue to have as we've seen great
15:54
optical performance but also this
15:56
wonderfully compact package i mean this
15:58
is a lens that easily fits into the palm
16:00
of your hand easy to throw into a bag
16:02
easy to bring along no issues there at
16:06
$800 it's not cheap per se but the fact
16:09
that it is $100 cheaper than the 20mm
16:13
f1.8 you know after you know all of the
16:15
inflation since that lens has been
16:17
released tells me that Sony's actually
16:19
being very competitive with the pricing
16:21
here and so $800 for what is an
16:23
extremely good lens outside of that
16:25
barrel distortion I think makes it a
16:26
pretty fair value and again it's not
16:28
radically more expensive than what the
16:30
Viltrox is which is really the only
16:32
other main competitor that's out there
16:35
this is a lens with great autofocus a
16:37
great feature set it's wonderfully
16:38
compact it's extremely sharp and so all
16:42
of that adds up to a lens I think that
16:43
is well worth consideration now if you
16:46
want more information you can check out
16:47
my full text review that's linked in the
16:49
description down below there's buying
16:50
links there also and I we're getting
16:52
close to those pre-orders starting to be
16:54
fulfilled at this point and of course if
16:57
you want a deeper dive into the optical
16:58
performance stay tuned with me right now
17:00
we'll jump into that together okay we're
17:02
going to start by getting the bad news
17:05
out of the way so we're going to like a
17:07
band-aid we're just going to rip it off
17:08
quick here there is a really tremendous
17:11
amount of barrel distortion and so you
17:12
can see here looking at this there's a
17:15
considerable amount of leftover image
17:17
that's there that's not because I framed
17:19
with that additional but rather I was
17:21
framing with these basically right
17:23
inside i used these outside lines as my
17:26
framing guide and so that was how I was
17:28
lined up and there's a lot left over
17:30
that's to allow for electronic
17:32
correction now I've only seen Canon
17:34
really do more than this uh but this is
17:36
bad i mean this is a massive amount of
17:38
distortion and as you can see it's a
17:40
very complex pattern i tried to manually
17:43
correct it as good as I could there is
17:45
no yet no raw profile available for
17:47
Lightroom yet so but I always do this
17:49
anyway so I wanted to see how it would
17:52
correct and as you can see it's just a
17:53
really wavy pattern that's left behind
17:56
now by the numbers this is a plus 30 to
17:59
correct for the distortion vignette far
18:02
less of an issue vignette I used a plus
18:04
52 to correct for it's not bad now while
18:07
there isn't a RAW profile yet available
18:10
I've taken this JPEG out of camera so it
18:12
give you an idea on how well it's all
18:14
going to correct you can see it's not
18:16
flawless um it's a little too complex to
18:18
be corrected flawlessly but it's not bad
18:21
either and so certainly usable and I
18:24
think that's illustrated here if we look
18:26
at the RAW image you can see there's
18:28
just lots of bowed areas where that
18:31
barrel distortion is affecting the image
18:33
if we look on the right this is the JPEG
18:35
out of camera you can see how much of
18:37
the image has been taken away for
18:39
correction if you compare side by side
18:41
remember this is the exact same image
18:42
taken at the exact same time but that
18:45
being said you can see that the lines
18:47
for kind of a real world shot like this
18:49
they all look fine i mean I don't see
18:51
anything that's kind of standing out to
18:52
me as being objectionable obviously
18:54
that's really going to help this lens to
18:56
continue to be useful for a lot of these
18:58
applications thanks to getting great
19:00
electronic support from Sony now beyond
19:03
that it is mostly good news yes there is
19:05
a little bit of this green fringing some
19:07
longitudinal style chromat chromatic
19:09
aberration but with a wide-angle lens
19:11
like this there are going to be
19:12
relatively few situations where you
19:14
would ever see what little is there and
19:17
more important would be the lateral
19:19
chromatic aberrations near the edge of
19:20
the frame and they are not quite
19:22
perfectly but pretty close to perfectly
19:24
corrected very clean black to white
19:26
transitions so that means if we go out
19:28
into the real world and we look off into
19:30
the edge of this image where typically
19:33
in all particularly these bare branches
19:36
that you would see the fringing on
19:38
either side of them it's just not there
19:39
and so what that means is that the lens
19:41
is going to resolve really nicely right
19:43
off to the very edge of the frame now
19:45
the MTF suggests that this is a very
19:47
sharp lens particularly in the center
19:49
and mid-frame this is going to be 200%
19:52
magnification i'm going to show you on a
19:53
61 megapixel Sony A7R Mark 5 so here at
19:58
extremely high magnification on very
20:00
high resolution the center is pretty
20:02
much perfect very very precise rendering
20:05
of all the fine details good contrast if
20:08
we move into the midframe it also looks
20:11
excellent really really strong and as we
20:13
kind of pan down here we can see that as
20:16
we get towards the corner it does drop a
20:19
little bit and a lot of that's also too
20:22
you can see it's things are kind of
20:23
dragged and stretched a little bit and
20:25
trying to correct for the distortion we
20:27
can see a pretty similar result in the
20:30
various areas of the frame and so we
20:33
have got a good centering performance
20:35
here as well now in real world use I
20:37
felt like even at f1.8 the real world
20:40
contrast is really great and so you can
20:42
see a lot of pop here into all of these
20:45
branches just a lot of places for
20:47
textures to be mushy they're not it's
20:49
resolving really nicely obviously at
20:52
f1.8 depth of field means it's not going
20:54
to be the same all the way throughout
20:55
the image but everything that's falls in
20:57
that plane of focus really looks quite
20:59
excellent here's one f1.8 and then f2.8
21:03
and so we see in the middle of the frame
21:06
it already looks great obviously
21:07
contrast improves a bit more as you stop
21:10
down a little bit if we pan over here to
21:12
the side you can see a little bit more
21:15
noticeable a difference you know just
21:17
more that the contrast levels are a
21:19
little bit deeper but it already looked
21:21
really good and between f2.8 and f5.6 we
21:25
can see that the details really just
21:27
resolve even more so so contrast becomes
21:30
great right into the corners going back
21:32
to f1.8 in a real world image you can
21:35
see the amount of detail there is just
21:37
really really beautiful contrast looks
21:39
great and of course this being a
21:41
first-party Sony lens with great
21:43
autofocus it means you're getting great
21:45
results even when uh you're in kind of
21:48
an extreme situation and so you know in
21:50
this moment this is f1.8 you know very
21:53
fast action you can't tell cuz it's a
21:55
frozen shot but he's moving very quickly
21:57
here but detail looks great there well
22:00
focused again here a very you know
22:02
precise moment but detail looks really
22:04
good because autofocus is helping the
22:06
lens to achieve its its potential going
22:09
back to the test chart for a moment f2.8
22:11
looks brilliant in the center of the
22:13
frame and f5.6 doesn't look a whole lot
22:16
different but you're going to see that
22:18
difference more up here in the corners
22:19
and you can see that at f2.8 it looks
22:22
good but at f5.6 it looks great nor is
22:25
it a paper tiger if we take a big
22:28
landscape image like this and we just
22:30
poke around in the various details right
22:33
off to the edge of the frame you can see
22:35
that there's just lots of information a
22:38
lot of textures that have been gathered
22:39
it looks really really fantastic this is
22:42
an extremely sharp lens you've probably
22:44
heard me frequently say that I consider
22:46
f11 to be pretty much the smallest
22:48
aperture that I'm willing to go to when
22:50
I'm using a high resolution camera and
22:53
you can see the reasons why by f11 it's
22:55
not looking as good but still looking
22:57
very good but by f-22 the minimum
22:59
aperture you can see the image is just
23:01
really really much softer and that's due
23:04
to the effects effects of defraction so
23:06
again if at all possible I would say go
23:09
as small as f11 and don't go beyond that
23:12
so as mentioned previously while you can
23:14
get a very high degree of magnification
23:16
if you're working with a two-dimensional
23:17
subject the plane of focus is not fast
23:19
at all in fact it looks like the ship is
23:21
kind of sailing right off of the flat
23:24
bill and that's because there is so much
23:26
field curvature here so just be aware of
23:29
that it's actually going to work better
23:31
with a three-dimensional object you can
23:33
see it's it's actually the perspective
23:35
is not great but you're able to kind of
23:38
use that as a point of emphasis and so
23:40
it's not as destructive here's the
23:42
difference just toggling back and forth
23:44
between this would be the autofocus
23:46
result this is the manual focus result
23:48
so you can get a little bit closer you
23:50
can get a slightly higher degree of
23:51
magnification if you uh manually focus
23:54
in now without being right on top of the
23:57
lock and you'd be surprised at how close
23:59
I was but not anywhere near the minimum
24:01
focus distance but you can see that the
24:03
detail on the lock looks fantastic the
24:06
bokeh quality I can only say that's okay
24:09
i don't consider that to be exceptional
24:10
at all here I'm you know right on top of
24:13
the subject near minimum focus distance
24:15
so the background is more strongly
24:17
blurred out it's better but it's Don't
24:20
expect this lens to be like crushing
24:22
backgrounds and making them really soft
24:24
and creamy that's not realistic flare
24:26
resistance overall is good so here's a
24:28
pretty typical shot where the sun might
24:30
be right out of frame you can see
24:32
contrast is holding up perfectly here
24:34
where a very bright directional sun is
24:36
in the frame at f1.8 again contrast is
24:39
holding up very well just a very very
24:42
minor little ghosting artifact right
24:45
there nothing bad uh here stop down to
24:47
f11 you can see that there's a little
24:50
bit of a prismatic pattern from you know
24:52
stopping down but again it's holding up
24:54
really well what's interesting here is
24:57
that there is you might be able to see
25:00
here in this image where I've composed
25:02
to where it allows more of that to show
25:04
up there is a little bit of a ghosting
25:06
pattern but it's not strongly pronounced
25:08
in fact I see it more stopped down
25:10
towards the middle of the range this is
25:12
f6.3
25:14
now maybe you don't mind that at all i'm
25:16
just pointing it out and so you can be
25:18
aware of it you will also see here going
25:20
back to f11 in this shot that the
25:23
sunbursts look to me really quite good
25:25
uh 22-pointed star from the 11bladed
25:28
aperture and uh you know the the blades
25:31
have nice precision i think that that's
25:32
going to add rather than distract from
25:35
an
25:35
image finally taking a look here at Coma
25:39
and so you know the good news is is that
25:42
star points are nice and crisp here in
25:44
the center of the frame there's very low
25:46
fringing and so that doesn't mar the
25:48
image and you can see that as we get off
25:50
into the corners that's where we start
25:52
to see that aigmatism and so the stars
25:54
start to look like they're taking wings
25:56
and trying to fly out of the frame um
25:59
but it's it's also not the worst that
26:02
I've seen by far and obviously because
26:05
those star points occupy such a small
26:07
portion of the frame the general
26:09
impression you're going to get I think
26:10
is just good overall so thanks for
26:13
sticking through the optical breakdown i
26:14
hope it's helped you to make a more
26:16
informed decision whether or not this is
26:17
a lens for you as always thanks for
26:20
watching have a great day and let the
26:22
light in
26:23
[Music]

Sony FE 16mm F1.8 G Review | All the Wide Angle You'll Need!

dustinabbott.net

Fujifilm X-Half Review | All about the Vibes

Sigma 17-40mm F1.8 DC | ART (APS-C Review) The New Cult Classic?

Schneider-KREUZNACH x LK Samyang 14-24mm F2.8 FE Review | Impressive!

New Flux 1.1 Pro Released: A Comparison with Flux 1.0 Pro

Hadoop Architecture

Dubai Emirates Hotel - Room Video

Automate Visuals and Graphics with n8n + Placid.app (No More Canva!)

The Ultimate Free AI Tool for Research Mistral AI

I Built 5 Impossible Optical Illusion Chairs

Everything To Know About This Astrounaut Galaxy Projector

10" Digital Microscope 1200X Review

LED Motion Sensor Cabinet Light Review

Up next in 10

Sony FE 16mm F1.8 G Review | All the Wide Angle You'll Need!

dustinabbott.net