p.2 #1 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
I never once gave a thought to zooming with the rocker. I've always used the ring. Perhaps I'm not as sensitive to this topic as some, but I don't really notice any material difference between the zoom ring on the PZ 16-35 and the other Sony zooms that I've used.
I find it a non-issue, and the very good IQ combined with the compact size and light weight is a gift.
p.2 #3 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
hasenbein wrote:
When I am out for landscape (i.e. most of the time), I now bring the combination of 16-35 PZ and Tamron 50-400. The whole range from 16-400 in such a small, light and versatile, at the same time high quality, package of only 2 lenses! Awesome!
I use the same combination for landscapes and it works really well.
Before that I have used Sigma 100-400 on MC-11 and primes below 100mm (20G, 28/2, 55/1.8, 85/1.8) as older zooms that I also have: 16-35/4ZA and 24-105/4G were visibly worse than primes on a7riv.
I have a landscape review of 50-400mm on my website, but I have not writen a review of 16-35/4G yet. In a few words: on a7riv it is perfect at 20mm or more. At 16mm the distortion correction eats some resolution in corners, but still it is good. PZ works good enough (much better than on APS-C 16-50PZ). Some may object the f/4 limit, but I have 20/1.8G for night use so I don't care that much.
p.2 #4 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
I use the 16-35PZ way more than I thought I would. It’s a fantastic lens for hybrid photo / video shooting in a 350g package that sits nicely on a stick
The lens is decent for landscapes, but there are better (sharper) zoom options like the 12-24GM and 14-24 art.
For the same money, the 16-35GM is not as good as the EF 16-35L… hopefully we see the update soon
p.2 #5 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
The 16-35 is simply wonderful because it simply is always in the bag (so small & light) and always delivers. For me as a landscaper a perfect solution for all my wide angle needs. Here are some recent photos.
p.2 #6 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
I picked one up from another FMer locally in new condition but admit selling it after a short while when the new FE 16-35/2.8 GM II came out. I too did not adjust to the PZ. I had originally owned the V1 GM 16-35/2.8 that my son has on permanent loan and he is a videographer and I thought he would want the PZ for his A7SIII but he wanted to keep the GM V1 so I got the GM V2.
p.2 #8 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
I replaced my 16-35mm GM with the 16-35mm G lens to save as much weight as I can. So far so good. The difference is really slight if any; both are great lenses. However, I don't need 2.8 aperture in that focal range. The only thing is that I prefer a manual zoom ring over a power one; not a big deal though.
p.2 #10 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
Is this lens still best in that focal lenght (excluding GM)?
Is it really hard to get used to electronic zooming, would you guys prefer to have traditional mechanical zoom ring with focal length markings?
p.2 #11 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
I do a lot of landscapes and like others I had the original 16-35 f/2.8 GM. I sold it and got the PZ.
I do not do a lot of wide angle work but like to have such a lens available.
The lens is so good and so small that it's really hard not to just keep it in the bag... just in case.
That has paid off more frequently than I thought it would. I take photographs of nature, not test charts and have found few if any weaknesses in the little 16-35PZ.
p.2 #12 · How’s Sony 16-35mm f4 pz for landscape photography?
I just purchased the 16-25/2.8G. Basically the same size but with f2.8 (and minus the 26-35). For me this lens works better since I prefer the aperture advantage. Two good choices now!
