Shot with FE16-35mmf4ZA OSS lens, which I bought here in Asahikawa for my temporal wide angle solution here in Hokkaido.
It is even not a great university but they seem really proud of this university. Sometimes it is really annoying that the professors here always talk about how good their school is compared to the other major universities in this country.
They seem to have to talk about it every time we start some sort of conference, or even a short discussion here.
Why we need an open mount system 1(updated 3):
As my FE16-35mm f2.8GM died a day before this shooting, I used my backup lens FE16-35mm f4ZA for all of this set....
I think for me 16-35mm is not wide enough for my personal needs, it is the most versatile focal range for me for sure, but I still need some thing really wide like the FE12-24mm f4G or the new Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 Art in addition to it.
I wish my FE12-24mm f4G were a GM quality lens, but it obviously isn't. I tested a few copies of it in very different times over the last few years and I always got disappointed with it.
I am sure it could have been better if they designed it a 14-28mm f4 or something like that. All 11 or 12-xx zooms are very soft in the long end and they all produce terrible color.
I think it is just too difficult to design and produce a good quality 12-24mm or 11-24mm zoom in an acceptable size and price range for the mass market.
For me many times 16mm is not wide enough but I do not like the FE12-24mm f4G and all other FE mount wider than 16mm lenses currently available. IMHO, the Zeiss Batis 18mm f2.8 and Sony FE16-35mm f2.8GM are both great lenses, but nothing else wider than 21mm in the current Sony lineup is great. Maybe this FE16-35mm f4ZA can be acceptable for some sort of stopped down snaps like this image, but it is still quite bad for many other types of applications such as architecture, landscape and anything having straight lines, or requires sharp corners.. Also, its has serious lateral CA issue.....and its flare resistance is very bad too.
So Sony lens advantage is a myth, they have never had it over any manufacture, almost all Sony lenses are just above average or acceptable, nothing is really outstanding except a several GM class lenses.
After my last Okinawa conference trip, I really strongly decided not getting any more new FE lenses for my A7R3 and A7R2 for at least 8 months or so. The Tamron 17-28mm f2.8 or the Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 will be my last FE lens purchase for a while (maybe 8 or 9 months)..
I may need to seriously consider moving to Nikon Z or maybe Panasonic S1R (maybe Canon for their new RF15-35mm f2.8 L) as they seem to have more practical wide angle lens selections for me. I tried all of these at least once or twice recently , but I think I need to rent them for a week or so and seriously retest them side by side in a very humid Okinawa wood or in a Thai jungle or some where like that, or I may not even need to go that far, just go to Aso volcano complex near me......maybe 60km away from my house, as we are in the middle of annoying summer season now(extremely hot and humid).
I am a wide angle freak and I do not think I like any of the current FE wide angle offerings except the FE16-35mm GM and Batis 18mm f2.8.... and even these two moderately wide lenses have some issues, maybe not optics related issues, but serious mechanical quality issues. Also, they are not really wide enough for me most of times. That is why I have really high hopes for the new Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 Art.
I really like the idea of traveling with just a couple of tiny lenses ( the Z14-30mm f4S and Z50mm f1.8S), or even better just one wide zoom like the Canon RF15-35mm f2.8 L...
For me wide lenses are far more important than any camera body or other FL lenses.
The FE16-35mm f2.8GM is a fine lens with respect to its optical quality, but its mechanical quality is really bad for a over 2k US lens. It sucks in a lot of dusts and a lot of moisture as zoomed out and that seems to develop really annoying EVF fog in humid places like Okinawa woods or Thai jungles.
The poor sealing quality of that zoom really needs to be improved if Sony wants to sell it to those who shoot in really physically demanding places like crazy cold mountains or salty seaside beaches, or very humid woods.
The FE16-35mm f4ZA is also made very poorly, without any proper sealing, and it is missing some serious water repellent coating that almost all its class of zooms have......
The FE12-24mm f4G is also very plasticky and cheaply made lens, I have collected 3 broken FE12-24mm f4G in the last winter conference and decided not to buy it ever again(but in the worst case scenario I may have to buy it again, it is still a bit better lens than likes of the Voigtlander 15 or 12 dark primes).
The Voigtlander 12mm and Laowa 12mm are also questionable quality lenses that I do not really love in any way. If you visit Sony lens forum in any big camera forum online, you may find many asking about Laowa 15 vs Voigtlander 15 vs Sony FE12-24mm f4G........and all of these lens proponents are very defensive or extremely emotional about these lenses and defend one they own every time that cheap Sony wideangle lens issue brought up....... you might wonder why they sound overly defensive about one of these?
It is simple since all of those guys know all of these are actually not a great lens, but they want to justify or rationalize their wasted money on one of these lousy wide angle lenses they are forced to buy(not exactly forced but they have no other choices).
The Voigtlander 15 and 12 are very dim slow lenses that need f8 or smaller aperture to be acceptably sharp across the frame...its color may be amazing as Fred says, but it is soft even his so-called exceptional copy is nothing really special. We just do not comment that since it is rude......after all it is his forum.......and Fred is a really great person, so most of us respect him......
But honestly I never seen really sharp Voigtlander 15mm f4.5 including my 5 copies that I tested myself and Fred's and Guy's samples I saw at Fred's forum. I also never saw acceptably sharp Voigtalnder 15mm at DPR or any local forum here, either.
We should not talk about it at these forums since it is rude and I do not want to come across as a rude person or insensitive moron.....but their copies is nothing really better than my 4th copy of that lens it was the best Voigt 15 I found for myself and even that copy was lacking in many areas.
Sure it produces excellent sunstars, but many times it is actually more image-destroying destructive than attractive to many people who do not really love any sort of sunstars.
And seriously , having really defined sunstars is more important than having good resolution across the frame throughout 16-35mm or 15-35mm range? Cool sunstar effect maybe nice, but it is really not as important as resolution, better distortion control ,etc., and sunstar is something we can never test objectively. Some prefer very defined one, some prefer a bit less defined one.
So it may be a good lens for those looking for a compact character lens, even at the big cost of resolution and proper CA control.
Some people get too emotional about their choice of lenses and trying really hard to rationalize or justify it , but in any rational logical sense both the Voigtlander 12 and 15 are a just OK kind of lens, nothing it does is really amazing.........
The worst of those lenses is their very poor resell value.
I paid about 800 US for it and I could only get 340 or so for it...and my copy was an excellent one.
Then what about the FE12-24mm f4G.....I say it is actually a fine lens for many people, in many objective tests. It is definitely not a bad lens in any objective way.
If there is nothing other than this , I would use it again, it is at least much sharper than the Voigtlander or the Laowa 12.
But its mechanical quality and flare resistance can be serious issues for some people.
It has no durable fluorine coating to protect the fragile bulbous front element.
It is impossible to use regular filter unless you use some sticky tape or bond to stick a thin 77mm filter to the lens hood, and that destroys its resell value.
It has terrible flare resistance, it often produce green ring flare, it was the main reason I dislike it.
It has a bit heavy distortion(but easy to fix in post).
It has terrible low quality sealings.
And, do not forget terrible SOOC color with extremely strong green bias (which is really hard to fix in post), just like the FE24-105mm f4G but even worse than the more ambitious convenient zoom that costs a lot less than the FE12-24mm f4G.
The only one good thing I can say about the FE12-24mmf4G is its respectably high resolution in 12-21mm range and some exceptional copies of it actually rival the Zeiss Batis 18mm f2.8 or the FE16-35mm f2.8GM in terms of sheer resolution at 18mm f5.6(but that incredible resolution comes with terrible color and flare performance).
So I do not want to buy it again(unless I have to), I have bought it too many times and fed up with the bulbous lens design and associated flare issues.
However, if there is no other choice, I will buy it again, I hope the Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 Art will solve all the serious issues of the FE12-24mm f4G.....
At least, the FE12-24mmf4G is acceptably sharp across the frame even at f4 and it just gets better till around f7.1.
So I have to choose it or the Voigtlander 12, 15 or the Laowa 12mm f2.8, I would definitely choose the Sony zoom.
Now what about the Laowa 12 and 15? Well the 12mm is just a lousy lens.....it is simply an old D-SLR lens. So I do not want to get it, it is a bad lens.
The 15mm f2 Zero D, on the other hand, is actually a fabulous lens if you get a decent copy, but you may have to play an endless lens lottery game to get one good or acceptable copy.....I had a great copy of it but I sold it for the Voigtlander for so-called better color and sunstars after reading Fred and his friends comparisons of these two....
I immediately regretted it, and got the Laowa back but my new copy was just horrible, returned it and got another one. Again it was horrible......after 4 bad copies in a row, I just decided to move on.
So there are no great wide lenses in the current Sony lineup except the 16-35mm GM, the Batis 18mm f2.8 and the new Tamron 17-28mm f2.8......if those are wide enough, or even the Loxia or Voigtlander 21mm f1.4 is wide enough for you, then you are lucky, but for me 21 or 18mm does not work........if I use that sort of SEMI-WIDE prime at our conference and travel documentary, I am going to have to ask my colleagues to stop every single block or so to change my lenses over and over......and I am sure they do not allow me to do it, they are not that kind.....even if they can accept me doing that, it is not really practical.....in a city there are lots of dusts, in a rural wood there is lots of moisture. In the north island here there is a lot of snow and very cold air might kill camera electronics while changing lenses, sometimes. I think it is very risky as it invites some dangerous salty wind and air into the mount.
So the only one solution for this issue for me is getting a 14-30mm or a bit more durable 16-35mm or even better 12-24mm zoom(or 14-24) than what I currently own (FE16-35mm f2.8GM and FE16-35mm f4ZA).
Honestly, I do not think Sony will give us anything like that, as we all see in their new FE35mm f1.8 announcement.......they are extremely greedy and cheap on lens glass materials.
They just want to sell cheaply made glass at a high price point for naive new FF buyers and they think they can get away with this strategy forever......cause the fanboys protect them, defend them every time they try to rip off us with a lens like the FE35mm f1.8 or the FE35mm f2.8ZA(hate this lens).
The FE16-35mm f2.8GM should've been at least an internal zoom lens at the over 2k price point.
Now the Tamron 17-28mm f2.8 is out and it seems great.
It is an internal zoom lens , it does not extend out as zoomed. It has an expensive fluorine coating. It handles backlit scene very well.
Sure we will lose about 1 mm compared to the 16-35mm f2.8GM but both require an extra wide angle in addition to them any way.
I think I will sell my FE16-35mm f2.8GM and FE16-35mm f4 ZA for the Tamron and the Sigma zoom combo plus the Voigtlander 21mm f1.4.
I really have very high hopes for the new Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 zoom, if it is really great , I do not even need the Tamron 17-35mm, I can just use it in conjunction with my FE24-105mmf4G for travel and conference to completely eliminate lens swapping.
If the Sigma won't meet my expectations for it, I might have to seriously consider moving to Panasonic or Canon for their a bit better wide angle solution for my type of things.
As Panasonic releases their version of a 16-35mm zoom , I might try it......if it does not work, I may even try the Canon RF15-35mm f2.8 L........if that does not work for my needs, either..........then I will have to buy the FE12-24mm f4G again..
I just avoid Nikon even if I prefer their wide angle lens selection to that of Sony or Panasonic.....as I do not trust Nikon as a mirrorless manufacture.
I am not very optimistic about them, remember Nikon One?
Key Mission? DL?
None of their cameras outside of their venerable F mount system became commercially successful in the last 30 years or so.....
We must realize that there is no real innovation in the ILC world for a long time, just an annoying hype whenever Sony or Nikon releases something new.....but it will always turn out to be another boring just spec-obsessed toy.....
All that said though , unlike all other FF ILC makers, Sony is at least accepting third parties, or even encouraging them to produce great lenses, rather than restrict them out of the system. It is a huge plus of the Sony system.
Unlike extremely 90's minded Nikon and Canon, Sony seems to understand why E mount or MILC in general has become this popular this fast.
It is the incredible lens adaptability of these short FFD mirrorless mount systems with the open mount policy of the E and m43 systems........forcing the major third party lens makers like Zeiss, Sigma , Tamron, Samyang and Cosina out of the system, is the fastest way to kill the system. Nikon and Canon do not seem to understand that.
They may produce great lenses of their own, but many of us just want to try and use many other types of rare lenses like Voigtlander, Zeiss, CO, Samyang , Sigma and many others, plus old Russian lenses,etc.
They just cannot get it.
UPDATE 2: Now Sony seems to have upped the QC part of their E mount lens game.
All new Sony lenses seem to be durable and very consistent in quality, especially centering quality.
I think we should give them a bit more respect as a lens manufacture, as they have improved their quality control game and now seems to be one of these better consumer lens manufactures in the world-if not the very best.
And I hope some day some one makes a 12-24mm f4 kind of lens without bulbous front element.
UPDATE3: Many forum lens snobs trash zooms even a great zoom like the FE16-35mm f2.8GM in favor of a set of heavy fast primes like the Sigma 14mm f1.8 Art, the Voigtlander 21mm f1.4, the Sigma 35mm f1.2 Art, the Sigma 40mm f1.4 Art,etc. Sure these lenses are great in terms of sheer resolution and over all image quality at wide f stops, but as a part of a good travel kit or a street kit , are these heavy primes still great or even practical?
The huge Sigma lenses are not at all interesting to me , I can accept the size of my Sigma 28mm f1.4 Art, but the 35mm f1.2 is just a bit too much for a prime. I cannot fly with just one 35mm prime , that means I will have to carry on a couple or more lenses in addition to that lens with me and that may cost me a lot of extra money as I need to upgrade my flight to a business class.
Sure the Sigma 35mm f1.2 is a great lens for pro portrait shooter, but for most of us the Sony FE35mm f1.8 E is a much more practical lens, and IMHO, also a bit more versatile lens.
I think these moderately sized practical lenses like the Sony 35mm f1.8, the Batis 40mm f2CF, the Sony FE85mm f1.8 and the Batis 18mm f2.8 , even the Sony FE16-35mm f2.8GM(or the even more compact Tamron version) are all underrated because those online camera forums are dominated by the members of the super fast lens worship shallow DoF cult.
But if you often shoot your lenses at f5.6 o f8, then those super fast primes are really a big waste of money.
I mean most of super fast lenses become sharpest at f2.8 -f 4 range and even at f5.6 they are not very sharp any more.
If you follow Lenstip.com lens resolution tests , you may know what I am trying to talk about here.
Most of the Sigma Art or Sony GM line primes are designed to really shine at f1.2 or f1.4 and they are not really great at f8.
The Loxia , Voigtlander , and even cheaper Sony f1.8 primes are usually better than the similar focal length super oversized Sigma Art lens at f 5.6 and on.
If you compare the FE85mm f1.4GM vs the Loxia 85mm f2.4 or the Batis 85mm f1.8, or even the FE85mm f1.8 E at f8 or f10, you know what I am talking about here.
The FE85mm f1.8E is sharper at f5.6 and f8 than the GM.....all computer based lens tests and Cameralabs infinity resolution test have proved that.