Sony Pancake Comparison: 16mm vs 20mm + Ultra Wide Adapter
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 08. 2024
- Sony 16mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2F7KeNi
Sony 20mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2D0NBF8
Ultra Wide Angle Adapter: amzn.to/2FabGKw
The best option: amzn.to/2m6yIt4
M Y G E A R :
Cameras -
📷 WHAT I USE TO RECORD: geni.us/qEib
📷 BACKUP CAMERA: geni.us/eWBG
📷 BEST STARTER/BUDGET CAMERA: geni.us/Ujn1TC3
📷 BEST FULL FRAME FOR THE $$$: geni.us/8PxAj
Lenses -
❤️ MY #1 MOST RECOMMENDED LENS: geni.us/BbGlnB
❤️ BEST PORTRAIT LENS: geni.us/bvwq
❤️ BEST ULTRAWIDE LENS: geni.us/ARXj
❤️ BEST DO-EVERYTHING LENS: geni.us/dDLwY
❤️ WHAT I FILM MY VIDEOS WITH: geni.us/ojGKI
❤️ MY FAVORITE CHEAP/MANUAL LENS: geni.us/cQoztp
Accessories -
🔋🔋 CAMERA BATTERIES: geni.us/TXaeo3B
🎤 AUDIO RECORDER: geni.us/L5dejj
🎤 MICROPHONE: geni.us/O8UzW
⚙️ BEST CHEAP TRIPOD: geni.us/4uf5
⚙️ BEST GIMBAL: geni.us/iYiy
⚙️ SD CARD: geni.us/7BhUrBj
🛒 SHOPPING ON AMAZON? geni.us/yn7t0 (Paid Amazon Link)
🌍 OUTSIDE OF THE US? USE THIS LINK: geni.us/ezoD (Paid Amazon Link)
🎦 MY E-MOUNT PAGE: www.amazon.com...
👧🏼 MY WIFE'S CZcams: goo.gl/P7D5RW
🖼️ INSTAGRAM: / arthur213
DISCLOSURES:
I participate in the Amazon Affiliates Program, where I earn a small commission if you decide to purchase an item at no cost to you.
I participant in the B&H Affiliates Program, an affiliate advertising program in which I earn commissions by linking to bhphoto.com at no cost to you.
In this video I compare the Sony 16mm SEL16F28 lens to the Sony 20mm SEL20F28 lens with the Sony VCLECU2 ultra wide angle adapter.
Yeah! Good vid!
I got the 20mm a few years ago and it’s so small that it fits in my pocket or bag so easily that I carry it more and can whip it out quick. It has become my default lens, just because it’s ease, size, and simplicity. Those bigger lenses make people behave differently and the camera gets noticed more often.
I got the wide angle converter later at an open box discount. I have fun with the two options, even though it adds some fuzz.
That Sigma looks sharp, but it’s huge in size comparison.
Cheers!
I’d love to see comparison, Sony 20mm vs kit lens!
This comparison reminds me of the eye exams one gets where the two images are like literally the same and the doctor is like: Number 1 or Number 2? 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I'd be curious to see a comparison of the 20mm f2.8 and the Sigma 19mm f2.8 Art..
I love the 20mm for a very compact, decent lens for the 5100. It could also be a good travel lens for a second body. And the Sigma 14 for a dedicated wide angle.
i'll love to see the 20mm vs the 16-50 kit lens ! that'll reflect whether it's a valuable addition to your lineup or not if you already own the kit lens
Second this!
I can add my two cents since I own both lenses. The 16-50mm is an ok lens with a useful focal length range - it came with my A6000 and was the only lens I had for that camera for a short time - but I use it only very rarely now (By the way - I own quite a number of cameras and lens across multiple brands and formats - so I can also judge quality across various brands in some cases). On the 16-50mm the image quality is acceptable (unless you are into extreme pixel peeping) and actual prints made from its images look fine in normal use. It suffers quite a bit when used wide open on aperture but stopping down to middle of the range apertures improves things a lot. The 20mm f/2.8 is better on image quality. Most pancake style lenses are a bit of a compromise, balancing size concerns with image quality concerns. I bought the 20mm largely for use in street photography and it is really excellent in such use. Wide open it is much better in IQ than the 16-50mm lens wide open. Stop down to f/4 and critical sharpness improves a lot. Once again - print quality from this lens is quite good - yes, if I zoom up to 100%, and pixel peep along the edges of the image file, sharpness is a bit less than optimal - but my own opinion is that such tests are somewhat irrelevant - when was the last time you went up to a gallery print hanging on the wall and looked at the details along the borders of the print with a magnifying glass? I'm happy with the 20mm for the uses I call on it for.
Pancake lenses is unique, and there are no real alternatives for them. May be only kit16-55, sigma 19mm.
Most youtubers compare only pixels in corner, but forget about size factors and real usage scenarios. For me even sony a5000 with SEL18-55 is big, at least I cant' just put it in my jacket. But 20mm is realtively fast, its enough for low light condition in rooms,cafe places at evening. Camera with 20mm lense is compact and always with me, so I can use it.
First time at Ching this video and it is years after the release. Thanks for all the hard work over the years, Arthur. You have inspired my journey in photography and i have made many well informed decisions based on your videos! Thanks! (I JUST picked up this wide angle converter for my 16mm )
Yes I would love to see the 20mm 2.8 compared to the kit lens and also the Sigma 19mm 2.8 as they are nearly similar in focal range!
Amir Azlan Agreed. I think you should compare the 20mm with the kit lens @20mm, and the 16mm with the kit at 16mm. While I think there is value in comparing the 16 with the 20, what we really want to know is whether it is worth upgrading from the kit or not.
You are right, wide lens is for landscapes and should be sharp. But landscape also means that lens will be stopped down to f8. Would be interesting to see how it works there. Also, saw somewhere that converter actually adds some sharpness to the 16mm lens corners, while reducing center. So 16mm + ECU + f8 could be an OK combo. Would be nice if you can test this :)
That's what I was thinking. Why shoot with such wide apertures? I would think f8 to f11 would be very usable.
16 or 20 mm lenses on an APS C sensor are at the most 22 or 28 mm lens. My 20 mm lives on my 5100 as a selfie camera. For sharp lenses I have bigger 12 24 f4 G lens. But the 20 mm is a sweet performer on the 5100 plus a great lens for travelling. Great vid!
Really good comparison, thanks!! I would be interested in finding out how the 20mm pancake stacks up against the kitlens at 20mm on various apertures.
By "kit" lens I am assuming you mean the 16-50mm OSS? I can add my two cents since I own both lenses. The 16-50mm is an ok lens with a useful focal length range - it came with my A6000 and was the only lens I had for that camera for a short time - but I use it only very rarely now (By the way - I own quite a number of cameras and lens across multiple brands and formats - so I can also judge quality across various brands in some cases). On the 16-50mm the image quality is acceptable (unless you are into extreme pixel peeping) and actual prints made from its images look fine in normal use. It suffers quite a bit when used wide open on aperture but stopping down to middle of the range apertures improves things a lot. The 20mm f/2.8 is better on image quality. Most pancake style lenses are a bit of a compromise, balancing size concerns with image quality concerns. I bought the 20mm largely for use in street photography and it is really excellent in such use. Wide open it is much better in IQ than the 16-50mm lens wide open. Stop down to f/4 and critical sharpness improves a lot. Once again - print quality from this lens is quite good - yes, if I zoom up to 100%, and pixel peep along the edges of the image file, sharpness is a bit less than optimal - but my own opinion is that such tests are somewhat irrelevant - when was the last time you went up to a gallery print hanging on the wall and looked at the details along the borders of the print with a magnifying glass? I'm happy with the 20mm for the uses I call on it for.
Thanks
The 20mm could use some butter, and both would be better with maple syrup.
Good stuff. Can't wait to see the review of the new 18-135 that Sony just announced.
I would love to see how the 20mm + wide angle converter compares to the kit lens both being at 16mm and f3.5. If I had to guess, I would say the kit lens will out perform it in terms of sharpness. It would also be nice to see how these two lens' compare when stopped down a bit... f5.6, f8, etc. I think the kit lens is still king if you are on a budget. Love to see a video if you have time to make it.
Front converters don't change the relative aperture. The lenses are still F2.8 with the converters mounted.
for about 40 euro i recently bought the wide angle lens dorr 0.45x 40.5 which i attached to the 16/50 kit lens. for the money i think it is the best solution if you want to go wider than 16. it has extremely positive feedback on amazon.de
Hey, could you please tell me about this... adapter? I'm italian, so I speak italian in case ;) Thanks!
I have the SEL20F28, for the right price it's a great lens, especially stopped down to 7.1 or 8 (which is how you should shoot landscapes!). It's very tiny, decent sharpness, great min focus distance and SO SMALL. As much as it's an outstanding lens, I would never travel with that Sigma 16mm, it is so big and yet it doesn't even have stabilization...
These lenses are holdovers from the NEX cameras, so,....... I have the 16mm pancake with the 8mm fisheye, which is a lot of fun.
I like the things you test but have a little problem with methodology. You shoot scenes with depth at f2.8. The parts of the scene with a different distance than the focus point are going to be oof. Most lenses are sharpest at f8 to f11. If you must use deep scenes, at least stop down a little. There is a reason the big boys use wall charts, to eliminate dof issues.
I do like your reviews and they are mostly on stuff I use, so keep it up. Just got a Sigma 16mm f1.4 Contemporary for Astro. Haven't used it yet but It looks pretty sweet.
You are right about DOF, but in the real world sometimes stopping down to F10 isnt practical. My opinion is if you buy an F2.8 lens or a F1.4 lens you should be shooting it wide open or as close to wide open as possible, otherwise what's the point? The Sigma is awesome, congrats!
Arthur R actually if you are buying a prime lens then f/2.8 would be considered slow. So stopping down is extremely relevant, especially for landscapes. If you were buying an f/1.4 then shooting wide open is important as you would not have bought it otherwise. It’s like the difference between a kit zoom and an f/2.8 zoom. The kit zoom is for the guy who wants to shoot at f/8 and get sharpness to the edges. The f/2.8 is for someone who needs light gathering or shallow DOF.
Great comparison of the two lenses and using the converter. I liked the addition of the Sigma lens at the end of the comparison. I agree the 20mm is the better of the pancakes. However, the Sigma lens performs the best among the wide lens used. If size isn't a problem then the Sigma is the better choice. I've watched several of your reviews and your voice sounds like Carl Sagan. Very good tone, speed and clarity in explaining and presenting your topic. New subscriber here, BTW.
Can the Ultra Wide adapter apply on the 16-50mm kid lens?
You probably got rid of these, but did you try the VCL-ECU1 on the 16mm? Some people claim that it makes the 16mm sharper. I don't know how that could be true. Just needing an occasional wide angle for an a6xxx camera for travel, wider than 16mm. Full frame is way too heavy to travel light. I have the ECF1 fisheye and it is a lot of fun, but only acceptable at F8/F11.
Get the fish eye converter! Way more fun
please do a 16 mm vs a 16/50 kit lens...great job btw , thanks
The sigma 16 is definitely very clear, but it's a Huge lens. I stuck with my 18-105 over it, not that much bigger. ok, half again, but both are big lol.
Are you sure that the pictures at 6:00 are focused on the same distance? The comparison directly before that one showed similar sharpness but this one doesn't.
I got the 16mm + 0.75x converter for $220 so basically a 12mm f5.6 (most usable aperture) which is a good deal. Shooting videos in 4K actually gives usable footage but 1080p is very soft and smudgy...
Hi and thanks foryour reviews that I really like. Like you I'm in love with 35/1.8 on my A6000 and I recently bought a vcl-ecu2 that I'm using on the 35mm. I like the results, giving me a 25/2.8 (apertures up to 2.8 are not usable) nice lens, quick to swap when I'm tight with 35 shooting at my kids. Please try this combo!
Hi,thanks for your interesting review.I love the Sony 20mm lens with my Sony A6300 when I want to travel light.I use the Sony 16 mm lens at night when sharpness in the corners in not so important.Bye!
How would you rate the 20mm pancake vs the Sony 16-50mm kit lens at 20mm? thank you!
I'm surely late to the party, but I'd love to see a comparison between the SEL20F28 and SELP1650 kit lens.
I have the sony 16mm f2.8 pancake lens. Why didn't you test it at 5.6 or 8.0. It is sharp to the edges here. F4.0 is a little bit better than 2.8 but 5.6 and 8 are best. Because the lens is so thin I'm sure curvature comes into play. The optics are fine.
Why would they sell an ultrawide converter when their business model benefits from making you buy more lenses? Is it still available?
Thanks for the vids man just got a A6000 so helpful
same here i get so much help from this guy!
Alan Pelton yah right I want to get some man lens great deals out there
just picked up an old 55mm f1.8 manual lens, adapter is on its way i cant wait
love your videos man! super inspiration!
Alan Pelton thanks for watching!!!
I think the kit lens is sharper, and covers the entire zoom range, no point in those lens.
Michael Tapel it breaks so quick lol. Mine stopped working after a quick tilt
Sorry, i have to ask, the second comparison i Could read 16 mm 1.4. isńt the pancake 16mm 2.8? Please let me know, because i want to buy the 20
Does anyone know if the ultra-wide adapter compatible with all sony lenses? Thanks.
Very good video, answers some questions for me. Thanks.
Will you review the new Samyang AF 12mm?
How about to try VCL-ECU2 with SEL30M35?
Yeah, these 2 are the worst lenses of the entire e-mount lineup made by Sony. Thanks for informing your viewers.
Felipe Figueroa I was just thinking that...
lol but most people understand that tradeoff when they're getting a pancake lens; it's for very specific use cases (e.g., need to shove the camera into a coat pocket and run and gun)
Still I love the 20mm for my 5100. I can put it in my bag and run with it. Now I'm considering the 16-50 more, it's not much larger!
Why would it be the worst? With its converter, I still think they are a good budget wide&fisheye lens
@@Susazeu 20mm stays stuck on my nex5n and in 2021 i still use that combo every day on streets of paris and it's just fine, excellent b/w documentary pix. a mere 120€ aps-c camera (i've got it used for 120€ lens+body), with little postprod (silver fx) the results are just the same as rx100 mk5 (5 times more expensive) or x70 (3 times more expensive). i'm not afraid of beating the crap of my nex5n it's a ak-47 gun of street photo, you don't need much for fb or flickr, 8mpix are more than enough for web (especially for 6" phone screens), ppl are spoiled and nuts swallowing marketing crap and paying 10-20 (literally, 20) times more for 42mpix cameras and next 98% of their results are seen only online and also they thing twice about taking their 2-3k cameras everywhere everyday
Why not u paired converter with 16mm
Hi,thanks for the review.I love the Sony 35 mmf/1.8 but I think it's not the best focal length for landscapes or cityscapes unless your subject is quite far.Because of this,I only have to decent Sony options:the 20mmf/2.8 or the Sony Zeiss 24 mm f/1.8.I prefer the latter but it's more expensive and heavier so I think I'll end up buying the 20mm f/2.8 for my Sony A6400.I love travelling and walking light!Do you have any comparison with the Kit lens?If not,it would be interesiting how these two lenses perform at 30mm.Bye!
It would have been interesting to test the Canon 22mm Pancake with these 2 Sony.
Will you order the new Sony 18-135 APS-C lens?
Masaki McLellan Maybe, although honestly it looks like a waste. It’s a lens no one asked for! I just wish they would release a 16-50 F2.8 for the e mount. Maybe one day.
That would make sense, about time they did
can I use the ultrawide adapter to SEL35f18? thank you!
Can i use the ultra wide converter with prime lens 50mm f1.8
Many thanks, a very good review
what do you recommend for indoor architectural/ homes pictures. such as to take kitchen , bathrooms etc. as far as wide angle lenses
Rokinon 12mm and Sigma 16mm.
Nice, and now, I am curious about the results of Sony's 20mm + Ultra wide adapter & Sigma 16mm comparition
Lol. The Sigma wins by a long shot! The 20mm + converter isnt very sharp unfortunately.
I really like the form factor though.
I am curious how they will perform on a6500 with the 5 axis ibis.
EDIT: Okay my bad problem isn't with the lack of OSS.
Can you make a review for Yungnou 50mm f1.8 EF with any AF adapter (probably the cheapest one that can still use the AF) on A6000? Please..
Why is the 16mm lens only available in silver?
Nice vid! Wondering about ur favorite wide lens in the description, so u like the rokinon 12mm more than the sigma 16mm?
Pikoo Jr I haven’t compared them back to back, but I prefer the Sigma 16mm. I’ll update it! Thanks!
Seems like your reviewing the older e-mount lenses. The 55-210 is next on the way right?
Sigma 16mm art + Sony VCLECU2 -
Does it fit?
For scientific purposes .............. You should've thrown the zeiss 24mm f1.8 in the mix with these two ! Just to see if................. Keep up the good videos . I enjoy Them.
Haha I might get it to try out sometime....
Please compare 20mm with kit
Could you have a look at SEL55210 and Olympus TCON-17X tele- converter? I think you need an adapter ring in there as well? Thanks. Luv the channel...
Thanks for the video. I wish Sony would refresh both the 16 and 20mm primes (or ideally 14mm) as they are a not that great (I think about the same as the lens kits would be. Are you going to consider a review of the Sony FE 85mm / 1.8 ($599) lens?
Rob The Cycling Guy yes he did
Thanks. Any chance reviewing cheap speed boosters like Viltrox from aliexpress?
Oh, thank you!
20mm vs kit lens @20mm and @16mm using the adapter would be interesting I suppose
will it fit the 18-55mm lens?
UT Austin represent!
thanks a lot, very interesting (as always)
If you have only one choice, which lens would you take with you for the holidays?
Sony 18-105mm f.4 ( and I would throw in the the 35mm F1.8 for the smallest 'low light' lens.)
Chryseas S. Yes, I was about to say the same.
I like to see comparison between sony 20mm and sigma 19mm
that's funny first few photos look so familiar ... then oh there it's Austin... just moved to Hawaii from Austin, lived there for 14 years
Thank you for adding the Sigma 16 to this discussion
*update, thanks to your video I purchased the Sigma and enjoyed the first shoot with it at a local park
Please make a review of the Samyang 10mm F2.8!!
At about 2 minutes and 54 seconds , what lens where you using to blur that background.
Sony 35mm F1.8
Always love your videos, but I've noticed you do a lot of your photos at 100 iso even on a dull day. Car headlights were on it was that dim, so I would have tried around 400 to 800 iso. Also stepping down to an aperture of around 7 on the landscape shots.
Indeed. I try to keep my ISO as low as possible. Good suggestion. Thanks!
TechnologyMafia I thought the second photo you took at 200 iso looked better. Might be worth testing them at different iso's and compare the results. Thanks again and looking forward to your next video.
Thanks for the review, peace from France
Which would you use for vlogging?
Or would you prefer the 18-135 kit lens for vlogging over both?
Looking at the corners of a photo when you shoot at f2.8 is pointless. The depth of field eliminates that. Thus the reason the center or wherever you aimed is sharp. I like your videos, not bagging on you just saying it defeats the purpose. Take your lenses up to f10-14 and check corners and you'll get a much better comparison. Watch anything above f16 and you'll start to see diffraction. Thanks for sharing.
You know you can add the adapter on the 16/2.8 right? It's still a very inexpensive AF 12/2.8 for under 300$
Yes, to make it even worse in the corners! lol.
Are the same dude from Casually Explained?
Just for curiosity: can the adapter be combined with the 16mm, and if so, what is the result?
The converter will work, result is about 12mm and I read comments that this is one of the rare cases where a converter improves(!) the image quality.
You can find measurement data on opticallimits.com
The tested 16mm with and without VCL-ECU converter. Go to Sony Alpha APS and look for the 16mm review in the "24MP" section.
These converters (there's also a fisheye VCL-ECF) were meant to be used with the 16mm in the first place. Afaik the 20mm was added to the spec for version 2 of them.
You should have compared the lenses at f8.
I would have if I had better lighting conditions, but in general when you compare lenses they are consistently sharper or softer than the other lens at any aperture - its just more noticeable at the faster ones.
Sony 20mm f2.8 vs Sony kit lens. Looking for the best portable lens.
Kit lens is better.....
@@ArthurR but 20mm is faster. Its important for low light conditions.
What lenses do you recommend for newborn photography? & holiday set up pictures, family photos? Have a Sony A6000.
I feel like the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 is a no-brainer compared to these
Except the size... when you take camera for few months backpack vacations - then a6000+sel20f28 is better just because of size and weight ;)
except its 10 times bigger and heavier
The point of a pancake lens is minimum size; that puts the Sigma out of the conversation.
Bro, you are in ATX! I recognize that tower!
Think I'll go for it as the 16mm sigma is about 90x larger
Did you seriously try to compare the sharpness of photos you took handheld at 1/20 sec? Dude that's motion blur, not bad image quality .
The very first shots at 1/100, 2 second delay and on a tripod, still not sharp. In fact, the only shots at 1/20, he did not state these were hand held so we are to assume he is still using a tripod which was stated at the beginning of the first picture he reviewed.
I hope sony will create like the canon 22mm f/2
Not seeing quality in the APSC lenses from Sony, very soft is there any sharp ones in their lineup?
Paul McCarthy The Sony 35mm and 50mm are both nice and sharp.
i hope sony would make a better glass :/
Try the 28 mm
Danny Dam not wide as expected
OK then if you can afford it, I would go for the 10-18 mm. That's a very sharp and wide lens
Can we use this 20 mm with A7 III ?
Yes, but only in crop mode - this is a crop sensor lens.
I'm not a profesional photograph, I just want to buy a wide lens for my sony a6000 for family trips. Between $200-$400.
I only have in my stuff the Sony FE 35mm F2.8 Zeiss lens and the Sony 55-210mm F4.5-6.3
Recommendations please??
Sell the 35mm zeiss, get the Sigma 16mm F1.4 and the Sony 35mm F1.8.
TechnologyMafia Thank you SO much for your response. I appreciate it.
One more question... where can I get as much money as I can for my lens?
Start with Craigslist, and if you dont get any buyers move over to eBay. Youll pay shipping and fees, but usually will also sell for a higher price.
TechnologyMafia Thanks again. You’re the BEST!! I will try as you told me.
I ate both of them pancakes after you showed me how horrible they are...
*for* *$340*, you can get a *Samyang* *AF* *12mm* *F2.0*! (that totals the price of the Sony 16 plus the wide angle adapter)
My six year old won't mind the 16mm for learning on my old Nex5R
Yay, UT 🤘🏼
I realised I have way to much dust in the air of my flat to perform an easy swap of lenses -_-
Thanks for the demo. Neither lens is very appealing, I'm afraid.
My canon 24mm is ultra sharp compared to those, I think when I'm getting the a6000 I will continue to shoot vintage glass
Would have been a far better comparison if shot on anything other than 2.8, couldn’t take anything other than 2.8 sheeesh
Wow. I thought the 16mm was supposed to be terrible, but it held up extremely well against the 20/2.8 and adapter. Im really surprised the expensive 20/2.8 and adapter did so poorly. Was only expecting much more for an expensive prime. The 16/2.8 is the clear winner. Smaller, cheaper and hardly much difference.
I would not buy either based on their images that you have shown
TBH, given the price of Sony 16 f2.8 and its not so bad performance compares to the other two more expensive lenses reviewed here, i must say Sony 16 f2.8 is a clear winner. Becoz in the real world, nobody would look at any photograph with a manifying glass. Let's forget about the converter, these are good for nothing and they are highly priced.
Man I thought this Tyler hoovie