Wide angle selection: SEL 16mm f 2.8 vs Sigma 19m f2.8

Discussion in 'Sony Alpha E-Mount Lenses' started by Manu-4Vendetta, Dec 7, 2013.

  1. Manu-4Vendetta

    Manu-4Vendetta TalkEmount Regular

    Apr 7, 2013
    Dominican Republic
    Real Name:
    Emmanuel Peña
    I need to confirm that the Sigma is better given the reviews I've read and examples. I think the SEL is not bad for the photos I've seen, but I think the Sigma is better.

    I will need a similar focal and balance seems to lean towards the Sigma.
  2. Hawon

    Hawon TalkEmount Regular

    Feb 5, 2013
    Chicago, IL
    Real Name:
    I for one kept sel over sigma. Smaller footprint and my copy gives me good pictures.

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
  3. Grisu_HDH

    Grisu_HDH TalkEmount Veteran

    Dec 16, 2012
    Southern Germany
    Real Name:
    Sigmas IQ is better, but the SEL16 is multi flexible when buying wide angle converter and the fisheye converter...
    So still your choice.
    Perhaps choosind SEL16 and the Sigma 30?
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Poki

    Poki TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 30, 2011
    Also, don't forget the difference in focal length. 3mm might sound like ignorable, but it's quite much for a wide angle lens.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Amamba

    Amamba TalkEmount All-Pro

    Apr 13, 2013
    SE MI
    I got Sigma and it's very good. I was intrigued by 16+WA converter but there's enough spilt opinion on it's performance that I decided to go a different route altogether. From what I read, the good copies of 16 are very sharp in the center 1/3rd of the frame when stopped down, with softer edges and mushy corners; at f2.8 the legs is fairly soft, by f8 the edges improve considerably but the corners are still soft. Again, this is what I read - not what I experienced. And there also seem to be a fair amount of sample variation.

    Now, these characteristics are not a problem for a portrait lens, but 16mm is a landscape / architecture lens and I would expect it to be sharp across the frame. Still may not be a bad lens if you get a quality copy, but I already had the 19 and decided to spend the money on LA-EA2 instead.

    The 19 is a nice lens, would be very good value at $200, and as a B&H $100 closeout deal it was a no brainer. It's perfectly usable at f2.8, sharp across the frame, not as sharp as 30/2.8 but very very close.

    Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
  6. dmc

    dmc New to TalkEmount

    Jun 29, 2013
    Will have to, respectfully, agree to disagree. I have both lenses and much prefer IQ of Sony 16 to Sigma 19. The Sony is a far superior lens IMHO.
  7. Poki

    Poki TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Aug 30, 2011
    Both are not very good lenses, but technically, the Sigma is better. I too prefer the Sony because of its size and color rendering, though I hardly use it nowadays.

    Measured data can be seen here:
    Sigma 19
    Sony 16
    • Like Like x 1