what is the difference between sony vegas 16 and 14

Obviously in low light situations the slower aperture of the Zeiss zoom can be more challenging to deal with and the cameras may revert to using contrast detection. I didn’t notice any substantial difference in the performance of the AF motor but the GM can be more consistent and quiet in continuous AF thanks to the two DDSSM motors (Direct Drive SuperSonic Motor). Diffraction decreases the performance from f/11 once again on both lenses.Īutofocus, manual focus and stabilisationīoth lenses perform well on the third generation A7 series as well as the previous series. The results even out from f/5.6 although the GM retains a very small advantage when it comes to crisp detail rendering. Composition referenceĪt 20mm, the performance remains similar with the GM being sharper at 2.8 and 4 in comparison to the Zeiss at its fastest aperture. At f/16 and f22 especially diffraction becomes more severe. By f/5.6 the results are more similar and remain so until f/11 where diffraction starts to kick in and the GM lens regains a tiny advantage. Starting with their fastest apertures (2.8 and 4) at 16mm, the GM matches the sharpness of the Zeiss, if not even outperforming it slightly. Let’s begin with sharpness at the centre. It uses 7 aperture blades and features Zeiss’ T coating to control flare.Īll the images for the side-by-side test were taken with the A7R mark III. The 16-35mm f4 features a Zeiss Vario-Tessar design with 12 elements in 10 groups, including one AA (Advanced Aspherical), four aspherical and 3 ED glass elements. It has a circular 11 blade aperture and Nano AR coating to reduce flare and ghosting. The 16-35mm f2.8 features 16 elements in 13 groups including 2 XA (extreme aspherical), 3 aspherical and 2 ED elements. To know more about our ethics, you can visit our full disclosure page. If you buy something after clicking the link, we will receive a small commission. Within the article, there are affiliate links. We were not asked to write anything about these products, nor were we provided with any sort of compensation. Recently I had the chance to test these two products side-by-side – here are my findings!Įthics statement: We rented the two lenses to conduct our comparison. I have good memories of the 16-35mm ZA when I tested it on the A7 mark II in 2015 but I was curious to see what differences the G Master lens would bring to the table besides the obvious faster aperture. The latest to be realised was the 16-35mm which is part of the high quality G Master series. At the time, the trio was the only option available if you wanted quality variable focal length lenses.įour years later, Sony users have much more choice including a set of faster f/2.8 constant zooms.

The 16-35mm f/4 ZA was the third zoom released for the Sony full-frame E-mount system in 2014 and completed the f/4 constant aperture series.

What is the difference between sony vegas 16 and 14