It’s been a while...

[TreeofLifeStairs]

So it’s been several years since I’ve posted but it’s good to see some people I remember. My NEX-7 was stolen a week or two ago so I took the opportunity to upgrade to an a7II. My question has to do with lens selection. I used my NEX-7 for two primary purposes. First, to take pictures of my family, and second, to take pictures of the staircases I build. On the NEX-7 I used my 50mm 1.8 almost exclusively when taking pictures of my family. So for the a7II I’m looking at the 85mm 1.4 GM Lens. What I haven’t decided on is the lens I’ll use to take pictures of my staircases. I had been using a Rokinon 12mm 2.0. It was overall a pretty good wide angle lens that I was 80% happy with. The thing I liked least was the manual focus/aperture. So here are the runners up that I’m looking at. The Sony 16-35mm 2.8 GM, 16-35mm 4.0 vario-tessar, Sony 12-24mm 4.0, and the Venus Laowa 12mm 2.8. They all have their pros and cons so I’m looking for a good discussion to help guide me in my decision.

I don’t need a zoom (I actually prefer a prime) which leads me to the Venus, but I’m afraid that it might not stand up to the others in image quality and it has the same manual focus/aperture that I didn’t like from my last lens.

The Sony GM lens is very appealing but it’s price isn’t. It is a business expense so it would be written off but if another lens is going to be equally effective for me then I don’t want to spend the extra money needlessly. 2.8F is great but I don’t know if it’s needed. When I shoot my staircases I (almost) always use my tripod so 4.0 even at 100 iso would be fine. I do shoot some Astro photography rarely though which would definitely benefit from those extra couple stops.

What are your opinions of these lenses and which would you think would best suit me.

 

[cherylynne1]

Have you looked at the Zeiss Batis 18? It would have the equivalent field of view as the 12mm on a crop sensor, it’s a prime, it has autofocus, and it’s cheaper than the GM (although not cheap by any means....it is a Zeiss, after all.)

I drool over that 85 1.4. I hope you’ll upload some of the photos from it!

 

[TreeofLifeStairs]

Have you looked at the Zeiss Batis 18? It would have the equivalent field of view as the 12mm on a crop sensor, it’s a prime, it has autofocus, and it’s cheaper than the GM (although not cheap by any means....it is a Zeiss, after all.)

I drool over that 85 1.4. I hope you’ll upload some of the photos from it!

Great suggestion. Just when I thought I had it narrowed down to 4. It’s the same price as the other Zeiss but is a fair amount faster and since I don’t need the zoom it might be a top contender. How does it do as far as distortion, ca, and vignette compared to the GM?

 

[cherylynne1]

I don’t think any of the reviews I read reported any distortion on the Batis, while the GM has a tiny, easily corrected amount at extreme focal lengths and apertures. CA is small and easily corrected on both. Vignette is better on the Batis, I believe, barely even noticeable, while vignetting was definitely something a few reviews noted as needing to be corrected on the GM. Don’t get me wrong, the GM is still beloved by even the harshest of reviewers, but even the greatest zoom is subject to things that are more easily corrected in a prime.