I'm not sure I'd disagree with the idea that a really good 35/1.4 might not be a reasonable choice for a lot of situations Maybe A7Riii for the body. I don't have either and if given $2500 (a rough guess looking at KEH for the used 35/1.4 and A7Riii in reasonable conditions), that's probably not what I'd rush out to buy.
Without some parameters, it's not really an answerable question. And there's a good chance, in my hands, quality image and image quality might well be rather different things. I think there's a potential disconnect between holding a budget limit and "best image quality."
It's like "What's a good budget car?"
Let's say the idea is, $5000. Taking "landscapes" from the South Rim of the Grand Canyon. Now, your $5000 budget including the camera, lens and small bag, has to get you a car, and take the four of you from San Francisco, over Tioga Pass, down Highway 395 to Lone Pine, east through Death Valley, then Las Vegas, then on to Williams or Flagstaff. On a Fourth of July weekend.
Impossible to answer this in the definitive for anyone else because there is no single perfect combo, rather there are many possible excellent combos depending on your specific preferences and needs.
For me? 35/1.4GM on an A7RV (much better ergonomics for me than the A7CR and massively better EVF). A7RV brand new on the forum for $2850, less for used, 35/1.4 for $750 used in mint condition. Killer image quality, you have to move to medium format to get any better. The body feels great in the hand. The 35 is sharp corner to corner even at f/1.4 (both images below wide open). Extremely versatile focal length, only held back by the photographer’s creativity.
And I could come up with a bunch more combos equally worthy in various ways. For example, tighter budget? Same lens on a used A7RIII.
