p.2 #1 · 16-35 shooters how often do you feel limited on the long end?
For landscape work, I often hiked with a (Canon) 16-35 F4 (I like the lens), Contax 50mm 1.7 (crazy sharp), and a Nikkor AIS 105 (I like the look). Great kit.
On a trip to Thailand, I took the 16-35, pancake 40, and the 105. For my photography, I often ran into the 35 end on the 16-35. I rarely used anything below 28, but that's me. I liked the 40 because it's so small and doesn't scream "pro photographer." For travel, the 16-35 was too big and I didn't use the wide end, but I like the lens.
I think the Sony 24-50 is a good contender. It has the exact range I'd like, and I could probably get by with one lens for travel. Lens changes are an issue compared to landscape.
That said, my travel kit is a 28mm 1.4 (I like the look), 40 2.5, and a 90 2.8. I just got back from a trip, and a backpack didn't work (for lens changes), so I'm gonna try a hip belt. A work in progress.
p.2 #2 · 16-35 shooters how often do you feel limited on the long end?
I have adopted E Mount Tamron 17-50 and it's excellent on Z8, to pair with my Viltrox 14mm and 16mm primes. Sony users should consider this lens if 35mm on long end feels too short, it's an internal zoom as well.
p.2 #3 · 16-35 shooters how often do you feel limited on the long end?
Outstanding wrote:
I have adopted E Mount Tamron 17-50 and it's excellent on Z8, to pair with my Viltrox 14mm and 16mm primes. Sony users should consider this lens if 35mm on long end feels too short, it's an internal zoom as well.
If you think the Tammy 17-50/4v is great, you should try the Sony 20-70/4. For me the net gain of 20mm at the long end for the loss of 3mm at the wide end was an overall usefulness tradeoff well worth it for my needs in a “do-it-all” travel zoom. The Sony is an ounce or so heavier, but 15mm shorter and only 4mm wider than the Tammy. By most measures the Sony is also a bit better optically, though not hugely so. FWIW
