Kalainen wrote: rob_ww wrote:
Thanks. That is very useful. Looking at the lines (rather than actual pictures) I would say 35, 24, 18 is roughly equivalent steps. 20mm is somewhat in-between 18 and 24 and not a big enough step in either direction to really make a difference. 14mm is a step too far, unless cropping. 16mm might be sensible, but I do not know of any well regarded lenses at that focal length.
Of course, that's in theory rather than considering actual photographic situations.
As a fan on prime lenses I would say that having a wider lens and using cropping to achieve your wanted focal length is a no-go. One creative advantage of a prime lens is that you learn to see photographic opportunities and motifs in certain focal length. If one tries to 'save and eat the cake at the same time' by having wider lens and crop to different focal lengths, imo, it kind of muddles this advantage.
For me the final contenders would be Sony 20/1.8 G and Zeiss Batis 2.8/18. Sony is technically better lens (better AF) while the Batis has better contrast and colors. Both are cream of the top and relevant options, for example the highly critical Lloyd Chambers said that the Batis is, when it was released, the best super wide angle lens ever made for full frame cameras. You can't go wrong with either one.
As for budget options, I would skip the Samyang (technically and optically worse), but if you want to find a pretty good budget option, I would look at the Tamron 2.8/20.
Hmm I guess we all have different ways of viewing scenes. Personally I view and compose in my head and then select the FL to suit. This is often suggested by experienced landscape photographers - leave your camera in the bag until you have studied the scene.
Obviously this doesn't work if walking around with a single FL lens but then I never do that, always having 2-3 lenses to choose from. I never feel 'muddled' and a scene can sometimes offer numerous shots from different perspectives/FLs.
If it's for landscape that is even more pertinent, for travel it's often spur of the moment unless planning for a specific time/light.
------
The SY isn't comparable to the Batis and if buying one lens that will form the basis of your kit then it should be the Batis or Sony 14mm (IMHO). If you're not sure and want to cover all bases then the Sony 16-35/4 PZ is perfect unless you need faster (mostly at these FLs I don't).
I have the SY 18mm. Almost never use it but it is a very good landscape lens. Basically a backup lens for me since it is so light, tiny and didn't cost a lot. I find I'm always shooting wider (15-16mm) or narrower (21-24mm) but that's just me !
Kalainen wrote: rob_ww wrote:
Thanks. That is very useful. Looking at the lines (rather than actual pictures) I would say 35, 24, 18 is roughly equivalent steps. 20mm is somewhat in-between 18 and 24 and not a big enough step in either direction to really make a difference. 14mm is a step too far, unless cropping. 16mm might be sensible, but I do not know of any well regarded lenses at that focal length.
Of course, that's in theory rather than considering actual photographic situations.
As a fan on prime lenses I would say that having a wider lens and using cropping to achieve your wanted focal length is a no-go. One creative advantage of a prime lens is that you learn to see photographic opportunities and motifs in certain focal length. If one tries to 'save and eat the cake at the same time' by having wider lens and crop to different focal lengths, imo, it kind of muddles this advantage.
For me the final contenders would be Sony 20/1.8 G and Zeiss Batis 2.8/18. Sony is technically better lens (better AF) while the Batis has better contrast and colors. Both are cream of the top and relevant options, for example the highly critical Lloyd Chambers said that the Batis is, when it was released, the best super wide angle lens ever made for full frame cameras. You can't go wrong with either one.
As for budget options, I would skip the Samyang (technically and optically worse), but if you want to find a pretty good budget option, I would look at the Tamron 2.8/20.
Hmm I guess we all have different ways of viewing scenes. Personally I view and compose in my head and then select the FL to suit. This is often suggested by landscape photographers - leave your camera in the bag until you have studies the scene.
Obviously this doesn't work if walking around with a single FL lens but then I never do that, always having 2-3 lenses to choose from. I never feel 'muddled' and a scene can sometimes offer numerous shots from different perspectives/FLs.
If it's for landscape that is even more pertinent, for travel it's often spur of the moment unless planning for a specific time/light.
------
The SY isn't comparable to the Batis and if buying one lens that will form the basis of your kit then it should be the Batis or Sony 14mm (IMHO). If you're not sure and want to cover all bases then the Sony 16-35/4 PZ is perfect unless you need faster (mostly at these FLs I don't).
I have the SY 18mm. Almost never use it but it is a very good landscape lens. Basically a backup lens for me since it is so light, tiny and didn't cost a lot. I find I'm always shooting wider (15-16mm) or narrower (21-24mm) but that's just me !
Jan 11, 2023 at 12:28 AM
Previous versions of Frogfish's message #16141383 « Zeiss Batis 18mm or Samyang 18mm? »
