Which of these 2 lenses more suitable for 'standard' use cases?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
OP indigoshrine Forum Member • Posts: 72
Re: Which of these 2 lenses more suitable for 'standard' use cases?

little jim wrote:

...

This long preamble is only to emphasize that your decision should take into account the question: what is "truly special" about your lens choices for your photography? The 65mm classifies as "special" but it sort of overlaps with your 85mm. A traditional 3-lens kit would favour the 2/40mm Batis, but 40-55mm seems to be otherwise "normal" and might explain why I don't use my 2/45mm very much even though that Zeiss lens is considered to be "special".

If you go with the 65mm APO, I'd think about selling the 85mm and going with something longer, like a good 135mm with AF (since your 85 is your only AF lens). The Samyang 135 is quite good for astro and would definitely extend your astro reach.

So your two 3-lens kits options could be 18/40/85 and 18/65/135. The second of these would be superior, imo, over the first.

Of your two options, the 40 and 65 APO, my vote would be for the 65 APO. Its macro capability is not outstanding, but it does give an extra dimension creatively (I love my 90M). Everything else I read about this lens is outstanding (e.g Phillip Reeves review of this lens).

Hope this helps,

Jim

Thanks for the feedback! I totally agree with you that the 65mm kind of overlaps with my 85mm. It is one of the reasons why I was still not completely sold on it. I definitely want to keep my 85mm though, it is a great lens for the price and serves the occasional portrait just perfectly. At present I am actually not interested in longer FL, so I want to keep it at a 3 lens kit at most while avoiding any unnecessary redundancy. I never shoot tele, and for the astro use case, since the tracker I use is the most basic/cheap, I prefer not to go beyond 65mm - also, the longer the FL the more complex multi row panos on a star tracker will become.

This thread shows a good example of what I am trying to achieve. Basically this can be done with a 50mm just fine. Aside from tele, the only other reason for me to think of a longer FL right now would be macro - which is not mandatory, just a nice-to-have.

That being said, 18/40/85 would be the more logical choice. Just like you mentioned I had read Phillip Reeve's review as well as many others about the Voigtlander and it just seems to get consistently better marks than the Zeiss 40mm. Also, while I have at least one confirmed test shot of the Voigtlander for a Milky Way Panorama, I could not find a single review for the Zeiss regarding astro, hence making it a bit of a potential risk purchase.

 indigoshrine's gear list:indigoshrine's gear list
Sony a7 III Zeiss Batis 18mm F2.8 Sony FE 85mm F1.8 +1 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow