Tell me I'm not crazy

[UHDR]

so somewhere along the lines of re-structuring my setup, I have the following travel setup planned:

A7r
VG 12mm
VG 15mm
Batis 25mm
FE 55mm
Sony 85mm F2.8 + LAEA3

so this covers 12-85mm range, and includes two large aperture lens at 25mm (F2) and 55mm (F1.8). This will cover all my needs, but of course this setup includes no zoom...

lately i have been toying with the idea of have sigma 18-35mm F1.8 in the set up... in place of the Batis 25mm. This will:

1, increase bulk and weight (33Xg to 8XXg)
2, half my cost.
3, increase F2 to F1.8
4, i often crop to 16:9 and 21:9 ratio so i think i can get away shooting at 25mm on the 18-35mm. i.e. i will have zoom from 25-35mm.
5, i might lose tiny bit of IQ (although may just be losing that zeiss look. if you believe in DXOmark score, sharpness-wise, the 18-35mm actually preforms better than sigma 35mm ART; which, in term, does slightly better than the FE55mm).
6, filter size gone up. in the original plan everything is do-able with just two ND filters (58mm and 67mm + step up ring).
7, but...i get ...zooooooooom!

so...question here, am i going crazy to ditch Batis for Sigma? :loco:

PS: my wife uses a A6000 and she has no large aperture lens, so 18-35mm makes sense on her camera too.

 

[Jack]

It's not an easy decision, and probably a good argument could be made for keeping everything and adding the zoom . Personally, I wouldn't ditch the Batis -- I would however add that 18-ish is a very nice focal range, though using the 15 and taking a step closer to your main subject is probably going to serve almost as well. I have a 14 in my kit and just ditched my 17-35/2.8 zoom in favor of a fixed 24/1.4 as an example, saving weight while gaining speed and IQ -- and I don't own a 35 either(!) but do have a stellar 28. When I really need wider than the 24, I generally need a LOT wider, so use the 14 and crop a little if needed. YMMV...

 

[UHDR]

It's not an easy decision, and probably a good argument could be made for keeping everything and adding the zoom . Personally, I wouldn't ditch the Batis -- I would however add that 18-ish is a very nice focal range, though using the 15 and taking a step closer to your main subject is probably going to serve almost as well. I have a 14 in my kit and just ditched my 17-35/2.8 zoom in favor of a fixed 24/1.4 as an example, saving weight while gaining speed and IQ -- and I don't own a 35 either(!) but do have a stellar 28. When I really need wider than the 24, I generally need a LOT wider, so use the 14 and crop a little if needed. YMMV...

Thanks for the insight, Jack.

I picked VG 15mm because its size and when partnered with A7r (36MP), i can crop to 18mm without too much penalty (i rarely do large prints). I replaced my sigma 12-24mm with VG 12mm, 15mm and , originally planned, Batis 25mm. i found i used these three focal lengths the most after looking back at my own work with 12-24mm. One of the the biggest driver for going to 18-35mm is so i can cover 35mm too. The original plan will see me jump from 25mm straight to 55mm, which is fair a jump; skipping 28mm and 35mm to say the least.... another advantage i guess is that i will be using LAEA4, so i will add phase detection to A7r i.e. which will help with street photography/tracking fast-ish objects...

Anyway, I just came across a second hand 18-35mm in a local store, i might pick it up and try it out. If at later date i find the Batis better, then i will put the sigma back onto the market. :grin:

 

[mbroomfield]

How much cropping is needed on the Sigma given that it's an APSc lens? I've not seen any images to show corners on FF. I always like the idea of that lens when I was shooting Nex though.

I'm pretty close to your prime list if limited to a handful of lenses except that I wouldn't need to go wider than 15mm and I use the OM 90/2 macro for a short tele.

Edit : I think I'd switch the 55/1.8 for a Vario Sonnar 35-70 and forgo the speed for a bit more flexibility.

 

[uhoh7]

Everybody will have their own take.

I would loose the CV 12 (not sell, but leave home), and possibly add a small light 135+

I would never bother with an APS-C lens on the full frame camera, let alone a giant monster like the sigma.

The F/1.8 is meaningless considering the crop. Does your wife really want such a big lens? With A6000 I would think she would like that little zoom...I forget the range.

The Batis may be the first truly great WA for the A7 series. I would not want to forego that

 

[ggibson]

Yeah, I don't think cropping makes any sense if you're going for a huge lens like the Sigma 18-35. You'd probably get better results from the Batis 25 by cropping until you switch to the 55/1.8.

If you want more flexibility of a zoom, why not go for the Sony 16-35/4? I find it to be an excellent lens (even at 35mm, despite some grumbling here), and a very nice focal range. It pairs really well with the 55/1.8 IMO. Sure you might give up f2, but I find most UWA shots usually need a little DOF anyways and the 16-35 has image stabilization to help with the hand-holding. If you shoot astro shots, you should probably get the Rokinon 24/1.4 anyways.

My kit right now is the 16-35, 55, and 24-240 (with a legacy 135/2.5 as an alternate) and I feel pretty confident in being able to cover most scenarios (probably 80% of the time I'm shooting the first 2 anyways). I could see the Batis 85 or SAL85 as a good alternate to a tele-zoom too.

 

[UHDR]

How much cropping is needed on the Sigma given that it's an APSc lens? I've not seen any images to show corners on FF. I always like the idea of that lens when I was shooting Nex though.

I'm pretty close to your prime list if limited to a handful of lenses except that I wouldn't need to go wider than 15mm and I use the OM 90/2 macro for a short tele.

Edit : I think I'd switch the 55/1.8 for a Vario Sonnar 35-70 and forgo the speed for a bit more flexibility.

Not much cropping if you stay within 28-35mm. but i think i can get away with 25-27mm if i shoot 21:9 or 16:9. Guy did a demo previously, i found it quite acceptable:
http://www.getdpi.com/forum/sony/51113-sigma-18-35-1-8-zoom-aps.html

Everybody will have their own take.

I would loose the CV 12 (not sell, but leave home), and possibly add a small light 135+

I would never bother with an APS-C lens on the full frame camera, let alone a giant monster like the sigma.

The F/1.8 is meaningless considering the crop. Does your wife really want such a big lens? With A6000 I would think she would like that little zoom...I forget the range.

The Batis may be the first truly great WA for the A7 series. I would not want to forego that

Thanks for your input. :grin: i will almost always carry the CV12, i found it extremely useful when i do building/structure pictures like large church/palace. on the other hand im increasingly staying away from the tele end, even 55mm is...too tele. i might consider going 100/105/135 again (to replace the 85mm) if leica/zeiss/voigtlander decides to make a super compact f2.8/4.

mounting on A6000 will strictly be backup choice when both of us want to do night photography aboard. so i think she will find it acceptable.

Yeah, I don't think cropping makes any sense if you're going for a huge lens like the Sigma 18-35. You'd probably get better results from the Batis 25 by cropping until you switch to the 55/1.8.

If you want more flexibility of a zoom, why not go for the Sony 16-35/4? I find it to be an excellent lens (even at 35mm, despite some grumbling here), and a very nice focal range. It pairs really well with the 55/1.8 IMO. Sure you might give up f2, but I find most UWA shots usually need a little DOF anyways and the 16-35 has image stabilization to help with the hand-holding. If you shoot astro shots, you should probably get the Rokinon 24/1.4 anyways.

My kit right now is the 16-35, 55, and 24-240 (with a legacy 135/2.5 as an alternate) and I feel pretty confident in being able to cover most scenarios (probably 80% of the time I'm shooting the first 2 anyways). I could see the Batis 85 or SAL85 as a good alternate to a tele-zoom too.

thanks. i did consider 16-35mm f4 previously but i didn't find the final image is quite my taste. but i think you are right that, with zeiss 25mm, i can probably crop fair abit and still retain decent enough resolution. hmm.....may be i am going crazy :grin: