The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Modestly Priced Basic Sony Landscape Kit

pjmsj21

New member
I am looking for your input on putting together a body and lenses geared mostly to landscape photos. I have been using a Sony A6000 with 10-18, 18-135, and FE28 F2.0 and will continue to keep this kit for travel, family photos and an light hiking kit.

My thoughts are to purchase a used A7RII body and a used Sony 24-105 and a less than 24mm fixed lens to round out my wide angle needs. I would appreciate any comments or suggestions as to whether this would work well for my intended use. Thanks in advance.

Pat
 
V

Vivek

Guest
New A7rII on ebay are about the same or less than the price of an used (out of warranty) A7rII. They offer the best bang for the buck at the moment.

Not sure about the zoom.
 

pjmsj21

New member
Which focal length do you most frequently use for your landscapes? How large do you print?
11x14 or 16x20 would be my most common print sizes. I would say my most frequently used focal length is 24mm but I am looking for something below that but not ultra wide.
 

pjmsj21

New member
New A7rII on ebay are about the same or less than the price of an used (out of warranty) A7rII. They offer the best bang for the buck at the moment.

Not sure about the zoom.
Your E-Bay skills may be better than mine but I mostly see prices in the $1,700 area where I see craigslists prices for used in the $1,200 area depending upon condition and clicks.
 

seb

Member
Sony a7RII + Sony Zeiss 16-35/4
The 16-35 has prime character from 16 to 25. Above it is getting worse towards 35 but it is still ok. Here in Switzerland, I would get both new for 2750$ with 4 years of warranty. Used it will be around 2000$.
When it is about image quality the a7RII sensor is on par with the a7RIII and d850. And you can use the smooth reflection app. That's why some still prefer the a7RII for landscape over its predecessor.
 

pegelli

Well-known member
Sony a7RII + Sony Zeiss 16-35/4
The 16-35 has prime character from 16 to 25. Above it is getting worse towards 35 but it is still ok. Here in Switzerland, I would get both new for 2750$ with 4 years of warranty. Used it will be around 2000$.
When it is about image quality the a7RII sensor is on par with the a7RIII and d850. And you can use the smooth reflection app. That's why some still prefer the a7RII for landscape over its predecessor.
Agree fully with this, but wouldn't give up on that 24-105/4 either, by all means it seems to be a stellar zoom and for landscapes it's also nice to pick out details with a longer lens.


Forget Sony buy a D850
I'm sure the D850 will outperform the A7rii in some areas but I think for landscapes it won't. It's twice the price, twice as heavy, uses the same sensor and the OP won't be able to use the lenses he buys for it on his other camera.

Maybe you can explain why the D850 would be better for the OP's intended purpose, or is it just your immense appreciation for the D850 combined with your frequently expressed dislike of anything that has to with Sony?
 

fotografz

Well-known member
I own the A7R-II ... not my favorite camera by a long shot. But they keep on getting better.

Sony pumps out upgraded cameras at a ferocious rate rather than upgrading what you have, so can be expensive. So far I've sunk nearly 10K into Sony camera bodies that became worth 1/3 of that pretty quickly ... IF I could even get anyone to buy them. Gotta love digital. So, buying new/discount, or used, is a good idea.

I won't debate the merits of one brand over another, but can say if I were looking to start fresh with Sony FF, and wanted to shoot what you do, I'd suggest the new Sony-G FE 24-105/4 for it's versatility, and a Zeiss Batis FE 18/2.8.

IMO, the Sony A7R-II is the best new buy out there right now ... about 1/2 the original price. Which is why my used one is semi-worthless.

- Marc
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I’ll second the A7RII and a 16-35/4 if bang for the buck is primary concern. Hard to beat that combo. I haven’t seen many discounts on the 24-105/4 and generally the supply still isn’t meeting the demand. I’ve yet to see one on the shelf and they frequently sell out online rather quickly. It’s probably the most versatile lens in the system overall and don’t forget about the 12-24 as well if you want to gonreally wide... but it doesn’t take filters.
 

seb

Member
I’ll second the A7RII and a 16-35/4 if bang for the buck is primary concern. Hard to beat that combo. I haven’t seen many discounts on the 24-105/4 and generally the supply still isn’t meeting the demand. I’ve yet to see one on the shelf and they frequently sell out online rather quickly. It’s probably the most versatile lens in the system overall and don’t forget about the 12-24 as well if you want to gonreally wide... but it doesn’t take filters.
f4 and slower is good for landscapes (or macro). Otherwise I hardly shoot above f3.2. And as most of my landscapes are wide (12mm-28mm) the 24-105/4 is the most useless lens for me in the whole Sony lens setup. :)
But to be honest, If I would do more studio I'm with you. ;)
 
V

Vivek

Guest
I do not know Craig’s lists. Given the retail prices are only $300 more, an used, out of warranty camera, to me would be very unattractive.

YMMV. :grin:

Your E-Bay skills may be better than mine but I mostly see prices in the $1,700 area where I see craigslists prices for used in the $1,200 area depending upon condition and clicks.
 

KenLee

Active member
11x14 or 16x20 would be my most common print sizes. I would say my most frequently used focal length is 24mm but I am looking for something below that but not ultra wide.
Landscapes often depend on good sharpness to render vegetation, mountains, etc. When focusing at infinity distance we use the entire image circle but because you crop your images to those ratios, you remove the corners of your original captures: see Traditional Aspect Ratio on Full Frame Sensor.

Therefore you can worry less about lenses with shabby performance in the corners, which includes almost all zoom lenses, even the Sony 24-105.

Cropping this way will allow you to choose from a greater variety of lenses because while many (even vintage lenses) have good center performance, there are far fewer with stellar performance in the corners even at best aperture.

If your subject is stationary, image stitching can be an attractive option. Using a lens of only modest quality, stitched vertical images can give you a wide shot with so much resolution that you won't know what to do with it. Stitching also solves the issue of mediocre corner performance because we combine the central portion of the image circle from each shot.
 
Last edited:

ggibson

Well-known member
IMO, once you pick up an A7rII, you will have very little need for your APS-C setup. The A7rII is miles ahead of the A6000 in terms of image quality and speed of use. You can continue to use your APS-C lenses and retain 18MP which will let you print at 221ppi for a 16x20" (your 10-18 can even be used in full frame mode to some extent).

I agree with other posters that the 16-35/4 is a great lens for landscapes and travel. I have one, and typically I will pair it with a 55/1.8 or 85/1.8.

If you prefer to have a zoom for most of your shooting, the Sony 24-105/4 is quite sharp from what I've read. You might alternatively consider the new Tamron 28-75/2.8 for a faster lens with a slightly narrower range. Your 10-18mm might suit you for an ultrawide option to complement those. There are a lot of nice options wider than 24mm, so it kind of just comes down to your preferences for things like size/weight, lens speed, IBIS, AF vs MF, zoom vs prime, and of course budget.
 

KenLee

Active member
the Sony 24-105/4 is quite sharp from what I've read.
The tests I saw on LensRentals and Digilloyd were disappointing, particularly with regard to performance away from the center of the image. I'm no expert, but these guys strike me as serious testers and Digilloyd is a landscape shooter.

(Digilloyd requires a subscription to see the comparison images in any detail. They show distortion and low resolution in the corners of the image. For APS-C where we discard the outer 1/3 of the image circle at infinity, I suspect it's a fine choice.)

Are there links to some favorable reviews you could share ?
 

ggibson

Well-known member
I'm surprised to hear the Lensrentals review characterized as "disappointing", since he basically concluded it was among if not the best 24-105/4 available. He kind of badmouths all 24-105/4 lenses, which feels like it overshadows what is otherwise a positive review.

Anyways, Fred Miranda has a set of comparisons to take a look at which give an idea of the performance in the real world and the (pretty minimal IMO) drop in resolution from center to edge:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1498758/0
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
I'm surprised to hear the Lensrentals review characterized as "disappointing", since he basically concluded it was among if not the best 24-105/4 available. He kind of badmouths all 24-105/4 lenses, which feels like it overshadows what is otherwise a positive review.

Anyways, Fred Miranda has a set of comparisons to take a look at which give an idea of the performance in the real world and the (pretty minimal IMO) drop in resolution from center to edge:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1498758/0
In my limited trial of the 24-105 I thought it was comparable to other similar premium mid range zooms. Great for general use that you can technically do some of anything with but withbthe obvious limits for a lens of this type. Definitely is a good 1 lens kit option that’ll cover MOST things.
 

KenLee

Active member
I'm surprised to hear the Lensrentals review characterized as "disappointing", since he basically concluded it was among if not the best 24-105/4 available. He kind of badmouths all 24-105/4 lenses, which feels like it overshadows what is otherwise a positive review.

Anyways, Fred Miranda has a set of comparisons to take a look at which give an idea of the performance in the real world and the (pretty minimal IMO) drop in resolution from center to edge:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1498758/0
Thank you that's very helpful ! Fred Miranda's review demonstrates that the 24-105 holds up quite well against very good primes, never exceeding but matching closely in most cases.

You're right: I wasn't discerning enough to overlook the negative tone of the Lensrentals review so I missed the point.

Digilloyd's tests are more thorough than Fred Miranda's: he considers distortion, field curvature, vignetting, color, light transmission, etc. He also examines images directly, with lens correction disabled. These factors may be more important to architecture than landscape shooters.
 
Last edited:
Top