FE UWA lens recommendations

[Mr.Meerkat]

Hey all, I'm currently looking at some UWA lenses and am bashing my head against the wall a little in deciding what I want to do. It will be paired with my A7R2 and the planned usage is a little landscape and currently, have a trip planned up north, which will involve the northern lights. I have however short-listed 4 lenses, all at completely different price points. 

 

1. Sammy 18mm f2.8, £260 

- Cheapest option

- Super light (145g) 

- Has variation issues (made worse by how I have confirmation bias from the two Sammy lenses I've previously owned both were incredibly soft and didn't focus correctly)

 

2. Tamron 17-28mm f2.8, £580

- Is affordable

- Performs well

- Limited range for a zoom

 

3. Sony 16-35mm f4, £620 

- Very useful zoom range

- Performs quite well, unless you're looking at the 35mm-side (not so sharp)

- F4 could be a little tricky to compensate for the northern lights (we'll see I guess?)

 

4. Sony 16-35mm f2.8, £1300 

- Again, very useful zoom range

- Great performance as a whole albeit soft on the 35mm-side 

- A bit expensive but am thinking of selling my 35mm f1.8 to compensate for the cost

 

Of course, there's also the 14mm and 20mm f1.8, which are both utterly beautiful but f1.8 will probably be overkill for me so rather drop down to the f2.8s for either a lower price or some zoom action. 

 

Now, someone persuade me one way or the other! 

[GDRRiley]

to me its ether 17-28 2.8 from tamron for its low cost but decent performance and I'd assume by the time you reach 28mm you got a lens like 24-105 or 24-70 to take over
or the 16-35 2.8 that extra mm on the wide end you'll notice and its a great lens
 

could also just rent the 14mm 1.8

[Mr.Meerkat]

34 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

to me its ether 17-28 2.8 from tamron for its low cost but decent performance and I'd assume by the time you reach 28mm you got a lens like 24-105 or 24-70 to take over
or the 16-35 2.8 that extra mm on the wide end you'll notice and its a great lens
 

could also just rent the 14mm 1.8

I do have a 24-105 so the 17-28mm could work pretty nicely but then again, I've been tempted by the 16-35 2.8 for such a long time now, I think you have just convinced me to get the 16-35 2.8. Only caveat is the cost, which as photography is just a hobby for me, it's a little too steep at the moment so the 18 2.8 could be a good stop-gap, giving me something wider than 24mm@F4.

 

Nonetheless, I guess in the near future, I'll be adding a third lens to my collection that I would have spent more than the body itself...

[GDRRiley]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

I do have a 24-105 so the 17-28mm could work pretty nicely but then again, I've been tempted by the 16-35 2.8 for such a long time now, I think you have just convinced me to get the 16-35 2.8. Only caveat is the cost, which as photography is just a hobby for me, it's a little too steep at the moment so the 18 2.8 could be a good stop-gap, giving me something wider than 24mm@F4.

 

Nonetheless, I guess in the near future, I'll be adding a third lens to my collection that I would have spent more than the body itself...

how longs the trip? why not just rent to try?

 

in the end you should always have spent more on glass than on the body. bodies come and go. I'm running 20+ year old lenses

[Mr.Meerkat]

Just now, GDRRiley said:

how longs the trip? why not just rent to try?

 

in the end you should always have spent more on glass than on the body. bodies come and go. I'm running 20+ year old lenses

The trip is going to be 2 weeks long. As for renting, I'll be looking at approx £250~ if I were to rent a 16-35 2.8 for the whole trip, which at least based on the way of how my brain works, I'd rather try to get a good copy of the Sammy 18 2.8 for virtually the same price. As for just trying it for a day or two, I usually would say yes but it doesn't negate the desire of wanting an UWA for the trip nor does it negate the monetary issue (which is less can't afford and more not wanting to dip into savings right now as I've already done so for a sigma 100-400 ). 

 

That I do know, at the rate I'm buying (and selling) lenses, I will have been able to buy an A1 

[GDRRiley]

9 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

The trip is going to be 2 weeks long. As for renting, I'll be looking at approx £250~ if I were to rent a 16-35 2.8 for the whole trip, which at least based on the way of how my brain works, I'd rather try to get a good copy of the Sammy 18 2.8 for virtually the same price. As for just trying it for a day or two, I usually would say yes but it doesn't negate the desire of wanting an UWA for the trip nor does it negate the monetary issue (which is less can't afford and more not wanting to dip into savings right now as I've already done so for a sigma 100-400 ). 

 

That I do know, at the rate I'm buying (and selling) lenses, I will have been able to buy an A1 

no point int renting for 2-3 days. 250 for 2 weeks sounds about right

keep dipping into that savings for glass

 

lol

[Mr.Meerkat]

2 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

no point int renting for 2-3 days. 250 for 2 weeks sounds about right

keep dipping into that savings for glass

 

lol

Right, I guess it's time to set eBay alerts on the 16-35 2.8. So much for saving!  

 

I mean I only make bad good decisions! 

[GDRRiley]

4 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

Right, I guess it's time to set eBay alerts on the 16-35 2.8. So much for saving! 

I've got so many ebay searches saved. I need to clear most of them out now

[Mr.Meerkat]

2 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

I've got so many ebay searches saved. I need to clear most of them out now

I usually just buy grey market as there's a grey market store that is pretty much as reputable as say Amazon or mpb when it comes to buying camera gear (it literally has a 4.5/5 rating on trustpilot with 3K reviews, praised by most people) and the pricing for lenses is no more than 5% more expensive than used (often cheaper than used) which combined with a warranty and return policy that is actually honoured (have returned three lenses and also warrantied one lens effortlessly), it's almost a no brainer. However, in this specific case, I'm going to try to send some low-ball offers to eBay listing first (sorry sellers but hey, that's just how business works). 

[GDRRiley]

22 minutes ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

I usually just buy grey market as there's a grey market store that is pretty much as reputable as say Amazon or mpb when it comes to buying camera gear (it literally has a 4.5/5 rating on trustpilot with 3K reviews, praised by most people) and the pricing for lenses is no more than 5% more expensive than used (often cheaper than used) which combined with a warranty and return policy that is actually honoured (have returned three lenses and also warrantied one lens effortlessly), it's almost a no brainer. However, in this specific case, I'm going to try to send some low-ball offers to eBay listing first (sorry sellers but hey, that's just how business works). 

I tend to send out lowballs on older gear or gear that I see is way above market rate
missing accessories is often a way to get a good price but thats mostly for bodies. not so much for glass

[Mr.Meerkat]

2 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

I tend to send out lowballs on older gear or gear that I see is way above market rate
missing accessories is often a way to get a good price but thats mostly for bodies. not so much for glass

I mean when it comes to low-balling, it's one of those "you'll only know if you try" situations. Generally I try not to low-ball so much but hey, who doesn't like a good deal? I mean whenever I sell on eBay (only if there's a £1 max final value fee offer), I usually list items a little higher than what I actually want as people will always try to get it cheaper (don't think I've sold anything that's not been a "best offer), even if it's solidly below market value so hey, other sellers could also be doing the same. 

[GDRRiley]

1 hour ago, Mr.Meerkat said:

I mean when it comes to low-balling, it's one of those "you'll only know if you try" situations. Generally I try not to low-ball so much but hey, who doesn't like a good deal? I mean whenever I sell on eBay (only if there's a £1 max final value fee offer), I usually list items a little higher than what I actually want as people will always try to get it cheaper (don't think I've sold anything that's not been a "best offer), even if it's solidly below market value so hey, other sellers could also be doing the same. 

yeah thats often a tactic. I try my best not to sell on ebay, I use gear specific sites because they take a lot smaller cut.

[YellowJersey]

I recommend the Tamron 17-28mm 2.8. I sold my Sony 16-35mm 2.8 GM. The Tamron is 98% as good while being cheaper, lighter, and smaller.

[D13H4RD]

The Tamron.

 

The GM is good but I would only go for it if you really, really need that extra 1mm wide-end and the 35mm long end.

[Mr.Meerkat]

5 hours ago, D13H4RD said:

The Tamron.

 

The GM is good but I would only go for it if you really, really need that extra 1mm wide-end and the 35mm long end.

 

On 7/11/2021 at 7:50 AM, YellowJersey said:

I recommend the Tamron 17-28mm 2.8. I sold my Sony 16-35mm 2.8 GM. The Tamron is 98% as good while being cheaper, lighter, and smaller.

Unfortunately GDRRiley already convinced me so GM it is (definitely didn't have a bias towards the GM in the beginning either) . Managed to successfully low-ball, I mean negotiate down one and at the price I purchased it for, it was pretty near touching distance from retail 17-28 pricing (note: price listed in OP is grey market, add £200 for retail) so I'm pretty happy to throw pricing out of the equation in this case, especially if the 35mm side is satisfactory where it just outright replaces my 35mm f1.8 (I stop it down 85% of the time anyway). 

 

I guess the biggest driving factor for me, from wanting to sway away from the 17-28 is how for me specifically, the focal range is just too limited where I'll personally struggle to use it in a single lens setup. This means it's now competing against the cheap f2.8 primes that cost a third to half as much, such as either the Sammy 18 or Tammy 20, which are also smaller and even lighter. 

 

The 16-35 on the other hand actually does cover my most used FL range of 30 to 40mm where for me, although lens vs lens, its heavier+bulkier, this is basically a moot point as I can actually go single lens with the GM. 

 

I guess "really really need that 35mm on the wide end" applies here

And yes, I've definitely haven't put some additional thoughts into this.