MiraMeadows Loc: Summerville, SC

I got some wonderful feedback from fellow members several months ago when I needed advise on buying a camera. I purchased a new Sony A7RII mirrorless after much deliberation. Knew this brand would have a steep and daunting learning curve but was going to have that anyway, not being a seasoned photographer, so decided to go for it. I now would like some advise on smart lens choices. I read somewhere that zooms are great when you can't use your legs, for what ever reason, to get to the best vantage point. Primes require your legs become the zoom to achieve the best vantage point. My thinking is since I love landscapes and they can be pretty far away and inaccessable, a zoom lets say 16-35mm, would be a great choice, and it wouldn't be crazy heavy. But to use nothing but zooms would make my less weighty camera pretty heavy and I want to avoid that as much as possible. I'm thinking of buying a couple of primes, let's say 50 or 55mm and an 85mm, for shooting things around me that I can walk to easily. I'm thinking this would keep the camera light and manageable and give me access to better quality lenses (good used lenses are what I look for first and foremost if I can't find those I'll buy new). Not interested in shooting birds or wildlife at this point so I don't need a long range zoom like 35-200mm. What say you my photography gurus?

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

I recommend 16-35mm f4, 55mm f1.8, 70-200mm f4. The f4 lenses are great landscape lenses. You need depth of field for landscapes so so you don't shoot them at f2.8, and f4 lenses are lighter and less expensive than f2.8 lenses. The 55mm f1.8 lens is a very sharp and relatively affordable prime lens with a wide aperture and is useful for portraits, close shots with background out of focus to remove distractions from the primary subject, and indoor photos. I would buy the 16-35mm first, the 55mm second, and the 70-200mm last.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Take your time, don't rush into buying lenses. Avoid impulse shopping. Really get to know the lens you already have before buying another lens; perhaps you will discover that you don't need another lens, or don't need the kind of second lens you thought you would.

BebuLamar

The 50 (or 55) and an 85 is a good idea in my opinion. I don't think they make the 35-200mm for the Sony A7RII. Please correct me if I am wrong about this.

BebuLamar

One thing I have to caution the OP though that it's not possible to zoom with your feet. Changing subject to camera distance and changing focal length don't give you the same result. You have to decide in each case which would give you the image you want.

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

Personally, I like Sony's 24-240mm zoom and all of Samyang's fast inexpensive manual lenses (14, 24, 35, 50, 85 & 135mm). If I was doing a do-over, it would be the 24-240mm and Samyang's 14 & 35mm lenses.

bwa

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

Whatever you decide from us, my opinion is the 24-240.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1126138-REG/sony_sel24240_fe_24_240mm_f_3_5_6_3_oss.html

Enjoy whatever you decide.

Hank Radt

I second this. I spend a considerable amount of time with each lens to find out what it can and can't do before I consider my next purchase.

That said, based on your comments, if you're looking at an 85mm, take a good look at the Zeiss Batis 85mm f1.8. I decided on it after comparing the reviews of it and the Sony FE 85 f1.4 GM, since you don't indicate you're going to be taking a lot of portraits - the FE has Auto eye focus, but the batis has OSS. The reviews indicate the FE is a tad sharper and a better choice for portrait professionals, and with the f1.4, you get better low light performance, but for the price and my needs, I'm very happy with the Batis.

I'm also considering the new FE 24-105 f4 G, but awaiting more reviews before pulling the trigger. Depending on what the reviews say, I'll either get that or the FE 24-70 2.8 GM.

Some links for your research:

http://briansmith.com/sony-a7-a7r-a7s-lens-guide/
http://briansmith.com/best-sony-fe-fullframe-e-mount-lenses/
https://www.switchbacktravel.com/10-great-sony-fe-full-frame-lenses
http://www.techradar.com/news/photography-video-capture/cameras/best-sony-e-mount-full-frame-lenses-1316111

whwiden

As for focal length choices for prime lenses, I use a 24mm and an 85mm in Nikon full frame. At the wide end, I find 28mm not wide enough in some city street situations so I went for the 24mm. For a three lens travel situation, I add a do everything 28-300mm lens. My fourth lens would be a 45mm or 50mm. The primes are better, but the convenience of a zoom is sometimes welcome if you are with a fast moving group, for example, and do not have the luxury of time. And in dusty conditions, you may not want to change lenses.

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

I've always tried to maintain 3 prime lenses in my bag . . . 24, 50 & 85. There are other great focal lengths, but these work for me. (I'm without an 85 currently, but Santa is coming, you know!!) But, as has been stated, take your time to decide what focal lengths (lenses) you know you want, then shop them. Then, make a plan for purchases. Good luck!! Enjoy!!

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

For landscapes most people prefer wide angle lenses, so 35 mm or shorter for a full frame camera. There is a genre of "telephoto landscapes" in which telephotos are used to isolate features of the landscape instead of the wide vistas of traditional landscapes.
Good high end zooms have great image quality, at a price in money, size and weight. But the really high end primes are often even more expensive and bigger and heavier when you get into the fast ones.
The zoom is versatile and saves carrying more lenses. The primes are usually faster and a bit higher IQ but you need a bag of them to replace a good high end zoom. Unless you are willing/able to use "foot zoom" (and carry that bag of lenses, or hire a local HS football player to act as porter).
I have 14 to 400 mm covered with three lenses for my Canon 5DIV (560 mm with my 1.4x extender):
14 mm f/2.8 prime, 24-105L f/4 and 100-400L and I have a 50 mm f/1.8 for low light work. One mid sized camera bag and I can carry the camera with one lens on it and the extras. Throw in a tripod and my gimbal head and we are getting into exercise country. (I do also have a 180 macro.) Put them on my APS-C 80D and I cover 22.4 to 640 Angle of View or out to 896 with the 1.4x. Yes, I am into birds. Bird and wildlife photographers don't consider a lenses "long" until you pass 300 mm and the upper limit? There is no such thing as "too long".

For your landscapes and other fairly close subjects a pair of lenses covering 24 (or wider) to about the 105 to 150 range should do it. You could go for one of the "super zoom" "walk around lenses but they get larger, heavier and the IQ is usually not as good. For just the landscape end Sony has three good zooms a 10-18 f/4, 16-35 f/4 and a 16-70 f/4.

whwiden

Yes. That is my exact three prime set in Nikon f/1.8. Very versatile, not too hard to carry around.

MiraMeadows Loc: Summerville, SC

Thanks Jackpi. Thats sort of my thinking too..

MiraMeadows Loc: Summerville, SC

OK Rook 2c4...the only lens I have is an FE 90mm f2.8 Macro G OSS. It was an open box ( used) lens from Best Buy which was not used at all by previous owner and was 40% off retail. Thats the only reason I purchased it first, the price and I knew it was a decent lens and I love macro shots. This is a really stupid question, can I use a macro lens for nonmacro shooting? Like I would an 85mm? If so I don't need to buy an 85mm in the future.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

For landscapes you need wide rather than long. Zooms create a 'flat' DOF.

That said.....there is always something that need a 'long lens' to capture.....!

Rather than going for a mixed bag....I would look at something like 16mm extra wide. 50mm and 70mm-300mm. I use a 70-300 with macro so it can get really close as well.(Sigma)

I distrust lenses with very long focal lengths....but that is me!