Last week I started a thread on this subject trying to get views on which lens is best (referring to MM) if you only carried one prime lens for landscape. I have some ultra wide and some zooms, but was thinking of investing in one really good wide lens for landscape and night sky shots. I received a lot of good input about zooms, and ultra wides, but we never got to the point of my question (which maybe I did not make clear enough). I have been shooting Nikon for 10 years since I retired, and last year started shooting Sony A7 series due to a bad injury and transport issues. My strategy is to get a lens for Nikon D810 and to also use it with adapter on the A7.

I have the Zeiss Distaton T 15mm, but in a lot of cases it is so wide it is difficult to compose and expose properly. I am thinking a 28mm would be a good solution. Zeiss has the Classic Distagon, Milvus and Otus lines for Nikon. (I have some of the Batis and Loxia lenses for my Sony A7 in E format.) My question would be if anyone thinks the Mil's and/or Otus lines are worth the cost. I have read that some of these lenses have Coma issues.

I have read a lot of reviews but a lot of the tech analysis is beyond my ability. Since I started as a beginner, and acquired a lot of equipment slowly over the years, and kept improving quality, I now wish I had just bought the best from the beginning. I am planning to start selling all my "b" quality stuff and to only keep the stuff that is really good. For reference, yes, I am an amateur, but good enough to have been published quite a few times. Not making any money.