I can only tell you what I use and why. I do have the 24 -240, purchased for it's reach and wide capabilities. It's heavy so bring a tripod. It can be the one lens that does a lot for you thus it can be the only lens you need for a variety of situations. Not good for sports, it's not the fastest or sharpest lens. These "do it all," lenses rarely are.
I use the 16 - 35 for landscapes, it does the job very nicely. But is not that fast or light to carry, should be using a tripod anyway. Love, love, love that lens, wouldn't trade it.
Have the 55mm, just don't use it, I like landscape photography. Probably will sell this one.
The Batis 18mm is gorgeous, love, love, love it. How do I justify having it along with the 16-35? It's tac sharp, lighter but not a zoom, which I've so gotten used to having. I'm forcing myself to get used to not using a zoom, with 42 mega pixels I can crop the crap out of a photo and still have a printable shot.
In the past I've had canons and nikons with a 70-200mm lens and it was never my got to lens so I haven't purchased one for this system.
My baby girl, Ebi (Japanese for Shrimp)
I spotted this scene while driving last month in NH.
Sony Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 for full frame mirrorless A7r/A7r II is a fantastic lens. Also have Sony 16-35mm f/4 which is a great lens until there's no sun...or deep shade...or astrophotography. Thus the Batis 18mm purchase. I still prefer the convenience of a telephoto lens over a prime because I hate missing a photo while changing a lens. The Batis may cost a lot by some standards, but good glass can't be beat, it can make a mediocre camera take better grade photos.
Thank you for your comment photophile, it's appreciated.
Trip to the Schoodic Peninsula in Maine. Shot with Sony A7r II and either the 24-240mm or 16-35mm lenses.
Nicely shot Harvest Moon.
Great subject matter and execution.
The sony a7r ii has 5 way stabilization, the lenses have two way stabilization. I'd use the camera's system, in fact that's what I do.
Yes, you're absolutely right $2.00