1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8

Discussion in 'Sony Alpha E-Mount Lenses' started by MAubrey, May 2, 2016.

  1. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    • Like Like x 3
  2. WoodWorks

    WoodWorks Super Moderator

    Dec 12, 2012
    Ashland, OR, USA
    David
    Well, I look at this lens, and the Loxia 21, and then at my SEL1635Z and wonder why I would want to spend the money on either of the two primes. I can probably count the number of times I've shot with an ultra-wide at anything more open than f/8 on one hand. So the faster speed of the primes is not all that lust-worthy to me. Is there an IQ improvement in the corners at f/8 with these primes? Very likely. Would I notice? Very unlikely. As I like to say: if you're checking out the corners in any of my photos, then I've shot a lousy photo.

    Sure, I'd love to have the Loxia 21 for its size and weight. But the Batis isn't much smaller than my 16-35. So aside from my genetically-encoded GAS, I just can't muster much interest. :hmmm:
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 2
  3. mattia

    mattia TalkEmount Regular

    143
    Dec 13, 2013
    I have the 16-35/4.0 (which I love, and mostly shoot at f9.0 or so), but I'm still a bit tickled by this lens, because it is smaller, it is lighter (330 grams vs 550 or so - it weighs about what the 55/1.8 weighs with hood) and faster aperture with excellent optical quality in the corners which would matter for me for starscapes. But it is a lot of cash for only minor additional value and saving 200 grams in the bag, with a loss of flexibility. I've pondered the Samyang 14/2.8 (which is also great for starscapes, and cheap, but 550 grams or so - heavy and large for a single
    Purpose lens) but keep putting off the purchase.

    If I had oodles of cash if get the 18/2.8, and Batis 85 to round out my primes (CV 35/1.2II and FE 55/1.8 being the others). But the 16-35 is just so practical for traveling.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  4. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    I have a 12mm f/5.6 and a 20-35mm f/3.5. I wouldn't mind something in the middle...especially that's a bit faster, too. This could be that, depending on how gigs line up through the rest of the year.
     
  5. Jefenator

    Jefenator TalkEmount Top Veteran

    876
    Nov 23, 2012
    Oregon, USA
    Jeff
    I could use a nice f/2.8 full-frame ultra-wide for the nightclub shots. :cool:
    fb-1.
    ... maybe not to the tune of $1500, though. o_O
    (Especially when f/4 on APS-C seems to be managing... as long as the people are sitting still.)
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 3
  6. mattia

    mattia TalkEmount Regular

    143
    Dec 13, 2013
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. ggibson

    ggibson TalkEmount Regular

    154
    Sep 1, 2011
    Love to see these new Zeiss lenses added to the lineup (including of the Loxia 21 also). The performance is quite compelling!

    Like others here though, I prefer the convenience of the 16-35/4 zoom over the gains in sharpness and speed. If I were more into astrophotography, I'd definitely go for the Batis 18 for that extra speed and smaller size. Maybe it'll make its way into my bag one day though :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. MAubrey

    MAubrey TalkEmount Top Veteran

    • Like Like x 3
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. ggibson

    ggibson TalkEmount Regular

    154
    Sep 1, 2011
    Great coma performance there.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  10. WoodWorks

    WoodWorks Super Moderator

    Dec 12, 2012
    Ashland, OR, USA
    David
    Seriously! And I love the sunstars in the first shot and the other samples at phillipreeve.net. No doubt it would be great for astrophotographers.