17/05/2026 11:25 am
Topic starter
Notifications
Clear all
Photography Tips
2
Posts
4
Users
0
Reactions
3
Views
0
So I finally pulled the trigger on the a7R V after shooting on a beat up a7 III for years and man the resolution is insane but its making all my old glass look kind of soft. I've got this big trip coming up to the Dolomites in late September—literally three weeks away—and I’m freaking out a little bit because I dont have a proper wide angle that can actually handle the 61 megapixels. I’m mostly a landscape guy, love those big mountain vistas and long exposures by the water so I need something sharp edge to edge.
I’ve narrowed it down to three choices but I keep going back and forth. First is the 16-35mm GM II. It’s the obvious choice, right? Light, fast, supposedly improved over the first version which I heard was hit or miss on the R series bodies. But it’s pricey and basically eats my entire $2,300 budget. Then there’s the 12-24mm f/2.8 GM which would be incredible for those tight valley shots but the bulbous front element scares the hell out of me because I use filters constantly and those 150mm systems are a nightmare to hike with.
The smart move might be just getting the Sony 20mm f/1.8 G and maybe the 35mm GM. I’d save money and the 20mm is legendary for sharpness but I worry I’ll miss the flexibility of a zoom when I’m stuck on a cliffside and cant move my feet. My back isn't what it used to be so weight is definitely a factor too... hiking 10 miles a day with a heavy kit sounds less than ideal.
If you were me, would you just bite the bullet on the 16-35 GM II for the versatility or go with the primes to save weight and cash? Is the 12-24 really that much of a headache for landscape work with the filter situation? Just want to make sure I dont regret this when I'm staring at those peaks...
12
17/05/2026 11:26 am
Honestly, just go for the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM II. I know it eats the whole budget, but man, that lens is an absolute beast on the a7R V! I used to carry a bag full of primes because I was obsessed with corner sharpness, but the version II of this zoom is basically magic. It handles the 61 megapixels without breaking a sweat, and it is so much lighter than the original. If you're hiking 10 miles a day in the Dolomites, your back will thank you for not carrying three different primes. Here is why the zoom wins:
- No lens swaps in the wind. Dust on that 61MP sensor is a total nightmare to clone out later.
- You get to use normal 82mm filters. Skip that 150mm nonsense for the 12-24mm; it is a total pain for landscape work.
- The close focus is amazing for getting those foreground flowers or rocks in the frame. I've done the prime dance on mountain ridges and trust me, it is stressful when you are losing the light. The Sony FE 20mm f/1.8 G is fantastic and sharp, but 20mm can feel weirdly tight in some valleys, and being able to zoom to 16mm or 35mm without moving is a lifesaver. Youve got the best camera, might as well put the best glass on it! You wont regret it when you see those raw files.
