Laowa 15mm F/2 & Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8

[Fit]

Hey friends,

Looking for my first wide/ultra-wide lens for my Sony A7iii.

Having difficulty selecting between the Laowa and the Zeiss. I watched every video and read just about every review I can find.

The obvious BIG difference is price, with the Laowa under $900 and the Zeiss just under $1500. I have the Sony-Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 and am completely smitten with the quality of shots I get from it.
Additionally, while I realize that with a very wide lens auto-focus is likely far less-critical, I will be using this lens for some creative, low-light indoor shots with humans involved where Sony's powerful face recognition and speed of focus may be very rewarding.

The attraction to the Laowa has been how it handles distortion (though the Zeiss is readily corrected in post) and... and this is the biggest thing that has me leaning towards Laowa (other than price): that extra 3mm. I'd like to eventually dabble in landscape astrophotography. I know the Zeiss 188mm is excellent in this regard but many of the astro reviews champion 14-15mm.

There's just something about that extra 15mm... when I use a lens simulator or look at shots with focal length overlays, that extra 3mm just resonates with me.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55286613?image=0

Would love to hear your experiences.

PS - needs to be a prime
I did also look at Voigtlander and Samyang - not interested.

[george013]

Hey friends,

Looking for my first wide/ultra-wide lens for my Sony A7iii.

Having difficulty selecting between the Laowa and the Zeiss. I watched every video and read just about every review I can find.

The obvious BIG difference is price, with the Laowa under $900 and the Zeiss just under $1500. I have the Sony-Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 and am completely smitten with the quality of shots I get from it.
Additionally, while I realize that with a very wide lens auto-focus is likely far less-critical, I will be using this lens for some creative, low-light indoor shots with humans involved where Sony's powerful face recognition and speed of focus may be very rewarding.

The attraction to the Laowa has been how it handles distortion (though the Zeiss is readily corrected in post) and... and this is the biggest thing that has me leaning towards Laowa (other than price): that extra 3mm. I'd like to eventually dabble in landscape astrophotography. I know the Zeiss 188mm is excellent in this regard but many of the astro reviews champion 14-15mm.

There's just something about that extra 15mm... when I use a lens simulator or look at shots with focal length overlays, that extra 3mm just resonates with me.
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55286613?image=0

Would love to hear your experiences.

PS - needs to be a prime
I did also look at Voigtlander and Samyang - not interested.

I don't know if you've been at this site https://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff. The score for the Laowa, never heard of it, isn't that good.


George

[Fit]

I don't know if you've been at this site https://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff. The score for the Laowa, never heard of it, isn't that good.


George

Thanks Geroge- I have seen that. It's the only negative review I can find of it. There's a litany of reviews praising it. FWIW, the comments they make about the lens don't seem to equate to the "stars" they give it.

[LePetomane]

My colleagues presented me with the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 at my retirement party. I can't wait to get into the Bighorns this spring to put it through its paces.

[William W]

Looking for my first wide/ultra-wide lens for my Sony A7iii. Having difficulty selecting between the [Venus Optics Laowa 15mm f/2.0 Zero –D & Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8]
. . . while I realize that with a very wide lens auto-focus is likely far less-critical, I will be using this lens for some creative, low light indoor shots with humans involved where Sony's powerful face recognition and speed of focus may be very rewarding.
. . . attraction to the Laowa has been how it handles distortion and . . . the biggest thing that has me leaning towards Laowa (other than price): that extra 3mm. I'd like to eventually dabble in landscape astrophotography. I know the Zeiss 18mm is excellent in this regard but many of the astro reviews champion 14-15mm.
. . . Would love to hear your experiences.
PS - needs to be a prime
I did also look at Voigtlander and Samyang - not interested.

I have two Venus Optics Lenses:

> Laowa 9mm F/2.8 Zero – D (used on an M5)

> Laowa 105 F/2.0 STF (Used on 5D Series)

As a general comment, both are gorilla-proof with smooth well damped actions. Relative and overall IQ in both lenses (and especially the 9mm, considering the intrinsic nature of UWA Lenses) is “excellent”.

I also have other UWA lenses – and more lately I use them more than I have ever done before.

I have used UWA lenses for Portraiture for a long time: mostly all of my Portraiture is made in Available Light.

Other than Portraiture, my main Photographic interest is Architecture, especially interiors of Holy Places/Buildings.

I don’t do a lot of Astro-photography, yet, I did teach the theory of it for as part of my teaching High School Student.

***

My opinions:

Based upon my use of UWA lenses, the DIFFERENCE between FL = 18mm and FL = 15mm is H U G E, so huge that although I have a 16 to 35 F/2.8 for my 5D Series – I eventually acquired a 14mm F/2.8, mainly for that extra 2mm.

I don’t place a great deal of emphasis on ‘needing’ AF for Portraiture when using an UWA. I have some which are AF and some which are not, it really doesn’t worry me at all. Provided your camera has a good and easily understood method of informing you of accurate focus, I think that any Photographer who puts in a little bit of work and practice can learn to use MF, especially easy at UWA.

Recognize for Astro-photography, that the extra stop of lens speed on the 15/2.0 will be useful, sometimes critical.

Obviously my experience is not with the specific Laowa lens that you are considering and I can make NO comment regarding the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8., but I hope that the range of these general comments are useful to you.

Good luck with your choice.

WW

[rpcrowe]

Have you considered the Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 models.. There are two of then one with AF for around $650 USD and the other being manual focus for $300 USD (Adorama prices)...

I have a Rokinon 12mm f/2.0 manual focus lens for my Apsc a6500 and the quality of that lens for the $250 I paid is excellent.

If the 14mm full-frame models are anything like the 12mm crop sensor model, they should be great lenses...

[William W]

Rokinon is exactly the same as Samyang, except for the nameplates.

Having said that, I am interested in the reasons why Chris is not interested in that lens (14 F/2.8): I am very familiar with the MF version and my impressions of that lens are in concert with Richard's observations; also I think the newest addition to the Samyang stable is an "XP" (the "premium version') of their 14mm lenses, and it sports an F/2.4 Max. Ap.

The world of UWA has expanded recently: depending on what criterion one prioritizes - (i.e. Max. Ap. or F.L.) - there's the IRIX Firefly 11mm, which is really W I D E - not sure if it comes in a Sony Mount.

WW

[Fit]

I have two Venus Optics Lenses:

> Laowa 9mm F/2.8 Zero – D (used on an M5)

> Laowa 105 F/2.0 STF (Used on 5D Series)

As a general comment, both are gorilla-proof with smooth well damped actions. Relative and overall IQ in both lenses (and especially the 9mm, considering the intrinsic nature of UWA Lenses) is “excellent”.

I also have other UWA lenses – and more lately I use them more than I have ever done before.

I have used UWA lenses for Portraiture for a long time: mostly all of my Portraiture is made in Available Light.

Other than Portraiture, my main Photographic interest is Architecture, especially interiors of Holy Places/Buildings.

I don’t do a lot of Astro-photography, yet, I did teach the theory of it for as part of my teaching High School Student.

***

My opinions:

Based upon my use of UWA lenses, the DIFFERENCE between FL = 18mm and FL = 15mm is H U G E, so huge that although I have a 16 to 35 F/2.8 for my 5D Series – I eventually acquired a 14mm F/2.8, mainly for that extra 2mm.

I don’t place a great deal of emphasis on ‘needing’ AF for Portraiture when using an UWA. I have some which are AF and some which are not, it really doesn’t worry me at all. Provided your camera has a good and easily understood method of informing you of accurate focus, I think that any Photographer who puts in a little bit of work and practice can learn to use MF, especially easy at UWA.

Recognize for Astro-photography, that the extra stop of lens speed on the 15/2.0 will be useful, sometimes critical.

Obviously my experience is not with the specific Laowa lens that you are considering and I can make NO comment regarding the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8., but I hope that the range of these general comments are useful to you.

Good luck with your choice.

WW

Thank you- very helpful!

[Fit]

Rokinon is exactly the same as Samyang, except for the nameplates.

Having said that, I am interested in the reasons why Chris is not interested in that lens (14 F/2.8): I am very familiar with the MF version and my impressions of that lens are in concert with Richard's observations; also I think the newest addition to the Samyang stable is an "XP" (the "premium version') of their 14mm lenses, and it sports an F/2.4 Max. Ap.

The world of UWA has expanded recently: depending on what criterion one prioritizes - (i.e. Max. Ap. or F.L.) - there's the IRIX Firefly 11mm, which is really W I D E - not sure if it comes in a Sony Mount.

WW

I borrowed the Rokinon/Samyang for a couple of days and found true what some reviewers had said: it's a bargain for what you get but it was too soft - corners far too much so. Also, the AF was slow and a bit hesitant (but I'm spoiled by the 55mm 1.8's focus ability. Additionally, you cannot attach standard filters. There are some reports of greater variation from lens to lens.

[William W]

Chris, Thanks. Because of idle curiosity, I shall look into whether the AF version has the same optics as the MF version.

WW

[Fit]

I visited a local shop and was able to try out a few lenses and ended up buying the Batis. Functions just like my 55mm 1.8 and silly sharp it seems without really trying.

[LePetomane]

Chris, congratulations on your new lens. I have yet to use mine. I look forward to seeing your photos.

[Fit]

Cheers-

Still learning my way around it.

Chris, congratulations on your new lens. I have yet to use mine. I look forward to seeing your photos.

[Tri Danimal]

Dang, I'm late to the party as usual. But maybe someone will search for this comparison in the future so Ill type out my response anyways.

I had the Rokinon 14mm but I ended up selling it off after I got the Tamron 28-75mm. I honestly didn't feel the need to remove the Tamron, for my uses the extra 14mm on the wide end did make that much of a differance.

I use the Tamron for my general all-purpose lens. I use it for Landscapeastro with a star tracker, adventure documentation (snowshoeing/rock climbing/camping/kayaking/etc.) and, reverse macro.