AskMaddiLenses for Landscape
On the criteria landscape leans on — Optical Performance, Distortion, Vignetting, Chromatic Aberration, Filter Thread and Build Quality — here is how the reviewed lenses compare, with the sourced evidence behind each position. We don't crown a winner; we show the fit and let you decide.
Shopping to a budget? Lenses for landscape under $1,000 · under $2,000 · under $3,000.
Ranked on the evidence
Strongest reviewer support on Distortion and Optical Performance.
- Optical Performance+47%9▲ / 2▼ of 15 · low
- Distortion+100%1▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting+60%4▲ / 1▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+60%4▲ / 1▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
"expect in low to medium contrast areas and when using the lens on an older X-Series body." — Admiringlight Blog
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Distortion.
- Optical Performance+65%68▲ / 10▼ of 89 · medium
- Distortion+60%7▲ / 1▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting+41%16▲ / 4▼ of 29 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration+69%19▲ / 1▼ of 26 · medium
- Filter Thread-12%2▲ / 4▼ of 16 · medium
- Build Quality+50%12▲ / 2▼ of 20 · medium
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Vignetting.
- Optical Performance+63%60▲ / 8▼ of 82 · medium
- Distortion+31%6▲ / 1▼ of 16 · medium
- Vignetting+40%18▲ / 6▼ of 30 · medium
- Chromatic Aberration+17%9▲ / 6▼ of 18 · medium (contested)
- Filter Thread+11%5▲ / 3▼ of 19 · medium (contested)
- Build Quality+61%16▲ / 2▼ of 23 · medium
"though i've been really impressed with how well this lens performs when it comes to focusing right onto image quality now don't be shocked when i say that the optics in this lens are top quality because that's exactly wh…" — Brett Day
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+53%49▲ / 11▼ of 72 · low
- Distortion+37%24▲ / 8▼ of 43 · low
- Vignetting+27%7▲ / 3▼ of 15 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration+25%5▲ / 3▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread-21%6▲ / 13▼ of 33 · low (contested)
- Build Quality+81%13▲ / 0▼ of 16 · low
"I took this single exposure at 14 mm pushing into those pandanus trees and wow, I'm so impressed with the sharpness with this lens." — Adrian Alford Photography Tamron
Strongest reviewer support on Vignetting and Chromatic Aberration.
- Optical Performance+0%1▲ / 1▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
- Distortion+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting+100%1▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration+100%1▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 6 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+50%3▲ / 0▼ of 6 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"Focus Focus accuracy and repeatability is critical to consistently produce sharp shots especially with large aperture lenses." — Cameralabs
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Filter Thread.
- Optical Performance+44%68▲ / 20▼ of 109 · low
- Distortion-9%10▲ / 14▼ of 43 · low (contested)
- Vignetting+19%15▲ / 8▼ of 36 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration+25%5▲ / 2▼ of 12 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Filter Thread+60%6▲ / 0▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality+42%14▲ / 4▼ of 24 · low (contested)
"what it looked like originally that's what it looks like after and then here is another view where it was a slightly longer exposure 5 Seconds f3.5 ISO 100 and we are getting nice sharp edges around the Contour of this v…" — Anthony Gugliotta Canons Sharpest
Strongest reviewer support on Vignetting and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+24%33▲ / 14▼ of 78 · low (contested)
- Distortion-11%3▲ / 4▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Vignetting+50%6▲ / 1▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Filter Thread+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+100%13▲ / 0▼ of 13 · low (thin evidence)
"surprised with this lens is sharp as sorry sharp af rather i was very surprised with the sharpness and the clarity of this lens uh i'll include some photos here but one photo that really surprised me was this photo here …" — Andreo Photo Fujifilm
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Distortion.
- Optical Performance+37%47▲ / 15▼ of 87 · low
- Distortion+44%5▲ / 1▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting+0%4▲ / 4▼ of 14 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-60%0▲ / 6▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+50%2▲ / 0▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality+55%13▲ / 2▼ of 20 · low (contested)
"it's totally fine I could talk about the image quality from an objective standpoint and I could tell you again it's fine it's a 28 mm lens so there's some vignetting there's some Barrel Distortion it's fine it doesn't I …" — Chris Tellez
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Filter Thread.
- Optical Performance+79%11▲ / 0▼ of 14 · low (thin evidence)
- Distortion+0%3▲ / 3▼ of 18 · low (contested)
- Vignetting-47%0▲ / 7▼ of 15 · low
- Chromatic Aberration+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+50%2▲ / 0▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+20%3▲ / 1▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence)
"quality across the frame and throughout the range even at f2.8." — Cameralabs
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Filter Thread.
- Optical Performance+50%2▲ / 0▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Distortion+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+25%1▲ / 0▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+25%2▲ / 0▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence)
"Continue: Image Quality Pages: 1 2 3 Tags: 35mm , 35mm f/1.4 , lens." — Admiringlight Blog Mini
Strongest reviewer support on Distortion and Optical Performance.
- Optical Performance+28%42▲ / 22▼ of 72 · low (contested)
- Distortion+44%4▲ / 0▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting+5%6▲ / 5▼ of 22 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-22%4▲ / 8▼ of 18 · low (contested)
- Filter Thread+12%2▲ / 1▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+18%4▲ / 2▼ of 11 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"to f1.4 after all most people will be buying this lens to shoot at f1.4 the lens is very sharp indeed in the middle of the image with no visible purple finging there's plenty of contrast giving a nice clear image in the …" — Christopher Frost
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+38%50▲ / 18▼ of 84 · low
- Distortion+8%4▲ / 3▼ of 13 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Vignetting+0%7▲ / 7▼ of 22 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-10%6▲ / 8▼ of 20 · low (contested)
- Filter Thread-11%2▲ / 3▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality+29%9▲ / 4▼ of 17 · low
"far as image quality goes this thing is fantastic I did test this out uh for the Sony e-mount version a little bit ago when it first came out and found that and actually almost fully covers a full frame sensor as well so…" — Benj Haisch
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+40%65▲ / 23▼ of 105 · low
- Distortion+8%10▲ / 8▼ of 25 · low (contested)
- Vignetting-6%5▲ / 6▼ of 18 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-20%1▲ / 2▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Filter Thread-15%3▲ / 7▼ of 26 · low (contested)
- Build Quality+43%7▲ / 1▼ of 14 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"[Music] hi i'm dustin abbott and i'm here today to give you my definitive review of the sony fe 12 to 24 millimeter f 2.8 g master lens now this is kind of the big dog of sony's ultra wide angle and obviously it goes wid…" — Dustin Abbott
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Distortion.
- Optical Performance+40%15▲ / 5▼ of 25 · low
- Distortion+50%2▲ / 0▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-75%0▲ / 3▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration+25%2▲ / 1▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Filter Thread+33%4▲ / 1▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality+0%8▲ / 8▼ of 20 · low (contested)
"my latest video and it stayed with me throughout the entire recording which that video was like 30 minutes of continuous recording as far as sharpness i was expecting it to be much worse wide open at f 2.8 in the center …" — Arthur R The Samyang
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Chromatic Aberration.
- Optical Performance+23%46▲ / 26▼ of 87 · low
- Distortion+10%4▲ / 3▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Vignetting-12%4▲ / 6▼ of 17 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration+33%1▲ / 0▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+0%1▲ / 1▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality+25%5▲ / 2▼ of 12 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"the sharpness test with the lens adapted on a Canon M50 I photographed this image with Targets this is the center and this is the corner of the image I put both on one screen so that we can see how the lens is performing…" — Aperture Atlas
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Filter Thread.
- Optical Performance+64%42▲ / 7▼ of 55 · low
- Distortion-14%1▲ / 2▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-50%0▲ / 2▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-14%3▲ / 4▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+40%3▲ / 1▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+33%2▲ / 1▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
"i don't like to use this word a lot but it's flawless when it performs wide open flawless [Music] look this way [Music] now coming from using cinema lenses um i use a certain blend of modern vintage lenses that are quite…" — Moment
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance.
- Optical Performance+33%1▲ / 0▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Distortion+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence)
"prime is a great general-purpose lens thatâs sharp even at larger apertures, and also ideal for portraits, low light or still-life." — Cameralabs
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+50%52▲ / 14▼ of 76 · low
- Distortion+0%10▲ / 10▼ of 25 · low
- Vignetting-5%5▲ / 6▼ of 20 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-50%0▲ / 2▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread-33%4▲ / 10▼ of 18 · low
- Build Quality+40%8▲ / 2▼ of 15 · low (contested)
"ridiculously sharp with excellent contrast and the corners well outstanding this is incredibly impressive to really appreciate what we're dealing with here by way of comparison here's the closest equivalent lens that I'v…" — Christopher Frost
Strongest reviewer support on Chromatic Aberration and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+14%9▲ / 6▼ of 22 · low
- Distortion-67%0▲ / 6▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Vignetting+0%2▲ / 2▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Chromatic Aberration+100%1▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 6 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+75%3▲ / 0▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
"Through the lens: optical quality As usual, I’ll start by talking about sharpness." — Mirrorlessons
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+42%11▲ / 3▼ of 19 · low (contested)
- Distortion-25%0▲ / 2▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-20%1▲ / 2▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration+17%1▲ / 0▼ of 6 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread-33%0▲ / 1▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+50%2▲ / 0▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
"At 8mm, zooming right into images reveals slightly less crisp detail than I saw." — Digitalcameraworld Cameras Lenses
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Distortion.
- Optical Performance+29%2▲ / 0▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Distortion+33%2▲ / 1▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-80%0▲ / 4▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+60%3▲ / 0▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
"Continue: Image Quality Tags: 27mm , fujifilm , fujinon , lens , pancake , review Comments 13 responses to “Review:." — Admiringlight Blog
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+25%24▲ / 12▼ of 48 · low (contested)
- Distortion+0%1▲ / 1▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Vignetting-67%0▲ / 2▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration+33%2▲ / 1▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+17%1▲ / 0▼ of 6 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+57%9▲ / 1▼ of 14 · low (thin evidence)
"I wish there were some full size samples to evaluate sharpness of the lens." — Admiringlight Blog
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Filter Thread.
- Optical Performance+33%24▲ / 8▼ of 49 · medium
- Distortion-9%3▲ / 4▼ of 11 · medium (thin evidence, contested)
- Vignetting-30%1▲ / 4▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-12%1▲ / 2▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Filter Thread+26%7▲ / 2▼ of 19 · low (contested)
- Build Quality+0%4▲ / 4▼ of 12 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"Here we start with both lenses wide open and you can see that extra depth from the f1.4 aperture on the sur lens." — Gary Scaife Sirui Aurora
Strongest reviewer support on Distortion and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance-4%31▲ / 34▼ of 72 · low (contested)
- Distortion+33%2▲ / 1▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Vignetting-38%4▲ / 10▼ of 16 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration+14%3▲ / 2▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Filter Thread+14%3▲ / 2▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality+20%4▲ / 2▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"move on and look at image quality as I mentioned before there are lots of reports on the internet about this lens having quality control issues and Sample variations I can only afford to hire one copy of the lens for tes…" — Christopher Frost
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+41%36▲ / 12▼ of 58 · low
- Distortion+0%1▲ / 1▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-25%3▲ / 7▼ of 16 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-71%1▲ / 6▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread-14%1▲ / 2▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+33%8▲ / 3▼ of 15 · low
"want your landscape or wider Singh I use wider angle zoom lens I use what I got wide angled inside that I found myself never use this 50 million to this so I just got rid of it I enjoy using zoom lens a lot and I have di…" — Aiur Media Crazy Bokeh
Strongest reviewer support on Build Quality and Filter Thread.
- Optical Performance+0%1▲ / 1▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Vignetting+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 1 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration-50%0▲ / 1▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+17%1▲ / 0▼ of 6 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+33%4▲ / 1▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"At f/1.8, the lens delivers good sharpness for portraits and available light work." — Dpreview Com Reviews
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Build Quality.
- Optical Performance+15%33▲ / 23▼ of 68 · low (contested)
- Distortion+12%8▲ / 5▼ of 25 · low (contested)
- Vignetting-29%5▲ / 10▼ of 17 · low
- Chromatic Aberration-50%0▲ / 2▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread-11%2▲ / 3▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality+40%6▲ / 2▼ of 10 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"for decades in one set 144 tiles of marjong tiles all carved by hand with simple handmade tools not often do I have to resort to the a word but the images that you get from it can only be described as awesome if you thin…" — Digitalrev Tv
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Filter Thread.
- Optical Performance+31%36▲ / 17▼ of 62 · low
- Distortion-61%1▲ / 12▼ of 18 · low
- Vignetting-25%2▲ / 4▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Chromatic Aberration+11%2▲ / 1▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Filter Thread+29%4▲ / 2▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality-20%1▲ / 2▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"small full-frame camera it's about as good as it gets for an ultra wide I've said this before in previous videos it's getting hard to review these lenses from Sony Tamron Sigma because they're just getting so good that e…" — Arthur R
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance.
- Optical Performance+5%31▲ / 27▼ of 80 · low (contested)
- Distortion-12%3▲ / 5▼ of 16 · low (contested)
- Vignetting-31%5▲ / 14▼ of 29 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration+0%5▲ / 5▼ of 15 · low (contested)
- Filter Thread-12%0▲ / 1▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+0%6▲ / 6▼ of 17 · low (contested)
"really tend to rely on but I do like the aesthetic effect that they give so a very nicely made lens for sure so this is a very sharp lens all the way from wide open at F 2.8 and it renders details very crisply and very c…" — Zenography
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance.
- Optical Performance+27%5▲ / 2▼ of 11 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Distortion-50%0▲ / 1▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-20%1▲ / 2▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration-33%0▲ / 1▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality-33%0▲ / 1▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"For the best results, I'd probably still use the center focusing point and stop down a bit.The Sigma 16mm f1.4 DC DN Contemporary's absolute strongest point is the image quality." — Thephoblographer Com
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance and Filter Thread.
- Optical Performance+22%5▲ / 3▼ of 9 · low (thin evidence)
- Distortion-80%0▲ / 4▼ of 5 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-83%0▲ / 5▼ of 6 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration+33%1▲ / 0▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+50%1▲ / 0▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality+50%3▲ / 1▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
"Optical Performance Sharpness is exceptionally sharp at f/1.8, with slight softening in corners that requires pixel-level inspection." — Autumnschrock Com Blog
Strongest reviewer support on Optical Performance.
- Optical Performance+54%7▲ / 0▼ of 13 · low (thin evidence)
- Distortion-62%1▲ / 6▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-25%0▲ / 1▼ of 4 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration-67%0▲ / 2▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread-36%0▲ / 4▼ of 11 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality-14%2▲ / 3▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence)
"7-14 is still a bit sharper throughout the range." — Admiringlight Blog
Strongest reviewer support on Build Quality.
- Optical Performance-1%31▲ / 32▼ of 77 · low (contested)
- Distortion-100%0▲ / 3▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence)
- Vignetting-13%7▲ / 10▼ of 23 · low (contested)
- Filter Thread-12%0▲ / 1▼ of 8 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+100%6▲ / 0▼ of 6 · low (thin evidence)
"in this video I will test the sharpness of two of the most popular lenses for the EOS M Mount at the ending of this clip we will find out which one wins first let me tell you a few things about the lenses the first one i…" — Aperture Atlas
Strongest reviewer support on Build Quality.
- Optical Performance-6%18▲ / 21▼ of 51 · low (contested)
- Distortion-41%0▲ / 7▼ of 17 · low (contested)
- Vignetting-38%1▲ / 6▼ of 13 · low (thin evidence)
- Chromatic Aberration-43%1▲ / 4▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+0%0▲ / 0▼ of 2 · low (thin evidence)
- Build Quality+33%2▲ / 1▼ of 3 · low (thin evidence, contested)
"Continue: Image Quality Pages: 1 2." — Admiringlight Blog
Mixed reviewer sentiment across the criteria — see the evidence below.
- Optical Performance+0%30▲ / 30▼ of 75 · low
- Distortion-30%8▲ / 20▼ of 40 · low
- Vignetting-26%5▲ / 10▼ of 19 · low (contested)
- Chromatic Aberration-29%1▲ / 3▼ of 7 · low (thin evidence)
- Filter Thread+0%5▲ / 5▼ of 13 · low (thin evidence, contested)
- Build Quality-50%2▲ / 8▼ of 12 · low (thin evidence)
"lens it looks like it's not going to be pretty in the corners we're just gonna say that so a real quick quirk to note about this lens that a lot of people have noticed is that um first of all obviously it's a new lens so…" — Brent Hall
Side by side
| Camera | Optical Performance | Distortion | Vignetting | Chromatic Aberration | Filter Thread | Build Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Fujifilm 23mm f1.4 | +47% | +100% | +60% | — | +0% | +60% |
| 2. Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG DN Art II | +65% | +60% | +41% | +69% | -12% | +50% |
| 3. Sigma 35mm F1.2 DG DN Art | +63% | +31% | +40% | +17% | +11% | +61% |
| 4. Tamron 12 20mm f2.8 | +53% | +37% | +27% | +25% | -21% | +81% |
| 5. Nikon 24mm f1.8 | +0% | +0% | +100% | +100% | +0% | +50% |
| 6. Canon 35mm f1.4 | +44% | -9% | +19% | +25% | +60% | +42% |
| 7. Fujifilm 16mm f2.8 | +24% | -11% | +50% | — | +0% | +100% |
| 8. Nikon 28mm f2.8 | +37% | +44% | +0% | -60% | +50% | +55% |
| 9. Sigma 16 28mm f2.8 | +79% | +0% | -47% | +0% | +50% | +20% |
| 10. Nikon 35mm f1.4 | +50% | +0% | +0% | — | +25% | +25% |
| 11. Sigma 35mm f1.4 | +28% | +44% | +5% | -22% | +12% | +18% |
| 12. Sigma 23mm f1.4 | +38% | +8% | +0% | -10% | -11% | +29% |
| 13. Sony 12 24mm f2.8 | +40% | +8% | -6% | -20% | -15% | +43% |
| 14. Sony 35mm f2.8 | +40% | +50% | -75% | +25% | +33% | +0% |
| 15. Canon 24mm f2.8 | +23% | +10% | -12% | +33% | +0% | +25% |
| 16. Sony FE 35mm F1.4 GM | +64% | -14% | -50% | -14% | +40% | +33% |
| 17. Canon 32mm f1.4 | +33% | +0% | +0% | +0% | +0% | +0% |
| 18. Sigma 14 24mm f2.8 | +50% | +0% | -5% | -50% | -33% | +40% |
| 19. Sony 28mm f2 | +14% | -67% | +0% | +100% | +0% | +75% |
| 20. Sony 8 14mm f3.5 | +42% | -25% | -20% | +17% | -33% | +50% |
| 21. Fujifilm 27mm f2.8 | +29% | +33% | -80% | +0% | +0% | +60% |
| 22. Sigma 19mm f2.8 | +25% | +0% | -67% | +33% | +17% | +57% |
| 23. Panasonic lumix s 35mm | +33% | -9% | -30% | -12% | +26% | +0% |
| 24. Zeiss 35mm f1.4 | -4% | +33% | -38% | +14% | +14% | +20% |
| 25. Rokinon 35mm | +41% | +0% | -25% | -71% | -14% | +33% |
| 26. Nikon 35mm f1.8 | +0% | — | +0% | -50% | +17% | +33% |
| 27. Canon 11 24mm f4 | +15% | +12% | -29% | -50% | -11% | +40% |
| 28. Sony 16 25mm f2.8 | +31% | -61% | -25% | +11% | +29% | -20% |
| 29. Nikon 35mm f2.8 | +5% | -12% | -31% | +0% | -12% | +0% |
| 30. Sigma 16mm f1.4 | +27% | -50% | -20% | -33% | — | -33% |
| 31. Sony 16mm f1.8 | +22% | -80% | -83% | +33% | +50% | +50% |
| 32. Olympus 7 14mm f2.8 | +54% | -62% | -25% | -67% | -36% | -14% |
| 33. Canon 28mm f3.5 | -1% | -100% | -13% | — | -12% | +100% |
| 34. Sigma 30mm f1.4 | -6% | -41% | -38% | -43% | +0% | +33% |
| 35. Canon 16mm f2.8 | +0% | -30% | -26% | -29% | +0% | -50% |
Net reviewer sentiment per criterion (share positive minus share negative). A blank means no reviewer evidence on that axis for that camera — a gap, not a zero.
Not ranked — outside the criteria
- Canon 100 400mm f5.6 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 400
- Canon 100mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 100
- Canon 15 45mm f3.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 45
- Canon 18 200mm f3.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 200
- Canon 200 400mm f4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 400
- Canon 28 105mm f3.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 105
- Canon 28 70mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 70
- Canon 40mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 40
- Canon 45mm f1.2 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 45
- Canon 50mm f1.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Canon 50mm f2.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Canon 70 200mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 200
- Canon 85mm f2 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 85
- Fujifilm 16 55mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 55
- Fujifilm 400mm f4.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 400
- Leica 100mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 100
- Leica 50mm f1.4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Leica 50mm f2 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Nikon 105mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 105
- Nikon 16 50mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Nikon 200mm f4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 200
- Nikon 50mm f1.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Nikon 50mm f2 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Nikon 800mm f5.6 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 800
- Nikon 85mm f1.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 85
- Olympus 45mm f1.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 45
- Olympus 60mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 60
- Olympus 75mm f1.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 75
- OM SYSTEM 12 40mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 40
- Panasonic 70 200mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 200
- Panasonic 70 200mm f4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 200
- Pentax 135mm f2.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 135
- Sigma 16 300mm f3.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 300
- Sigma 17 40mm f1.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 40
- Sigma 20 60mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 60
- Sigma 28 45mm f1.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 45
- Sigma 45mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 45
- Sigma 56mm f1.4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 56
- Sigma 60mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 60
- Sigma 85mm f1.2 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 85
- Sony 100 400mm f4.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 400
- Sony 100mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 100
- Sony 16 70mm f4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 70
- Sony 20 70mm f4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 70
- Sony 28 70mm f3.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 70
- Sony 50mm f1.2 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Sony 50mm f1.4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Sony 50mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 50
- Sony 70 200mm f2.8 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 200
- Sony 70 350mm f4.5 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 350
- Sony 85mm f1.4 — require focal_length_mm <= 35: got 85
Pending — a spec we're still sourcing
These earned a review card but are held out until we confirm a spec the criteria gate on. That is a data gap on our side, not a mark against the camera.
- Nikon z 20 — focal_length_mm: focal_length_mm not present on card
Every position above traces to the reviewer claims on each product's card. We don't write opinions — we synthesize theirs, and we present fit rather than a verdict.