Check out the review of the Minolta AF 35mm F/2 lens, which turned in a stellar performance. This diminutive wide angle lens is as close to perfect as you can get on an APS-C camera, and almost as good on a full frame camera. For landscapes, I’d prefer this lens to the much more expensive Sony 35mm F/1.4, and you can see the differences in a comparison review here. If I were shooting hand held low light scenes, I’d choose the one stop faster Sony 35mm F/1.4, that would possibly keep you from using a high ISO and having a mess on your hands.
In other news, I’m afraid the Sony 300mm F/2.8 G review is not going to happen. I just couldn’t get a firm date with the owner. I usually need a couple of weeks to shake down a lens, so if there isn’t enough time to properly test it under varying conditions, it may wind up being a waste of time, for both of us. If you own a $6000 lens, you ought to be making money with it, when it sits on a shelf, it’s a waste of money. I suspect most people who buy the Sony 300mm F/2.8 G are rich amateurs.
They use it for a few weeks, then tire of holding 5lbs of metal and glass, then either sell it or let it collect dust in the closet until they die, then the children sell it. I buy $1500 lenses and let them sit in the closet, then sell them, so I guess I’m one step up from them, or is it one step down?