I have a Sony NEX-5R with two prime lenses: 19mm F2.8 Sigma, and 35mm F1.8 Sony. I'd like to compare these two lenses to see why the second lens cost me more than twice the first, what the differences are, whether they are noticeable, whether I'll be better served by buying a cheaper lens over a better lens in the future, or whether more expensive lenses make sense for me, etc.
I'm NOT looking for:
A quantitative test (like MFT or other numbers). I'm looking at a qualitative / subjective comparison for my kind of photography (landscapes and low-light).
A synthetic test like a resolution chart.
Reviews, which describe lenses in general terms like being soft or having chromatic aberration or what have you, which don't give me a concrete idea of what the actual differences will be for me in day-to-day shooting.
For example, I compared a point-and-shoot with an iPhone at Why does my point-and-shoot take hazy photos? which give me a good idea of the differences.
I'd like to do a similar test for my NEX. If I had a zoom lens and a prime lens for my NEX, I could zoom the zoom lens to match the focal length of the prime lens to compare apples with apples.
But when I have two prime lenses, they capture different fields of view, so I'm comparing apples to oranges. Here's a photo from the wide-angle lens:
compared to a photo from the normal lens:
I could crop the image produced by the wide-angle lens to match the photo produced by the normal lens, but that would in effect be a digital zoom and therefore be unfair to the wide-angle lens.
One technique I can think of is to pick a scene, shoot it with my normal lens, and then switch to the wide lens and walk closer to the center of the scene to match the photo taken earlier. Is this a good technique?
Obviously it won't work in cases like this one, where I took these photos from my balcony and can't walk towards or away from the scene. What are some other techniques to compare lenses? Thanks.
(I looked at How do I best compare lenses? but it doesn't address these questions.)