I've got the 35 G RS & a900 as well
While I do agree that I would probably never think of it for landscapes because this is a low-light specialty lens which excels at environmental portraits due to its thin DOF and fluid colors, it is my only 35mm lens and when I did use it for landscapes I was impressed.
This lens has a reputation as being soft, but in reality while it may have low contrast wide open, stopped down to f/5.6 has amazing corner-to-corner resolution that beats the 16-35/2.8 za. i agree the minolta 35/2 would be a better value for landscape.
this site offers some interesting test results:
http://www.artaphot.ch/lens-comparisons/16...s-test-at-f35mmI'm quite shocked that anyone would favour the 135stf over the 135za for landscapes. while i have used both, i'd rather have the 135stf for portraits but the 135za's contrast & resolution is insane.