Filtering a result set on a very large table (using INCLUDE index in SQL Server)
From the details you've provided it seems reasonable that the IX_VeryLarge non-clustered index would support both queries you've shown in your question.  You have the Payload column typed as VARBINARY(MAX) - if you expect large objects to be stored in that column, I'd likely not INCLUDE it in the index since that will cause the index to be much much larger than it would otherwise be.  If the vast majority of your queries result in one or two rows, a simple lookup into the clustered index/heap (the table) is preferable.  The pattern you've shown whereby you have a clustered index/heap and supporting non-clustered indexes with included columns (a so-called covering index) is extremely common, and perhaps the single best way to ensure good performance, along with good statistics.

Having said that, I wouldn't expect the 2nd query to outperform the 1st query since the results returned would be exactly the same.  SQL is not a procedural language, it is a declarative language.  With a procedural language, you tell the computer what to do, whereas with a declarative language you describe the desired results.  Since SQL is declarative, and since both queries return the same result set, it is reasonable to assume SQL Server will likely come up with the same plan for both queries.  Since the 2nd query is more difficult for a human to understand, I'd favor the 1st variant.  Try not to outsmart the SQL Server query optimizer, it cannot be done is very hard to do.

At the end of the day, the only way for you to truly understand the best option in your situation, on your data, with your table definition and output requirements, is to test them.