View Full Version : Lenses

04-09-2008, 08:35 PM
So, out of curiousity, what lenses do you use the most, and what lenses would you like to have, if you had the money? Even if you have a fixed lens on a compact, do you mostly use wide angle focal lengths or telephoto?
Are you satisfied with the sharpness and image quality of your lenses at various focal lengths? If you are into wide angle, how do you cope with the distortion, which is not appropriate for many subjects? If you add filters such as a polarizer on top of a UV filter do you end up with vignetting?
Do you have a tendency to buy expensive or cheap lenses? Are the expensive lenses you buy worth it in your opinion, after some use?


04-09-2008, 10:26 PM
Well my most used lens currently is my Canon EF 24-70L USM lens. Seems to be the best overall lens for what I like to shoot and the IQ I get from it is great. My second most used lens is my Sigma 10-20mm lens. I could do almost all my shooting between those two. I have all but one lens currently that I want, the last lens I am going to be getting for a while will be a 50mm prime. If money was not an issue I would go for the Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM but more than likely will go with Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM but need to go and try them out, if the 50mm 1.4 is anything like the Canon 10-22mm may wait the get the 50mm 1.2 L lens. And of course will keep my eye open for a used 50mm 1.2 L or a great deal on one, but doubt I will get much of a deal on one.

04-10-2008, 08:55 AM
If I'm shooting inside I use my 18-55 stock lens. Every day I take the dog for walk down a country trail, for this I use the 55-200 as I am bound to stumble on animals subjects (which don't seem to enjoy the dog). Even still, the 55-200 doesn't give the range or speed I sometimes need and I end up have to heavily crop the image and the detail is reduced (hence:thefawn)

Nikon has a 18 - 200 that has great reviews (as a prosumer lens), and money aside ($800) this would be next choice. Looking back, I should have just bought the D60 body and the 18 - 200. I shot indoor and outdoor almost every day and this may sound lazy but swapping the lenses twice daily sometimes annoys me. With the 18 - 200 it would be grab and go for most general photography.

After that, and if money no issue, I would be looking for good fast glass to 400mm. Also something faster for indoor shooting.

As far as image quality, to be honest, I am still to newb to ascertain if the lens were to blame or person behind calibrating the camera. <--- most likely :)

I find the polarizing filter to be a bit annoying. I often forget to take it off after use. Then, the next day always seems to be cloudy and I find myself in the middle of the woods with no need for the filter and no place to put it. The case for it is always in another jacket or the camera bag. Just lazyness, I should get used to removing it when I swap lenses. :)

04-10-2008, 09:53 AM
The lens on my camera most often these days is a great lens by Tamron 28-75mm F.2.8 as it is so versatile. I also have the sigma 10-20mm which i love for artsy fartsy foolin' around.

I also have a proper canon zoom lens which I often use.

In my pre-digital life I was a nikon shooter and have a bunch of good primes for that system as well.

My dream lens?
I would love to see a 10-300 mm F2.0 compact amazing lens with corner to corner sharpness across all apertures and focal lengths for under a grand. That's my dream lens. :D One day i'll tell you about my dream girl(s).

04-12-2008, 05:33 PM
My first lenses way back when I started were a 28mm 2.8 prime and a 200mm 2.8 prime. I liked the 28mm because it provided minimal distortion while allowing me to get in close and have no one walk in front of me. When you are competing for space with other photographers, that is important. The 200mm 2.8 was nice for low light situations and I could shoot flash from 50 or 60 feet away.

I now have several zoom lenses with a 28mm to 200mm 2.8 to 3.5 on one camera most of the time, an 18mm to 50mm 2.8 macro spends a lot of time of one of my others, a 35mm to 135mm macro on still another. I also have a heavyweight 70mm to 200mm 2.8 macro which is quite sharp and even with a converter gives lots of stretch with still a f.4 speed.

Filters are somwhat of a problem when they are for 72mm and 77mm. Fitting those in a small shirt pocket are a challenge, as is getting them out quickly. The attachment and linear graduated ND filter on the end of a long zoom makes things look huge. I certainly get some doubletakes by people wondering what I am doing. I am glad no one has reported a guy with a what looks like a missle launcher roaming around.


04-20-2008, 11:02 AM
This thread got me talking to my local camera shop....

He bought back my 55 -200 for the purchase price

Bought my 18-55 for $130 (this came with the kit and retails $200)

Bought back my 52mm polarizer and uv filter for purchase price

and even bought back the Nikon camera sleeve (which doesn't fit anymore due to new lens)

in exchange i bought the 18 - 200 (799.00) and 72mm polarizer and uv (ouch those filters get expensive at 72mm)

anyways... i thought it was a sweet deal... and glad i purchased at local store instead of a place like future shop... i doubt i would have been able to swing this them..

now i just need a 10 - 20 and something for macro...

ps - it sure is nice to have this range when take a lot of pictures at varied focal lengths...