gat474 Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 Sometime soon, I'm after one of those Nikon 70-200 f2.8's. 👠1
buddyev Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 My most used lens and best lens is my Olympus 12-40. Switching from Nikon APSC last year I miss the extra reach I had with the Nikon 16-85 which I used as standard but havent regretted the change at all. I'm thinking of getting the oly 40-150 pro but the weight of it sort of defeats the point of going micro 4/3 - the plan was to not load up on glass again. I also recently bought a Panasonic 7-14 but haven't spent a lot of time with it yet. It's a lovely light lens and early impressions are good.
hired goon Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 My most used lens is a Canon 15-85 ... not a great lens but has a decent range for walking around. My most favouritist lens is a Canon 35/1.4 L ... nice colour, contrast, sharpness, and bokeh. --Geoff 1
betty boop Posted July 23, 2015 Author Posted July 23, 2015 My most used lens is a Canon 15-85 ... not a great lens but has a decent range for walking around. My most favouritist lens is a Canon 35/1.4 L ... nice colour, contrast, sharpness, and bokeh. --Geoff there is a new canon 35 f1.4L II coming ...my most regretful sale was my sigma art 35 f1.4... I thought similarly about it as you do with your canon. had some sort of magical quality about it and probably more versatile in use than the 50 1.4
Addicted to music Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 Sometime soon, I'm after one of those Nikon 70-200 f2.8's. I have one, but it's for the f90.....
mickj1 Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 My most-used lens is the Sigma 150-500, only because I like photographing birds and I can't afford something better. I like my Sigma 28mm F1.8 prime for indoors and my Tamron 90mm F2.8 for macro (bought from an SNAer). cheers Mick 2
betty boop Posted July 23, 2015 Author Posted July 23, 2015 My most-used lens is the Sigma 150-500, only because I like photographing birds and I can't afford something better. I like my Sigma 28mm F1.8 prime for indoors and my Tamron 90mm F2.8 for macro (bought from an SNAer). cheers Mick sigma make some lovely "affordable" zooms I reckon, have been much tempted in the past in getting one ! 1
Addicted to music Posted July 23, 2015 Posted July 23, 2015 sigma make some lovely "affordable" zooms I reckon, have been much tempted in the past in getting one ! Sigma is a great alternative to the branded lenses, in some case they can measure better.
harmo_hammer Posted August 1, 2015 Posted August 1, 2015 Hi all, Good question, and I'm afraid it has no simple answer for me. Simply because it changes depending on the style of photography I'm doing, and any weight or bulk limits at play. I've had the amazing opportunity to use the majority of Canon's EF L series lenses over the years (not the 1200mm beast yet, nor have I used the tilt-shift models), so I thought I'd make some suggestions based on my actual experiences, and compare them where I can. I hope it helps. Like Al, my better half and I use the Canon 24-105 F4L IS, as the "workhorse" or "walk around" lens. However, I use this term extremely loosely. It's one stop slower than the other popular choice, the Canon 24-70 F2.8 L (mk I or II). The image stabilisation on the 24-105 is good for at least two stops. (Canon says 3, but I'm a little more conservative than that). The 24-105 is also lighter than the 24-70 but having said that, the 24-70 is better in low light, with moving subjects, despite it having no stabilisation at all. Best lens overall... in terms of usefulness, I'd say the 24-105 F4L IS or the 70-200 2.8L IS models (mk I or mk II). In terms of sharpness, the 85mm 1.8 prime, or 180mm F3.5L macro are extremely sharp. In terms of fun to use, I'd say the 100mm 2.8L macro, or the 16-35 2.8L IS lenses. The most rewarding, but utterly challenging lenses... well that is any of the Canon really long lenses (500mm and above) or the MPE-65 Macro. Each have their special requirements and require effort, thought, and preparation from the photographer.. but get them right and you can wow everyone. Travel photography rig: Canon EF 24-105 (as indicated) and the Canon 100-400L Zoom. These two lenses are amazing and compliment each other extremely well. The 100-400 is a controversial lens if you look at the online forums. However, it focuses a bit faster than the Sigma 150-500, and the "Dust issue".. put simply... isn't a big deal at all in my experience.I've tested it in the volcanic cloud of ash, dust, and sulphur at Mt Yesur in Vanuatu with no ill effect. I've even been in a dust storm in the outback with no problems (obviously not changing lenses at this time is a good idea). It also packs away smaller than many of the 400mm capable lenses, but it is heavier than some. People complain about this lens more because their skills with longer lenses need work, not that the lens has a problem. However, the 100-400 does have the oldest generation of IS that I'm aware of so while some compensation is there, it's not 3, or four stops worth. It also seems to be the model of lens which has more variance in sharpness than most (try a few before you buy). Obviously this is not the best lens in low light, the 100-400 is not really suited, given that it's F5.6 at the long end. Portraiture: Well I love my 85mm 1.8 prime, heck even the 50mm 1.4 prime is very sharp (and roughly equivalent to the 85mm on crop factor cameras). The 100mm prime (and the macro variant) are also extremely good. The 24-70 F2.8L when I'm doing weddings is great, and the 70-200 2.8 IS models are amazing too. If I'm lazy enough to want to use zoom lenses over primes. Landscapes: 16-35mm F2.8 IS L mk II. (Wow! But the lens hood on it isn't so effective, given the wide angle of the lens gives more opportunity for flare and other issues) or I just stitch panoramas together with the 24-105. For crop factor Canons, the EF-S 10-22 is the equivalent length of the 16-35mm 2.8L (or the somewhat cheaper variant 17-40mm F4L) but it has more distortion than the L series models (my better half hates this lens, but I've used it to good effect). Please note: that if you're considering these wider lenses you need a SLIM ringed filter. The usual filter threads encroach into the wider angled shots, so you either look like you're shooting through a ships port hole, or you have vignetting in the corners. Wildlife: If you can afford it (buy or rent), the 600mm F4 IS is a dream to use if you don't have to carry it (for instance, not getting out of the truck on an African safari). The Mk II is considerably lighter than the older models, but like everything good, it costs considerably more. My friend owns the Canon 200-400 lens (which has an inbuilt teleconverter) and it's beautiful but heavy lens if you're hiking with it. My personal favourite long lens if traveling (and walking any sort of meaningful distance) is either the Canon 100-400L lens or the Canon 400mm 5.6L prime. The prime is light, sharp, focuses extremely quickly, and costs less than a quarter of the cost of a Canon 500mm/600mm lens. But has no image stabilisation. All of the above lenses have been Canon. But I've tried a few third parties such as Sigma and Tamron. It's true that Sigma and Tamron make some very fine lenses, but their quality control isn't the as good Canon or Nikon. (That's not to say that the branded lenses perfect, just that Canon and Nikon are more consistent). I had the privilege to use some Sigma primes (50mm, 85mm, and longer on Nikon/Pentax bodies) but the most impressive was the Sigma 200-500 2.8 Lens. With the empty case weighing 16KG, and the lens weighing a little more than the case) you need a serious tripod to handle this green bazooka. Sure, I could shoot the small text on a camera box on the other side of a largish/poorly lit Camerahouse store in Sydney, but it's just so heavy I can't figure out who'd use this lens unless they have some sort of balcony in/near a lot of wildlife. Choices in lenses are based on function, budget, and personal preferences. My advice to anyone is to buy a lens (from reputable sources) second hand, and give them a try. If you don't like it, it's likely you can sell it with little-to-no loss. Also, do your research to make sure that the lens in question is compatible with your camera (Third party lenses can have Canon, Nikon, or Sony mounts), or some lenses only work on crop factor camers (DX models in Nikon, and EF-S in Canon). Best of luck! Hamish. 2
MrHorsepower Posted August 2, 2015 Posted August 2, 2015 Used on D7000 ..Most used lens Sigma 24-70 f2.8 ..favourite lens Sigma 150 f2.8 first bought the Tamron 90 f2.8 but it only comes out now when both Wife and I both doing Macro at the same time
Keith Anderson Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I have no best or most used lens, every lens I buy has to have a specific purpose or it a waste of space in my bag and money in my account. I switched to Fuji a while ago and so for my work 14, 24, 35, 56 are all there for a specific reason, one does not get used more than another but I do grab certain lenses for certain shots. Head portraits 56/1.2 Three quarter portraits 24/1.4 or 35/1.4 depending on size of person, skinny people get the 35 slightly larger the 24. Landscape depends on image and I use all of them but if I hike and go light the 14/2.8 goes with me. Street usually the 24/1.4 2
Tax Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) Following on from reading a couple of posts here, I pM'd Alittlewino and Nevillekapadia and subsequently bought a Fuji X-T1 with a XF 23mm f1.4 last week. I am off to Taipei on Saturday so look forward to using it while I am there. @@keitha I am considering a second lens and am undecided on whether to get the 56mm or 14mm first. Main use would be as a hobbyist shooting street and landscape with an occassional portrait thrown in. I am undecided on the 35mm and as to whether I would need it. Advice appreciated. Edited August 11, 2015 by Tax 1
Guest Misterioso Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 (edited) I am considering a second lens and am undecided on whether to get the 56mm or 14mm first. Main use would be as a hobbyist shooting street and landscape with an occassional portrait thrown in. I am undecided on the 35mm and as to whether I would need it. Advice appreciated. 14/23/56 is a great combination (basically a 21/35/85 combination in 35mm terms; 24/35/85 used to be very popular in the old times). You will not need or miss a 35mm lens. Edited August 11, 2015 by Misterioso
Tax Posted August 11, 2015 Posted August 11, 2015 14/23/56 is a great combination (basically a 21/35/85 combination in 35mm terms; 24/35/85 used to be very popular in the old times). You will not need or miss a 35mm lens. Thank you!
Keith Anderson Posted August 12, 2015 Posted August 12, 2015 Well going off you want to do street, landscape I would go the 14/2.8 or the 10-24/4 before the 56/1.2 The 56 is an incredible lens but is mainly for portraits, the 14 is beautiful for landscapes and still has a DOF scale. I'm probably a little different but I could not do without the 35/1.4, Shooting 3/4 portraits you need to use the right lens and I use either the 23 or 35 depending on body type, male or female. If someone is skinny to normal build I use the 35 if they are larger I use the 23. But if I had only two lenses for street and landscape it would be the 14 and 23. Hope that helps
Flynnyfalcon Posted August 13, 2015 Posted August 13, 2015 Best lens... Medium format, Schneider 35mm & 47mm Digitar. Both have outrageous colour, clarity and sharpness. For 35mm format, Zeiss 100mm Macro is simply superb, does it all with all the romance of a classic valve amp. Most used... probably 16-35L mkII. Good enough for most people and clients.
Tax Posted August 13, 2015 Posted August 13, 2015 Well going off you want to do street, landscape I would go the 14/2.8 or the 10-24/4 before the 56/1.2 The 56 is an incredible lens but is mainly for portraits, the 14 is beautiful for landscapes and still has a DOF scale. I'm probably a little different but I could not do without the 35/1.4, Shooting 3/4 portraits you need to use the right lens and I use either the 23 or 35 depending on body type, male or female. If someone is skinny to normal build I use the 35 if they are larger I use the 23. But if I had only two lenses for street and landscape it would be the 14 and 23. Hope that helps Thanks! Lucky I ended up with the 14mm as I am just reading your post/advice now. Went into Digi Direct this morning and had a play with the 14mm and 56mm and ended up buying the 14mm. The 14mm just felt right for shooting buildings and landscapes while I am on the road. The 56mm was nice but as you say it was an outright portrait shooter so I deferred it's purchase till later in the year. Also picked up a carbon fibre tripod. 1
Misternavi Posted August 20, 2015 Posted August 20, 2015 Best Lens: Hasselblad HC 80mm 2.8 sharp and light. autofocus is quick too. I use to to shoot products, people, and anything else. still sharp at f32 100mm 2.8 macro is my most used. I do a lot of studio product photography. cheap and sharp from f8-16 . pretty crap at f22. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Guest Sime Posted August 21, 2015 Posted August 21, 2015 sigma make some lovely "affordable" zooms I reckon, have been much tempted in the past in getting one ! Agree, this 150-500 is my most used lens.
betty boop Posted August 26, 2015 Author Posted August 26, 2015 well my most used lens the 24-105 4L started hunting the other day while at the redefy gtg....might have been the strong bass and spls shook it to death ! ..still would work and focus but something on it kept hunting and then got the dreaded er1...took to canon prof service centre locally and low and behold have had the lens over 10 years ! amazing ! and just wore out the aperture / IS unit. cheaper to repair and get back as good as new than get a new lens so went ahead. but goes to show
betty boop Posted September 2, 2015 Author Posted September 2, 2015 got my 24-105 4L back from canon yesterday...with "iris and IS mechanism replaced...re adjusted optical alignment...cleaned and checked for operation" and am not sure how they have done this...but my goodness it looks like a brand new lens ! and boy its quick sharp and responsive. ready for the next 10 years as the work horse ?
Recommended Posts