Architect1776 wrote:
I saw an article that is very good discussing lens purchases.
Here are some highlights of the question
"Dear Thom: Nikon currently lists 76 lenses on their Web site. How many of them is it realistic to own? I've got the money. Should I collect all 76? Signed Nikkor Fanatic"
Dear Fanatic: The economy is still recovering, so buy them all, preferably through 76 different dealers. But first you need to figure out how to carry them all. Signed Thom.
This is a tough question to answer and an easy one, too. Let's start with that seemingly joking "how are you going to carry them" comment.
Seriously: how many lenses can you carry? The average pro tends to carry perhaps five lenses (14-24, 24-70, 70-200, couple of fast primes), and supplements those from time to time with a handful of others when an assignment specifically calls for it (200-400mm, 600mm, 16mm fish, macro lens, PC-E lens). But even the basic five lens kit (add 24 and 85 f/1.4) is over 10 pounds of optics. Add two pro bodies, some flashes, some support gear, batteries, etc., and said pro is already carrying 30 pounds around with them.
http://www.dslrbodies.com/lenses/lens-articles/choosing-lenses/how-many-lenses-do-you-need.html
And there-in lies our true answer: do you know what you're trying to do photographically? Do you understand the compromises and are you willing to make them? For 90% of the photos you take, what do you really need and use?
There's a side note to the lens chase/collection issue: some people think that lenses will make their photography stand out: "If I shoot with an X and everyone else uses a Y, then my images will be better." Well, no. They might be different from what you've done before, but there isn't a lens you can buy on the market that hasn't been used to death by some pro seeking to make a style statement. For example, the full-frame fisheyes (10.5mm DX, 16mm FX) are now a mainstay of mountain bike and extreme sports photographers because it changed perspective from the usual stand-offish telephoto renderings and made someone's images stand out. But now everyone's doing it, so it looks "normal." Don't fall into the trap of thinking that "lens = style." A lens is just another tool. You define your own style, and lens choice is only one small part of that.
So let me close with some questions for you:
1. How many lenses do you own?
2. How many of those lenses produce 80% of your images?
3. Do you have the best possible lens(es) for #2?
4. Will a new lens change #2?
And because I'm not grading in my usual tough way today, here's the answer sheet:
1. No more than six.
2. Two or three.
3. Yes.
4. Usually not. It will if the answer to #3 is no. It probably will if the answer to #1 is 1.
I saw an article that is very good discussing lens... (
show quote)
I have 3 cameras that are my (currrent) mainstays. They are the Nikon's D7000 (wife's), D7100 and D610 (mine) Also have a Nikon D70s that doesnt get used anymore. The lenses are a Tamron 10-24mm (DX wide) so so wide angle, Nikon 18-70mm DX pretty good for normal all around on DX, Nikon 50mm 1.4 lens (great FX lens and is used on all cameras for low light and general shooting) Nikon 70-300 DX decent mid telephoto with no frills and my Nikon 80-400 which is a good general tele with 2 vibration reduction but is an f/4.? to 5.? so a little slow for low to medium light. Generally, I'm carrying the 50mm and the 80-400 on my cameras and the 18-70 with the 70-300 as backup for wife's D7000. I do carry (occasionaly) the 10-24 on the D7100 for wides but only when necessary.