xt2 Loc: British Columbia, Canada

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Ummm, I'm gonna guess the guy that asked the question, at the least.

Bill_de Loc: US

And apparently everyone else who has followed it to page 9.

---

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Moreover those who replied...

Dean37 Loc: Fresno, CA

20, some just because, some I wanted and some were not good enough and I couldn't just pawn them off on someone else (they are excellent paper weights). Only 3 are Nikon DX though my cameras are film, DX or fixed lens.

28-70 f/2.8, 80-200 f/2.8 and 200-500 f/5.6-6.3 are the ones I really like. 18-200 f/3.5-5.6, 12-24 f/4 are the most used.

E.L.. Shapiro Loc: Ottawa, Ontario Canada

Actually, it ain't a bad question and basically deserves respectful answers and opinions. Problem is, perhaps in the phraseology or the inference, on the part of the OP, that folks who purchase, collect, use, more lenses than he deems necessary are ill-informed, overindulging in their hobby or themselves, frivolously spending their hard-earned money, or as he indicated are "obsessive" which could be misconstrued as an abnormality.

Lots of folks, not only photographers, think that if others don't do or see things exactly as they do, that something isn't right.

Many of the photographer I know, if they don't have enough room in their camera bag for more lenses, they'll simply get a larger camera bag and even put wheels on it if it gets too heavy!

It's best when coming across a question or a post that is not of interest and you don't wish to participate in it, to just skip it and move on. It makes for peaceful communications.

Bill_de Loc: US

Always the voice of reason.


---

Kozan Loc: Trenton Tennessee

Who cares?

Quixdraw Loc: x

Comes right down to it, it costs me nothing to keep nearly every lens I've acquired since 1968 (ex a few gifted to friends) and acquire the occasional new one. Tools - specific to particular tasks.

lmTrying Loc: WV Northern Panhandle

Actually I should not have attached this response to any one person in particular.

Basically, I don't care how many lenses you or anyone else has in their "kit". I have to assume that each person acquires what they need (or want) and can afford to achieve the photos they want. Personally I have no desire to photograph birds, so I have no need for a 900mm lens. But I know people who do. I do very little portrait style work so I don't need expensive fast glass. But I know other people who do. I do go to scale model shows and photograph models on the contest table. I have found that my Canon SX710HS point & shoot does a better job than any full frame camera and lens you can find to attach to it. I know that primes have a lot of advantages, if you have the time and space (to move forward and backward). In a lot of situations (vacations) you just don't have those options, so a selection of zooms is a good choice. But then, an interchangeable lens camera is not good in places like Disney, but my 710 is excellent.

What is interesting is to see what lenses different people find are necessary to make their images. And to see what lens they have upgraded to, to improve their work. I even understand the guys that have a collection of 100, 200, or even more vintage plus modern lenses. It's all personal. And what you, me, or anyone else thinks is pretty much no value whatsoever. Just interesting.

Winslowe

You expect a sensible answer for an obviously senseless question?? You are out of touch with reality!

Ottom8 Loc: Portland, OR

After 10 years, I've settled on the following lenses:
Nikon 20mm f/2.8
Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D
Nikon AF Micro 60mm f/2.8 Lens
Nikon 85mm f/1.4 D
I love simplicity...
I've grown fond of primes
I don't use zoom lenses
I don't use lenses that have image stabilization

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

Nine pages in you feel like we need that asinine response.

Winslowe

My comment was addressed to Leitz. Everyone else is free to think of it as they wish.

cmc4214 Loc: S.W. Pennsylvania