Jwshelton Loc: Denver,CO

That answer is easy - one more than what you currently have!

ronpier Loc: Poland Ohio

I also use an 18-200 just for walking around and a 50mm 1.8 prime. All lenses can be used on both cameras so that my sanity is not tested. lol

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

Yes, we do.

William Royer Loc: Kansas

I’d been using a Nikon camera and lenses (many lenses) since the advent of digital. Last year moved to Olympus. Went through this kind of lens analysis over and over. Had more lenses than I ever used regularly with Nikon. Strongly prefer to have only the camera + 2-3 lenses in a bag. The fewer lenses, the better! THIS time will NOT have miscellaneous lenses always staying behind. Period!
So, thought process became: Their mid range zoom 24-80mm f2.8 (all stated in 35mm equivalent) is an excellent one-lens solution for most situations. But, since I love using ultra-wide, how about the 14-28mm? Well then, should really have a couple of fast primes — like 35mm and 90mm. (Could travel anywhere and get 90% of my desired shots with those. Right?). And, of course, for those occasions needing a little more reach, their compact 75mm (150mm equivalent) could be very handy to have around.
Oh, crap! Here we go again!!!

A. T.

Amen.........

rtryan

So if you are “other than professional” photographer, why not capture the memory. Love my Sony RX10 for great photos without worry about changing lens and I can tweak and make look better with PS and LR and also have great memories and darn good photos with my iPhone

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

First define "need'. Do we need a camera? After that step, need is defined in the eye of the credit card holder.

karno Loc: Chico ,California

You need what you want
And want what you need.

shelty Loc: Medford, OR

Back in the day, a photographer using 35 mm usually had a half a dozen or so ranging from wide angle to telephoto. Today, all you need is one or two zoom lenses. I've found them just as sharp as standard lenses.

TBPJr Loc: South Carolina

I need six: The four zooms that I have now, 11-24mm f/4, 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8, and 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6, that cover from 11-560mm (with a 1.4 extender), plus a 17mm T/S, and either a 600mm or 800mm and maybe a 2.0 extender; to a lesser extent, I have some need for my 100mm f/2.8 macro and maybe even less for the 50mm f/2.5 macro. I almost certainly will buy the T/S lens, but probably neither of the super telephoto primes (unless I decide to and succeed at earning enough from photography to justify it).

My need is based on what I want to photograph--almost everything. When I was using film cameras, I had only primes for several years, because the primes were so much better than the zooms then (I did eventually add a medium telephoto zoom); I really found it confining to "zoom with my feet" or to try to change lenses in a fast-changing situation. Before I bought all the zooms for my digital camera, I got by a long time with a 24-105mm f/4.0, and, before that, the kit lens that came with my first digital camera (crop), an 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6. I really liked the 24-105mm, but wanted both wider and longer, because I felt very strongly that I could improve the pictures I could take with the expanded focal ranges; I also got the two macro lenses before all the zooms, and it turned out that the zooms are pretty much capable of getting the same shots as the macros at a greater distance from the subjects. I use all four of my zooms--the 11-24mm is fantastic for narrow older streets and landscapes both, not to mention interior shots; the 24-70mm covers a range that is very useful inside and outside, and is fast and sharp; the 70-200mm is fast, has excellent IQ, and decent reach for a lot of situations; and the 100-400mm has almost enough reach to let me capture as much as I can see without binoculars or the camera, especially when I add the extender. I made a conscious decision to forgo the fast primes in favor of the slightly slower zooms to get the capability to fill the frame with lens adjustment when I can (of course, this hasn't stopped my taking pictures of birds or other animals that are just a spot in the middle of the frame with my longest focal length, or anything else that catches my eye). I finalized my decision to go with zooms after I got a camera with good low-light and high-ISO performance, thinking that even a full-stop or stop-and-a-half speed increase would not make up for the limitations of single focal lengths in most situations I expected, when an ISO increase would do the job.

I need the tilt-shift lens to take the architectural photos I want to take more facilely--I really prefer my pictures of buildings not to exhibit keystoning, and, while I can avoid that with a wide-angle, I don't like to give up half of the frame to foreground to do so; I also am intrigued with the perspective shifts with varied focal planes (but I haven't actually taken any of those). I need a faster super telephoto for the wildlife pictures I cannot quite reach with my relatively slow 100-400mm, especially when the lighting is not ideal.

I still have a use for my macro lenses, mostly for copy stand work; strictly speaking, they are not absolutely necessary, but they have a flatter focal plane and can be much more convenient than a zoom, particularly when the zooms want to creep when pointed straight down. The 100mm macro is a good portrait lens, too, but I don't take many pictures in a studio or studio-like environment.

I do carry the four zooms with me when I am traveling (on a belt system with a shoulder harness--they are still heavy); I used to take my macros with me in my rolling travel case, but the zooms were so much larger than the other lenses they displaced, since my case was already max airline size, that I have to leave the macros at home. On a walking excursion, if I am pretty certain I won't need the 100-400mm, I might leave it behind to save on weight, but I have wanted it too often to do that much anymore. I really like to have the 70-200mm with me, even when I expect to use the 100-400mm, because it is so much faster and easier to use to focus on fast-moving subjects; it is also much better in dim interiors (think cathedrals or other large spaces) when 70mm is not quite long enough. I will carry the tilt-shift when I get it, when I can take a tripod, but I expect to have to be in pretty much complete control of my schedule to use it, since it's manual--although I may even try it on a monopod (which I am trying to carry all the time now) when I know I will have some unstructured time for taking pictures. I know from the size and weight that I probably will not be lugging any of the super telephotos around with all this gear--it would require a separate backpack. Of course, I would take it all when I am operating out of my own vehicle and can get near to the place where I want to shoot.

So, that's what I think I need and why. I could make do with fewer, perhaps, but not without sacrificing some of the capabilities I prefer to have available (and some I want to have).

ialvarez50

Why is it that a lot of people like yourself get offended at anything that other person has to say. Did I mentioned to him that all he need it was a 50mm lens? A very good photographer can create amazing images with a 50mm including macro photography with the use of extension tubes o close up filters, landscape photography, portraits if you get close enough, etc. But the photographer has to understand that his creativity and knollegde plus a camera with a lens its all he needs. Stop being so sensitive.

SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA

You’re the one getting sensitive because I once again called you out for you usual inane comments.

ialvarez50

Inane comments. Wow! So, according to you what should I have said to the person that asked the questions. Please tell me so I don't make any more inane comments that may offend you.

billbarcus Loc: IPNW

What kind of a question is this? One can never have enough lenses. It's the same for guns ... I can never have enough and keep buying more ... lenses, guns and silver - best investments that one can own ... bar none!

digit-up Loc: Flushing, Michigan

My other hobby is Woodworking, and I have a nice workshop. There’s an oft-used phrase among woodworkers, That “you can never have ENOUGH clamps”.. I believe that idea applies well to LENSES with photography. IMHO... RJM