Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
This is easy .... an SLR and a ZOOM!
:angel:
:angel:
maggieo
More Deadly
Stone The Heretic!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
barnwulf
Well-known
If you are going to be kissing frogs, pick the ones with the most beautiful eyes. It kind of depends on whither you have some idea of what focal length you want to work with. If you don't have any idea then choosing a 50mm and a 90mm might be risky. You may find out that you really want a 35 or a 28. Chosing one that you are pretty confident about wanting and then go which way you are leaning with a second lens later. If you already have a good idea of what focal length you want, I would go for 2 lenses. Of course if you prefer an excellent more expensive single lens then maybe the one will do. How is that for no answer?
barnwulf
Well-known
I could go on and on with this but you are the only one that knows the answer.
rya
Established
Oh, it isn't my answer that I want. I am interested in that of others.
At the present, exactly half of the voters selected two lenses, one-third selected one lens, and only one-sixth selected a variety of cheaper gear. This means five-sixths of the respondents would rather have one or two really good lenses on a single body than multiple lenses and bodies. The number of one to two lens campers surprises me.
I realize that I asked for answers in theory rather than in practice and I would think that more than 17% of the voters have kits with more than two lenses and one body. If I am right, then my scenario of budget restraints may not apply to most people here. In other words, the favorite or most desired one or two lenses are not expensive enough to consume our budgets.
This seems contrary to the great deal of coveting discussion of photographers--or at least, among those conversing about equipment. I understand that there are many lenses that could easily be favorites and are relatively inexpensive to individuals (e.g. the 35 Nokton, pre-ASPH summiluces, Zeisses and Canons, etc), yet there is tremendous lust displayed for things some people label unobtainable. Here I am thinking about any new Leica glass and many other select items such as any generation of the Noctilux.
Then again, my entirely casual and loosely phrased scenario in the original post does not exactly set up a sure understanding of the respondents' preferences. Like back alley says, some time may be spent simply learning by first hand experience; he does not seem concerned about an ideal so much as he is for the knowledge of what exists. In addition, I am sure there are many other exceptions to making my initial question applicable.
At the present, exactly half of the voters selected two lenses, one-third selected one lens, and only one-sixth selected a variety of cheaper gear. This means five-sixths of the respondents would rather have one or two really good lenses on a single body than multiple lenses and bodies. The number of one to two lens campers surprises me.
I realize that I asked for answers in theory rather than in practice and I would think that more than 17% of the voters have kits with more than two lenses and one body. If I am right, then my scenario of budget restraints may not apply to most people here. In other words, the favorite or most desired one or two lenses are not expensive enough to consume our budgets.
This seems contrary to the great deal of coveting discussion of photographers--or at least, among those conversing about equipment. I understand that there are many lenses that could easily be favorites and are relatively inexpensive to individuals (e.g. the 35 Nokton, pre-ASPH summiluces, Zeisses and Canons, etc), yet there is tremendous lust displayed for things some people label unobtainable. Here I am thinking about any new Leica glass and many other select items such as any generation of the Noctilux.
Then again, my entirely casual and loosely phrased scenario in the original post does not exactly set up a sure understanding of the respondents' preferences. Like back alley says, some time may be spent simply learning by first hand experience; he does not seem concerned about an ideal so much as he is for the knowledge of what exists. In addition, I am sure there are many other exceptions to making my initial question applicable.
I'm a one lens type of person. However, I own more than one lens. It depends on the system. With Nikon, used lenses are so cheap that I own multiple lenses. With Leica stuff, I tend to stick to one lens.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
as an amateur shooter I dont need more than one lens; perhaps two - one semi wide and one super wide (such as 21VC pocket lens). This avoids hindrance when traveling. Often less is more. I learned this the hard way.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
One stunning lens
OR
Two good lenses
OR
Switch to a larger format where lens quality isn't critical but 'character' is, e.g. Dagors on 5x7 inch
BUT NOT
Three or more indifferent or 'characterful' lenses for 35mm/digi
UNLESS
You are absolutely certain that you will be happy with them and you KNOW that ALL of them suit your style (e.g. Summaron 35/3.5, Canon 50/1.2, Jupiter 85/2)
Cheers,
R.
OR
Two good lenses
OR
Switch to a larger format where lens quality isn't critical but 'character' is, e.g. Dagors on 5x7 inch
BUT NOT
Three or more indifferent or 'characterful' lenses for 35mm/digi
UNLESS
You are absolutely certain that you will be happy with them and you KNOW that ALL of them suit your style (e.g. Summaron 35/3.5, Canon 50/1.2, Jupiter 85/2)
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Today I went to the beach to make some shots, and I had decided I'd only shoot under direct sun... I took the gear I've enjoyed the most ever on sunny days:
From my left shoulder I had a camera loaded with APX100 and the 40 1.4 on it with yellow and ND8 filter, and the camera already set at 1/1000 for shooting the Nokton wide open only... All I had to do was quick focusing and shoot...
From my right shoulder I had another camera with the 15 Heliar on it with yellow filter, loaded with Tri-X, and set at f/11 1/250 prefocused at 1 meter... When something interesting was passing by or close to me, all I had to do was just shoot, without even taking the camera to eye level....
On my right hand, and down, I had my main camera loaded also with Tri-X, and the 28 3.5 with yellow filter on, prefocused at 2 meters and set at f/11 1/250 too... Those clean 28 framelines are superb on the R4M viewfinder...
Didn't even carry a bag... I love my Bessas' two sets of curtains protecting my film under the sun... Not having any camera hanging from my neck, made my afternoon and evening shooting discreet: no problem with anyone in hours, even photographing children near their parents... And today, more meant more for sure, and less would have meant less to me...
Cheers,
Juan
From my left shoulder I had a camera loaded with APX100 and the 40 1.4 on it with yellow and ND8 filter, and the camera already set at 1/1000 for shooting the Nokton wide open only... All I had to do was quick focusing and shoot...
From my right shoulder I had another camera with the 15 Heliar on it with yellow filter, loaded with Tri-X, and set at f/11 1/250 prefocused at 1 meter... When something interesting was passing by or close to me, all I had to do was just shoot, without even taking the camera to eye level....
On my right hand, and down, I had my main camera loaded also with Tri-X, and the 28 3.5 with yellow filter on, prefocused at 2 meters and set at f/11 1/250 too... Those clean 28 framelines are superb on the R4M viewfinder...
Didn't even carry a bag... I love my Bessas' two sets of curtains protecting my film under the sun... Not having any camera hanging from my neck, made my afternoon and evening shooting discreet: no problem with anyone in hours, even photographing children near their parents... And today, more meant more for sure, and less would have meant less to me...
Cheers,
Juan
jbielikowski
Jan Bielikowski
Thing I love about my 2 cameras is that they have non-interchangeable lenses. I'm lusting for loads of RFs, SLRs, MFs and even more lenses but I wont buy em cause I'm happy...
ok I'm not, I want Leica M3 with 50/1.2 Summilux, M5 with 35/1.2 Nokton, Zeiss Ikon with 28/2.8 Biogon and 50/1.5 C Planar, Minolta SRT 101 with 58/1.2, Canon F-1 with 24/2 and 85/1.2, Pentax MX with 28/2 and 85/1.4*, Olympus OM-3 Ti with 24/3.5 shift, Pentax Spotmatic with countless Takumars, Nikon F with non-AI 20/3.5 35/2 55/1.2 85/1.8, Contax Aria with small Zeiss family, Rolleiflex 2.8, Hasselblad 500 C/M with 50/80/150 trio, WIdelux F8, Toyo 4x5 field, 8x10 wooden pinhole.
And you were asking about few lenses, thats not enough for me
ok I'm not, I want Leica M3 with 50/1.2 Summilux, M5 with 35/1.2 Nokton, Zeiss Ikon with 28/2.8 Biogon and 50/1.5 C Planar, Minolta SRT 101 with 58/1.2, Canon F-1 with 24/2 and 85/1.2, Pentax MX with 28/2 and 85/1.4*, Olympus OM-3 Ti with 24/3.5 shift, Pentax Spotmatic with countless Takumars, Nikon F with non-AI 20/3.5 35/2 55/1.2 85/1.8, Contax Aria with small Zeiss family, Rolleiflex 2.8, Hasselblad 500 C/M with 50/80/150 trio, WIdelux F8, Toyo 4x5 field, 8x10 wooden pinhole.
And you were asking about few lenses, thats not enough for me
With my M8.2, I will use a 28mm and a 35mm. That's it.
back alley
IMAGES
i seemed to have settled on the 28/35/50 combo for use on the rd1. i have a small but slower set and a fast but bigger set of lenses to suit my needs and whims.
the only outsider is the 15 which is so easy to use on the rd1.
the only outsider is the 15 which is so easy to use on the rd1.
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Given the constraints (one body only - then one, two, or more lenses) I voted two. The reason is that's what I did with the two main systems I actually shoot most with. They are my Canon EOS DSLR system and my Hexar RF Leica M-mount system. Or, at least, that's what I did initially.
For the EOS DSLR system I bought camera, kit ("do most things adequately") lens and the best lens of the type I really wanted, which was an IS-equipped telephoto lens for wildlife shooting. I spent a bunch of money on what was my target lens (the tele) and the least I could on the "everything else" lens. The tele did everything I wanted, while the kit lens was "good enough". Sure, I've moved on from there. The tele has been replaced by something more expensive, yet better in every other way (except size and weight). But I got the photos I wanted and otherwise couldn't get with that lens, and it still does good work for my father. The kit lens has been retired as the paperweight it no-doubt deserved to be all along - but it hung around long enough for me to learn what was important to me in what I then regarded as "secondary" applications.
I did something similar with RF cameras. I didn't even decide to buy an RF camera until I knew what lens I wanted for the application I wanted an RF for. That lens was a 75 'lux, which I still have and still love. However, part of the affordable price of the 'lux was its having to be sent off for a CLA. I covered that gap by buying an RF camera kit - the Hexar RF and 50mm/f2 M-Hexanon lens (the boxed set). Using the camera and lens combo taught me how to use an RF in the way I wanted, so I was prepared for the 75 when it arrived. And unlike the SLR kit lens, that M-Hex is still one of my favourite lenses. (OK, I've bought way too much RF stuff since - but that's what got me started. And a 35 would have been a better "do everything else" lens for me than the 50 - but I didn't know that at the time. I'd always preferred a 50 on an SLR. Oh, and I'd have replaced that 75 'lux with something better - except for me there is[/u nothing better than that 75.)
I was in the fortunate position that having established myself with both systems I could then expand on them. But if "stuck" with both I'd be quite happy - able to meet my primary objective with each system, using the best (for me) lens I could afford for what I wanted to do, and having another lens to do, more or less, the "everything else" tasks.
...Mike
For the EOS DSLR system I bought camera, kit ("do most things adequately") lens and the best lens of the type I really wanted, which was an IS-equipped telephoto lens for wildlife shooting. I spent a bunch of money on what was my target lens (the tele) and the least I could on the "everything else" lens. The tele did everything I wanted, while the kit lens was "good enough". Sure, I've moved on from there. The tele has been replaced by something more expensive, yet better in every other way (except size and weight). But I got the photos I wanted and otherwise couldn't get with that lens, and it still does good work for my father. The kit lens has been retired as the paperweight it no-doubt deserved to be all along - but it hung around long enough for me to learn what was important to me in what I then regarded as "secondary" applications.
I did something similar with RF cameras. I didn't even decide to buy an RF camera until I knew what lens I wanted for the application I wanted an RF for. That lens was a 75 'lux, which I still have and still love. However, part of the affordable price of the 'lux was its having to be sent off for a CLA. I covered that gap by buying an RF camera kit - the Hexar RF and 50mm/f2 M-Hexanon lens (the boxed set). Using the camera and lens combo taught me how to use an RF in the way I wanted, so I was prepared for the 75 when it arrived. And unlike the SLR kit lens, that M-Hex is still one of my favourite lenses. (OK, I've bought way too much RF stuff since - but that's what got me started. And a 35 would have been a better "do everything else" lens for me than the 50 - but I didn't know that at the time. I'd always preferred a 50 on an SLR. Oh, and I'd have replaced that 75 'lux with something better - except for me there is[/u nothing better than that 75.)
I was in the fortunate position that having established myself with both systems I could then expand on them. But if "stuck" with both I'd be quite happy - able to meet my primary objective with each system, using the best (for me) lens I could afford for what I wanted to do, and having another lens to do, more or less, the "everything else" tasks.
...Mike
thomasw_
Well-known
In a starter situation.....I would read a lot and view images a lot on both technical and aesthetic aspects. I would try out a few set ups if at all possible before laying the loonies on the table. Only after a fair amount of deliberation would I make a decision. I can only do this knowing what I know now, as I can't unknow what I do know. Bearing that in mind, I would buy the best 50mm lens I could afford and work with it, around it and through it until I knew which other FL I wanted to use.
Obviously each of us tries to get what works best for us given our situations. When I made this decision, I had some foundation on which to stand; my father's experience and his M3. At the time, all that pointed to learning on a 50mm lens; but I longed for wides thinking I was missing out and that my vision was too limited. Since those times I have experimented with lenses much wider and longer. Thus I have been a "prodigal" lens user, as I am back more or less where I started, a 50mm man. Just a little more seasoned
So put me down for one lens...
Obviously each of us tries to get what works best for us given our situations. When I made this decision, I had some foundation on which to stand; my father's experience and his M3. At the time, all that pointed to learning on a 50mm lens; but I longed for wides thinking I was missing out and that my vision was too limited. Since those times I have experimented with lenses much wider and longer. Thus I have been a "prodigal" lens user, as I am back more or less where I started, a 50mm man. Just a little more seasoned
So put me down for one lens...
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
One body, one lens for me.
But I value the ability to upgrade/switch that one lens.
For instance, I recently tried a pre-asph 35mm Summilux. The way it looks and feels on my M4-P, it took *a lot* of willpower to take it off and gave it back to the store attendant
One day I'll replace my Ultron with it.
But I value the ability to upgrade/switch that one lens.
For instance, I recently tried a pre-asph 35mm Summilux. The way it looks and feels on my M4-P, it took *a lot* of willpower to take it off and gave it back to the store attendant
One day I'll replace my Ultron with it.
I voted "one lens", and if doing it all over again that's what I'd do. In fact I sorta did that for my first RF. I got caught up in the Leica mystique and got a used M body and a new 35 Summicron. So far so good, and I might have been better off to leave it that way, but a year later I got a 90mm Tele-Elmarit, figuring for some reach for that very discreet quiet shutter. But it is seldom used.
This was partly psychological I think... No excuses, I had a Leica and a Summicron, so I wasn't held back by "lesser gear." No choice but to accept failures as my own. Also, I was more free to justify other gear: Yes, I had a Leica, but I CHOOSE to use this other stuff right now.
In practical terms, it makes more sense to spread the budget a bit wider with two excellent lenses rather than one elite lens. But if the elite lens makes you happier, then that's the way to go, and then add to the kit as the budget allows, and based on accumulated personal experience.
After several decades I still have that used M body, and the the 35 'cron just came back from DAG freshened with a CLA, focus adjustment, and 6-bit coding... It's a keeper!
This was partly psychological I think... No excuses, I had a Leica and a Summicron, so I wasn't held back by "lesser gear." No choice but to accept failures as my own. Also, I was more free to justify other gear: Yes, I had a Leica, but I CHOOSE to use this other stuff right now.
In practical terms, it makes more sense to spread the budget a bit wider with two excellent lenses rather than one elite lens. But if the elite lens makes you happier, then that's the way to go, and then add to the kit as the budget allows, and based on accumulated personal experience.
After several decades I still have that used M body, and the the 35 'cron just came back from DAG freshened with a CLA, focus adjustment, and 6-bit coding... It's a keeper!