Bill Pierce
Well-known
There have always been little cameras and big cameras and little lenses and big lenses. But with today’s digitals, it’s getting a bit much in the lens department. I have a Sigma 40mm, f/1.4 lens that combines sharpness, high speed and autofocus that is over 5 inches long and weighs just short of 5 pounds. I also have a tiny Sony 40mm, f/2.5 that is just short of 2 inches long, weighs just a hair over a third of a pound and combines autofocus with a small size that makes it ideal for street shooting. I also have a 35/2 Voigtlander Apo that delivers excellent sharpness in a reasonable size, a lens that would certainly be the compromise in size and speed that would normally make it the only lens in that focal length neighborhood that I needed. But it’s manual focus. And I find there are certain fast moving situations where I have become dependent on autofocus.
In the ancient past, I never had 2 lenses of the same focal length unless one was a highly specialized lens like a Noctilux, a perspective correction lens or a macro lens. Now I tend to have a big killer autofocus lens, a little autofocus street lens and a highly corrected but relatively compact manual focus lens in a number of focal ranges.
It’s weird. I use to pack a gadget bag saying, “Which cameras do I need?” Now I say, “What lenses do I need?” Have I grown delusional in my old age or does this make sense in a digital and mirrorless age?
In the ancient past, I never had 2 lenses of the same focal length unless one was a highly specialized lens like a Noctilux, a perspective correction lens or a macro lens. Now I tend to have a big killer autofocus lens, a little autofocus street lens and a highly corrected but relatively compact manual focus lens in a number of focal ranges.
It’s weird. I use to pack a gadget bag saying, “Which cameras do I need?” Now I say, “What lenses do I need?” Have I grown delusional in my old age or does this make sense in a digital and mirrorless age?
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
For Sony mount where are 35 and 24 Samyang 2.8 lenses. Next to pancake size. Next to nothing weight. Those are AF FF lenses.
For digital street I went from 5D to M-E 220 and now GRD III.
With GR III you could select 28, 35 and 50 mm within same prime lens. Because of enough MP.
I don't like where Canon ended up with RF lenses. In Dec 2019 their rep told us at SMPTE meeting what smaller than EF lenses are possible. Canon went opposite. Huge and heavy L lenses. And no small non L lenses. They only managed to keep only 50 1.8 RF at decent size.
Now if I think which lens to get, I think "do I really need to deal with its weight and size".
Age, for sure
For digital street I went from 5D to M-E 220 and now GRD III.
With GR III you could select 28, 35 and 50 mm within same prime lens. Because of enough MP.
I don't like where Canon ended up with RF lenses. In Dec 2019 their rep told us at SMPTE meeting what smaller than EF lenses are possible. Canon went opposite. Huge and heavy L lenses. And no small non L lenses. They only managed to keep only 50 1.8 RF at decent size.
Now if I think which lens to get, I think "do I really need to deal with its weight and size".
Age, for sure
agentlossing
Well-known
Small lenses are the most enjoyable to use for me, even when I can get better results from a big honking lens. I had Sigma's 30/1.4 for M4/3 for a while, and the files it produced were amazing, but the shooting factor just isn't as fun as something like the 20/1.7 pancake.
There are many more differences in the types of lenses being offered these days- so NOT delusional. Not just differences in focal length and aperture, but AF, super-corrected, compact, all in the same mount. If the choice in lens gets the job done in an efficient manner- nothing delusional about it.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Now that I pay attention to the health of my spine a little more, I look more for compact lenses if I'm carrying a 35mm camera. 35mm, 40/45mm, and 50mm are always the ones I reach for. Yesterday I was out shooting my Leica M4 with a 2.1cm O Nikkor which is a very lightweight kit. First time I went out shooting with that combo in over a year and a half and it was very nice. I would have loved to take other cameras and other lenses, but that kit happened to work just fine.
Not delusional at all.
Phil Forrest
Not delusional at all.
Phil Forrest
the_hunter
Established
I personally like a small portable setup with a very limited number of lenses (don't want to waste time and miss shots while swapping lenses) The Fuji x100 was a favorite of mine, and a Nikon S3 with a 35mm is great.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
I take the smaller camera and lenses out when I want to be happier shooting, and take the bigger camera and lenses out when I want to be happier looking at the resulting images.
In general.
In general.
das
Well-known
I find that picking just one combination of one camera + lens for a day of shooting makes things interesting and presents a challenge. Or maybe two smaller camera bodies that can both fit in a small shoulder bag -- one with b&w, the other with color, and neither with overlapping focal lengths.
Michalm
Well-known
Is it consumers who demand gigantic lenses like Sigma art 40 1.4 or manufactures want us to belive that it is worth sacrifacing our backbone for the sake of sharpness wide open from corner to corner i wonder?
steveyork
Well-known
I'm not a digital guy, but it seems to me that the easiest way to shake up the digital look is with different lenses. With film cameras you can get a different look by changing films or filters, using a different developer or development technique, and in the case of mechanical cameras you're more likely to play with your exposures. Ha, ha, or get the exposure wrong and thereby (accidentally) get something different. Creative types like variety, and in the digital realm you're kind of limited. That may be some of it.
I’m a small lens guy… and small camera guy. However, only to a point. If quality is less than I expect or need for what I’d like to accomplish, then I’ll go larger. There’s always a good compromise though. For me it’s currently the X-Pro3 and 27mm and the Sony a7C with Sigma 45mm 2.8. My next camera will be the Fujifilm GFX-50R with 50mm 3.5. That is not small but I know it will be useful. I found M43 and 1” sensor cameras a bit flat for my taste in bad light.
Dogman
Veteran
As I got older and my arthritis went from occasional to persistent and my frequent backaches turned out to be inoperable spinal stenosis and I generally started to fall apart, I began to appreciate carrying less stuff around. I don't really own any of the super lenses but I've got a few that are a bit on the heavy side (for me). I just don't carry them anymore. They are my "car lenses". I'll shoot them from the car or carry them a few feet to shoot something close by. Ain't walkin' around with them much. I'll take a slow or variable aperture zoom or a moderate aperture prime. Maybe a higher megapixel camera to allow cropping. Put the ISO on auto and let it top out at 3200...even 6400. Don't much care about noise and getting super clean images these days.
And truthfully looking at some of the photos online done with those "perfect" lenses, I'm not really that impressed. Oh yeah, they're sharp. Eye burning, retinal dissecting sharp. As we used to say about knives when I was a collector, "scary sharp". Right out to the edge. But there's something unrealistic about those overly sharp photos. Too perfect. I'm bored with perfect.
And truthfully looking at some of the photos online done with those "perfect" lenses, I'm not really that impressed. Oh yeah, they're sharp. Eye burning, retinal dissecting sharp. As we used to say about knives when I was a collector, "scary sharp". Right out to the edge. But there's something unrealistic about those overly sharp photos. Too perfect. I'm bored with perfect.
agentlossing
Well-known
That's often where the line is drawn for me, and while we can't forget the also-important factor of $ versus $$$, I tend to come down on the side of: experience is more important than results. Someone will always capture something with greater fidelity than I, with a bigger/heavier camera or lens, a larger format, or more gear. I'd rather enjoy the moment, and I suspect that even when I'm old, provided I don't step out in front of a bus, I'll prefer looking at something which triggers a memory of the moment than something that's higher-IQ.
Evergreen States
Francine Pierre Saget (they/them)
Having different tools for different uses is the opposite of delusional. Many of the lenses for these full frame mirrorless cameras would absurd to have to carry around. I'm only 28 years old but with a chronic illness that makes things that I carry feel a lot heavier than they used to. And carrying water when going out is mandatory. Earlier in the spring, just taking my Bronica ETRS and 75mm PE for a morning walk was grueling. And carrying my Fuji X-Pro1 and single lens on a strap cuts into my shoulder and unbalances my gait, so I've taken to winding the shoulder strap around my wrist when I walk.
zuiko85
Veteran
Strictly a hobbyist so doesn’t really matter with me but.....
I just cannot see having my small (consumer) micro 4:3 body and lenses the size of a two liter pop bottle. That and I cannot afford modern lenses anyway.
So.
My main lenses for an EM10 are a set of old Olympus Pen F half frame Zuikos.
Compact, real click stopped aperture rings, manual focus and cheap (cheap in that I’ve owned them for many years)
Speaking of small, I did pay $40 for a used 15mm f8 body cap lens. It’s my widest lens.
I just cannot see having my small (consumer) micro 4:3 body and lenses the size of a two liter pop bottle. That and I cannot afford modern lenses anyway.
So.
My main lenses for an EM10 are a set of old Olympus Pen F half frame Zuikos.
Compact, real click stopped aperture rings, manual focus and cheap (cheap in that I’ve owned them for many years)
Speaking of small, I did pay $40 for a used 15mm f8 body cap lens. It’s my widest lens.
tbhv55
Well-known
KenR
Well-known
Follow the money
Follow the money
While these modern huge lenses may offer a tad better performance, they certainly command a hefty price. I have a lot of Nikon lenses that I purchased at “bargain” prices by today’s standard and many small, almost tiny, VC lenses that deliver excellent results that were “modestly” priced. So good performance can be obtained at reasonable prices. But now that the megapixel wars are over, the manufacturers have to hype something that is the latest and greatest. They have moved over to lenses as it is clear that nobody really needs more than 24 megapixels in their camera and so people won’t be trading up their camera bodies every two years. Ditch your perfectly good f/2.8 modest sized lens for an f1.4 behemoth that will certainly make you a better photographer. Sure it will. If you follow the money, you can usually answer most of life’s questions.
Follow the money
While these modern huge lenses may offer a tad better performance, they certainly command a hefty price. I have a lot of Nikon lenses that I purchased at “bargain” prices by today’s standard and many small, almost tiny, VC lenses that deliver excellent results that were “modestly” priced. So good performance can be obtained at reasonable prices. But now that the megapixel wars are over, the manufacturers have to hype something that is the latest and greatest. They have moved over to lenses as it is clear that nobody really needs more than 24 megapixels in their camera and so people won’t be trading up their camera bodies every two years. Ditch your perfectly good f/2.8 modest sized lens for an f1.4 behemoth that will certainly make you a better photographer. Sure it will. If you follow the money, you can usually answer most of life’s questions.
kram
Well-known
The Simga Fp makes me smile, nice small FF camera, put a lens on it and it looks a pig to hold. Lens size nit matching the camera. Which is why people love M mount camera and the like.
And now that’s why the Sony a7C is desirable. Just a little bigger and heavier than the fp but a lot more convenient in every other way. And there are at least a few small lenses for it. Some even have aperture rings.
ndnik
Established
In my view, the compromise in engineering a lens between size and optical quality has shifted too far in favor of optical quality at all cost. This is the price we pay for pixel peeping.
The combination of the smaller mirrorless bodies with their larger lenses makes them less desirable to me than older SLR/DSLR and their older lenses. Fuji is better at offering smaller packages than other manufacturers, but even the APSC lenses have still grown in size quite a bit.
- N.
The combination of the smaller mirrorless bodies with their larger lenses makes them less desirable to me than older SLR/DSLR and their older lenses. Fuji is better at offering smaller packages than other manufacturers, but even the APSC lenses have still grown in size quite a bit.
- N.