Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Really, it depends on what you are photographing. It also depends on how you see. Placing objects in perspective: wide angle. Simplifying down to essentials: long lens. Most recently I photographed in an aircraft museum, and needed the widest lenses. My 21mm was useful. Once in a while I might need the 90, but more often the 75 will do. But that's just me.
I think that the more extreme a lens is, the less it will be used. When there is no special requirement or constraint, a 24mm is usually wide enough for me. But then, I keep a 15mm and an 18mm around for the Nikons and at times I need them.
To go out photographing with no special goal in mind, I like to carry a 24, 35, and 75 as a three-lens outfit. Those are three well spaced focal lengths. I didn't vote because I didn't see that option.
I think that the more extreme a lens is, the less it will be used. When there is no special requirement or constraint, a 24mm is usually wide enough for me. But then, I keep a 15mm and an 18mm around for the Nikons and at times I need them.
To go out photographing with no special goal in mind, I like to carry a 24, 35, and 75 as a three-lens outfit. Those are three well spaced focal lengths. I didn't vote because I didn't see that option.
That can work; I've done it happily. After one shoulder-straining trip carrying two bodies and three lenses, the next time I took only one body and a 35 f/2. More relaxing, and I just worked my compositions into the angle of view and my position.
tic
Established
21, 35, 90.
FrankS
Registered User
Here are 2 different walking around kits. Yesterday I took out the F2, today was the HRF. Both kits include 28 and 50mm lenses. Today my walk began with the 50 on the camera. I took some shots of a small stream with ice along the edges. Then my walk took me through a wooded path and I switched to the 28. I really needed both focal lengths.
If this walk were in a distant location, one I'm not likely to return to, I'd carry 2 cameras and include 21 and 35mm lenses.
If this walk were in a distant location, one I'm not likely to return to, I'd carry 2 cameras and include 21 and 35mm lenses.
Jani_from_Finland
Well-known
It seems lately that i use almost only a camera with 40-50mm lens or equivalent. As i use mostly OM-series slr, then i would take OM-2n with a 24/2.8 and the OM-4Ti with some of my 50mm lenses, depending on situation the 50/1.2 or 50/1.8 or as during summertimes with a lot of available light (instead of available darkness) the 50/3.5 macro lens. If a telelens is a must to take with me, id take my 100mm (equivalent to your 90mm then)
mdarnton
Well-known
28 + 50 is all I ever carry anywhere, so 24 + 50 + 90 would be OK, but I'd leave the 90 at home. 
My third lens of choice is 90, but not when I have to carry it everywhere. I like the focal length, and have had a bunch, but rarely seem to actually use it.
My third lens of choice is 90, but not when I have to carry it everywhere. I like the focal length, and have had a bunch, but rarely seem to actually use it.
JohnTF
Veteran
I carry the 50, but I use the wide and the long more, plus I like the 12mm for those scenes that ask for it.
As a travel kit in general (i.e. for a month or more trip), I can carry more but not with me on a particular day.
It also depends on how I am traveling and how my leg is acting.
Regards, John
As a travel kit in general (i.e. for a month or more trip), I can carry more but not with me on a particular day.
It also depends on how I am traveling and how my leg is acting.
Regards, John
raid
Dad Photographer
I am more used to a 24mm lens than a 21mm lens, even though I have both. The 90mm is great for portriats. A 75mm lens is slightly lomget lens than a 50mm lens.
myM8yogi
Well-known
Ideally, I would like: 21/2.8, 40/2, 90 macro.
Currently, a "full" travel set for me would be: 21/2.8, 35/1.2, 50/1.5, 135/3.5.
and a lightweight option would be 21, 40, 75.
Currently, a "full" travel set for me would be: 21/2.8, 35/1.2, 50/1.5, 135/3.5.
and a lightweight option would be 21, 40, 75.