Which lens to get next?!?

[Mackinaw]

........so now target 1 - 50/1.4 , 2 - 100/3.5 , any other lens to jump onto the list?

35mm, 50mm and 100mm lenses are a good start. The 35mm Nikkor is a good lens, but F3.5 is pretty slow. You may want to (eventually) buy something faster like a Canon 35/2.0 or Nikkor 35/1.8. And if you really enjoy wide-angle lenses, maybe try for the Canon 25/3.5.

Jim B.

 

[Godfrey]

We're on the opposite side of the equipment acquisition spectrum. But even if you are into collecting, if you ask a question like that so broadly, it means you haven't really studied what is out there to acquire next IMO.

Figure where next you want to take your collection.. Research what's interesting. Etc. 🙂

G

 

[goamules]

I tested the Canon 1.2, 1.5, and 1.8 50mm lenses here at three apertures.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/garrettsphotos/sets/72157628955481717/

 

[jarodfwh]

I tested the Canon 1.2, 1.5, and 1.8 50mm lenses here at three apertures.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/garrettsphotos/sets/72157628955481717/

hi do you had photo from 1.4 as well?
am impress by the 1.5 but not sure how it hold against 1.4.

 

[Richard G]

A 50 and a 35. One of these might do for life. As an owner of more lenses than I need, I can tell you that lately I am shooting mostly a 50 2.8. Close focus might be just as important as maximum aperture for getting nice out of focus effects, even at f2.8. I haven't had any f2 lens on the camera in months, and only used my C Sonnar 50 1.5 briefly the other day for the first time in ages. My first lens after the core 50 and 35 was the wonderful Elmarit M 90 2.8. Hard to take a bad photo with that. The next was a 25 I hardly use. The 21 has been used a lot for architecture. As others said, it depends what you like to shoot. Out of focus blur as an object of photography gets boring after a while. An image more or less sharp across the field and from foreground to horizon poses compositional challenges worth meeting.