One lens forever...

[Deleted Member 5045]

What would you choose if you could have only one lens for your camera?

Me? On a high resolution body I would take a 16-35mm f2.8 because I can crop. On a normal resolution body I'd deal with the loss on the wide angle (as painful as it would be) and take a 24-70mm f2.8. I think the 20-70mm f4 would also be tempting for me in this scenario, but as a one lens solution I'd probably want the option to open that aperture a little more when needed.

 

[Cαscαdian]

Never thought I'd choose a superzoom as my answer, but the Tam 28-200 sounds good enough to take that spot. But then my forever camera would need 60+ Mpix for tighter crops. Is that cheating?

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

My one lens would be the 100400 GM that I own now. It is pretty much my one lens now although I very occasionally use my 24-70 Zeiss.

How often do you take the standard zoom out Chaitali? Or is it really only something you use when you're on holidays?

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Hah, I don't disagree; I also did the hypothetical lens response. I'm an enthusiast with G.A.S. after all, and one lens will never be enough.

That said, I did identify the one lens that I purchased which is as close to ideal for me as possible (Tamron 17-70mm f2.8). Its technically the lens that stays on my camera 95% of the time.

That Tamron 17-70mm was the tipping point for me to get full frame. I thought that if I am now using lenses which are full size then I might as well just have the bigger body too.

I do understand your love for it though mate, it's a fantastic performer. ️

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

For me it would be the 35mm GM if I had to choose from the lenses I currently own. It works well indoors taking pictures of my 10 month old son and it is very versatile outdoors as well. Just came back from a short trip to NYC and took only that lens.

If I were to choose any lens, I would choose between the 35GM and the 24-70GMII...16-55G

Do you own that 16-55mm G mate?

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Never thought I'd choose a superzoom as my answer, but the Tam 28-200 sounds good enough to take that spot. But then my forever camera would need 60+ Mpix for tighter crops. Is that cheating?

That's a tough lens to top. My only argument against it is wanting a touch more width for my liking, but I think anyone would definitely be happy with it if that's the only thing they could have. Mine won't be going anywhere for a long time that's for sure!

60+ is definitely a nice luxury. Much like I don't think taking steroids is cheating. Providing that all your competition also has access to them, it's fair game I think...

 

[alexpler]

I'm hoping that the 20-70 f4 will be that one lens when I buy it. Now I'm saving for it. I don't like changing lenses or carrying too much stuff around so I have to choose wisely as I don't want ending with a lots of lenses scattered around the house.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I'm hoping that the 20-70 f4 will be that one lens when I buy it. Now I'm saving for it. I don't like changing lenses or carrying too much stuff around so I have to choose wisely as I don't want ending with a lots of lenses scattered around the house.

Can't wait to see the results you get when you get that one mate! Personally I think either a 16-35mm or this particular lens would be fantastic for you! I'd really like to see a super wide angle in your hands, and also what you will come up with when you get the background compression from telephoto!

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

85/1.8

or the 55/1.8; the 28/2?

or maybe the 100-400mm

ah, too hard dammit, but 85mm - it even looks good on the camera

Although I never used it, I used to put my Sigma 85mm Art on the camera just to look at it! Such a sexy lens!

 

[alexpler]

Can't wait to see the results you get when you get that one mate! Personally I think either a 16-35mm or this particular lens would be fantastic for you! I'd really like to see a super wide angle in your hands, and also what you will come up with when you get the background compression from telephoto!

I can't wait to use some telephoto! Nothing too exaggerated as I like my photos to look natural-ish but certainly I want to experiment with having more reach and background compression. Maybe in September or October...

I checked the 16-35 but I think I prefer having more reach than width...

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I can't wait to use some telephoto! Nothing too exaggerated as I like my photos to look natural-ish but certainly I want to experiment with having more reach and background compression. Maybe in September or October...

I checked the 16-35 but I think I prefer having more reach than width...

This will give you an indication of what telephoto does. I took this a long time ago. The Opera house is at least 500m over water past the end of this 100m platform that the camera is on the deck on here. Pretty remarkable as it absolutely does not look like this in real life! My opera house shot last week will show you how this distance actually looks without background compression.

Excited to see the results you get Alex! Sweet, I guess I'll just have to wait a month or two.

View attachment 43999

 

[iamdlewis]

Ok, I'm an idiot. I misread your post.

As much as I love long lenses, that seems kind of restrictive for 14 months. Did you find any unique or inventive ways to use the lens for some variety?

There was a lot of learning and lots of subjects to mark off the list. A good number of failed pano stitching and stuff that looking back is just doesn't work.

How long had you been shooting for when you made the upgrade?

It was around 14 months before it was obvious the camera was what was holding me back and another 4 months before actually getting the A9. It was a noticeable jump going from the A6000 to the A9.

 

[alexpler]

This will give you an indication of what telephoto does. I took this a long time ago. The Opera house is at least 500m over water past the end of this 100m platform that the camera is on the deck on here. Pretty remarkable as it absolutely does not look like this in real life! My opera house shot last week will show you how this distance actually looks without background compression.

Excited to see the results you get Alex! Sweet, I guess I'll just have to wait a month or two.

View attachment 43999

Awesome picture and great use of perspective.

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

That Tamron 17-70mm was the tipping point for me to get full frame. I thought that if I am now using lenses which are full size then I might as well just have the bigger body too.

I do understand your love for it though mate, it's a fantastic performer. ️

That is a VERY fair point.

 

[Matthias]

Do you own that 16-55mm G mate?

No... That's why I said if I were to choose any lens. From the lenses I currently own I would choose the 35GM

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

No... That's why I said if I were to choose any lens. From the lenses I currently own I would choose the 35GM

I got confused with the end of that post. As I said to Chrisso, the Tamron 17-70mm was the tipping point for me changing to full frame. I ordered the Sony 16-55mm G on an evening because I wasn't happy with the size. The next morning I cancelled the order and bought an A7III with the Tamron 17-28mm and 28-75mm. I almost owned that Sony APSC zoom...