If you could only have 2 lenses...

swintonphoto

Just to make interesting discussion...
If money were no issue, and you could only choose two lenses to use for the rest of your life, what would they be (All systems please chime in!)?

Mine would be:
Zuiko 14-35 f2
Zuiko 35-100 f2
Man how awesome would it be to have those! Anyone want to give me $4000 so I can buy them?

ziggy53

swintonphoto wrote:

Just to make interesting discussion...
If money were no issue, and you could only choose two lenses to use for the rest of your life, what would they be?

Mine would be:
Zuiko 14-35 f2
Zuiko 35-100 f2
Man how awesome would it be to have those! Anyone want to give me $4000 so I can buy them?

Those are amazing lenses and alone are a compelling reason to choose an Olympus system.

Unfortunately, money "is" an object and a limited resource (for me at least) so "'tis just a dream and nothing more". :cry

Mav

Please excuse the n00b questions - but wouldn't you want/need more zoom?

swintonphoto

Mav wrote:

Please excuse the n00b questions - but wouldn't you want/need more zoom?

Well, more zoom would definitely be good. However, one benefit of the Olympus system is the 2x crop factor so those lenses together are the 35mm equivalent of 28-200mm.

Mav

swintonphoto wrote:

Well, more zoom would definitely be good. However, one benefit of the Olympus system is the 2x crop factor so those lenses together are the 35mm equivalent of 28-200mm.

Presumably that is the case for all digital SLRs, not just Olympus - correct?

marlof

I'd be happy with my 12-60 (24-120 equiv) and the 25 1.4 on the E-system. But I'd seriously miss my 50 macro and 50-200 (100-400 equiv) telezoom...

ziggy53

Mav wrote:

Presumably that is the case for all digital SLRs, not just Olympus - correct?

Not quite.

Nikon and Canon both have full-frame dSLRs now. Lenses used with these bodies perform with the same (or very similar) FOV as they would on a film 35mm camera body.

Nikon also has many crop 1.5x dSLRs while Canon has both crop 1.6x and 1.3x dSLRs. Sigma uses crop 1.7x imagers.

Then the Olympus, Panasonic and Leica "Four Thirds System" imagers use a different aspect ratio than the rest of the dSLR manufacturers.

Each of these can be compared to each other, but each has to also be considered a "system" of its own in order to really understand how it will work best for "your" situation.

Mav

ziggy53 wrote:

Not quite.

Nikon and Canon both have full-frame dSLRs now. Lenses used with these bodies perform with the same (or very similar) FOV as they would on a film 35mm camera body.

Nikon also has many crop 1.5x dSLRs while Canon has both crop 1.6x and 1.3x dSLRs. Sigma uses crop 1.7x imagers.

Then the Olympus, Panasonic and Leica "Four Thirds System" imagers use a different aspect ratio than the rest of the dSLR manufacturers.

Each of these can be compared to each other, but each has to also be considered a "system" of its own in order to really understand how it will work best for "your" situation.

Holy crap That's a whole other variable that I wasn't aware of that I now need to learn about! I told you I was a n00b

luckyrwe

18-200, 200-400. :d

puzzledpaul

100mm macro
mpe65

pp

Grainbelt

DA*16-50 2.8 L
DA 100 Macro

I shoot primarily landscapes and nature, so I doubt there is a better combination.

hiroProtagonist

17-35mm f2.8 Nikkor
70-200mm f2.8 Nikkor

Tango

swintonphoto wrote:

Just to make interesting discussion...
If money were no issue, and you could only choose two lenses to use for the rest of your life, what would they be (All systems please chime in!)?

Mine would be:
Zuiko 14-35 f2
Zuiko 35-100 f2
Man how awesome would it be to have those! Anyone want to give me $4000 so I can buy them?

they havent made the two lenses i would choose yet....

but, the "Hubble" would suit me ok...

pyry

I've actually pretty much been there. I shot with a 17-55/2.8 IS and the 100-400 L IS for a while.

The mentioned pair has since been joined by an ultrawide and two bright primes - but I still have those two and those are probably the two I'd keep if I couldn't trade a leg for the rest of my current glassware.

Scott_Quier

This is a very hard question to answer as each kit you would put together would be focused on a particular task. My current kit is designed to provide me the tools I need for portrait/event/wedding photography. Hence, I don't have the EF 100-400 (but this might be pretty cool at an outdoor wedding:D).

Manfr3d

After carrying 12kg of equipment cross country, holding 3kg of camera&lens
for hours, getting stared at and taked to by strangers because of big-o-
white-lens syndrome, spending thousands of euros to do all this, I have come
to the conclusion that all I need to enjoy this hobby is a fullframe camera
with a big bright viewfinder. And the two lenses I would choose are:

Canon 24mm/2.8 (300g) and
Canon 50mm/2.5 (260g)

ziggy53

From my own set, if I had to choose just 2 lenses:

Canon EF-S 17-55mm, f/2.8 IS USM
Canon EF 70-200mm, f/2.8L USM

Plus I would add:

Canon EF 1.4x II teleconverter
Canon 500D Close Focus diopter (in 77mm)
Tripod and Panoramic head
2-3 flashes plus a bracket or 2 and off-camera cords and RF slaves
Several flash modifiers

That would give tremendous flexibility and there is very little that could not be done (assuming a competent camera body of course.)

Cato

Ugh, what a difficult question!

For me, as a Pentax user, it kind of boils down to "range or quality"?

So, since my photography skills kinda stink, as do my PP skills, and I shoot solely for my own amusement, I'll go for range.

Pentax DA*16-50mm F2.8
Pentax DA 55-300mm F4-5.8

Can I add a Raynox macro adapter?

Awais Yaqub

With Full frame
24-70 2.8
70-200 2.8 IS

With Crop
17-55 2.8
70-200 2.8 IS

PixNW

Right now I usually always have my 24-70 2.8L and 70-200 2.8L IS with me. The 24-70 limits me on the wide end, if I had to choose I may opt for a 17-40 4L instead of the 24-70 if I could only have two. I'd hate to give up the 2.8 for the 4 though. The truth is that most of us would never be satisfied forever with just two lenses. What if you like shooting sports and also landscapes and birds/wildlife, and maybe the occasional portrait?

Benjer

With my D300: (the only 2 lenses I own)

* Nikkor 17-35mm
I love this lens! I used it almost exclusively on a recent trip through Colorado and Utah. Super sharp, excellent color and great in low light situations.

* Nikkor 24-70mm
This lens has been great for all kinds of portraits and "normal" range shots. I even got some decent macro-like shots with its relatively close focusing distance. Again, SUPER sharp and bright lens, best portrait lens I've used. Great bokeh, too.

My next two lenses: Nikkor VR 70-200mm (2.8) and 105mm VR macro. I used to have the 18-200mm DX zoom (bought with the D300 body) which was extremely versatile (changing lenses can be a drag, and I'm really missing the longer tele ranges right now!) but a bit disappointing in performance (lacking sharpness and detail). Of course, since all my lenses are now full frame, I find myself lusting after that D700...

Internaut

My choice of lenses would be:

1. Olympus 7-14 F4
2. Olympus 14-35 F2.

I rarely need to shoot any longer but there is always the 40-150 which cames with the camera just in case.

Miguel Delinquento

Fun question, I'll steal if for an upcoming party of photographers I'll be hosting.
I would choose:
Pentax DA 12-24--I like very wide to capture the ever-changing skies
Mamiya/Sekor 60mm M42 Macro f. 2.8--There are always photo-worthy objects to shoot with a macro lens. This is my favorite of three macro lenses as its rendition is unique. As a preset, the handling action is very cinematic and fun.

M

Photoskipper

This is my question also.

I am planning a trip to Eygpt in late December. I want to travel light and just bring 2 lens (one mounted and the other standby).

Currently, my preference is the 24-105 F4 IS and 70-200 F2.8 IS.

The first one is a very useful wide range walk around lens for almost everything. Later on is great for portrait and some special landscape but a bit heavy.

I may bring along the 17-40 and the 2X TC "just in case"

Photoskipper

This is my question also.

I am planning a trip to Eygpt in late December. I want to travel light and just bring 2 lens (one mounted and the other standby).

Currently, my preference is the 24-105 F4 IS and 70-200 F2.8 IS.

The first one is a very useful wide range walk around lens for almost everything. Later on is great for portrait and some special landscape but a bit heavy.

I may bring along the 17-40 and the 2X TC "just in case"

davev

On a Canon crop camera, a Tokina 12-24 and a Canon 28-300is.
On a full framer, a Canon 17-40 and a Canon 28-300is.

mountainhouse

For travel (assuming FF), I'd prefer the 24-105mm and 70-200mm L f/4. Those would be the 2. I'd take the 17-40mm also.

Art Scott

I have sorta been a 2 lens advocate for 25+ yrs I guess (and 2 body also)....so I have been using lenses in the 24-70mm f2.8 and 70-210mmf2.8 for quite some time....have I wished for something different at times ya bet if I could get a 10-70mm f2.8 and a 70-500mm f2.8 (these have to be tack sharp across the board) that would do it for me...but coming back to reality.....next setup will be 17-70 and again the 70-200 both f2.8......but I can't seem to get close enuff to the birds for great pics....so I am gonna have to a third lens in the upto 500mm range..... but the 17-70 abs 70-200 will always be staples in my stables so to speak.

Cygnus Studios

When going out for a "fun" day I pack the Nikkor 17mm-35mm and the Sigma "Bigma" 50mm-500mm
Between the two they cover alot of ground...

Roaddog 52

A great question. For me, using a full frame Canon, it would be the 24-70mm f/2.8 and the 300mm f/2.8

On a recent trip to Montana and Yellowstone I practiced this very thing, when away from the van hiking in the hills I carried these two lenses. I zoomed by using my feet, and I accomplished ultra wide shots by shooting a series of images and stiching them together in CS3.

There are lighter lens and setups available but this combo seemed to work well for me.

BenA2

10-22 & 24-105
When I need to travel light with my Canon XTi, I go with:

EF-S 10-22
EF 24-105 f/4L IS

I actually find this particular combination exceptional for travel photography. It gives me excellent coverage and descent low-light capability in most situations. It's very rare that I ever need anything longer than 105 on a crop body.

I love my primes for low light and portraits, but I can easily get by without them when space is limited.