I feel like I'm missing something

[jcdeboever]

I think Derrel gives you some good advise. He and Gary challenged me to shoot street with my 55-200 extended all the way out! Talk about uncomfortable at first! But as I used it, a light came on.... I was able to judge what shots I could take at that focal length. The last time I went out street shooting, I missed several opportunities for interesting images because I didn't bring it along. As @Gary A. has said many times to me, you don't use it because you don't use it... Think about that for a minute.... So true.

 

[nerwin]

That would be a fun challenge I guess.

 

[nerwin]

Hey @Derrel, I hope you don't mind asking, but what exactly do you mean by the 50mm being pedestrian?

 

[Derrel]

I mean pedestrian in the sense that it is neutral in its rendering;neither wide-angle nor telephoto; neither increasing apparent distances, nor altering apparent size relationships between near and far; I mean "boring" in its pictorial rendering nature. Mount a 20mm or a 300mm lens and every image has "character", or a "look", which is the opposite of pedestrian. Today I have a 70-300, 85 1.8 G, 24/2.8,90 macro, 60 macro,28-80,and D610, and the 180/2.8ED. I picked every lens for its character and usefulness. Note: none of my regular 50mm lenses are With me--but i am carrying the Lensbaby 3G 50mm!! The 85 and 90 macro fulfill different roles. The 180 is much different than the slow 70-300 at 180mm.

 

[nerwin]

But everyone says you "must" have a 50mm with you haha. I tend to agree that it's super common and when you are trying to be unique, I guess the 50mm isn't probably the best lens for the job in that sense.

 

[Derrel]

Instead of a 50, a small, light 35-70 zoom has been my go-to type lens for a long time. Nikkor 35-70 f/3.3~4.5, Af screwdriven, same size as many 50mm primes.

 

[nerwin]

I dunno. Maybe a 35/85 prime combo would be better for me than just a 50.

I'm still on the fence with a macro, I just don't know how much I'd use it because I don't have a huge interest in true macro photography.

 

[Peeb]

I mean pedestrian in the sense that it is neutral in its rendering;neither wide-angle nor telephoto; neither increasing apparent distances, nor altering apparent size relationships between near and far; I mean "boring" in its pictorial rendering nature. Mount a 20mm or a 300mm lens and every image has "character", or a "look", which is the opposite of pedestrian. Today I have a 70-300, 85 1.8 G, 24/2.8,90 macro, 60 macro,28-80,and D610, and the 180/2.8ED. I picked every lens for its character and usefulness. Note: none of my regular 50mm lenses are With me--but i am carrying the Lensbaby 3G 50mm!! The 85 and 90 macro fulfill different roles. The 180 is much different than the slow 70-300 at 180mm.

I totally agree with ALL of this.

Having said that- it's still a very good thing every one in awhile to mount that 50mm prime, promise to leave it on, and force yourself to make interesting images without the 'character' of wide or long. I have a tendency to ignore my 50mm- which is a mistake.

 

[nerwin]

I'm so confused! Hahaha. Maybe it's this insanely humid weather that's driving me nuts! Oh my goodness the air quality here so bad.

 

[Peeb]

It's simple- you want what we all want: a small lightweight f/1.2 8-2000mm lens that is optically equal to prime lenses for under $200.00.

Until that comes along, we are all scratching our heads about the best compromises to make!

 

[nerwin]

It's simple- you want what we all want: a small lightweight f/1.2 8-2000mm lens that is optically equal to prime lenses for under $200.00.

Until that comes along, we are all scratching our heads about the best compromises to make!

Oh even then, I'd find something I didn't like haha.

I guess I just don't know exactly what I want. I'm not going to lie though, that 85 1.8 would allow me to get some bokehlicious shots haha. But is it worth having when I already have the 70-200 f/4? Granted its an f/4 and not 2.8 or even 1.8 so those extra stops could be handy. But then again, getting a macro could be handy too but I just don't see myself using it much

Even though the 85 1.8 doesn't focus as close as the 50 1.8, it does have the focal length as an advantage so correct me if I'm wrong, but the 85 1.8 has slightly more magnification than the 50mm? I have a funny feeling I'm wrong but when looking through photo galleries on Flickr from the 85, it seems to be used quite a bit more for flower and other nature type imagery than the 50.

 

[Braineack]

But think @Braineack said he has extension tubes with an 85mm and quite like it. Maybe it was someone else who said it, I don't remember haha.

yes, it was me. works well enough, i rarely need macro -- but i use it when i need a detail shot.