What lenses do YOU use.

the F value is the minimum aperture you can set when using the lens, i would also reccommend a long telephoto like 80-200mm or 90-300mm
 
I'm not sure of the results of long zooms by others here, but as for my own experience as well as one other person I know; the quality isn't that great. Zooms are getting pretty close to primes in quality with laser ground glass and all, but I have not had much luck with any brand inparticular that is more than 200mm of range coverage. I have a 28-300mm that is very good from 28-200mm. Between 200-300mm the quality goes down hill fast. There is too much abberation around the edges and contrast from the center. The lens is supposed to be all that and a bag of chips with the glass and coatings as it is advertised, but it's not. Any others have similar experince?
 
duncanp said:
the F value is the minimum aperture you can set when using the lens, i would also reccommend a long telephoto like 80-200mm or 90-300mm
Be careful about your vocabulary here... the way you phrase it is a tad confusing and perhaps incorrect. The f/stop number that we talk about when we discuss our lenses refers to the maximum aperture width or minimum f-stop number that the lens is capable of opening up to. So, a smaller number means a wider maximum opening, meaning that the lens is capable of letting more light through. For example, my 50mm f/1.8 is able to let more light thgough to the film than my 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0 (the range of f/stops on the second lens refers to the maximum apertures at different focal lengths, since it is a zoom lens). I hope this clears things up.
 
With my DSLR - I carry a Sigma 17-35 2.8, Canon 24-70 2.8 L and a 70-200 2.8L IS. Oh and a Canon A2 film body. Digital is nice but film is awesome! :lovey:
 
well now after tragedy number 2 im now using an olympus e-500 and the 2 lense kit(40-150, and 14-45) and they work great. the only thing i find that the lense lacks in is the maximum aperture.

id recommend a good wide angle, a 50, and a decent tele. dont forget whatever magnification that your camera will provide, (like, my 40-150 produces images like an 80-300)
 
I only have the three (four counting the 50mm twice) but i've not needed any others so far :, )

Olympus 50mm F1.8
Miranda 24mm F2.8
Sirius 80-200mm zoom F3.9

And tri-pods are very handy indeed :thumbup:
 
I agree yay for film. But digital is just so perfect.

I use canon (sorry folks) and I mainly use a 35 - 135mm 4.5-5.6, and when I very occaisionally need wide angle I use the horrible kit lens (18-55 for the 350D )
Or if I'm going to be using my flash, I use my 50mm f/1.8. why? because my flash is a nice swish flash but on my 350D it only works in manual mode and it's too hard to keep changing (and remembering to change) the flash strength when I zoom etc. So I just use the 50mm so I can't fark it up.

If I could, I'd buy a really nice wide angle to something like 100ish mm. And a big zoom from about 80 to 200..... if that exists. I'm just pulling numbers out of my arse as to what I want.
 
Vivitar 300mm f/5.6
Soligor 135mm f/3.5 (i think)
Minolta 58mm f/1.4
Osawa 28mm f/2.8
Macro extension tubes

i'm a light photographer, don't carry around much, usually use the wide angle or the 58

manual camera so obviously all manual focus, wouldn't have it any other way
 
Canon EOS 350D

EF-S 18-55mm
EF 50mm F1.8

Currently saving for:

Sigma EF 10-20mm Wide Angle
Sigma EF 70-200mm F2.8 Telephoto

This is after i've bought a Speedlite. :)
 
Got a whole lot of equipment to my disposal... In the end, my "general" all around use arsenal consists of the following:

24/1.4
50/1.8
85/1.8
135/2
Tamron 35-105mm f2.8 Aspherical

Just curious. My Tamron has served me well for the past 5-6 years now. Anyone out there have this lens still in service?
 
I have a tamron 35-70mm 2.8 macro that's from somewhere in the early 80's I keep in my bag. Great lens.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top