Your most common focal length(s)?

Peeb

Semi-automatic Mediocrity Generator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2015
Messages
4,022
Reaction score
4,591
Location
Oklahoma
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Recently finished a trip. I had 3 lenses: 16mm, 24-85, and 70-300.

Took several hundred images, and I made a folder of my favorites- there were 36. Here is how the focal lengths broke down:


24mm - 12
85mm - 11
zoom (between 24 and 85) - 7
16mm - 6

In hindsight, if I owned and taken the following primes I would have the same shots, but arguably better IQ: 20, 50, 85.

I was quite surprised that I didn't have even one keepers with the 70-300 (though that is obviously subject dependent).

Was mildly surprised that 2/3 of my 'keepers' were at the extreme ends of the 24-85 zoom. (EDIT: broken down another way: 1/2 of the keepers were 24 or wider).

Do you find that there are focal lengths that you gravitate towards?
 
Last edited:
I think people have a tendency to go to the extremes of any zoom lens, often wishing they could go longer or wider. I took a look at a recent set taken with a 17-55, and while focal lengths really were all over the place, I found my tighter shots to almost always be at 55mm, the long end of that lens. I think an interesting question is how many shots would you have missed switching lenses if you had only brought primes.
 
Yes you would have gotten better IQ with the primes but only if you didn't miss the shot while you were changing lenses. I guess it depends on what you shoot and whether or not there is time to change a lens and the ability to carry multiple lenses with you.
 
It seems on zooms I'm mostly at one extreme or another in general shots.
Sports you're all over the place but in general I know
18-35, mostly 18mm
24-85, mostly 75-85, or 24mm
80-200, all over the place (main sports lens)
150-600, mostly 600mm
and when I use my 50mm, I'm always at 50mm :)

When I had my 24/2.8 lens I found that my 24-85 @24mm/2.8 was better than the prime.
 
It depends on what I am shooting. I have two main interests - mediaeval churches and landscapes. For the churches, it is almost entirely my EF-S 10-22 with occasional use of my Tamron 90mm macro lens for details. Space will not allow the user longer lenses, in the main. For landscapes, it is my kit lens: EF-S 18-135.

I have a 75-300 lens that I bought thinking it would be very useful but I doubt I have taken a dozen shots with it in 5+ years.
 
It depends on what I am into. For a year or so I was shooting bugs and small stuff so I used my 105 macro for most of my stuff. Now a days I'm doing more wide angle landscape stuff and I'm working from 24mm to 50mm.
 
I have a penchant for wide angle shooting like you do, OP. I like the getting up close to the subject and I like the perspective I get from shooting up close. I have some telephoto lenses but find I use them fairly seldom. I went to the zoo a couple of weeks ago and shot everything with a telephoto zoom and tripod. I ended up with zero keepers. I'll bet if I could have gotten up close to the animals with a wide angle, I would have managed quite a few keepers. You have probably guessed I'm not a wildlife photog.
 
Yes you would have gotten better IQ with the primes but only if you didn't miss the shot while you were changing lenses. I guess it depends on what you shoot and whether or not there is time to change a lens and the ability to carry multiple lenses with you.
Yep. Traveling solo I wouldn't mind sitting down and making a gear change, but when travelling with my bride of 30 years, I hate to make her wait while I get organized and changes lenses.

She hates that too. ;)
 
This is a metric I have zero interest in finding.

Suppose I take 35 shots with a 20mm to create a spherical panorama. Does that 'count' as 35 shots, or 1? Or I take 20 shots with a macro lens to create a focus stack? Or 10 frames to create an HDR? And if they 'count' as one, what happens when the final image is created without any EXIF data from the original images being transferred to it? Suppose the software I use to create the pano/focus stack/HDR does transfer EXIF to the finished image? How does the tally software deal with that? Does 35 shots plus the one final image count as 36?

What about bracketing? Bracketing for exposure? Focus? White Balance?

What about shots taken to test a lens? Firing off a shot just to check the histogram/focus/composition/etc.? Or a quick lo-res JPEG just to attach to an email and then delete? Or just a simple "Oops, I didn't mean to hit the shutter button."

Those image alone would totally skew any results I might generate. I'd much rather spend my time using a camera and looking at a scene or subject, then merely determine what lens would best suit my needs and use it to generate the results I want. After that, I don't care.

ETA: Not to mention I have 9 cameras that use film. I have dozens of lenses that work on them. Keeping track of those alone would be a statistical nightmare.
 
Last edited:
Hey,

with my OMD-EM1 I have two good zoom lenses and always ended up at the end of the focal length.

I don't like lens changing either (who likes it?!?) but with my R2 I am only using primes and so far I think I am a lot more into composing. If you have a 35mm attached, you will make the best out of your 35mm. Not very often I think: "Oh, would I have my 90mm on, would I have my 25 on". When I have the lens attached, I try to make the best out of it. Sure you miss a shot here and then in tele, but that's how it is.

And when I take my time to compose architecture or landscape, there I always have the time to change my lens and switch to the 25mm.

But when I go out, I decide before what I want to shoot and stick to that lens. And I have the feeling that somehow I learn to see that way. Because as I said, so far never had the feeling "oh, this one I missed because I didn't have this or that lens on".

But everybody is different.

I think I am using 40% my 25mm, 30% my 35mm, 15% my 55mm and 15% my 90mm Macro. But I dont care much about the numbers. I shoot what I want and at the moment I have what I want. (Only maybe a good Batis 18mm or best (praying) a Batis 15mm I miss)...
 
Last edited:
I do not keep track of this statistic currently, and have only checked on it a few times. I don't think it is very critical to me, since I have a lot of lenses and lengths, and besides, this is going to vary fdrom season to season, and type of shoot, and FX or DX camera in use. For example, in the summertime if I make trips to the beach, I will often use longer lenses than if say, I'm shooting a family reunion in a 30 x 35 clubhouse or reception room...that will all be handdled by shorter lengths. A 70-200 zoom with 130 different focal lengths: do we round the used lengths to the closest prime lens add mentally compensate with one, tow, or three steps closer or farther?

I think this is an issue where it would take at least a year, or maybe more, to get any valid info. Most recently I've shot DX, and the 20mm/2.8 AF-D, 50/1.8-G, 80-200 f/4 Ai-S, and 100-300 f/5.6 Ai-S, and 17-35 f/2.8~4 were the lenses used the most, plus a CoolPix S570, with 28-140mm 35mm equivalent zoom range. So, I dunno...17mm, 20mm, 50mm, 80mm,100mm,200mm,300mm...see, it really does not make much sense...focal lengths are all over the place.
 
This is a metric I have zero interest in finding.

Suppose I take 35 shots with a 20mm to create a spherical panorama. Does that 'count' as 35 shots, or 1? Or I take 20 shots with a macro lens to create a focus stack? Or 10 frames to create an HDR? And if they 'count' as one, what happens when the final image is created without any EXIF data from the original images being transferred to it? Suppose the software I use to create the pano/focus stack/HDR does transfer EXIF to the finished image? How does the tally software deal with that? Does 35 shots plus the one final image count as 36?

What about bracketing? Bracketing for exposure? Focus? White Balance?

What about shots taken to test a lens? Firing off a shot just to check the histogram/focus/composition/etc.? Or a quick lo-res JPEG just to attach to an email and then delete? Or just a simple "Oops, I didn't mean to hit the shutter button."

Those image alone would totally skew any results I might generate. I'd much rather spend my time using a camera and looking at a scene or subject, then merely determine what lens would best suit my needs and use it to generate the results I want. After that, I don't care.

ETA: Not to mention I have 9 cameras that use film. I have dozens of lenses that work on them. Keeping track of those alone would be a statistical nightmare.
I appreciate your detailed and thoughtful analysis, but I think you may have misunderstood the goal of the exercise.

The sample set I used was "keepers from one trip". Obviously, bracketed images would be discarded with only the "keeper" counted. Panoramic shots would count as one regardless of the number of component images that were sticks together.

This was not intended as a statistical exercise – it was merely intended to give me a glimpse into my focal length preferences on one trip. This triggered in my mind a curiosity as to whether or not the preferences I exhibited would seem consistent or inconsistent with everyone else's inclinations.

I share your disinterest in compiling long-term statistical data on these issues as I agree that it could well be incredibly inefficient – and not overly helpful.
 
The only good think I could think the statistics are good for is if you want to make the jump to Prime lenses. To see if you shooting habits are centered around the prime focal lengths.
 
The only good think I could think the statistics are good for is if you want to make the jump to Prime lenses. To see if you shooting habits are centered around the prime focal lengths.
If you had a little money socked away to purchase a new lens and you were torn between a wide angle and telephoto, for example – it could be helpful to know which focal length you tend to exploit more often.
 

Most reactions

Back
Top