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.

 

[spudhead]

Wow Clint it a difficult question mate my answer is very impractical in photography terms but it would be Sony 300 2.8 prime it is really due to the fact its my all time fav mate

 

[Landshark99]

24-70 F2.8 for a zoom but if it had to be single focal length 24 F1.4

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I guess it sort of comes down to what you would shoot if you had to keep it pretty genre specific. ️

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

What Clint said, so for me, the 200 600 would be the one.

 

[spudhead]

What Clint said, so for me, the 200 600 would be the one.

Kev I left that answer for you mate I too love the 200-600 but it is Clint world and we have one choice only

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Kev I left that answer for you mate I too love the 200-600 but it is Clint world and we have one choice only

You're too good to me. I wouldn't give me that much respect...

 

[spudhead]

You're too good to me. I wouldn't give me that much respect...

Clints way or the highway mate

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

You guys know me well...

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

24-70 F2.8 for a zoom but if it had to be single focal length 24 F1.4

Do you consider yourself to be a certain type of photographer Bob?

 

[iamdlewis]

100-400GM
Good for wildlife and macro and nice for other stuff.

 

[spudhead]

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.

which 24-70 f4 or 2.8 both are nice

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

My a6400 came with the 18-135 kit lens. This works out to be 27mm - 203mm full-frame equivalent. This is probably nearest to my ideal focal range for a one lens to rule them all. Where the lens falls down is the variable aperture starting at 3.5 and ending at 5.6; it would be an amazing lens if it was f2.8 the whole way through (though I admit it would get MUCH heavier and bulkier). So my mythical "one-lens-forever" would be a 16-135mm f2.8. Closest I could get in reality is the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 and I love it.

 

[Matthias]

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

 

[MeowZzz]

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

 

[spudhead]

Clint new title required for Tim @Brownie to reply! one ring to rule them all

 

[spudhead]

This is a worthless thread. Pure fiction for every single person responding. One lens, indeed.

That is why I have stopped counting the ones I own its a crazy number

 

[FowlersFreeTime]

Pure fiction for every single person responding. One lens, indeed.

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.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

Thanks to everyone. I wanted to prove my point to a member who questioned 'why would someone need more than one lens'. Who has also added here that he'd need more than one lens...

Congratulations to those one lens photographers here too, that's true love for sure.

 

[iamdlewis]

This is a worthless thread. Pure fiction for every single person responding. One lens, indeed.

I only had the 100-400GM for the first 14 months I owned my first FF Sony.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

I only had the 100-400GM for the first 14 months I owned my first FF Sony.

Wow! How often were you contemplating other lenses? Did you have another system as well though?

 

[spudhead]

Context? Did you have more lenses?

I do not qualify to reply more than one lens and more than one system

 

[Landshark99]

Do you consider yourself to be a certain type of photographer Bob?

yes

 

[GT12]

50mm/1.8. Weighs less than 200g, compact, versatile, good in low light. Not good for bird spotters admittedly. In the post apocalyptic world of only one lens, may need to sell the others to pay for food.

 

[iamdlewis]

Wow! How often were you contemplating other lenses? Did you have another system as well though?

Context? Did you sell it and have no lenses? Did you sell it because you had the FR covered?

When it was time to move to FF from the A6000 I was going to go for the A7iii and 100-400GM and was unsure of a wide-angle lens but kind of blew my budget on a refurbished A9 and 100-400GM. After there was budget for a new lens it took me like a month or so to settle on the 24-105G but for some reason it took another 2 months to show up.
The wide-angle stuff was covered by the phone.

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

When it was time to move to FF from the A6000 I was going to go for the A7iii and 100-400GM and was unsure of a wide-angle lens but kind of blew my budget on a refurbished A9 and 100-400GM. After there was budget for a new lens it took me like a month or so to settle on the 24-105G but for some reason it took another 2 months to show up.
The wide-angle stuff was covered by the phone.

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

 

[Deleted Member 5045]

50mm/1.8. Weighs less than 200g, compact, versatile, good in low light. Not good for bird spotters admittedly. In the post apocalyptic world of only one lens, may need to sell the others to pay for food.

Must be similar size to my 40mm f2.5 G. Makes for a really small form factor on camera.

Governments are racing in with their nitrogen laws amongst all the other make believe climate change legislation. Netherlands will basically be crippled in the next two years, the world's second largest food exporter. The real crisis, the completely fabricated ones are coming. Unlike a pretend virus which was simply renaming existing illnesses and misusing a PCR, a food crisis will actually be wiping people out left right and centre.

Once the digital ID and CBDC are in soon, trading possessions and bartering will be paramount for anyone who doesn't wish to be included in the authoritarian system as any other type of legal currency will be outlawed.

 

[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. ️