Favorite lenses?

[Mike S]

I hope some of you will share your thoughts on the lenses you use, how you like them, and why.

I have all Nikon 53mm gear, and, while I use the medium and longer lenses a lot, my best lens is a manual focus 24mm f2.0 Nikkor. Hard to take a bad phot with this lens, and it is both sharp and flexible. It allows me to emphasize the foreground subject, and include a sense of the background scene. With the ability to stop down to f22 it can capture excellent detail from close-up to infinity.

 

[cruiser guy]

I had all Nikon 35mm stuff but I made the switch from film to digital last year and I haven't developed any favorites yet.

My favorite 35mm lens was the 35mm 1.4. Fast, sharp and it was good for many shots. All the manual focus lenses went when I made the switch and it ended up being basically cost neutral for me. I went from 9 to just 3 lenses and from 4-5 bodies to just one (though I'd like to have one backup).

I'm thinking my new favorite will likely be the Nikkor 12-24mm zoom. It's got great wide angle coverage and with digital the speed isn't as critical as it was when I was shooting Kodachrome 25. It's a digital only lens though so it won't do you any good with film unless you like round pictures.

 

[cruiser guy]

I've heard good thing about both the 35 f/1.4 and 24 f/2.0, but have never been able to afford either.

My 35mm 1.4 was purchased on an Ebay "Buy it Now" for $100 several years ago so it was hard to complain about the price!! I couldn't afford it normally either.

 

[Mike S]

I've heard good thing about both the 35 f/1.4 and 24 f/2.0, but have never been able to afford either...

Dave - the 24/f2 lens is very pricey - still in production on special order, and over $1100!!. I bought mine used, in good condition, at Keeble and Schucat in Palo Alto, but it was still expensive over $500 I think. I do love it, though.

 

[bigreen505]

I'm currently shooting Leica, but I do miss some of the IS Canon super teles. I switched to Leica for many reasons, but bottom line is all the lenses have a very 3D rendering of the world, colors have a lot of depth to them and there is a lot of micro-contrast to the images without them being clinically sharp. These are the most used and pretty much always in the bag:

Leica 15 f3.5
Decent lens, though the f2.8 version is much better. The f3.5 is an older Zeiss lens and works well for landscape use. The f2.8 lens is a more modern Schneider lens and much more expensive. 15 mm is a nice perspective on film, but with the DMR's 1.37 crop factor it is a 21 which is not wide enough for me.

Leica 90 f2 (Summicron, non-APO)
Similar in some ways to the 80 Summilux (f1.4) this lens, like many Leicas, has a bit of a split personality that it is very soft wide open and sharpens up very quickly when stopped down a bit, making it a nice portrait lens. I just like the look of it. I love the way it renders the world at about f2.8-f4 -- smooth but clear.

Leica 180 f2.8
I adore the look of this lens on film, soft with very deep colors. Somehow it doesn't translate that well to digital. Still, it is small, light and fairly inexpensive. Ideally I would love to upgrade to a 180 f2 APO and 180 f3.4, but like the 90 cron above, the 180 does a reasonably job as an all around lens.

Leica 35-70 f4
I add this lens because, even though I have absolutely no attachment to it, there is really nothing to fault. Nothing spectacular, it just gets the job done. Interestingly it is a pretty mediocre lens on film but excellent on digital. I can't really explain it, but my hunch is Leica spent a lot time mapping the lens characteristics to the ROM chip and the DMR puts that information to use well. As a test, a colleague taped over the contacts and fired of a few frames on his DMR and just like film, the lens was nothing special.

Meyer 300/4
This is a 1950's or 1960's Russian medium format lens in a Pentacon mount. The results are, uh, interesting, but kind of fun. I have not completely figured out what to do with the lens since it isn't that sharp and doesn't really handle color that well, but I carry it when weight is not an issue.

Since I am no longer shooting that much, there is some chance that I may sell it all for a small Leica M system and a modern DSLR of some type.

 

[tdesanto]

70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor
ultra fast, durable, very sharp, bokeh is outstanding...a solid lens. After getting this one, I don't use my 300mm f/4 as much anymore. The VR has its advantages too, when used properly.

17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
Fast, durable, a good all-around lens. Build quality is right up there with their other pro lenses. I love the bright viewfinder you get from a constant aperture zoom.

20mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor
When using this one on my F5 for landscape shots...wow is all I have to say. The 12-24 DX Nikkor still doesn't compare in terms of flare control or sharpness. This is the landscape setup I enjoyed the most, I just don't miss processing my own film anymore.

 

[cruiser guy]

Very nice since that's a $500~$700 lens! Heck, I would be happy to get a nice version of a 35 f/2.0 for $100.

I know!! When it came up I was hoping that I pushed the keys fast enough to be the first one! It was the latest AI-s version as well so it was nearly new.

 

[Scott Brady]

24-105 F4 L Canon. Put it on my camera one year ago, and it has never come off.

I am considering a 16-35L to compliment.

 

[esh]

My Canon 70-200 f/4L is the sweetest I have. It gives shots this buttery richness that just doesn't exist with the others. Kind of wish I could afford the f/2.8 varieties for speed but this has always been a home run for me, when I could use it.

I also have a thrifty 50 (50mm f/1.8), 17-40 f/4L and a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. But the long lens wins, especially shooting kids. I think I'd like to try the 85 f/1.2L prime.. I've seen amazing shots come from them, but really hard to justify the cost for what I like to shoot.

 

[jeffryscott]

the Leica 180 3.4 APO lens was the sharpest lens I've ever used, owned or seen ... man it was a beauty. I am however partial to wide angles and equally loved my 21 2.8 Zeiss for my Contax G2, and the Leica 21 2.8 for my M cameras.

For a camera/lens combo to just have available though for kicking around, the aforementioned G2 with the 35 2, or an M6 with the legendary 35 2 are hard to beat.

Currenty using Canon glass, which is great, but how I miss the rangefinders. Wish I could afford the Leica M8 - that would be the ideal digital camera for me.

 

[cruiser guy]

Heck, the XA people think is a throw away camera it's so small, but other than a bit of vignetting it's pretty sharp and renders pleasing pictures.

Yes, the XA is a sweet camera. Do you have the original XA or the simpler derivatives?

The XA is the only film camera I still own! For a "point and shoot" type camera it's actually quite versatile.

 

[go4aryd]

Favorite lens depends on the subject - I love my 15mm fisheye w/my 20D digital - you get a gentle distortion that often flows with the surroundings. My workhorse lens is my 80-200 f2.8 lens. I won't leave home without it nor the 1.5x converter. Of course, I won't leave home without my trusty 15-35 wide angle either. (I think I need a trailer just for the photo gear!!!)

 

[XJxplorer]

I have a question that is kind of off topic.....

I am trying to figure out which lens to buy my fiance for her birthday. She has a cannon digital rebel XT. She is using the lens that came with it but wants to upgrade.

What would be a great all around lens for that camera? I have a limit of about $700...

Didn't mean to hi jack the thread! Thanks

Mike

 

[jeffryscott]

the Canon 17-40 4 L is an exceptional lens. It is within your price also, as is the 70-200 4 L. I had these, now have the 2.8 versions and prefer the 4's.

Either would be fantastic, it just depends on whether she wants wide to normal, or telephoto.

Good luck and how nice of you.

 

[Digital Nomad]

I use the following lenses on a full-frame Canon 5D:
17-40mm L -is on my camera most often
15mm Fisheye -just got it and am using it frequently
24-105mm L IS -always on my waist, but on my camera a lot less often than the ones above
100-400mm L IS -Only use when shooting wildlife
100mm Macro -I almost never use and should have never purchased