p.1 #1 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
After years of buying, selling, testing, and second-guessing camera gear, I've come to a conclusion that surprises even me: if I could only own two lenses, they would be the Voigtlander 35mm APO-Lanthar f/2 and the Voigtlander 65mm APO-Lanthar f/2.
Not because they're the most versatile lenses ever made. Not because they're autofocus wonders. And certainly not because they're the cheapest option.
I'd choose them because together they cover almost everything I actually enjoy photographing.
The 35 APO has become my "walk-around" lens. It feels natural for environmental portraits, product photography, street work, and general photography. It gives me context without excessive distortion, and the rendering is simply beautiful. Sharpness is incredible, but what really stands out is how clean and honest the images look. There's a sense of clarity that doesn't feel clinical.
The 65 APO complements it perfectly. For product work, detail shots, portraits, and close-up photography, it's exceptional. The longer focal length adds authority to the image while maintaining the same APO-level correction and rendering style as the 35. It also focuses close enough that it can handle a surprising amount of macro-style work.
What I appreciate most is that these two lenses share the same philosophy. They don't fight each other. Files from both lenses have a similar look and character. Switching between them feels seamless.
I've owned zooms that cover this entire range, and they're certainly more practical. But photography isn't always about practicality. Sometimes it's about enjoying the process. The manual focus experience of these Voigtlanders slows me down just enough to make me more deliberate, and I think my photographs are better because of it.
Could I live without a wider lens? Probably.
Could I live without a longer lens? Most likely.
But if I were forced to build a kit with only two lenses for the rest of my photographic life, the Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO would be the pair I'd keep without hesitation.
I'm curious: if you were limited to only two lenses, what would they be?
p.1 #6 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
Nice post.
I recently sold 17 lenses and replaced them with one - the Tamron 35-150/2-2.8. After using it for two months, I can safely say that it and the Viltrox 14/4 would be the only two lenses I would need (wildlife excluded). The 14mm can safely be cropped to 28mm with 61mp. Perfect two lens combo.
p.1 #7 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
I depends for what purpose. There are plenty of good 2-lens combos.
For teles I like 100-400 (or 100-500) and 600/4. (Usually a 24-105 is also somewhere around.)
For wider I like 24-70 and 70-200.
I do not find most primes to be adequate for a 2-lens setup other than big teles like 400/2.8, 500/4, 600/4.
I do use primes for special purposes like tilt-shift, macro, fish-eyes.
p.1 #8 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
I have a few preferred two lens combos:
For travel, the original Tamron FE 17-28mm f2.8 & Tamron FE 28-200mm f2.8-5.6
Prime combos:
Voigtlander FE 21mm f3.5 & Voigtlander FE 50mm f2 APO
Samyang FE 24mm f1.8 & Sony/Zeiss 55mm f1.8
Voigtlander FE 28mm f2 APO & Samyang FE 75mm f1.8
Sirui FE 35mm f1.4 & Sirui FE 85mm f1.4
p.1 #10 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
pgrillone wrote: I'm curious: if you were limited to only two lenses, what would they be?
The Voigtlander 35/2 APO and Voigtlander 65/2 APO.
I came to this conclusion years ago. They are the base of my landscape kit, which includes the Voigtlander 180/4 APO and Sigma 14-24/2.8 to round out the range.
Both are great lenses. The 65/2 is the best lens I have ever shot.
p.1 #11 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
24-70 2.8 Sigma Art and 50-400 Tamron. The first gives me landscapes and almost the full range for portraits, very sharp and clear. The second is what I hunt wildlife with, and remote landscapes.
I am still on accumulation stage, so I have two more lenses, but this exercise made me realize that these other two are my fun, luxury ones, while the above are the workhorses.
p.1 #12 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
Depends on the camera...
907x 100c... 30/3.5 and 45/4P
a1... Otus 35/1.4 and 300GM (I'll work it out! It's not that long)
a6700... Sigma 10-18/2.8, Zony 24/1.8, and Tamron 35-100/2.8 (it's tiny- I should get three)
a7rII UT-mod... ZM Biogon. 25/2.8 and Contax G Sonnar 90/2.8 (rehoused with an e-mount and longer helicoid) but I would really miss the ZM Biogon 35/2. And the Distagon 18/4. I don't know if I can break up the family.
a7rII mono full-spectrum bare sensor mod... Minolta AF 28-85/3.5-4.5 and 7Artisans 35/1.4
Minolta X-570... MD 35/1.8 and MD Tele-Rokkor 85/1.7
And all that's contingent on keeping my macro kit (lenses, diopters, tubes, bellows). If I can't, then I can't play and this game is stupid.
p.1 #13 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
Assuming I have a full-frame camera:
1. 24-70mm f/2.8.
2. 35mm f/1.4 or 70-200mm f/2.8 or perhaps 70-180mm f/2.8. Difficult to choose.
If I could make it three lenses rather than two, it would be much easier: 24-70mm f/2.8, 35mm f/1.4, and either 70-200mm f/2.8 or 70-180mm f/2.8.
I have a 35GM and a Sigma 65mm f/2 in my kit and they do make an excellent two lens combination, but if I could only have two lenses, personally I would want more focal length flexibility than if I just had those two lenses.
p.1 #15 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
lol... there's no way I would limit myself to only 2 FE mount lenses.
I will say that the one lens that gets most of the shots is the 20-70 as we're in full on travel mode these days. It's great for that job.
As much as I enjoy the CV lenses - particularly the 40 1.2 I shoot Sony in part for the superb AF and tracking so it wouldn't work as a one and only for my shooting needs.
p.1 #16 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
I agree with your 35 - 65 Apo Lanthar combo.
This was my match as well, before the 28mm Apo Lanthar came out.
Now my favorite match is 28mm - 65mm (both Apo lanthars)
I have dedicated a button on my camera to a „full frame - APSC“ switch. This gives me two additional focal lengths:
- 42mm and
- 98mm
The final result is that I have aproximately: 28 - 42 - 65 - 100mm covered with just two lenses.
This is really nice!
(And with extremely high quality lenses, e.g. Apo Lanthars).
p.1 #17 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
Yes I also considered the 28, a much better space between focal lengths for sure. And to be honest, hopefully not causing a stir, my entire career has been as a firearms photographer, the 35 is for rifles and the 65 for pistols. Used to be ts -45 for rifles and ts-90 for pistols. The 28 does fit better in a 2 lens kit, but also requires more work in post to correct for distortion on close up shots.
The 28 is an extremely fantastic lens, and if my work was something different I would have it
p.1 #18 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
A fun post to pass the time in this world ravaged by boredom for most people and by the criminal actions of those in power
pgrillone wrote: I'm curious: if you were limited to only two lenses, what would they be?
When I limit myself to only two lenses, I use 24-70 and 70-200.
You wrote that photography isn't always about practicality. But photography is about having the tools that allow you to capture the scene you see with your own eyes at a given moment BEFORE you look through the viewfinder. And I often “see” compositions that I could never capture with just two prime lenses.
Jun 19, 2026 at 05:56 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
There are many 3 prime lens combos that I like, but I can't think of any 2 lprime ens combos that wouldn't leave me missing a lot of what I would want to shoot. Still with a 2 lens even zoom combo I would either have to skip wildlife shooting, which is what I would probably do or skip a lot of ultra wide angle landscape and architecture, which I could do but would be a big sacrifice.
On Sony I would pick a 16-35 f/2.8 GM II and a Sigma 28-105 f/2.8 but I would hate the restriction on the fps with the Sigma.
On Canon I would pick the 15-35 f/2.8L and the 24-105 f/2.8L Z.
For me personally I just couldn't live without something at least f/2.8 and longer than 70mm and even keeping it to 105 would be tough and I couldn't live with no lens wider than 28 or 24 mm. That ultrawide to wide zoom I could probably live with being slower than f/2.8 but I would prefer the speed especially if I have no other lenses for most of that range.
p.1 #20 · If I Could Only Have Two Lenses: Voigtlander 35 APO and 65 APO
scrappydog wrote:
The Voigtlander 35/2 APO and Voigtlander 65/2 APO.
I came to this conclusion years ago. They are the base of my landscape kit, which includes the Voigtlander 180/4 APO and Sigma 14-24/2.8 to round out the range.
Both are great lenses. The 65/2 is the best lens I have ever shot.
I had to look closely at the signature on this reply because I could have easily typed the same response. I own both the 35/2 and 65/2 APO's and they are my 'go-to' landscape lenses. Rounding out the bottom is the same Sigma 14-24/2.8 and in between sits a CV 21/1/4 Nokton. And as you've stated, my opinion is similar in that the 65/2 is the best lens that I've also ever shot.
Brothers from different mothers!!
I've read good things about the CV 180/4 APO and would like to try one someday...kinda' hard to find though. Its a lens I wish Cosina would resurrect.
