I know there are a lot of you that have used at ton of lens and have been useing them for years, so I would like those of you qualify, pro's or if you happen to have a lot of lens or have used a lot of them, please put your top five primes, and top five zooms both L and non-L. Lets limit this to lens that fit canon's body's without adapters please.
Edit: if you could put your main interest or focus of photography, that would be fantastic!
Non-L Prime
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Non-L Zoom
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
L Prime.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
L Zoom.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
If you could give a short - long reason you feel that way, it would be great.
I am posting this for two reasons, to both see what everyone thinks are the best lenses, and so others can read this at a later time.
I hope everyone likes the idea of this post.
Since I am new to SLR's, and I have a short lens supply for now, I will not put down my thoughts.
Thanks
Edited by roger lund on Dec 30, 2006 at 08:27 PM GMT
Ok, I'll bite on a futile post :-). Since no one ever agrees. I don't do sports or wildlife, so here would be mine.
Non-L Prime
1. 85 1.8. Except for some color and contrast, great lens.
2. 50 1.4
3. 100 Macro
4. 35 2.0
5. 50 1.8 (just because I love the plastic wonder)
Non-L Zoom
1. 17-55 2.8 IS (Havne't used it, but many friends love it. Just can't use on Pro Bodies(
2. 28-135 IS - Wierd focal length when cropped, but was a great lens for me
3. 70-300 DO. Great compact travel, long distance lens
4.70-300 IS
L Zoom
1. 70-200 2.8 IS
2. 24-70 ...I got a sharp copy. Use it for 90% of my work
3. 16-35
4. 24-105 - amazing lens if you don't need 2.8
5. 17-40...Chose to save money and get the f4, definately worth the price.
Sorry but a totally pointless idea because everyones "top" choices are going to be totally dependant upon what they may shoot, their budgets, and how many other lenses they may used/owned.
If I for example have an intrest in sports photography, what good is it going to do me to see a list of someone who's a landscape shooter. His gear wont work for me needs and mine may not work for his needs.
If someone with a $15,000 budget list their choices, and I only have $1,500 to spend, what good will their choices to ? We've all got vastly different budgets for gear.
lastly, unless someone has owned/used every lens made ideally, how can I put much stock in what their limited viewpoints are ? If you've used three lens, your #1 could change vastly after you've used 10 lenses.
On top of all that, whats to say we each judge our collective lens in the same way ?
What do I use to judge whats #1 ? Value, image quality, number of shots I take with it ? Versatility ?
Is my 70-200 my #1 because its my most used and very versatile, or is the 200 1.8 #1 becaues its optically so good ?
Suppose I shoot more than one subject matter as well ? Whats "better" then ? My 400 2.8 which is awesome for sports, or my TS/E which I love for landscapes ? Both are #1 for what they do.
Sorry but while I can understand your newfound enthusiasim and excitiment about camera gear, you need to realize that the only best lenses are what works for your own given needs and not care about what others shoot.
Dont make purchase decsions based on ratings, but instead on what meets your needs. What fits YOUR budget, what focal range do YOU shoot, what type of light to YOU shoot in, and so forth.
Didnt want to let you down in regards to the disagreements so heres on for ya...... Since you dont do sports or wildlife, what do you use a 400 2.8 for ? Given its a $6500 lens, I would think that unless your really into sports, it would be hard to jusitfy as a good purchase choice, much less as a top 5 item.
Thanks for the replies, I believe this post will be helpful for a couple of reasons, it gives a base for research, and it gives a idea of what people are using and why.
If i didn't want peoples opinions, I wouldn't have asked.
I might politely add that this is exactly the point of the FM review section https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/. One - so people can compare lenses. Two - that it stays for long time.
Have you tried to look there? You can line up all lenses and look up all the ratings, prices, etc. Or is there anything that is not covered there
roger lund wrote:
Thanks for the replies, I believe this post will be helpful for a couple of reasons, it gives a base for research, and it gives a idea of what people are using and why.
If i didn't want peoples opinions, I wouldn't have asked.
What base for research does it provide you Roger ?
If I tell you my #1 L prime is a 400 2.8, how did that help you ? If your a sports photographer and you've got $6500 just burning a hole in your pocket then yeah, maybe it was good advice, go buy one, but are you either of those things ?
How does what anyone else is using affect me or my needs ? Should I say "hmmm, other people use different gear than me, I better sell my stuff ?"
If you want help with a specific need, then this forum is a great place for advice, but your poll or survey etc is totally useless.
its like saying your just going to go buy whatever the 5 highest ranked lens in the review section are.
What specific need do you have ? An example would be that you want to do low light street photography, and you've got a budget of $500, and you would prefer a compact prime under 21oz in weight.
Then we can help, then we know what your subject matter is, how much you can spend, what conditions you shoot under and so forth.
Go ask a portrait guy, a sports guy, a landscape guy and a wildlife guy whats a "good lens" and they will all give you a very different answer.
Brutus_B wrote:
What base for research does it provide you Roger ?
If I tell you my #1 L prime is a 400 2.8, how did that help you ? If your a sports photographer and you've got $6500 just burning a hole in your pocket then yeah, maybe it was good advice, go buy one, but are you either of those things ?
How does what anyone else is using affect me or my needs ? Should I say "hmmm, other people use different gear than me, I better sell my stuff ?"
If you want help with a specific need, then this forum is a great place for advice, but your poll or survey etc is totally useless.
its like saying your just going to go buy whatever the 5 highest ranked lens in the review section are.
What specific need do you have ? An example would be that you want to do low light street photography, and you've got a budget of $500, and you would prefer a compact prime under 21oz in weight.
Then we can help, then we know what your subject matter is, how much you can spend, what conditions you shoot under and so forth.
Go ask a portrait guy, a sports guy, a landscape guy and a wildlife guy whats a "good lens" and they will all give you a very different answer.
I want to know what lens people are using for different types of photography, at this point I am mostly studying photography, and all aspects of it. I plan to search the forum for every lens someone puts down, read what everyone likes and dislikes about it. I hope to learn what a lens is good for and not good for, for me, I can't afford to go buy them all, but this lets me learn what I can about them. It will do what a book can't, and tell me peoples different opinions on different lens and their uses.
Different lenses are better suited to certain tasks, depending on the type of photogrpahy, or the style of the photogrpaher. Therefore they can't really be placed in "absolute order", without knowing what the subject and style of the photographer is. For example, if I'm shooting a wedding, the 24-70 is my best zoom. But if I'm shooting landscapes, the 24-105 is much better. So, the right idea is to understand what features are most useful for the type of photography at hand, and choose the right tool for the job.
gfiksel wrote:
I might politely add that this is exactly the point of the FM review section https://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/. One - so people can compare lenses. Two - that it stays for long time.
Have you tried to look there? You can line up all lenses and look up all the ratings, prices, etc. Or is there anything that is not covered there
Yes, I have browsed through just about every page of every lens.
Call this the reverse approach.
If someone posts that they do wedding photograph, and post their favorite lens, I can then use that information to make a mental note of what some wedding photographers like the most, and then look at those lens and learn the strengths and weakness of each.
ChrisDM wrote:
Different lenses are better suited to certain tasks, depending on the type of photogrpahy, or the style of the photogrpaher. Therefore they can't really be placed in "absolute order", without knowing what the subject and style of the photographer is. For example, if I'm shooting a wedding, the 24-70 is my best zoom. But if I'm shooting landscapes, the 24-105 is much better. So, the right idea is to understand what features are most useful for the type of photography at hand, and choose the right tool for the job.
May I ask why you say that the slower zoom with a longer focal length would be better for landscapes? I would think you would want wider, unless your saying that because of the IS.
I'll bite too, without all of the rhetoric and disclaimers:
Non-L Prime
1.85mm. 1.8 (don't have it, but want it)
2.50mm. 1.8 (cheap, plastic, first lens, works ok)
3.
4.
5.
Non-L Zoom
1.No experience
2.
3.
4.
5.
L Prime.
1.135mm/f2; my favorite lens for image quality
2.400mm/f2.8; big and fun
3.
4.
5.
L Zoom.
1.70-200mm/f2.8 IS (had and liked the size/weight of the f4, but the f2.8 IS is more versatile)
2.70-200mm/f4 (small and light weight, excellent quality)
3.17-40mm/f4; not my favorite due to distortion and outside softness, but it fits the need when "wide" is needed.
4.100-400mm/f4; don't like push/pull zoom
5.
I have only commented on the lenses I have actually used, except for the 85mm.
L Prime.
1. 50/1.0L (lets you shoot where no other lens will)
2. 35/1.4L
3. 135/2.0L
4. 200/2.8L
5. 400/5.6L
L Zoom.
1. 16-35/2.8L
2. 24-70/2.8L
3. 70-200/2.8L IS (I've gone to just these three zooms for speed)
I like fast primes. Primes make me think about my subject, the light and my releationship to them. I'll be adding this year the 24/1.4L, 50/1.2L and 85/1.2L. I may keep a 70-200/4.0L as it is so light and and appears to be a bit sharper at 5.6-8.0 than the 2.8 IS.
Hmm, I started on the list but it's not possible to say which lenses I like most, I do a lot of varied photography and therefor it changes from day to day which lenses I'd put on the list.
I don't know what new info you hope to get, in the end people will have added all the usual suspects to your list - almost all of the Ls, the 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 macro etc...
I'm going to answer in a different format, but in the spirit (I hope) of your request:
Favorite versatile lens for wedding and social event coverage - 24-105/4L IS
Favorite for outdoor head shots - 85/1.2L[Mk2]
Favorite for crowded, dimly lit rooms at receptions - 24/1.4L
Favorite for candids from a distance - 70-200/2.8L IS
Newest lens that seems likely to become my favorite for romantic wedding shots - 50/1.2L
Lens that gets only limited use (because of its focal length) but never disappoints me with the results - 135/2.0L
L Prime.
1. 50/1.0L (lets you shoot where no other lens will)
2. 35/1.4L
3. 135/2.0L
4. 200/2.8L
5. 400/5.6L
L Zoom.
1. 16-35/2.8L
2. 24-70/2.8L
3. 70-200/2.8L IS (I've gone to just these three zooms for speed)
I like fast primes. Primes make me think about my subject, the light and my releationship to them. I'll be adding this year the 24/1.4L, 50/1.2L and 85/1.2L. I may keep a 70-200/4.0L as it is so light and and appears to be a bit sharper at 5.6-8.0 than the 2.8 IS.
You stated you like fast primes, I take it your replacing the 85 1.8 with the 85 1.2?
and why are you getting a 50 1.2 if you have a 50 1.0? because of lack of quality at smaller F stops? Is it because of the slower speed that you don't have a 100mm prime?
roger lund wrote:
I want to know what lens people are using for different types of photography, at this point I am mostly studying photography, and all aspects of it. I plan to search the forum for every lens someone puts down, read what everyone likes and dislikes about it. I hope to learn what a lens is good for and not good for, for me, I can't afford to go buy them all, but this lets me learn what I can about them. It will do what a book can't, and tell me peoples different opinions on different lens and their uses....Show more →
With all due respect, do you want to be a photographer or a gearhead Roger ?
Honestly, get out and shoot and stop reading reviews. Its the only way to learn what YOU need. Trust me, Ive been there, all this gear stuff is fun and exciting at first but its a waste of time. I'm sure we've all been there, staying up til 3am reading reviews on every possible site on the net, paying more attention to what the pro's on the sideline are using than we are watching the game, shooting brick walls, dollar bills and pouring over the results at 400% in PS. Its all meaningless in the end.
Theres no right or wrong way to use a lens. I've taken landscapes at 800mm, Ive shot sports with a 15mm fisheye. I've never had a lens thats "bad". Every lens I've owned has been good at something, even if its just a low price.
50mm f1.8 mkI metal mount, 50mm f1.8 mkI plastic mount, 50mm f1.8 mkII, 50mm f1.4 or 50mm f1.2. We could debate and discuss them to death, compare brick walls crops, argue that the results are a "bad copy", or user error in the test. Say that " I own one and mine are better than that" and its all meaningless. Why ? Because were sitting inside at a computer instead of actually out shooting.
What do you care more about ? What a bunch of strangers on an internet forum think about such and such, and the fact that for every view, theres a counter viewpoint thats the total opposite, or about actually taking a photo and learning how to use a 50mm lens ?
Have you stopped and asked yourself what you enjoy shooting ? What you think you may enjoy shooting ? What your goals are with your photography ? How much money you want to invest ? What elements in photographs appeal most you ?
If not, I would spend a lot more time with those issues and less with what other people are using. The gear is just a tool. A tool is useless without a job to use it for.
