Frederik0711
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: The Perfect Lens Selection | |
I can never make up my mind when it comes to which lenses to keep and bring. Everything is a compromise, just like all optics are based on. I've went through many kits, consisting of either a combination or solely fast or slow zooms, or fast, slow, autofocus or manual primes. Currently, I mostly photograph architecture, and also a bit of landscape, macro (insects) and wildlife.
Architecture
Slower lenses as f/4-8 for outdoor architecture is enough, but I've started photographing a good bit of indoor architecture as well. This goes for churches, entrances and museums, where f/2.8 is appreciated and often enough, while f/2 and faster is great in more dim parts, especially some museums, and where some isolation of sculptures et cetera might be desired. I always bring my widest lens, but I also enjoy photographing small details on buildings where a short to medium telephoto is great.
Landscape
I never need anything faster than f/4, unless I travel to a location where I might focus on astro and northern lights photography, in which I would rent or shortly keep a 14 GM or 16 G and 24 GM. Sometimes, I bring manual focus primes, and sometimes I bring some zooms, depending on how open the area is, and if it's a location that I always can visit or very rarely. I either bring the 12-24 G and 20-70 G or Laowa 9, Voigtländer 15, 35 APO and 50 APO, and sometimes add the Zeiss 100-300. This kit will probably be changed, by replacing the f/4 lenses with f/2.8, adding an autofocus telephoto, and perhaps adding one or two manual focus lenses more.
Macro (insects)
Don't need anything faster than f/5.6, but I do at least need 2x magnification. For the most part, 2x is fine, but I might compliment the 90 with the AstrHori 25 f/2.8 2-5x. Not sure, though, as I previously wasn't too satisfied with the Laowa 25 f/2.8 2.5-5x, and found that cropped 2x images usually result in as good or better images, while having a deeper field of view. I previously had the Laowa 85 f/5.6 2x, but found the bokeh distracting, probably due to fewer aperture blades, so I went for the Laowa 90 f/2.8 2x.
Wildlife
The 200-600 G mostly does the job for me. I only occasionally photograph wildlife, mostly medium to large birds, where this lens does the job. I did consider the 400-800 G, but it's much more expensive. Sometimes, I do consider a shorter and faster lens for deers in forests, but that's such a small portion of my photography.
Current kit
Laowa 9mm f/5.6
Voigtländer 15mm f/4.5
Voigtländer 35mm f/2 APO
Voigtländer 50mm f/2 APO
Laowa 90mm f/2.8 2x
Samyang AF 14-24mm f/2.8 (purchased 6th june)
Sony 12-24mm f/4 G
Sony 20-70mm f/4 G
Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II (purchased 6th june)
Sony 200-600mm f/5.6-6.3 G
Might add
Zooms
Samyang 14-24mm f/2.8
f/2.8 is appreciated, and it's both lighter and accepts circular filters (I don't use filters often, but it's convenient, if I happen to travel to locations with waterfalls and such) compared to my 12-24 G.
It starting from 14mm is fine, as I usually pair these with the Laowa 9. I enjoyed the 16-35 G a lot when I had it, but I find the gap between 9mm and 16mm a too big, though I can live with the gap between 35mm and 50mm (16-35 + 50-300).
Edit: Just purchased.
Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 G2
Again, f/2.8 is appreciated. I'm not sure if starting from 28mm over 20mm will bother me, but I very rarely only bring a standard zoom anyway.
Mostly pair it with the 12-24 G or Voigtländer 15.
The gap between 24mm and 28mm doesn't bother me. This and the 14-24 will replace the 12-24 and 20-70 lenses.
Tamron 70-180mm f/2.8 G2 or Tamron 50-300mm f/4.5-6.3
Again, f/2.8 and slightly greater image quality, but I mostly use telephoto for outdoor architecture and landscape, where I don't need a fast lens, but appreciated for some photography in forests and some architectural subjects. I loved the 70-200 GM II, but I'm not sure, if I want to spend that much on occasional usage of f/2.8. It's that good, though, and I probably will add the 1.4x teleconverter at some point, which comes in handy. I have to crop quite a bit at times, but the image quality is noticeably better than the 50-300 while being faster, and I don't want to bring lenses beyond 300mm, as they get too bulky.
I did previously have the 50-300, and sometimes regret selling it. It was very sharp throughout the zoom range beside in the corners at 100-150mm. The stabilisation wasn't that impressive, and I often desired something faster.
For a while, I did consider the Tamron 28-300, but it gets very mixed reviews, and I wasn't satisfied with their 28-200, so this probably won't do it for me.
I do have the Zeiss 100-300, which I have used a bit for landscape and architecture, but I'm tired of its weight and cumbersomeness, though it produces some lovely landscape images like most Voigtländer and Zeiss lenses.
Primes
Voigtländer 21mm f/3.5 (the gap between 15mm and 35mm is quite noticeable, and I do really enjoyed this focal length previously when I owned the Loxia 21. Didn't enjoy the haptics of the Loxia, and I ended up going for zooms, but now I go back and forth with manual focus primes and autofocus zooms for landscape. I would actually prefer a 24mm, as it gaps better, or perhaps, I'll go 9-15-28-50-90, once the 28 APO gets released for Sony FE.)
Voigtländer 90mm f/2 APO (probably the best 90mm to adapt for defined sunstars and excellent image quality, matching the other f/2 APO lenses. Perhaps they will release it on Sony FE.)
Or I might just get rid of my manual focus primes altogether (besides the Laowa ones), as I rarely photograph scenes where sunstars appear anyway (they rarely show up in my landscape images, and I rarely photography nightscape). Not sure.
As for fast primes, I'm not sure. Maybe, I'll get one or two f/1.4 primes, but I can never make up which to pair, perhaps the 35 GM and 85 DN. Maybe I'll just get the Samyang 35mm f/1.8 and 75mm f/1.8 lenses and throw them in the bag, if I think that I'll photograph sculptures indoor and so on.
Bags aren't allowed in many museums, and I mostly want to bring the 9 and 14-24, so not sure how I would fit two lenses more. A third, like the 28-75, can probably fit in a large pocket.
|
