View Full Version : Lens Frustration
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 19:18
I'm finding that I'm changing lenses every 5 minutes out in the field (it's very bare and on a hill). All sorts of bit's are ending up on the sensor and mirror. Why oh why don't DSLR maker's offer an ultra wide to telephoto range lens as standard with a camera?! Bridge Cameras nearly do it and they are well cheaper than a DSLR. Just stretch the lens a bit more each end and there we have it - lens perfection (ideally on a DSLR and not a Bridge Cam).
Daysleeper40
05-10-2009, 19:22
I imagine because it would end up being a "jack of all trades and master of none" kind of lens :shrug:
The Matt
05-10-2009, 19:25
If that's what you're after, what's wrong with the plethora of 18-300mm etc lenses on offer?
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 19:25
I imagine because it would end up being a "jack of all trades and master of none" kind of lens :shrug:
The maker's should put a bit of thought into it first! Perfect ultra wideness right through to telephoto goodness. It's not that much to ask is it..?
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 19:25
If that's what you're after, what's wrong with the plethora of 18-300mm etc lenses on offer?
18 ain't ultra wide... :thumbsdown:
CyBeRkId2002
05-10-2009, 19:27
as Matt said, plenty of 18-300mm-ish lenses around if your not too fussed on quality. Doubt many, if any, bridge cameras go wider.
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 19:28
Oh yeah... we need macro capability too of course. I forgot to mention that the lenses I change between so rapidly are the Tamron 10-24, Sigma 70-300 APO & the Sigma 105mm macro.
I don't mean this in any rude way; but if you're after something like that, then why don't you get a bridge camera?
aligibbs
05-10-2009, 19:28
Its wider than any compact gets.....
18 ain't ultra wide... :thumbsdown:
It used to be ;)
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 19:29
as Matt said, plenty of 18-300mm-ish lenses around if your not too fussed on quality. Doubt many, if any, bridge cameras go wider.
It's a wonder nobody has come up with this idea of ultra wide - telephoto. There's a mint to be made innit! ;)
aligibbs
05-10-2009, 19:32
It's a wonder nobody has come up with this idea of ultra wide - telephoto. There's a mint to be made innit! ;)
Because its very difficult? It would have been done otherwise!
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 19:32
I don't mean this in any rude way; but if you're after something like that, then why don't you get a bridge camera?
Had one... sold it for a DSLR which has now destoryed me for a bridge camera again.
Its wider than any compact gets.....
Compacts are for wimps! :p
It used to be ;)
Your showing your age! :D
EF 10-1000mm f/1.0L IS MACRO
I think I like the sound of that! :)
Uneducated_Rick
05-10-2009, 19:33
It's a wonder nobody has come up with this idea of ultra wide - telephoto. There's a mint to be made innit! ;)
let me guess, constant f/2.8 throughout as well, if not lower!
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 19:37
Because its very difficult? It would have been done otherwise!
For us mere mortals maybe but cam techs are an entirely different matter altogether.
EF 10-1000mm f/1.0L IS MACRO
I think I like the sound of that! :)
Wow where did you see that for sale?!
let me guess, constant f/2.8 throughout as well, if not lower!
f/1.4 would be nice..
DigitalRelish
05-10-2009, 19:39
Just buy more bodies :shrug:
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 19:41
Just buy more bodies :shrug:
Yeah just remind me to watch the next Derren Brown How To Win The Lottery. :(
coldpenguin
05-10-2009, 19:45
I was thinking about this the other day. How about, buying a full-frame camera, add a teleconverted, and leave that on the camera all the time?
pearce_jj
05-10-2009, 19:52
compact with a wide converter should do the trick
It's a wonder nobody has come up with this idea of ultra wide - telephoto. There's a mint to be made innit! ;)
You can get the Canon 28-300 at about £2K. Wider and longer with decent glass would no doubt cost considerably more.
c_robinson
05-10-2009, 19:58
i said a while back that i'd love canon to do a 10-600mm F/2.8 IS USM
you may need a pick up truck to mount it, and an army to operate it but hey ho.... we can all have our dirty thoughts now and again!
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 20:05
I was thinking about this the other day. How about, buying a full-frame camera, add a teleconverted, and leave that on the camera all the time?
See my last reply!
compact with a wide converter should do the trick
You mean Bridge (compacts are for wimps!). Dang... why didn't I think of that... :thinking:
You can get the Canon 28-300 at about £2K. Wider and longer with decent glass would no doubt cost considerably more.
Canon is for wimps! (just joking) :lol:
i said a while back that i'd love canon to do a 10-600mm F/2.8 IS USM
you may need a pick up truck to mount it, and an army to operate it but hey ho.... we can all have our dirty thoughts now and again!
Yeah Dad's Army more like... :D
DigitalRelish
05-10-2009, 20:08
Yeah just remind me to watch the next Derren Brown How To Win The Lottery. :(
Additional (used) bodies would be a cheaper alternative to the super focal range lenses you're suggesting!
Is your profile's camera bag up to date? Are you shooting with two distinct camera systems?
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 20:09
I'm just thinking my photo threads don't get so many reply's as this and in such short a time too....... :shrug:
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 20:11
Additional (used) bodies would be a cheaper alternative to the super focal range lenses you're suggesting!
Is your profile's camera bag up to date? Are you shooting with two distinct camera systems?
My gear consists of 1 Pentax K20D & 3 or 4 lenses.
The Canon is long gone.... (not because Canon's for wimps but because I couldn't afford to keep two different system's running.)
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 20:20
OK guys I've ordered a bridge camera (Fuji s6500fd) of a well know auction site. Maybe I can get a wide angle adapter too. Just a pity it's a bridge camera and not a DSLR with an ultra wide to telephoto lens.
Maybe they'll be talking about this thread in years to come when a lens of this calibre finally does happen...
Ere.....:D
What about going the other way, as dod so rightly pointed out, 18mm is super wide on 35mm, only since you started putting those on your daft arsed crop sensors has it become not so super wide.
So if you had a camera that could alternate between full and crop, this 18 to whatever lump of poop, would do the job.
Wait...so is it lens problem or a brand problem..:lol:
Surely a Tamron 18-270 or Sigma 18-250 are still going to give better results than a Fuji bridge camera?!
My dad had film SLRs years ago, I can remember him having a "dark bag", idea was you put the camera in it and changed the film, it meant you didn't expose it to sunlight and therefore ruin it.. I wondered if it'd be useful to have one for changing lenses in..
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 20:35
Ere.....:D
What about going the other way, as dod so rightly pointed out, 18mm is super wide on 35mm, only since you started putting those on your daft arsed crop sensors has it become not so super wide.
So if you had a camera that could alternate between full and crop, this 18 to whatever lump of poop, would do the job.
Wait...so is it lens problem or a brand problem..:lol:
This is gettin' way to technical for me now!!
As for your question.. A bit of both maybe...... :suspect:
Surely a Tamron 18-270 or Sigma 18-250 are still going to give better results than a Fuji bridge camera?!
You saw the price of those?! And I had one of those Fuji's before and it was dead on like.
My dad had film SLRs years ago, I can remember him having a "dark bag", idea was you put the camera in it and changed the film, it meant you didn't expose it to sunlight and therefore ruin it.. I wondered if it'd be useful to have one for changing lenses in..
But then I'd need a torch and I've only got two hands (one for the camera and the other for the lens). :bang:
hashcake
05-10-2009, 20:48
Surely a Tamron 18-270 or Sigma 18-250 are still going to give better results than a Fuji bridge camera?!
The Tamron 18-270 is a cracking walkabout lens and largely ignored imho.
The level of sharpness across the focal range is quite impressive for the price.
I was sceptical at first but I totally agree with the review photoplus magazine gave it.
petersmart
05-10-2009, 20:52
EF 10-1000mm f/1.0L IS MACRO
I think I like the sound of that! :)
And the price a mere £25,000!
Supernatural
05-10-2009, 20:52
The Tamron 18-270 is a cracking walkabout lens and largely ignored imho.
The level of sharpness across the focal range is quite impressive for the price.
I was sceptical at first but I totally agree with the review photoplus magazine gave it.
For me it's a no brainer really. With the Fuji I get a super zoom lens and I also get a camera too. Do you get a camera with the Tamron 18-270? I don't think so! And to make the Fuji wider I should be able to buy an adapter. It's not perfect because it's a bridge camera and I'd rather it be a DSLR with an ultra zoom - telephoto lens. But ya'll knew that already, right!
kingbling11
05-10-2009, 21:29
No. What we need is a 1-2000 f/1 VR Macro. With prime quality optics.
No. What we need is a 1-2000 f/1 VR Macro. With prime quality optics.
Nah, too much vignetting at 1 ;)
c1187600
05-10-2009, 23:12
Nah, too much vignetting at 1 ;)
Not with the new Nano Coating - all safe :D
Apart from being ridiculously impractical and phenominally expensive, there is one other problem - the laws of physics. It's impossible.
Compacts get closest because of their tiny format. No chance on a DSLR.
Chaz Photos
05-10-2009, 23:58
Its easy have two bodies with two zooms on then all covered then.
Apart from being ridiculously impractical and phenominally expensive, there is one other problem - the laws of physics. It's impossible.
Compacts get closest because of their tiny format. No chance on a DSLR.
Finally some sense on this otherwise headbending thread!
If the camera manufactorers COULD make this super lens you speak of, they probably WOULDNT anyway because the image quality would be reduced somwhere... Inside they make fantastic lenses that you MIGHT have to change from time to time.
I have found what really helps is thinking about what sort of thing you want to take photos of, putting the suitable lens on and going out, only change your lens when you are changing what you are taking photos of
For example - at a festival i will wander around taking pictures of wide things, teepees, groups of hippies etc
then i stop and put a long lens on, get some nice pictures of faces and far away things and stuff like that.
Make the most out of each lens and you wont find you are changing them constantly
Take a pillow case with you to change the lens over. That way it would stop alot of the bits getting on the sensor
But surely there would be more lint and fabric is a dust trap.
In all honesty I find that simply keeping the body facing down and keeping the time taken to a minimum keeps everything pretty clean.
Just buy more bodies :shrug:
+1
Hobbytog
06-10-2009, 11:00
EF 10-1000mm f/1.0L IS MACRO
I think I like the sound of that! :)
I don't think you'd like the price though. :shake: LoL
Paul
I don't think you'd like the price though. :shake: LoL
Paul
Front element would be 1,000mm across.
nickwatson
06-10-2009, 12:05
The Fuji s6500fd has an equivalent focal range of 28-300 (according to DPReview), so that's not super wide either?
This is why God gave us the ability to own more than one camera-body...lol
This is why God gave us the ability to own more than one camera-body...lol
Shame he didn't give us all the ability to pay for more than one :(
The Fuji s6500fd has an equivalent focal range of 28-300 (according to DPReview), so that's not super wide either?
Compacts are not good at very wide angles. I think the widest are the Panasonics that go down to 24-25mm equivalent. That's miles away from the many DSLR lenses that go down to 10mm, which is 15-16mm equivalent.
The kind of lenses being discussed here are not just impractical, they are literally impossible.
kiteninja
06-10-2009, 12:23
I think someone has missed the purpos of a DSLR, which in my eyes is too take the best quality photos you can get. This is done through the body & more importantly the choice of lenses for the job.
For example,
If your a chippy you can get a Black&Decker thing [not knowing the name] which will allow you to drill, jigsaw, grind, sand etc.. by changing an attachment, yeah it'll do the job but not very well. Or you could get a dedicated drill, jigsaw, sander etc...
This is the same for DSLRs, you get the right lens for the right job, fast glass for sports, wide for landscapes etc.. primes for absolute quality and low light.......
You can't have your cake and eat it in this instance something has to give.
Davec223
06-10-2009, 12:35
I think someone has missed the purpos of a DSLR, which in my eyes is too take the best quality photos you can get. This is done through the body & more importantly the choice of lenses for the job.
For example,
If your a chippy you can get a Black&Decker thing [not knowing the name] which will allow you to drill, jigsaw, grind, sand etc.. by changing an attachment, yeah it'll do the job but not very well. Or you could get a dedicated drill, jigsaw, sander etc...
This is the same for DSLRs, you get the right lens for the right job, fast glass for sports, wide for landscapes etc.. primes for absolute quality and low light.......
You can't have your cake and eat it in this instance something has to give.
I think you have hit the nail on the head, quoting supernatural.
For me it's a no brainer really. With the Fuji I get a super zoom lens and I also get a camera too. Do you get a camera with the Tamron 18-270? I don't think so! And to make the Fuji wider I should be able to buy an adapter. It's not perfect because it's a bridge camera and I'd rather it be a DSLR with an ultra zoom - telephoto lens. But ya'll knew that already, right!
Supernatural, what you also have to realise is that the sensor is smaller than your dslr sensor the lens will not be to the same optical quality as the tamron ( I am not saying the Fuji is a bad camera or takes bad photographs, I had and sold a s7000, which I do miss sometimes) but your dslr and tamron or any of the other superzooms that have been mentioned in this thread will give you better photographs. It seems that you are looking at owning a dslr in slightly the wrong way. The camera bodies are the cheap bits it is the lenses and acessories that are the expensive part.
Shame he didn't give us all the ability to pay for more than one :(
Prioritisation...what's more important to you? If you need it - you'll find a way to pay for it...somehow...
"ahh...easy for him now that he gets his kit for nothing", I hear you say - but that wasn't always the case - by the time I was 14, I'd managed to get a Nikon F2-AS and a suite of three fast Nikkor prime lenses by doing crap jobs and saving-up...
After that I upgraded to an F3, then an F3P with motor-drive.
At the same time I aquired a Leica M6 a Pentax 6x7, darkroom kit including DeVere 504 enlarger, drying cabinets and JOBO processor...
All by the time I was 18...
I rode a clapped-out bike, didn't smoke, didn't drive and ate frugally...
Then I joined the Army. It's only in the last 6 years that I've been lucky enough to be issued my photographic equipment...
Front element would be 1,000mm across.
Hmm.. better get a gorillapod with it then! :bonk:
Buying the Fuji to replace your SLR seems a bit.. Pointless :S. I bought a Tamron 18-200mm lens for about 160 quid and it seems to be what you are after. It gives the equivalent of 11.1x optical zoom and will go wider than the fuji. It also takes some really good shots. However, like the Fuji you've just bought, it's a bit of a jack of all trades, master of none.
Here are some pics from it though, to give you an idea of the sort of quality.
Wide End
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2529/3957371914_bcd9ea243b_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3424/3957387474_dfe7f7b473_b.jpg
Telephoto end
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2664/3775538975_10576f8b15_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2572/3776338674_c80905715d_b.jpg
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2604/3775378155_347997dd79_b.jpg
And the lens itself is reasonably compact too.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3492/3748465399_86c792e84c.jpg
This lens will take much better pictures than the Fuji bridge. It seems to be the sort of thing you were after?
MrAngry2
08-10-2009, 07:59
Wouldn't manufactures be shooting themselves in the foot if they bought out a lens like that, people would only ever need to buy one lens :thinking:
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.