If you had just ONE lens - which ones would you have?

[bl0at3r]

Season Greetings

This lens dilema (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=188310) is driving me nuts :bang:

So in 2010 I am going to go back to basics, selling the Canon 17-85, Sigma 10-20 & the Nifty Fifty and have just ONE lens on my 7D.

I spend more time researching new gear to buy than actually using the stuff - this way I can focus (get it) on my photography and also spend some money on other stuff instead of photography gear.

What ONE lens would you have & why?

[justinitus]

Well, as much as I love my Nikon 18-200VR as a do-it-all walkabout lens, I always smile at the shots I get with my Sigma 18-50 f2.8 as the quality and sharpness @ f4 is noticeably better than the Nikon, which is best @f8, especially indoors and in low light.

If it were me, I value the wider end of 17/18mm more than the extra 20mm a 24-70mm would give me on the long end (I can crop if needed but I can't always move back to get it in).

The difference between 17/18mm and 24mm is more useful than I imagined it to be. With all those pixels on a 7D you can crop quite big chunks I would think.

Happy Xmas!!

[trevorbray]

Great question. For me it is the 50mm 1.4. I need to be able to shoot in low light, that's the overriding reason. I could use it for portraits, landscapes and as a walk about. in fact I owe you a debt of thanks, I'm going to use nothing else this festive season and see how I get on. (Assuming I'm allowed to get my camera out)!!

[justinitus]

I'm going to use nothing else this festive season

Great idea :D I hardly ever use mine, I'm going to stick it on the camera now for a complete change and not take it off until new year - should be fun!!

[EdBray]

I think if this question had been raised a couple of months ago my answer would probably be different, but currently on my 1DMkIII I would have my 24L TSE MkII.

[68lbs]

Canon 50mm f/1.4 for me. Though if funds allowed, I'd like to try a 1.2L!

[STARRIDER]

35L 1.4...Blows me away every time i use it..:thumbs:

[Dark Star]

My 2009 treat - Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS - Gooooooooooooooooooorgeous :)

[Jayst84]

24-70 2.8 L

Do 90% of my photography with it already.

[Jimmy_Lemon]

24-70 2.8 L

Do 90% of my photography with it already.

+1 - I dont have one, but have used Marcel's on occasion. If I just had one lens that would have to be it.

[CScottMcQueen]

+1 - I dont have one, but have used Marcel's on occasion. If I just had one lens that would have to be it.

+ another 1, it hardly ever leaves the camera, in fact the fact I use it 99% of the time is the reason I got rid of the 70-200mm

[alexhcowley]

I'm into wildlife photography so for me it would be my Canon 55-250mm IS zoom. No cute little furry animal is safe from me when I have it plugged into my Canon 450D.

[Raymond Lin]

Canon 24-70L

@ F/2.8

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4044/4213078360_ee6b727a22_o.jpg

Follow closely by the 135L

@ F/2.0

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2540/4213079920_8d754d6b8e_o.jpg

[konastab01]

Nikon 24-70 2.8

[lawrenceots]

wildlife for me...so probably a 70-300 or *I wish* 200-400. Can always make do with my mobile for wider shots.

[Yv]

If I could only have one, it would be a 24-70 f2.8, but not the sigma version I currently have, would have to be the Nikon offering :D

[dunganick]

70-200 2.8

[blakester]

For me, it would have to be my 24-70 2.8, closely followed by nifty fifty 1.4

[Kaouthia]

That's a tough call, but out of the lenses I've owned, probably the 70-200 f/2.8 VR.

[stan the man]

me, i love my sony 70-200 F/2.8 G SSM,so it would most probably be that one...

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c207/1137/DSC04403.jpg

[dod]

24-70 F2.8N :D

[Huss1100]

Sigma 50mm f1.4

[Marac]

I just got a 35-350 and that would be a nice lens to carry around.

failing that I would use the old faithful 24-70 f2.8L

[rickj]

for me it would be my 70-200 f2.8 IS

[wicker_man]

Well I tend to have my Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 on my 40D most of the time, so I would say that would be the lens of choice. Although, if I had the money it would be a Canon 17-55mm f2.8 IS for crop sensor, or 24-70mm f2.8L for full frame. You can't go wrong with a standard walkaround zoom!

[kluen]

I sold all of my lenses to get the 24-70 L, haven't regreted once... yet.

I now seem to buy flashes instead of lenses though....

[JEmerson]

I'd use the 5200mm f14 TBH, great for weddings.

[P-Chan]

nothing too fussy. Just the 100-400 L canon :love:

I have a basic 75-300 and feel 300 dont do me justice in wild life

[Nod]

On a FF or 35mm film body, a 24-70 f/2.8 and on a crop body, a close equivalent, so 18-50 or so, ideally f/2.8. f/1.something is nice for the extra speed but the high ISO capabilities of my body reduce the necessity.

[ChrisJ_SLH]

For me, i could happily get by with my 24-105 f/4 IS (on FF). Crop is a harder question though.

[Raymond Lin]

I do weddings, where there are a lot more extreme conditions and I promise you that the 24-105L will not cut it.

Last sunday's wedding I had to resort to primes in the evening at times as the venue was way too dark. Even 2.8 wasn't fast enough, I needed another stop at F/2 and shot entirely on 3200ISO. F/4 just too slow, IS is pointless as people moves.

But then...that's me.

[chris321]

If I just had 1 lens, it'd be my Tamron 17-50 f/2.8. For wider stuff, take a few steps back, for tele move closer. Add a set of kenko tubes for 1:1 macro. Sorted :thumbs:


I like my Tamron :)

[davekiddle]

Out of the lenses I already have - Nikon 70-200 VR f/2.8

If I could have any one lens - Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 (probably)

[goslayer]

My 70-200mm 2.8 IS, great lens:)

[desantnik]

70-200 2.8 VR for me... my most used lens.

[BirderOzzie]

Nikon 200-400 f4 VR - great for wildlife on a crop body (I have the D300s) and good for sport. shame about the price though...

[Trixster]

My 17-55. Couldnt be without it.

[bl0at3r]

Great idea :D I hardly ever use mine, I'm going to stick it on the camera now for a complete change and not take it off until new year - should be fun!!

Well, I tried to manage yesterday round the M-In-Laws with just my Nifty50 but unfortunately on the 7D it was just too close.

Reverted to the 17-85 for the rest of the day and will use it again today.



Some great feedback/suggestions here guys - really appreciate it

I reckon the 17-85 IS USM, whilst only managing f4-f5.6, is a good all round lens - I may just keep it and flog the 10-20 and the 50.

Whilst it's not amazingly sharp or fast, I am generally pleased with the results - having said that may end up selling them all for the f2.8 17-50 tamron or the f2.8 17-55 canon.

One decsions made for sure though - I am most definately going to have just 1 lens in 2010 and also carry less gear around with me - I am more likely to take the camera out and about wherever I go for a start!

Happy Boxing Day

[Kerioak]

It would be a close call between the Canon 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 IS but I think the 24-70 would be my choice if I could only use one lens.

[bigsmiff]

Great question. For me it is the 50mm 1.4. I need to be able to shoot in low light, that's the overriding reason. I could use it for portraits, landscapes and as a walk about. in fact I owe you a debt of thanks, I'm going to use nothing else this festive season and see how I get on. (Assuming I'm allowed to get my camera out)!!

Ah, but do you have the lens attached to the FF or the crop body?

[trevorbray]

Ah, but do you have the lens attached to the FF or the crop body?

Well, 5D for stills and the 7D for movie, does this count! I'm only going to be shooting indoors for the holidays.

[45689ajax]

For me, i could happily get by with my 24-105 f/4 IS (on FF). Crop is a harder question though.



+1 :thumbs:

[specialman]

Probably my brilliant (and very cheap - £160) Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, although I'm tempted by the Nikon version just to have an all-Nikon setup.....

[daugirdas]

At 18MP I would be very worried using 17-85mm. But I would be interested to see a RAW file taken with this combination though (please PM) to make a better judgement.

I would say it depends what subjects are important to you. I need 100mm macro, and most of my other lenses - all for each little task. If I had to start over it'd be between 24-70mm, 24-105mm and 100mm macro regardless of camera.

[Gary.D]

My canon 24-70mm f2.8L

[jnO]

Tamron 17-50, of the 2 lenses I own.
If I was to sell up and get a 7D & 1 lens, probably a 24-70L.

[CT]

500mm f4L. It's by far my most used lens.

[Rob_Ashton]

canon 85mm f/1.2 by faaaaar my favorite portrait lens

[Squawk]

As a man with only the kit lens (18-55) at present I can tell you that it has to be something with more reach. Today, yet again, I have been unable to get the shot I wanted simply because I couldn't reach it. 4 swans on the ice. Absulutely perfect, no more than about 30 feet away, and at 55mm (on a 400D so crop sensor) I couldn't get there.

Fine I got the image after a crop, but its a big old crop. If I was to have one lens and one lens only I'd like it to go from about 20mm to 120mm, so whatever you can get that's in and around those marks.

[Liam]

I only have one lens...

Canon 400mm F5.6 L

Well digital anyway :)

[combat squirrel]

24-70 2.8 L

Do 90% of my photography with it already.

[Naboo32]

I'd use the 5200mm f14 TBH, great for weddings.

... on the Moon ;)!

[Loopy]

Really interesting thread as I'm looking at a new lens. I currently use the tamron 17-50 2.8 and find it brilliant, but am looking for a longer range. The tamron 18-270 f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO is currently looking good if I can get the funds together - anyone got one who can comment.

Now, I know that I've have a few vinos, an sometimes the obvious doesn't jump at me, but the following comment confused me. What difference does the lens make to the size of file the camera stores? Is it a quality issue - i.e. cheap lens doesn't produce a good image at full magnification. But I can't see reference to the 17-85mm being a budget lens.......

At 18MP I would be very worried using 17-85mm. But I would be interested to see a RAW file taken with this combination though (please PM) to make a better judgement.

[whiteflyer]

Only one lens for a 7D, then it would have to be EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS. The 24-70 would be the one on a full frame, but just not wide enough for the 7D.

[Gonetae]

Mainly wildlife I do with the odd landscape, but also some studio bits at college so I'd have to go for my Sigma 50-500mm if I could only have one lens to use. :)

Tommy.

[Laudrup]

Sensible head says the 17-55mm f/2.8, but the heart says take the 300mm f/2.8 L IS if I only had one. Just an exceptional lens.

[Shorty]

If I could only have one, it would be a 24-70 f2.8, but not the sigma version I currently have, would have to be the Nikon offering :D

+1

[Raymond Lin]

took these with the 24-70L today !


http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/8402/img00591s.jpg

(check out that new reverse hold grip technique!)

http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/238/img99891.jpg

[Naboo32]

took these with the 24-70L today !


http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/8402/img00591s.jpg



:thumbs: Mmmm, bokeh-licious!

[Craikeybaby]

It's a toughie, as I do a lot of motorsport work I'd have to keep my 70-200 f2.8L, but when I go out with a light weight setup it would be the 50mm f1.4 (on a 1.3x crop).

[bl0at3r]

Really interesting thread as I'm looking at a new lens. I currently use the tamron 17-50 2.8 and find it brilliant, but am looking for a longer range. The tamron 18-270 f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO is currently looking good if I can get the funds together - anyone got one who can comment.

Now, I know that I've have a few vinos, an sometimes the obvious doesn't jump at me, but the following comment confused me. What difference does the lens make to the size of file the camera stores? Is it a quality issue - i.e. cheap lens doesn't produce a good image at full magnification. But I can't see reference to the 17-85mm being a budget lens.......

Glad someone asked the question!!
I'm not sure what was meant by that comment either

[bl0at3r]

:thumbs: Mmmm, bokeh-licious!

Mmm Mmm love the dreamy Bokeh!


Thanks a million for all your replies - am leaning more and more towards the 17-55 2.8 Canon, but would be more than happy with the tamron too by the sound of things

[JohnD76]

It would have to be my 24-70 2.8, closely followed by the 70-200 2.8......

[onefunkypenguin]

for me it's the canon 17-40mm f4!

i use it constantly and love portraits with it even though most people wouldnt think about it...

that said, i would love a 24-70mm f2.8 canon, just wont happen any time soon :razz:

[Billy]

Out of the lenses I own it would have to be my Tamron 17-50 f/2.8


But out of what I don't own, hmmmm let me think.

[Loopy]

:wave:

Can I bump this to see if anyone has an answer for the question at the top of page 3 please?

Ta

[Arkady]

On FX the 24-70mm f/2.8
On DX the 17-35mm f/2.8

If it had to be a prime lens: 35mm f/2 and 24mm f/2 respectively.

[mid_gen]

I do love the 24-105 on the 5D....just a great range for general use. Not tried a 24-70 yet though!

[CT]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loopy http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=2178175#post2178175)

Now, I know that I've have a few vinos, an sometimes the obvious doesn't jump at me, but the following comment confused me. What difference does the lens make to the size of file the camera stores? Is it a quality issue - i.e. cheap lens doesn't produce a good image at full magnification. But I can't see reference to the 17-85mm being a budget lens.......

Glad someone asked the question!!
I'm not sure what was meant by that comment either

I guess it was a reference to the fact that high pixel density on a crop sensor can be very unforgiving in showing up any deficiencies in lens quality. I don't think the 17-85 is a budget lens by any means, but it isn't 'L' quality either.

I did own this lens for a while but I was using it back in the days of 8mp sensors and never had any complaints about it. I did eventually swap it for a 17-40L and found the latter to to be a tad sharper with better colour saturation and noticeably less barrel distortion which could be an issue sometimes. How it would perform on an 18mp crop sensor I don't know - you'd just have to try it and find out.

[mastertrinity]

its quite easy for me with my current line up as i have;

18-70mm f3.5-5.6 - which ive sold
55-200mm f4-5.6 - beatiful lens
50mm f1.7 - this would be my one lens.

yes my 50mm would be as i like prime lenses but for flexibility and a money no object one lens would have to be the zeiss 24-70mm f2.8. one of the most gorgeous lenses ive ever seen.

[we11ingon]

Interesting ... but crazy :cuckoo: question.. Like asking which one of your senses you'd like to keep...:)

[bl0at3r]

Interesting ... but crazy :cuckoo: question.. Like asking which one of your senses you'd like to keep...:)

Not so crazy really - like many people on here, I spend more time worrying/dreaming about the next bit of kit to buy...

....when I should really be out taking pictures :whistling:

Also, can't be bothered humping loads of gear around, or swapping lenses :bonk:

So, my new years resolution is to shoot with just one lens - forget all the hype about kit and concentrate on my photography

So far it has been the 17-85, but I still intend to sell all 3 and buy 1 just lens

[bl0at3r]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loopy http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=2178175#post2178175)

Now, I know that I've have a few vinos, an sometimes the obvious doesn't jump at me, but the following comment confused me. What difference does the lens make to the size of file the camera stores? Is it a quality issue - i.e. cheap lens doesn't produce a good image at full magnification. But I can't see reference to the 17-85mm being a budget lens.......



I guess it was a reference to the fact that high pixel density on a crop sensor can be very unforgiving in showing up any deficiencies in lens quality. I don't think the 17-85 is a budget lens by any means, but it isn't 'L' quality either.

I did own this lens for a while but I was using it back in the days of 8mp sensors and never had any complaints about it. I did eventually swap it for a 17-40L and found the latter to to be a tad sharper with better colour saturation and noticeably less barrel distortion which could be an issue sometimes. How it would perform on an 18mp crop sensor I don't know - you'd just have to try it and find out.

Cool, thanks for clarifying - on the 40D I found the 17-85 to be a great lens, but on occasions seemed a little off in the sharpness department - and also not blazingly fast at only f4-5.6

So I see where you're coming from with it mounted on the 7D - it needs good glass to bring out the best (as with any body really but especially with 18MP). In fact I still intend to trade it on for something else.

[fatphotographer]

I would get the 6mm -1200mm f1.2 zoom, you know the one, it has 5x macro and Tilt & Shift capability? It only measures six inches and weighs half a kilo.

But that isn't created yet, so I will have to have more than one, :) sorry - not much help! The whole point of an interchangable SLR is the ability to swap lenses for the one that matches your needs.

[dotcomjohnny]

Mmmmm One lens! Then it would have to be my Nikkor 18-200 VR

[Freester]

I would get the 6mm -1200mm f1.2 zoom, you know the one, it has 5x macro and Tilt & Shift capability? It only measures six inches and weighs half a kilo.


:withstupid:

Actually I'll be less greedy, 10-400 f/2.8 IS / VR would do me ;)

[fatphotographer]

:withstupid:

Actually I'll be less greedy, 10-400 f/2.8 IS / VR would do me ;)

I see you have gone for the slightly cheaper DX version!!! :thumbs:

[Paddysnapper]

No doubts for me Nikkor 50mm 1.8....Only a prime would do!

[LCPete]

I would find it impossible to be restricted to one lens :D
But could just manage with 2
Sigma 105 macro Canon 100-400

To the OP I would have a real good think about what sort of things you want to shoot and then decide on the best lens

[bl0at3r]

The whole point of an interchangable SLR is the ability to swap lenses for the one that matches your needs.

yes agreed, but bridge cameras & compacts just don't cut the mustard when it comes to image quality, noise and sensor size

[AndyWest]

For me and my GF1 it must be the 20mm f1.7 'pancake' lens. Just perfect for Micro four thirds.
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/ProductImages/fullsize/panasonic20mm.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2491/4235074752_fb6edfbbf1.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/andywest1/4235074752/)

[Loopy]

Cool, thanks for clarifying - etc.

and thanks from me too.

[bl0at3r]

For me and my GF1 it must be the 20mm f1.7 'pancake' lens. Just perfect for Micro four thirds.
http://www.srsmicrosystems.co.uk/ProductImages/fullsize/panasonic20mm.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2491/4235074752_fb6edfbbf1.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/andywest1/4235074752/)

jesus that lens is thin !! :thumbs:

[seventythree]

had the nikon 24-70mm f2.8 for almost a week now. not had much time to play around, but i think we will get along just fine.

saying that though, the lens has far more capability than i have talent!

[Michael Bosanko]

.

[Brooksy]

For me my Sigma 24-70 2.8. It does everything I need it to do. Upto now!

[Paulie-W]

For me it would be 17-55 f2.8 (have for the D300) or 24-70 for the (would like D700).


Having said that, at the moment my 50 1.4 seems to be glued to the body for now :shrug:

[markyboy.1967]

Tough one to call--between the Sigma 120-300 and the Nikon 500 AFS..I think i would need to stick with the Sigma 120-300 as its so versatile and i have used it for a year or so now and the Nikon is just starting to get used by me.As me in a few months and i may change my mind.:lol:

[355858]

For me it would have to be my nikon 105mm VR micro lens :)

[StewartR]

I would get the 6mm -1200mm f1.2 zoom, you know the one, it has 5x macro and Tilt & Shift capability? It only measures six inches and weighs half a kilo.

Actually I'll be less greedy, 10-400 f/2.8 IS / VR would do me ;)

Do you mean this one? Canon EF 20-400mm f2.8 IO USM IS (http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/canoniolens.pdf)?

[EdBray]

Stewart, if you only had the one lens you would starve :lol:

[fatphotographer]

Do you mean this one? Canon EF 20-400mm f2.8 IO USM IS (http://www.canonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/canoniolens.pdf)?

Sorry, I run Nikon, so that one wouldn't fit my body, I'll stick with the expensive black one thanks!;)

[ScarySquirrel]

24-70L probably. Although I would miss the length of my 135L.

[Jamieconverge]

of the lenses ive got it would be nikon 18-70mm. pretty much use it for everything i do, and for everything i do its perfect. insanely sharp to the point where i rarely sharpen my images (other than when resizing down) and a fantastic lens to use.

however if i hadnt got rid of a 17-55 f2.8 or a 70-200 f2.8 it'd be one of those ;)

[Paul Philpott]

Personally I would check to see what type of focal lenghts you use and then plump for a 24-105L or the new 15-85.

I recently changed to the 24-105L as I found most of my pics were taken at 24+ and I really like the extra range and IQ of this lens versus my 17-85.

The 24-70L is a superb lens but a very restrictive range if you are just going for the 1 lens!!

[Flash Harry]

My 2009 treat - Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS - Gooooooooooooooooooorgeous :)



:plusone:

[Patch]

Tamron 70-300.
But then it is the only lens I have as the kit lens for my D40 bought from Bennets last March imploded within 5 weeks and they refuse to replace it so until I sue them I only have my Tamron, it was the only lens I could afford so that I could use the camera at all.
I do like the lens though, it`s been great so far for learning with.
I would like a longer lens for wildlife/birds but the Tamron does nicely for my preferred targets of dog agility and horses, plus the Macro [ well, close up ] option on the lens means I can get reasonable-ish shots of flowers/berries etc as well, so as a duel purpose lens it`s not bad at all.
[ I am a beginner though so I don`t have anything to compare it to really other than the crappy duff 18-55 which I only got to use for such a short time that I did`nt get to explore it`s potential ].

[pragmatist]

My Canon 600mm F4 IS L as i'm a birder but the 16-35mm F2.8 II is a beauty too

[LASTOLITE]

NIKON 17 55 F2.8 :thumbs: stays on the camera 95% of the time - If I had a D700 and 70 - 200 F2.8 it might be the 70 - 200:lol:

[StephenP]

Canon 24-105 never off my camera

[lauren_t]

Canon 24-70 2.8 as its never off my camera, use it for everything

[bl0at3r]

still getting great suggestions - thanks guys

my last 3 lenses are on ebay as we speak - as of tomorrow night i'll have a 7D body and no glass :cuckoo:

Canon 17-55 2.8 is looking favourite ...

....or the 24-70 L

:bang::bang::bang::bang:

Maybe then I'll finally stop this nonsense and go outside to take some photos !

[mackoy77]

for me its my canon 17-55 f2.8 IS its fantastic on my 20d

[bl0at3r]

for me its my canon 17-55 f2.8 IS its fantastic on my 20d

thanks paul

pretty sure it will be for me too :)

[The sweep]

Has to be the canon 24 -70 f2.8 the best allrounder for me

[Foggy]

Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 for me - it's quite simply an outstanding piece of kit

[CSB]

Tamron 17-50, its always on the camera.

[MagicMynx]

honestly? Well, I only have 3 lenses - all I need ATM TBH. If I had to choose, it would be the kit lens.

[mini_mad216]

24-70mm f2.8L every time, I love it

[darrenb]

Nikon 24-70mm f2.8