Lens Frustration

phodru

phodru

Messages
1,218
Edit My Images
No
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).
 
I imagine because it would end up being a "jack of all trades and master of none" kind of lens :shrug:
 
If that's what you're after, what's wrong with the plethora of 18-300mm etc lenses on offer?
 
Daysleeper40 said:
I imagine because it would end up being a "jack of all trades and master of none" kind of lens :shrug:
Click to expand...

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..?
 
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.
 
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?
 
CyBeRkId2002 said:
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.
Click to expand...

It's a wonder nobody has come up with this idea of ultra wide - telephoto. There's a mint to be made innit! ;)
 
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?
 
Supernatural said:
It's a wonder nobody has come up with this idea of ultra wide - telephoto. There's a mint to be made innit! ;)
Click to expand...

You can get the Canon 28-300 at about £2K. Wider and longer with decent glass would no doubt cost considerably more.
 
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!
 
coldpenguin said:
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?
Click to expand...

See my last reply!

pearce_jj said:
compact with a wide converter should do the trick
Click to expand...

You mean Bridge (compacts are for wimps!). Dang... why didn't I think of that... :thinking:

dod said:
You can get the Canon 28-300 at about £2K. Wider and longer with decent glass would no doubt cost considerably more.
Click to expand...

Canon is for wimps! (just joking) :LOL:

c_robinson said:
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!
Click to expand...

Yeah Dad's Army more like... :D
 
Supernatural said:
Yeah just remind me to watch the next Derren Brown How To Win The Lottery. :(
Click to expand...

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?
 
I'm just thinking my photo threads don't get so many reply's as this and in such short a time too....... :shrug:
 
DigitalRelish said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.)
 
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..
 
joxby said:
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:
Click to expand...

This is gettin' way to technical for me now!!
As for your question.. A bit of both maybe...... :cautious:

JJ! said:
Surely a Tamron 18-270 or Sigma 18-250 are still going to give better results than a Fuji bridge camera?!
Click to expand...

You saw the price of those?! And I had one of those Fuji's before and it was dead on like.

Craft said:
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..
Click to expand...

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:
 
JJ! said:
Surely a Tamron 18-270 or Sigma 18-250 are still going to give better results than a Fuji bridge camera?!
Click to expand...

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.
 
hashcake said:
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.
Click to expand...

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!
 
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.
 
HoppyUK said:
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.
Click to expand...


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
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top