if you could only have 3 lenses.

I think they can also help anyone new to photography understand you don’t really need lots of lenses. Just listing the lenses without saying why those lenses probably isn’t as helpful.

Since I’ve gone for a 2 Lens setup I don’t really miss having numerous lenses just in case of what if. It’s much nicer to go out with a camera and 2 lenses than wondering if you have left something at home. It’s much lighter too, carrying heavy kit around isnt something I enjoy. I remember taking a full bag of 5 lenses and 2 cameras to Skomer one year. I mainly used only two lenses on that trip so the rest was mainly extra baggage. I didn’t enjoy carrying 12kg ish around skomer that year. I see some photographers out with every bit of camera kit they own, it just looks heavy and miserable to carry around.
I generally leave the house with just the one lens that I intend to use - I have a choice of seven lenses for my digital Canon - and just occasionally a second lens in my pocket. I have spent too much of my life working hard to want to do so when I am supposed to be enjoying myself. My full camera bag weighs over 10 kg and o ly leaves the house when I am going on holiday and then it sits in the holiday home while I go out and enjoy myself.
 
That's not the rule :p

It's a hypothetical game. Doesn't say I can't have multiple systems either.

If we're playing the hypothetical game, I'll have an 6-1600 f/1.4 that weighs 28g and is 1" deep. With a mount that automatically adjusts to whichever system it's offered up to. Oh, it has an 8 stop stabiliser as well.
 
If we're playing the hypothetical game, I'll have an 6-1600 f/1.4 that weighs 28g and is 1" deep. With a mount that automatically adjusts to whichever system it's offered up to. Oh, it has an 8 stop stabiliser as well.

hypothetical but base in reality :p
 
3 lenses is about all I will ever need at any one time, so that's easy. Something wide, a nice mid range prime and some form of telephoto and I'm good. I think a harder question would be 'if you can only have one lens' - and it has to be one that exists of course
 
oooh, just one lens? now for me thats easy as I photograph nothing in particular, I use my 24-70 as a walk around lens, my 50 if I want great bokeh, and my 70-200 for a bit more reach, I do half the time take the lot in my bag, but some times I just take the one on the camera depending on where im going and what I think I may be taking pictures of, if I miss an opportunity because I dont have a certain lens then to me its no big deal, but I understand some people may well need to be well prepared and have to take several lenses,
so if I only had one lens it would defiantly be my 24-70mm f2.8
 
The one I have is fine, 14-54 /2.8-3.5 but 50/2 would be nice addition to that ...
I wish I always had good ideas for decent photos to put the lens and camera in proper use...
 
When I had Fuji X-Pro1s I ran 14, 23 (1.4) and 56, now I have Leicas I run 21, 35 and 75 as my main lenses. On my GFX it's 23mm 32-64 and 100-200 (although when Fuji make a 18-32 I'll change the 23 for that). Before the GFX for landscapes I had X-T2 with 10-24, 18-55 (latterly and preferably 16-55) and 50-140).

If I were forced into just 3 it would be on the Leica with the 3 listed.......... but I hope it will never come to it. ;)
 
Nikon 28 1.4e
Nikon 58 1.4g
Nikon 105 1.4e

I have recently picked up the Sigma 40 1.4 and it’s pretty epic...
 
These are pretty much the 3 lenses I use:

Canon 100mm f2.8 macro
Canon 24-105mm f4L as my main walkabout lens
Sigma 150-600mm C for birds/wildlife
 
I'd probably go 24-105 f4 for walkabouts, 85 f1.4 for subject isolation and 18 f2.8 for interiors. However there's lots of 'depends', and if I were travelling I'd leave the 85 behind & take a (tiny) 35 f2.8 instead for people pictures where I need to be unobtrusive.

I love the results of primes but there's never enough time to change lenses, usually because my photography happens while I'm out with others.
 
depends on what's being shot !
one bag may be 14-24, 28-70, 70-200.
another will be 80-400, 300, 400.
then another will have 50, 85, 150 (macro)
Sometimes I may take more than one bag - lol
 
Irix 15mm f2.4
Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VRii
Nikon 500 f4 VR F (but couldn't carry it around now). :)
 
Sony's 24 f/1.4, 85 f/1.4 and 135 f/1.8 for me.
Covers 95% + of all my shots.
My choice would be pretty much the same too : Sony 20 F1.8 , 55 F1.8 and 135 F1.8
 
I would have to get rid of most of my cameras!

My Bronica has two lenses which is plenty - a 70mm and a 250mm. But those will not fit my Nikon bodies for which I have an excellent Vivitar 35 to 200 mm lens. None of those will fit my Pentax K mount cameras for which I have a 28mm and a 50mm lens

My walk-about cameras all have fixed lenses so just the one per camera which is fine and very freeing.
 
16-35mm f2.8, 70-200mm f2.8, 100-400mm f4.5-5.6
 
200mm f/2.8 MFT Panny and frankly a blank space for the other two. Let's fill them with my travel duo, the 12-60 variable aperture and the 100-300..... but if I'm really honest with myself this year it's the lens packing the front of an FZ82 and an iPhone 11
 
I have the three lenses I want/need thankfully. :) No GAS for me anymore. ;) :LOL: All these are on a Nikon D500 btw.

Nikon AF-S 16-80mm f2.8-4E VR ED DX
Nikon AF-P 70-300mm f4.5-5.6E ED VR
Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM

The 16-80mm is the lens that is used for pretty much everything bar sport/distant subjects. I have found it, and the 16-85mm that preceded it, the best combination of quality, range, size, weight and cost. Quality is more than good enough for me. The wide end is wide enough for most situations, and noticeably wider than you would think compared to the many 18- whatever lenses out there. :)

The 70-300mm lens has seen more use than that range of lens on my previous camera (D300S) as I have been taking more pics of Cricket for the last few years. The new AF-P version of the 70-300mm is a lot better wide open than the previous version, and the only downside of the new lens is that it is a 'fly by wire' design which means that the focus can be lost when the camera 'goes to sleep'. :rolleyes: Great lens though, and excellent value for money. :)

For the very few times when the 16-80mm is not wide enough, I have the Sigma 10-20mm. And that is mainly when I am travelling in narrow streets/locations. The fixed f3.5 aperture is nice, but I had used a f4-5.6 version from a friend years ago, and that didn't seem that much of a problem with so wide a lens. Nice to have the newer version though. :)

For what I mainly take pics of, travel/city, landscape, sport and occasionally flying birds, these will do me fine. :)
 
If we're playing the hypothetical game, I'll have an 6-1600 f/1.4 that weighs 28g and is 1" deep. With a mount that automatically adjusts to whichever system it's offered up to. Oh, it has an 8 stop stabiliser as well.

What a waste of an opportunity choosing a hypothetical lens.

I would like a Canon EF 5200mm f/14 (for reach), a Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 (for low light), and a Yongnuo YN50mm f/1.8 (because I am not greedy) please, burleyviking. Just let me know when you will be delivery them.
 
150mm, 210mm, 300mm are my three.

(The 3 lens limitation hits me hard, because I use full frame digital, and film in 6x4.5cm, 6x6cm, 6x7cm, 4x5in, 5x7in and 10x8in. With a three lens limit, I'd stick to large format, and my choice would just about fit all the sizes I use.)

If confined to digital, 14mm Samyang, 50mm f/1.2 Canon and 85mm f/2 OM. Mix and match since the camera takes them all. And medium format film on 6x7 I'd only use 110mm on my RZ67 which is the standard lens for the format.
 
Hmm. If only 3, then 24, 50 and 105mm Macro. The last being that it covers portrait use and macro. But tbh I'd prefer a 4-lens set up; 24, 50, 105 and 200mm. Or maybe a 5-lens set; 24, 50, 85, 105 macro, 200m. Or maybe a 6 lens kit; 24, 50, 85, 105, 135, 200mm.Etc. It's pretty impossible to envisage only having 3 lenses. A mate worked for a while with almost exclusively the 35 and 85mm lenses, but he did eventually find that too restrictive. I am finding my Z6 with 24-70, 50 and an old 135mm f2.8 E series, via the FTZ adapter, to be a pretty good combo mind.
 
I thought this would be easy (12-24, 24-70, 70-200) but to maximise options I'd say:

12-24
24-105
100-400
 
I have four lenses and would not throw one away. The range covered by 3 of the lenses is 12mm to 200mm on a full frame camera but add the Macro Lens for the complete set. While I have occasionally felt I could use a longer lens, I did not think I could justify the expense for just a few shots a year. Of course, if I was a regular nature or sports photographer I would need it.

Dave
 
After 30+ years of Canon ownership moved to Olympus in January so have had time to acquire a few of the fine Olympus lenses so my 3 are
12-100 (IBIS withe EM1 Mark 2 is insane hand held at 10 secs and sharp)
40-150 F2.8 Pro
Panasonic 8-18 F4
 
Back
Top