Stupid Question - Lenses

recrudesce

recrudesce

Messages
718
Name
Russ
Edit My Images
No
OK, stupid question this...

What is the benefit of having lenses that overlap ?
I mean, I have a 18-55mm, and a 55-250mm. Why are there lenses out there that are 75-300mm (for example). Doesn't that really overlap about 75% of the 55-250mm or is there something I'm missing ?

What I'm getting at, is why don't lenses go
10-20, 20-55, 55-250, 250-400
rather than
10-20, 18-55, 55-250, 75-300, 100-300 ?

Is there a benefit to using a lens that has most (if not all) of it's focal length in the same range as a lens you already have ?

Sorry if this is a bit of a n00b question - I just can't get my head around it. If I want a focal length beyond the 55-250mm I already have, I'm having to go for a 100-300mm or a 200-400mm right ? Also, what difference does a fixed 50mm lens have over my 18-55mm set to 50mm focal length ?

I'm confused ! HELP ! :thinking::shrug::help:
 
One of the reasons could be that lenses tend to be not as good at the start and finish of their focal lengths.
 
The reason why there are so many lenses that overlap is simply commercial. If they can sell they will get made no matter how many similar lenses exist.

However, a prime lens of fixed focal length tends to give better image quality than a zoom set at the same focal length, but that is not written in tablets of stone.

In an ideal world just having lenses in the 10-20, 20-55, 55-250, 250-400 group would be fine.
Most of us end up with lenses duplicated to some extent.
 
Would you rather not have the flexibility/choice?
 
B_M said:
Would you rather not have the flexibility/choice?
Click to expand...
yeah, but why would you need a 100-200mm if you already had a 75-300mm ?
that's what i cant get my head around :(
 
recrudesce said:
OK, stupid question this...

What is the benefit of having lenses that overlap ?
I mean, I have a 18-55mm, and a 55-250mm. Why are there lenses out there that are 75-300mm (for example). Doesn't that really overlap about 75% of the 55-250mm or is there something I'm missing ?

What I'm getting at, is why don't lenses go
10-20, 20-55, 55-250, 250-400
rather than
10-20, 18-55, 55-250, 75-300, 100-300 ?

Is there a benefit to using a lens that has most (if not all) of it's focal length in the same range as a lens you already have ?

Sorry if this is a bit of a n00b question - I just can't get my head around it. If I want a focal length beyond the 55-250mm I already have, I'm having to go for a 100-300mm or a 200-400mm right ? Also, what difference does a fixed 50mm lens have over my 18-55mm set to 50mm focal length ?

I'm confused ! HELP ! :thinking::shrug::help:
Click to expand...

The only stupid question is the one you don't ask. ;)

The reason that lenses don't run in the sequence you describe is that in real world photography, shooting situations don't warrant such a system. In many situations you'd be constantly changing lenses, whereas with a bit of overlap you're spared constantly doing that.

A fixed 50mm prime will be sharper than your zoom lens covering the same range and usually have a much larger max aperture around 1.8 or larger, so they're much faster to use in low light situations.

Decent modern zoom lenses produce excellent results, but even the best of them wont equal the sharpness you'll get from a prime lens. The best of them are very good indeed and close to the quality of a prime, but invariably the prime will be sharper, so it's a trade off between the convenience of the zoom lens and the better performance of the prime.

Hope that helps.
 
recrudesce said:
yeah, but why would you need a 100-200mm if you already had a 75-300mm ?
that's what i cant get my head around :(
Click to expand...


It's more a case of the 75-300 will suit some folks and a 100-200 would be better for others.

All zoom lenses are a bit of compromise in design and quality somewhere so you have to choose the one that best fits your needs at the time you buy. A biiiiiiig range of focal length, the best image quality, the largest aperture and so on. Once you get a bit further into your photographic journey you're going to end up in that place where even with all the overwhelming choice of lenses, there won't be one that's exactly what you want. :lol:
 
recrudesce said:
so if i wanted to go further than the 250, it'd make sense for me to get this: http://www.simplyelectronics.net/mainproduct.php?pid=597

what's the difference between 250mm and 300mm zoom wise ?
Click to expand...

I'd avoid that particular supplier if were you. Many people report huge problems with them.

That lens would only give you a 50mm increase over the 250mm you already have, so you're carting another bit of weight about for a minor gain in reach. Something like the Canon 100-400L would be a lot more benefit to you, but of course it's a lot more dough.

Choosing your lens range is something you really need to do with a lot of care from the outset, giving a lot of thought to the sort of photogaphy you're likely to be doing. It can get very expensive chopping and changing lenses if you make the wrong choices initially, but you wont be the first or the last if you find yourself in that situation. ;)
 
good call, i wasn't going to use them as a supplier - they do look kinda dodgy if i'm honest.

i think i'm ok with the 18-55, 55-250mm range i have right now. i just wondered why lenses overlapped so much. it seems like it's a combination of being able to sell more lenses, and also having to carry around less equipment.

why cant they just make a 10-500mm and be done with it ;]

the only thing i've been recommended is the 50mm f1.8 as apparently every photographer should have one in their arsenal.

cheers all - appreciated.
 
recrudesce said:
why cant they just make a 10-500mm and be done with it ;]

.
Click to expand...

LOL
We'd all be after one of them, but it's just too much of a zoom range and image quality would be pretty crappy.

I'd recommend a 50mm prime to anyone - provided they use it, otherwise it's a waste, but they're great for taking natural light shots in low light situations without flash.

Don't run away with the idea that you have to have a gapless range of focal lengths. If you look at my lenses under my first post I'm covered from 17mm to 500mm (1000mm with converters) but you'll see plenty of overlap between some of the lenses and a couple of small gaps in the range which don't bother me as I can move my feet enough to make up for those.
 
CT said:
LOL
Don't run away with the idea that you have to have a gapless range of focal lengths.
Click to expand...

Good advice. I'd pretty much decided that I can live with 10-22, 50 and 70-200.

I keep wondering about the 'do it all' walkaround zoom. 24-105 anyone? :bonk:
 
Freester said:
I keep wondering about the 'do it all' walkaround zoom. 24-105 anyone? :bonk:
Click to expand...

LOL. No2 Son has that lens and I have to say it's an absolute belter. :D

EDIT
But no real replacement other than conveniece for the good glass you have there.
 
A couple of things spring to mind:

1) Manufacturers appear to run two different focal lenth ranges for crop and ff bodies; and it's a little "false" to compare across image formats. Keeping to one size sensor, there's not actually that much overlap between the top spec Canon Zooms: 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 for full frame and 10-22, 17-55 and 55-250 for crop.

2) As previously stated, a little overlap aids versitility - you don't want to be constantly changing lenses because you're shooting across a focal lenth range that covers two lenses, if it can be covered by one..
 
There's also more to a lens than the focal range - for example,

- format (EF vs EF-s)
- aperture (max size and whether constant)
- stabalisation, or not
- weather sealed, or not
- macro capabilities
- special features (like soft focus & tilt-shift)
- build and optical quality
- and of course, resulting size and weight (and price :()

So some will stick with the kit lens, some will upgrade that and add a couple of primes, and others just get all of them :D
 
pearce_jj said:
There's also more to a lens than the focal range - for example,

- format (EF vs EF-s)
- aperture (max size and whether constant)
- stabalisation, or not
- weather sealed, or not
- macro capabilities
- special features (like soft focus & tilt-shift)
- build and optical quality
- and of course, resulting size and weight (and price :()

So some will stick with the kit lens, some will upgrade that and add a couple of primes, and others just get all of them :D
Click to expand...

I was just about to post pretty much the same. +1
 
A big overlap is pointless (e.g. having 55-250 and 75-300) but a small overlap can prevent you having to swap lenses, say you had a 24-105 and a 70-200 there is a bit of "middle ground" where you could be using either lens..

if you had a 24-70 and a 70-200 you might find that to do a few shots you want the first lens, but then need a bit more length, so switch to the other lens, but then that doesn't go wide enough a few shots on..
If you had a 24-105 you could stick with that (or the 70-200) for the majority of the shots.

I haven't used my 24-105L much but I have noticed it makes "walkarounds" so much easier than using the 18-55, I've got more flexibility and thus don't feel the need to change to the 55-250.

The 50mm prime is sharper than your kit lens and can shoot down to f1.8 (or lower for the expensive lenses). I've shot in a pretty dark room at 1/4 sec @ f2.0 with no flash.. the kit lens just wont do it !
In general all the prime lenses are sharper than "zoom" lenses, dunno why, I guess they can be more accurate with the glass ?
The street photographers here seem to like the 50mm and 85mm.

far as that 75-300 goes, I wouldn't consider it - the 55-250 is generally accepted as the canon budget zoom.. to go up from there I would look at the 70-300 USM or 100-400L, more expensive yes, but from what I read the 70-300 USM is a better lens than the 55-250.. you'd gain a bit of aperture @250mm I would think. I guess it'll focus quicker too thanks to the USM ?

100-400L... would love one but need to find a bank to rob first!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top