One lens vs. multiple lenses

Started Jul 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
YRUNVS
YRUNVS Senior Member • Posts: 1,057
Re: One lens vs. multiple lenses
2

trut_maluglist wrote:

Why on earth would one want to carry around several lenses when an 18-200 (or perhaps 18-135) would cover most of the types of photography they do and would eliminate the necessity of changing lenses all the time?

While a superzoom may cover all of the focal lengths I may want to shoot in a given day, or week, the 70-300 I use to shoot pictures at a mud run likely won't deliver what I am looking for at the pub later when I am shooting 1.8  1/60th a second and 5-digit ISO. I tend to shoot more with my 85mm prime even though I have that FL covered by two zooms. I like the rendering on my 105 2.5p enough to use it regularly even though it is manual focus, which is often more of an inconvenience than switching lenses.  Horses for courses. If a superzoom allows you to get the shots you want in the style and/or rendering you like then that's good for you and saves you some cash and hassle. Others may prefer a different route, and if it works for them, good for them as well.

 YRUNVS's gear list:YRUNVS's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon D7100 Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow