One lens vs. multiple lenses

Started Jul 30, 2013 | Discussions thread
roby17269 Senior Member • Posts: 1,560
Re: One lens vs. multiple lenses

trut_maluglist wrote:

Advantages of using just one lens:

1) less times changing lenses means lower likelihood of dust getting on the sensor

2) I can change from wide angle to zoom within a second or two. With two lenses, that would take a good 30-60 seconds at best.

More like 10 secs if you have a minimum of experience with changing lenses

Almost all of the other photography enthusiasts I know (almost all are amateurs and most aren't even as advanced as I am) use multiple lenses. Some started out with a 18-55 and then got a 70-200 or 70-300. Others started out with something like a 70-300 and then wanted wide angle capabilities, so they'd get an 11-16 or something like that. Yet another photographer I know insists I'd be far happier using a 50 mm prime lens than an 18-200 zoom. These photographers are stuck with either having to change lenses all the time or having to stick to a certain type of photography each time they shoot. I tell all these photographers about the advantages of the 18-200 lens - especially how I can quickly change from one type of photo to another. Yet these suggestions almost always fall upon deaf ears. When one of these photographers spends his/her next $1000 on a lens, they do something strange like upgrade their 70-200 to a 70-300 rather than get a lens that covers wide angle and zoom.

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?

Why the negativity? "deaf ears"? "do something strange"? "why on earth"?

It's a choice. Everyone has his/her own priorities, especially if we're talking about hobbyist who doesn't have to deliver against a contract or some such. Some will value portability and convenience and less sensor cleaning. Some will value lens' speed and image quality. No one can say that his/her own priorities are "better" or "make more sense" than someone else's. They're just different. Accept that.

If a superzoom works for you then fine. Glad you're happy and don't have to change lenses. When I started with DSLR cameras I wanted only zooms (plural - at the time there were no decent 18-something options) to cover perfectly all focal lengths. Fast forward now I have only primes (save for the fun 8-15mm) and do not feel constrained in the least. I've done 2 days on a trip in NY just with a 17mm and a 135mm. Yes I did have to change lenses... c'mon it is not such a big deal. And if I am focal length-constrained and I cannot move, I can crop or create a panorama.

Horses for courses: what I like to do now (fashion photography with models) means that primes work perfectly for me (I can move around the studio or the location and if I need to change lens there is no real pressure to do it quickly).

Enjoy your photography and don't worry about what others do with theirs. People on this thread have explained already the advantages of primes. You know the advantages of zooms. You decide which ones matter most to you.

-- hide signature --
 roby17269's gear list:roby17269's gear list
Canon EOS-1D X Canon EF 35mm F1.4L USM Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L +13 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