Frustrated having "too" many lenses

kisse · Nov 3, 2017

Hello!

I've got to the point where I have 8 lenses in use and I wouldn't want to get rid of any of them. I should be able to be fine with less lenses, but I see situations, where I need all of them. Do you see any unnecessary lens in this list? I am also considering move to FX in future, so 14mm and 50mm are kind of saved for that situation.

D7200 + grip

Sigma 8-16mm 4.5- (uwa, dramatic landscapes etc. and sold if moved to fx)

Samyang 14mm 2.8 (low light landscapes, night sky etc. and uwa for fx in future)

Sigma 17-50 2.8 os (general use, one lens solution, sold if moved to fx)

Nikon 50mm 1.8g (shallow dof shots, normal for future fx and too cheap to sell)

Sigma 105mm os macro (insects and other macro)

Tamron 70-200 2.8 vc (low light telephoto)

Nikon AF-D 75-240 (lightweight telephoto, very cheap)

Sigma 150-600 C (birds, wildlife)

In my opinion this list is too long, but I find use for all of them. Is it stupid to keep that much lenses for D7200 when photography is just hobby for me?

Gerry Winterbourne · Nov 3, 2017

kisse said:
I've got to the point where I have 8 lenses in use and I wouldn't want to get rid of any of them. I should be able to be fine with less lenses, but I see situations, where I need all of them. Do you see any unnecessary lens in this list?

No lens is unnecessary if you have a use for it, so as you have stated a purpose for all of these lenses (except one, see below) none of them is unnecessary as long as you shoot the things you list.

kisse said:
I am also considering move to FX in future, so 14mm and 50mm are kind of saved for that situation.

D7200 + grip

Sigma 8-16mm 4.5- (uwa, dramatic landscapes etc. and sold if moved to fx)

For the same use on FX the Sigma 12-24 is significantly bigger and heavier. A 1.4X TC with the 8-16 will be cheaper and lighter; you wouldn't lose quality compared to DX but neither would you gain.

kisse said:
Samyang 14mm 2.8 (low light landscapes, night sky etc. and uwa for fx in future)

Sigma 17-50 2.8 os (general use, one lens solution, sold if moved to fx)

Nikon 50mm 1.8g (shallow dof shots, normal for future fx and too cheap to sell)

Sigma 105mm os macro (insects and other macro)

I'd add a set of extension tubes for even closer macro. And a TC as well gets you even closer.

kisse said:
Tamron 70-200 2.8 vc (low light telephoto)

Nikon AF-D 75-240 (lightweight telephoto, very cheap)

This is the exception I mentioned; in use it more or less duplicates the 70-200 so it's only value is relatively minor weight saving.

kisse said:
Sigma 150-600 C (birds, wildlife)

In my opinion this list is too long, but I find use for all of them. Is it stupid to keep that much lenses for D7200 when photography is just hobby for me?

Is it stupid to take photos? Obviously not, so it isn't stupid to own lenses that let you take the photos you want.

kisse · Nov 3, 2017

Gerry Winterbourne said:
Gerry Winterbourne said:

I am also considering move to FX in future, so 14mm and 50mm are kind of saved for that situation.

D7200 + grip

Sigma 8-16mm 4.5- (uwa, dramatic landscapes etc. and sold if moved to fx)

Click to expand...

For the same use on FX the Sigma 12-24 is significantly bigger and heavier. A 1.4X TC with the 8-16 will be cheaper and lighter; you wouldn't lose quality compared to DX but neither would you gain.

Yeah that is possibility, but instead I'd be fine with 14mm samyang I have and 24-70 that I'd get after selling 8-16 and 17-50.

Gerry Winterbourne said:
Gerry Winterbourne said:

Sigma 105mm os macro (insects and other macro)

Click to expand...

I'd add a set of extension tubes for even closer macro. And a TC as well gets you even closer.

I have set of tubes already, but TC is worth considering. How does it affect when shooting macro? Adds 1:1 working distance and FL or is there something else to think?

Gerry Winterbourne said:
Gerry Winterbourne said:

Tamron 70-200 2.8 vc (low light telephoto)

Nikon AF-D 75-240 (lightweight telephoto, very cheap)

Click to expand...

This is the exception I mentioned; in use it more or less duplicates the 70-200 so it's only value is relatively minor weight saving.

I know those are duplicate, but I'd hardly get money from that 75-240 so its fine for daylight hikes since it is so light compared to 70-200 that I am not selling.

Gerry Winterbourne · Nov 3, 2017

kisse said:
Gerry Winterbourne said:

kisse said:

I am also considering move to FX in future, so 14mm and 50mm are kind of saved for that situation.

D7200 + grip

Sigma 8-16mm 4.5- (uwa, dramatic landscapes etc. and sold if moved to fx)

Click to expand...

For the same use on FX the Sigma 12-24 is significantly bigger and heavier. A 1.4X TC with the 8-16 will be cheaper and lighter; you wouldn't lose quality compared to DX but neither would you gain.

Click to expand...

Yeah that is possibility, but instead I'd be fine with 14mm samyang I have and 24-70 that I'd get after selling 8-16 and 17-50.

Yes, I use my 8-16 almost as two primes of 8 and 16, so if you are happy with 14mm compared to 12mm you can get rid of the 8-16 without replacing it.

kisse said:
kisse said:

kisse said:

Sigma 105mm os macro (insects and other macro)

Click to expand...

I'd add a set of extension tubes for even closer macro. And a TC as well gets you even closer.

Click to expand...

I have set of tubes already, but TC is worth considering. How does it affect when shooting macro? Adds 1:1 working distance and FL or is there something else to think?

It makes little if any difference to working distance but it magnifies the image, so 1:1 goes to about 1:0.7 for a 1.4X TC. With extension tubes as well you can get to about 1:0.4.

With anything that isn't flat you need focus stacking, though.

--
---
Gerry
___________________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006

Galleries by Gerry Winterbourne

www.pbase.com

[email protected]

kisse · Nov 3, 2017

Thanks for advice. More magnification without getting closer to subject sounds nice. So far my favourite macro shot is this (just with the 105mm, no accessories or stacking):

--

Loading…

www.flickr.com

Mystery member · Nov 3, 2017

kisse said:
Hello!

I've got to the point where I have 8 lenses in use and I wouldn't want to get rid of any of them. I should be able to be fine with less lenses, but I see situations, where I need all of them. Do you see any unnecessary lens in this list? I am also considering move to FX in future, so 14mm and 50mm are kind of saved for that situation.

Sigma 8-16mm

Samyang 14mm

Sigma 17-50

Nikon 50mm

Sigma 105mm

Tamron 70-200 2.8

Nikon AF-D 75-240

Sigma 150-600

In my opinion this list is too long, but I find use for all of them. Is it stupid to keep that much lenses for D7200 when photography is just hobby for me?

I don't see a problem with your lens selection, although the 75-240mm seems a bit surplus to requirements.

My suggestion is that you plan on keeping the D7200 with the best of your existing lenses, and restrict your (future) FX purchases to additional prime lenses such as 24mm and 35mm, since you have just about everything else covered in DX.

With the D750/D850, the wide angle zoom options are expensive (e.g. to replace the DX 8-16mm), as are most of the other zooms.

I have a useful range of DX lenses, and was considering going down the FX path (with my 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8), but eventually jumped ship to Sony a6000/a7 and four FE lenses that I swap around between them. That wasn't a cheap option, but I was a bit concerned about the bulk of the D750.

kisse · Nov 3, 2017

Yeah, but as said before, 75-240 is cheap and for lightweight hikes in good light. For DX, I don't find need for any other lens and actually would like to have less, but then I'd miss something.

As 24-70 I've considered second hand tamron 2.8 vc, that I'd be able to get for the money I'd get from both 8-16 and 17-50. Other than that, I would't need to change any lenses and it won't be that much heavier then. Lack of "reach" wouldn't be an issue and after that 14mm samyang and 24mm wide end of the zoom lens would be enough.

yardcoyote · Nov 3, 2017

Says who? Nobody has to justify their lens collection to anybody. As long as you have the space to store them, who cares how many lenses you have? I personally have way, way "too many" prime lenses between 20 and 55mm in focal length. (9 at last count, across two systems, plus the Pentax 20-40mm Limited zoom, a most weird and wonderful lens). This bothers me not a single bit , and I am seriously thinking about buying another one.

LordKOTL · Nov 3, 2017

yardcoyote said:
Says who? Nobody has to justify their lens collection to anybody. As long as you have the space to store them, who cares how many lenses you have? I personally have way, way "too many" prime lenses between 20 and 55mm in focal length. (9 at last count, across two systems, plus the Pentax 20-40mm Limited zoom, a most weird and wonderful lens). This bothers me not a single bit , and I am seriously thinking about buying another one.

I do...to my wife.

Mainly for the storage requirements since we both have an mutual agreement that we won't hoard stuff that we use maybe once or twice and then never use again because we got something better. If I "upgrade" a lens, the old one should go--just like if she upgrade something of hers, she donates the old one it replaced.

So, per the OP, that 75-240 would be the obvious odd-one out within my paradigm. However, if he does have the space and can justify use of all his lenses, you're 100% correct: they're getting use and thus are needed.

Mark_A · Nov 3, 2017

I only have 5 lenses..

All are FX because I always planned to get a FF camera at some point.

I have

20mm f2.8 Nikon

50mm f1.8 Nikon

85mm f1.8 Nikon

28-70mm f2.8 Sigma

80-400mm f4.5-5.6 VR AF

There are perhaps two more I would like, but I am holding off for the time being.

Mark_A

Thread for Sunrise & Sunset pictures (part 3!)

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60273364

hotdog321 · Nov 3, 2017

If you use them, no. But I switched to high end pro zooms and never looked back. I'm an editorial photographer and own some great gear, but I probably shoot 85% of my assignments with two zooms.

Mark_A · Nov 3, 2017

hotdog321 said:
If you use them, no. But I switched to high end pro zooms and never looked back. I'm an editorial photographer and own some great gear, but I probably shoot 85% of my assignments with two zooms.

Hi Craig, do you mind me asking which 2 pro zooms you use most?

If you were a wedding photographer I would guess 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8

Mark_A

Thread for Sunrise & Sunset pictures (part 3!)

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60273364

hotdog321 · Nov 3, 2017

On two full frame cameras I use a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II. But I do occasionally swap out the 16-35 for a 24-70 f/2.8L II.

I shoot editorial stuff, not weddings, so the wide range of focal lengths allows me more creative range. If I shot weddings, though, I would definitely be using the 24-70--it is just a perfect range for parties, galas, events and whatnot.

Andy010 · Nov 3, 2017

What's missing in your line-up is a tilt shift lens for architectural subjects.

Mark_A · Nov 3, 2017

hotdog321 said:
On two full frame cameras I use a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II. But I do occasionally swap out the 16-35 for a 24-70 f/2.8L II.

I shoot editorial stuff, not weddings, so the wide range of focal lengths allows me more creative range. If I shot weddings, though, I would definitely be using the 24-70--it is just a perfect range for parties, galas, events and whatnot.

I was having a look at your site and I like your images. Am I right that you use a bit of off camera flash?

Mark_A

Thread for Sunrise & Sunset pictures (part 3!)

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60273364

yardcoyote · Nov 3, 2017

I very well might end up unloading at least one or possibly two or more of these primes-- ones that represent dead ends and some flailing around I did when I converted to digital and wasn't sure exactly what my needs would be. The others are all in at least occasional use and most were bought so cheaply that they aren't worth the trouble to sell. Some may eventually be given away, or traded in as a lot against another used lens. I never expected have this many lenses, but then I never expected to have this many cameras-- and each needs to have at least one normal prime or it is no good to me. I never understood owning a camera body and keeping it stored with a body cap on it, when it could be sitting with a lens on it instead, ready to grab and go.

As for the spousal situation, the Other Old Pentaxian and I stay well clear of each other's hobbies.

hotdog321 · Nov 3, 2017

Mark_A said:
hotdog321 said:

On two full frame cameras I use a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II. But I do occasionally swap out the 16-35 for a 24-70 f/2.8L II.

I shoot editorial stuff, not weddings, so the wide range of focal lengths allows me more creative range. If I shot weddings, though, I would definitely be using the 24-70--it is just a perfect range for parties, galas, events and whatnot.

Click to expand...

I was having a look at your site and I like your images. Am I right that you use a bit of off camera flash?

Mark_A

Thread for Sunrise & Sunset pictures (part 3!)
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60273364

You bet. Off camera and often a second slaved (likely gelled) background flash. You can do a lot with two camera strobes.

--
photojournalist
http://craighartley.zenfolio.com/

LordKOTL · Nov 3, 2017

yardcoyote said:
I very well might end up unloading at least one or possibly two or more of these primes-- ones that represent dead ends and some flailing around I did when I converted to digital and wasn't sure exactly what my needs would be. The others are all in at least occasional use and most were bought so cheaply that they aren't worth the trouble to sell. Some may eventually be given away, or traded in as a lot against another used lens. I never expected have this many lenses, but then I never expected to have this many cameras-- and each needs to have at least one normal prime or it is no good to me. I never understood owning a camera body and keeping it stored with a body cap on it, when it could be sitting with a lens on it instead, ready to grab and go.

As for the spousal situation, the Other Old Pentaxian and I stay well clear of each other's hobbies.

Oh, we steer clear but we have finite space and both of us have hobbies that can collect stuff no longer used, so hence the agreement between us.

I think that's a salient point though: do you *use* it. If it's virtually collecting dust, why keep it? If you do use it and have a tangible need, by all means keep it!

Mark_A · Nov 3, 2017

hotdog321 said:
Mark_A said:

hotdog321 said:

On two full frame cameras I use a 16-35 f/4L IS and a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II. But I do occasionally swap out the 16-35 for a 24-70 f/2.8L II.

I shoot editorial stuff, not weddings, so the wide range of focal lengths allows me more creative range. If I shot weddings, though, I would definitely be using the 24-70--it is just a perfect range for parties, galas, events and whatnot.

Click to expand...

I was having a look at your site and I like your images. Am I right that you use a bit of off camera flash?

Click to expand...

You bet. Off camera and often a second slaved (likely gelled) background flash. You can do a lot with two camera strobes.

A remote flash trigger is on my Christmas list

I have been meaning to get one for some time.

Mark_A

Thread for Sunrise & Sunset pictures (part 3!)

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/60273364

John Michael Winterbourne · Nov 3, 2017

I'm afraid to say this, but in my contrarian opinion, your quandrary isn't about having too many lens options for your single camera.....

What I believe you should really be asking yourself is "do I have enough cameras?" - to actually take the sort of photographs in the way that you would like to, whatever the circumstances.

I should probably try to explain that a little better. I have a D7100, and just about as many lenses that I could take photos on it with, as anyone on this forum could shake a stick at - fast primes, zooms both fast and slow, legacy MF lenses. I just like lenses. But I, as often as not these days, find myself in situations where I want to take photographs, but a fairly big DSLR with whatever lens, isn't what I want to use.

Frustrated having "too" many lenses

Active member

Forum Pro

Active member

Forum Pro

Active member

Forum Pro

Active member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts