Opinion: the 16-80/4 a purposeless lens Locked

Started 4 days ago | Discussions thread
Flat view
This thread is locked.
deednets Forum Pro • Posts: 12,291
Opinion: the 16-80/4 a purposeless lens

I just read yet another post advocating the 16-80/4 as a "travel" lens.

I am on the other side of the fence, thinking that whenever you travel you should take lenses that have "purpose" ... as in the opposite from "general purpose" (whatever that means, a record of where you were?).

I believe you should take your best gear that is "target" gear, be it for portraits, macros or wildlife.

Why is "travel" often associated with wide ranging lenses? 12-300mm anyone?

To illustrate what I mean let me just say that I would be far more interested in somebody saying he/she was going to Ladakh with just a 5DII plus the 135/2.0 than with a 24-70/4.

Like biza43 said in the other thread: you miss out on taking some pics, but so what?

Any opinion out there thinking that pics taken with the 16-80 (or whatever other zoom that comes to mind) as in "general purpose" is any good?

Thanks for reading but this has been a pet "dislike" for a long time for me ...


 deednets's gear list:deednets's gear list
Sony RX1R II Fujifilm X-Pro3 Sony a7C Sony a7R IIIA Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +9 more
Canon EOS 5D Mark II
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow