How do you choose your lenses?

<p>

I have been doing research on the SLR bodies and lenses for about 2 months. I

have visited lot of websites, when it came to equipments, IMO, everyone's

judgment seems to match pretty closely. However, when it comes to lens, each

individual reviewer seems to have bit varying perspective of a lens and judgment.

I guess, the reason for the difference in equipment vs a lens review is that,

equipment is mostly electronic performance where as lens is more complicated

science.

</p>

</br>

</br>

<p>

My question is ...

<p>

 

I am curious to know, how would you choose your lenses? How do you evaluate a

lens before you buy them?

Or you just follow one person's review?

<p>

I buy fast prime lenses. They help me with creating my art. It's how I see things. I find

controlled available light most of the time. Lenses are an investment but bodies get

changed.

 

I'm waiting to get my new body. Then I'll be young again. Now where's my brain?

A lot of it has to do with many years of experience working with your own lenses and looking at other's samples. For instance a friend of mine has owned virtually every manual focus 35mm film camera ever made and has slides from them all. So one day we sat down, went through them all and compared the different lenses. It was the best educational experience as regards various lens qualities I ever had as we could see and compare directly the differences in Leica vs Contax vs Canon L vs Nikon ED, etc. (which we decided was pretty much their overall order of quality, BTW). So I now have a pretty good feel for judging lens quality since I now have a good frame of reference as to just how good a lens can actually be.

 

So today when I evaluate a new lens I can pull on that experience.

 

Now to more directly answer your question, I do use the various lens tests sites coupled with my own experience as to how the lenses I have used compare with the test site's evaluation of that lens, and then extrapolate from there. I also keep in mind that there can be a tremendous lens to lens variation in build quality, i.e. some will get a very good copy of the lens and love it whereas some will get a bad copy and hate it. I also know that as a general rule fixed lenses will be better than zooms and L or ED zoom lenses will generally be of better quality than non-L or ED zooms. For instance Canon's fixed non-L lenses compare optically very well with their L zooms, with their L fixed being the best.

 

Not sure if this answers your question very well or not, but hopefully it has helped some.

This is a big question, so I'll just provide part of the answer...

 

I think about what perspectives I need, then look at places like Photo.net and Fredmiranda.com reviews. After buying lenses for a while, I realized you get what you pay for, and so now I try and save up for the nicer lenses instead of getting cheaper lenses now. There are usually a few price/performance gems in any lens line. If you want those perspectives, it's worth digging to find them.

 

I also tend to shoot primes, since I like to be constrained in my artistic work. If I'm on a job though, I'll usually bring/rent a good zoom, so I don't missing anything.

Easy.

 

I start by considering all lenses - I eliminate those not made by Canon - I eliminate those for which there is an L-Series product covering the same range - I eliminate those for which there is a wider-spec'ed L-Series lens to be had (eg I'll buy a 70-200/2.8 IS over a 70-200/4 IS.

 

And then I buy what's left :)

i just shoot what i have lying around...

 

:)=

At least start by having a plan of what you are going to buy, so you don't end up buying multiple lenses that do the same thing. Unless you have supernatural discipline (or are very tightfisted with money) you won't stick to the plan perfectly, but if you can stick to it partly, it will help.

 

Past that, I made decisions about specific lenses (when more than one lens can possibly fill a role) by sort of a tossing-together of reports from reliable testers (such as Bob Atkins or the reviews on Photozone.de) and less formal reports, such as accounts from people who've built up credibility over time in forums I frequent. informal reports from strangers, and the "survey" results on photozone.de don't get much credibility. Magazine reviews get no credibility.

How do I choose my lenses? Let me count the ways.... ;)

 

Sometimes, I get convinced by some media campaign that I need some kind of lens I don't have. This led to my purchase of a Macro lens.

 

Sometimes, I have an abstract desire to cover a lens range not represented - this led to my purchase of a 75-300 IS lens (when it was still current).

 

Sometimes you want to improve a range you already have and get new features: 17-85mm IS.

 

Finally, sometimes you go out and do an extensive shoot and find that you really needed something you hadn't planned on getting: 10-20mm ultrawide (I call this 'barndoor' buying - from closing the barn door after the horse is stolen).

"I am curious to know, how would you choose your lenses? How do you evaluate a lens before you buy them? Or you just follow one person's review?"

 

First I make a lot of photographs.

 

After a time I begin to see patterns of use - what focal lengths and apertures, etc. seem most useful to me. I also begin to see certain types of shots where my equipment may not be ideal.

 

I identify certain specific features I need in order to get or improve these types of shots. Do I need longer? Wider? Zoom? Prime? Larger aperture? Closer focusing capability? IS?

 

Once I figure this out I start to identify lenses that might provide the specific features I need. I read. I review. I think.

 

Eventually one or more options begin to emerge as the most likely solutions. I may even think that one starts to look like the best.

 

At the point that one seems like "the lens..." I stop and sit on the decision for awhile. Knowing how easy it is to be seduced by Lens Lust, I've learned that a bit of distance from the decision often reveals the

possibility that the first choice is not the best one. In general I wait a month or more. Sometimes in the end I realize that it was just Lens Lust and I don't make a purchase. Sometimes I realize that my first instinct

was wrong and I end up making a better choice. Sometimes it turns out that my original choice was right.

 

Then I make a purchase. Just made one yesterday.

 

Here's what I do not do:

 

I do not buy another lens because I happen to have some money. I do not buy another lens because I want to expand my kit. I do not buy a lens unless I can clearly and concretely articulate what purpose it will

serve in my photography. I do not buy another lens because every photographer should have this lens. I do not buy a lens just because it is on sale.

 

Dan

I go and rent (or borrow, if possible) the ones I'm interested in, shoot a few rolls, and take notes. If this route is open to you, I highly recommend it. Blogs and review sites are helpful -- especially to decide what is on your short list for consideration. But when it comes time to decide what to buy from your short list, nothing compares to trying them out in person.

 

At least one surprising result from this approach was against the 85/1.2. I was completely sold on the idea of the lens, but when I rented it for a weekend I found that I just didn't like the perspective as much as I thought I would. A later rental weekend had me comparing wides and I absolutely fell in love with the 35/1.4, which I had expected to be of less interest.

 

Anyway, I guess my point is that there are factors that emerge in use (even relatively brief use) that I would not have thought to look for in a review that affect whether I will actually use a lens. So rent before you buy if you can.

 

cheers,

 

Chris

there are three criteria. price, versatility (convenience), and image quality. there's a fourth criteria, speed, but that's only for people who know they need to shoot wide open under bad conditions.

 

i only care about image quality. money is not to be considered -- if it was i couldn't justify spending what i do. i'm not rich but i'm willing to part with the bucks to pursue photography.

 

i don't care about versatility or convenience. if i need a versatile zoom i use one. if i have the time to use a fixed lens, i put one on the camera. if i need a zoom and i don't have one in a certain range, i use whatever i have. but, i'm always going after the same thing -- the best image quality i can get under the circumstances.

 

all this sounds obvious but most shooters are not going for the best image quality, they're going for the most convenient lens (that cost the least) and, by and large, most photographers are willing to live with the results.

 

i will move (to another position), stop and change lenses (even if it's cold, rainy, etc), use a tripod, whatever, to get the best image quality. i'll even come back at another time of day or year. most shooters will just twist the zoom ring until the subject looks okay and trip the shutter. considering all the energy i put into it i want a lens that delivers.

 

that's what i look for in a lens -- will its imagery justify all the money/energy i will expend in getting the picture, and will the picture i end up with make me feel that i've done something worthwhile. if not, i get a lens that will and put the other one on a shelf

This is a good question. First off I buy a lens because I know I need it for my photography. The selection of the actual lens is a three way compromise between sharpness, versatlity, and cost. Other lesser considerations are handling and build. I can't see how you can sensibly buy a lens without first having a clear idea of how it's to be used. Everybody is different with different wants and preferences, that's why different people buy different lenses for the same job. In my case I take few wide angle shots, but I need a WA for the odd occasion when it's required, hence the old kit lens is sufficient. Most of my photography is around the 50 to 85mm length and sometimes out further so I have a 50mm and 85mm prime and cover the range 70-200 with a good quality zoom. I also love animals and go on safari every few years, I have a 100-400LIS 'cause I want to keep the amount of gear I travel with down, but at least 400mm is needed. See, every lens has a purpose or use, and its cost/quality is proportionate to its importance for my photography and budget.

"First off I buy a lens because I know I need it for my photography. The selection of the

actual lens is a three way compromise between sharpness, versatlity, and cost."

 

Neil, I wish more people would understand those very important and concisely stated

concepts.

 

Dan

>>> how would you choose your lenses? <<<

 

By using the experience of buying the wrong or inappropriate lens several times, about thirty or so years ago, and then having to sell them second hand.

 

I detest selling things privately.

 

Doing something one hates, makes for a very fast learning curve.

 

Thereafter always prioritising lens speed as the first criterion: and then work through the three other criteria I consider important in order (similarly as mentioned by NF):

 

1. sharpness.

 

2. applicability both individually and as a partner in the whole lens kit (versatility as NF mentions)

 

3. cost.

 

But with the caveat on COST of never buying anything I could not afford, or the business would not make money with.

 

As a private purchase I will do without until I can afford it, if the business needed it for a one off job, I would rent.

 

Oh, and I do not read many lens reviews, I never have: I like asking questions instead.

 

WW

I like Colins idea.

Dan Mitchell wrote:

 

"First I make a lot of photographs.

 

After a time I begin to see patterns of use - what focal lengths and apertures, etc. seem most useful to me. I also begin to see certain types of shots where my equipment may not be ideal.

 

I identify certain specific features I need in order to get or improve these types of shots. Do I need longer? Wider? Zoom? Prime? Larger aperture? Closer focusing capability? IS?

 

Once I figure this out I start to identify lenses that might provide the specific features I need. I read. I review. I think.

 

Eventually one or more options begin to emerge as the most likely solutions. I may even think that one starts to look like the best.

 

At the point that one seems like "the lens..." I stop and sit on the decision for awhile. Knowing how easy it is to be seduced by Lens Lust, I've learned that a bit of distance from the decision often reveals the possibility that the first choice is not the best one. In general I wait a month or more. Sometimes in the end I realize that it was just Lens Lust and I don't make a purchase. Sometimes I realize that my first instinct was wrong and I end up making a better choice. Sometimes it turns out that my original choice was right.

 

Then I make a purchase."

 

I knew it - Impulse buyer! :)

I buy the lenses that I feel will enable me to get the photographs I want (want not need - I'm not earning my living this way), and will do it well and conveniently, and are of good enough quality that when something doesn't work out, it's my fault not theirs. Very often, that means L-series lenses, but not always - for example, the 85/1.8 does what I want quite adequately, I see no reason to change it for the 85/1.2L. Size and weight are quite important criteria for me, so I use the f/4 zooms supplemented with fast primes rather than the f/2.8 zooms. And, based on experience of using a -1V both with and without the PB-E2, the 1D series are a non-starter for me - but you're asking only about lenses.

You need to think about what you want to shoot and in what conditions and then consider that vs budget, weight/size and timeline. It helps if you have had a SLR system before.

 

Things to think about:

 

1. Will you shoot full frame, APS-H or APS-C?

 

2. Will you perhaps start with APS-C and progress to FF later, or perhaps use both together?

 

3. Main subjects: People (candid or posed), nature (birds [from a hide or waling about the woods), lions, insects, flowers [macro lenses]), sports, landscape....

 

4. How comfortable with weight and bulk are you, for the system bag for a single lens/camera combination?

When thinking about this consider if you got every lens and accessory you wanted you could probably not carry it all, so one tends to end up with sub-kits for different applications. Don't forget you may have accessories to carry, tripods, monopods, flash guns etc.

 

5. Sharpness and some extent other aberrations can be got from reviews and Canon's MTF charts. It is nice to see the quality trade-off vs price etc but remember in real life sharpness will be severely limited without a tripod and by the limitations of depth of field vs diffraction softening, ie sharpness is not key, important but not key.

 

6. Zoom or prime: Could be a mixture, Canon tends to be a bit limited on primes below 50mm but good for telephoto primes. I am zoom only below 28mm and prime only above 100mm and a mixture in between.

 

7. If zoom you have a choice of consumer zooms (a bit hit and miss), or L-Zooms either f2.8 or f4. Personally I use f4L zooms (where available) and use fast primes as I don't consider f2.8 to be fast.

 

8. Is IS useful to your subjects or not?

 

I did a study exercise like you, it is out of date now but it might still give some thoughts. http://www.zen20934.zen.co.uk/photography/lensselection.htm

There is some real good advice from experienced photographer above me here. I will just add that when looking for a compromise of lens speed, value, and versatility, I picked the Canon 24-105 L IS to go on my 40D. It offered a lot of versatility for my usage and so far I am extremely pleased with its performance. Coupled with the 10-22 and 100-400, it offers me quite a lot. But as others have suggested, it depends on what your interest are.

You have to figure out what you want to shoot and how. That will dictate your selection.

This is probably the only time I'd suggest something along the lines of "you should have this," but it's usually a good idea to pick a high quality standard zoom lens. The 24-70 or 24-105 are ideal for this, or perhaps the 17-55 2.8 on a crop body (or maybe you decide you only want to shoot primes, meaning you should disregard this.) Things that are wider, longer, closer etc. are more specific, and one should wait to see if the need is there before purchasing such a tool. I bought a 200 2.8L a few years ago for an event after justifying to myself that I "needed" to have such a lens because "I didn't have that range covered." Now my razor sharp and relatively pricey 200 only comes out of its case a few times a year because I really don't shoot telephoto that often. As said above, it always pays to think these things through...

Colin wrote about me: "I knew it - Impulse buyer! :)"

 

Uh, let me think about that for awhile before I respond. ;-)

 

Dan

>>> How do you choose your lenses?

 

It's about how close I want to get - and then how much light I expect.

 

Ultimate sharpness, blah, blah, blah, just doesn't interest me - and rarely drives the strength

of a compelling photo.

I shoot available light photography (no flash, etc.). So, f/2.8 is the slowest I can go. This automatically eliminates all the variable maximum aperture lenses, and some of the L lenses. I have plans of upgrading to a 5D or 1D, so no EF-S for me either. From there, it's just a matter of selecting the appropriate focal length, usually.

I also shoot available light. Quite often I do this by making light from my 580EXII available ;)

<p>Sorry, couldn't resist that one MB :)

<p>For the OP, Dan Mitchell put it nicely, so I won't add much, except to say that I also avoid EF-S lenses because I plan on going FF dSLR sometime in the near future and in my part of the world I can't exactly trade them in...