What is the coolest lens you've used?

[Saadsalem]

I would like to understand fun as the best or favorite, hence my best is the

Nikkor 80-400mm.

[Sanford]

<p>I usually go with one lens and one camera on a given day and convince myself I've made the perfect choice. Today its the XE1 and the 27mm. This combo has proven to be less than perfect in the past but I would sure like to make it work for once.</p>

[fred_haeseker]

<p>Same as JDM von Weinberg for the same reasons, although my PC Nikkor is an older model, the original 35/3.5. An old one but a good one, amazingly sharp.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>Takumar 200mm f3.5(Preset). This lens is a pain to carry, but once you get used to it you are rewarded by the images coming from such an old lens...<br>

http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/Takumar-200mm-F3.5.html</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<blockquote>

<p>0.95!? That's a really wide aperture! I'd imagine the DoF isn't that great?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Spencer, I can't say that I ever had need of a depth of field that shallow--I got the lens originally in order to shoot in low light. It really does't come into its own as a useful lens until about f/2, however, and so I have had much better luck with modern 50mm autofocus lenses, either f/1.4 or 1.8, especially on low-light cameras.<br>

<br /> --Lannie</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I like my 15mm fisheye.</p>

[Brad_]

<p>>>> I like my 15mm fisheye.</p>

<p>Here's a snap using that lens.</p>

<center>.

<p><img src="http://citysnaps.net/2015%20Photos/Dog%2012-19-09.jpg" alt="" /> <br /> <em> San Francisco, California • Copyright ©Brad Evans 2016 </em><br>

.</p>

</center>

[Sanford]

<p>The 18-200mm Nikkor zoom on a D300 is/was the combination that could cover it all.</p>

[johne37179]

<p>I would say the Nikkor 10.5mm full frame fisheye.</p>

[mjferron]

<p>My Nikon 28mm pre-Ai F2. Not a tiny lens but superb.</p>

[Bill C]

Not the traditional sort of lens, but certainly interesting - several times I've sat down with the operator of an electron microscope at our local

testing lab while they looked at (and photographed) samples for me. Incredible capabilities.

 

We've looked at "stabilizer scum" from color processing; what looks like white powder under a regular microscope turns into zillions of

perfectly formed little spheres, many embedded in the film. Turns out it's what they call "matte bead," an integral part of normal films that

lets the film slide on itself; otherwise roll film would be almost impossible to handle.

 

Another time we studied digital camera "sensor dirt;" they suggested that I might be able to pick up particles on the tip of a needle (they were right). When samples are "in the beam," they can move around and zoom, and also do what they call X-Ray elemental analysis to tell what elements are in it. I always thought my operator was the senior tech because he would reassign the other operator while he took over. It was years before I realized that he was the Lab Director; he said that my stuff "is always interesting."