What Do You Think Is The Definition Of A Grail Lens (and how many do you own?)

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>I'm not sure I buy the big reflex lenses as grails, even if they're uncommon. You can always hook the camera to a bigger telescope, and they obviously do nasty things to the bokeh. That said, I guess the difference between the 1200-1700 zoom and a big refractor scope is minimal (the Canon 1200mm at least has autofocus).<br />

<br />

Sadly, I sympathise with the work arrangements (which is why I keep posting here at 2am local time). I've not yet compared my other half to any camera kit in such a way that she actually wants me to stay away, though.</p>

[gary_mayo1]

<p>I have a blast with my Nikkor Mirrors. There is a big difference between them and later knock offs like Vivitar. Mind you, these are manual focus lenses, but that is part of the fun and the charm. Like bow hunting, rather than using a shotgun. eBay always has some Nikkor 500mm reflex lenses for about $250 and up. If you get a nice clean copy that looks / acts new, I would most certainly categorize that as a grail. The 1000mm versions are really fun. You can do anything you want with the background in PP, so you need not be troubled by circles if you want to ex-nay them.</p>

[User_4136860]

<p>After more than fifty years of photography I don't have a "holy grail", any equipment I haven't got already I don't need.</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>In response to the original question, my grail lens would be the one I've just bought (although I haven't bought any in quite a while). She doesn't really understand how lenses work, and why I'd need different ones or more of them, so all she sees is the -$ in the checking account. Since I'm pretty happy with my current kit, I don't anticipate having to discuss it anytime soon...but if i see a great deal on CL and can't resist...</p>

[maciek_stankiewicz]

<p>It would be <strong>Minolta MD 24-105mm f/1.2</strong> :)</p>