tail wagging the dog?

[blue_max]

You have say, an L zoom lens and two third party lenses in your bag. Do you switch lenses to get the best shot or move hell or high water to be able to use the 'L'?

Will you ever be happy knowing that the image quality would be even better with the best lens.

Can anyone actually have all the lenses to deal with any situation (and have time to select and install them).

I want to know about the Dud lenses you bought and never used and why. Or the best lens and what you ended up using them for (portaits, landscapes etc).

Discuss.

Graham

[jfred]

the 50mm lens i had on my 1st Canon (AE1) was fantastic.... budget dictated that I was stuck with that lens for a while.. but I didn't feel too hard done by - it got used for *everything*

I think the biggest lens mistake I made was getting the 75-300 zoom for the extra reach over one of the upto 200mm zooms that might have given much sharper results. Oh well.. you live and learn!

[rdenney]

You have say, an L zoom lens and two third party lenses in your bag. Do you switch lenses to get the best shot or move hell or high water to be able to use the 'L'?...Will you ever be happy knowing that the image quality would be even better with the best lens....I want to know about the Dud lenses you bought and never used and why.

I never second-guess my eye to use a "better" lens. If I get the right image on a sub-standard lens, I'll just live with smaller prints.

I'm far more apt to regret not having a larger format in my hands. Some of the images I've made on the 10D made me wish I'd had a much larger format available at the time. But I use the camera that's in my hands for the most part and don't worry about it.

I bought a 75-300, and spent the evening trying to make images with it. The image quality wasn't that bad, but the ergonomics of the lens were just awful, prohibiting the sort of bracing that I do to minimize camera shake. I took it back the next day (one reason I tend to shop locally is so I have the privelege of an easy return) and bought a 70-200/4L in its place. THAT lens has found its way onto my camera for landscape use far more than I ever expected it to. I don't do "nature" stuff, not having the patience to stalk animals, but that lens is quite good even just to help isolate a subject.

http://www.rickdenney.com/images/cedar-stump-crater-lake-lor.jpg

I have improved my long-lens collection in medium format as a result.

Another dud was the 135mm/2.8 soft focus lens that I bought out of the used bin in a Seattle store. The soft-focus effect produced by that lens really annoys me for some reason. I was hoping more for the Zeiss Softar effect. When I use that lens at all, I use it with the soft focus turned off. It's quite good that way, but not really better than the 70-200/4L.

Rick "who would need a 300mm lens in medium format to make the above image, and whose back hurts and the thought of hiking with that 300/4 Sonnar" Denney

[xstrio]

my position is that i`ve only got one lens to cover each range ie 18-55 28-75 70-300, so i use which lens is necessary even though the 28-75 gives far better results, i even use my camera phone from time to time , ive got some great pics from that too

[robertwgross]

Rick, is that photo from Crater Lake?

---Bob Gross---

[CyberDyneSystems]

The easy solution was to weed out the bad glass...

Now the only lens I own that I consider a "compromise" is the 70-300mm DO IS... and I use it only when portability is my biggest concern.

[Tom W]

The easy solution was to weed out the bad glass...

Now the only lens I own that I consider a "compromise" is the 70-300mm DO IS... and I use it only when portability is my biggest concern.

I can see that lens being very useful if I intend to continue shooting NASCAR from the stands. I almost lost my ride home after I kept sticking the 100-400 hood in my friend's face at the race. :)

[ron chappel]

My only bad lens decision recently (i.e that i can remember,LOL) is trying to make use of the EF-s 18-55 lens.
I have a EF50/1.8 but wanted to try using a zoom .Bad move!
Out of 100+or- shots i got *one* that i liked ...and that's mostly because the panning effect drowns out that lack of image quality!

I definitely would have been better off putting up with the lack of perspective adjustment the 50/1.8 misses out on..at least i would have had a *few* really outstanding images.:(

Judging by the way it compares to other lenses ,i don't have a bad example either.
Some may be able to make use of this lens at it's sweet spot - wide end, f8-11 for landscapes ,etc ...but even at that from the few example pics i've seen it doesn't compare to a real lens.

I should go through all my images one day and see if there are any great ones taken with the 18-55.I'm allmost willing to bet there are none

[Citizensmith]

I think the only time I went off track was with the 22-55. I started with a 35-80 which is one of the weakest lenses in Canon's line. It was however all I could afford some it wasn't a mistake. I've moved from so weak lenses to Ls and primes, but with the one exception I've not regretted any of them.

[IanBMW]

My biggest mistake was spending all my time thinking about what my next lens purchase should be, instead of getting out there and just shooting what I love.

[RichardtheSane]

My biggest mistake was the Tamron 28-75.

At the time I had a 17-40L, 50mm F1.8 and a 100-400L IS and thought 'maybe I should fill the gap' so I did. Because I had stumped up the cash I felt obliged to try and use it (similar to the I have L so I should use it suggestion OP made :) ). I always found myself wanting to go either wider, or longer. Sold it 4 months later and bought the 70-200F4.

[thomasrhee]

I don't do a lot of lens switching. I usually stick with one or two lenses for a day's shoot and depending on where I am and what I'm photographing, I may only use one lens. It really depends on the situation.

I also never second guess myself about not having used a better lens to get better image quality. Better to have gotten the shot with a lesser lens than not at all. I'd rather look at an image that says something with inferior image quality than an image that says nothing with superior image quality.

I think people get too caught up switching lenses trying to use the "perfect" lens to get the "perfect" shot. Henri Cartier Bresson shot over 90% of his body of work with a 50mm lens.

[mgash]

Just shoot and don't worry about the focal lenght.

[blue_max]

I have found myself taking pics of the family on days out (particularly). I have the 85 1.8 and have found it very good. However, I am envious of the wide angle shots that have so much impact – and the very long telephoto lens that shows every detail.

I feel very comfortable with the lens choice I have made, but wonder if I am comfortable because I have made it or because it was my preferred subject matter that dictated it. It would be easy to think that I could make fantastic wide angle pictures if I only had a 16-35 L. I have borrowed a wide angle sigma lens and I am rubbish! Must be the lens no? I also have a borrowed 100-300 and take pics of birds in the garden, but they are still tiny and lacking in detail – not very satisfying.

Some lenses must have novelty value – these macro lenses unless that is your forte. How long are your family going to be interested in pictures of a very big fly. Learning from people's mistakes may help us all soul search and find the real reason we take pictures in the first place.

It may just stop us lusting after the most expensive glass and save us a fortune and many sleepless nights.

Thanks for all the insights so far. Can't say I'm sleeping any easier though!

Graham

[Mr. Pickles]

My biggest mistake was getting the Canon 75-300 IS. I have sinced passed it on, and later aquired the Sigma 70-300 APO II jobbie. It is better in my opinion, even though there is no IS.

My other one was buying other lenses instead of saving and getting the one I still want to try....

[rdenney]

Rick, is that photo from Crater Lake?

---Bob Gross---

Yup. From the overlook right where the north road intersections the rim road. Incredible place. We camped at Diamond Lake the previous night, and stayed in Bend the following night. I'd have spent a hundred bucks in film if I'd been using film. I did do some medium format, but not much of it at Crater Lake because I didn't have any long lenses with me.

Here's another from Crater Lake (this one is Dutton Cliff, which is across the lake from that stump):

http://www.rickdenney.com/images/green-against-crater-rim-lo.jpg

Also the 70-200/4L, this time at 70.

Rick "who used that long lens more than any other at Crater Lake" Denney