Reducing number of lenses

[yltan]

Hi,

I have the following:-
zooms:
EFS 10-22 F3.5-4.5 - My recent aquisition for true wide( finally! ) angle for landscape.
EF 17-40 f4L - My "when I want quality" walkabout lens.
EFS 18-55 f3.5-5.6 - My cheap "walkabout" lens - I carry this with the 80-200 for super portable kit ( plus perhaps the 35mm for low light ) - comes with the 350XT.
EF 80-200 f4.5-5.6 - My cheap & light telephoto ( when I am too lazy to carry 70-200 )
EF 70-200 f4L - My ultimate quality telephoto for outdoor sports, zoos etc

Prime
EF 24 F2.8 - Together with 35 f2, this is my walkabout lens when I want primes
EF 35 F2 - Indoor event lens
EF 50 F1.8 - portrait/indoor event lens
EF 100 F2 - portrait/indoor sports/event lens

I also have a Tamron 1.4X teleconverter for emergencies.

My purpose is to reduce my number of lenses, but all of them "seems" useful to me. Perhaps I should drop my 17-40 f4L ( very reluctantly )which Ifound I don't use so much due to its size. Most of my primes seems useful to me except the 50 f1.8 which I obtain because it is so cheap. I am also inclined to replace my EF 35 F2 with Sigma 30 f1.4 when it comes out.

Another plan is to get rid of 17-40, 80-200, 50 f1.8, 18-55, 24 f2.8 and carry instead the 10-22, 35 and 100 for daily walkabout. Also might consider a long convenient zoom such as Sigma 18-125, one of the 18-200 lens when I am lazy from the sale of the above lenses.

I am looking at more primes due to size reason.
What do you all think?

thanks
YL Tan

[TonyKInTexas]

I have a total of 4 lenses: Tamron 17-35; Tamron 28-75; Canon 50 F1.8 and Canon 70-200 F4L. These meet my needs.

What one has to decide is what lenses meet their needs and remove those that do not. I see both an 80-200 and a 70-200. Why have both? I would keep the L lens and sell the other. I see an 18-55 and 17-40. I would keep the 17-40 and again sell the lesser lens, in this case the 18-55.

Primes are a bit harder. I would always keep the 50 F1.8. The others are covered by your zoom range and maybe not needed. Yes primes can be sharper. The times I would keep and use primes is for commercial needs.

But each to their own.

Take care,

[CyberDyneSystems]

Sell the EFS leses except your new 10-22mm.. and maybe ditch the 50mm.

I'd keep the rest.

[MTalley]

Can't offer any specific recommendations, but I will mention that I'm in the market for a 50mm f/1.8, if you decide to drop that one off your list.

[Simon Spiers]

Keep EFS 10-22 F3.5-4.5 - My recent aquisition for true wide( finally! ) angle for landscape.
Keep EF 17-40 f4L - My "when I want quality" walkabout lens.
Sell EFS 18-55 f3.5-5.6 - My cheap "walkabout" lens - I carry this with the 80-200 for super portable kit ( plus perhaps the 35mm for low light ) - comes with the 350XT.
Keep EF 80-200 f4.5-5.6 - My cheap & light telephoto ( when I am too lazy to carry 70-200 )
Keep EF 70-200 f4L - My ultimate quality telephoto for outdoor sports, zoos etc

I think only you can answer for the primes
Prime
EF 24 F2.8 - Together with 35 f2, this is my walkabout lens when I want primes
EF 35 F2 - Indoor event lens
EF 50 F1.8 - portrait/indoor event lens
EF 100 F2 - portrait/indoor sports/event lens

[cactusclay]

The only reason for redundancy that I know of, is if you need back up incase something breaks. If that is not the case than I would have my range covered with the best I could afford. Personally I like to use primes, to fill certain areas and they are usually faster than zooms, so there lies the delima, when trying to keep it simple. I like the fast primes in the portrait range.

[kraterz]

Only you can decide what to get rid of. Over the years, I've noticed that my needs change, and the lens lineup changes accordingly. A few years back I had a 100-400L. It is big and bulky. It got traded in for the much lighter 70-200/4L. Now that's been replaced by something else because I needed a different range. Keep the lenses you really use.. everyone here will have a different opinion which may not necessarily suit you.

[lostdoggy]

whatever you don't want just send it over to me!!!

[Tom W]

Ordinarily, I'd say lose the 18-55 kit lens, but you're not going to get much for it, so you might as well keep it as part of the kit in case you want to sell the camera for another model at a future date. The value of the 24/2.8 might be questionable in your lineup - do you use it much?

Myself, I'd ditch the 80-200 and just carry the L lens, but I know that there may be situations where a big honkin' white telephoto might draw a bit too much attention.

Look at your actual use patterns and decide what you really aren't using.

[neil_r]

EF 17-40 f4L - My "when I want quality" walkabout lens.
EFS 18-55 f3.5-5.6 - My cheap "walkabout" lens - I carry this with the 80-

If I had a lens that was capable of producing "better" quality and a lens that covered about the same thing but produced "less" quality images, every time I looked at pictures I had taken with that second lens I would regret not having used the first lens. but I guess that is just me :confused:

N

[condyk]

As someone who likes to travel, and then travel as light as is possible, I have tried to build towards a max of four lenses to cover all my needs. My kit lens has never been out the box so it doesn't count. I have four that now meet my needs ... five if I go for a Macro but I'd leave the 50mm II at home or sell it in that case.

Your requirements may be different and if you just need to select the right few lenses from a larger collection each time you leave the door, then no harm in having loads of them. If you must get rid of some to reinvest in others, or you want to travel lighter, then you just have to look at real world usage patterns in context of your primary interests. You can have a maximum number, like I aim for just four, to give some impetus to your selecting, otherwise you may just twiddle around for ever.

[gasrocks]

Yes, too much overlap in what you have. 3 zooms will cover most things: 10-22 efs, Tamron 28-75/2.8, Canon 70-200/4 L. Keep the 50/1.8. Sell the rest. Of course, it all depends on what you will shoot next year. Nothing long or macro in that mix. How about 100/ 2.8 USM macro = macro + indoors + port? Longer = 300/4 L IS? But, I am biased - like everyone else.

[DionM]

You have a 'cheap' kit (18-55 and 80-200) and a 'good' kit (17-40L and 70-200L). Why have both? Ditch the 'cheap' kit in my opinion, for a start.

The 10-22 is a specialist lens - you sort of know when you will want it.

You have a good spread of primes - do you use the more than others? I would maybe keep the 35 f2 and 100 f2 and ditch the others - or upgrade your 17-40 to 16-35 f2.8 and ditch all your primes except 100 f2 (your only long fast lens in the absence of a 70-200 f2.8 ).

[Citizensmith]

Funny, a while back I had a selection alot like yours. I'm now down to 17-40, 24, 85, and 70-200 with the 17-40 and 85 getting the most use.

I'd suggest selling off the 18-55, 80-200, 35, and 50. The zooms are small but not exactly stellar quality.

[yltan]

Funny, a while back I had a selection alot like yours. I'm now down to 17-40, 24, 85, and 70-200 with the 17-40 and 85 getting the most use.

I'd suggest selling off the 18-55, 80-200, 35, and 50. The zooms are small but not exactly stellar quality.

Well, I took my EF 80-200 4.5-5.6 to a zoo and the results were certainly pretty good for the price I paid for it!

[DionM]

Well, I took my EF 80-200 4.5-5.6 to a zoo and the results were certainly pretty good for the price I paid for it!

... and your 70-200 f4 would take much better photos. :confused:

I don't understand - you have two lenses covering almost exactly the same focal length. One is L quality and f4, the other is consumer quality and slower over the whole range.

If I were you, I'd keep the L and ditch the other.

But if you are happy with the cheaper lens, then ditch the L.

[mrclark321]

I think you should sell the 70-200L to me....No I can't lie!!listen to everyone else
and keep it. LOL

Dan

[yltan]

... and your 70-200 f4 would take much better photos. :confused:

I don't understand - you have two lenses covering almost exactly the same focal length. One is L quality and f4, the other is consumer quality and slower over the whole range.

If I were you, I'd keep the L and ditch the other.

But if you are happy with the cheaper lens, then ditch the L.

I agree that the 70-200 f4 takes incredible pictures. It also happens to be about 3x the length and 4x the weight of the 80-200! I can't take it around all the time! In any case, the 80-200 is dirt cheap and I don't think I can get much money for it. I will probably sell my 24mm f2.8 at least. I will hold on the rest and think about it carefully...

For those who wants to buy the 2 "L" lens, I am not going to sell them. They are my best lens and my workhorse. By the way how do I post some picture here?

Thanks
YL

[DionM]

I agree that the 70-200 f4 takes incredible pictures. It also happens to be about 3x the length and 4x the weight of the 80-200! I can't take it around all the time! In any case, the 80-200 is dirt cheap and I don't think I can get much money for it. I will probably sell my 24mm f2.8 at least. I will hold on the rest and think about it carefully...

For those who wants to buy the 2 "L" lens, I am not going to sell them. They are my best lens and my workhorse. By the way how do I post some picture here?

Thanks
YL

So you want to reduce your lens count, but still want to have 1 set of Ls and one set of lightweight consumer lenses? Mutually exclusive things, I fear! Your philosophy of 1 quality set and 1 lighweight set will mean you will always have twice as many lenses as you need.

For what its worth, my 70-200 f2.8 goes everywhere with me.

[condyk]

Gawd ... I even used my Bigma as a walk-around on Saturday for 2-3 hours. No problem! The 70-200 f4 is just NOT a big or heavy lens.

[Andy_T]

By the way how do I post some picture here?


Either make them available online at a website like pbase.com or photo.net (there's a sticky thread 'where to host your photos', I think it's in the 'talk about photography' section of the forum) and link them with {img}yoursite\yourphoto.jpg{/img} (replace the brackets with [ ] brackets)

or

compress them so that they are below 100KB, then you can attach them to your post.

Best regards,
Andy

[yltan]

Either make them available online at a website like pbase.com or photo.net (there's a sticky thread 'where to host your photos', I think it's in the 'talk about photography' section of the forum) and link them with {img}yoursite\yourphoto.jpg{/img} (replace the brackets with [ ] brackets)

or

compress them so that they are below 100KB, then you can attach them to your post.

Best regards,
Andy

Here is a first try in putting the pics from the 80-200 f4.5-5.6. All set to 200mm, iso400, f5.6, taken in Taiping zoo.

[cyclone]

I didn't see what cameras you have. I must assume that you have a 1.6x DSLR that has ef-s capability (rebel, rebel xt, 20D). But do you have a film camera as well? Some of your wide angle primes would make a lot more sense if you have a full frame film camera.

[Longwatcher]

This is just my opinion, but the first picture (of the bird) is a fine example of bad bokeh in a picture. My eyes were drawn to the blurry shinny spots, instead of the bird, where they should have gone first.

I suspect that had the same picture been taken with the 70-200/4 these blurry spots would not have distracted so much.

On the other hand, if you like the lens that beats my opinion any day.

Unless there is a need otherwise, I would keep what you have. This is namely because I believe in having backups to everything. My 10D backsup my 1DsMkII, My 28-135 backsup my 28-70, my 75-300 and 100-400 back up my 70-200/2.8L IS. I unfortunately don't have a back up to my 16-35, but I have enough range otherwise that I felt I could live without a backup in that range.

Just my opinion,

[Citizensmith]

It sounds like you don't really want to loose any lenses. How about looking at it another way. Buy a small shoulder bag that the 18-55, 80-200 and a prime can live in with room for a body. Buy a second bag with all the Ls and such in it. That way, you need the light bag, everything is to hand. You need the quality bag, everything is to hand. You're not selling off anything, just better organizing what you have.

[yltan]

It sounds like you don't really want to loose any lenses. How about looking at it another way. Buy a small shoulder bag that the 18-55, 80-200 and a prime can live in with room for a body. Buy a second bag with all the Ls and such in it. That way, you need the light bag, everything is to hand. You need the quality bag, everything is to hand. You're not selling off anything, just better organizing what you have.

I truly appreciate all the comments made. I learn something about myself too - that I actually want to keep what I have at the moment. As for the pictures, I understand that the consumer zoom has bad bokeh but at that time, that was what I brought to the zoo. I have brought the 70-200 f4 to different zoos before but when I was through about 4-5 hrs later, I was covered in sweat - while I was comfortable throughout the 5 hrs when I was using the 80-200! I guess it depends on what I want to do!

Thanks
YL Tan