The Official, How Long Are You? Thread

[Persian-Rice]

Similar to the megapixel thread. How long are you?

Combined, how many millimeters of lens do you currently own?
Primes are simple, for zoom, give us the long end.

Again, this can be any lens. If you wish, tell us what you have.

I have 525mm of lens.

Cheers

[Dante King]

970 I think If I understand the question. OHOHOHO do TCs cound? LOL

[Ikinaa]

so...
10-22 (22) + 18-55 (55) + 28-135 (135) + 35-105 (105) + 50 (50) + 60 (60) + 75-300 (300) + 100-400 (400) = 1127...

Unfortunately one can't stack the lenses :cool:

[buze]

Canon : 50 + 85 + 135 + 200 + 300 = 770
Sigma : 200 + 50 + 135 = 385
Total AF: 1155 (JUST make that slot, we prime fanatics have the longest one :D)

M42 : 30 + 35 + 35 + 35 + 50 + 50 + 50 + 55 + 135 + 135 + 135 = 745 (and some more on the way :D)

Grand Total : 1765!

[LastLine]

Interesting thread idea.

*Calculates*

[Persian-Rice]

I'm on the short end, but its not the length that matters, it's how you use it :) lol

[Rob612]

Grand total 1392 including stuff that I use but won't fit in my sig.

[CorruptedPhotographer]

50-500 [500]+ 17-40 [40] + 50 MKII [50]= 590mm

[nitsch]

545mm if my maths is correct!

[condyk]

420 incl 1.4x TCon
70
55 (Kit lens which I used for the first time today - and not bad!!!!)
-----
545mm

[aam1234]

1,090

[ddelallata]

should we multiply the total with the camera's crop factor??? j/k 390mm for me :(

[Cadwell]

According to my best calculations: 1809mm (TCs not included).

(Click the "Gear List" link in my sig. if you want details)

[HKFEVER]

Similar to the megapixel thread. How long are you?

Combined, how many mm of lens do you currently own? Primes are simple, for zoom, give us the long end.

Again, this can be any lens. If you wish, tell us what you have.

I have 525mm of lens.

Cheers

Do you count the corp factor?

[CRE@TE]

;) The lenses themselves have no crop factor.

[WepWaWep]

For the lenses I use the most, 540... with the addition of the ones I don't use, 895.

[BearSummer]

Lol,

thanks for making me smile, I'm 1528

[Adam Hicks]

We need a new thread so we can vote for the most pointless thread of the year. I vote this one.

Maybe another useful thread would be 'What's the average color of your camera bags.'

[Scottes]

1340, but 1740 if I can count the 1.4 TC on the lenses it fits...

Maybe another useful thread would be 'What's the average color of your camera bags.'ROFLMAO!!

[LesE]

Mine's blackish (RGB 6,6,6)! (Oh dear ........)




.

[Michaelmjc]

590mm

[Andy_T]

We need a new thread so we can vote for the most pointless thread of the year. I vote this one.

Maybe another useful thread would be 'What's the average color of your camera bags.'

Nah, the sum of megapixels for all the cameras owned would top that :lol:

But hey, it's an official poll :p

Best regards,
Andy

[Steve Parr]

I voted "500mm", but I had to round up from 498mm...

Steve

[willg]

i voted wrong but i have 580...i thought you meant the longest length

[Tomsk]

655mm

We need a new thread so we can vote for the most pointless thread of the year. I vote this one.

Maybe another useful thread would be 'What's the average color of your camera bags.'

Mine's blackish (RGB 6,6,6)! (Oh dear ........)


is that sRGB or Abobe RGB? :D

[stuartf287]

8 (Peleng FE) + 12-24 (Sigma) + 14 (Sigma 2.8 ) + 16 (Zenitar FE) + 18-35 (Sigma) + 24-70 (L2.8 ) + 50 (1.8 ) + 65 (MPE) + 85 (f1.8 ) + 28-135 (IS) + 18-200 (Tamron) + 70-200 (L2.8IS) + 200 (L2.8 ) + 50-500 (Bigma) + 70-300 (Tamron) + 300 (f4IS) + 400 (Sigma) + 500 (Tamron SP) + 500 (Spiratone) = 3,602.

Maybe I've overdone it a bit. Maybe this thread does have a point after all. Too many lenses... My wife was right.

[Belmondo]

2872 :o

[Citizensmith]

17-40, 24, 85, 70-200 for 349 for me. Helps that I sold off a lot of my older lenses in the past year.

I think it would also be interesting to see what peoples single longest lens is as well as the total.

[Belmondo]

2872 :o
Oops. Forgot my 50 f/1.4 and the 17-40

2962 :o :o

Makes me want to go buy a nifty fifty just so I can get to 3000. (After all, this is a sickness)

[Andy_T]

Tom,

because it's your birthday today, I offer you to swap your tiny 17-40 for a great manual focus M42 300 mm /4.5 lens :shock:

Russian quality build, comes with a gun stock that you will find hard to leave in the desert.

You'll be the king of the poll.

Best regards,
Andy

[Goodluck]

I've always heard it's not about the length but how you use it.:p

[Belmondo]

Tom,

because it's your birthday today, I offer you to swap your tiny 17-40 for a great manual focus M42 300 mm /4.5 lens :shock:

Russian quality build, comes with a gun stock that you will find hard to leave in the desert.

You'll be the king of the poll.

Best regards,
Andy

Thanks, Andy.

I'm not sure how I can turn down an offer like that, but I fear I must. Redistributing that much mass from Europe to North America would probably create a wobble in the Earth's rotation that would disrupt weather patterns for years to come, and I don't ever want to see snow here in the desert. I also doubt you'd want to see any of our weather in Germany, either.

I think I just confused myself. :confused:

[KevC]

135 (CZJ) + 105 (35-105) + 50 (nifty fifty) + 28 (bday present) + 55 (kit)

//edit: Totally forgot kit lens.

[Citizensmith]

I think it would also be interesting to see what peoples single longest lens is as well as the total.

Instead of just saying wouldn't it be interesting I actually went and started the poll myself (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=89240).

Quoting myself. How lame is that. :)

[Gadget-Guy]

805 and getting longer every month :lol:

[Jon]

Do I roll the FD stuff in as well? Doesn't change the category - I'm well over 1100, but counting both systems gets me over 3000 (3018 if I remembered everything).

[CoolToolGuy]

Including my two FD long lenses (600 & 400), what I can mount on my DSLRs comes to 2,767mm. That includes the 1.26 factor for the FD-EOS extender for the two FDs. TCs not included.

Add in the FD glass (but not the 400 & 600 again) and it comes up to 3,331mm.

Geez, over 10 feet of lens!

Now, do I count my G3, or my wife & kids' cameras? And there is this little project I am working on using 50mm FD lenses. . . The house is a veritable crystal palace. :lol: :lol: :lol:

Have Fun,

[CyberDyneSystems]

.. trying to work out how to do this with T-cons...
I can't multiply all my lenses x 1.4X as they don't all fit..
So here's the methdology used.

First add up all lenses that I would use with a 2X, and multiply X 2 = 2070mm
Then add up any lenses I would ONLY use with the 1.4X and mult x 1.4 = 1337mm
Then add in the remaining lenses that would not be used with a T-con = 118mm

**EDIT**
Subtotal 2,108mm NOT icluding TCs

Total 3,525mm




This does not include the 2X plus 1.4X stacked T-con potential...

[Jon]

.. trying to work out how to do this with T-cons...

Oh Jeez! I don't even want to think about the TC calculations! And does that include stacking them? That's at least another 4000 mm!

[davidfig]

OHOHOHO do TCs count?

Dante, I was rolling on the floor, just thinking about you jumping up and down saying this.

[Medic1]

790mm without including the TC

[NickyBlade]

595 for me!

[LazyPhotographer]

1125... not counting the 2 TC's.

Gee, this is fun. Can we do a "how tall are you" poll next? ;-)

[Tom W]

Oops. Forgot my 50 f/1.4 and the 17-40

2962 :o :o

Makes me want to go buy a nifty fifty just so I can get to 3000. (After all, this is a sickness)

Can't touch THAT! :)

1164....

[Tom W]

1125... not counting the 2 TC's.

Gee, this is fun. Can we do a "how tall are you" poll next? ;-)

Reciprocal of the average maximum aperture of all your lenses. :)

[Belmondo]

Can't touch THAT! :)

1164....

Nor should you want to. :confused: :o ;)

[Tom W]

Nor should you want to. :confused: :o ;)

It's a good thing I wasn't taking a sip of tea when I read that - that would most certainly have messed up the keyboard. And the XT which is also sitting within range.

[IanD]

1520 No TC's added in. What the hell we talking about?:confused::confused::confused::confused::con fused::confused::confused:

[CyberPet]

440 mm and soon 475.

I don't think it's the size or the length, guys... it's how you use it. :D :D :D

[thomascanty]

1435mm, not counting TC's, but including three third-party lenses I haven't used in years.

[stoneylonesome]

465 no TC " I WAN'T MORE"

[Raj]

70-200mm + 18-125mm + 100 mm + 10-22mm + 50 mm mkII
I am at 497 mil :-) without any TC's

[Moppie]

it's how you use it. :D :D :D


Thank you, I feel confident to share mine now. :cool:


23.4mm, when its all full extended. :o

[jimtfoto]

50-500 (500), 100-400 (400), 28-300 (times 2) (600), 15-30 (30), 17-85 (85) = 1615
plus two 2x TCs
cheers,
jim

[EoSD30fReAk]

980 for me

[buze]

It's not because you have a long and/or big one that you don't know how to use it either ! It's not mutualy exclusive :D

[ssim]

2660 before teleconverters and I'm not even going to try and figure that part out.

[Belmondo]

2660 before teleconverters and I'm not even going to try and figure that part out.

Sheldon:
If you pick up a 600 f/4, that will put you ahead of me. Do it! Do it! Do it!

BTW, glad you're back. It's been way too quiet here without you.

[ssim]

Sheldon:
If you pick up a 600 f/4, that will put you ahead of me. Do it! Do it! Do it!

BTW, glad you're back. It's been way too quiet here without you.

Don't temp me Tom. You are a bad influence you know.http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif

I was around much yesterday so belated happy birthday.

[FloridaCamera]

Found this old thread... Not as long as I would have hoped :(

[Steve Parr]

I've had a few equipment changes since I first posted in this thread last year.

If I factor in the 1.4TX, I'm lookin' at 536.2 mm...

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Well gosh, I never noticed this thread last year. Must have been before I joined.

I've got 705mm goin' right now.

[Tommy]

375mm.... gee.... now I feel kinda inadequate... :( lol!

[Jamie Holladay]

895 as of right now but I hope that goes down a bit so that it can go up a bit.

[elTwitcho]

Less than 200

[Jim G]

Heh.. I've got 435 at the moment... 17-85+50+70-300. Not that I use the zoom but I still own it, so.. :p

I hope to grow a little more next year, 435mm just isn't satisfying me...:lol:

[jimtfoto]

Seeing as this thread has been revived, I may as well revise my earlier answer. Current lineup:
50-500 (500), 100-400 (400), 28-300 (300), 15-30 (30), 17-85 (85), 28-105 (105), 60 (60) and, of course, the 300-800 Sigmonster (800) plus two 2x TCs and one 1.4.
Without TCs it's 2280.

cheers,
jim

[CoolToolGuy]

I feel like I must respond. . .

6095mm, all of which can be mounted and used on a Canon DSLR.

If you take off the extra FD 200 f2.8 and FD 600 f4.5, it comes down to 5085mm.

:o

Have Fun,

[MegaHurtz]

530 for me

18-55, 50, 17-85, 17-40, 75-300

[stephaniebarnes]

kit lens = 55
70-200 IS = 200
grand total comes up to 255, that may change soon enough though

[Tommy]

kit lens = 55
70-200 IS = 200
grand total comes up to 255, that may change soon enough though

Saw in your sig that you got the 70-200IS today.... congrats on the new purchase!!

[stephaniebarnes]

Thank you! I've been jumping up and down all day, too bad it took 11 days to get here.

[blackviolet]

bigma - (500) + 80-200L (200) + 135L + 85 1.8 + 24-70L (70) + 50 1.4 + 12-24 (24) + 15mm fisheye + LensBaby 2.0 (50) = 1129 (not counting my wife's lenses or my telescope mounts).

[ssim]

I've had a few additions to my gear since I posted last on here. Before TC's I'm at 3440mm.

[forsaken]

540mm

[chakras]

I have 679 but I don't go full capacity :). I only use 279. I am short by 320. Given I have two primes, what are my lenses :lol: :p :lol:

[CyberDyneSystems]

Some changes here as well:

Lens MM Total: 2,858mm

With T-conversion: 4,333mm

Again,. my methodology for the T-con total is just like a zoom,. I add up the lenses the same as I did with no t-con,. but for the lenses that I can and do use a t-con I add the longest MM THAT I WOULD USE.. and only that measurement (just like adding the long end of a zoom) so for many, though they would fit the 2X, I only rate them with the 1.4X (in fact there are only two lenses that get the 2X)

I never stack so that math is not required.
If liquidstone or Sheldon used this methodology,. (whom I have seen stacking T-Cs) it would be,.. well,. a very much larger number!

[CoolToolGuy]

Some changes here as well:

Lens MM Total: 2,858mm

With T-conversion: 4,333mm

Again,. my methodology for the T-con total is just like a zoom,. I add up the lenses the same as I did with no t-con,. but for the lenses that I can and do use a t-con I add the longest MM THAT I WOULD USE.. and only that measurement (just like adding the long end of a zoom) so for many, though they would fit the 2X, I only rate them with the 1.4X (in fact there are only two lenses that get the 2X)

I never stack so that math is not required.
If liquidstone or Sheldon used this methodology,. (whom I have seen stacking T-Cs) it would be,.. well,. a very much larger number!

So do you count the Tcon lenses twice, once with and once without?
I want to make sure I get it right if I'm going to do the math.

Have Fun,

[CyberDyneSystems]

Nope...
just like a zoom,. only count the lens once with the longest focal length you will use it at.

Mind you .. I CAN put a 2X on the Sigmonster,. but I won't so I didn't include 1600mm in my math. But I do use the EF 500mm with a 2X so it is listed as a 1000mm lens in the T-con calculations.

Here's the whole thing for an example for anyone interested..

1120mm = Sigmonster & 1.4x
1000mm = EF 500mm & 2x
560mm = EF 100-400mm & 1.4x
420mm = EF 70-300mmDO & 1.4x
400mm = EF 200mm f/1.8 & 2x
280mm = EF 70-200mm & 1.4x
190mm = EF 135mm & 1.4x
140mm = EF 100mm Macro & 1.4x

..............................................then my non t-con lenses
85mm = EF 85mm
70mm = EF 24-70L
40mm = 17-40L
28mm = EF 28mm

total 4,333mm


Again,. if I stacked 1.4x and 2X on the Sigmonster instead of the 1120 entry,. it would be 2240mm
So how I actually use the lenses has limited the numer I used for the longest length.

[CoolToolGuy]

Nope...
just like a zoom,. only count the lens once with the longest focal length you will use it at.
Let me know if I should type up the whole thing for an example...

Okay, so the new numbers including TCONs:

All lenses: 6,469mm

Without duplicate lenses: 5,459mm

Have Fun,

[Wazza]

:lol: I have a measly 1195mm. No fair.

[thomascanty]

I guess I should post an update too, since I picked up an EF-S 10-22 earlier this year. That brings me up to 1457mm without bringing my two TC's into the equation.

[liquidstone]

Joining late.... I'll consider only my birding lenses, and with TCs in a configuration that I have actually "fired in anger," not just in tests (each particular TC is used only once in the computation)....:mrgreen:

Sigmonster + Sigma 2x + Tamron 2x + Sigma1.4x = 4525 mm *
500 f4 IS + Canon 2x = 1000 mm
400 5.6 L + Canon 1.4x = 565 mm
100-400 L IS + Tamron 1.4x = 565 mm

Total = 6655 mm

*I compute a 1.4x TC as square root of 2 (1.41421...). I've used the Sigmonster + 16x TC (12,800 mm) but only in tests and I doubt if it can produce a decent result even at astro targets.

Here's the longest length I used where I'm happy with the result - 3200 mm:

http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/54706315.jpg


This one was fired in anger but I think I already hit the optical potential of stacking TCs - 4525 mm:

http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/42093034.jpg


And lastly, a length I regularly use at birds - 1600 mm (Sigmonster + 2x):

http://www.pbase.com/liquidstone/image/58532655.jpg


Regards,

Romy

[Citizensmith]

Total = 6655 mm

The words holy and crap spring to mind :)

Great photos by the way, that must be on the mother of tripods.

[Wazza]

:lol:

That's physically larger than looking through my telescope
http://wazz*****scity.com/20d/jupiter_2500_01.jpg
Which is 2500mm focal length..
I may try my 1.4 converter.. ;)

[AmericanFirst]

Using the maximum focal length of each lens, it adds up... 4,584mm... glass galore. Kind of sad that the 'little stuff' doesn't count for more. LOL

That's without any T/Cs... which I feel is more fair... otherwise the stack becomes rather pointless. I mean I have used my TAmROn SP AF200-500mm f/5-6.3 Di LD with both the Bower 2x and the SP1.4x added together on it. I have noticed it does affect "infinity" focus, though... with either/or... or both... and when you are shooting the Moon... it just doesn't work. You have to go naked to get the focus right.

I have yet to try a Canon EF 1.4x or EF 2x on the lens... and see if 'infinity' is there.

If you wanna see how it all stacks up... read the gear list below... I think it is all there. :rolleyes:

Woo-hoo!

[::John::]

1264, not counting teleconverters.

[PAFC2004]

645mm

[Jamie Holladay]

Well I'm down to 595 as I sold my sigma 70-300. Thats okay Christmas is around the corner <imagine evil grin here>

[weka2000]

945 with out TC,s

[Citizensmith]

I'm still only 349 and actually perfectly happy with that. :)

[theague]

210mm of lens length... =/

[GilesGuthrie]

(18- )55 + 50 + (75-)300 = 405.

Sans TC, natch.

Boo!!!

[kevin_c]

Blimey, this thread goes back to August 2005...

1114mm - Just managed to scrape into the '>1100' option because I have 2 x 50mm primes for my old MF Canons.

[JAZZ D.P.G.]

Wow, when I originally answered this I scored less than 800. I think it was about 520.
Recalculated today at well over 1200mm:D Not including TC's.

I don't think this hobby is good for my wallet :cry: Great for my health though.

[Lightstream]

1424. Tremendously over-lensed and that's even before I throw the TC in the mix. I realized I could already break 1100 just by looking at the long glass alone.. :shock:

Wallet is assuredly not happy as you can see. Must stop myself from buying glass.. I am going to try and impose a moratorium on glass acquisitions...... we all know how this one is gonna end though ;)

[SoaringUSAEagle]

294

[badgerW]

Hmmm... 200 + 105 + 100 + 85 + 50 + 40 = 580

[FlyingPhotog]

100-400
300
70-200
24-70
17-40
135
100
85
50

1380mm Total

[mrgtturbo]

2545mm Counting all my old lenses for my FD camera, (which I occationally use). And 135mm of Zeiss lens on my old Exakta camera which I have every intention of using.

To break it down...

1925mm of Old glass.

620mm of EF lenses, (of which 300mm of it is crap, and 80 more is close).



So...

2545mm of lens.

but only 240mm that counts for anything here. :oops:



Aaron

[thomascanty]

Ewww! Another math test? Who brought this old thread back from the depths?

At least my calculations are easy. My last post said I was at 1457mm. I've since acquired a 100mm macro lens which put me at 1557. But, I'm in the process of finding my 70-200 a better home, so I will soon be at 1357mm. If my math was correct... And I don't really care if it is... Or isn't...

[Jon]

Do I roll the FD stuff in as well? Doesn't change the category - I'm well over 1100, but counting both systems gets me over 3000 (3018 if I remembered everything).

Oh Jeez! I don't even want to think about the TC calculations! And does that include stacking them? That's at least another 4000 mm!As of now I'm 2640+ the short stuff (under 100 mm), and that's only counting the lens+ max TC combo, not the intervening levels (300 2.8 gets used with up to 2x+1.4x if needed, so it counts as 840, not as 300+420+600+840, for example). And though I've been known to use a TC on the 70-200 2.8, I used 200 for that. I figure the short stuff's good for another 400 mm or so, but I can't be bothered. Maybe when they survey "How wide are you" by summing AoV of your lenses on whatever body they do the best. I'd probably meet myself going away on that one, starting with a 15 mm fisheye on a 5D (180 deg. corner to corner).

[KRUSH]

Late to the game but still in the game.

I come in exactly at 500mm! How 'bout that!!

[Trevor04GT]

158

[neilwood32]

Current line up, 10-20, 18-50, 70-300 &170-500.

Gives me a grand total of 870!

[Jaymz]

Current lenses, 16-35, 18-55, 24-70, 28-135, 70-200, 200, 400, 600, and MPE-65.

Not included; 1.4x and 2x extender.

Total 1760, (assuming I added correctly in my head)

[Mike]

630 for me...I think!

[DetlevCM]

Considering that my 17-50 went to my mother with my 400D and the (horrible) Sigma 70-300 (who pretty much never uses them except once - I don't think she likes the poor little 400D)

I'm left with a nifty fifty and the brick - hence 120mm of lens :)

[JonSC]

50 + 70 + 200 = 320!