Why have so many lenses when only 1 will do?

Here are my five lenses for my 70D and 60D:

• Rokinon 8mm Fisheye - a fantastic lens, really sharp even in the corners at f/8.
  
• Canon 10-22EFS - also a great lens, but perhaps not sharp as the Rokinon. If I had to do it over, I would get the new 10-18EFS-IS, as it is much cheaper. Or I might just rely on "defishing" the Rokinon.
  
• Canon 15-85EFS - a great lens. If I had to go with only one lens, it would be this one.
  
• Rokinon 85mm/1.4 - pretty good for the price, but manual focusing is tricky and I have not yet mastered it. I would have gotten the Canon 50mm/1.4, except for its fragile autofocus mechanism. If I had it to do over again, I might consider the Canon 85mm/1.8.
  
• Canon 70-300L - a fantastic lens - sharp and accurate focusing. It takes great close-ups. Its image quality doesn't seem to deteriorate noticeably at the very small apertures, such as f/16 or f22, that are usually needed for extreme close-ups.
  

I'll try to follow the format as best I can. I started out with a 60D in 2012 after using my G12 for a couple of years and learning. I'll break down my lens list in the order purchased and the reason(s) why.

15-85: This was my first lens. I asked around here a lot, trying to decide what to buy for my 60D.
So many people recommended the 15-85. There were a few 17-55 suggestions as well, but
at the time, I was shooting almost entirely outdoors so the 15-85 was the best choice for me.

70-300L: Not long after I got started with DLSR photography, I knew I would need a longer
telephoto lens. Again, I read a lot on POTN, got advice from my fellow 60D
owners here, etc. The determining factor for me was the extra 100mm over one of
the very fine 200L's available. Again, this lens is used here in Florida so usually in
brilliant sunshine. This lens is still my favorite because I've used it far more than any
other I own.

100L macro: I did a lot of fun macro work with my G12 plus add-on lenses. I wanted something
so I could explore this genre with my 60D. Hence the 100L macro. I use it for other
things as well; close ups, portraits, etc.

35 f/2 IS: This lens is fairly new to me. I got it for indoors, but truth be told, I haven't used it much.
I need to remedy that a bit.

17-55: We got a new kitten earlier this year. I wanted something so I could document his growth
into a cat and this lens seemed like a good choice. I'm starting to get used to it. Initially,
I was disappointed because of its lack of range. I was so used to my 15-85. It has been
growing on me of late, however. Of course, the f/2.8 makes a huge difference.

400L f/5.6: I have only had this lens for a week now. I purchased it so I could get a bit closer
to the Florida wading birds I often shoot... along with catching them in flight.
I also added the Kenko 1.4X telecoverter. It works well for stationary objects where
blinding fast AF isn't required.

I grew up on 50mm, and so I've based every gear decision around having a 50 as my bread and butter. I also mainly shoot primes as I don't do events or photography that requires easy coverage, and I'm not a pro, so it's not so important for me to have zooms for convenience. That being said though, I try to keep things simple to a 3/4 lens kit, and I often only take 3 out at a time, if not just my 50. My current kit is as follows:

(I use a 6D)

20-35mm F2.8L : I just recently discovered this gem, and I love it. I don't go wide often enough to justify having dedicated wide lenses to cover 20, 24, and 35 lengths, and so wide zooms are the ONLY zooms I will ever use, as bokeh isn't a priority when it comes to wide angle, and it's so much more economical to have 1 lens replace 3 focal lengths with negligible impact on real world quality. I also don't like going much wider than 20, and so this lens is perfect for my needs. It's always with me if I take more than my 50 out, for family or groups of people mostly.

50mm F1.2L : My bread and butter, this is on me at all times. Pretty much any subject I can find a pleasing angle to shoot at 50mm with, to me. Maybe 75% of what I shoot is with a 50. It's my general purpose lens, and so I'm ok with splurging on the best. I usually shoot at 1.4 - 2.0, since 1.2 is so soft. I've used the Sigma 50 Art before and just can't justify it's weight and bulk.

100mm F2.8L : For general portraits, babies, and very rare macro. I find shooting babies requires me to be at 2.8 or higher anyway to get more in focus, and I like being able to get buckets of sharpness that I can soften as much as I'd like in post. Also, IS is awesome.

200mm F2.8L MK1 : For when I want/need compression, for portraits, animals, or candids. I much prefer the MK1 to the current MK2 version, it's just so solid feeling, and I love the collapsible hood. I always try to be discreet as possible so it's great having the hood built in, and not have it turn my lens into a bazooka (like the 100L hood does lol).

I've never owned a midrange zoom because it's useless for me, and I've never owned a tele zoom because they're far too big for a casual person like me!

Sure, I don't need 4 lenses. I would be happy with just my 50. But, it's nice to have more if you can afford it.

After much gear 'trial', I have found my perfect set up. Without detailing my whole story:
I had a T4i (650D) and kit, tried about 1 used lenses of all sizes and types.
Got the 100L, then the 24L II and then got a 6D.
Last lens I 'upgraded' was my 50 1,4 to the the 50L

24L II - This is my go to wide lens, perfect for low light and great stopped down for the occasional landscape around f8.0

50L - This is my standard lens on my 6D, I find it to be sharp even at f1.2 and OOF shots seem to be my user-error with the thin DOF. I got an ND filter for afternoon walk around shooting.

100L - This is both my portrait lens as well as my macro lens. Head and shoulder portraits at 2.8 have great bokeh with the whole face in focus and extreme closeups are very sharp.
I find it extremely lightweight and the IS is a good bonus for handheld shots.
After MFA it is even sharper than before.

These lenses comprise my gearbag. I take them everywhere and I have no unused lenses.
I do not shoot sports, and I don't need longer than 100mm for my current photography.
While the 85L II has tempted me in the past I know the larger size, heavier weight would have me choosing other lenses. The older MF Helios 85mm has my attention. That will be my next 'trial' lens.

I suggest reading through this thread at your leisure. It is not in depth, but it has many users listing their own reasons behind gear changes. It is an informative read than may have you reconsidering your own gear / needs.

https://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1295241

From a crop user....From my most used to least

∑18-35 f1.8: Limited zoom range, big and heavy for its range, but simply the fastest and sharpest zoom for crop bodies. I grabbed this lens as soon as it came out as I wanted the extra speed this lens offers in the, crop, wide to normal range. This is one of two lenses that see the most action on my camera

∑50-150 f2.8 OS: The 70-200mm style range for crop cameras (but also the 70-200mm f2.8 size as well). Great AF, optical stabilization, bokeh, and image quality (compare the IQ of this and the canon 70-200L II on a crop camera and be amazed!). This is the other lens that see's the most action on my camera. From portraits, to compressed landscapes, to action, its just an all around amazing lens!

50mm f1.8 mk1: Small, light, fast, good image quality and good build (mk1 so same optics are the mk2 but metal mount and a distance scale). For when I need a little bit more reach then the ∑18-35 but need more speed then the ∑50-150 OS

Tokina 11-16 f2.8: The fastest ultra wide angle for crop cameras (until the Rokinon 10mm f2.8 was released). I wanted one UWA lens that would be good during the day and at night. The flare can be massive with this lens so you do have to be careful.

60mm Macro: Small and super sharp macro lens for crop cameras that can also double as a portrait lens.

Rokinon 8mm fish eye: Fun and distortion.....That is the only purpose of the is lens at this point


The fact is I could get away with just the ∑18-35 f1.8 and ∑50-150 OS. In fact I use the 8mm FE and 60mm macro so little now a days that I might end up selling them. If I were to add anything to my kit it would probably be either the 85 f1.8 or 135 f2 just so I could leave the 50-150 OS at home and still have a good range covered with the ∑18-35, Canon 50, and Canon 85 or 135

If you are thinking of just one lens, all I can think of is Light field technology.

I shoot full frame primarily, with a bit of EOS M on the side.

-Canon 50mm f/1.4: When I moved from a compact digital P&S to a Nikon film SLR, I had a 50/1.8 on it. Fell in love with that focal length, and so when I moved from a 20D to a 5D, I had to have a nice, fast 50 to match. This is my walkabout lens, and when it's not on my camera it's either in my camera bag with me or somewhere else on my person. The focal helix died on me once, and I got it repaired at half the cost of a new 1.4...
Still, I have no desire to get the 1.2 L. Between the price, weight and no significant difference in sharpness, I'll stick with my 1.4.

-Canon 17-40mm f/4: Wide angle, I'm all about it. I had a Tamron 14mm f/2.8, but was never satisfied with the sharpness or flare handling (the only lens that's ever given me flare issues...). A year or so after selling the Tamron I felt I needed to get another UWA, and my local store had one of these used at a decent price. Between not being wide enough and not being sharp enough, I'll probably sell it in the not-too-distant future and eventually pick up a Sigma 12-24mm II.

-Canon 135 f/2: I originally bought it new at a great price with an intention to sell. I never thought I would use this focal length. Then I decided to try it out one day... This isn't a lens I'm likely to get rid of anytime soon!

-EF-M 22mm f/2: Got it as part of the EOS M kit. I don't care for it. 35mm FOV just isn't my thing. Give me a 15mm pancake and I'll dance with joy, but this 22 just doesn't do it for me. I'd sell it, but my other half uses it on occasion when she borrows my M.

-EF-M 18-55mm: Gets the job done. It's an 18-55, it's light, it's cheap, it has IS and a useful zoom range. However, like the 22, its sharpness never amazed me. Stays attached to my M whenever I'm using it.


What am I missing?

Like the OP, I don't have a general purpose zoom, at least not for my main camera.
I had a 24-105 for several years. Of all the lenses I've put on my camera (300/4, 100mm macros, Sigma 150mm, among others) this has been the sharpest, tied with my 135. I sold it because I wanted to try new things. No regrets, but if I could find my copy again, I would probably re-buy it... Otherwise, I'll look for a Tamron 24-70 VC eventually.

i don't like to own too many lenses because of my small bag
and i hate big bags
after using canon bodies and lenses, I'm thinking to get rid of all my gear and go for a small camera with one lens like the Fuji X-Pro1 with Fuji 35 f/1.4
but my big problem that i love to shoot macro photos , then I will need a macro Fuji lens
return to the main story with lenses again
my gear
35L wide angle lens , i use it for indoors portrait with low light
100L for macro and portrait , love this lens
200 f/2.8L II , I bought it for shooting outdoors but I can use it indoors with a flash for shooting kids from a distance
MP-E 65 macro , love to use it for a tiny things but not for insects <<< i hate them
so
I think I can live with only three lenses for a DSLR:
24-105L for general use
100L for macro and portrait
70-200 f/2.8L II for portrait and for shooting from a distance or the 100-400L for the reach

"Why have so many lenses when only 1 will do?"

I have a different way to see it, i put all my lenses "together" and take the best of each one, so i have only one lens it's the :
EF 15-800mm f/1.4 L IS Macro fisheye USM II

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17119738
I have a different way to see it, i put all my lenses "together" and take the best of each one, so i have only one lens it's the :
EF 15-800mm f/1.4 L IS Macro fisheye USM II

No built-in 2X TC? What kind of crap lens is that?

LV Moose wrote in post #17119745
No built-in 2X TC? What kind of crap lens is that?

No because it' too heavy with the x2 TC

Mine has a built-in 2X teleconverter!!!

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17119738
"Why have so many lenses when only 1 will do?"

I have a different way to see it, i put all my lenses "together" and take the best of each one, so i have only one lens it's the :
EF 15-800mm f/1.4 L IS Macro fisheye USM II

i need this one EF 15-800 f/1.4 IS Macro fishboat but i like it with the same weight and size of the EF-S 55-250

I came from Pentax 6x7 and 645 manual focus cameras. 120 film processing was leaving town and I started looking at digital. I was only interested in manual focus at the time. I knew the Zeiss Contax lenses from film, liked them, and when I read about being able to use them on the original 5D, I thought "That's it!" I bought 28/2.8, 50/1.7, 85/2.8 and 135/2.8 (all fairly cheap when I bought them), and a Zuiko 21/3.5, (because I could not afford the Contax), the body, all used, and the matte screen.

Well, that wasn't it, at least for me. I had difficulty and some very odd results using the longer lenses on the 5D, and I bought a number of AF primes (50, 85, 135, 200) over a period of time, new and used, added a 17-40L for ultrawide. Later, when the ZE line came out and income increased, I did pick up a ZE21mm (which I'll probably sell, as the 16-35/4L which recently replaced the 17-40 I find to be very satisfactory where the 17-40 was not completely).

And from there, that's basically what I have, with a few additions, like macro and a cheap zoom for kid birthday parties. It started with a definite idea and evolved as I learned what worked and as the cameras gained features that made things work better.

I intend to keep the manual focus set because I now really enjoy using them on the 5Dii with LiveView, and they give me the results I originally hoped for, but I want to add a 70-200/4L IS and carry that with a 50mm (Sigma/1.4 or macro) and the 16-35L for travel. I would keep the AF primes for portraits.

It looks like a mish-mash, but it works for me. Small light MF primes plus UW zoom for landscape, faster AF primes for people, and two f/4 zooms and a fast or macro 50 for travel.