How do you handle the 5% of situations when you may need a lens?

I used to bring all my stash with me at one point but now I refuse to bring anything else except my 6D and 35/1.4 unless its a professional gig. The more gear you have, the less you need (and the lazier you become). Id rather work with one lens and improvise than drag around a heavy pelican case and bag just to shoot for fun.

I never really need another lens or focal length. I think owning more than two lenses is a luxury. I can photograph everything I do (weddings, architecture, baby's, portraits and travel) with the 17-40L and 85LII only. My other lenses are really nice to have (and I use them all pretty much), but I can live without some of them.

I just make do. I shoot for myself though now.

5D2, 50/1.4, 135L & 17-40L does me just fine. As said, if there's a shot I can't take then I don't take it Ohh I have a 100mm macro collecting dust somewhere too

I very often just take the 50mm. I'll sometimes add the 135L to the bag. I'll take the tripod/17-40L only if I know I'm going to be shooting coastal/landscapes.

Most of the times I only used my 5DMKII + 50L, but now I use EOS-M + 22mm 70% of my trip.

To answer the bringing your kit question. I used to when I had 2 or 3 lenses. But then I didn't really know what I wanted to shoot so I brought everything to be ready for whatever I found. Now I usually know what I will be shooting or attempting to shoot and I bring the lenses that best fit that. I usually bring a wide or ultra wide angle and a telephoto. I almost always bring the 40mm. I only scale down to a single lens on hiking or backpacking trips unless the hike is super easy.

I always rent when I need a specialized lens.

The Dark Knight wrote in post #16697593
I noticed a number of you guys have a minimal amount of equipment. Something I see often may be something like a 7D, 17-55 f/2.8, and 85mm 1.8. A body, 2 lens. I'm curious what you guys do when you need to shoot something that your equipment may not cover. For example you go to a pro baseball game or something. Do you rent? Make do with the 85mm and go for wider more creative shots?

Heya,

If I can't cover the length (usually long end of telephoto), then I can't shoot it. That simple. I won't bother renting for experimentation and fun. I'd rather just save up and buy a good lens that I will use every day for a few years. The short end really is the easy to cover end. You can get really inexpensive lenses that are very good with short focal lengths. It's that long telephoto end that starts to get pricey, when your aperture is wide. Even then though, I'm referring to things longer than 200mm. You can get super cheap zooms that go to 300mm and are good enough for average "whatever" photos. I'd rather buy one of those than rent something, if I wanted to cover a 5% chance of needing that length.

I generally take 2~3 lenses and a flash unless I know I need minimal. If minimal, I take the lens that best suits the project and a flash.

Very best,

I get round it by having my own look and style... Change my lens.. Change how my images look..

gasrocks wrote in post #16697939
Foot zoom is a myth. Moving is not the same as changing lenses.

No it's not, but also any less valid.


Getting back on topic, many (if not most) experienced photographers specialise. The gear they have usually only covers their area of expertise.

another spin off question:
how many of you PURCHASE a lens/body/accessory in expectation that the "5%" (or even more)
will be covered - and find that it is NOT covered to your satisfaction?