Need more than 4 lenses?

I am assuming that people have a whole lot of lenses to cover the focal range that they need. From what I can see, how many of you have more than four and why? The only reasons I can think of is 1, speed, and 2, prime.

This is what I am looking to get to complete my arsenal.
1. 10-22 canon or 10-20 sigma
2. 24-70 canon or 24-105 canon or equivalent 3rd party.
3. 70-200mm 2.8 L canon - Rented this and loved it.
4. 100-400mm canon for the range.

I guess that would be my ultimate wish list. I am looking to get the Sigma 70-300 APO DG this week to cover my top end range temporarily.

I would end up selling my 28-135 IS canon to put towards one of the 4 above.

Do any of you have more than this? Is this a good goal to shoot for for a complete coverage of range? I am not even thinking above 400mm due to cost.

Thoughts?

A good value and fast lens I recommend is the 50mm 1.4. At about $300 bucks (on sale), I enjoy having this lens in my bag at all times.

Do you ever plan on going FF? If so, try to stay away from the EF-S lenses for obvious reasons. Although, like me, I plan on keeping my 40D as a backup when I go FF so getting EF-S lenses really isn't an issue.

Another vote for 50 1.4. It's excellent for low light, indoor shots. And 85 1.8 is awesome for portraits.

I am having Canon 10-22 delivered today. That should complete my gear. I am sure.

A macro lens may come in handy as well.... Thats what I found and I have a similiar lens lineup as what you're loooking at

I agree my ideal bag is
Canon 10-22
Canon 17-85
Canon 70-200 L IS
Canon 2x (1.4)
Canon 50mm

cory1848 wrote in post #4729604
I am assuming that people have a whole lot of lenses to cover the focal range that they need. From what I can see, how many of you have more than four and why? The only reasons I can think of is 1, speed, and 2, prime.

This is what I am looking to get to complete my arsenal.
1. 10-22 canon or 10-20 sigma
2. 24-70 canon or 24-105 canon or equivalent 3rd party.
3. 70-200mm 2.8 L canon - Rented this and loved it.
4. 100-400mm canon for the range.

I guess that would be my ultimate wish list. I am looking to get the Sigma 70-300 APO DG this week to cover my top end range temporarily.

I would end up selling my 28-135 IS canon to put towards one of the 4 above.

Do any of you have more than this? Is this a good goal to shoot for for a complete coverage of range? I am not even thinking above 400mm due to cost.

Thoughts?

that's close to what i have but i also have a low light prime ..... 35L.

ed rader

If you can live without fast primes, you can easily cover yourself in 3-4 zoom lenses. Your list looks good.

cory1848 wrote in post #4729604
The only reasons I can think of is 1, speed, and 2, prime.

It's a combination of both really (fast primes). Three or four zooms should be plenty for most people. Probably the most widely desired set would be 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, and 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS. I don't have much use for supertelephoto, so I've opted for the first three. I could also see adding the 24-105mm f/4L IS as a lighter travel/walkaround zoom also.

Past that it's all primes, and since I do a whole lot of low-light action shooting in theatres it's pretty much all primes that I'm looking at in the future. Currently that's the 50mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.8. Down the line I'll probably add the 35mm f/1.4L, 85mm f/1.2L II, and possibly the 135mm f/2.0L (only after I add a full-frame digital body). Then there are specialty lenses like the 100mm f/2.8 Macro, 15mm Fisheye, etc.

sadowsk2 wrote in post #4729715
A macro lens may come in handy as well.... Thats what I found and I have a similiar lens lineup as what you're loooking at

Can I ask why you have these?

24-70L |[COLOR=black] 24-105L | 70-200 2.8L IS

I would think the 24-70 and teh 70-200 would nix the need for the 24-105? or nix the need for the 24-70?

Is one faster than the other?

After getting the 100-400, I found that I rarely used the 70-200. I think you could easily cover the full range without it if that's what you're trying to accomplish.
1. 10-22
2. 24-105
3. 100-400

My bag consists of the following...

Sigma 10-20
Canon 28-105
Canon 70-200 f/4L
Canon 50mm f/1.8

If I want a bigger lens, I'll just rent one for the day. I don't much long range photography. I think nifty fifty is a "must have" in anybody's bag. For $50 you can't go wrong.

Doc

Well here's my list...mostly f/4 because I shoot mostly outdoors and I want to keep weight down. If I am bringing both the 30D and the 5D with me on a shoot I will add the Tokina 12-24 f/4 in case I want to use the 30D body for a landscape.
So if I limited to four lens due to space in a bag; typically I will pack:

30D
5D
17-40
24-105
70-200
100-400
1.4 TC
20mm extension tube.

and mont one of the bodies for wide landscape and the other body for reach.

Oh you will always want more! I have "one" lens left to have my complete set (if there is such a thing), but so far its:

Canon 15 fisheye
Canon 17-40L
Canon 24-70L
Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS
Canon 100 macro
Canon MP-E 65 1-5x macro
Canon 50 1.4

and the last one will be the Canon 100-400L.

So sure, if the four lenses you have is enough for you great, but I think youre only fooling yourself and someday you will want another.

All you really need is one lens.

Bahahahaha! Yeah. Right.

Seriously though, some of the most famous photographers have used nothing more than your basic "50mm standard" lens.