# What lens do you use?



## richifever (Mar 8, 2007)

I'm talking about your Go-To lens. Currently I only have a 18-135mm, but I'm looking to get the nikkor 50mm 1.8.


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

i've been mostly using my canon 50mm 1.8 and have left the kit lens in the bag for the past while. i'm having problems choosing my next lens. 85mm 1.8, 70-200mm f4.0 L, 70-300mm IS, ef-s 55-250mm, ef-s 18-55mm IS. 

what i really want though is a good fast walk around non-EF-S (for when i go full frame), and a good fast zoom. the new ef-s combo is low in price enough that i could get them for use for now but don't want to spend 1k on the 17-55 2.8 EF-s.


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

An AF-S 17-55 lives on my camera most of the time. I have a 50/1.8 AI but I rarely use it.


----------



## BahnBaum (Feb 25, 2004)

HW said:


> i've been mostly using my canon 50mm 1.8 and have left the kit lens in the bag for the past while. i'm having problems choosing my next lens. 85mm 1.8, 70-200mm f4.0 L, 70-300mm IS, ef-s 55-250mm, ef-s 18-55mm IS.
> 
> what i really want though is a good fast walk around non-EF-S (for when i go full frame), and a good fast zoom. the new ef-s combo is low in price enough that i could get them for use for now but don't want to spend 1k on the 17-55 2.8 EF-s.


Depending on what I'm doing, my general go to lenses is my 24-105 F/4L, or occasionally my 16-35 F/2.8L. I also have a 70-200 2.8 but it's just too large and heavy to work as a walk around for me.

You might also consider a 17-40 F/4L.

Invest in the best glass you can afford, especially if you're looking at adding a ff body.

Alex


----------



## EdCT (Mar 14, 2002)

I'm lazy, so I keep the 18/200mm Nikkor screwed on most of the time.

However, I'm tempted to go with that f 1.4 50mm Nikkor (or perhaps the cheaper f1.8)

Ed


----------



## e46Christian (Feb 27, 2003)

Nikkor 80-200 2.8. Love it...just love it. Tried the 80-400, but it's too damn slow. Time to start saving for a 200-400 F4.


----------



## richifever (Mar 8, 2007)

Wow..interesting...the thread responses started out with about 15-50 then people went 15-80, then 80-200....haha. Nice. I'm trying to figure out a good lens to take with me on my ED trip. $109 for the Nikkor 50mm 1.8 is a pretty tempting offer though.


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

It depends on how weight tolerant you are. 

I went to Asia last Summer. My walk around kit for the trip was my D2X, the 17-55 f2.8, and an 85 f1.4. I also brought a 70-300 but it never left the main camera bag (which in turn never left the hotel room - it's a big sucker that also held my laptop and some other stuff).

I would not limit myself to a 50mm lens alone. What does the 50mm do for you that the 18-135 that you will probably have with you anyway won't do?


----------



## 325ic a beer (Oct 21, 2005)

*Well.........*

The lens that is mostly on my rig is the 17-40 ,4.0L series Canon.
It's great for what i usually am doing. I have a LowePro Photo Trekker 2 to carry all my other lenses. Tripod goes nicely on the side too. It's a hell of a nice backpack. Airline approved for overhead storage.
Sometimes I wish I would have gone with the one with the wheels on it for the fact my backpack weighs in at 60 pounds!!(When fully loaded....)


----------



## richifever (Mar 8, 2007)

Cliff said:


> It depends on how weight tolerant you are.
> 
> I went to Asia last Summer. My walk around kit for the trip was my D2X, the 17-55 f2.8, and an 85 f1.4. I also brought a 70-300 but it never left the main camera bag (which in turn never left the hotel room - it's a big sucker that also held my laptop and some other stuff).
> 
> I would not limit myself to a 50mm lens alone. What does the 50mm do for you that the 18-135 that you will probably have with you anyway won't do?


I have problems at taking close ups. I lose speed and lighting is becomes horrible in low light conditions when I get to the 40-70 range. But I think its the environment and type of picture that I want to take.


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

richifever said:


> I have problems at taking close ups. I lose speed and lighting is becomes horrible in *low light conditions* when I get to the 40-70 range. But I think its the environment and type of picture that I want to take.


*Nikon AF-S Nikkor DX 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 G IF ED :dunno:
*


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

richifever said:


> I have problems at taking close ups. I lose speed and lighting is becomes horrible in low light conditions when I get to the 40-70 range. But I think its the environment and type of picture that I want to take.


You might be better off looking for a lens with VR. Alternatively, you could work on your handholding technique.


----------



## JBss (Feb 19, 2007)

EF-S 10-22


----------



## Jon Shafer (Dec 15, 2001)

The money shot lens for sure is the 70-200 f/2.8L IS.


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

Jon S. said:


> The money shot lens for sure is the 70-200 f/2.8L IS.


  $$$$$


----------



## richifever (Mar 8, 2007)

HW said:


> *Nikon AF-S Nikkor DX 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 G IF ED :dunno:
> *


I think I just suck taking pictures. :bawling:


----------



## JBss (Feb 19, 2007)

Jon S. said:


> The money shot lens for sure is the 70-200 f/2.8L IS.


i want the f/4 non IS.... Anyone want a 28-135? :angel:


----------



## HW (Dec 24, 2001)

JBss said:


> *i want the f/4 non IS*.... Anyone want a 28-135? :angel:


thinking about the same as well. that + a prime

either the 85mm f1.8 or something wide than the 50mm 1.8.


----------



## BahnBaum (Feb 25, 2004)

Jon S. said:


> The money shot lens for sure is the 70-200 f/2.8L IS.


As a walk around? :dunno:

Alex


----------



## Cliff (Apr 19, 2002)

BahnBaum said:


> As a walk around? :dunno:
> 
> Alex


Yeah well, the question posed by the OP to start the thread wasn't his real question. I love my 80-200 f2.8 AF-S too, and for sports or similar events, it's the lens that's on my camera. But I wouldn't drag it along on an international vacation.


----------

