I've been on a "thinking about gear" kick recently. You might have noticed.
Yesterday, Thomas Rink wrote a nice comment:
I find that too much product researching and testing is just confusing. Therefore, I tend to keep my "gear footprint" low—for the last two years, I used a single camera body and two prime lenses. I don't care that the camera isn't a current model, or that the lenses might be 'bad.' On almost every outing, this gear yields me one or two pictures I'm pleased with, and that's what counts.
This is another interesting gear topic. Some people feel the appeal of having a big selection of gear and switching around, or mix-and-matching for anything from specific moods to specific jobs; other people are the opposite, and feel the appeal in paring down to essentials.
So let me ask you a question: if you could have only two lenses, which would they be? Extra credit if you name specific lenses. Extra-extra credit if they're lenses you actually own now.
If you're the type of person who couldn't get by with only two lenses and who thinks the question is stupid, one word: understood. You're excused.
Me, I see the appeal, but I'm having trouble with the question.
Mike
P.S. And if you aren't in a gear mood and would rather think about something else, seen any good movies recently? Seriously, I'm looking for a few good movies to watch in the evenings, and I find myself rewatching old movies I liked years ago, which is making me feel stuck in the mud.
"Open Mike" is the editorial page of TOP. It appears on Wednesdays, assuming the moon is in phase and the stars are aligned.
Original contents copyright 2017 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Pick any two:
Give Mike a “Like” or Buy yourself something nice
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
Kev Ford: "For me it's the 35mm-e of the Fuji X100 plus the XF 56mm on my X-Pro1. Is it odd to have an ILC and only one lens? It feels a little odd."
Mike replies: Not at all. Early on, interchangeable lenses were to customize cameras with, as often as they were meant to interchange. Photojournalists in particular would stick with one lens / one camera, but would have multiple cameras—they felt changing lenses on the fly would slow them down too much. Do a Google image search for people like George Rodger, W. Eugene Smith, and David Douglas Duncan, and any others of that era you can think of, and you'll see what I mean. If you can find portraits of them you'll see they carried two or three camera bodies, each with its own lens. Often not the same camera body, even.
Frank Figlozzi: "I'd start with a Fuji X-E2 (a rangefinder-style APS-C camera); follow it with the Fuji 35mm ƒ/2 lens and the Fuji 18–55mm zoom; and—if you turned your back and looked in the other direction—I'd sneak in a third lens, the outstanding Fuji 14mm ƒ/2.8. All of which I own. Taking pictures is fun again!"
Kalli (partial comment): "Is your 'thinking about gear' kick caused by you not photographing? I find that it usually happens for me at least once a year, usually in winter, that I, for some reason, don't photograph and then I furiously research gear instead as a substitute. That period was cut short at the end of last year after venturing out a couple of times and coming home with some photos I was happy with."
David Anderson (partial comment): "I must admit two prime lenses would be one too few to be ideal for me; either just one or three would be my choice."
Dale Greer: "For Nikon FX, it would have to be the PJ workhorse zooms—a 17–35mm ƒ/2.8 and a 70–200 ƒ/2.8. I need the range and speed to get the job done. For personal enjoyment, I shoot Micro 4/3 and prefer fast primes (lighter than zooms, and they regain some of the depth-of-field isolation lost to the smaller sensor). The Panasonic Leica 42.5mm ƒ/1.2 Nocticron renders beautifully and is perhaps my all-time favorite short tele for any mount. On the other end, it's a toss-up between the Olympus M.Zuiko 12mm ƒ/2.0 and the Panasonic 20mm ƒ/1.7. Both lovely lenses."
RubyT: "This post describes the long-time war between my inner magpie and my inner ascetic (at the moment, the magpie is winning). If I could only have two lenses they would be the Pentax FA 77 Limited (my all-time favorite lens), and the Pentax DA 16–85mm, which covers pretty much any shooting situation I'm likely to find myself in. It doesn't render as beautifully as the 77mm, but it's weather-sealed and practical. I do own both of them right now. I took a fall onto the 16–85mm while hiking recently, and I shattered the hood, but the lens is fine (as is the camera). It's a great lens for hiking."
James Dyrek: "I have recently adopted the Fujifilm system and I picked their 23mm ƒ/1.4 and the 56mm ƒ/1.2. And the 23mm is the one I keep on my camera."
Mike replies: That's what I would have, except I can't tear the money for the 56mm out of my wallet. I bought the 14mm two years ago and the poor wallet is still recovering. :-)
Ed Donnelly: "If I had to pick only two, my Canon 100–400mm II for wildlife and trains, and my Fuji 18–55mm for everything else. I use more of course, but these two are by far the most versatile and both provide excellent image quality on their respective bodies."
Michael Poster: "I don't need two. One 35mm (or equivalent to that) will do. It's not that the 35mm focal length is ideal, necessarily, it's that I can always make it work."
Mike replies: Well said. That's a very good way to sum up the main benefit of a lens with a 35mm or equivalent angle of view.
Timo Virojärvi: "Nikon PC-E 24mm ƒ/3.5 and Sigma 50mm ƒ/1.4 Art. I have them both (and 35 other lenses)."
Stephanie Luke: "You probably want to hear about a movie you can watch at home, but all I can come up with is something we recently saw at the local cinema: 'Passengers.' It got poor reviews, so I wasn't expecting much, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. I admit, I'm a sci-fi fan, and good ones are pretty few and far between. There was some great CGI and just plain beautiful scenery. It's a rather 'slow' film but I like slow. Maybe most of all I liked that it didn't have a villain, which is quite rare these days. It was plain, old-fashioned sci-fi, with a basic philosophical conundrum."
Alan Wieder: "I walk the streets and shoot. Have fallen in love with the Leica Q—no issues about lens choice anymore."
Rube: "If I had to pick two, I would only pick one: the lens on the Ricoh GR. Of course I would leave it on the body! GRIN."
Shaun: "The 28mm equiv. on the Ricoh GRII—what an excellent walk-around lens/camera. I'm continually impressed with this camera and lens, and it fits in a pocket. I do wish Ricoh would do a 35mm version of this camera/lens. The other would the Sony Sonnar FE 55mm ƒ/1.8 on an A7rII. Own and use both."
Dogman: "I like a body dedicated to a lens so there's not a lot of changing out lenses. If I had to pick two lenses only, the choice would be pretty easy. Fuji 23mm ƒ/1.4 and 35mm ƒ/1.4, each mounted on a Fuji body. Both are great lenses, nearly magical in their look. I have to add that I could also happily live with a Fuji X100 series camera with its 23mm ƒ/2 fixed lens and a Ricoh GRII with its 18.3mm ƒ/2.8 fixed lens. The Fuji X100 cameras, in use, are almost transcendental. The Ricoh has one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used."
Marcelo Guarini: "I shoot Micro 4/3. My favorites by some margin are the Voigtlander 17.5mm ƒ/0.95 and the new Olympus 25mm ƒ/1.2. Both are absolutely fantastic lenses—large, but optically really beautiful."
Stuart (partial comment): "Aggghh—get behind me Satan! I’ll try to keep this short…."
[Ed note: He doesn't! As always, you can read the full text of "partial comments" in the full Comments section.]
Wesley Liebenberg-Walker: "I have an OM-D E-M5 Mark II and use the Oly 12-40mm and the Panasonic 35-100mm. I have other lenses, but if they all disappeared tonight I'd still be happy with those two for nearly everything that I shoot. (I wouldn't be happy that the others disappeared though...)."
Doug Thacker: "One, two, or three lenses, and which one(s)? This has always been my favorite exercise, because it requires so much thinking and self-reflection, and paring down, and reveals so much about one's development.
"For years I shot with only a 50mm. It was always a bit too long, but 35mm was too wide. I'd have preferred a 40mm, or a 45mm, maybe, but I made do with 50mm and prided myself on being able to shoot anything with it, and get any shot I really wanted. And where I couldn't get the shot, I told myself I really didn't want it. Nowadays 50mm or the equivalent isn't right at all, neither wide enough nor long enough.
"When I started with the X-T1 I settled on the 14mm ƒ/2.8 and the 27mm ƒ/2.8 as my everyday walking-around lenses. But over time I find that I almost never use the 14mm. The 27mm is the one I use constantly, but it's too slow, both in terms of focus and aperture, despite being pleasingly small.
"I skipped the 18mm ƒ/2 because I also have the Ricoh GR and figured it could serve as my 28mm. And in fact I now realize this is the focal length I most enjoy using.
"So, when I upgrade to the X-T2, my new walk-around lenses are going to be the 18mm ƒ/2 and the 56mm ƒ/1.2, neither of which I yet own. Upgrade day is going to be expensive, then, but I have a feeling it will result in a more satisfying shooting experience, and more shooting."
FKT: "I've been shooting more film than digital for personal projects in recent years. My favorite 35mm body is the contemporary Cosina/Voigtlaender R2C, which has the old Zeiss Ikon Contax rangefinder mount. I've got four lenses for the body (and an original Zeiss Ikon Contax IIa body), but my two favorites are the Zeiss 35mm ƒ/2.8 Biogon and Zeiss 50mm ƒ/1.5 Sonnar. Both are post-World War II models, and all four lenses were overhauled by Henry Scherer at Zeisscamera.com. Servicing is necessary as the four lenses are between 60 and 65 years old."
Ben Rosengart: "Nowadays, I use the Fuji 23mm ƒ/1.4. The FOV fits the way I see—it could be a few degrees wider—and if there's a picture which demands a longer lens, well, I let someone else take it. In theory, I want a portrait lens too; in practice, I can happily shoot with one focal length for years at a time."
Rod Thompson (partial comment): "As to lots of gear, I find the less I have the easier the process is."
Steve Smith: "The only two lenses I need are the taking and viewing lenses on my Rolleicord."
Mike replies: Yes, it's one of the great advantages of a TLR—no lens choice to worry about. Really teaches you how to see like the camera sees. Something photographers didn't really recover in digital until smartphones came along. Note Carey Rose's article at DPReview—he accomplished the same thing by only bringing one lens to Thailand.
Another advantage of the old days was that view cameras and rangefinders enforced our knowledge of prime lenses—you couldn't put a zoom lens on a Leica or an 8x10 Deardorff.
While restricting myself to only two lenses would mean painfully missing some lenses that I love, the choice is actually easy for me in my Nikon DX (APS-C) system (partly because I like to think about this sort of thing every so often): my Nikon 16-80 DX VR, and some 50mm f/1.4 (I currently have the Nikon 50mm f/1.4 G, but the Sigma Art would be tempting if I was going to have only two lenses).
APS-C 50mm seems to be basically the focal length that I naturally see in; I love it in a prime and if left alone I often gravitate to somewhere around it in a zoom. And I know that I can happily use a 50mm prime exclusively for a long time, as one of my Project 365s was about half done with my 50mm (which meant that I kept it on the camera for months on end).
However, I do eventually get bored with a single lens and a single focal length, and want some variety in both. The Nikon 16-80 is a generally great lens and it covers a large enough focal range to be a general use lens that I'm perfectly happy with. If I want flexibility instead of the simplicity that a prime gives me, I can wander around with it and get a wide range of shots, and if I'm exploring somewhere with no idea of what sort of shots I'll see it gives me a lot of options. I'd like a bit more reach, but not enough to give up any of its strengths.
Posted by: Chris Siebenmann | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 04:34 PM
Okay, this film is a couple of years old but I have just watched it again: Interstellar.
It's definitely not everyone's cup of tea. It's part-hokum, part-slush but I think it's absolutely wonderful with an ending that brings tears to my eyes. Christopher Nolan really aimed for the stars with this one (excuse feeble pun).
Also, the music by Has Zimmer is worth watching the movie for. One of the best soundtracks I've heard in years.
Bridge of Spies isn't bad, either and have you seen the movie version of Tinker, Tailor? Almost as good as the original BBC TV series from the early '80s.
Finally if you want an undemanding thriller with a large slab of black humour, I heartily recommend the Norwegian version of Headhunters. Outrageous!
As for lenses: the Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art is a gem and is a great price.
Posted by: Andrew Lamb | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 04:36 PM
Easy:
35/1.4 ASPH Summilux for Leica M. Mated to any Leica M body.
Cooke PS945 large format portrait lens. The greatest modern portrait lens. 4x5 only of course.
***
And if I am not doing all these portrait project, then the Cooke should be replaced with the 150mm APO Sironar S.
Posted by: Richard Man | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 04:42 PM
1. Canon 35mm 1.4L II (which I don't own but really covet).
2. Canon 85mm 1.4L II (which I don't own but only slightly covet).
35mm is my fav focal length and the 1.4 II looks like magic.
For the second I might go with the 50 1.2L and would certainly have to consider a new/revised Canon 50 1.4 if it was ever delivered. 50mm is growing on me.
I should add that I agree with and, for the most part, practice Thomas' philosophy of small gear footprint and who cares about the MFT chart.
Posted by: PaddyC | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 04:49 PM
For Fuji X-Pro 2: the 16-55 because you only allow two, and a lens that keeps the old-fashioned look, perhaps my Leica Summaron 35/3.5.
Posted by: Charles | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:00 PM
Simple, and I own both:
Olympus Zuiko 17mm f1.8
Olympus Zuiko 45mm f1.8
Both pretty much perfect and... cheap
Posted by: Marc Gibeault | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:00 PM
Although I own more than 2 lenses, the vast majority of the best photographs I've made over the last couple of years have been made with either the 35mm f/2 lens on the Sony Rx-1 and the Sony 50mm f/2.8 Macro on the A99 (I've used these 2 lenses for about 85% of all the photographs I've made over this time period).
The Rx-1 has my favorite lens of all time on it and I use it about twice as often as the A99.
The 50mm Macro is a very good lens but I keep thinking about the Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 FE lens. I have never tried the 55mm outside of a store.
Posted by: John Sparks | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:06 PM
Seems easy, although I'm a split person...
For publishing needs, I take a Oly 12-40/2,8 plus an Oly 75/1,8, each on its own Oly EM-5 Mark I body (for the reasons you mentioned.)
For fun, it's the Pana 20/1,7 plus the Oly 45/1,8 in my pocket. Altho I'm thinking about the Pana 15/1,7 to replace the 20...
Posted by: Thomas Wiegold | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:08 PM
We're planning a trip to Scotland this summer so I've been looking carefully at what to take. We'll be hiking so weight is important. And we're going to try to not have any checked luggage so size is a consideration. The Sinar P is staying home.
As I look through the photos from many years of shooting (I started in 1974) and think about the situations from which they were made I have come to the realization that the times I carried multiple lenses (early on) or three zoom lenses (more recently) and several bodies the quality of the photos were lower. I was "seeing" everything and trying to make a photo of everything. The best photos were made when I had very little equipment.
So, I'll be carrying a Nikon F2A body and a Nikkor 35mm f/1.4 AIS and an 85mm f/1.4 AF-D. I won't be able to get everything with that combo and that's for the best.
Posted by: Terry | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:19 PM
I'm not a big fan of zooms but what I have and use when traveling are: Nikon FX 35-70 plus 80-200 f2.8. For m43 I use 14-42 and a 35-100. If I could only have one lens it would be a 35mm (fx), any major brand would do.
Posted by: Eric Rose | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:31 PM
I would struggle with this but - I have almost a dozen Cnon EF mount lenses plus a similar amount of Contax/Yashica fit Zeiss lenses. Ideally I want to keep my TS-E 17/24/45/90 & Zeiss 35mm PC Distagon. However if push came to shove I'd probably pick the Canon 24-70 f/4 L IS and TS-E 17mm. This would cover most situations I think.
Posted by: Barry Reid | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:34 PM
X100F + X Pro 2 with 35mm F2. If I can only have one camera, I would just have to have one lens since it would be the X100F (which I am not so patiently waiting for....).
Posted by: Stanleyk | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:39 PM
Nikon D700 with 35 f/2 AF-D (90% of the time) and the 28 f/2.8 AIS for when I need a bit wider. Most of my best photos of the last four years have come with these two lenses.
Posted by: Chris Fuller | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:42 PM
Canon TS-E 45 and 90mm. Have them both (also the 24mm version). They're old designs but work well for creating easily merged photos so results can be other than 2x3 aspect ratio without cropping down a single image.
Posted by: Tom Robbins | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:42 PM
Mike, if you haven't seen the movies by Japanese master Yasujiro Ozu yet, you are in for a serious treat, both cinematic and photographic. Beautiful beautiful movies with Tokyo Story in b&w as perhaps the crown achievement.
Posted by: Mattias | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:44 PM
Easy, a Leica 35mm and a Leica 50mm. Time tested and many examples of great photos. We forget that up until digital lots of pros used this setup as their main system or as backups to a Canon on Nikon. Small go everywhere outfit. One lens on camera and one in the pocket. Super sharp and the color rendition that we still strive for with photoshop.
Posted by: J Mellody | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:49 PM
I have four answers - 2 lenses for each system that I use :) Maybe a bit of a cheat within the spirit of the question?
Fuji XT-2 - XF 23mm f1.4 & XF 100-400 f4.5-5.6
Leica S 007 - 24mm f3.5 Super-Elmar-S & 120mm f2.5 CS APO Macro-Summarit-S
Leica M 246 - 28mm f1.4 Summicron-M & 90mm f2 APO Summicron-M
Leica SL - 24-90mm f2.8-4 Vario-Elmarit-SL & 50mm f2 APO Summicron-M
The four systems are used in very different ways, and hopefully, that is reflected by the lens selection for each system. Extra-extra credit - I voted with my wallet. Further straying from the original question the M and S lenses can be used on multiple bodies. The evolution to this kit was an interesting journey of good and bad decisions and experience.
Posted by: Glenn Edens | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 05:50 PM
One I have: Olympus 17/2.8
One I need and intend to get: Olympus 25/1.8
Final one to make my set complete: Olympus 45/18
Those would equal the classic standard rangefinder set and would be all I want.
In the meantime I use my kit zooms because they're "good enough" but they'll retire once I have my three primes.
Posted by: William Lewis | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:02 PM
I'm a bit late to the comments, but my take on it is that maybe you asked the wrong question Mike. Not what lenses but what focal lengths would be more to the point for simplifying. Zoom lenses might be technically one lens but they don't actually simplify things like a fixed focal length does - it's a state of mind rather than the gear itself.
Fujifilm 35/f2 and 60/f2.4 for me, which I have, and I have very rarely owned more than one camera body at any one time either.
Posted by: Kefyn Moss | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:12 PM
I use ONLY two lenses and they are an interesting combination if only because one is for the Nikon D5100 and it's the Sigma 17mm-50mm f2.8 The other is the 27mm f2.8 for the Fujifilm XPro-1. I would prefer that the 27mm was weather resistant. Another short coming of the 27mm is dof. Not the best. Which means I may get the 23mm f2.0 and retire the 27mm or maybe not. I really like the angle of view of the 27mm.
Question: How many comments did you get for this post? It seems to go on forever.
Posted by: John Krill | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:15 PM
A 24mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.8 Zuiko for a OM-1
Yes, I own both.
Wish I could help with movies but I'll stuck in the same situation.
Movies I've enjoyed over the last 20 years;
O' Brother Where art Thou
Apollo 13
Good Night and Good Luck
Despicable Me I & II
About Schmidt
The King's Speech
Older movies;
The Hot Rock
The Producers (the original one)
The Twelve Chairs
Love and Death
Never Cry Wolf
The British made series, available on You-tube,
'Tinker Taylor Soldier Spy' and the follow up
'Smileys People', both featuring Alec Guinness as George Smiley
Posted by: john robison | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:15 PM
I own a Pentax K7. I would like a K3, but not enough to buy one.
For lenses, there is no doubt in my mind.
SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F2.8 Limited Macro
SMC Pentax-DA 21mm F3.2 Limited
I own both of them, and I really love them. I think the 21mm is the one I use most of all, but I couldn't be without the 35mm. The FOV is perfect for me and the image quality is lovely. When you add the small size and the excellent build quality there is no doubt.
Every time I think of changing system, I remember those two lenses. Even going to FF Pentax K1 is not an option.
Posted by: Kjell H A | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:27 PM
I have, and am delighted with a Fuji 35 1.4 and 18 2.0. They are used on my X-Pro 1. The only change I would make is a second X-Pro 1 so I could have them both handy. This setup gets out of the way and lets me create. Any failure in capture a moment worth printing is down to misjudging the moment or, more often, some level of error on my part.
Posted by: Stephen McCullough | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:32 PM
All the prints I make come from two of my four lenses. I love a good candid portrait and my EF 135 f/2 L makes me very happy. I use my EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L for wildlife and this lens just amazes me. I shoot both on a Canon 6D.
You should consider checking out some recent "golden era" TV series which feature "movie stars" for one season and then change out the cast for the next season. I recommend season one of True Detective (McConaughey & Harrelson) and season two of Fargo (Dunst & Danson).
Posted by: Jim A | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:41 PM
If I could have only two lenses I'd keep my 135mm f/5.6 Rodenstock Sironar S and 300mm f/9 Nikon M for my 4x5. I own them both and they never fail to please me. I usually carry one or two others, but these are what I shoot the bulk of my 4x5 sheets with.
Posted by: Larry Gebhardt | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:42 PM
"Tucker and Dale vs Evil"
"Lars and the Real Girl"
"Room"
"My Afternoons with Margueritte"
"Old Boy"-(Korean)
"I Saw the Devil"–(Korean)
Posted by: John H.Seidel | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:45 PM
I'm currently using two camera bags (not at the same time!), the small bag contains an OMD EM5 usually wearing the Panny 20 f1.7 which I adore for the almost 3D quality it produces, also in the bag is the Panny 42.5, a wonderful lens. In the larger bag I keep a OMD EM1 with 12-40f2.8 and 40-150f2.8. Both of these lenses just wow me for sharpness, fast focus, and lack of CA. They are a bit large/heavy, but not if one considers that they cover e-24 through 300 at 2.8, and weather protected to boot!
Posted by: Steven Willard | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:46 PM
My first year of Fuji ownership was with the 18mm and 35mm (1.4) and it was probably the most relaxing experience of my photographic life. No choices to make, just a bag with a camera and two lenses.
Posted by: Steve Jacob | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:46 PM
Canon 24/2.8 on a 6D and 50/1.4 on a 60D. I can switch, always have a backup and the equivalent of 24, 38, 50 and 80mm.
Posted by: Hugues-Antoine Suin | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:51 PM
Will be setting off on a couple of trips over the next few weeks. Usually travel with WAY too much gear. This time: Panasonic GH3 with 12 - 35 f2.8 and Olympus E-M1 with Sigma 60 f2.8 plus sneaking it in when no one is looking .. the Panasonic 20 f1.7. (it's so small no one is going to notice :-)
Also have a full frame Nikon D610. Would travel light with that with the 35 f2.0 and 85 f1.8 G.
Posted by: Chas | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 06:57 PM
I wander from Pentax to m43 and now god help me to Fuji. I dread moving from Pentax as I have been through Spotmatic, ME Super, LX, 1st DS, K200D and K5. But mirrorless is so much lighter and as I walk all day weight is very important now. I plan to try out Fuji as I love their cameras but right now 90 % of what I do is the Olympus 12-40 and the 17/1.8. The former is versatile and the latter makes a lovely light mix with the OMD5.
Although there are frustrations with m43 in poor light it is an astonishing system. Coming up here to the Orkney Islands I fitted the OMD 5 with the 12-40 + 12/2 and 17/1.8 and 9-18/4 and 60 macro plus charger and all the bits and bobs into a tiny Tamrac Velocity 9 bag. The difference between the systems of m43 and APSC is significant but really comes into its own when you cant restrict yourself to 2 lenses and end up with 5!
Posted by: Tom Bell | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:04 PM
After having our first child and starting a new job, we were poor, living paycheck to paycheck. For five years I was stuck shooting with the two lenses that I purchased during my freewheeling bachelor days, the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L and Canon 135 f2.0 L. The 24-70 zoom on a full frame camera covers 90% of what I like to shoot. The 135mm is a worthless brick that never comes out of my camera bag.
Now days, my primary lens is a Canon 24-70 f2.8 L II. The pictures I get with that lens look like they come from a prime, they are magic with great contrast, sharpness, and colors. Of course all that performance comes with a drawback, th3 24-70 is huge. I hate carrying it on family outings because it gets in the way and I'm always bashing it into one of our kids foreheads.
That brings me to my surprise favorite lens: the Canon 85mm f1.8. I've never been a prime guy, but I love the size of Canon's cheaper 85mm and, I love how it feels on my 5D mk3. Also, for some reason, the 85mm focal length just plain works with how I see. I can lift that lens to my eye and there's always a picture there. Distracting background? No problem, just crank up the Bokeh. It also gives me some working distance for taking pics of my kids or street photography. 85mm gives you space to breath but not so much space that you're disconnected.
Posted by: David Raboin | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:14 PM
For my November trip to Rome I wanted to be real clever and stripped it down to:
Sony NEX-6 + Alpha 7 + Sigma 24mm Super Wide + Rokkor 58mm F1.4. This calculation would give FoV of 24,36,58 and 85mm. It didn't work out too favourably. Too much lens swapping ... not practical!
Posted by: Scarlatti24 | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:16 PM
Leica 50mm Summicron Dual Range f/2 Own
Leica 50mm Summar f/2 Own (when I’m in the mood for that special ‘glow’)
Posted by: Steve | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:26 PM
Film: The Worlds Fastest Indian. Stars Anthony Hopkins. The "Indian" being a motorcycle as you probably know.
I've watched this film 3 times over the last two years and am looking forward to watching again soon. An absolute gem.
Posted by: Len Salem | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:27 PM
Pentax K3 with DA 21 and DA70 - I have all 3 with me all the time - APSC DSLR adaptability in an 'almost' mirrorless configuration.
Plus one on the "Wilderpeople" movie
Posted by: Roger Bartlett | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:30 PM
It's easier to choose one lens than two. My two are Canon 35m F2 IS and Canon 70-200 F4 both take a 67mm filter which is handy; I love my polarizer.
If only one lens Canon 24-70mm F4.
On 4x5 film after the solar flare it would be my Schneider 210mm f5.6 digitar (it does cover 4x5) and as a telephoto only needs a short bellows draw.
Posted by: William Furniss | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:32 PM
For me it would be the Sony A7Rii with Zeiss Batis 25mm and 85 mm. Then I could crop easily to 40mm and 135mm. I presently have Sony A7ii and Sony 28mm and Zeiss Batis 85mm.
Posted by: Bill Symmons | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:32 PM
Movies... I can never remember, so I scanned our rated Netflix titles. We gave five stars to Smoke Signals, Frida, The Imitation Game, Spotlight, Love Actually, Chocolat, Mansfield Park, Iris, Moonrise Kingdom, and Kill Bill, and The Color Purple. Likely much more, but that's a start...
Lenses, I think I'd be happy with my Ricoh GRll and a new (unicorn) GR with a normal lens, one in each coat pocket, or both lightly dangling around my neck.
Posted by: John Krumm | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:35 PM
I have two little systems, Sony A7 and Panasonic MFT.
For the A7 I'll go for the 35mm f2.8 and 55mm f1.8. They're maybe a bit close for some people but I can't decide which I like best so I'll take both and perhaps mostly use the 35mm f2.8 but switch to the 55mm f1.8 as for indoor low light shooting f2.8 often just isn't enough.
For MFT I'll take the prime sized and good enough to use wide open all the time Panasonic 14-42mm Mega OIS for good light use and the Oly 25mm f1.8.
For either system I'd dearly love a macro but rules are rules so I'll stick to the two lenses.
For a good film please give a Korean film called "Poetry" a look. I saw it a few years ago and it's been near my top of best ever films ever since.
Posted by: Alan | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:43 PM
I think I have about 60 lenses without going and counting them. I couldn't say which is my favorite, but I know my favorite f stop is 4.5
Posted by: hugh crawford | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 07:56 PM
Right now I'm using the 28mm lens around which the Minolta TC-1 is built
http://www.hookstrapped.com/album/quito
and a 19th century petzval lens in a 4x5
http://www.hookstrapped.com/album/the-house-at-the-foot-of-mariana-grajales
I love both because they each have a tremendous and pleasing character. It makes sense for me to limit myself to a few approaches and ways of seeing at a time. I see benefits from working within self-imposed constraints.
Posted by: Peter | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 08:00 PM
The Lumix 12-60mm is pulling me back to micro43. It's 210 grams, 24-120mme, splashproof and does about 1:2 closeups. I can live with its 'slowpoke' aperture range. The new Leica will add more bulk and $$ for a bit more speed, and the 560g Oly 12-100 f/4 is also more than I wish to carry.
Another lens, and a body -hmm. My pancake prime is the Oly 17/2.8, and a 45-150 mini telezoom is on its way. The body should be splashproof, but it doesn't exist yet; it would be a sealed G85+, or a GX8+ with the '85 shutter.
Posted by: jim r | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 08:03 PM
Get out of the house and go see LA LA Land. Warm Los Angeles never looked more beautiful. Especially for those of us locked in an endless northern winter.
Posted by: Dave Kee | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 08:19 PM
Sign of my age imagine. But the 1970's model Nikkor 35f2 and 105f2.5 always seemed the best I've ever owned, and I have owned dozens. I often go back and look at some of those photos and wonder how I might get that look.
And when it comes to multiple cameras, Dennis Hopper in Apocalypse Now always comes to mind.
As a side note, I friend of mine who still shoots for Reuters, and I would drape ourselves with two or three nikons each and talk our way into about any event anywhere in the early 70's.
Posted by: Del Bomberger | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 08:28 PM
One body, two lenses: Nikon F3HP with a 20/2.8 and 55/2.8 AIS. Film would be Kodak Ektar 100.
One body, one lens: Leica M3 and 50/DR. Film would alternate between Kodak Ektar 100 and Rollei Superpan 200.
One camera: Rollei 35S. Film would alternate between Fuji Velvia and Rollei Superpan 200.
All three options have their merits. But in the end, the Rollei would be the one camera I couldn't let go.
Posted by: David Aureden | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 08:43 PM
AF-S FX NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G and AF-S NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8.
Cover 99% of my needs.
Posted by: Williams Khürt Louis | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 08:50 PM
Two lenses? They would be the twin 75mm (f3.5 and f3.2) on the Minolta Autocord with which I fell in love with Photography as a boy.
Posted by: Tom | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 08:56 PM
If you haven't seen it, "Lars and the Real Girl" is wonderful and showcases Ryan Gosling before he "hit it big". Don't let the publicity photos put you off. It's a well acted, poignant, sweet movie. A more recent movie you should be able to watch at home "Bridge of Spies".
Posted by: Steve Rosenblum | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:00 PM
That's easy, it'd be the two that I use now, a Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 and a Nikkor 85 1.8G, each on its own D7200 body.
Posted by: Cliff R. | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:15 PM
Re: Movies
*Arrival. Best sci-fi I've seen in years.
*Safety Not Guaranteed
*Ruby Sparks
*Moonrise Kingdom
Posted by: DavidB | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:16 PM
Interesting question and not the first time I've seen it asked. But now as in the first time I saw this question considered, it seems like "cheating" to pick zoom lenses. That's the question you asked though, so who am I to complain?
My choices are the Olympus 17mm f1.8 and the 60mm f2.8 macro. More often than not, I'm happier than I thought I'd be with the results of the 60-mil lens. I hate the way the lens looks, and don't especially love its peculiarities related to manual focus. But it works well for me. I love the Olympus' 45-mil and 75-mil lenses too. But the 75 is a little to specialized and the 45 lacks the ability to focus closely that the 60 has.
If I could add a lens, I'd add the Voightlander 25mm f0.95. I might pick that one or the 45-mil Oly if I could only have one lens/focal length. I own all the lenses I've mentioned.
Posted by: Bob | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:20 PM
Leica 35mm summilux for my normal.
Leica 21mm summilux because why not.
Add a M240 or M10 that I can afford and it would be bliss.
Posted by: Morgan | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:30 PM
A great photo is a great photo even if it isn't Zeiss Otis sharp.
My philosophy is this:
1. Buy lenses that are inexpensive enough that you can afford to go places where you'll be able to take photos you'll love.
2. Buy lenses small and light enough enough that you'll always have them with you when you need them.
I take mostly urban photographs here in Asia and I've found that all I need are a small APS-C 35 mm f/1.8 (although I often wish it were slightly wider) and the Tamron 17 - 50 f/2.8.
Posted by: Mark | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:37 PM
Movies: If you want to laugh your backside off, and don't mind crude humor, try Simon Pegg and Nick Frost's "Paul". If you're a fan of SciFi movies it's an added bonus.
Posted by: BruceK | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:37 PM
Movies:
Barry Lyndon
Full Metal Jacket
Posted by: Stanleyk | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:39 PM
Leica Q, done.
Posted by: Steve | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 09:43 PM
This is a cruel question, but if forced to 2 lenses, it'd most likely be my glorious Fuji 16 f1.4 and...probably the 50-140 2.8, just to cover the bases. But the 35 1.4 is awful close.
The only other combo that calls to me would be a Sigma 35 1.4 ART and a Nikon 105 1.4 on a...camera that doesn't yet exists, but something that would have the AF of a D500 and the size and at least the sensor of the D750.
Posted by: Rob L. | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 10:02 PM
When I was shooting film SLRs (Canon F-1 mostly), 90% of my shooting was with the FDn 50/1.2 L, and most of the remainder with the FDn 85/1.2 L.
Now that I mostly use a Leica M9, I'd have to go with my Minolta M-Rokkor 28/2.8 and 40/2 lenses.
Posted by: Ari | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 10:15 PM
The Tessar 75/3.5 and Heidosmat 2.8, both of which are permanently mounted on my Rolleiflex.
Posted by: Earl Dunbar | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 10:20 PM
Instant brain freeze, but once unfrozen, xf23 f/2 & xf18-55 f2.8-4.0. But this does blow my master multi- purpose kits plan of zooms for landscape and Primes for everything else. I have the good fortune of already owning both.
What I really need, is more time.
Posted by: Mark Kinsman | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 10:25 PM
I've used the Fuji X10, X20, and X30 series cameras, all with the f2-2.8, 28-112mm (equivalent) fixed zoom lens, for the last 5 years. I own a Nikon kit for the occasional job, but for my personal work, these little cameras give me everything I could want for the kind of work I do.
The lens and sensor aren't the sharpest available today by any means, but they are completely adequate for the up to 17x22" museum quality prints I make. I don't need the latest and greatest camera-of-the-moment to get prints that I love!
You mentioned yesterday that I use a long lens to flatten my compositions, but 112mm (equivalent) is my maximum focal length. I use focal length less to flatten the composition than to adjust the relationships among objects within an image, and the zoom is a life-saver in this regard. Given the same image framing, moving back with a longer focal length creates a significantly different image than moving close and using a shorter focal length.
I guess I get double points for using one body and one (admittedly attached) lens for virtually all of my work.
Posted by: Rodger Kingston | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 11:11 PM
I'd probably stick with my two most used lenses - Canon 24mm f/1.4 and Canon 24mm Tilt-Shift f/3.5. The latter is what I use for my "walking around with a tripod work" which is where most of my "serious" work comes from. The former I bought years ago when I had an APS-C sensor. I wanted something that was close to 35mm but would still be useful when I moved up to full frame. After using it for so long, I just got good at using it. I've used 35mm on film cameras since then and like that focal length well enough. Maybe when the 24mm dies (unlikely, it's a tank) I'll look in the 24-35 range for something that's smaller and doesn't weight a ton. But then again, I'm used to carrying around the heavy one and it's not so bad.
Posted by: Chris Norris | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 11:13 PM
BTW, missed the part about movies. Since I blathered and didn't answer about lenses, I've seen lots of mediocre movies (my taste tends to run towards "junk food for the mind") but the gems among the junk recently have been The Revenant (favorite recent movie, though the end went a little too Hollywood) and American Hustle. A couple of less recent recommendations are Nobody's Fool (Paul Newman 1994) and Gran Torino (Clint Eastwood 2008).
Posted by: Dennis | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 11:21 PM
Ach ! And how could I forget "Nebraska" ? 2013 in black and white.
Posted by: Dennis | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 11:29 PM
I have two go to lenses for the images I take, both are zooms. The pair is the much derided Pentax DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 and the Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8. I have a set of primes in 8mm, 50mm, 85mm and 300mm which I use when the situation lends itself. Giving what I normally shoot (arts performances documentation for non-profits) the need to have the correct focal length for composition is paramount.
That said, I did shoot quite a few events with my 85mm and 8mm in combination. It still can take a long time to swap lenses but with these two manual lenses it takes even longer due to having to adjust the focal length parameter for shake reduction.
Posted by: PDLanum | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 11:42 PM
Lumix 20mm/1.7 (my wife has that one normally), and
M.Zuiko 45mm/1.8 (both of us have one)
And yes, I could live with these two. But additional to the Lumix which is still one of my favourites, I have the PanaLeica 25mm/1.4, and the Lumix 14mm/2.5.
So it's 20 and 45mm for her, and
14, 25, and 45mm for me.
Posted by: Wolfgang Lonien | Wednesday, 25 January 2017 at 11:44 PM
I bought an Olympus EP-3 in 2013. Kit lens was ok, then decided one lens, a Sigma 19mm f/2.8 DN was all I needed for my photography. I lived with that until 2016. It was a nice lens. I've just recently purchased a Sigma 60mm f/2.8 DN A because it seemed to fill a need the 19 could not. I'm very happy with just these two. they seem to cover all I see.
Posted by: Russell Guzewicz | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 12:21 AM
Olympus OM Zuiko 35/2.8 and 100/2.8 Silvernose lenses.
I own both.
Movie: Rubber
Posted by: Ken N | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 12:27 AM
Picking the first lens is easy: Panasonic 25mm f/1.4. It has has some magic touch to it, specially for people. The best lens I ever had in 20 years in the hobby and 30 lens or so.
The second one is much harder, as there is only one left. Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 is lovely, but would miss tele too much. I think it would be the Panasonic 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6, a great all around lens.
BTW, another great question is, how many lens you have and how many you really use (e.g. take more than 10% of pictures with it). I bet many people who have many lenses use only a small subset of them.
Posted by: A Facebook User | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 12:38 AM
Criminy, are you drowning in responses yet? Pandora, close the box! Anyways, I have the two lenses right here in the bag: Nikkor f/1.4 50mm and Nikkor f/2.5 105mm. Both to be paired with Tri-X, Ektar, or Portra.
Although if your rules allow two different cameras, then I might jettison the 105mm and go with an 80mm Zeiss on the Hasselblad.
Posted by: Steve Renwick | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 12:40 AM
Just a 50mm Summitar on my Leica IIIa and some variant wideangle lens on my Olympus XA2, Olympus Trip 35 or Lomo LC-A... suits me fine.
Posted by: Frank | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 12:53 AM
Pentax 21mm f/3.2 Limited and 70mm f/2.4 Limited. A 32mm(e) and 105mm(e) setup that has done well for me for years.
OK, cheating, but sometimes I sub the 15mm f/4 Limited, which is 22mm(e) for the 21.
Posted by: Bob Keefer | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 12:58 AM
Hard question, 28mm Elmarit, third version for sure. Second one 50mm f4 Pentax macro.
Movies. The Great Beauty is one I can't stop watching lately, but there's a lot more in my list.
Posted by: David Lee | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 12:58 AM
For my Olympus E-M1: The 12-40mm zoom and the 45mm f/1.8. The zoom covers the vast majority of things I would want to photograph. The 45mm seems to end up being on the camera most of the time when the 12-40mm is not on it. It is very close to the lens that was usually on my most-used old 35mm camera -- an 85mm f/1.8.
For my 4x5: For sure my 125mm f/5.6 Fujinon NW and a 210mm Tessar type. I have a 210mm f/6.1 Caltar Pro (which is a rebranded Schneider Xenar), but the shutter jammed right before a trip. I picked up a 210mm f/5.6 Fujinon L and like it a lot too. Both are smaller than the typical Plasmat design 210mm. Much better for hiking with plenty of room for movements on 4x5.
For my 5x7: My preferences are not as strong here. Probably my 215mm Ilex-Caltar convertible (is that cheating?) and my 450mm Fujinon C.
For my Whole Plate camera: My 250mm f/6.7 Fujinon W and 450mm Fujinon C.
Posted by: Dave Karp | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 01:14 AM
I had been a two-lens shooter for many years when creating my personal work with my 4 x 5 view camera. The two lenses are 120mm f5.6 Schneider and a 270mm f9 Schneider, the 120 would be a medium wide the 270mm a short telephoto on the view camera. About 5 years ago I added a third lens to my two lens kit, a very small 180mm f9 Fuji lens. I would have to say though that 75% of my work is done with the 120mm lens. Less is more.
Posted by: Gary Nylander | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 01:19 AM
Great post and an easy answer.
Olympus 17mm because it has very coherent bokeh transition, allowing me to get "right" looking street images even at f1.8 (looks like f4 on FF),even with slight focus misses, not the more "modern" fast/smooth drop off. The second lens for exactly the opposite use, the 75mm f1.8 is ideal for separation of subject and candid portrait, I obviously own them both, used on Pen F and OMD cameras and even though they have lots of stable mates, they have by far and away the highest keeper rate. My old fave's were the Canon 28 and 85 f1.8's on crop frame (45/135). Honourable mention to the full frame Canon 40mm and 135 f2 combo. A pattern of stellar short teles and supposedly "average" short standards?
As to lots of gear. I find the less I have the easier the process is.
Posted by: Rod Thompson | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 03:14 AM
Here's a slightly "left field" choice, and a real one. For my Panasonic GX8 (or yours), lens #1 is obvious: the Panasonic 12-35mm f/2.8. But although I own the 35-100mm, it doesn't make lens #2 - that would actually be the Panasonic 45-175mm f/4-5.6. It's a wonderful jewel-like thing, very sharp, well stabilised and with a range extending into "serious telephoto". It often gets an outing when the 35-100mm doesn't.
Posted by: Andrew Johnston | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 03:22 AM
Interesting how often the TS-E (tilt-shift) lenses get mentioned. :)
Posted by: Hugh | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 03:31 AM
My two-lens systems depend upon how much I'm willing to pack around in a particular situation.
Light system for close-quarters use:
Olympus Pen-F with Panasonic 20/1.7 and Panasonic 42.5 /1.7 or Olympus 45/1.8 ( I wasn't sure that I would like the Pen-F, but for me, it's a home-run camera that shares lenses with the dSLR style Olympus models.) As others have noted, the Panasonic 20mm/1.7 is a very good lens, with a versatile FOV, and it's small and light. The Panasonic 42.5 and Olympus 45/1.8 are roughly equivalent in size and image quality, although optically the Panasonic 42.5 seems slightly better.
General purpose system:
Olympus E-M5 II with 12-40 /2.8 zoom (best zoom that I've ever used) and Sigma 60mm/2.8 DN Art or Olympus 75/1.8 The Sigma 60mm /2.8 for M43 is nearly as sharp as the Oly 75mm/1.8 but 1/4 the price and smaller and lighter, although with noticeably less reach.
Super-light travel kit:
Panasonic GM5 with optically stabilized Panasonic 12-32 and 35-100/f4-5.6 zooms. For their size and cost, these zoom lenses are optically decent, very small, and designed to the GM5.
I use all of the above, although the small size of
M43 systems usually allows me to fit some accessories, batteries, and additional lenses into a small Domke F5X bag while keeping the total weight under 6 pounds. I'll usually include a Panasonic 14/2.5, Sigma 30/2.8, and Sigma 60/2.8 in the Pen-F bag and an Olympus M.Zuiko 9-18mm superwide angle zoom and Panasonic 35-100/f4-5.6 telephoto zoom in E-M5 II bag. A fast prime lens like the Panasonic 20/1.7 would great with the GM5 except for the lack of any stabilization.
Posted by: Joe Kashi | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 04:01 AM
I have always been drawn to 50mm primes. Nowadays I shoot with a now ancient (in digital terms) Panasonic G3 using the Olympus 25mm f1.8 and the same Pentax 50mm f1.4 FA that I used with a film body.
Posted by: Andreas Plath | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 04:13 AM
For my Fuji X-E1 I made do with only the very nice 35/1.4 for about two years. Recently I got the 60/2.4 macro... these two cover what I really need, although I must say that the 56/1.2 is seriously tempting as an ersatz Canon 85/1.2 which I've had a lot of fun with on my Canon setup.
On top of that I just inherited the 18-55 2.8-4 zoom from my father, which is nice to have but hardly critical.
Currently I am scratching my head about whether it is possible to conjure up a tilt-shift macro setup for the Fuji for not a lot of money... something similar to hanging a 90mm T/S on some extension tubes on my full-frame Canon setup to get real close while being able to get the focal plane where it does the most good. I am thinking it would include a cheapish manual-aperture non-Fuji mount t/s lens, an adapter and some tubes.
Posted by: Ståle Sannerud | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 04:55 AM
I shoot with an Oly EM5, and my two favorite lenses ever are an old Super Takumar 50 1,4 taken from my very first camera (a now defunct Spotmatic) and the best prime out there: the Oly 40 f4, known to the rest of the world as the ED 40-150 4.0/5.6 R.
I bought it as a go everywhere versatile zoom lens but I always use it on 40mm. At that focal length, it's the best on that something DxO can't measure. By far.
Posted by: Gaspar Heurtley | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 05:06 AM
A further thought, which I've put it into practise recently, is that if you're only using two lenses, and they're not particularly big lenses - and the cameras they fit on aren't particularly big - you might as well take two cameras out and save swapping lenses. I've been doing this recently with my Fuji -T10 and an X-E1 (which had been languishing in the cupboard since I got the X-T10 for it's better AF, but is actually just fine for taking landscapes).
I've not weighed them to compare, but I can pack these two cameras in my Crumpler rucksack more easily than my Nikon D7100 + 2 lenses.
Posted by: NeilClasperPics | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 05:06 AM
For landscapes and general shooting on my Sony A7II: Sony FE 24-70 f4 zoom lens.
For portraits or more "moody" photos: Zeiss C Sonnar ZM 50 f1.5 lens, on the Sony A7II. This lens just gives so much fun!
For travelling light: Fuji X100T.
Posted by: Paulo Bizarro | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 05:14 AM
Since going digital I've wanted an equivalent of the Flektogon 35mm f2.4 that lived on my Spotmatic. Not only my focal length of choice, but it could focus very close. If it weren't so expensive and heavy I'd probably go for a Voigtlander Nokton 17mm 0.95 for my GX7. My current compromise is the Panaleica 15mm f1.7, which I've not been able to take off the camera yet. If I ever manage, I'll get something a bit longer.
I also have a 16-50 sitting on my 'spare' Fuji. This was about the only Fuji lens I could afford, and though apparently unpopular, can also focus quite close, and gets some really nice results.
Posted by: Brian Taylor | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 05:46 AM
I hate changing lenses
I usually carry two cameras
a Fuji x30 and a pentax k3ii/300 f4
Posted by: craig | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 07:30 AM
I still own and use Nikon D70s with Nikon AF 24 mm f2.8 and Nikon AF-D 50 mm f1.8. Those are really good sharp old lenses. And, considerably cheap, too.
Posted by: Dony | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 07:30 AM
I have two camera systems; one for travel photography and one I use for local projects, but they both have two lenses that I reach for most often.
My travel set up is a Sony A7r and most of the time I have the Sony/Zeiss 24-70 zoom, but when I need a longer reach I pull out my Sony G 70-300.
The project kit is a Mamiya 645AFDII/Leaf and I almost always have an old 50mm MF 645 shift lens on it because it's sooo sharp. If I need anything else, I usually go to the 80mm AF lens.
Posted by: Jim Witkowski | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 07:46 AM
Aggghh – get behind me satan! I’ll try and keep this short…
As a general walk around I’ll have the NEX-6 and the 16-50mm – pocketable, discrete, love the Sony files. On photography trips out I’ll take the NEX-6 with the 10-18mm and a NEX-7 with the 18-200mm. Separation and compression do it for me. Like photogs of old I find it easier to have 2 cameras. The 6 & 7 are great for this as they use the same batteries, less to carry, and have similar menus, less for my aging brain to remember.
The 10-18mm must go on the NEX-6 and the 18-200mm on the NEX-7 - why I hear you ask – well – I normally go wide (10-18mm) in confined or darker natural light places and I can get sharper results from the less megapixels of the NEX-6 (no really that’s a thing – the more megapixels you have the more critical your camera holding, shutter technique and stabilisation have to be - sorry - of course you know all that!). I’ll only be zooming on stuff if it’s bright and hand holdable, 200mm can be a bit short (wildlife, sports) so I may end up cropping so the more megapixels of the NEX-7 is good.
Had them both since 2012 – long story, perhaps another time, I’m trying to keep this short remember.
GAS is nibbling at me at the moment in the shape of Sony’s A6500 with IBIS. I’ve a feeling though that none of those lenses may be good enough – perhaps a change to the 16-70mm and 70-300mm – agghh - even more expense. I’ve a feeling resistance is futile. The next price drop may push me over the edge. Good job I only change every 5 years – I need that long to save up! Then I’ll just have to deal with the earbashing from her-indoors!
I’m sure you’ll get plenty of advice for films (“Hell or High Water” is good) but how about a few with interesting cinema camera and lense combinations:
“The Revenant” – very wide 65mm digital camera & lenses, filmed in harsh and low light conditions, read more here;
“The Hateful Eight” and “Rogue One” – also filmed on 65mm format digital cinema camera and the exact same 70mm Ultra Panavision lenses, read more here.
They have a film look to them - oh - and the stories are good too.
Stuart
Posted by: Stuart | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 08:01 AM
For 5x7 and 8x10 I would have two lenses. Cooke XVa triple convertible and 150mm Apo Sironar S.
As for films, check out the Jesse Stone series with Tom Selleck playing the Police Chief. What I really like is the set ups for the scenes. Most are still images with people moving in them. No herky-jerky epeliptic seizure video. Quiet, composed beautifully and the music is so good I bought the CD. Perfect for working in the darkroom or on this computer.
Posted by: Daniel | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 08:09 AM
Hi Michael
Blimey I'm late to this, but here goes
1. Panasonic 15mm f1.7
2 Olympus 45mm f1.8
Both of which I own and use on the PenF
If I owned (or wasn't perpetually broke) the new 12-100 f4 I might pair it with the Panasonic 42.5 f1.2 but I don't own either.
All the best
Posted by: Michael Walsh | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 08:43 AM
When I shot Canon pro bodies, it was like Dale Geer's set: Canon 17-40/4 and 70-200/2.8.
For my Fuji system, I tend to shoot a bit wider so, it's the 14mm f/2.8 and 18-55 f/2.8-4.
Posted by: Stephen Scharf | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 09:04 AM
I have five lenses but I seldom bring more than one along.
Posted by: christer almqvist | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 09:05 AM
I own half a dozen lenses, but I probably would be pretty content with the Oly M. Zuiko 25 mm and 45 mm lenses alone.
Posted by: Nicholas Condon | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 09:24 AM
Canon 70-20mm f/2.8 IS II (on APS-C) for sport, Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 for everything else. And if I can have a third, the Olympus 45mm f/1.8. I love the 20mm for family photographs, and every now and again I like a change, so put on the 45mm. Funny to see how many other responses also name these two!
Posted by: Alexander Thorp | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 10:16 AM
I recently returned from a month in Northern Europe, over Christmas and New Years. I took two Panasonic zooms: 12-32mm and 35-100mm. The combined weight of these two lenses is 8 ounces (including caps). I could hardly feel the weight on my shoulder, and walked easily on the paths of Ireland and the streets of London. I like my GX85 better than the Olympus E-M5 II which I left at home.
Posted by: Allan Ostling | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 10:30 AM
In order to keep my New Year's Resolution to speak only of images and feelings, not get hung up on gear...I won't mention brands, just FL's.
I spent a lot of time last year graphing EXIF data, both my own and that of images I enjoy looking at as well as forcing myself to intentionally set zoom lenses to specific FL's when taking an image and really observing my reaction to each view. I came to the conclusion that I could happily exist with a 28mm equivalent and a 75-105 equivalent with closeup capability.
Jim
Posted by: Jim Mooney | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 10:43 AM
Nick Nolte, dressed as every photo-journalist I ever knew, prior to sharp zooms:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/fc/ef/6a/fcef6a7efeef395f4cb471121d59c5c9.jpg
Posted by: Tom Kwas | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 10:47 AM
Favorite Lenses:
1) Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8 for Sony A7r
2) Olympus PRO 12-40mm f/2.8
3) Olympus 75mm f/1.8
Posted by: Bob Rosinsky | Thursday, 26 January 2017 at 11:02 AM