What lenses do you own?

[Zv]

In order of purchase date (not counting the 18-55 kit lens that came with my T2i) -

50mm f/1.8 II - this is the first lens I bought. Mainly bought it because it was cheap and had an aperture of 1.8 which I was curious about. Absolutely adore this lens and when I first used it I instantly fell in love with primes. Sure it's slow and noisy but that's part of the fun!

10-22mm f/3.5 - 4.5 - After a few vacations to exotic places I realized that I needed something wider than the kit lens. My mate had one and swore by it. This was my first big spend and I pondered over it for a while. So glad I bought it. Some of my best images were taken with it. Love it because it introduced me to the world of Ultra wide.

Tamron 70-300 f/4 - 5.6 VC - I put off buying a telephoto for as long as possible but then decided to get this as a cheap starter lens. Was OK but too bulky and felt cheap. Basically it annoyed me that it wasn't Canon!


Then I bought a 7D body only and sold the T2i to my girlfriend (so i could still use it!!) . Almost threw up at the idea of using the 18-55 kit lens with it so I decided to get ...

17-55mm f/2.8 - I bought this the same time as my 7D. A perfect match! Love this lens for it's constant f/2.8, IS and USM and useful focal range.

85mm f/1.8 - I hadn't planned to buy this but when I looked up portrait lenses this one kept popping up so I investigated. Why did I buy this again? Oh yeah,  I had resolved to sell my Tamron before I bought it I remember now! It was my Telephoto replacement. Purple fringes like a mofo but delivers nice bokeh. And mine surprisingly came with a hood! Bonus!

Sold the Tamron  and bought ...

70-200mm f/4 IS - I was second shooting my mates wedding and had no telephoto except the 85 so I decided to go for it. This was my first L lens and WOW! the images were just so clear and natural looking. You could use the images SOOC they were that good. Now I see what the fuss is all about! Wedding was a success and images turned out just fine! (cursed myself for wasting money on the Tamron - was a bad dream that's all!)

Got asked to do another wedding next year this time as the main photographer. So decided to get 5D mk II

Had a long hard think about selling my 10-22 .... put it up for sale ..... changed my mind and as I was about to pull it off amazon someone bought it! Decided what the hey and got a 17-40L instead. Haven't used it yet but I'm sure it will be just as good ... right guys?? Tell it me straight!!

I have pretty much all the lenses I need now and think I'll stick with this for a while. Though I am thinking of getting the 24-105L to pair with the 5D mk II but debating whether to sell the 17-55 or just keep it and own both or remain status quo?? Also like the idea of owning the holy trinity one day 35L 85L and 135L ....

[rene@]

24-70 L f/2,8 II

70-200 L F/2,8 II

300mm L is f/2,8

Use on mark IV, i hope too buy a 5d I or II later

[jaymunney]

EF16-35L
EF24-105L
EF70-200L II USM IS
EF100L Macro USM IS
1.4x TE III
 

[sufirosso]

I own many lens:
24
35
50
85
100 macro
24-105

but my suggestion to you is not to put too much emphasis on the lens you have or which lens to buy. What is important in my opinion is to keep your "arsenal" light and efficient and became very familiar with at least 1 or 2 lens. There are world famous photographers that built their entire career using a 50mm or 35mm... Cartier-Bresson just to name one.
By getting familiar with a lens I mean really know the potential of that focal lens, the difference that makes the distance between you and subject at different apertures, and know exactly, almost instinctively, the coverage of that lens even before you frame.
Too many options  sometimes can be distracting and sometimes make you lazy:) Many time you don`t need a 200m if you can take few steps and use a 85mm.

Good luck

[kev8d]

You should know that I'm a professional videographer, so autofocus isn't a priority to me.

Keepers:

• Samyang 14mm f/2.8. Shows significant distortion, but it makes a great effects lens for video. Quite sharp. Great value if you don't need AF.
• Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS. One of my favourite general-purpose lenses. I've shot entire weddings with just this lens (by choice, too! The shootsac had other lenses, but it's just so darn versatile!). Despite being a "kit" lens, this lens is quite sharp and has reliable autofocus. The IS is very handy, too. If Canon made a 24-105 f/2.8 IS, I'd probably sell most of my lenses and then carry the f/2.8 and a 2x teleconverter.
  
• Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8 L I. A wedding photographer's best friend. Most photogs I know use this with a 70-200. Great combination. That being said, I've never been "wowed" by the image quality. The image quality is very good, but I can see why people are willing to upgrade to the new II version.
• Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8 (pancake lens). This lens is brand new. It was released less than a month ago. It's entirely manual focus, and it's extremely small and well built. The image quality in the center is really sharp and with decent contrast. The corners are soft and show vignetting wide open. Despite being less than perfect optically, the lens's small size, wonderful focus ring, excellent build quality, and great center sharpness make it fun to use.
  
• Canon EF 50mm f/1.4. I think this is one of the best values in Canon's lineup. The build quality is better than the 50mm f/1.8, and the focus ring feels really nice. That being said, I've worked with people whose copies had the AF motor die, which is apparently a common problem. The image quality is quite good, which is what you'd hope for when shooting with a fast prime lens.
  
• Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS I. This big, heavy lens' versatility makes up for its sometimes awkward size. The IS and AF work well in my copy, and I'm generally pleased with the image quality. I bought it used, and it was worth the price. That being said, if you have the budget, consider the II version. It's noticeably sharper and will quickly sell if you ever have to part with it.
  
• Canon EF 85mm f/1.8. I love this lens for photography. It's a great portrait lens. Sharp, fast AF, unobtrusive size, and reasonably priced. That being said, I find the focal length really awkward for video. For photography, this is probably the best value in Canon's lineup - even more so than the 50 f/1.4.
  
• Nikon 180mm f/2.8 ED (manual focus). I use this old lens on my Canon's with a cheap adapter purchased from ebay. We often shoot with second or third shooters who don't have long lenses, so this is a great lens to lend them on wedding days during ceremonies. The image quality is really quite good, and it's very solidly built. My biggest complaint for video is that it doesn't come with a tripod collar, which means you tend to get lens shake in your footage whenever you pull focus.
  

Sold:

• Sigma 24mm f/1.8. Reasonably sharp. Quite versatile because of its macro abilities and large aperture. It's a large lens, and I found I didn't use it enough to justify the weight in my shootsac. Most importantly, my copy had terrible backfocusing. Even after sending it back to Sigma for repairs and then micro adjusting it to match my bodies, it was still unreliable. I bought it used and sold it at a significant loss. Sigma is notorious for poor quality control. Sigma makes some great glass, but make sure you test the lens yourself with your camera before you buy.
  
• Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II. Fairly sharp wide open and better stopped down. For it's price, it's a great little lens, but it's poor build quality and tiny focus ring may get on your nerves. If you can afford it, go for the 50 f/1.4.
• Canon EF 50mm f/2 macro. This is probably the sharpest Canon lens I own. It has excellent image quality. Unfortunately, the build quality is quite poor. After using the lens only four or five times (always indoors), the focus ring has started to grind and turn awkwardly. I'll be sending it in for service. I also find the focus ring uncomfortable to use and difficult for focusing on distant objects (it's made for macro work). After this one's back from Canon, I'll be selling it.

[aroo]

I'm an artist, and a professor of art & design. A lot of my work focuses on landscape. All my cameras are APS-C, all the lenses are Canon. I want a 6D pretty bad.

I've gotten hooked on canonrumors forums within the past year, and learned quite a bit here. This thread a consistently fun and informative one! It's interesting to me that even the cheapest Canon lenses are often very capable.

15-85mm is my current favorite, because the range of focal lengths are exactly the ones I use most. IQ is really sharp, with vivid colors and contrast. Landscapes love this lens, and I don't have to carry anything else on day hikes.

18-135mm is an extremely useful range, and it's light, so I take it on backpacking trips.

85mm f/1.8 has given me some really dreamy candid portraits.

70-200mm f/4 excels when details are the key thing, it makes nice big colorful prints without much PP.

24-70mm f/2.8 and I don't really understand each other yet, but we're working at it.

60mm f/2.8 is actually pretty versatile, useful for macro (insects, plant surfaces, textures) and also portraits. Macro video of really tiny stuff turns out awesome.

10-22mm is an awe-inspiring device, the ultra-wide offers a very new and different way to see. Also very light, good to carry around all day.

50mm f/1.8 makes the sharpest pictures of any of my lenses, including the L's, with a sweet spot at f/10. The normal perspective limited to a cropped field of view on APS-C bodies is sometimes frustrating, and the focus ring suuuuuuucks. A love/hate situation, with far more love than hate.

400mm f/5.6 is very sharp, with rich saturated colors, difficult to hand hold but rewarding when it hits.

55-250mm was one of my first three lenses, and I still use it (kind of a lot) for the combination of image stabilization, portability, and a pretty long reach.

18-55mm was my main landscape lens for a few years, but rarely gets used anymore.

[Creek28]

Hi,

i have

Canon 24 - 70mm L ii 2.8
Canon 70 - 200mm L IS ii 2.8
Canon 100mm L IS 2.8

i need something wider 

[verysimplejason]

Hi,

i have

Canon 24 - 70mm L ii 2.8
Canon 70 - 200mm L IS ii 2.8
Canon 100mm L IS 2.8

i need something wider 

17-40? unless you're shooting in low-light then 16-35 II.

[notapro]

I have these now:

Canon 24mm f/1.4L II USM
Canon 50mm f/1.2L USM
Canon 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Future might include a Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM and maybe one more Canon prime, but a 5D Mark III will come first.