At 04:32 AM 9/18/1998 EDT, Gary you wrote:
>How do you decide what to actually put in your camera bag? Any
suggestions as
>to what would be best to actually carry around for street photography and/or
>travel snapshot type photography? (To fit in a Domke medium size or small
bag
>for example, assuming you either have or are looking to put together such
>combination of lenses?)
>
Variations on this topic abound. I don't care; I always enjoy what people
have to say.
>28, 35-70 zoom and 75-150 zoom?
Darn good set if you ask me.
>28, 35, 65-200 zoom? (have you seen this lens, it is too big, if you
point it
>at someone set at 70mm they will think you are shooting close-up at 200! It
>is intimidating and attention drawing.)
If at 70mm you're worried that people will think you're in their face
200mm's worth, maybe you should back up and just shoot at 200.
>28, 35, 50, 100 (adding 200mm if anticipated to be needed)?
>28, 35, 80, 135?
Personally, I don't own a 35mm prime. Sacrilege, I know. But I find the
28mm seems like a 35 with attitude.
>35, 80 (go simplistic)?
Possibly, if I can go with the 85/f2 instead.
>I think 35-70 zoom and 75-150 zoom may be the best combination, but then
> the optical benefits (if any) of the single focal lengths sit at home
>unused
> assuming you have some single focal lengths.
For walkaround shooting, I think you could do a lot worse than the two
zooms you mention. The zooms help me study and compose quickly, and I can
occasionally get things that would otherwise slip away. Returning with the
bag of primes is often a deliberate "afterthought." I hate the thought of
being without either the zooms or primes, but if I simply have to do with
one or the other, I take the zooms.
>Maybe the 35-105, is the best solution, but I havent seen one of these yet.
>
I have one of these in a, errr, different line of camera. It's a desert
island zoom -- if you can only take one ...
>Third party brand of lens-- such as 39-80 Sigma or 70-150mm Vivitar 3.8 (so
>you can bang them around without fear of loss or damage to an OM lens that
may
>sit at home collecting dust?)
>
Hey, nice people don't bang lenses.
>The least useful lens to carry seems to be the 50mm, unless one needs it for
>low light conditions and one does not have 35, 80 or 100 f2's (or one only
>wants to carry one lens and for some reason wouldnt rather have a 35mm.)
>
>(I am leaving out 24mm because I dont have one yet!)
>
IMHO the 50mm is the single most essential prime lens. It can do a little
of everything. Not very jazzy, I know. Make it a macro if it makes you
feel better.
Thanks. Fun.
Joel
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|