ACJC.S
きれいな (Kirei-na)
With FE 85mm f1.4 GM.
Refreshed 23Nov21 with latest post processing workflow.
Classical focal lengths (FL)
Preamble
1. Less is more.
2. Influencers abound to steer you towards overspending.
3. The best gear is always yet to come and whatever you already own is accelerating in depreciation.
4. User ability is always more limiting than gear quality.
UWA zoom
==========
16-35mm range is most practical, takes filters and covers 5-6 Primes as 1-2mm affords a noticeably different POV at the wide end. The quality of the FE 16-35mm f2.8 GM is as good as the best Primes within the range. Even 18-35mm is a good enough range, got to roll my eyes whenever someone says that 16mm is not wide enough. 10-14mm are extremely wide, not easy to find suitable subjects and even if filters can be mounted, you will end up with vignette and more likely uneven polarization. A poorly composed wide angled shot is obvious, it invariably has too much boring foreground in the frame, more likely than not shot by the special ones who felt that 16mm was not wide enough!
28mm
======
is classic street shooting angle and to me, the Ricoh GR (& smartphones) owns this. A large sensor (APS-C) in a pocketable form factor is highly versatile.
35mm
======
is the most classic of classical FLs being neither too narrow nor too wide. Human cone of visual attention is said to be similar to a 40mm POV. I would buy a 35mm f1.4 but not 28mm f1.4 or 24mm f1.4 as f1.4 vs f1.8 becomes less meaningful the wider it gets from 35mm vs cheaper and much lighter f1.8 versions.
50mm
======
the Prime FL to replace a 24-70mm zoom. Great for street shots for those “allergic” to perspective distortion of wide angles. Personally this FL never appeals, hardly use my 50mm Primes and these days with high mp sensors, 35mm cropped to 50mm still produces good files since it is slightly less than an APS-C crop. All said the upcoming CV 50mm f1.2 looks interesting.
85mm
======
most classical portrait lens. Personally 85mm is much more versatile than 105mm and 135mm and again with high mp sensors, 85mm at roughly around an APS-C crop gets you 135mm. Very happy with my FE 85mm f1.4 GM, the lens that taught me that weight alone is misleading, it’s all in the way the weight is distributed for comfortable handheld shooting.
Hence I’ve found 16-35mm f2.8 and 85mm f1.4 as a most versatile 2 lens combo for my needs eliminating the need for a front heavy and seldom great 24-70mm f2.8 zoom.
This is based on my realtime practical experience in field use, not some hallucinatory verbal diarrhea shamelessly plagiarized from forum postings, so much BS on the internet!
16-35mm f4.0 paired with 85mm f1.8 will also work.
Special rendering lenses
======================
The CV 65mm f2.0 Macro APO Lanthar. Unlike normal macro lenses, this is good both at macro distance and at infinity thanks to “floating” elements. Lovely especially for night portraits with OOF specular highlights thanks to 1:2 Macro ability on top of it being f2.0 and the famous CV sunstars. Achille’s heel really is the rather obvious onion rings within the bokeh balls, a fact conveniently glossed over in the forums by “influencers” until the newer 110mm f2.5 is released recently which boasts an absence of onion rings!
24-105mm zoom
===============
this is way more practical than a brick-like 24-70mm f2.8 and rather limiting 24-70mm f4.0. I prefer my 2 lens combo mentioned above but will concede that the 24-105mm f4.0 can be very useful even if it can never produce magic like those from a great 85mm f1.4. The 24-105mm f4.0 can be added to 16-35mm and 85mm for a 3 lens combo.
135mm
======
just like the 50mm this is a good FL to replace the 70-200mm f2.8 zoom being roughly halfway between 70mm and 200mm. It is however a more specialized FL vs the 85mm and probably not worth plonking down serious $ for one.
My essential 4 lens kit is:
1. 16-35mm f2.8 zoom
2. Special rendering CV 65mm f2.0 APO Lanthar for no fringe bokeh balls and well defined sunstars by f2.5.
3. 85mm f1.4 Prime.
4. The last one depends on vastness of the landscape:
Moderate 70-200mm f4.0
Vast 100-400mm zoom.
100-400mm
===========
very versatile zoom range not restricted to just wildlife purposes.
Z 600mm f5.6 PF VR
==================
if and when this gets released, I’ll buy a Nikon Z body. Z UWA roadmap adds nothing to what I already have and is narrower by a significant 2mm at the widest end. The Z 35mm f1.8S is apparently good but not great and the Z 50mm f1.8S appears to over deliver for its price although jury is still out on strange OOF rendering just like the 35mm. Too many great 85mm options already exists so Z 85mm f1.8S adds nothing. The Z 20mm f1.8S is probably worth getting, maybe the upcoming Z 50mm f1.2S too. The Z 24-70mm f4.0S is meaningless vs a good 24-105mm f4.0.
Imagery overload is here and now, more of the same is meaningless, for this very reason, Canon’s not very practical RF 28-70mm f2.0L, RF 50mm f1.2L and even RF 35mm f1.8 Macro IS STM somewhat breaks new grounds and Canon wisely offered the RF 24-105mm f4.0L instead of a more limiting range of 24-70mm.
Ultimately it is silly to regurgitate that this new lens is better than that older lens (based on some numbers) since progress makes sure that it will be and more fundamentally, what is mounted in front of the camera is nowhere near as limiting as who is behind it! Fixation over empirical measures at the expense of the artistic process of photography is silly.
Voigtlander APO Lanthars
=======================
I wish CV will release f1.8 versions in 21mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm and 50mm like what Leica will be doing for their SL mount with their range of APO Summicrons. If CV can pull off 1:2 Macro on these like the 65mm f2.0 Macro APO Lanthar, it will be hard to resist!
The world is inundated with messages that you “need” more, all designed to make you part with your hard-earned $:
1. Holy trinity of pro level f2.8 Zooms is bad religion.
2. 50mm prime gaps well with 35mm and 85mm, never mind if you actually have no use for a 50mm.
3. You need a separate manual focus kit from your Autofocus one.
4. It’s ok to own multiple versions of the same FL.
Conclusion
==========
You really “need” at most 3-4 lenses, see the trees from the forest to avoid getting hopelessly lost in endless loop of buying then selling…..
1. UWA zoom
2. Special rendering standard FL APO Prime for sunstars etc (no bokeh fringing) and zero onion rings
3. 85mm f1.4
4. 100-400mm zoom (even better if it takes 2x TC well).
きれいな (Kirei-na)
With FE 85mm f1.4 GM.
Refreshed 23Nov21 with latest post processing workflow.
Classical focal lengths (FL)
Preamble
1. Less is more.
2. Influencers abound to steer you towards overspending.
3. The best gear is always yet to come and whatever you already own is accelerating in depreciation.
4. User ability is always more limiting than gear quality.
UWA zoom
==========
16-35mm range is most practical, takes filters and covers 5-6 Primes as 1-2mm affords a noticeably different POV at the wide end. The quality of the FE 16-35mm f2.8 GM is as good as the best Primes within the range. Even 18-35mm is a good enough range, got to roll my eyes whenever someone says that 16mm is not wide enough. 10-14mm are extremely wide, not easy to find suitable subjects and even if filters can be mounted, you will end up with vignette and more likely uneven polarization. A poorly composed wide angled shot is obvious, it invariably has too much boring foreground in the frame, more likely than not shot by the special ones who felt that 16mm was not wide enough!
28mm
======
is classic street shooting angle and to me, the Ricoh GR (& smartphones) owns this. A large sensor (APS-C) in a pocketable form factor is highly versatile.
35mm
======
is the most classic of classical FLs being neither too narrow nor too wide. Human cone of visual attention is said to be similar to a 40mm POV. I would buy a 35mm f1.4 but not 28mm f1.4 or 24mm f1.4 as f1.4 vs f1.8 becomes less meaningful the wider it gets from 35mm vs cheaper and much lighter f1.8 versions.
50mm
======
the Prime FL to replace a 24-70mm zoom. Great for street shots for those “allergic” to perspective distortion of wide angles. Personally this FL never appeals, hardly use my 50mm Primes and these days with high mp sensors, 35mm cropped to 50mm still produces good files since it is slightly less than an APS-C crop. All said the upcoming CV 50mm f1.2 looks interesting.
85mm
======
most classical portrait lens. Personally 85mm is much more versatile than 105mm and 135mm and again with high mp sensors, 85mm at roughly around an APS-C crop gets you 135mm. Very happy with my FE 85mm f1.4 GM, the lens that taught me that weight alone is misleading, it’s all in the way the weight is distributed for comfortable handheld shooting.
Hence I’ve found 16-35mm f2.8 and 85mm f1.4 as a most versatile 2 lens combo for my needs eliminating the need for a front heavy and seldom great 24-70mm f2.8 zoom.
This is based on my realtime practical experience in field use, not some hallucinatory verbal diarrhea shamelessly plagiarized from forum postings, so much BS on the internet!
16-35mm f4.0 paired with 85mm f1.8 will also work.
Special rendering lenses
======================
The CV 65mm f2.0 Macro APO Lanthar. Unlike normal macro lenses, this is good both at macro distance and at infinity thanks to “floating” elements. Lovely especially for night portraits with OOF specular highlights thanks to 1:2 Macro ability on top of it being f2.0 and the famous CV sunstars. Achille’s heel really is the rather obvious onion rings within the bokeh balls, a fact conveniently glossed over in the forums by “influencers” until the newer 110mm f2.5 is released recently which boasts an absence of onion rings!
24-105mm zoom
===============
this is way more practical than a brick-like 24-70mm f2.8 and rather limiting 24-70mm f4.0. I prefer my 2 lens combo mentioned above but will concede that the 24-105mm f4.0 can be very useful even if it can never produce magic like those from a great 85mm f1.4. The 24-105mm f4.0 can be added to 16-35mm and 85mm for a 3 lens combo.
135mm
======
just like the 50mm this is a good FL to replace the 70-200mm f2.8 zoom being roughly halfway between 70mm and 200mm. It is however a more specialized FL vs the 85mm and probably not worth plonking down serious $ for one.
My essential 4 lens kit is:
1. 16-35mm f2.8 zoom
2. Special rendering CV 65mm f2.0 APO Lanthar for no fringe bokeh balls and well defined sunstars by f2.5.
3. 85mm f1.4 Prime.
4. The last one depends on vastness of the landscape:
Moderate 70-200mm f4.0
Vast 100-400mm zoom.
100-400mm
===========
very versatile zoom range not restricted to just wildlife purposes.
Z 600mm f5.6 PF VR
==================
if and when this gets released, I’ll buy a Nikon Z body. Z UWA roadmap adds nothing to what I already have and is narrower by a significant 2mm at the widest end. The Z 35mm f1.8S is apparently good but not great and the Z 50mm f1.8S appears to over deliver for its price although jury is still out on strange OOF rendering just like the 35mm. Too many great 85mm options already exists so Z 85mm f1.8S adds nothing. The Z 20mm f1.8S is probably worth getting, maybe the upcoming Z 50mm f1.2S too. The Z 24-70mm f4.0S is meaningless vs a good 24-105mm f4.0.
Imagery overload is here and now, more of the same is meaningless, for this very reason, Canon’s not very practical RF 28-70mm f2.0L, RF 50mm f1.2L and even RF 35mm f1.8 Macro IS STM somewhat breaks new grounds and Canon wisely offered the RF 24-105mm f4.0L instead of a more limiting range of 24-70mm.
Ultimately it is silly to regurgitate that this new lens is better than that older lens (based on some numbers) since progress makes sure that it will be and more fundamentally, what is mounted in front of the camera is nowhere near as limiting as who is behind it! Fixation over empirical measures at the expense of the artistic process of photography is silly.
Voigtlander APO Lanthars
=======================
I wish CV will release f1.8 versions in 21mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm and 50mm like what Leica will be doing for their SL mount with their range of APO Summicrons. If CV can pull off 1:2 Macro on these like the 65mm f2.0 Macro APO Lanthar, it will be hard to resist!
The world is inundated with messages that you “need” more, all designed to make you part with your hard-earned $:
1. Holy trinity of pro level f2.8 Zooms is bad religion.
2. 50mm prime gaps well with 35mm and 85mm, never mind if you actually have no use for a 50mm.
3. You need a separate manual focus kit from your Autofocus one.
4. It’s ok to own multiple versions of the same FL.
Conclusion
==========
You really “need” at most 3-4 lenses, see the trees from the forest to avoid getting hopelessly lost in endless loop of buying then selling…..
1. UWA zoom
2. Special rendering standard FL APO Prime for sunstars etc (no bokeh fringing) and zero onion rings
3. 85mm f1.4
4. 100-400mm zoom (even better if it takes 2x TC well).