Quick note: I re-uploaded this video with a small edit as I sounded like a spoilt brat when talking about kit lenses. My new edit does a better job at explaining my thoughts on using kit lenses :)
Alright I have to ask. Did you actually refilm the entire video, edit, and upload it or did you just refilm the part about kit lenses? And whilst we're on the topic of kit lenses, are you going to upgrade your fuji kit lenses?
The best lens is undoubtedly the one you left at home and you only discover this logistical error when you have just hiked up a mountain in Scotland in Winter.
@@newenglandlight8724 I went to Iceland and had the wrong charger and batteries for my camera body. Luckily I was able to use a charger from an AirBnB host throughout the trip for the only battery I had was the one in the camera.
And...in the size from a pancake lens, lol! Together with the fist size featherweight mini tripod, which turns into a 10 pounds king size tripod monster, if you extend the legs from it.
My most stressful photography excursions have been when I’ve had several lenses in my bag. By the time I got to a location I was already exhausted and I began to fumble around frantically searching for the “perfect” lens for that scene so I could get a shot before I lost the light. My most relaxing excursions have been when I only had one camera and one prime lens. Then I just casually tried to find a composition to suit what I had. For me, photography is about stress relief so I now choose to go out with less options not more. Great video!
Molybdan42 That’s true. I used to have a 24-120 which stayed on the front of my camera for a long time. It meant I seldom had a situation where I thought I could have gotten a better shot if I had a different lens. I just think that for me less is more. The more relaxed I am the more creative I can be. The less gear I have the more “in the moment” I can be. I’ve been down the track of thinking I needed to have every focal length covered only to find that I didn’t enjoy what I was doing anymore. I’m not a pro and I don’t have to make a living with my camera and I’m not winning any major competitions with my photos so take what I say with a grain of salt. 😊
I do really enjoy the less is more approach too. Spend a few years with just a 23mm (on Fuji) and it's been great, I added a 70-200 (well 50-140 on Fuji) for some specific event work / portraits but it only comes with me if I know I need it, and since I have been missing the longer reach when on casual trips / traveling with just the 23mm. So adding a 16-80 which hopefully will be the single lens I take with me for travel / weekends. So I have added more to my kit, but still only taking one lens out at a time
I'm watching an older video during the slack season... But I find I'm agreeing with you - "This is what I have - I must make the most of it" - is just so relaxing. No gear choices to distract - Just do it! The real challenge is finding a subject, not taking a photo!
First thought: In my opinion the 24-70 is a very good lens to start. First, with actual cameras (at least 24mp) you can crop to get a more tighter composition. And if you like a wider shot you can do a 24mm pano. Second thought: Don't buy F2.8 lenses for landscapes, it will save money and weight to invest into the f4 ones! Thanks for the video, love that kind of videos :) Regards Stefan
Hi Stefan: Agree with your comments about f2.8 lens. I have bought them in the past and while I primarily shoot landscapes/travel, I really didn't need an f2.8 lens. Money wasted....experience learned. Keep safe, Keith
Good comment, Stefan. The "one you have on your camera" - brigade poses as the receptacle of some sort of smart-alec wisdom while offering nothing of a practical nature. Nor would I try to "master" a 600mm telephoto to shoot a scenic mountain range (ok, no panoramas).
Yup, Photography in the end is about creativity and if you splash the money and buy the trinity of lenses at once without previous experiences in those focal lengths, you will need more time getting used to those lenses and hence affect your creativity.
Yes having to think through the problem of what to do when you don't have the lens you want helps your problem solving and creative skills. Still I'm always planning which lens or other gear I'm going to get next. 😆
Cold comfort for a photographer who is fighting chromatic aberration, poor resolution and rotten contrast. Thank goodness lens manufacturers have not been satisfied with second best and strive to produce better products.
@@alexandermenzies9954 I don't think there is ever a time when we "master" anything in this life. The word implies that there is no more to be learned. While in reality there is always more to learn and greater skill to strive for.
The importance of lenses is the reason why I am baffled by the obsession with larger sensor sizes these days. You can get lenses that each cover a wider range of focal lengths while maintaining the same level of quality and size/weight for APS-C and m4/3 and at a lower price. Nikon 24-70 F2.8 costs almost twice as much as 17-55mm F2.8 for example. In the long term, high quality lenses are the smartest investment for a photographer but the focus is almost entirely on camera bodies now. When I bought my first interchangeable lens camera last year, it was the lens that dictated it. I researched and I chose one lens, THE one lens that I must have, and I based my choice of camera body on that. Even if this video is about gear, it is still kinda refreshing, bring the discussion back to lenses. I also think maybe photographers now think too much about how their equipment is limiting them and holding them back. I'm not sure that is really the right mentality to have. Of course, that mentality is good for the camera companies, but for actual photography? I'm not so sure. Personally, I'd rather think about my own limitations and the ways in which I could improve. When I look at my photos, I usually don't think it is my camera that is holding my photography back. That's why I like to like to buy photography books and visit Instagram and Flickr and watch TH-cam channels like this. I try to immerse myself and experience other photographers work and hopefully learn from them and grow as a photographer. I think that will help me more than any new lens, even if I didn't already have a pro-grade lens.
@@zenphotojourney The lens was Olympus 12-100mm F4 IS Pro. Before COVID, I was planning to visit relatives overseas this year so I wanted a single travel lens with constant aperture. Optical IS would help me keep weight down for the trip as well (less need to bring a tripod), and I needed weather-sealing for a rainy, tropical environment. With that decided, it was easy to choose a body with matching weather-sealing and sensor IS (Olympus E-M1 II). I won't say that they're weren't any features of the camera body or the system that attracted me, but I think maybe people focus too much on that stuff now and neglect the lenses in comparison. After using a fixed-lens camera for 15 years, I will choose the lenses very carefully. I don't want to sacrifice the lens quality or "miss the shot" just because of affordability, otherwise why move on from fixed-lens cameras in the first place? I got pro-grade quality covering 24-200mm EFL for $1450 CAD. Lots of pro-grade lenses for Fuji X system as well. I am not sure it is a sacrifice people actually need to make so much, not even non-pros like me, especially if we avoid thinking about upgrading bodies so much.
Let's see if I can remember what I wrote first time round. Many years ago when I first started in photography, I could only afford a camera and one lens. If I was starting out today I would choose an a73 and a 24-105mm G lens. Of course one lens will not cover all situations. But, the 24-105mm will cover most. Oddly enough though, if I had to choose 2 lenses it would be the 16-35mm and 70-200mm. And for 3, I'd either add a 50mm prime or keep the 24-105mm which is what I chose. I used to put a lot of pressure on myself to get a great shot whenever I traveled. But, these days I still try to get the best shots I can, but I don't worry if I don't get a great shot. I just try to enjoy the beauty of nature wherever I am first and if I get a great shot that's even better.
Yeah. A new lens won’t add 500 luminosity masks to your image and replace the sky. 😏 Instagram can be quite frustrating to look at as a new photographer. Find your style and realize, that over time, it will change. So will your gear. It’s impossible to get there in one day.
I really enjoyed this video but may be for reasons you wouldn't have expected. Firstly, let me say that I'm an amateur photographer on a very tight (kit lens) budget. I've been viewing your vids during lockdown and I'm now venturing into landscape photography, mainly due to you. The reason this video spoke to me so deeply is that, prior to lockdown I used to give talks to cancer patients and their family / carers for a cancer charity, to help them with the psychological and emotional issues related having cancer. The courses were based on a process called ACT: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. The first part of this is, Acceptance and we try to encourage people to apply Acceptance, not only to cancer but to all parts of their life. I don't know if you've previously experienced ACT but you're non-rant was was an excellent demonstration of how to apply it to any part of your life. Thank you for this and all the other videos. I will be sharing this one with people who will make use of it in a way I don't think you expected. Wayne John
Thanks Tom, I always appreciate your honesty. We have the same issues with wildlife photography, we see the lenses the pros use and think we need those to get the best shots, when you can get very nice shots with much more affordable gear. I agree with your comments re social media, it can be very overwhelming when starting out seeing all these epic shots when your own shots don't look anything like them. Over time I have learnt to enjoy the process more than the result, that way you still have a good time regardless of the final shot. Cheers, Duade
Good to see the thought processes are felt by others! I personally think that this issue of 'getting the shot' is compounded when you are a hobbyist and have a social media account....I myself suffer with this. I find that i can slip out of the moment by pressurising myself to have some kind of 'result' for the effort. I therefore went for the many lenses option that put a hole in the wallet. Looking back i think you are right by focusing more effort on asking yourself 'why' you are taking the photo.
The vintage lens craze proves nothing more than the overpriced nature (or photographers' becoming more camera-spec obsessed and leaving lenses as afterthoughts) of lenses these days rather than any quality that these so called ''legendary lenses'' have.
It depends on the final product you are trying to output. Whilst I agree some vintage lenses are a joy to use, optical designs and coatings have evolved, and there is something to be said about an edge to edge sharp image, free of chromatic aberations, exagerated distortion, andwith high fidelity contrast and colour rendition.
About half way through this video I was reminded why I rarely visit your channel. I stayed for the second half as a courtesy hoping you would come to some consequential conclusion. So instead of wasting 6 minutes, I wasted the entire 11:30 watching. You really should take this video down and include your statement about being satisfied into 20-30 second of a genuinely impactful video. You can delete this comment now, if you like.
Why would you need new lenses when switching to a mirrorless camera? If you get an EOS R you can just get an adapter. Apparantly there is no loss in quality using an EOS R adapter for EF lenses.
@@russell1234 I too only heard positive things about it so far. I'm wondering why he isn't considering just using the adapter but instead talks about having to sell all his lenses when switching to a mirrorless camera.. Well unless he is planning to go to a different brand.
@@Frobbl He's considering all his options, which likely include using adaptors, but there's advantages to going native. Transitioning from DSLR to ML is the ideal time to assess the photography landscape, pardon the pun, and being open to switching brands.
if all you are going to do is post it on Instagram ... use the camera on your phone more than enough dots to play with. I take photos for me so I'm happy.and have 3 lenses I use regularly 16-20mm 24-105 and 100-400 covers most of the stuff I want and my best photo was a dragonfly taken with 100-400 and a couple of extension tubes to turn it into a sort of "400mm macro" came out pinsharp and i didn't frighten the little bugger with a shadow :D
I went to my local woodland last weekend. I normally go out with my 80D, 3 lenses, a tripod, filters, batteries... etc. This time though, I went with just an X100F with its fixed 35mm eqiv, shot nothing but jpg and loved every minute. No bag, no fussing around with a tripod, no swapping lenses.. it was so much fun!
I can live with the fact of taking all my lenses everywhere (great pain for my back but no regrets!) and coming back with no shot. But I can't live with the idea of coming home with no shot because of that lens I didn't take with me :D
Adam Gibbs has done some fantastic work with his 24-120 ‘kit’ lens on the D850, so it certainly can be done. Of course he is now shooting the Fuji GFX, so you may want to check with him if interested in trying that route.
No, it's not. It's patronising nonsense, there is a huge range of lenses and some will have characteristics much more suited to outdoor landscapes than the rubbish with which some poor sod is plumbered.
Thought I had lost it when suddenly the video disappeared... glad its back :-) Great advice, I would also suggest its better to buy a good quality secondhand (L type) lens than a similar priced new kit type lens. That's what I had to do and I am very happy I did, the glass makes all the difference as you say :-)
Agree, before going to Lofoten in Feb 2020 I purchased a 16-35 f2.8 SECOND HAND. It was half the price of the lates version but a brilliant lens, well worth paying 1/2 price LOL :)
@@PMCN53 I own a Sony a7r2 and cannot afford the Sony glass other than the Ziess 24-70 (kit) that came with it. So have the cheaper 17-40mm L f4 and the older 70-200mm L f4 non IS. Love them both as they are very sharp and my body as IS if needed. To be honest when out in the Peak District I use the 70-200mm most of the time.
I appreciate your comments on feeling the visceral pain of missing a shot, which has happened to me numerous times over the years. I'm glad you have come to terms with it. I'm not there yet, but maybe your thoughts can help.
Happiness is wanting what you have..... Struggled with that in the past...one just has to get it or you'll never be happy. Now onto your site to look at the book and such. Keep the videos coming - frankly, the telephoto is a good option video you did meant a lot to me. Jeff
Oh I just went out and got the best lens. It is ok though. I didn’t really need that kidney and it mostly paid for the lens. My first born will only have to work a few years to pay the difference. Thanks for the video. John
Very interesting video Thomas! When I recently upgraded my camera to the canon eso r, I got the 24-105 kit lens with it, and I’ve been planning on getting the other f4 wide and telephoto when the come out, but I found that as of right now, with the photography I’ve been shooting, I haven’t even need those focal lengths. Sorry that was probably unnecessary, great video though! Keep it up man!
Great video! Thanks for posting it. My "hobbiest" entry level Nikon D3100 came with only one lens (18-55mm) and I then bought a 70-300mm, Both are great but I've been musing about getting a wide angle. You're point about seascapes vs woodland vs hiking photography was enlightening. I am now more than ever aware that I needn't go out specifically hunting for a shot but rather just have my camera to hand in case I do see something amazing (as I show in my own latest ramblings video) :-)
Ahh those beautiful Canon lens...they're the best. Also, I wanted to share this quote from Galen Rowell: “You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn't waste either.”
I don't and never will make money with photography. I'm satisfied taking photos of the landscape in my area and posting the images I like to Flickr. I still have a butt load of kit. If I'm driving somewhere I'll pack the three zooms, a 12mm prime, and two cameras. Just taking a walk in the fields around my home, camera and lens on a strap. Different lens from day to day. I think this helps me learn to "see" in whatever focal length I'm carrying, therefore making it easier to pick the "right" one when I have a choice.
How dare you, Chuck! You obviously have lenses you don't understand because you have too many. And no bumper sticker with a faded aphorism such as, "The best lens is the one on your camera". "Life wasn't meant to be easy" could be stuck on as well. Fancy planning ahead, too, and taking a lens(es) with suitable FLs for that day's shooting. You must be mega-rich. Have a thought for under-privileged!
The best lens for landscape photography is the lens that is most versatile and still offers great image quality. So I'd say the Canon 24-105mm II L IS with a full-frame body. Great coverage, quite alright wide open and tack sharp stopped down, from a rather wide wide-angle to a really good telephoto range with IS. Plus: super lightweight and compact. Aaaaaand - it's a kit-lens, or at least it was for the 5D-series. I don't even shoot Canon, I'm a Fuji-guy, but I'd still recommend it.
Yeah, some brands\models will sometime give you some pretty impressive gear along with the camera - but you'll usually pay for it. You'll maybe save 2-300$ compared to what buying the body and the lens separately would normally cost (which is still pretty cool).
@@brucebrodie7388 as far as I know, the lens coming with the 5D is the L version (f/4). A quick search through Amazon seems to confirm this. The other lens you're referring to is perhaps the f/3.5-5.6 STM, but I don't think I remember a camera coming with that as the kit lens.
Do you feel pressured into buying a new system. Due to current body being discontinued. What system have you in mind. Interesting to see what you end up purchasing.
Being ok not getting the image is ok if you all ready have them or you get the time to pick the days. Like you did say some dont get the time and to not get the image week in week out. But it was a great lesson to be ok not to get the shot. And least with the mis range lens to start with you can crop in to get closer or you can shoot pano to go wider so I recommendations is the 24-70 or 24-105 or equivalent haha
Great video...agree with the importance of lens quality. That's why I stayed with Canon when going mirrorless. My high quality EF L lenses adapted easily when I upgraded to the mirrorless system. I slowly accumulated a few RF L lenses ( pricey, but worth every penny). Their quality surpasses any other. My favorite is the RF70-200 2.8 L- very compact and outstanding! If I have to travel with only one lens, it would be the RF 24-105 f4 L.
Very thoughtful comments... “master the lens that you have” ...and the camera! So true. I have to admit I have too many Fuji lenses... and the ones I use most are the light and underrated 18-55 and the nearly-do-it-all 18-135 which is surprisingly good at its f8 sweet spot. As another person said, if you want a stress free day, just take one camera and one lens. If you have a particular shot/location in mind then work out exactly what you need and take only that.
As technology progresses, stereotypes must be changed too, e.g. Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 RXD is a third-party super zoom lens, which objectively outperforms many lenses with a glorified red ring.
Really like the idea of going out with just one lens with a specific idea in mind of how you want to apply that lens in a given situation. So much more liberating and also less to carry on a long hike.
It’s so easy to fall into “if I buy this lens then I’ll get the shots I want” but honestly that’s an endless cycle. I’ve found I’ll carry multiple lenses “just in case” but I usually only use one of them. I also have found that I don’t like zoom lenses. Having every focal length between A to Z is just another thing I’m focusing on instead of the scene, and moving around to frame the shot is one of the fun experiences of photography for me. I like the last part of this video. Maybe the answer to “which lens do I need for this shot” should be “the one you have”
Thomas - thank you. This is probably one of my favourite videos of yours. It’s honest and cuts through the crap that others sometimes put out about “MUST HAVES”. There’s a shot for every focal length, and I believe that learning how to shoot with what you’ve got is the key to producing better photos. Was really considering buying your book before, and I think this has pushed me over the edge. Thanks again.
Hey Tom, great message. I’ve always been happy, and avoided all ‘gear anxiety’, by just shooting with a single prime. That’s it. Nothing else. It’s all you need to make images, and you can spend all the rest of your money on travel, trips and experiences... You win, hands down, in the end. Love the channel.👊🏻
I have a Sony a7iii with two lenses, both Sigma and they are the 24-70 f2.8 and the f1.4 20mm and it’s as good as it gets for me until Sigma release the 70-200 2.8 and they will be the only 3 lenses I will ever need.
Richard Jones I’m very similar to you, a7iii but with Sony 20mm G and Sony 70-200mm G. Having just purchase a a7riv I have one of those lenses on each body
Good and interesting comments. I keep filling in my collection with 14, 16-35, 70-200, and 200-500. But when it comes to walking around weight and flexibility, I still mostly use the f4 24-120 that came with my D750.
This is the hardest thing I had to learn over the years : to not be frightened by not getting a shot. I now take the time to look at the scene with the two best lenses I always have with me, my eyes.
I'm selling a brilliant lens I don't use (23mm f2) and will put the monies towards upgrading from 18-55mm f2.8-4 Fuji to the 16-55mm f2.8. ie it's the 24-70mm equivalent to those heavy pieces of Canon glass, just as good, but still 1/2 the price (Ok it's still not cheap)
When I moved from Canon to the Sony A7III, I wanted that one lens to do as much as possible, I went with the Sony 24-105mm, with an L-Bracket it's a decent all-in-one package for landscapes, If I need wider I can do a simple 3-4 vertical Pano to create an 18mm ish shot.
Trouble is imho there are far too many focal lengths and far too many variables in all types of photography. As a news photographer I lug around a 16-35 and 24-70 a 70-200 a 300 all 2.8 and a 500 f4 it’s insane but all lenses are needed to cover what’s needed. In my own time I spent years doing landscapes with one lens the fixed 23mm on my Fuji X100 series 35mm equivalent this thing never let me down I made some amazing shots I had to work hard at times to get them and occasionally I’d rue the fact I couldn’t get a close up of a distant subject but hey it’s the one that got away this time. Of late I’ve been using my old Bronica medium format film camera I have two lenses a 50 and a 75 the 50 is by far the most used it’s a 28mm equiv I just love it to bits. Basically imho the best lens for any genre is the lens you have with you. 📷❤️
I'd say, analyze what you like and want from your photography and get the lens that makes it possible. If you're new look at others work and see what is most inspiring to you, then get the focal lengths makes it possible. If you have experience then be honest with yourself and introspect your feelings about your work to see what actually matters to you. For instance I enjoy hiking and I'm really melding that with photography, which means that I want lightweight lenses (which often means kit lenses). I find lots of different scenes on my adventures but I have a preference to frame my compositions a little wider to include a little more. Therefore I'm currently using two lenses from 16-85mm, that covers most of my needs unless I'm in the mountains. Then I want something longer as well. So I'm currently looking at getting a 24-200 to cover that need while still only carrying two lenses. It's not really that hard figuring out what lens YOU need if you first figure out what you want and like to photograph. If you like everything then you're not focused enough... 😇
Thank you for the rant! So I’m older now and a serious hobbyist who has lenses, both fast zooms and great primes since I shoot all kinds of different things from events, sports, wildlife, and portraits. For landscape do you prescribe to zooms like 15-35mm, 24-70, 70-200, and 100-400. (Or 100-500) or a set of strategic primes or a combination of both. Sure you can tune your specific kit for what you plan to shoot on a given day but it seems these days the landscape photographers seem to be happy with zooms and even at f/4 and not even f/2.8 to reduce weight. What are your thoughts pr a link to a video showing what you take on a landscape shoot. Take care.
My 27th lens (Canon EF 24-105mn f4) just came this morning. I have from 6.5mm to 800mm (I actually have some more for Pentax K and 42mm screw mount). If I was to only choose one of my lenses it would be the Tamron 18-400mm f3.5-6.3. This is my photo scouting kit. For my typical Light Weight Kit I add a Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6, and perhaps a Canon 250D duplet close-up filter. For Landscapes in the woods I have been using a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5. I bought the new lens to replace this one because when I use a speedbooster the f4 becomes as bright as an f2.8 and will have the equivalent range of a 26-115mm. For Wildlife I would definitely carry the Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 Sport. For Birds...either the "Sigmonster 300-800mm f5.6 (maybe with the speedbooster and 1.4X converter or the Canon 800mm f11 (because of the super light weight).
maybe vintage lenses are a option for some people as well. they can be really cheap (talking 50€ per lens) and create very nice images! Idk if they hold up in landscape photography but they might be worth mentioning
Honestly I faffed around for a long time over this. Carrying 5 lenses some days. I now stick to 12mm, manual focus and a 55-200 on my fuji. That does all I need, sometimes I need to shoot a 55mm pano but that's it. I leave the zoom on the camera incase I see some wildlife and want to photograph it.
Pete I have the 10-24 and 55-200 on my Fuji for landscapes..... more than enough .... I like having the gap between the 2 lenses, as it forces me to think about my composition. I used to carry a standard zoom as well.... it seemed to stay on the camera and got less interesting shots as too lazy to change lenses.
I was honestly expecting more comments from Fujifilm users bragging about their 18-55 kit lens =P I've never tried it, but I hear quite often that people think its very good. Anyway, I just ordered the Fujifilm XF 55-200 because your videos inspired me. Buying it used, so its not too expensive.
How many have you spend in lenses ti upload your images at Instagram? Or to print at 30x30cm? Some time this is crazy, you don't notice the difference in this cases with a cheaper lens.
If you use 4k screen and only view photos from there, cheaper lenses look much less advantageous than viewed through a lower resolution monitor. 2.7k monitors are middle of the road. FHD screens are very critical on lens quality. 2-3 lenses is the max that one can carry (all the time). $ spend on a huge high resolution monitor saves money on lenses (and improves satisfaction).
One advise from me: don't bother with f/2.8 or faster lenses. It's better to spend money on f/4s and be happy with the results (anyway, we all have to "close" the iris to capture landscapes). F/4s are smaller and lighter. For example: instead of 24-70 f/2.8 I'd recommend 24-105 f/4. More reach in the same volume/mass.
@1Energine1 I buy second hand, got a Four Thirds 14 - 54mm f2.8 - f3.5 for £95 , you need an adapter and you lose focus points, but it's optically good.
Thanks for the video. When I shoot landscapes with only one lens, here are the lenses I use: 90mm f/5.6 on my 4x5 inch large format camera 65mm f/5.6 on my 6x9cm medium format camera 28mm f/2.8 on my 35mm camera 16-55mm f/2.8 weather resistant Fuji zoom lens on my weather resistant Fuji X APS-C mirrorless digital body 14mm f/2.5 on my micro 4/3 mirrorless digital camera
The perfect lens would be a compact 10-800mm f0.95 that is perfectly sharp from corner to corner even wide open and should not be bigger than a pancake lens
You're just a truthful young man who doesn't like all the commercial crap, which I totally respect. However, no need to be embarrassed about good glass. Yes the best camera is the one you have with you but the fact is that good lenses can give you the most amazing files and detail to print if you know what you're doing. I was recently re-processing some old raw files of the Isle of Skye taken with a good camera for the time but with a not so cheap but "handy" but lower quality 18-200 zoom. Well the files were still fairly difficult to bring stuff out of giving mediocre results at best. I also had a few raws shot with a good and cheap 50mm prime from the same shoot which came out much better. So beginners are better to get some decent older used and cheap primes of a few different lengths , do some research on which ones are good, Nikon is quite good as there are so many f mount primes on the market at great prices. Learning that way you will learn composition and light more comprehensively too. Not a bad thing. The high quality zooms are expensive. Save up for some slowly, buy once, by quality and shoot with good old primes in the meantime. I often take my camera out with just one prime to challenge myself.. It's fun.
Option #4: Rent gear that you are interested in buying. Sometimes you're on the right track and fall in love. Sometimes, you find out that, while the new thing is great, you can do just as well with what you have. Sometimes, you find out that it doesn't work for you at all. Renting gear for a week costs ~10% of the retail price -- it is really a great value when trying the gear you don't ultimately purchase. Acceptance is also really awesome. A lot of us already have gear that, "if only we had X, we could make great images". If so, go do it! Also: f/8 and be there.
If it is just a hobby and not your main source of income, then as soon as you start stressing out about your photography then it is time to look for a different hobby. I have made do with ‘kit lenses’ for a number of years and I am satisfied with the results I get. Thank you Thomas for a realistic viewpoint on this...
THOMAS , hello have not, been here in time, I recall something about you going to a 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 format, anyhow true story went to a photo store for film,,filters , etc, then 2 women came in saying , LOOK at that BOX CAMERA, I looked at the clerk & winked, so he said that BOX CAMERA is some $600, it was a BRONICA 2 1/4 SO WE all laughed , Yes there is NO 1 perfect lens for everything , I have a YASHICA 230 AF 25x85mm 2.8 w/ macro , then 70x210 3.5 bought it thinking for us photos in a housing, however the focusing was. CONTRAST Not practical UW , But have a NICONN 3 With just the standard 55mm lens with extension tubes & framers for UW MACRO W flash, My all time favourite film was AFGA, the greatest neutral skin tones, blue skies, but sadly that died years ago, so WENT TO FUGI FILM good colours but had not used any film in years now, Basic digital OLYMPUS , stay well, stay safe , Cheers 🏴🏴🏴🇬🇧🇺🇸
I'm on the Fuji system, and quickly upgraded from the kit lens on my first X-T20 to a 23 f/1.4 prime (and sold the kit lens to make that happen) and it's been great for 90% of the stuff I shoot. But over time I wanted something longer and when I came to upgrade my body I got a deal on the 50-140 f/2.8 which has been awesome for portraits and some event stuff I have done. But I take most of my pics on casual walks / weekend travel and it's just a bit big to carry everywhere and I don't like changing lenses all the time while in the city. After thinking about it for a while and selling some kit I have ordered the 16-80 f/4, and while a lot slower it's a lot smaller, has OIS and I'm hoping it will be enough to stay in my bag all the time and stop me worrying about all the great shots I took on my iPhone and wondering how much better they would have been on a real camera
Buying used and vintage is also a great (if your comfortable with ebay). When getting into photography i bought quite a few different used lenses and learnt about what i liked. I've sold lenses mostly for the same price I bought them (over 1-2 years period ownership), so ends up being much cheaper than renting. However this isn't possible with new lenses (especially on new mirrorless systems).
I feel the best minimalistic option is the duo of 16-36 f4 and 70-200 f4 zooms. The main thing you need is a sturdy tripod that is light enough that you'll actually carry it with you.
"Is tought (when you can't get the shot you want) and it takes time (to get used to take the pictures that you can with what you have). But it's liberating and its fantastic. You really start to enjoy the true meaning of photography. Which isn't to be the biggest/best person in Instagram. It's to be out there, connect with the outdoor and to have a nice momento to yourself." So good to hear that. That is what keep us photographers going on and on with what we have and taking pictures of what we can.
I think that lenses like Tamron 28-200mm F/2.8-5.6 (for Sony FE) and Nikon 24-200mm F/4-6.3 are making things more simple for landscape photographers. Compared to dedicated 24-70 and 70-200 lenses, these are only compromised by narrower aperture and worse bokeh. So in terms of sharpness and contrast, they should perform the same on typical landscape apertures. So in the end, A7 III (or A7R III or IV) + Tamron 17-28mm + Tamron 28-200mm or Nikon Z6 (or Z5 or Z7) + 14-30mm + 24-200mm should cover everything. And in the case of Sony + Tamron combination, both will share the same 67mm lens thread.
Best video on this topic, and I have watched a fair few trying to decide which lens to purchase. Thanks Thomas, you were entertaining as well as being realistic. It helped me to know what to do.
I don't know why TH-cam was suggesting this to me today, but nice to go down memory lane. I do have 2 things relevant to this conversation. 1. It does not matter which lens you get (in terms of focal length). Hear me out here... If you asking the question you are fairly new to photography. Creativity is inspired by the limitations we impose upon ourselves. Just pick one and use it to death. Learn it inside out. Your images are more likely to be affected by the time you get up in the morning, the weather, the research you do on your locations. So just don't sweat it.. regardless of what lens you buy... you are going to look back and think most your old images are not great anyway (because it is the practise and experience that gets you compelling images). Point 2 - One of my favorite lenses is my 24-240mm travel zoom. It is freeing to just hike with and I have printed images with it that are 20x30" with 'good enough' quality (if people a pixel peeping... you don't have a compelling image). But here is the real thing... why does no-one make a good quality travel zoom? They all have like 68mm or 72mm filter thread and generally are compromised for people who want to spend $700-$1000. I wonder what would happen if a lens manufacturer decided to make a good superzoom that actually lets in enough light, has better lens coatings, and optical design? Ok it would be a bit heavier... but it would be lighter than carrying 2 lenses. I guess that's what Tamron did with the 35-150mm F2-F2.8 but its not wide enough. I would love to see a 24-200 F2.8-F4 with a 82mm filter thread and a $2K-$2.5K price point... I think it would be doable... and I bet it could actually replace 2 lenses.
Thomas, I'd highly highly highly recommend checking out the new Tamron lenses for Sony FE. Tamron is doing amazing things with their lens technology to make cheap, light, and extremely sharp lenses. I've bought all of them, and used them extensively. They have a holy trinity setup with the 17-28, 28-75, and 70-180 (all F/2.8), but I personally have found I can replace the last two with the new 28-200 F/2.8-5.6 (surprisingly sharp super-zoom, check Dustin Abbott's review). This gives me an amazing hiking setup with 17-200mm covered in under 1kg. You should probably get an A7R IV and just get these lenses, and you'll be surprised believe me. Just wanted to share my thoughts since you seem conflicted on the topic and I think this problem has been solved by Tamron.
There are pretty good compromises from Tamron if you use Sony. Tamron 17-28 and 28-200 and that won’t break the bank and are decent quality. If you are on fujifilm i would recommend the 10-24, 18-80 F4 and the 55-200. For fujifilm I have the 18-55. Not bad but not great either. Inalei have the 1024 and 55200 that I like. For Sony I have the 16-35 f4 and the 70-300 G. Both not bad but not great either. I’m planing on upgrade those 2 to a 17-28 and a 100-400. So many options but there are some mid priced alternatives to the top of the range versions that while not as good, are still way better than KIT lens without breaking the bank. Choices choices.
The old saying is "f/8 and be there". The best lens is the one you have with you when it is time to create an image. Working the subject to tell a story, and communicate your vision is the goal. I have owned various camera systems with primes and zooms from kit lenses to top end glass. When I look at my images and prints the last thing I notice is which camera or lens I used, and only another photographer would even think of asking. I make images that (I think) are beautiful, which makes me happy and that is why I do it.
Quick note: I re-uploaded this video with a small edit as I sounded like a spoilt brat when talking about kit lenses. My new edit does a better job at explaining my thoughts on using kit lenses :)
Definitely sounds better...
Alright I have to ask. Did you actually refilm the entire video, edit, and upload it or did you just refilm the part about kit lenses? And whilst we're on the topic of kit lenses, are you going to upgrade your fuji kit lenses?
I wondered haha
Saw this pop up then disappear.
I appreciate your willingness to edit and refine 🙌🏻
The best lens is undoubtedly the one you left at home and you only discover this logistical error when you have just hiked up a mountain in Scotland in Winter.
I arrived at my shooting spot a few days ago to discover I had my lens in the bag, but not the camera body. Arrrgh!
@@newenglandlight8724 I went to Iceland and had the wrong charger and batteries for my camera body. Luckily I was
able to use a charger from an AirBnB host throughout the trip for the only battery I had was the one in the camera.
🙋🏼♀️ tried my hand at some wild camping and only took 35mm to keep the weight down. Really wish I had that 24mm when I decided to do some astro 😑
I once drove two hours to get to a friend's property to do some photography only to realize I'd forgotten the key to the gate.
Naaah! The best lens is the one on the camera when IT happens!
10 - 200mm f1.4 is obviously the answer. We just need a manufacturer to bend the laws of physics and build one.
Oh, under 500 grams please too :-)
And...in the size from a pancake lens, lol! Together with the fist size featherweight mini tripod, which turns into a 10 pounds king size tripod monster, if you extend the legs from it.
maybe neil deasse tyson can do it, or anyone who is a spinning ball beLIEver, they reject physics every day :)
And priced at around £150 please. 😎
Sony’s 18-105 is as close you can get sadly
Panasonic has a 28-280 ff equivalent, and it's small + light
My most stressful photography excursions have been when I’ve had several lenses in my bag. By the time I got to a location I was already exhausted and I began to fumble around frantically searching for the “perfect” lens for that scene so I could get a shot before I lost the light. My most relaxing excursions have been when I only had one camera and one prime lens. Then I just casually tried to find a composition to suit what I had. For me, photography is about stress relief so I now choose to go out with less options not more. Great video!
I would switch the prime against my 24-80 because I know I can shoot almost everything with it. Thats pretty relaxing too ;)
Molybdan42 That’s true. I used to have a 24-120 which stayed on the front of my camera for a long time. It meant I seldom had a situation where I thought I could have gotten a better shot if I had a different lens. I just think that for me less is more. The more relaxed I am the more creative I can be. The less gear I have the more “in the moment” I can be. I’ve been down the track of thinking I needed to have every focal length covered only to find that I didn’t enjoy what I was doing anymore. I’m not a pro and I don’t have to make a living with my camera and I’m not winning any major competitions with my photos so take what I say with a grain of salt. 😊
I do really enjoy the less is more approach too. Spend a few years with just a 23mm (on Fuji) and it's been great, I added a 70-200 (well 50-140 on Fuji) for some specific event work / portraits but it only comes with me if I know I need it, and since I have been missing the longer reach when on casual trips / traveling with just the 23mm. So adding a 16-80 which hopefully will be the single lens I take with me for travel / weekends. So I have added more to my kit, but still only taking one lens out at a time
I really like that thought!
I'm watching an older video during the slack season... But I find I'm agreeing with you - "This is what I have - I must make the most of it" - is just so relaxing. No gear choices to distract - Just do it! The real challenge is finding a subject, not taking a photo!
"Twelve significant photographs in any one year is a good crop" - Ansel Adams. So perhaps we should expect the same.
First thought: In my opinion the 24-70 is a very good lens to start. First, with actual cameras (at least 24mp) you can crop to get a more tighter composition. And if you like a wider shot you can do a 24mm pano.
Second thought: Don't buy F2.8 lenses for landscapes, it will save money and weight to invest into the f4 ones!
Thanks for the video, love that kind of videos :)
Regards
Stefan
Hi Stefan: Agree with your comments about f2.8 lens. I have bought them in the past and while I primarily shoot landscapes/travel, I really didn't need an f2.8 lens. Money wasted....experience learned. Keep safe, Keith
Good comment, Stefan. The "one you have on your camera" - brigade poses as the receptacle of some sort of smart-alec wisdom while offering nothing of a practical nature. Nor would I try to "master" a 600mm telephoto to shoot a scenic mountain range (ok, no panoramas).
“Master the lens you have” - I reckon that would definitely improve your photography
Yup, Photography in the end is about creativity and if you splash the money and buy the trinity of lenses at once without previous experiences in those focal lengths, you will need more time getting used to those lenses and hence affect your creativity.
Yes having to think through the problem of what to do when you don't have the lens you want helps your problem solving and creative skills. Still I'm always planning which lens or other gear I'm going to get next. 😆
Cold comfort for a photographer who is fighting chromatic aberration, poor resolution and rotten contrast.
Thank goodness lens manufacturers have not been satisfied with second best and strive to produce better products.
And, how will he/she know when they have finally "mastered" their lens?
@@alexandermenzies9954 I don't think there is ever a time when we "master" anything in this life. The word implies that there is no more to be learned. While in reality there is always more to learn and greater skill to strive for.
"Most photographers don't get an epic shot every time they go out." Too true, just get out and enjoy the moment. If you get an image, it's a bonus.
I now realize that I'm totally liberated! I never get the shot...
I realized that I now know more about how not to get the shot then the other way around.
learning from mistakes in nature’s way of self improvement!
Next week's video why s 40mm prime is what you really need 😂
Yes . well thats what I use , and a 12 - 24 and a 28 - 74 and a............... and primes too
The importance of lenses is the reason why I am baffled by the obsession with larger sensor sizes these days. You can get lenses that each cover a wider range of focal lengths while maintaining the same level of quality and size/weight for APS-C and m4/3 and at a lower price. Nikon 24-70 F2.8 costs almost twice as much as 17-55mm F2.8 for example. In the long term, high quality lenses are the smartest investment for a photographer but the focus is almost entirely on camera bodies now. When I bought my first interchangeable lens camera last year, it was the lens that dictated it. I researched and I chose one lens, THE one lens that I must have, and I based my choice of camera body on that. Even if this video is about gear, it is still kinda refreshing, bring the discussion back to lenses.
I also think maybe photographers now think too much about how their equipment is limiting them and holding them back. I'm not sure that is really the right mentality to have. Of course, that mentality is good for the camera companies, but for actual photography? I'm not so sure. Personally, I'd rather think about my own limitations and the ways in which I could improve. When I look at my photos, I usually don't think it is my camera that is holding my photography back. That's why I like to like to buy photography books and visit Instagram and Flickr and watch TH-cam channels like this. I try to immerse myself and experience other photographers work and hopefully learn from them and grow as a photographer. I think that will help me more than any new lens, even if I didn't already have a pro-grade lens.
Which lens dictated your choice out of interest?
Yeah, this is why I love Fuji. Lenses are awesome. But more importantly, camera is small so I can take it everywhere.
I'm also interested in knowing which lens you got.
@@zenphotojourney The lens was Olympus 12-100mm F4 IS Pro. Before COVID, I was planning to visit relatives overseas this year so I wanted a single travel lens with constant aperture. Optical IS would help me keep weight down for the trip as well (less need to bring a tripod), and I needed weather-sealing for a rainy, tropical environment. With that decided, it was easy to choose a body with matching weather-sealing and sensor IS (Olympus E-M1 II).
I won't say that they're weren't any features of the camera body or the system that attracted me, but I think maybe people focus too much on that stuff now and neglect the lenses in comparison. After using a fixed-lens camera for 15 years, I will choose the lenses very carefully. I don't want to sacrifice the lens quality or "miss the shot" just because of affordability, otherwise why move on from fixed-lens cameras in the first place? I got pro-grade quality covering 24-200mm EFL for $1450 CAD. Lots of pro-grade lenses for Fuji X system as well. I am not sure it is a sacrifice people actually need to make so much, not even non-pros like me, especially if we avoid thinking about upgrading bodies so much.
Best lens is the one you can actually carry.
the best lens is the one that your back appreciates XD
5D Mark IV still one of the best Cameras out there at the moment imo EF glass rules 🤗😂😂😂
I'm glad to have my Micro Four Thirds Camera, where I can get the "holy three" together for under 1000€ 🤣 (used and with luck lol)
12-35/f2,8 was over 1000EUR i think :( But for me 12-60 works better for hiking and 45-150 is sometimes useful to have.
same haha
Let's see if I can remember what I wrote first time round. Many years ago when I first started in photography, I could only afford a camera and one lens. If I was starting out today I would choose an a73 and a 24-105mm G lens. Of course one lens will not cover all situations. But, the 24-105mm will cover most. Oddly enough though, if I had to choose 2 lenses it would be the 16-35mm and 70-200mm. And for 3, I'd either add a 50mm prime or keep the 24-105mm which is what I chose. I used to put a lot of pressure on myself to get a great shot whenever I traveled. But, these days I still try to get the best shots I can, but I don't worry if I don't get a great shot. I just try to enjoy the beauty of nature wherever I am first and if I get a great shot that's even better.
Yeah. A new lens won’t add 500 luminosity masks to your image and replace the sky. 😏 Instagram can be quite frustrating to look at as a new photographer. Find your style and realize, that over time, it will change. So will your gear. It’s impossible to get there in one day.
I really enjoyed this video but may be for reasons you wouldn't have expected. Firstly, let me say that I'm an amateur photographer on a very tight (kit lens) budget. I've been viewing your vids during lockdown and I'm now venturing into landscape photography, mainly due to you. The reason this video spoke to me so deeply is that, prior to lockdown I used to give talks to cancer patients and their family / carers for a cancer charity, to help them with the psychological and emotional issues related having cancer. The courses were based on a process called ACT: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. The first part of this is, Acceptance and we try to encourage people to apply Acceptance, not only to cancer but to all parts of their life. I don't know if you've previously experienced ACT but you're non-rant was was an excellent demonstration of how to apply it to any part of your life.
Thank you for this and all the other videos. I will be sharing this one with people who will make use of it in a way I don't think you expected.
Wayne John
Thanks Tom, I always appreciate your honesty. We have the same issues with wildlife photography, we see the lenses the pros use and think we need those to get the best shots, when you can get very nice shots with much more affordable gear. I agree with your comments re social media, it can be very overwhelming when starting out seeing all these epic shots when your own shots don't look anything like them. Over time I have learnt to enjoy the process more than the result, that way you still have a good time regardless of the final shot. Cheers, Duade
Quick tip: if you’re a landscape photographer, do not ignore quality older lenses, especially manual focus or adapted glass.
Good to see the thought processes are felt by others! I personally think that this issue of 'getting the shot' is compounded when you are a hobbyist and have a social media account....I myself suffer with this. I find that i can slip out of the moment by pressurising myself to have some kind of 'result' for the effort. I therefore went for the many lenses option that put a hole in the wallet. Looking back i think you are right by focusing more effort on asking yourself 'why' you are taking the photo.
I bypassed the expense by buying some quality vintage lenses. If you're doing landscape then you've probably got the time to manually focus.
The best lens is always the one I leave at home when I go hiking :(
lol true
Or...buy vintage manual lenses, learn how to use them, and you can cover the entire range for less than the cost of one modern prime lens.
this, people are skeptical when I turn up to a paid shoot with vintage nikkors, but they don't ask questions when they get the photos back.
The vintage lens craze proves nothing more than the overpriced nature (or photographers' becoming more camera-spec obsessed and leaving lenses as afterthoughts) of lenses these days rather than any quality that these so called ''legendary lenses'' have.
It depends on the final product you are trying to output. Whilst I agree some vintage lenses are a joy to use, optical designs and coatings have evolved, and there is something to be said about an edge to edge sharp image, free of chromatic aberations, exagerated distortion, andwith high fidelity contrast and colour rendition.
Oh definitely. I use my AI’d 60s/70s NIKKORs on my D7200 when I’m not using my F2AS. Works perfectly well bar the 1.5 crop factor.
There are excellent vintage lenses available to do the job. Good advice.
About half way through this video I was reminded why I rarely visit your channel. I stayed for the second half as a courtesy hoping you would come to some consequential conclusion. So instead of wasting 6 minutes, I wasted the entire 11:30 watching. You really should take this video down and include your statement about being satisfied into 20-30 second of a genuinely impactful video. You can delete this comment now, if you like.
Why would you need new lenses when switching to a mirrorless camera? If you get an EOS R you can just get an adapter. Apparantly there is no loss in quality using an EOS R adapter for EF lenses.
Yep..,the adapter is great!
@@russell1234 I too only heard positive things about it so far. I'm wondering why he isn't considering just using the adapter but instead talks about having to sell all his lenses when switching to a mirrorless camera.. Well unless he is planning to go to a different brand.
Faster focusing (though that may not matter), lower weight and smaller size.
@@MLodge Well I mean the focus might be a tad faster but to me it wouldn't be worth selling all lenses and buying new ones.
@@Frobbl He's considering all his options, which likely include using adaptors, but there's advantages to going native. Transitioning from DSLR to ML is the ideal time to assess the photography landscape, pardon the pun, and being open to switching brands.
The short answer is: it depends.
The long answer is: it depends a lot.
Ultimate answer: 42mm
@@pavelperina7629 it can't be wrong '^^
if all you are going to do is post it on Instagram ... use the camera on your phone more than enough dots to play with. I take photos for me so I'm happy.and have 3 lenses I use regularly 16-20mm 24-105 and 100-400 covers most of the stuff I want and my best photo was a dragonfly taken with 100-400 and a couple of extension tubes to turn it into a sort of "400mm macro" came out pinsharp and i didn't frighten the little bugger with a shadow :D
I went to my local woodland last weekend. I normally go out with my 80D, 3 lenses, a tripod, filters, batteries... etc.
This time though, I went with just an X100F with its fixed 35mm eqiv, shot nothing but jpg and loved every minute. No bag, no fussing around with a tripod, no swapping lenses.. it was so much fun!
I can live with the fact of taking all my lenses everywhere (great pain for my back but no regrets!) and coming back with no shot.
But I can't live with the idea of coming home with no shot because of that lens I didn't take with me :D
Adam Gibbs has done some fantastic work with his 24-120 ‘kit’ lens on the D850, so it certainly can be done. Of course he is now shooting the Fuji GFX, so you may want to check with him if interested in trying that route.
Maybe when I buy that new full-frame mirrorless Sony camera I can take your advice. Till than I'm stuck with all of my purchase mistakes, lol.
“Master the lens you do have” best advice ever!!!
No, it's not. It's patronising nonsense, there is a huge range of lenses and some will have characteristics much more suited to outdoor landscapes than the rubbish with which some poor sod is plumbered.
I have no idea what lens to use for landscape because I don’t shoot Landscape photography I should girls and fashion!
The best lens for landscape photography is - undoubtedly - the lens that is on your camera.
Very true my friend very true
So we need at least two primeo lenses: One to leave at home that you really should have brought, and one to have on the camera. :^)
@@ronboe6325 you should always try to at least bring two lenses at least I do
So true.
So a broken lens?
Thought I had lost it when suddenly the video disappeared... glad its back :-) Great advice, I would also suggest its better to buy a good quality secondhand (L type) lens than a similar priced new kit type lens. That's what I had to do and I am very happy I did, the glass makes all the difference as you say :-)
Agree, before going to Lofoten in Feb 2020 I purchased a 16-35 f2.8 SECOND HAND. It was half the price of the lates version but a brilliant lens, well worth paying 1/2 price LOL :)
@@PMCN53 I own a Sony a7r2 and cannot afford the Sony glass other than the Ziess 24-70 (kit) that came with it. So have the cheaper 17-40mm L f4 and the older 70-200mm L f4 non IS. Love them both as they are very sharp and my body as IS if needed. To be honest when out in the Peak District I use the 70-200mm most of the time.
I appreciate your comments on feeling the visceral pain of missing a shot, which has happened to me numerous times over the years. I'm glad you have come to terms with it. I'm not there yet, but maybe your thoughts can help.
Happiness is wanting what you have..... Struggled with that in the past...one just has to get it or you'll never be happy. Now onto your site to look at the book and such.
Keep the videos coming - frankly, the telephoto is a good option video you did meant a lot to me.
Jeff
Oh I just went out and got the best lens. It is ok though. I didn’t really need that kidney and it mostly paid for the lens. My first born will only have to work a few years to pay the difference.
Thanks for the video.
John
Too many people focus on gear, kinda blame TH-cam also for being so gear centric
Very interesting video Thomas! When I recently upgraded my camera to the canon eso r, I got the 24-105 kit lens with it, and I’ve been planning on getting the other f4 wide and telephoto when the come out, but I found that as of right now, with the photography I’ve been shooting, I haven’t even need those focal lengths. Sorry that was probably unnecessary, great video though! Keep it up man!
Great video! Thanks for posting it. My "hobbiest" entry level Nikon D3100 came with only one lens (18-55mm) and I then bought a 70-300mm, Both are great but I've been musing about getting a wide angle. You're point about seascapes vs woodland vs hiking photography was enlightening. I am now more than ever aware that I needn't go out specifically hunting for a shot but rather just have my camera to hand in case I do see something amazing (as I show in my own latest ramblings video) :-)
A black one with glass. Why would anyone take advice about buying kit from you tube, when the host is getting gear for nothing or cheap?
Ahh those beautiful Canon lens...they're the best. Also, I wanted to share this quote from Galen Rowell: “You only get one sunrise and one sunset a day, and you only get so many days on the planet. A good photographer does the math and doesn't waste either.”
I don't and never will make money with photography. I'm satisfied taking photos of the landscape in my area and posting the images I like to Flickr. I still have a butt load of kit. If I'm driving somewhere I'll pack the three zooms, a 12mm prime, and two cameras. Just taking a walk in the fields around my home, camera and lens on a strap. Different lens from day to day. I think this helps me learn to "see" in whatever focal length I'm carrying, therefore making it easier to pick the "right" one when I have a choice.
How dare you, Chuck!
You obviously have lenses you don't understand because you have too many. And no bumper sticker with a faded aphorism such as, "The best lens is the one on your camera".
"Life wasn't meant to be easy" could be stuck on as well.
Fancy planning ahead, too, and taking a lens(es) with suitable FLs for that day's shooting. You must be mega-rich. Have a thought for under-privileged!
The best lens for landscape photography is the lens that is most versatile and still offers great image quality.
So I'd say the Canon 24-105mm II L IS with a full-frame body. Great coverage, quite alright wide open and tack sharp stopped down, from a rather wide wide-angle to a really good telephoto range with IS.
Plus: super lightweight and compact.
Aaaaaand - it's a kit-lens, or at least it was for the 5D-series.
I don't even shoot Canon, I'm a Fuji-guy, but I'd still recommend it.
what lens would you recommend on the fuji side?
Yeah, some brands\models will sometime give you some pretty impressive gear along with the camera - but you'll usually pay for it. You'll maybe save 2-300$ compared to what buying the body and the lens separately would normally cost (which is still pretty cool).
Canon have two 24-105, one a kit lens and the other is a L lens which is their professional version and a very good and versatile piece of glass.
@@brucebrodie7388 as far as I know, the lens coming with the 5D is the L version (f/4). A quick search through Amazon seems to confirm this. The other lens you're referring to is perhaps the f/3.5-5.6 STM, but I don't think I remember a camera coming with that as the kit lens.
My Canon 24-105 mm II L IS is on my camera probably 90% of the time.
Do you feel pressured into buying a new system. Due to current body being discontinued. What system have you in mind. Interesting to see what you end up purchasing.
Being ok not getting the image is ok if you all ready have them or you get the time to pick the days. Like you did say some dont get the time and to not get the image week in week out. But it was a great lesson to be ok not to get the shot. And least with the mis range lens to start with you can crop in to get closer or you can shoot pano to go wider so I recommendations is the 24-70 or 24-105 or equivalent haha
Great video...agree with the importance of lens quality. That's why I stayed with Canon when going mirrorless. My high quality EF L lenses adapted easily when I upgraded to the mirrorless system. I slowly accumulated a few RF L lenses ( pricey, but worth every penny). Their quality surpasses any other. My favorite is the RF70-200 2.8 L- very compact and outstanding! If I have to travel with only one lens, it would be the RF 24-105 f4 L.
The canon 24-105mm is well priced starting point... and very high quality...
Ranty, philosophical, gear video ! Bills must be due !
Great advice. Commenting because I want you to someday succeed :) ATB!
Very thoughtful comments... “master the lens that you have” ...and the camera! So true. I have to admit I have too many Fuji lenses... and the ones I use most are the light and underrated 18-55 and the nearly-do-it-all 18-135 which is surprisingly good at its f8 sweet spot. As another person said, if you want a stress free day, just take one camera and one lens. If you have a particular shot/location in mind then work out exactly what you need and take only that.
Didn’t Robert Capa say “if your photo isn’t good enough your lens isn’t expensive enough” ? :)
Ha ha
As technology progresses, stereotypes must be changed too, e.g. Tamron 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 RXD is a third-party super zoom lens, which objectively outperforms many lenses with a glorified red ring.
Really like the idea of going out with just one lens with a specific idea in mind of how you want to apply that lens in a given situation. So much more liberating and also less to carry on a long hike.
It’s so easy to fall into “if I buy this lens then I’ll get the shots I want” but honestly that’s an endless cycle. I’ve found I’ll carry multiple lenses “just in case” but I usually only use one of them. I also have found that I don’t like zoom lenses. Having every focal length between A to Z is just another thing I’m focusing on instead of the scene, and moving around to frame the shot is one of the fun experiences of photography for me. I like the last part of this video. Maybe the answer to “which lens do I need for this shot” should be “the one you have”
Thomas - thank you. This is probably one of my favourite videos of yours. It’s honest and cuts through the crap that others sometimes put out about “MUST HAVES”.
There’s a shot for every focal length, and I believe that learning how to shoot with what you’ve got is the key to producing better photos. Was really considering buying your book before, and I think this has pushed me over the edge. Thanks again.
Confession: I use a GoPro Hero 7 Black, and I enjoy it soooooo much.
Hey Tom, great message. I’ve always been happy, and avoided all ‘gear anxiety’, by just shooting with a single prime. That’s it. Nothing else. It’s all you need to make images, and you can spend all the rest of your money on travel, trips and experiences... You win, hands down, in the end. Love the channel.👊🏻
Same here, and so true.
I have a Sony a7iii with two lenses, both Sigma and they are the 24-70 f2.8 and the f1.4 20mm and it’s as good as it gets for me until Sigma release the 70-200 2.8 and they will be the only 3 lenses I will ever need.
Richard Jones I’m very similar to you, a7iii but with Sony 20mm G and Sony 70-200mm G. Having just purchase a a7riv I have one of those lenses on each body
Good and interesting comments. I keep filling in my collection with 14, 16-35, 70-200, and 200-500. But when it comes to walking around weight and flexibility, I still mostly use the f4 24-120 that came with my D750.
The best lens is always the one on the front of your camera. The trick as Ansel Adams once said is knowing where to stand.
My 28-70 was my only lens for decades. I was my own zoom for all that time!
This is the hardest thing I had to learn over the years : to not be frightened by not getting a shot. I now take the time to look at the scene with the two best lenses I always have with me, my eyes.
I'm selling a brilliant lens I don't use (23mm f2) and will put the monies towards upgrading from 18-55mm f2.8-4 Fuji to the 16-55mm f2.8. ie it's the 24-70mm equivalent to those heavy pieces of Canon glass, just as good, but still 1/2 the price (Ok it's still not cheap)
Too true. I've had a bad back for a while now just taking the camera and 24-105 has made me more selective about images. Love the vid.
When I moved from Canon to the Sony A7III, I wanted that one lens to do as much as possible,
I went with the Sony 24-105mm, with an L-Bracket it's a decent all-in-one package for landscapes,
If I need wider I can do a simple 3-4 vertical Pano to create an 18mm ish shot.
Yeah the 24-105 is extremely versatile.
Brutal truth of social media. Thanks for sharing
Trouble is imho there are far too many focal lengths and far too many variables in all types of photography. As a news photographer I lug around a 16-35 and 24-70 a 70-200 a 300 all 2.8 and a 500 f4 it’s insane but all lenses are needed to cover what’s needed. In my own time I spent years doing landscapes with one lens the fixed 23mm on my Fuji X100 series 35mm equivalent this thing never let me down I made some amazing shots I had to work hard at times to get them and occasionally I’d rue the fact I couldn’t get a close up of a distant subject but hey it’s the one that got away this time. Of late I’ve been using my old Bronica medium format film camera I have two lenses a 50 and a 75 the 50 is by far the most used it’s a 28mm equiv I just love it to bits. Basically imho the best lens for any genre is the lens you have with you. 📷❤️
I'd say, analyze what you like and want from your photography and get the lens that makes it possible. If you're new look at others work and see what is most inspiring to you, then get the focal lengths makes it possible. If you have experience then be honest with yourself and introspect your feelings about your work to see what actually matters to you.
For instance I enjoy hiking and I'm really melding that with photography, which means that I want lightweight lenses (which often means kit lenses). I find lots of different scenes on my adventures but I have a preference to frame my compositions a little wider to include a little more. Therefore I'm currently using two lenses from 16-85mm, that covers most of my needs unless I'm in the mountains. Then I want something longer as well. So I'm currently looking at getting a 24-200 to cover that need while still only carrying two lenses.
It's not really that hard figuring out what lens YOU need if you first figure out what you want and like to photograph. If you like everything then you're not focused enough... 😇
I tried limiting myself to a filter size of 77mm for lens. Well, it didn't really work...
Thank you for the rant! So I’m older now and a serious hobbyist who has lenses, both fast zooms and great primes since I shoot all kinds of different things from events, sports, wildlife, and portraits. For landscape do you prescribe to zooms like 15-35mm, 24-70, 70-200, and 100-400. (Or 100-500) or a set of strategic primes or a combination of both. Sure you can tune your specific kit for what you plan to shoot on a given day but it seems these days the landscape photographers seem to be happy with zooms and even at f/4 and not even f/2.8 to reduce weight. What are your thoughts pr a link to a video showing what you take on a landscape shoot. Take care.
As I have learned with many other hobbies using 'tools', brush, pencil, lens, etc., it's not always the tool,, but the person behind the the tool.
My 27th lens (Canon EF 24-105mn f4) just came this morning. I have from 6.5mm to 800mm (I actually have some more for Pentax K and 42mm screw mount).
If I was to only choose one of my lenses it would be the Tamron 18-400mm f3.5-6.3. This is my photo scouting kit. For my typical Light Weight Kit I add a Sigma 8-16mm f4.5-5.6, and perhaps a Canon 250D duplet close-up filter. For Landscapes in the woods I have been using a Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.5. I bought the new lens to replace this one because when I use a speedbooster the f4 becomes as bright as an f2.8 and will have the equivalent range of a 26-115mm. For Wildlife I would definitely carry the Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 Sport. For Birds...either the "Sigmonster 300-800mm f5.6 (maybe with the speedbooster and 1.4X converter or the Canon 800mm f11 (because of the super light weight).
Go without - Wait till you can afford it and buy the best quality you can afford, has always been my philosophy in photography and in life....YMMV =)
maybe vintage lenses are a option for some people as well. they can be really cheap (talking 50€ per lens) and create very nice images! Idk if they hold up in landscape photography but they might be worth mentioning
Honestly I faffed around for a long time over this. Carrying 5 lenses some days. I now stick to 12mm, manual focus and a 55-200 on my fuji. That does all I need, sometimes I need to shoot a 55mm pano but that's it. I leave the zoom on the camera incase I see some wildlife and want to photograph it.
Pete I have the 10-24 and 55-200 on my Fuji for landscapes..... more than enough .... I like having the gap between the 2 lenses, as it forces me to think about my composition. I used to carry a standard zoom as well.... it seemed to stay on the camera and got less interesting shots as too lazy to change lenses.
I was honestly expecting more comments from Fujifilm users bragging about their 18-55 kit lens =P
I've never tried it, but I hear quite often that people think its very good.
Anyway, I just ordered the Fujifilm XF 55-200 because your videos inspired me. Buying it used, so its not too expensive.
How many have you spend in lenses ti upload your images at Instagram? Or to print at 30x30cm? Some time this is crazy, you don't notice the difference in this cases with a cheaper lens.
If you use 4k screen and only view photos from there, cheaper lenses look much less advantageous than viewed through a lower resolution monitor. 2.7k monitors are middle of the road. FHD screens are very critical on lens quality. 2-3 lenses is the max that one can carry (all the time). $ spend on a huge high resolution monitor saves money on lenses (and improves satisfaction).
I thougth you shot with a Fuji?
One advise from me: don't bother with f/2.8 or faster lenses. It's better to spend money on f/4s and be happy with the results (anyway, we all have to "close" the iris to capture landscapes). F/4s are smaller and lighter. For example: instead of 24-70 f/2.8 I'd recommend 24-105 f/4. More reach in the same volume/mass.
90% of photographers are probably okay with a kit lens
@1Energine1 I buy second hand, got a Four Thirds 14 - 54mm f2.8 - f3.5 for £95 , you need an adapter
and you lose focus points, but it's optically good.
Thanks for the video.
When I shoot landscapes with only one lens, here are the lenses I use:
90mm f/5.6 on my 4x5 inch large format camera
65mm f/5.6 on my 6x9cm medium format camera
28mm f/2.8 on my 35mm camera
16-55mm f/2.8 weather resistant Fuji zoom lens on my weather resistant Fuji X APS-C mirrorless digital body
14mm f/2.5 on my micro 4/3 mirrorless digital camera
The perfect lens would be a compact 10-800mm f0.95 that is perfectly sharp from corner to corner even wide open and should not be bigger than a pancake lens
You're just a truthful young man who doesn't like all the commercial crap, which I totally respect. However, no need to be embarrassed about good glass. Yes the best camera is the one you have with you but the fact is that good lenses can give you the most amazing files and detail to print if you know what you're doing. I was recently re-processing some old raw files of the Isle of Skye taken with a good camera for the time but with a not so cheap but "handy" but lower quality 18-200 zoom. Well the files were still fairly difficult to bring stuff out of giving mediocre results at best. I also had a few raws shot with a good and cheap 50mm prime from the same shoot which came out much better. So beginners are better to get some decent older used and cheap primes of a few different lengths , do some research on which ones are good, Nikon is quite good as there are so many f mount primes on the market at great prices. Learning that way you will learn composition and light more comprehensively too. Not a bad thing. The high quality zooms are expensive. Save up for some slowly, buy once, by quality and shoot with good old primes in the meantime. I often take my camera out with just one prime to challenge myself.. It's fun.
Option #4: Rent gear that you are interested in buying. Sometimes you're on the right track and fall in love. Sometimes, you find out that, while the new thing is great, you can do just as well with what you have. Sometimes, you find out that it doesn't work for you at all. Renting gear for a week costs ~10% of the retail price -- it is really a great value when trying the gear you don't ultimately purchase.
Acceptance is also really awesome. A lot of us already have gear that, "if only we had X, we could make great images". If so, go do it!
Also: f/8 and be there.
If it is just a hobby and not your main source of income, then as soon as you start stressing out about your photography then it is time to look for a different hobby.
I have made do with ‘kit lenses’ for a number of years and I am satisfied with the results I get.
Thank you Thomas for a realistic viewpoint on this...
THOMAS , hello have not, been here in time, I recall something about you going to a 2 1/4 x 2 1/4 format, anyhow true story went to a photo store for film,,filters , etc, then 2 women came in saying , LOOK at that BOX CAMERA, I looked at the clerk & winked, so he said that BOX CAMERA is some $600, it was a BRONICA 2 1/4 SO WE all laughed , Yes there is NO 1 perfect lens for everything , I have a YASHICA 230 AF 25x85mm 2.8 w/ macro , then 70x210 3.5 bought it thinking for us photos in a housing, however the focusing was. CONTRAST Not practical UW , But have a NICONN 3 With just the standard 55mm lens with extension tubes & framers for UW MACRO W flash, My all time favourite film was AFGA, the greatest neutral skin tones, blue skies, but sadly that died years ago, so WENT TO FUGI FILM good colours but had not used any film in years now, Basic digital OLYMPUS , stay well, stay safe , Cheers 🏴🏴🏴🇬🇧🇺🇸
I'm on the Fuji system, and quickly upgraded from the kit lens on my first X-T20 to a 23 f/1.4 prime (and sold the kit lens to make that happen) and it's been great for 90% of the stuff I shoot. But over time I wanted something longer and when I came to upgrade my body I got a deal on the 50-140 f/2.8 which has been awesome for portraits and some event stuff I have done. But I take most of my pics on casual walks / weekend travel and it's just a bit big to carry everywhere and I don't like changing lenses all the time while in the city. After thinking about it for a while and selling some kit I have ordered the 16-80 f/4, and while a lot slower it's a lot smaller, has OIS and I'm hoping it will be enough to stay in my bag all the time and stop me worrying about all the great shots I took on my iPhone and wondering how much better they would have been on a real camera
Thing is, the fuji primes are exceptionally good, sharp, solid and affordable.
Buying used and vintage is also a great (if your comfortable with ebay). When getting into photography i bought quite a few different used lenses and learnt about what i liked. I've sold lenses mostly for the same price I bought them (over 1-2 years period ownership), so ends up being much cheaper than renting. However this isn't possible with new lenses (especially on new mirrorless systems).
I feel the best minimalistic option is the duo of 16-36 f4 and 70-200 f4 zooms. The main thing you need is a sturdy tripod that is light enough that you'll actually carry it with you.
"Is tought (when you can't get the shot you want) and it takes time (to get used to take the pictures that you can with what you have). But it's liberating and its fantastic. You really start to enjoy the true meaning of photography. Which isn't to be the biggest/best person in Instagram. It's to be out there, connect with the outdoor and to have a nice momento to yourself."
So good to hear that.
That is what keep us photographers going on and on with what we have and taking pictures of what we can.
I think that lenses like Tamron 28-200mm F/2.8-5.6 (for Sony FE) and Nikon 24-200mm F/4-6.3 are making things more simple for landscape photographers. Compared to dedicated 24-70 and 70-200 lenses, these are only compromised by narrower aperture and worse bokeh. So in terms of sharpness and contrast, they should perform the same on typical landscape apertures. So in the end, A7 III (or A7R III or IV) + Tamron 17-28mm + Tamron 28-200mm or Nikon Z6 (or Z5 or Z7) + 14-30mm + 24-200mm should cover everything. And in the case of Sony + Tamron combination, both will share the same 67mm lens thread.
Best video on this topic, and I have watched a fair few trying to decide which lens to purchase. Thanks Thomas, you were entertaining as well as being realistic. It helped me to know what to do.
Nikon Z24 200 is my favorite landscape lens if I bring only one lens with me. But normally I bring Z24 200 and Z14 30.
I don't know why TH-cam was suggesting this to me today, but nice to go down memory lane. I do have 2 things relevant to this conversation. 1. It does not matter which lens you get (in terms of focal length). Hear me out here... If you asking the question you are fairly new to photography. Creativity is inspired by the limitations we impose upon ourselves. Just pick one and use it to death. Learn it inside out. Your images are more likely to be affected by the time you get up in the morning, the weather, the research you do on your locations. So just don't sweat it.. regardless of what lens you buy... you are going to look back and think most your old images are not great anyway (because it is the practise and experience that gets you compelling images). Point 2 - One of my favorite lenses is my 24-240mm travel zoom. It is freeing to just hike with and I have printed images with it that are 20x30" with 'good enough' quality (if people a pixel peeping... you don't have a compelling image). But here is the real thing... why does no-one make a good quality travel zoom? They all have like 68mm or 72mm filter thread and generally are compromised for people who want to spend $700-$1000. I wonder what would happen if a lens manufacturer decided to make a good superzoom that actually lets in enough light, has better lens coatings, and optical design? Ok it would be a bit heavier... but it would be lighter than carrying 2 lenses. I guess that's what Tamron did with the 35-150mm F2-F2.8 but its not wide enough. I would love to see a 24-200 F2.8-F4 with a 82mm filter thread and a $2K-$2.5K price point... I think it would be doable... and I bet it could actually replace 2 lenses.
Thomas, I'd highly highly highly recommend checking out the new Tamron lenses for Sony FE. Tamron is doing amazing things with their lens technology to make cheap, light, and extremely sharp lenses. I've bought all of them, and used them extensively. They have a holy trinity setup with the 17-28, 28-75, and 70-180 (all F/2.8), but I personally have found I can replace the last two with the new 28-200 F/2.8-5.6 (surprisingly sharp super-zoom, check Dustin Abbott's review). This gives me an amazing hiking setup with 17-200mm covered in under 1kg. You should probably get an A7R IV and just get these lenses, and you'll be surprised believe me. Just wanted to share my thoughts since you seem conflicted on the topic and I think this problem has been solved by Tamron.
There are pretty good compromises from Tamron if you use Sony. Tamron 17-28 and 28-200 and that won’t break the bank and are decent quality. If you are on fujifilm i would recommend the 10-24, 18-80 F4 and the 55-200. For fujifilm I have the 18-55. Not bad but not great either. Inalei have the 1024 and 55200 that I like. For Sony I have the 16-35 f4 and the 70-300 G. Both not bad but not great either. I’m planing on upgrade those 2 to a 17-28 and a 100-400. So many options but there are some mid priced alternatives to the top of the range versions that while not as good, are still way better than KIT lens without breaking the bank. Choices choices.
The old saying is "f/8 and be there". The best lens is the one you have with you when it is time to create an image. Working the subject to tell a story, and communicate your vision is the goal. I have owned various camera systems with primes and zooms from kit lenses to top end glass. When I look at my images and prints the last thing I notice is which camera or lens I used, and only another photographer would even think of asking. I make images that (I think) are beautiful, which makes me happy and that is why I do it.