View Poll Results: Priority on Lens coverage or Lens Speed(Aperture)

Voters
47. You may not vote on this poll
  • Lens coverage - Priority to spend on range

    19 40.43%
  • Lens Speed- Priority to spend on Faster lens

    28 59.57%
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Lens coverage or Lens Speed?????

  1. #1
    Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    4,026

    Default Lens coverage or Lens Speed?????

    Hi All......

    Just to check out......if you ppl normally prioritise and invest to go for lens coverage or lens speed (you equipment)....???


    Lens coverage - e.g - 17mm all the way up to 600mm
    Spend $$ on Faster lens



    regards,
    me

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Behind the viewfinder...
    Posts
    5,851

    Default

    Dual factor... I prefer faster lenses...

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    Interesting question,

    Are you asking if we were to buy a zoom lens, are we getting a 24-85mm f4.5-5.6 or we'll add more $$$$ to get a 24-70mm f2.8 ?

    Or you want us to compare prime and Zoom since that is also a comparison between speed and coverage and cost?


  4. #4
    Moderator
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    4,026

    Default Hmmmm....`

    Welll....juz wanna see if you would jusz get what you can afford now to get the range of lens.....or save up to go for the faster lens.......

    As you see getting one fast f2.8......80-200 f2.8 can cost the range of 28 to 300 mm lens.....


    regards,
    Sulhan

  5. #5

    Default

    For me, speed upgrade than range upgrade.

    Everyone has a preferred range of shooting. For me, speed upgrade allows me more flexibility in working in that range. I will only extend the range if I have loads of extra $$.

    If you want speed across the full range (8mm - 600mm)

    Just my opinion.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    453

    Default

    For the Standard wide angle and standard lens, I'll get the cheapest original prime available, probably the slowest prime too. The Zoom have too much distortion in this range.

    For telephoto, I'll go for the Mid range Zoom that is not too expensive and heavy. eg, given 80-200 f4.5-5.6, 70-200 f4 and 70-200 f2.8, I'll go for the 70-200 f4 since it is half the price and relatively lighter when compare with the f2.8 version.

    Having said that, I don't usually handheld lenses >50mm

    The dead weight and size is my basic consideration. If the 70-200 f2.8 weights only 400 grams and is the same size as the 75-300mm, I don't mind paying S$2 K for it

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    5,499

    Default

    hmmm interesting question - personally i'd go for lens range first, since speed/aperture can be compensated somewhat by higher ISO films/settings. also, faster lenses are usually heavier/bulkier. whereas, if i don't have that particular coverage that i want for a shot, all the big apertures in the world also cannot help.

    but that's if on budget lah. got $$$ i sure go for the whole jingbang one.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    New York, New York!
    Posts
    330

    Default it all depends...

    depends...

    on ur current needs and requirements...

    more towards fast lens... though.

  9. #9

    Default

    definitely bigger apertures preferred!

  10. #10
    andylee
    Guests

    Default

    Originally posted by Larry
    hmmm interesting question - personally i'd go for lens range first, since speed/aperture can be compensated somewhat by higher ISO films/settings. also, faster lenses are usually heavier/bulkier. whereas, if i don't have that particular coverage that i want for a shot, all the big apertures in the world also cannot help.

    but that's if on budget lah. got $$$ i sure go for the whole jingbang one.

    Well said, that's why i stick to my zoom 24-50 F 4 lens

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Astin Studio
    Posts
    4,736

    Default

    I vote for bigger aperture, aka faster lens. Lens coverage is not important to me.
    (Thats what my sifu told me from day 1 )

  12. #12
    andylee
    Guests

    Default

    If you are bestow with the ability to process a roll of 3200 B/W film to become the grain of 400 B/W, then you dun need fast lens.

  13. #13

    Default

    For the middle focal lengths from between 28 to 135mm or so, I'd rather take a faster lens since this is the range where moving a few steps forward or backward can compensate for some coverage.

    Anything above or below, coverage comes first before speed, however, I'd not want to take a slow long tele if I can really help it.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Lens coverage or Lens Speed?????

    Originally posted by sulhan

    Lens coverage - e.g - 17mm all the way up to 600mm
    why stop at 600mm.

    If a Canon user go for the 1200mm.

    Or a Nikon user, get the 1200-1700mm zoom or 2000mm mirror lens.



    BTW, I voted for fast lenses over coverage.
    Last edited by james m; 24th July 2003 at 07:38 PM.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Singapore, North Area
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Lense Speed.....
    Faster lense........

    Don't like to push/pull films if I can help it. Don't like the big grain.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UP NORTH
    Posts
    727

    Default

    with digital in my hand..i go for lense coverage

  17. #17

    Default

    Originally posted by Zerstorer
    For the middle focal lengths from between 28 to 135mm or so, I'd rather take a faster lens since this is the range where moving a few steps forward or backward can compensate for some coverage.

    Good say, take a few steps forward and backward.
    To add a few, a fast len allows faster AF in dim lights.

    Beside, with a shorter zoom range, it makes the photographer to go nearer to the subject, thus encourages intimacy.

  18. #18

    Default

    Originally posted by andylee
    If you are bestow with the ability to process a roll of 3200 B/W film to become the grain of 400 B/W, then you dun need fast lens.
    not everybody like u mah!

  19. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,911

    Default

    Don't much about. Go for fast lenses with range. You know that 2 months down the line you'll end up selling your slow lens with lots of range / fast lens with no range, only to get the job done properly.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •