Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Your dream lenses?
#1
Share your objects of secret desire...  :wub: It doesn't have to be rationalized anyhow. Smile

 

Mine is, first and foremost, the Sigma 85/1.4. When using my 70-200/2.8L IS, a lot of the time I'm finding myself at 85mm, and quite a few times I would've liked a faster lens to eke out some extra shutter speed.

 

Then again, the 24/1.4L II looks like a very nice counterpart to this Sigma, and a terrific lowlight lens in its own right.

#2
If I'm honest, I have all I need ... or even a bit more than that ...

but ...

 

a 300/2.8 would really fit nicely into my collection.

 

Not an AF lens of course ... I would like to add it to my set of

manual lenses ... so I always have a look into the usual

2nd hand places. At times, the old Nikkor 300/2.8 goes for

relatively low prices ... also the Adaptall Tamron SP 300/2.8.

 

What would I do with it? I don't know ... but this huge chuck

of glass ... well ... you were asking about the secret desires ... weren't you ;-)

 

Just my thoughts ... Rainer

#3
Canon EF 50mm f1.0 USM. For its shallow DOFness for a 50mm, and its unique look. 

 

Uhmm... 

 

Canon EF 200mm f2 L IS USM. A tad heavy though, but nicely rendering lens.

Leica 180mm R APO. Both versions are truly top optics, very sharp, CA less and contrasty.

Canon EF 400mm f4 DO  IS USM. 400mm top tele on a relatively compact, light (just under 2kg) package.  
#4
Woohoo, that's a formidable list!

Although I think the first item seems to have a more realistic (price- and availability-wise) substitute, Sony A7(or R) + SLRMagic 50/0.95. No AF but you don't seem scared of that. Smile
#5
Nikon 200-400 f/4, plus the upper body strength to handhold it. Smile

#6
There isn't much I need or want really, until we get into exotics. I'd get the Coastal Optics UV-IR for fun as I do some beyond visible spectrum stuff (both ends) at times. I'm not a fan of 50mm non-macro enough to look at the Otus, but if the new Sigma f/1.4 is close enough to that without the price, that could be some fun too. I still want the Canon fisheye zoom lens for a bit of fun to replace the Samyang.

 

On 50mm macros, if the Touit is any good, I'll probably get that and a NEX-5-something. Sell the ZE one I have to help pay for it. Tilty screen AF goodness! I still miss that feature from the a350 sometimes (Canon contrast AF doesn't count!)

 

Next, the Officina Stellare Veloce RH 200. Ok, it's not a camera lens, although I'd still try to stick a DSLR on the back of it. At 600mm f/3 it is a nice balance of relatively short focal length and quite fast speed for astrophotography use. At less than half the price of the 200-400L. And I hate to admit it, but I'm a sucker for Italian design... I know it shouldn't figure into the decision process for a technical item, but on the 99% of days when I can't use it, at least it'll look good indoors!

 

It'll never happen, but I'd still really like a step up (not straight successor) to the 100-400L retaining its best characteristics and improving on its weaknesses. Keep the push-pull handling as nothing else comes close to speed and accuracy in the heat of the moment. Add more water resistance. Faster AF. More zoom range on both ends, keeping parfocal. Closer MFD. Newer IS. Note I'm not saying make it faster (aperture). If anything, I want all the above at the same or even less weight than the 100-400L. Minimum size should also not increase.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
#7
Quote:Woohoo, that's a formidable list!

Although I think the first item seems to have a more realistic (price- and availability-wise) substitute, Sony A7(or R) + SLRMagic 50/0.95. No AF but you don't seem scared of that. Smile
Yes, funny how the f1.0 is more expensive than a different body + lens. I rather like the Canon 50mm f0.95 (how it renders), and even that is more affordable Wink
#8
Quote:Yes, funny how the f1.0 is more expensive than a different body + lens. I rather like the Canon 50mm f0.95 (how it renders), and even that is more affordable Wink
I don't think that ancient lens (you're referring to that old Canon 0.95 rangefinder lens... Right?) is very practical now - from all the examples I've seen it's morbidly soft and ridden with flare. I did toy with the idea, but the samples turned me off, and I didn't even try to learn how it can be adapted to the Sony NEX... Then again, you already have a 50/1.2 lens... I don't know how much there is to realistically gain by going even faster? Maybe the shortest MFD is something to look out for, I dunno...

But looks like I'm breaking the rules of my own thread. Smile
#9
Quote:I don't think that ancient lens (you're referring to that old Canon 0.95 rangefinder lens... Right?) is very practical now - from all the examples I've seen it's morbidly soft and ridden with flare. I did toy with the idea, but the samples turned me off, and I didn't even try to learn how it can be adapted to the Sony NEX... Then again, you already have a 50/1.2 lens... I don't know how much there is to realistically gain by going even faster? Maybe the shortest MFD is something to look out for, I dunno...

But looks like I'm breaking the rules of my own thread. Smile
It is about its character... And I find it to be sharp enough wide open. It seems quite a bit nicer than the Leica.... I have two 55mm f1.2 lenses, which have a different character than either the Canon 50mm f0.95 or the EF 50mm f1.0 USM.

 

Here some samples to get an idea of the character of that 50mm f0.95:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/06/03...the-m-240/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/doo3/sets/...803194199/
#10
Quote:It is about its character... And I find it to be sharp enough wide open. It seems quite a bit nicer than the Leica.... I have two 55mm f1.2 lenses, which have a different character than either the Canon 50mm f0.95 or the EF 50mm f1.0 USM.

 

Here some samples to get an idea of the character of that 50mm f0.95:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/06/03...the-m-240/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/doo3/sets/...803194199/
I thought the idea was that the bokeh was not intrusive with ciné lenses, it certainly is with this lens!  Looks like it's going down with first signs of Petzval sydrome!

Dave's clichés
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)