if you could have just one......

[Cozen]

If you could just have one lens, which would it be. General uses would be portrait and landscape.





Let's hear your opinions!

[wickerprints]

As much as you may say you will only ever have one lens...you will get another. Once you pop, you won't stop. Trust me. I should know, I started out with one lens...I'm now at five, and I still desperately want at least three more. So do the smart thing, realize that there will never be that one do-it-all lens, and buy the best lenses for each of your anticipated shooting conditions. Buy a landscape lens, buy a portrait lens. Buy a lens for macro, buy a lens for wildlife. Buy a lens for low light, buy a lens for fast action. But don't buy a lens thinking it will do all of these--or even some of these--remotely well. Because it doesn't exist, and even if it somehow magically did, it would cost more than what it would cost to buy lenses designed for each specific purpose.


That said, you don't specify the kind of camera body you have, nor do you specify your budget or any other relevant parameters besides "portrait/landscape" work. So I can't provide any recommendations.

[crosbyharbison]

24-70 L on FF

[asmodai]

It's an atypical choice for 'just one', but I'd take the 85 f1.2. I mean, there are a million amazing general and wide range lenses out there. But back when I got my first DSLR I did have only one lens, my 35mm1.4, for YEARS (this was on a 1.6 crop body, mind you). Some of my favorite photos were thus taken. Now I have a number of lenses, and when I want to make something artistic and not documentary, I still often find myself happier when I put focal length, angle of view, and other technical considerations out of mind and just shoot with whatever lens I have. I really think it makes for interesting shots, and I think my days stuck at 35 helped me find my voice as a photographer. Today I'd take the 85 because I am in awe of it. It's probably my favorite lens. It does pretty things. I also do a lot in low-light.

[alexniedra]

For me? Without doubt the 24-70 L. Simply amazing. I use it primarily on my 40D, but I find the focal range "just right" for my style of shooting. If I had just one lens, this would be it.

[nickds7]

24-70 L on FF






Same. 50 1.2l would be tempting too, i guess (85mm 1.2l on non 1.6x crop).

[ShutterbugJohan]

24-70L or 100-400L

[clemmb]

24-105

[Benjamin]

Of course it's the 1200/5.6L!! [:D]


But seriously though, I would prefer my 16-35/2.8L II on FF. It's as perfect a walk around lens as the 24-70L and it gives a wow at 16mm when used properly.


I usually take my 16-35L + 85/1.8 with my 1V-HS for a trip. This is combo does landscape + portrait brilliantly.


Just my $0.02

[Keith B]

As a guy trying to make a living at this I'd say my 24-70 2.8.


But if I was just shooting for pleasure I'd say my 16-35 2.8 II.

[piiooo]

These are lenses that"live" on my bodies:


EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS on my APS-C


EF 24-105 4 IS L on my FF.I also own the 24-70 2.8 L and still I don't use it as much as the 24-105.

[Sean Setters]

I'm going to have to go with the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS like piiooo. It's the ultimate general purpose lens for my 50D. Most of my work is done with it.

[Daniel Browning]

If you could just have one lens, which would it be. General uses would be portrait and landscape.


24mm f/1.4 II. Awesome landscapes. Low light. Environmental portraits (crop for tighter portraits). It's just my favorite all round lens.

[Cozen]

I know I will never just get one lens, this was more of a poll type thing. In fact I already have 3 lenses. I just wanted to see what everyone thought. As for parameters, I own a 40D with plans of getting a 7D. I'm just waiting on specs for the new 60D. As for lenses I own a Sigma 10-20mm, a Canon 50mm 1.8, and a Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro. I find I generally shoot landscapes and portraits and some artistic/abstract stuff. Occasionally I need a telephoto, but not enough to need an expensive one.





I just notice sometimes when I'm out shooting it is a hassle to switch between the 3 lenses and it slows me down. Here is what I like/dislike about the 3 that I have:


Sigma 10-20mm- Love the super wide angle. Sometimes images don't "pop" as much as I'd like. Distortion can sometimes be a problem.


Canon 50mm 1.8- good low light lens, great shallow depth of field. Bokeh and flare issues leave a little to be desired. Also auto focus is kinda slow.


Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro- great for close up macro work. Super sharp and great depth of field. Auto focus searches sometimes and isn't as fast as I'd like.





I'm looking for a lens that can "do a little of everything" (I know, almost impossible.)


I was mainly considering the Canon 24-70L as it has a decent wide angle, low light capability (as far as zooms go), and fast auto focus. Apparently it also has semi decent close up capabilities (obviously not a macro lens).


Others I was considering were the Tamron 17-50mm (very affordable), the Canon 24-105L (broader focal range, but F4), and I'm open to other suggestions.





Does anyone have a non-cropped "macro" shot taken with the 24-70L? I just want to see how close up it can get. Thanks.

[neuroanatomist]

For a crop body (like you have and are planning on upgrading to), the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. If there was an EF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM lens, my answer might be different...

[Maleko]

If it had to be ONE lens, would be 24-105. Good range imo.

[Manofmayo]

Canon TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II Tilt-Shift if price is not a factor


Canon 85 f1.8 if price is an issue

[db_ch]

Canon EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 L IS.

[Cozen]

good to hear all your opinions. How about this curve ball then. Say I were to have a 7D, what one lens would you want to have considering HD video shooting as well?

[db_ch]

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L or a decent lightstrong fixed lens that still gives you enough wide angle on a 7D 1.6 crop factor cam..

[Brendan7]

I have the 24-105 and if i'm not shooting wildlife it is on my camera.


No doubt the best walk around lens.


brendan

[wycrich]

I'm also looking for my ONE general purpose lens and thus have been reading a lot of reviews and doing comparisions.If money is not a concern, I will pick ef 24-70 f/2.8

[musickna]

24-105mm f/4 L. Endlessly versatile.

[nickds7]

except, of course, low light. Just have to decide if the extra 30mm is going to make the difference between 2.8 and 4 worth it.



24-105mm f/4 L. Endlessly versatile.

[Daniel Browning]

except, of course, low light.


Actually, it's far better in low light than the 24-70, thanks to I.S. [;)] Of course, you meant "low light action shots", not all types of "low light". [:D]

[PVN2392]

Definitely the 24-70mm f/2.8L for what I shoot. I love the feel and quality of the pictures I get when I shoot it. I have tried my friends 24-70mm on my Canon Rebel XSi and I love it. I just need to find the income to get one.

[Rob Gardner]

Another vote for the 24-105 f/4 L. Fast AF, sharp wide open, and IS with a great reach. What more do you need?

[alexniedra]

What more do you need?


f/2.8! [H]

[Rob Gardner]

OK, you got me on that one....