In the not too distant past, my choice of walkaround lenses frequently depended on where I planned to walk. If I was hoping to shoot architecture or landscapes, I would choose a 35 mm or 28 mm prine. For street shots of people, I might have gone with a 50 or 85. However, I've recently found that the performance of late model zooms is quite adequate for most work, certainly for street portraits and even landscapes. So now I frequently carry two zooms: the DA 16-45 and the FA 28-105. These cover quite a range and both perform very well. The DA 16-45 (which can only be used with the *istD or *istDs,) performs exceptionally well. Yesterday, I picked up an FA 80-320 just for grins. I know that it's not thought to be a great lens, but I think it might be fun for trying to grab some tight people shots in crowds. All that being said, for most of my serious work I still use primes. Tomorrow, I have to shoot a car for a magazine. I'll probably use the A 400/5.6, the SMC Pentax 135/2.5, and perhaps the 85/1.8. However, for the interior shots I will use the DA 16-45. It's the widest lens I own and is quite adequate for the task. Of course I do lust for the new DA 14/2.8.)
Paul
On Oct 23, 2004, at 3:50 AM, Peter Smekal wrote:
www = walking with what
When I started photography more seriously a couple of years ago I went to a
photo course. Our teacher gave us the advice to use prime lenses,
preferably normal primes, at least to start with. So for some time I only
had a 50mm-lens.
The last year I found a used FA 20/2.8, started to experiment with it and
became really fond of the perspective it gave. During a trip to a Greek
island this summer it became the favorite lens on the PZ1-p I walked around
with. It produced images I am very pleased with. Sometimes, however, it
made me unprepared for certain motives. I remember walking through a
fantastic barren, almost moonlike coastal landscape, when suddenly a man
appeared from the left carrying a huge sack filled with salt he had
collected. On the photo taken with the wide angle he (of course) appeared
as a tiny figure. Thus, using a 20mm as a walking around lens is not so
clever. Changing lenses would have taken too much time.
The obvious solution might after all be a zoom lense, like a 28-105. I am
thinking about buying one now. But then again, maybe using a longer prime
lens as walking around lens might be better. One mostly has more time to
change to a wide angle when the picturesque landscape or the like
"appears", than the other way around. At least that's what I think. So what
about let's say a FA 100/2.8 (too heavy?) or the FA 135/2.8 (too long?)?
I am still quite a novice so any advice is really appreciated. Thanks
Peter, Sweden
