A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Home > Equipment > Building a Lens Kit

Featured Equipment Deals

Eyeist Review: My Experience Read More

Eyeist Review: My Experience

Photographer, mom, and blogger Rebekah Gough shares her Eyeist.com experience. In short, she loved it. Read on to find out why it was so fantastic.

Latest Equipment Articles

Lensbaby Spark Review Read More

Lensbaby Spark Review

This inexpensive gadget does indeed spark your creativity. Read on to see how.

Latest Learning Articles

26 Creative Photos of Water Drops Read More

26 Creative Photos of Water Drops

These absolutely amazing macro photographs feature a tiny elemental thing that can hold a lot of mystery. Take a moment to enjoy these photographs of water drops.


Building a Lens Kit

by Bob Atkins, April 2009 (updated August 2010)


Once you’ve decided which camera to buy, your next problem is to decide what lenses you will need. There’s no single “best set” of lenses for everyone since the choice depends on your budget and your needs.

Lenses are classified by their field of view. A wideangle lens has a wide field of view, while a telephoto lens has a narrow field of view. Field of view depends not only on focal length, but also on the format size. This means that a lens of a given focal length (say 35mm) might we classified as a wideangle lens when used on a full frame camera, but a normal lens when used on an APS-C crop format camera.

The table below splits lenses into 6 categories based on their horizontal angle of view. The classifications are slightly arbitrary but nevertheless useful.

  Horizontal Angle of View (degrees) Focal Length
(full frame)
Focal Length
(APS-C 1.6x)
Specific
Applications
Ultra Wide 97° 16mm 10mm Extreme DOF
Landscapes
Interiors
84° 20mm 12.5mm
Wide 74° 24mm 15mm Landscapes
Travel
Group Portraits
65° 28mm 17.5mm
54° 35mm 22mm
Normal 40° 50mm 31mm Travel
General Purpose
Short Telephoto 24° 85mm 53mm Travel
Portraits
20° 100mm 62.5mm
15° 135mm 84mm
Telephoto 10° 200mm 125mm Sports
Wildlife
Zoo
6.8° 300mm 187.5mm
Long Telephoto 5.2° 400mm 250mm Sports
Wildlife
500mm 312.5mm
3.3° 600mm 375mm

With regards to the applications, these are just general common uses. You can pretty much use any lens in any application, i.e. you can shoot landscapes with a 400mm lens or wildlife with a 35mm lens, it’s just that you probably won’t be doing either very often.

In the following article I’ll probably mention Canon lenses more than lenses from other manufacturers simply because I use Canon equipment and so I’m more familiar with their products. This should not be taken as an indication that Canon lenses are “best”. Most other lens manufacturers will have similar lenses in their lineup and this article is about selecting lenses based on focal length and aperture so it is applicable no matter what brand of camera you own.

Primes and Zooms

Prime lenses have a fixed focal length, while zoom lenses have a variable focal length. Each has it’s own set of advantages and disadvantages.

Advantages of Prime Lenses

  • Usually faster than zooms. The fastest current primes are f/1.2, but almost all are f/2.8 and faster. In most camera systems, the fastest zooms available are f/2.8 (though Olympus have an f/2 zoom for their “four-thirds” format cameras). Fast lenses are not only useful in low light, but can also be used to throw a background out of focus by shooting at the maximum aperture and minimizing depth of field.
  • Low distortion. Since they can be optimized for a single focal length, geometric aberrations can be more easily minimized.
  • Usually smaller than zooms, at least smaller than fast high quality zooms
  • Primes are usually higher in optical quality than zooms in the same price range. So, for example, an Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, (compare prices) (review) prime lens will typically be significantly sharper then a typical low cost 28-90mm zoom at its 50mm setting. However expensive zooms such a Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM, (compare prices) (review) may often come close to the quality of individual primes – but at a cost of over $1000.

Advantages of Zooms Lenses

  • Versatility. It’s much easier and faster to change focal length with a zoom lens then it is to remove a prime lens and replace it with a prime lens of a different focal length.
  • Along with versatility, not having to change lenses means that there is less change of dust getting into the camera and landing on the sensor.
  • Cost. Although a high quality, fast zoom may be expensive, it’s still probably cheaper than a selection of prime lenses which cover the same range.
  • Size – Although a prime may be smaller than a high quality zoom covering the same focal length, the zoom is probably smaller (and lighter) than a set of primes which cover the range of the zoom.

Most photographers chose zooms except when they need an ultra fast lens. While the fastest zooms are f/2.8, primes can be as fast as f/1.2 and many are f/1.4 or f/2. The lower distortion of primes can be an advantage for architectural photography where you need straight lines to be straight, though in today’s digital world, distortion can often be corrected in Photoshop.

Fast vs. Slow

The maximum aperture of most lenses falls somewhere in the range between f/1.2 and f/5.6, though there are a few 3rd party zooms which have a maximum aperture of f/6.3 at the long end of their range.

Fast lenses are larger, heavier and more expensive then their slower counterparts, so that a Canon EF 400mm f/5.6L USM, (compare prices) is 10” long and weighs 2.8 lbs, while a Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM, (compare prices) is 14” long and weighs 11.7 lbs. In this case both lenses are very sharp, so the extra two stops of lens speed cost you around $5600 and mean you have to carry around and extra 9 lbs in weight!

At the other end of the lens range, consider the price difference beteeen a Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 L USM, (compare prices) (review), a Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM, (compare prices) (review) and a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II, (compare prices) (review). When stopped down to maybe f/4 or f/5.6 there won’t be a whole lot of difference in optical performance. There may be some, but the f/1.2 lens won’t be 14x sharper, even though it costs 14x as much. The main advantage of the f/1.2 lens is that it can be used at f/1.2. Pretty much the same goes for the f/1.4. Now in this particular case, the f/1.2 lens is better built and has Canon’s ring USM focusing system, the f/1.4 uses a mico USM motor and the f/1.8 is all plastic (including the mount) and uses a regular (AFD) focusing motor.

Should you buy a fast lens or a slow lens? I’d say that a fast lens only makes real sense if you intend to shoot it wide open. If you’re going to be shooting at f/8, you’ll be paying a lot more for capabilities you never use. The fast lens might be a little sharper even stopped down, but the difference may not be enough to justify the additional cost.

So if you intend to shoot landscape with a 24mm lens, you’ll probably be shooting stopped down to around f/8 in order to get good depth of field, so you might be just as well off with the Canon EF 24mm f/2.8, (compare prices) as with the more expensive Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L II USM, (compare prices) (review). On the other hand, if you’re doing a lot of work shooting in confined dark places, like night clubs, you might want to chose the 24/1.4L over the 24/2.8 because it’s a full two stops faster.


Original text ©2009 Bob Atkins. Photos © Bob Atkins.

Article revised August 2010.

Readers' Comments


Add a comment



SUGAUTAM SAMADDAR , May 20, 2009; 02:34 A.M.

Mr. Bob, Many thanks for an excellent article. This is very helpful.Can I also have your views on CANON EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM for wildlife and bird photography in this regard.

Donna Bolstorff , January 23, 2010; 11:18 A.M.


A Deer Friend

Thank you, Bob for an excellent article. I am first of all a new subscriber to photo.net and a beginner with a Canon EOS 500D Rebel T1i with a EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and a 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS.

Someone told my husband (who gave me the camera as a gift) that I should purchase a 'doubler' to place on the end of the 18-55mm to make close-ups of flowers and wildlife better quality. What is a 'doubler' and do you agree with this piece of advice?

Andrew Graham , February 08, 2010; 05:56 P.M.

if i can add one other point to consider when it comes to the price of lens's.. if you buy a cheap (say $200) lens as opposed to the higher priced/quality lens with equivalent focal length. Ask yourself, is it worth insuring this cheaper lens after paying the excess in the event of theft etc? Also in the event you had to sell your equipment.. a more expensive lens will retain more resale value (i think).

David Rader II , August 11, 2010; 10:10 P.M.

Are any of the lenses in your table most suited recommend for macro photography? For taking pictures of bugs, plants, jewlery and other small things? Thank you!

iwan pribadi , October 07, 2010; 09:45 A.M.


hello there...

Thanks for the article, really great and useful.

 

regards,

pri

Giancarlo Cipolla , March 15, 2011; 06:24 A.M.

Very well presented and very usefull to keep for future referenses.

Thank you

Lars A Grønningsæter , February 16, 2012; 05:11 P.M.


D3 24-120 at 120mm

I am campaining the normal to short telephoto in the 70-135mm range as  ideal for landscape work.

 I consider the 50mm to be a moderate wideangle .  

Wide and ultra wideangles are best for closer  scenes in my opinion or for the extreme near-far effect. 

 An ideal lens for moderate distance landscape and general work would be the 210mm in the 4x5in format which translates into a 63mm in 35mm format.

But of course, all rules must be broken. 

 


Add a comment



Notify me of comments