Do you REALLY need more lenses?!

ok, I know we all suffer from LBA.

But that aside, is there REALLY any need these days for more than one lens of the same focal length?

I currently have:
sigma 8-10mm
Pentax 16-45mm
Tamron 70-300mm macro
Sigma 70mm macro
Sigma 120-400mm

At the moment I'm on the point of getting a sigma 18-250 which, with its close focusing MIGHT mean I could get rid of the 16-45 and the 70-300mm. But I think before I do I'll take some comparison pics just to see if there is any NOTICEABLE difference - I don't mean pixel peeping but real-world viewing.

I know there's the question of aperture.. but with the K5's high ISO handling this is much less of a problem than it used to be.

Has anyone else shrunk their lens collection in a similar way - or do I really need to get a prime lens to see why people say they're so much better??

Martyn

I can see the logic in replacing a number of slow zooms with one slow zoom, but there'll always be a place for primes and fast zooms. I know you don't necessarily need fast lenses because of better iso performance, but what about the creative use of dof? If you always shoot at small apertures you almost might as well stick to a compact camera imho.

No fisheye

Davex.

It depends on what you want/need to do.

For example, you don't have a macro lens, a fast prime lens or indeed the mentioned fisheye. Do you need these?

The trouble is, maybe we but the first prime, think it's amazing and then buying more primes follows. The there's the constant decision making - which lenses do I take with me? Zoom convenience of prime quality? But the differences can be subtle....

And so we tie ourselves in knots and buy yet more lenses. All this is very good for manfacturers of lenses.

At the moment I've caught the bug for buying old primes, particularly telephotos. I find that in general they render images in a warmer / more flattering way than my DA L 55-300, especially for bird photos which is what I'm currently trying to master. At present, I would not want to ditch any of my lenses, even though many of them overlap. I'll just have to get a bigger kit bag!

Regards
David

In the 2 years I have been involved in photography I have bought, kept, and sold dozens of different lenses. Am not sure there is a definitive list or set up, as ones interest and experience evolved so does ones kit list.
Get a used fisheye or macro or whatever, if it does not "fit in" the sell it on, losses are usually minimal.

Davex.

Need, no.

Want, yes.

The reality lies somewhere in between!

Could do with a 100mm macro.

Personally I wouldn't replace my Tamron 17-50 and DA 55-300 with a Sigma (or any other) 18-250. Useful as it is not to have to change lenses quite so much, I like a lens which is sharp enough that you can still get a decently sharp image after a reasonable (though not extreme) amount of cropping. From what I've seen I don't think any of the 18-250 options qualify on this score. With a lens that goes to 250 rather than 300 if anything more cropping would be needed, and the problem is made greater by the fact that (according to reviews) the Sigma 18-250 performs at it's weakest at the 250 end. It also seems more prone to CAs (again, especially at 250).

To me, these things make a difference in 'real-world' viewing. I'd rather change lenses and 'get it right' than end up with unusable images.

Hi Martyn, A very genuine and sensible question. I have a pentax 18-55, 28-105 and a sigma 28-300. I have not tried a prime. I find my collection quite sufficient. Maybe i don't get the prime quality but i am happy and above all its very very convenient/comfortable. Tamron/Pentax 18-250, i understand is better than sigma....regards, jeeess

Most of my walkabout photography is done with the DA*16-50mm or the DA*60-250mm. Macro is handled by the FA & D-FA 100m and Sigma 180mm macro lenses.

When I want to challenge myself, I'll pick one prime from my arsenal and go out and see what I can find.

I'll not be selling any of the others that only get occasional use for a while yet though, whether I 'need' them, or not.

I do tend to have two lenses covering most ranges. One is a cheap and plentiful type for situations where I'd be worried about it getting damaged, the other is usually slightly rarer and slightly nicer for safer scenarios.

Need don't enter into it.
You don't need to look at a lovely lady in the street, but you want to.

Mmmm, the wife usually makes sure that doesn't happen as well

Your kit seems to have good coverage, but your missing a big Pentax plus - going on to ebay and picking up something like a cheap A50 1.7.... you've got to, you've just got to

My wife always tells me that if I don't look at other women anymore, I just as well can be dead. An I listen to her