I think with the improvements in higher ISO/lower noise sensors, the need for a faster lens for it's light-gathering capabilities has been lessened. i recently shot some night scenes with the K1 at ISO 3200 enabling me to use f5.6 and keep a hand-holding shutter speed. i would not have been able to do that with my old K10, and opening up a lens to 2.8 or faster in the circumstance I was shooting in would have been hopeless, it would not give me the DOF I needed.

Having said that, there are many times we want the minimum DOF for artistic reasons and fo that i can always see the faster lenses being desired. I do take Nigel's point that in the 15-30 FL range the difference could well be marginal.

I don't do astro-photography (yet !) but understand that the fastest lenses are an advantage.

Yep, number 2 for me too.

i like the woodpeckers, see them often in the garden. Lovely shots.

Number 5 for me please, closely followed by 9.

Lunchtime at the Sage for me, lovely image

Nice selection. I like number 9 and 7, but the stand out one for me is the first. Critically focused and super DOF

Thanks Nigel , i will look that up for sure.

Lovely set

I don't post this picture as an example of an architectural photograph. I had to use a slow shutter speed/high ISO holding the camera above the heads of the crowd. I used the full sliders to create a shift lens effect during PP (it still was not enough). I post it simply as an example of what the clever people who present Lumiere 2018 are capable of. It was a glorious sight.

I think the main problem with older linear polarisers is that they may prevent the AF from working correctly. With a Takumar lens that wont be an issue.