Thanks Smeg.

If you read the reviews you might think that the 16-50 is "unusable" wide open at 16mm. I shot this just messing about. I'm not saying it shows off what the lens is capable of, or that this picture is going win any awards. Obviously most of the picture is deliberately out of focus, but I kind of like the toy lens, tilt shift feel it's created.

DA* 16-50mm, 16mm, f2.8, ISO1600



Who would shoot a landscape, wide-open, handheld at ISO1600? Sometimes I think there are too many "rules" of photography....

I wouldn't think you'd need to have them all. Obviously it depends on your shooting style:

*55

Suprised noboby wants this one! I very much like this lens and find it a good companion to a wide prime (or the GR)

1) 16-50, 50-135 and 300, or
2) 16-50, 60-250

I don't think you need both the 300 and 60-250. The 50-135 is the perfect companion to the 16-50. They make a nice travel set.

The 16-50 is much maligned, but I find it superb. The rendering is particularly good. I don't feel I'm compromising anything on IQ if I use it in preference to a prime. It is quite expensive and I think people expect it to be perfect for the money. But like (m)any lenses it is weaker at the extremes. The 18-135 can give it a good run for the money at wider angles and f5.6-f8, but I find the 16-50 is better over a wider range.

They're all nice. But number 2 is absolutely stunning. Keep up the good work.

A couple of reasons in my view. A lot of people are influenced by the style of old New York or Parisian street photography, or indeed photojournalism. Vivian Maier shot black and white because that was what was readily available. Later on she increasingly shot colour.

Aesthetically colour can be a distraction unless it is considered in the composition. Steve Mccurry is a master at using colour in street style photography, but it can be hard when you are doing this on the fly with little control. Black and white allows you to focus on the light, shapes and subject and removes an additional variable that you have to control.

Of course much as there is a lot of poor street photography on the internet, there are also those that think b&w looks arty and will make a bad image good...

Here's one interpretation, from a photographer I like: http://blog.mingthein.com/2012/11/02/what-is-street-photography/

Personally, I think unless you are trying to emulate a particular style the genre is quite open.

Thanks for the feedback Jim. I was quite interested in this lens when it came out and using it in a kit with the 15mm and 70mm or even the 100mm macro is exactly how I envisaged it. I sort of see the 20-40 as "a zoom lens for prime shooters". As it happens though I bought a GR, so probably won't get this lens for the foreseeable future, but it's still good to hear how it performs in real life.

Thanks everyone. I liked the fact that number 3 had contrasting colours, the arch and, oh... and a castle, but sometimes it can be too easy to overlook the obvious stuff. I appreciate the feedback, thanks

The sigma 30/1.4 looks like a very useful lens. I'd be interested to see how it stacks up against an FA31. I'm also wondering if the extra speed of the sigma makes any real world difference?

I have also have a DA21. PM sent.