# If you could only have 3 lenses...



## Defy (Feb 4, 2009)

What would be your top three lenses?  Since i only have a D60 here are my three i want!  

-*[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-50mm-1-4G/dp/B001GCVA0U/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I2WVHJ9J6QJT2K&colid=3O2LPMQ3NFDNT"]Nikon 2180 AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G[/ame]
-**[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-12-24mm-Autofocus-Nikkor-Zoom/dp/B000092M1T/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I39JZ9L89IU90D&colid=3O2LPMQ3NFDNT"]Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED IF Autofocus DX Nikkor Zoom Lens[/ame]
-**[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-70-200mm-Nikkor-Digital-Cameras/dp/B00009MDBQ/ref=wl_it_dp?ie=UTF8&coliid=I15HD12GSSPGJ2&colid=3O2LPMQ3NFDNT"]Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras[/ame]

Right now i am saving up to get the 50mm (it's like 600).  Any better suggestions?  Will this be enough for most things?  I mostly shoot outdoors nature/wildlife (really my dogs outside), and if i ever win some money or something i will look at a 400mm but for now i think the fast 200 will work!  
*


----------



## Josh66 (Feb 4, 2009)

Only picking from lenses that I currently own:

50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.8
70-200 f/4L

(Canon)



$600 for a 50mm?  Sounds high.  The 1.4 is $300ish (?), the 1.8 is like $80 (canon)...


----------



## Crazydad (Feb 4, 2009)

Nikkor 24-70mm 2.8
Nikkor 70-200mm VR 2.8
Nikkor 300mm VR 2.8

That covers me from 24-300. Now where did I put that $8000....


----------



## Montana (Feb 4, 2009)

Canon:

24-70 f/2.8
70-200 f/2.8 IS
600 f/4 IS


----------



## Jaszek (Feb 4, 2009)

From what I own
Canon
70-200 f/2.8 IS
50mm f/ 1.8
Sigma 10-20mm f/ 4-5.6


----------



## Don Kondra (Feb 4, 2009)




----------



## Ls3D (Feb 5, 2009)

All I need is a nifty fifty and a set of truck balls!  :thumbup:

-Shea


----------



## potownrob (Feb 5, 2009)

Defy said:


> What would be your top three lenses? Since i only have a D60 here are my three i want!
> 
> -*Nikon 2180 AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G*
> *-**Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED IF Autofocus DX Nikkor Zoom Lens*
> ...


I wouldn't spend that much on a 50mm prime, even if I made my money shooting portraits. Either put up with manually focusing the older 50mm f/1.8 AF-D (or even the one without the D at the end) or upgrade your camera to one that will AF with the 50mm f/1.8 AF-D, such as the Nikon D80 which can be had for well under 500 USD. I personally think the 50mm is a little limited on a crop sensor, so I would see how much you use your kit lens at around 50mm before spending more than $120 on a 50mm prime. I assume you already have the 18-55 VR kit lens. If you want to shoot wildlife, I would think you'll want the 70-200 before the 50mm lens or the ultra wide angle lens. Your kit lens should be wide enough for most landscape photography and it has decent optics, especially for a kit lens. For outdoor shooting in decent light, something like the 55-200 VR should be good, at least to start with. A bit slow but the VR works alright, the AF is pretty good (in my opinion at least) and it's a nice sharp lens. Well, that's just my 2 cents based on my limited experience. Kit lens and 55-200 VR (which can be had for under 200 bucks) should keep you busy for a while.  If you want to start with faster lenses like the 70-200 f/2.8 VR, I'd recommend looking at similar lenses from Tamron, Sigma and Tokina.  Make sure they have the AF motor for the D60 though (unless you upgrade to the D80 or another camera that will AF lenses without the AF motor).


----------



## Dubious Drewski (Feb 5, 2009)

Well, from the lenses I own:
Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6
Asahi 50mm f1.4 (Manual focus)
DA* 50-135 f2.8

But If I could have dream versions of these lenses then the list would change like so:
Sigma 10-20 f2.8 (And 20mm would be actually usable!)
Asahi 50mm f1.2 (Tack sharp at 1.2 and autofocus!)
DA* 50-200 f2.8 (But at the same tiny size of the 50-135)


----------



## JustAnEngineer (Feb 5, 2009)

Hmmm.  With the AF-S crop body:
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM (owned)
EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM (owned)
EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM (to replace my EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM)

P.S.:
On the Nikon front, your 50mm f/1.4G should be about $500 from a good e-tailer, when it is in stock.  The 50mm f/1.4D is around $300.


----------



## gsgary (Feb 5, 2009)

From my collection 

300mmF2.8L
200mmF2.8L
50mmF1.4
but would like the 85mmF1.2


----------



## Phranquey (Feb 5, 2009)

I have 

28-70mm f/2.8 
105mm f/2.8
70-200mm f/2.8
500mm f/4

Asking me to give one of these up would be very painful.


----------



## Trenton Romulox (Feb 5, 2009)

Hmm, only have three lenses? I would probably opt for: 
-Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G (own)
-Nikon 60mm f/2.8G AF-S Micro (own)
-Nikon 200-400mm f/4G AF-S VR (own)

So I guess I'm all set. 

Although, I would like a 600mm f/4. :]


----------



## LWW (Feb 5, 2009)

*If money doesn't matter:*

12-24 F4.0 Nikkor AF

50 F1.4 Nikkor AF

80(Or70)-200 F2.8 Nikkor AF



*On a budget:*

18-35 Nikkor F3.5-F4.5 AF

50 F1.8 Nikkor AF

70-210 F4.0 Nikkor AF

LWW


----------



## Overread (Feb 5, 2009)

I only have 3 lenses!

however were you to force me to only have 3 lenses - of any type - gah how limiting but it would probably be:

Canon 300mm f2.8 L
Sigma 150mm macro
some wideangle lens - if I were on crop sensor a 10-20mm if not then something more suitable.

That backed up with a full set of teleconverters should see me mostly happy - but still so much range missing


----------



## Battou (Feb 5, 2009)

Oh...only three of the lenses I own......Tough one

Canon FD 50mm 1.4
Canon FD 85 mm 1.8
Vivitar 400mm 5.6 (C/FD)

Three lenses if I had a choice of any lenses

Canon FD 50mm 1.4
Canon FD 85 mm 1.8
Canon FD 400mm 2.8L


----------



## anubis404 (Feb 5, 2009)

Defy said:


> What would be your top three lenses?  Since i only have a D60 here are my three i want!
> 
> -*Nikon 2180 AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G
> -**Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED IF Autofocus DX Nikkor Zoom Lens
> ...



You know it would be cheaper to upgrade to a D70s and buy the 50mm 1.4 AF-D right?

My three lenses:

Tokina 12-24 2.8
Nikon 24-70 2.8
Nikon 80-200 AF-S 2.8

I own a Sigma 18-50, which cuts into bot the Tokina and the Nikon. I've saved up almost enough money for the 80-200.


----------



## Village Idiot (Feb 5, 2009)

Canon makes it easy.

16-35 f/2.8L
24-70 f/2.8L
70-200 f/2.8L IS


----------



## Samriel (Feb 5, 2009)

anubis404 said:


> Tokina 12-24 2.8



I wonder which one of the following you actually meant:


Tokina 11-16mm f2.8
Tokina 12-24mm f4
Nikkor 14-24mm f2.8



anubis404 said:


> Nikon 80-200 AF-S 2.8



I think you meant either:


Nikon 70-200 AF-S 2.8, or
Nikon 80-200 AF 2.8
And yes, I have nothing better to do than to correct completely irrelevant typos...


----------



## anubis404 (Feb 5, 2009)

Samriel said:


> I wonder which one of the following you actually meant:
> 
> 
> Tokina 11-16mm f2.8
> ...




Ah, my bad. I was going to type the Tokina 11-16, but decided I like the 12-24 better and forgot to change the 2.8. I meant the 12-24 F4.




> I think you meant either:
> 
> 
> Nikon 70-200 AF-S 2.8, or
> ...



Nope, here I was right. The Nikon 80-200 F2.8 AF-S is a great lens, and I'd love to have one.


----------



## dhilberg (Feb 5, 2009)

For Nikon DX:

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 AF-D
Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR AF-S

If I had an FX body I'd want the Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8 AF-S instead of the Tokina.

Of those, I only own the 50mm, lol. I plan on getting the 70-200mm soon. My 18-200 just isn't cutting it for speed and sharpness. Great walk around lens though.


----------



## JerryPH (Feb 5, 2009)

Nikkor 14-24
Nikkor 24-70
Nikkor 70-200

I have the 2 out of the 3 already, but that doesn't mean that other lenses aren't any good.  The Nikkor 85mm F/1.4 is precious to me.


----------



## SrBiscuit (Feb 5, 2009)

i dont know specifics, but i know the ranges i guess i would want

10-20 (sigma?)
18-200 VR
and then something longer...Nikkor 200-400?


----------



## shivaswrath (Feb 5, 2009)

$600 from where??

I paid $394 for mine, pre-ordered on J&R.

I'd wait for that price to come down. . .

I'm thinking 14-24 NIKKOR and 85 1.8 to complete my collection of the "pantultimate" collection

BTW, amazon is dicey about prices, sometimes they are great, sometimes a rip - check out ritz, pre-order for $484 http://www.ritzcamera.com/product/541533303.htm

Glad I got mine when I did. . .seems like I could turn my 50 1.4G around for double what I paid?!



Defy said:


> What would be your top three lenses?  Since i only have a D60 here are my three i want!
> 
> -*Nikon 2180 AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G
> -**Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED IF Autofocus DX Nikkor Zoom Lens
> ...


----------



## dxqcanada (Feb 5, 2009)

Three fixed focal length lenses:

very wide angle - 14mm f/2.8
medium macro - 50 f/2.8
fast telephoto - 300mm f/4 or f/2.8


----------



## notelliot (Feb 5, 2009)

ha, I only have three lenses.. 
17-55/2.8
50/1.4
35/2

but if I shot FX..
17-35/2.8
28/1.4
85/1.4


----------



## bhop (Feb 5, 2009)

This should cover it... for my Nikons anyway..

Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
Nikkor 17-55 AF-S f/2.8
Nikkor 70-200 AF-S f/2.8 VR


----------



## Steph (Feb 6, 2009)

Schneider 72/5.6 Super Angulon XL
Schneider 90/5.6 Super Angulon XL
Schneider 150/5.6 Super Symmar XL

And maybe an Ebony camera to go with them...


----------



## JerryPH (Feb 6, 2009)

O|||||||O said:


> $600 for a 50mm?  Sounds high.  The 1.4 is $300ish (?)



Actually the new Nikkor 50mm F/1.4G is available for well under $550, and you cannot compare apples to oranges.  The 50mm F/1.4D is also in the $350 range and doesn't do as well as the F/1.4G in many respects.

- nano coating for reduced lens flare
- faster focus
- more reliable focus in lower light
- lightly sharper
- lightly better bokeh

For most "serious" enthusiasts, this is more than enough to warrant the extra couple hundred bucks.  Me, if I tripped over a nice used copy of the "D" version for a good price, I would snap it up.


----------



## smyth (Feb 6, 2009)

Nikkor 12-24
Nikkor 24-70
Nikkor 70-200

Of course, I don't have that kind of money! lol I might be willing to sacrifice the 12-24 for my 50mm f1.8 AF-D


----------



## sabbath999 (Feb 6, 2009)

Crazydad said:


> Nikkor 24-70mm 2.8
> Nikkor 70-200mm VR 2.8
> Nikkor 300mm VR 2.8



+1

I actually own two of the three


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Feb 6, 2009)

Village Idiot said:


> Canon makes it easy.
> 
> 16-35 f/2.8L
> 24-70 f/2.8L
> 70-200 f/2.8L IS



What he said...

...and if the Hong Kong trip comes off, I'll have them, plus the 5D MkII :mrgreen:

I already have the 50mm f1.4


----------



## TUX424 (Feb 6, 2009)

I want:
Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
Nikon AF-S 24-70 f/2.8
Nikon AF-S 70-200 f/2.8 VR


----------



## invisible (Feb 7, 2009)

TUX424 said:


> I want:
> Tokina 11-16 f/2.8
> Nikon AF-S 24-70 f/2.8
> Nikon AF-S 70-200 f/2.8 VR


That would be my list too.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 7, 2009)

For DX:
Sigma 10-20, I can't stand how plastic the Nikon 12-24 is, and the 10-20 is wider. 

Nikon 17-55 f/2.8

Nikon's 70-200VR


For FX:

Sigma 12-24, because when I want to go wider then 24mm, it's because I want things to look jacked.

24-70 f/2.8 (because limited to 3, i chose this instead of primes in the range)

Nikon's 80-200 AF-D, because yes it really is that much better on full frame, not to mention is ergonomically superior to the 70-200VR.


----------



## Prophet (Feb 7, 2009)

Canon does make it easy.

Canon | Telephoto EF 200mm f/2L IS USM Autofocus Lens | 2297B002

Canon | Telephoto EF 400mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer | 2533A002

Canon | Zoom Wide Angle-Telephoto EF 24-70mm f/2.8L | 8014A002

And I would throw in this, because its not a lens:

Canon | 1.4x EF Extender II | 6845A004AA | B&H Photo Video

Nothing like spending the equivilent of the MSRP for a small car on glass....

Honorable mention:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/112539-USA/Canon_2520A004_Telephoto_EF_135mm_f_2_0L.html

-JD-


----------



## Samriel (Feb 7, 2009)

anubis404 said:


> Nope, here I was right. The Nikon 80-200 F2.8 AF-S is a great lens, and I'd love to have one.



Hmm, interesting lens - didn't see that one yet. Is Nikon still making this? How much can it be found for used? I really don't like that they're removing the aperture rings from the newer lenses, and a 80-200mm AF-S sounds interesting.

If I would be getting three additional lenses, I'd get the following:


Nikkor AF 80-200mm f2.8
Nikkor AF 35mm f2
Nikkor AF 85mm f1.4
If it would be ONLY three lenses to have, I'd get the following:


Nikkor AF-S 105mm f2.8 Micro
Nikkor AF 80-200mm f2.8
Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f2.8
However, if I'd have more choices, I'd prefer only primes, except for the long end (80-200mm).


----------



## dhilberg (Feb 7, 2009)

Samriel said:
			
		

> Hmm, interesting lens - didn't see that one yet. Is Nikon still making this? How much can it be found for used? I really don't like that they're removing the aperture rings from the newer lenses, and a 80-200mm AF-S sounds interesting.



Nikon no longer produces the 80-200mm AF-S lens. It was replaced by the 70-200mm AF-S VR lens. They do still make an 80-200mm AF-D lens. You might be able to find the AF-S version on ebay. A quick check reveals quite a few. I actually just watched one sell for $605 USD.


----------



## TUX424 (Feb 7, 2009)

Sw1tchFX said:


> For DX:
> Sigma 10-20, I can't stand how plastic the Nikon 12-24 is, and the 10-20 is wider.
> 
> Nikon 17-55 f/2.8
> ...


I dont think that you would be able to use that full range of FX or the Sigma 12-24


----------



## Ejazzle (Feb 7, 2009)

Out of what i own i would go with: 
Sigma 10-20 
Tamron 28-75
Nikkor 80-200 AF-s


----------



## Iron Flatline (Feb 7, 2009)

24mm f/1.4

50mm f/1.2

85mm f/1.2


----------



## usayit (Feb 7, 2009)

Hmm... hard call.  It would probably be what is currently in my bag.

Voigtlander 12mm Heliar
Leica 35mm Summarit
Leica 75mm Summarit

Easy to focus, easy to pack, loads of fun.


----------



## Patrice (Feb 8, 2009)

I use DX bodies

My best 3 primes: 
Nikkor 20mm f2.8 AFD
Nikkor 50mm f1.8 AFD
Nikkor 85mm f1.4 AFD

My 3 best zooms:
Nikkor 17-55 f2.8 AFS
Nikkor 35-70 f2.8 AFD
Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 AFS

It's all good


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Feb 8, 2009)

TUX424 said:


> I dont think that you would be able to use that full range of FX or the Sigma 12-24



Yes you can, it's a DG lens, not a DC lens, we have one in our storeon display, and have used on a D700, it's WILD. 


Look up reviews for it, it's designed for film.


----------



## Defy (Feb 8, 2009)

Thanks for all the help!


----------



## Frequent Traveler (Feb 8, 2009)

Digital or Film? :mrgreen:

From my digital kit (Minolta Dynax 7D) selection is a no-brainer:
Minolta Maxxum 24mm f2.8
Minolta Maxxum 28-135mm f4-4.5
Minolta Maxxum 70-210mm f4 "Beercan"


----------



## Layton (Feb 11, 2009)

Easy.

16-35mm f2.8
50mm f1.2
70-200mm f2.8


----------



## robbie_vlad (Feb 12, 2009)

My dream Trio:

16-35mm f/2.8*L*
24-70mm f/2.8*L*
70-200mm f/2.8*L*


----------



## bigtwinky (Feb 12, 2009)

If I had to keep my current camera (XSI)

10-22mm f3.5-4.5
50mm f1.2
70-200mm f2.8

If I could upgrade to a full frame:

16-35mm f2.8
50mm f1.2
70-200mm f2.8 

I was going to say a 24-70mm f2.8, but I don't seem to shoot much in the 35-70 zone that I can't do with a 50 and moving my feet.  

Hard choice though


----------



## Santa Gertrudis (Apr 24, 2010)

Easy. For DX anyway...

Nikon 12-24 f/4
Nikon 17-55 f/2.8
Nikon 70-200 f/2.8

EDIT: I was searching for something and came across this. Didn't realize it was so old.


----------



## inTempus (Apr 24, 2010)

If I could only have 3, it would be the most practical lenses in my collection that give me the most versatility.

17-40L
24-70L
70-200L

I would like to say one of my primes, but I can make due without the super shallow DoF and super low light performance.


----------



## TomBlaze (Apr 24, 2010)

Below are the lenses I want to have when I get my 5D MK2

Canon | 24-105mm f/4L IS USM AF Lens | 0344B002AA | B&H Photo

This one is going to be my all-around lens. Focal range is a nice sweetspot. I am buying this in a few weeks but will have to settle using it with my rebel until I raise the money for my 5D.

Canon | Super Wide Angle EF 14mm f/2.8L II USM | 2045B002 | B&H

For when I want nice, wide open landscapes and architectural shots. I like landscapes a lot so This will see a lot of use. I just wish the filter size matched up the the 24-105mm. Two sets of ND filters can get expensive.

Canon | Telephoto EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Autofocus | 2529A004AA

For when I need a little distance. I would prefer the 300mm but it gets expensive exponentially after that. 200mm still provides a nice range.


----------



## Hooligan Dan (Apr 24, 2010)

Easy choice. 

Nikon 17-35 2.8
Nikon 70-200 2.8
Nikon 300 2.8


----------



## bigboi3 (Aug 26, 2010)

out from the graves.. haha.


Nikkor 24mm 1.4G
Nikkor 50mm 1.4G
Nikkor 85mm 1.4G


----------



## pbelarge (Aug 26, 2010)

I have the 7D
10-22 - I like the wide angle below 16
24-70- I love the lens
70-200 - with at least the 1.4 extender


But....
I will not stop with the lenses I already have. I plan on dispatching of my 70-300 and purchasing a couple of fast primes.
I am going to get the 70-200-2/8
and I also think I am going to purchase one of the TS-E lenses. 

I have my eye on the  5D mII either later this fall or early in '11.


----------



## cfusionpm (Aug 26, 2010)

On my crop body, I've already got my ideal 3 lenses:

10-22
17-55 2.8 IS
70-200 2.8 IS II


----------



## Derrel (Aug 26, 2010)

Nikon 14-24 AF-S
Nikon 24-70 AF-S
Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR-II

Those three would be a good basis for a career in photography.


----------



## sovietdoc (Aug 26, 2010)

8-15 f/4 L
24-70 f/2.8 L
70-300 f/4-5.6 L

maybe 24-105 L with 100-400 L at the tele end..


----------



## magkelly (Aug 26, 2010)

Make mine all Takumars, 50MM, 105MM, 200MM.


----------



## Idahophoto (Aug 26, 2010)

Tough call. I have thought about this alot and I think it would be

1)Canon 24-70/2.8L
2)Canon 70-200/2.8L IS II
3)Canon 100/2.8L IS

Right now I would probably swap out the Macro for a super wide> Tokina 12-24/4 or maybe the Canon 8-15 when it comes out (Should be one sweet ass lens)


----------



## Travis F (Aug 26, 2010)

Well, I think I would pretty much cover my _needs_ with what I have already.

Sigma 24-70 f/2.8
Canon 70-200 f/2.8
Sigma 120-300 f/2.8

If I could keep one more it would be my 100 f/2

This says nothing about my _wants_ though LOL!

Travis


----------



## kundalini (Aug 26, 2010)

Derrel said:


> Nikon 14-24 AF-S
> Nikon 24-70 AF-S
> Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR-II
> 
> Those three would be a good basis for a career in photography.


^^^ What he said.....





 




​


----------



## DiegoV (Aug 27, 2010)

I'd probably pick something like:
Canon 35mm f/1.4
Canon 85mm f/1.2
Canon 135mm f/2

And yep, that'd make me happy


----------



## den9 (Aug 30, 2010)

16-35 f/2.8
85 f/1.2
70-200 f/2.8 vr

or a 300mm f/2.8, but i cant afford that


----------



## greybeard (Dec 15, 2016)

On DX I carry a Tokina 12-24, a Nikon 16-85 and a Nikon 70-300.    I'm in the process of adding FX (D750) to my gear.  It comes with a 24-120 f4, I already have a 50mm 1.8  and I am currently bidding on an old Nikkor 35-70 2.8.   The 1st Zoom lens I ever bought was a Vivitar 35-70 2.8-4 that I used back in my film days on an Min SRT 201.  I actually love that focal range, kinda like a 50mm with legs.  So,  I don't really know yet what 3 lenses I will carry with FX but I am certain the 70-300 will be part of it.  I may end up carrying the 24-120, 35-70, and 70-300 or the Tokina 12-24 using it at 16-24, the 35-70 and the 70-300.


----------



## fmw (Dec 15, 2016)

From my own lenses I would choose the 12-24mm f4 zoom, the 17-55 f2.8 and the 80-200 f2.8.  The fourth lens would the 60mm micro Nikkor and the fifth would be the 10.2mm fisheye.  After that I would add in my prime lenses.  Except for my studio shooting the three would represent more than 90% of my exposures.  I tend to use the micro Nikkor a lot in the studio.


----------



## Peeb (Dec 15, 2016)

An ancient, but fun thread!

24-70 choice seems to have staying power...


----------



## Didereaux (Dec 16, 2016)

24-105, 70-200, 150-600  Canon Canon Sigma


----------



## Peeb (Dec 16, 2016)

I shoot FX, so don't apply nikon 1.5 crop factor to this analysis:

From what I NOW own, the top 3 would be:
1.  Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 (yeah, a DX lens, but works great at 16mm on FX)
2. Nikon 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 (the 2006 model- no VR)
3, Nikon 70-300 (not a fast lens, but very portable)

There's some gap and overlap in the coverage, but it's what's here right now.  

Current lineup lacks wider apertures beyond wide angle (_regrettable)_ and lacks primes (_regrettable- but you only get 3 lenses_).  The absence of a portrait lens stinks.  Reach over 300mm for wildlife (_especially birding_) is missing. A vacation do-it-all superzoom is missing (_28-300 would be fun_).

As far as a dream team, I thought I was tempted to go with something similar to what @Didereaux had suggested, but after recently renting the Sigma 150-600 I wonder if there's something smaller/lighter with that much reach (haven't really found it).  So I'll go with his suggestion, replacing 'canon' with 'nikon'.


----------



## astroNikon (Dec 16, 2016)

I use 4 lenses constantly
18-35
24-85
80-200
150-600

can't do without any of those.


----------



## Didereaux (Dec 16, 2016)

Peeb said:


> I shoot FX, so don't apply nikon 1.5 crop factor to this analysis:
> 
> From what I NOW own, the top 3 would be:
> 1.  Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 (yeah, a DX lens, but works great at 16mm on FX)
> ...



Nothing out there that competes with the Sigma and Tamron 150-600's   they own that niche at the moment.


----------



## chuasam (Dec 17, 2016)

Crazydad said:


> Nikkor 24-70mm 2.8
> Nikkor 70-200mm VR 2.8
> Nikkor 300mm VR 2.8
> 
> That covers me from 24-300. Now where did I put that $8000....


closer to $11k if you're using the 70-200 VR III and 27-70 VR


----------



## chuasam (Dec 17, 2016)

Really depends on what I am doing.
If I had to really pare down to 3:
24-70 f/2.8
70-200 f/2.8
105mm macro


----------

