# You can have one body and two lenses



## jaomul (Oct 11, 2017)

..... What are they? And why this choice?

Just a bit of a not to serious thread..


----------



## zombiesniper (Oct 11, 2017)

As of right now.

7D MKII
Canon 500mm F4
Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS L II

I shoot mainly wildlife so I use the 500mm 98% of the time and when it's not on the camera my 70-200 F4 is.
The only thing I'd change is the speed of my 70-200......that is until the 7D MKIII comes out.


----------



## JonA_CT (Oct 11, 2017)

Nice thread.

If I stuck with a full frame camera, I guess it'd have to be the D850, the 105 F1.4, and the 20 F1.8. Note, I don't have any of those items currently, haha. 

I'd get a lot of mileage out of that...but I think I'd also seriously consider a smaller body camera with the equivalents.


----------



## limr (Oct 11, 2017)

Easy for me (and probably no surprise  )

Pentax K1000, 50mm 1.7, 28mm...can't remember the f-stop. I might want a different 28 than the one I have anyway.

Why? This combo has served me for 20+ years already. Plus, giving up the other cameras in my collection would be hard, but losing that camera would be like losing a finger or a little piece of my soul.


----------



## davidharmier60 (Oct 11, 2017)

Not possible at this time. My AE-1 has better glass. But my EOS650 has better close glass.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk


----------



## Designer (Oct 11, 2017)

That's just crazy talk.


----------



## 480sparky (Oct 11, 2017)

I'd chose a hot 24-year old chick.  With glasses.


----------



## weepete (Oct 11, 2017)

Canon 5Dmkiv, Canon 16-35mm f4 L is and a Sigma 150-600 sport.


----------



## limr (Oct 11, 2017)

480sparky said:


> I'd chose a hot 24-year old chick.  With glasses.



A camera body wouldn't get you arrested for kidnapping, though.


----------



## ronlane (Oct 11, 2017)

For me, that would be a 1Dx mk II with a 400mm f/2.8 and a 70-200mm f/2.8 II. The why would be sports and portraits, I could make that work.


----------



## snowbear (Oct 11, 2017)

Without having to lay out any cash (OP is giving me the gear): D850, AFS 24-70/2.8, AFS 200-400/4.
Picking from what I already have, I can't do it: D750, AF 24/2.8, AF 50/1.8, AIS 105/4 Micro (my F90S lens combo for a few years).


----------



## dunfly (Oct 11, 2017)

I am a committed crop sensor guy due to size and weight.  I have a Nikon D5200 now, but my dream combination would be the Nikon D500 with a Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-80mm f2.8-4E and a Nikon 18-300mm f/3.5-5.6G AF-S ED DX.  It would be significantly larger than my current setup, but still manageable.

I would go with the 24 year old chick with glasses but my wife would kill me.


----------



## snowbear (Oct 11, 2017)

480sparky said:


> I'd chose a hot 24-year old chick.  With glasses.





dunfly said:


> I would go with the 24 year old chick with glasses but my wife would kill me.


I'll stick with my xx year old chick with glasses.


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 11, 2017)

jaomul said:


> ..... What are they? And why this choice?
> 
> Just a bit of a not to serious thread..


Nikon D700
Zeiss Distagon 35mm f2 ZF
Zeiss Makro-Planar 100mm f2 ZF

Why ? Two of the best lenses mankind has ever produced, one of the best cameras mankind has ever produced. That should be enough explanation.




480sparky said:


> I'd chose a hot 24-year old chick.  With glasses.


 In that case - Michelle Trachtenberg, please.


----------



## jaomul (Oct 11, 2017)

It's a tough one but I reckon a Nikon D850 from specs with a tamron 24-70f2.8 G2 and a siggy 150-600 sports. Gives me standard and reach with lots of weather sealed pixels


----------



## SCraig (Oct 11, 2017)

Nikon D7100
Sigma 18-300
Sigma 150-500

Oh, wait.  That's already what I use most of the time


----------



## jaomul (Oct 11, 2017)

SCraig said:


> Nikon D7100
> Sigma 18-300
> Sigma 150-500
> 
> Oh, wait.  That's already what I use most of the time


Great to be happy with your existing setup


----------



## Frank F. (Oct 11, 2017)

jaomul said:


> ..... What are they? And why this choice?
> Just a bit of a not to serious thread..




I take two bodies, one lens....


----------



## jaomul (Oct 11, 2017)

Frank F. said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > ..... What are they? And why this choice?
> ...



No you don't. You can't play with us..


----------



## SCraig (Oct 11, 2017)

jaomul said:


> Great to be happy with your existing setup


It actually is great.  I honestly have no urge to get anything else.  I've got some other lenses but those are the two I use the vast majority of the time, and the body I have does what I want, so I actually am happy with it.


----------



## coastalconn (Oct 11, 2017)

I think I could get by just fine with my D500, 500 F4 and 300 F2.8...  The gas passed on the D850 when I learned how crippled the buffer is at 9 FPS..


----------



## Destin (Oct 11, 2017)

Nikon D850 for sure. 

Only two lenses? Probably a 24-70 and 70-200. 

But it’s hard because there are at least 2-3 other lenses that I would consider essential. I have expensive taste.


----------



## Destin (Oct 11, 2017)

coastalconn said:


> I think I could get by just fine with my D500, 500 F4 and 300 F2.8...  The gas passed on the D850 when I learned how crippled the buffer is at 9 FPS..



Care to elaborate? Haven’t seen this anywhere yet.


----------



## coastalconn (Oct 11, 2017)

Destin said:


> coastalconn said:
> 
> 
> > I think I could get by just fine with my D500, 500 F4 and 300 F2.8...  The gas passed on the D850 when I learned how crippled the buffer is at 9 FPS..
> ...


Apparently in 14 bit lossless, full frame, the buffer is only about 36 shots.  That wouldn't cut it for what I do and 95% of my shots are cropped from DX anyways so I wouldnt have much benefit at all from the D850...  So I picked up a super cheap, high mileage D810 with Grip and saved $2500....


----------



## davidharmier60 (Oct 11, 2017)

Should I ever get a DSLR it will most likely be a 10mp or even less. But I shall learn to love it. Lenses are another problem. 
I have a Phoenix 19-35, a Sigma 28-105 that are both clear and focus pretty fast.
And a Sigma 70-300 that has a foggy rear element and focuses slow.
I have some decent FD glass which an adapter will allow use of. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk


----------



## Derrel (Oct 11, 2017)

D3x with a 70-200 f/2.8 and a 24mm f/1.8 G series wide-angle.


----------



## DamienW (Oct 12, 2017)

Love my Pentax K5II and the 35mm DA LTD SMC and 15mm DA LTD HD I already have (the lenses I use most frequently). If we're talking what we might want...well...I'd like to bump up to the K3, or maybe full frame (K1 maybe?)...then I'd need new lenses of course...

Slippery slope.


----------



## ClickAddict (Oct 12, 2017)

I would actually stick with my current setup.
*Canon 7D MK II
Sigma* 18-35 1.8 ART | 50-100 1.8 ART


----------



## jcdeboever (Oct 12, 2017)

Pentax P30T, Tokina EL 28mm 2.8, SMC A 50mm 1.7. However, waiting to see images from my Minolta Maxxum 9, AF 50 1.7 and AF 70-210 F4 beer can, next week I think.


----------



## fmw (Oct 12, 2017)

I guess I would keep my Fuji E2 and 18-55 zoom and 14mm wide angle.


----------



## Gary A. (Oct 12, 2017)

A Hasselblad H5D 200MS $44,000.00.
Leica 1600mm f/5.6 Telephoto Lens: $2,000,000. 
Nikkor 6mm f/2.8 Fisheye Lens: $160,000.

I'd sell it all.


----------



## jcdeboever (Oct 12, 2017)

Gary A. said:


> A Hasselblad H5D 200MS $44,000.00.
> Leica 1600mm f/5.6 Telephoto Lens: $2,000,000.
> Nikkor 6mm f/2.8 Fisheye Lens: $160,000.
> 
> I'd sell it all.



You have those? Send me your address and the nearest gun store....


----------



## Gary A. (Oct 12, 2017)

The title states "You can ..." not "You have ...".


----------



## fmw (Oct 12, 2017)

$2 million for a lens.  I'll bet they don't sell many of them.


----------



## vintagesnaps (Oct 12, 2017)

How many Polaroids and plastic cameras can I have? 

I'll go with SX-70, Pop 9... and my Kodak squeegee?!


----------



## davidharmier60 (Oct 12, 2017)

I could easily put $20 aside for a future camera purchase.  In 3 or 4 months perhaps I will get one.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 12, 2017)

davidharmier60 said:


> Should I ever get a DSLR it will most likely be a 10mp or even less.


 I very strongly doubt that.

You wont get one of those because those are really early ones. They simply break down easily.

The oldest to try are from Nikon are the D3/D700 generation.

I dont know the point when Canon DSLRs became really reliable, though.





Gary A. said:


> I'd sell it all.


 I am fairly sure we're supposed to be on a lonely island or something. Selling is not an option. And since your lenses and camera dont match neither is photographing.





fmw said:


> $2 million for a lens.  I'll bet they don't sell many of them.


 I agree that will be the problem.


----------



## davidharmier60 (Oct 12, 2017)

You obviously don't understand. I don't have much in the area of skills. While my Diesel Dodge ran hot shot was how I made money. Now the only three places that EVEN called back (or emailed) were able to local grocery store at 5 miles away, Kroger at roughly 25 miles and a place called Favor which as far as I can tell is a shop.and deliver app for pretty much anything. My current truck is a 99 Chevy 3/4 ton that gets maybe 16 mpg.
And I can't count on it staying reliable. 

Therefore an old camera is about all I'll ever be afford. And of course an adapter or  three to use good old glass. 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk


----------



## astroNikon (Oct 13, 2017)

my Nikon D750

The Nikon 80-200/2.8
and Meade 3,054mm

are the two I use most.


----------



## Gary A. (Oct 13, 2017)

fmw said:


> $2 million for a lens.  I'll bet they don't sell many of them.


They only have to sell one.


----------



## Frank F. (Oct 19, 2017)

jaomul said:


> Frank F. said:
> 
> 
> > jaomul said:
> ...




OK. D850, 1.4/105mm, 8-15mm fish.

happy?


----------



## jaomul (Oct 19, 2017)

Frank F. said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > Frank F. said:
> ...



I was joking, you can play if you want.
Nice kit me thinks


----------



## Braineack (Oct 19, 2017)

I'd take a D5.

And then I could possibly be happy with the 28mm 1.4E, and 105mm 1.4E


----------



## jaomul (Oct 19, 2017)

Braineack said:


> I'd take a D5.
> 
> And then I could possibly be happy with the 28mm 1.4E, and 105mm 1.4E



Do you do a lot of sports or is there another reason for d5, just curious


----------



## Braineack (Oct 19, 2017)

Might as well drive the Rolls Royce or Bentley over the MB or BMW...

I don't like shooting without a grip.
I don't like shooting a camera not really designed for shooting (pretty much every camera on the market)
I don't need the MP of a D850, but I want the body of it over a D750 (mainly the viewfinder)
I don't want a camera with two different types of memory card slots.

having wifi and/or BT would be nice, but I really have no use for 44mp.


the Sony A9 and two similar lenses would be another option for my, but I wasn't the biggest fan of the AF on my a6000 vs. a dslr, I never quite got used to it and missed so many easy shots due to it.


----------



## Frank F. (Oct 19, 2017)

jaomul said:


> Frank F. said:
> 
> 
> > jaomul said:
> ...




in reality I go with two bodies. The 850 drives the 105, the 500 drives the fish. because i do not zoom two bodies are my way to go.

i sold the D600, mbd14 and sell the d3 and 1.4/24 ... My bag is still full of great glass apart from the two lenses


----------



## Frank F. (Oct 19, 2017)

@Braineack I love the look of the D850 files. Megapixels are nice to have. Not that I need them, but my computer is fast enough and the pixel density is the same as the D500, so technique is the same. Very rewarding results.

I hate SD Cards. Why do the bodies not have both XQD cards? bollocks


----------



## benhasajeep (Oct 19, 2017)

480sparky said:


> I'd chose a hot 24-year old chick.  With glasses.



Buba "I'ma going to trade my 40 year old wife in on 2 18 year olds"
Me "That math doesn't add up"
Buba "They can keep the change"


----------



## benhasajeep (Oct 19, 2017)

For me it would be D850, 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8.  For STARTERS!  I could never stop at just 2 lenses!


----------



## chuasam (Oct 21, 2017)

if it's work system:
D850 with 105mm f/1.4 and 24-70 f/2.8 E

if it's vacation system:
EM5 II with 12-40 f/2.8 and 40-150 f/2.8


----------



## goodguy (Oct 21, 2017)

My ideal would be
Nikon D850
Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G
Nikon 70-200mm 2.8E

So if I would be able to justify and replace my wonderful Tamron 70-200mm 2.8 VR with the new Nikon version I would have my ideal set up but I think its close enough and really I don't need the Nikon version, the Tamron is good enough and then some for my needs of it.


----------



## benhasajeep (Oct 21, 2017)

goodguy said:


> My ideal would be
> Nikon D850
> Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G
> Nikon 70-200mm 2.8E
> ...


If we number a lens the same number can we have more than 2??  For instance 2 lenses listed as #5. 

Hint - Hint!


----------



## raschmidt (Oct 21, 2017)

If I care about price (so most realistic for me)
Panasonic G85 + Panasonic 14-140mm II l& Panasonic 42.5mm f/1.2 lens

If I don't care about price:
Olympus E-M1 ii + Olympus 12-100mm Pro & Olympus 25mm f/1.2 Pro.

If I don't care about price or weight:
GH5 + MB & Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 & Panasonic 100-400mm


----------



## ac12 (Dec 5, 2017)

FX
D850 + 24-70 f/2.8 + 70-200 f/2.8

DX
D7200 + 10-20 + 18-140


----------



## Dave Colangelo (Dec 9, 2017)

ill it down by format: 

Digital: 
The latest Nikon body dejour D850 if I could 
50mm 1.2 (Oh so sharp)
300mm (for da birds) what ever they are offering up these days. 

35mm Film 
Nikon F3 
50mm 1.2 (oh so sharp again) 
300mm Ai-s 4.5 (Still for the birds)

Medium Format Film
Hasselblad 500CM 
50mm 
150mm


----------



## Derrel (Dec 9, 2017)

Dave Colangelo said:


> ill it down by format:
> 
> Digital:
> The latest Nikon body dejour D850 if I could
> ...



You've got some great 1980's lenses listed there! The 300/4.5 Ai-S was okay, I owned one and used another pool version of it,hard to focus fast with it on anything moving but built like the proverbial brick waste disposal facility; the 300mm f/4.5 ED~IF was better, and more compact, and has that astoundingly fast, feather-touch internal focusing mechanism that allows manual focusing with amazing speed and accuracy even on fast action; these days Nikon's new 200-500mm autofocusing zoom is pretty popular, and it might be (I stress _it might be_) the next long lens I buy.

The allure of the 50/1.2 has never caught the fancy of many people, but it is uber-fast,for sure.

Looking forward to seeing some pictures out of the newly-acquired 500mm Tele-Tessar you recently got off of the e-Bay site!


----------



## Destin (Dec 9, 2017)

Derrel said:


> these days Nikon's new 200-500mm autofocusing zoom is pretty popular, and it might be (I stress _it might be_) the next long lens I buy.



Agreed. I’m regretting having sold my Tamron 150-600 and I want something similar.. I’m thinking the 200-500 May be the next addition to my bag.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 9, 2017)

I met a fellow at Pier 39 in Astoria, Oregon, on the mighty Columbia River, and he let me use his Nikkor 200-500 on my D610 to shoot a bunch of test files...I was greatly impressed by the files I shot with it. Seems to me like it could be the "one long lens" solution for most of the fair weather months of the year, now that Nikons have such amazing higher ISO performance.

I am thinking about heading in the Pro Photo Supply, to see the all-day Sigma representative show, but am afraid I might drop $1399 for the new 135 f/1.8 ART lens...so, thinking about NOT going to the demo day...watched three on-line reviews of the 135/1.8 this morning...


----------



## Dave Colangelo (Dec 9, 2017)

Derrel said:


> You've got some great 1980's lenses listed there! The 300/4.5 Ai-S was okay, I owned one and used another pool version of it,hard to focus fast with it on anything moving but built like the proverbial brick waste disposal facility; the 300mm f/4.5 ED~IF was better, and more compact, and has that astoundingly fast, feather-touch internal focusing mechanism that allows manual focusing with amazing speed and accuracy even on fast action; these days Nikon's new 200-500mm autofocusing zoom is pretty popular, and it might be (I stress _it might be_) the next long lens I buy.
> 
> The allure of the 50/1.2 has never caught the fancy of many people, but it is uber-fast,for sure.
> 
> Looking forward to seeing some pictures out of the newly-acquired 500mm Tele-Tessar you recently got off of the e-Bay site!



Regrettably I was born in the wrong decade, but now I get to buy glorious 80's gear for a fraction of the cost. The 50 1.2 and 300 4.5 Ai-s came to me in a package deal, both near mint, from a local antique shop for $120. Ill agree that the 300 is not perfect but on my D3300 its great for birds in the summer and cheap enough that Im ok bringing it onto the beach with me near sand. 

The secret to the 50 1.2 is not its speed, frankly at 1.2 the depth of field is so shallow its hard to use and with modern ISO ranges its not super necessary. But... at F2, 2.8 and 4 its sharpness is second to none. There is also something about the glass that renders colors in a very true and satisfying way.  

Im hoping to get the tele-tessar out soon. I have encountered an issue whereby my ball head is a bit small for it so I think im going to need to up my tripod rig to something more serious. I may look for an old Bogen with a tilt head that can handle the weight better, off to craigslist!


----------



## Dave Colangelo (Dec 9, 2017)

Derrel said:


> The allure of the 50/1.2 has never caught the fancy of many people, but it is uber-fast,for sure.



I almost forgot, in the end I'd say its one of their best looking lenses!


----------



## Destin (Dec 9, 2017)

Derrel said:


> I met a fellow at Pier 39 in Astoria, Oregon, on the mighty Columbia River, and he let me use his Nikkor 200-500 on my D610 to shoot a bunch of test files...I was greatly impressed by the files I shot with it. Seems to me like it could be the "one long lens" solution for most of the fair weather months of the year, now that Nikons have such amazing higher ISO performance.
> 
> I am thinking about heading in the Pro Photo Supply, to see the all-day Sigma representative show, but am afraid I might drop $1399 for the new 135 f/1.8 ART lens...so, thinking about NOT going to the demo day...watched three on-line reviews of the 135/1.8 this morning...



Now that I own one I’m telling you... you WILL buy that lens if you test it. I am in love. 

Heading out tonight to shoot some low light portraits with Christmas lights and a cute model.. will post results for you to see tomorrow.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 9, 2017)

Now that I have moved from 24 Megapixel Nikon full-frames (D3x, D610) to the D800 and 36 Megapixels, I have become more interested in acquiring a few, very special, very _distinctive imager-type_ lenses; the newish Sigma 135/1.8 is a distinctive imager; unlike the Nikkor 135 AF Defocus Control that I sold off a year ago, the new Sigma seems to have almost _zero_ visible color fringing at wide apertures...something the old Nikkor had at f/2 to f/4 to a degree that made me not want to shoot it at such f/stops.

Back to the ONE BODY and two lenses question: as much as I did love the D3x, the extra pixel count of the D800 or D810 would make me change my vote to my newest Nikon, the D800...same AF module, MultiCAM 3500, as the D3x had in the D800, but a bigger file, better for crop-ins, and better ISO performance than the D3x sensor had, so my new one body, two lens forever has the D800 and the "old" 28-105 zoom and the 70-200 f/4 AF-S VR-G lens...I've never liked the performance of any 70-200 wide-open, so the f/4 is my choice in a 70-200.

But, seriously though...this question is a mere hypothetical. I, and millions of photo enthusiasts, and full-ime working and part-time pros could never, ever own just two lenses! Gotta own that glass! 24,50,85,105, 60 macro,90 macro,300/4,etc.,etc.. Got.To.Have.Glass.


----------



## nerwin (Dec 13, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Now that I have moved from 24 Megapixel Nikon full-frames (D3x, D610) to the D800 and 36 Megapixels, I have become more interested in acquiring a few, very special, very _distinctive imager-type_ lenses; the newish Sigma 135/1.8 is a distinctive imager; unlike the Nikkor 135 AF Defocus Control that I sold off a year ago, the new Sigma seems to have almost _zero_ visible color fringing at wide apertures...something the old Nikkor had at f/2 to f/4 to a degree that made me not want to shoot it at such f/stops.
> 
> Back to the ONE BODY and two lenses question: as much as I did love the D3x, the extra pixel count of the D800 or D810 would make me change my vote to my newest Nikon, the D800...same AF module, MultiCAM 3500, as the D3x had in the D800, but a bigger file, better for crop-ins, and better ISO performance than the D3x sensor had, so my new one body, two lens forever has the D800 and the "old" 28-105 zoom and the 70-200 f/4 AF-S VR-G lens...I've never liked the performance of any 70-200 wide-open, so the f/4 is my choice in a 70-200.
> 
> But, seriously though...this question is a mere hypothetical. I, and millions of photo enthusiasts, and full-ime working and part-time pros could never, ever own just two lenses! Gotta own that glass! 24,50,85,105, 60 macro,90 macro,300/4,etc.,etc.. Got.To.Have.Glass.



I didn't know you had the 70-200 f/4 VR. That lens, besides the 20 1.8 has been probably best decision I ever made. Nikon hit the ball out of the park on that lens, no question. I love shooting with it. That one stop of difference is nearly unnoticeable.


----------

