Discussion question: When traveling with only one lens, which one would you choose, 16-35, 50 prime, or 70-200?

If you travel with only one lens, which one would you choose, 16-35, 50 prime, or 70-200?

This is a "divergent" multiple-choice question. No matter what option you choose, as long as you can say something "something", you can get full marks.

Among these three lenses, there are two zooms and one fixed focus, all of which are good lenses.

First, the 16-35 zoom lens is a classic in wide angle. It is an ideal focal length and is very suitable for shooting large scenes of natural scenery. The picture will have a wide field of view, majestic and very shocking. It is the trump card for people who want to shoot large-scale scenery.

Second, the 50mm fixed focus lens is a powerful tool for portrait photography. The 50-focal length lens is relatively moderate, and the imaging effect is very close to the visual effect of seeing the world and people with the human eye. The image distortion is minimal, the workmanship is neat and satisfactory, and it is very suitable for shooting close-up portraits.

The 50mm fixed focus lens has excellent image quality. In addition to the neatness of the picture, the imaging of the 50 lens is stable, delicate and of good texture, which reflects the imaging advantages of fixed-focus lenses to the greatest extent. Zoom lenses of the same focal length and level cannot be compared with fixed-focus lenses in this regard. of.

The 50mm fixed focus lens can take into account the scenery. Many people will disagree with the fact that the 50mm fixed focus lens can take into account scenery. In fact, it is precisely because of the stable imaging characteristics of the 50mm fixed focus lens that it is very advantageous to use it to shoot scenery, especially scenes with groups of buildings. The distortion is extremely Small. If you really think that the scene is not grand enough, you can use the splicing method to solve everything.

Thirdly, the 70-200 is a good camera that can take both small scenes and portraits. Because it is in the telephoto range, it can have a panoramic view of the "small scenery" and can also reflect a certain "sense of space compression", such as the sunrise in the morning and the sunset in the evening. Without it, shooting would still be a bit blurry. The disadvantage is that the sun is not big enough; when you use it to shoot portraits, you can shoot at a longer distance, allowing the person being photographed to relax and avoid embarrassment; its imaging is very textured and delicate, and you can clearly see everything; when its telephoto advantage is fully utilized, Coupled with the use of a large aperture, it can reflect a sufficient blurred background effect.

Having said all that, the answer is self-evident.

I chose to bring a Huawei P30 for the following reasons. First of all, the post-processing technology of mobile phones has become extremely advanced. Secondly, the pixels are far more than those of a SLR. It is easy to carry, easy to use, and easy to charge. It has a 50x super lens from Leica. You can directly upload to the cloud, etc. To be honest, I played with DSLR for 10 years and finally gave up. The first reason is the increasing equipment expenses, the second reason is the rapid advancement of mobile phone camera technology, and the third reason is the omnipotent mobile phone software. Post-processing technology, the fourth is very uncomfortable to carry the equipment and peripheral supporting equipment, the fifth is a waste of post-processing time for a lot of electronic waste, and the sixth is the storage space of a large amount of electronic waste. In short, current mobile phone photography can basically replace most SLRs Camera, why carry a bulky device? Isn’t it good to make yourself relaxed and simple? Spend more time enjoying life, why be constrained by a bunch of cumbersome equipment? Life is short, I am not a slave to a DSLR, I just want to record my life with my mobile phone! No rebuttal accepted!

Discussion question: If you travel with only one lens, which one would you choose, 16-35, 50 prime, or 70-200?

If the question only allowed me to carry one lens, I would choose the 16-35mm lens without hesitation. The reason is mainly due to the convenience of travel photography and the practicality of the lens.

1. Convenience of travel photography.

Travel photography, walking long distances, taking photos while walking. The lens is compact and lightweight, which is naturally the best choice. At this point, the selection order of the three lenses is 50>35>70-200.

2. The practicality of the lens.

Travel photography mainly shoots landscapes and portraits, taking into account environmental portraits and humanistic portraits. In terms of focal length ranking, 16-35>50>70-200.

In summary, 70-200 was passed first. Although it is a perfect tool for shooting outdoor portraits, its ability to take into account landscapes is too poor; the key is that the lens is long and heavy, so I had to give it up.

Now there are only 16-35 and 50mm left. The 50mm is indeed compact and convenient, but the focal length is not good. Taking it out for travel shooting will definitely lose too many beautiful pictures that you want to capture.

16-35 When it comes to landscapes, portraits, environmental portraits, and cultural portraits, it is not enough to take into account pure portraits. But on a full-frame camera, through image cropping in the later stage, it is possible to obtain images with focal lengths of 50mm and above.

In reality, if you are going to travel and shoot, 16-35 is still perfect, and paired with 50 fixed focus or 85 fixed focus. After all, the fixed focus head is small and convenient, and bringing it will be the icing on the cake!

This discussion question is a bit deliberately embarrassing for me. Now that I am here, I will talk about my choice. Among the three lenses, I will choose the 50mm prime lens first, because my first fixed focal length lens is 50mm.

This is a standard lens. The visual range is neither wide nor narrow. It is more suitable for shooting portraits. It is also acceptable as a stand-up lens for traveling. I prefer to travel light when traveling.

I don’t like to carry anything too heavy. The most suitable of these three lenses is the 16-35, but I don’t often take pictures of large scene scenery, so the 50mm fixed focus is enough for me.

I only choose one of these three lenses, and it also depends on where I am traveling and what I mainly shoot. For traveling portraits, I choose a 50 prime lens.

When traveling to the south, choose 16-35 for landscapes and countryside, and 70-200 for sparsely populated places in the north.

Why would you choose 16-35 when going to the south? Because urban buildings in the south are relatively dense, ancient towns, alleys, narrow bridges and flowing water spaces are suitable for storage with wide angles.

If you bring a 50 when composing the picture, you will find that you are in a dilemma. The roads in the ancient towns in the south are relatively narrow. One step forward is water, and one step back may be a wall.

Of course, each lens has its own advantages. A fixed-focus lens can make you more diligent, and you will try more composition methods for better angles.

Zoom lenses may make you more dependent on the convenience of zoom and lose better composition skills.

If I travel to the northwest, I will choose 70-200, because the northwest is vast and sparsely populated, and in this environment only a medium-telephoto lens can play its role.

For example, it is best to bring 70-200 when going to the grassland, because the distant view of the grassland with its undulating mountains and the changes in light and shade is more beautiful than the approach view.

When going to Tibet and Xinjiang, you can’t take pictures of the distant snow-capped mountains with 16-35, but 70-200 is suitable for such distant snow-capped mountains and glaciers.

If I could only choose one travel lens from these three lenses, I would only choose the 16-35.

Judging from these three lenses, they are all excellent lenses, but they have their own areas of expertise.

50 fixed focus. It is a lens that every photographer should have. It can shoot a wide range of subjects, including portraits, flowers, humanities, and landscapes. However, it is not very convenient for shooting landscapes because its focal length is fixed at 50° and wide-angle. It seems insufficient and it is difficult to capture large scenes. If you are traveling to shoot scenery, it is still not a good choice.

16-35 lens. This lens is specially designed for landscape photography. It has a super wide angle and can incorporate a wider range and visual impact in landscape photography. Because we are traveling, we must focus on the local cultural landscape and beautiful scenery. If we want to shoot some cultural and folk customs at the destination, the telephoto range of this lens can also be used for these shots. The imaging and image quality of this lens are very good. Therefore, if it is a lens for travel, this lens should be the best choice.

The above is my opinion. Friends are welcome to add or comment.

For these three lenses, I will choose 16-35. My current daily hang-up lens is 16-35. It can take into account both landscape and humanities. The 16-end When shooting large scenes of scenery, the 35 is used to shoot humanities. If you step back and crop the picture, you can also use the 50.

For travel, the subject matter of 50-year-old shooting is relatively fixed, and the need to shoot large scenes and take pictures can be partly solved, but it is more troublesome.

The medium telephoto lens 70-200 is generally used as a supplement. It is not recommended as the main lens, or you have specifically gone to a place suitable for this type of telephoto lens.

None of the three lenses listed are suitable for traveling with a single lens. The focal length is either too long or too short, and the standard fixed focus 50 is not long enough or wide enough. It is best to wear both 16-35 and 70-200. If you can only choose one of these three lenses, you will have to make do with 16-35. If you only bring one lens, there are three more suitable choices than these three lenses: 1. 24-70, a constant 2.8 large aperture, good image quality, but the disadvantage is that the telephoto is not long enough; 2. 24-105 (Nikon’s 24- 120), with a constant aperture of 4, it is good for shooting landscapes and landscape portraits. It is relatively balanced in terms of focal length, aperture, and image quality. It is a good choice for traveling; 3. 28-300, the focal length is wide and long enough, and the zoom is nearly 11 times. A true one-glass lens that travels the world.

However, Canon's lens is not lightweight, has a red ring, and is expensive; while Nikon's lens is lightweight and affordable, and of course, don't expect any extravagant image quality.

I happen to have 50, 70-200. If you are taking portraits, 50 is the first choice. You and the subject are close enough, communication is easier, and you don’t have to worry about tourists coming and going. More importantly, although there is a certain distortion, the image is close to human vision. If you make good use of the depth of field, you can create It has a certain sense of space, needless to say sharpness, is not expensive, and is easy to carry; 70-200 is really good for taking portrait close-ups, including 85, 105, 135 and other common portrait focal lengths. Combined with aperture and human-machine distance, it can achieve the ultimate Blurring, but the sense of compression is not that strong either. When shooting landscapes, if you have a good composition, you can still capture exquisite landscapes. But if you take portraits in scenic spots, you have to avoid the crowds of people, otherwise you really need to be patient and physical.

These three lenses are all excellent lenses with outstanding features and expertise. If you have to make a choice, you can only choose this 16-35 lens. This lens is specially designed for landscape photography. It has a super wide angle and can incorporate a wider range and visual impact in landscape photography. Because I am traveling, I can hang up easily. This lens is the obvious choice. When visiting beautiful scenery, the focus will definitely be on the local cultural landscape and beautiful scenery. If you want to take some close-ups of the folklore of the destination, the 35 focal length of this lens can also be used for these shots. The imaging and image quality of this lens are both Very good.

Why do you have to limit yourself to only one? When I travel now, I take these three with me at the same time.

One takes wide-angle shots, one takes close-ups, and one takes low-light shots. Each has its own use.