Photographers all say that big ternary lenses are good. Among the three lenses, which one is the weakest?

Whether it is Canon, Nikon, or Sony, there must be a reason why it can be called the Big Three. There are so many lenses in one camera, why are these lenses called the Big Three. Canon Sony's 16-35f2.8 24-70 70-200 Nikon's 14-24 70-200 24-70.

First of all, the 16-35 and 14-24 are very good wide-angle lenses, with a constant aperture of f2.8. They are indispensable lenses for wide-angle shooting. They are not useless at all. Both the picture quality and the effect are very good. 24-70 as a process satisfies the mid-focus range for taking group photos. The wedding process and activities are all very good shots, and you can basically take one shot. Very convenient. As a medium-long zoom portrait lens, the 70-200 has good depth of field and blur when shooting portraits. Take a close-up. Not tasteless at all.

All three lenses are f2.8 constant zoom lenses. There is no conflict in focal length. Cooperate with each other to satisfy most focal lengths. So I think they are all useless and very useful. Wide angle close-up, process. I think they are all very suitable lenses.

If you have to choose one. I think. 24-70 can be replaced. I just feel that I am nit-picking. I am not saying that it is tasteless. I don’t think it is tasteless at all. They are the best lenses at this focal length.

The large ternary lenses of each manufacturer are similar, that is, three zoom lenses with different focal lengths:

These three lenses are the specialty lenses that are constantly updated by various manufacturers, covering a wide range of Commonly used focal lengths from super wide angle to medium telephoto (except super telephoto).

For landscape photography, 16-35 and 70-200 both have characteristics. The former has impact and the latter has a sense of space compression;

For portrait photography, 24-70 and 70-200 Used frequently (24-70 used more when shooting in the studio).

There is no saying that these lenses are useless, it just depends on your budget and shooting type.

If you have a low budget, there are small three-dimensional lenses with similar focal lengths, but with smaller apertures;

If it is not convenient, you can choose a fixed-focus lens.

Basically, all photographers who work have either big three yuan, or at least one or two. Even if they are short of money, there are still small three yuan hanging up. Don’t use special cases as an excuse, the actual situation is like this .

That’s right, basically every photographer will say that big three-dimensional lenses are good. There are very few people who don’t like big three-dimensional lenses. After all, they are the mainstay of portrait lenses, and they represent the highest quality of lenses!

Which three-dimensional lens is the most useless? So let’s first take a look at which three lenses can be called big three lenses. Canon's three-dimensional 16-35mmF2.8, 24-70mmF2.8, 70-200mmF2.8, Nikon 14-24mmF2.8, 24-70mmF2.8, 70-200mmF2.8. For these three F2.8 lenses, there are not many overlapping focal lengths, and they all represent lenses for various types of shooting! Are there any tasteless ones? No!

Is the wide-angle 16-35mm or 14-24mm useless? Impossible, this is the main lens for landscapes and portraits. Many landscape lovers cannot do without this focal length (the aperture does not necessarily need to be F2.8). Ultra-wide lenses are essential for landscapes, and majestic photos can only be taken with these lenses! It can't be useless!

Is 24-70mm useless? It’s also worthless. No lens is as convenient as the 24-70 for indoor shooting. It can be long or short, and the aperture is not small. It is the main lens for indoor portraits. Unless you use a fixed focus, otherwise, the image quality of this lens is still acceptable. The main thing is convenient. When I was shooting indoors, including wedding ceremonies, this lens played a big advantage!

Is 70-200mm useless? If the first two are worthless, if the last one costs 70-200 and is worthless, someone will probably beat him to death. This is the best zoom for outdoor portraits. You can even use this lens for landscape photography, which shows how versatile this lens is. It is obvious that none of these three lenses are worthless lenses. If some people really think that they are worthless, then there is only one possibility. For example, if I don’t like scenery, then I think lenses such as the 16-35 are worthless. I don’t If I like portraits, I think the 24-70mm is useless, and so on!

No useless shots.

Each of these three lenses has outstanding performance and each has distinctive characteristics.

The so-called useless means that the photographer blindly chooses to buy a lens that does not match his own photography style or subject matter. As a result, he cannot use the characteristics of the lens and cannot achieve what he wants.

When choosing a lens, think more about whether you need to use this lens to create, and whether it is suitable for your photography habits and photography themes; for example, the 24-70 lens is not wide enough at the wide-angle end, and the 70 The lens is slightly shorter at the end; but it covers the two most commonly used focal lengths, 35 and 50, and is quite satisfactory for landscapes and portraits; the 16-35 lens is mostly used at its wide-angle end, and the 24 lens is also quite satisfactory; the 70-200 lens is also quite satisfactory. Needless to say, it is a god-like existence for every Canon user.

When I first started playing with digital SLRs, I made the mistake of greedy for too much. I once bought all the three-yuan ones in my bag, but after a while I felt that 16-35 and 24-70 could not meet my requirements. They were sold out one after another. The 70-200 was sold out after being used in the second generation. The reason why it was sold out was not that the quality of the big three yuan was bad, but that there were higher-end lenses to choose from, so I bought the 14L, 35L, and 50L. , 85L and 200L. It should be said that it is very good, but after playing with it for a few years, I found that the 24-70 (the second generation) is too practical for landscape photography, so I purchased this zoom lens again; and then successively bought the 14L and 35L I gave it away because I didn’t use it as frequently as before, I left it idle for too long, and my favorite photography themes have changed...

I wrote so much in a long way, mainly to explain that I can follow my own preferences. As the subject matter changes and the requirements for lens quality increase, the lenses in your hand will also change according to your preferences; furthermore, it is not about making the most complete lenses, which will only cause waste, but when you feel that a certain lens can help you shoot Find your favorite subject matter and meet your imaging requirements before you consider whether to purchase it. Only in this way will you be able to play with it easily, and will not end up with a lens in your hand sitting idle in the drying box without any use, which is a useless phenomenon.

Hope this helps.

Choosing a lens is always based on the subject matter. Some masters only use one or two types of lenses throughout their lives, so it depends on what you want to shoot. The reason why the big three yuan is called the big three yuan is that it covers the golden focal length. , On the one hand, it is the imaging effect. Fixed aperture, although the effect is not as good as fixed focus, but it is just inferior in theory. Equipment is always just equipment. If you want to take good pictures, your head is more important. Photography has a very low threshold, but it is difficult to master well. It requires accumulation, practice, creativity, and courage. It also requires some social experience and communication skills. Photography is definitely not something that can be taken casually.

In 2000 AD, I published an article in the Friends of Photography magazine, "Go to the beginning, the end, not the middle." I described my thoughts on the choice of the Big Three as a photography enthusiast at that time. At that time, I was more pursuing so-called artistic photography. I sincerely felt that the angle of view of a mid-range focal length lens was too mediocre, so I "followed an example" by selling out my 24-70 and replaced it with a 50mm large aperture lens...< /p>

But now, I am much more rational, and maybe I will pay more attention to humanistic themes. I feel that this middle section is equally indispensable, and I even added two "middle sections" with the focal length of 24-120. I slapped myself in the face...

If you have to ask me to give you a suggestion, I suggest you decide according to the subjects you often shoot. If you often shoot indoors, I suggest not to use a telephoto lens. If you like to shoot outdoor beauties, I suggest you don’t use the wide-angle one. If you like great scenery, you can give up the middle one. If you don’t want to give up on all kinds of subjects, you might as well get them all, because it’s also expensive. It doesn’t cost much, and it doesn’t take up much space...

Let’s talk about their characteristics and shooting purposes

16-35, his design concept is to shoot scenery + humanities, with ultra-wide angle A large aperture is definitely a favorite for landscape photographers. In addition, you can use 35 to slightly compensate for the wide angle. It is very useful to push forward some scenery that is not very far away. In addition, 35 can also play a great role in humanities. If you use He is a bit reluctant to shoot portraits

24-70. His design concept is mainly aimed at universal portrait wedding studios. Using this lens in these situations will give full play to its value, convenience and flexibility, and excellent image quality. If you use it to shoot scenery, it is a bit reluctant.

70-200. Its design concept is mainly portrait + scenery. For outdoor portrait shooting, this lens can give full play to its telephoto advantage, and it brings a very sense of compression. It is powerful and can be used for landscape photography to shoot distant scenes and zoom in for close-ups

Which lens among the three lenses is the most useless? This in itself is a false proposition.

First of all, each lens has its photography purpose and object-specificity. This correspondence is irreplaceable to a certain extent, which determines the unique application value of each lens.

Secondly, the photographer’s personal photography expertise, preferences, and skills are different, which also determines the difference in frequency of use and performance requirements for different lenses.

In this sense, no lens is useless. It just depends on how much you can exploit its performance.

Whoever buys 24-70 is stupid, because after buying it, it will be idle for preparation. It is completely useless in the big three yuan! You think, the progress of technology cannot be solidified, and the big three yuan will be completely replaced by the big two yuan 14-50f2.8; 50-200f2.8. I hope that the majority of photographers will promote the concept of the big two yuan.

There is nothing tasteless or useless, it depends on your own theme preference. For me, 70-200 is a tasteless thing, but others may be inseparable.