3 Essential ZOOM Lenses for Landscape Photography: Focal Length Doesn’t Matter!

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

🌟QUICK QUESTION: How many lenses do you own?

[@coloradokurt]

I got three. 17-28mm 2.8, 28-75mm 2.8, and the 90mm 2.8 Macro

[@chrissss999]

Got 3 28mm prime manual lens :( 50mm prime auto 70-210mm manual :( I am looking to get a 70-200 auto lens from Tamron, but need to save some more

[@drewherbi]

Nikon 24-70mm f4 Nikon old version 50mm f1.4 Sigma 150-600 contemporary f5.6-6.3 Viltrox z mount 85 ( stopped working within 6mo, never buy lenses from amazon even new its considered "grey market")

[@-xox-]

6 for now, Wide standard zoom, 70-180mm & 100-400, 55 & 85 f1.8 Perfect for landscape and events

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

@@bertiboehm Beautiful lens!

[@HR-wd6cw]

The problem that many people experience when starting out in photography is, first they generally don't know what they want to shoot, and second they fall into the trap where people tell them "You should get X lens" (I hear this a lot about the 50mm for example, which I own and use, but a 50mm is not for everyone too -- although it may be one of the more versatile lenses for many genres). But often times beginners buy a lot of gear because people recommend it and because they haven't learned yet that more gear doesn't equate to better pictures and in some cases, can muddy things because you can start to get confused, with things like "Which lens should I use for this?" I'd say for the 3 essential lenses, you can't really go wrong with a wide angle, standard zoom and a telephoto zoom, so three lenses that perhaps range from say 15mm to 200mm (on full frame) should cover most of what the average (non-wildlife / sports) shooter might encounter. Personally I've found my 14-30 Z, 24-70 Z OR my 24-200 Z, and a 70-200 to be realy the three lenses I need. The others I have are more specialty (50mm, 28mm and 85mm) and are used, but not anywhere near as much as my ultra wide and my travel zoom or standard zoom (24-70), which those two/three lenses probably make up the majority 2/3 perhaps of my photography. I think when it comes to primes vs Zooms, yeah that may have been the case 5-10 years ago, but today, I think unless you're pixel peeping at 100% all the time, many of the pro-level zooms can produce very sharp images that are almost as sharp as primes made today. Yes Primes usually have the edge but it's slight, and the biggest reason to use primes currently (if we set aside sharpness, which is very close in modern lenses) is they do still offer faster apertures (usually by 1-2 stops) but in terms of sharpness, many of the modern higher-level zooms do a great job and you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference unless you were shooting wide open compared to a prime wide open.

[@stephendenagy3396]

Two things. First, as you are now a professional photographer, it makes no sense to limit yourself. There are times exotic lenses are useful as has been mentioned, like astrophotography. But there are some amazing lenses out there. My favorites are the Voigtlander Heliar 10mm F/5.6. It is rectilinear, VERY sharp, and tiny. I use it on my Sony a7r4. Amazing lens. It can take pictures and perspectives that literally no other lens can. Fully pro durability and sharpness. (And you will never see it in RF mount!). And, the Sigma 105mm f/1.4. The beast! Ridiculously sharp. Sharpest lens I have ever used. But the Isolation, the bokeh. Both are specialized but useful. I have the “Trinity” though I often use the 10mm as a walking around lens. Tiny, sharp and you can crop in with the Sony. And use the 105 for low light portraits and landscapes. Which is my second point. As a physician and a photo enthusiast I have been reading on this topic for over 50 years. The available information suggests that our eyes see at 100-105 mm, but are wide angle like the 10mm lens. We do that because the distance of the lens to retina is like to a medium telephoto, but the retina is huge and the lens has intense focal curvature. So the coverage is that of an extreme wide angle, but the foveal perspective is of a portrait telephoto. That’s why 105 is a popular portrait lens. That’s how we actually see. Years ago Modern photography mag had an article on this, where they compared a famous artist’s sketch of a scene (1800’s artist as I recall) with a modern photograph of the same scene. The 105 micro Nikkor matched it perfectly regarding compression and perspective. The 50mm is a “normal” lens mainly because of a compromise between field of view and perspective. There is no lens that can match our eyes, but a close option is family of rotating lens cameras, Widelux, Noblex and Horizon. They rotated the lens and slit on a curved film plane and made huge images. Digital stitching killed them, but that’s the closest thing to an eyeball.

[@blujeans9462]

I think this video lends credence to buying one camera brand and sticking with it. Jumping from one camera brand to another - buying new accessories, new lens, new everything limits your choices - unless your budget is unlimited. I bought a Nikon in the 90's - bought the best, fastest lenses I could afford - and now, decades later I still have many of those lenses and accessories - plus many of the nicer zooms that are 'required' for the best digital images. I would never sell my 90's lenses (for just the reason mentioned: resale prices aren't even worth packing them up and shipping them out). I do agree: there are some lenses (especially some of those old primes) that have not seen the light of day in 'ages', but I can say there are certain situations where I do take them along because nothing else will do - should that situation present itself. Great video!

[@GeorgeENorkus]

Mark, You may not agree with me although using a fisheye lens can be wonderful. An example is several that I took in the Nation Forest just West of your area. I now make it a practice to rotate my lenses. I might be overdoing it but I pick one lens for a day and that is it. The next day, (or two), I change that lens and shoot with another one. One day might be a wide angle prime or zoom. The next day might be a telephoto. Then an analog totally manual lens. The next day might be a fisheye, and so on. That will allow you to cover one area, (more if you choose). By doing things that way you'll find that it really makes you think and expand your creativity.

[@goodearthrecordings1989]

I own 4 lenses. Canon 10-18mm, Canon 18-55mm kit lens, Canon 18-135mm which is on my camera most of the time, and a Tamron 70-300mm. I rarely ever use the 18-55mm kit lens now that I have the other 3 which took me a ton of searching for the best deals possible to afford them. I did find some incredible deals! Thanks for the video Mark!

[@Axonteer]

My Lense selection for most hikes this is quiet often the 24-105 f4 and the 70-200 f2.8. (Canon R5) I could switch the 70-200 for my 100-500 but that thing is much much heavier and bulky. Thus i only take it to airshows in the mountains (switzerland ;) ) or wildlife sessions. I found that whenever i really needed a wider shot i could just pano crop it at 24mm, (or get a very high resolution panorama with 50-100mm), but the 70-200 didnt limit me that much on the wide end (i often leave the lense on and walk and look for photographs there). I recently got the 15-35 2.8 but i keep the same mantra. I think about what my main interest is on this hike, and then choose two lenses. Taking more just limits me actually as i will spend more time changing lenses than hiking and getting new scenes infront of my camera. As always, my mantra / rule is: I work with what i have, not with what i dont have. Im not the guy that gets up at 4am to drive to a mountain to get the first light, and then stay there for 12h to get the best shots trough out the day of one scene. :D Sometimes i do that (go to a location for specific shoots) but its rare. Often i just... well shoot what i see along the hike.

[@PMCN53]

I agree Mark, that the set of 3 you talked about are great tools in the art of Landscape photography. I use a Canon 5DsR, 16-35mm F/2.8, 24-70 F/4 & a 70-200mm f/2.8 + x2 extender. Therefore my focal length range is from 16mm to 400mm, ample for any situation. I also have a 24-105mm F/4 I use for general shooting. Cheers. 👍

[@johnhogg9756]

Same choice as I made. Tamron 15-30 2.8, minolta 24-70 2.8 and minolta 80-200 f2.8 (and good 1.4tc). Yes I have a few tele’s but they don’t need to go in bag. But have them for a reason 50 1.4 and a 35 for lower light street photography.

[@imac3355]

Great work as always Mark! I have just finished adding the third zoom lens to compliment my Sigma Sd Quattro (APSC) and couldn't be happier. Sigma 18-35 F1.8 50-100 F1.8 120-300 F2.8. (yes it weighs a ton) P.S that yellow sony walkman brings back fond memories:)

[@TS84NO]

I'm on a pretty tight budget, so on my Nikon, I only use two lenses. A 16-85mm (Nikkor), and a 70-300mm (Sigma). Both of them were bought used, so I paid a total of $130 (the Sigma is an older model, while the Nikkor is still sold new, for $730) No, they're not "high end" lenses, but it gives me good flexibility, and more than good enough image quality, especially for the price :)

[@jeffmaronphotography]

This is an absolutely inspiring video! Love it! I believe beauty is always present no matter what light conditions are present. I move to where the light inspires me. Lenses I own are the Sigma 20 f1.4 Art , tamron 24-70 f2.8, nikon 70-200 f2.8, nikon 200-500 f5.6 and nikon 105 macro.

[@UrbanVerse69]

I've only recently picked up a mid range zoom, Nikon 24-120 f/4. I had been using a 18-35 and 70-300 for about two years and had really started feeling the limits on them, especially during a local photography class. After my first outing with it last week, i have to admit that I've been missing out. The versatility is so refreshing.

[@robertwhitemoto]

Wow some beautiful shots Mark!!! This year I converted to mirrorless so I feel your pain with selling all your glass for a good bit less than you paid for it! My lens lineup now is just 3, 15-35 2.8, 24-105, and the 100-500. My wallet demands I take a breather for quite some time and thankful with this lineup, for my shooting purpose, I think I’m well covered. Great video Mark, thank you.

[@lisawells8226]

I have 5, Sony 16-35 2.8, 24-105, Zeiss Batis 85, Sony 90mm Macro, Sony 100-400. My 16-35, 90mm and 100-400 are my most used lenses.

[@hywel3143]

I use the Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS, the Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L IS and a 50mm 1.8 mainly for low light. These are mainly used on a full frame Canon 6D, but the 70-200 is sometimes used on my old APSC 100D for wildlife shots. I borrowed a 17-40 from a friend, but decided that this zoom range was too specialist for me. I know the range works well for many other photographers, just not for me. Travelling relatively light like this as an amateur travel and landscape photographer, mostly without a tripod and just using a Tenba 10L sling bag, makes it more likely that I will actually be carrying a camera to take photos...

[@victahh281]

Canon 90D with the following. Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Canon EF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II Sigma Art 35 mm f/1.4 DG HSM Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM Canon 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM I have multiple applications though. I do some photography for apartment rentals, some automotive, and some landscape. The 18-135 is coupled with the power zoom that I use for family home videos. So I have a wide enough spectrum for pretty much any shoot.

[@kerrygrim7934]

I used a 16-35, 50 macro, and 70-200 on a Canon 6D for years. Figuring the 50 macro (1987 resigned compact macro) would be fine for that occasional mid-range. I’ve finally got the idea that what is excluded is important, so less wide angle work. The 50 was light, small, easy to carry, but I hated the lens. We visited my daughter in Norway this year, so I bought a used Canon 24-70 f4, took that and the100 macro. A great combination. Back to normal life, I find I cannot live without the 24-70. The photos from an area I frequently visit have improved tremendously. I was never quite impressed reading reviews on this lens…not nearly as sharp as the f2.8. It has IS, and the images are very sharp. Starting from scratch, I would likely go for a Nikon 24-105 and 100-400. Although would not rule out Sony or Canon. But, just a tool, no equipment replaces experience and technique. As much as I absolutely would love to go mirrorless, I cannot begin to afford or justify the cost. This now ld Canon gear is serving me well. I own 5 lenses: 16-35 f4 IS, 24-70f4 IS , 100 macro IS, 70-200 f2.8, 300 f4 IS. The tripod is always used with the 70-200 as it has no image stabilization. The 300 is mostly used for wildlife but of course short, especially for birds. But places like Shenandoah NP, it is perfect for deer and bear.

[@tobaldy]

I carry a similar arsenal of lenses for my landscape work. Still appreciate your willingness to not only show your successes, but also that which you are learning.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks Tony!

[@HR-wd6cw]

One thing to consider too with some of the zoom lenses is you don't necessarily need fast glass for landscape, so even if you bought an f/4 lens versus an f/2.8 lens, you can save some big money (I know when I got my 14-30 Z lens it was about $1200 cheaper than the 14-24 Z lens which was around $2300, versus the $1100 I paid for my 14-30, and for landscapes, there isn't a terrible amount of difference (since you aren't really shooting at 2.8 most of the time) to justify another $1200. Of course if you're shooting astro, then you might want the faster aperture. That $1200 meant that I COULD buy a fast 24-70 2.8 lens (versus the slower f/4 version although the f/4 Z version is very good itself and worth looking at for landscape photography). And don't be afraid to get an f/4 zoom. Kit lenses are fine obviously, but they may be a little limited in some respects. But the point being you don't need the fastest most expensive glass for landscape photography. (The only reason I bring up f/4 and faster glass is due to the whole two-stops-down for sharpness thing, even though you will likely be shooting at f/8 or f/11 most of the time anyway, and even for kit lenses that have variable aperatures, even on the long ends, you're still about 1.3 to 2 stops from f/8 or f/11 so you can stop down to get the maximum sharpness. It's just a pro-sumer f/4 lens has a little bit better optics but this does come with a bit higher price tag over a cheaper variable aperutre kit lens.

[@lewiss66]

Hello Mark, I really like your videos ! I'm about to buy a wide angle lens for landscape and hesitate between two zoom lens for my A7IV. The tamron 20-40mm and the Sony 16-35mm pz. One is wider but F4 and the other start at 20mm but more versatile and F2.8. I've got already a 70-180mm Any advice ? Would I regret the 16mm to shoot special photos with forground emphasys or won't use it as much and better buy a dedicated extra wide prime lens like a samyang 12mm for that purpose and astro paires with the more versatil 20-40mm?

[@850Tech]

Lesson learned and my message to everyone. Shoot in whatever you have cos it falls into a perfect focal length anyways. Upgrade later when you got the green

[@michaelhale416]

Another great video. I especially appreciate the message of getting a photo no matter what the conditions. There are some other photographers I follow that will not even take a shot if it is not the perfect conditions they were expecting. I prefer your philosophy. Currently I have three lens, Canon 18-55 kit lens, Sigma 10-20mm and Tamron 18-200. All low end, but what I can afford for now.

[@riva7rau]

I have 4 lenses (All Sony): - 12-24 f4 16 - 35 f2.8 24 - 105 f4 100 - 400 f4.5-5.6 (?) I use the 24-105 a lot. Definitely my most used lens. The 12-24 is my least used lens. That being said, I would like to slowly shift to more 16-35 & 100-400, and less 24-105, so that maybe I'm using those three lenses about equally. Next up for me is a macro lens and a fast super wide prime - something around 14mm f1.4 for instance.

[@jeffkogler1170]

Excellent and thought provoking (or should I say thought confirming) video Mark. I'm glad my phone shot me a notification that you had uploaded it. I'll watch again and perhaps make a more substantial comment later. Thank you

[@frederickmcdonald6636]

I have about 12 lenses, but I shoot a variety of situations like portraits, events, golf tournaments, hockey and baseball, wildlife, travel, architecture, and every now and then landscape and I use different lenses for different things. I also have 4 camera bodies and love them all - Canon R5, R6, R7 and the M6 mk2. Lenses are Canon RF 15 - 35, 24 - 105, 100 - 500 and the 800, Canon EF 28 - 300 (great for outdoor events), EF - M 18 - 150, 11 - 22, 22 and 28 macro and Tamron EF 35 - 150 and 35 and Sigma 14 - 24 (but will be selling this because it's distortion with the RF mount is not good). I would have to say that I use most of my lenses quite often and none have dust on them except maybe the 24 mm TS lens. As you can see I have a great variety of tastes and lenses but being that I am semi-retired and still shooting from time-to-time professionally and only really spend my money on travel and photography I need all these lenses. I look at life as variety is the spice of life and that it's hard to narrow things down for me. Thanks for asking....

[@mstphoto99]

My 3 lenses for the a7R4a are the 12-24, 24-105 & 100-400. Covers everything from ultra wide to tele

[@mariobaert8346]

10 lenses. I mainly use the 24-70 f4 and 70-200 f4. But I also use a 100-400 4.5-5.6 and a 16-35 f4. Depending on where I go I decide to switch the 70-200 with the 100-400. I still have a 50 f1.4, 85 f1.8 and 135 f2.8 lens I use for portraits, a rarely used 11-18 f4.5-5.6 and of course an often used 100 f2.8 macro lens. That one though is rarely with me on a photo trip but used at home in the garden or product shots in the studio. Only when I know I will use it specifically for macro it will be taken on a photo trip. I also own a 70-200 f2.8 but it is heavy and does not get much use anymore although it has a wonderful bokeh.

[@russellschundler6559]

I currently pack my 24-120 and 100-400 zoom lenses. I have a 16-30mm lens and pack it if I use my bigger (heavier) pack. For night photography, I find a 20mm f1.8 is a great specialty lens. I am finding that my 105mm macro lens is rarely used as the 100-400mm lens does most close-up photography very well. Having said all this, I would replace the 2 words "camera" and "lenses" with "composition" and "lighting" as being the most important considerations in getting good photographs.

[@robwasnj]

When you made that video I was thinking even though I lean heavily on wides and teles there's times when something in between really is the right choice. I have a lot of lenses I may not use all the time but when i need them I'm happy to have them. The only lenses I ever sell are just ones I don't like due to quality, sharpness, etc... if I get a better version I may well sell the old one unless I need redundancy. I find landscape photography isn't as demanding of my gear as shooting low light events or wildlife... you can do just fine with slower lighter glass for landscape photography in general. I'd love to have the 12-24 at some point, with that and my 24-105 and 100-400, three lenses would have everything covered. People poo poo on zooms but even my 24-105 is good enough and pretty dang sharp. Compared to my old Canon L glass version 1 that Sony zoom was far superior.

[@brucewiebe6490]

I recently purchased the Tamron 28-200 for my Sony and I think this will be a perfect travel, hiking lens. Combined with my Sony 16-35 I should be covered and will render my 24-105 and 70-200 obsolete and lighten my load considerably. I still have a 90mm macro and 200-600 for wildlife.

[@leniehulse1621]

I have a 28-200 tamron for my sony also - not sure if yours is the same but unless there is plenty light, mine hunts a lot!

[@brucewiebe6490]

@@leniehulse1621 can’t say I’ve noticed that but haven’t used it much yet.

[@S-K42]

I used to own a ton of lenses - almost every focal length between 14mm and 135mm as a prime and a 100-400 Tele-Zoom. Now i only have three lenses left - the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 (best zoom-lens ever build for event- and people-photography) , the Sony 24mm 1.4 GM and the Sony 90mm 2.8 G Macro. Cameras: Sony alpha 7c and Alpha 7 IV. Thats all i need. I almost never used the tele and 24mm is wide enough for me.

[@markstanton2362]

Three lenses. Micro 4/3. A 14-42, a 25 mm prime and my absolute favorite s 45-150 mm tele. I do love the compression that lens gives (90-300 mm full frame).

[@dfinlay587]

I have a core trinity of 14-30, 24-120, and 70-300. I like having an overlap. BUT i also have a collection of "specialty" lenses I have purchased over the years. 8mm, 35, 28, 85, 105 Macro for times when they are needed.

[@ardalaanpeeroozi6499]

Hello Mark. I enjoy your videos very much & I think I've learned more from you than anyone else. I have a comment though, although it might be irrelevant. You didn't say anything about the f stop for the three lenses. Was it because it didn't matter in the photography you do or something else? Thank you for all your help.

[@jhosseestyven5628]

When I was using a Canon APS-C, Rebel T7i and 90D, I had the trinity of the 10-18, 18-55 & 55-250. It’s was awesome to find out what I liked and now that I’ve upgrade to full frame, R5, I use the same equivalent focal lengths. I now use the rf 14-35, rf 24-105, and rf 100-400mm. Love the lenses. Just get a little worried that the 100-400 isn’t weather sealed. Great video as always. Having a wide verity in focal lengths definitely makes me feel confident I can make something, even if it means swapping the lenses and trying to find the perfect picture. Awesome video as always

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks so much - glad you enjoyed it!

[@Mark-qn9xl]

For my M43 cameras I started with small primes for hiking, then when I decided to use their pro cameras more often for travel photography I started to get the zooms. I am also a confessed hoarder :( I have 10 if you include teleconverter Laowa 7.5mm F2 Olympus 12mm F2 Lumix 25mm F1.4 Olympus 45mm F1.8 Olympus 60mm F2.8 Macro Olympus 300mm F4 Olympus 1.4 teleconverter Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Olympus 12-100mm F4 Lumix 35-100mm F2.8 Please don't judge 🤐

[@TrollMeister_]

The mid range zoom can be skipped imo or replaced with a 50/1.8 but the wide angle zoom and a mid telephoto zoom are a must

[@jasmck3261]

I have a few I use on Nikon D7500. 35mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8, 16-80 2.8-4, afp 70-300 4.5-5.6. The 16-80 and 70-300 I have only bought recently. I also have a 18-250 sigma and a 10-140 3.5-5.6 but I've only kept them so my kids can try out photography on older camera I have.

[@TLM823]

Thanks Mark for this 3-lens talk! I just added a Fuji 16-80mm (24-120 FF equivalent) to my 10-24mm and 55-200mm collection. I too used the go long or go wide concept for several years and am now enjoying composing photographs in the middle, so to speak. Great video!

[@animestarlord9021]

I have a wide range of lenses. Prime lenses are just a tad sharper than a zoom but way more forgiving in bad lighting. So general shooting my 24-70 2.8 is fine. Portraits is where a prime will shine. My 50 or 85 1.2 when doing portraits is where I love my primes. I tend to pick up too much details on folks skin so have to edit some things away.

[@Narsuitus]

Here are my three essential zoom lenses for my full-frame cameras: 80-200mm f/2.8 28-70mm f/2.8 14-24mm f/2.8 Here are my three essential lenses for my APS-C cameras: 50-140mm f/2.8 16-55mm f/2.8 12mm f/2.8

[@lusl1094]

For my Sony A7III I have e 24-105 and a 70-300. I find these great for just about anything. I have a 20 mm 1.4 that I use for the night sky. Soon I will have the 150-600 for birding.

[@ozuidema]

Fully agree with you Mark: for landscape, I only shoot with (Fuji) zooms: 10-24 f4, 16-55 f2.8 and the 55-200. Fast primes for landscapes make no sense to me; almost never shoot landscapes below f4 (with the exception of night cityscapes). Instead I want flexibility in focal lengths. I get heartily sick of that tired old saw “zooming with your feet”; so often, this is not feasible, either fysically or because of fast changing circumstances: light, rain, clouds etc. I’m not concerned about image quality: modern zooms are very good; especially the 16-55 is amazing.

[@johnbibens2643]

I love the Sony Walkman and the VHS tape! I shot mostly 16mm on Fuji X. I also have a 9mm, 27mm and 80mm. I had a Nikon system but it was too much gear.

[@exploretography]

YES---- sing it Mark! Love those lenses! 25 years shooting weddings and those 3 plus a macro were my kit! Love it!

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

👏👏👏

[@marvinbeatty]

I used to have Nikon gear and loved the versatility of the 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II. It was almost always the lens on my camera. I shot hand-held a lot more back then and think my creativity was better than it is now.

[@eileenconragan1064]

5 lenses for my Fuji XT4 14mm, 23mm (new one super sharp), 50mm - tiny so lightweight & sharp; Lens w/camera 16-80 f4; And 50-140 f2 Beautiful red badge lens. Plus a 2X magnifier.

[@haaa]

Very helpful this one, not that the previous weren't. Thanks a lot!

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks so much!

[@carolguezen5829]

I used my 100-400 to capture flowers on the forest floor that were sprinkled by sunlight filtering through the trees. The results were amazing...and not because of my photographic expertise

[@davemenard5089]

Wide angle zooms are great for taking pictures that look like everyone else’s pictures. 70-200 and 100 macro are my tickets to paradise. 16-500 availability is needed to really be prepared.

[@zZola_Photography]

In Nikon's Mirrorless Ecosystem they have given an amazing series of options for landscape photographers... They have released a f/4(ish) trinity ... 14-30/4, 24-120/4, and 100-400/4.5-5.6 AMAZING landscape kit!

[@alexzahnd2642]

While I have more lenses, especially some prime lenses, such as the 3 Sigmas F1.4, 16mm, 35mm, 56mm, or the Sigma 18-35mm and 50-100mm, both fixed F1.8 (excellent lenses but weighty), when I go for longer treks in the Himalayas, I take along with my Sony a6500 my Tamron 11-20mm F2.8, Tamron 17-70 mm F2.8 and Sigma 100-400mm F4.5 - 6.3. Perfect for 99% of the shots I take indoors the local Himalaya homes, outdoor landscapes and project shots with excellent quality lenses.

[@lowellprice6351]

Good video! I shoot with Nikon, where I have a 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm, and 100-400mm. The 24-70mm is probably my workhorse, but I definitely utilize the other three lenses quite often...it just depends how I want to preesent the subject and scene.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks for checking it out!

[@raulal00]

I own a lot of lenses, but if I begin now, I will buy something like that: (in FF equivalence) wide angle zoom (16-35 f2.8), a prime 50 f1.8, and a telephoto zoom (100-400 or simply the 70-200 if you dont care moon or birds, or just a cheap X-300 if you dont shoot long very often also captures that images) Probably 99% situations solved.

[@richardpriebe4183]

I'm right there with you Mark. When I head out with a "full" pack, it includes my 17-40, 24-70, and 100-400 (I shoot with the Canon R5 and 6DII). I also have a 100mm macro for those days when the "landscape" just isn't cooperating.

[@LucianoStabel]

7:53 this composition is gold.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks a million!

[@andrewsimpson5436]

As you mentioned the GFX what are your thoughts on that set up? I thought I was happy with the typical 23, 32-64 and 100-200 setup but I missed too many in the 64-100 gap, so I bought a 45-100 and I'm delighted I did. I thought the solution would then be to get the 20-35, allowing it to replace the 23 and 32-64 with the missing the 35-45 not a problem. Now the 20-35 is available (almost) I'm hesitating as the 32-64 is just so useable, it's my go to lens and spends SO much time on my 50S, I feel the 20-35 and 45-100 will mean many changes of lens. Oh decisions decisions?! Have you any similar thoughts? Enjoy the channel and your thoughts on the lenses here.

[@SHENRAR]

I have the holy trinity (in my ASPC Nikon): 10-20, 18-55 and 55-300. Being crop sensor lenses and having bought them second hand (all in great condition) I spent a very reasonable amount of money on them. I cant think of any other lens I could need (well... if they were all 1.8 it would be fantastic XD).

[@finison1]

I'm a fellow NC photographer, I've learned a lot from you so thanks ! Trying to get my work posted on Vero to get views to help critiquing (I'm following you on that platform as well). Currently have 3 lens but trying to sell one and buy another. Just moved to a full frame so need to find a buyer for my basically new 11-20mm f/2.8 for a crop sensor. Had great results with 75-300mm (just sold to get 24-105mm L series) and 50mm prime recently in the Smokies. Love the wide angle as well so need the 16-35mm one day. 1st need to sell my ultra wide angle to get a better 70-300 L series Canon (for landscapes but mainly for my son's soccer games right now).

[@akalli]

Note to self - *holy trinity*. This helped me so much. Thank you!

[@warricksmith5178]

Useful review, Mark. My main lenses are all zooms: 10-24, 16-80, and 70-300 on a Fuji APSC. I use the 16-80 as my default/walking-around lens, but still find plenty of opportunities for the other two. My only prime is for astro: a Viltrox 13mm f1.4.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Glad you think so Warrick - thanks for checking out the video as well!

[@raphaelcoelho1557]

There is no difference really. Except if you like me make astrophotography. In that case prime lenses reach easly f/2, f/1.8 f/1.4... besides, in such low signal to capture chromatic aberration and other problems are amplifyied at zoom lenses. Otherwise, not necessary at all

[@timd4524]

I'm debating on getting a prime or a macro lense for just this issue. Any advice?

[@TimvanderLeeuw]

Astro, and macro. Both are best served with prime lenses.

[@JJRAIA-es9cj]

Agree about the importance of full coverage. For the mid-range though, I opted for a 50mm prime for 5 reasons: super sharp, faster (f/1.4 or f/1.8), much lighter than a mid-range zoom, smaller (takes up almost no room in the bag), and much less expensive. I also use it for close-up work with a set of close-up filters. I filled out the the rest with a 17-35mm f/2.8, and a 70-300mm, feeling the 100-400mm too heavy and expensive. Every millimeter is not covered, but with the sensors today, cropping in a bit fills those gaps.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Totally agree with ya - thanks for checking out the video!

[@danielschmaderer]

For my X-T4 (which I’m planning on replacing with an X-H2) I usually carry the 16-55 or 18-55 depending on weight and weather resistant needs, along with my favorite 70-300, which is used about 90% of the time, mainly for wildlife.

[@gregboyce360]

Likewise Daniel, on my X-T3 I have the 16-80 and 70-300, a Rokinon 8mm for 360s, and the Laowa 65 macro. I'll see you in line for the X-H2 yummy yummy.

[@danielschmaderer]

@@gregboyce360 that 40mp sensor will be amazing. I like how they added a digital teleconverter in the menu to utilize the extra resolution.

[@wanneske1969]

I use the 17-40, 24-70 and 70-200 for landscapes (on a fullframe)

[@michaelmanzonephotography]

I own the Nikon 14-24mm 2.8, the 70-200mm 2.8 and a 50mm 1.8

[@chrisbohinski3364]

50mm, 10-22mm, 18-135mm, 55-250mm and 70-200mm on a crop sensor Canon 80D. I absolutely agree with this video about flexibility. I've found myself changing lenses several times on a shoot to get just the right feel in my photos.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Appreciate you checking out the video Chris!

[@johnhubble5156]

It's a good idea to think twice before selling gear. As you say you will take a hit on price and it is all too easy to regret the sale down the line. Some examples of gear I am glad I kept: Pentacon 135 and 200mm primes from the 70s' now usable with interesting effets via an adapter on my MFT cameras Nikon D200 10MP camera with old nikon zoom with failed AF. Low cost option for creating hi-res time lapse videos Nikon D7000 17MP camera currently being converted for IR photography. A range of nikon fit lenses that I can use with all of my current cameras either directly or via adapters. Some options I now have: A nikon fit Sigma 70-200 f2.8 via an adaper giving me a 400mm f2.8 equivalent via an adapter on my Lumix G9 A nikon fit Sgma 150-600 giving me upto 1200mm equivalent on the G9. OK these combinations may not give the highest quality but they allow me to get shots that would difficult, expensive or impossible any other way.

[@billkipper3264]

I own a Fuji X-T3 with 16-80 and 70-300 zooms. I also have a 1.4 teleconverter which gives me a bunch of reach. Like you, I thought that would do it but I'm finding I need the 10-24 as well. Yesterday, if fact, trying to shoot a mountain lake had me wishing for a wider lens. Also, I like the reach the big zoom and teleconverter give me. It gives me the ability to bring in distant scenes and doubles as a wildlife lens as well. Thanks for another great video.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Much appreciated Bill - thank you!

[@rlfisher]

14-35mm, 24-105mm, and 70-200mm work well for me. I occasionally still rent a longer zoom.

[@renejul2534]

I shoot nikon d7200 (dx) fore indors and partys i use 17-55 f2.8. Famaly/hollydays/walkaround 24-120 f4 and in the loakel woodlands i shut deer ect. I use a 300 f4.5 AI. And Them i have a cople of "fast primes"

[@vperalta]

I have a 50mm (nifty fifty), 100mm macro, 85mm f/1.8, Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8, (Tokina AT-X 11-16mm f/2.8 and the kit lens, a EF-S 18-135mm that came with the camera for my Canon 80D} The other lenses I use on Canon Mk4 III

[@harderja]

I agree for landscape photography zoom lenses are the way to go you are not looking for a fast lens. I assume that you use a middle f stop to get more in focus. However I’ll keep my 35 and 55mm for a faster lens when needed

[@BudBetz]

Great Video Mark! I use a 14-30mm f4, 24-120mm f4, and a 100-400mm f4.5-5.6. I like the trio very much. Not fast but quite good for stills of landscape photography. Heading to Moab, Albuquerque for the Hot Air Balloon Fiesta, and the return trip home through Colorado, Grand Tetons, Idaho, Montana, and Washington. Looking forward to putting these three to good use for great landscapes! You've been a great inspiration for me in my photo growth and post processing journey. I'm still interested in a 1-2-1(late Oct/early Nov). Your last few videos are very motivating getting me going. Thanks for all you do!

[@kerrygrim7934]

My dream combo exactly if I could afford it.

[@geopapa80]

Agree with the video. Always thought that omitting the most popular general photography range (24-70mm) is a little bit weird decision even though not the most popular range for landscape photography..

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks for checking out the video George!

[@B.A.S.Drydock]

Hey Mark, love your content and your story! I feel like you are, or have, lived your photography journey much in the same vain as I have. Sitting down with you over a beer and a bone fire just talking photography would be a very cool thing. Heard your story on David Johnston podcast. I am about to take that next step and start the media side. KZbin, website, ...etc. Scary stuff. Except I'm 58 and retired. Lol. As for lenses. I have my kit lenses 18-55, 55-250, The nifty 50 and my go to is my Tamron 18-400. When comparing it at 50mm to my Tamron at 50. The prime 50 is sharper. Granted the Tamron was only 650⁰⁰ so not top quality glass. Like you said actually noticing it when it is a stand alone photo is difficult. Everything you mentioned about being able to go wide or compress is the beauty of having that in 1 lens. Great stuff my friend. Will be watching!

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks so much for the incredible comment - means a lot, thank you!

[@sonaippa]

I have the Nikkor trinity in F mount, and since getting a Z 7ii I've gotten the Z 24-200, which is my (i.e., a lazy man's) workhorse, and the Z 20 f/1.8 for astro. I use the (adapted) trinity for occasions when I think I might take something special.

[@kerrygrim7934]

The 24-200 has become a workhorse for Mads Peter Iverson.

[@adjake1]

👆true story. Timing on this is perfect. This past weekend I made a point to use my 24-70 2.8. I used to use this a lot before I switched bodies, since then I barely use it. It is a 3rd party lens adapted to my rf mount. While it is fully functional etc. I do have issues with focus now and then (searching) usually cured by turning the camera on and off. I also don't like the balance with the adapter when hand held. Sometimes the adapter is on my 150-600 that I don't always take with me. Last, I don't know if this is a lot of 3rd party lenses but my nisi filters don't like screwing onto the tamron which I find weird. They go on my rf lenses without issue. All that said, I got some really nice shots with it this weekend. Im going to more than likely sell that one and pick up a native lens soon.✌

[@edc641]

Tamron 28-75, Tamron 28-200 and Sony 200-600. Lacking a wide angle lens. Ever since I bought the 28-200 I rarely use the 28-75. But I might get the upcoming Tamron 50-400. Maybe add the Sony 16-35 pz. Two lenses to do it all for landscapes. Lightweight with great IQ.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

👍👍👍

[@santoshvk]

I think I was a similar boat with just wide and telephoto - 16-35 and either 70-200/100-400, and sometimes I would carry a 50mm prime along, though, I realized that I was missing a mid range zoom, and for long hikes/travel - I got a Tamron 28-200 which pairs well with Sony 16-35 mm for landscapes.

[@BrianWatkins9000]

Great story and images as usual, Mark! Your work is inspirational to me.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks so much Brian - that means a lot!

[@motaztawfik]

Great video Mark... I find that a lot of us sometimes buy lenses simply because it's a great feeling :) I have 6 lenses covering 18mm to 300mm. A couple of those lenses are macro which I'm going to sell. I use AF macro tubes which give amazing results. I really can't justify owning the 2 macro lenses I no longer use. I almost just need to keep my Nikon lenses 18-55mm and 70-300mm and the 50mm 1.8. I might just get the 35mm 1.8 though LOL 50mm can be a bit tight on a DX in some scenarios.

[@bhenkle36]

Off topic but I am highly intrigued by the Sony walkman that I have noticed in at least a couple of your videos. I have one too and it sits in a drawer because I can't bear to part with it (had it since I was a teenager). But it looks like you might use yours. Do you? Also, I am a budding landscape photographer and really enjoy your channel. Thank you for your work.

[@carolinezaramati9193]

Thanks Mark for this very helpful review. Up till now I only had a 18-55 mm and felt that it quite restricted me. I’m now looking into buying a 70-300 Fuji lens. And later down the line I intend getting a wide angle zoom lens.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Much appreciated Caroline - I'm glad you think so!

[@DaveKingMusic]

I have the Sony 20mm f1.8 for wide, low-light and astrophotography. 24-105 f4 which is my most used lens and 70-200 f4 for more reach but I often wish it zoomed further.

[@brucedelorme5026]

15-35, 24-70, 70-200 have used those for years but I'm a novice and this covers the gambit of what I like to shoot. Lenses are like a candy store. Absolutely desirable, tasty but will give you painful cavities of you over eat.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Good analogy🤣🤣

[@andycoleman2708]

I'm just waiting for the 16-400mm on a full frame! 😄

[@finkster321]

Thank you Mark!

[@altrujillo3566]

If you're shooting Sony and switch to Fuji you're not only buying a new lens but into a new system which becomes even more expensive. In your case I'm wondering why you just didn't pick up a Sony 24-70mm or 24-105mm; which I think either would have been an excellent mid-range lens?

[@francoruiz2583]

Love your videos Mark! thanks for putting the work in 👍

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Thanks Franco and thank YOU for watching them!

[@rraschka2112]

Thank you for a great video. I'm curious as to how important aperture is to you?? Do you stick to f 2.8 zooms...or is that not as critical due to the distances of landscape photography?

[@geogu3images]

Just received a Sony 16-35mm PZ so that makes lucky 13.. 14 if you consider my GRiiix 40mm.

[@davidewersphotography1013]

5 lenses 17-35,, 24-70 70-200 105 micro 300mm

[@christiang1781]

I started photography about a year ago with just a Nikon D3500 and a 18-140 kit lens. I still use just this (I don't even have a tripod yet). About now I am starting to reach limits and boundaries what I can do with my gear. I feel that gear is very overrated.

[@dennisfrederick9304]

I do use my 24-70 quite a bit. I'm missing the 16-35 but have a 20mm prime. I also have a 70-200 f2.8 and a 200-500 . Your videos are quite good.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Much appreciated Dennis - thank you!

[@andreasbininda6226]

Very interesting. When I saw your video about only using 2 lenses I was asking myself, is this really enough? I think, for saving weight, it's better to use an f/4. I really like my 16-35 f/4. Using also an 24-70 and a 70-200. Occasionally I use my 100-400 but only when I know that I'm not running around a lot.

[@charliejg]

I only have one Fuji lens, the 18-55 that came with my XT-3(bought barely used). I also have two Canon FD lenses I used with an adapter of course. First, the nifty fifty f1.5. Secondly, the 135mm f3.5. I actually really like the images I get from that 135mm. I've even used it to shoot youth sports. It's tricky and makes you work, but I really like the output. Now, I'm really hoping to get something else from Fuji at some point. I rented the 56 f1.2 recently. That think is amazing. But, I can't afford to spend that much on it. I need to buy something I can use for more than one purpose. So, I've been considering the 90mm f2(no, I can't afford the 5-140!!). The 90 has a reputation for great sharpness though. I've also considered the 70-300 zoom. Just need to save some $$$. Maybe I'll sell a kidney! LOL!! Have a great week Mark.....

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

🤣🤣🤣You as well Charlie!

[@TheZ3roCool]

Canon R5 with 50mm 1.4, 70-200 2.8, 24-105 f4, 400 5.6 and 500 f4.

[@mikehines14]

Yates Mill! I've done a bunch of family/engagement photography there.

[@MarkDenneyPhoto]

Great spot!

[@deniseobermeyer6888]

Three: Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L Canon 50mm f/1.8 Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L