Beginners Avoid it Pros Use it - The MOST Boring Lens You Need To Own

This video is all about the boring lens. In it, I'm going to explain why you need to buy this lens and why it's one of the most important lenses you can own for your photography.
If you're someone who hates shooting with boring lenses, then this video is for you! In it, I'm going to share with you the reasons why you need to buy this lens and why it's one of the most important lenses you can own for your photography.
You can find me on;
Instagram / scottchoucino
Facebook Group / 1893064874281393
Tin House Website and WORKSHOPS www.tinhouse-s...
My Commercial Workscottchoucino....

[@TinHouseStudioUK]

Not usually a gear channel, but I thought this was an interesting discussion and also the first lens I have purchased since about 2015?

[@joep8668]

Appreciate your style of video is more on the advice-lean rather than gear, but ever since following your work and channel, and as an aspiring product photographer, I'm keen to understand the bits of kit between the body & lens. For someone who has only been in the photography space for a couple of years, it looks alien to me, and even a simple explanation of what, how and why you use those 'add-ons' and how it affects the final image, would be super useful! Thanks for these videos - really helpful, down to earth advice!

[@kenrhem]

Yours is definitely a gear channel. Just not a G.A.S. channel. You're a constant reminder to me that I should have gone into shooting product as the cameras last so much longer than in lifestyle where chasing AF is everything.

[@OriginalWatchcow]

My days as a product photographer are pretty much ancient history. These 24-105 and 24-120 f4 lenses are my bread and butter for indoor events like banquets, awards ceremonies, receptions, and even weddings. A lot of my peers laugh and point and carry on about what a hack I have to be to use something other than f2.8 or faster lenses. Let them. I am okay using the family minivan of lenses, instead of the sexy, fast, heavy, and expensive 24-70/2.8 that seems to be the "standard." I find with my working style that extra zoom reach is so much more valuable than the extra stop in aperture. While covering events, swapping lenses takes time I don't have and can't control. Even with two bodies, 24-120/4 on one and 70-200/2.8 on the other, that overlap in focal length is not wasted, it adds freedom of choice.

[@jonphebus6720]

The subtext is the mantra: "good" depends on the job. No one cares what gear we use as long as we deliver . Thank you for showing us this pont. Again. Massive love to you for your truth and persistence.

[@fadiheterjag]

It's so funny I had this reflection with another photographer just the other day where I said that if I were to start over with no kit I would just buy the 24-105/4 as my first and only lens, and that I'm pretty sure I can still get most of my work done without a noticeable difference (the irony is that I don't have that lens today, never bought it). On a side note, I really appreciate the fact that you're one of the few photographers on KZbin that talks about gear not mattering while simultaneously NOT having the latest and greatest gear, like actually living up to your own advice.

[@stuarttracey2009]

Glad to see you're making life easier for yourself. You are so right about the obession with bokeh, it is boring and an excuse for laziness.

[@danncorbit3623]

I don't even like the f1.2 look, or even worse, f0.95. Corneas are in focus but the nose is too close and the ears are too far.

[@fiddleandfart]

Love, "Nobody cares..." The all-purpose expression that you can apply to so much in our lives today. And so refreshing when applied to the excessively, (and needlessly?) nerdy world of modern photography!! Always love your cool and grounded advice!

[@Davion474]

24-105 has been my workhorse this past year. I shot 4 major corporate conferences with an Average of 1.2k headshots per conference. at f4 it's fast, covers all the focal lengths I need and does the job for me. dropped it a few times and it's still going.

[@WhenWillILearn]

Same

[@davidward1224]

I consider the Canon RF 24-105 F4 to be my "standard" lenses. When I got the first 5D it came with the EF version. Mine was sharp as a tack. It's a great lens.

[@sammorganmoore]

Id do wnat an F4 for my R6 and dont like the EF 24-105 (too floppy) ive been thinking of an RF 24-105 but very costy.. the sigma could be the thing thanks. I have a stigma 18-35 for my c200 and its very good.

[@mikalevalampi]

24-105mm f/4!!! That has always been an underrated lens in my opinion! great to hear I am not the only one who thinks that! 😁 I love the Sony 24-105mm, its 99% as sharp as a macro lens, and the zoom range is brilliant when you shoot food on location for example. Its great in the studio as well though, as you said, when you need a wide variety of focal lengths 👏💯😁

[@WhenWillILearn]

Yeah I have the Sony one too and I shoot similar stuff to you. It hardly comes off my camera these days

[@capruciubogdan6596]

Once I bought the sony 24-105, a friend of mine told me: you're never going to take it off camera. And boy he was right. That lens is so versatile that I just love it.

[@yajt6651]

I’m not a pro photographer, so only one of my lenses is neither “budget” nor boring. I am often surprised by what I can do with boring, budget lenses. My boring, budget Tamron 28-200mm has been reliably surprising for varied styles. I admit that in other videos where you explain your setup, I had wondered if it always needed to be so complicated. I’m happy for you finding something that might help simplify your workflow. “Work smarter not harder.”

[@placesonthelist]

the Tamron 28-200 2.8 is my everyday lens for travel photography.

[@mdw1927]

The Tamron 28-200mm is one of my favourite lenses on my Sony. That and the 20mm 1.8 is my travel kit.

[@dezinedude1417]

The Tamron 28-200 is my travel lens on my Sony a850 as well. I've got a raft of circa '85 Minolta AFs but I can't carry them all.

[@ScottRandall]

@@dezinedude1417 I have a full complement of Minolta & Nikkor vintage glass that I love. I mean, I really love. However, I shoot a lot of live events and manual focus is always a huge risk with the chaos of stage photography. Even though Sony gives me the gift of focus peaking. I often fall back to my Tamron 18 - 200. Fast lenses are important to me. I shoot very low, random, light. However, AF and adjustable focal length is also really handy.

[@dangilmore9724]

I use a lot of vintage lenses because of the color rendition, and they can be obscenely sharp and obscenely inexpensive. The old thorium doped lenses are great.

[@SchardtCinematic]

I use old Minolta MD mount and older Canon FD mount lenses with my Canon DSLRS and my Canon R7. I love the variety ypu get from older manual primes.

[@kenmorrisproducer]

@@SchardtCinematicMinolta lenses are the best kept secret in vintage photography. People geek for Nikon and Canon when some of the Minolta glass outperforms either for 1/10th the cost.

[@javelinphotography]

My FAVORITE setup is using my old Rokkor 50mm on my Canon R5.

[@Digg3r]

I have started shooting with cheap manual lenses. Obviously not for anything professional as my photography is a hobby. However you commented about sharpness doesn't matter, I agree, I love the fact my manual lenses don't make everything unnaturally sharp. The obsession with image sharpness and pixel peeping on YT is ridiculous. People look at an image for what it is not zooming in to 100% to see if it is sharp. I appreciate your honest and open approach and how you dispel the myths of needing the latest and greatest gear other YT channels push 👍

[@Skipsul]

Interesting that you say “bokeh is done”. Maybe we’ll see more sharp and compact F2 primes again soon? Maybe also a trend back to actually using backgrounds again? Would be great, almost like a return to film techniques and teaching composition.

[@AdrianBacon]

I totally called it. The 24-105 f/4 is a total a complete workhorse lens. That and the 70-200 f/2.8. All of the other lenses are nice to haves, but at the end of the day, it's two bodies, one with the 24-105, and the other with the 70-200. When I was doing a lot of event work, it was the 24-105 on one body and the 100-400 on the other body. These days, if I need the reach, it's easier to just use the 70-200, but put it on a crop body to get an effective 112-320 zoom. The 90D (or R7) drops 33MP into a crop body and is quite good. I transitioned over to mirrorless RF a few years ago and have since moved all my glass over to RF mount. Orders of magnitude better focus.

[@DigitalSketcher]

It's funny...as soon as you were talking about the process of what you were doing and what you were trying to accomplish with a different lens, I immediately knew it was going to be a 24-105 f/4 lens. I didn't know if it would be a Canon lens or Sigma or whatever other brand...but I just knew the focal length and f/stop you were just about to mention. Two things brought a smile to my face when I guessed right; 1)The fact that this focal lenth/fstop is getting some love because I feel it's very underrated and 2) I was proud to know that I was able to know what you were going to mention right before you actually said it in the video. There's a nice little bit of pride when one begins to feel like they're grasping the details of their hobby/professional work in photography. Anyway, I've been using the Canon L Series lens of this focal length for a lot of my work, and it's such a good lens, especially for video (that IS comes in handy). Yes, portrait photography still looks good when you have the right subject, lighting and shallow depth of field (most of my portrait clients still enjoy that look). But this lens is just a great one to have in your bag.

[@howliteandcoffee]

Thanks for the pep talk! It’s easy to think that x or y lens will be life changing

[@mattleccese]

With the KZbin tide turning against gear review videos Scott smashes it out of the park with no nonsense honesty. Great advice, great video.

[@OSMTraining]

No one cares about boka. I'm glad someone finally said it

[@cadmus777]

I'm not a true pro, but my understanding is that pro's don't really care about what they're 'supposed to' use, they just use whatever does the job they need at the quality required. Sometimes an ultra-cheap 'nifty 50' will be the best option. I'd say that if you've lasted so long with just two lenses, you're still doing pretty well anyway!

[@timryan894]

I carry two cameras when I’m on the job so I don’t have to fiddle with changing lenses. My primary unit uses a 24-120 f/4 and my second camera has a 14-30 f/4. Both are excellent and cover the ranges I need for work.

[@FrerkMeyer]

I shoot 80% of my photos with my 24-105 f/4 "Kit" lens from Lumix and I absolutely love it.

[@davegroves1841]

Sigma lenses have replaced all my L series. They are so much better and cheaper. The 24-105 is pretty much my go to. Next would be the 14-24 ... i've a 150 CPL to cover the lens when needed ... the only drawback. The 35 is creamy and nice in low light events, the 85 is for head and shoulder stuff and it is sharp as ... in a nice way. I love them all! Thanks for posting Scott. Always enjoy your work. Dave:)

[@davecarrera]

90% of my digital work is via my R6 and the 24-105 f4. An easy you use and reliable combination.

[@supertech3344]

Hard to beat a true workhorse of a lense.

[@eyesonly4451]

I've got the 50mm ULD on an RZ67 Pro IID with a Phase One IQ3-100 back. It's slow and heavy, but it's the best capture solution I have.

[@areilly76]

(Before watching) The 24-70 2.8 is the one lens that you can do just about anything with. It's my "if I only had one lens" lens. In the Canon range the 24-105 might beat it for versatility.

[@karney44m]

You make the perfect point! I had to think about your question at the beginning and thought about all of my lenses, couldn't answer the question. No lens is boring, they all do a job. Pick the right lens for the job and away you go. Its about time we all got on with image making instead of cork sniffing and spec comparing.....buying the most expensive lenses on the planet does not make a person a photographer, the 10,000 hours after the purchase does, and by then lenses no longer matter in skilled hands. I own the Nikon version of that lens, its 24-120 f4, its tack sharp, has good contrast, and the only negative is its distortion at the wide end but this matters not for my line of work. Its a fantastic workhorse lens.

[@ritrattoaziendale]

I had it; used in a bunch of daylight open air weddings. The thing got the jobs perfectly done, is tack sharp even fully wide open. And yes, it's cheap. For what it is, it's an outstanding piece of kit, inside and outside the studio.

[@shaunmaddox]

Yeah the 24-105 f4 is a great all around lens. It’s good to have one in the kit for run and gun scenarios.

[@danienelphoto]

I use the Canon RF 24-105 F4. It is great. The F2.8s are often not really crisp wide open anyways. And very little if any LCA

[@RadioJonophone]

A year ago I went lens shopping and ended up with the Canon version of this lens. Apart from a slight chromatic aberration that easily fixed, it is a joy to use. Is it boring because there are so many of them? Is it boring because it stops at 105mm leaving one wanting more? Is it boring because it's ƒ/4? Well, I don't think it's boring at all. If 105mm isn't enough for you then go closer. ƒ/4 is adequate, and the glory is that it maintains that over the whole range of focal lengths. It has an upvote from me.

[@repatomonor21]

Haha, I have that one. I used to dislike it, but it slowly grows on you. As you said, swiss army knife lens.

[@darkerarts]

I work as a press photographer, I have a 24-105 on my 1dx mkiii about 80% of the time. The lens doesn't making boring pictures, the lack of creativity does

[@jayse1195]

This is so weird, I got the Canon 24-105 f4 after using only primes for 8 years, and I love the damned thing. Sharp, not too heavy, weather sealed, and makes me lazy as sh!t but I can't take it off my camera (for now) Great video sir, cheers. :)

[@digitaliphotography]

These days I mostly concentrate on landscape, and my Canon 24-105 f4 is my go-to lens. It's the one that stays on my camera in the bag, and the one I first use on location. I carry the 17-40 and either 70-200 or 100-400 when the 24-105 is not quite wide or long enough. Most of my shots seem to be at around 35-50mm, so this lens is perfect, and being landscapes (usually) i'm almost always at f8 or 11 anyway.

[@SchardtCinematic]

I have the Canon EF 18-135 on my 90D. I have the 18-150 RF on my Canon R7. Each turn opposite of each other to Zoom and it drives me crazy when switching between them on a video shoot.

[@neeyal]

Late to the comment party, but I feel like even in wedding photography, perhaps the best remaining argument for very fast lenses, even they're moving away from 1.2 and seem to have way more slightly blurry backgrounds in the 4-5.6 range.

[@snappychappy]

'I shot at f16 and nobody cares' A classic statement that can be used for a lot of photography and so very true. Kit doesn't matter.

[@patfase]

My Sony 24-105 f4 basically lives on my camera 😄 in 90% of situations it’s all I need. Occasionally I need a wider aperture, closer focus, or more reach, but these situations are the exception not the rule.

[@seb_steimel]

This! I knew you'd talk about a 24-70 or 24-105 f4 when I read that title and you're so right. Coming from video with less and less shooting days the 24-70 is my go-to lens. Do I bring some other lenses and beautiful vintage lenses? Yes. But I mostly use them only for personal projects.

[@SteveKershaw]

My 24-105/f4 was my most unused boring lens, after not using it for 2 years I got rid of it, will keep watching to see what’s yours

[@paulmitchell1580]

Some people do spend a lot of money on lenses, thanks for confirming that you don't have to.

[@ralphberrett8485]

One of my favorite lenses for product shots is the Nikkor 35-70 f/2.8 ED. It relies on the camera to have an AF motor and is manual focus for Macro shots. It is very sharp and cost me all of $87 which I think is about £69.

[@CryptoJones]

I have the OG EF 24-105 f/4 and the RF 24-105 f4-7.1 kit lens. The both work sooo fabulously

[@davemil716]

I enjoy your insights to photography. My work is mostly models and portraits. I have the Nikon Z system and my most used "studio" lens is my 50mm and 24-120! I absolutely love the 24-120, i prefer primes but in my small garage studio the 24-120 does it all for me. I honestly thought you were going to say theh 50mm was the most boring!

[@cameronrichens6738]

As an event photographer that is my go to lens. (The red ring canon version).

[@juergenbaumann8817]

Brilliant. I thought of a kit lens too, maybe a bit longer. However, I feel that these lenses today are all good enough, and camera sensors deliver more than you often need in terms of pixels, it's totally fine to do many jobs. Especially on the far end, you just crop a bit, and if all fails, you get closer or use one of the tools in the market to double your pixel count. Not having the need to change the lens or switch to the second camera body trumps quite often. The only downside I see with my Sigma lens (a 150mm macro) is, that after a major update on my camera firmware, a separate update is needed on the lens, so I need to send it in and wait for a week to return.

[@iamuphotography]

The canon 24 - 105 F4 is my " bread and butter " or " my money maker " lens ... I also feel like it's underrated by many yet I use it for all my events & when I now shoot in studio, it's my lens of choice.

[@OliverEwert]

First thought was 50mm, second thought was a 18-55 or similar, kit type. I guess the 24-105 f4 is the “higher end” kit lens, it is boring but it’s what everyone needs!

[@liamstrain]

The Canon 24-105 EF has become a daily driver for far too many projects - especially anything that involves video.

[@sukikomandos]

Agreed, my 24-105 f4 rf is getting the most use by far.

[@blubravery]

Since you shoot Canon, gotta be 24-105. I own the 24-120 Nikon and yes it's a boring lense which shines in studio. Not sexy but gets the job done and that's all that matters

[@philliphickox4023]

My Sony F4 G Master 18-105, I don't like it soft focus is a huge issue and it pin cushions, so severely even I am able to notice it. I do like zooms as I have hired a 150-600 for shooting Brumbies and I have some great shots of the Blue Moon, but that lens is soon going back and the next try will be the 100-400. Most of my photography at present is landscape, animals, sports with very little studio.

[@TheBigBlueMarble]

Lance Armstrong's book, "It's Not About the Bike". said it. It is not about the camera (or the lens).

[@Drewlehman]

Absolutely love my 24-105. Perfect for traveling.

[@leandrotavaresrocha]

Okay, I saw the whole video first, but since the begin my bet was that you would talk about some 24-105mm. I am a 24-105mm user and most of people ignore it, but this lens is amazing. I mean, any lens is a trade off, you have a pro and a con, so If you don't have the necessity to work with wide apertures (like studio work), this lens can do most of the work. Lindsay Adler is a photographer that loves the 24-105mm in studio work.

[@sammorganmoore]

I got an r6 with a 'free' 24-105 f7.1 I never got roung to selling it.. because its just great for everything and as a side note the RF glass and mirrorless world is better - try it and you wont go back

[@chriswrightphotographs]

Excellent video, it's the lens that dare not speak its name! Completely agree about f/4 and bokeh. I have the Canon version of this lens and, I'm ashamed to say only recently rediscovered it's many great qualities. The Sigma version may well be even better value for money.

[@michaellegrange]

And funnily enough, i have the same combo of the 5Ds R, And a much used Sigma ART ƒ4 24-105mm. It is just so versatile and convenient. I really think i must be using it, especially for top shots at least 80% of the time. Love my fixed lenses, 100mm macro 90mm ts etc, But even as a'purist' there is much to say for going with a good zoom.

[@mjl1958]

50mm f/1.8

[@kenmorrisproducer]

“Ex portrait photographer” said that like a dispatch from the trenches 😂

[@anta40]

I'm a hobbyist. 24-105 is absolutely fine for travelling, when too lazy carrying a bunch of primes. But f/4 means crappy bokeh? Perhaps. But I'm not a portrait photographer, or super obsessed with shallow DoF. It's not my daily lens, though. For that purpose, I prefer another boring lens: 50/1.8. Or 35/2, occasionally.

[@fernanmateos]

Nice insight! The 24-105 is indeed a workhorse that does not excel at anything, but will do everything just fine. I am just curious as to why you picked the Sigma instead of the Canon 24-105.

[@guglielmo_arte_naturale]

I use nikkor 105 mm f2.8 macro and would like to add 50 mm macro, I’m really pleased altho you need a lot of space to work with this one.

[@TheNewArtSchool]

Excellent video. Why did you not get the canon version of this lens? I believe that canon has two versions of the 24-105.

[@JeffBourke]

You THINK you don’t need that stabilisation BUT it increases the sharpness.

[@jacktomlinson9337]

Years ago, I tried the 24-105. It was meh for me. But then, any lens in the standard range is meh. Then, I got serious about sports. I shoot at f5, but you can't beat the focus speed and accuracy of the 24-70 f2.8 for randomly moving subjects. The f2.8 is just that extra bit faster to focus. Still meh, but the lens grows on you when you figure out that it's the lens you end up using all the time. I've tried it on the crop sensor, because I think that might be the ideal range for roller derby, but the R7 is such a disappointment. Canon need to make a real, pro-body crop sensor camera.

[@jacktomlinson9337]

I should have said, "any zoom lens in the standard range", my 50 f1.2 lives on my R6. And yes, I use it with an ND and wide open all the time.

[@willbaren]

50mm lens. The boring lens. The one I love.

[@nilofido411]

I am left with a smirk on my face..... I have been using that lens as my work horse for the past 5-6 years

[@robertsimpson1729]

If you shot MFT the depth of field would be huge (as Bokeh no longer matters). I wonder if it would be viable? Sensor shift 80mp images.

[@samanthaodonnell4329]

😂😂 My 24-120 F4 is pretty much stuck to the front of my camera! Even when everyone's raving about the holy trinity, my 2.8's rarely see the light of day! 🤪 Think outside the box & don't follow the masses! (Sometimes the M is silent!) 😘

[@theiteam]

I had that lens on Nikon and hated it. The focus was canon and not Nikon direction. The focus distance markers were so far off I had to get it repaired and it had horrific field curvature. Sold it, bought a tilt shift.

[@ruimarto]

Well, it's my ONLY ZOOM lens, the Sony 24-105 F4 G. Holding it's place with the likes of 55 Zeiss or 135 GM in the same bag.

[@pauldarville3843]

Thanks, interesting video!!

[@matuszewskistudio]

That's quite funny actually as my favourite bit of kit is the 24-105LIS which i have for years and now 24-70/4LIS. I have some better or cooler glass, but the sheer amount of images you can produce with it is astonishing. f/1.2 glass is nice but the times it got you portfolio shots are long gone now.

[@33antonius]

A professional like you could also get approximately the same results with the canon 18-55 lens and decent apsc camera. This is the test no one wants to do. In the film days we were not that much interested in the differences between gear. I also don't understand why the lenses have to be that big and heavy. Compare the Nikon z 50 mm 1.8 to the 50 mm ais.There is one photographer (Gilbert Carosin) who gets best portraits wih simple good equipment.

[@ianpartridge3321]

You mentioned that you acquired the lens because of the trend of having to shoot fast. Could you elaborate? Lots of products in one session?

[@Lucy-dk5cz]

I too love internal zooms. That’s why I stuck to my EF 70-200 and didn’t go to RF

[@danncorbit3623]

Both Sigma and Tamron are (astonishingly) making good glass today. Too bad the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 is not available for Canon, because it looks like a great utility lens.

[@fromquake]

I’m guessing the color cast is from the lens coatings. I noticed a difference from my L lens to the sigma that I had. Great lens overall. Sigma and Tamron appear to have leaned into producing quality in the past few years. I still don’t know if I trust tamron enough to buy another lens though.

[@smoloms]

24-105mm lenses are underrated and I hope they stay that way because they stay cheap😅. But I love them

[@atlantamx3]

Not sure why you didnt grab the Canon 24-105L since youre shooting Canon. Its brilliant.

[@piporcel]

Before I watch. Is it the 50mm 1.8?

[@gr-os4gd]

I noticed that you puished the front portion back in rather than using the ring; how "sticky" is it as far as staying at focal length and focus that you set? Does it tend to creep at steep angles?

[@stefistefistef]

@3:03 What do chromatic aberrations have to do with an f/16 aperture? What are you talking about?

[@olafzijnbuis]

At 03:00 you say Chromatic Aberration... Did you mean Diffraction? Or does F 1:16 cause chromatic aberration with this lens?

[@mikes978]

I’d say the 18-55 f5.6 would be most boring by a long shot 😂 This was the kit lens on Canon crop sensor dslr and was all I had when I first started

[@alexmuccilli]

Not talked about... The barrel and pincushion distortion this lens has. It's extremely noticeable. Also, while shooting overhead, you're going to need to lock down the zoom ring however you can. That massively heavy front element is going to be on a run for it.

[@maxbilger]

I assume it is something like a 24 to 70mm f 2.8.

[@mtmccornack]

I don't know how I feel about being a "Lot!" Lol😂

[@rauleduardo85]

The 35mm f1.8 is the most boring lens. But considering the intro, I gotta go for the 24-105 f4; boring as hell, great for fast paced shoots.

[@ericfernando4296]

i've seen pros uses kit lens sometimes composition is more important than switching lens every shot, and above f8, it's very hard to tell the difference if you don't pixel peep

[@garyrowe58]

😢absolutel loved my 24-105 on my 5dmkii, it hardly ever came off ... Now i have an R5 and the 24-105 stays on the 5dmkii ... dont get me wrong, i still only use my ef lenses on the R5, but the corners of the 4-105 are just soooo bad on the r5, compared to the centre. Not a bother for people and events, but lousy for landscapes :(

[@funknick]

I can't disagree with your logic and applaud your finding an affordable option that works for you. I think for your focus and your target of photography, this is a great way to help people save money and not get bogged down in gear when they could be focusing on their business. As someone who does a bit different types of photography, whether it's portraits, street photography, or especially in my case, wildlife photography, the lens can matter more. Using a boring Sigma f4 24-105mm works excellent in a studio where you can really control the light. Also, while I agree that the bokeh effect can be overdone, it is still quite useful for street and late evening portraits to be able to open the aperture to f2.8 (or wider, if budget allows). Especially in wildlife photography, AF speed is very important and I absolutely want as much light as I can get any day of the week to keep it as snappy as possible. Because of this, I drool over those f4 500/600mm prime lenses that I continue to avoid buying despite knowing they'll dramatically improve my image quality and keeper rate. I just know I don't want to afford them, so I don't and keep trucking with my "boring lens" Sigma 150-600. I don't say this to contradict you, but to say "it depends". There are a lot of reasons folks might reach for that pricier kit with extra options. It might make or break them getting the shots they need. It all depends on your style of photography and your environment. Maybe this is too pedantic. Maybe your advice is about studio shoots and product photography and nothing else. If so, my apologies, I don't mean to derail your focus for your viewers. Sound advice all around and I always appreciate your wisdom!

[@edwinmartens509]

I thought ( though a very good lens for money) is the 50mm 1.8 prime. It's the lens anyone can buy and still, you can shoot great pictures with it.

[@PipsClips]

do you use focus peaking?

[@MrHecnik]

I would say 24-70 f2,8

[@chuck-ji8dy]

Hi Scott, do you use the nifty fifty prim lens?

[@roxikoko3744]

f16. I think you mean diffraction?

[@SilatShooter]

50mm f1.8?