The ONLY 2 Lenses YOU NEED as a Photographer

[@Photography-Explained]

📷 Want to start taking photos that leave your friends and family speechless? Download our FREE cheat sheets: 👉 photographyexplained.com/cheatsheets/

[@ORWELLGEORGE-r6i]

For some years i was using one lens, one lens only, the Tamron 18-400mm.Were my photos perfect, not even close. But i had the chance to practice,practice,practice...without having to carry 10-15+ kilos on my shoulders. Now when I'm walking in a city or I'm in nature, my eyes will see a subject that deserves to be photographed and I know (roughly) from which distance, from which angle, with which lens I will get the best result.😎

[@Keilikeramen]

This advise is good for travel and lanscape photography and I think 28-200 tamron more than enough on Sony I have 50-400 tamron and 20mm 1.8 is all I need but for working like wedding and portrait is not gonna work and I use 35-150f2.8 and 85 1.4 for this section

[@patrickmcmahon818]

Wow, another great video and I hope you get thousands of views! You are absolutely right about starting off with two lenses, learning your gear and most importantly, composure. So many new photographers are told you need primes, you need the widest aperture, this lens will make the best shots, this lens will make the best portraits… know the gear you have. When I am out with the family or having fun I take two lenses, a 14-30 and a 24-120. That’s it. I purposely bought a smaller backpack that limits what I can take and what lenses will fit. So, if 120 isn’t zooming in enough I move forward, bend down, maybe go higher if I can or go wider. The idea is always keep learning and have fun.

[@pieterwessel3733]

Nice some chatting about photography in the morning. As photographers have their own preferences you can agree or disagree mine is that I take Not 2, but one lens when I am with my family in nature or city breaks. The 28-300mm F of Nikon. Amazing quality. Underrated lens in my opinion. Responsible for 90% of my pics. For the super sharp/bokeh/field of depth/wide angle/macro/portrait I use other lenses. If I carry them with me😂😂😂

[@mmartel]

Agree with this video. My kit is m43 and my Swiss army knife lenses are the 12-60 Leica for urban and general travel, or swap it for my 14-140 when going out for nature, sports and hiking. I pair with a 9mm prime for ultrawide. I have other lenses but these three get used 99% of the time. That Tamron 28-200 f2.8-5.6 seems awesome - I'd definitely have it if I were in E mount (like I'd have 24-200mm for Z or 28-200 in L mount).

[@Princeton_James]

Yup. That 12-60 rarely leaves my G9.

[@SeaAngMo23]

I have 2 lenses for my DSLR, (albeit nice quality) EF 24-70 and EF 70-200mm, for exactly the same reasons you are saying. My old film camera (Pentax 645) I have like, 6 lenses.....soooo heavy! you are exactly right.

[@Rebecka_J]

A lot of the comments on this video miss the point of it, but I also somewhat agree with them. If going on a walk then restricting yourself to two lenses, a general purpose one and one for fun, is a great idea. But saying you only need to own two lenses is wrong for may people. Examples were given in the video of what the fun lens may be, but what if you you want do not want to be restricted to one of those types of photography. Professionals tend to specialize because that is their business, and that limits their shooting to a limited focal range. But amateurs who shoot for fun often enjoy the variety of very different types of photography, their fun can be both wide landscapes and macro. Saying you must pick one type of photography or the other undermines the hobby. But when you go out your destination will normally determine, or limit, what type of photography you can do, so choosing two lenses to carry based on that still remains a good idea. And sure you can save money by only owning two lenses, but if money was the priority then you would just take photos with you camera. You accept it is a hobby that will cost money when you buy a dedicated camera rather than using the one that most people carry around with them at all times. I would also strongly disagree with the comment that said having two lenses is boring. Creativity is not something in front of you that you just need the right equipment to capture. It is the interaction between you, the capturing medium, and the subject. You can isolate something with a longer lens or contextualize it with a wider one. Neither is any more correct or wrong that the other, creativity is not about which you take but how you make it interesting. And if you have multiple lenses it is easier to take the boring shot because you act automatically matching a focal length to a subject. Assuming you do not miss the shot in all the fumbling to change lenses. Being limited to the lens on your camera, or the fun one in your bag, can mean having to find a way of making a subject interesting by having to consider the environment because your lens is wider than your automatic focal length choice, or need to abstract detail because it is longer. Limiting the lenses you have on you increases creativity because you have to be more creative to take interesting shots with what you have. Limiting the lenses you own decrease creativity because it restricts the type of photography you are capable to making.

[@PietWijnstra]

I agree . I bought my a6700 with the 18-135mm kit lens, a 50mm f1.8 and a 70-350mm. approx 90% of my shots I took with the 18-135, less then 1% with the 50mm.

[@sigsegv111]

this is actually very cool approach ... good point with that fun lens ... I normally take out only 16-35+70-200 for my landscapes .. I don't have this swiss army lens-knife for my FX .. two lenses instead of three (like if I was taking also 24-70) makes me more focused on composition and photography itself .. this is my trick to trick myself

[@tonyb1223]

I have 4 lenses for my Nikon Z mirrorless, the one that sits on there all the time, and you've guessed it, the 24-70mm F4 which is the kit lens, it just does the job nicely. Then depending on what else I am doing (be it landscape, astro, street or wildlife), it will be either the 14-24mm F2.8, the 70-200mm F2.8 or the 180-600mm F5.6 - F6.3.

[@vladponoran7381]

Ok. I've seen your ISO video, where you provided a wrong example of higher ISO(I've left detailed comment there); here you also state that 2 lenses are enough for everyone; but even if 2 lenses would be enough for specific use case, they would not be same for a landscape photographer, a wedding photographer or a wildlife photographer and so on... I mainly use 2 lenses for landscape: 16-85mm on crop 1.5x, plus 70-200mm; additionally, sometimes I use a wider lens: 10-24mm or a 1.4 teleconverter on the longer focal lens. If I switch to capturing portraits at an event like a concert the f2.8 70-200mm makes sense, but if I go to a wedding(amateur, not paid photographer) I would probably use also a shorter focal range like a f2.8 28-75mm; If there enough time for adjusting composition and moving around, I would use my f1.8 77mm lens for portraits. So here are just a few examples that only 2 lenses are not enough for covering all photography types.

[@the_rat_run]

I freed myself from the burden of Full Frame cameras and lenses a couple of years back. Now use APS-C gear and pleased with the change. I have 2 zoom lenses, 17-70 & 70 to 350 which gives me all of the focal lengths I normally need. Fun lenses are 60mm 2x Macro and 12mm superwide for Astro. Works for me!

[@Princeton_James]

For aps-c the 70-350 is one of the best. I made the mistake of selling mine and I repurchased it. For me, my most used lens is the Sony 16-55. Crazy sharp. That one is glued on to my a6700.

[@CocoKoi321]

The 70-350 sucks Get the 70-180, constant f2.8 makes the difference

[@CocoKoi321]

​​@@Princeton_Jamesno. The 16-55 is overpriced sony crap. Tamrons better sharpness and focal length and vc

[@CocoKoi321]

Full frame is still better if you do low light. You can't do ultra high ISOs on apsc

[@the_rat_run]

@@CocoKoi321 No thanks, I want the reach of the 70-350, else why would I have it? I don't think a wider aperture is going to give me nearly double the reach, is it? I understand your requirements would differ from my own, that is what makes us individuals, isn't it?

[@rongrantga]

Will, I take one lens with me and force myself to get creative. I bought into the Nikon system a few years ago. I love their older prime lenses. My goto setup for the Botanical Gardens is my Nikon D4 and a 105mm Micro f2.8D lens. I find prime lenses are sharper than zooms. For street scenes, I take my 50mm f1.8G lens. I guess it depends on what you enjoy shooting. Thanks for the video!

[@Photography-Explained]

Yeah I really think there's something to having just one lens and making it work. I think the next time I travel I'll take just a 35mm or something similar and force myself out of my comfort zone. Thanks for taking the time to comment.

[@Jswcat]

The only Swiss Army knife of lenses would be the 24 to 600 mm F2.4-F4 (mostly F4 )which is on the Sony RX 10iv. Using digital clear image zoom you could go out to 1200 mm and have a decent photo and if you want to really get wild double it to 2400mm but only if you really need something because it’s quality is far, far less.

[@Photography-Explained]

I've seen loads of people recommend the RX10IV. Is it really that good? The only problem is that it doesn't allow for a "fun" lens being fixed.

[@johandenhertog6878]

My lens on my Nikon D4 is always the Nikon AF 85mm f/1.4D IF. My fun lens is on my Nikon F5 the Nikon AF DC 105mm f/2D. My third lens is the Nikon AF DC 135mm f/2D but used it not so much.

[@GiNodrog]

The Sony 24-105mm is vertualy bolted to my A9ii, I find it perfect for travel. In the past ive taken additional lenses and found I never used them.

[@robertleem5643]

I use a Tamron 18-300mm lens for 90% of my photography, a Canon 10-18mm for my night photography and Sigma 150-600mm along with a 1.4 teleconverter giving me 840mm for wildlife etc. My large lens I purchased a second Canon 77D so if my original Canon 77D breaks I have a spare. If I'm going out and don't need some of my gear I empty my bag or put it in a second and leave it in the car

[@drkanyalkar8624]

Great input. Different thought process. i think i will implement your input. Thanks a lot.

[@Photography-Explained]

You're very welcome. Glad you enjoyed the video.

[@seansimpson7245]

That's only your personal opinion, mine is Canon 16-35 .... 70- 200.... niffty 50 😊

[@davidhoover3116]

Well done…. I agree and use two zoom lenses👍

[@orlandomolina3722]

AWESOME VIDEO! Can you do a video like this for people who want to do wedding, or portrait photography? What fun lens should I have? Thank you!! You got my Like and Sub!!

[@Joh146]

"The Only 2 lenses I need as a Photographer" were the better an more honest titel. It´s ok, if 200 mm is enough for you, but it´s not enough for me. With such a high megapixel camera I don´t really understand, why you use a superzoom. Yes you can crop, but the quality is not the same. And wanting to spare lenses, but using two bodys? I need at least three lenses, my wide angle, my standard zoom an my tele lens. But because of using Sony APS-c the lenses could be very small and light, my Sony 70-350 for example is really small. But I have a macro lens and primes for portraits, too. But I never take all lenses, but for my luck buying these is not so extremely expensive. But the quality you could say, but that is my personal decison and if I see the landscape photos from Andy Mumford for example with the very tiny Sigma 10-18 2.8 than this is all what I could expect as an amateur for an hobby. I like your channel but this was a bit of a click bait titel.

[@pentagramyt417]

The ONLY 2 Lenses YOU NEED as a Photographer: 1. 600 mm f4 2. 300 mm f2.8 💣💣

[@eltinjones4542]

Wide angle zooms are far too expensive. I use wide angle primes to compliment a standard zoom

[@alexmirza5210]

Fun lens could ben old 6 kilo lens aaaagh not fun lol. Actually a 35mm f2 is fun and useful.

[@edwinperez2726]

I am with you, I walk around with my Nikkor 18-200mm. I also carry with me other lens; if I am going to take pics of birds, I carry my Nikkor 70-300mm, if I am going to do Macro I take my 60mm. I have other lens, but in my bag, I may carry only 2 or 3 lens. I do have a 50mm, 2 other Macro, etc. But I don't carry them all. I pick and chose the 2 or 3 lens I know I am going to use.

[@Photography-Explained]

I think you're right that it's about being intentional of what you want to shoot rather than being overwhelmed by trying to shoot everything. Thanks for the comment Edwin.

[@DonaldWMeyers-dwm]

Teach your kids photography, and they'll never have enough money to buy drugs. ;-)

[@Mixer000999]

I don't get the point. It is evident that an amateur does not need too many lenses. Which ones specifically depends on what is the main purpose: wildlife, landscape or travel. BTW I personally would never buy a 28 - 200 mm zoom because for travel, landscape or cityscape it is not wide enough. Zooms starting from 28mm are used by professionals for weddings. But I agree that amateurs do not need expensive primes - modern zooms are more than enough quality wise.

[@mmartel]

Then you got the point, you just fixated too hard on what is his swiss army knife, which is 28-200. Your swiss army knife would be a 24-70, 20-70, 20-60, 24-105, or 24-120 range.

[@Rebecka_J]

For a long time my main walkaround lens was a Sigma 17-70mm, equivalent of 27.2-112 on a Canon APS-C body. But I also had a 70-200mm as a long lens and mainly used those together. When I wanted something simple and light to carry on a motorcycle I bought the Tamron 16-300mm, but it is awful wide open to be unusable under 20mm, so was more like a 35mm at the start of its usable range. Not wide enough is subjective. No one is saying your main lens has to be the same as his or mine. But was pointed to in the video, such limitations improves creativity because you are forced to properly look at subjects to find interesting perspectives. By missing out on yet another shot of that building you can instead find yourself isolating details that everyone else overlook.

[@Mixer000999]

@Rebecka_J Let me explain my point. Many years ago I was looking for a travel and cityscape camera to take photos of buildings when you cannot physically go further to have the building fully in the frame. And I bought a tiny jewel of a camera Canon PowerShot SD870 IS. It had the widest lens on a pocketable camera back then: 28mm. All other cameras were 32mm and up. My disappointment was when I learned that the "super-wide" 28mm as it was advertised was not wide enough... I used this camera for many one-bag trips and had a lot of beautiful pictures taken with it. But in many cases it was useless because I couldn't take architectural and cityscape photos. My current one-bag travel camera is Canon g7x Mii, which has 24mm on the wide side. It is almost perfect, I seldom miss a shot with it. But my perfect wide angle lens is a Nikon 10-20mm APS-c lens - small and light. With it I never missed a shot in my major trips to Greece, Japan etc. But of course if you are not into travel photography you may not need that wide lens. As I mentioned before: all depends on what type of photography you are into.

[@mmartel]

@Rebecka_J I simply disagree that primes force you to be creative. What they do is constrain your possibilities thus limiting one's ability to be creative with composition. This primes "force you to be more creative" is sheer copium - it's old school photography 101 dogma that we get fed and repeat t @Rebecka_J I simply disagree that primes force you to be creative. What they do is constrain your possibilities thus limiting one's ability to be creative with composition. This primes "force you to be more creative" is sheer copium - it's old school photography 101 dogma that we get fed and repeat to others. If you want to be forced to a single focal length, you can also do that with a zoom lens - set it to a specific length and only use that. If one is not seeing creative possibilities you could otherwise see just because you have a zoom lens, I will repeat the issue is the creativity of the operator, not the equipment. o others. If you want to be forced to a single focal length, you can also do that with a zoom lens - set it to a specific length and only use that. If one is not seeing creative possibilities you could otherwise see just because you have a zoom lens, I will repeat the issue is the creativity of the operator, not the equipment. Indeed, being able to achieve multiple focal lengths frees you to see more compositional possibilities than a single focal length. In the time you're struggling to "be creative" with a prime, I've already seen and taken 3 different creative competitions without having to change my lens.

[@SpotBentley]

Bob Loblaw

[@wdb1932]

No one lens lives on my camera(s).

[@dongee1664]

How does this bloke know what I need for my photography...he doesn't. If I have more than 2 lenses will I be stoned to death? Photography is not rocket science, there's only a few things to learn about camera setup, the rest is composition and some people are naturals. I see some are saying, 'use the same lens for a year', well, how boring can you get?

[@bamsemh1]

Nah, Sony is horrible.

[@Photography-Explained]

Ahhhh