[tclausen]

As a wife, I can promise you that the lenses are NOT the problem. What they represent/mean is. And in general, it's either time, money or attention. Or space.

"Thinning the heard" could, in that case - where the object of a man's hobby, or what they represent, being a problem - also mean the man being better off getting a divorce-lawyer, could it not?

Not trying to be provocative, but if a relationships is in the state that you describe, then it's effectively over already.

[kraigg007]

"Thinning the heard" could, in that case - where the object of a man's hobby, or what they represent, being a problem - also mean the man being better off getting a divorce-lawyer, could it not?

Not trying to be provocative, but if a relationships is in the state that you describe, then it's effectively over already.

Just a word of note, my wife and I have been happily married for 16 years and I see no decision involving this camera ending in a divorce. No threat there, but as my partner in life is she wants me ,to thin the heard, I will make every effort to do it or convince her otherwise. You guys have made some great points and your kit assembly logic is sound.

[Adam]

I now have what is known as a good problem to have...I have too many great lenses for my Pentax K-5II. They are all great copies but I can't take them all with me.

My passion is taking photos of People, Landscapes, Architecture, and pets. I do very little sports photography and am honing my craft in an effort to do for hire work. I have had a couple for hire shoots and am actively looking for more.

If you had to pair this list down to 5 lenses which 5 would you choose:

Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro HSM Contemporary (Solid lens that does everything well, Not Prime Great but it is the ideal walk around lens)
Sigma 8-16mm F4.5-5.6 DC HSM (Architecture, real estate, and landscape lens. very sharp, bit distorted, but it gets me to 8mm)
SMC-DA * 50-135mm F2.8 ED (IF) SMD (Almost prime sharp, great portrait lens, no SDM issues, large lens)
SMC-DA 50mm f/1.8 (Razor Sharp but my FA 31mm limited trumps this)
SMCP-DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited Series (Incredible, small, but lots of lens changes)
SMCP-DA 55-300mm f/4-5.8 ED Autofocus (Solid, sharp copy, inexpensive zoom lens, pretty impressed with this lens taking event / concert photos)
SMCP-DA 70 f/2.4 Limited Series (Incredible, small, but limits me to head shots or small groups at a distance)
SMCP-FA 31mm F1.8 AL Limited (Grail lens, all positives, price negative)

I like them all. I love the 31mm and 8-16mm, so those have to stay. There are things I love about all the others, but I can't keep them all. The primes are great for being out in the public and not having a huge obnoxious lens on the end of the camera. They also produce exceptional image quality. The zooms are great because they are flexible and produce excellent image quality, close but not quite to prime level.

So from the list which of the others would you keep in your bag? The wife says I can't keep them all.

Well, if you're using the 31mm a lot I guess the 35mm macro could go, and since you complained a bit about the 70mm and have the 50-135mm, I'd sell that one too. But your kit looks pretty good overall, so the question is, do you really need to downsize?

[kraigg007]

Well, if you're using the 31mm a lot I guess the 35mm macro could go, and since you complained a bit about the 70mm and have the 50-135mm, I'd sell that one too. But your kit looks pretty good overall, so the question is, do you really need to downsize?

Just a question about my 31mm lens. Since it is full frame is it closer to 35mm or 50mm. I thought that due to the 1.5 Crop factor, it was more like a 47mm on my K-5 II.

If so would it make sense to get rid of the 35mm or 50mm.

Forgive me if this is way off base.

[Tanzer]

The image circle is irrelevant. The focal length is still 31mm. Therefore closer to your 35.

[Colbyt]

Don't fall into that way of thinking. The FOV on an APSc sensor is the same as a 46.5 of a FF camera. It is and remains a 35mm. The FOV on the same camera for the 50 is closer to 75 on a FF.

For the APSC cameras I tend to shoot wider lenses than I ever did with film. I see the 70 and maybe the 50 as the best place to thin the herd but that depends on whether you use them or not.

[dansamy]

Great insight. Please elaborate, because you are right the money is already spent, they don't take up a ton of space, and I got great deals on the gear. I think it is because she was the original one that wanted a DSLR, but I took it up 5 notches. I blew the budget by a couple grand but I am paying for it out of my business account so it isn't a family expense beyond the camera body and 1 lens.

My mentality is always to get the best and have no regrets. I feel I have a kit that will last me 5-7 years, so I need your wife insight.

Thanks for adding your comments, but more would be helpful.

I think you just found your problem. She's the one who originally wanted "a better camera", right? Then, you went balls deep, blew the budget & now have a camera & 8(?) lenses. And you took over. It's great that you're getting paid work, etc. What happened to the family camera with a couple lenses for her to take pictures of the kids?

Many couples are able to successfully share hobbies. If she's a sensitive, feelings on her sleeve gal, she's a little bruised & jealous. She wanted to learn more about photography & using a better camera. Instead, the family bought you a camera that turned into a business tool.

I've also been married (almost) 16 years now. It's not the camera or the lenses. And no, the camera wouldn't be the cause of a divorce. Underlying issues, what it's really about, would.

---

Last edited by dansamy; 01-26-2014 at 02:25 PM.

[kraigg007]

I think you just found your problem. She's the one who originally wanted "a better camera", right? Then, you went balls deep, blew the budget & now have a camera & 8(?) lenses. And you took over. It's great that you're getting paid work, etc. What happened to the family camera with a couple lenses for her to take pictures of the kids?

Many couples are able to successfully share hobbies. If she's a sensitive, feelings on her sleeve gal, she's a little bruised & jealous. She wanted to learn more about photography & using a better camera. Instead, the family bought you a camera that turned into a business tool.

I've also been married (almost) 16 years now. It's not the camera or the lenses. And no, the camera wouldn't be the cause of a divorce. Underlying issues, what it's really about, would.

Thanks but a bit too heavy for this situation. My wife and I are fine weather I keep them all or sell them all. God is first and she is second. She knows that and I do too.

[dansamy]

Thanks but a bit too heavy for this situation. My wife and I are fine weather I keep them all or sell them all. God is first and she is second. She knows that and I do too.

You asked. I answered. It's not about the camera or the lenses. And I'm not suggesting that the underlying issue IS a big enough issue for a split. Unlike some of the previous posters who made suggestions to do things like hide the lenses you don't sell.

[Kozlok]

I guess my answer would be dependent on WHY she wants to limit your lenses. If your family needs the money, sell the 31 and the 50-135. It maximizes the return of cash to the house with a minimum impact on your flexibility. You lose quality, but maximize the financial gain. If you are broke (or even if you are struggling paycheck to paycheck), you have no business owning ~$1000 lenses.

If you are at the upper end of the income bracket, or have at least 3 months income in accessible savings (not 401K), then she's being unreasonable and I'd tell her to stuff it.

[kraigg007]

This post is not about my wife, our relationship, or our finances. It is about thinning the heard and maximizing my kit. I love all the items I have. I am not hurting for the funds, but admit I went overboard. I purchased every lens I ever wanted with the exception of the 15mm Limited, DA 300, and DA * 60-250. I feel I can do without those since my 8-16 is razor sharp and I am very satisfied with my 55-300. It is a little slow but the color is spot on and the images are very sharp. All I need since I don't do any sports photography.

I actually agree with her, but have a hard time getting rid of a couple of them because they are all so great and fit a purpose.

My wife and I have reviewed the post and he is happy that I have valued her concerns and took steps to narrow my collection. At this point she sees the value in having all the lenses I have. You must understand if you are not into photography, you feel a camera is a camera and a lens is is lens. But what I have found is that lenses are like limbs and body parts. The Body is the heart and brains, but the lens are like arms, legs, fingers, and your joints. You can function without them, but the body works so much better with them.

Probably selling 1 or 2 of the lenses now instead of all three. While I have the freedom to keep them all marriage is about a partnership and I value the her so much more than these lenses, so in the next week or so look for me to list a lens or two.

Still undecided but leaning towards getting rid of the 50 and or 35.

[Digitalis]

keep the 8-16mm, FA31, DA*50-135 and DA70 - sell the rest. With the proceeds from selling the remainder it will be a trivial matter to buy some manual extension tubes, which can be used on the FA31 so it can replace the DA35mm f/2.8 macro.

[dansamy]

You must understand if you are not into photography, you feel a camera is a camera and a lens is is lens. But what I have found is that lenses are like limbs and body parts. The Body is the heart and brains, but the lens are like arms, legs, fingers, and your joints. You can function without them, but the body works so much better with them.

I doubt you'll find people who understand this as well as a group of photography enthusiasts. I think everyone here appreciates the value of a lens being more than just the dollar amount....

[c.a.m]

I doubt you'll find people who understand this as well as a group of photography enthusiasts. I think everyone here appreciates the value of a lens being more than just the dollar amount....

Through a lens, your heart sees the world.

- Craig

[drypenn]

I think that most of everybody here are just horsing around with the "wife" angle, so ignore it!

If I were to really choose 5 from your collection, I'd get:

1. FA 31. Enough said.
2. DA 35 - It gives you the macro, and the compactness of the 30s.
3. DA 55-300mm - Some "reach" when you need some.
4. DA*50-135 - Portrait
5. 8-16 - Different Perspective.

But then again, personally, my wife used to ask me to sell some of my lenses every time she sees me buying one. Now either she has grown tired of reminding me, or she has accepted it totally that I love these glasses next to her and my daughter. Truth be told, when I can't sleep, I'll open up my dry box, (beside our bed), caress those beautiful metal and glasses, and often, she'll wake up, gives a knowing sardonic smile, and just goes back to sleep.

We have been married for 10 years.