Hello, Heather! You are in the interesting stage of your photography. The stage is the one when you are really not absolutely sure of what you want, and one can spend a lot of money working out the kinks in the kit.
Here is my current most used kit:
- DA 12-24 (Love that super wide!)
- DA*16-50 (I actually bought it for the extra 5 mm over the DA 16-45)
- DA* 50-135 (Works better than I thought) Same field of view as the 70-210 on film, and a whole stop faster.
- M 100/4 macro (Sharp as a tack)
- M 400/5.6 (have to fiddle the CAs, but ...)
- A 1.4X-S (The 1.7 doesn't work well on the 400 because of the CAs)
- 50mm extension tube (The 100 goes to 1:1 and the 400 can focus closer than 16.5 feet/5 meters.
Claire is using the MZ-S and 24-90 as her standard kit.
I was lucky enough to be broke enough over my life that I had to think out every lens I bought, and had found out by the time I had the cash, exactly which way I wanted to go in focal length.
My Dad's estate bought the k10d and the three DA lenses - no worries about cash. I remember him every time I use them.
Perhaps a long winded exposition of my working lenses over the 47 years would help. Each line is the lenses in use. I have left out the lenses I did not like and changed out, such as a Sigma 170-500 AF, and a Pentax 28/3.5 Shift lens that was great in the city, but not out here, and a few other excursions into mediocrity.
- 55 mm
- 55 + 135 mm
- 28 + 55 + 135 mm
- 28 + 55 + 70-210
- 28 + 55 + 70-210 + 1.4X
- 28 + 55 + 70-210 + 400 + 1.4X
- 24-90 + 70-210 + 400 + 1.4X
- 24-90 + 70-210 + 400 + 1.4X + 100 macro
- Then I went digital, so the lenses changed a bit. they will stay here until January 1st - thanks to your LBA anonymous club.
- 12-24 + 16-50 + 50-135 + 100 macro + 400 + 1.4X + AF 1.7X
I never seemed to ever use anything between 200 and 400 on film, and I still don't. For me it's 12 - 135 and go for the birds.
Aplogies for the late night drivel.