This is an expensive hobby; at least, it certainly can be. I bought my first DSLR about 13 years ago. A brand new Pentax k20d. I bought two lenses: a Pentax 50/1.4 and a Tamron 70-300. Those lasted me for a couple years. I eventually added on a cheap wide zoom and some old manual focus primes.
When I made the switch to Nikon this year, I knew a little better what I needed. I grabbed a 35-70/2.8, an 80-200/2.8, and a 400/5.6, all from the 90s. Hell, even the camera I bought when I made the switch was an 11 year old d700 instead of something new. You can do this hobby in an affordable manner if you know what you’re doing.
I then learned the value of modern autofocus systems and vibration control. I actually learned that the day that two of these three photos were taken. With my better paying day-job, it wasn’t *too* difficult to find some space in the budget for some more expensive upgrades. And I’m not gonna lie, those modern systems make my life easier. It makes it easier to make the pictures I *want* to make. But are they necessary?
You be the judge.
The three photos above are each taken with a 12mp sensor and are straight from camera. One of them is shot with a $300 lens. One with a $1300 lens. One with a $13000 lens. Obviously the lighting and angles are different. This is not a scientific study. If you want to dig into the science of optics, this is not the blog for you. I care about pictures, and most pictures are not seen at full resolution. Most pictures are not pixel peeped.
Which is which? Why do you think each one is what you think it is?
Better question: which lens is best?
I can answer that one, and I can do it without telling you which picture is which. The best one is the one you’ve got. If you can drop $13000 on a lens because you’ll make it back in licensing fees, go for it. If you can drop $13000 on a lens because your day job pays seven figures? Go for it. If you can only afford the $300 lens and want some wildlife reach? Go for it. For me, the $1300 lens is the sweet spot right now. It’s invigorated me creatively. But then again, so did the $300 when I bought it. And if I ever do have the need or the spare cash for that beastly Nikon 180-400 f/4, I’m sure that it’ll invigorate the hell out of me.
But yeah. The point of this post is not to sell you a lens. It’s to reaffirm something I’ve believed in since my first camera: take what you’ve got and go make pictures. For anyone with a smartphone in their pocket, money is not what’s stopping you from making pictures.
The Zootographer 