[stoppingdown]

I'd like to thank Dave, who originated this post, not only for providing another excuse for pleasant chatting, but also because the topic made me think more than I expected... Ok, let's start from the simple part. As others, I had various phases:

 

• 1998-2000: first approach, Minolta cameras and two cheap lenses (24-70 and something like a 70-300). Just to spend less money and see whether the hobby was ok for me.
  
• 2000-2013: serious approach, embracing Nikon, with the intermediate switch to digital in 2003. I went for the prime way: 24 f/2.8, 35 f/2 (later f/1.8), 50 f/1.8, 85 f/1.8, 180 f/2.8, 300 f/4. My understanding - without being able to test the thing by myself - was that zooms (apart from the very expensive ones) were of inferior quality; and I liked the idea of walking rather than zooming. The only exception was for the 12-24mm f/4, because in the UWA a few mm make great changes, and would require too many lenses.
  
• 2012-2014: I realised that my approach to photography was changing. Around 2001 I had a "unofficial" nervous breakdown because of too much work, and I was ordered to relax. Photography in the open air was a perfect way of relaxing. I could afford to relax, because - at least - that too much work had brought some wealth. In years around 2005/2006 there was the peak of the relaxed approach. I was able to take advantage of any business travel to add some days of free journeys. For instance, I was attending a yearly business conference in Antwerp, and for 4 days of conference I was able to take 10 days: 3 to drive northbound from Genoa to Antwerp and 3 for the return trip, of course spending only the unavoidable on highways. I was able to wander through Bourgogne and Champagne, of spotting a ruined castle and take a few hours to drive and walk around to seek for the best perspective and light. I had time to change prime and walking instead of zooming. After some years, things started to change. The increasing uncertainty in Europe (2008 didn't strike hard in general, but at the time one of my major contractors was a USA university operating in Florence, and it was hit hard - I realised it was just a matter of time before the waves came to Europe), the continuous increase of taxes and, later, the surge of health problems with elder members of my family progressively eroded time. Photography was more and more done in a hurry. Furthermore, I "discovered" Alps and unfortunately walking through steep slopes for me is quite hard. Less time, less chances of walking... I was pushed to have another look at zooms. I read a very good review by Thom Hogan of an inexpensive lens such as the Nikkor 18-70mm and decided to have a try. It was revealing. Much more photos, much more keepers, no more little pain of seeing some photos that were just a bit "too narrow" on the subject, much more pleasure.
  
• 2014: In the meantime I started to have my own health problems at neck and back. Hence the desire of reducing weight and the mirroless switch. My excellent experience with the 18-70mm made me choose only zooms for the Sony system.
  

If I look at the statistics for the Nikkor system I see:

• 300mm 50%
  
• 12-24mm 18%
  
• 180mm 10%
  
• 85mm  6%
  
• 18-70mm 5%
  

The 300mm was for birding and wildlife, that in the former years were prevalent, so that figure is obvious. It's also probably magnified by the fact that I shoot much more at a moving subject, and have many keepers, than a static one. For the rest, the 18-70 stands out as its 5% was done in just a couple of years, while the other lenses were in my bag since a decade. If I look at statistics only for 2012-2014, the 18-70mm has got the 37% and the 300mm the 35%.

 

It turns out that the 12-24mm and the 18-70mm (for landscapes), and the 300mm f/4 (mostly for wildlife, with a switch towards landscape in the latest years) can be really nominated my favourites of the Nikkor phase.

 

A special mention, though, goes to the 180mm and the 85mm. In the age of the OVF I loved them because they were bright in the viewfinder, and really sharp. I'm still guessing whether I'll have the courage to sell the 180mm, even though I'll never use it.

 

The Samyang 8mm had a peak when I bought it, mostly used for "panoramas in a single shot" (with heavy vertical cropping, or defishing), but since Lightroom introduced the stitching feature I've switched to stitched panoramas with other lenses. Since then, it’s used for really “fish-eye” shots, but this makes it a specialty lens.

 

When looking at the Sony statistics I see:

• 16-70mm 43%
  
• 70-200mm f/4 28%
  
• 10-18mm 11%
  

Apparently, it makes sense: the 16-70 is the natural "heir" of the 18-70. But these numbers are not stable yet: my Nikon bag was completed in 2003, so those statistics are related to more than a decade of full availability, while my Sony bag has been completed just a few months ago. Also, there's a "énamourement" phenomenon so I'm using a lot the latest bought lens (also to get in acquaintance with it). In two months I've used the Sigma 150-600mm a lot, but it is a much shorter time than for the other lenses.

 

But - here the part that made me think - while for the Nikon age those numbers are telling the same story of my perception, I don't feel the same for the Sony lenses. The 16-70, if it was as it should be, should be the king. But its decentering defects prevent it from being (even though, clearly, the quality is much better than the Nikkor 18-70). In the end, my perceived favourite of the Sony system is the 70-200mm, even though it's not the typical "mirrorless" lens.

 

Doing the maths for this post, I realised that the 10-18mm is under-used. It's a bit strange. It's true that 10-11mm are somewhat hard to be properly used and the upper 2mm are covered by the 16-70. But the intermediate range 12-16mm? Perhaps I've just become too lazy and I'm reluctant to change lenses while on the field?

 

The Trioplan is another favourite (even though I'm still far from being able to use it at all its capabilities), but it's a specialty.

 

PS When I decided for zooms, I still thought I had to own a few primes and force myself to use them once in a while. But the Sigma 30mm f/2.8, that was the very first lens bought with the NEX-6 because it was good and inexpensive, and at first I wanted to experience the EVF, has been used only for the initial tests. The Samyang 12mm, as I told you in the past days, was only tested too - true that it has been intended by me as a specialty lens, for astro panoramas, and I hardly have chances for that kind of shots.

 

But in the past days I've actually forced myself to use it - also taking advantage from the fact that during this month I'm doing much more hikes than usual, in places that I know since I was a child and have been perused (so I have less fear of losing something fundamental if I go out just with a single lens). So far it gave me the highest satisfaction of the month, which is worth complimenting this post with an image. I fell I’ll think of it in the next weeks…

 

*** Edited to replace the photo with one with a hopefully better compression.

 

 [ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]