What lens do you like more than you thought you would?

[Smaug]

Fir me it has been the Panasonic 20/1.7
I wasn't expecting to add much to my photography given it was sitting uncomfortably aside the 12-40 and 25/1.4 but despite its AF flaws, it has surprised me with its lovely rendering. It is still one of my favourite primes, not only in mFT realm.

...by "AF flaws" do you mean that it's just slow to focus?
I read about that before I bought it. I didn't bother me, because it wasn't an action lens. I finally re-sold it and replaced mine with the Zuiko 17/1.8. I just like the 35 mm FoV better.
The Panasonic lens was a bit sharper though. ;-)

 

[Felice62]

...by "AF flaws" do you mean that it's just slow to focus?
I read about that before I bought it. I didn't bother me, because it wasn't an action lens. I finally re-sold it and replaced mine with the Zuiko 17/1.8. I just like the 35 mm FoV better.
The Panasonic lens was a bit sharper though. ;-)

Yes, I was referring to the slow AF but, like you, it doesn't affect my type of shooting.
I also have the pl15/1.7 and the Oly 17/1.8 but I prefer the Fov offered by the 20 mil...
Lucky enough we have plenty of choices

 

[Brian]

I recently bought into the Nikon Z system with a used Z5 body and a few lenses. (40/2, 24-50/slow, 24-120/4, 70-300/slow, 400/8 mirror)

I bought the 40 mm f/2 with the idea of it being my low light, lightweight prime lens, which would only occasionally displace the 24-120 that I thought would be pretty much glued to the camera all the time. I thought the 70-300 would get the next most use and the 24-50 would be my vacation lens. (compact & lightweight)

In reality, I find myself questioning whether I could get the job done with the 40, even when the 24-120 would technically be the better choice.

One recent example was my stepdaughter's prom photos. The 24-120 on the Z5 would have given me the "better" focal length, or I could have used the 45/1.8 on my Olympus E-M10.3 body for a good combo of portrait focal length + fast maximum aperture. But no, I chose the 40/2 and just moved around more. Or backed up a bit too far to keep the semi wide angle distortion from wrecking the closer shots, then cropped a bit later.

I just love that lens! Maybe I'm going into a prime lens phase again? It's just so light and the focal length seems just right, so often. Here's a sample shot. Stepdaughter and her boyfriend, about to go to their junior prom. I embarassed him a little when I asked if he would like to borrow one of Lorelai's hair ties to help keep the hair out of his face.

View attachment 3227​

This guy must have a Time Machine. I think he was in my High School Class.

 

[Brian]

This is with the "Worst Lens that Nikon Ever made", the original 9-element 43~86/3.5. Scanned from a negative, full crop.

Remember- Pin Cushion Distortion makes People Look Thinner. Know your Zoom's Sweet Spot.
Nikon F2 Photomic.

 

[Lee Jay]

Why?

Because it's useful as a circular fish, a full-frame fish and, on crop, a full-frame fish through to an ultra-wide rectilinear with defishing.

 

[Lee Jay]

I find 40mm a really universal FL. IMHO often underestimated.

I think, if you weld a hyper-zoom on your camera and keep it that way for a year, you'll be surprised at how even the histogram of focal lengths you use ends up being.

 

[Mujana1]

No images here, but that has to be the Voigtlander 110mm Macro APO-Lanthar
Bought it during covid crises, because there weren' t many models for portrait shooting. So, macro could be a nice alternative.
This lens is so much more than "only" a macro lens; quality (build and image results), so much better and nicer than many other lenses I use and have used.
Rendering is gorgeous and it' s pin sharp! Love it!
Maybe minuses: pretty heavy and manual focussing.
Happy to accept that when I see the results.