My use of photo equipment in year 2007
Posted in Photography on Feb 18th, 2008 Comments Off
Each year I make statistics about my use of photography equipment to find real figures on what camera lenses were used and which were simply collecting dust. I’ve also analyzed, what focal lenghts I’ve been using in my photographs. To make statistics more interesting, I’ve added figures from year 2006 as well as my entire dSLR era as comparison point.
Use of camera lenses
One thing that needs to be taken into account, when you look into these figures. In year 2006, I sold Canon EF 35mm f/2 and Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 lenses and bought Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM at the end of year.
| Lens | 2006 | 2007 | 11/2004- 12/2007 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tokina AF 12-24mm f/4 AT-X Pro DX | 10% | 11% | 7% |
| Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM | 30% | 35% | 42% |
| Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM | 14% | 8% | 10% |
| Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM + 1.4x II | 1% | <1% | <1% |
| Canon EF 35mm f/2 | 10% | - | 6% |
| Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM | 1% | 6% | 2% |
| Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro | 14% | 14% | 10% |
| Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L USM | - | 1% | <1% |
| Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L USM + 1.4x II | - | 1% | <1% |
| Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L USM + 2x II | - | 6% | 2% |
| Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM | - | 9% | 3% |
| Canon EF 300mm f/4L IS USM + 1.4x II | - | 4% | 1% |
| Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 SP AF Aspherical XR Di LD (IF) | 16% | - | 5% |
| muut | - | - | 5% |
Focal length
Since my camera lens collection on this study has four zoom lenses, two teleconverters, overlapping focal lenghts, its worth of the effort to write down, how much each focal length was used.
| Focal length | 2006 | 2007 | 11/2004- 12/2007 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12mm | 3% | 2% | 2% |
| 17mm | 6% | 11% | 11% |
| 18mm | 1% | ||
| 19mm | 1% | 1% | 1% |
| 20mm | 2% | 2% | 2% |
| 21mm | 1% | 2% | 1% |
| 23mm | 1% | 1% | 1% |
| 24mm | 3% | 3% | 3% |
| 25mm | 1% | 1% | 1% |
| 26mm | 1% | ||
| 27mm | 1% | 1% | |
| 28mm | 4% | 2% | |
| 29mm | 1% | 1% | 1% |
| 30mm | 1% | 1% | |
| 32mm | 1% | 1% | |
| 33mm | 1% | 1% | |
| 35mm | 13% | 7% | 10% |
| 36mm | 1% | 1% | |
| 37mm | 1% | ||
| 40mm | 5% | 2% | 7% |
| 50mm | 4% | ||
| 70mm | 5% | 2% | |
| 75mm | 5% | 1% | |
| 85mm | 1% | ||
| 100mm | 14% | 19% | 12% |
| 200mm | 2% | 3% | 2% |
| 280mm | 1% | ||
| 300mm | 9% | 3% | |
| 400mm | 6% | 2% | |
| 420mm | 4% | 1% |
When you look into these figures, we should keep in mind that during year 2007, none of my lenses had focal length in 40-70mm range. An other big issue is related to rounding figures. All the figures above were truncated. As a result from this operation, if you sum up all the figures from all (30) listed focal lengths, sum from year 2006 is going to be 74%, from year 2007 it is 77% and from whole dSLR era the total figure is 76%. So one fourth of all lens usage falls into rounding errors.
If we try to analyze things behind these numbers, Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L is quite curious piece of glass. On last couple years, its usage is heavily concentrated on photographing iceBREAK events. iceBREAK is whitewater paddlers event in Helsinki and 70-200mm lens is ideal for taking photographers about paddlers, who want to paddle in rapids, where the water is still pretty cold. Since I am only taking photographs for my own pleasure, I probably should experiment, how well I could cover the same event with Canon EF 100/2.8 USM Macro. This would tell me quite bit about whether or not I really need 70-200mm f/4L or not.
Good goal for year 2008 would be to stop making changes to gear list and at the end of year make careful evaluation on which lenses are most valuable for me and which could/should be sold.
