Interesting discussion on lenses. As a photojournalist for over 25 years I have gone through several stages of what lenses to carry/use. First off, Zeiss optics, both for the G system and the slr's are better than any other out there. Forget the graphs and curves, Provia or Reala on a light table, properly exposed through Zeiss glass will beat all challengers. There is one exception, sports, the Nikon or Canon 400 2.8's with supporting F5 or D1H or Canon EOS are the rulers of the sidelines. For sports that is what I use. For all other situations my prime lens is the 45 mm on the G2 or the 50mm 1.4 on an RX. I don't feel my eye or reflexes are good enough for zoom lenses, if you use a zoom, ask yourself how often you use it any other focal length besides it's widest or longest setting. In the bag or on another body I keep a 28, 90 (G) (NOTE: I think the 90 for the G is perhaps the sharpest lens made for 35mm, portraits shot wide open with this lens look 3D!, even better than the 85 1.4) I also carry a 180, a 60 macro a 21(G) and a 18 in case my back is to the wall, but 80% of my work is done with a normal lens. It has taken me many years to learn that if the shot is not there with a normal lens, than perhaps it's just not there. The 50mm is better than any other focal length to "layer" a composition with different elements, and conversely, also the best at creating a "flat" seamless composition. Check out the "Classic" photos shot through the years by the masters, most have been shot with a "normal' or near normal focal length. Forget the gimmicks, if you are reading this you already have the best lenses, spend more money on film, load up your camera and get out there.
