I only know of lenses of shale in reservoirs. Reservoir lenses will be the small discontinuous ones which are very difficult to find and usually not worth the investment. Unless you mean the Pinnecale Reefs which can be small or large. Actually lenses means repeated reservoir bodies,these I have not seen in my 40 years as reservoir engineer. Most probably due to their low economic value and the difficulty of finding them.
Frankly speaking, in my research work I have been mapped my reservoir and it look like a lens. So I want to make little bit assumption postulated from previous lens reservoir and tested my findings.
Do you mean it is flat thin reservoir with small diameter (this is the lens), and why would you expect more lenses? It seems that your question is trying to use the word lens for no obvious reason. Can you explain clearly what you mean.
For Roberto: Even connected lenses could be bad if they lead to bottom water or if permeability variations between the lenses and surrounding reservoir are extreme, one of them is small and the other are very large
If you mean by lens a reservoir interval that would be a) high net to gross b) roughly circular in XY shape and b) thickest close to XY center and thinning toward edges, turbiditic lobes reservoirs would fit the bill. A few references from TOTAL portfolio: DALIA flanks [Angola] (and quite a few parts of the neighboring Angola block 17 fields), Laggan [UK]. Look for "turbiditic lobe reservoir" on onepetro.org for further references.
If you want to map the geometry of the reservior with a given accuracy, you will also need a TVT description derived from the TVD's. In order to get that, you need the along-hole depth to be measured with a given uncertainty. See my book "Along-hole Depth" for more details.