Vacation with 50mm only: is it possible?

[antiquark]

For various reasons, I'd like to go on my next vacation with a single lens: a 50mm equivalent.

Has anyone ever gone on a vacation with a 50mm only? Did you miss many shots? Were you always able to "work around" the angle of view limitations to produce good compositions?

Thanks,
Derek.

 

[kxl]

All the photos in my Everyday Egypt gallery are from a a CV 35/1.2 on an Epson RD-1s.

 

[gilpen123]

And my recent Hongkong family trip is likewise with RD1 and a Leica 35 2.0 V4.

 

[antiquark]

All the photos in my Everyday Egypt gallery are from a a CV 35/1.2 on an Epson RD-1s.

Thanks! It looks like you weren't limited by the focal length. Even some of the interiors have a bit of a "wide-angle" look to them.

 

[monochromejrnl]

I trekked (850km over 30 days) across northern Spain twice with a M4P and 50HexanonM (and a bag of TriX) and it was fantastic. Liberating to have only one lens and body to choose from.

Do it!!!

 

[robklurfield]

Having unloaded all my gear to afford an M8 a little more than a year ago, I was left with only a single lens, a 28 Elmarit, for a week in Paris. I've now rebuilt my kit, but I have no regrets about the shots I made while traveling with the single lens. My attitude is: work with what you have and enjoy yourself doing it. If you can move, you move to accomplish what you need to as far as framing with only one focal length. I had to step closer with the wide and you'll have to do the opposite. Not a big deal. It's much more fun to travel light anyway. Personally, when I have to select just one lens without knowing what I might encounter, I always tend towards the 28 or a 35, but that's just a personal preference.

 

[kxl]

Thanks! It looks like you weren't limited by the focal length. Even some of the interiors have a bit of a "wide-angle" look to them.

The nice thing about a 50 is the working distance, especially in deep but narrow spaces... in those indoor photos, a 35 or wider would have captured too much of the periphery.

 

[funkpilz]

On my last vacation, I wanted to shoot myself in the head at least daily because I brought a 50mm and left my 35mm at home. I missed a lot of shots in Bruges, were the alleys are very narrow and you need a wide lens to actually get anything inside your frame.
I guess it really depends on where you're going.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

I've taken trips with a single lens... and found it nice and invigorating. Suddenly, I had to think more about my shots and the limitations of the lens itself. But I learned...

Especially, I learned that I'm a 35mm man! 😱 🙂

In any event, I am embarking on a trip and will take only one Leica body and one lens: my M4-2 and my Hexanon 35/f2.

 

[typhillips]

I think funkpilz is right that the "ideal" focal length would depend on where you're going.

This blog entry chronicles my last two winter vacations to Sanibel Island. This year, although I technically traveled with more than one camera/lens, all of my keeper shots were with an M4-P/Hexanon 50 and Isolette II folder (50mm equivalent).
http://drasticdiversions.blogspot.com/2010/03/south-for-winter.html

 

[scorpius73]

Years ago I went to Puerto Rico with only a 50mm lens. Didn't think twice about it and just enjoyed myself. Today I would opt for a 35mm if I were only taking one lens. That's jus me though. Whatever you do. Enjoy yourself.

 

[dfoo]

If I had to travel with just one lens it would be a 35mm. I just spent a month in Shanghai and I brought with me just a 21/35/50. Perfect setup if you ask me. I shot 90% of the shots with the 35mm 🙂

 

[Steve Bellayr]

Went on vacation last year with a 35mm f2.0. I was completely satisfied.

 

[GrahamWelland]

I just got back from a week in Istanbul. I took my M9 & 21/1.4, 35/1.4 & 90/2.8 but other than interior shooting in the mosques where the 21 lux was invaluable, I probably shot 95% of the time with just the 35mm. If it had been less of an urban location then I'm sure I could have got away with just a 50mm.

 

[chris00nj]

I agree that it depends on where you are going.

In Rome, I brought a 21/4, a 50/1.5, and a 135/4.5, but I used the 21/4 most of the time, and the 50/1.5 for inside churches when I needed the speed. I could have just used a 28/2 and been fine.

A 50 would be better for something with more landscapes. I went on an Alaskan cruise and brought a 35 and a 100, which was a nice combination, though most shot were with the 100mm.

Next trip I want to bring my Ikonta 6x9 and Bessa w/ 35/2. Two cameras, two films, and no lens changing.

 

[scorpius73]

I just got back from a week in Istanbul. I took my M9 & 21/1.4, 35/1.4 & 90/2.8 but other than interior shooting in the mosques where the 21 lux was invaluable, I probably shot 95% of the time with just the 35mm. If it had been less of an urban location then I'm sure I could have got away with just a 50mm.

Thanks for the info. I'm headed there in October. I'm thinking of picking up a CV 15mm for the trip.

 

[Bob Michaels]

I believe there are two questions here: should you travel with only one lens and is 50mm "the lens" if you only have one.

I have personally no problems with a singular focal length for shooting all the time. I travel with two M bodies so I have a backup. And, I travel with two lenses also to have a backup. Since I don't duplicate focal lengths, they are a 28mm and a 35mm. Those are the focal lengths that work for me. But I only carry one to photograph all day.

Of course if your style at home is to constantly switch between a wide, a normal and a tele, you better take all three on vacation.

The second question "is 50mm the focal length" is a purely personal choice. Base it on what you use at home. Your style will not change when you go on vacation.

The "one body, one lens, no backup" is also a personal thing. If you are going on vacation where the vacation aspect is primary and photography is secondary you can live with an equipment malfunction. But if photography is the main reason you are going, don't risk being somewhere remote for an extended time period with no functioning camera.

 

[degruyl]

The "one body, one lens, no backup" is also a personal thing. If you are going on vacation where the vacation aspect is primary and photography is secondary you can live with an equipment malfunction. But if photography is the main reason you are going, don't risk being somewhere remote for an extended time period with no functioning camera.

If it is a vacation, and you don't want to carry extra gear, remember that disposable cameras are all over the place. That can be considered a back-up if photography is not the main goal.

On the other questions: I use 50mm on 35mm film (I use a 35mm equivalent on every other size of film, so take that with a heaping teaspoon of salt). I rarely use more than one lens with a particular camera. I have not been carrying a backup most short trips.

For long trips, I bring just about everything short of the 8x10 with me, and that might change the next intercontinental move.

 

[mooge]

on my trip to Singapore/Malaysia/ Thailand last year, I brought a whole bunch of crap: a Minolta Hi-matic, a Canon FTb with 100, 50, 24, teleconverter... I ended up using the FTb with the 50mm the most. I just 'see' well with that lens. I guess it also helps that it's so hot there that you really don't want to bring that extra gear in a bag.

so on our little detour to Phuket, Thailand, I brought the FTb, the fifty, four rolls of film and a Gossen Lunasix. no regrets...

cheers.

 

[maddoc]

I have made many short-trips to various cities and found the 50mm to be perfect, it is my "city/people" lens. When going hiking or camping, I leave the 50mm at home and bring a 21mm and 90mm.