1-Body, 1 lens: A renewed commitment

Bill,

I, for the most part find myself agreeing a lot with what you said (not in this particular thread, but outside).

One thing that I observe is that you always use yourself as the yardstick of how you see others. All relative to your values, your methods, your experiences, your knowledge, and your (whatever).

I don't. I can't.

I measure myself against others and I constantly learn and derive inspirations from others (including you, sometimes :) ). So from time to time, I'd like to give back by sharing my experience hoping that it may inspire someone that came after me.

I am putting the 1-body-1-len stake in the ground not because I am proclaiming a breakthrough zen/minimalistic/"ommm...." approach, I did it because I need it. Because without it, I'll be a wannabe who end up with a bunch of super-optics and gears, and no pictures to show for. And I don't like that picture at all (pun enforced).

The Leica M-system is a perfect choice for me to draw the line in the sand because there is so much for me to achieve. Right now I can't take street-pictures worth a dime, by limiting myself to 1-body-1-lens, all I have left is myself to push forward. Nothing else.

So my post has nothing to do with belly-button gazing (funny picture, that :) ) or booze (I can't even finish one glass of beer without getting red in the face). It's about deciding which one is more important for me, the photographs, or the gear.

If my decision doesn't measure up to your yardstick, then I just have to live with that. :D
 
I used one lens, 90mm, for years because I didn't have money fro other lenses. It also helps to learn what a lens can do by using it exlusively for a month or two and you know it and know when to use it.

As far as kicking your head into the right place if using one lens does it for someone why get pouty about their method.
 
shadowfox said:
Bill,

I, for the most part find myself agreeing a lot with what you said (not in this particular thread, but outside).

One thing that I observe is that you always use yourself as the yardstick of how you see others. All relative to your values, your methods, your experiences, your knowledge, and your (whatever).

I don't. I can't.
Click to expand...

OK, fair criticism. Truth is, I use myself as a reference because I am all I know. Some things I can grok even though I cannot agree with. Some things I can understand the basic concept of, but I cannot quite get my mind around it. And some things just seem, well, silly to me.

The limitation is of course, mine. I accept that.

I measure myself against others and I constantly learn and derive inspirations from others (including you, sometimes :) ).
Click to expand...

I know that I work in a different way. I never go to the gallery, for example. I have very little interest in the photographs other people take. I have a 'Flickr' friends list, and I try to look over the photographs I see there and make comments from time to time. And don't get me wrong, I like what I see - in many cases, their abilities far outweigh mine; it's just that left to my own devices, I'm not terribly interested in anyone else's photographs.

On very rare occasions, I see the work of some famous photographer and go 'wow' and want to see more. I am planning a trip before May to the Milwaukee Art Museum to see "FOTO: MODERNITY IN CENTRAL EUROPE, 1918–1945:"

http://mam.org/FOTO/

But I went to see an Ansel Adams exhibit here in Detroit and it did nothing for me - it was quite a let-down, to tell the truth.

I do what I do. I may take inspiration from others, I may learn from their techniques and their methods. But I may not. I read about Garry Winogrand's method of taking photos, and I'm not interested at all in trying to duplicate that. I like street photography, but the only street photography I find really exciting is Brassai. And I don't draw the line anywhere - I have never tried wildlife photography, but I'm willing to give it a go. I've done weddings, events, hot air balloons, flowers, portraits, parades, you name it. It's all grist for the mill. I'm not an artist - I do what I do.

So from time to time, I'd like to give back by sharing my experience hoping that it may inspire someone that came after me.
Click to expand...

Again, fair enough. Sorry for poking fun at it.

I am putting the 1-body-1-len stake in the ground not because I am proclaiming a breakthrough zen/minimalistic/"ommm...." approach, I did it because I need it. Because without it, I'll be a wannabe who end up with a bunch of super-optics and gears, and no pictures to show for. And I don't like that picture at all (pun enforced).
Click to expand...

Whereas I go to an airshow with a 70~210 lens, get some decent photos, but notice that I am not quite filling the frame, so I think a 300 zoom would be a good way to do that. I don't think hmmm, how can I get a more creative shot with the gear I have? I did that while I was shooting. When I think about next time, I think about how I could have done that better and what I'd need to do it.

I went to a ballroom dancing competition because it sounded like a pip. And it was. I learned a lot of new skills there. I really had to push myself. I took a slew of lenses because I did not know what would work. I began to work through my options and finally settled down with a 135mm f/2.8 lens shot at f/3.5 (with digital crop factor). If I had not had it, I would not have gotten the shots I wanted. So perhaps you can see where our experiences differ. I reach for a tool that seems to me to fit what the situation is, I don't try to match my situation to the tools I have.

The Leica M-system is a perfect choice for me to draw the line in the sand because there is so much for me to achieve. Right now I can't take street-pictures worth a dime, by limiting myself to 1-body-1-lens, all I have left is myself to push forward. Nothing else.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I see now. I don't think I'm all that, either, but I am not worried about it. I just do what I do. If it challenges me and I enjoy it and like the results, I'm happy. I know they're probably unworthy dross to the rest of the world.

So my post has nothing to do with belly-button gazing (funny picture, that :) ) or booze (I can't even finish one glass of beer without getting red in the face). It's about deciding which one is more important for me, the photographs, or the gear.
Click to expand...

I see them as inextricably intertwined. Mechanics use tools, blacksmiths use hammers, painters use brushes. Photographers use lenses.

If my decision doesn't measure up to your yardstick, then I just have to live with that. :D
Click to expand...

No, you made your point. Well done. I'll stop now.
 
Will - for what it's worth, I encourage you to pursue your plan.

I look forward to following along as you go.
 
MikeCassidy said:
... I read 30 years ago that Ralph Gibson shoots with just a 50mm. He has some nice pictures. I dont know if he still does this but it wouldn't surprise me. ...
Click to expand...
As of last year he still does. He also eschews red filters, and considers digital a passing fad.
 
I feel the same way...I just learned a few things about photography when I was a kid that conflicts with this simplicity. These few things have become my rules.

First, if you want to learn about photography...shoot.

Second, shoot slides to tighten your skills...it's less forgiving.

Third, never sell a Leica.

Since I have : inherited an M2, bought an M6 because it was a really good deal, and bought an M8 at full price just because I am at a point in my life where I can.

So, I found I can't violate my rules. Instead, I pick the camera I want to shoot with and use it. Mainly, I'd hate to get caught in a dark alley with all three.
 
Will

you have all my respect and esteem for what you're doing. Coming back to "basics" it's something I'm moving toward too. I consider RF shooting the utmost photographic level under both the creative and technical side. Mastering a manual RF camera it's for sure one of the greatest challenges a photographers can face in his life.

Best wishes.
 
I firmly believe in the one-lens one-camera Philosophy being professed here.

Everyone with more than one lens and one camera, kindly list them in the Classifieds.

(Bill, SShhhh. Gotta lure them into range...)
 
bmattock said:
OK, fair criticism. Truth is, I use myself as a reference because I am all I know. Some things I can grok even though I cannot agree with. Some things I can understand the basic concept of, but I cannot quite get my mind around it. And some things just seem, well, silly to me.

The limitation is of course, mine. I accept that.



I know that I work in a different way. I never go to the gallery, for example. I have very little interest in the photographs other people take. I have a 'Flickr' friends list, and I try to look over the photographs I see there and make comments from time to time. And don't get me wrong, I like what I see - in many cases, their abilities far outweigh mine; it's just that left to my own devices, I'm not terribly interested in anyone else's photographs.

On very rare occasions, I see the work of some famous photographer and go 'wow' and want to see more. I am planning a trip before May to the Milwaukee Art Museum to see "FOTO: MODERNITY IN CENTRAL EUROPE, 1918–1945:"

http://mam.org/FOTO/

But I went to see an Ansel Adams exhibit here in Detroit and it did nothing for me - it was quite a let-down, to tell the truth.

I do what I do. I may take inspiration from others, I may learn from their techniques and their methods. But I may not. I read about Garry Winogrand's method of taking photos, and I'm not interested at all in trying to duplicate that. I like street photography, but the only street photography I find really exciting is Brassai. And I don't draw the line anywhere - I have never tried wildlife photography, but I'm willing to give it a go. I've done weddings, events, hot air balloons, flowers, portraits, parades, you name it. It's all grist for the mill. I'm not an artist - I do what I do.



Again, fair enough. Sorry for poking fun at it.



Whereas I go to an airshow with a 70~210 lens, get some decent photos, but notice that I am not quite filling the frame, so I think a 300 zoom would be a good way to do that. I don't think hmmm, how can I get a more creative shot with the gear I have? I did that while I was shooting. When I think about next time, I think about how I could have done that better and what I'd need to do it.

I went to a ballroom dancing competition because it sounded like a pip. And it was. I learned a lot of new skills there. I really had to push myself. I took a slew of lenses because I did not know what would work. I began to work through my options and finally settled down with a 135mm f/2.8 lens shot at f/3.5 (with digital crop factor). If I had not had it, I would not have gotten the shots I wanted. So perhaps you can see where our experiences differ. I reach for a tool that seems to me to fit what the situation is, I don't try to match my situation to the tools I have.



Yeah, I see now. I don't think I'm all that, either, but I am not worried about it. I just do what I do. If it challenges me and I enjoy it and like the results, I'm happy. I know they're probably unworthy dross to the rest of the world.



I see them as inextricably intertwined. Mechanics use tools, blacksmiths use hammers, painters use brushes. Photographers use lenses.



No, you made your point. Well done. I'll stop now.
Click to expand...


this is the bill i fondly remember and miss.

just a thought bill.
joe
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom