Do any of you have only one camera by choice?

6

68degrees

Well-known
Local time
1:54 AM
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
882
Is thre any virtue in one man one camera, disconnecting from 'gear' and just making it not about the camera and gear and not just saying it but actually living it by only having and shooting one camera by choice? Where your only camera just becomes an extension of your own mind and body?
 
While I'm by far a beginner in photography, I have bought and sold quite a few cameras. I keep thinking that I need something else as a backup or compliment, but when I get them, I find that I end up coming back shooting just my main camera. After a few rounds of that, I've learned my lesson and just shoot with one camera and not be bothered by GAS. There is something to be said about being well practiced with your equipment to know all the strengths and flaws so you adjust yourself to them.
 
I'm just using one camera and a couple of lenses at the moment. But I don't think it makes any more sense to be a photographer with one lens and one camera than it does to be a photographer with 7 cameras and 32 lenses.
It's just a matter of finding what works for you and going with it.
 
Hosermage said:
While I'm by far a beginner in photography, I have bought and sold quite a few cameras. I keep thinking that I need something else as a backup or compliment, but when I get them, I find that I end up coming back shooting just my main camera. After a few rounds of that, I've learned my lesson and just shoot with one camera and not be bothered by GAS. There is something to be said about being well practiced with your equipment to know all the strengths and flaws so you adjust yourself to them.
Click to expand...

Great reply thank you!
 
If my dad remembered what Canon (if he still had it even, it was an SLR of some sort) 35mm camera he had been using for all our family photos back in the day, i'd still be using that one.. but since he can't remember what it even was.. :bang:
 
I don't see the point of "one man one camera" philosophy, but on the other hand I equally don't see the point of having two or more lenses and bodies where one would suffice.

As for 'owning' one camera, why? there are so many of them out there that are intriguing and/or fun to shoot with. Having a choice does not mean inability to focus on producing good images.
 
I own many cameras now.
At other times, I've owned only one and sometimes only one lens too.

Makes no difference at all, just ebb and flow of a particular aesthetic. It's what you do with the camera(s) that's important.

G
 
More cameras and more lenses should be tools. There are times when I want more real estate than 35mm affords. When I do, why should I confine myself to only one camera that is 35mm. If all I had was a MF or LF camera, I might limit the amount of photos I took due to cost. I might like to have a 35mm camera so I could take more photos, for what ever reason.

More lenses can make it easy to get photos without having to change your position, or change perspective to the advantage of the photo.

For those reasons, I find it advantageous to have more than one camera system. If you or others don't, and are happy with your results, good for you.

The real problem is if I have more than I need to accomplish the goals I mentioned above. Then I should be a collector or a victim of GAS. I think I am both. :D
 
It all really boils down to what you intend to achieve with your photography.

Different camera systems call for different techniques, just as much as different lenses yield different perspectives and drawing characteristics. Same can be said for using a specific film or digital sensor.

Although I have three different lenses, a 28, 35, and 50, I rarely ever take an additional one with me. It's usually just one lens, body, and film.

I occasionally paint, and although I have a wide set of paint-brushes and different format papers/canvasses and paint options, as I am learning, I tend to restrict myself to one size paper, and acrylic paint. Once I am confortable with that, I might venture something different, but if you get good at something why not stick to it?

I worked with a Nat Geo photographer in Brazil for a while and he's good at taking pictures from helicopters, climbing up trees, and carrying beastly telephotos. His photos have a distinctive aesthetic, and he sticks to his kit (and subsequently heavy and huge bags). He used to shoot one type of slide film before he went digital, and now uses a full frame Canon body. His kit also includes wides, as wildlife photography
inevitably takes you close to your subject, and it's his knowledge of both what to use and when that defines his technical skill. He's not a National Geographic photographer for his skill alone though....

Last year I participated in a workshop with Mauricio Lima (Time's Wire photographer of the year, 2010) http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,2039390,00.html
and amongst the discussions, gear came up. His answer, one 5D, a backup, plenty of batteries/cards, a 35mm. Sometimes he'll use a 50. He's been to the middle east on a number of occasions and this is his kit.

HCB, one camera, one lens.

What I have found with this method (restricting yourself to a specific kit for specific reasons) is that eventually you begin to get used to a certain combination and understand how that particular combination "sees", leading to, hopefully, consistency in the images you produce.

That to me, personally, is nirvana.
 
bonatto said:
It all really boils down to what you intend to achieve with your photography.

Different camera systems call for different techniques, just as much as different lenses yield different perspectives and drawing characteristics. Same can be said for using a specific film or digital sensor.

Although I have three different lenses, a 28, 35, and 50, I rarely ever take an additional one with me. It's usually just one lens, body, and film.

I occasionally paint, and although I have a wide set of paint-brushes and different format papers/canvasses and paint options, as I am learning, I tend to restrict myself to one size paper, and acrylic paint. Once I am confortable with that, I might venture something different, but if you get good at something why not stick to it?

I worked with a Nat Geo photographer in Brazil for a while and he's good at taking pictures from helicopters, climbing up trees, and carrying beastly telephotos. His photos have a distinctive aesthetic, and he sticks to his kit (and subsequently heavy and huge bags). He used to shoot one type of slide film before he went digital, and now uses a full frame Canon body. His kit also includes wides, as wildlife photography
inevitably takes you close to your subject, and it's his knowledge of both what to use and when that defines his technical skill. He's not a National Geographic photographer for his skill alone though....

Last year I participated in a workshop with Mauricio Lima (Time's Wire photographer of the year, 2010) http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,2039390,00.html
and amongst the discussions, gear came up. His answer, one 5D, a backup, plenty of batteries/cards, a 35mm. Sometimes he'll use a 50. He's been to the middle east on a number of occasions and this is his kit.

HCB, one camera, one lens.

What I have found with this method (restricting yourself to a specific kit for specific reasons) is that eventually you begin to get used to a certain combination and understand how that particular combination "sees", leading to, hopefully, consistency in the images you produce.

That to me, personally, is nirvana.
Click to expand...
Highlight: A fine old myth, but unfortunately, not true.

Cheers,

R.
 
68degrees said:
Is thre any virtue in one man one camera, disconnecting from 'gear' and just making it not about the camera and gear and not just saying it but actually living it by only having and shooting one camera by choice? Where your only camera just becomes an extension of your own mind and body?
Click to expand...

You kind of loaded your question with a biased opinion, by what I highlighted there.

I use 3 cameras to shoot regularly, and (1) when I am in the process of making pictures, it is not about gear, the moment is about making that picture and (2) I pick the camera and lens depending on where and what I am going to shoot - which one I pick does become a "part of my mind and body" for the circumstance - which is why I picked that setup for that situation.

It is wrong to imply that people who have options with their gear are just GAS addicts. Yes, I do collect cameras for enjoyment (that's a separate topic) and use 3 of them all the time, but that's because no one camera/lens setup is the best for me for evry situation.
 
I've just recently sold all my cameras, and purchased one, cheaper, camera with one lens (OM4ti, standard 50mm)
The main reason for this was for money, I have a lot of expenses coming up, and I need the cash. Secondly, i've never felt comfortable having lots of 'stuff', I feel more comfortable when I don't own much stuff.

I chose the OM4ti because I've owned one before and know I like it, and it's a good combo of affordability and quality.

I'm not judging, but I think it works for me.
 
I think it's a question that cannot be answered for everyone in the same way. Our association with cameras is a personal feeling. If you feel that having many cameras is a distraction, then it is, the fact that you feel it makes it true. On the other hand if you feel that you can own many cameras and it does not distract you, then that may be true also, although of course it's far easier to prove a positive than a negative.

For me, having *lots* of cameras was a distraction, trimming down a few feels better for me, and I could probably have just one, but I do like them, and often they will be for different purposes.
 
thegman said:
I think it's a question that cannot be answered for everyone in the same way. Our association with cameras is a personal feeling. If you feel that having many cameras is a distraction, then it is, the fact that you feel it makes it true. On the other hand if you feel that you can own many cameras and it does not distract you, then that may be true also, although of course it's far easier to prove a positive than a negative.

For me, having *lots* of cameras was a distraction, trimming down a few feels better for me, and I could probably have just one, but I do like them, and often they will be for different purposes.
Click to expand...
Exactly. My Nikon D70 is perfectly adequate for step-by-steps, pack shots, etc., and easier to use than my M9+Viso+65. On the other hand I almost never use it for anything 'serious'. Likewise I like my 8x10 De Vere for portraits and my 5x7 cameras for still lifes. And on Friday I went to Montmorillon, which (to me) cries out for either my Alpa or my 'baby' Linhof special (Tech 70 minus viewfinder but with trapdoor to allow more rise), so that's what I'll take next time go there.

Cheers,

R.
 
Wow... interesting question. You don't buy a dump truck to commute in rush-hour traffic, and you don't buy a Prius to haul gravel. Cameras are no different. You choose the tool for the job. I've owned everything from a 4x5 press camera down to APS film in the day. I've shot 8x10 view cameras and used Mamiya TLRs as daily shooters. I used to use 5" roll film aerial cameras. I've had several Tilt-shift lenses for 6x6 and 35mm for architectural work. Each has an area that they excel in. Few cameras can "do it all."

Digital has changed all that to some extent. We can now compensate for linear distortion in post-processing. FL-D filters are passe because we can set white balance. And camera systems are becoming closer to one-size-fits-all. The size of the "negative" isn't as important as it once was.

I think that the best I can do is say that I'm down to a single camera system (a couple of bodies and an array of prime lenses from 28mm to 135mm) and that understanding the limits of the equipment, I'll not take assignments it's not competent to handle.
 
Talking yourself into one camera one lens when you have not yet made up your mind about what do you exactly want to express in your photography, does not make any sense to me.
I have never bought gear as an end in itself, but rather as a means of making a particular type of photography, therefore I have many camera "systems", although I have made up my mind early enough about the medium: B&W film, so this has saved me from throwing away lots of money on digital bodies.
Limiting your gear options makes sense when you start out in photography, and need to concentrate on the process, rather than fiddle endlessly with gear. Once you have been through this phase, you should follow exactly this route: first decide what you want to show, then look for gear that will be appropriate for the task.
 
For more than 10 years, i had an Canon EOS 5 with a plastic sigma zoom lens and i was happy with it.
The last couple of years, my GAS has spired out of control....
 
I've always had one system and preferred the simplicity of that approach. And that one system has always met 90% of my needs. If I miss something because of it, so be it. There's always a next photograph.

Of course, I'm not paid to deliver; that's a whole different thing, for which one needs whatever does the job.

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom