If you could travel with just one focal length or lens, what would it be?

I don't worry about cost or replaceability ... I figure, I went through all the hassle and expense to find the lens for the purpose of using it, so I'm going to use it. If it gets lost, stolen, or otherwise damaged, well, at least it was doing what it was intended for. :)

G
 
Godfrey said:
I don't worry about cost or replaceability ... I figure, I went through all the hassle and expense to find the lens for the purpose of using it, so I'm going to use it. If it gets lost, stolen, or otherwise damaged, well, at least it was doing what it was intended for. :)

G
Click to expand...
I totally agree! Cameras are tools, and tools are made to be used. Good tools deserve to be treated with respect and used properly. But like all tools, they have a life span. Appreciate your tools, but don't get too attached.
 
Since 2018 or so, I have made a number of trips around the PNW and once to Arizona. Some trips I've made with a lot of equipment, some I've made with little equipment, but the most photographically rewarding trips have almost always been made when I brought 1) One camera and one or two lenses and 2) Equipment that I was familiar with at home. I mostly use 50mm lenses and equivalents for a given format, with the 35mm being my second-most used. I would like to get better at using my TLR but traveling is a bad place to do it. I mostly prefer 35mm rangefinders and SLRs or my digital mirrorless because they're smaller, lighter and less cumbersome to use than my medium format gear.

Last summer I took the Leica M3 and rigid Summicron to Portland, shot 8 rolls of HP5 over 6 days and came away with an outstanding number of keepers. I went twice more later that year with a Minolta SLR and 55 and 28mm lenses and had hearty success as well. I went to Whistler in 2019 and brought my Fuji X-Pro1 and 23mm ƒ/2 and 60mm ƒ/2.4 and got some good pictures but found the focal length spread was too great and the wrong lens was always on the camera. I missed something in the middle. So when I went again in 2021 I just brought the 35mm ƒ/1.4 and had a much easier go of it. Visiting a place multiple times teaches me what equipment I need to make the most of it. In 2019 I visited Portland with a Fuji X-Pro1 and 23mm ƒ/2. Had a great time, regretted nothing yet sometimes wished for something longer, hence the Leica and 50mm lens when I went back in 2024. I could have fun with either. This spring I plan on going back and will take a film camera and either a 35 or 50mm. Maybe both?

How did you deal with varying subject matter that might have been better suited to longer or shorter focal lengths?
Click to expand...
If I have one lens or two in moderate focal lengths, I'm usually not even looking for pictures that would require different focal lengths. Sometimes I see something farther away and shoot with the intention of cropping later. If I encounter a wider scene than I can capture, I try to zero in on a detail that I can that can help convey the same feeling. If not, you just have to let a shot go. At my host's house in Portland, the 50mm wasn't wide enough to capture some of what I wanted to in the house, so I looked for what I could fit. You work with what you've got. I shot that whole trip on one type of black and white film and rated every roll at ISO 800 so that when it was pushed in development all of the pictures would have a consistent look. There were some times when ƒ/2 was not wide enough, so when the light levels dropped, I shot for as long as I could handhold, looked for pools of light, shot anticipating motion blur or just stopped shooting for the evening and enjoyed myself.
 
Last edited:
Retro-Grouch said:
I totally agree! Cameras are tools, and tools are made to be used. Good tools deserve to be treated with respect and used properly. But like all tools, they have a life span. Appreciate your tools, but don't get too attached.
Click to expand...
In about 2010, a (nonphotographer) workmate was horrified when he learned the cost of the M9 kit I carried around every day. 'Why would you take out something like that??' Yes, it was the most expensive thing I'd ever bought (and probably still is) but I bought it to document my life with high quality images. Can't do that if it's at home!
 
Archiver said:
In about 2010, a (nonphotographer) workmate was horrified when he learned the cost of the M9 kit I carried around every day. 'Why would you take out something like that??' Yes, it was the most expensive thing I'd ever bought (and probably still is) but I bought it to document my life with high quality images. Can't do that if it's at home!
Click to expand...
And people routinely drive, and ultimately wear out, cars that cost several times that. At least the camera kit is easy enough to protect and can be rebuilt/repaired when it does wear out. I don't get the idea of buying a nice camera and letting it sit on a shelf.

Chris
 
When I owned interchangeable lens cameras it was usually a fast 35mm prime.

These days I only own vintage fixed lens scale focus models so its 50mm now.
 
mtnbkr said:
Also, lenses that might not seem ideal turn out to be good choices. When I was in the Southwest, the vistas were so expansive and I was often standing in less attractive spots (ie on the side of the road or in a parking lot), having a touch more reach with the 50 let me avoid having the ugly foreground in the shot vs the same shot with a 28mm or wider lens. Also, the scenes were so broad and interesting elements so far away, if you went too wide the items of interest would disappear in the shot.
Click to expand...
This is a good point about wide-angles. For landscapes, they are all about foreground. If you can't compose for some interesting foreground elements, it's not enough simply to get a lot of distant landscape and a horizon. Those are boring photos, often.
 
When I was only using SLR cameras, my two most widely used lenses were 24mm and 50mm. Just as I see the world or much wider. With a Leica M, the 24mm lens was too costly for my taste. A 35mm or 28mm lens has to do for a wide angle lens. The 50mm lens is perfect. I may have twenty excellent 50mm lenses. They are awesome.
 
agentlossing said:
This is a good point about wide-angles. For landscapes, they are all about foreground. If you can't compose for some interesting foreground elements, it's not enough simply to get a lot of distant landscape and a horizon. Those are boring photos, often.
Click to expand...
Absolutely my experience, too! The wide is comforting to have, for the possibility of getting everything in, but getting everything in rarely makes for good pictures.
 
In my prime SLR days (1970s-1980s), my standard kit was a 35/85 lens pair (mostly Nikkors, although I did have a Contax for a time, an Olympus for a time, etc). A 21 and a 200 were also in the kit for extreme moments, but I only rarely carried them. A 50-ish macro is another "always in the kit, not the most used, many of the best photos" lens for me.

With Leica RFs (only had a couple others over the years, mostly fixed lens) the 35 and 50 have been the most frequent, and it's a flip-flop between them as to what I'd pick if I NOW had to decide on just one. I'm finding again that a 35/75, or 28/75, works well for me, and of course I have focal lengths down to 10 and up to 360 mm available for the occasional moment.

(A 20-21mm is fun and easy to use, a 10-15mm is difficult to get my head around. Likewise a 75-90 is fun and easy to use, and longer takes serious work.)

G
 
raid said:
I also own a Pentax 43mm lens in Leica mount. I hesitate using it on an international travel. It is a hard to find lens at a high cost. I may use this lens anyway as I don’t collect lenses in a safe. Lenses are meant to be used.
Click to expand...

Lotsa them on ebay for cheaper than a well used summicron V3… in 2025 terms it’s quite a cheap lens.

That pentax 43mm lens would be my lens for higher risk places; Rio de Janeiro Favellas, san francisco skid row…
 
Last edited:
Archiver said:
In about 2010, a (nonphotographer) workmate was horrified when he learned the cost of the M9 kit I carried around every day. 'Why would you take out something like that??' Yes, it was the most expensive thing I'd ever bought (and probably still is) but I bought it to document my life with high quality images. Can't do that if it's at home!
Click to expand...
My solution to this concern (back when I shot 35mm RF) was to have a Leica system for most shooting, and a Nikon RF system for when I went into dicey social situations or environments like rodeos where the conditions were brutal enough to warrant concern for damage. As an aside, the Nikons weathered anything I threw at them; I'm not so sure the Leicas would have.
 
Retro-Grouch said:
My solution to this concern (back when I shot 35mm RF) was to have a Leica system for most shooting, and a Nikon RF system for when I went into dicey social situations or environments like rodeos where the conditions were brutal enough to warrant concern for damage. As an aside, the Nikons weathered anything I threw at them; I'm not so sure the Leicas would have.
Click to expand...

Nikon, the cameras that photographers used to wash off sandy gears under tap water and continue shooting.

Leica? Depends which. The iiif and iiig are inderstructible, and armed with a Leicavit they become absolute shooters. The iiig particularly: the meanest machine.

Leica iiig/f, M3, M2, M4 and M4-P are the ones that can whitstand and rival Nikons (albeit with a set of mini screwdrivers in a pocket)
 
raid said:
When I was only using SLR cameras, my two most widely used lenses were 24mm and 50mm. Just as I see the world or much wider. With a Leica M, the 24mm lens was too costly for my taste. A 35mm or 28mm lens has to do for a wide angle lens. The 50mm lens is perfect. I may have twenty excellent 50mm lenses. They are awesome.
Click to expand...
Have you tried the Zeiss Biogon 25mm f2.8? Fantastic lens, and no way near the Leica 24mm in price. The only problem is the dreaded scuffy wobble that my copy has. But when it focused smoothly, it was my go-to walkaround lens.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom