If you want to take good pictures use one camera lens combo

[Godfrey]

...
Using one camera and lens is certainly valuable as a beginner's step, or as an educational step. Once that step has been taken, going back to it is not really necessary. It would be like putting training wheels on a bicycle again, wouldn't it?

Not really, the analogy isn't very apropos. Doing the one camera-one lens thing is often a quite refreshing different way of thinking about seeing photographically.

You never need to learn how to set a camera properly, just like once you learn to balance a bicycle you don't need to learn that over again. Returning to a single camera and lens is more like refreshing your vision, not re-learning how to use a camera.

G

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

Using the pre-war Leicas or the Contax II these days is more or less the same as my early photography as I have just one body and one lens. Mainly because I don't think much of the Leitz 3,5cm wide angle and leave it in the display cabinet (and the 90 f/4 needs cleaning etc). And I can't afford (or justify spending money on) the Contax 30's wide angle. FWIW, I could get the 50's starter camera out and use it but prefer not to.

It's great for a while but there are times when the outfit is inadequate. Of course, comparing it with (say) a 1920's falling plate camera or a "one plate at a time" one with its dark slides and viewing back etc the Leica is a big step forward but all the same...

BTW I graduated to a Periflex and then the Olympus-35 SP and later on the Leica CL. I sold the Periflex and didn't regret it. A few years ago I got one for the collection and confirmed what I thought about the original 60's one and sold it on. I still have the other two and my XA and XA2 and Minolta 7000. (They were all bought new.) And I still don't know which of the XA and XA2 I prefer...

FWIW, I feel sorry for people who start off with a digital SLR, I wonder how many of them understand the things.

Regards, David

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

While I'm far from monocameraogamous (I have stuff ranging from Contax G series through 14x17), I'm more and more favoring the one camera, one lens idea the more I work. I'm not getting rid of my systems (although I might offload the RB system en toto), but I find I'm doing a lot more street/public photography lately and as such, the large/ultra-large format stuff is a hindrance because it attracts too much attention. But I've noticed that even when using that gear, I'm more often restricting myself to carrying just one lens. I've only got one set of eyes with one focal length - they're plenty good enough for my head as it is.

That said, there are tasks for which I do want other options - I wouldn't want to shoot sports or action shots with a 50mm, I wouldn't want to do grand landscapes with a 135mm (on 35mm/ff digital), and I wouldn't want to shoot head and shoulders portraits with a 28mm or equivalent. So I'll keep my tools that are appropriate for the job at hand, but I'll not try to pound nails with a screwdriver, nor will I carry the entire Snap-On toolchest when all I want to do is tighten a 1/4" hex bolt.

 

[Godfrey]

Had to laugh at myself a bit reflecting on this topic again this morning.

Two weeks ago, I went to NY with just my Leica X2. Make a hundred or so exposures, about 2/3 of which I'm happy with (either family snappies or real photos by my criteria).

I was shooting with the new 'toy' ... my Elmarit-R 180mm f/2.8 ... the other day fitted through a double adapter setup onto the used Oly E-PL1 body I picked up for $100. It returns breathtaking results, even for the simple few still-life snaps I made with it purely to test its hand-holdability with the Pen's image stabilization.

And then Saturday morning I picked up the M9 fitted with Ultron 28/2 lens which has been languishing on my desk for several weeks. I made twelve exposures that morning and ten of them are satisfying to me, I posted five or six I think.

This morning, I was very tempted to grab the SX-70 and load it with a pack of IP Color Protection, do some more Polaroidy things...

So I laugh at myself: how can I ever seriously contemplate nailing myself down to using just one camera, one lens, for any extended length of time at this point in my photographic adventures? I know what my cameras do, I know what my vision wants at various times, and the fact that I have a bunch of cool cameras and lenses to work with is sometimes a little management hassle but otherwise, eh?, who cares?

🙂

G

 

[Spanik]

I have used years nothing else but a 50mm because that was all I had. I cannot but cry for all the missed occasions.

If you have no idea when to use what lens because of the photo you want to make then you have another issue.

 

[koven]

Had to laugh at myself a bit reflecting on this topic again this morning.

Two weeks ago, I went to NY with just my Leica X2. Make a hundred or so exposures, about 2/3 of which I'm happy with (either family snappies or real photos by my criteria).

I was shooting with the new 'toy' ... my Elmarit-R 180mm f/2.8 ... the other day fitted through a double adapter setup onto the used Oly E-PL1 body I picked up for $100. It returns breathtaking results, even for the simple few still-life snaps I made with it purely to test its hand-holdability with the Pen's image stabilization.

And then Saturday morning I picked up the M9 fitted with Ultron 28/2 lens which has been languishing on my desk for several weeks. I made twelve exposures that morning and ten of them are satisfying to me, I posted five or six I think.

This morning, I was very tempted to grab the SX-70 and load it with a pack of IP Color Protection, do some more Polaroidy things...

So I laugh at myself: how can I ever seriously contemplate nailing myself down to using just one camera, one lens, for any extended length of time at this point in my photographic adventures? I know what my cameras do, I know what my vision wants at various times, and the fact that I have a bunch of cool cameras and lenses to work with is sometimes a little management hassle but otherwise, eh?, who cares?

🙂

G

Well I meant if you're starting out. You seem like a season vet with a lot of experience and skill.

 

[airfrogusmc]

Well I meant if you're starting out. You seem like a season vet with a lot of experience and skill.

I'm a very seasoned vet (been a photographer for over 30 years full time pro since 1986) and have been shooting my personal work with only one camera and one lens for the past 8 months or so. I think we all have our own way of working and this works for me because I tend to see in 35mm and B&W so the MM and 35 lux are working quite well for me at this point in time.

 

[Boris Stupak]

I buy hundreds of lenses, I take one or two photos with them, I put them in a box and I never look at them again. I've made a lot of money when their value appreciates though.

 

[Godfrey]

You haven't made any money at all if they're still in the box... 🙂

G

 

[raid]

I use the set-up that I feel like using on a given occasion or day.
It could be a vintage 2.1cm lens on a Standard Leica because I feel close to vintage equipment on that day, and it will actually result in nicer looking images than had I used other equipment. On another day, I may see that day as a "Pentax Spotmatic F Day", and I match it with a 50/1.4 SMC for lots of fun taking photos. Changing equipment does not degrade my photography. I makes it all more fun and more versatile.

 

[honozooloo]

I see both sides of this argument; on one hand there's the one camera, one lens approach, about which much can be said about the beauty of simplicity. And I have many friends who hop from camera to camera so quickly that they never truly learn to exploit their gear's full potential. And I don't see the point in doing that!

But on the other hand, at their most fundamental level cameras and lenses are merely tools and if you're looking for the ultimate "do it all with one camera" camera and lens combo, well sorry but that just doesn't exist.

Ultimately, I think it boils down to the simple fact that just as fancy cameras do not a good photographer make (LOL), your choice of gear doesn't define you either. There are many approaches one can take to the same goal, and this discussion is clearly evidence of this.

 

[back alley]

i find the idea of one camera/one lens very attractive and the way that i shoot, i might be able to get away with it.
just walking around and shooting what attracts my eye...i could do that with my new 27...no great need for the 60 or even the 18 for about 90% of what i shoot...so if i was willing to miss out on that 10% then i could use this most simple approach.
but...i like to mix things up on occasion and carrying the 18 & the 60 along with the camera/27 is no big deal really.

 

[airfrogusmc]

i find the idea of one camera/one lens very attractive and the way that i shoot, i might be able to get away with it.
just walking around and shooting what attracts my eye...i could do that with my new 27...no great need for the 60 or even the 18 for about 90% of what i shoot...so if i was willing to miss out on that 10% then i could use this most simple approach.
but...i like to mix things up on occasion and carrying the 18 & the 60 along with the camera/27 is no big deal really.

The way I look at it you don't miss shots you just learn to see different shots.

 

[gns]

The way I look at it you don't miss shots you just learn to see different shots.

That's probably a good way to look at it.

I've always pretty much stuck to one camera and lens. I didn't choose to do it because I thought it would make me better. And I don't think it did make me better. I don't know if having more gear would have made me better, but i'm pretty sure it wouldn't have made the whole thing any more interesting or fun.

 

[msbarnes]

One camera / one lens makes my life easier.

Unfortunately, I don't like my life easy. (I have multiple cameras/lenses)

 

[chathaway]

I think this "One camera -One lens" is bull****. It´s going backwards, limiting your vision.
I usually have three leica M´s , two around my neck with 21mm and 35mm lenses Third, the M8 on one shoulder, with usually a 50mm and fourth, a Nikon F with 105mm tele. I shoot with film & digital simultaneously. usually same shots with both, digital converted to B&W. I see everything in wide angle, but sometimes it is nice to draw up the details...

...kidding...right?

 

[back alley]

The way I look at it you don't miss shots you just learn to see different shots.

maybe both...i am forced, with one lens, to see what i can do with that lens...sometimes i come up with something good and other times...i've missed a shot.

i don't use lenses longer than the 60 normally and there are all kinds of shots missed because of that...it's a reality...but one i can live with.

 

[airfrogusmc]

I guess it boils down to each persons vision. I see in 35mm so its a F/L that matches my vision well. Gibson shoots with what is usually excepted as a normal F/L because he says that's the way he sees. Nice to have choices.

 

[back alley]

I guess it boils down to each persons vision. I see in 35mm so its a F/L that matches my vision well. Gibson shoots with what is usually excepted as a normal F/L because he says that's the way he sees. Nice to have choices.

i agree...i think i was born with the fov of a 40mm lens, it seems so natural to me.
but i have learned to visualize in other focal lengths as well...

 

[airfrogusmc]

i agree...i think i was born with the fov of a 40mm lens, it seems so natural to me.
but i have learned to visualize in other focal lengths as well...

Yeah I have to. My work bag consists of 2 5DIIs a 24L, 35L, 85L and 200 2L with formal portraits mostly 85 and environmental split between the 35 and 200 2L If forced I could actually live with just a 35 though and have been with my personal work for the last 8+ months. Just an MM and a 35Lux...HEAVEN....