mainly one lens shooters...what makes them tick?

aperture64 said:
I think this is really the downfall of this forum for new, inexperienced photographers. It stresses the equipment being used, instead of learning through shooting.
Click to expand...

Equally annoying for me is the incessant urges to focus on the shooting and the image. Talking endlessly about these is just as detrimental as talking about gears without ever getting familiar with them.

Forums are not educational institutional, it has educational resources in it, but only for those who are willing to dig (and filter) for themselves.

Don't ever feel guilty for liking cameras and lenses. It's part of the fun in photography.

The trick is to *balance* it with the rewarding experience when you shoot, develop, and print your images.
 
Gives consistency to a series.
Takes the mind out of the mechanics/gear.
Let's you focus on the subject / image.
No time wasted / shots missed changing lenses.
No extra weight/bulk carrying extra gear.

You'd be surprised what you can shoot with any lens.
35mm is supposed to be "the lens" for street. Or 50mm.
I'm shooting a 50mm on M8, so the crop makes 65mm equiv.. it's almost a 75mm.

Some people "see" better with one focal length/range or another.

I've come to the conclusion that I do not see wide well.
I come away with more keepers if I restrict myself to the normal-short tele, 50-75mm equivalant range.
 
one lens

one lens

mathomas said:
I've found (though I continue to ignore my findings) that creativity/productivity is often enhanced when constraints are in place.
Click to expand...

i definitely agree.
i believe that restricting yourself to "one lens per assigment" kicks in all your personal skills and creativity to 100%.
a bag full of lenses, filters, flashes has you fussing with decisions that many times won't make your life (or your photo) any better.

my personal favorite focal length is 35mm (in the 35mm reference format).
 
daveleo said:
i believe that restricting yourself to "one lens per assigment" kicks in all your personal skills and creativity to 100%.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying, but doesn't this really mostly apply to street photography? What if a fashion photographer is taking pictures of a model in a street scene. Let's say that he starts with a 28mm lens to capture the environment that the model is in. Then, let's say that he notices the cool make-up the model is wearing and wants to do a head-shot. Should he still use the 28mm lens?

I realized as I was writing this that the tone may come of a little confrontational; that's not my intent. I'm just not sure that the one lens idea is *always* the best for every photography project.
 
back alley said:
<snip> ...do you think the 'famous' choose one lens because of their vision?
what makes/made them do it?
Click to expand...

Joe asked a very interesting question as the OP. However the replies had taken the typical RFF turn into the often discussed: "is one lens good?, do you espouse the one lens concept?, which one lens?"

Getting back to Joe's original question:
* Do you think the "famous" use just one lens more than the average RFF conributor?
* If so, why?
 
Bob Michaels said:
Getting back to Joe's original question:
* Do you think the "famous" use just one lens more than the average RFF conributor?
* If so, why?
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the famous photographers used all sorts of lenses in their job. In fact, the "one lens only" people seem to be few in number.
 
antiquark said:
I was under the impression that the famous photographers used all sorts of lenses in their job. In fact, the "one lens only" people seem to be few in number.
Click to expand...

I am not sure that I know that many photographers that might be considered "famous" but of those I do know, they all seem to shoot with one fixed focal length lens almost exclusively.
 
filmfan said:
They have their style down to a science. For example, David Alan Harvey says he uses the 35mm focal length for 90% of his work because he takes photos of subjects between 3 and 15 feet away from him. What better lens for this style of work is there? I can't think of any.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Less is more.
 
ottluuk said:
Forum-visiting, technology-obsessed photographers spend days and months mulling about covering all focal lenghts or having the very best optical quality or picking the "ideal walk-around lens". But this hardly means that all photographers care so much about these matters.

I suspect that many (unknown, famous, no difference) simply find a camera/lens combo that they are comfortable with and forget about the existence of alternatives. It might be that searching for relevant subject matter, shooting, editing and post-production consumes their time and energy to a point where they no longer care about whether their camera/lens is "the right one".
Click to expand...

Well-said, young man! (and guilty as charged!) :)

A determined point of view counts.
Click to expand...

Well-said, not-so-young man! :D
 
Last edited:
i am by no means famous but i do use the 35mm 99.9% of the time.

i think it is a DAH thing for me... most of the work is in 5-10 feet. 35mm just works. perhaps when it stops working i will try something else.

i used to sport a couple of big dslr's with a 16-35/80-200 combo and i tell you, carrying that stuff 5-6 days a week, 10-12 hours a day is for the birds!
 
mathomas said:
I've found (though I continue to ignore my findings) that creativity/productivity is often enhanced when constraints are in place.
Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Also -

1. Ultrawides: exaggerated perspectives. Can look cool but are specialty glass, really only "a bit" more practical than fisheye. Cool for effect, not too cool for people. Not the lens you want to keep on your camera.

2. 28mm, kinda what's the point?

3. 35mm - a staple, but to me not good for portraits.

4. 50mm - Staple. Most versatile, fastest, most plentiful, and cost effective focal length. Prefer over the 35 because you can shoot people without distortion, and it can give you what 35 gives you if you step 2 steps back. They are faster than 35's typically, without spending lots of dough and usually have better OOF.

5. Above 50 are weird inbetween focal lenghts, then you're into specialty portrait focal lengths or telephoto.

I don't "hate" any focal length - that's silly. In fact I have 19mm, 24mm, 35mm, 50mm (1.4, 1.8), 85mm focal lenghts. The most practical is the 35 and the 50. Because of their superior light-gathering capability and versitility without distorting perspectives, that's what stays on my camera. 90% of the time.

To the contrary, regarding your statement, I don't understand why people run around with 20 different lenses in their bag. Don't get it. Do you really find the need to swap lenses that often?
 
traveling light I suppose. Many "famous" photogs aren't gear collectors..Before 35mm took off in popularity most photogs shot with the Rollieiflex 80mm.
 
OK, I am certainly not famous and not an authority on anything. Nor am I a pro. Im simply someone who loves taking pictures and often finds myself with a camera and only one focal length.

The reason why, is that I LOVE using a high quality lens and I am most happy and feel most creative when I am using the lens I WANT to use and not a compromise. The problem is that I dont have money for all the various great lenses that I desire. So, I will happily blow the money I do have on ONE lens I want the most and then I have to make due with that one and only that one. I could easily buy a variety of cheaper stuff and have choices but I am not interested in compromising. Also, if I do happen to have different lenses I wont change them when Im out, Ill simply choose one for the day.

If I were wealthy, sure Id buy all the focal lengths. Because what the hell? Why not? However, here in reality I can make due and be very happy with a very limited amount of lenses.

Currently, Im purging a lot of gear to pay for a trip which I just took to South America. This means Ill be restricted to my 5D with 50L and a Rolleiflex 2.8D. Looks like its going to be a very 50mm winter :)
 
Last edited:
hipsterdufus said:
What if a fashion photographer is taking pictures of a model in a street scene. Let's say that he starts with a 28mm lens to capture the environment that the model is in. Then, let's say that he notices the cool make-up the model is wearing and wants to do a head-shot. Should he still use the 28mm lens?
Click to expand...

Not always but generally a fashion shoot is about a product not the model or models. So the photographer is going to use the lens that best lets him capture that product. for a dress or gown it might be a 65-80mm lens for a necklace or lipstick it might be a 150-250mm lens.
Len focal length examples assume the use of a 645 format system.
 
35mmdelux said:
<snip> Many "famous" photogs aren't gear collectors. <snip>
Click to expand...

I would go a step further and say that most of them know less about the various models of lenses than the average RFF contributor does. They just have a lens that delivers photos that work for them and keep using it.

I spoke of Chris Usher earlier. He recounted how he had to replace his M6 and 35mm Summicron when a truck backed over his gear bag. Someone asked which Summicron he got as a replacement. He said it was the "Leica Summicron". He seemed to know nothing of the different versions but just wanted the Summicron made by Leica. And this is the lens he used for at least ten years to create a major exhibit and book.
 
it's easy to believe that many of the famous know less or maybe even care less about their own gear than we here at rff do.
that's a choice they make as we make that same choice. i wish i could easily make that choice not to drown in my gear thoughts.

there are times that i want to shoot with only one lens - as in own one lens! but most days i can't leave the house without the 3 lenses that i have left. they are small and light and it just seems silly to leave any of them behind.

and so i wonder makes these one lens shooters tick? how do they do it...
 
On this forum we tend (naturally) to think of photographers who use rangefinders - a camera that really lends itself (partly through its own limitations) to a single lens set-up.
That works great for street photographers. But who else can get away with that? Portrait photographers. Maybe fashion or documentary?

But I'd be shocked if anyone could name many famous sports, wildlife or landscape photographers who only use a single prime lens. The same goes for the most well-known photojournalists and wedding photographers. Those areas of photography demand more versatility in a kit than a single lens can provide.

So I'm going to argue that the famous/successful photographer with the single lens is more the exception than the rule.
 
I really hate carrying extra things. I sometimes take half the keys off my key ring when I leave the house. One lens is all I need. Sometimes I leave the hood at home because it seems like a bit much...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom