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

tbarker13 said:
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.
Click to expand...

it's not about how many one lens shooters are out there...it's about what makes the few tick.

i agree that it is most likely the street shooters that can do it...and that would fit me as i see myslef as mostly a street shooter. and i can see that i could get away with one lens for a great majority of what i shoot.
i wonder if i have 'what it takes' to do it though.
 
it's also much improved the cohesion of my work, which might or might not translate into a personal style, which is important (to me).
 
back alley said:
it's not about how many one lens shooters are out there...it's about what makes the few tick.

i agree that it is most likely the street shooters that can do it...and that would fit me as i see myslef as mostly a street shooter. and i can see that i could get away with one lens for a great majority of what i shoot.
i wonder if i have 'what it takes' to do it though.
Click to expand...

Maybe you have "what it takes" not to do it.:D

I don't mean this as a shot at you or anyone else.
But I think this fascination with the "one lens" approach is pretty much the same thing as gear obsession.

Both are rooted in this idea that there's some elusive key to great photography: Maybe if I just used one lens... Maybe if I just had every new Summilux Leica makes... Maybe if I were using a TLR or a Hasselblad....Maybe if I added a DSLR to my kit...

But in the end, what works for one photographer doesn't necessarily work for another photographer.
Obviously, I don't know you that well. But you seem like someone who enjoys his camera equipment. (much like I do) Why take that pleasure away from yourself? Shoot and enjoy.
 
Last edited:
Tim, I've been impressed at your use of the 50mm Planar ZM on the M8 for your glamour series... there's a consistency of light, tone, and look that ties it together. So you've been making good use of that one lens with few diversions to other gear... :) Any comments on how you chose that combination and how you think it's worked out?
 
Dear back alley,

I would like to advance three reasons:

1) the great photographers are often known for their highly personal worldview, and the choice of lens contributes to their worldview.
2) in their artistic process technology often has very little importance, what matters is the form and content, the relevance of discourse, in which case the constraint (or restriction of variables) is stimulating.
3) A very best photographer can take great pictures of everything in any situations with every kind of lens : he is a good photographer, that's all. He will magnify each photographic act. So, why loose time to changing lens and carrying weight?

(excuse me for my poor English, but to express complex ideas in a foreign language is difficult).
 
back alley said:
it's not about how many one lens shooters are out there...it's about what makes the few tick.

i agree that it is most likely the street shooters that can do it...and that would fit me as i see myslef as mostly a street shooter. and i can see that i could get away with one lens for a great majority of what i shoot.
i wonder if i have 'what it takes' to do it though.
Click to expand...

Joe: there was not a conscious decision on my part. I just realized that I almost never changed lenses during the actual shooting process and decided not to carry the extra lenses. Now I do have M mount 21mm and 25mm lenses sitting on the shelf that I have not used in over a year. In fact, I just bought M mount 50mm and 75mm lenses to see what they were like. I cannot yet see how they are going to fit into my style but at least they were priced right so I can pass them on inexpensively.
 
I guess you could call me a one and one half lens photographer as I seem to use my one of my 35mm lens for 80 or 90 percent of what I shoot, whither that be shooting street or nudes on location. For the other 10 or 20 percent , for say candid portraits, I find a slightly longer lens works better. So I usually have my Summarit 5CM stuck in my pocket just in case.
 
Last edited:
Doug said:
Tim, I've been impressed at your use of the 50mm Planar ZM on the M8 for your glamour series... there's a consistency of light, tone, and look that ties it together. So you've been making good use of that one lens with few diversions to other gear... :) Any comments on how you chose that combination and how you think it's worked out?
Click to expand...

Thanks Doug.
I do have to admit, though, that I take just as many photos with a DSLR (Nikon D700) during the shoots. I usually have the M8 and D700 together - and just alternate as I go. (I tend to post more of planar shots here, figuring this audience cares more about that lens than it does a Nikkor 70-200/2.8)

I went through quite a few 50s (including the modern summicron) before picking the planar. In the end, it's really pretty simple. I just like the way it renders. And I feel like it works well for both color and B&W.
I do believe, that I'll increasingly be shooting with my CV 75/1.8 (as soon as my M8 comes back from Solms). Those two lenses will cover 95 percent of my portrait/glamour shooting with the M8.
 
hipsterdufus said:
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?
Click to expand...

my problems are (1) before i go out to shoot, I "what if . . " myself to death with imagined scenarios and what equipment needed to deal with them all and (2) if I have a bag full of stuff with me, my brain chokes on "which this and which that should I use".

I personally have more fun and do my best shots when I go out with one (usually prime) lens (usually 35mm, 40mm or 50mm). Yes, i miss all the long distance shots . . . okay.

Am I world famous for my work? . . . . Not for at least 500 years from now :p
 
daveleo said:
my problems are (1) before i go out to shoot, I "what if . . " myself to death with imagined scenarios and what equipment needed to deal with them all and (2) if I have a bag full of stuff with me, my brain chokes on "which this and which that should I use".

I personally have more fun and do my best shots when I go out with one (usually prime) lens (usually 35mm, 40mm or 50mm). Yes, i miss all the long distance shots . . . okay.

Am I world famous for my work? . . . . Not for at least 500 years from now :p
Click to expand...

Yup, I'm picking up what you're putting down. When I go to shoot, I actually rarely change lenses; I mostly start the shoot with either the 50 or the 35 and the lens rarely leaves the camera. Still, I won't sell my 90. I just like having the option to change lenses if I want. :)

And no, I am not famous for my photos either. :D
 
Bob Michaels said:
Joe: there was not a conscious decision on my part. I just realized that I almost never changed lenses during the actual shooting process and decided not to carry the extra lenses. Now I do have M mount 21mm and 25mm lenses sitting on the shelf that I have not used in over a year. In fact, I just bought M mount 50mm and 75mm lenses to see what they were like. I cannot yet see how they are going to fit into my style but at least they were priced right so I can pass them on inexpensively.
Click to expand...

I can echo Bob to a degree here. I started shooting with a 35 and it seemed to work almost all the time. I wish I could explain away some sort of profound meaning to the whole 1 lens thing but it really is just a "it works" thing. I stopped buying lenses as I didn't use them. If I could get past the "back up" thing I would roll with 1 camera and 1 lens everywhere.
 
Disclaimer - I will never be famous so take this with a grain of salt.

However I have been photographing and paying my rent this way for decades.

Two observations, Im tired of "what camera for this type photography." Most guys I know rent the gear they need, and if that mean a canon TS lens or a Nikon 300 - so be it. we all know how to use a lightmeter, different days and different jobs require different tools, it is scarily much like being a contractor, sometimes one need a hammer and sometimes a jack-hammer.

Back to the artist, a vision is a vision, whatever works to capture the mental image formed and help the artist / famous photographer capture the image. I don't see the what lens issue as being meaningful, it is all about what matches the metal expectation, lately I see more and more guys with plastic diana? cameras so the need for high-quality lenses is also not a given.

I have watched a very famous fashion photographer show up and bang out a shoot with a pentax 50mm lens and a bit of pocket lint. Im sorry, its vision, imagination and a great eye over hardware anyway. I fret about lens quality becuase my vision is a bit fuzzy.


Bo

www.bophoto.typepad.com
 
can't say why others choose a particular lens, unless they tell us.
But I have 2/ur 3 main lenses, A 28, and a 40/50.
For my Leica M5: 28 f/1.9 and 50 f/1.5
For my Pentax SLRs: 28 f/2 and 40 f/2.8 Pancake
For my Panasonic G1 m4/3: a native 20... Adapted M mount: I shoot the 50mm to give a fast/short tele.

I may get a longer tele for the m4/3 also, for fast 190 + adapted lens. Looking at the Nikkor 105 f/2.5 Pre Ai

But, I shoot 80% with a 50 or 40 depending on the camera. The 28's get some use too.

I just get more keepers with this sparse lens choice.
 
I like 35mm most and shoot it on my M3. Hardly ever need an extra finder for it, since I can do my math.

A 35mm lens at 3.5 mtrs (= focal length times 100) produces an image that covers 2.40 mtrs x 3.60 mtrs (frame size times 100). Large enough to depict anyone from top to toe. With aperture f/8.0, the DOF will give the spectator the feeling I was in the scene. Pre-set that and only the need to compose is left.

With a 35mm, 'twelve foot and being there' gets a very special meaning ;).
 
I think by the time you get really good at it you realize it's all you need. Learning the quirks of one camera and one lens and developing your style.
 
One other point: On 135 format the 35mm FL, cropped square, has coverage that is nearly identical to 80mm on a 6x6 camera.
 
Me and my one lens (a beater collapsible 5cm Summicron from 1954) get along just fine. Then again we get along because alternatives are, well, not an alternative.
 
back alley said:
i have read, like many of us here, i'm sure, of the famous photographers that used only one lens for most of their careers...sure it turns out they actually did own and occasionally use other lenses but for the most part they eventually were found to use mostly one lens.

why, i wonder?

they clearly could afford other focal lengths but chose not to do so.

was it their 'vison' that restricted them? did they really only 'see' in 35mm or 50mm?

i am sometimes tempted to play that game with myself where i choose what one lens i would keep and use exclusively and sell the others...i mean wow, how simple would that be?

i surprise myself at the answer sometimes because while i mostly end up choosing the 40 on the rd1...other times i choose a 15...

rambling...do you think the 'famous' choose one lens because of their vision?
what makes/made them do it?
Click to expand...

I think everyone has a point in their work where they realize what they actually need... you start with range of lenses from 15 to 300mm, and eventually you realize that you pretty much just one or two, and sell the rest.

Difference between 28, 35 and 50mm is about 5-6 steps anyway, and if you do specific type of work, over time, you find one focal length that works best, and use that. If you're doing only street photography, and find yourself most comfortable shooting with 50mm, why would you carry another 10 lenses?

If you shoot only studio headshots, all you need is one lens, 35, 50, 200, whatever...

Sure, you'd come across shot-or-two where you might wish to have something wider, or tighter, but that only shows how good you are using what you have.
I think you can pretty much always work your way around composition even with less desirable lengths for specific shot....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom