Roger Hicks
Veteran
Interesting, yes, but unfortunately twaddle. 'Angle of view' depends too much on enlargement size and viewing distance, and as the human eye is constantly scanning and refocusing, the d-o-f argument is even feebler.
I do not pretend that I have all (or even any) of the anwsers, but http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps magic window 1.html explores the whole question of 'what looks natural' with slightly more rigour than the theory described above.
Cheers,
R.
DNG
Film Friendly
That's what I do, But, I go out a lot with just the 50mm, I have a 28, but, I don't carry it that much. I will carry it more often though.
I had all kinds of cameras and lenses over the years, I am settled now on 28/35/50 primes for my 2 cameras. I do have a 14-140 HD zoom for my G1 (more for my wife's convenience though, I use my 35 (17mm) and 50 when I use it.
There is a thread started by Back Ally for a "1 year 1 lens" diary if you want to contribute.
But, don't lock yourself in, if you need another lens, use it. Just get back to your project as soon as you can.
Remember, it is for fun, learning, discipline, back to basics...
Enjoy
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Normally, I put the 35 Summilux on whichever Leica I'm using.
But if I can see that I'll REALLY get a better picture with another lens, I put that on: typically 75 Summicron or 50 C-Sonnar, with an option on an 18/4 Distagon. None of 'em weighs much or eats much.
The replacement lens then stays on until I REALLY need another lens (usually 35 Summilux).
Or in the Pyrenees the 135/2.8 will often stay on for landscapes; or in the studio for portraits or for certain kinds of reportage or landscapes, I'll go for the 90 Thambar.
I take different kinds of pictures. Why wouldn't I use different lenses? Sure, switching from 35 to 50 to 90 for street might mean I spent more time swapping lenses than taking pics, but 35 on one body and 75 on the other is a dream. And shooting studio portraits with a 35 might suit some people, but not me.
As others have said, there are no 'lens police'. There's only you. If something suits you, great. But I still maintain that for many people, 'one camera, one lens, one film' is someone else's fantasy, with a certain puritanical appeal but not much logic behind it: it's pure emotion. If that emotional fantasy chimes with your fantasy too, great. But if you think you'll have trouble keeping the One True Faith, why are you considering trying? The purpose of amateur photography is to enjoy yourself. The purpose of professional photography is to earn money, preferably while enjoying yourself as much as possible. There may be those who see the purpose of photography as purifying the soul through suffering, and the best of luck to 'em, but I'm not buying it myself.
Cheers,
S.
But if I can see that I'll REALLY get a better picture with another lens, I put that on: typically 75 Summicron or 50 C-Sonnar, with an option on an 18/4 Distagon. None of 'em weighs much or eats much.
The replacement lens then stays on until I REALLY need another lens (usually 35 Summilux).
Or in the Pyrenees the 135/2.8 will often stay on for landscapes; or in the studio for portraits or for certain kinds of reportage or landscapes, I'll go for the 90 Thambar.
I take different kinds of pictures. Why wouldn't I use different lenses? Sure, switching from 35 to 50 to 90 for street might mean I spent more time swapping lenses than taking pics, but 35 on one body and 75 on the other is a dream. And shooting studio portraits with a 35 might suit some people, but not me.
As others have said, there are no 'lens police'. There's only you. If something suits you, great. But I still maintain that for many people, 'one camera, one lens, one film' is someone else's fantasy, with a certain puritanical appeal but not much logic behind it: it's pure emotion. If that emotional fantasy chimes with your fantasy too, great. But if you think you'll have trouble keeping the One True Faith, why are you considering trying? The purpose of amateur photography is to enjoy yourself. The purpose of professional photography is to earn money, preferably while enjoying yourself as much as possible. There may be those who see the purpose of photography as purifying the soul through suffering, and the best of luck to 'em, but I'm not buying it myself.
Cheers,
S.
Last edited:
DNG
Film Friendly
LOL.........Made me laugh....Thanks
..."The purpose of amateur photography is to enjoy yourself. The purpose of professional photography is to earn money, preferably while enjoying yourself as much as possible. There may be those who see the purpose of photography as purifying the soul through suffering, and the best of luck to 'em, but I'm not buying it myself."
Photograph IS for enjoyment, and a living for some also....
But NEVER Self Inflected Suffering.... NEVER......If it gets to that point, change your hobby &/or profession.
..."The purpose of amateur photography is to enjoy yourself. The purpose of professional photography is to earn money, preferably while enjoying yourself as much as possible. There may be those who see the purpose of photography as purifying the soul through suffering, and the best of luck to 'em, but I'm not buying it myself."
Photograph IS for enjoyment, and a living for some also....
But NEVER Self Inflected Suffering.... NEVER......If it gets to that point, change your hobby &/or profession.
Brian Levy
Established
Interesting to see a simple question go so far astray. A number of very interesting views and opinions.
I've used 35-40-50 mm lenses and find the 40mm lens seems to e the near perfect single lens for me. 35 can be a bit too wide and a 50 just a hair too narrow. Of course the Summicron-C 40mm was the only 40mm lens from Leica. So I'd suggest it as a possibility. As you want only a single lens for the year and none of the Leica LTM or M series cameras have a 40mm finder, I'd vote for a CL as the body. Find a decent body and have it serviced just to make sure it is in spec and try it. Sadly, it is usually relegated to a shelf or a 2nd camera but it is a 1st rate body and with the Cron-C lens an excellent system and it is IMHO the only M mount body that meets Leica's goal of having a small 35mm camera body 1st proposed. Easy to carry and can fit in the pocket of a London Fog overcoat. A M series body can not make a similar claim even with a collapsable 50.
I've used 35-40-50 mm lenses and find the 40mm lens seems to e the near perfect single lens for me. 35 can be a bit too wide and a 50 just a hair too narrow. Of course the Summicron-C 40mm was the only 40mm lens from Leica. So I'd suggest it as a possibility. As you want only a single lens for the year and none of the Leica LTM or M series cameras have a 40mm finder, I'd vote for a CL as the body. Find a decent body and have it serviced just to make sure it is in spec and try it. Sadly, it is usually relegated to a shelf or a 2nd camera but it is a 1st rate body and with the Cron-C lens an excellent system and it is IMHO the only M mount body that meets Leica's goal of having a small 35mm camera body 1st proposed. Easy to carry and can fit in the pocket of a London Fog overcoat. A M series body can not make a similar claim even with a collapsable 50.
Some RFF members have embarked on the self-imposed limitations of gear. There have been threads calling for others to join the venture, with the "Who's in?". Some members might feel a certain peer pressure to give it a try, or at least to find out for themselves what it is about. If it is self-motivated, and improves your photography- great. If it is peer-pressure, it probably will not have a positive effect. I did the one camera/one lens thing when I was 11. If I ever do it again, it will be with that camera. Minolta Hi-Matic 9, works just as it did in 1969.