One Lens, One Camera, One Year

R

Robert Ades

Member
Local time
4:12 AM
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
19
Thinking about embarking on this project -- one camera, one prime lens, and shoot and print a a few images each day.


Trouble is, I can't decide on 35mm (equiv) or 50mm. Most of my work has been 35mm because of the environmental aspect. 50mm will challenge me more, but it captures less of the "room."



Btw, I shoot Fuji, so the 35mm would likely be the X100V and the 50mm would be with the wonderful 35mm f/1.4, if this matters.
 
The 35 vs. 50 dilemma is one that most of us probably can relate to. Along with it goes the other dilemma: The lightness / compactness / speed of operation afforded by having only ONE lens and not wasting time choosing, vs. the flexibility that carring an extra little lens gives you.

I've been shooting for 30 years and still haven't made up my mind once and for all. Good luck :)
 
I’m considering this notion as well, but I’ve yet to decide which camera, let alone lens. A bad case of GAS, now that I’ve discovered super cheap Nikon AF bodies everywhere, isn’t helping! If I decide on a Nikon I’ll probably cheat and use a short zoom lens, like the 35-70mm Nikkor. For RF, I think 40mm is reasonable.
 
I'm doing this but have cheated and am using the 16-55 with an XT1.

If I had an X100 I would be using that. Carry everywhere camera. Plus you have said you prefer the 35mm FOV so why, on your first year doing this? Would you not use that.

I'm trying for one photo I love a month so that I can make a calendar for next year.
 
What is your project going to be over the year? Is the 35mm or 50mm a better fit? As with photography in general, the lens should be chosen based on what you want to accomplish photographically.
 
I did this awhile back; in my case limiting myself to one focal length for an entire year. Ha, ha, multiple cameras and multiple lenses but just that one focal length. Not only did I get so much better shooting it, but I learned that's all I need and my equipment list has been morphing in that direction ever since. Not surprisingly, it's the 35mm lens on a rangefinder for 35mm film. I suppose if I shot an SLR more, I'd feel different, but with a rangefinder all I really need, or want, is that 35mm lens, and lots of film, and plenty of gas to get out the door. Keeps things simple too.
 
In terms of focal length, I don't think it matters much. It's a challenge project, after all. You'll get deeply into either, and there are no more good photos at one focal length than another. I'd say be more concerned about which setup you'd prefer to carry all year. For 2022 you could shoot the other.

John
 
petronius said:
40mm is the way to go (preferably in a Rollei 35;-)
Click to expand...

40mm is truly wonderful. I used the Panasonic 20mm 1.7 on M4/3 for years, and now the 40mm on my Ricoh 500G. It combines the versatility of a 35mm with a sort of cleaned-up frame closer to a 50mm.

I'd probably stick with a 35mm if I were restricting myself for a whole year, and 35 or 50 was what was available. That might be a bit of hedging, though. Pick a fifty and you will be forced to be skillful and artistic.
 
This whole exercise was something often done as a necessity by some of us old timers. You scrimped and saved until you had enough to buy a 35mm SLR and it always came with a 50mm’ish standard lens usually around f2 or a bit faster.
At that point, broke, you walked around taking pictures for a year (more or less) until you could afford another lens.
If, in that time period you often found yourself backing away, trying to get more in the picture it was a good indication you probably should consider a wide angle as your next lens purchase. Perhaps you had saved enough for two lenses, especially if you bought third party lenses. If you had improved your financial position enough you could even consider one of those fancy 85-205mm f3.8 Vivitars but if you were still poor you were stuck with a 135mm in most cases.

Simple times......simple times.
 
Robert Ades said:
Thinking about embarking on this project -- one camera, one prime lens, and shoot and print a a few images each day.

Trouble is, I can't decide on 35mm (equiv) or 50mm. Most of my work has been 35mm because of the environmental aspect. 50mm will challenge me more, but it captures less of the "room."

Btw, I shoot Fuji, so the 35mm would likely be the X100V and the 50mm would be with the wonderful 35mm f/1.4, if this matters.
Click to expand...

I have done this numerous times and mostly inadvertently. The focal length never seemed to matter as I would simply adjust my approach. Oddly I never adapted my approach for zooms. I put them on the camera and left them a single focal length 95% of the time.
 
I can see the appeal of 35mm, but that would just lead to cropping in the long term. Too many things going on. 50mm is to the point and a good golden middle. My only gripe is the lowest shutter speed for handheld is higher on 50mm. But I alway tend to go back to 50mm. If I want wide I just take my iPhone out.
 
petronius said:
40mm is the way to go (preferably in a Rollei 35;-)
Click to expand...


I like 40mm, too.

I used fixed-lens compact RFs (a couple of Olympus 35 RCs, a Vivitar ES, and a Canonet QL 17 GIII) when I traveled and when I lived abroad. These cameras suited me very well and rarely left me frustrated for other focal lengths.

I have found, in my own case, that using a camera with a fixed lens significantly reduces the desire for other focal lengths. When I bought my first SLR with a 50mm lens, I felt like it wouldn't be complete without other interchangeable lenses. It seemed I was always thinking that a photo would be better if I had a different focal length. When using a camera with a fixed lens, that was the only option, so I simply thought and visualized in terms of what I had. If this principle applies to you, as well, you might consider going with the Fuji X100V.

- Murray
 
JohnWolf said:
In terms of focal length, I don't think it matters much. It's a challenge project, after all. You'll get deeply into either, and there are no more good photos at one focal length than another. I'd say be more concerned about which setup you'd prefer to carry all year. For 2022 you could shoot the other.

John
Click to expand...

+1 this

You will get used to whatever lens you choose if you stick with it.
 
40mm or 35mm. While this is obviously subjective, but I feel I can work around the limitations of a 35/40mm more easily than the limitations of a 50mm.
An exception could be if you do a lot of people/portrait, but then 50mm may not cut it fully, either.
 
Don't know why it is in this sub forum. :)

And not sure where the problem is. Like 35? Why go for something which doesn't work for you? It will be your pictures, why any need to satisfy some theoretics' theories.

I like 35 and to me it way more universal and interesting than crop and tele 50.
It is how you are looking at life. Wide or within horse blinds.
 
zuiko85 said:
This whole exercise was something often done as a necessity by some of us old timers...
Click to expand...

Exactly so.

For 15 years, all I used was a Pentax SP500, its 50/2 Super Takumar lens, and bulk-loaded B&W film. 15 years.

I developed the film myself and printed about 5% of my photos with my $45 enlarger.

Now I’m scanning photos I haven’t seen in 45 years.

But the 15-year use of one camera, one lens, made its use intuitive. The 100+ cameras and lenses I have now are just toys. I feel most comfortable with that first Pentax. I never felt hampered having just one lens.
 
50mm FOV would be my choice. I’ve never used the 35 1.4 Fujinon but I do enjoy the 35 f2. I think pre-covid I would have liked to try a 28mm for a year but I think people are very cautious and possibly even fearful of someone getting as close as a 28 would be. I think the 50 is the right focal length to sorta keep people at a non stressful distance
 
So when I bought my new mirrorless digital, I assumed that I would spring for the 32mm prime lens (50mm equivalent) to complement the kit zoom because that's what you do, right? Except...I was looking through my old photos and I realized that I haven't taken many really good photos with a 50mm lens* and that my best shots were all with either a 28mm or a 35mm lens, and vastly more in the 35mm pile. I think I'll save up for the 22mm prime (35mm equivalent) instead because that seems to be what my eye actually sees as opposed to what I'd like it to see. Might as well work with the length I know.

* The exception is in medium format, where I seem to like the 75-80mm normal lens just fine. Go figure.
 
Last edited:
One camera/one lens could be a good idea, but why does it have to be for a whole year? How about for a week? OK, OK, a month?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom