One lens question

For me it’s camera type specific.

Nikon D90 – 18-200 Nikkor zoom. It’s a SLR, zooms work well with SLRs. I don’t now use this combination much – mainly for colour – and compared today’s systems it’s big and heavy. But I can live with it.

M6 – 35mm Summicron Asph, my only lens since about 2000. This year I bought a 50mm, and I’m having fun with it even though it’s taking time to get my 50mm eye in.

If I could have only one lens? 35mm Summicron… on my M6.
 
Hi,

These one lens questions are silly aren't they?

Using one lens means to me Macro but nothing else, or landscapes but nothing else or portraits but nothing else. Or abandon the RF's and use an SLR with a not so brilliant zoom lens.

Try as I may I can't get an outfit lower than an SLR with two lenses (Macro and 200 or so for air shows, wildlife etc) and a RF with 2 or 3 (35, 50 and 90 or 35 and 90). Or else the more modern version of (say) the CLE 28, 40 and 90mm line up.

And a compact for weekends etc would be nice and back up bodies for accidents or two films at once, etc.

Then there's the body question which is best raised in Leica terms as M2, or M4, or M6, or M7 or M9.

Like I said, its a daft question. A useful academic excercise but little else, or do we all like hair shirts?

Regards, David
 
For me, one camera one lens is easy: Sony R1. This is an obsolete bridge camera with a very good, 10MP APS-C sensor and a marvellous 14.3~71.5 (24~120 equivalent) Carl Zeiss zoom. It also has both eye level and waist level finders and the ability to hold two cards at once. Batteries last for well over 400 shots and mine is now 8 years and 20,000 shots old with no signs of problems.

But I still have several other cameras and lenses... :D
 
hepcat said:
Different audiences perceive things very differently. If I could only have one lens it'd probably be my Nokton 35mm f/1.2 v1, although the Nokton 50mm f/1.1 would be a close runner-up.
Click to expand...

Interesting to read that as I've just written on another thread ( Which Voigtlander? 35 1.4SC, 35 1.4MC or 35 1.2) that the 35mm 1.2 was probably my favourite lens of any make, focal length or fitting...v.1 too :)
 
For work, and to keep those Nikon Forum guys happy it's the 24-70mm f2.8 zoom - its my workhorse, not my favourite that would be the little 35mm f/2.

The Voigtlander 35mm 1.2 is my favourite lens ever, as mentioned above and I wish I could have one for every camera type and in AF too.

For my X-Pro1 (the Leica's and much loved 35 1.2 are long gone) it would currently be the 35mm 1.4 (50 equiv) but I'd love to try the 23mm (35 equiv) as its supposed to be extremely good and if I have to pick a fixed focal length its probably always going to be 35mm.
 
Trying to put the "single lens" in SLR, I see.

My "single lens" would be the ZM Biogon 35/2. It is as close to an "all around" lens as I have for my photography.
 
David Hughes said:
Hi,

These one lens questions are silly aren't they?

Using one lens means to me Macro but nothing else, or landscapes but nothing else or portraits but nothing else. Or abandon the RF's and use an SLR with a not so brilliant zoom lens.

Try as I may I can't get an outfit lower than an SLR with two lenses (Macro and 200 or so for air shows, wildlife etc) and a RF with 2 or 3 (35, 50 and 90 or 35 and 90). Or else the more modern version of (say) the CLE 28, 40 and 90mm line up.

And a compact for weekends etc would be nice and back up bodies for accidents or two films at once, etc.

Then there's the body question which is best raised in Leica terms as M2, or M4, or M6, or M7 or M9.

Like I said, its a daft question. A useful academic excercise but little else, or do we all like hair shirts?

Regards, David
Click to expand...
Dear David,

Yeah, but you've been thinking about it for a few nanoseconds. Rather than thinking, it's MUCH easier to ask the same pointless and meaningless question for the 2,076,342nd time this year.

Cheers,

R.
 
I really did not mean for this to be a "answer this question" ... just thinking out loud.

I can put my 35mm 2.0 on all day and be happy.

Peace
 
Roger Hicks said:
Dear David,

it's MUCH easier to ask the same pointless and meaningless question for the 2,076,342nd time this year.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Hi Roger, This question wan't asked by the OP, he was mearly pointing out that he was berated for asking it on a different forum. I don't think anyone read the OP though, just jumped to conclusions.

But yep, the question you're referring to gets asked a lot, it just wan't here, however, I think the answers that were received (mostly happy with one or two primes) is a sufficient response to the OP, and shows the obvious difference in photographer that frequent this forum to the nikon one referred to.

Michael
 
A small, lightweight, collapsible 8mm-300mm constant f1.2 with negligible distortion, high microcontrast, MF build-quality/feel and silent autofocus (Nikon's AF-S or Canon's whatever they call it), with an aperture ring.

Oh and a standard filter size.
 
What he said.

Peace


michaelwj said:
Hi Roger, This question wan't asked by the OP, he was mearly pointing out that he was berated for asking it on a different forum. I don't think anyone read the OP though, just jumped to conclusions.

But yep, the question you're referring to gets asked a lot, it just wan't here, however, I think the answers that were received (mostly happy with one or two primes) is a sufficient response to the OP, and shows the obvious difference in photographer that frequent this forum to the nikon one referred to.

Michael
Click to expand...
 
OurManInTangier said:
Interesting to read that as I've just written on another thread ( Which Voigtlander? 35 1.4SC, 35 1.4MC or 35 1.2) that the 35mm 1.2 was probably my favourite lens of any make, focal length or fitting...v.1 too :)
Click to expand...

It's stellar on all of my bodies... M8, M9P or M4-P. It's just an amazing lens.
 
Spicy said:
A small, lightweight, collapsible 8mm-300mm constant f1.2 with negligible distortion, high microcontrast, MF build-quality/feel and silent autofocus (Nikon's AF-S or Canon's whatever they call it), with an aperture ring.

Oh and a standard filter size.
Click to expand...

You forgot pocketable. ;-)
 
Like I said, its a daft question. A useful academic excercise but little else, or do we all like hair shirts?
Click to expand...

Well, there are people who claim that there's no such thing as a daft question. Perhaps they mean there's no such thing as a draft question? Nawwwwwww. :rolleyes:

Yeah, but you've been thinking about it for a few nanoseconds. Rather than thinking, it's MUCH easier to ask the same pointless and meaningless question for the 2,076,342nd time this year.
Click to expand...

Are you sure you included the one about changing the lenses of a TLR? I only ask because it seems a little low, as estimates go. :angel:
 
One lens. Don't know as I am suddenly finding I am enjoying the 50mm. Two months ago, I would have said a 35. So, one lens I guess a 50, two lenses a 35 and 90.

There is really very little that recommendes one over the other as your feet can usually make up the differences in field of view.
 
I shoot with one lens all the time and then if I see a shot that I think would work better with one of the other lenses I have in my bag I stop and calmly change to that lens and take the shot then continue to survey the area for other possible shots.
Aren't I worried about not having the right lens or missing a shot(s) while changing lenses? Simple answer to this is NO. The way I look at it you're always going to miss shots I mean if you turn right at an intersection rather then left you're going to miss all the shots that you might have gotten if you'd turned left. If you go shooting in the morning you're going to miss all the shots you might have gotten if you'd gone in the afternoon or evening.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom