Thinking of taking the one camera, one lens plunge.

Roger Hicks said:
Of course I have a cast iron excuse in this one: I can always write about it.

But equally, I'm not sure that I'd cut back VERY much if I were doing it for fun. There are cameras that I can't sell because of sentimental attachment (my late father-in-law's KowaSix, for example) and others I don't want to sell because they allow me to do something I can't do otherwise (but do I need TWO 5x7 inch/13x18cm cameras? Or five 4x5s?).

I have to say that if I could get enough money for my 12x15 inch Gandolfi I'd probably buy a Noctilux, because it would see more use. But that's not exactly cutting down...

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger,
I have a Noctilux for sale - cheap, too! :)

/T
 
It can be done, but I can almost guarantee that the minute you sell everything else, you'll be invited to shoot something wherein the perfect gear just happens be the stuff you just sold.

Like you, I'm also a fan of the fifty, and if I were to only shoot film and forsake my R-D1S, I can probably live with just a 50mm lens (on my CV R3A). My problem is I have a few of them (Summicron Rigid, Sonnar, Planar and an old Industar 61LD), and I may switch from one to the other on any given day depending on my mood and what I'm shooting.

So, I'd say, keep the stuff unless you need the money for something else.
 
kxl said:
It can be done, but I can almost guarantee that the minute you sell everything else, you'll be invited to shoot something wherein the perfect gear just happens be the stuff you just sold.
Click to expand...

I've thought of that, but I've shot enough weddings for friends that I'd enjoy having a good excuse for telling them no . . . and I'm pretty sure I could do it all with the 50 anyway.

Ray Nalley said:
One camera, one lens is truly not in the spirit of this forum. ;)
Click to expand...

How about if I change the straps weekly? Or the grip? Or the leatherette? etc etc etc. I already replaced the red dot with a black one, so I can see going for only cosmetic changes ;-)

ferider said:
28/50/90 is a complete set, IMO. Sounds like a waste to break it up.
Click to expand...

If I had the 35 and the 50 1.2, then it would be the complete set. I understand the logic there, but I really don't use the 28 and the 90 often at all.

CK Dexter Haven said:
You seem like the type of person who enjoys gear. As much as many forum members would like you to feel guilty about that, it's not a sin or a vice.
...

Here's a suggestion. Don't sell anything, except possibly the duplicated/redundant pieces. Keep one of the 35mm lenses. You may want to also choose between the 28 and the 35 instead of keeping both. Whatever you keep, though, choose one lens and pack the others in a box, sealed, and stored somewhere in your house. Out of sight, and too much hassle to retrieve.... If, after six months or a year, you don't miss it, then you can sell. it's not as if the market is devaluing rangefinder lenses.

.
Click to expand...

I do enjoy the gear . . . and you are right, it will be worth just as much/little in six months, but some of it's been sitting for a couple of years already . . . I could just sell the lot, escrow the money until I get the itch for something different, and then use it to buy a second M6ttl, a .58 though, with a cron v4. I've always had a thing for that square hood.

mfogiel said:
Matt,
I've hardly ever seen you shooting with 28 or 90 mm, so I don't see any problem - I'd even say that narrowing the scope to 50mm will eliminate some of these wall shots... :)
For 1 camera 1 50mm lens I'd go for an 0.85x M7 or M6, If instead you want to stick to 35mm and experience a superior VF at the expense of some solidity, keep the Biogon and get a ZI.
Click to expand...

Oh, have no fear, I can shoot blank walls with a 50 too ;-)

I like all the space around the 50 framelines with the .72 vf. I think the .85 would feel constricted, but I could be wrong.
 
The one camera/lens sounds good in theory, but in practice is very restrictive and limiting.

If you never change your shooting style or subjects, I suppose you can make it work.

But one camera cannot do everything. There are some days, that I just want to go the beach close to my house with my medum format and tripod and take pictures of the shells washed up on the beach. There are days that I jump on the bus and go into the city with a pocket full of film and the Bessa. Then there are the weekends that my sons and I travel to the Blue Mountains to meet the birding bunch and I am very glad for my Nikon with its long telephotos. I have several fashion shoots happening over the next few weeks, where I will be using DSLR's, medium-format, the Bessa and the Nikons. I am looking forward to using my new 8x10 to make contact prints.

Photography has been my sanity keeper through a myriad careers and industries on various continents over the past 3 decades. It is the one constant in my life. And like food and music, I enjoy good photography over such a broad range of styles and types, that to be limited to one camera/one lens would be like being forced to only eat fast food and listen to opera for the rest of my life.
 
Last edited:
Unless you need money - I'd keep it all - never know. I have just about the same Hexanon kit as you and I am too a 50mm user mostly, so my Hex 28 and 90 see less use. Yet, there are times I'm really glad I have them. Fact that you have extra lenses doesnt mean you HAVE to use them all the time. So, like I said - unless it's done for financial reasons - keep them all and use your camera and 50mm lens as a "one camera and one lens" until you decide to use them again. Plus this way you can have several "one lens one camera" combinations.
Oh, and I'd keep the Hexar and not M6 if you decide to sell it all ;)
 
There's times when I agree with the one lens one camera philosophy and times when I don't ... currently I don't! I agree that having a gazillion lenses in focal lengths from a rangefinder's practical minimum to it's maximum and lugging them around is insane but it's still good to have the appropriate tools for the job when the occasion or particular subject matter calls for it.

I drove for a couple of hours into the valley behind Brisbane yesterday searching for more abandoned farming properties to photograph, which has been a bit of a mission with me lately. I found an absolutely derelict gem of a place on top of a windswept rise and couldn't wait to hop the fence and get snapping. I had a 35mm on the camera and a 50mm in the bag and realised very quickly that I needed something wider. Yeah sure ... I got a lot of pleasing shots of this magnificent location but after three rolls of film, not the ones I wanted ... I'll be making the trek back out there with a 25mm and probably a 15 as well because for me to create the mood of this place in the way I see it and want to represent it ... that's what I'll need.

Modern cars are supplied with five or six speed transmissions these days to maximise their performance potential ... most of them could effectively be driven in one gear and still perform their function adequately for what they were intended. I'm not about to lock mine into second gear for an ideal that only exists in my mind!
 
back alley said:
i hate threads like this one...makes me want to sell off gear and be a minimalist.

i think the one camera one lens idea is romantic at best and harmful at worst. what harm is there in having extra lenses and a back up body or 2?

but on the other hand a part of me easily understands the pull of a simple approach.
my answer is to try to 'fool' myself by creating kits. the zeiss kit, the cv kit and the cle kit.
the cle kit is very simple, small and covers 99% of most anyone's shooting needs and it all fits in the tiny domke 5xa bag.
the cv kit is great for really feeling covered to shoot most anything. all it needs is a cv 75.
the zeiss kit is the 'prestige' kit, extraordinary lens quality and a body that can handle anything and it looks great in all it's silver glory.

but, like you, i usually just take one camera and one lens when i go out shooting. these days, it's the zi with 35/2.8.

so, i'm pretty sure that i have been of no use whatsoever!
so i'll add this.
follow your gut and do what's comfortable for you. sell and evaluate and
buy it all again if you really miss the extra gear. i have done that and with no regrets.

shooters have a saying - 'beware the man with one gun'.
we are not alone.
Click to expand...

Romantic at best, harmful at worst is an elegant way to put the dilemma. Since I only shoot for myself, I can afford the luxury of romance. Reminds of the way Zeiss advertised the Ikon as the perfect tool for 'photo poets'.

The idea of discrete kits is somewhat appealing, but I think I might want them various enough to be distinct in their uses. So instead of 3 35mm RF kits, perhaps the M6/50 combo + a Hassy + a pano cam + DSLR/macro (something that's always interested me) etc etc etc. While it isn't necessary to sell the current kit for any immediate financial concerns, I couldn't afford a collection like the one above no matter how much I sold :-(

Anyway, thanks to everyone that's responded so far. There's some interesting points in here.
 
For a long while I walked around with a IIIf & a Summar on it. That's it.
Since getting more lenses I've had to spend more time thinking about which lens to bring with me and its corresponding viewfinder. I thought more lenses = more flexibility but all it seems to be doing is weighting me down.

Sometimes I think 1 body & 1 lens is the best way to go.
 
You've only got to look at HCB's work for a little while to see why he never never really developed much as a photographer and pretty well remained a street snapper most of his life. He crippled his career by restricting his lens and gear choices and I, and a lot of good people here are not about to make the same mistake! :angel:
 
CK Dexter Haven said:
I've wanted to do the same, for a long time. But, there are just too many issues.

Although i truly admire photographers who have committed to one format, one lens, one film, etc, i simply am not that type of person. Most of my favorite photographers are one lens guys, essentially, or at least they are in the bodies of work that i most admire. Avedon, Penn, Koudelka, Erwitt, Levitt.... But, then there are the people like Steven Meisel, Steve McCurry, Patrick Demarchelier - who use various tools, depending on whim or necessity. Two types of people. I don't think you can fight who you really are.

You seem like the type of person who enjoys gear. As much as many forum members would like you to feel guilty about that, it's not a sin or a vice. I'm learning to accept that. I feel guilty for having a Canon dSLR, Hasselblad, Ikon rangefinder, Nikon slr, Contax slr.... But, i LIKE all of those pieces, for various reasons. And, i would feel a compromise if i let any of them go, even if i don't particularly use them all 'enough.'

But, i do buy and sell pieces, kits, and systems with too much regularity. The promise i made to myself three years ago, though, was to not buy MORE gear than i already had, and not to spend MORE money. Whatever i do should come from an equal or plus $ transaction. And, the effort should still be toward simplifying everything.

Here's a suggestion. Don't sell anything, except possibly the duplicated/redundant pieces. Keep one of the 35mm lenses. You may want to also choose between the 28 and the 35 instead of keeping both. Whatever you keep, though, choose one lens and pack the others in a box, sealed, and stored somewhere in your house. Out of sight, and too much hassle to retrieve.... If, after six months or a year, you don't miss it, then you can sell. it's not as if the market is devaluing rangefinder lenses.

If, like me, though, you are attracted to too many different types of photography, you may find you want more than just the one lens. It seems like every week i begin to like something else, and i want to try it for myself. Where i used to have no interest in wides, all of a sudden this month i need to experiment with a 28mm. All because i saw something i liked and i found a new appreciation for it. Some people, though, like ONE THING only. Like those who, when asked What kind of music do you like...they have a one word response. I typically have to say, ALL types, except one or two.... And, then i have to clarify...that sometimes i do like those one or two other types. Photography is no different. And anything i don't like now, i'm bound to find an appreciation for soon. And, whatever i like, i need to try to accomplish myself.

It's a difficult set of characteristics, and i agree that those with singular interests have an easier time 'focusing' on accomplishing a singular task. But, my personality doesn't allow me to dismiss the other interests.
Click to expand...

This sums it up pretty well for me. I sometimes "dream" about the one camera / one lens combination ... it doesn't work for me, too. I use 35 / 50 in 90 % of the time but sometimes, I only take the 21mm with me or only (!) the 90mm. When I want to try something different, I use my Rolleiflex or the Hasselblad...
 
different strokes, diff folks thing.

I recall growing up with a yashica slr & 50mm lens I bought at the PX in 1971. It was about taking pictures for a very long time.

The 21st century has brought more money and more gear for me. At times I have had ten great cameras and twenty great lenses. Did it make me a better photog? Not in the least.

I will never go back to the bad ole days anymore than I would trade in my Mercedes for some Ford banger. But I want to keep it within certain constraints. I want to concentrate on my "vision" more than anything else -- to make a personal breakthru -- and no amount of extra gear will help me reach this goal.
 
I managed for many years with a Zeiss Contina and its 45mm lens. That's it.
With SLR equipment I was for years on a very basic set of equipment. It is RFF influence that pushed me overboard.
 
Um...

HCB didn't stick with one camera, one lens. Pictures exist of him using a 90mm and I'm reasonably confident that I've read about his carrying two cameras on occasion (overseas). For shooting in India, for example, he'd have been an idiot not to have a spare body available, even if he didn't carry it 'round his neck.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Um...

HCB didn't stick with one camera, one lens. Pictures exist of him using a 90mm and I'm reasonably confident that I've read about his carrying two cameras on occasion (overseas). For shooting in India, for example, he'd have been an idiot not to have a spare body available, even if he didn't carry it 'round his neck.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

I believe he also owned up to occasionally using a 35mm lens... the cheat! :D
 
i personally am dealing with something similar. just bought a 35 and it will face some stiff competition from the 50 as to what i am more likely to use. i suspect the 35 will win out. for 35mm photography, 1 camera and 1 lens is fine by me. if i wanted something different, i would go for a hassy 6x6 or maybe even a kowa6. that a potent digi p&s will do it for me.
 
Last edited:
Ade-oh said:
I believe he also owned up to occasionally using a 35mm lens... the cheat! :D
Click to expand...

The bounder!

Well, the fella was clearly unreliable. French, y'know.

Edit: I assumed that the deliberately old-fashioned use of language would reveal that this was a joke -- does anyone seriously use the term 'bounder' nowadays, let alone 'fella' and 'y'know'? -- and a further clue to my Francophilia is that I've lived in La France Profonde for the last 6 years. Even so, in response to a PM I've added this para... Trouble is, I HATE smilies and emoticons.

Second edit: a further PM suggests that I 'clearly do not respect the French'. (The author was not French).

Was anyone genuinely offended by this? Or did they take it in the same sense as the previous post, where someone called him a cheat?

How much walking-on-eggshells do we have to do? I'd be especially interested in responses from French RFF members.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
I think most of us here can relate to both sides of the issue:

Pro one/one: You focus on the picture, not the gear. I used to have a 28 as my widest lens for ages. Often enough I would not be able to frame a whole building in architecture shots, but then I would simply have to find a crop that brought out the essence of that building. And guess what? Better shots resulted! Today I put on my 21, frame the whole thing and - booooring!

Contra one/one: It makes things easier to have one lens with you, yes. But what's wrong with the other lenses sitting at home? I personally find the thought very comforting that if I really, absolutely cannot get the shot with the current lesn, I can come back another day with another lens and take it.

So, like most are recommending: Unless you really need the money right now: put your other lenses away to where it's a hassle to get them out quickly (or give them to someone).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom