Who shoots with two standard lenses ?

As time goes on I shoot the 50mm more and more but my other favorite focal length is 35mm. Used a 28mm, 50mm combo for a while but I realized Im not a huge fan of 28mm.

And definitely two bodies for two lenses. Can't stand changing lenses. Right now the carry kit i end up using the most is a rollei TLR with a 50mm equivalent and a digital with a 50mm prime. Like I said I love the 50mm right now. Maybe I'll get bored with it at some point.
 
Last edited:
Juan Valdenebro said:
I find myself carrying everyday 28 & 35 & 40 & 50 because those are my most used focal lengths, and I use them on different bodies, for different films and kinds of light, and for extremely different depth of field apertures.

Cheers,

Juan
Click to expand...

Interesting and potentially quite useful approach. I like those focal lengths too and often have trouble with mixing films - black and white and color, or ASA 100 and ASA 400, eg.

Sounds like you have a more versatile method, encompassing a greater range of options for taking advantage of available light, manipulating depth of field, utilizing different film types, etc.

Unfortunately, I don't have the cameras, lenses, nor the arms to carry all of that even if I could afford it!

I'm not making fun of you! I read another post earlier this week in which you described your method of shooting with two cameras slung over your shoulders, and two others in reserve (in a bag?) for different situations. I carry two cameras, one over each shoulder, and a bag with an extra lens and film.

Your method sounds intriguing. I'm thinking of giving it a try. Most of my work, at least that for which I'm paid, consists of parties, reunions, weddings, festivals, conventions, etc.

It might be worthwhile to have two kits with two bodies/lenses each, for different lighting situations and/or black & white/color, though I really don't do much color.

I'll go back and read that other post. I'm definitely open to new suggestions and techniques. You've given me much to think about, and even though I'd like to keep things simple, I'm willing to admit that having two kits, organized, might be much better than one larger kit in a state of chaos!
 
Hi Gregor,

It's very easy... As overcast days are simpler, you could try it then... Sunny days are more complicated as those have two situations: harsh and soft light zones. But on overcast days you have low contrast always... On overcast I go out with just two cameras, and use one for huge depth of field with 3200, and another one for narrow depth of field with 100... The normal, natural thing would be to use the wider lens for more DOF and the longer lens for less DOF, but you can try it the other way if you prefer it and if your wides are fast...

If you see a scene, and prefer it with most of it on focus, you use the camera with a 28 or 35 preset at f/11 and focused at 8 feet, so you just have to set speed and shoot, and most of the times you already have the speed set, so just shoot... And even easier with AE...

And if when you see another scene you prefer selective focus for it, you just use your other camera with a 40 or 50 wide open, and after your already set speed you just focus and shoot...

It's not complicated in any way, and there are no technical things to think about. It's an A or B thing... You want lots of focus or little on focus: you want one camera or the other one...

It's comfortable, fast and funny... That's why I do it: I enjoy it more than missing shots...

And on sunny days it's the same: you do this I just described when you're in the shadows... And when you're under the sun you put these two cameras in the bag and take out the two cameras with film for sun, and it's again a simple, easy A-B thing... And as under the sun you use the same speed (and aperture) always, with one camera you just shoot (huge DOF) and with the other one you focus and shoot (narrow DOF)... Believe me it's easier than using just one body, changing lenses, and thinking of different light and different settings all the time... With two prepared cameras I think less and shoot more...

Sometimes I mix cameras: RF's, SLR's, compacts, autoexposure and autofocus... Freedom!

Hope you enjoy it and catch lots of scenes!

Cheers,

Juan
 
Thanks for all your contributions. It seems that there are two main schools of thoughts for these that use two standard lenses that is :
A) two bodies, two lenses
B) leave one at home and enjoy the other.

Very few seem to carry both of them at the same time and switch. And others just use one lens ..

Two bodies is a no go for me, I am not a pro so prefer to miss a shot now and then bear with the overload in weight ... and cash. I also think that having one body forces your creativity when facing the "do with what I have or switch and risk to miss the shot" dilemna.

I'll give it a try for a few weeks with 35mm Lux + 75mm Cron with the Lux being the only standard lens. I do like is their very similar rendering and the fact that the 75mm is very demanding composition wise (i get to kneel down and bend again).
I'll put the 60mm Hexanon on the side for sometimes. Anyway, I think it is more a winter lens for these misty parisian atmospheres ....
 
Trekking with one camera strung over my shoulder is preferred here. No lens changes, no other gear to worry about. I have one window to look through and that is fine with me. I try to concentrate on composition, exposure, light, and speed.
 
35mmdelux said:
Trekking with one camera strung over my shoulder is preferred here. No lens changes, no other gear to worry about. I have one window to look through and that is fine with me. I try to concentrate on composition, exposure, light, and speed.
Click to expand...

That's precisely why I use two bodies: To concentrate more on composition than on exposure, light, and speed... And to concentrate precisely on composition with a wide or a tele depending on what is more natural or convenient for every scene... With two bodies I don't change settings: just shoot. They're ready tools. With one body, of course you have to use just one tool for different things, so you must adjust it for different situations...

One thing is knowing that with a 40mm you can step back and forth and "simulate" a 35 or a 50, even if we all know the angle and "feel" will always be a 40mm... But a very different thing is considering that precisely just one focal length is the most appropriate for all scenes. Or that precisely just one film and just one development are the best for all kinds of lights and places.

It can be done, and I have done it, and that's why I know it's inferior. I understand and respect people doing it, but I would never agree about less being more. At least not if we talk about an experienced photographer.

Cheers,

Juan

EDIT: To be clear and fair... When I say one body is inferior, I don't mean all shots will be bad: no... I mean some of the shots will be inferior to what those shots could have been with another lens or ready body... Apart, almost no shot will be missed with two lenses on two bodies set and ready...
 
Last edited:
I only carry one standard lens (a 28 or 35 on the m8) at a time. Then I'll generally add a 75 and maybe a 21 to give me a nice range of options.
I know a lot of people praise the one camera/one lens approach. But I find that to be too limiting. I decide what I want to create and then pick the lens that best accomplishes that vision.
 
Juan Valdenebro said:
That's precisely why I use two bodies: To concentrate more on composition than on exposure, light, and speed... And to concentrate precisely on composition with a wide or a tele depending on what is more natural or convenient for every scene... With two bodies I don't change settings: just shoot. They're ready tools. With one body, of course you have to use just one tool for different things, so you must adjust it for different situations...
Click to expand...
You have a point, yet I am not sure I understand your concern about speed. I mostly shoot wide open (around F1.4-2) with both lenses so as I am in fully manual, most often I don't have to worry about modifying the settings.
In the end, it is probably also about how each individual brain functions :
- some in an complementary way, meaning it is either 35mm or 50mm based on what seems to work best for a given scene.
- others in a substractive way, meaning if it really can't work with the lens I have, then I need to go to option two.
 
JSU said:
Do you still have a R-D1? If so, consider carrying the 60/1.2 on it while keeping the 35 Summilux on your M9. Stuff a couple of spare batteries in a pocket and hit the street. I expect to eventually do this with a M9 and a M8.2, just not yet. If you happen on a scene that will last only a moment or two, both lenses are at the ready. If you anticipate needing the 60/1.2 on the M9 the lens is just as accessible from a R-D1 as it would be from a shoulder bag.

I've been adept at swapping lenses between bodies for longer than I can remember. In the era of working with film it was faster to change lenses between bodies than to change film. Now it is just something I do, film or digital.
Click to expand...
I still have both the M8 (though technically my girlfriend inherited of it ;) mistake ), and the R-D1. Yet M9 files are so much better and react differently to my post processing, than a second body could only be a M9. And really, two bodies is a no go, I carry my camera everywhere, hanging on my shoulder (no bag). Two would be a nightmare and make me feel like a Christmas tree.
 
yanidel said:
You have a point, yet I am not sure I understand your concern about speed. I mostly shoot wide open (around F1.4-2) with both lenses so as I am in fully manual, most often I don't have to worry about modifying the settings.
In the end, it is probably also about how each individual brain functions :
- some in an complementary way, meaning it is either 35mm or 50mm based on what seems to work best for a given scene.
- others in a substractive way, meaning if it really can't work with the lens I have, then I need to go to option two.
Click to expand...

If you have one body and two lenses, you have to change lenses...

The thing is when to change them... ¿Just when you see a scene that will be gone in five seconds? That's what I mean when I talk about two lenses ready to be used: two bodies. As a plus, I define each of them for more or less depth of field so I react faster.

Cheers,

Juan
 
Juan Valdenebro said:
That's precisely why I use two bodies: To concentrate more on composition than on exposure, light, and speed... And to concentrate precisely on composition with a wide or a tele depending on what is more natural or convenient for every scene... With two bodies I don't change settings: just shoot. They're ready tools. With one body, of course you have to use just one tool for different things, so you must adjust it for different situations...

One thing is knowing that with a 40mm you can step back and forth and "simulate" a 35 or a 50, even if we all know the angle and "feel" will always be a 40mm... But a very different thing is considering that precisely just one focal length is the most appropriate for all scenes. Or that precisely just one film and just one development are the best for all kinds of lights and places.

It can be done, and I have done it, and that's why I know it's inferior. I understand and respect people doing it, but I would never agree about less being more. At least not if we talk about an experienced photographer.

Cheers,

Juan

EDIT: To be clear and fair... When I say one body is inferior, I don't mean all shots will be bad: no... I mean some of the shots will be inferior to what those shots could have been with another lens or ready body... Apart, almost no shot will be missed with two lenses on two bodies set and ready...
Click to expand...
It's great you've found something that works for you, but you can't claim it's objectively better. Other shooting styles will work better for other people.
 
If the best system was one body and one lens, that's all that would be manufactured, and all that would be used by all photographers. Why more if that's the best way to do it?

The reasons for using one body and one lens can go from economical to laziness to false preconceptions to blind faith to low weight and to anything imaginable, except being the most capable or best system. Can it be used to get a good image? Of course! Lots of them! Is it a good system for missing shots? Of course! Lots of them! You won't miss the shots from scenes that fit precisely for that focal length and film set, but you will miss the rest of them... It's not about me: it's about optics and light... Why do you think 99.99% of all shooters in the world use digital cameras with zooms and automatic ISO's?

Cheers,

Juan
 
juan, you're starting to sound like some kind of dogmatic college professor.

and your logic is a bit off but then i'm not all that logical...

your way of shooting is unique and you are happy with it...others, close to the same thing, they are happy with their system.

personally, i prefer not to lock myself in a system of shooting and much prefer to go with my gut feeling when choosing my kit. i can be happy with one lens and camera and then next time out i take it all with me...diversity is a thing of beauty.
 
Hi back alley, I also go out with just one camera... Please excuse me for using two! :) Sometimes with an XA, sometimes with a Hasselblad, sometimes with a RF, sometimes with an SLR, sometimes with a compact, and I even use AE and AF... I sound dogmatic only when you want to imagine me like that...

On another thread I said: Freedom! I attend results above comfort... Two different focal lenses can capture two different kinds of images requiring different fields of view... Isn't it simple?

And two different films are far more ready for different lights or extremely different apertures than one body with one lens used for sun and shadows and just develop the same way any image as if different lights didn't exist... With sensors it's the same: that's why those cameras have similar settings no matter the brand... Scenes require that... Not to exist, but to be good...

All the photographers I know personally, -different countries and ages- see benefits in using more than just one lens or body or film... Not my system, but the system of almost every good photographer... Then and now... Maybe you're right and all great photographers of all times have been a bit dogmatic about some things when those things were clear and beyond proof to them... Maybe that's the definition of dogma: what is true.

Cheers,

Juan
 
Juan Valdenebro said:
Hi back alley, I also go out with just one camera... Please excuse me for using two! :) Sometimes with an XA, sometimes with a Hasselblad, sometimes with a RF, sometimes with an SLR, sometimes with a compact, and I even use AE and AF... I sound dogmatic only when you want to imagine me like that...

On another thread I said: Freedom! I attend results above comfort... Two different focal lenses can capture two different kinds of images requiring different fields of view... Isn't it simple?

And two different films are far more ready for different lights or extremely different apertures than one body with one lens used for sun and shadows and just develop the same way any image as if different lights didn't exist... With sensors it's the same: that's why those cameras have similar settings no matter the brand... Scenes require that... Not to exist, but to be good...

All the photographers I know personally, -different countries and ages- see benefits in using more than just one lens or body or film... Not my system, but the system of almost every good photographer... Then and now... Maybe you're right and all great photographers of all times have been a bit dogmatic about some things when those things were clear and beyond proof to them... Maybe that's the definition of dogma: what is true.

Cheers,

Juan
Click to expand...


juan, you seem to have a great need to be right, a trait i dislike immensely.
carry on being who you cannot help being and i will start ignoring you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom