If you could use just one lens . . .

<p>I'm curious to see how others "view" their world. If you could use just one lens (in this case, PRIME of course) what lens would you use to view your world and express yourself to others? Different assignments mean different equipment, like the Galápagos might need a 400/2.8 while the Grand Canyon might need 24mm. But forget that. Creativity can work with any lens, anywhere. If you could only use one forevermore, with what would you choose to see your world?</p>

<p>For me? Long lenses de-clutter but ultimately, I'm a wide guy. I wonder if the 50mm is overrated from the Cartier-Bresson era and because they are called "normal" and affordable. Either way, a nifty fifty is too long for me. I enjoy the 35 or 24, so for me, the one lens to rule them all is a 28. Wish I could afford the 1.4 . . .</p>

<p> It's an impossible choice, of course, but for me (on an FX body), it would be a 35mm, f/2 or f/1.4.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I second the motion on the 35mm f/2. It was my one best all-around lens.</p>

<p>i third the motion, 35/2.</p>

<p>Yeah, I should have mentioned I'm an FX shooter. I'll have to look into this 35/2 you speak of. :)</p>

<p>Thinking back on my photo history, I was most often comfortable with a 40mm to 50mm fast lens on either a rangefinder or SLR, and only occasionally wanted something longer.<br>

These days, I'm mostly at about the 35mm equivalent of 105mm, but I wouldnt want to be limited to that. These preferences are expressed in the fact that my Tamron 28-75mm is on my DX camera most of the time.<br>

If I had to choose between the wider and longer ends of this lens, I'd choose the wider, at a 35mm equivalent of 42mm.</p>

<p>I'm a wide-angle junkie, so I'd have to say 20mm prime for FX. 2nd place would be 35mm.</p>

<p>One lens - why bother buying a slr or dslr. The reason one buys a dlsr (or slr for that matter) is the ability to be able to change lenses.<br>

But if I could have just one lens - - now wait a minute..... I have three dslr cameras & two slr cameras..... Not to mention - I have a lot of lenses. I don't need to choose just one lens.<br>

If I had to choose just one lens & waste a dslr (or slr) camera - I would choose a zoom. After all - Nikon's zooms are so highly regarded. Why waste the camera.<br>

JMHO on a Saturday morning - while still highly irritated. :-(</p>

<p>I actually thought about this pretty often. I love long lenses more than wide angles. But only one lens... they would be too limited. I like my 16-85VR, but everytime I seriously want to make pictures, it comes off. Not because it's a bad lens, but because I prefer primes ultimately.<br>

So, another vote for the 35 f/2 (AF-D, on DX, though) in a very very close battle with the 24 f/2.8 (Ai). For FX, I'm pretty sure it would be 35 and 50. I do not think the 50mm length is overrated. To me, it keeps something natural, and often I intuitively like 50mm photos. To me, the ultra-wide angle is more overrated; nowadays at least I feel it is overused.<br>

By the way, I like my Nikon 35 f/2, but mainly for its focal length. It starts to shine at f/4, but below it's not that brilliant. I think the Zeiss 35 f/2 is a much better lens for that length, and for me the one I'd get (budget allowing).</p>

<p>If somehow I were limited to only one fixed-focal-length lens, I would have very little interest in photography.</p>

I will try to find a sharp ~85mm f/1.4 capable of doing at least 1:1 macro, with or without AF, for Minolta A bayonet mount.

<p>+1000 on what Shun said.. More and more I am using my different lenses equally... except my super-zoom, which I use less and less (I need to take a trip BAD!).</p>

<p>probably <a href="../photo/8811297">no lens at all</a></p>

<p>I was always impressed with the book: <a href="http://www.kennerly.com/portfolio/pdj.php">Photo Du Jour</a> where David Hume Kennerly took one photograph a day for the entire year of 2000. He used one camera and one lens: A non-DSLR/SLR M7II and 43mm (21mm in 35m equivalent). It is very awe inspiring and shows that the use of on angle of view, at least for a while, can spark a lot of interest in photography. </p>

<p>Several years ago I had a Nikkormat and only a Nikkor 24mm 2.8. It was not a asthetic choice, it was economics. It was all I could afford at the time. It forced me to be creative with composition and get close to subjects. I really enjoyed the challenge and recall some fun photos. If I had to choose only one lens I would error on the wide side, a 28mm I guess or maybe a 24 again. (Lil, I hope things settle, I enjoy your contributions.)</p>

I AM using just one lens. It's a 5cm collapsible Summicron.

<p>Thank you Dave -<br>

I appreciate the support. :-)<br>

Lil :-)</p>

<p><img src="http://a05-b05.mypicturetown.com:80/P2PwebCmdController/cache/xJm-P5WF_3ZBS0*ehxBGY7l1F4L*aS7EPqPcE*bXzDZo_3EN%3DYlY16NEQh8eG%25y/item.jpg?rot=1" alt="" width="480" height="480" /></p>

<p>I would use only 50/1.2 on full frame body.</p>

<p>Jose, you stripped the exif info :) - I wanted to see what you used for the shot. Very creative answer.</p>

<p>I'd choose my 28mm f/1.4 AF-D Nikkor on my D700's; or I'd choose my 65mm f/4.0 (equal to about 32mm in 35mm format) on my Mamiya 7II's. I can understand what Shun and Peter are saying, but the vast majority of images I have hanging on my walls were taken with moderate wide angle lenses- 28-35mm in 35mm format- and I could get by with a single lens in that range.</p>

<p>I'll see your thirty-five and raise you a hundred...<br>

in this case, the 135mm that is my favorite lens. I like being able to reach out and snag things, without being so limited in field of view that I cannot casually walk around and shoot.</p>

<p>David, very easy shot. D700 + 105VR, f32 - 2sec., tungsten bulb light. Subject: the lens (mounted on my F3) over the table and in front of a silver gelatin print, originally taken with the same lens. No tricks or Ps...</p>

<p>I suspect 90% or better of responders come into this page with a zoom lens in mind. Maybe the moderator could change the title to something like:</p>

<p>If you could use just one <strong>prime</strong> lens...</p>

<p>Anyway, with a full frame 5D I would have to say Canon's 50mm f1.4, but I would be <em>hurting</em>, was going to say the Canon 24-70 ;)</p>

<p>35mm f2.8 Summaron.</p>