ANYONE OWN ONLY ONE PRIME LENS ? ( 5D +35L )

<p>I do mostly fine art photography. I have owned several lenses at various times over the years. But the lens I use 99% of the time is the 35L on a 5D. <br>

I read that Henri Cartier Bresson used a 50mm for his entire life. <br>

Just curious if I am the only one using one prime lens exclusively? <br>

Does anyone think I am missing out on something?<br>

And I know this does not apply to wedding or commercial photogs.</p>

<p>Such a romantic notion: a man and his one lens. When I was a starving student I only had one lens and it was a 50mm prime. Now I have a lot of lenses. More than I can carry. However I can only use one at a time so, for that moment, I'm exclusive and feel like a starving student again. Actually I haven't removed the 50 1.2L from my 5Dii since last summer so the nostalgic rush just goes on and on.</p>

<p>In a sense yes, but probably not how you think. I have only one prime: 85mm 1.2L orig. On the other hand, I have other lenses that are all zooms.</p>

<p>That being said, there are certain types of photography that I do and want to get better at just because I love what this lens can do. Presumably if your interests in photography were specific enough, you could quite happily use one lens and never 'miss out' on anything that didn't raise your heart rate. It's about what intrigues you.</p>

<p>The real question is, "Do you feel limited by only having one lens at this point in your exploration of photography?"</p>

<p>HCB reportedly owned lenses ranging from 35mm to 85mm. He also lived in an era in which primes were the only option - I wonder if he would so limit himself today?</p>

<p>The "do you feel limited" question seems odd to me. I would certainly be limited in my own photography if I only had a 50mm prime to work with. Which is not to say that I don't occasionally go out with just a 50mm prime on my camera.</p>

<p>Dan-- So would I. My point is, maybe Jon doesn't. It is a question each photographer must answer with respect to their own personal interest in photography.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>HCB reportedly owned lenses ranging from 35mm to 85mm. He also lived in an era in which primes were the only option - I wonder if he would so limit himself today?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>He'd probably be ah one lens wonder 'n be humpin' ah Tammy 18-200 on street 'n sidewalk. Or maybe a cellphone camera would be his weapon 'o choice: stealthy, in your face and always in hand to nail city dwellers on hoof.</p>

<p>Nope, I've got a closet full of apparati.</p>

<p>However I have great fun when I go out with just my 400D and a 50mm lens.<br>

(Another combo I love to take out -not weighed down by other equipment- is my 50D plus 100mm macro.)</p>

<p>These outings can last anywhere between 30 minutes and 12 hours. The 12 hour ones are mostly events in which I participate like a family outing, a work related casual trip or an evening out with friends. Those are the 400D+50mm/1.8 outings.</p>

<p>I usually have my Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on my 20D. Very nice combination which I use almost exclusively.</p>

<p> HCB owned and used 35/50/90mm lenses, though he heavily favored the 50mm.</p>

<p>Here's a guy who's done well using one lens on his film Canons:</p>

<p>http://www.bazanphotos.com/</p>

<p> He used to work with a 28mm, but has gone for the reach of a 35mm</p>

<p>Here's another guy who managed with two Leicas and two identical 28mm lenses:</p>

<p>http://www.masters-of-photography.com/W/winogrand/winogrand.html</p>

<p>A Magnum member who uses 28mm and 35mm lenses (yeah I know, two):</p>

<p>http://www.costamanos.com/</p>

<p>Here's a guy who's done essays for National Geographic on Viet Nam, Cuba, The Border, NASCAR, all with only a 35mm lens on his Leica, and leaves the 28 and 50 in the hotel room.</p>

<p>http://www.davidalanharvey.com/#a=0&at=0&mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=0&p=0</p>

<p> I could go on and on, but you get the idea. Limiting as it is, and as much as the idea terrorizes photo retailers, it's possible to "get by" with one lens for <em>some</em> people.</p>

<p>I used nothing but a 50mm for decades. Well almost: I picked up a horrible zoom and played around with it for a while, resulting in a few amazingly chromatic abberated shots. I currently have a 50mm f1.4 with my 5D: I tend to use it a lot for interior and night shots, but do find the fixed focal length limitting: I prefer a normal zoom for the most part.</p>

<p>It is interesting to read his notions about shooting. He was apparently uninterested in careful and slow consideration of images, and preferred to work very quickly - taking literally the notion of "drawing with light" and being attracted to the speed and spontaneity with which this could be done.</p>

<p>He also was completely uninterested in darkroom technique and the technical quality of the print from that point of view. He had others print his stuff for him.</p>

<p>I think it is interesting when people become fascinated with any particular iconic photographer and think that if they select the same equipment that the photographer used that they'll be closer to creating similar results. For me this is problematic on several levels. First, the earlier photographer had the equipment of his/her time to work with - who is to say that he/she would use the same possibly antiquated gear today. Secondly, the fact that photographer X used a particular sort of gear to get a certain shot must be informed by the knowledge that photographer Y used different gear to get shots are arguably in similar genres. (I was thinking about the Arbus photo of the kid with a hand grenade - a photo not made with a Lieca and a 50mm lens.) Third, while it is am important exercise to understand the way that previous photographers worked, the idea is to apply what you learn about this to developing your own approach that is most effective for your subjects, your working circumstances and methods, and your output format.</p>

<p>There is no question that HCB did great work with the gear he had at his disposal, as did many other photographers from earlier eras. There is some question about the value to trying to emulate their equipment choices.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>(Who confesses that he is about to head to San Francisco armed only with a single 50mm prime... :-)</p>

<p>The lens I use about 80% of the time is my 50.</p>

<p>I hardly use my 24-105 as the F4 limits my needs at the moment.<br>

I just got the 100L and I rather like it. since I went FF my 16-35 II gets way less use.</p>

<p>I f I was made to choose one lens, it would be the 50.</p>

<p>100mm 2.8 macro is my lens of choice most of the time.</p>

<p>Luis thanks for those references ! And add Magnum photographer Bruce Gildern to that mix, he solely uses a 28m lens. </p>

<p>G Dan: Well you made some interesting points. Personally, every now and then I get sucked into the "gear head" mentality that permeates boards like these. On my own personal level, I am finding that I get easily distracted by the "process" and forget why I take photos. That is why I am trying to make a serious effort not to get into that "more gear -latest and greatest" mindset. For me its all about the narrative and concept behind the image, as opposed to the technical process. Well, at least thats what I want it to be about, lol.<br>

If I were a commercial photographer who needed to make a living at this it would be a different story. </p>

<p>If I were doing the same thing all the time, I guess one prime lens might do. And of course, there's always "sneaker zoom."</p>

<p>However, I sure do find a lens like the 24-105mm on the 35mm-sensor (or the 17-85mm on APS-C) to be awful handy when I'm traveling "light". If I had to make do with only one lens, I'd choose something like that.</p>

<p>Is the person who chooses several lenses, each appropriate for particular tasks, more of a "gearhead" than someone who arbitrarily says they will only shoot with one particular lens? I wonder.</p>

<p>I'm getting increasingly addicted to my 35/2 and 50D combo and I could probably live with only that for quite a while. Yes indeed. Having said that, I'd find it frustrating to <em>never</em> be able go wide or get the effects that only a 85-100-something prime can produce. An ultra-wide zoom, a normal FOV prime and a short portrait/tele prime would be minimum. After all, apart from speed, changing lenses is what SLRs are about to a great extent.</p>

<p>Always a good idea if possible to master one tool before moving onto the next I think. I've always leaned towards long telephoto, but before I took a break I was trying to master the wider angles. From looking at others photos I can easily say that great pictures can be taken at all focal lengths, but individually we all see the world just a little different. I happen to really like the 50mm Portrait, but I don't get the chance to photograph people very often. </p>

<p>That said I've been thinking the new Canon 100mm f/2.8 IS macro would make one heck of a walk around lens if I could not carry the 100-400mm zoom.</p>

<p>I also use only primes (btw as does anybody using a rangefinder). I have the following lenses: 24/2.8, 50/1.8 and 100/2.8 Macro. I generally carry always two lenses: one on the camera and the other in the backpack as a "backup". I use primes mostly because of their good IQ/price and light weight. I tried the 80-200 but it is too heavy and too conspicuous for me.</p>

<p>I started off with zooms but picked up a 50/1.8 (mk1) and have since<br /> sold most of them. But now I'm using digital more (cropped sensor),<br /> so will probably get a 28/1.8 or sigma 30/1.4 soon. Or save up<br /> for a 5d - Puppy Face's 5d/ 50 1.2L combo sounds pretty ideal.</p>

<p>Yes. 35mm L, 85mm 1.2 II L, 135mm f2 L, and 200mm 1.8 L. <br>

Had 70-200mm 2.8 IS also but sold it. Actually 35mm or 135mm stay 95 percent of the time on my 7D. Sold my 5d, and am now waiting for 1Ds IV. </p>

<p>Yep I do for my Nikon F2. When I decided to pick up 35mm shooting again last year and decided on a F2 body, I really wanted to keep it simple. That left it at one prime lens. I much favor primes over zooms. I went with the 28/2.8 AiS. Nice lens but after a year, I decided I wanted something a bit faster and a bit tighter so I bought a 35/2 ZF Distagon. So far it's a great lens and I'd love to use it more if my F2 wasn't in the shop so much these days for shutter issues lol! Anyway, I don't feel limited at all with one prime lens.</p>

<p>I have to ask one question: WHY?</p>

<p>What's the purpose in shooting with only one prime lens? The viewer of your images will never know that you had only one lens - unless you tell them.</p>

<p>I have to theorize that it's some form of ego gratification, but I can't help but wonder how many killer portfolio images any photographer misses by limiting himself to one lens. Even one zoom lens, much less a prime.</p>

<p>In my arsenal, I carry: Canon 24-105 L IS, 16-35 L, 28-300 L IS, 70-200 L IS, 600 L IS and a Sigma 50-500. Plus a 5D MkII and a 7D.</p>

<p>On most advertising / portrait / wildlife / landscape shoots, I carry them all. I carry fewer only when a specific job is well controlled, like a wedding where I know exactly what I'll need ahead of time.</p>

<p>In other words, I choose the tool that's right for the job. Today, I spent a few hours chasing Snowy Owls and Snow Buntings. A 50mm 1.2L is just the wrong tool for both. Just as my 600mm is the wrong tool for shooting weddings.</p>

<p>Ego gratification is all well and good, but erecting artificial barriers and claiming some self-proclaimed accolade for overcoming them seems to miss the point of photography. </p>

<p>It's all about the image, not the tools. But that's just my opinion...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What's the purpose in shooting with only one prime lens?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A cheapo 50/1.8 can give nice effects that none of your zooms can reproduce. Some people like it.</p>

<p>my 500 f/4L IS is on my camera 95% of the time.</p>

<p>Interesting, that someone with many lenses would accuse one with 1 lens of ego gratification, seems like the shoe is on the wrong foot; Perhaps the images of Rinze Van Brug, a single noctilux ( gulp) on an M8 will answer the question; of course he could not shoot surf photography with it. Why is it that the people most threatened by these one lens posts are those with many lenses ? What is the sound of one hand clapping ?</p>