There are some cases, such as parties, where you can shoot the whole thing with just one lens, that being the 35mm. Of course, some would say 28mm, some would say 40mm, some would say 50mm. But, the point is still valid: you can shoot an entire event with just one lens. I was thinking about this just recently because I was at a party on the weekend, which was mostly an outdoor affair. I took photos even though I didn't really expect to. I used my iPhone, an 8 Plus, with dual lenses. One is a wide, the other a standard (wrongly called 'portrait' but whatever). I did switch between them but I did feel that if I had a 35mm equivalent (which I feel is not a wide angle lens but a wide standard) I could have used only that. However, parties and other kinds of events are not quite the same. I have done a couple of weddings, and I find that you do need a tele zoom for those. The main reason is that there's a lot of sitting down, and if you want to get all the guests at their tables, you really do need a lens long enough. Same with conferences, where you need a telephoto to shoot the speaker and members of the audience. Again, a different dynamic. Back in January I was supposed to shoot a 21st birthday party but that fell through. I was going to do the whole thing with a standard zoom. But if I still had a Leica kit, I would have taken no more than two lenses, a 28 and a 50 - the only two lenses a PJ really needs, or so they say. Perhaps I would have taken a 21mm as well, just in case? But here we're getting into choosing lens sets. The thing is, a 35mm would have been fine, even indoors, but I do like the fact that different lenses give different types of pictures. Purely because of that, I don't know if I really would want to shoot any event with just one lens - but you certainly can do it, no question about that. I'd love to know what you all think. Has anyone shot a wedding with nothing longer than a 50 or a 90? Has anyone shot a party with nothing other than a 50? Do tell.