Can you manage with JUST a 50mm prime?

depends on what you're going to be doing... :thinking:
 
POAH said:
you can but you'll be limited in what you can shoot.
Click to expand...

Really?

Take a look at what people shot with years ago with a single lens - granted that was FF but a single lens wasn't thought of as a disadvantage - we just got on with the job.

I think too many people have got used to having it too easy and have lost (or never had) an "eye" for a shot.

.
 
Not with a crop body, I dont know whether the D300 is, but I couldn't with my 40d, it would have to be the 28mm F1.8 or 35mm 1.4L :love:
 
I currently have a 17-40, 24-105, 70-200, 85, 100.

My next lens? A 50mm f/1.4. On my first (film) SLR all I had was a 50mm and not being able to zoom really made you think about everything else that bit more.

It may be a totally disappointing misadventure but I want to re-visit that situation. Quite looking forward to finding out though.
 
petersmart said:
Really?

Take a look at what people shot with years ago with a single lens - granted that was FF but a single lens wasn't thought of as a disadvantage - we just got on with the job.

I think too many people have got used to having it too easy and have lost (or never had) an "eye" for a shot.

.
Click to expand...

of course you'll be limited... both in terms of access, and in terms of image look - choosing focal length is a massive part of deciding the overall look of a photo...
 
not going to be great if you want to shoot somthing a long way away or you want to get a wider FOV.

people have not lost the eye for the shot. I suppose you don't use a remote control or email because you can still change channel and send a letter?

petersmart said:
Really?

Take a look at what people shot with years ago with a single lens - granted that was FF but a single lens wasn't thought of as a disadvantage - we just got on with the job.

I think too many people have got used to having it too easy and have lost (or never had) an "eye" for a shot.

.
Click to expand...
 
Spent many years shooting with a standard lens on my cameras. Not always ideal, but not difficult. You take a different approach, which normally involves either walking towards or walking away from the subject.

Seriously thinking of doing it again, gets the grey matter working again.;)
 
I have no choice but to use the 75mm f/3.5 'standard' lens on my Yashica TLR :)
 
It's just a case of using the manual foot zoom to alter the POV:)
 
I believe HCB shot with one camera and one lens through out his life. Of course, he didn't know what he had missed out on :D
 
Dumb question if you ask me, pointless post? Sorry to sound harsh but to me its obvious you could get by, you will just be limited in some ways.

Why do you ask? I mean you can 'get by' eating the same meal every single day, or riding a bike everywhere but its limiting....
 
we are not HCB (thankfully) and just because some over rated street photography only used one camera and lens does not mean we have to

ujjwaldey8165 said:
I believe HCB shot with one camera and one lens through out his life. Of course, he didn't know what he had missed out on :D
Click to expand...
 
scottcampbell said:
Is it possible to manage with a D3+50 1.4 alone?
Click to expand...

I'd say.... yes. :D

Anythings possibly in photography. Yours boundaries are like all of time and space, Unlimited.

I'd say you could photograph anything with a 50mm. Landscape, Portrait, documentation, a wedding, wildlife.

Or have I lost it? ;)
 
went to prague with just my 50mm and d700 and it was fine
 
I occasionally will just go out with just a 50mm lens as it makes me think about composition. I really do find it a challenge but useful. Could I survive without my other lenses - no way.
 
I would imagine that you could stick with a 50mm alone, whether or not that would be advisable for press work is a whole different matter. I'd imagine this would cause you a fair bit of pain, lost shots etc...
 
You could if your photography was only a limited range.
I think that cricket and football matches, air displays, zoos, safaris, macro and bird photography would be a case of spot-the-subject though:D
 
I can cope with just a 35mm, 50mm and a short telephoto around 85mm/90mm.

However since starting my diploma in photography I need to purchase an 18-55mm kit lens again or an upgrade because we have to shoot everything from 18mm to 200mm so its best to have two kit lenses for basic work and then I have my three primes for my personal photography ;)
 
When I got my first Nikon 'F' I only had a 50mm lens and that was fine - but then that's all anyone else had too. Nowadays - not a chance - in a press scrum where everyone has at least two bodies with zooms - probably 24-70 and 70-200mm you'd have no chance with just a 50mm. On your crop body I'd go for the 17-55mm and 70-200mm. Lens choice is very important for some of these situations you might find yourself in. Of coure you can take great pictures with just a 50mm and a D3 - but not in news situations.
 
Last edited:
Personally, a 50mm my first choice but there are many circumstances which prohibit my preference.

As mentioned before, if the action is further away or if you happen to be in a tight space then you may encounter some issues.

However, if your simply taking pictures for your own pleasure and not being paid to fulfil a clients wishes, then I say go for it :)
 
As an experiment I used nothing but a 35mm prime for a while and it was an interesting experience, but I didn't find the standard lens a challenge for what I'm interested in anyway.

There are certainly more flexible options around, I guess it depends on what interests you.
 
PsiFox said:
It's just a case of using the manual foot zoom to alter the POV:)
Click to expand...

focal length isn't just about how close / far you are away from the subject... contributes a hell of a lot towards the look of an image too, how different objects look in relation to each other etc.
 
My Panasonic Zoom lens broke on me before my holiday this year and as it as away being repaired I was stuck with either a 25mm pancake or a 35mm Macro, which seeing as I'm on 4/3 system meant in reality it was 50mm or 70mm, in the end as I was flying I just took the 35mm macro.

I had a great holiday and got some fantastic shots with it!

I had to change my perspective quite a bit, but it all worked out really well, ended up with a 3rd equal place with one of my photos on another web site I inhabit too.
 
petersmart said:
Really?

Take a look at what people shot with years ago with a single lens - granted that was FF but a single lens wasn't thought of as a disadvantage - we just got on with the job.

I think too many people have got used to having it too easy and have lost (or never had) an "eye" for a shot.

.
Click to expand...

Having an eye for the shot is completely irrelevant, when the scene you are trying to shoot is too wide for the lens, and you can not step back any more. On the contrary, for something that is too far away, that you can't reach. Both occasions mean missed shots.

For a short while after I got my FF camera, the only lens I had left was a 50mm prime, and for a while I survived, but after a month or two it began to annoy me. It was just too "middle of the road". Not wide enough for a lot of the urbex stuff I like to do, and just a tad too short for my style of people photography. It was trying to be the best of both but it wasn't working -- I ended up with a 17-40 and an 85mm f/1.8 and I am MUCH happier that way.

If I had to only have one lens though, I'd still rather an 85 over a 50. At least then I could do one of my types of photography properly - people.
 
Last edited:
Would you say the 35mm Nikon AFS is a better lens than the 18-55mm VR?
 
Can you guys tell I'm trying to convince myself to get a D3?!

See, I'm laying off press photography for a few months, just doing things occasionally, due to important exams.

Would get a 28-70 2.8 after that.
 
It depends on your definition of 'manage'. You'd almost certainly live, if that's what you're asking? In the same way you'd 'manage' if you didn't have a camera at all. Last time I checked, food, water, and oxygen are the only things that are really tricky to manage without. :)

If you're a professional sports photographer, then you're unlikely to be able to manage. You won't get any good shots, run out of money, then will find yourself lacking food and water, thus finding it difficult to 'manage'. ;) :D

Chris
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top