Prime lens question

M

Mqta

Suspended / Banned
Messages
196
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Stuck on the front of my OMD (which has a crop of 2) I have a 25mm f1.4 prime, and that's it, no other lenses. Ideally I'd like wide angle and a short tele, say 100mm in 35mm terms. But for present I have to make do with the lens I have.
Can you take effective photies with one lens, or am I expecting too much. I've read that it's just a matter of using your feet more, but having played with photography 30 years ago, I know the value of wide angle and telephotos.
 
It's entirely possible to use just one lens - when I first got into photography thirty something years ago, I could only afford a standard (55mm) lens. It's often possible to simply move closer or further away (but not always!) and for faux telephoto, you can always crop into the image a bit (depending on resolution and lens quality). Extra lenses do make things easier though, especially when footzoom isn't an option.
 
Of course if is possible to take fantastic photos with a fixed lens with certain limitations.There are cameras like Fuji x100 which comes with 21mm lens fixed lens , which takes fantastic images.It is a matter of learning to move you feet depending on the subject, rather than zooming.
 
When I took up photography originally in the mid 70'd I had a camera with a 55mm lens. I used it for years and took some decent photos. Yes, having just one lens is a constraint but all creativity is subject to constraints of one kind or another.

Regard it as something of a challenge. Ask how you can take a photo of such and such with this lens. Work with it, if you know what I mean, rather than viewing it as some kind of handicap. I'm sure you'll get some great shots.
 
Of course you can. I started photography when I was a kid and couldn't afford a camera with interchangeable lenses, let alone the lenses, for years.

Footzooming - moving closer or further away fom the subject - works well, but isn't always possible and there are always going to be situations where there isn't any substitute for a telephoto or a wide angle. Lots of people with these lenses also find that they're not long, or wide, enough to do everything they want. Just accept that. Work with the gear you have for now, and buy more lenses if and when you can. You have a fast 25mm prime. Explore what it can do, rather than worrying about what it can't. Experiment with light and composition, changing your own position can also give you new ideas and perspectives for the shot, which you might not even see if you did have other lenses and could just zoom in or out.
 
Mqta said:
Stuck on the front of my OMD (which has a crop of 2) I have a 25mm f1.4 prime, and that's it, no other lenses. Ideally I'd like wide angle and a short tele, say 100mm in 35mm terms. But for present I have to make do with the lens I have.

Can you take effective photies with one lens, or am I expecting too much. I've read that it's just a matter of using your feet more, but having played with photography 30 years ago, I know the value of wide angle and telephotos.
Click to expand...

Of course. Most of the times I go out with my camera I have just the one prime lens mounted.
 
Thanks for the replies.
I 'view' it as a challenge rather than a handicap, and when I think back to my 35mm days, all those years ago, I suppose the 50mm prime was on the camera 90% of the time and only now and again did the zoom tele or wide angle make an appearance.
Anyway the wife would kill me if I spent any more money!
 
As you've gathered, a "standard" focal length prime normally used to be offered on 35mm cameras.
Lots of us would have loved to have one approaching the quality of your 50mm F1.4 equivalent. Get out and enjoy it rather than worrying about if it's constraining you; I'm saying this in a light hearted way as one who seems to be stuck indoors at the moment:(

When you are able to muster up some more readies, why not keep an eye out for a used standard 12-50mm zoom, which shipped with the body originally. The often come up quite cheaply and have the advantage of being both weather sealed and with a macro facility.

Even if your interest is mainly in primes, it might still be an idea to try the zoom out for a while, and then use one of these nifty bits of software to analyse your keepers for a breakdown of focal lengths that they were taken with.
You can then either sell the zoom on, maybe even at a profit if you purchased carefully, and add the cash towards the prime of your choice.
 
Thanks Bill.
I read about the kit lens 12-50, and the comments were rather mixed, no one being over excited with it. If I remember, some of the dislikes were a cheap plastic construction, soft images and a rather constrained f number (f4.5 -5.6?). With tele shots I like to use differential focusing (if that's the right term) throwing the background out of focus so the subject is the point of attention. There's umpteen posts on the OMD forum so I'll spend sometime reading what I can.
I'm also aware that you can use four thirds and a lot of other lenses such as those used on the original 35 OM film camera, using a suitable converter. Im aware that focus is manual with such lenses and I presume the 'iris' is in the converter which may be a compromise.
 
I actually don't think it's as bad as some would have you believe. It will never match the quality of the 24mm prime, but I guess it would be unreasonable to expect it to given the price.
If purchased second hand as you can soon sell it on if you don't like it with little financial hardship.
Yes, the smaller aperture can be restrictive in terms of DOF, particularly as the 4/3s has greater DOF than 35mm equivalent anyway. The high ISO capability of that sensor seems pretty good, so the kit lens does seem to be a reasonable compromise in terms of size and weight.

Ian posted some edge sharpness comparisons over at the UK E-group forum which might be of interest.
http://e-group.uk.net/forum/showthread.php?t=19545&highlight=12-50mm

They're very much holiday snapshots, rather than high artistic merit fine art shots, but some of the Albanian and Indian photos in my signature link were taken with the kit lens.
most were probably taken with the 14-140mm Panasonic, which is rather bigger and heavier, somewhat defeating the idea of buying the OMD; to that end I've just picked up a 14-150mm Oly superzoom instead as a holiday walkaround lens.

p.s. Just been having a look at Pixel Peeper
http://www.pixel-peeper.com/lenses/?lens=13293
 
Last edited:
Mqta said:
Can you take effective photies with one lens, or am I expecting too much. I've read that it's just a matter of using your feet more, but having played with photography 30 years ago, I know the value of wide angle and telephotos.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is - for some people and some subjects. When I started in photography, the "advanced amateurs" would often be using a TLR camera with a fixed (prime) lens. For non-standard subjects, a non-standard focal length might be used, but one lens can still suffice.

It isn't really a matter of using your feet more, because moving further back or forward affects the perspective of the image. You should use your feet to get the perspective you want, then adjust the lens focal length (zoom or lens swap) to include what you want/exclude what you don't.

Personally I prefer a "natural" perspective and so use the standard focal length for my format almost exlusively. I think that in the last few years the number of times I haven't used one lens is about half a dozen (if that).

That begs the question whether the results I get are any good. They satisfy me, which is the only criterion I'm bothered about :)
 
I started out with a similar setup (5D + 50mm f/1.4) not long ago. No reason it should stop you taking great photos - I'm loving the prime way of working.

I have since had a bit of spare cash though and added on an ultra-wide zoom (20-35mm) and a 100mm Macro. These let me cover three things that the 50mm wouldn't do well (wide, macro and headshots) but I still have no desire for a standard range zoom in my kit.
 
I know several people with DSLRs and only a fixed 50mm or there-abouts prime. They take some great shots, and makes for a really light travel kit.

Personally I wouldn't bother with a 35mm if I had a 50mm, sure it's different but it's not that much different. I'd go with a 24 or 28mm equivalent first. Then you've got more reason to change lenses! I find I'm often happy just carrying a 50mm prime along with a UWA 15mm lens. The only real need I've had for telephoto is for wildlife.
 
The cheap option is to pick up some old manual focus lenses and use them on an adaptor.

An older Nikon 50mm F2/F1.4 would give you the same field of view as a 100MM and still retain the faster aperture to give you a shallow depth of field.

Wide angle wise its harder but at the cheaper end are the samyang wide angles, they seem to work well for a lot of people.
 
Thanks for the replies.
Is my understanding correct, the 'manual' lens remains wide open, f1.4 using a Nikon 50mm in the example above, and the iris in the converter, and hence aperture, is automated by the Olympus OMD?
 
Mqta said:
Thanks for the replies.
Is my understanding correct, the 'manual' lens remains wide open, f1.4 using a Nikon 50mm in the example above, and the iris in the converter, and hence aperture, is automated by the Olympus OMD?
Click to expand...

Not the case at all Steve, the converter is purely a mount converter, and contains no iris. (Nikon in this example).
The lens iris is set by the aperture ring as normal, but in stop down mode.
That is you can focus wide open, but need to stop the lens down yourself to your chosen aperture before releasing the shutter.
You can use the camera in fully manual exposure setting or use Aperture priority if you want some automation.
You cannot use Shutter priority or Program modes with a purely manual lens as there is no means of stopping it down automatically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top