One lens - artistic zen or a limiting frustration

[LeeSimmons]

4x5 large format photography is my choice for my personal expression and relaxation. I revel in its slow contemplative nature. The prints I enjoy reinforce the energy spent pre visualizing and executing an image free from digital feedback and interruption. For me it is very zen. Kind of like a meditation.

I'm considering limiting myself to shooting with a single lens for an extended period of time. My thoughts are to remove all lens selection from my process and allow 100% focus on my subjects and how they speak to me with the intention of seeing past the obvious. I imagine pre visualization would become very intuitive and would have less mental clutter.

It goes against most of our modern desires but do any of you roll only with a single lens by choice?

Care to share how that adds to you process?

Thanks

Regards Lee

[mdm]

Nearly everything I do is with a 210 on 5x7 or a 250 on wholeplate, which I have calculated to be exactly equivalent to a 210 5x7 combination at 6x8.5. But I don't restrict myself.

[Toyon]

I could see managing with just a 120 - 125 lens. To me that allows a pretty straightforward (natural) view of the landscape. I almost never use filters. They can be useful, but they almost always introduce unexpected consequences in unanticipated areas of tone. The result is exactly what you say - greater focus on the evocation of the moment.

[LabRat]

One lens on that camera??? Bravo!!!

You would be forced to "see" in that perspective, and soon the frame edges would be "burned" into your brain, you would optimize the FOV available, and learn to not worry about the things that are beyond (wider/distant) that would probably change the balances of what you shoot...

Some would use it to develop a "style" that creates a linkage between other shots in the series, but others like Vivian Maier used that old Rollei (with fixed FL) for most all of her shooting, and was still able to capture MANY different types of subjects with a fresh look for each...

And when it's printing time, you would get into the groove sooner, as the negs would easier to print than if you shot them with a dozen different lenses... And all of the prints hanging on a gallery wall would match each other's (lens) look...

I think anyone considering buying (yet) another lens for that format should ask themselves would they be able to shoot that lens for at least 50%-70% of what they do for that series, and with any lens in their kit, is there one lens (FL+look) they would use if it was the only one that they could shoot???

I think many series would have a more focused look... And someone would learn to get the best out of that lens...

Steve K

[Michael E]

I can see the merits of this approach, especially since I have a clear favorite among focal lengths. Most of my images are made with a 120mm on 4x5" (or equivalent for other formats). I can judge a scene very intuitive, composition factors are very familiar by now. On the other head, I am a gearhead and enjoy working with different lenses and cameras, picking the right tool for the job or the right project for a technique I want to use. If your work profits from the variety of tools or you can't easily tell a favorite focal length, this might not be your way. If limiting your lens options is your own choice, go for it. It is very rewarding. If you have the feeling that it limits your artistic freedom, don't be to strict on yourself.

Michael

[Bruce Barlow]

It's a great idea, and pretty much what I do.

210mm on 4x5, and I keep an 85mm on my Canon F1.

The avoidance of choice is actually liberating, for the reasons you describe.

[jp]

I do it with mf and it works excellent. Rolleiflex user.

In 4x5 i have plenty of lenses but only take two for the last year, my 9" hyperion and 7.25 verito. Its mostly for the purpose of learning them well. It is working.

Go for it!

[RichardRitter]

When I started working with a 4 x 5 I had a lens and I was not all that happy with the focus length. But I kept working with it. When I started working for Zone VI, Fred would have me house sit while he was away and this gave me a chance to do darkroom work. At the time I did not have a darkroom ,I would used the bathroom to develop film. While house sitting I had the chance to use Fred's camera and try a lot of different lens and found one that was to my liking and bought that focus length lens. It's has been my main lens ever since then. When I go out photographing or traveling with the camera it's that lens and one other as a back up.

Every one sees the world a little different and what works for one person my not work for someone else. Best thing to do is find a lens you are happy with and just go photographing.

[Ken Lee]

We learn from everything we do.

You might find it interesting to view a book like John Sexton's Quiet Light (http://www.amazon.com/John-Sexton/e/B000APB7S4) or Ansel Adams Examples: The Making of 40 Photographs (http://shop.anseladams.com/Examples_The_Making_of_40_Photographs_p/2440120.htm%22) because they tell you the lenses used for each photograph. You can tally-up the various focal lengths and see how often certain lenses were used: some more than others. In the process, you may get a better appreciation for choice of perspective.

As the saying goes, "The Sabbath was made for Man and not Man for the Sabbath" :cool:

[Jac@stafford.net]

[...]I'm considering limiting myself to shooting with a single lens for an extended period of time.

It is better to choose limits than to have them thrust upon you. Try it. To me it was a liberating experience.

[mdarnton]

There's nothing wrong with one lens. I feel more comfy with two, but not more than that. I suspect that most of the older photographers I liked the most had one "normal" and perhaps a wide angle that they didn't use much, and that's it. A lot of the time my 35mm cameras are wearing a 50mm, and given a choice of one, that's what I'd take. For 8x10, though I have other choices, I seem stuck on a 36cm, and that's about the same. In your case, I'd probably be perfectly happy with only a 180mm.

[LeeSimmons]

Good morning all and thank you all for the feedback. I've been a photographer for nearly 20 years and most of that time has been professionally with smaller formats. I have a number of great lenses a 90mm nikkor f8, fuji 150 6.3, 203 7.7 kodak ektachrome and a 270mm rodenstock. And my large format images are purely for myself "no external creative pressure".

The lens that has turned everything on its head has been the imagon 200mm. It has forced me to appreciate an entirely different aesthetic. It feels like a large format holga which is counter to just about everything we see value in large format. But with use it grows on you. It is in an gorgeous old compound shutter which I adore the sound of when making an exposure and the images are opposite everything i'm used to. I've got rid of the disks and marked apertures with the beautiful round diaphragm in the shutter. It seems to beg exploration of selective focus and is the opposite of the perfect image and perfect sharpness.

The idea of frame lines being burned into my brain is very appealing.

Thanks for the extra encouragement. I'd love to hear anymore thoughts and experiences and think I'll take the less is more approach for a spin.

[Pete Watkins]

You could try using a 203mm Kodak Ektar. Not too expensive if you don't like it and easy to sell on.
If you can cope without a shutter there are many process lenses that you can try, Escofots come to mind. Many like 135mm lenses for 4x5, only you can decide.

Pete.

[IanG]

While I'm happy using a 35mm camera with just a 50mm lens and in the last 8 years a TLR with it's fixed lens they haven't been my main camera and I definitely found it limiting and frustrating when I just had a 150mm lens for my 5x4 camera, I found I frequently needed a wide angle lens. Now I always take two lenses a 90mm & a 150mm and sometimes a 65mm & 210mm if I'm going somewhere I think they'd be useful.

Ian

[Ari]

As an exercise, it's wonderful to stick to one lens only, it teaches us a lot about how to see as well as forcing us to come up with creative problem-solving ideas.
But after going through a few of those exercises, mostly with MF, I knew that there would always be one situation in five that demanded a wide-angle lens of some sort.
So these days, I keep to a normal and a lens roughly half the FL of normal.

[jp]

Good morning all and thank you all for the feedback. I've been a photographer for nearly 20 years and most of that time has been professionally with smaller formats. I have a number of great lenses a 90mm nikkor f8, fuji 150 6.3, 203 7.7 kodak ektachrome and a 270mm rodenstock. And my large format images are purely for myself "no external creative pressure".

The lens that has turned everything on its head has been the imagon 200mm. It has forced me to appreciate an entirely different aesthetic. It feels like a large format holga which is counter to just about everything we see value in large format. But with use it grows on you. It is in an gorgeous old compound shutter which I adore the sound of when making an exposure and the images are opposite everything i'm used to. I've got rid of the disks and marked apertures with the beautiful round diaphragm in the shutter. It seems to beg exploration of selective focus and is the opposite of the perfect image and perfect sharpness.

The idea of frame lines being burned into my brain is very appealing.

Thanks for the extra encouragement. I'd love to hear anymore thoughts and experiences and think I'll take the less is more approach for a spin.

I think you'd benefit with a long stint with the Imagon. I like soft focus too but haven't gotten into the imagon as I don't need a shuttered lens on my speed graphic. I think the notion of previsualization has it's roots in softish pictorialism. You had to know what you wanted for a final image when selecting the aperture/softness. I think straight photography simplified that by making everything in focus and giving a name to the idea of previsualization. It takes a lot of photos and outings to get proficient with the soft lenses and it will benefit your other photography by extension.

When framing I can eyeball the scene and know where to put the tripod because I don't have lens choices. Then I can get right to work making a photo rather than maneuvering and trying things. I'm not in a hurry but just leave more to contemplation and less to busywork.

[Jac@stafford.net]

The lens that has turned everything on its head has been the imagon 200mm. [...] I've got rid of the disks and marked apertures with the beautiful round diaphragm in the shutter.

Interesting. I did not know the 200mm Imagon covered 4x5.

You got rid of the disks? Why? Stopping down the aperture in the Imagon turns it into a rather sharp lens. I think the Imagon has a traditional aperture diaphragm only because that's what the available shutters included. The discs are there to give variations of aberration.

[LeeSimmons]

Thanks JP and thank you all for for the continued discussion. It's funny, the recommended books John Sexton's Quiet Light. There are beautiful trees in my area and they are one of my favorite subjects.

I think secondary thing that is driving me to this is a sharp 16x20 print can be achieved with most professional gear and our large format clarity and sharpness doesn't provide the obvious technical distinction it once did when talking purely sharpness/resolution in a mid sized print.

The application of vintage lenses and a print process something along the lines of carbon printing are a less trodden path and when mastered I imagine will provide a unique and rewarding experience a point of view.

[Kirk Gittings]

For many years (6) in my 20's I just owned a TLR and one normal lens. I did a lot of fine work with that combo that has stood the test of time. All the work during that time was similar in vein-I was exploring an idea that fit that combo perfectly. But once I had exhausted that idea and was ready to move on I found it very limiting. That was in the mid 70's-my aesthetic now is more encompassing-an amalgam of all ideas and approaches that went before and my lens kit allows me to explore all that all the time-nothing extreme 90, 120, 150, 210, 305.

[Old-N-Feeble]

One lens? No way!! I have a lens fetish. I'd feel neutered without several at my beck and call. Yeah, I'm a lens pervert... it's a harem for me... none of that monogamous nonsense.:rolleyes:

[Jody_S]

As an exercise it is valuable, but it doesn't have to be conducted in LF.

Since I also shoot for myself, it doesn't really matter if I come back with anything good, but I do enjoy the focus that having a single available angle of view gives me. Though it doesn't work (for me) with a wide-angle, it needs to be a 'normal' or slight tele to force me into composing rather than just taking whatever comes into view.

[LeeSimmons]

Hi Jac, I'm not a huge fan of the haloing but do enjoy the softness to a point. It's an older compound shutter and I've measured the aperture and use that in the traditional sense. For my tastes I prefer the flexibility and working parameters when using it with the shutters aperture. It's not the secondary out of focus overlay from the tiny holes that I enjoy. It's the shape and draw of the lens used traditionally. I usually use it at F11 and 16. It has a weird focus representation that I'm still learning. The 200 is a shy in resolution at the edges but illuminates well. 139554 Here is a test file at F11 just getting a sense for how the lens sees and what it does with dark and light out of focus areaas. I find the groundglass is quite different than the neg. Hope that helps.

Regards Lee

[LeeSimmons]

I'm a lens pervert... it's a harem for me... none of that monogamous nonsense :o That bought on a good laugh.

[LeeSimmons]

Hi Kirk,

"But once I had exhausted that idea and was ready to move on"

Great quote Kirk.

I think that is it in a nutshell. I feel I am reaching my personal limits with the idea of approaching a subject with absolute sharpness, clarity and making a pretty picture. I am exploring a way to see into and beyond my subjects.

Thank yo again for the continued discussion.

Lee

[Lenny Eiger]

Almost every photographer in the History of Photography (Newhall) shot with one lens at a time, for fifteen years or so. I use one lens 95% of the time, a normal, and on occasion I have one a little longer (240 A) when I see something that is across a barrier of some kind, like a stream.... Those rarely work...

When you take on this practice, it tunes your eye to exactly what will fit in the frame.... it's a great exercise... it will definitely enhance your work.

It is, after all, a practice of finding out who you are and what you prefer. Kirk likes big scenes, and does them well. I am more interested in what's right in front of me. I don't ever look far out and see something I like.... and wish for the 500mm Tele I sold... After enough of them I just realize its not who I am. These are personal values, of course, we're all different.

Lenny

[Kirk Gittings]

Hi Kirk,

"But once I had exhausted that idea and was ready to move on"

Great quote Kirk.

I think that is it in a nutshell. I feel I am reaching my personal limits with the idea of approaching a subject with absolute sharpness, clarity and making a pretty picture. I am exploring a way to see into and beyond my subjects.

Thank yo again for the continued discussion.

Lee

Your welcome. I used to also own and carry a 65 and 450 also but never used them and sold them. In fact I also don't often use the 90 or 305. The 120 and 210 do the heavy labor.

[Mark Sawyer]

"One lens - artistic zen or a limiting frustration?" Yes, to both.

I limit myself to one lens... at a time! But it's not unusual to switch lenses in the studio when I want something longer, shorter, contrastier, faster, or with different aberrations. I could live with one lens, and did for many years. But when you learn the differences, it's nice to have the choice. Sticking with a single lens is a good exercise, but so is switching lenses and learning the differences. The real trouble comes when everything you do is practice, trials, tests, and exercises...

[Maris Rusis]

I often go out with the 4x5 and one lens with the idea that I will pursue a particular style of subject matter that day:

Spaces? Take the 75mm
Places? Take the 135mm.
Things? Take the 210mm.

The following day I'll take a different lens to catch all the interesting stuff I saw but wasn't equipped for.

[LeeSimmons]

Great input again.

Maris that is also a solid way to think about it. Great thoughts and discussion. Noosa - that's great. I grew up on the gold coast and have fond memories of Noosa. I moved to Canada about 20 years ago. Thanks for the thoughts.

Mark Too true. Hence the post trying to skip over too much testing and move to visually speaking.

Lenny - These are personal values. agreed and for me defining those is more than half the battle.

[John Kasaian]

One lens? Sure.
Get an 8x10 and one lens may be all you can afford, or physically carry in your kit.
I spent a few years with only one lens (14") and later only added on what I could use for certain situations, like a light, svelte little G Claron for back packing, a WF Ektar with acres of wiggle room for architecture, and a 19" Artar for the Grand View and I enjoy them all, but if pressed I could get by with just one, no problem---in fact on most photo shoots I'll take but one and sometimes a back up.
Go on a trip with only one lens---it's quite liberating!

[LeeSimmons]

Thanks John,

Funny you say 8x10.

I recently impulse purchased a 15 inch Taylor Hobson Cooke Series II 4.5 knuckler that I really what to shoot with. To use film I will need to purchase a Sinar P2 8x10 and one of those carts to drag it around on location. purchase a sinar shutter and a custom made lens flange and I'll be in for about $3000.

I am excited to do this and like the romance of using such a lens which is what got me started on this discussion. I already have a great stable of lenses for 4x5 and am doing a self check before chasing a bigger/heavier setup. The grass always seems to be greener.

When thinking about that lens in an 8x10 setup I almost feel like my 4x5 is a sub par system and all of a sudden the whole point gets lost somewhere along the way. In the meantime how many core/meaningful/soul moving images have been created. While I put energy onto yet another system dream "that will make me great".

So I was thinking of moving towards working on a single lens set up refining the vision and subject matter. Which has been well reinforced by the posts to this thread.

Again I enjoy each of your posts as an educated learning opportunity and sounding board. It's a wonderful community and the images I see posted are beautiful. I'm sure some of you reading this can relate to this and again appreciate the discussion.

Lee

[Vaughn]

I was a one lens per format person for many years -- just what I could afford, then I got use to it. I figured in a world of infinite images, having just one lens cannot reduce the number of possible images.

If you are interested in carbon printing, let me know of any questions you may have -- I have been making them since 1992.

[tgtaylor]

For me having just one focal length is too limiting as there are some shots that a given focal length can't handle. My last 8x10 image was taken with a 610mm lens. If I had used a shorter lens, say the 480mm, then it would have been necessary to move closer in on the subject. But that would have resulted in bringing the trees and foliage in the foreground closer to the lens and obscured the detail on the subject in the background that I wanted to show. Since the 610 was my longest lens and I was back against a small tree, the 610 was the only lens that would work for the composition.

That said I often do 35mm street photography with just a 35mm lens.

Thomas

[richardman]

EVen people with multiple lens often take a majority (> 80%) of their photos with just one lens.

[rakkir]

i have found a convertible lens is a good solution (i have a Schneider Symmar 210 mm f5.6 Convertible)
you only have to carry one lens but if you need a longer focal length you can have it.
also the one i have is not well known so its quite cheap.

[tgtaylor]

Actually my first dedicated 8x10 lens was a 360mm (14 inch) Schneider Symmar-S which I used for better than a year before getting a second lens and came to favor the 360's FOV over the normal 300.

Thomas

[ic-racer]

I never carry more than one lens at a time.

[Michael R]

I don't think one lens or many lenses means much. The one lens thing is just another one of those many "pearls of wisdom"/philosophies. If you like it, go for it.

[tgtaylor]

Unless I'm out to shoot a known subject, in which case I will know which lens to bring and the spot from which it will be taken, I bring 3: a wide, normal, and moderate long. That way I am prepared for anything that may come my way. Why waste all that time and energy to find that you don't have the right lens with you?

Thomas

[invisibleflash]

OP, do as you like. I am not a fan on one shot a day nor one lens does it all. I put the pix first, not my ego or whims. Bottom line, either it will help or hurt your work.

[John Kasaian]

I was a one lens per format person for many years -- just what I could afford, then I got use to it. I figured in a world of infinite images, having just one lens cannot reduce the number of possible images.
Just like having one pair of eyes!

[LeeSimmons]

Reflecting on the discussion I thought I'd throw in a few images. Typically I'm chasing an images like the one on the left shot this summer at Little Huson Cave Regional Park on Vancouver Island. 90mm nikor f8 Pretty sharp front to back. Focusing on shapes and tones.

Second image shot with imagon this week which seems to be experimenting with dream like representation which seems to come from the soft focus lens (still a new approach to me). Blacks seem to want less contrast. So hitting the 1st scene only armed with the imagon would certainly require a different approach.

Perhaps a project approach (Landscape Dreams) or whatever until a series is complete and then move on. I guess it comes down to defining your vision and then using your dedication and commitment see it realized.

One of the posts mentioned john Sexton so I watched some interviews of him last night. My take away was his absolute commitment to his vision and then tirelessly sticking with it for the long haul. Bravo to him.

This thread continues to inspire and provide a great exchange of ideas.

Thank you all for sharing.

139596139597

[Kirk Fry]

Actually millions of folks are carrying around one camera and one single focal length lens and using it. It is called an iPhone. Someone said it is equivalent to about a 129mm on a 4X5. Depth of focus is somewhat deeper...

[Jim Jones]

Consider this: No individual photographer has access to enough lenses for every conceivable photograph! We are all limited to some extent. The Anniversary Speed Graphic was basically a one-lens camera, yet produced some of the great images of its time. For 65 years I've had a range of lenses on small and eventually large format cameras. Probably mostf of the many thousands of photos in that time were made by lenses near normal in focal length. I might go years without using the 20mm or 800mm on 35mm cameras, or the more modest extremes on large format. The photographer who is constrained by photographic requirements imposed my others may need a wide variety of lenses. In my declining years it is obvious that someone free to chose subjects within the range of a single lens can be happy with nothing more.

[archphotofisher]

4x5 it is the 120mm and 8 x10 it is the 240mm

[Doremus Scudder]

The opposite approach here. I let the scene in front of me determine camera position (perspective) and framing (focal length) as well as shape (square, panorama, rectangle and everything in between). Then I choose the closest focal length lens I have with me to get the desired image onto the film. Later, when making the print. I crop down to the desired framing and format.

For me, every image has its own, best focal length requirement. Although I don't have an infinite variety of focal lengths with me, I can sure crop to get what I (and the image) want.

Having just one focal length would definitely be a limiting frustration for me.

Best,

Doremus

[jp]

Reflecting on the discussion I thought I'd throw in a few images. Typically I'm chasing an images like the one on the left shot this summer at Little Huson Cave Regional Park on Vancouver Island. 90mm nikor f8 Pretty sharp front to back. Focusing on shapes and tones.

Second image shot with imagon this week which seems to be experimenting with dream like representation which seems to come from the soft focus lens (still a new approach to me). Blacks seem to want less contrast. So hitting the 1st scene only armed with the imagon would certainly require a different approach.

Perhaps a project approach (Landscape Dreams) or whatever until a series is complete and then move on. I guess it comes down to defining your vision and then using your dedication and commitment see it realized.

One of the posts mentioned john Sexton so I watched some interviews of him last night. My take away was his absolute commitment to his vision and then tirelessly sticking with it for the long haul. Bravo to him.

This thread continues to inspire and provide a great exchange of ideas.

Thank you all for sharing.

139596139597

I like that imagon photo.

What you're doing is using light/shapes/tones with the 90 and ADDING with the imagon mood/diffusion in just the right amounts. More things to think about and it's a nice challenge that requires hard work. If you like doing stuff with the 90, nothing wrong with 2 lenses. It's not like 2 girlfriends or something. I can mentally change gears between soft and sharp while shooting because I'm in the lookout for mood in my sharp photos now too.

[mihag]

150mm is the only lens I have for my 4x5 LF camera. I live quite happily with it. When I want something longer I crop the view by using a roll film back (and I honestly see no quality differnece on a 12x16 wet print from FP4).

[Gary Tarbert]

I have dropped the amount of lenses i use , i had 3 wides for 5x4 58,75 and 90 , now i only have the 90 and am happy with that , I shoot most of my shots on the 90 or the 180 with the occasional 135 or 240 , but 1 lens ?

[DrTang]

despite the stack of lenses I have available....because I shoot in a studio of slightly limited length, I end up using a 12" on my 8x10 about 75 percent of the time ( and the 19" about 25 percent); a 240 on my 5x7 and a 150 on my 4x5

hasn't been a problem so far

[John Kasaian]

When I had just my 14" lens (on 8x10) if I wanted to go long I'd simply get closer to my subject, for wide I'd back off---much like when using a fixed lens camera. Adding extra lenses to my kit usually came when physical limitations (such as cliffs:rolleyes:) hindered my movement within a physical location.

[Old-N-Feeble]

Once I discovered the immense joy of nearly total perspective control I never went back to one prime lens... or two or three or four.

[Robert Langham]

I have one lens for my 5X7 which is THE lens. But I have a few others for when I need more or less.

139990

[Randy]

No matter the format (35mm, 4X5, and especially 8X10), I believe I have to many lenses. Have been telling myself this for years. My reasons for wanting to greatly limit my lens collection is because I have gotten to know myself over the years.

I know that I lack the discipline to learn the "best" use for each lens.
I know that when I have fewer choices in the field, it benefits my image making, both in numbers, and in quality.
I know that I enjoy the picture taking experience much more when I am not distracted by lenses.

So, I usually try to take just two...usually...

[jbenedict]

I chose to shoot 8x10 with one lens for a year. It is a 375/6.3 Caltar. It was an interesting and growing experience. 8x10 lenses cost money I didn't have so I settled on the one lens and it has been fine. I'm still considering a "modern" lens with multi coating and a Copal shutter but just haven't got around to spending the money. I can't say that I think I'm missing anything.