Is less more when it comes to lenses?

[Stephen Willard]

It is very expensive for me to be in the field shooting film with the cost of food, llamas, cameras gear, film, camping gear, fuel, and wear and tear of my vehicle and trailer. I cannot afford to have low yields.

I have spent years developing methods and strategies for increasing my productivity in the field to help mitigate these expenses. There are many things I have done to further my yields. One thing I have done that is applicable to this thread is to expand the types of photographs I shoot which include grand scenes, intimate landscapes, macro images, and grand vistas with views up to 30 miles. To facilitate these diverse types of photographs shot within the diverse land formations of Colorado requires a large variety of lenses. Currently, I have ten lenses starting at 75mm and ending at 720mm, and I use every one of them extensively. I have just purchased the 600 to1200mm Nikkor lens set to help me address the grand vistas which brings the count up to 13 lenses. I can assure you that if I did not need 13 lenses, I would not have purchased them. They are not cheap by any means, and I am businessman just as much as I am an artist.

Does having all these lenses increase my yields in the field? Does more mean more? You bet it does. I estimate the 1200mm set alone will add anywhere from five to 20 new images per year. There is no doubt in my mine that my new lens set will pay for itself very shortly.

[Stephen Willard]

Some of you wonder why I even posted this thread if I have already made up my mind. My hope here is not necessarily motivated to help myself, but rather to share different approaches, ideas, and debate so that others may benefit. Perhaps there is some who finds their self stuck with producing the same type of images over and over again. I know this happened to me once. This thread suggests that he may be able to climb out of his or her rut by trying other types of photographs and acquiring some new lenses to facilitate that effort.

[C. D. Keth]

This thread suggests that he may be able to climb out of his or her rut by trying other types of photographs and acquiring some new lenses to facilitate that effort.

Your way of working obviously works for you. Nothing will ever make me believe, however, that the best way to get out of a creative rut is to buy stuff.

[Ed Richards]

Stephen,

You do wonderful work, but you attack this as a full time professional, which is very different from most of the folks on this forum. If someone is doing this as a full time photographer, shooting the full range of material, a full lens set is essential, and you will work them enough to be proficient with them. But if you are a more typical LF shooter who gets out less, and shoots less, then that lens set is probably going to get in the way because there is no time to learn to use each of them well.

Christopher,

Sometimes a new lens or format will help someone get out of a rut, but fundamentally you are right, it is not a good long term solution because you end up with a garage full of stuff. Not that it could happen to anyone on this list.:-)

[Stephen Willard]

Your way of working obviously works for you. Nothing will ever make me believe, however, that the best way to get out of a creative rut is to buy stuff.

Christopher, that is not good enough. Now you have to make suggests on what you would do to get out of a rut and improve your images and yields. I am truly all ears, and I do not have all the answers either. It is a never ending quest for me to get better, and I always look to others for new ideas.

I have said "more is more", and you said never. So what else do you have besides "less is more"...

[Vaughn]

Just enough is just right?

vaughn

[Ole Tjugen]

More is more, and less is always less.

Most of us don't have the luxury of having every conceiveable lens (ehrm...), and some of us do wonderful work with a single focal length. For my own part sticking to one single lens would mean I would have to take four different cameras instead, so I find it much simpler to carry one camera and four lenses (at a time).

I use - and find that I need - very wide lenses, so 47mm, 65mm, 75mm and 90mm are now part of my standard 4x5" kit. But sometimes I need a narrower view, so I bring a 150-ish and a 210-ish as well. And most likely a 355mm.

Most others won't need the widest lenses, but I find that it's the only way to get the pictures I want in Western Norway's landscape.

[Frank Petronio]

As far as productivity goes, I know I am more productive with one lens than a slew of them because I've tried both approaches over several cycles now. I won't make the same kinds of photos if I have one lens or a dozen, but since what you photograph and how you might frame up your shot is entirely subjective, then it's pointless to claim you'd be more or less productive with this or that gear until you give it a good try both ways.

If I were a commercial architectural photographer who had clients dictating what kinds of shots they wanted (usually wide as hell to get all their wonderwork in...) I'd want to have a selection of lenses. Or if I were a studio photographer and some lameo art director wanted me to copy some other photographer's shot, then I'd want the same lens they had.

But otherwise, why-oh-why would it matter?

Now I can see for selling nature prints as Stephen does, he probably wants a wide dramatic sunset shot and then a tight one of a peak in Alpenglow... but those are commercial considerations just like the above examples. It doesn't mean he couldn't create a bunch of excellent salable photos with just a plain old normal lens....

[Stephen Willard]

Stephen,

You do wonderful work, but you attack this as a full time professional, which is very different from most of the folks on this forum. If someone is doing this as a full time photographer, shooting the full range of material, a full lens set is essential, and you will work them enough to be proficient with them. But if you are a more typical LF shooter who gets out less, and shoots less, then that lens set is probably going to get in the way because there is no time to learn to use each of them well.

Ed, you are correct that I am a professional. However, I would like to challenge your notion that a large set of lenses are to complicated to use because of life's time constraints. Here are some things to consider for the record.

1) Lenses can be classified into three basic categories of wide angle, normal/intermediate, and telephoto. Once you have learned to see wide angle, then it is no big deal when you add another wide-angle lens to your bag. This is also holds true for the other two categories. It took me two years to figure out how to make a sharp image with my 720mm lens because of vibrations. That lesson will now be applied to my new 1200mm lens set. I will be using it effectively the minute I take my first shot with it.

2) Never make a hollow lens purchase unless you are collector. All equipment purchases should be motivated by a compositional or artistic need. For example, just recently I started shooting from the car where I encountered gigantic vistas and lots of private property that denied me access. My 720mm lens fell far short of this new need. With the purchase of my 1200mm convertible lens set, I am hoping I can shoot across private land and start to take on some of those big vistas. The 1200mm lens set was my first lens I have purchased in four years.

If there is no compositional need, then do not buy any additional gear period. You would be wasting your money. If you are in a rut and looking for changes then drive your purchases from a well thought out artistic vision. Making random lens or gear purchases will not help.

3) Restrict your lens or gear purchases to one a year. This will make things more affordable and provides you with time to get acquainted with your new tool. It took 7 plus years to purchase my 10 lenses. I could never have afforded them if I purchased them all at once.

I suspect that many know these things already, but for those who don’t, I hope this helps.

[Stephen Willard]

Now I can see for selling nature prints as Stephen does, he probably wants a wide dramatic sunset shot and then a tight one of a peak in Alpenglow... but those are commercial considerations just like the above examples. It doesn't mean he couldn't create a bunch of excellent salable photos with just a plain old normal lens....

Correct, except that a richer suite of lenses will add variety to my images. As I have said before, lenses are like paint brushes, each having their own unique optical characteristics, and thus will allow me to paint light on film in different ways.