Let's say you're hiking into one of your favorite landscapes – camera, lens, film in pack, tripod in hand, high confidence in tow.
You're in a great mood
. The dawning day promises good light. You have all the time you need for shooting, plus more to spare. You haven't arrived yet, so it's too early to start looking for shots. But deep down, you know plenty of shots will be there. After all, a lot of care and consideration went into the number of lenses in your pack. Then a moment of pause. A curious question comes to mind. Will this choice of glass – this well-considered choice – really influence the number of compositions that will be possible for you to capture and take home?
Hiking on, two ideas, honed for simplicity, occur to you and seem to clash – yet you're aware that each idea has its supporters – and you grow curious about "which side" you're on, which idea makes more sense:
#1: There is a clear relationship between the number of focal lengths in my pack and the number of compositions that will be possible for me to capture.
#2: The number of compositions that will be possible for me to capture has no relationship to the number of focal lengths in my pack (i.e., one or more).
Just as you arrive at your location, your doubts give way to clarity. Good timing!
But tell us – what did you decide and why?
-----
Note: This might betray me as a #2 person, but I started writing this about my belief that a single lens kit, whether by choice or economic necessity, makes for a liberating field experience, not a restrictive one. ;^)
Bookmarks