There are many days that every shot I take is with a 500mm prime. Would I ever give up my other lenses, both primes and zooms? Of course not. There is a whole giant world of different subjects at a variety of sizes and distances out there. 
Could you live with one prime lens?
- Thread starter MatthewK
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
In the OM Systems world there is the 150-400, f/4.5. Paired with an OM-1 the total weight is about 6# and is easily the best one lens wildlife system out there. A 300f4+a 1.4TC is a cheaper, lighter alternative. A 100-400 f/6.3 give up a bit in IQ but is lighter and cheaper still.
In the Nikon world I would be just fine with a Z-8/600pf planning to shoot in DX mode if I needed more reach but I would give up some closeup opportunities rather than reduced IQ using the 180-600.
In the Nikon world I would be just fine with a Z-8/600pf planning to shoot in DX mode if I needed more reach but I would give up some closeup opportunities rather than reduced IQ using the 180-600.
lukemeup
Well-known member
For wildlife? If I were to pick just one it would be 400 TC. Add an external TC1.4 and you have 3 lenses in one. Alas I can't afford or justify one.
Can I live with only one. Sure. Do I want to. No. Like many have mentioned if I only shot one type of subject sure I could live with one. But that's not the case.
That said, on any given day I much prefer to go out with one lens, preferably a prime. I enjoy shooting a lot more and honestly do a better job. It reduces the number of variables in the equation so my pee brain can cope. There are no equipment options to consider so I can concentrate on the subject.
That said, on any given day I much prefer to go out with one lens, preferably a prime. I enjoy shooting a lot more and honestly do a better job. It reduces the number of variables in the equation so my pee brain can cope. There are no equipment options to consider so I can concentrate on the subject.
RikWriter
Well-known member
No.
EricKlees
Well-known member
I have no problem with just my 800PF with my Z9. I shoot everything from elk, bison to Kingfishers. Though i will be adding the 180-600 next year. I have no issues missing anything with 800mm
It got me curious how it would work with the 800 mm. The pf has an MFD of 16.4 feet, meaning the worst case would be once one could focus woulld be a rectangle roughly 6 by 9 inches. At 50 feet there would be roughly 1.5 by 2.25 feet and at 100 feet there would be 3 feet by 4.5 feet. And 200 feet is about 6 by 9 feet. So sure it could be done for even large mammals. Add in the ability to composite and some environment can be included. There would be some missed opportunities though.
not for me. I actually rented the z400 f4.5 for a couple of weeks a the end of last year ... basically, as I have a preference for zooms, to show myself what I'm missing. What it proved to me was that I do still prefer the composure and flexibility of zooms.
The latest, z180-600 certainly lives up to all my expectations. Something like 75% of images from my last trip were at the extreme 600mm. That's definitely made me think on the new z600mm S, but the price point for that really doesn't justify it, for me; as a generalist, rarely doing BIF anyway.
edit: I DO have a prime, the z MC 105mm ...macro. Does that count?
edit 2: I also have FOUR prime lenses for my Hasselblad X2D....that's weird. Hmmm
I went from the 500PF as my only birding lens, to the 800PF, thinking that it'd be the same feel as the 500PF on a D500, but as time went on I realized that I didn't get along with it as well for general use. It's so, so good when it's used within its constraints, but I eventually found I needed a wider FOV for more of my use cases. I'm 100% keeping the 800PF, but it's been relegated to location-specific employ.
I'm with you, Patrick, the 180-600 would be an ideal one-lens setup for wildlife and birding. There's just something satisfying about everything coming together and landing the shot w/ a prime, but the occasional miss from being stuck at one FL can sting a bitnot for me. I actually rented the z400 f4.5 for a couple of weeks a the end of last year ... basically, as I have a preference for zooms, to show myself what I'm missing. What it proved to me was that I do still prefer the composure and flexibility of zooms.
The latest, z180-600 certainly lives up to all my expectations. Something like 75% of images from my last trip were at the extreme 600mm. That's definitely made me think on the new z600mm S, but the price point for that really doesn't justify it, for me; as a generalist, rarely doing BIF anyway.
edit: I DO have a prime, the z MC 105mm ...macro. Does that count?
edit 2: I also have FOUR prime lenses for my Hasselblad X2D....that's weird. Hmmm
When I had DSLR's I had a 500/4. At various times I had a 2nd prime (the 300PF in particular). If you count tilt/shift lenses as prime lenses then I've had 3 of those at one point. Right now I have the z600 PF and a z105 Macro along with 3 very capable zooms (14-24, 24-120, 100-400). I have no need for faster primes in those ranges. So, I guess my answer to Matthew and the OP is NO...
arbitrage
Well-known member
I could live with just my 600/4. I'd miss my 400/2.8 but I shot for many, many years without one. I'd miss my 100-400 more as it is nice to have for close-up work or times I don't want to haul the big lens around. But I do 98% of my shooting with the 600 and 400 and could manage fine with just the 600. And if we really want to be strict, I could live with the 600/4 without ever using a TC as I do 90% of my shooting with the bare lens anyways.
35 mm...... I had (still have) an Olympus XA 35mm with 35mm f/2.8 that went with me everywhere for years. At f/8 everything from 3 metres to infinity was in focus. Work with what you have and don’t worry about what you haven’t.
Not sure I get the point of this question. Who is it aimed at? Certainly not pro photographers. What pro would ever limit himself to 1 lens? It would never cross his/her mind. Would a chef limit himself to 1 pan? A surgeon to 1 scalpel? A craftsman to 1 wrench?
The idea of limiting one’s self to just one lens (or any tool) is something that appeals only perhaps to those who might want to try it for a finite period of time as an exercise, but I cannot conceive of any rational photographer/chef/surgeon/craftsman doing it long term.
Edit - after posting this reply, it struck me that it might be read as a slight to OP. Didn’t intend that. My takeaway from his original question was that since he was perfectly happy with just the long tele lens for several years, that just meant that his style of shooting during that period was obviously on distant subjects. But Matthew - if during that stretch, you decided to shoot a party event, would you not have preferred a more modest length prime or zoom?
The idea of limiting one’s self to just one lens (or any tool) is something that appeals only perhaps to those who might want to try it for a finite period of time as an exercise, but I cannot conceive of any rational photographer/chef/surgeon/craftsman doing it long term.
Edit - after posting this reply, it struck me that it might be read as a slight to OP. Didn’t intend that. My takeaway from his original question was that since he was perfectly happy with just the long tele lens for several years, that just meant that his style of shooting during that period was obviously on distant subjects. But Matthew - if during that stretch, you decided to shoot a party event, would you not have preferred a more modest length prime or zoom?
Last edited:
It wasn’t meant to be taken seriously, just a fun mental exercise. My later responses in this thread already stated that I wouldn’t give up my other lenses. I could, if somehow forced to, but I’m not, so I won’t
If I had to sell everything but one camera and lens my 600f4 would be all I would keep.
Dido
Pro here, and I can fairly easily live with just a fast 85mm. It's about 80% of my shooting already, the rest at 50 and 105.
When I was young and did not earn much money I had only a single prime lens.
60 years later with a decent pension and a range of lenses I shoot a much wider range of subjects - and prefer life to stay this way.
60 years later with a decent pension and a range of lenses I shoot a much wider range of subjects - and prefer life to stay this way.
JanH
Active member
Taking the question at face value, yes. In fact, I can even live without a prime. But taking the question in the spirit it is intended, no. The different kinds of photography I enjoy - landscape, wildlife, and street photography all require different lenses, even within each category. However, I enjoy putting one particular lens on for a day, say a 85mm or 35 mm for a walk in the city and live within that particular perspective for a time. It can even make the walk more satisfying not having to worry about what perspective to chose . . . until I see something that I wish I could shout with a different angle (and then remind myself of some existential lesson about possibilities and the inherent limitations of all choices we make)
JanH
Active member
A very good reminder - though I quickly traded my Zuiko 50mm for a 35/85mm combination and then lived with those for many years.
AnnetteJane
Active member
I’d need at least 2.
My 500 5.6 pf ( I’d rather the 600 )
And the 70-200 2.8
And then I’d still want the 800,
My 500 5.6 pf ( I’d rather the 600 )
And the 70-200 2.8
And then I’d still want the 800,
I couldn’t live with a single prime…as BIF to waterfalls to landscapes to travel genres all call for different lens. I could live with a “single prime and body for today‘s outing” scenario as long as I can have assorted primes and zooms so that I can choose the single lens for today. Otherwise…too restrictive.
O
Well-known member
Direct answer to the question as asked
300 F2.8 VR II have done for years, and i shoot it 95% at F2.8
or the 50mm 1.8s recently
Only an opinion
300 F2.8 VR II have done for years, and i shoot it 95% at F2.8
or the 50mm 1.8s recently
Only an opinion
I have used Z800pf on Z9 95% + of the time since 5-1-22.
The other 5% I still do indoor outdoor people projects for my church and the new Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 model A058Z beats having to juggle 2 or three primes.
The other 5% I still do indoor outdoor people projects for my church and the new Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 model A058Z beats having to juggle 2 or three primes.