Can you live with just 1 prime lens?

Simple yes or no question... but probably more difficult to act out.

Can you live with just 1 prime lens and what would it be?


Im NO LONGER thinking about trading my 24-105 for the sigma 35mm (interested in portrait work)

If you are interested in portrait work, except for environmental portraiture, 35mm is not, IMO, a great choice for either full-frame of crop cameras. The focal length is too short for head and shoulders portraiture and in order to fill the frame, you have to get too close to your subject. Head and shoulders work is a significant part of portrait photography.

I prefer a longer lens. Of course, you need enough space to for the camera to subject distance.

If space is a problem, I would find somewhere else to shoot rather than to shoot from too close a camera to subject distance with a wide lens resulting in distortion...

However, everyone has his or her likes and dislikes. You can find if 35mm will work for you by setting your 24-105mm lens at 35mm and using it at that focal length exclusively for a while.

As you progess in photog world you will want more variety of lens to use and imo trading the 24-105 to 35mm is a wrong move. 24-105 is a very good all around lens.

For my type of shooting, I would go with 35mm.

Thanks guys! just threw that thought out of my mind!

Sometimes it likes to wander into some random nonsense.

mesakid wrote in post #15418168
For my type of shooting, I would go with 35mm.

I understand the advantage to multiple primes, and i was just day dreaming about the sigma 35 that everyone else seems to be day dreaming about. In reality, i like the idea of it to take photos of my son.

But of course my long term goal is to have that as 1 of the lenses i carry

Forced to live with one prime, I would probably go with the 35mm/1.4L on my 60D.

i can but I don't get paid. For hobby it works just fine when I had just a 50. I actually think for learning that is an awesome path to take for a few months.

Could I? Yes.

I started learning photography on a 50mm 1.8 and would gladly do it again if necessary. The light weight and ability to "see" in one focal length has its advantages.

Would I want to? No, I've been spoiled by so many cool lenses =]

kekais wrote in post #15418207
Could I? Yes.

I started learning photography on a 50mm 1.8 and would gladly do it again if necessary. The light weight and ability to "see" in one focal length has its advantages.

Would I want to? No, I've been spoiled by so many cool lenses =]

Honestly to answer my own question, i dont think i could live with just 1 prime. Maybe my 24-105 cause that's all im doing now.

I can live with just one prime. In fact, I have lived with just one prime for the past 4 years.

My prime is the 400 f2.8, and the reason I can live with it as my only prime is due t it's versatility - due to it's wonderful compatibility with both the 1.4 and 2x teleconverters, I use it as a zoom.

Additional versatility comes from using it on both my 1.6 crop body and on my full frame body. With different converter / body combinations, I can achieve the following effective focal lengths (by "EFL" I mean the same field of view that each FL would give):
400mm
560mm
640mm
800mm
896mm
1280mm

I do hope to get another prime (like the new 600mm) at some point in the distant future when I can afford one . . . for now I'll make due with what the 400 provides.

For just a hobby I could probably live with my 50, but I would miss the wider lens for landscapes. For paid, no way.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15418269
I can live with just one prime. In fact, I have lived with just one prime for the past 4 years.

My prime is the 400 f2.8, and the reason I can live with it as my only prime is due t it's versatility - due to it's wonderful compatibility with both the 1.4 and 2x teleconverters, I use it as a zoom.

Additional versatility comes from using it on both my 1.6 crop body and on my full frame body. With different converter / body combinations, I can achieve the following effective focal lengths (by "EFL" I mean the same field of view that each FL would give):
400mm
560mm
640mm
800mm
896mm
1280mm

I do hope to get another prime (like the new 600mm) at some point in the distant future when I can afford one . . . for now I'll make due with what the 400 provides.

SMART!!!!

Nifty 50 is all I need right now

600mm f4 or 400mm f2.8 in my future for Sure!

Why only the 50 for now? Any portraiture I do is strictly for family photos 50 1.8 is plenty fine for that. I don't shoot professional portraits or studio stuff much. I shoot Wildlife and Nature and I mainly use my Sigma 150-500mm or my Sigma 18-250mm for now, or until I make a bit more money for the big prime glass

I voted no. But if I had to try, it would be with the 400.