[PenPusher]

I've been watching lots of videos on YouTube on working with Large Format equipment where part of the philosophy seems to be to work with one lens, wander around in ideal conditions until they find a pleasing composition take a shot or two with different film material and call it a day.

The idea of searching for a single composition or two and getting it wright rather than blasting off shots by the new time on everything and anything appeals to me.

However the eyes are not as good as they used to be and I'm thinking of falling back on autofocus lenses of which I have the DA 21, DA 40, FA 50 and DA 70. The FD 50 has the advantage of an F1.7 diaphragm for bokeh and bad light but it can sometimes be rather long.

I was wondering if anybody else has thought about the one lens camera philosophy and if so which lens of the above would they find the most useful, I have no specific targets in mind and I tend to favour the DA 40 which I find to be very sharp, I'm using the K70.

Any thoughts ?

[que es tu]

Hmm.. I think that given the choices you listed, I would go for the 21mm followed by the 40mm in order of preference. I have found even 35mm to be a bit long on APS-C, and 21mm on my zoom lens gets used a lot for general versatility, so that is why I put the 21 first!

[acoufap]

I've been watching lots of videos on YouTube on working with Large Format equipment where part of the philosophy seems to be to work with one lens, wander around in ideal conditions until they find a pleasing composition take a shot or two with different film material and call it a day.

The idea of searching for a single composition or two and getting it wright rather than blasting off shots by the new time on everything and anything appeals to me.

However the eyes are not as good as they used to be and I'm thinking of falling back on autofocus lenses of which I have the DA 21, DA 40, FA 50 and DA 70. The FD 50 has the advantage of an F1.7 diaphragm for bokeh and bad light but it can sometimes be rather long.

I was wondering if anybody else has thought about the one lens camera philosophy and if so which lens of the above would they find the most useful, I have no specific targets in mind and I tend to favour the DA 40 which I find to be very sharp, I'm using the K70.

Any thoughts ?

Depends on your subjects, distance, vision, your message, story etc. - very personal. Try to find what pleases your self. I‘m pretty sure choice doesn‘t depend on absolute sharpness of a specific lens.

[filmamigo]

I have taken this approach before when travelling. I had a really good experience in New York City with just a Pentax MZ-S and the FA Limited 43mm. On film (or full frame) I find 43mm to be a flexible length. By "zooming with your feet", lots of composition options are possible. It doesn't have any wide angle distortion - which ironically makes it good for capturing panoramas by taking multiple shots and merging them together in software - allowing the 43mm to become "super wide".

For the lenses you list, I assume you are shooting an APS-C-sized DSLR. Because I like 43mm on full frame, I tend to like 24mm to 30mm on APS-C - but that's just my preference. You are right to prefer a faster lens - it does give you more flexibility on a range of subjects when you need to isolate a subject or are facing low light. Of course - the most effective way to isolate a subject and get shallow DOF is to move closer to the subject (decreasing camera-to-subject distance, compared to camera-to-background.)

Depending on your tastes, I would probably try the DA 21 or DA 40 for the day. If you like tighter lenses (or intend on shooting people) go for the FA 50.

It's a worthwhile experiment. I find it freeing to not have to constantly re-evaluate whether I want to change the lens on my camera for a given subject. I can stay "in the moment" and work a subject with my feet and viewfinder.

Good luck and let us know how it goes!

[house]

What focal length to choose depends on personal preference or project intent. When I was on apsc the DA21 did a lot of single lens duty. But I photograph architecture and spaces + family and find focal lengths around 28mm +- FF equiv incredibly flexible. Works for environmental portraits as well.

Bringing only the prime lens attached to the camera hugely improves my photographic enjoyment. Mostly I can't be that relaxed about i because I need to get a range of shots so a three prime setup becomes necessary. It does take away from the moment though.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

I find going for a walk with only one prime lots of fun and, of course, excitement. As I do not know what I am going to see on my way it does not matter which lens I take with me. DA 35mm f2.4, DA* 55mm f1.4 or DA 50mm 1.8, FA 77mm Ltd, A 135mm. I just have to adapt myself to the lens chosen and I need comfortable shoes to step for- and backwards. And sometimes I have to miss an opportunity to shoot something special, just because of my choice for that day. Any lens is useful and they all deserve to go with you on an outing. Although before we set out I always decide if we go into the woods or along the fields. In the woods I prefer my 28 or 35mm (the widest primes available) and along the fields it could be any of them. But the same goes for the zooms I own, no more than one lens a day. And even then you come across things you wished you had taken another lens. In the woods, DA* 11-18, along the fields, DA 18-135. Or my recently acquired DA* 50-135.

[FozzFoster]

wander around in ideal conditions until they find a pleasing composition take a shot or two with different film material and call it a day.

I've heard stories that Ansel Adams would take a trip into Yellowstone and come away with like 1 or 2 pictures....
incredible!

[MrB1]

I usually photograph subjects that don't move, or that move slowly, and that don't require tele focal lengths, so often take the DA Limited pancake trio - 21, 40 and 70. (I have the HD versions.} I seem to like using the 40 most, so if I take only the camera with one prime lens, it is usually the 40. Its image quality is excellent so, if needed, a closer framing can be achieved by cropping. It also has a flat field with very little distortion, so a wider angle of view can be produced by stitching two or more images.

Philip

[Des]

I agree with others that the one-lens walk can be very liberating. If it's a prime, you just go looking at your surrounds with that focal length in mind. Wider lenses are certainly more flexible, because you can crop if you need to. But longer lenses can jolt you out of complacency. They tend to make you look for single subjects and little things.

My favourite would be the FA 77mm Limited, because it has that "Wow" factor like no other. I had a lot of fun walking around a local agricultural show with it: A country show, viewed through the FA 77 - PentaxForums.com

But I've also been out for a one-lens walk on occasions with other primes: DA 15 Ltd, DA 35mm f2.4, FA 43 Ltd, DA 50mm f1.8, DFA 100 macro, FA*300mm f4.5. They have all been enjoyable. If you are going to the same places, try a different lens for each occasion. It can make you more creative - you can see something familiar from (literally) a different perspective.

To take up a point raised by @MrB1, stitching with a sharp prime can work well for static subjects. I do like mid-telephoto lenses on APS-C for this. You get a lot of detail.

FA 77 Ltd (8 vertical images stitched)


DFA 100mm f2.8 macro WR (8 vertical images stitched)

[kypfer]

I've been watching lots of videos on YouTube on working with Large Format equipment where part of the philosophy seems to be to work with one lens, wander around in ideal conditions until they find a pleasing composition take a shot or two with different film material and call it a day.
The idea of searching for a single composition or two and getting it wright rather than blasting off shots by the new time on everything and anything appeals to me.
However the eyes are not as good as they used to be and I'm thinking of falling back on autofocus lenses of which I have the DA 21, DA 40, FA 50 and DA 70. The FD 50 has the advantage of an F1.7 diaphragm for bokeh and bad light but it can sometimes be rather long.
I was wondering if anybody else has thought about the one lens camera philosophy and if so which lens of the above would they find the most useful, I have no specific targets in mind and I tend to favour the DA 40 which I find to be very sharp, I'm using the K70.
Any thoughts ?

The "single-lens" philosophy is one I've used for many years, if only as a throw-back to my youth when one lens was all I had
Personally … and this will always be a personal choice … I'll pick a lens suitable for the environment I'll be in … wide sweeping vistas on the sea cliffs are a different challenge to being in a wooded valley with a single narrow footpath.
Through my film days, my "standard" lenses varied between 35mm and 58mm (on 35mm film) so, to replicate that with an APS-C camera, something between 24mm and 40mm would fit the bill, with, possibly, my Sigma 21-35mm (M42 on an M42-PK adaptor) being a good all-around compromise, but of course there's a reason why the ubiquitous and much-maligned "kit" lens is an 18-55mm … it really does cover most bases
As for manual focussing … with the K-70 you've got two perfectly good options without needing to rely on autofocus, the Focus Peaking option in LiveView and the little green hexagon focus confirmation indicator in the viewfinder.
I'm not suggesting the full-time use of LiveView, far from it, but as a compositional aid and focus confirmation tool it can be very handy, especially if the camera is on a tripod.
The little green hexagon in the optical viewfinder can take some getting used to, but, with a little practice, it can become second nature quite quickly.
A couple of other suggestions for the "single lens on a tripod approach" would be use of the histogram facility in LiveView or Digital Preview and the use of a cable release for that "stand back and enjoy the moment" effect and getting the clouds "just right" behind that tree

[robgski]

For primes, the DA 40mm XS can stay on my KP or my K-1 for weeks at a time.

[UncleVanya]

I've been watching lots of videos on YouTube on working with Large Format equipment where part of the philosophy seems to be to work with one lens, wander around in ideal conditions until they find a pleasing composition take a shot or two with different film material and call it a day.

The idea of searching for a single composition or two and getting it wright rather than blasting off shots by the new time on everything and anything appeals to me.

However the eyes are not as good as they used to be and I'm thinking of falling back on autofocus lenses of which I have the DA 21, DA 40, FA 50 and DA 70. The FD 50 has the advantage of an F1.7 diaphragm for bokeh and bad light but it can sometimes be rather long.

I was wondering if anybody else has thought about the one lens camera philosophy and if so which lens of the above would they find the most useful, I have no specific targets in mind and I tend to favour the DA 40 which I find to be very sharp, I'm using the K70.

Any thoughts ?

Given your statements, try the FA 31 - it gives a similar f stop to the 50/1.7, it has a similar angle of view as a 50mm FF when used on crop. And it has a great rendering.

[Lord Lucan]

The idea of searching for a single composition or two and getting it wright rather than blasting off shots by the new time on everything and anything appeals to me.

There are many users of digital cameras who do this, albeit a minority. I have just come back from a half-hour walk to get one picture with my DSLR. I confess I did take three shots from slightly different positions but with the intention of keeping only one.

[PenPusher]

Thank you for spending the time to air your suggestions, I would indeed like to have the FA31 but its cost is something else so I had wondered about the DA 35 F2.8 micro or the FA 35mm F2 but they don't come up very often so I'll just keep watching and hoping.

I've had the DA 40 for some years now and members of our little club were astonished at the detail it revealed when used with my old K200D and I've often thought that it would be the one to use, not too wide and not too short but of course it could be swapped out for a particular subject or a few exposures stitched together and I can still zoom with the feet - just. Of course when I started photography it was with a 1958 Carl Zeiss Jena 35mm Werra with a 50mm F2.8 Tessa lens bought new so in a way its back to the future, by the way it still works though the ever-ready case is not quite so ready these days. It was followed by Yashica 35J with a 50mm F2.0 lens which I think came out of the Tomioka factory, the lens gives beautiful results on digital, I could not afford the Spotmatic at the time.

Although the DA lenses are not that fast I could always bump up the ISO if needed as I find the sensor in the K70 is quite good, though I still think the K200D's was smoother but in terms of sensor development that's probably classed as a dinosaur by now.

I find that I can only use Live View satisfactorily with a tripod which I'm trying to avoid carrying, age you know, though it does allow very good subject framing. I'd quite forgotten Catch in Focus and have now discovered where its hidden in the menu.

It must be nice to travel the world and go to far away places with strange sounding names, but I'm a bit to old for that now (so I'm told) so the last trip before covid was visiting a daughter in Germany and discovering that Ryan Air's destination of Frankfurt-Hahn is only around 120Km from Frankfurt, duh! By the way, to my eyes, Frankfurt seems to acting as a parking lot for the US airforce.

CD

[UncleVanya]

Thank you for spending the time to air your suggestions, I would indeed like to have the FA31 but its cost is something else so I had wondered about the DA 35 F2.8 micro or the FA 35mm F2 but they don't come up very often so I'll just keep watching and hoping.

There’s an fa 35/2 with a damaged filter ring in the marketplace now (or there was yesterday). I’ve owned all these lenses; the da 35 macro is the most recently acquired of the three. Each is different, the 31 has the slightly wider perspective that might fit your needs better, but the 35/2 is a very good lens with less expensive pedigree that still performs well. The FA 35 offers slightly more even sharpness across the frame than the 31. This is mainly because the center sharpness on the 31 is really sharp. The extra sharp center on the 31 makes the adequately sharp borders more noticeably less sharp than the 35/2 does because of this difference in center sharpness. The fa 35/2 is more evenly sharp and is impressive in its own way. Both lenses have good rendering, and while I own the 31 and use it, I find the 31 is hard to justify over the fa 35/2 on many shots - but there is something special there. I tend to describe the fa 35/2 as a poor man’s fa 31. The results are close enough for most shots and the price difference is large. The DA 35/2.4 and DA 35/2.8 are also good lenses. I owned the f2.4 plastic fantastic previously and sold it, then I bought it again this year and find it is better than I remembered or I got a better copy. The da 35/2.8 is a jewel of a lens but it lacks the wider aperture which seemed to factor into your lens choice.

In the end the choices you make must fit your practicalities and budget. I wouldn’t hesitate to try any of the 35mm options discussed here - all are good in one way or another.