Short answer to your question: yes, I find myself using a fairly narrow range of focal lengths. But the longer answer is that the range varies according to where I am and what I am doing. If I am wandering through a museum or local street fair, I'll have the 16-50 on the camera and nothing else with me. If I am in a marketplace in Guatemala or Costa Rica, where I am being more intentional about the photography aspect of my visit, I'll probably have the 21/2.8 on one camera, 55/1.4 on the other. Or 16-50/2.8 on one, 77/1.8 on the other. But if I am in the Costa Rican rain forest or a Missouri National Wildlife Refuge, I'll have my 300/4.5 on one camera and the 60-250 on the other. My general rule of thumb is that for me cityscapes and people = shorter lenses, and more open spaces = much wider or much longer lenses.
I think we all evolve a shooting style and develop a preference for the use of certain lenses. 15 years ago, I was in a comfortable rut, shooting mostly 50mm with an occasional 135mm telephoto shot thrown in. Then when I joined the PDML (12 years ago?) I was exposed to people who raved about their long lenses and the ability to isolate details in a scene. And others who were equally voluble in praise of their wide angle lenses. I never have owned a 35mm lens as far as I can recall. I had the 31mm Limited and hardly used it and didn't replace it when it was stolen. I had a 28mm but never used it. But then I got a FA* 24/2.0 and started to change my notions about wide angle. I think that is a great portrait lens! And then I got a 20/2.8. Meanwhile I kept getting longer lenses as well. So many choices, so little time! stan On Dec 24, 2010, at 1:39 AM, Andrew Allen wrote: > First, let me say thank you to those who e-mailed me with suggestions > on how to enjoy this mailing list and send some specific messages > straight to the circular file. That being said, I suppose one must > have a thick skin when dealing with any 'open' internet forum. > > Back to photography, I was wondering if anyone has the same affliction > I do; that is, using certain focal lengths almost exclusively. I find > that 90% of my needs are covered by the rough range of 24mm - 85mm > (this being a 35mm equivalent range). That is wide through portrait - > clearly, I don't do any birding or serious sports work. Recently, I > had a friend told me I should try out a RF for my needs - of course > I'd love an M9 - but I've yet to win the lottery. Any thoughts on > this focal length constriction, and the use of a RF for street > shooting versus a DSLR? > > -- > Andrew Allen > Freelance Photographer and Writer > www.andrewallenphoto.com > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
