Does anyone use a 50mm as their main lens on a full frame?

Started Jan 25, 2013 | Discussions thread
Guidenet Forum Pro • Posts: 15,748
Re: Does anyone use a 50mm as their main lens on a full frame?

joneil wrote:

glo wrote:

Since you have a 50, there's no harm in keeping it, certainly you'll find a use for it. For me, there's no such thing as a main lens unless I'm shooting an event, food shots, portraits, etc. They all require a different lens. The 24-85 is a nice lens, even if you get it, I'd not get rid of the 50. Your 50 will get you images you can't get with a 24-85. Don't know your experience or the the type of shooting you do. There are those who are happy with one lens for everything.


+1 on everything above. Back in my film days, I found my "normal" everyday lens was 35mm, and today it is my 24-70mm zoom. But there are times you will be glad you have that 50mm, so don't get rid of it.

Today, in terms of primes, I find my 24mm f2.8 is almost my "everyday" lens. Small, light and sharp, and I like shooting buildings and landscapes.

Sure there are those who are happy with one lens for everything, but those folks must have a fairly narrow interest in photography overall. The ability to interchange lenses with an interchangeable lens camera is ther reason for these type cameras, obviously. We are able to match the correct lens to the job at hand. There are many various jobs and therefore many various lenses to do them with.

Sure, if all you shoot is landscape and buildings, you can get by with one lens, but if you also like to do head and shoulder portraits, you may just need something else. If you like landscape and also like to do birding, you're likely in big trouble trying to get one lens to do both. This is obvious and I know you both know this, so I'm not sure why we'd even suggest this concept as other than somewhat absurd.

There are just too many various genres of photography from Sports to Macro, all requiring different cameras and lenses. This is one of the best reasons to own a big system camera like Nikon. We have so many options we can pursue and those options are needed, not optional in many cases. If you deem a 20 f/2.8 is your one sweet lens, macro is going to be out of reach mostly for you. You'll not be doing formal portraits much either. Birds and wildlife would be a pipe dream.

The 50mm is a great in betweener type lens to learn on especially back in the film age prior to the 43-86 zoom, Heaven forbid. Today, novice photographers can learn on mid zooms where they might get a better feeling for various mid range options. Later, if and when their interests begin to move in some direction, specialty glass becomes more and more a requirement. They might have to also invest in lighting, support systems, different bodies and other accessories to accomplish their goals and desires.

Being happy with one lens strikes me as being somewhat stagnant in one's endeavors, don't you think? I mean it might sound good to say, but does it really mean a whole lot given we're all using interchangeable lens cameras for a reason, hopefully?

This is only my opinion and not meant to be arrogant or contentious.

From one extreme to another. heheh´╗┐

-- hide signature --

Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

 Guidenet's gear list:Guidenet's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Nikon D800 +31 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow