If You Could Only Shoot With One Lens, What Would It Be?

If You Could Only Shoot With One Lens, What Would It Be?

Photographers love gear. After all, playing with advanced cameras and lenses can be a lot of fun. But if you could only shoot with one lens, what would it be?

Personally, I really don't see anything wrong with obsessing a bit about camera gear, so long as that obsession comes from a place of being passionate about technology and doesn't cause financial stress, instead of being used as a justification for inadequate photography skills. Lately, however, I've been trying to downsize and streamline my kit a bit. I love playing with all sorts of cameras and lenses, from 80-year-old TLR cameras to the latest and greatest bodies and lenses. However, I'm someone who is easily paralyzed by choice, and I've found myself staring at my collection of gear and wondering what I should actually take out to shoot with a little too much lately. And as much as I enjoy my collection, if it's getting the way of my creative process, then it's time to reevaluate things a bit. 

So, I laid out all my gear on the floor recently and got really serious about evaluating it, divorcing my fondness for the novelty of any specific piece from the evaluation so I could have the objectivity needed to be pragmatic about what I actually needed. That brought me to some decisions that might have surprised me before I made the pointed effort to be really practical about this process. My Canon 85mm f/1.2L II USM lens? I love it. It was my first professional lens, and it has an inimitably unique look that I've always been very partial to. But the truth is that ever since I switched to Sony for my portraiture, the Canon lens has languished in my Pelican case, its place taken by the Sigma 105mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art lens. It's sharper, autofocuses much more quickly, and lets me take advantage of Eye AF. Much as I've enjoyed the Canon, it's time to move on from it. I came to the same conclusion about a lot of other gear, vicious pragmatism overriding any "what if I need it later?" questions generated by any fondness. It feels good to downsize, to pare away to only essential tools, refocusing yourself on what really matters: the images. 

I love my Canon 85mm, but I just don't use it anymore.

In the process of this downsizing, I thought of a question: if I had to get rid of all my lenses except one, which would I keep? It was a tougher question than I thought. I tend to find that there's a bit of an inverse relationship between lens utility and how inspirational it is, though it's not strict. My 24-70mm f/2.8? It's an exceedingly practical lens that has never failed me in the multitude of situations in which I've placed it, yet I find it aggressively boring and uninspiring. On the other hand, there's something like my Canon TS-E 90mm f/2.8 tilt-shift lens. Is it something I'd have any use at all for in 99% of situations? Nope. But the uniqueness of the lens makes me excited to pull it out of my bag and create things. Could I spend the rest of my career only shooting with it? Not if I want to make any money or have any sort of versatility. 

My 24-70mm has never let me down.

So, as I sat there, surveying my lenses, I thought long and hard about which one I would keep if I could only hang on to one. It would have to be a lens that had the versatility to cover everything I shoot (mostly landscapes, events, and portraits) or at least be able to get by in those situations. While not necessary, it would be nice if it could inspire a bit of creativity too. 

At first, I figured I would choose a zoom lens just because it gave me options. But after a while, I finally chose my Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM lens (or really, any wide aperture 50mm). It's a weird choice because I don't particularly like that focal length and don't really shoot with it very often, but the lens has a lot of character, which is important to me. It has a wide aperture, which makes it useful for low-light events and creative work. It's sharp when you stop it down for studio work. And my disdain for the focal length actually works to my advantage sometimes, as it forces me to work extra hard to find a composition I like. It's a bit long for landscapes, but not so much I couldn't work with it. I surprised myself a bit with that choice, and it made me realize that maybe I should put that lens on my camera when I go out a bit more often, as it's a little more versatile than I gave it credit for.

That 50mm is pretty alright after all.

So, what's the point of this exercise anyway? No one is forcing any of us to shoot with only one lens. I think it's a good thing to think through, because it can give you a bit more insight into the relationship you have with your equipment and what gear most readily enables you to explore and grow as a creative. Had I not taken the time to go through this thought experiment, I would have left the 50mm to continue sitting unused in my bag, missing out on the creative opportunities it affords. 

It's also made me reconsider what I take for a walkaround lens. I used to take the 24-70mm, thinking it gave me a reasonable zoom range to take in whatever I happened upon and not miss shots. But switching to something like the 50mm has made me come home with more keepers, even if I miss some extra shots due to not having the extra focal length range. That's because it's a lens that inspires creativity. I think there's something to be said there: perhaps it's worth sometimes sacrificing a bit of utility for something you're excited to shoot with. I know it has certainly streamlined and reinvigorated my shooting patterns a bit.

If you could only keep one lens, what would it be and why? Let me know in the comments! 

Alex Cooke's picture

Alex Cooke is a Cleveland-based portrait, events, and landscape photographer. He holds an M.S. in Applied Mathematics and a doctorate in Music Composition. He is also an avid equestrian.

Log in or register to post comments
125 Comments
Previous comments

Nikon 20mm f1.8 because of the Sunstar and if you need more wide angle, then is a panoramic the solution.

Nikon 35mm f/1.4G

My Canon EF 35-135mm. Old but gold- no other lens I have can give me that level of performance in a package so small and light.

Tamron 24-70mm G2.

I love that photo so much alex!

Thanks, bud!!!

M.Zuiko 12-40 f/2.8

Fujifilm X-T3 with 16mm f/1.4.

I'd chose a zoom, specifically the 24-105 f4 lens. I can use it for most of my situations from weddings to headshots to product photography.

Then benefits of such a range is more beneficial to me than have a super fast prime. Beside, with my one lens I'd also have a flash. :D

I'm probably the only one that going to say this: My Kit Lens
I have a bunch of lens, this one still lives on my camera.

this should have been a poll or something. that would have been cool to see

Carl Zeiss Distagon 2,8/21 ZE

28mm Nikkor f1.8 G

35 mm f2 (FF equivalent) Had several camera over the decades that came close to that spec.

28mm set at 5.6 or 8 and just shoot all day.

Super Muti Coated Takumar 6X7 90mm 1:2.8 LS which strangely enough is already mounted on my Asahi Pentax 6X7.

The one lens.
Then the 24-105mm L is by far the best.

Without hesitation I would keep my Zeiss Otus 55mm f1.4 ZF.2, and chuck the rest.

12-300mm F1.8

100- 400 mm lens - does not matter what brand - that is the only lens I like to carry all the time

If I had to use only one lens for the rest of my life, then I would want to keep with reality as much as possible. As such, I would use a 45mm or 50mm lens. 42mm is closest to what our eyes see...so either one of these.

I’ve been using the Sigma 45mm f2.8 Contemporary for much of my personal work. I was interested to see if I could manage with a single lens in different situations. It takes time to really get to know a lens, to a point where you can judge the results before switching on the camera. You get to know how it performs in different situations and start looking for images that suit it.

After I’d used it for a while I wrote my thoughts on using just one lens and illustrated the text with my images. For me, it was quite enlightening to see what could be achieved with minimalist equipment.

https://spark.adobe.com/page/wFmXNlovoSM2i/

I shoot mostly wildlife so for sure I would keep the Canon 100-400 mark ii.
It is very versatile: landscapes, close-ups of flowers and insects, mammals, birds, etc. Also useful for portraits.
Along with a 36mm extension tube, a 1.4x extender iii, an f/8 AF camera, and a good speedlight and I get all I need, except for astrophotography...

I absolutely agree. The 1.4f 50mm lens is my go to lens when nothing is working. This is the lens all new to the craft should have because it teaches you good habits and is simple to use.

Canon 24-240mm