 |
| Foggy Morning. This was made with a single focal length film camera. It shows a pretty ordinary perspective. A telephoto lens would have compressed the perspective and changed the entire look of the composition. (click to enlarge) Leica Minilux; 40mm f/2.4 lens; Kodachrome 64 |
Back on November 15th (2024) I wrote a post entitled, “Single Focal Length, Fixed Lens Cameras; Are They For You.”
That post was about what I thought about those cameras and if one would work for me, my current creative vision and the types of photography I practice. If this interests you, you can find it here. I think it may be an interesting read.
Since then and in light of my recent experiment in regularly using a kit with only prime lenses, I’ve continued to think about and mull over in my mind the concept of these cameras (I still have that nagging irrational GAS driven desire to buy one…). Regardless of whether or not a single focal length will work for you, in my mind a more important question arises that might concern those of you who want to buy and only use a single focal length for all of your photography all of the time. That issue is how does using only a single focal length lens impact one’s creativity? Here is how I would phrase my thoughts:
“On the positive side using a single focal length lens exclusively for photography is touted as an exercise to expand one‘s creativity by forcing the photographer into seeing compositions that only fit into that focal length. It causes the photographer to search for, find, see and develop compositions that he or she may otherwise not see or pass by when having access to many focal lengths.
The other side of the coin, so to speak is:
Conversely, an argument can be made that using only one focal length actually stifles creativity by limiting a photographer’s vision to that one field of view causing the photographer to ignore significant subject matter and compositions, which may abound, i.e., that are all around the photographer.”
One of the reasons this train of thought has arisen is that I follow many photographers on YouTube, some of which only use a camera with a single focal length, whether or not the lens is interchangeable. Some are non-specialist photographers, some travel photographers and some street photographers. What I’ve found is, although I generally like their work, it is all starting to look the same. Frankly, some of it is getting boring. It looks like they photograph basically the same subjects or types of subjects in the same way, with the same point of view, with the same perspective over and over. All subject matter is treated the same. No dramatic leading lines, no compressed perspective, etc. Also, while watching their videos, I routinely see apparent compositions all around them that are ignored. They have the wrong focal length to photograph them, I guess. They are forced to ignore them. Hence, the second half of my statement above.
If you’ve been photographing for a while, taken photography courses, workshops or went to school for photography, you might have been subject to an exercise of this nature by your instructor. This ‘single focal length only’ is a common exercise for photographers learning the craft.
 |
| Can your eye be fooled into thinking this was made with a very wide angle lens? Same camera and 40mm lens as used above. Notice the finger pointing down on the headstone? I wonder if that means....well, he isn't going up! (click to enlarge) |
So, does using a single focal length enhance or stifle creativity? Here are some thoughts pro and con.
The argument for using a single focal length usually is something like 'limits actually fuel creativity.' By limiting oneself to a single focal length, such as a 50mm, 35mm or 28mm lens, photographers are forced to:
- Learn to 'see' the world and all of their surroundings through a single perspective
- Develop a focused vision
- Physically move to frame their compositions, rather than using a lens to zoom in or out
- Become more disciplined in compositional thinking
- Internalize the characteristics of a particular lens' field of view
- Think more intentionally about subject placement and perspective
- Develop a deeper understanding of how a specific focal length "sees" the world
- Establish artistic consistency
- Eliminate the ‘paradox of choice’ where too many choices degrade an experience
The "Single Focal Length Limits Creativity" counterargument can be described conversely by critics that restricting oneself to one focal length:
- Artificially constrains visual possibilities
- Potentially causes photographers to miss compelling compositions
- One focal length creates an arbitrary and potentially unnecessary limitation
- Might lead to repetitive, mechanistic image-making
- Could blind a photographer to spatial relationships that emerge at different focal lengths
- Could cause a photographer to develop creative fatigue
My personal opinion is that both arguments have merit. I think limiting oneself to just one focal length is most valuable as a temporary, intentional practice—a training or 'creative jumpstart' method rather than be permanent. But to only photograph with one focal length for the long term can stifle creativity.
Considering my recent experiment with only using prime lenses and the arguments presented here, my preference would be for zoom lenses or a single prime, but not multiple primes.
What are your thoughts? Could you work and fully exercise your creative vision using only a single focal length for the long term, or only for short durations.
Thanks for looking. Enjoy!
Dennis A. Mook
All content on this blog is © 2013-2025 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.
I would much rather pick a distance from my subject to get the relative sizes of the elements in the frame correct and then choose a focal length that serves making that image. Telling myself that using just one focal length will teach me how, or force me to, always create the best photo if I just zoom with my feet serves the method, not the photograph. If I use a single focal length because that is the FL I like the most so be it. But forcing myself to that artificial limit seems like I would be trying to fit my photos into someone else's vision, not my own. BTW I don't want to see the world from a "single perspective", my eyes already do that. I want my photographs to show me the world from different perspectives. Otherwise I'll just look out my window.
ReplyDeleteIn the past when all lenses were single focal length, the standard procedure was to adopt a camera position, partly derived from personal vision and partly imposed by objects in the scene. That camera position would dictate the choice of a lens that would fit the scene into the film format. It was a form of heresy not to fill the film format with the optimal view of the scene.
ReplyDeleteWhen using 4x5 I had several modern lenses along. When using 8x10, which I used as the primary camera for several years, I had 2 Goerz convertible lenses, providing 4 focal lengths, that were much older than I was. Those are the only lenses I have ever used that made images with a special rendering quality that stood out in a print.
Today, with excellent zoom lenses, I am able to use a chosen camera position and make a bracket of focal lengths for more options in post processing.
Back in the darkroom/Lightroom I am able to refine the image from the one visualized in the field, to one that may have more visual impact in the final print or display. Usually this is the result of a crop to strengthen the view, or to eliminate distracting elements.
I suppose I am always using a single focal length for each initial image. The zoom, or varifocal lens, conveniently permits other single focal length images to be made from the same or near camera positions. For most scenes, I start with the equivalent of a 35mm
(FF ) because that usually seems good, then bracket wider or longer depending on the subject.