Can one camera body with a fixed lens satisfy your Photography Hobby?

[luetz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sold and traded my multiple collection of camera body's, lenses and accessories  for the Q2 and now Q3 and never looked back...

[Sandokan]

Yes if it had a 40mm f1 or f1.2 lens. 

Preferably 3 bodies please; 21mm, 40mm and 80mm

But the most important thing would be a simple user interface. 

[Indeepthought]

Depends entirely on the individual…  

[anonymoose]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

I'm currently around the 120 mark. I use my Q3 for photography and really enjoy it. I use my A1 for videography and occasionally slap a zoom on there for trips to national parks or other places I need reach.

If the Q3 was my only camera, I'd be a-ok with it. The only thing I'd be missing is shots where I really need a 70mm+ lens to capture it properly.

[JaeR]

It all depends on the use case; I have used Sony camera for the better part of my photography hobby. I decided to switch over to the Leica Q3 to provide some simplicity and enjoyment back to this hobby. Each shot becomes more deliberate and thoughtful. The process may take more time, yet it enhances the overall enjoyment. I do miss the faster, more accurate, and advanced focusing systems offered by major camera manufacturers today. Here's to hoping, Leica and Panasonic to improve the focusing mechanics of the Leica Q3 through firmware updates.

[Driften]

No... I like my Q2 but no one camera does everything I want. I can afford to have more than one camera and have no qualms having different cameras for different uses. I wouldn't use a Leica for birds in flight. I have a Canon R7 for that with lower cost 100-400mm and 600mm lens that with the crop sensor has the reach I need for that. But I would rather take the Q2 to a museum or a walk looking for artistic images. My Ricoh GR IIIx fits in my pants pocket unlike any of my other cameras. I like my Fujifilm models for landscapes where I want longer lens without the weight of full frame. I might be silly but I like using a 70-300mm for some landscape pics. My Q2 can't do that.

When I recently moved from Washington to California I bought my Q2, Fujifilm X-H2S, and Ricoh GR IIIx and left all my other camera gear for the movers to bring. 

[David Wien]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I also have a Canon R6 with a few lenses. I need my 10mm or 15mm (shift) lenses for many photos of buildings. I also need telephoto lenses for detail.

The disadvantage of the R6 is that with the 24mm sensor I need to match the focal length to the object distance in order to optimise resolution. I do crop a lot on the Q3, but obviously cannot get a wider angle than that provided by the 28mm lens.

I prefer to use the Q3. Apart from the super sharp lens, not having to carry so much or change lenses in the field is a great advantage. Because of this, when I am out with just the R6 I often find that the lens I need is one of those that I left at home. That said, it is amazing how rarely the Q3 cannot cope!

David

[Paul W]

6 hours ago, luetz said:

Sold and traded my multiple collection of camera body's, lenses and accessories  for the Q2 and now Q3 and never looked back...

ditto. Very happy

[RexGig0]

The short answer is a simple “no.”

Some of my most-treasured family images, with multiple people within the frame, very late in my father’s life, were made possible by having a 21mm lens, to use at very close range. These were candid images, with moving subjects, and a moving shooter, so could not be “stitched” together, from images shot with a longer focal length. There was no room for me to back-away, and capture enough with a “wide normal” lens. There is simply no substitute for having a 21mm lens.

Overall, if I did not have a 21mm lens, I would miss some images, that I could see, in my mind. On the other hand, while it would be possible to use a 21mm lens for general photography, then magnify-and-crop the images, as needed, that can only be taken so far. 21mm cannot satisfy all of my photography.

The Summilux-M 50mm ASPH was THE lens that lured me to add the Leica M system. Acquiring this lens may well have been vitally necessary, for me to continue the “hobby” of photography. I had been using DSLRs, with a highly-optically-corrected macro lens, for performing grim duty, for official purposes. I needed beauty, with some amount of optical imperfection, to re-learn to care about personal photography, with human subjects. I did not need for this to be achieved with a 50mm lens, necessarily, but the character of the transition from in-focus to out-of-focus, and the background, happened with this focal length, in the Summilux ASPH model. I have a high measure of loyalty to this lens.

So, I need at least two lenses to “satisfy.” This is enough to support the answer of “no.”

35mm is very important, to me. I tend to see landscapes at 35mm. Because I shoot while wearing eyeglasses, 35mm is about as wide as I can frame the image, while using the viewfinder. I may not truly need a 35mm lens, the important word in the question was “satisfy.” I would feel frustrated, at times, perhaps much of the time, if I did not have a 35mm lens. 

I also enjoy using 24mm, 28mm, 75mm, 85mm, and 90mm M-mount lenses, but, they are not essential, in realizing satisfaction, .

Then, there is nature/ wildlife photography, with macro and telephoto lenses. I generally do this with DSLR equipment, so, will not go into further detail.

 

Edited June 18, 2024 by RexGig0

[DonovanMediaCenter]

I get a lot more work done with my Canon 5Diii, and a variety of lenses.  But I enjoy the experience of my Q2 much more.  When I retire, I’ll seek out a used Q3. 

[Marc B-C]

For me, absolutely yes. There is something so much more freeing and enjoyable about one lightweight bit of kit whilst traveling etc. On the occasional moment I wish for a longer lens, I just crop in post. Close up wildlife and sports are no longer an interest to me. 

Two Nikon Dxx bodies and a 12kg bag of lenses on holidays eventually took a lot of enjoyment away from me and the cameras stayed home.

[bobtodrick]

Twenty-five years ago I had an R3 kit, two bodies with winders and 1/2 doze lenses.  
A Mamiya medium format with three lenses.  
And a Linhoff Technica with three lenses.

Now I have a Q and a Zorki with a 50mm for when I feel like shooting film…about twice a year 😂

I don’t have the choice of all those focal lengths…but I have way more fun with my photography.

 

 

[JimP]

That's a really good question.  I have certainly had my share of gear, and while they made some excellent images, I always felt bogged down by the choices. I came to a point (after 36 years) where I was having trouble with the Leica M rangefinder and not being able to see the rangefinder patch due to a combination of glasses and eyesight. So, three years ago I sold the gear and bought an Q2 Monochrom. This led to a period of sellers remorse, however, over time I came to really appreciate the Q2M... just grab and go with no decisions needed. My wallet was happier as well 🙂 with no camera gear purchases since The Q2M. Fast forward to a month ago when someone tempted me with a nice Nikon Z body and a few lenses. I thought about it and ultimately decided that I didn't want to go back to a collection of gear. The Q2M does 90% of what I want to do, and I can do without the other 10% just fine. As an added benefit, I have really become one with my camera since I don't have the distraction of thinking about focal length choice or other body button placement / operation.

 

Long story short... yes I can 

[liggy]

Kudos to those of you that can.  Zero percent chance I could just go with one fixed lens camera considering everything else I like to shoot.

[Ko.Fe.]

Q series with three crop modes, two framelines are one of the best one camera, one lens choice.  Except Q2/Q3 insane prices for batteries.   

I was born in country were consumerism was not common. I'm not sure if G.A.S. was common form of consumerism in many countries 30+ years ago.

For millions of millions one camera, one lens was norm. Wait, where are now real photogs who are using nothing but phone...

Last year I got new job, new phone (in new country  ).

First camera phone which is OK alternative to dedicated photo rig. So, one camera and not one, but few lenses seems very realistic to me.

 

[Qwertynm]

The Q3 is my only camera for holidays (apart from the phone, which is easier to take video with). At home, I like to have options. I like shooting multi-row panos with huge +200MP images. Sometimes I like shooting film and digitize the negatives with my macro. Sometimes I want to blow away the background with a 50 f/1.2. So no, the Q3 is not my only camera. It's a hobby that I enjoy and I enjoy the different gear. It's not a burden for me but an enhancement of the hobby. Could I wear the same pants and shirt every day? Yes I could. But do I want to and do I have to, no I don't.

[crons]

On 6/18/2024 at 6:26 AM, luetz said:

Sold and traded my multiple collection of camera body's, lenses and accessories  for the Q2 and now Q3 and never looked back...

Seems like you went from one extreme to another extreme. 

This is all I own. 1 camera and 2 lenses I use for everything. And that's all. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

How about 1 or 2 camera body(ies) and 2 or 3 lenses?

Maybe in the future I'll get a mint single stroke M3 black paint and put the 50 on that. 

Edited June 19, 2024 by crons

[student]

20 hours ago, crons said:

Seems like you went from one extreme to another extreme. 

This is all I own. 1 camera and 2 lenses I use for everything. And that's all. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

How about 1 or 2 camera body(ies) and 2 or 3 lenses?

Maybe in the future I'll get a mint single stroke M3 black paint and put the 50 on that. 

Really nice photograph there. I must confess, I find that image most appealing- an enticing "advertisement" to follow in your footsteps! 

Will give this one some thought

[Stuart Richardson]

I work as an artist and a professional photographer. I have a ton of gear. More than is necessary, certainly. That said, I really enjoy the variety. In my most recent show at the local museum of photography I had work on the walls from an iphone SE at the lowest end to an 8x10 view camera at the highest, along with video work from a Panasonic S1, most of the digital photos from The S006 and most of the film ones were 4x5. Despite the chaos of the equipment, the photographs look like they all live in the same world. For me at least, the cameras open up interesting possibilities of how to work, and what I can capture. But the vision stays the same, so the final work winds up hanging together well. 

I often take one camera and one lens to certain places, but which one it is changes. In general I think I could certainly make do with one camera and one lens (I would probably pick a Mamiya 7II and 80mm), but I think it would take a bit of joy out of the process for me. I do see, however, how it can be the opposite for others.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[jaapv]

Absolutely not. I don't have gear for just having gear, but I do several types of photography and have a small set  for each use case.