New Foto Tip by Mark Alberhasy - A Perspective on Lenses

Hi All,

I've just posted the latest Foto Tip by Mark Alberhasky on DIMi:
http://www.dimagemaker.com/specials/fototips.php

It is on lenses and I can heartily endorse Mark's great advice. Mark is
a Nikon Mentor in the US.

Cheers,

Wayne

Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/
Publisher, Experimental Digital Photography
http://www.experimentaldigitalphotography.com
Coordindinator of Studies, Multimedia and Photomedia, Australian Academy
of Design
Personal art site http://www.artinyourface.com/

"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message
u...
I've just posted the latest Foto Tip by Mark Alberhasky on DIMi:
http://www.dimagemaker.com/specials/fototips.php

It is on lenses and I can heartily endorse Mark's great advice. Mark is
a Nikon Mentor in the US.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been saying the same thing for years!

MrT.

Mr.T wrote:
"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in message
u...
I've just posted the latest Foto Tip by Mark Alberhasky on DIMi:
http://www.dimagemaker.com/specials/fototips.php

It is on lenses and I can heartily endorse Mark's great advice. Mark is
a Nikon Mentor in the US.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has been saying the same thing for years!

MrT.


No you are not. But of course with newcomers migrating to dSLRs all the
time it does need to be said again and again. It see it with my incoming
students all the time. Their idea of a fast lens is f4 and a really fast
one f2.8. It is the zoom mentality. Now nothing wrong with zooms, I love
my ones, but they are not the whole answer.

Cheers,

Wayne

--
Wayne J. Cosshall
Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/
Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/

"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote
No you are not. But of course with newcomers migrating to dSLRs all the
time it does need to be said again and again. It see it with my incoming
students all the time. Their idea of a fast lens is f4 and a really fast
one f2.8. It is the zoom mentality. Now nothing wrong with zooms, I love
my ones, but they are not the whole answer.


Not mentioned in Mark's article:
The need for a "fast" lens has become less pressing with today's DSLRs
providing for 4- stop ISO changes, e.g. from ISO 100 to 800, with virtually
no sharpness / noise penalties (and decent pictures even at 1600 or 3200),.
Get me right, I love to use my f1.4 prime lens and agree with the
"Cartier-Bresson" approach to learn to see through just one focal length. On
the other hand, Mark's "No more zoom in, zoom out. You've got to look for
the right subject and the right composition" is misleading. Any decent
photographer w/o a zoom will use his legs to get the right framing!
Cheers,
Hank

"Herb Ludwig" wrote in message
...

"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote
No you are not. But of course with newcomers migrating to dSLRs all
the time it does need to be said again and again. It see it with my
incoming students all the time. Their idea of a fast lens is f4 and a
really fast one f2.8. It is the zoom mentality. Now nothing wrong
with zooms, I love my ones, but they are not the whole answer.


Not mentioned in Mark's article:
The need for a "fast" lens has become less pressing with today's DSLRs
providing for 4- stop ISO changes, e.g. from ISO 100 to 800, with
virtually no sharpness / noise penalties (and decent pictures even at
1600 or 3200),.
Get me right, I love to use my f1.4 prime lens and agree with the
"Cartier-Bresson" approach to learn to see through just one focal
length. On the other hand, Mark's "No more zoom in, zoom out. You've
got to look for the right subject and the right composition" is
misleading. Any decent photographer w/o a zoom will use his legs to
get the right framing!
Cheers,
Hank

Well, maybe not quite that simple -- a) the refs get a bit
upset if I am out in the middle of the soccer field during
the game to "get the right framing" and b) many times,
I want a different perspective between the foreground
subject and the background (mountains etc) - it takes
a different focal length to get the perspective right too
(yes, you still need to use your legs to get it right though)

mikey

"Mike Fields" spam_me_not_mr.gadget2@comcastDOTnet wrote
Well, maybe not quite that simple -- a) the refs get a bit
upset if I am out in the middle of the soccer field during
the game to "get the right framing" and b) many times,
I want a different perspective between the foreground
subject and the background (mountains etc) - it takes
a different focal length to get the perspective right too
(yes, you still need to use your legs to get it right though)


Yes, of course, there are a number of situations where the legs alone won't
do it.
Indoors, for instance, where a nasty wall may soon crowd one's effort to
step back-
Thanks for pointing out the importance of the foreground / background
perspective.
I use my Canon DSLR with 3 lenses (17-40 f4 Zoom, a 50 f1.4 Prime and a
70-200 f4 Zoom) and find that I take about 50% of my pictures with the 17-40
f4 lens, because I like its perspective on a 1.6 crop camera.
Cheers,
Hank

"Herb Ludwig" wrote in message
...

"Mike Fields" spam_me_not_mr.gadget2@comcastDOTnet wrote
Well, maybe not quite that simple -- a) the refs get a bit
upset if I am out in the middle of the soccer field during
the game to "get the right framing" and b) many times,
I want a different perspective between the foreground
subject and the background (mountains etc) - it takes
a different focal length to get the perspective right too
(yes, you still need to use your legs to get it right though)


Yes, of course, there are a number of situations where the legs alone
won't do it.
Indoors, for instance, where a nasty wall may soon crowd one's effort
to step back-
Thanks for pointing out the importance of the foreground / background
perspective.
I use my Canon DSLR with 3 lenses (17-40 f4 Zoom, a 50 f1.4 Prime and
a 70-200 f4 Zoom) and find that I take about 50% of my pictures with
the 17-40 f4 lens, because I like its perspective on a 1.6 crop
camera.
Cheers,
Hank

I have seen more people bitten with the foreground/background
thing. Out in the open country somewhere with a beautiful
mountain backdrop, they shoot the picture of someone from
up close with the wide angle then notice when they get home
the "magnificent mountain scenery" that was there when they
took the picture is just a couple of little bumps behind their
subject. Always the same comment "gee I don't understand,
the mountains looked so much bigger when we were there".
Step back even 10 feet, zoom in a bit to frame the subject
and voila - the mountains are there !! (unless you live in
Kansas, in which case, there is no hope for mountains .. )

mikey

"Mike Fields" spam_me_not_mr.gadget2@comcastDOTnet wrote:
I have seen more people bitten with the foreground/background
thing. Out in the open country somewhere with a beautiful
mountain backdrop, they shoot the picture of someone from
up close with the wide angle then notice when they get home
the "magnificent mountain scenery" that was there when they
took the picture is just a couple of little bumps behind their
subject. Always the same comment "gee I don't understand,
the mountains looked so much bigger when we were there".
Step back even 10 feet, zoom in a bit to frame the subject
and voila - the mountains are there !! (unless you live in
Kansas, in which case, there is no hope for mountains .. )


When one wants to enhance the size of distant mountains, the condensed
perspective of a tele lens is certainly the way to go. My personal taste for
landscape images goes rather in the opposite, wide-angle direction, where
the foreground subject is emphazised and the feeling of depth enhanced.
Therefore my preference and reliance on the 17-40 f4 Zoom.
Here is an example of the kind of image I strive to emulate:
http://www.pbase.com/paskuk/image/65952350

Cheers,
Hank

Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:
Hi All,

I've just posted the latest Foto Tip by Mark Alberhasky on DIMi:
http://www.dimagemaker.com/specials/fototips.php

"That 50mm became a 75mm when you switched to a digital body"

poorly explained. Reduces credibility. Old terrain, much traveled.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Herb Ludwig wrote:
"Mike Fields" spam_me_not_mr.gadget2@comcastDOTnet wrote:

I have seen more people bitten with the foreground/background
thing. Out in the open country somewhere with a beautiful
mountain backdrop, they shoot the picture of someone from
up close with the wide angle then notice when they get home
the "magnificent mountain scenery" that was there when they
took the picture is just a couple of little bumps behind their
subject. Always the same comment "gee I don't understand,
the mountains looked so much bigger when we were there".
Step back even 10 feet, zoom in a bit to frame the subject
and voila - the mountains are there !! (unless you live in
Kansas, in which case, there is no hope for mountains .. )



When one wants to enhance the size of distant mountains, the condensed
perspective of a tele lens is certainly the way to go. My personal taste for
landscape images goes rather in the opposite, wide-angle direction, where
the foreground subject is emphazised and the feeling of depth enhanced.
Therefore my preference and reliance on the 17-40 f4 Zoom.
Here is an example of the kind of image I strive to emulate:
http://www.pbase.com/paskuk/image/65952350

Beautiful photos!

Tuli