RSS

Tag Archives: zoom lens

Prime or Zoom Lens

20 May

130517-171031_untitled-Edit

130517-193259_untitled-Edit-3

These might not be the best pictures to illustrate this point but they do.  I was on the way down to the central building the other evening to take some pictures of an event.  Due to the lighting, the distance between me and the actors, etc. I had to take pictures with fast prime lenses.  On the way down I had the 50mm f/1.8 lens mounted on my K-5 and used it to take the first picture above.

On the way back I happened to have the 21mm f/3.2 lens on the K-5 and used it to take the second picture.  The 21mm lens was probably the best choice for both pictures but I just used the 50mm for the first picture since that is what was quickly available.  It is the nature of those scenes to not last long and I didn’t wish to take the time to change lenses.  Would I have been better off to have had a zoom lens mounted and ready?  Probably, but since I wasn’t using a zoom for the event I didn’t have one with me.  I was traveling light with my camera in hand with the other lens plus extra battery and memory card in vest pockets.

I wasn’t using a zoom lens because my zoom lenses are all slower, bigger, and heavier and I couldn’t use them to get acceptable pictures for the conditions I expected.  By acceptable I mean as good as I could get with my 50mm f/1.8 prime lens.  I had tested them out and found that it was better for me to use the 50mm lens and crop-zoom to get pictures without digital noise in the poor lighting.  The zoom lenses all required a higher ISO which resulted in less detail in the pictures after I removed the noise.

There is another reason that I didn’t switch lenses for the first picture.  I try not to change lenses any more than necessary to lessen the chances of getting dirt in the camera.  I also find that it isn’t the easiest thing to do, change lenses, when I’m walking.  I prefer to do it while sitting next to a flat clean surface to set the lens on.

My world of photography seems to revolve around the issue of what lens should I use.  When going out to take particular pictures under a known environment, I usually can pick the right one.  If the circumstances are unknown I will usually use a general purpose zoom lens, either the 18 – 135mm or the 55 – 300mm depending upon the likelihood of particular subjects … but, not always.  I don’t like the combined weight of a zoom lens on the K-5, so I often just go for a walk with the 21 or 50mm lens on it, or with the NEX-6 with a 35mm lens, which is much lighter, and just photograph what is appropriate for the lens.  This means I will be photographing landscapes and if a fox runs across the field, or a colorful bird lands in a tree, it isn’t photographed.

I really prefer a prime lens due to better speed, higher image quality, quicker response time, and lighter weight.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on May 20, 2013 in Homewood at Plum Creek, Photography

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Photographers Have Options for Reducing Weight

06 Jan

In this past year I have read many blog articles about how some photographers no longer like to carry big heavy DSLRs when they are out walking and/or just shooting for their personal pleasure.  They are suffering from having carried heavy camera bags their whole life.  Their backs are giving out.  All of them are getting older, just like all the rest of us, and it seems that many are making a change in their cameras as they age.  Some replace their big heavy DSLRs with smaller, lighter, mirror-less compact system cameras such as the Sony NEX or Olympus or Panasonic micro 4/3 system cameras while others keep their big DSLRs for their business use, but get lighter cameras for their personal use.  In all the cases that I have read about, they put the emphasis on downsizing the camera; but, I would like to make an observation that there are other variables in the equation for reducing the amount of weight carried.

I speak from experience.  As I started having problems carrying my Pentax K-5 and lenses, and eventually had back surgery, I made the decision to sell my DSLR system and replace it with something lighter.  I tried many micro 4/3 cameras and lenses.  I found they reduced the amount of weight that I was carrying around but they also decreased the quality of my pictures in low light situations and created adverse problems for me with camera ergonomics … a case of arthritic fingers vs. small buttons too close together.  Since I did not like the negative aspects of the downsizing route that I had taken, I went back to a K-5 DSLR camera as well as lenses for it, and sold all of my other cameras.  I decided to make other changes to reduce the weight and increase the quality at the same time.

I agree with many older photographers that it is necessary to reduce the total weight of the gear that we carry with us … it is just a fact of getting older, especially for those of us with back problems.  But I decided to keep the advantages of my DSLR and to reduce the weight in other ways.  I’m in the process of using my heavier, longer zoom lens less and less and using prime lenses more and more.  As I mentioned in my last article, I added a Pentax 21mm prime lens to my set of options.  If I find that I can’t carry my 55 – 300mm zoom lens as much as I did (was on my camera the majority of the time), I will also change what I photograph as well.  It might mean fewer pictures of wildlife.  I hope to primarily use my 21mm, 35mm, and 50mm prime lenses and change the type and style of my photography to fit that choice of lenses.

I haven’t had an opportunity to really try my new 21 mm lens, but I did take one picture with it yesterday when I made a quick trip to a market.

Hanover Market

Hanover Market

The lighting in the market wasn’t the best so the above picture was taken at an ISO of 400, f/4.5, and 1/50 sec with the 21mm lens.  I’m thinking that this lens will make a nice travel lens since it is light-weight, very small (only 1 inch long), and makes for a more discreet camera-lens combination for carrying while touring.  One advantage of the lens is that it also gives me nice depth of field coverage and it crop-zooms fairly well as noted in the following crop from the center of the above picture.

130105-090515_untitled-2

In addition to having smaller, lighter gear to carry, it also allows me to carry it in a smaller, lighter bag as I make another change.  I have found that having a strap on my camera creates problems.  In the first case I decided that carrying a camera on a strap around my neck or over one shoulder was one of the problems relative to my back pain.  In the second case, I found that the strap attached to the camera lugs also occasionally got in the way of my hands … even when using a wrist strap.  The solution that I’m now trying is neither a neck, or shoulder, or wrist strap.  I have gone back to a system that I tried two years ago in which the camera is attached to my camera bag by a tether.  It is the system as shown in an earlier blog article (click here).  The picture in the article shows my older K-7 camera but the size is the same as my current K-5.  I’m also using the same bag as shown, but I might try some other bags before I deem the one shown as my preference.  It will depend on how many lenses I take with me.

At the beginning of this article I mentioned that all the photographers complaining of the weight of their system only talked about changing cameras … not lenses; but I don’t think that means that they haven’t also changed lenses.  Several photographers have switched from their heavy DSLR cameras to cameras like the Fujifilm X system.  Since these cameras currently don’t have long zoom lenses available yet, it either means that the photographers didn’t use long zoom lenses before or else they have also made a change in focal range as I am trying.

In reality, photography isn’t any different than other aspects of life.  As we get older we have options relative to reducing the burdens on our life.  Photographers can change cameras or they can change lenses, or/and they can change what they photograph.  All of us, photographers or not, will have to make similar changes in our lifestyle to reduce the impacts of our non-sustainable lifestyles.  We will all end up making changes and downsizing.  We will have to cut back and do less with less.  It’s time to make changes while we are able to adapt.

 
3 Comments

Posted by on January 6, 2013 in Hanover PA, Looking Back to the Future, Photography, Simplicity

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Working through the Fog … Prime vs. Zoom Lenses

03 Jan

121225-073000_Plum Creek

I used my 55 – 300mm Pentax zoom lens set at 107.5mm, f/5.6, ISO = 400, and 1/200 sec. to take the above picture.  This was a clear case where I needed the zoom’s focal length to reach across the pond.  The conditions were also such that I didn’t want to be changing lenses while out in the field.  Conditions like this, along with the potential of seeing wildlife, have made this lens one of my favorites except for when it isn’t.

There are many situations when the 55 – 300mm f/4-5.8 zoom is not my preferred lens.  These are when I find it too heavy to carry long distances, when I desire greater image quality such as sharpness, when I desire a faster lens, and when I’m working among people who don’t like to be “shot with a cannon.”  For those times, I prefer to use a prime lens.  I will occasionally use my 18 – 55mm zoom lens, but not often.  I don’t like the quality of the images as well as those taken with a prime lens so I generally only use the 18 – 55mm f/3.5-5.6 lens during inclement weather since it is weather resistant as is my K-5 camera.

But, the decision process of which lens to use is sometimes foggy since I can’t see into the future.  My preference when going out to take pictures is to decide which lens I’ll need before I go and then put it on the camera and not take any other lenses.  I usually manage with my decision, but not always.  I have three prime lenses for the Pentax K-5 … the 21mm f/3.2 (on order), the 35mm f/2.4, and the 50mm f/1.8, which give me effective focal lengths of 31.5, 52.5, & 75mm.  A big difference between Pentax and Nikon or Canon is that Pentax decided to produce small light-weight primes rather than fast primes; therefore, the Pentax primes are lighter and create a more discreet camera-lens combination than its competitors.  I love the smaller, lighter size of the system when using primes, but I still have to decide which one to use.  I try to error on a slightly wider focal length than I think I’ll need since I can then crop-zoom to get the composition desired.

I’m going to change my setup in order to decrease the chances of having the wrong lens with me.  If I know that the odds are high that I might need different lenses, I’m going to start taking a camera bag with an extra lens or two in it.  I have mostly avoided this in the past since I didn’t want to carry any more weight than necessary.  Since my circumstances have changed … my back is doing better and the weight isn’t as much of a problem, and I’m not out in the field for long periods of time any more … I am going to take a bag and multiple lenses.  But, this also means that I need to get familiar with changing lenses while out in the field.  I’ll let you know how it works for me and tell you a little about my bag setup as well as different strap arrangements at some later date.  My desire is to work the kinks out and have my techniques perfected before spring so that I can concentrate on taking pictures.

BTW … if you aren’t using prime lenses, try them.  I really prefer the image quality, the lower weight, and greater ease of carrying a more discreet system.  I’m looking forward to my new 21mm prime lens and will use my primes more than my zooms if I take less wildlife pictures.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on January 3, 2013 in Homewood at Plum Creek, Photography

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Versatility of the Olympus E-PL5 and the Micro 4/3 System

20 Dec

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

I have been testing my new Olympus E-PL5 … yes I plan to keep it.  My hope was that it would turn out to be a versatile, small camera that I could more easily take with me no matter where I went, and I think that will be the case.  All of these pictures were taken with the E-PL5 as raw files using two different lenses … the Olympus 14 – 42 mm f/3.5 – 5.6 II R zoom lens and the Panasonic 20 mm f/1.7 prime lens.  They were then developed using Adobe Lightroom 4.3.

Initially I had some concerns about the 14 – 42 mm kit lens that came with the camera, but it is turning out to be better than I initially thought … it just takes a little more work in LR4 and learning how to work with it.  The above picture of the Plum Creek train layout (one of four layouts) was taken with the kit lens at the widest end of the zoom … 14 mm, ISO of 1600, f/3.5, and 1/60 sec.  As with most of my pictures, you can click on it to see it several sizes larger.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

The above picture of Misty was taken with the 20 mm prime lens at ISO of 200, f/1.8, and 1/80 sec.  It was then cropped a bit.  At the point of focus, close to the eye, the camera with the 20 mm lens has a lot of detail or resolution, even at the widest aperture of the lens.  This also gives a pleasing out-of-focus in the distance.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

The above picture of this morning’s sky was taken with the 20 mm lens at ISO of 200, f/1.7, and 1/60 sec.  It has also been cropped and massaged in LR4 quite a bit.  I’m finding that the 16 MP files of this new sensor hold up quite well for a micro 4/3 size sensor when under going extensive development in LR4.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

The above picture was taken using the kit lens at a setting of 42 mm (max zoom) at ISO of 200, f/7.1, 1/80 sec.  The above image is an approximate 100% crop of the original.  I’m showing this image to demonstrate the details of the file.  At the maximum zoom end of the lens the image is a little softer and requires a little more adjustment to contrast, clarity, sharpness, etc. but is still quite good for a micro 4/3 camera while using an inexpensive zoom lens.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

The above picture is the softest of this lot.  It was taken hand-held (as were all of these pictures) at an ISO of 5000, 28 mm, f/4.7, and 1/30 sec.  Since I had set the ISO at 5000 and was at the widest aperture of the lens for that zoom, the shutter speed was down to 1/30 sec. which is a little slower than I like, even when using the image stabilization of the camera, but I think the softness of this image is primarily due to the high ISO except for the blur of the moving train.

All things considered, I am pleased with the camera as long as I use it appropriately.  I need to try to keep the ISO below 5000 and I need to use the zoom lens to achieve the composition needed.  I have primarily used prime lenses lately and cropped to achieve my composition so I need to remember to do that with my primes, but not with my zoom lenses if I wish to achieve the best image quality.  Even with those caveats, I think that the above images demonstrate that I still have a reasonable degree of latitude while using this camera as a jacket pocket camera for walking, traveling, or for when I desire to carry a more discreet smaller camera.

 
2 Comments

Posted by on December 20, 2012 in Homewood at Plum Creek, Photography

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Advantages of a Prime Lens

19 Oct

I have mentioned earlier about the advantages of prime lenses while traveling overseas but I will reinforce it in this article.  I find that all the same advantages apply even while walking around town or on country lanes or on the paths here in Homewood at Plum Creek.  Having a prime lens on the camera reduces the weight and bulk of the camera-lens combination and increases the quality of the images.  This is due to the design advantages for a prime lens.  They use less glass and don’t have the built-in zoom mechanism thus enabling the designers to better optimize the image quality (IQ) while keeping the weight and size smaller.  But, I need to remind you that to take advantage of this you need the higher number of pixels in late-model cameras, and if you are taking it to the extreme, you need to view the pictures on your computer or projection device and not make large prints.

I took the following picture on my Pentax K-5 which with 16 mp gave me a picture of 4928 x 3264 pixels.  The picture was taken with a prime 50 mm lens (effective 75mm) at ISO = 100, f/5.6, and 1/1000 sec.

Assume for the purpose of this article that I was curious about what was at the base of the trees.  Since I didn’t have a zoom lens on the camera, I couldn’t zoom in closer, and since the farmer was working right close to me I didn’t want to tramp across his field.  My alternative was to crop-zoom the picture on my computer after I had down-loaded the picture.  The following picture is a 1018 x 674 crop of the above picture.  As you can see it really makes a difference and I went from an area of 16.08 mp to 0.686 mp … quite a reduction with very little, if any, perceived reduction in IQ.  You can click on the pictures to see them larger, but they have still been reduced for display in this blog.

And there are other benefits.  The 50 mm lens is an f 1.8 lens and my 55 – 300 mm lens is an f 5.8 at the far zoom range so I achieve a significant increase in low light level capability with the prime lens.  In addition, the 50 mm weighs 122 grams and the 55 – 300 weighs 440 grams … and the 50 mm lens only protrudes about 1.6 inches in front of the camera while at 300 mm that lens protrudes about 7 to 7.75 inches.  Which would you prefer to carry … or have pointed at you if you were on the receiving end?

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t always use a prime lens.  I enjoy the ability to compose my shot with a zoom lens.  I can also crop zoom pictures taken with my long zoom lens even at 300 mm, but the quality isn’t as good.  If I’m walking where it is likely that I will see wildlife, I prefer to have a much longer lens than the 50 mm, but lately I have had back problems and have been almost exclusively using my prime lenses to reduce the weight of my camera-lens combos.  I either use my Fuji X100 with its effective 35 mm lens or my Pentax K-5 with the 50 mm (effective 75 mm) prime lens.  I’ll also mention that it has occurred to me that if I get a new camera with even more pixels, and/or a larger sensor, and a prime lens, that I might even do better. … maybe the new Sony RX1 ?

But don’t forget that I am talking about viewing the pictures on a computer monitor.  If you were to print the picture at 240 px per inch, the resulting size of the print would only be roughly 4.25 inches by 2.8 inches.  I don’t print my pictures but even I would be concerned about the small size of the picture in some cases.  For example, the newer tablets and monitors have much higher resolution.  There may come a time in the future that you would find the above picture too small.  That is one reason that I have generally limited my pictures on this blog to a minimum of 2000 px long on the widest side … and I may increase that in light of the latest Mac Reticular screens.

If you are interested in using prime lenses to reduce the weight and bulk of your system, I urge you to read about  street photographers since they tend to use primes lenses.  You might wish to first read my article about the similarities of street and travel photography by clicking here.  I would also encourage you to check out other articles on the web.  A recent good summary of street (urban travel) photography can be found by clicking here.

 
1 Comment

Posted by on October 19, 2012 in Photography, Travel

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Lightweight Travel Photography

02 Apr

If you have read my blog you realize that I have moved from a heavier Pentax DSLR, the K-7, to a couple of Olympus micro four-thirds cameras.  I have been downsizing the weight and volume to a level that is more manageable for carrying while at the same time maintaining sufficient image quality with my cameras.   My intent was to carry two Olympus cameras, the E-P1 and the E-PL2 with me as I travel to have total interchangeability and a backup if anything goes wrong with a camera or lens.

While my latest micro four-thirds camera, the Olympus E-PL2, is quite small and very good, it is still not a pocket camera … unless it is a jacket pocket.  While it is smaller than the K-7 system, the camera still feels like you have a small brick in your jacket pocket.  In addition there are times when I don’t expect to be taking pictures, but still desire to have a camera with me, so I started thinking whether I could reduce the volume and weight even further … and found that I could.

If I replaced one of the micro four-thirds cameras in my travel bag with a point & shoot (P&S) camera I could go lighter.  The problem with this approach is that while I have had many P&S cameras over the years I always eventually became dissatisfied with their image quality; but, I decided to take another look.  I started researching current P&S cameras (those with much smaller sensor sizes) to find which was the best and if they were good enough.

I found in the literature that the Canon S95 is the smallest, pocket-able camera with the highest image quality.  Another feature that was desirable was a camera that took raw files as well as jpeg since that would give me a little more leeway to process the pictures and the S95 does.  Rather than for me to go into the specifications of the camera, etc., I suggest that you look here: S95 on the web.  Make sure that you look at its’ competitors since they all have something different and the S95 might not be the best for you.  In particular, this ePHOTOzine article shows some of the differences quite well.  For me, the Panasonic LX5 was not as easily pocket-able due to its’ slightly larger size along with the protuberances, and the new Nikon P300 doesn’t take raw pictures.  I also looked at the Olympus XZ-1 but it is also larger than the Canon S95, more expensive, and there are some questions about the XZ-1′s image quality.

One of my favorite web sites has this article about the S95.  It pretty well sums up the advantages as they relate to me.  But, it takes more than a good review to convince me to spend that kind of money on a P&S.  I was still concerned about the kind of images that could be taken with it by ordinary photographers, so I kept looking for more information and came across this web site … s95.com.  It has many pictures submitted by S95 users.  Take a look through the pictures and I think you will see why I decided to give the camera a try.

The following is a photo of the S95 along with my E-PL2 and the lenses that I most use on it.  As you can see, the S95, with 28 – 105mm effective optical zoom, is smaller than the E-PL2 with its’ lenses.  I just got the S95 and haven’t taken any pictures yet.  I’m still waiting for the weather to warm up and stop raining so I can put it in my pocket and go for a walk.   While you can see the size differences below, it also translates into a noticeable difference in weight when carrying in a pocket:  193 gm for the S95 versus 480 gm for the E-PL2 with the 20mm lens.

From your left is the 14mm lens for the E-PL2, then the Canon S95, then the E-PL2 with the 20mm lens on it, and on your right is the 14 – 150mm lens.  Notice that I have the wrist strap on the E-PL2’s left side.  I have done that since I find it easier to carry it in my left hand by the lens when the 14 – 150mm lens is on the camera.

These are the lightest, smallest, travel-light, walk-about camera systems that I have found (so far) that gives me sufficient image quality.  When I’m not expecting to be taking pictures I can just put the S95 in a pocket in case I do see something.  When I’m traveling, or just out to take pictures, I will use the E-PL2 with one or more of the lenses shown above with the S95 for backup.  I won’t take the 14 – 150mm zoom unless I know I will need it since I’m growing more fond of just shooting with primes.

 
3 Comments

Posted by on April 2, 2011 in Photography, Travel

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

The Aging Photographer

13 Mar

Some of us can remember when these cabooses were on the rails being pulled by a coal powered steam locomotive.  I can remember stories about my grandfather who, by the time I could remember him, was a retired conductor and had spent his entire working life on the rails in WV.  Now they seem to be converting the old cabooses into museums and parking them off to the side of the main tracks.  The one above is in Old Bowie.

Unfortunately, many older people feel like they have also been parked on the sidelines, and they have to make a few changes as a result of it.  Before I mention some necessary changes, I’ll go over some of the problems that I have seen or experienced due to the problems of aging.

Our eyes change and some need to get cataract surgery.  We end up with either bifocals or eyes that can’t see well in the distance or eyes that can’t see well up close.  Either way, that means that it is difficult to see the control settings of the camera at the same time that we are trying to focus and compose the subject.  This is a minor but irritating problem that slows us down, but fortunately, artificial lenses enable us to see better as long as we learn to compensate for the far-near issue.

A far more difficult problem is arthritis.  It can make it hard for us to get around when it attacks our knees, hips, or back … and sometimes we have to use a cane or walking stick.  Have you tried walking with a cane and them using two hands to hold and adjust your DSLR without dropping the cane?  Also keep in mind that photography is a mobile hobby or profession.  You have to go to where the subject is located if you wish to photograph it.  And if you are into street photography or the photographing of any moving subject you have to be fast.  Another issue is the effect of a heavy camera bag that causes you to lean to one side.  If you have arthritis of the back you need to keep straight and keep the load balanced and minimized.  Many of us may end up with lumbar fusions, and/or artificial hips and knees, but they enable up to keep doing what we love.

Another problem with arthritis is when it hits the hands … usually it’s the thumb joints that go first.  This makes it hard to hold heavy objects between the thumbs and fingers.

By now you should be getting the idea; getting older creates different problems.  If we wish to pursue a hobby of photography, what can we do?  Well, from my experiences, I decided to make several changes in my equipment.  The most important change that I found that I needed to make was to reduce the weight of my camera gear since I was having trouble holding it as well as carrying it.  I sold my heavy DSLR and all of its heavy lenses.  I replaced them with a micro 4/3 system consisting of the Olympus E-PL2 along with three prime lenses, the Panasonic 14 and 20mm and the Olympus 17mm lenses, and two zoom lenses, the 14 – 42mm and the 14 – 150mm Olympus lenses.  I also kept my older E-P1 camera so that I have redundancy in cameras, lenses, batteries, and chargers while traveling.  This new system gives me a wealth of choices in lenses and allows me to go out with a very good, very low-weight, very small camera.  I never go somewhere with all the above since I select a camera and a lens or two depending upon where and what I will be shooting.  I can just put a camera in a jacket pocket or take a small bag.  And when/if this system becomes too much I can always get a good point & shoot camera.  Since we all age, I think that many of you will be making similar changes.

I’ll be saying more about how I carry my latest camera, the type of bags I use, etc. in a later article but for now I would like to end with some comments about using a cane or walking stick while carrying a camera.  Fortunately I’m no longer using a cane or walking stick but I had to use one off and on for several years, and may have to use one later as my arthritis increases, but I found a way to resolve any problems with using it and a camera.  I got a cane with a wrist strap.  I then replaced the original wrist strap with a longer piece of nylon parachute cord and attached it to my wrist so that the cane wouldn’t fall to the ground when using the camera.  You can see a picture of it in an earlier article called Gear Preferences (click here).

As we age we have increased problems with mobility and that has a major impact on the types of photography that we can do, I’ll try and make that a subject for another article.  In the meanwhile, age wisely.

 
7 Comments

Posted by on March 13, 2011 in Photography

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Travel with Prime and/or Zoom Lenses? … Part 2

25 Feb

In the previous article I addressed the choice based on which focal length you use and whether a single focal length lens might be a better answer.  In this article I would like to talk about the decision from more of a user perspective concentrating on when a prime lens might be a better choice to have on your camera.

From an image quality perspective, a prime lens will almost always be better if you tend to use your zoom lens at either extreme of the zoom range.  The design of zoom lenses are more of a compromise and they generally perform best about 1/3 of the way into the zoom range and worse at the extremes … much worse at the longest zoom range.  In addition, zoom lenses usually have much smaller apertures than primes … at least for us mortals who can’t afford, or carry, a professional F2.8 long zoom.  The small apertures reduce the transmitted light and you have to shoot at a higher ISO setting to achieve reasonable shutter speeds.   This is most important in low light settings inside buildings, etc.   For these reasons, if you want better image quality, the prime is the lens to use.

Another issue relative to selecting a lens is the change in perspective.  It’s really not the focal length but a matter of how far you are away from the subject.  Read the quote below and click on it for a good explanation and demonstration.

“Many will say that focal length also determines the perspective of an image, but strictly speaking, perspective only changes with one’s location relative to their subject. If one tries to achieve the same subjects filling the frame with both a wide angle and telephoto lens, then perspective does indeed change because one is forced to move closer or further from their subject. For these scenarios only, the wide angle lens exaggerates or stretches perspective, whereas the telephoto lens compresses or flattens perspective.”

The main issue is how you wish to view your subject.  With a prime lens it will be consistent, with a zoom lens it will change depending on how much you zoom, and it always depends on how far away you are from your subject.

Another concern is changing lenses.  You have to be careful when changing lenses in the field so that you don’t get dirt on the sensor.  The data aren’t really in yet since the cameras are so new, but this might be a larger problem with the mirror-less cameras since when you take the lens off to change it, the sensor is sitting right up front.  Therefore, if you must change focal lengths frequently in a dirty environment, a zoom is probably a better option.

When traveling, I often visit towns & markets where there are a lot of people and I’m essentially “streetshooting”.   When shooting in those environments, I’m not comfortable having a big long lens mounted on a large camera since I think it diminishes my chances of getting candid shots of people.  One recommendation that I have seen is to try to blend in and not look like a professional photographer.  If you are shooting with a small inexpensive looking camera, people seem to pay less attention to you.

Another feature about prime lenses is that they are smaller and easier to carry in a small “non-camera” bag, either when mounted on the camera or carried separately.  I often carry my camera with a prime lens on it in my jacket pocket thus I don’t even need a bag as long as I also have a spare battery and memory card in another pocket.  But I only carry it this way in between areas where I might be taking pictures.  If I’m planning on shooting frequently I carry the camera around my neck or in my hand.  In addition, a couple of prime lenses are usually lighter to carry and if you have been reading my other articles you know that this is a big requirement for me.

If you consider all of the above carefully, you should be in a better position to decide which lenses to take with you on your next trip.  For me, I’m planning on going to Ireland at the beginning of summer and as of now, I’m planning on walking-about during the day with a 14mm prime lens on my micro four-thirds camera and my 14 – 150mm zoom lens in my bag just in case I need it.  In addition I will use my 20mm lens on my camera in the evening or in any low light setting.  (Don’t forget that there is a factor of 2x for converting these to 35mm camera equivalents.)   When I get to wherever I’m going, I can reevaluate the situation and make changes as needed.  As an example, if I were traveling to Costa Rica I would carry the camera with the 14 – 150mm lens mounted on it.  In that location it is more important to have the versatility a zoom represents relative to focal length.

Good luck with your choices.  In the last year I have been drifting more towards using prime lenses rather than zoom lenses for pretty much the same reasons that Nik stated in his comments to an earlier article.  I’ll let you know what I used in Ireland after I return.  At the moment I’m betting on this one … Olympus E-PL2 with the Panasonic 14mm f/2.5 lens, but I still have to take it out and try it in a similar setting.

 
3 Comments

Posted by on February 25, 2011 in Photography

 

Tags: , , , , ,

Travel with Prime and/or Zoom Lenses? … Part 1

23 Feb

When I travel or go anywhere I like to have the right camera and lenses with me.  For me, this means that I have the most discreet and lowest weight system that adequately covers the focal lengths and image quality that I will need.  If you look for recommendations on most travel web sites, they most likely will recommend that you take a zoom lens which has a wide range of focal lengths, usually between 28 and 200mm in 35mm equivalency.  The assumption is that you will then be ready for whatever focal length you might need.  This is the easy recommendation to make but it is probably not the lightest or most discreet camera-lens combination.  In this article I will try to go over some of the more detailed considerations and show how I am approaching making a more refined decision.

To me, making a decision about which lenses to take is similar to hunting with a gun.  You wouldn’t take a deer rifle to go hunting for squirrels or rabbits, so why would you take a large, heavy zoom lens if it is unlikely that you will really need it.  The harder questions to answer are “what focal lengths do you most often use, and what will you need on your next vacation?”

The only way to decide what focal lengths have worked best for you is to review what you have used in similar situations.  Since most of you got a kit zoom lens with your camera when you first bought it, look back through your picture data and see which focal lengths you used the most while taking pictures in a similar situation.  In my situation I have found that I most often use the focal lengths at the extreme ends of the zoom range.  Usually one end or the other depending on the location and type of shooting that I did.  The next decision is to decide whether a prime lens might be better than having the zoom lens mounted on the camera all the time.

To decide whether you like using just one focal length is relatively easy.  Look and see what primes lenses are available for your camera.  Some manufacturers have a wider selection than others but you can usually find one close to the focal length of interest. To test whether you like that focal length, just tape your zoom lens barrel at the focal length that you are considering and try it for a few days while taking pictures in a setting similar to where you will be traveling.  If you like that focal length you can then take the next step and decide whether it is worth acquiring a prime lens in that focal length.

Prime lenses have some advantages, as well as disadvantages, over zoom lenses.  In general, primes are of higher quality, are lighter, and make your camera-lens combination a lot more discreet, but they can be expensive for newer lenses.  You might wish to check out some of the on-line reviewers to see if they have reviewed your lens of interest.  Some that I use are dpreviews.com, m43 Reviews, DxO Mark, LensTip.com, as well as others.

In general you will find that there are two types of reviewers.  Those who measure the technical qualities of the lenses … like the reviewers mentioned above, and then the user reviews which I also find very valuable.  There aren’t as many of them and they typically limit themselves to a narrow range of cameras that they use and prefer.  For cameras of interest to me, there are two that I look at:  Steve Huff Photos, and Soundimageplus.  In all reviews you need to be careful in utilizing the information.  In the technical reviews they often discuss variations between lenses that might not be important in your type of shooting.  In the user reviews you get to see the pictures they took and how well the lens worked for them.  In those cases you don’t know how far away they were when they took the picture nor do you get to see the examples that didn’t work so well.  In the final decision you will need to put the lens on your camera and check it out.

At this point I still wasn’t ready to make a decision, and I doubt you are.  I’ll continue the discussion and get closer to a decision in Part 2 which will follow.

These are the lenses that I’m considering:  Panasonic 14 mm f/2.5 and 20 mm f/ 1.7 (on the E-PL2 camera), and the Olympus 14 – 42 mm f/3.5-5.6 II and 14 – 150 mm f/4-5.6.  They are all great lenses.  I also have the Olympus 17 mm lens which was on my E-P1 camera when I took this picture .  At the moment I’m not considering the 17 mm lens since it is mid-way between the 14 and 20 mm lenses.

 
2 Comments

Posted by on February 23, 2011 in Photography

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 149 other followers

%d bloggers like this: