Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Choosing a lens/system  (Read 7991 times)

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2748
    • Photos
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #20 on: November 16, 2017, 03:54:47 PM »

It's probably a silly question, but do you know the bythom Nikon reviews site? He's pretty clued in about the entire Nikon range.

Rob

Yes, I read it on regular basis. He cannot change the lineup though and currently Nikon doesnít have what I want.

Two23

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 478
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #21 on: November 16, 2017, 11:24:32 PM »

I'm reaching a point where it takes me a very long time trying to decide which system and what lenses should a I bring for a particular outing. I usually have no specific projects, more like walk and shoot whatever I find appealing.
...

... Yesterday I left with 4 lenses but I ended up using the zoom 24-120 for most of the trip despite knowing I'll be losing some iq.

Does anybody else has these kind of "problems" and how do you get around?



I think the problem you are hinting at is called "analysis paralysis."  There have been some studies about decision making over the years and the conclusion is that we soon reach a point where more options simply creates more unhappiness.  When I go to buy ice cream at Dairy Queen my choice is chocolate or vanilla.  When I go to Baskin Robbins there are more choices than I can comfortably consider in a reasonable length of time.  In the end I'm no more happy with French Cherry Chocolate Cheesecake than I was with chocolate. ;D 

I think your basic mistake is to concentrate on "image quality" (technical) than on "quality of the image" (aesthetics.)   Concentrating on "image quality" has a way of sucking all the fun out of photography, so why do that?  Here's what worked for me:  go buy yourself a Kodak Brownie.  Any year will do, 1904 to 1958--they're basically the same.  You can even get a pretty red one from the early 1930s. ;D  Put a roll of Ilford FP4 in the thing and just go out and shoot some sunny day.  You are limited to eight shots.  Concentrate on making the most interesting images you can.  Rediscover the fun!


Kent in SD
(South Dakota, NOT
San Diego!)

Below shot:
Kodak Brownie (1904), Ilford FP4+

Logged
In contento ed allegria,
Notte e di vogliam passar!

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #22 on: November 17, 2017, 07:33:49 AM »

Most half decent offerings are capable of delivering enough "Image Quality" for this photographer. I'd rather look for and use a half decent offering that delivers joy in use. 
Logged

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19531
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #23 on: November 17, 2017, 09:04:05 AM »

If one could decide which focal length (in which format) was the key one to one's way of working, it would be easy to buy one body and lens. Unfortunately, for me at least, I can periodically fall in love with anything I've got from, on 135 format, 24mm to 500mm cat. That makes overall simplification impossible, but it's no longer a problem for me because I learned some years ago that it's an error to leave home for a few hours with more than one camera with the chosen optic of the moment.

As long as one's talking about basic 135 format systems, they are all close enough to make but theoretical differences in weight and convenience terms; it ends up personal taste/depth of pocket.

Rob

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2748
    • Photos
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #24 on: November 17, 2017, 12:03:33 PM »


I think the problem you are hinting at is called "analysis paralysis."  There have been some studies about decision making over the years and the conclusion is that we soon reach a point where more options simply creates more unhappiness.  When I go to buy ice cream at Dairy Queen my choice is chocolate or vanilla.  When I go to Baskin Robbins there are more choices than I can comfortably consider in a reasonable length of time.  In the end I'm no more happy with French Cherry Chocolate Cheesecake than I was with chocolate. ;D 

I think your basic mistake is to concentrate on "image quality" (technical) than on "quality of the image" (aesthetics.)   Concentrating on "image quality" has a way of sucking all the fun out of photography, so why do that?  Here's what worked for me:  go buy yourself a Kodak Brownie.  Any year will do, 1904 to 1958--they're basically the same.  You can even get a pretty red one from the early 1930s. ;D  Put a roll of Ilford FP4 in the thing and just go out and shoot some sunny day.  You are limited to eight shots.  Concentrate on making the most interesting images you can.  Rediscover the fun!


Kent in SD
(South Dakota, NOT
San Diego!)

Below shot:
Kodak Brownie (1904), Ilford FP4+

Thanks, I self diagnosed this some time ago and you are right but dealing with it is not that easy.


Most half decent offerings are capable of delivering enough "Image Quality" for this photographer. I'd rather look for and use a half decent offering that delivers joy in use. 

I could just use my cellphone.

Yes, all of them could be good enough strictly image quality but that applies for most situations not all and itís in the human nature to strive for more.
I enjoy using all cameras at different times with Fujifilm having the edge on enjoyment.
Part of the problem is that I have too many lenses and I feel I should use them all, or as many as possible at a given time.

Oh well, Iíll keep trying.

Two23

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 478
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #25 on: November 17, 2017, 01:44:49 PM »


Yes, all of them could be good enough strictly image quality but that applies for most situations not all and itís in the human nature to strive for more.
I enjoy using all cameras at different times with Fujifilm having the edge on enjoyment.
Part of the problem is that I have too many lenses and I feel I should use them all, or as many as possible at a given time.



And back to "image quality."   I think we often get too hung up on that.  It's something objective and can be measured, so it's easier to deal with.  We've all seen images from guys who spent tens of thousands $$ (or Islandic Kronas) on the latest gear only to make photos that were perfectly exposed, perfectly sharp, and perfectly boring.  I've come to think that putting too much emphasis on the gear distracts us from the more important thing, the quality of the image. :)  I have been using two strategies to deal with this myself.  First, I sometimes will just go out with a very simple camera made a lifetime ago.  I have just as much fun using them, and they force me to focus my energy on composition.  Second factor is I eventually just got tired of carrying a pack full of heavy lenses, the majority of which I ended up not using.  It's just not fun!  I have slimmed down to carrying only one camera and three lenses (usually 24/50/105mm or their LF equivalents.)  Next week I'll be in Seattle, WA and plan on doing some "street" shooting.  My camera of choice?  My c.1942 Lecia IIIc with period correct LTM 28/35/50/90mm lenses.  This all fits in an exceedingly small bag--smaller than my wife's purse even!  I will have just as much fun as if I had taken a Nikon D800E with my Sigma ART lenses, and I'm betting the quality of the images will be the same.  I will conclude with a quote from St. Ansel, "Any photographer worth his salt can make compelling images with just a Brownie!"  (Never mind that he mostly used state of art Zeiss lenses on his Hassleblad or Schneider lenses on his Deardorff.  ;)  )

I suppose what I'm getting at is that by using long obsolete cameras I was forced to not depend on the camera gear to make a nice photo.  Once I came to think that in the end the camera gear is the least important thing in photography, my photos became more interesting.  Instead of finding it frustrating to use a Brownie, I found it liberating!


Kent in SD


Below photo:
Chicago,
Leica IIIc, Leica 50mm Elmar, FP4+


« Last Edit: November 17, 2017, 02:05:51 PM by Two23 »
Logged
In contento ed allegria,
Notte e di vogliam passar!

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19531
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #26 on: November 17, 2017, 03:31:24 PM »

Hold your stallions! Cameras are not just interchangeable boxes. Cameras give not only your images but yourself a different dynamic as you use them.

I've used this story before, but it bears repetition here: on a fashion shoot, the client, a lady, remarked to me that she preferred it when I used the little cameras (Nikons) because then I jumped around doing different things and generating an air of something happening. What I couldn't tell her, diplomatically, was that I was using a 'blad on a tripod for a simple, logistical reason: the clothes were so formal and boring and the model so wrong for the job that I wasn't prepared to waste my time processsing and proofing more rolls of film than I had to when I knew that nothing was going to happen beyond getting a competent record shot which could be achieved on a roll of twelve frames per garment. Clearly she understood that excitement drives creativity, but not that creativity and subject are directly linked.

So yep, different cameras and focal lengths make you work differently. That's why it seems a good idea to sally forth with but one lens and use different ones on different days as the mood takes you. And of course, if for fun. it must be fun.

Rob

KLaban

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 766
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #27 on: November 17, 2017, 04:48:08 PM »

I've spent far too many days hauling large bags brimming with equipment up and down villages built into mountainsides: not fun. Now, on a typical walkabout I'll have one small body with lens in hand and another identical body with lens in a tiny bag worn across the chest. Works for me and remains great fun.
Logged

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3357
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #28 on: November 17, 2017, 05:09:42 PM »

I also do ďone camera & lens per outing.Ē Rangefinders take zooms out of the mix too, which helps simplify the process.

-Dave-
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2748
    • Photos
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #29 on: November 17, 2017, 11:20:32 PM »

I occasionally get out with just a prime (even went to New York once for 3 days with only a 35 F1.8 on APS-C) but I dislike missing shots just because I want to prove a point. My time for photography is limited. Therefore when I go out with primes a take at least 2, more like 3-4.
The 2 body works the best but the weight makes me do it less often plus I donít have identical bodies so I have to decide which lens goes on which body; this is valid only for Fuji, I donít have backup bodies for the others.

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2748
    • Photos
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #30 on: November 17, 2017, 11:25:12 PM »

From the prior reply you can guess most of the underlying problem. My time dedicated to photography is limited and I donít want to miss the few opportunities that I might get.
ďBetterĒ cameras wonít make me take better photos but will help me miss less shots or salvage some suboptimal settings, etc.

Telecaster

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3357
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #31 on: November 18, 2017, 04:12:01 PM »

With my little Panasonic GX8 I have a 14Ė140mm zoom I use when I want focal length versatility. Itís a darn good lens for a 10xíer. This rig is great for travel when taking pics isnít the main purpose.

-Dave-
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15303
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #32 on: November 18, 2017, 07:46:54 PM »

Sorry I haven't chimed in before this, but I've been too busy out shooting pix with cameras that I do enjoy.

In my younger days I shot with everything from 35mm to 8x10 view cameras. When I went over to the dark (digital) side, I started with a Canon 10D. That, of course, led to the acquisition of numerous lenses, mostly Canon L-glass. Then I upgraded to the full-frame 5D and then the 5DII. I still had the hefty Gitzo that I used to haul around with the various lenses and cameras.

But when I wasn't looking, I got older and less enamored of hauling piles of equipment everywhere I went. Than a couple of years ago I started looking for something a bit lighter but with decent optics for taking along on a trip to the Dordogne region of France. My local camera store guy suggested I try out the Sony RX10, which was light enough and with zoom lens that went from (FF equivalent) 24mm to 200mm.

I was skeptical, but he let me take it out to shoot for a day, and I was convinced. The Zeiss lens was excellent at all focal lengths, and the stabilization was good enough for hand-held shots even at 200mm. I bought it and used it for the trip, and liked it so much that I immediately sold off my Canon 5DII and all my Canon lenses.

This year I traded it in for the RX10 III, which has an equally fine Zeiss lens that runs from 24mm to 600mm (FF), still hand-holdable.

Now I never worry about what lens to take with me, and I never have to clean crap off the sensor. I quickly got used to the very good EVF, and it doesn't bother me that the rear screen only tilts one way. I don't miss my Canons at all.

Well, I haven't completely abandoned the Canon camp. I must admit that I also now have a second camera, a Canon G5X, which is small enough to fit in a largish pocket, with an EVF and back screen. Previous pocket Canons have not had a viewfinder, and the rear screen was unreadable in bright back sun lighting. This little gem is the camera that I have with me almost all the time, even when I don't want to carry as much as the Sony.

As they say, the best camera for any situation is the one you have with you.

Cheers,

Eric
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

scooby70

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 450
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #33 on: November 19, 2017, 05:31:00 PM »

I have Panasonic MFT with a selection of Panasonic and Olympus primes and zooms and I also have a Sony A7 with Sony 35mm f2.8, 55mm f1.8, Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 and the 28-70mm kit zoom which I've never used outside of the house and garden. I also have quite a few Minolta Rokkor, Olympus Zuiko and Canon FD primes.

My problem at the moment is I'm stuck between the look that the old lenses give, and some of them do have their own look, and the excellence of the newer lenses and particularly the Sony 55mm and Voigtlander 40mm. I think I need to decide which direction to go in, should I choose the older lens for the look they give or the newer lenses for their technical excellence.
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2748
    • Photos
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #34 on: November 19, 2017, 06:50:32 PM »

The more you have the more difficult is to choose.

Going back to what I've said earlier that I have hopes for the A7Riii + 24-105 F4 my bubble is being deflated as I looked and added the weights.

A7Riii + 24-105 = 1320
D750 + 24-120 = 1420
D850 + 24-120 = 1585

If I consider that the batteries are less heavy for the Nikon for the same shooting duration (video excluded) then the D750 combo is about the same weight while the D850 is at most 200g heavier.
That 24-105 really needs to be good to justify 4500$.

PS. for somebody who starts the current deal on the D750 with a grip and the 24-120 F4 is really good at 2000$.

stever

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #35 on: November 20, 2017, 11:50:39 AM »

i did these same numbers against my Canon ff shortly after Sony introduced zoom lenses and came to the conclusion that micro 43 is the only way to lose significant weight and bulk if you need zooms and/or long lenses.

i'm satisfied with the latest 43 generation that has eliminated shutter shock and the high quality olympus and pany lenses - testing against Canon 7d/dIi i don't see a noticeable difference in IQ

That said, the last couple generation of ff slrs have obviously lower high ISO noise, significantly better dynamic range and resolution (and probably AF)

So now i still have to decide when it's worth carrying ff.

PS - the Sony RX 100 is amazing, particularly with good light
Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 2748
    • Photos
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #36 on: November 20, 2017, 01:39:10 PM »

I still have and occasionally use the original RX100 with at 28-100 equiv lens and it's decent. Once I took it on a trip with another Sony compact, a pocket superzoom to cover for the telephoto. It worked well and I came with good shots but on the better ones I was wishing I had a little better base file. This is why I'm a little reluctant regarding the RX-10iii; if anything I would prefer the mark ii version with the 24-200 equiv.


The m43 I decided to use the most is the E-M5ii with the 12-100 F4 particularly for backpacking. It's a good quality WR kit at about 1000g. This is the combo that makes the most sense for me because if I go for the 12-40 the weight is practically the same as the Fuji X-T2 with the 18-55. You lose the 24 equiv and some WR but I prefer the Fuji combo otherwise.
« Last Edit: November 20, 2017, 01:44:34 PM by armand »
Logged

Eric Myrvaagnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15303
  • http://myrvaagnes.com
    • http://myrvaagnes.com
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #37 on: November 20, 2017, 05:10:20 PM »

I still have and occasionally use the original RX100 with at 28-100 equiv lens and it's decent. Once I took it on a trip with another Sony compact, a pocket superzoom to cover for the telephoto. It worked well and I came with good shots but on the better ones I was wishing I had a little better base file. This is why I'm a little reluctant regarding the RX-10iii; if anything I would prefer the mark ii version with the 24-200 equiv.
I skipped the RX10ii, but the RX10iii seems to me to give as good image quality as the original RX10 did. At least on both of mine the Zeiss lens has been superb. The extra weight of the iii over the ii makes a bit of difference, but I have not regretted going for the iii, and I do find (much to my own surprise) that I do use the 600 length from time to time, even hand-held, with good results.

Whatever you decide on, try to get a chance to borrow it for a day to try some real shooting. I got both of my Sonys at my local camera shop, and they were happy to let me try before I bought.

-Eric
Logged
-Eric Myrvaagnes (visit my website: http://myrvaagnes.com)

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19531
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #38 on: November 21, 2017, 07:01:19 AM »

I skipped the RX10ii, but the RX10iii seems to me to give as good image quality as the original RX10 did. At least on both of mine the Zeiss lens has been superb. The extra weight of the iii over the ii makes a bit of difference, but I have not regretted going for the iii, and I do find (much to my own surprise) that I do use the 600 length from time to time, even hand-held, with good results.

Whatever you decide on, try to get a chance to borrow it for a day to try some real shooting. I got both of my Sonys at my local camera shop, and they were happy to let me try before I bought.

-Eric

For as long as it proved possible, I always believed in sticking with a local hero. It used to be the norm; different shops carried a different variety of brands and sometimes specialised in one or two; they came with a wealth of experience about those particular marques. The closest I can still find to that confidence and knowledge regarding Nikon is in London, which ain't exactly next door.

That world of unfair trading and digital salesmen has sure washed a lot of happy babes down the plug hole.

Rob

BrownBear

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 118
Re: Choosing a lens/system
« Reply #39 on: November 21, 2017, 07:18:56 AM »

So true. In many venues in addition to photography.

I'm encouraged by local developments in venues other than photography.  A Walmart moved into our small town, driving off many small businesses. But a handful made an important discovery.  Walmart service suxx, and the "expert" behind the counter was a previous window attendant at McDonalds. The shops that focused on service and expertise in their staff have thrived, to the point that Walmart even shut down their own competing departments.

The same is true for web competition. Shops focused on service and expertise can thrive if they survive the learning curve for dealing with online or big box competitors.

It's not universal for all businesses by any means, but if we as clients and customers place value on service and expertise over a few percentage points in price, we can help.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up