#new mirrorless lenses

[sirfrogsworth]

Frogman's Camera Buying Guide

A few weeks ago someone asked if I could recommend an interchangeable lens camera (ILC) to supplement their smartphone photos and hopefully get better pictures of important things like vacations and pets.

I decided to go very extra with my response and due to that... I'm still not finished with it.

I'm worried I am letting this person down because they did not ask for a giant post explaining every detail about cameras in the history of forever.

So I am going to do a camera recommendation post without as much explanation and hopefully I can finish the giant post at some point in the near future.

If you want to take better pictures you are probably going to need a camera with a decent sized sensor, a fast lens, a tripod, and a flash.

The bigger sensor gives you more dynamic range so you can capture brighter and darker things in the photo.

A fast lens has a giant hole in the front that lets in a ton of light. That hole is called the aperture and the bigger it is, the better your photos in dark environments will be. So you will want something that does f/1.8 or f/1.4 (lower f-stop number = bigger hole = more light). This can also help you get a lot of cool background blur.

A tripod will help get you longer exposures without any blur from camera shake. Especially good for landscape photos.

And a flash is for taking photos of pets and other moving subjects when you are indoors and don't have a lot of light. A flash is an absolute game changer for indoor photos.

HOWEVER, never point it directly at your subject.

Point it at a large white ceiling or wall. The flash happens so fast that it freezes motion. It is how I got all of my indoor photos of Otis.

Here he was playing and being rambunctious and he is not blurry.

I used no special settings. I just stuck on a flash and pointed it at the ceiling and suddenly sheep are sticking to things.

Oh, and one other huge benefit of using a flash... you can take much better photos of pets with dark fur. So if you have a cute little void in your home, a flash can help you capture detail in their fur.

Just lift the shadow slider in your image editor and that beautiful fur will reveal itself.

If you get an ETTL or TTL flash, it will output the correct amount of light automatically. You can literally just put your camera in automatic mode, aim the flash at the ceiling, and press the shutter button.

Before I talk about recommendations I want to make one thing very clear.

GETTING A GIANT CAMERA WILL NOT AUTOMATICALLY GIVE YOU BETTER PHOTOS.

Aside from my flash aimed at the ceiling trick, a big boy camera is not a magic solution for better photos. In some cases, you might actually get *worse* photos than your smartphone. You need to learn the basic fundamentals of photography and you also need to learn some basic photo editing skills.

Smartphones employ powerful algorithms and computational processes to make every photo you take look as good as possible.

ILCs say, "Here is your RAW data, you figure out the rest."

You don't have to become an expert, but if you watch this free 6 hour photography course, that will ensure you have the knowledge needed to improve your photos.

Okay, let's get into the nitty gritty of buying a nice new old ILC.

If you are on a tight budget and cannot afford a fancy mirrorless camera, I would highly suggest a used DSLR. You can get them for very reasonable prices. And unlike just about every other modern technological gadget, cameras and lenses are built to last for decades. So I have no qualms about recommending used photography gear.

However, I do highly recommend using either KEH or MPB, as they have a long trial period and decent customer service. If something goes awry with your used gear, KEH has a 180 day warranty and MPB has a 6 month warranty. So there is much less of a risk than eBay or Facebook Marketplace. You pay a bit of overhead, but the piece of mind is worth it.

Before I start my recommendations I want to quickly explain the difference between APS-C and Full Frame camera bodies. (For brevity's sake I am going to omit Micro Four Thirds bodies as they are not typically geared toward beginner photography.)

APS-C has a "crop" sensor. It is a bit smaller than full frame and does not perform as well in low light (more noise). However these bodies are cheaper and can still produce great photos. You can see above the sensor is still significantly larger than a smartphone. APS-C adds a 1.5x zoom to all lenses. This can be annoying in small spaces but advantageous for outdoor photography like wildlife and sports. You can use full frame lenses on a crop sensor body (within the same brand). APS-C lenses are usually cheaper but of lower quality.

Full frame has a larger sensor that will give you less noise in low light. It is also much easier to get background blur. Full frame also allows you to work in more cramped spaces. You *cannot* use APS-C lenses on a full frame body. However, the lenses meant for full frame cameras tend to be better quality in general.

If you can save up a little more and get a full frame body, I would recommend it. These bodies used to be geared more toward professional use, but since mirrorless cameras became popular, used full frame DSLRs have become much more accessible to those on a budget. Full frame cameras make it easier to get better results in challenging circumstances. And challenging conditions are really the main area where ILCs still kick a smartphone's ass.

For tight budgets I would recommend the following...

Canon or Nikon APS-C DSLR camera body

50mm f/1.8 lens (Nifty Fifty)

18-55mm APS-C lens (good for landscapes and portraits)

Yongnuo ETTL Flash

There are lenses called "superzooms" which can go from (as an example) 18-200mm or 70-300mm and other crazy focal lengths. That sounds fantastic and very versatile... but these are usually utter shite. You may be tempted to get one of these lenses hoping it can do everything you need, but there are no free lunches in lens land. Unless you are spending many thousands of dollars, the wider the focal range, the worse the lens will be.

When you stick to the 18-55mm range, you can be assured the images will be decent. And if you find yourself really needing a telephoto lens, you can save up and add it to your collection later on. The 18-55 will give you wide angle for landscapes all the way to slightly telephoto for portraits and moderately close wildlife. This lens cannot be used indoors or at night without a flash. Which is why I recommend the Nifty Fifty for that purpose. $100 for a moderately sharp low light lens is a no brainer.

Also, stick to Canon, Nikon, Sigma, or Tamron lenses. You can try exotic 3rd party lens brands when you know more what you are doing. And always make sure the lens has autofocus before buying.

It's hard to give you exact recommendations as used items are not reliably in stock. So I'm going to show you an example of the above, but I am not necessarily saying you should buy this *exact* combination. You might be able to get something similar with Nikon as well.

Canon 60D APS-C DSLR

50mm f/1.8 lens

Canon 18-55mm APS-C lens (EF-S mount)

Yongnuo TTL Flash

(I wouldn't recommend getting a used flash, as the Yongnuo is already a great price and you can't know if someone used the flash 100,000 times or 20 times.)

Altogether that is about $500. You can start with the 60D and the 50mm Nifty Fifty for $330 and add on the other two items later on.

My recommended full frame setup...

Full frame Canon or Nikon DSLR body

50mm f/1.8 lens (same as before)

24-70mm full frame zoom lens (full frame equivalent to 18-55mm)

ETTL Yongnuo flash (same as before)

And an example from KEH might be...

Canon 6D Full Frame DSLR

Canon 50mm f/1.8 Lens

Sigma 24-70mm Full Frame Zoom lens (EF mount)

Yonguo ETTL Flash

And that would be about $800 total.

Again, you can start with just the camera and 50mm lens and add the other items later. So invest $500 initially and go from there.

And just to give a Nikon example as well...

Nikon D600 Full Frame DSLR

Nikon 50mm f/1.8 Lens

Tamron 24-70mm

Yonguo ETTL Flash (Nikon version)

I highly recommend researching any camera body and lens before purchase. I can vouch for the items above, but you should definitely check out some YouTube videos before buying.

All of the stuff on KEH and MBP is marked down in price for aesthetic reasons. They do test everything to make sure it is functional. If you care if the camera or lens looks pristine, it will cost a little extra. But if you don't mind if it is beat to hell, you can save some money. Ugly or not, you will get the same photos out of the gear. As I said, photography stuff is built to last for a long time. Almost all repairs are due to user damage and not defects. And usually defects manifest when the product is brand new.

Oh, I forgot about the tripod!

Amazon's $35 tripod is surprisingly decent. It even got a good review on a very picky tripod review site. I recommend starting with this and then upgrading when you know more what you need out of a tripod.

Amazon 60 inch Tripod

I worry I'm leaving out a lot of important information, but hopefully I can expand in the other post I am working on.

That said, if anyone is thinking of buying a camera and you are not sure about the items you selected, please feel free to message me and I will help you assess your choices. Please make sure you include a budget range when asking for buying advice.

I hope that helps. I will try to finish the more in depth post soon. And it will include tips for how to get better photos from your smartphone if you cannot afford an ILC at the moment.

Further resources...

Recipe for Landscape Photos Froggie's Encyclopedia of Lens Terms

#photography #long post

[neil-gaiman]

hello sir what kind of slr do you use for astrophotography? everything you’ve posted is such good quality and I’m just hoping it’s not mirrorless so I don’t have to invest in all new lenses 📸✨

I'm embarrassed to admit all the good astrophotography I've posted here has been me and a Pixel phone.

[zytes]

what camera do you use?

I learned on a Canon T3 and currently use a Canon T6, an inexpensive DSLR that’s several years out of date - it isn’t exactly professional gear and I usually avoid talking to self-labelled photographers about my equipment because it’s quite insufferable listening to 50 year-old hobbyists tell me that I *need* a mirrorless camera for the Nth time; they’re like $4000 tho, so even if I could afford that I’d be too scared to use it in the ways that I like to use mine.

I think the T7 or T7i is the more current model, and it runs around $500-700 brand new in a basic starter set with two lenses and a soft case. In addition to the lenses that came with the camera body, I also occasionally use a half-dozen different plastic lomography lenses that I bought in a set from a thrift store many years ago — they take sorta shit photos, and are a little inconvenient to use, but they’re really unique; plastic lenses are super underrated imo. The only other accessory I use is a $20 aftermarket battery pack that doubles the battery life and extends the body of the camera to make it fit more comfortably in my hands. Using inexpensive gear has allowed me to be much more adventurous while I’m shooting without fear for rain or snow or dirt - although I do occasionally have to digitally remove water spots and other small shadows that make it into photos whenever my lens is a little scuzzy.

^ the lomo lenses I mentioned, extremely cool vibe but literally held together with tape.

#my asks #I rlly hope this is helpful; idk anything about other camera manufacturers as I’ve only ever shot on Canon #downloadpirate(dot)com has up-to-date adobe products available for download btw #but you’ll NEED to uninstall the ‘adobe genuine service’ software that automatically installs alongside your chosen software #otherwise it’ll fuck with you - force crashes; make the software behave slowly; and notify you that you’ve accidentally ‘stolen’ via email #I wish there was a separate noti for asks because I ALWAYS miss them when they come in

[livefromphilly]

Sony A7CII Thoughts After Two Months

PROS:

The A7C was already one of my favorite cameras of all time and this improves on it a lot more than I thought when just seeing the specs. The added front dial alone makes it many times easier to control than the older model, and lets me use my typical Sony setup that I’ve grown accustomed to (aperture on front dial, shutter speed on rear dial, and ISO on the scroll wheel). 

This is the quickest operating Sony camera I’ve owned. I think they kind of lulled me into forgetting how fast cameras can be going from off to on and taking photos. The A7RII was slow as heck with each subsequent model I’ve owned getting faster and faster (A7III to A7C to A7RIV). This new Sony is at a level of speed that makes it hard to go back to using the A7RIV which I still own (for now). 

The autofocus is superb. I still haven’t really put it through its paces since I got the camera in the winter and the lack of light plus uncooperative weather has made it tricky to go out and shoot, but from what I have shot it’s nearly flawless. It’s way better than any camera I’ve owned before. It also has some really neat autofocusing modes, like the ability to focus on the eyes of birds. I’m not really around birds close up all that often but it worked really well at an exotic bird place in Jersey I went to recently. 

The camera is 33 megapixels, which is a nice compromise between feeling like it’s sometimes too much (61) or too little (24). 

The in-body image stabilization is really good. It’s certainly the best I’ve used in any camera so far…although to be fair I’ve never used a Nikon/Canon/Fuji/Olympus body with IBIS, only Ricoh (GRIII), Panasonic (GX7 and GX85), and Sony. 

It can lower the shutter when switching lenses so dust doesn’t get in there. Not gonna lie it seems kind of dangerous and something that could potentially damage the shutter, but so far it’s kept the dust out. 

CONS:

The viewfinder isn’t great. I’ve never really been an EVF snob since I’ve been shooting on mirrorless EVFs for over a decade now (I had a V1 back in 2013), but going from the A7RIV to this makes it kind of stick out. I also recently handled an A7RV, which really blows it out the water. With autofocus lenses it’s no problem, but using manual focus lenses is more difficult. On the plus side, it automatically goes into peaking mode when you manually focus, even when using adapted lenses or lenses without electrical contacts. 

The camera only has one card slot. Not a huge dealbreaker considering every other camera I own aside from my A7RIV is the same in that regard. A second slot even if it was a micro would have been great though. A nice thing about the A7RIV is that I’ve never left home without a memory card because even if I forget one there’s always another in there. 

No joystick. Again, not completely necessary but it’s nice to have. Most of my subjects aren’t humans (or animals, or other things that the camera can instinctively detect) so there are plenty of times I want to position the focus point myself. 

Slow flash sync and shutter speed. This camera is like the A7C before it in that it only flash syncs up to 1/160. It also only shoots up to 1/4000.

Still don't love the flip screen because it makes quick waist-level shooting a pain in the ass. I wish they went with the A7RV style screen.

Speaking of, all the new perks on this camera make me want to use it a ton more than my A7RIV, but it also makes me want to get an A7RV. Maybe I'll sell my X100V since the prices are nuts right now...

SAMPLE PHOTOS:

Sony 85mm f/1.8 | ISO: 250, f/2.8, 1/125 sec

Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 | ISO 100, f/1.8, 1/160 sec

Sony 85mm f/1.8 | ISO 5000, f/1.8, 1/50 sec

Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8 @ 20mm | ISO 3200, f/2.8, 1/125 sec

Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 | ISO 100, f/2, 1/160 sec

Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 | ISO 12800, f/2, 1/50 sec

Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 | ISO 100, f/2.2, 1/640 sec

Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8 @ 32mm | ISO 320, f/2.8, 1/20 sec

Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 | ISO 100, f/1.8, 1/500 sec

Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8 @ 37mm | ISO 800, f/2.8, 1/40 sec

Sony 24mm f/1.4 GM w/ K&F Concept Black Diffusion 1/4 Filter | ISO 8000, f/1.4, 1/50 sec

Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 | ISO 250, f/1.8, 1/125 sec

Sony Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 | ISO 250, f/2, 1/125 sec

Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8  @ 20mm | ISO 400, f/2.8, 1/40 sec

Sony 24mm f/1.4 GM | ISO 8000, f/1.6, 1/50 sec

Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8 @ 20mm | ISO 100, f/2.8, 1/320 sec

#Informal Reviews of Cameras #Cameras #Sony #Sony A7CII

[michaelwriston]

Hey Micheal what camera would you reccomend to some one starting out taking photos & what’s your set up?

Hey!

I'm a firm believer in buying an inexpensive DSLR or mirrorless setup with interchangeable lenses. You don't have to break the bank on a starter setup — just focus on buying a camera with a robust selection of first- and third-party lenses.

My usual advice is to start simple and only upgrade gear once you run into a physical or technical limitation that stops you from realizing your vision. For example, if you're not getting the shallow depth of field you want with your current lens and body, then maybe it's time to consider buying a lens with a larger maximum aperture (e.g., f/1.8 or f/1.4).

I started out with a Nikon D50 and a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8. That served me well for nearly five years, before I started running into technical limitations with the sensor that made shooting night photos difficult. That's when I switched to shooting medium format film for a spell, before ultimately settling on a full-frame Canon digital body. All-in-all, that experimentation period took about 17 years (I'm still not done).

That said, shop used for your first camera. Places like KEH or MPB have a great selection of tested and used gear. I personally shop from MPB. Here are a few great beginner full-frame camera bodies. I'll break out lenses later on in this post.

Why full frame? I think you get superior image quality, better depth of field, better image resolution for printing, and phenomenal dynamic range.

Canon EOS 5D Mark III ($714)

Nikon D750 ($774)

Canon 6D Mark II ($884)

Nikon D810 ($819)

Anyone of these are going to get the job done and then some.

The world of lenses is complicated and varied. You'll have “prime purists” that will tell you to eschew zoom lenses and only shoot prime (a lens with no zoom capabilities). You'll have people that say longer telephotos are all you need. The truth is, you'll find your niche the more you shoot. I prefer prime lenses for their simplicity (and the less I have to think about, the better).

I'll break these out by purpose.

Portraiture

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 ($259)

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 ($134)

Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 ($184)

Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 ($78)

Landscapes

Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS ($294)

Nikkor AF 24mm f/2.8 ($134)

Multipurpose

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-f/5.6 IS STM ($54)

Nikon AF-P DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ($73)

I could go on and on, but this is enough to get you a start in the right direction.

If I were to put together a beginner kit with the above options, I would snatch up the Canon 5D Mark III with the Canon 50mm f/1.8 and the Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS. Total cost before taxes and shipping would be $1,142. You would have an incredibly flexible kit that lends itself to portraiture, landscapes, and street work, all for the same price as a new “prosumer” kit with only one lens from Amazon or other big box stores. If you don't know which direction you want to go, or you want to save on cost, there's nothing wrong with swapping out the two primes and grabbing the 18-55mm kit lens for next to nothing. That will at least let you dabble with different focal lengths and see what suits you.

I'm happy to answer any other questions here!

P.S. I shoot with a Canon EOS 6D Mark I and usually have a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 lens mounted on it for street portrait/street landscape work. My other carry-around camera is a Ricoh GR III.

#photography #questions #photographers on tumblr #original photographers #buying a camera

[gfxced]

I went Full-Fuji! (GFX One Year Review)

One year ago, I decided to ditch my Nikon DSLRs for a Fujifilm GFX 50R.

The GFX's sensor is larger than a full-frame sensor with a crop factor of 0.79

A little over a year ago, I still was using a few Nikon DSLRs to do just about anything. For portraits and landscape, I had a very respectable D810. Enough megapixels to provide some room for cropping and a decent dynamic range for most situations. For action and hobby-wildlife I had a D500. A durable mini-tank with performance that to this day would be hard to dismiss even in the light of mirrorless flagship innovation.

However, the question of my camera-future slowly crept into my mind. Was it time to change and upgrade into the Nikon Z system? Switching to a Z7 would indeed have been a sensible move, adapting older lenses while getting the sensor of the D850 in a smaller, cheaper body with an ecosystem of native lenses with the optical quality up to specs for the next decade. On paper and elsewhere, it should have been the obvious choice. Yet my answer to this question was a resounding "no" and I went against reason to set my sights on a Fujifilm GFX 50R. I took that model over the S because I enjoy the rangefinder form factor.

In hindsight, the smartest of all moves would probably have been to remain with what I had, adhering to the ancient photographic wisdom: "lenses are more important than cameras". My kits could have kept me satisfied for probably another 10 years if we are being honest. I could have stayed within the F mount ecosystem and could have taken advantage of its downright insane price drops to get top-of-the-line lenses for peanuts instead of selling the farm on a whim, however carefully considered it might have been.

These old and trusty Nikon DSLRs got sold off to finance the 50R

The truth is that after fifteen years of walking the beaten paths camera-wise, I wanted to shake things up. I longed for a change of pace. I felt confident enough in my practice to know what type of photography I would want to engage in for the foreseeable future. I also felt confident enough that I'd be able to answer the call of the occasional assignment using a camera system that would have a non-negligible amount of drawbacks. The challenge even seemed like a fun new variable to add to contracts. Thus, the choice I made for my photographic future has been one born out of love rather than made from a place of reason.

When I think of good photographic memories involving the process — how photography is approached with mind and body — I immediately have two very different ideas jumping to mind and each has an ideal type of tool that best suits it. Neither of these are about efficiency. Neither of these are about performance beside niche-performance, perhaps. But that, is more of an acquired taste and it also comes at a price, but we'll see about that later.

The first idea is an instinctive and spontaneous approach, form of feral and visceral active meditation, akin to Daido's rabid dog method; roaming the streets clear of thoughts and letting the subconscious take the helm. Shooting, shooting, shooting and discovering everything later. No plan, only image-taking. No clear framing, no image-reviewing, no judgement to pass, no threads to weave. Only arrange and make sense later, if there's any of that to find.

Results using the "rabid dog" method, using a Fujifilm X100, 2014

For this type of photography, the Fujifilm X100 was the tool that instantly clicked with me. The "poorman's Leica" is an apt way to describe what the X100 represented when it came out. I got the original 12mp camera in 2012 as a fun but capable toy to bring along my Nikon D700, until the shutter release button (which also is the on/off switch) broke off in 2020 after one power-up too many. I have since replaced it with a Fuji X-Pro 2 with the XF 18mm F2, 27mm F2.8 and 50mm F2 lenses. To this day, such small Fuji bodies are my tool of choice for this kind of photographic mood (and of course, for family pictures).

Fuji X100 later replaced by the X-Pro 2 as street photography go-to.

The second photographic process that I tend to naturally gravitate towards stems from my first year of photography school, during which all projects had to be done using film and would have us deal with the whole process (that is to say; shooting, developing, printing, framing, and displaying our work ourselves). It is with nostalgia that I look upon the memories from that time.

There sure is something inherently different in figuring out what to do with the exposures one has left on their film than being able to inconsequentially shoot within two hours three thousand pictures through which you can almost immediately browse. The latter is of course more practical and a welcome technological improvement, but the former brings an unhurried and deliberate focus that I find both refreshing and appealing.

When I think of my strongest recollection of touching the quintessence of the analog experience, the days of using my Mamiya 645 immediately come to mind. Such sluggish, heavy-as-a-couple-bricks box-machines compel one to being careful and purposeful every step of the way. I need that too.

Mamiya 645 Super, since sold to finance GF lenses.

I have for the longest of time considered getting a more serious medium format camera but some quick-math with the price of film, chemicals and photographic paper made me realize that digital medium format was actually much more worth the investment while most definitely retaining some of the core characteristics of its analog counterparts. My love for the film process couldn't hold up against all the advantages of going digital, especially when buying second-hand.

Using medium format always felt like journeying inwards. It has allowed me to spend long hours in daydreaming-states paradoxically laced with an acute awareness of my surroundings. When thinking about medium format, I can recall the soul-washing quality of some of the winds that swept my cheeks while I was standing next to the tripod waiting for the exposure of the 50iso film to finish.

States of contemplation. Another kind of active meditation?

Of course, any camera can provide this type of feeling, but of all of the digital cameras available, medium format is the one type that will weigh you down the most and dictate the pace you work at.

Telepanoramas created with the Fujifilm GFX 50R

Notice how these two ideas are almost the ends of a spectrum?

The first one is nervous and agitated, highly reactive, while the other is composed, meticulous and invites introspective fugue-states, yet they both share one vital element in the way that I approach them in that they take the practical considerations out of the picture to leave more space for what is going on within me.

The setting up of the camera or lack thereof becomes an excuse for something else. Maybe it isn't a surprise, that my adhd-ridden brain experiences this inexorable attraction for both these approaches. For they are in essence, two sides of the same coin, with each side matching different, specific and fluctuating needs.

Let's dive in!

After selling my DSLRs, I started looking for a good second-hand candidate. After a month or so, I found a barely used GFX 50R sold with a 50mm 3.5, a couple additional batteries and an L-bracket to boot. The price was rather attractive for the bundle, so it seemed like the time to take the leap. After a short but excruciating wait for the package to arrive, I finally was able to join the larger-than-35mm-sensor club.

How it started

My first few months with the camera had me immediately blown away by the difference in output. The higher resolution and the sensor's qualities made the (very much existing) noise hardly noticeable when downsized to small printing or screen-viewing sizes. What also immediately struck me, was the looks of the images the camera produced. Images taken with the GFX feel more "3D" to me. It is a very peculiar and hard to describe feeling. I suspect it is a combination of factors; the depth of field of the larger sensor and the very smooth transitions between what's in focus and what is not that it permits, the colour depth, and the quality of the optics. I've seen many Youtube reviews, read forum threads or been in discussions on Discord about GFX cameras where people (who more often than not don't own one) will maintain that these qualities don't exist at all. After a year in the system I can confidently state that they're wrong.

I can't really put my finger on what causes these differences as I am not as tech-savvy as I could be, but it is still clear as day. To use a pretty apt analogy, I would say that the difference between full-frame and (crop) medium format is akin to the difference between aps-c and full-frame cameras. Are they deal-breaking? Not necessarily. For some people they can be. Are they noticeable? Definitely. It is especially funny to me to see medium format cameras being dismissed by such a many full-frame shooter who at the same time, is constantly bashing aps-c sensors.

Don't you love to pixel-peep? Omnomnom (imagine with 102mp!)

This being said, I will always fully stand by the statement that full-frame cameras are the more sensible choice as they are better all-rounders by design. High-res cameras like Sony's A7RV or equivalent are also better high-iso performers than the aging IMX161 sensor that the GFX 50 series uses, which sees its operational limit at around 6400iso (but the GFX 100 would be another matter entirely). A top-tier full-frame camera is evidently more practical, lighter and cheaper without any deal-breaking image quality difference to what the medium format niche can offer. When all costs are factored in, the choice would seem self-evident. If you consider medium format, it should be understood that you know this before committing to any bigboy sensor. Or don't heed this and make people who buy second hand happy, as GFX gear loses almost one third of its value once it hits the second hand market (a consequence of too many people jumping on the medium format bandwagon only to realise — way too late — that it wasn't for them).

Are we cooking yet?

I need to talk about the GFX's files for a little bit; I'm a raw shooter only — which hopefully you'd have guessed — (in my opinion anyone buying into a medium format to shoot jpeg must have cognitive issues or too much money, or possibly both) and I have to say that when I opened the raw files to give the sliders their very first +100/-100 or +3/+4 EV from base iso (or any combination of these) I was utterly floored by how well the files could handle such an ungodly beating.

This isn't a joke, I promise.

This type of camera makes the slider memes come true, to a point where for the first few months, my ability to edit properly was severely impaired by the glee I experienced while pushing everything way too far. I believe it is not an uncommon symptom at the start of a medium format journey. It takes a while to come back from that and simply be able to tell yourself "ok here, maybe less dynamic range would be a good edit". I'm getting better at this as I consciously try to avoid overcooking.

Clean recovery? Can do!

On the image-taking side of things, the major change for me with regards to file-handling is that I'm almost systematically exposing for highlights now. Adding 3EV and boosting shadows in post when shooting at low iso is inconsequential in terms of image quality as there won't be any visible noise whatsoever on the output, unlike my aps-c cameras that will show noise even at base iso. Similarly to many other aspects medium format manages well, this is something I got used to very quickly.

To adapt or to not adapt, that was the question, here's my answer:

At first, I tried adapting my old Mamiya 645 lenses to the 50R. It was useful in the sense that it allowed me to enjoy different fields of view at no cost but it quickly felt like a plaster on a wooden leg. I'm not someone who enjoys the manual focusing as a default and I've grown more and more intolerant of the optical flaws of older lenses as time went by. I realised that it wasn't a viable long term solution for me and quickly chose to sell all my Mamiya cameras and lenses to finance native glass for the GFX.

My experience adapting? It was alright but not at all ideal.

Which lenses then?

Getting into the GFX system I promised myself I would make no compromise whatsoever on optical quality and directly aimed for the 250mm F4 (mainly for tele-landscapes) and 110mm F2 (mainly for portraits). The grind felt long but it really wasn't, as I managed to secure both lenses from the second hand market within 6 months. It is only later that I added the 35-70mm "kit" lens to my arsenal to fill the wide-angle gap I had. As I seldom feel the need to shoot wider than short-tele fields of views, this is more of a lens of convenience.

The difference between adapting older lenses and using native glass was night and day to me. Two things made this the better choice in my view: first, I've been actively seeking the "clinical" quality of modern optics. I do not care much for the "character" of older lenses especially not if the word is used to help one overlook a lens' unforgivable flaws. Second, while there sure are lenses worth adapting out there, this come at a cost for the adapting to be worth it (the cost of an AF-capable adapter and of course the cost of the lenses themselves) which I saw as a waste of my limited resources. I told myself I wasn't going to make compromises, remember?

One year after switching, I am now knee-deep into the system, having sold most of my Nikon gear as well as my Mamiya medium format film-cameras to acquire some of the incredibly hard to resist GF lenses.

After a year of transforming a heap of dormant gear and side-gig revenue into new lenses, I also noticed that the representation I had about the worth of money also changed radically when gear was concerned.

A little over a year ago, an XF lens priced 800€ definitely seemed like a steep investment I'd try to find alternative choices for. Nowadays, 800€ is a mere budget lens in my mind. Seeing the price tags of GF lenses doesn't make my head spin anymore and this is somewhat worrisome for the thrifty Dutchman living in the back of my brain.

With the announcement of the 500mm F5.6 lens being in development (a focal length I definitely miss from my Nikon days, I'm a sucker for ultra-telephoto landscape photography), I fear I will manage to push my monetary boundaries further back yet, which I will help achieve by selling my X-T3 video-oriented kit.

APS-C: you're dead to me.

An unforeseen consequence of my GFX switch was that my aps-c cameras were pretty much relegated to the bottom gear drawer and seldom used barring a few notable exceptions (such as a wedding gig) where the need for its autofocusing speed was greater than the need for image and file quality.

To reuse the analogy I made earlier; my X-Pro 2 and X-T3 have become to me what a micro-four-thirds camera would be to a full-frame camera user. Getting into Fujifilm's medium format system prompted me to think about how I use my cameras and to what end. The realisation that there is a clear split in my photographic approaches I evoked at the very beginning of this article is the result of that thought process.

Although I will sell my X-T3 because it feels superfluous and I want to stop my video gigs completely, (and because my need for GFX lens money is still great), I would never part with my X-Pro 2 nor the few XF lenses that I have as they serve a totally different purpose to that of the GFX's.

Having a compact, fast, discreet yet still capable camera that can be casually put into a pocket is an advantage that I would be a fool to part with. The X-Pro is a more practical choice for street-photography, documentary in less-than-favourable conditions, as well as for family pictures, when packing a brick of a camera and two bricks worth of lenses for a walk in the park in suboptimal weather would be met with a tired roll-eye from my spouse.

My dear X-Pro, I'm Never Ever Gonna Give You Up

Of course there have been many occasions for which I have chosen to take the challenge and went into these situations with the GFX. However, I wouldn't want the GFX to be the only option at my disposal in such cases.

For example, during the last wedding I shot, when the dining room got darker and the guests started moving around a lot (and dancing), the switch to aps-c cameras was absolutely necessary because of how difficult it was to consistently get acceptable results in poor light and with subjects making erratic movements. When you are held under a result-delivering imperative, you have to be able to honour it.

Packing a Fuji GF or Fuji X kit can be a slightly different experience

"Megapickles don't matter!"

This was an idea that I lived by just a few years ago. I changed my mind. I still believe that megapixels don't matter when you don't have them. Just like one should shoot with the camera one has / is able to afford. It doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things but all these technical niceties just make one's life more comfortable. Cropping, denoising through file reduction algorithms, or enjoying detail endlessly because one can, these are just the icing on the cake. I just happen to like my cakes with more icing than cake now.

Regarding resolution specifically, it's been another area in which there seems to be no possible coming back. Nowadays, every time a manufacturer announces a new camera and I discover they plan to fit it with a 24MP sensor I dismiss the information entirely. It doesn't register anymore. 32-36 is the new 24 in my mind now and it's sometimes difficult to come back from those expectations.

This being said I have no issue using lower resolution aps-c that I own and could perhaps even have fun with a X-Pro 1 because then the output quality wouldn't be my prime concern. It is only concerning new releases that my interest dips firmly for "low" MP cameras.

Did I tell you that medium format AF sucks?

Before I conclude this one-year review, let me hammer this point in with a two-handed mace; it can't be understated, especially for the GFX 50 series which uses contrast detection — the autofocus will throw you back to the early 2000s. Be ready to be stuck on single point, single AF mode because that's the only thing that will be consistent enough.

Then let's not forget other factors that add to the bad and make it worse; the shutter lag is half a second, the sensor readout speed is 1/4th of a second, and the time the shutter takes to clear the large sensor in combination with the camera's high resolution means you'll need higher shutter speeds in order to get rid of motion blur when shooting handheld (count about one stop faster than usual). Those would be valid reasons as to why a less niche camera system makes more sense for a lot of people.

The final comment:

Despite its sometimes dramatic drawbacks, I definitely have found the pleasure I sought when I originated this system switch. The change and the adapting my process is engaging and makes me think more about what I do, what I use, when and why. This is a win on its own.

All in all I feel like I am still at the very start of my journey though I've had the opportunity to test my GFX 50R in a wide array of situations in the past year (portrait, landscape, documentary) it seems like the way forward is clear and also opened for plunging deeper into this incredibly fun (but needlessly expensive) rabbit hole.

The upcoming 500mm, the prospect of finding an original GFX 100 (with its weirdly appealing tiltable EVF) are ideas that will — for the foreseeable future — definitely keep pulling me back in (and emptying my pockets).

Fun! Fun! Fun!

#fujifilm gfx #photographers on tumblr

[amayasnep]

Well this thing got my neurons activated

A retrospective

During the winter of 2017, my path in college was underground a profound shift. In the midst of this shift I decided to take an intro to photography class. I always had an interest in photography so this became my first serious foray into the arts.

At the time I was quite new to photography, having only recently received my first ever interchangeable lens camera the past Christmas. I leveraged this new reality to help propel myself into the world of professional photography.

While enrolled in the class I had the opportunity to use a Nikon FG, a 35mm (full frame) film camera dating to the mid 1980s. The camera was one of two film cameras I used during my time in college, the other being a Pentax K1000. The camera came with a Micro-NIKKOR 55mm F2.8 lens (which apparently Nikon still makes???) and our choice of a couple rolls of Ilford 100 or 400 black and white film. I went with ISO 400 for the added low light performance.

Whenever I had the opportunity to check out one of the film cameras I always went for the Nikon because of its more pleasant and intuitive interface (to me at least). I would end up shooting At least four rolls of black and white film. It was pretty cool using such an old camera. Even the screw-in manual shutter cable had a vintage look and feel to it. I never had any issues with it.

Due to the fact I only had 36 shots per roll and couldn’t zoom, I had to choose and compose my shots carefully, and hope that everything was in focus and properly exposed when I hit the shutter button. I think for a beginner interested in photography it’s a good experience to have. The whole dynamic changes when you can zoom as you please, take as many shots as you want, and get immediate results on a screen.

Side note: Apparently film camera connoisseurs have a lot of gripes with this camera and I’m just like “yeah it gets the job done and looks and feels pretty”. I bet these same people would have a heart attack I chose it over the Pentax.

Back to the camera

The Nikon ZF camera is such a neat blending of an old Nikon film camera with cutting-edge mirrorless camera technology. You get the nostalgia of a metal camera body and brass dials with a digital flip-out screen, a full frame sensor with great high ISO performance, in-body image stabilization, 4K video at 30 fps, and advanced subject identification software driven by AI.

Is it practical? Depends who you ask… Cameras have come a long way and I don’t imagine the new Nikon ZF is any more pleasant to hold for long periods of time than the Nikon FG was (though they do make special add-on hand grips for them). The camera has no “auto” setting on the shutter speed dial, which funny enough the much older Nikon FG had. There’s no “auto” on any of the dials actually, making this logistically a pain to use. On my camera I have an ISO button that makes setting auto ISO quick and easy, so having to dig through the menu to do the same on this camera is a hard sell personally.

But it does look pretty…

A bit about my own setup

I’m quite content with my own cameras. I have two: an older APS-C camera and a newer full frame camera. They’re the best cameras I’ve ever handled, each with lenses that are the best I’ve ever shot with.

That being said, I do have two vintage lenses I picked up from a vintage goods store for a great price. One is a prime lens and the other is a pump-action zoom lens. I can’t wait to try them out on my newest camera one of these days. To get an idea of how they really perform. There is a certain nostalgic charm in that. A compromise between the digital age and the analogue age, for regularly shooting in film is just too heckin’ expensive!

#Nikon #Nikon FG #Nikon ZF #camera #lenses #photography #film photography

[nice-bright-colors]

Suddenly, I feel the urge,

To buy something that will make me feel better about myself.

New camera accessories

New mirrorless Nikon Z mount lenses (yes that is different)

New shoes (because you have enough boots; note- 2 pair need cleaning)

New pants, preferably some lighter weight chino/ travel friendly fabric

New IPad, perhaps some new Air Pod Pro - 2nd Generation

Thule Aero crossbar & Cargo box for my car

New Tumi luggage - carry on & matching backpack

Or maybe I just need to have sex. Sigh. For that I need to plan time to shave my face.

[swede1952]

Good morning, friends. 🌻🌻🌻

17 October 2023

I should get a new camera today. This time I ordered from Amazon. Even though Ebay issued a refund for the camera that I never received, waiting a month for something to arrive via slow boat from China isn't my forte. Anyway, that's another story. I originally intended to get another Canon 90D but changed my mind and went for a Canon 6D Mark II, which is a full framed camera. I did a little research, and it might be a better choice for certain kinds of shots. I thought about a mirrorless, but I have all EF lenses, which would mean having to at least buy an adapter as well as a camera.

“The camera has always been a guide, and it's allowed me to see things and focus on things that maybe an average person wouldn't even notice.” - Don Chadwick

#photo #photography #photographer #photographylovers #morning #flowers #firends #camera

[bricktoygrapher]

Baby Groot's new mirrorless camera 📸

Joking aside, I upgraded my camera and switched from DSLR to mirrorless. After reading and watching lots of reviews, I've decided to stay with Nikon, mostly because I already own several F-mount lenses.

Below you can see my old Nikon D3300 and new Z50. Lenses, from left to right:

AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.8G

AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

AF-S DX NIKKOR 35mm f/1.8G

#lego #lego photography #legophotography #toy photography #toyphotography #brickcentral #nikon #nikon z50 #nikonlove #mirrorless #camera #legophoto #toyphoto #lego groot #baby groot #i am groot #lego marvel #photohraphy #photogrphers on tumblr #lenses

[minceyfresh]

Dear Pentax,

Could you PLEASE release some new prime lenses that are:

a) wider than 23mm (35mm equivalent on an APS-C crop),

b) f/2.0 or faster, AND

c) charge less than $900 USD for it???

Not a single limited lens of theirs is a combination of A and B. The mirrorless (especially Fujifilm X) users can't have all the fun!

I love my Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 lens, but I can't carry that thing around with me everywhere!

#photography #pentax #pentaxian #prime lens #primelens #dslr #pentax limited

[sirfrogsworth]

Hi Froggy,

I hope you've been well! I wanted to reach out and first say that you inspired me many years ago to rescue a corgi! She was a grump, I think she may have taken her name (Elphaba) too literally. She recently crossed the rainbow bridge, but she was such fun and a joy. I hope our pups are playing together, somewhere peaceful.

I have a question unrelated to stumpy Corgis. I'm a veteran birth doula and an aspiring birth photographer! I've been trying to research cameras, lenses, and all sorts of technical stuff. I'm leaving towards purchasing the new Nikon ZF, because of the purported low-light capabilities.

Lenses are throwing me completely.

Do you have any guidance or resources to help a newbie like myself? Not really looking for an in-depth answer (I know how complicated things can get), but maybe a general push in the right direction?

If you don't want or can't answer, no hard feelings! I enjoy just seeing your posts on my dash and I hope the rest of your year is amazing and calm!-Steph

(continued...)

My budget is pretty flexible, since I am an independent contractor the expense would be tallied towards my taxes. But that being said, maybe $1-3k? I know it's important to invest more into lenses!

Usually, I am in a hospital, and lighting is extremely variable. I would be shooting mostly in low-light before baby is born. During delivery and after there is usually a spotlight or fluorescent lighting. The low lighting is exactly why I was looking at the new ZF, but if you have suggestions on that too I'm happy to hear them!

It's very cramped when the baby is born, most medical and support staff are clustered around the laboring person.

Warning! A lot of birth photos will have baby crowning or blood. It's a messy business, so I don't want to trigger you if you're sensitive to those sorts of images.

I will not be able to be directly next to the laboring parent, more than likely I'll be a few feet away, possibly behind the parents or standing on a stool.

After the baby is born, I'll be able to get closer to both parents and baby!

Here's a portfolio that is close to what I would like to provide (once again TW for blood and crowning):

https://www.sarahginderphotography.com/birth-photography-north-new-jersey

I cannot thank you enough for any help or advice, this whole endeavor is like learning a new language!

----------------------------

Note from Future Froggie...

I went way overboard on this response, as usual. I have decided I'm going to break it up into 3 parts.

First, an encyclopedia of lens terminology.

Second, a camera and lens buying guide.

Third, practical advice for shooting in cramped rooms with tricky lighting conditions.

While this will be geared towards the original ask, I think this could be helpful to a lot of people. So, let's learn about lenses!

--------------------------

Lenses throw everybody, just because there are so many options. It can be overwhelming to look at a picture like this and wonder what will suit you best.

It's a lot of pressure too, because lenses are more important than the camera in a lot of ways. Interchangeable lenses are probably the biggest advantage big cameras have over smartphones these days.

But I think I can help get you up to speed.

The following terms are photospeak you might hear in camera and lens reviews and if you aren't familiar with them, it can make it difficult to figure out what camera and lens to purchase.

I tried to put these in an order that makes sense, but some terms relate to other terms and you may have to read the list twice to make sure you understand how everything mushes together.

Froggie's Encyclopedia of Lens Terms

Lens Mount

Every camera has a specific lens mount. Sony calls theirs the E Mount. Nikon has the F Mount (older) and the Z Mount (mirrorless). So you need to make sure the lens you are looking at is compatible with the mount on your camera.

Mirrorless cameras all upgraded to a mount with a "short flange distance." Going without a mirror allows the lenses to be closer to the sensor.

Long story short... Short flange distance = easier lens design = sharper/lighter lenses.

However, if you want to use older DSLR lenses, there are adapters for Nikon and Canon that allow you to do that.

Aperture

"Aperture" is an opening at the front of the lens. It gets bigger to let in more light or smaller to restrict light.

Wider apertures have a shallower depth of field, causing blurry foregrounds and backgrounds outside the plane of focus. Smaller apertures expand the focus area to keep more stuff from being blurry, but they let in much less light and are difficult to use in dark environments.

Aperture can be a creative decision or it can be a technical decision or it can be a mix of both. If you need a blurry background, use a wider aperture. If you need everything in focus, use a smaller aperture. If you need more light in a dark scene, open it up.

F-stop

"F-stop" is a number representing how big the aperture is. A lower number is a bigger hole. Higher number is a smaller hole. It is helpful to memorize f-stops as they are not easily divisible. Cameras generally allow third stops, half stops, and full stops.

These are all a "full stop" apart.

Stop Down/Open Up

When someone says to "stop down" a lens, they are telling you to make the aperture smaller or use a higher f-stop number.

If they say to "open up" they are saying to make the hole bigger or lower the f-stop number.

Depth of Field (DoF)

Depth of field refers to how much of the photo is in focus. Things in front of the plane of focus will get blurrier and blurrier and things behind the plane of focus will get blurrier and blurrier. A shallow depth of field means only a tiny sliver of your image will be in focus. A deep depth of field means almost everything will be in focus.

The wider the aperture, the shallower the depth of field.

The smaller the aperture, the deeper the depth of field.

Focal Plane or Plane of Focus

The focal plane is the sharpest point within the depth of field. You can imagine an imaginary section of 3D space where things within the depth of field are sharp and things outside are blurry. The farther away from the focal plane, the blurrier they will get. But the focal plane is not always dead center of the depth of field.

Typically, at close distances, things will be sharp half in front of where you focused and half behind where you focused. As things get farther away, that changes to more 1/3 in front and 2/3 behind. The ratio changes even more at greater distances, but the 50-50 and 1/3-2/3 ratios are typically what photographers try to remember.

Shallow Depth of Field

The focal plane is something you need to be very aware of at close distances with a wide aperture—as the depth of field can end up as a tiny sliver.

Let's say you are only a few feet away from a baby and you have the aperture set at f/1.2. You focus on the nearest baby eye, and then you notice its ears and nose are out of focus.

The plane of focus and shallow depth of field are causing this issue. This might be a worthy compromise if you are in a dark room and your ISO is very high and you are worried about too much noise.

However, if you can use a flash or some kind of lighting, you can stop down your lens and increase that depth of field around the focal plane.

Bokeh

Bokeh is the quality of the blurriness. Some people are more obsessed with how good the blurry parts of the photo are more so than the in focus parts. Bokeh is typically judged by "bokeh balls" which are just out-of-focus lights in the background. While I like attractive bokeh balls as much as the next photographer, I will admit this is one of the sillier aspects of photography.

Field of View (FoV)/Angle of View

This is how much stuff you can fit in frame at a given distance. Wide angle lenses can fit more stuff in at a shorter distance and telephoto lenses can fill the frame with stuff that is farther away. The focal length of the lens determines the field of view. The focal length is designated by millimeters and the field of view by degrees.

Focal Length

Technically, this is "the distance between the lens's optical center and the camera's sensor."

In simpler terms, this is how you determine the field of view of a given lens.

A short focal length, like 10mm, will have a wider field of view. You have to be very close to your subject to fill the frame with them.

And a longer focal length, like 500mm, will allow you to fill the frame with your subject from farther distances.

Typically all lenses are designated by their focal length. If someone says, "Hand me the 50" they mean a 50mm lens.

35mm Equivalent

Not every camera has the same sized sensor. So when we talk about lenses, we need a reference to help us understand how a given lens will behave. A 50mm f/2.8 lens does not have the same field of view or depth of field when placed on different sensors. So, we need a standard for comparison.

The standard that is used is the "full frame" sensor which is roughly the same size as a 35mm piece of film.

Anything smaller is considered a "cropped sensor."

Those cropped sensor cameras have a "crop factor"—a simple multiplier that helps you understand how lenses compare. And when you use this multiplier it tells you the "35mm equivalent."

Confused yet? Yeah, sorry, it would be easier if camera manufacturers chose metrics that didn't change depending on the sensor, but this allows them to make their cameras and lenses seem more impressive in the marketing.

There are two main cropped sensors for ILCs. (Interchangeable lens cameras.) APS-C and Micro Four Thirds. They have a "crop factor" of 1.5x and 2x respectively. The Micro 4/3 sensor is half the size of Full Frame, therefore it has a 2x crop factor. And when you apply this crop factor to the aperture and focal length you can determine how a lens will behave.

For example, a 50mm f/2.8 lens on a micro 4/3 sensor would behave the same as a 100mm f/5.6 lens on a full frame—as 100mm is 2x 50mm and f/5.6 is 2 stops above f/2.8.

As you can see, the Micro 4/3 lens is not going to do as well in low light. The iPhone boasts an aperture of f/1.8 on its main lens, but when you figure out the 35mm equivalent, it's more like an f/8 lens.

I went to all the effort to explain this because it demonstrates that larger sensors allow you to work in cramped spaces with less light. If you want to use a 50mm in a hospital room, you probably can on a full frame. But on a Micro 4/3 you might need to be out in the hall because your lens is acting like it is 100mm. So the Zf would be a good choice in this regard.

Camera Shake

This is the bad kind of blurry. Humans are not tripods, so when you are handholding a lens, you need to make sure your shutter speed is fast enough to freeze the action of your image. Camera shake is very easy to control on wide angle lenses and very difficult to manage with telephoto lenses.

Reciprocal Rule

The reciprocal rule states that in order to get sharp photos without blurry camera shake, you must set your shutter speed to 1 over twice the focal length of your lens. So if you have a 100mm lens, you need to set your shutter speed at 1/200 to be safe.

This rule breaks down at a shutter speed of 1/50 if there is anything moving in your image. So if a dog is running or a car is driving by, it will have a motion trail, but at least it won't be due to your shaky hands.

Image Stabilization

This is a feature some lenses have that helps reduce camera shake. Image stabilization can counteract shaky hands and let you get sharp photos with a much slower shutter speed. Newer cameras have sensor stabilization which does the same thing. And if you pair up a stabilized sensor with a stabilized lens, it is almost as effective as using a tripod.

Stabilization is measured in stops. You might hear a lens has 4 stops of stabilization. That means you can handhold the lens and not get camera shake with a shutter speed 4 stops below the reciprocal rule. So for that 100mm lens, that 1/200 becomes roughly 1/12. And if your sensor has 4 stops, you could handhold a shot for nearly a second without any shake.

However, at shutter speeds that slow, if anything in the frame is moving, they will probably have motion blur. But for still life scenes, or maybe a sleeping baby, this can be very handy if you don't have a tripod with you.

If being able to handhold at lower shutter speeds seems important, then you might want to seek out a lens with stabilization and pair it to a camera with sensor stabilization for maximum stable-osity.

Lens Compression

Lens compression is kind of a myth, but I think we still call it compression because it is easier to explain to beginners than optical physics. The lens doesn't really compress anything, it's actually a matter of distance and the aforementioned physics. But I'm going to go with the easy explanation for now.

Lens compression is a phenomenon seen with different focal lengths. If you take a photo with a 500mm lens, the background will seem to compress with the foreground. Thus objects in the background will seem much larger in size.

This also happens with faces.

Wider lenses exaggerate distance. At 10mm, the lens would only be a few inches away from someone's face.

From the lens's point of view, the ears are several times farther away from the lens than the tip of the nose. So the lens is like, "Your ears are really far away! And far away things are really small, right?" So the lens gives us a big nose and small ears and makes us look a bit alien.

But at 100mm, the lens will be several yards away.

From this perspective, the lens feels like your ears and your nose are nearly the same distance away. And the lens is now like, "Things that are the same distance away do not get bigger or smaller." The lens seems to compress or flatten the face, causing a more flattering appearance in the image.

Minimum focus distance

This is sometimes called the working distance. This is how close you can get to your subject while maintaining focus. If you get too close, your camera will just hunt and freak out perpetually until you back up and it can lock on again. This isn't always advertised prominently for lenses, so you need to make sure the lens will be able to focus in the space you plan to use it.

Extension Tubes

Sometimes called "macro extension tubes." These are spacers you put between your camera and lens to decrease the minimum focus distance. In some cases you can even turn a normal lens into a macro lens. These tubes are able to stack and the more you put on, the more into the macro realm you can go. They come in smart and dumb versions. The dumb ones require you to manual focus whereas the smart ones can still use the autofocus system. I highly recommend the smart ones, as they are not too much more expensive.

Lens Imperfections

There are a few imperfections that can plague all lenses and their quality is sometimes judged by how well they mitigate those imperfections. Here are some of those attributes.

Lens Distortion

As lenses get wider, they allow a larger field of view by accepting light rays that are coming from the side of your lens. Let's look at this image again.

Your lens then has to correct those rays and send them to a square, flat sensor. If you look at the 180 degree fisheye, that entire arc has to be flattened and made square. And as good as optical engineering has become, the wider the lens, the harder it is to keep the image from distorting.

This is typically called "barrel distortion." Minor distortion can actually be corrected in editing software. Every lens has correction algorithms. Though sometimes it is best to embrace the distortion, like on a fisheye lens. Make the distortion a feature and not a bug.

Chromatic Aberration

This is the fancy name for color fringing. This is a defect in the lens that cause false colors to contaminate certain objects in a photo. Typically this happens around dark skinny things against a bright background, such as tree branches.

Modern lenses have nearly eliminated this, except for the super cheap models, but if you do end up with fringing, this can be easily corrected in Lightroom or Photoshop. And many lenses even have that correction built in and all you have to do is check a box.

Sharpness

You might not think of sharpness as an optical flaw, but no lens is perfectly sharp. And the quest to make a perfectly sharp lens involves engineering those optical flaws to a minimum.

A "sharp lens" is one with incredible fidelity. Even zoomed in beyond 100%, sharp lenses will show great detail. If you can't get close to the subject and need to crop your photo later, having a sharp lens can make up for the loss in resolution—as you can upscale without much loss in quality. If you plan to make large high quality prints, a sharp lens will help more than tons of megapixels.

That said, if you truly want to get the most out of a high megapixel camera, a sharp lens comes in handy here too. A smartphone may boast in the marketing as having 200 megapixels, but it has a tiny plastic lens. So even though it technically has 200 megapixels on the sensor, the lens will give it the equivalent of maybe 8-10 megapixels worth of detail. People forget, the lens has a resolution as well, and if the lens cannot resolve 200 megapixels, you aren't going to get a 200 megapixel image.

A sharp lens will allow for more detail than higher megapixels. In some cases you need to double or triple the number of pixels to see an increase in detail. Whereas you can put a super sharp lens on a 12 megapixel camera and blow any smartphone out of the water.

And if you put a sharp lens on a 50 megapixel camera, you can almost see into skin pores.

So... sharp = more detail. And more detail gives you greater cropping power for when you can't get close to babies.

Now, I am obligated to say that some photo nerds chase sharpness as if it is some holy grail. They need the sharpest lens so all of their pixels are perfect at 100% zoom even though no one ever looks at an image that close. There are amazing photos that have been blurry. There are amazing photos taken with 50 year old vintage glass. Sharpness is just another tool. If you need to crop. If you need to upscale. If you need to print large... it is a great help. But nearly every lens made for a modern mirrorless camera is "sharp" to some degree.

So, if you need extra sharpness for certain situations, do your research and find a lens that is sharp as can be. But sharpness should be like 8th on the list of priorities.

Soft Lens

A "soft" lens is how a non-sharp lens is referred to. Most modern optics for mirrorless cameras have some degree of sharposity.

Sharpitude.

Sharp...ness.

So you don't need to worry too much about getting a detrimentally soft lens unless you go super duper budget. This is why I usually recommend people skip the "kit lens" unless they absolutely can't afford anything better.

Though sometimes people purposely get vintage lenses because they don't like sharpness and prefer the "character" of older lenses. The imperfections can achieve a different artistic goal. Though this can also be achieved through lens filters... or Vaseline.

I'm looking at you, Barbara Walters.

Sharpness at the Corners

When I read that in my head just now I said it the same way I do "Panic! at the Disco."

Engineers will prioritize sharpness at the center of the lens since that is where most of the interesting stuff tends to be. But also, the light rays at the center tend to be the most parallel as they head to the sensor, so they don't need as much correction. The rays coming from the sides have to be bent and manipulated to correct for distortion, so keeping things sharp at the corners can be a challenge.

Now, knowing that, and knowing how the aperture works, you can infer that when you stop down your lens and make the hole smaller, all of the light rays are constricted to a smaller area. This makes them easier for your lens to deal with, so if a lens has problems with corner sharpness, you can usually stop down to improve this. So if a lens is soft at the corners at f/1.8, you might be able to go to f/2 or f/4 to get better results.

Vignetting

Vignetting is a circular area of darkness at the perimeter of your photo. This is another side effect caused by the same things as soft corners. When correcting those non-parallel light rays, it causes them to travel an ever so slightly farther distance getting to your sensor. And the inverse square law tells us that light becomes dimmer as it travels longer distances.

This is very easy to correct. Usually your camera has a setting to correct vignetting if you are outputting JPEG files. And if you are shooting RAW photos, your editing software should have a check box to fix the vignetting—usually the same one that fixes chromatic aberration. This is usually called "lens correction" in most menus.

Also, same as with corner sharpness, stopping down your lens will usually fix this optically rather than with software algorithms.

Contrast

Contrast is probably the most important attribute to determine lens quality. Good contrast can make a soft lens look good. But lens contrast is not always consistent. It can get better or worse depending on the lighting in your scene.

The best way to test the contrast of a lens is to take a picture of something that is backlit. A person with the sun behind them is a great indicator. If they have no light on them, the person should fall into inky darkness. But if a lens has poor contrast, they will seem like a faded gray.

Focus Breathing

Focus breathing is a phenomenon where your focal length changes depending on how far away your subject is. It's usually not a big deal and most people don't even notice it, but if you ever do video, it can cause a few headaches. Some people can get annoyed because they feel they aren't getting the advertised focal length on the lens they bought. Like, if you get a 300mm lens and it only goes to 250mm for things super far away, that can be annoying.

This video explains it in detail.

Lens Types

Prime Lens

A "prime lens" has a fixed focal length and cannot be zoomed. Typically prime lenses are "faster" (wider max aperture) and sharper. Weirdly they can be very inexpensive or the most expensive. They can be extremely lightweight or weigh a ton. And if you want the sharpest lens possible or the fastest lens possible or both, it will be expensive and heavy.

Having at least one fast prime is usually recommended for any professional photographer.

Zoom Lens

A "zoom lens" allows you to zoom. Obviously. But there are few that go below an aperture of f/2.8, so less light gathering and you sacrifice a bit of sharpness. However, if you don't know how much space you will have to work with, the flexibility of a zoom can be invaluable.

Be warned, while a cheap prime lens can still take fairly good photos, cheap zooms are usually pretty terrible. There are plenty of reasonably priced zoom lenses to choose from, but if the price seems too good to be true, I would trust that intinct.

Wide Angle Lens

A "wide angle lens" is any focal length below 35mm. Wider focal lengths allow you to get more stuff in the photo at shorter distances. A theme you might notice with photography is that every benefit has a compromise or consequence to go with it. Wide angle lenses are wonderful if you are in a cramped space. They also make it easy to keep everything in focus. But as you go wider, distances become exaggerated and barrel distortion becomes more pronounced and harder to correct.

Things that are close to the lens seem huge and things farther away seem tiny. One trick to remember is things in the center of the frame will be less affected by distortion. Something to take into account when taking those smartphone selfies.

If you look, the ball looks huge in frame because it was only a few inches from the lens. Otis was literally smaller in frame than the ball despite only being about 2 feet away. However, he doesn't look all stretchy like the ball because he is centered.

Standard Lens

A "standard" or "normal lens" represents about the same field of view as the human eye. Generally around 40mm to 55mm on a full frame camera (there is some debate on this, but close enough). This is right about where you can take pictures of faces without the unflattering side effects of wide angle.

Telephoto Lens

A "telephoto lens" allows you to stand farther away and still fill the frame with your subject. Usually lenses 200mm and above are considered telephoto. These are often heavy and expensive.

Specialty Lenses

Ultrawide

This is just an extremely wide angle lens. At this point, you just except the massive amounts of distortion and embrace it. These lenses are extremely fun.

Medium Telephoto

These are sometimes called "portrait" lenses as well. They are a little more tele than standard and not quite tele enough for long distance photography. Usually in the 70-200mm range. This is the focal range that allows you to still be close to your subject but you are far enough away to get extra flattering lens compression on faces.

Superzoom Lens

A "superzoom" has an extremely large focal range. It can go from very wide to very telephoto. These are usually not wonderful lenses, although they have improved on mirrorless cameras in recent years. There are a few that could even be used professionally now. But most are just a huge mediocre compromise for vacation pix.

The cheap ones aren't fast, they aren't sharp, and every time you zoom people think your camera is having an erection.

If you are traveling and you have no idea what you might be photographing and carrying around a bunch of lenses is impractical, these have utility. But the larger the focal range, the more mediocre they get. Typically if the zoom range exceeds ~150mm you will start noticing that mediocrity. So a 70-200mm can be fantastic. But an 18-300mm will be very mid.

Macro

A macro lens is any lens that has 1x or more magnification. 1x magnification is a designation that relates the sensor size to how much of the subject fills the frame of your image. For 1x, that ratio should be 1:1.

So if you imagine a quarter lying on top of an image sensor, that's how big the quarter should be in your photo. 2x magnification would be like if a quarter doubled in size and you laid it on top of the image sensor. And so on.

Beware of lenses claiming to be macro and really only having a short working distance. 0.5x is not macro, but is sometimes advertised as so.

Tilt Shift Lens

This is a very niche lens. Most people know of it from the photos that make everyone look like they are in a miniature land.

For every other lens, the focal plane is perpendicular. If you move the camera at an angle, the focal plane will match that movement. So what the tilt shift lens allows you to do is angle the focal plane so your depth of field goes in bonkers directions.

Product photographers love this because you can take a photo of an array of products from a 45 degree angle and keep everything in focus.

This image would be impossible to maintain complete focus of all the objects without a tilt shift lens.

In this example, without tilting the lens, the tip of the multitool is out of focus.

And now you can see the camera hasn't moved, but the lens is at a steeper angle. And you'll also notice the entire tool is in focus.

But wait, there's more! Did you forget about the shifting? Architectual photographers can use the shift function of the lens to correct perspective distortion and keep buildings looking straight.

Will this lens help in the photographing of infants?

Probably not.

But I bet you thought it was cool and are glad I included it.

Recommended Essential Lenses

I didn't know what to call this section. These are just the collection of lenses most photographers will try to acquire as they build out their kit.

Nifty Fifty

This is probably the first lens everyone should buy. Almost every brand has their own version. It is an inexpensive 50mm lens with a sub f/2 aperture. Canon's Nifty Fifty or "Plastic Fantastic" is probably the most famous example. It is only $125 and has an f/1.8 aperture.

This lens may not be the sharpest and it might have a lot of plastic-y, cheap feeling parts, but it is a wonderful way to get started with photography. You can use the wide aperture to experiment with bokeh and shallow depth of field. And the 50mm focal length is probably one of the most versatile. Not too wide, so people look normal, and not too tele, so you aren't a mile away from your subjects.

The Holy Trinity

The "Holy Trinity" is meant to describe the 3 lenses that can handle nearly every photographic task while maintaining professional quality results. Typically these lenses are all f/2.8 and are high quality zoom lenses. The 16-35mm, the 24-70mm, and the 70-200mm.

Most photographers can accomplish just about any task with these lenses in their bag.

Froggie's Holy Hexagon

That said, if I had an unlimited budget I would actually have 6 lenses to cover everything. Beyond the Holy Trinity, I would get a fast prime, an ultrawide, and a macro lens.

A fast prime can see in the dark and has more background blur. The nifty fifty would work great for this.

An ultrawide is one of the most fun lenses you will ever use, even if it distorts everything to a crazy degree and isn't useful very often. It is great for breaking you out of photographic ruts and can really get the creative juices flowing.

And a macro lens is not just useful for making tiny things big. It also allows you to focus at any distance. Sometimes you just need to get a tad bit closer than your other lenses will allow. Macro lenses are also pretty great portrait lenses and can serve multiple functions.

And if anyone is interested in sports or wildlife photos, a nice telephoto lens might be a seventh lens to consider.

I think that is the end of part 1.

I hope this was helpful. And I look forward to posting part 2 soon.

#photography #lenses

[jennrosefx]

So, a little over a month ago, I got myself a new camera and lens. I’d been toying with switching to Mirrorless for awhile, and by selling a couple of lenses I’d been meaning to sell, I was finally able to make the switch. And I have to say… it’s the best thing I’ve ever bought. Sometimes I hug the camera when no one is looking. I love it so, so much and it brings me a whole lot of joy. And being the accident prone, ADHD hurricane that I am, I’m going out of my way to try to take better care of it than I have past equipment. In an attempt to protect it from scratches and dust when it’s laying around my house or being thrown in my car to go birding, I ordered a protective sleeve for it (I prefer to call it “Camera Pajamas” because protective sleeve just sounds…). Anyways, all this today I had an Aurebesh patch made that says “Firepuncher” because I love this camera as much as Crosshair loves his rifle and I’m a great big nerd. And I’m absolutely delighted by it. Delighted I tell you!! 😂

#tbb crosshair #Crosshair #the bad batch #star wars #because clones #camera #canon photography #aurebesh #firepuncher

[lovestory]

100% agree with you in investing in a point and shoot. My DSLR broke a few years ago and I've been saving up to get a new one, but I'm 99% leaning towards investing in a good quality point and shoot now 😌

Crazy because years ago having a DSLR was all the craze😂

right!!!! i mean ideally i'd get a mirrorless, but they still have detachable lenses. i'm too lazy to lug around a DSLR and set it up, i'm no professional lol i just wanna have something that easily takes nice pictures

[colorsinautumn]

hi, I love the photos you take and I was showing my brother who wants to get into photography, he was wondering what camera you used and if you had any beginner tips or resources that helped you 😊

Hi hello! Thank you that’s so nice of you 🥹 and I’d love to share what I know and have learned so this may get long.

I use a Sony A7iii mirrorless with about 4 different lenses. 24-70 mm Sigma, 70-300 mm Sony, 50mm Sony and 20 mm Sony.

As for a few tips:

You can’t buy a bad camera nowadays, whether it be an entry level basic DSLR, to a $1000 mirrorless camera. Nothing out there is bad. So don’t worry about investing much in gear from the start. Gear will only improve your workflow, it’ll never make you a better photographer. Invest in courses and lessons, there are tons of books out there, some of which I have and have really learned from and I’ll list at the end.

Don’t get caught up too much in picking the right camera at the start, just find something that’s affordable and gives you a good set of accessories. Start with a camera body, kit lens (usually 24-70mm or 18-55mm depending on sensor size) a telephoto kit lens if included, a few extra batteries, a camera strap, extra lens caps, microfiber cleaning cloths, a small bag to carry it all, and maybe a decent tripod. Don’t go overboard on gear, I cannot emphasize that enough, you’ll end up which a bunch of shit you realize you never use and never really needed like me.

Don’t get too caught up in the technicals of photography that you hear coming from professionals. People will argue over sensor size, the right lenses to use, dslr vs mirrorless, what brand is better, fuck all the argument and just focus on learning.

Don’t be too hard on yourself either. Youre going to suck at the start. You’re going to make mistakes, fuck up photos you can’t get back, and just not be good, and that’s okay. Just keep showing up, every time you have a camera in your hands, aim to learn something from your mistakes. Practice makes improvement. And one day you’ll take that one photo that’s just perfect in every way. And it’ll make it all worth it.

Also please feel free to talk anything photography with me, I'm so happy to talk about it whenever I can.

As for books I loved:

Understanding Exposure

Mastering Compostion

Learning to See Creatively

The Photographers Eye

Also, some YouTube channels I love for teaching new techniques:

Mark McGee

The Art of Photography

Dunna Did It

Jason Vong

Also, fuck Jared Polin.

[kas-e]

The State of Photography

Photography is dead.  This sentence is on the lips of many people these days, but it's a rather insane idea if you think about it.  The proliferation of the camera in phones has made it not only available, but also easy and accessible, to essentially everyone.  So at its' core, photography isn't only not dead, but it's unquestionably more popular than it has ever been. 

The recent popularity is a sour subject for us older photographers who started in the film era.  Many of us from that time have had to wade through the masses over the last 10 years, and quite frankly, can't stand the fact that our little corner of the art world has been injected into the mainstream via technology, consumerism, and social media - and subsequently blown out of proportion.  Not to mention the working photographers who now have to contend with a massive uptick in competition.

The bottom line is that photographers have been used as pawns in a much bigger marketing experiment for the business minded.  The days of photography being a niche art form vanished with facebook and instagram.  But these platforms are merely trends, and have simply used photography as a marketing tool.  Currently, with the popularity of reels and tiktok, it seems the minds behind the marketing have realized that video is a more useful tool to keep all eyes on the screen.  This fact is largely the cause of making people believe that photography is dead, or at least it triggered the idea - though that's not the only reason.  

What the majority of people don't understand is that we, the photographers, have been through all of this before.  I have dormant accounts on DA, Flickr, and 500px.  These art and photography sharing sites were great in their day, and created an online community for photographers before the social media explosion.  Unfortunately, over time these communities died down immensely.  

Much like 20 years ago when digital photography was developing it's foothold, we are in the midst of a massive change in camera systems.  The standard, for the last 50 years, has been the Single Lens Reflex camera.  Even the digital cameras we've been using over the last 20 years are SLR cameras, still very mechanical, still using ground glass, mechanical shutters, pentaprisms, etc.  Anyone shooting a modern Digital SLR also has a plethora of lenses to choose from that have been made, and are adaptable to modern cameras.  SLR cameras, that is.  Mirrorless cameras, because of basic design differences, (will eventually) render the entire SLR system obsolete.  Some lenses are adaptable, and still used, but because of several factors, switching to mirrorless will most likely remove the photographer away from the old system entirely.  I have tried out the new mirrorless system, and the main difference is the feel and responsiveness.  There is something I love about feeling the springs and levers and metal moving around in an SLR camera.  I find that lacking in mirrorless, and instead it's replaced with a feeling of technical lag and cheesy noises.  It's difficult to articulate, but the feel is plastic and cell-phone like in operation.  But the quality and output is on point, and honestly spectacular, and in a few years there will be no arguing that Mirrorless is the new standard among working professionals, and hobbyists alike.

What I've learned over the years is that none of this matters.  Photography is a solitary skill divided into separate disciplines, all of which are approached in drastically different manners.  While Macro and Portraiture solely rely on the controlling of artificial light, landscape and street photography is all about dealing with natural light.  Each facet demands different gear, different skills, and different tools.  They also differ in dealing with their respective situations and subjects, whether it's dealing with people, or animals and insects, or raw nature and fickle strangers, adapting to these conditions is a skill unto itself.  While many people came make beautiful photographs quite easily these days, mastering the entirety of the particular discipline is an honest challenge, and an interesting process. 

Photography isn't dead.  It got cool for awhile, and thankfully that seems to be dying out.  I think that it will soon be pushed back into it's little corner, and I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that I'm fine with that. 

The silver lining shining through this transient period of photography is that we are in a moment that makes serious gear very affordable.  Over the last 20 years since digital photography started, the rat race to create adequate gear has been swift and steady.  But just after 2010 Canon and Nikon reached a plateau that consists of very capable cameras with an output that can hang with tomorrows most advanced tech.  Before that the right to passage was expensive, not to mention the hassle of selling and upgrading was basically expected every year or so.  Now, you can grab a full frame body (DSLR) and a bag of some good glass, and you're in business.  The Mirrorless race is really just getting started, and it will take a few years still until the trickle down reaches prices that are actually worthwhile for workers and hobbyists.  Yes, most professionals are switching over now, but don't believe the hype.  Instead, capitalize on how affordable this last generation of gear is now becoming.    

#writing #photography #journalism #opinion #writers on tumblr