Ah lens envy. Every photographer has it. Every photographer has another lens they'd like to own, should they be asked. Unfortunately equipment is cost-prohibitive, so most folks can't afford every one. There are lenses that stretch any budget at $25k each, and weigh too much to be carried around. Camera manufacturers (or sellers like Futureshop and Best Buy) are now providing 'suggested lens kits' at a reasonable cost, including a short telephoto (55-200mm) and a short zoom (18-55mm) to cover all the bases.
I didn't get one of those. I bought my lenses in stages, after the 'need' presented itself. First the 18-55mm kit lens. Later on a whim, I purchased the 55-200mm telephoto. Not too long ago, I completed my group with a fast 50mm F1.8 for those low light situations. I consider these the basic lens kit that satisfy most of my needs (for now).
Sometimes, cameras come with the 55-200mm lens or something else (18-70mm, 18-105mm or 18-200mm). Though I'd love those other 'kit' lenses, at this point they wouldn't add anything to the focal lengths I already have, nor are they much faster to warrant the extra cost. The recent Nikon addition - the 35mm F1.8 would be great if I didn't already have the 'nifty fifty' 50mm lens or if my camera didn’t have the internal auto-focus motor like the D5000, D3000, D40 or D60.
Some shots are 'off-limits' or require flash. I have no awesome fast, long lenses (like a 70-300mm F2.8 for $2,000) and some day I might pick up its slower macro cousin (70-300mm F4-5.6 for $250 or the OS version for $600) when my kid starts organized sports. But until that day comes, I can summarize my needs as: 1) 18-55mm - wide angle shots of landscapes and cityscapes 2) 55-200mm - short telephoto for portraits and unobtrusive photography and 3) 50mm F1.8 - for low light situations or super-sharpness of action (like my daughter in a swing).
All of these will fit nicely in a camera bag without weighing you down or breaking your budget.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Unforgiven
I don't normally run into confrontations while taking photographs. Most of the time it's pointed at my daughter who seems mostly oblivious to it. But recently I've had to explore the rules and laws in Canada. I was looking to upload a few pictures taken of the Toronto skyline recently to a stock photography site.
Reading the site http://ambientlight.ca/laws.php made it clear that taking photos in any public space is allowed in Canada, however there are special rules governing Toronto. I had to make a few calls around to the Toronto Parks and Toronto Island before I got a straight answer. As long as I wasn't coming with a 'studio kit' or taking wedding photos, I was fine. The same photos could have been made in a boat two yards away. I actually suspect I was at the waterline - technically not private or park land, but alas it doesn't matter.
The point is, know your rights. For non-Canadians I point to http://digital-photography-school.com/im-a-photographer-not-a-terrorist-how-to-shoot-in-public-with-confidence. It was a good read regardless, for those times you're accosted by security guards and actual cops. I've heard more than a few stories of police officers forcing photographers to delete photos or confiscating cell phones in order to remove pictures of arrests and shootings.
Reading the site http://ambientlight.ca/laws.php made it clear that taking photos in any public space is allowed in Canada, however there are special rules governing Toronto. I had to make a few calls around to the Toronto Parks and Toronto Island before I got a straight answer. As long as I wasn't coming with a 'studio kit' or taking wedding photos, I was fine. The same photos could have been made in a boat two yards away. I actually suspect I was at the waterline - technically not private or park land, but alas it doesn't matter.
The point is, know your rights. For non-Canadians I point to http://digital-photography-school.com/im-a-photographer-not-a-terrorist-how-to-shoot-in-public-with-confidence. It was a good read regardless, for those times you're accosted by security guards and actual cops. I've heard more than a few stories of police officers forcing photographers to delete photos or confiscating cell phones in order to remove pictures of arrests and shootings.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Of Birds and Parks
I uploaded my first 18 photos to Fotolia last night and attempted to find my way through the maze of keyword requirements to finalize my submission. They have not, as of yet, been accepted though I'm sure I'll get feedback soon either way. I noticed that when I searched using my keywords, a rather large selection of types of photos were returned. Somehow, pictures of hummingbirds found there way into 'conservation park' or 'forest' and I'm clueless on why this occured.
The cynic in me might think that photographers just upload every single dictionary word they can find in order to get their pictures included in every possible search. This is unfortunate. How do I get my pictures of 'rocks and forests near lake' to the top of the list? Ken Rockwell's suggestion that, "if you can't see why the picture is interesting as a thumbnail, it's not interesting" is true. Potential buyers will scan through looking no further than the thumbnail.
Clearly this will dictate some of my composition decisions going forward.
The cynic in me might think that photographers just upload every single dictionary word they can find in order to get their pictures included in every possible search. This is unfortunate. How do I get my pictures of 'rocks and forests near lake' to the top of the list? Ken Rockwell's suggestion that, "if you can't see why the picture is interesting as a thumbnail, it's not interesting" is true. Potential buyers will scan through looking no further than the thumbnail.
Clearly this will dictate some of my composition decisions going forward.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)