I'm the type that loves candid shots, well composed and non-posed pictures that give you a true sense of story. If I had a telephoto lens, I could more easily sit back, aim at my subject from afar, and shoot. So why don't I use one? Well for a few reasons including "I don't have one" and "I'm not that interested".
See, wide-angles are the true story-telling lens, which is really what candids are all about when they can capture a moment. As opposed to a telephoto lens, there's a significantly greater chance that most of your frame will be in-focus, allowing tremendous depth of field which adds so much detail about the context of your shot. Also, the wide-angle lens's ability to include more and "see everything" adds the signature unique touch for which many seek out this lens; this allows more for your story-shot.
The problem though is that many photographers perceive the wide angle lens's main purpose to be to "include everything". While this may make the lens shine in landscape or similar situations, that is just one small facet of wide-angle glass. When not in those landscape-like situations, the "include everything" strategy can lead to mediocre pictures.
So what is the true wide-angler strength? Simply, it is to bring your viewer into the exposure, make him/her feel a true connection to your subject, as if s/he were right there (which is why landscape shots can be so powerful in the first place). How do you do this? Simple answer: MOVE CLOSER TO YOUR SUBJECT!!!
When you think you are close to your subject and you're ready to shoot, move another two or three steps closer. Without this proximity to your subject, you miss out on the impression of exaggerated perspective that add an important, artful wideangler touch. Without this close proximity, can be left with subjects that take an insignificant and uninspiring portion of your frame, not lending a connection to your viewer.
Still as a humble beginner, I am fascinated by wide-angle photography, but I'm finding it to be the most difficult lens to use. When you move close to your subject, you must concentrate on the "art of exclusion", eliminating all non-contributing items from the sight of your viewfinder (this is a whole other tip in itself). Being this close, you also compromise the "candidness" of your shots, which is a challenge; conversely, you are more intimate with your subject.
This all takes practice, I still have a lot to learn. I plan to showcase a few different examples in future posts and welcome your contributions as well! In a nutshell, the most valuable trip I've heard for wide-angle shots is certainly to push in close to your subject.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Why less than 24mm?
After realizing I wanted a wide angle lens, I started researching prime glass since they seemed to offer great values. My general knowledge (and quick reading) told me anything 35mm and less is considered, to some degree, as wide.
The labeled Wide Angle AF Nikkor 35mm f/2.0D Autofocus Lens was looking like a possible choice until I started reading the reviews, indicating that it wasn't that wide on a digital camera. Huh? Why?
Now this applies to most Digital SLRs, not just Nikon. The SLR cameras we know have a sensor that "reads" the image seen through the lens. The old film cameras of multiple decades have a sensor to record the exposure on the film, and the new digital cameras have a sensor to capture the image onto a storage card (i.e. SD, Compact Flash). The thing is that these sensors are actually different sizes (in most cases). The old 35mm or full-frame (full-format) cameras have a bigger sensor than most of the new Digital SLRs. Yes, there are a few DSLRs that have that same size sensor, but they are usually top-of-the-line and expensive.
In Nikon world, you'll see the old "traditional" sensor size referred to as FX, while the newer smaller sensor size is identified as DX. Now, lenses that were generally used with full-frame traditional sensor cameras are generally compatible with DX cameras, but there is a trade-off. Due to the difference in the size of the sensor, the smaller version sees less through the glass than the traditional size. There is a "crop-factor" depending on the size of the sensor, for Nikon DX it is about 1.5x and for Canon DSLRs, it is 1.6x.
So what does that mean with the 35mm prime lens I thought would be a good deal? It means that on my Nikon D50, that 35mm lens is really acting like a 52.5mm lens, not really wide at all. To be even close to the general definition of "wide" on a digital camera, I need to have my focal length less than 24mm since 24mm * 1.5 = 36mm.
Here's a quick table that helps show what is actually wide:
Wide: 24-35mm (FX or 35mm camera) vs. 16-24mm (DX camera)
Super-wide: 16-23mm (FX or 35mm camera) vs. 11-15mm (DX camera) ... "super-wide" is also known as "ultra wide".
In a nutshell, for your DSLR, look at the range of 10-24mm whether that be in zooms or primes for your wide glass. Below 10mm, today, it is more likely you're working with a fish-eye lens, which (while wide) is different than wide-angle lenses. My Tokina 11-16mm is the perfect mini-zoom for me to take a deep dive into the wide-angle world. What lens do you have? Or what glass are you looking to add to your collection?
The labeled Wide Angle AF Nikkor 35mm f/2.0D Autofocus Lens was looking like a possible choice until I started reading the reviews, indicating that it wasn't that wide on a digital camera. Huh? Why?
Now this applies to most Digital SLRs, not just Nikon. The SLR cameras we know have a sensor that "reads" the image seen through the lens. The old film cameras of multiple decades have a sensor to record the exposure on the film, and the new digital cameras have a sensor to capture the image onto a storage card (i.e. SD, Compact Flash). The thing is that these sensors are actually different sizes (in most cases). The old 35mm or full-frame (full-format) cameras have a bigger sensor than most of the new Digital SLRs. Yes, there are a few DSLRs that have that same size sensor, but they are usually top-of-the-line and expensive.
In Nikon world, you'll see the old "traditional" sensor size referred to as FX, while the newer smaller sensor size is identified as DX. Now, lenses that were generally used with full-frame traditional sensor cameras are generally compatible with DX cameras, but there is a trade-off. Due to the difference in the size of the sensor, the smaller version sees less through the glass than the traditional size. There is a "crop-factor" depending on the size of the sensor, for Nikon DX it is about 1.5x and for Canon DSLRs, it is 1.6x.
So what does that mean with the 35mm prime lens I thought would be a good deal? It means that on my Nikon D50, that 35mm lens is really acting like a 52.5mm lens, not really wide at all. To be even close to the general definition of "wide" on a digital camera, I need to have my focal length less than 24mm since 24mm * 1.5 = 36mm.
Here's a quick table that helps show what is actually wide:
Wide: 24-35mm (FX or 35mm camera) vs. 16-24mm (DX camera)
Super-wide: 16-23mm (FX or 35mm camera) vs. 11-15mm (DX camera) ... "super-wide" is also known as "ultra wide".
In a nutshell, for your DSLR, look at the range of 10-24mm whether that be in zooms or primes for your wide glass. Below 10mm, today, it is more likely you're working with a fish-eye lens, which (while wide) is different than wide-angle lenses. My Tokina 11-16mm is the perfect mini-zoom for me to take a deep dive into the wide-angle world. What lens do you have? Or what glass are you looking to add to your collection?
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Curiosity less than 24mm
I was jealous. My bro-in-law received a brand new lens for his Canon DSLR as a birthday gift. It was a telephoto lens, giving him the awesome ability to hone in on his subject from far away, I think it had a 200mm range. He could "peacefully" compose from his camera and shoot. He was already producing some spectacular shots at the local farmers market.
Immediately I thought of my one and only lens, the Nikkor 24-85mm AF-S, a great first lens to complement my first DSLR, the very spectacular and underrated D50. The 24-85 range is a sweet-spot, offering a flexibility to zoom in on a subject at a mid-distance as well as opening up wide enough to not feel constraints in smaller spaces. With this lens, I can compose portraits and I can shoot landscapes. I never really had a problem with this lens, it is sufficiently sharp, focuses well, maybe it's a little slow in lower light.
The 24-85mm was just that though, nothing out of the ordinary, just a really great "normal" lens. I didn't want to replace my perfectly good glass, but I was jealous of my brother-in-law's lens because he could now step out of that "normal" focal range with his extended zoom ability. The focal lengths greater than 85mm allowed him to make totally different exposures, to compose from his camera at lengths.
I had curiosities about the range on the other end of my first lens, focal lengths less than 24mm. With some trade-offs, these shorter focal lengths can offer such expansive perspectives, making the photographer concentrate on composition and position. These wide angles really allow the photographer to tell a more complete story in a single shot.
I like photography because it combines science and art, and under 24mm, some of the science makes unique contributions to the art it creates. This is what draws me specifically to these wide angles. The larger viewing angles gives way to exaggerating perspectives, seeing a lot in your frame, effectively distorting and adding dynamics to the picture. Under 24mm, the photographer needs to stay on his/her feet. There is less reliance on the zoom-range from the camera; instead, the photographer needs to push close to the subject, and consciously choose what to include and exclude from the frame, being very careful with placement and the effects of the lens's distortion. At less than 24mm, for a great shot, the photographer needs to tell a story.
Jealousy for my brother-in-law's telephoto lens was the ultimate catalyst that made me also want to go beyond the limits of my rig, wider than the 24mm end of my then only lens. Eventually I landed with a great piece of glass, the Tokina 11-16mm AT-X Pro DX f/2.8. See pictures from the Tokina 11-16mm Flickr group.
Nikon D50, Tokina 11-16mm @ 11mm, f/4, 1/60s
Immediately I thought of my one and only lens, the Nikkor 24-85mm AF-S, a great first lens to complement my first DSLR, the very spectacular and underrated D50. The 24-85 range is a sweet-spot, offering a flexibility to zoom in on a subject at a mid-distance as well as opening up wide enough to not feel constraints in smaller spaces. With this lens, I can compose portraits and I can shoot landscapes. I never really had a problem with this lens, it is sufficiently sharp, focuses well, maybe it's a little slow in lower light.
The 24-85mm was just that though, nothing out of the ordinary, just a really great "normal" lens. I didn't want to replace my perfectly good glass, but I was jealous of my brother-in-law's lens because he could now step out of that "normal" focal range with his extended zoom ability. The focal lengths greater than 85mm allowed him to make totally different exposures, to compose from his camera at lengths.
I had curiosities about the range on the other end of my first lens, focal lengths less than 24mm. With some trade-offs, these shorter focal lengths can offer such expansive perspectives, making the photographer concentrate on composition and position. These wide angles really allow the photographer to tell a more complete story in a single shot.
I like photography because it combines science and art, and under 24mm, some of the science makes unique contributions to the art it creates. This is what draws me specifically to these wide angles. The larger viewing angles gives way to exaggerating perspectives, seeing a lot in your frame, effectively distorting and adding dynamics to the picture. Under 24mm, the photographer needs to stay on his/her feet. There is less reliance on the zoom-range from the camera; instead, the photographer needs to push close to the subject, and consciously choose what to include and exclude from the frame, being very careful with placement and the effects of the lens's distortion. At less than 24mm, for a great shot, the photographer needs to tell a story.
Jealousy for my brother-in-law's telephoto lens was the ultimate catalyst that made me also want to go beyond the limits of my rig, wider than the 24mm end of my then only lens. Eventually I landed with a great piece of glass, the Tokina 11-16mm AT-X Pro DX f/2.8. See pictures from the Tokina 11-16mm Flickr group.
Nikon D50, Tokina 11-16mm @ 11mm, f/4, 1/60s
Thursday, January 15, 2009
What is a "wide angler"?
This blog focuses on wide angle photography. My name is Nico, I am an amateur photographer with a Nikon D50 that is amazed and humbled by the range and abilities of a recent addition to my "rig", a Tokina AT-X Pro SD 11-16mm f/2.8 (IF) DX.
Why do I like wide-angles? There are a few reasons. With somewhat of a limited focal range, it really forces the photographer to be an artist, to move around and think about what is in the frame and what is excluded, to think about positioning and perspective, and, with some of the distortion effects, to play some also. Shooting people is not easy. There is no cheating with a wide-angle lens, no sneaking with a long zoom. For an intimate picture, you need to be close to your subject. Conversely, what is better for a landscape shot? As an additional benefit, at a wide-angle, chances are better that your exposure will be tack sharp!
Why do I like wide-angles? There are a few reasons. With somewhat of a limited focal range, it really forces the photographer to be an artist, to move around and think about what is in the frame and what is excluded, to think about positioning and perspective, and, with some of the distortion effects, to play some also. Shooting people is not easy. There is no cheating with a wide-angle lens, no sneaking with a long zoom. For an intimate picture, you need to be close to your subject. Conversely, what is better for a landscape shot? As an additional benefit, at a wide-angle, chances are better that your exposure will be tack sharp!
My goal with the blog is to bring together a community of "wide anglers" - photographers (new and seasoned) passionate about wide-angle photography - in order to help maximize the benefits and improve the overall art that these broad focal lengths offer. Similar to what Strobist is for off-camera flash (amazing site, check it out!), here I hope to provide a wide-angle idea bank with a supportive group. (Full disclosure: I have no association with Strobist)
Nikon D50, Tokina 11-16mm @ 15mm, f/4.5, 1/80s
I should also re-emphasize that I am far from the experienced veteran to provide instruction. While my reading and experimentation will help pave the way on this blog, I look to those with more tenure to share their images, provide guest posts, and offer advice in order to improve all not only as photographers, but as wide-anglers.
Nikon D50, Tokina 11-16mm @ 15mm, f/4.5, 1/80s
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
