Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,921   Posts: 1,522,089   Online: 767
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: 60, 80 or 150?

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    My motto could be: the shorter the focal length, the more boring the photograph.
    I like to use the near standard stuff (60 80 100 110 120) for a lot of things (you do need longer and shorter lenses sometimes). So there must be some optimal range, inbetween the two mottos.

  2. #22
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    My motto could be: the shorter the focal length, the more boring the photograph.
    I like to use the near standard stuff (60 80 100 110 120) for a lot of things (you do need longer and shorter lenses sometimes). So there must be some optimal range, inbetween the two mottos.
    Your motto could be.

    I commit to my motto, however. :-)

    Realistically, I don't think there's any "optimal" FL, however the FL is most definitely attached to how much space the photographer shares with the subject - which is further picked up on by the viewer of the images produced from it.

    In terms of 135, a 50mm can convey separation, whereas a 20-35mm can convey involvement or immersion because you had to be close to pull off a good shot.

    Sometimes separation is pertinent - however most of the time immersion is much more powerful. Mainly because it takes involvement and commitment.

    Caveat emptor: I'm not a rocks and trees photographer.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  3. #23
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Sometimes separation is pertinent - however most of the time immersion is much more powerful. Mainly because it takes involvement and commitment.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVCtkzIXYzQ
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    5,686
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Your motto could be.

    I commit to my motto, however. :-)
    My life, my world, isn't black and white, contains many nuances.



    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Realistically, I don't think there's any "optimal" FL, however the FL is most definitely attached to how much space the photographer shares with the subject - which is further picked up on by the viewer of the images produced from it.

    In terms of 135, a 50mm can convey separation, whereas a 20-35mm can convey involvement or immersion because you had to be close to pull off a good shot.

    Sometimes separation is pertinent - however most of the time immersion is much more powerful. Mainly because it takes involvement and commitment.

    I agree. But 20 mm is far too short, far too unreal for that sort of stuff. I doesn't convey, i think, involvement or immersion, but a "look at my neat lens and the trickery it can do, and so yes, i'm a photographer here to take photos, not giving a hoot for what they are doing, but do want you to notice i'm not afraid to get in other people's faces" kind of thingy.

    35 mm would do nicely though.

    Longer lenses too, because people stand back from what they are doing too. The photographer should join them and do likewise.

  5. #25
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    And yet have you posted a single photograph anywhere to see, Lebowski?
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  6. #26
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Q.G. View Post
    I agree. But 20 mm is far too short, far too unreal for that sort of stuff. I doesn't convey, i think, involvement or immersion, but a "look at my neat lens and the trickery it can do, and so yes, i'm a photographer here to take photos, not giving a hoot for what they are doing, but do want you to notice i'm not afraid to get in other people's faces" kind of thingy.

    35 mm would do nicely though.

    Longer lenses too, because people stand back from what they are doing too. The photographer should join them and do likewise.
    I have to politely disagree with you here. 20mm is not all about "whoa dude, check out the wiiiiiiiiideee angle." There are ways to frame such that distortion is less of an issue and involvement is a higher concern.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  7. #27
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    And yet have you posted a single photograph anywhere to see, Lebowski?
    I do not "post" photographs unless it is part of one of the postcard exchanges. (Hyuk hyuk.) It is an utter waste of time. I can barely find time to develop and proof half what I shoot, and I am supposed to waste money and time digitizing them for the peanut gallery on an analog photo Website so that one fellow named Clayne can have the opinion that my opinion is allowed to exist? Yeah? Well, you know, that's just, like, uh, your opinion, man. I do plenty with my pix...but not online. I do not view online forums as a worthwhile venue for the sharing of my imagery, since I have a fine group of flesh-and-blood people around me to fulfill this purpose. We all come here for different reasons. You may come here to look at and share photographs, but others do not.

    ...and what you said has nothing to do with what we are talking about. What I am talking about is:

    Why the need for mottoes and rules to govern ones photographic choices? Why the need to state them as fact? Why not just talk about how lens choice affects photographs, and how this, in turn, affects what is done by the photographs upon their viewing. Flatly dismissing photographs shot with certain types of lenses is almost the height of uselessness in the discussion of photography.

    Yes. It is harder to discuss things a bit more objectively and fairly. However, it is not useless – unlike rules, mottoes, and opinions stated as facts. One can state a very strong opinion without needing to rely on generalizations and aphorisms.

    ...but then again, I guess if you scan pictures and put them online, you are allowed to do so after all.....

    Maybe my attempt at stating this humorously fell on deaf ears.......but lighten up, mang!
    Last edited by 2F/2F; 10-24-2010 at 08:42 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  8. #28
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by 2F/2F View Post
    Maybe my attempt at stating this humorously fell on deaf ears.......but lighten up, mang!
    It's cool. We're good (relatively). :-)
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  9. #29
    maarten m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    gent belgium
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    220
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Here's my motto: The longer the focal length, the more boring the photographs.
    i like this one

  10. #30
    wclark5179's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    505
    I use the 150 for portraits. I can get the camera in far enough distance so as the client is not so nervous.

    Also I can have the persons eyes tack sharp whilst the background is a blur.

    The 150 is wonderful for head & shoulders and three quarter shots.

    For full length portraits and groups I wil usually use the 80mm.

    I don't use the 60 mm very much for people photography other than environmental photographs with the people in the scene.

    Just what I do.

    Hope this helps you.

    My wife and I spent a few days here:

    http://maps.google.com/maps?client=s...ed=0CCQQ8gEwAA

    Beautiful city and nice people.
    Bill Clark

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin