Category Archives: Equipment

Bad Advice – Part 1

I follow online photography forums enough that I recognize certain topics that come up with great frequency. Among them is the question: “What should be my first lens?” (There are variations: “What is the best lens?” for example.) Many posting this question have acquired an entry-level cropped-sensor DSLR like the Canon 400D/XTi, a fine little DSLR. (You can get an idea of my view on this camera by reading an old post of mine: Why I Chose the Canon 350D/XT.)

Among the standard answers to this type of question, one goes something like this: “Just pick up the Canon 50mm f/1.8 lens.” There are variations. Some writers also suggest that using only a prime lens (rather than a zoom) will teach more about composition. Many point out that the lens is both quite sharp and quite cheap.

It is sharp. It is cheap. But as advice to beginning DSLR photographers, this is among the worst.

Yes, the 50mm focal length used to be regarded as “normal.” Back in the days of 35mm film SLRs many people did start out with just such a lens. And the Canon 50mm f/1.8 is a fine little lens, optically speaking, at a remarkably low price. If you look around a bit you can pick one up for $75 or less.

But it is still the wrong choice for almost all new DSLR photographers. Why?

  • Several decades ago nearly everyone started out with a prime lens (or two) rather than a zoom. But at that time the quality of the zooms – at least those that were affordable – was not very good. Maximum apertures tended to be small, and before high ISO DSLRs this was a big problem. It wasn’t necessarily the case the primes were better photographic tools, but they were pretty much the only option for most new photographers. Today decent and even excellent zoom lenses are available at costs that are quite reasonable.
  • Leaving aside the availability of decent zoom lens options, even if you wanted a “normal” prime it would not be a 50mm lens. Nearly all DSLRs (and all entry level DSLRs) use cropped sensors that are smaller than a 35mm film frame. Because the smaller sensors pick up a smaller angle of view from a given focal length lens, one typically uses shorter focal length lenses on the crop sensor bodies. The old-school “normal” 50mm “standard” lens provides the narrower field of view that an 80mm “portrait lens” would have provided on a 35mm film camera. To get the same so-called “normal” field of view that the 50mm lens provided on the older cameras you would use a 31mm lens on a modern crop sensor DSLR. Bottom line: If you want to replicate the old “50mm normal” lens on a crop sensor camera body, an actual 50mm lens is the wrong lens. A more comparable “normal” prime might be something in the 24mm, 28mm, or 35mm range.
  • Some claim that using a fixed focal length lens makes you a better photographer. I have a couple problems with this idea.
    • First, and most practically, most buyers of entry-level DSLRs do not aspire to careers as professional fine art photographers. They want to get decent quality photographs of friends and family, and of their experiences. For them the versatility of a decent zoom makes it a much better choice than a prime in nearly all cases. In fact, most of them will probably be quite happy with the standard (and virtually free) “kit zooms” that come with the cameras – such as the Canon EFS 18-55mm f/4-5.6.
    • Second, I don’t buy the idea that using a prime necessarily does make you a better photographer or necessarily teach composition more effectively. Good composition is the result of a number of factors including, but not limited to, the following: finding an interesting combination of picture elements, determining a shooting angle that places them in an interesting and effective arrangement, figuring out how to best locate them within the frame, using subject/camera distance and focal length to control the relationships among the elements, and using depth of field appropriately. What quicker way to learn about the effects of different focal lengths than by using a lens that provides them? With a zoom one can readily experience how different focal lengths affect the final composition. I have nothing against prime lenses – I do use them – but I think that primes can slow down the learning process, not zooms.

So, if that 50mm prime is not the right place to start, what is?

In my view, the true beginner (using a Canon crop sensor DSLR – I’m not familiar with the options from other brands) can be well served at first by the inexpensive and decent 18-55mm EFS kit lens. The cost is next to nothing, it covers a pretty useful basic range, optical quality is fine for starting out. By using this lens, the beginner can learn a lot about photography – and begin to discover what his/her photography may require in terms of other lenses for future purchase.

If one is determined to start out with a “normal prime lens” on these cameras, there are more appropriate options. While they are not too expensive, they will cost more than the 50mm f/1.8 – but they do have the significant advantage of being more useful lenses for most people. Some examples from Canon include the 35mm f/2, the smaller aperture 28mm lenses, or even the 24mm f/2.8.

With all that said, what is the use of the 50mm f/1.8? There are several, and among new photographers starting out with the kit zoom, for some one of the 50mm primes will eventually make sense. The f/1.8 version is an inexpensive and fine little “portrait” lens for crop sensor cameras for beginners whose interests run in that direction. It can also be very useful in certain types of indoor, low light photography, for example concert and theatrical photography. I can imagine other uses, too.

But just not as a starter lens for a crop sensor DSLR user.

Current Equipment (July 2007)

Cait (who posts at Light of Morn) recently asked about the gear I use for my landscape/mountain photography, so I’ll take her question as an opportunity to summarize what I use these days.

Camera: These days I’m lugging a Canon 5D digital SLR (DSLR) around. The 5D is a full frame DSLR, with 12 megapixel sensor that is essentially the same size as 35mm film. This provides certain advantages for my approach to photography: higher resolution for large prints, wide angle lenses are truly wide, smaller apertures are usable for DOF control, somewhat better dynamic range, better noise control. There are some downsides: cost is more than twice that of more common “crop sensor” DSLRs, size and weight are greater.

Lenses: I try not to succumb to Lens Fever, so I have a small set of good Canon lenses: EF 17-40mm f/4 L, EF 24-105mm f/4 IS L, EF 70-200mm f/4 L, and 50mm f/1.4. While I may take all four on some hikes, more often I take a subset. On pack trips where weight becomes a significant issue I take only the 17-40mm and the 24-105mm lenses.

Tripod: On shorter hiking trips (and car supported trips) I use a very large and relatively heavy carbon fiber Induro C313 tripod. This is generally too large for backpacking, so I substitute a smaller (though not exactly tiny) carbon fiber Velbon 540 “Carmagne” tripod that is lighter and packs more easily. I fit an Acratech Ballhead to whichever tripod I use. I do shoot handheld sometimes, but I almost always use the tripod for landscape work.

Packs: Like many photographers, I’m always looking for the perfect bag or pack – even though I know full well it doesn’t exist. I use a Lowepro Rover AW for longer day hikes, since it can carry my photo gear and enough general equipment and food/water for serious hiking. I’m fond of my Lowepro Slingshot 200 AW for shorter hikes and urban photography. When backpacking (and sometimes on longer day hikes when I’m heavily laden) I carry my camera in the Lowepro Topload AW bag with a chest harness.

Other stuff: I use a remote release (“cable release”) with tripod shots. I sometimes use a circular polarizing filter. I carry a bunch of extra memory cards and batteries when I’m out for a longer period of time.

As you can imagine, you need to be pretty committed to doing photography if you are going to carry all this stuff on the trail – and I’d forgive any of you who decide to go with something a lot lighter. Fortunately, you can do some very nice photography with less expensive and lighter gear.

Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Pentax all sell very nice crop sensor DSLRs these days. Because they use smaller sensors than my full frame 5D, the cameras can be smaller and smaller, lighter lenses will provide the same reach. The Canon Rebel XTi/400D (or the previous model, the Rebel XT/350D) with the 18-55mm kit lens can do a fine job. I’m sure that equivalent models from the other manufacturers are also quite excellent. Some of the smaller “point and shoot” cameras also perform well and can be quite small and light.

Most Valuable Photographic Tool?

Jim Goldstein writes:

The Loss of My Most Valued Photographic Tool

… On this trip I lost something which previously I never gave much of a second thought to and which I’ve since realized is one of the most critical components of my photographic arsenal. What could possibly be so key and why?

The answer — my cable release.

Keep in mind I’m not just talking about the impact of losing a piece of equipment. I’m talking about losing something that is an extension of ones mind and body critical to the creative process….

[JMG-Galleries]

(Click his title link to read the full post at his blog.)

I understand. Not only about forgetting something, but about how important this silly little thing called a cable release is to the process of making a photograph. There is something about setting up the shot and then waiting, cable release in hand, as light changes, clouds move across the ridge, people move in and out of position… and you stand back or to the side of the camera watching and waiting… and holding the cable release.

– Dan

—–

About Vignetting

In photography forums I often read posts that dismiss a lens because “it vignettes.” The assumption seems to be that really good lenses don’t vignette. I’m afraid that searching for lenses that don’t vignette is a hopeless quest.

Vignetting (or “fall-off”) in the corners of the frame is a fact of life with essentially all lenses. As I understand it, this is simply a condition that can’t be completely eliminated in the design of normal camera lenses – though there are ways to reduce it. So the question really is not “does my lens vignette?” It does. More useful questions are: “How much does the lens vignette?” and “How apparent is vignetting at different apertures?” and “How do the vignetting characteristics of this lens affect my photography?”

50mmPrimeVignettingExample: EF 50mm f/1.4 lens shot at f/1.4 and f/4. © "Copyright G Dan Mitchell".

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 lens at f/1.4 and f/4

I have four excellent Canon lenses: 17-40mm f/4 L, 24-105mm f/4 IS L, 70-200mm f/4 L, and 50mm f/1.4 prime. I looked at all of them when I did my recent Full Frame Lens Test. I confirmed that all four can produce really excellent results… and that all four produce noticeable vignetting in certain circumstances, especially in test conditions. (Results posted at various lens test sites on the web will confirm this.)

But is this a problem? Generally, no – though it is important to understand the vignetting characteristics of your lenses if you want to take advantage of this characteristic when appropriate and minimize it when you don’t. The body you use also makes a big difference. Fall off from a given lens will be more visible on a full frame sensor than on a crop sensor.

Stopping down greatly reduces the effect with all of my lenses. On some of them (e.g. – the 50mm prime and the 70-200mm zoom) light fall off becomes very minor when stopped down just a bit. It does not diminish quite as quickly on the 24-105, and the 17-40 can show the effect at apertures as small as f/8, depending upon subject.

Given that vignetting is a fact of life, how can we deal with it? There are actually quite a few approachs that can be used individually or together in different situations.

  • Vignetting can often be effectively reduced or even eliminated in post processing. When necessary I use adjustments in ACR or Photoshop to reduce the effect.
  • Shooting at smaller apertures can minimize or virtually eliminate the effect. Since I often shoot from a tripod I tend to use slower shutter speeds at smaller apertures. Fortunately, full frame DSLR cameras can use smaller apertures than crop sensor cameras; at f/11 or f/16 vignetting effects are rarely visible.
  • In many situations vignetting is actually a pleasing effect. My theory is that vignetting often simulates the way we see with our eyes – we are more aware of objects in the center of our field of vision and less aware of those in peripheral areas. Vignetting can de-emphasize the peripheral area and draw attention to the center. (In some images I intentionally add a bit of vignetting for this purpose.)
  • Vignetting that is cleary visible when the subject is a perfectly uniform test target is often completely invisible in photographs of detailed subjects. In other words, the lens vignettes but you can’t see it. (This is a good illustration of the principle that what happens in photographs is more important than what happens in tests.)

So, vignetting is a fact of photographic life – for better or worse. Searching for a lens that does not vignette is hopeless. It makes a lot more sense to understand vignetting and learn how to work with the vignetting characteristics of your lenses.

—–