Lens Flair

Aoshi_88

Active Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2009
Messages
192
Location
Malaysia
Car(s)
Myvi, Civic, Vios, MX-5
 

evoWALO

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
1,619
Location
Philippines / Naples, Florida
Money doesn't buy talent. Look at epp_b. He has a D40 and produces much better pictures.

Like a photo of someone before getting run over by a 4x4? :mrgreen:



or an over the head shot of an asian flee market using a manual focus lens?



I chose to present photos that I feel is unique to me. I make the best boring moon shots on FinalGear. :lol:

I could do safari but I'm saving that for the World Cup next year. Though my heart's more for the Singapore or Korean F1 races :)
 
Last edited:

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
Hey, I never said anything about your work, Paolo. I, for example, admire your ability to simply get out and do street shots -- I can't.
 

evoWALO

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
1,619
Location
Philippines / Naples, Florida
Hey, I never said anything about your work, Paolo. I, for example, admire your ability to simply get out and do street shots -- I can't.
Nor am I knocking your work. We do things that interests us.

Like in the Philippines it is a staple for your run of the mill Filipino photographer to take photos of street children, hobos and crazy street people in all their misery and despair. I think that type of photography is negative, exploitive, takes advantage of people and down right depressing. There are so much positive things to document so why focus on such bad things?

The mistake I did with this shot was shooting with a CPL filter on and shoot without a tripod. But overall I am impressed at how well I was able to chose what lens/body combination to use without the need to crop. I used a 5D Mark I and a 85/1.2L II @ f/16. A "portrait" lens used to do landscape.

 
Last edited:

Sir Stiggington

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
3,885
Location
Cambridge, UK
Car(s)
McLaren Mercedes MP4/23 :P
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
A "portrait" lens used to do landscape.
I've now learned to reject the notion that focal length relates to subject in any way. Focal length is a product of what you've envisioned to include in a scene.
 

evoWALO

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
1,619
Location
Philippines / Naples, Florida
I've now learned to reject the notion that focal length relates to subject in any way. Focal length is a product of what you've envisioned to include in a scene.

Though there are some focal lengths that are more appropriate than others. Like you can't use a 14mm or fisheye on a person as it would be unflattering. You as the photographer have the responsibility to make the right choices to make your subject look good.

Social convention makes one think that wides are for landscape and long lenses are for sports & wildlife. I've seen examples where in wides and macros are used for bird shots while long lenses were used to isolate a certain section of the field of view to do landscape

I think more towards focusing distance. Like I've noticed that on a full frame 70-200 tele zoom is ideal when shooting while driving. The flexibility of the zoom and the IS helps a lot. On a crop a 24-105/4L IS would be ideal.
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
Like you can't use a 14mm or fisheye on a person as it would be unflattering.
Says who? This, for example, makes the subject look "cartoonishly cute"



That's certainly a form of flattery.

And, too be honest, I find that, if used correctly, wide angles can be used to create photos that have far more impact than longer focal lengths.
 

evoWALO

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
1,619
Location
Philippines / Naples, Florida
Taking photos of children is a cakewalk. They don't have that much blemishes if at all.

What I mean is unflattering to women who are image conscious. Who think they're "fat" when they really arent.

Sometimes a high resolving lens (what people call really sharp) is sometimes more of a hassle than a blessing when shooting 'ordinary' people as there are more blemishes that'll show up and that needs photoshop work. So a cheaper lens may be a better option in that regard.

It boils down to what you want to do with your photography.
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
It boils down to what you want to do with your photography.
That was kind of my point. I still say that there are no rules as to specific focal lengths for specific subjects, but that specific lengths are often used for specific types of subjects is not what I'm refuting.
 

IceBone

Blue Wheel Hipster
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
27,205
Location
Slovenistan
Car(s)
Audi A5 Quattro
If you want to capture the person's true visual aspect, you can't use a wide angle lens, any sort of wide angle-ness will render them in a cartoonish fashion with caricatured features. I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying you won't portray the person as they seem in real life like that.
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
Sorry, but I have to disagree with that, too.

This was taken at 18mm (28mm equiv.) and it defines my parents (particularly my dad, because of his expression and because of the motorcycle, of course). "Portrait" does not equal "close-up".
 

IceBone

Blue Wheel Hipster
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
27,205
Location
Slovenistan
Car(s)
Audi A5 Quattro
Sorry, but I have to disagree with that, too.

This was taken at 18mm (28mm equiv.) and it defines my parents (particularly my dad, because of his expression and because of the motorcycle, of course). "Portrait" does not equal "close-up".

Well, yes, but it wasn't taken close up. You have to understand that on a camera, the larger the focal distance is, narrower the angle is, meaning the less of the viewfield you'll capture. So a lens @ 100 mms will capture only a fraction of the area that a 18mm lens will.

In your case the entire subject's body was in the centre of the picture, so there was no distortion. However, if you got really close to him, to fill the entire picture, you'd get something like this.

Am I making any sense here?
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
Well, yes, but it wasn't taken close up. You have to understand that on a camera, the larger the focal distance is, narrower the angle is, meaning the less of the viewfield you'll capture. So a lens @ 100 mms will capture only a fraction of the area that a 18mm lens will.

In your case the entire subject's body was in the centre of the picture, so there was no distortion. However, if you got really close to him, to fill the entire picture, you'd get something like this.

Am I making any sense here?
Yes, I fully understand all this already. I agree, long focal lengths often work well for portraits because they separate the subject and background nicely, etc. I'm just saying that you shouldn't limit yourself to specific focal lengths for a specific subjects just because it's what all the books tell you to do.
 
Last edited:

Ramseus

Have you been high today?
Joined
Jan 11, 2008
Messages
5,605
Location
Derpronto
blah blah you can't use wide angle or the person's nose will have its own zipcode blah blah generic response

...but people do not look the way they do in real life if their picture was taken with a long lens. Unless you have some serious personal space issues, you get fairly close to people you know when you talk to them. Wide angle close. Nearly orthographic looking photos that lack any perspective distortion have no character and are not how you see people in real life. And I'll have to ape Nomix a bit and say that head'n'shoulders portraits with completely OOF are boring anyways because they don't show the person, and obviously don't show contextual surroundings.

So, you can be another ape who takes boring uninspired pictures of people wherin there is no background, or you can attempt to be a good photographer. Me, I'll just stick with inanimate objects, let the people scurry by me, I have no business with them.
 
Last edited:

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
blah blah you can't use wide angle or the person's nose will have its own zipcode blah blah generic response
zip code, lol :lol:

Interesting points, though.

Me, I'll just stick with inanimate objects, let the people scurry by me, I have no business with them.
Yeah, for the most part, me too ;)

Just a thought: we should move this discussion to the "Random Thoughts" thread ... BCS?
 
Last edited:
Top