Posts Tagged long lens
Choosing a camera bag
Posted by Mark Duehmig in Everything on June 25th, 2009
Choosing a camera bag…
Disclaimer: I LOVE camera bags. I understand why some women want a lot of purses. No single purse will fit every occasion and no single camera bag will work in every shoot.
There are two things that might help you in your shopping though: first, expect to pay for quality, and second, get over the beautiful photos of the large bags festooned with camera bodies and lenses.
Point one, paying for quality; if you have a lot of equipment, it won’t take long before that ads up to thousands of dollars of gear quickly. You need to protect that stuff. So don’t wince too much when you need to spend $300 for a good bag. It will last you a long time.
Second point; if you get that big bag with 30 slots for lens, four slots for camera bodies, three more for flashes
A promotional photo of a loaded camera bag. I used to drool over these images. What do you think this weighs?
and side pockets for the little things, it needs to come with something else: a Sherpa to carry it. This might be ok if you take the bag from home/office/studio to the car, and from the car into a shooting site where you just pull from the bag all day. But there aren’t too many jobs like that unless you’re primarily a fashion or product photographer.
I still have, and it is still one of my favorite cases, a Tamrac 814. (I think it is an 814. They don’t make this model any more.) And I loaded it full of gear and was trouncing around Cairo one day when I started to take on an “S” shape. That gear was killing my back with continuous walking and shooting. And if you want to keep your gear, you don’t dare set it down in Cairo.
I wasn’t home 20 minutes when I ordered a Lowell Pro backpack. A little more difficult to swap gear in and out of, but a lot easier on the back.
I have a bunch of bags, but here are some favorites:
* Case Logic Camera Messenger bag; This is my everyday bag that allows me to carry my camera and essential gear with me everywhere. I carry a D-700 body with a 17-35 lens attached, and a 70-200 mm lens in the side. I have to detach the handgrip/battery holder and this goes in the other side, along with a SB900 speedlight. I also have room for my Canon HD video camera if I want to take it along. (I shoot video for the Weather Channel, and it isn’t good to run into a nice wall cloud and not have a camera.)
* Tamrack 814; This is a minimal sized bag for carrying a D-700 and two lenses. The 70-200 mm is just too long. But if I get a bigger bag, I’ll just fill it, so I’ll make this one work. It is supposed to be able to carry two camera bodies in this model, but not unless they both have small lenses. Even with two pro quality medium zooms it would be tight.
* Lowell Pro backpack.; this is a great bag. It holds the above gear easily and can accommodate a second body without a lens attached. Or a video camera. This is an earlier version of their packs and the accessories pocket is one big, giant maw. New bags have many smaller pockets to help organized stuff. I recommend this if you carry the stuff I do. (See my packing list below.)
* I have two excellent bags from National Geographic. They caught my eye because I thought they looked good, and I was curious about their quality since National Geographic put their names on them. Yes, they are excellent. I ended up getting a daypack and
Me shooting at the edge of Lake Fagnano in Tierra del Fuego, Argentina. Everything fit in my National Geographic bag. This is the "Explorer Backpack - Large."
a large backpack. The daypack acts much like the Case Logic bag above, but dressier. I take it when I don’t want to look like I’m carrying a camera bag. The large backpack holds lots of gear and enough clothes for a day or three, depending on where you’re going and what you need. Everything is padded well and looks great too.
I have to admit that I was drawn to the style of the National Geographic bags in part because of Marlin Perkins. You know, the white haired guy from 70’s Sunday night show Mutual of Omaha’s Wild Kingdom. “The lioness has my leather briefcase firmly in her claws, but my companion Jim is going to go get it back for me. Well done Jim! See to those cuts before you get blood all over the Land Rover.” I loved that show. But I digress.
* Tamrack Velocity 5 case; I don’t use this much any more. My first DSLR was a D70 with the kit lens. This bag worked great as my day bag to keep a camera with me, as well as a few other things. But it isn’t big enough to accommodate large pro lenses. The truth is few bags are designed to work with a whole set of f2.8 lenses. So try before you buy.
* Hard cases; I have two hard cases for carrying gear. The first is a Pelican 1650. I got it both to protect my gear in wet environments, and so I could safely check a bunch of gear on an airplane. There was a problem with this latter plan. I don’t know the exact weight of this case, but I’d guess about 35 lbs. That only leaves me about 15 lbs of gear before the airlines charge me exurbanite fees for being over the 50 lbs limit. I still haven’t really solved this since tripods and stuff weigh so much. I’d get charged for multiple bags too, depending on the airline… Sigh.
My other case is smaller and holds one set of gear. One body, two lenses and a flash. It is my go anywhere in any weather case. It is a Seahorse brand. Works well so far and cheaper than the top of the line Pelican cases.
* Tripod bag; There are times when I need to carry a big tripod, and the rest of the gear I’m packing won’t accommodate it. I have a PortaBrace Tripod bag. It is made to carry big video tripods so I can carry two smaller tripods or even a set of light stands. Odd story; once in St. Louis, I’m at the baggage carousel waiting for my gear to come around. I see the tripod bag on the belt and wait patently for it to get to me when this older (I’d guess 70) lady picks up my tripod bag, carries it over and lays it with her growing stack of bags. Folks, there is nothing common about a bright blue, 4 foot long triangular bag with a wooden handle. It wasn’t like it was a black roller bag. When I went to retrieve it, she seemed surprised; “Oh, is that yours?” Hmmm.
Ok, anytime you have a bag, you’ve got stuff to go with it. Some of this stuff varies depending on where you go, but a few things are good anywhere.
Accessories I carry in my camera bags:
Small flash light
Small roll of toilet paper in a ziplock bag
Lens cloth(s)
Comb
Small screwdriver
Small package of Band-Aids
Sensor cleaning swabs (NEVER use paper products!)
Pen & notepad
Business cards
Memory cards in crush proof case
And when I’m actually traveling with my camera bag as my carry on,
Cell phone
iPod
Water bottle & snacks
Tickets & passport in quick access compartment
I used to carry one of those cable locks where a cable pulls out, goes around your bag and connects it to something solid, so someone can’t grab your bag while you are sleeping at the airport or from under a chair at a restaurant. That is until I had my bag locked to my chair at an outdoor café in Uruguay. It wouldn’t unlock. At all. I ended up borrowing a pair of nail clippers and working on the small cable over time to get the thing cut. It took a while. I’ll get another some day.
All about camera bags now. I’m sure you guys have suggestions, tips and stories. Let’s hear them!
Keep shooting,
Mark
Not all lenses are created equal
Posted by Mark Duehmig in Everything on May 27th, 2009
I’ll begin this entry by saying I am writing it without coffee. I went through the drive-through this morning and forgot to order coffee. Now this shouldn’t be a big deal, but my daughter has fallen asleep in the back seat, and this much-needed nap will help her get though pre-school today, so I’m going to just sit here and write this… without coffee.
OK, so you’ve got a nice camera, likely with the “kit” lens that came with it, and you’ve decided that one of the first things you want is another lens. Either really wide or really long- something to compliment the mid-range workhorse that came with your camera. But when you look at the prices from the camera stores, you are shocked and confused at the wide range of prices for some lenses. Why the big differences?
A couple of reasons, but first, lets make sure we’re comparing apples to apples. When you see prices on line, or in the back of magazines, beware the unscrupulous sellers. Some will, at best, bate-and-switch you or sell you gray market stuff. At worse, you’ll end up with junk and without your money. I have experience with both, as those prices can be tempting and my spirit was weak. But please, take my word for it; there are only a few places to trust: B& H, Adorama & Abes of Maine. Hopefully your first choice is your local camera store. We need to keep those in business so we have a place to go and touch and feel our goods before we buy them without flying to New York. But I digress…
There are two big differences in lenses that affect their price; construction materials and the speed of the lenses.
The kit lenses that often ship with DSLRs are a good example of materials. The lenses are probably a high quality plastic such as fluorite. This isn’t bad as it does a great job and is lighter than glass. But, it isn’t as perfect as glass.
Even with glass lenses there are different qualities. Ground glass vs. cut glass and even composite glass, are all options for making lenses. The most expensive lenses are made from high quality glass blanks that are ground down to their final shape. The difference in quality is definitely that last 5-10%. Lens technology is such that the kit lens sold today with a camera is superior to a great lens just a few years ago.
The other, more important factor, is how fast the lens is. When I mention the speed of a lens, I’m talking about the smallest f-stop that a particular lens can be set to. The f-stop is a ratio between the focal length of a lens and the opening of the lens. The focal length is the number most people are familiar with; “I just bought a 200 mm lens.” 200mm is the focal length.
But an important factor with that focal length is the size of opening on the lens that lets light in. Comparing the two gives you a minimum “f-stop.” For example, if I had a 100 mm lens with a 50 mm opening on the front, I’d have an f 2 lens. (100/50=2). The smaller the front opening, the bigger this number becomes. A 100 mm lens with a 25mm opening is an f 4 lens. An lens is rated by its smallest f-stop.
It isn’t hard for a lens manufacturer to increase the focal length of a lens, just separate the glass elements further. What costs money is increasing the size of that front piece of glass (and most other inside too.) You can guess that time and materials increase greatly between a 25mm wide piece of glass and a 75 mm wide piece of glass.
So why do you care how big the front lens is or how fast lens is? If a 200 mm f 5.6 lens has the same magnification as a 200 mm f 2.8 lens, why not go photograph birds with the cheaper, and lighter, lens?
The difference is light gathering power. A lens with a bigger opening lets more light in. The results are brighter, crisper photographs and much faster shutter speed. Have a look at the sidelines at a pro football game. The photojournalists all have big lenses with HUGE front lenses. Those are 500 mm and bigger lenses that open up to f 2.8. They cost big bucks. (And don’t get lens envy, most of the photogs rent them.) But to stop action with fast shudder speeds and get crisp images, you need to let a lot of light in.
There is one other big benefit to a fast lens; depth of field. This is a whole posting in itself, but the f-stop you’ve got your lens set to determines how much of your image will be in focus. If you’re on the edge of the Grand Canyon and want everything from the rock in front of you to the distant river to be in focus, you close down your aperture to a small opening, which changes your f-stop. If there is enough light, you might choose f 22. If there isn’t enough light, use a tripod for that long exposure. Everything will be in focus.
But if you’re taking photos of your daughter blowing the seeds from a dandelion, you want all the attention just on her. So you stop down to f 2.8 if you can, and only what you focus on will be sharp. Everything else will be soft and unimportant.
Most “kit” lenses are listed around f 4.5-5.6. This means that zoomed out, they can open up to about f 4.5. And zoomed in they’ll have a minimum f stop of 5.6. These will give you good general photographs, but won’t allow you the option of a short depth of field.
So that is the 10,000 foot view of lenses. When you open your camera catalog, you’ll see the wide range of lenses and prices. The difference between a $200 and a $1600 lens is that last 10% of quality and flexibility when composing a photo. Is the difference worth about $1400-1500? That is up to you.
I’ve always given the advice that pretty much all DSLR cameras now are fantastic. With cameras, like lenses, you’re paying for that last 10%. But lenses will outlast cameras. The glass is where you’ll see that last 10% for many more years. If you can afford it, buy a cheaper camera body and put your money in the glass. When you wear out your camera you upgrade the body and keep using those wonderful lenses.
But isn’t it nice to know that even if you are using the cheapest digital gear out there, you can still have great photos? It all comes down to you and when you push that button. The Moment. So whatever you have in your camera bag, get out there and…
Keep shooting,
Mark
www.MarkDuehmig.com
A short treatise on long lenses
Posted by Mark Duehmig in Everything on May 27th, 2009
My friend from New Zealand read my posting on photographing people out on the surf and thought using a long lens from shore might be the best option. So, he asked, what should he consider when buying a long lens?
I have a blog posting all written up that I haven’t posted yet on how to choose lenses in general- and why some are so much more expensive than others with similar specs. I’ll put up that post shortly as it will be useful for this topic. But here are some points specifically for “long” lenses.
A long lens refers to great magnification and is measured by its focal length in millimeters. So a 200 mm lens is longer than a 50 mm lens. So the longer lens you get, the more you can “zoom in.” That’s the basics and you probably know all that.
As you’ll hopefully read in my next post, not all lenses are created equally. I’ll come back to this.
In this case, Paul is rightfully concerned about “lens shake.” The more you are zoomed in, the more your camera movement is visible. There are three ways to deal with this.
First: use a tripod or monopod. Either is good and has advantages. A tripod has more stability but is less easy to adjust on the run. And is heavier. Oh, you can buy carbon fiber, but look at the prices first…. A monopod might be good for this situation but you have to double check for straight horizons. Plant the camera, take a deep breath and compose the shot.
Second, pay a little extra for image stabilization. One of the best lenses I have is the Nikon 70-200mm lens with image stabilization. This lens has built in compensation for small movements and can help reduce shake a lot, especially in low light situations with slow shutter speed.
Third, pay for a “fast” lens. Remember where I said not all lenses are created equal? A fast lens refers to the “f stop” of a lens and is a ratio between the focal length of a lens and the size of the opening of the lens. In short, how big is that piece of glass in front? The bigger the opening, the more light that is let in and the brighter the image. The more light, the faster the shutter speed and camera movement is less of a factor. The smaller the f number, such as 2.8, the faster and brighter the lens.
You’ll notice that solutions two and three start with “pay extra.” Image stabilization isn’t too bad nowadays, but big, bright glass is expensive. My Nikon 70-200 lens with image stabilization is a fast f2.8 throughout its focal length but it cost about $1700. That’s more than 3x as much as a D40 camera with a standard lens. On the other hand, you can get a Nikon 70-300mm lens that is a bit slower at f/4-5.6 (This means it is f4 when at its widest point, and f5.6 when zoomed in) for about $160 US from B&H Photo. And that has image-stabilization built in to it! (Nikon calls it VR for vibration reduction.) So is that extra bright glass worth about $1500? That is up to you to decide. If you’re going to do this for a living, you’ll want the good glass. If you are shooting casually, go for the slower lens and shoot on bight, sunny days. And use a tripod.
One other big lens option when you need a LOT of magnification and just don’t have the pocketbook for really big glass (a Nikon 500mm f4 lens is $8500) you might use a mirror/lens. Technically a mirror/lens is designed like a Schmidt-Cassegrain reflector telescope and uses a big mirror to collect the light, rather than a lens. It is much easier to make a big mirror than it is a perfect piece of glass. So a 500mm mirror/lens is about $120 or so, and an 800mm mirror/lens is less than $250.
Naturally, there is a downside. First, most of these mirror/lenses are a slow f8. I’ve used these and actually notice the image is a bit dim. Second, they are all manual. No autofocus or other fancy 3-D metering blah blah. You put it on your camera and focus it and keep it focused while you take a picture. But, when it comes to high magnification at a reasonable price, these are it.
That is about all I can think of to help you decide about long lenses. If the price tag of a fast lens didn’t scare you, read my upcoming post on what makes a good lens good.
Thanks for reading,
Mark
www.MarkDuehmig.com