On 10/9/05, Shel Belinkoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > go out with a prime lens - 24mm through 50mm. A zoom allows you to cheat. > one lens, work close. When you get good with it, then move to other focal > lengths or zooms.. I can't speak for Godfrey, but Juan and I have gone out > shooting a few times, and both he and I always shot with primes - nothing > longer than 85mm iirc. I'm just guessing, but I don't think J used zooms > until he started working with the digi. > > When my interest in photography was rekindled several years ago, I used > longer lenses and a - gasp - zoom. My pics sucked big time. Then i read a > comment by Robert Capa - "If your photos aren't good enough, you're not > close enough." The very next time i went out I grabbed a 35mm lens and > ~forced~ myself to work close. >
Ahh.. I get it. So I could use my 24-135 as long as I lock it to 24mm (it has a lock switch-- I assume to keep the lens from accidentally unfolding itself although that's never happened). I'm not sure I understand -- is this "work close" specific to street photography or for photography in general? I mean, the Capa comment would appear to apply for anything (in my experience (eg, I photograph a lot of flowersand some insects)). > The bottom line is to develop a style that you're comfortable with. If you > go out with a 24~135 lens, you're gonna be trying to decide at each shot > what focal length is appropriate, more often then not staying at the longer > end of the focal range, working closer to your present comfort zone. This is very true. My current results show that photos I shoot and display (to friends) tend to be grouped at 24mm or 135mm, but rarely between the two. So I gather that I'm either trying to grab as much scenery as possible, or I'm far away from something and trying not to move closer. This is what I'm currently "comfortable with", but I'm trying to learn and improve. --s
