I generally think and “work the photo.” I take a shot to establish having one, then move around it, think of alternate ways of compositions, different viewpoints, lighting, etc. It’s kind of like a painter sketching around the subject, getting intimate with it, and then drilling down to figure out the important bits. But you do have to be actively thinking throughout the process. Because of my background (editorial), I’m usually not so much a set-up and think out the shot type of photographer. I don’t know for certain what photo I want until I start shooting it (usually, there are types of photos where I will think it out more, of course.) I usually will have some idea of my general approach, but I rarely have a “final image” in my head before I click the shutter. But I do tends towards photography that is fast-moving and reactive rather than studio work or carefully art directed kinds of stuff. However, even in some of those cases, like taking interiors or still life types of shots, there’s a process of shooting, reassessing, refining going on.
I’ve shot film and had my own color darkroom (Cibachrome and E-6 process), and I tell people that Digital has it ALL OVER film! Now, I also think that coming from a film background is valuable, and that every photographer should experience developing and printing negatives at some point in their life, but for creating images in the “real world” Digital is where it’s at. There are only two characteristics of film that are arguably better than Digital in my book: no long-exposure noise (at the expense of reciprocity failure), and overexposure tolerance. Everything else - resolution, dynamic range, color fidelity, noise, ease of processing, etc. is in Digital’s favor.
I only hope that I live to see another “great comet” like Hyakutake or Hale-Bopp. I got decent shots of both on film, but my Digital capabilities today far exceed what I could do 20 years ago.
One of the things I am most flabbergasted about is the low-light capabilities of modern dSLRs (and, heck, even the other formats, but this is my main area of experience). There are many, many photos that I have taken over the last decade that simply would not have been possible the decade before that. This does not mean I don’t use auxilliary lighting or shoot at 12.8K or 25.6K ISO regularly. But I know now that I have options of shooting moving subjects at 3200ISO and over in dimly lit situations and get an image with the quality of 400ISO (or possibly faster) film. This comes in extremely handy in situations where you are simply not allowed to shoot with auxiliary lighting.
This describes me too. My interest in photography grew organically out of a passion for travel. I have been fortunate enough to have visited 43 countries spanning all seven continents, so you can imagine the large variety of photos I have.
I’ve gone through lots of cameras. Not including flash-cube cameras as a teen, I’ve gone from a Fuji SLR in 1973 to my current Sony A6300 mirrorless.
In between there have been numerous SLR film cameras; numerous DSLR cameras; numerous Point and Shoots; and even underwater cameras. The vast majority have been Canon products, but I love my Sony.
Probably 80 percent of my shots are with my 20mm prime (30mm equivalent). My other lenses currently are: 35mm prime; 55-210mm; 12mm prime for night sky photography; and a 16-50mm kit lens I never use anymore.
I stopped in at a local camera store today just to see what they ask for a Nikkor 28-300 zoom lens. $950! :eek: The only other apparent maker of that same sort of lens is Tamron, and even theirs is only a $100 less. Gonna have to think about it for a bit.
Never buy lenses at a shop. Go online, and for new lenses bhphotovideo.com is a good choice. I buy mine used from the for sale forums on places like www.fredmiranda.com which can save you a lot of money. Also, I’d avoid superzooms like the 28-300, the IQ suffers when you have that great a zoom range.
I have the Tamron 16-300mm.
It’s pretty good optically, especially at the wide end.
It’s a bit soft at the long end, but it’s better than missing the shot, and I’d rather not miss a shot changing lenses when walking around on vacation. It does exhibit ferocious purple fringing at 300mm. The lovebird photo I posted above was taken with it.
Prices for new Nikon lenses are pretty much the same no matter where you buy them, unless there is a sale going on. I’ve thought about a used lens, but then you have no warranty. Maybe I’ll look at the 55-300mm, which is under $300. Problem with a shorter zoom range like a 200-300 is that the lens has limited use. I’m looking for something that is a go-to lens like my old 28-210 Vivitar. I’ve shopped at B&H in the past. Also 42nd Street.
You probably know this, but as a warning to everyone: If you do see a price that’s say, more than 10-15% off the going price everywhere else, be wary. If the price looks too good to be true, it probably is. Just go with the established trustworthy sites like the ones already mentioned in this thread. There’s a lot of shady bait-and-switch operations out there. (They were mostly associated with Brooklyn at least a few years ago.)
The lenses that are cheaper are usually the so-called “international” products, which Nikon will not warranty. I always confirm by email that what is being sold is authentic.
Oh, I buy gray market lenses and bodies from time to time. I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about these types of scams. Confirming by email that it’s authentic won’t help you.
That article is from 2009, so it’s possible those sorts of operations have gone away, but I’d be wary of other scams in their place if a price looks too good to be true.
Nice. When it comes to optics, I prefer new from an authorized dealer and avoid gray market stuff, although it’s tempting.
There seems to be a new breed of reputable second hand dealers springing up; examples include Camera Jungle and MPB (both in the UK). They part-exchange equipment and then sell it second hand at reasonable prices. Completely legit, as far as I can tell.
I still use a Sony DSC F707. It is only 5 megapixels and takes only up to 128 MB memory sticks, but it takes great photos and I love the swivel lens design, which is excellent for macro photography of subjects that are at awkward angles. My first one cost $1000 back in 2002. I finally managed to break it around 2010 and replaced it with a used one from Ebay for less than $50. Now that one has stopped working, and I need to come up with another one. I’d love to see the latest CCDs, lenses, and storage options in a new camera using the same design.
(Not a pro, but enthusiastic enough that I did drop $1000 on a camera even with a limited budget. Some of my photos are bucketed here.)
Over the past year, I have bought several (five, I think) Samyang/Rokinon manual-focus lenses, primarily for Astrophotography. They are a Korean manufacturer which has been targeting very fast (low f/number) wide-angle lenses. For what I want them for, the lack of auto focus is not an issue. The quality of the optics is as good (or better) than the major manufacturers, but their quality control needs work - I’ve had to send back one lens so far for a decentering problem. The replacement lens was sharp from edge-to-edge.
I love my Rokinon 12 mm for Night Sky Photography. I guess I got a good one.
Hi everyone, love the responses far.
Something we haven’t talked about much so far is post production and workflow - what happens to your images after you take them?
I’m a fan of Lightroom. I use it both for organising and editing, and I’ve recently set up Lightroom Mobile on my phone, so that shots I take automatically appear in Lightroom on my desktop.
I don’t do much editing - just a bit of cropping, colour correction and sometimes a b&w conversion.
I just downloaded Google’s Nik Collection of editing plugins. This used to be quite expensive, but is now free, so worth checking out. I haven’t used them much yet, but I’m looking forward to having a play.
Needless to say, in my film days the only post processing I could do was take a scissors to the print before putting it into the photo album. 
In the digital world I started out the same way – no post processing. Then I discovered Picasa and did rudimentary fixes and corrections. I saw what a difference could be made.
Then I decided to move on to a more powerful program. I debated between Apple Aperture and Adobe Lightroom, and chose Aperture. A poor decision in retrospect.
I had gotten a free copy of Photoshop Elements with some other software and used it occasionally. Particularly in instances where Layers would be needed.
Of course, when Apple killed Aperture I moved to Lightroom. And Lightroom has stronger capabilities and a better UI than Aperture. I fell in love with the software.
So much for my history timeline of software use.
I subscribe to Adobe’s CC, so I use both Lightroom (90% of the time) and Photoshop (again, ony when I need Layers capability).
My workflow (my photography is primarily travel photography):
a. Import all photos into LR, applying a custom preset.
b. Go through and Select photos for further review (eliminating crappy shots and near duplicates); create a collection of those photos.
c. Go through the collection and apply further editing if necessary – usually noise reduction; further sharpening; dodging and burning; and cropping. And further trim the number of photos to be uploaded.
d. The remaining photos I upload to my SmugMug photo gallery site.
I probably should make use of keywords, but I don’t.
I use the Canon Digital Professional software to look at the RAW files then convert them to TIFs which I edit in Adobe Creative Suite 4. Usually crop if needed, adjust the white balance if needed, and sharpen.
If I need to cull a lot of photos, I start with Photo Mechanic, then import my selects into Lightroom, where I do my toning adjustments. I generally do my best to stay out of Photoshop, if possible, but anything requiring more adjustments will go into Photoshop. For skin smoothing and retouching, I use a mix of Photoshopping and Portrait Professional. (I apply this with a light hand.) Every once in awhile, I’ll break out the Nik Collection, too, especially Silver Efex Pro, which is amazing black and white conversion software and worth the price of the Nik Collection on its own.