Which Lense

[teflon]

Originally Posted by impasto

...We're a team of "pro" photographers, (all Canon) and ALL of us use extenders on a regular basis (daily if we're travelling) with flawless results...

A 'team of pro photographers' - that doesn't make sense. Do you all take the same photo?

I'm curious - are they your own cameras?

[Rebaseonu]

My suggestion is to think if one really needs to take a SLR camera with big lens. I have seen many people carrying SLR-s on their trips but *typical* end results are not that much better than one can get from decent point and shoot. Actually the result depends much more on photographer's ability than camera. I'm not telling that p&s is better for all, but many people taking SLR-s just lug a lot of gear, jet their results are not that good.

You can see some typical travel pictures on my web page, these are taken with small Panasonic DMC-LX1 point and shoot camera in 19:9 format (in JPEG format). It ha zoom range of about 28-100mm and real image stabilization.

I really like compactness of small cameras, I can carry one in my motorcycle jacket's front pocket, always accessible.

SLR cameras have better image quality and advanced features but for typical touristic snapshots good p&s with some skill can make wonders. I agree that for more artistic type of shooting other cameras have their advantages, however for general "I was here" types of shots I can really suggest good compact point&shoot cameras over SLR. After all, image quality seems to be over rated compared to content.

[CrazyCarl]

Originally Posted by Rebaseonu

My suggestion is to think if one really needs to take a SLR camera with big lens.

I reckon people know what kind of camera they need for the kind of photography they do but choosing what is "right" or "best" for them is always complicated as there are usually many good options and none of them are free.

True, a moron with a D3 won't take any better pictures than a trained eye with an A640 but that's not comparing apple to apples. If someone says they want to bring a DSLR then why spend time trying to convince them to only bring a pns? Especially since people who bring DSLR's usually bring a pns as back up anyway.

Your pictures are great and the Panasonic is a wonderful camera (I might actually pick on up myself here in a few weeks) but it has limitations. What if I want to shoot wildlife? Can 100mm cover it? 100mm won't even do good street candid's without getting in someone's face. Actually, 100mm's isn't even sufficient for some types of landscapes. Telephotos can take some interesting landscapes:

Sigma 80-400OS@320mm


Then how about ultra-wide?

Sigma 10-20@10mm


Keeping it simple is great and entirely possible if you're taking record ("I was there") shots and a good pns can do wonderful things when placed in front of a good eye. That said, if you want the power and flexibility to shoot more kinds of subjects in different conditions, changing lenses is necessary and, I think, a blessing - think about all the different composition possibilities you can get out of one camera!

What? And risk getting dust in my camera? That's like saying I don't ride my motorcycle because I don't want to get dirt on my engine and, unlike motorcycle engines, there's technology now which helps keep dust off sensors.

Point is, PnS or DSLR, ride with it, use it and take amazing pictures with it. Change lenses, don't change lenses, it doesn't really matter, they all will get dirty and when they do, clean it and take more pictures with it. Motorcycle travel photography is not about photographing pictures in museums or a Mochaccino in Starbucks, this is about capturing the world, every, dirty, dusty, wet, damp, dry, dark and bright beautiful corner of it.

Ride, Take pictures, Ride some more,
CC

[Rebaseonu]

Originally Posted by CrazyCarl

If someone says they want to bring a DSLR then why spend time trying to convince them to only bring a pns? Especially since people who bring DSLR's usually bring a pns as back up anyway.

People often don't know that they can make decent pictures without a DSLR. That is why everyone thinks that a SLR is the only possibility. My bet is that over half of DSLR users actually don' t know how to use their gear to full potential (eg. they shoot in full auto "green" mode).

Originally Posted by CrazyCarl

What if I want to shoot wildlife?
100mm won't even do good street candid's without getting in someone's face. Actually, 100mm's isn't even sufficient for some types of landscapes.
Then how about ultra-wide?

Yes, we can make great photos with extreme lenses. However, we can also make nice pictures with only 1 fixed focal length lens (in fact most of iconic images of 20th century were taken that way). Just live with the limitations. Less is more. I have used and still use mostly 35mm fixed lens on my film camera. Yes, I can't do 15mm wide angles and wildlife, but I can still take pictures (I like).

If you want to take many lens and have fun doing so, by all means do it. I'm just trying to say that the peace of mind and ease you get when you have less gear is often worth more than these few extreme pictures that require special lenses.

[mollydog]

Carl,
Great shots and some good advice.

[teflon]

Originally Posted by Rebaseonu

...People often don't know that they can make decent pictures without a DSLR. That is why everyone thinks that a SLR is the only possibility. My bet is that over half of DSLR users actually don' t know how to use their gear to full potential (eg. they shoot in full auto "green" mode)...

To be fair, metering and focussing is so good nowadays that, 9 times out of ten, it's easy to get good results when the only thing you have to adjust is the compensation button. Trouble is, that turns an expensive SLR into a bulky point and shoot camera and you still have to choose the lighting and composition - no settings for that! Though that's the point you were making.

Taking a damn good picture with a compact is far more satisfying.

[daveg]

I borrowed a friend's 18-200 vr and man.. it was great! I rode around my city trying to take my typical touristy shot and was really happy with the range (esp along the 200mm end).


I agree that atleast 80% of a photo is independent of the equipment. The camera w/ lens mounted fit nicely into my tank bag, so once I sell my 70-300 VR and sigma 70-300, I'll prolly pick up the 18-200.

[teflon]

Originally Posted by impasto

..I challenge any photographer (I knoooow this is revolutionary talk for the purist among you), to bring a filtered photograph, that I can not reproduce EXACTLY in Photoshop.

The ND filter, that Mollydog suggested, would be needed in bright conditions to achieve a shallow depth of field when required.

Just a thought.

[teflon]

Originally Posted by daveg

I borrowed a friend's 18-200 vr and man.. it was great! I rode around my city trying to take my typical touristy shot and was really happy with the range (esp along the 200mm end).


I agree that atleast 80% of a photo is independent of the equipment. The camera w/ lens mounted fit nicely into my tank bag, so once I sell my 70-300 VR and sigma 70-300, I'll prolly pick up the 18-200.

If it floats your boat, then it's right for you. Lots of people like it. Glad you got it sorted.

[The Cameraman]

Mornin' Everyone,

just as an aside to this thread, has anyone discovered a point and shoot that doesn't suffer from shutter lag? A mate's after replacing his G3, which he loves apart from the said lag.

[CrazyCarl]

Originally Posted by mollydog

To use my Canon 20D, the only D-SLR in the bunch, I will have to refigure my whole travel packing system to make it fit. Need a tele also and something very wide. $$$$$$

Sigma 10-20. Not expensive, sharp, good build, high contrast and not very large or heavy. It's a WA landscape monster and many Canon users use it.

Originally Posted by mollydog

If you look into the Panasonic Lumix cameras, look at the DMC FZ18. Zoom range: 28 to 500mm...But I'm looking at a smaller, more compact camera with the quality of the G3, Leica lens and decent features. So many good super zooms now.

G3 was a good camera and I'm surprised you had problems with it. I'm considering the Panasonic LX2 (dpreview link) as I think it may perform more like the G9 but not as bulky with nice glass. Also worth noting is it doesn't have those weak little automatic lens covers; instead it uses a traditional snap-on cover which holds itself firmly in place. The LX2, probably more than any other pns I've seen so far, is more like a mini DSLR and shoots panoramic. Zoom range is 28-112 (4x) which I think is plenty for a back up.

I'm not into superzooms because I usually try to obey the rule of 3, meaning anything more than 3x and the quality WILL suffer somewhere. This is not a matter of preference but physical/optical limitations. 4-5x is okay, but 10x and 12x lenses won't even be in the same class. To be clear, if someone is looking for general record shots this is NOT an issue, but if you want to shoot material you can blow up big for print or submit to magazines, the sharp fast glass is important.

If you haven't already, borrow someone's Tamron or Sigma 18-50/2.8 for a day and tell me what you think. Be careful though, resolution in glass is like hp in engines. Once you taste it, it's hard to go back. But then what the hell do I know, I think a 200cc is big.

CC

[CrazyCarl]

Originally Posted by The Cameraman

Mornin' Everyone,

just as an aside to this thread, has anyone discovered a point and shoot that doesn't suffer from shutter lag? A mate's after replacing his G3, which he loves apart from the said lag.

That is an excellent question and I wish I had a definitive answer for you. I'm sure there have been improvements in this area since the G3 but it really depends on what your mate is looking to shoot. Does he want to do fast action stuff?

CC

[Rebaseonu]

Originally Posted by The Cameraman

Just as an aside to this thread, has anyone discovered a point and shoot that doesn't suffer from shutter lag? A mate's after replacing his G3, which he loves apart from the said lag.

Most current higher end point and shoots are much better than 5 years ago. G3 is a quite old model, current model is G9 (which seems a nice camera except it does not have 28mm wide lens). In-depth reviews at Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ list also different lag times now.

If you want to shoot action with typical camera you need to use pre-focusing. You press shutter release button half way down which will focus the lens on your subject, then you wait for your "decisive moment" (still half-pressing the shutter release button) and if it is there you fully depress shutter release. Then the camera will take picture almost instantly, as most of what is commonly referred as "shutter lag" is actually time that takes to focus the lens (move lens elements to right position using motor). This technique will also work with the old G3.

[photographicsafaris]

You need to figure out what you need and what you are prepared to carry and use.

Firstly Impasso:
Sorry I disagree: Photoshop is useful, but useless if the images are burnt out or you are digging endlessly in the dark
Neutral density graduate filter. and Polarising filter. You cannot replicate these in photoshop and the grad ND should have been used in CrazyCarls mountain shot. Anyone travelling to NewZealand without a Polariser should be banned at immigration.
You Have to have these two filters. But then I believe you have to have a tripod. even if it is a gorilla pod off the bike

I am a Nikon-Canon convert (but the D3 is going the right way) but I would seriously consider using my old Nikon fm2 with film, it wont rattle to death like your D70 will
And the teleconverter advice guys... please! I believe that the rear elements of the 18-200 lens will hit the Nikon extenders when mounted hence this can simply be rendered as incompatible. (You can use a 3rd party converter but you are wasting your time)

If you insist on taking an SLR then do it right:
Nikon D200/300 70-200 f2.8 1.7 teleconverter and a 17-35 f2.8 + 50mm f1.8mm and an SB800
Canon do a lighter package: EOS 20-30-40/5D a 17-40f4 with a 70-200f4 and 1.4 extender (or 70-300DOIS hmmm rattly bits!) + 50mm f1.8 and a 430ex
If you are not going to take all of those then dont bother with the SLR idea. Take a Panasonic F50 instead.
OR
Fuji made an Finepix E900, this is an incredible camera, and answers CAMERAMANS queries about what to buy next. Currently they are being released all over ebay.co.uk at £72+postage Its extremely cheap and the image quality is great and it shoots RAW
However everywhere that it is not important the camera is crappy, ie viewfinder, screen and plastic rear (good metal front though) However it goes forever on two AA batteries and takes extendable lenses taking it from about 17mm to 200mm with great image quality.

Oh and a tip, those of you using little compacts you can shoot through your sunglasses for Neutral density or polarising effects.

[CrazyCarl]

Originally Posted by photographicsafaris

You need to figure out what you need and what you are prepared to carry and use.

Oh so easy? Nothing to do before this? You must be especially clairvoyant!

Originally Posted by photographicsafaris

Neutral density graduate filter. and Polarising filter. You cannot replicate these in photoshop...

IMHO you're spot on about the polariser but about as wrong as you can get about the Grad-ND. Photoshop can do it, and even more, using multiple exposures. Matter of fact, some people take it to an absurd extreme and call it "HDR". It takes more time but can give more dynamic results (which means the ability to control the output over various tonal ranges) and with 14bit this becomes even a little easier.

I used to carry an Cokin ND Grad but the glass plate would vibrate around inside the plastic holder and get covered with plastic dust particles that stuck to the glass and could not be blown or wiped off. Also, the screw in frame for the filters was extremely awkward to pack and space on a 150cc is extra premium. What do you store your grad filter in when on rough roads?

Originally Posted by photographicsafaris

the grad ND should have been used in CrazyCarls mountain shot.

No, actually it shouldn't have been. That shot is exactly as I like it. You could so us the honor of sharing some of your work as well. I've also got a fine tooth comb.

Originally Posted by photographicsafaris

You Have to have these two filters. But then I believe you have to have a tripod. even if it is a gorilla pod off the bike

You'd stick a DSLR on a Gorilla pod on your bike? There must be no wind where you live. Ever consider a bean bag? You can use it as a pillow too.

Originally Posted by photographicsafaris

I am a Nikon-Canon convert (but the D3 is going the right way) but I would seriously consider using my old Nikon fm2 with film, it wont rattle to death like your D70 will

I had, and still do have a D70 which has crossed rivers of the Tibetan plateau, two high speed drops (one of which the bike cartwheeled) and countless other get offs with hundreds of hours on crap roads through some of the most extreme environments this planet can toss at a person and it still keeps shooting. Care to explain that? I'll bet not.

Don't act like film cameras are faultless either. All cameras are machines like any other and they will fail.

Originally Posted by photographicsafaris

If you insist on taking an SLR then do it right: Nikon D200/300 70-200 f2.8 1.7 teleconverter and a 17-35 f2.8 + 50mm f1.8mm and an SB800

And after you've finished settling the third mortgage on the house, maybe in a few years you'll be able to able to ride somewhere. DSLR's are not just for people who can afford 2,000 dollar lenses and you don't need a D3 or even a 5D to take good pictures. A D60 or Digital Rebel is still a great camera to take photos with, what's important is being there and using it.

Additionally, your "do it right" setup excludes the ultra-wide (10-24) angle and leaves two important gaps between 35-50 and 50-70. I'm sure you'd only use all Nikon glass too, because other glass, well...doesn't say Nikon. The 50/1.8 is a good piece for the money though - at least as soon as you stop it down to 2.8.

Point is, it's up to everyone to decide what their level of commiment (money, time, energy) and objectives are with the pictures they'll take. If someone wants to make a book, submit to magazines or blow up images for print then the needs are different than someone who want to post to a blog or bbs or simply have some pics to show their family and friends.

Although there is naturally some consternation in making these choices, their needs will become clear through time and as long as everyone does their best, they will arrive at the necessary gear eventually. What's disappointing is people who talk about the "right way" and someone "should do this" when anyone with a brain understands photography and all art is largely a subjective experience with varying levels of interest, commitment and goals. You can like it or not like it and offer comments if needed but at least give some considerate intelligent feedback or you're wasting everyone's time.

Now lets see some pics. I'm sure they're outstanding - they should be for all the hype.

CC