Cool Photography Site

Mike_Rupp

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
3,604
0
Mercer Island, WA
So I've been stuck in Ohio with my wife's family, which means that I spend a shitload of time on the net. I bought a Nikon 20mm F4 lens the other day and came across this neat photography site while searching about it: Flickriver. First off, there is some great photography there. The most interesting part of the site though is that the images are grouped by lens.

This got me to thinking. It seems that most people focus on what type of camera they own and the lens is a secondary consideration. Shouldn't it be the other way around? Wouldn't it be better to think of lenses as the primary instruments of photography?

As an example, most people spend the bulk of their cash on the camera and the lens choice comes next and ends up with a proportionally lower cost. Wouldn't it make more sense to pick out a lens first and then buy a camera that works with that lens?

Back in the early 90s, a friend of mine and I both decided to get new cameras. I already had a dinosaur Nikon, so I just decided to stick with Nikons and began searching for a lens first. I selected the 35-70 f2.8. This was a badass lens at the time and I think I spent around $750 for it. Based on how much money I had left in my budget, I bought the N70. It was nothing special, but I was able to get better images than my friend who bought a cutting edge Canon with the fancy eye tracking focus and the crapola kit lens. It's 20 years later and that lens is still on my camera body. I know that the D600 that I own won't be the last body I use, but I'll still have my 35-70 f2.8 in 20 years from now.
 

Blueboy

Well-known member
Apr 20, 2004
3,218
470
Back in the USA; Rockwood, PA
Couldn't agree more and is why I cringed when my wife's friend bought the latest / greatest Nikon with a crap lens.

Although I've added some glass when going digital, still am using all the stuff purchased over the years from earlier Nikon bodies.

A friend here has an old Sony dslr body, yet, all of her glass is top line stuff and the pics are awesome.

And Flickriver is a cool site.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
That's one of the reasons I bought my new 6D so quickly. I would normally have waited and mulled things over a bit more, but the sale essentially got me the EF 24-105 for free.

Fuck that. I wasn't about to wait around and lose out.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

Blueboy

Well-known member
Apr 20, 2004
3,218
470
Back in the USA; Rockwood, PA
"It seems like people would rather spend more time using photoshop than behind the camera."

That is one aspect of digital I've yet to embrace.

Maybe just too lazy or my film habits still guide me.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
Editing has it's place. I find it incredibly convenient for removing dust from small objects. It's also good for removing an unwanted reflection here and there on chrome. Sometimes you can't avoid them when taking the picture.

Every now and again, there is an undesirable aspect of a picture, such as a person or object in the frame that could not be removed in time, or within reason. Also, despite popular opinions to the contrary, it's good to have access to an editor when photographing people in certain manners.

The set I'm working with now includes several shots of a female wearing a sweater that did not accurately represent her figure. I've used editing programs to alleviate the issue; "airbrushing" for accuracy.

I don't do staged portraits. I fucking hate them. As a result, I run into situations like this on occasion. There's no way around it sometimes. The shots were beautiful, but that sweater added ten pounds. The result would not have been fair.

I can do a hell of a lot with Photopaint and Photoshop, but I don't. I've been using Corel since version 3, so I know my way around an editor. I just think extensive use is cheating for anything other than minor edits, advertisements, and fun.

I do play with it quite a bit, but my important shots are always as close to reality, as photographed, as possible.

Cheers,

Kennith
 

Mike_Rupp

Well-known member
Mar 26, 2004
3,604
0
Mercer Island, WA
I tend to like pictures that are very lightly edited. However, once in a while I'll see a picture that is good because of the editing. Some people use editing as a way to create art using the base photo as the framework.
 

kennith

Well-known member
Apr 22, 2004
10,891
172
North Carolina
I tend to like pictures that are very lightly edited. However, once in a while I'll see a picture that is good because of the editing. Some people use editing as a way to create art using the base photo as the framework.

There's nothing wrong with that.

Also, my view of extensive editing as cheating is not relevant. It is simply an opinion. This is not a subject that can be taken apart logically.

Cheers,

Kennith