50mm pictures with D300

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by Sosumi, Jan 21, 2008.

  1. Sosumi

    Sosumi Guest

    While I was waiting for my new zoom lens, I only had the 50mm left. So I
    thought about something someone said someday: take pictures without a
    zoomlens to learn composition.
    So for all you boys and girls I hauled my camera around town and tried to
    see....
    I think there's absolutely some truth in this. You do feel that you have to
    "create" instead of zooming.
    If I was successful?
    You´ll be the judge and jury. Leave a comment and a rating, preferably with
    an explanation.
    http://nikon-box.com/

    I did use some cool filters and tools from Nik software:
    Dfine, Nik Sharpener and Color Efex. Very nice stuff!

    Questions? Just ask...
     
    Sosumi, Jan 21, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Sosumi

    Don Wiss Guest

    Don Wiss, Jan 21, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. You got it! You did good. I love the old 50 and it is nice to be able to
    get the results you want by zooming with your feet.





    Rita
     
    Rita Berkowitz, Jan 21, 2008
    #3
  4. Sosumi

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    Zooming with your feet. Spoken like a true clueless imbecile.

    Sorry, you can change your position, but you cannot zoom, oh fattest of
    asses.
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Jan 22, 2008
    #4
  5. Sosumi

    PixelPix Guest

    I never bothered considering the statement until now and you are
    right.... it is impossible to "zoom with your feet". Lens zooming
    maintains perspective, while moving closer alters the perspective. So
    you while each of the two methods are useful in their own right and
    will maximise the use of the pixel count (as apposed to cropping),
    they will not produce the same result and it comes down to the image
    that the photographer wishes to create.
     
    PixelPix, Jan 22, 2008
    #5
  6. Sosumi

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    When I read unsolicited insulence such as this, I almost think that
    retroactive abortion can be justified.

    Some people are just too lazy to zoom with their feet. They would rather
    spend money, lots of it, and let technology create their art.

    So Long,
    Dudley
     
    Dudley Hanks, Jan 22, 2008
    #6
  7. People who suggest zooming with their feet should be introduced to the
    nearest superhighway.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Jan 22, 2008
    #7
  8. Sosumi

    John Navas Guest

    That childish response is actually correct. Moving with your feet is
    *not* the same thing as zooming (changing focal length) because it
    changes *perspective*, which zooming does not. It's why a "dolly zoom"
    is not the same as lens zoom alone.
     
    John Navas, Jan 22, 2008
    #8
  9. Sosumi

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Some people are just too dependant on a technilogical crutch.

    Take Care,
    Dudley
    Beauty isn't always in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes, it can be found
    in the mind as well.
     
    Dudley Hanks, Jan 22, 2008
    #9
  10. Sosumi

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Aw, but does every zoom lens maintain the same degree of depth of field,
    perspective, etc?

    I think not.

    So, the only thing that is constant throughout a variety of zoom lenses is
    that the area covered by the shot decreases and the objects in it become
    larger.

    For instance, are the effects produced by a 35mm to 80mm zoom exactly the
    same as, let us say, a 100mm to 300mm zoom?

    No, the shots from each would be much different, but the characteristical
    magnification of the image is what is the goal.

    So, why can't one "zoom" with one's feet?

    Take Care,
    Dudley

    Beauty isn't always in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes, it can be found
    in the mind as well.
     
    Dudley Hanks, Jan 22, 2008
    #10
  11. Sosumi

    John Navas Guest

    Zoom isn't a crutch -- it's a tool.

    When I want long perspective, moving in isn't an option.

    You do understand perspective, right?
     
    John Navas, Jan 22, 2008
    #11
  12. Sosumi

    John Navas Guest

    I'm afraid you're wrong. Zoom lenses do maintain perspective, since the
    distance to the subject doesn't change. As for depth of field:

    <http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm>

    Larger apertures (smaller F-stop number) and closer focal distances
    produce a shallower depth of field.

    ....

    Even though telephoto lenses appear to create a much shallower depth
    of field, this is mainly because they are often used to make the
    subject appear bigger when one is unable to get closer. If the
    subject occupies the same fraction of the viewfinder (constant
    magnification) for both a wide angle and a telephoto lens, the total
    depth of field is virtually constant with focal length!

    ....

    This exposes a limitation of the traditional DoF concept: it only
    accounts for the total DoF and not its distribution around the focal
    plane, even though both may contribute to the perception of
    sharpness. A wide angle lens provides a more gradually fading DoF
    behind the focal plane than in front, which is important for
    traditional landscape photographs.

    On the other hand, when standing in the same place and focusing on a
    subject at the same distance, a longer focal length lens will have a
    shallower depth of field (even though the pictures will show
    something entirely different). This is more representative of
    everyday use, but is an effect due to higher magnification, not focal
    length. Longer focal lengths also appear to have a shallow depth of
    field because they flatten perspective. This renders a background
    much larger relative to the foreground-- even if no more detail is
    resolved. Depth of field also appears shallower for SLR cameras than
    for compact digital cameras, because SLR cameras require a longer
    focal length to achieve the same field of view.
    They all have the same performance at a given focal length and
    aperature.
    Of course not -- different focal lengths.
    The entire composition is the goal!
    Because perspective changes. Compare the image taken with a 300 mm lens
    to the same subject size with a 50 mm lens, and you'll find the
    background is totally different! See
    <http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml>
     
    John Navas, Jan 22, 2008
    #12
  13. Sosumi

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Probably better than you can imagine.

    But, this thread started out with the suggestion that, once and a while, we
    should put the zooms away and trudge around town a bit in order to check out
    the 50mm perspective, and what effects can be obtained by "zooming" with our
    feet.

    You do understand the original intent of the thread, right?

    These posts received a resounding, unwarranted, ridicule, and I merely
    attempted to support the original two posters by defending the proposal.

    Given the high tech, mega-featured cameras we all have today, it's easy to
    rely on the technology to capture a stunning image. But, how many of
    today's point and shooters would even own a camera if they had to put in the
    same degree of work that photographers routinely exerted 30, 50, or more
    yeears ago?

    Of course, the flip side is: if people tried the 50mm challenge and found
    out that a bit of physical exertion and creative thought can yield as much
    of an improvement in our current images, imagine what could happen if a
    similar degree of effort and creative thought were to be employed in using
    our little pocket sized cameras.

    I think the exercise at least deserves a try, and the proponents of the
    concept a bit of respect.

    Take Care,
    Dudley

    Beauty isn't always found in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes, it can be
    found in the mind as well.
     
    Dudley Hanks, Jan 22, 2008
    #13
  14. Sosumi

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    But, you are missing my point.

    You admitted, above, that the effects of a small zoom are not the same as
    the effects produced by a bigger zoom because "they don't have the same
    focal length. And, this is the basis of my point.
    While both lenses are different, and produce different affects, which is to
    say that the depth of field and perspective of images produced with
    differing zooms are different, we still refer to the process of magnifying
    the effective image area as "zooming."

    So, why can we not use the term when refering to the magnification of an
    image by physically moving closer. The depth of field and perspective may
    be different from those produced by physically changing the focal length of
    a lens, but then, so are the effects of changing the focal lengths of any
    two not identical "zoom" lenses.

    Right?

    Take Care,
    Dudley

    Beauty isn't always in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes, it can be found
    in the mind as well.
     
    Dudley Hanks, Jan 22, 2008
    #14
  15. Sosumi

    John Navas Guest

    It actually started off with a zoom not being available.
    You did read the OP, right?
     
    John Navas, Jan 22, 2008
    #15
  16. Sosumi

    John Navas Guest

    What is your point?
    Depth of field does not change with focal length -- it changes with
    focal distance. See the links in my prior message.
    No. If you keep subject magnification the same, depth of field doesn't
    change. What does change with focal length is perspective, which is why
    "walking zoom" and lens zoom are different. The change in perspective
    may be desirable, or it may not.
     
    John Navas, Jan 22, 2008
    #16
  17. Sosumi

    Dudley Hanks Guest

    Okay, now it's starting to make sense. You don't know how to read. Please
    note the following:


    While I was waiting for my new zoom lens, I only had the 50mm left. So I
    thought about something someone said someday: take pictures without a
    zoomlens to learn composition.
    So for all you boys and girls I hauled my camera around town and tried to
    see....
    I think there's absolutely some truth in this. You do feel that you have to
    "create" instead of zooming.
    If I was successful?

    Now, you are right that the first sentence is about waiting for the lens,
    the restt is about "zooming" with one's feet (although that particular term
    didn't come in until a later reply).

    I take it you didn't do very well in litrature class when your instructor
    asked, "What's the main idea of this essay?"

    Right?

    Take Care,
    Dudley

    Beauty isn't always found in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes it is found
    in the mind as well.
     
    Dudley Hanks, Jan 22, 2008
    #17
  18. Sosumi

    John Navas Guest

    "Discussion" over.
     
    John Navas, Jan 22, 2008
    #18
  19. Sosumi

    Dudley Hanks Guest


    The above is my point.
    But, two different telephotos will likely produce differing depth of field
    at the same focal length, right? Besides, find an old telephoto lens, lets
    say a pre 1980's vintage, and look at the depth of field scale on the lens
    as you move the focal length. Then come back and tell me that the depth of
    field does not change with focal length.
    But, this is the crux of the matter. We don't want to keep the subject
    magnification constant. We want to play with subject magnification which is
    what the whole idea of this thread is about.

    of field doesn't
    Let me try this from a different angle.

    Imagine for a moment that you and I are the first two opticians in the world
    who think up the idea of moving one element of a multiple element lens
    farther away from the other.

    I say to you, "Isn't this neat? As we zoom this element farther away, the
    image gets bigger!"

    And, you reply, "Yeah, that's nice. But what's going to sell this baby is
    what it does to perspective!"

    We immediately part company, and start marketing our own version of the
    lens. Who do you think will be the better sales person?


    Take Care,
    Dudley

    Beauty isn't always in the eye of the beholder. Sometimes, it can be found
    in the mind as well.
     
    Dudley Hanks, Jan 22, 2008
    #19
  20. Sosumi

    Mr.T Guest

    Given the same magnification, wrong.
    Now try that again but this time changing the focus distance to maintain the
    same magnification as you zoom.
    No point in comparing apples to oranges then.
    I don't remember the OP saying that? In fact these were his words :
    "take pictures without a zoom lens to learn composition".

    MrT.


    MrT.
     
    Mr.T, Jan 22, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.