The most important lens you’ll ever buy

No, I can’t tell you which one it is, or will be – for you. But I can tell you what mine is, and how you can get there.

Most people who buy system cameras where you can actually change lenses buy some kind of DSLR, normally with what is called a “kit lens”. And according to the statistics, most people never change it (tho some invest a bit more and get some kind of “super zoom” (which they never change), or – like me, a “double zoom kit”. Both options give you a bit more reach, and thus they’re also quite popular). And the future of the consumer DSLR will be mirrorless, with less parts (which can break), lower costs (to produce at least), and fewer problems (like focusing and exposure).

But let’s get back to lenses. So how do you find out what you probably need, or rather want?

Well the first thing you should probably ask yourself is why you’ve got a camera, or why you’re planning to get one. Is it because you like the technical side, and playing with gadgets? Is it to just document your life, and that of your friends and/or family? You just want to hide behind a camera, or use it as an excuse to get closer to people? Holiday photos, safaris, portraits? Or macros, flowers?

The typical quick answer to this is: “Everything”. Well yes. But what is it really for?

For me, I’m an amateur, and by far the most photos I take are those of my family (which I can’t all show here, because some members of my family wouldn’t like it). My favourite photographic subjects are humans and animals, the occasional land- or cityscape, and something you could call product shots, or still lifes. So what does that translate to when thinking of lenses?

Experiment. Set your kit lens to the widest possible angle (shortest focal length), and keep it there, for at least a week. Now go and shoot everything you can. The next week, set the same lens to somewhere in the middle, to a more “normal” angle of view, and again, leave it like this for a week and shoot everything including your favourite subjects. The week after, repeat with the longest possible setting. Take lots of photos with each setting, of every subject you like to take pictures of, and then look at them.

What was the most difficult setting? With which setting did you get the highest number of “keepers”? Did you wish for even wider or longer, or could you be just happy with something in the middle? How did it all work outside, and how inside, with more difficult and dim light? Did you have to use flash inside most of the time, and would rather try without? Could you actually fill the frame, even with smaller subjects?

Well for me, it was more or less easy. When I was younger, I had a film SLR with what was considered the typical trio of lenses: a 28mm, a 50mm, and a 135mm. I loved the 135mm one, but inside it often was too long and gave me lots of “head shots”, or even crops of those. So I always wished for something a bit more moderate, like a 85mm or a 100 or 105mm. These focal lengths are great for photos of a single person, so the first and most important lens I’ve got after buying my double kit zoom DSLR was – no, not what I wanted. What I wanted was a macro lens, or for the Four Thirds system I bought, the macro lens. The one everyone wanted, because with a maximum aperture of f/2 it doubled as a relatively “fast” portrait lens as well.

Since I couldn’t afford it in the beginning, I got the closest possible substitute (sans the macro capability): an old and used OM Zuiko 50mm/1.8, plus an adapter to mount it to my DSLR. Now I had an angle of view like the one of a 100mm lens on an older film SLR. Life was good.

Of course, I still bought that 50mm/2 macro lens later, and life was even better. For me that is the most important focal length because it covers most of my subjects: people, macros and close-ups, product shots and still life.

Yes, you can also do it with a normal focal length, like here:

7de_a015541-eight-muffins

Eight muffins. Olympus E-PL5 camera with Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm/1.4 lens at f/6.3. Studio strobe (flash) with beauty dish, and a reflector.

So while I could do this with what would have been my 50mm lens on the film camera, doing it with a longer lens is a lot easier if you concentrate on just your subject and want to exclude as much background as possible. And because Mitchie lately photographed some small flowers for Zuleikha, I gave her my macro lens which has that 100mm-like angle of view on our cameras:

7de_a015544-camera-macro-lens

Mitchie’s camera and my macro lens. Olympus E-PL5 camera with Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm/1.4 lens at f/6.3. Studio strobe (flash) with beauty dish, and a reflector.

I wouldn’t take that 50mm macro or our 45mm/1.8 primes as my “normal” focal length for outdoors, but Mitchie loves her 45mm, while I have the 25mm lens mounted most of the time. I also have a 14mm lens, so for the Micro Four Thirds camera, I’m pretty much back with a classical trio, equivalent to 28mm, 50mm, and 90mm (plus this 100mm-like macro you see above).

We still have our kit zooms, both the normal 14-42mm (which equals 28-84mm on film), and a 40-150mm (double that for film again). But we both rarely use them. These single focal length lenses are simply better and sharper. They spoil you as soon as you get one. 😉

So my most important lens – apart from the normal one which I have mounted most of the time – is a 100mm macro (on film or on DSLRs with a sensor in film size), a 70mm macro (on APS-C sized cameras if I had one, that would include today’s most sold DSLRs and even some mirrorless cameras), or a 50mm macro (on Four Thirds and Micro Four Thirds cameras).

YMMV as they say – your mileage may vary. But for me, the 100mm-equivalent macro lenses are the lens to get as a second one (additional to your kit zoom or normal prime). I hope that helped with finding out what your most important lens could possibly be.

Thanks for reading.

Some good advice from Ming Thein

If you ask yourself (or even other photographers) which camera you should probably buy, Ming’s latest article “System thinking” has some good advice.

For most people the answer would be either “none”, or a mirrorless camera. Go and read it; he explains why (and has some alternatives mentioned for people who instead ask which next camera they should probably buy).

Recommended reading.

A recently “expored” photo, and some of today

A week ago I took a photo of Zuleikha, which I converted to black & white. She had just taken a bath, and we were about to have dinner. It was “explored” on Flickr, so it had lots of views, and some “favorites” (like “likes” in FB):

7de_9215446-zuleikha

Zuleikha, September 2014. Olympus E-PL5 with 45mm/1.8 lens and a bounced flash.

Today we took a short walk, and I had the 14-42mm zoom on my camera, set to 17mm. Zuleikha was collecting some leaves:

7de_9285488-ryg

Three colours: red, yellow, green

And back home I asked Mitchie if she wanted to swap our macro lenses (she’s documenting some of Zuleikha’s work for school a bit). So I gave my ZD 50mm/2 macro lens to her, and took her manual OM Zuiko Auto Macro 50mm/3.5 lens instead. Of course I had to immediately test it:

7de_9285501-chili

Red hot chili pepper. Olympus E-PL5 with OM Zuiko Auto Macro 50mm/3.5 lens at f/8. *Not* sharpened.

Thanks for viewing.

Time to cover up…

These are my knees. It’s autumn, and getting cooler pretty quick. One of our thermometers shows 19.6°C, the other one 17.6°C, in the flat. So I guess the truth is maybe somewhere in the middle. And it’s definitely:

7de_9255469-cover-up

Time to cover up…

Otherwise, my days are busy, and because of two construction areas on my commute I need some more time to get to work and especially for my way back home.

I’ve been asked to take photos at work on the 8th and 9th of October, but I won’t be able to show most of these here on my blog or on Flickr, especially not those with most of the people. I have something like carte blanche from my colleague Arno, but he’s about the only one. Oh, and from Markus, too. But it will be hard to avoid those other two dozen or more people, including our management. But who knows? Maybe they find something good enough to use it for advertising? For me it will be just a lesson in something like event photography, which I rarely do, so it’s going to be a fun challenge. And even if it’s only documentary, it will still be worth it.

Anyway – as always, thanks for reading.

Autumn leaves

Just another out of camera jpg image:

7de_9215438-autumn-leaves

Autumn leaves. Olympus E-PL5 with 45mm/1.8 lens at f/2.8.

Thanks for viewing.

A photo, not taken by me

Normally I rarely show photos here which I didn’t take myself. But here’s one I found at work:

IBM Debuts Analytics for Everyone

IBM Debuts Analytics for Everyone, by ibmphoto24 on Flickr

The photo shows IBMs next big thing, called Watson Analytics. And the slightly blurred colleague who holds the tablet PC is actually IBMs youngest Vice President (of IBM Big Data and Analytics, and since I’m working in Business Intelligence and in the IBM Software Group like her, she’s actually one of my highest bosses), Mrs. Inhi Cho Suh.

It’s an impressive technology, and if you want to know more about it, just visit IBM. I’m just showing it here because I also think that this is a nice photo.

Thanks for viewing.

Reverting back to jpg

I was playing around with my camera today. First I reset my usual settings back to “normal”, with both contrast and saturation back to “0” (normally I have them at “-2”). Then, still indoors, I took a custom white balance photo and stored it in the camera. And finally, I set my picture parameters from jpg “fine” plus raw to just jpg “super fine”.

Which means that I *have to* get everything right in camera. No post processing, no tricks, no safety net. Oh, and because my Olympus camera exposes for the highlights just a bit (which makes images darker but “protects” those highlights from bleeding out), I also decided to ignore that and set a + 0.3EV correction. Maybe I’ll keep those settings for a while, just to get used to doing things right, because I’m forcing myself to.

Those indoor shots are boring of course, just interesting for myself. So I set the white balance back to “auto”, with the option to “keep warm colours = off”, and went outside to have a smoke. To get a nice and dark sky in the evenings with any automatic settings, you have to apply some negative correction, minus 1 is like my base setting for night shots. And with my newly assumed standard setting of + 0.3, minus 1 from there means – 0.7 in total. Simple enough that I can still do this without much thinking at all. I let the ISO on “auto” as well, so it went up to my default max setting of 800. Et voilà, here’s my out-of-camera-during-a-smoke shot:

7de_9165398-evening

A quiet evening, almost autumn. Olympus E-PL5 and PanaLeica 25mm/1.4.

Thanks for viewing.

Under a blue light…

7de_9135362-under-blue-light

Under a blue light…

… and a self-drawn Malaysian flag, Zuleikha played one of the nicest melodies which were ever written:

a Polovtsian Dance from Alexander Borodin’s opera Prince Igor

see it here, here, or here.

Thanks for viewing.

About using different aspect ratios

I rarely crop photos, mostly I compose them like I see them in the viewfinder or on the rear display of my camera (and sometimes I decide on a square or on a 16:9 TV-like format, which both can show before taking the shot).

But there are times when some other aspect ratio than the native 4:3 one fits better. I like 5:4, especially in portrait orientation (and for portraits), it has that large format look somehow. And when I crop in post production, I tend to do it only on one side, and into the “classic” formats. Here are some shots from today, all in different aspect ratios:

7de_9135355-fairies

Fairies (or mini models with wings?). Cropped 3:2 during post.

7de_9135357-chilies

Chilies (there are still some left). Uncropped 4:3 full frame from my Four Thirds sensor.

7de_9135359-peanuts

Peanuts, roasted and salted. Cropped 7:6 during post.

All taken with my Olympus E-PL5 camera and the Panasonic Leica DG Summilux 25mm/1.4 lens, at apertures 4, 2, and 2, and with ISO 800, 200, and 800.

Thanks for viewing.