What's your street lens?

Street Mode for the 50?

Jack - I love my 50's - what did you mean by "street mode"?

Kathy Rappaport said:

Jack - I love my 50's - what did you mean by "street mode"?

Click to expand...

AF is usually off, or set to be active only via the thumb (*) button, a-la CF 4-1 on a 5D. Aperture set usually to 4 or 5.6, and lens pre-focused to the middle distance of the zone I'll be shooting in, usually between 2 - 4 meters. This enables a quick focus if needed for subjects at either end of the zone.

Asher Kelman said:

Jack,

Why is the T/S not suitable for surreptitious street work? I like the possibility of pointing slightly away from a subject and still capturing them.

Click to expand...

Nicolas Claris said:

You mean to be able to shoot someone aside, hence without his consent?

Click to expand...

Nicolas, we are not photographing inside someone's house where permission is required. Here, in the USA, at least, one has no legal impediment to any photography that is not causing provable damage and the bar that a plaintiff has to reach is very high!

What's the point of asking permission when one wants no interference with what the person "is" at that moment? Ask and one has already perturbed the emotions and one will get


If one is not happy with self-empowerment, then this type of photography is not for you! You feel permission is needed. I don't! I do however, seek permission afterwards if I like the image and want to share it with that person and also perhaps at some time get consent for more than just an art gallery, for which no consent is needed. Sales for stock would require consent!

The only exceptions are pictures of children, where they are identifiable or I am noticed. I would not want parents to have the slightest anxiety about safety. So I generally ask beforehand under those circumstances.

If there are objections, I usually delete!

Asher Kelman said:

Jack,

Why is the T/S not suitable for surreptitious street work? I like the possibility of pointing slightly away from a subject and still capturing them?

Click to expand...

Jack Flesher said:

No, it would be excellent for purpose... Two small things to keep in mind however is that one, exposure needs to be set BEFORE the shift or it will not be accurate and two, the viewfinder gets significantly darker with full shift.

Click to expand...

As Nicolas has witnessed, to his chagrin, I often do not use the viewfinder just point the camera! This I learned in the tough streets in Ibadan in Nigeria where one does not stop to photograph people with any flair!

I'd simply have the camera zone focused, look the other way and shoot from the hip, literally with the rangefinder against my side and aimed to the person. I would simply move on, not altering the position of my camera at my side. Since it was film, there was no way of checking the picture anyway.

It turned out I was pretty good much of the time.

With my digital cameras, the same except I also may bring the camera to my eye and even in relaxed situations, use the * button for focus. Otherwise it's zone focused and I take my chances.

In real rough neighborhoods, my wife drives and I shoot from the window, the camera zone focused.

Now in these circumstances, if you stopped and looked in someone's eyes that, alone, might be viewed as hostile! Forget about going to the next step and asking for anything!

Asher

Nikkor 17-35

Crisp, clear and with the crop factor, it becomes 25.5 --> 52.5

Beats the hell out of the 18-200 kit lens than came with my D300

Mt first attempt at a street lens (one size fits all, just carrying one lens) was a Nikkor 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 ED IF VR. This is used on a Nikon D40 which is a handy caryaround size; the lens dwarfs it a bit.

However:

• VR is no help for moving subjects
• big front elements catch more glare
• zooms still often have lower quality than primes
• f/5.6 max aperture at the long end is rubbish
• its a bit big
• most photos ended up at 24, 40-50, or 120

Not being really satisfied with the image quality either, my next lens was a prime. Cosina Voigtländer Ultron 40mm f/2. Its a very well built, manual focus, CPU-enabled prime; meters on the D40, has excellent image quality, is usable wide open and sharp from f/2.5 onwards, and is a small,light pancake form factor.

The D40 plus CV40 is a great street combo, 40mm is usefully shorter than the common 50mm and more like a 'normal' lens on a 1.5x crop cam, and the camera as a whole is less offputting than a big zoom lens pointing at someone.

Although I now have various other primes at differening focal lengths, this is still the one I reach for for 'just one lens' street photography.

Of course if you want an even smaller package, the Pentax K200D with 40mm pancake would serve and give you AF!

There is a Contax 40mm pancake lens that you can use with an adaptor on canon cameras.

I've come to the conclusion that for street work, if I'm going to use an SLR the size won't make that much difference and my 5D with 50mm gives incredible IQ. If I want small then an SLR, however small, is too big!

Ben,

Do you know if it clears the mirror of the 5D and do you know if the adapters with focus confirmation work?

Asher

Just bought the 24-105. Now if only I can figure out how to pay for it!

It IS a dandy little lens, though. I'm anxious to give it a good test.

Not sure Asher but if you go to FM there are a couple of people there using it on a 5D, do a search for the lens on the Alternative Board and you should come up with all the info you need.

I just got me a Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 new for a little more than $100 ! it is the perfect street lens -- a bit slow since the AF is the screw driver type--. I think that it is more fun than the medium wide to medium tele Zoom, and fantastic for portraits and grabbing shots from a distance.... also to do a mini project I had some time wanting to do that is to collect Urban Fossils.

On a street:
90% Zeiss 2.8/25 manual lens, on a D300.
10% Hasselblad and Zeiss 4/50
0% LF
For landscape: the opposite

Ken nice images.

I have EF lenses 35mm F/1.4, 50mm F/1.4, 85mm F/1.8 and 135mm F/2

I might carry a tele and wide in the field but sometimes I like to take one lens and use it exclusively as such the case with my Fairfax portfolio. Those photographs were taken with the 35mm lens and in some cases using a 10 stop variable ND filter.

Joe Thibodeau said:

Kev nice images.

I have EF lenses 35mm F/1.4, 50mm F/1.4, 85mm F/1,8 and 135mm F/2

I might carry a tele and wide in the field but sometimes I like to take one lens and use it exclusively as such the case with my Fairfax portfolio. Most all those photographs were taken with the 35mm lens using a 10 step variable ND filter and long exposures.

Click to expand...

Joe,

In quality of your images, how would you rate the 85 1.4

At a recent fashion shoot I was surprised that the guy used that modest lens. In fact I was flummoxed! I didn't know if I should be impressed by his economy or lend him a 70-200 2.8L IS to see the light.

Asher

Canon's EF 85 f/1.8 (not a f/1.4) is an outstanding and economical lens, Asher. I owned one for several years and ultimately sold it when I got the f/1.2L. But to this day I'm not at all convinced that the additional expense can be shown in image quality or flexibility. Personally I'd have to rate the EF 85mm f/1.8 a 9.8...but only because I have to rate the f/1.2 a 10.

BTW, my new favorite walk-around lens in Canon's EF line is the EF 35mm F/2. It's also superb (corner-to-corner on full-frame), very sharp, excellent contrast, almost a pancake-length, and very lightweight. Its only shortfall: like the other non-L lenses it does not have full-time manual focus. Tush. At $240 it sure is much less costly than my 35mm f/1.4L and at only 0.5 lbs much, much less bulky. Slap one of these puppies on your 5D and prepare to be impressed.

Canon makes a 85mm f/1.2 and a f/1.8. IMO the f/1.8 is a better value all around. It's lighter and sharp as a tack. I evaluated a f1.2 but didn't see the big draw especially concerning price and size and auto focus is more difficult to obtain wide open. The f/1.8 rules this focal length in my opinion. The 35mm f/1.4 is superb. Haven't tried the 35mm f/2 but suspect it is a great lens. I enjoy full-time manual focus on all my lenses.

35

Someone is loaning me the 24 1.4 and 35 to play with next week at a wedding I am shooting; I love the 85 1.8 as much as I love the 50 1.2. The 85 1.2 is on my wishlist, but, not high priority because the 85 1.8 is so excellent that the price point difference might not give me the difference back in income.

I have the 50 f/1.4 which I think is an equal to the 85 f/1.8 and if I were to get another lens it would most likely be the new 14mm. Kathy let us know how you feel about the 24mm 1.4. I had the f/2.8 version which is a toy but it worked fairly well.

I have the 85 1.8 in both ef and fd forms It's excellent and for a long time was my favourite lens. It's still up there with the 50 these days, lovely sharp lens, nice bokeh and just draws nicely.

Mike

Will report in.

I will definitely report in. I hope to have some great shots from this wedding. It's right on Puget Sound...the bride and groom are stunning and their dogs (miniature Schnauzers are the groomsmen. My assistant for the wedding has a prime collection.

On the street ... a 20 on the FF and the 70-200 on the APS-C.

Gary

I'm going to have the opportunity to do some of my first street shooting this weekend in New Orleans and the still ravaged areas of Waveland and Bay St. Louis. The 24-105 is going with me plus I rented a 10-22 mm. I have a crop, Rebel T1i. If I come back with anything interesting, I'll share. I'm hoping things look a LOT better than they did this time last year.

Sydney Rester said:

I'm going to have the opportunity to do some of my first street shooting this weekend in New Orleans and the still ravaged areas of Waveland and Bay St. Louis. The 24-105 is going with me plus I rented a 10-22 mm. I have a crop, Rebel T1i. If I come back with anything interesting, I'll share. I'm hoping things look a LOT better than they did this time last year.

Click to expand...

Sydney,

The 10-22 sounds a great idea since your x1.6 multiplier effect of the Rebel Ti makes your widest angle equivalent to ~38.4! I myself am so guilty for relying on stitching as I often have just my one 50mm lens for everything when casually shooting. It used to be the 24-105, for a time. However, the value of shooting in available light trumps most other considerations.

Asher

Hi,

My mostly used lens is the Canon 35mm f/1,4. It gives me the range of possibilities I need: depth of field, sharpness, colour.

35mm f/2

A street lens is one that has the most adaptability and can capture an image that presents itself. To me that rules out a lot of primes, since you may not have time to move your camera physically to get the right frame. And if you are not taking still photos, but ones of people or wildlife, then there are other considerations, like culture. In some cultures people do not seem to care at all about being photographed, but others, if you move around to make your prime work, then by the time you frame the shot, you have a very weary subject and the natural scene is gone. I am not into the 2.8 ED lenses yet, but I do have a lottery ticket in my pocket!! but for me zoom is key to capture the chance encounters on the street. I use the nikon 18-200. I would like to hear what anyone has to say about this lens.

Mike Nogle said:

A street lens is one that has the most adaptability and can capture an image that presents itself. To me that rules out a lot of primes, since you may not have time to move your camera physically to get the right frame.

Click to expand...

Mike,

To me, with a 50mm 1.2 or a 50 1.4, one can shoot no matter what light. That's the critical issue in street photography I think. Hardly ever is their such an issue with getting the frame filled, as good exposure generally trumps resolution. with the Nkon D3X, the Canon 5DII and the like, there's usually more than enough pixels to go around to define whatever interests you, even way on the other side of the street.

Also, I'd imagine that the 18-200 mm Nikon lens is a little more intrusive. However, to reach across the road, being black, it may work out fine. Canon's better L zoom lenses are white and that's not too subtle.

If one asks for permission, the 50 1.4 makes more sense.

Asher

[/URL]

Rich Beaubien: Silhouette 35mm f2.0​

Rich,

This is such a delightful and personal image of a quiet human moment, the book does allow one to vacation in imaginary world and we, in turn, pass by and wonder about what that might be. The 35-40mm has been the classic street lens for thousands of Leica users. it is just capable of pulling off great portraits and yet gives a more social point of view for street scenes, bringing more of the ambience of a place than the longer lenses.

Asher

I'll add a copy to our collection on silhouettes of the human form, here.

Good point Asher, I will try my 50 1.8 and see how it goes.

Asher Kelman said:

Mike,

To me, with a 50mm 1.2 or a 50 1.4, one can shoot no matter what light. That's the critical issue in street photography I think. Hardly ever is their such an issue with getting the frame filled, as good exposure generally trumps resolution. with the Nkon D3X, the Canon 5DII and the like, there's usually more than enough pixels to go around to define whatever interests you, even way on the other side of the street.

Also, I'd imagine that the 18-200 mm Nikon lens is a little more intrusive. However, to reach across the road, being black, it may work out fine. Canon's better L zoom lenses are white and that's not too subtle.

If one asks for permission, the 50 1.4 makes more sense.

Asher

Click to expand...

The 50mm may be a street lens but the D3X and 5D11 are hardly street cameras. There's nothing discreet about them. I would love to have the pixels of the D3X in a D300 body because my only reservation about the D300 is the pixelation should you desire to enlarge a cropped area. As I commented on one of Mike Shimwell's photos which he enlarged to show a cropped area of a bird - give me film grain over pixelation any day.

If I were choosing now, I might have gone for a Canon 7D since although it is cropped the 18 mp sensors is 'equivalent' to about 24mp on FF in pixel density - almost film resolution.

However, apart from the speed of the lens I cannot fault the 18-200mm Nikkor that you mentioned here and use it as my 'standard' on the D300. Intrusiveness is as much to do with your style and approach and chutzpah as the lens you use, although I agree a big white Canon 'pro' lens is hardly subtle.

Street or otherwise, I use 3 prime lenses; fov = 35mm, 50mm, 85mm. Rarely anything else.

I do not have any zooms. Rearly use flash or tripods.

My criteria for the lenses is as follows:

1. Light...should be able to carry all day. should fit in my pocket.
2. unobstrusive.
2. fast ...within the constraints of #1
3. No compromise at any aperture. Very well corrected.

P&S do not do it for me.

Most of my photography is what could loosely be termed as ' travel photography '. I never carry more
than 3 prime lenses, mostly two. Always carry 2 cameras.

I choose my lenses based on where I shall be traveling to. Weather conditions play an important role for me. Contrasty conditions means my lens are chosen for being less contrasty.

99.99% of my photographs posted for OPF have been taken using these lenses.

I do my research before I leave and know what I shall photograph.

Good light to you all.