Originally posted by jimr-pdx If primes get you close but not perfect, and cropping isn't an evil practice
I'd just crop the prime images.
I have zero aversion to cropping but for me I try to get the image 'right' from the start. I know it sounds kind of hokey but that at least is my goal.
As I slowly learn photography I walk around looking for things that would make for great shots... I don't know how to explain it all. When I try to take pictures (at least in a perfect scenario) I want to capture something unique. Sometimes that subject is unique all on it's own but in other cases what makes the image unique is the setting where it's taken.
For example I have a friend who lives in Africa. If I take a shot of him it's just another picture of a white guy that could have been taken anywhere. But if I take his photo of him standing on the dirt street of an African village it's something totally different. In both scenarios he's the subject but in the latter it's something else entirely.
In some cases if I am hanging out in some place for a while I can envision what I want, wait for the light, and bam. Got it. In other cases that action just happens too fast. If I am walking around with a 70mm on my camera and it could be something as simple as a vendor walks by on the streets of Bogota, then bam, I just missed it.
Originally posted by VoiceOfReason You might want to check out the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8.
So far as far as I am concerned this is the most interesting lens. Is the aperture a constant f1.8? Not that I always shoot wide open but I don't like lenses that change stuff for you. Truth be told I would be just fine with a constant f2.8.
As far as the focal length is concerned I know for sure I want to start with something that can go wide. 17mm ish or so...I don't really shoot that super wide all that much and although I want the 77mm the lenses on the ends of the spectrum are my least used lenses. I can't remember the last time I pulled out the 70mm...if I am going long I just use the 70-200.
But thinking outside the box most of my shots are done with just a few lenses. If I super glued a 31mm to one body and super glued a 43mm to another I could get 75% of my shots. BUUUUTTTTT....the big BUT... is that is me around here where I am now. I am planning in the next few months to go 'off road' so to speak and travel around more and do the adventure man thing.
On one hand I do dream of taking the perfect impromptu snap shot while walking down the streets of Zanzibar but in reality just random shots are not what I am about. The keeper rate of random street shots is about 2% if you ask me. I would much rather err on the side of having at least a semi planned idea of what I want to shoot. It's like walking up to a golf ball as my buddy Sean put it... 'you have to know what you want to do before you do it'...
I would rather get a stellar pre planned or semi pre planned shot than a random walk about shot but that said sometimes on those walk about shots you have just a few seconds to catch something awesome.
I don't know but here is kind of how I approach things now if/when I go somewhere (please note that I am still learning)... I scout out an area...I look for something--a scene---anything that could be cool or a nice backdrop...I try to make note of the sun, where its, how the shadows are cast etc etc. Then I try to envision in my head when and how that scene will play out in an image. Sometimes I take shots that look like random shots just to see how they would look on a screen. It's all part of scouting. Then I can go back to that spot 2-3 or more times right when I think the light would be good hoping for something to be going on, or if I could I would bring something or someone to 'be going on' in the shot. It might take 2 or 3 days or more to get a really good shot.
That is how I would describe my 'dream scenario' for shooting photos. I might have to talk to that vendor and ask them if I can take their photo... fine. So be it. This is all assuming cooperative subjects.
That said in my mind I keep on wondering if shooting with a zoom... any kind of zoom (lets say a 17-50 or the 18-35 mentioned above)...if I could produce the results I like or want. I don't know. I keep on having this debate. Lets say for example I catch a ride on a motorcycle to a small African village.... and all the kids are out playing stickball or something... if I don't want to disrupt them and catch what they are doing I am going to need a zoom of some sort. That said 95% of the time my 'off the cuff' shots never turn out. Yeah, it would be great for a scrap book or a travel log, but if I am trying to steer more into the artistic side of things....I really could do that with either or.
Like I said earlier... a shot that has all the right stuff in it could be a stellar shot regardless if it does or does not have pixel peeping sharpness to it. That said I think good zooms are still good.
Maybe I am just over thinking this whole thing.