Why, I am often asked, do you use prime (non-zoom) lenses? And why such fast (low f-number) lenses?

Consider this, a student today at f/1.2:

If you look at that full size, you will see how wonderfully sharp it is, and what incredibly shallow depth of field it has. So why do I have fast lenses?

1. They are crazy sharp, and I like crazy sharp.
2. They are consistent (zooming, on the other hand, makes every picture an adventure in different depth-of-field, acceptable slowest shutter speed, etc).
3. They give me blurry backgrounds if I want (see the picture).
4. They allow me to use a fast shutter speed. If I shoot in a living room at 400 ISO at f/1.4, I can use maybe 1/250th second. But if my lens was an f/2.8 lens, I would need to use 1/60th second (or I would have to raise the ISO). And with an f/5.6 kit lens (brrr), I would have to shoot at 1/15th second!

That is why I use fast prime lenses. And if I were you, I would get at least a 50mm f/1.8 or even f/1.4 lens.

Tomorrow night, after the Flash course, I am off to Aruba for a few days. So I am packing.

Packing what, photography-wise, you may well ask?

A camera, of course. But also a spare—the spare will, I think, be the little Fuji x100, and the main camera, the 1Dx.

Lenses? Well… the 16-35, and the 70-200 probably, or the 24-70 in its place, and one prime. Of course you can shoot with whatever you have: the trick is to shoot the kinds of things you can best shoot with the lens you have.

A tip: I usually do a Flickr search for the area I am visiting, so that I can see what I like, and I can see the EXIF data to determine what lens was used for it, if I cannot see it from the photo (which I usually can).

And a flash or two. Yes, two, for off camera flash. A few flash modifiers just in case; a few Pocketwizards too.

A tripod, naturally, for panoramas and long evening beach shots. Cloths and brushes, and even filters for on the beach, if I really must. The laptop. Power supplies and chargers. A USB cable and card reader. Business cards!

That should do it. Packing light means I can carry everything onto the aircraft in a small suitcase plus a camera bag. Indispensible and expensive stuff goes into the camera bag, just in case anyone makes me check it (the route is Toronto–Caracas–Bogota–Aruba).

A beginner’s tip: the viewfinder, and why to use it.

DSLR camera, and some point and shoots, have a viewfinder. And it is a good idea to use that, and not the display ion the back. Here’s why.

• Any viewfinder can be seen even when it is very bright outside.
• No battery power is used while you look through a traditional SLR’s (i.e., glass) viewfinder.
• You see the scene you are shooting in all its detail and richness, not an already interpreted digital version of the scene.
• Your eye, and the lens, still has higher resolution than the digital displays in “mirrorless” cameras (but not for much longer).
• The viewfinder helps steady the camera (push the camera up to your face, yes, all the way, hence the rubber bumper)
• And importantly – perhaps most important of all: the focus points on your DLSR are dedicated phase detection chips. When you flip up the mirror and use the rear screen, these are disabled, and the focus is derived from the picture itself: a slow, less accurate process.

So, for now at least, avoid the temptation to use the rear LCD unless it is necessary. Final benefit: you will look like a pro. Amateurs use the read display; pros use the viewfinder expect when necessary (i,e. when shooting over people’s heads, or when shooting some macro photos).

___

One More Chance: I am selling my pristine, boxed Canon 50mm f/1.2L lens (I have the 85 and the 50, and one is enough). Interested? To my readers here I am extending a $125 discount. It is listed for $1,500 on Kijiji (slightly cheaper than what this lens has been selling for on eBay) , but it is $1,375 for you. If interested, let me know quickly!

A reader wrote to me today about pro equipment, and about how pro cameras seem to be necessary for the work I describe in some of my posts — it would be better, he suggests, if all posts were accessible to all people, amateurs and pros alike.

Now, if this reader had said “pro-quality lenses“, or at least “fast lenses“, he would have had a point. But while sometimes I do use the features only a professional-grade camera has, this is in fact rare. Or rather, for this to have an effect on the quality of the photos is rare. A modern camera, yes, sure; but a pro camera is rarely needed.

First, what is a pro camera? I would define it as a camera body, often large, that costs $3,000 or more, without the lens. Cameras like the Canon 5D MkIII or 1Dx.

And what do these Pro cameras do more than a “regular” camera?

Actually, very little. You see, all cameras from the same generation are similar.

Let’s have a look at a few of the typical things that a “Pro camera” does more than an entry level camera:

• Larger, brighter viewfinder
• Stronger, “built like a tank”
• Longer battery life
• Better weatherproofing
• Faster continuous shooting
• More personalization options
• Better focus systems
• Better and faster internal photo processor
• The ability to write to two memory cards at once
• More options
• Sometimes, lower noise at higher ISOs

But there are also things a pro camera does not do:

• No “scene modes”
• Often, not even a pop-up flash

Big benefits, yes, but what of the above is important to the actual photos you take? Other than the “higher ISO’s”, not all that much, really! And that ISO point is misleading: it is more the difference in generations than the difference in “type of camera” that defines noise performance. A modern entry-level camera, for instance, can often do much better than a five-year old pro camera. Sure, my 1Dx goes to obscenely high ISO values, but take, say, a Nikon D800 and sample it down from its crazy number of megapixels to the number that I have, and you get very comparable performance. This is why we upgrade every few years: better image quality.

So if you have a modern camera, you can do what I do – all of it, or almost all of it.

So what is important to image quality? I would say (a) how new your camera is, (b) its sensor size (full frame is good) and (c) the lenses.  Lenses make a very material difference to your images. Good lenses are more sharp. They have better colour performance and less of the various distortions. They allow more light to enter the camera (faster lenses, i.e. lenses with lower minimum “f-numbers” ), hence allowing more blurred backgrounds, and the ability to use either faster shutter speed or lower ISO settings in the same light.

So while no doubt I do the occasional post that really needs a Canon 1Dx, mostly it’s just convenience and practical all-day use, but not the quality of the photos, that is affected by the camera; while lenses almost always affect the photo. So if you have money, I would recommend two things:

First, ensure you have a modern camera, preferably full frame. It does not need to be a pro camera, but they get better every year, so “modern” means good performance at high ISO values.

Then, ensure that you have the right range of fast lenses, including a few prime lenses.

And then go have fun!