In Praise of Long Lenses

[Mike Farley]

An article by Michael Reichmann about how he uses long lenses. Admittedly some subjects such as wildlife are predictable, but he also highlights other instances where a long lens has value which are not always obvious. On occasion, the focal length required is surprisingly long.

https://luminous-landscape.com/make-it-long/

[Rose]

Aaaarrgghhh... Just as I've finally decided what lenses to take (and not to take) for my trip to Canada in September, this article introduces some doubt into my selection...

[Mike Farley]

Well, if it helps, most of my shots are taken with the equivalent of a 28-90 zoom, including primes within that range of focal lengths. That's despite usually having other focal lengths available in my camera bag. Your approach might be different, of course, and depends on what you expect to be shooting while you are away. Using Lightroom's metadata function should help you narrow down the choice to what you are most likely to need.

It is one of the arguments for smaller camera formats based on mirrorless technology. DSLR lenses are forced to be bulky and heavy due to the mirror mechanism forcing the rear focus distance to be greater than it needs to be. I can get a lot of m43 gear into a relatively small space to cover most situations and it does not break my back carrying it.

[Rose]

This trip is going to be a bit different to our usual holidays - lots of really big landscapes which is a bit out of my comfort zone as I really don't consider myself a landscape photographer. As you know, my 24-105 has broken - and I still haven't quite decided what to replace it with - if at all. I need to pack the minimum amount of gear as weight is going to be an issue - I have to pack for 5 weeks as well as take musical instruments with me as I'm teaching on a course in the US at the end of the trip. After listening to Scott Kelby last week I have decided that I can live without the middle lens ground. I will take my 16-35 f/2.8L for landscapes and city shots, and - fingers crossed - some northern lights as we are going to a location where hubby has seen them before. I'm also taking my 70-200 f/4 plus 1.4X, and I will pack the 50mm f/1.4 as it's nice and small. I don't really want to take my 100-400 even though I might have the opportunity to take some wildlife shots in the national parks, simply because of the weight. I will have to make do with the 1.4X on my 70-200.

[davidb]

Rose

I have the 2.0x extender if you would like to borrow it on your trip.

[Rose]

Ooh... ! Which version ? MKiii ?

[davidb]

Ooh... ! Which version ? MKiii ?

3 (of course) not that I've made much use of it. I like auto focus but it doesn't work with the 100-400 zoom but it just might with the 70-200!!

[Rose]

I might well take you up on that David ! It will work with the 70-200, I just need to find out what the minimum f stop will be...

[Mike Farley]

...... I just need to find out what the minimum f stop will be...

f/8.

You lose two stops with the 2x extender.

[Mike Farley]

After listening to Scott Kelby last week I have decided that I can live without the middle lens ground. I will take my 16-35 f/2.8L for landscapes and city shots, and - fingers crossed - some northern lights as we are going to a location where hubby has seen them before. I'm also taking my 70-200 f/4 plus 1.4X, and I will pack the 50mm f/1.4 as it's nice and small. I don't really want to take my 100-400 even though I might have the opportunity to take some wildlife shots in the national parks, simply because of the weight. I will have to make do with the 1.4X on my 70-200.

That's a combination which should cover most situations. I have found that the equivalent of a 50 f/1.4 on m43 is a useful walkabout lens and it has the benefits of speed when there is not much light or limited DOF when needed. You can also extend the reach of the 70-200 with or without extender by cropping the image, if necessary. That will get you to around the equivalent of 500 when the 1.4 is attached as you can easily lose half the MP on the 5DIII and still have enough left for an A3 print.

The advantage of something like the 24-105 is that it can be used in most situations and reduces the need for lens changing. If you do take such a lens, I would be willing to bet that it would be on the camera most of the time. That said, I do understand the compromise between convenience and keeping your kit to a minimum.