martin_c. Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Hi there everyone. I am a newbie interested in photjournalism. I currently have a Eos R2k with a 50mm/f1.8 lens on it. I was thinking of getting a lens soon except I just want to run this by you guys before I do. I was interested in the EF 70-200 f/4 lens but despite the fact that I hear good things about it, I am wondering if I'm gettting more horse power than I really need, in other words, do I need such a big lens? is it the right choice for this kind of photography? Also on the drawing board is the EF 28-135 which I according to a review read on here, is a good lens as well. I once wanted a flash, and went with a 550ex, way more power than what I really knew what to do with and felt foolish afterwards for not asking first, and though I know that has nothing to do with this, I just want to mention that to describe what exactly Im afraid of. All right everyone. Thanks for your input in advance. Cheers! P.S. Id like to point out too, that although I am interested in photojournalism, I'd like to photograph rock bands,not live concert shots, but promo shots (portraits?) as a side thing. I dont know if that helps alright. Im done here. Thanks again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poul Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 i use 50mm/1.8 to shoot bands in available light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spearhead Posted July 8, 2004 Share Posted July 8, 2004 Your 50 is fine. When you find something you can't do with it, you'll know what else to get. Music and Portraits Blog: Life in Portugal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvarko Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 As a photojournalism junior at the Corcoran College of Art in D.C., Jeff is exactly correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 are you talkin daily newspaper photojournalism and photo agencies? zooms are the essential tools for that. most ive seen use a 17-35, 17-55, and a long range zoom, 80-200 or so....with 2 bodies....flash is another essential....on each cam..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvarko Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Uh, strobes are not an essential. particularly not on-camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 why do the majority of pjs use flash then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvarko Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Well, out of five working photojournalists in the District of Columbia that also happen to be my instructors, two of them use strobes on a regular basis. Another uses house strobes when shooting sports. All agree that unless it is dimmer than, say, 1/30s @ 1600 @ 2.8 (general events - of course faster for sports), available light is almost always superior to strobes in terms of quality of light, conveyance of information, and unobtrusiveness (not being annoying). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WM Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Martin, I agree with all of the above posts, the fast 50mm is a fine lens and will cover most of your shots on a film SLR. On a film body, my all time favourite is the fast 50mm. From what you described, it looks like you have a serious need for speed and even the high-end f2.8 zooms are not going to be fast enough, let alone the 28-135 at f3.5-5.6. The 70-200/4 is probably not going to be fast enough enough. Perhaps a longer, and fast prime lens might be a good next lens ? Something like the Canon 85/1.8 USM or the 100/2 USM ? It will allow you to get very shallow DOF as well for portraits and fairly nice bokeh (OK, Leica peoples, don't shoot me, I am NOT comparing with the 50 Summicron ! It would be an unfair comparison !). If you must have a mid-range zoom, then do check out the Tamron 28-75/2.8 Xr Di lens. Price is good and optics is good. Cheers, Wee-Ming Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candice Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Hey great feild by the way :-) I have been a photjournalist for the past 2 years and I finally switched over to canon after the mark II came out and I SWEAR by the 35-350 3.5 WoW what a lense! Unless I am doing a really long lense job. Or a super low light siutation, with no flash. That is the only you will need. that lense that is always on my camrea it is really the best thing, it light weight due to is dose not have the "I.S" system, really a wonderful lense, but I suggest you listen to yourself before you do us, and go to your local major camrea shop and hold and feel and play with on in your hands, and may-be if you can rent one for a day, and test it yourself. good luck and Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 sports is a different story, but i bet if they are covering a media event close up, theyre using strobes......papers and mags want well lit pix....almost all pix that are in papers are used with a strobe...ive never liked that, but thats what they want... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvarko Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 It's quite possible to have well-lit pictures without using strobes. Not always easy and not always possible, and strobes certainly impose a consistency, but the lighting from bounced strobes is so dull... The Washington Post doesn't run all that many strobe-lit shots. Many indoor photographs featured in, say, the A section, are either under strenuous/risky situations (e.g. Iraq) that make obtrusiveness unwise, or are feature shots that do not feature "significant" people. (The photographer can take the time to get it right, in other words. Margaret Thatcher won't wait for you to open up another stop, but Joe Q. Public probably will.) Many governmental speeches/events prohibit or strongly limit the use of strobes; one must simply deal with the terrible indoor lighting of Congress and other governmental mainstays. In essence, I feel (and my instructors - all currently working photojournalists, mind you - seem to share the sentiment) that strobes are a privilege, not a necessity, and that learning to use available light to your advantage is much more necessary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvarko Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Martin, when you say that you are "interested", does this mean that you are considering pursuing a career in journalism (and more specifically photojournalism), or that you are interested in giving your photographs a more journalistic feel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Taylor Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 I know a few photojournalists, mostly working Asia and the Middle East for wire services. They carry a few lenses but seem to have wide zooms on most of the time. (e.g. 17-35mm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant_. Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 well, here in good ole nyc they got the flash glued to their cams..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvarko Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Paparazzi. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melissa_eiselein Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Martin: I'm not a newspaper photographer, but as a reporter, I worw with them several times a week. And Grant is right...they seem to prefer fast (2.8) ultra wide angle zooms (especially since the photogs at our paper shoot digital) and the longer 80-200 zooms. Most of the time, they carry two cameras--one for each lens. I've done a couple stories about local bands and noticed that our photogs use the same lenses for those group portraits. Only they like to use colored lights or shoot them at unusual angles to give the band shots a different feel than your average portrait. The photogs at work use a good quality flash (such as your 550ex) that they can dial down to suit the situation. The photographer I worked with tonight chose not to use any flash while photographing the dress rehearsal of an indoor community play. On many other occasions (including outdoors during daylight) she's used a flash attached to a long cord which I hold from wherever I'm told (on top chairs, on the ground, etc) while she shoots. I am very, very much an amateur photographer--and not a good one at that--yet, I am often called to shoot my own pictures when our photo staff is overbooked. Initially, my 28-135 was the only lens I used. It is a fabulous all-around lens for outdoor daylight use, but I quickly learned that it was too slow for many of my shots. For that reason, I added a few 2.8 lenses. I still use the 28-135 more than my 28-70 2.8L. But since I went digital, I'd never be able to live without my 17-35 2.8. Personally, I don't like using my 80-200 2.8. I don't feel I can hand hold it steady enough to get good photographs. Not to mention that it's too blasted heavy! As for what YOU need...YOU are the only one who will know. Usually, you'll find out when what you're using doesn't fit the needs of a particular shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martin_c. Posted July 9, 2004 Author Share Posted July 9, 2004 Thanks, Ive just started experimenting with the 50mm. So I might stay there. I just wanted to clarify, that when I said bands, I ment portraits, like something that would be on the cover of Rolling Stone Mag (Im shooting for the stars here!!)not really pictures of them in live performances. In a way they both tie into photojournalism I suppose and thats why Im willing to consider them both together. so Elan 7e body and 50mm lens sound like a good convo? now just gotta find a 7e. What I'd kill for is a photojournalist to hang out with and learn from, but thats another story. Allright Keep them comin' guys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aardvarko Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Well, Rolling Stone covers are a completely different beast. Go buy at least two strobes (I recommend some big old Vivitar 285s, personally), optical slaves for the strobes - not the best, but certainly easy - and get a few Cinegel swatchbooks free with any order from B&H. When you want to add some color to your strobeage, rip out some gels, attach them to the front of your Vivitars, and enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Martin, PJ work can be many things: from reporting events as they happen (tornadoes, war, fires, convention, elections, etc...) to reporting shows and doing more editorial portraiture. It seems that you want to do the latter. However, covers for magazines are usually very involved processes. Each photographer had his/her own style and working techniques, with the equipment that serves those purposes best. You have to find your style and the rest will follow. If you like, check out these two PJs - they do lots of editorial portraits (especially Neil). <br> <a href=http://www.dg28.com>Neil Turner</a> <br> <a href=http://www.filmlessphtos.ca>John Lehmann</a> <br> You will find lots of valuable info on their site including equipment and techniques. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitmstr Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 CORRECTED LINK <a href=http://filmlessphotos.ca>John Lehmann</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brideday Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Martin, as a photojournalist myself, if I only had one lens, I would not leave home without a 17-35 2.8 lens. If I could have another, then I include a 70-200 2.8 lens. One thing I have learned about purchasing lenses is to do it right the first time. Don't settle for lenses with F3.5-4.5 and F5-5.6. You will quickly outgrow them and wish you had fast lenses. Ambient lighting photos using fast lenses often truly capture your subjects. Good luck, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtrace Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 Ditto. Wide and tele fast zooms. I use a 16-35mm f/2.8 and a 70-200mm f/2.8 IS and don't miss any focal length in-between. This is a pretty common PJ setup. I find no use for 50mm in my shooting. It's good for learning composition, fast, and high quality, but I don't use that focal length. Bogdan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee_shively Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 For the time being, stick with the 50mm. It should be fine for band shots. I dropped out the PJ field in 1991 so my observations are dated. Considering what's now available--I agree with the others who recommended a 16/17-35mm f/2.8 and a 70/80-200mm f/2.8 as essential. You will need a flash as well. Even back in my PJ days, we used flash for virtually everything--usually multiple flashes (you could always find someone willing to hold a 283 or 444D with a slave attached). The good old days of existing light with Tri-X pushed to EI whatever are long gone at just about all publications. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_carroll Posted July 9, 2004 Share Posted July 9, 2004 PJs I've worked with or observed as a rule use a fast/wide zoom and an 800-200/f2.8, often mounted on seperate bodies. I've never seen anyone use a normal 50, maybe a macro lens occasionally. If you want to be like them, throw your 50 in the river. On the other hand, one sees a lot of bad photojournalism, so it would seem using the "usual suspect" lenses isn't a magic formula for greatness. Some of the very best photojournalists use moderate primes for most of their work. Some others use zooms. Whatever works for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now