Telephoto Lens Suggestions for Urban Work

[eric_perlberg]

I do a lot of urban photography, not much people stuff but urban

details, urban landscapes, urban abstracts (see

www.curiouslyincongruous.net). I do a lot of walking and low weight is

crucial to me (I walk 5 to 10 miles a day and I like to enjoy the walk

as well as the photography). London England where I live is not a

sunny land so I wind up doing a lot of low light photography. I don't

and won't use a tripod as it tends to change the style of my work in a

way which I don't like. I'm really happy with a plastic toy camera

called a Panasonic FZ20 (f2.8 36-430mm) and a really nice Leica D2

(f2.0 28-90) but I need a camera and lens combos which I can use for

large prints greater than what the above tools can manage (A3).

 

I've just rid myself of my canon 300D gear and looking to start anew

in the DSLR world. I'm very much taken by the image quality at large

sizes of the Nikon D2X and its general robustness. While I have no

problems figuring out what wide to normal lenses I might buy for a D2x

I'm kind of stumped on a telephoto. The ideal for me would be a fast

zoom (or VR), not physically large (say less than 100mm in length)

covering the range of 150-400 with crop factor included not weighing

more than 900 grams but I'm flexible as to range and would also

consider a fast prime with maybe a 1.4 extender. The big problem for

me is that I don't want to walk around with a heavy lens on top of a

heavy camera (by the above standards) so for example the 70-200 VR is

out both because of its physical size (too visible for some of the

neighborhoods I'm in) and weight.

 

So can anyone suggest something to consider? 3rd party high quality

lenses are ok also. I realise most street photographers are working

with mostly wides and most telephotos are used by landscape

photographers who generally have transport to help lug their stuff to

location and that I'm in a kind of no-mans land on this. Perhaps no

such thing exists in which case I'll have to reconsider the whole

question.

 

Eric

[uli_theune]

Let's see:

<ol>

<li>fast

<li>long range (up to 400 mm)

<li>less than 900 g

<li>it better be cheap ...

</ol>

I don't know if such a lens exist :-), but there may be people coming up and suggest the <a href="http://www.photographyreview.com/PRD_84736_3128crx.aspx">70-210 f/4</a> lens. I don't have experience with this lens (unfortunately) though ...

[breakaway]

It's just a suggestion. Since you're keen on street photography, have you considered using range finders? They're probably more unobtrusive than DSLRs. Considering the fact that you can afford the D2X, you might consider the RD1 instead though there are plenty of QC problems with it. Do some research and you'll be amazed at the options available.

[ShunCheung]

As long as you are talking about 150 to 400mm type lenses, there are no small ones. Maybe you can try some of those super zooms like 28-300mm type, but as long as you are using a high-end DSLR such as the D2X, I would put some good lenses in front of it.

 

For your type of work, I wonder whether the D2X is a good choice in the first place, but that is another long discussion.

[vasilis]

For low weight, low light I would go with a Nikon prime. I can think of two that are perfect for your kind of photos. The 135mm f2 AF or the 180mm f2.8 AF. The weight should be around 600 to 800 grams which is light enough I think. They are fast, relatively cheap and they to 200mm or 270mm on D2x.

Either one of them with a teleconverter will do the job for you. Do not forget that with the D2X you can zoom by cropping and still reach to A3 prints.

[eric_perlberg]

Uli, checked the link on the 70-210, that's the kind of outside the box thinking I was hoping for

<p>

<i>it better be cheap</i><p>

 

actually it doesn't have to be cheap, I don't think I said anything about cost being a factor.

<p>Ruijie<brr>

I'm familiar with the RD-1, but at 6mp IMO it doesn't do anything the D2 can't do (1mp diff amounts to insiginficant size increase in prints) and rangefinders don't do long... I mean I could use a 135f/4 Leica lens on an RD1 to get to 200mm but without accurate framing or focus. Nope, I've thought a lot about this and for large prints I think I need a DSLR with 12+ mp.

<p>

Shun, you may be right. Two things brought me to the D2x. First, the possible print size (also thought about MF cameras but I prefer digital) and secondly the weatertightness of it. I agree, no point putting cheap glass on a good camera (which is what I tried to say in the post by the words high quality glass. It's a bunch of compromises I've agonised over without luck which is why I decided to post in the first place. I'd really like to do some very large prints (A1, A0). Maybe that's the mistake...

[todd peach seattle, washi]

You probably already know this, but the 'size and weight' shock you're going through is a direct result of your quest for larger sensors and better quality. The FZ20 is advertised as 'equivalent' to 36-430mm, but in reality it has a 6-72mm lens. As you are discovering, the difference in real size and weight between a 72mm lens and a 430mm lens is quite a bit.

 

I'll give what most here will consider the heretic answer: have a look at the Nikon 70-300 ED. It's very light and compact. Not very fast, but that's what makes it light and compact. Also, it's a little soft and flat wide open at 300, so this exacerbates the slowness thing.

 

If you end up not liking it, you won't have wasted much money. I bought one as I was building up my AF gear. I have since filled in with a few top-notch primes and the 80-200/2.8 AFD, but that 70-300 still has a home with me. It's my travelling lens for that range when I don't want to lug the big guns.

[eric_perlberg]

Vasilis, thanks, I will look into those further. I had thought briefly about the 180 and teleconverter. I'll do the research. I do want to print considerably larger than A3 as mentioned above, (posting overlaps make things complicated sometimes). Thanks all! further suggestions welcome.

[eric_perlberg]

Thanks Todd, you're right about the 6-72 thing on the FZ20, I know. I actually think that one future for digital is improved noise reduction and image stabiliisation algorythms and strategies rather than sensor size increases thus allowing smaller lighter cheaper lenses and cameras. This is probably hampered by the huge investment in glass design, production facilities and marketing that both Canon and Nikon have currently as a result of their 35mm film history.

 

I'll read up on the 70-30. Thanks for the suggestion.

[eric_perlberg]

oops 70-300

[ShunCheung]

For this type of work, I think you are better off getting a fast 70-200mm/f2.8 VR zoom and perhaps skim on the body. Are you really planning on making huge prints of urban work to justify a D2X? I would get a lighter body to save weight.

 

The problem with Nikon is that all D1 and D2 bodies are heavy. Therefore, the only remaining choices are the D100 and D70. I am not sure those are what you want, either, especially if you need some AF speed.

[lex_jenkins]

I tried the 70-200/2.8 VR in a local shop a couple of weeks ago. It's surprisingly easy to handhold steadily with in either VR mode - and I can't hold *any* lens steadily anymore. I just bought the 24-120/3.5-5.6 VR for that very reason, and the VR works great.

 

However the 24-120/3.5-5.6 VR is a bit of a slowpoke for what some folks might consider walking around street photography. I don't. The nice thing about a dSLR is that you can adjust the "ISO" as needed, shooting for lowest sensor noise whenever possible and for the sake of merely capturing an image whenever necessary.

 

And it's lightweight and compact. Not so the 70-200/2.8 VR. It's a beast, only slightly narrower in diameter and slightly longer than the typical 80-200/2.8 Nikkors of various AF incarnations, and the weight is roughly the same.

 

Considering that I use such a zoom mostly at the long end, I might seriously have to consider the 180/2.8 to save a bit of size, weight and money. But I wouldn't have the VR.

 

I'd consider the "lesser" VR telezooms except, like the 24-120/3.5-5.6 VR, they're a bit slow.

 

Some of us are hoping for something in the neighborhood of a 50-135/2.8G VR AF-S Nikkor. It could be a DX for all I care but only if it saves size and weight and can be proven to perform better on our dSLRs than a non-DX type.

[eskoufos]

One of the problems you would be facing with that range is the need for a tripod/monopod to stabilize the lens. The AF VR Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED would probably fit your specifications (the weight is 1200g or so; little more that 900) on the other hand it costs $5000. All the prime telephotos would also be heavy and expensive.

As far as a *light* Nikon DSLR set up that can print A3 size prints, I would suggest a D70 (595g vs 1150g for the D2x) with an AF-S DX Nikkor 18-70 mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED (390g) and an AF Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G (480g) or AF Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED (520g).

[ilkka_nissila]

I would second the recommendation of the 70-200/2.8 VR ... but you may want to have a smaller tele such as an 85 mm or 105 mm prime (my choice would be a 50/1.8 and 105/2 DC) for those situations where the zoom is too obtrusive.

 

I don't see anything wrong with the choice of the D2X since it's Nikon's smallest digital body that has a remote chance of obtaining sharp street pics in terms of focus. Believe me, I've done this a lot with the D70 and the body is totally inadequate, although it is small. A film body such as the F100 would also be a good choice.

[dan_brown4]

You may have sold your 300D prematurely, as the Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm

f/4.0L with a 1.4x converter sounds like it would fit your requirements rather nicely

indeed.

[eric_perlberg]

Well thanks for all the feedback.

 

Somehow I didn't seem to get the point across that I currently can make A3 prints with my current digital cameras, I was looking for an 11+ mp camera to make very large prints. As such, I'm not interested in D70/100 or even my old Canon 300D.

 

Although some people seemed surprised that I'd want to print street images out large, such street images printed large are very popular here in London fetching good prices.

 

The (white) Canon 70-200 F/4 I've already owned, and its discrete factor is slightly better than wearing Shocking Orange Hair, walking around with a white lens on a big camera catches every minor theives eye immediately. After all, Canon made them white so they'd stick out in a crowd of sports photographers, papparazzi and media scrums. And again, the only camera options for me in Canon would be the 1DS used (about the same price as a new D2X but I liked the rendition and tonality of the files from the D2X better and I liked the larger LCD for reviewing. And an added plus is that the D2X body is 3/4 of a pound lighter than the IDS.

 

I agree that the 70-200 is best used with a monopod or tripod. I just find that using such equipment crimps my style, getting really oblique angles which I like without lying on the ground, etc, would at best be tricky and time-consuming and it just wouldn't work in dodgey neighborhoods or in Central London where the crowds would probably trample over me in their eagerness to get to Covent Garden.

 

It sounds like medium tele primes, 135 and 180 are worth looking at and the I'll check out the 24-120 VR (just that i was hoping to go longer than that).

 

Thanks for suggestions everyone.

[eric_perlberg]

Todd, I'm also going to check out your heretical solution. I generally hang out in that territory anyway.

[kai_griffin]

Canon 70-300 IS DO: It's over-priced, it's only f/4.5-f/5.6, and it's not Nikon-mount, but probably fits the task well in two other key areas: it's black and *very* compact - ideal for keeping your profile low, if that is one of the primary concerns. Image Stabilization is a bonus.

[robert_kramer]

"I don't see anything wrong with the choice of the D2X since it's Nikon's smallest digital body that has a remote chance of obtaining sharp street pics in terms of focus. Believe me, I've done this a lot with the D70 and the body is totally inadequate, although it is small."

 

Illka, can you elaborate on the focus problems with a D70? I am thinking about getting one for urban street photos, and would like to here what the problems are with the D70.

 

Thanks!

[ilkka_nissila]

The problem is that the sensor area is larger than the markings, and if there is any texture behind the main subject, which is stronger than the texture of the main subject, the camera will focus to the texture in the street / wall / whatever there is, in preference to the main subject, even if I clearly try to point the sensor on the subject. This happens quite frequently but not always. This is the main issue I have with the D70, and yes, I only use the central focusing sensor.