Lens Choice for Street and Candid Photography

[mjferron]

Except that the AF-S 28mm f/1.8 G is a bit of a lump for a standard lens on a DX camera, and costs used the same as the new price of the 35mm f/1.8 DX lens.

 

Historically, many of the first SLR 'standard' lenses were actually 58 or 55mm in focal length - as supplied by Exacta, Pentax, Zeiss Jena and the like. And nothing wrong with such focal lengths for general use. I used a Zeiss 58mm f/2 Biotar for many years quite happily.

 

Technically, taking the frame diagonal as a 'standard' is a flawed hypothesis, since it takes no account of aspect ratio. It works OK with traditional formats that have a squarer 4:3 or 5:4 aspect ratio, but Barnack's choice of a 3:2 ratio broke the mould, and really needs something a bit longer to keep the horizontal (landscape) view-angle similar to what is seen in those earlier legacy formats.

 

Sorry, way off topic now.

That’s ok, good point made. And I agree on the lump reference.

[mikemorrell]

One more thought: I don't know anything about lens quality but one way of making a choice is just to browse 'street' and ''candid' photos with your son on sites like Flickr and 500px (PN too) and find out which ones he likes most. Then look at the focal lengths with which these photos were taken on a FF/crop camera. This may give your son some idea of the focal length(s) that he wants to work with.

 

IHMO, there's a difference between photographing a wide street scene and singling out a person or small group on the street.

[srijan_roy_choudhury]

Thank you, everyone, for your replies and suggestion.

 

After some discussion, we have decided to take this route that I am going to lend him my 18-55 for the time being.

Today, at a photo fair, he tried his hands on the 20mm f1.8G and 24mm f1.8G, and he instantly fell in love with the primes. He is even thinking of going back to full manual focus as he feels that he can wield far more control of the scene.

 

Thank you all again.

[Gary Naka]

Thank you, everyone, for your replies and suggestion.

 

After some discussion, we have decided to take this route that I am going to lend him my 18-55 for the time being.

Today, at a photo fair, he tried his hands on the 20mm f1.8G and 24mm f1.8G, and he instantly fell in love with the primes. He is even thinking of going back to full manual focus as he feels that he can wield far more control of the scene.

 

Thank you all again.

 

I wish him good luck in his hobby.

[srijan_roy_choudhury]

I wish him good luck in his hobby.

 

Thank you so much!

[royall_berndt]

With a film camera, I usually set the lens at 10 ft. and use a small aperture. That's a 28mm lens. I shoot from the waist. The results are often quite good. And a nice thing about a film camera: no one can demand to see your shots.

[Gary Naka]

With a film camera, I usually set the lens at 10 ft. and use a small aperture. That's a 28mm lens. I shoot from the waist. The results are often quite good. And a nice thing about a film camera: no one can demand to see your shots.

 

Oh but they can and will.

They will say that you just don't want to show it.

"what is this film stuff."

[bgelfand]

A factor to be considered is camera/lens physical size. Street photographers try to be inconspicuous so the images will be candid and not influenced by the presence of the photographer. That is one of the reasons Henri Cartier-Bresson used a Leica with a 50mm lens. Another reason, of course, is that it was an outstanding camera/lens for its time.

[rodeo_joe1]

And a nice thing about a film camera: no one can demand to see your shots.

And if something goes wrong in the many stages of the process, then even you may not get to see your shots. :confused:

[robert_ante]

For street photography I have long settled on a 50mm lens, occasionally a 35mm lens for 35mm cameras. The lens on my Rollei 35 also works well. If taking pictures of streets (as opposed to street photography) or urban architecture, something like a 28mm lens. For MF, something around 80mm works best for me.