Tech Talk for Pro Photographers: Gear, Lighting, Resources, Etc. See Post#1.

[dahse]

I was hoping practicing fashion photographers out there would comment on lens preferences... seems to be a debate between 50mm vs 85mm vs 100mm...I have a 50mm on a Canon 5d, and was debating whether I should get an 85mm to replace it, or just keep the 50 and add a 100mm.

Would anyone in the business be so kind as to share their views? Have you found the lens compression on the higher lenses to make that much of a difference? Thanks!!

 

[Imaginara]

the lens compression between a 85 and a 100 is minute, it's more about the optical quality of the glass used in the lens, sharpness, aberrations, etc. that differs between those two. They are both awesome lenses and will produce excellent images.

the 50 depends a bit on which model it is, the 1.2, 1.4 or 1.8 variant. I definately prefere the 1.2 (although very expensive), and then the 1.4 over the 1.8. The 1.8 has a slightly cold cast that im not too happy about + the diaphragm elements of the aperture opening makes the bokeh (out of focus) shape a bit edgy.

So should you use a 50, 80 or 100? it all depends on the framing of the picture and depth of field. A 85 or 100 is usually considered portrait lenses, but walk backwards and you will do great full body shots with them aswell. However, the further away from the subject you get, the bigger the area of focus at a particular depth of field. If you want very shallow depth of field, get in close and use a large aperture opening (small value). In this case a 50 might be better since you get in closer. Lens compression however will be much larger on a 50mm compared to a 100mm making facial features distort (allthough not too bad compared to a wide or ultra-wide angle ofcourse

My personal preference is a 70-200 F4L (on the Canon platform) or a 85mm f1.2L. On the Mamiya platform (medium format) i tend to use a 150mm or the 120mm macro these days. I have fashion shoots however done with a 17mm lens, so its all up to what image you want to take =)

 

[dahse]

Imaginara - thank you so much for that color, it was very helpful. To clarify, I have a 50mm f1.4 (I just cannot justify purchasing an 'L' series until I'm getting work!).

I think I will perhaps go for the 100mm, now next question, is it worth getting a 100mm f2.8 macro and having the option of doing beauty shots with it? Or would you suggest keeping it separate and getting say the 100mm f2, and focus on macro lenses separately?

Thanks again for your thoughts, I really appreciate it!

 

[ched]

The big question is "why." What were you trying to communicate to the viewer? Does there seem to be a clear message or feeling or mood? Are there are too many distractions and is there no real subjective focus in the compositions? If that isn't addressed, no amount of equipment will save you.

Either back away from your subject and use their bodies as an element in the composition, or close to point blank range and make their bodies the composition. Make a decision and carve the lines of your image from contrast and color. Take possession of the viewer's perspective and communicate.

Think of a photo shoot as war, and remember that photography, like all art, is all about editorial choices. Either you're in the trenches on the front lines, or you're at headquarters planning the larger operation. The supply lines are important, but that's not where you want to be if you're going to be a photographer, because there is no opportunity to edit in that middle ground, it is stagnant space.

The best lens for practicing is a 50mm prime (or 40mm on a cropped frame sensor). It's the lens that best matches the human eye's perspective, and therefore the easiest way to learn. If you're looking at the world through a fish-eye or a telephoto lens, it is harder to learn composition, because it's less natural for us.

 

[Imaginara]

Like Ched said, it's all about the editorial process, and instead of worrying too much if you want to go for f2 or f2.8 L or not L glass, use what you have. You can do very nice beautyshots with a 50mm 1.4, aswell as using longer lenses, hell you can even do them with a extreme angle lens aswell, it's all in what image you wish to convey and create.

Sure, making all those editorial calls might feel like it's very tough in the beginning, always questioning "did i make the right choise?". But thats whats called learning, and with practise you will pick up what works and what does not and occasionally go totally off the reserve and create magic ;D

 

[Humphrey Bear]

Hi all,
I have been following this thread with much interest. I am quite new to fashion photography having only completed a course and a few editorial shoots.

I am using a Canon 5D. I love using my 50mm 1.4 but, have struggled with the 70-200 2.8IS. Its heavy of course but also I have found it difficult to gain auto focus quickly. Most of the people in my class prefer primes and I think I am heading that way also. Truth is the 50 suits me very well. I am happy to move back and forth rather than zoom. I did try to manual focus the 'beast' (70-200) but to poor affect. I noticed that some of the group only used manual focus on their primes.

My question is do any of you use/prefer manual focus for fashion editorials? Are some lenses/cameras better for this? I know some medium format are only manual etc but are these good options today? maybe its just the 5D's auto focus. Would a 7D or 1Dxxx be better for me or should I just spend more time practicing manual focus?

 

[ched]

Auto focus is a tool. Like any other tool, there is a right time and a wrong time to use it. Shooting an editorial, when the point is to make choices, it makes more sense to be in full manual control of your lens, unless you're going for a specific effect. The only time I use auto focus for fashion photography is on the runway.

 

[Imaginara]

well chad beat me to it ;D

I do tend to use AF whenever i can because im lazy but in quite a lot of systems, the AF is less than optimal (Mamiya 645 AFD) or non-existant (MF lenses, Mamiya RZ-67/Large Format/Holga's, etc) so then you are forced to use manual focus.

As for manual focus systems, its like ched said, all in what you will use it for. If you are shooting a still subject using a tripod, it's quite easy to get manual focus set. If you are trying to track a model running around in the studio or on the catwalk, you need a good fast af =)

 

[Humphrey Bear]

Thanks for the replies ched and Imaginara.

I agree that there are different tools for different jobs and I can understand ched that manual could be better for a controlled editorial shoot. I would certainly prefer to focus manually for my stationary shots if I was just more confident at nailing the focus. I do use a tripod in the studio for classic portraits and agree focussing then isn't too difficult. However, I prefer to be more engaged and move about a bit for my editorials.

I imported into Lightroom and compared the output of one of my class mates who always focuses manually (5D2 and 85 lens) and his eye details are certainly as accurate as my auto focussed shots when viewed at 2:1. I probably just need to practise more and build confidence.

I still have the same question as before though; do you think its easier to manually focus with a light prime rather than a big, heavy zoom? Is the zoom a different tool for a different purpose? And does the camera make any difference to the ease and accuracy of manually focussing? Does live view on the 5D2 help or do you never even use it for focussing? Are lighter (rangefinder?) cameras any easier?

Thanks again for your insights.

 

[Imaginara]

Well i'll chip again, just can't keep me quiet

When i manually focus, i use the focus ring to get an approximation focus, it wont be perfect, but it will be close, then i let go of the focus ring and instead use my body for the finetune. If you rock back and forth you will slightly adjust the focus, bringing the subject into perfect focus. This technique works with all cameras and only need a big bright viewfinder (and if your eyesight isn't in the owl category, a fair bit of light present).

The size and weight of the lens only affect the bulkyness of the camera, not the actual focusing, and if it's too heavy, use a monopod (or tripod) for taking some of the weight.

This technique btw is actually one where the newer cameras with electric aperture control is better than an camera/lens with manual aperture control (ie. a aperture ring) because they will always be wide open when setting the focus and viewing, and then close for the shot wheras the old system meant the aperture was closed even when focusing, making it hard to see when stepped down to higher apertures.

just a little note though, focus is great, perfect focus is nice, a great content trumps all. If you have a look at the most iconic images (fashion and otherwise) during the ages, you will see that perfect focus and super-sharpness is actually a quite recent phenomena. A lot of the images pre-2000 could have been discarded today for being out of focus, simply because there is an weird emphasis today from a lot of photographers that the image needs to be perfectly sharp. In my personal opinion, this is putting too much emphasis on one single attribute of an image.

Now don't get me wrong, i am not saying that images should be out of focus to become good. What i am saying is that, don't get too hungup on creating perfect focus as the quality of the image depends on it because it doesnt.

It's just one factor among many and not a very important one at that =)

 

[candlebougie]

Has anyone experience with Anamorphic lenses? We have an Iscorama lying around and I'm going to do some test shoots with it over the weekend with friends.

 

[dahse]

Thanks imaginara and ched, your thoughts are appreciated!!

Does anyone have any thoughts on the optimal way to make a 580 EXII flash wireless on a canon 5d markII? I just bought an ST-E2, but I've been hearing more and more about pocket wizards being more versatile especially for outdoor shoots. Most of the feedback I have is from nature/wedding photographers, it would be nice to get a fashion photographer's perspective! Thanks everyone!

 

[Imaginara]

Pocketwizards are sort of the industry standard these days and they have been around for ages. They can trigger (with the right connectors) both cameras and flashes and have very good range.

As a fashion photographer when using flash in outdoor shoots you tend to use battery packs rather than the Strobist variant. If you cannot afford one, renting one is a good investment to create that extra kick in the shot (since if its not a client based shot its usually for your portfolio, and thus worth a little investment).

Now i'm not saying that you cannot use a 580 with a radiocontrol, it's actually a very good investment to any flash system, it's just that one 580 will work for some shots, but not all. The second you need to use larger octa's, softboxes or stripboxes, you will need more than one 580 (often many more and that becomes both costly and cumbersome to use compared to renting one batterypack for a day.

Anyway, to answer the original question, i use pocketwizards myself to trigger my flashes, both the packs and the 580's.

 

[dahse]

As always, thanks for such detailed responses. I'll give you a break from my endless questions (for now!)

Very nice work on your website by the way, what did you use for the dust in 'Ashes'? take care

 

[Imaginara]

I used babypowder which we put onto the model, then had her throw her head around and do small jumps and skips to make it blow out from the shoulders and hair. Then we shot powder against the black background where we just blew and threw it but without a model and then composited this together afterwards. Reason for this was that too much fine powder in the air is very hazardous to your health, so we played it safe. And it turned out pretty neat ;D

 

[ched]

Has anyone experience with Anamorphic lenses? We have an Iscorama lying around and I'm going to do some test shoots with it over the weekend with friends.

Just in cinema. The problem with anamorphic lenses is that you need a matched anamorphic lens to get the recorded image back or there will be distortions. For example, movies recorded with anamorphic lenses require an anamorphic projector lens to be shown on a screen at the proper aspect ratio. There is a lot of math involved if you want Photoshop to do the re-enlargement for you.

 

[kelsea]

this is a great thread!
i have a question about studio lighting. i'm relatively new to fashion photography and have only been shooting outdoors with a minolta xg9. (film)
what are the essentials for a basic studio shoot and how much does this equipment cost? i'm a high school student so i need to scrounge. i would love to hear your tips and suggestions

 

[kelsea]

here are some examples of the lighting i want to achieve:

(i love paolo roversi, heheh.)
and this one, which is, i'm guessing, much more advanced:

also, any pictures of setups would be amazing. thanks

 

[Imaginara]

Well, when you say studio shoot i assume you mean a shoot with a solid background (usually black, grey or white) and either hot lights (continuous light) or flashes.

bare minimum would be 1 light (i prefere flashes, some like continous light more) and some sort of background (usually paper, but can be pretty much anything).

The rest of the advice is the same as for any shoot, lightshapers that works for your style of shooting (softboxes, beautydishes, snoots, spots, ringlights, etc. ).

What can be an issue in a studio environment is to control the light, how it bounces around the studio, so some way to block light is usually very good to have (normally screens painted black on one side (to block) and white on the other (to reflect).

Now to keep cost down, i would suggest going for a medium-high end budget light with a good reflector. Avoid the cheapest china brands, and if you can get a used Profoto/Broncolor/Hensel/Bowens/Alienbee etc. its probably better than buying too cheap. There are tons of ways to do simple softboxes yourself and even improvise using thin white fabric acting as curtains to mimic window light.

Then everything also depends on what you will be using as your studio environment, if its the living room wall or a huge former industrial building As i suspect it will be the former rather than the later, i'd say keep it simple. Use whatever backgrounds you have, and use fabrics and wallpapers on screens to easilly switch backgrounds.

And another tip when it comes to backgrounds. If you have the space and money to buy paper backgrounds (on rolls), once they get a bit murky and gritty (which they do don't cut them down or throw them away. Instead you can paint on them and create a new background with a unique look. Here is one example where i took a white background and painted with a normal household mop dipped in coffee =)

So you can get creative with very little means. Now once you start working with paying clients, your image becomes fairly important aswell, and if you use homemade softboxes with duct-tape and cardboard boxes, the clients may think twice... unless you produce outstanding images ofcourse

Good luck!

 

[Imaginara]

Well didn't see your examples there before i wrote my post, but by the look of quite a few, you will do well with a big softbox =)