UER Mobile Forum UER Mobile - Not logged in
Home  Search   User Search   Login  Register  
Messages   New Posts   Favourites   Recent Posts   Recent Views   My LDB   My Buddies  


UER Mobile > UE Photo Critiques > Critique my photo+lens question. (Viewed 1653 times)

post by Sebk   |  | 
Critique my photo+lens question.
< on 9/22/2020 12:45 PM >

Whats your most used focal length? I’m trying to decide between a 14-24mm f2.8 or a 17-35mm f4.


https://flic.kr/p/2jK1XJ1




Reply with Quote


post by ryanpics   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 1 on 9/24/2020 1:40 PM >

I basically only use my 18-55. Anytime I need something wider I just shoot a little panorama and it works out well. Wide lenses are much easier to shoot with, but a longer lens will generally look better if you can get it right.

That being said, the 2.8 could come in handy if you don't shoot with a tripod. I would get the 14-24 but just make sure you don't start only shooting everything wide.

Love that shot btw, got any more from there?


Reply with Quote


post by bleckfrog   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 2 on 9/24/2020 3:09 PM >

my setup recently got stolen from my car, but before that, my favorite lens was the 16-35 f2.8L. I replaced it with a 17-35 f4L, but the 2.8 honestly makes a huge difference and I'm considering selling that lens and buying another 16-35 f2.8L.

i'd recommend the 14-24 f2.8 because the f2.8 is so useful for lowlight and wide angle looks really good in a lot of exploration pictures. i personally never use anything past 30mm anyway when shooting with that lens.


Reply with Quote


post by Sebk   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 3 on 9/24/2020 4:57 PM >

Posted by ryanpics
I basically only use my 18-55. Anytime I need something wider I just shoot a little panorama and it works out well. Wide lenses are much easier to shoot with, but a longer lens will generally look better if you can get it right.

That being said, the 2.8 could come in handy if you don't shoot with a tripod. I would get the 14-24 but just make sure you don't start only shooting everything wide.

Love that shot btw, got any more from there?


I decided to go with the 17-35 f4 because I don’t shoot anywhere near f2.8 much and I always end up cropping photos that I take on my phone that has a 13mm equivalent focal length and it the fact that I can’t find a used 14-24 lens with a reasonable price. I have a few pictures on my Instagram and will be posting more. https://instagram....shid=1s8m7krr3wwuh
It’s a hard location to photograph effectively an efficiently as there’s cameras and motion sensors everywhere.


Reply with Quote


post by Sebk   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 4 on 9/24/2020 5:01 PM >

Posted by bleckfrog
my setup recently got stolen from my car, but before that, my favorite lens was the 16-35 f2.8L. I replaced it with a 17-35 f4L, but the 2.8 honestly makes a huge difference and I'm considering selling that lens and buying another 16-35 f2.8L.

i'd recommend the 14-24 f2.8 because the f2.8 is so useful for lowlight and wide angle looks really good in a lot of exploration pictures. i personally never use anything past 30mm anyway when shooting with that lens.


Wow, that really sucks. I always worry about leaving anything in my car. I ended up going with the 17-35mm f4 as it’s a more versatile lens than the 14-24 f2.8. I generally shoot around f4 and above anyway. I’ll probably invest in a 14-24 when there’s a good used one for sale or I have almost 2 grand to buy a new one.


Reply with Quote


post by budda   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 5 on 10/6/2020 4:43 PM >

I bought a 10-20 in June of 2012 and basically never zoomed it in.

Between those 2 lens specs, I would definitely go with the F2.8 lens. You'll really love having that extra stop of brightness. If you find yourself really wanting a 35mm lens you could add a pretty fast prime for relatively cheap.

[last edit 10/6/2020 5:11 PM by budda - edited 1 times]

Reply with Quote


post by budda   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 6 on 10/6/2020 5:03 PM >

As for the photo, there's kinda a lot going on.

The subject is vague and has little contrast with the background. The eye's moreso drawn to that little green doodad on the bottom left corner as it's the strongest contrast and almost larger in the frame. Then there's that strong line above the subject that kinda moreso leads you away from it over to those panels on the right. So I'm kinda bouncing all over here wondering what exactly it is you want me to look at.

A possible fix would be to crop out some of those panels on the right (maybe about where that yellow-ish card is on the one) so the top and bottom would kind of form more of a frame around the furnace.


Or better yet if you get a chance to shoot there again, maybe get more of a straight on angle that removes that green and red thing from the shot.

[last edit 10/6/2020 5:11 PM by budda - edited 3 times]

Reply with Quote


post by Sebk   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 7 on 10/8/2020 3:14 AM >

Posted by budda
As for the photo, there's kinda a lot going on.

The subject is vague and has little contrast with the background. The eye's moreso drawn to that little green doodad on the bottom left corner as it's the strongest contrast and almost larger in the frame. Then there's that strong line above the subject that kinda moreso leads you away from it over to those panels on the right. So I'm kinda bouncing all over here wondering what exactly it is you want me to look at.

A possible fix would be to crop out some of those panels on the right (maybe about where that yellow-ish card is on the one) so the top and bottom would kind of form more of a frame around the furnace.


Or better yet if you get a chance to shoot there again, maybe get more of a straight on angle that removes that green and red thing from the shot.


I totally see what you mean about things being distracting. If I did it again I think id go up or down a floor and shoot straight on from really far back with a 70-200.

I ended up getting a 17-35 f4, I find my self shooting around f5 to f6 most of the time anyway. My camera is full-frame so I think our lenses have similar fields of view despite the focal length difference. So far no complaints.


Reply with Quote


post by Bass Mechanic   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 8 on 10/22/2020 8:29 PM >

Why is there soo much conversation about a bad photo with terrible composition?


Reply with Quote


post by Natchraz   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 9 on 10/22/2020 8:35 PM >

Go for the 14-24mm, you’ll need it for tight spaces as wider focal length is key for stuff like that.


Reply with Quote


post by randomesquephoto   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 10 on 10/23/2020 8:58 AM >

Posted by Bass Mechanic
Why is there soo much conversation about a bad photo with terrible composition?




Probably because there's just about zero activity in this section besides this. Lol. This was one of the first critique posts in ages.

[last edit 10/23/2020 8:58 AM by randomesquephoto - edited 1 times]

Reply with Quote


post by NotQuiteHuman   |  | 
Re: Critique my photo+lens question.
<Reply # 11 on 10/23/2020 4:02 PM >

I'd recommend looking into the tamron 15-30mm 2.8. It's cheaper and sharper than the nikon 14-24mm and it also has vibration control. IMO it's worth the 1mm hit on the wide end. Personal preference, but I think it's best to avoid shooting ultrawide if possible. The exaggerated perspective it gives is often displeasing unless done right.


Reply with Quote



Reply



This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private.



78 ms gen time