I had a friend send me an email the other day asking some photography questions so I figured I would answer here on the blog and hopefully a few others of you can benefit from it as well.
FAIR WARNING: I can get technical and geeky, this could get boring pretty quick. Like I said in my last post though - the more you know about the technical aspects of photography the better equipped you are to use them creatively whenever you want. So here we go.
The first question: I am trying to understand the difference between telephoto macro and a plain macro lens. I feel like I need a different lens than my plain one that is a 18-55mm.
Alright, that's actually a statement but there's a question in there :)
All the numbers I'll put out here are for 35mm cameras - the type of camera your dad wore around his neck. Digital has changed everything and this post would be a book before I could explain it all. But if you know the 35mm numbers you're good-to-go (it's the standard) because all the new equipment out there has the 35mm equivalents listed as well.
Before we get to the macro part let's deal with what a telephoto lens is. We've all heard of telephoto lenses and wide angle lenses. With those two extremes there has to be something "normal" in the middle. But what's normal? What you can see with your eyes is normal. And that's 50mm (millimeters) in lens terms. If you took a camera with a 50mm lens on it and looked at your computer screen like you are now it would look the same, not any closer - not any further away. With that 50mm anchor point - any number less then 50 is a wide angle lens and anything greater is a telephoto. Still with me? Probably not but I'll keep writing anyway. I warned you this would be lame!
Macro. This is a term for a lens that means it can focus very close to it's subject. It's universally marked by a flower icon. That's because 99% of people shooting macro are shooting flowers (or when the camera is right out of the box they're shooting spare change or their keyboard and getting all excited while their wife rolls her eyes). So if you've got a 100mm macro lens it's a telephoto macro and a 28mm lens is a wide-angle macro. Most lenses these days are zooms so you've probably got both regardless. If you took both the lenses and focused on the "H" in the middle of your keyboard the 100mm lens may get just the "H" to fill the whole frame whereas the 28mm lens, at the exact same distance, might get from the D to the L and the 7 to the space bar. In the film days macro meant you could focus somewhere less than a foot away. Many everyday digital point-n-shoot cameras can now focus down to less than an inch. If you need to focus closer than that - go get a PHD and a microscope.
My friend has a camera that she can change lenses on - a Digital Single Lens Reflex camera - DSLR. You don't care what that stands for - let's keep going. She also has an 18-55mm lens. These are digital numbers like I mentioned. For her DSLR she needs to multiply by 1.5 to get the 35mm equivalent. For the moment, you don't care about that either. So she really has a 27-82.5mm lens. Fairly wide at 27mm to a moderate telephoto at 82mm. If you've got a camera that you can change lenses on, the best thing you can do for your pictures is to get a better lens. I will say without reservation that she should buy a
Canon 50mm f1.8 prime lens.
I shoot with the Nikon equivalent of this lens and it may be my favorite lens. The Canon is on Amazon for $70 - new! My second favorite lens sells for $1700 - my Nikkor 70-200mm f2.8.
This 50mm lens doesn't do it all, it doesn't even zoom. It's awesome though for portraits and shooting without a flash. I shoot without a flash whenever possible. Two posts down are pictures of Gryphyn and Vahn. I know for sure the last three shot were with my 50mm lens. I was in my parents dining room on New Years day, I put down a black sheet and opened the curtains behind me and that was it. Start shooting.
When it comes to lenses - your aperture will set you free. The lower the better, meaning the smaller the number. 1.8 is much better than 3.5 Your lens is probably a 3.5-5.6 variable aperture. I've got one sitting on my desk in front of me waiting to go on eBay.
Your aperture is in your lens. It's just a hole than changes it's size like the iris in your eye. The bigger the hole the smaller the number - your "f-stop". It's a multiplier based on how big the aperture is to how long the lens is. Kinda screwy to get used to but, no big deal.
She asks what lens I use the most. Well, it's not my 50mm though I could use it more than I do. I probably use my 17-50 2.8 lens the most. It's my workhorse mainly because it's a fast zoom lens. Fast meaning a low aperture - bigger hole - more expensive. About $400 for my off-brand lens.
Man this is long. I could start typing the ingredients for Fruity Pebbles and no one's ever gonna know.
Oh well, for that one geek still hanging on...
She wants to make her pictures "glow" instead of the plain flat look she's getting. Well, if you don't own Photoshop, a screw-on "soft-focus" filter would probably be the cheapest route. The 50mm lens can work too. The shot of Gryphyn in front of the Christmas tree was with a 1.4 lens. The reason your subject pops with a fast lens is because the depth-of-field is so shallow (that's how much in front and behind the subject is in focus) You see in the picture that he's in focus but the tree is slightly out of focus and it takes on a bit of a glow because of it. In the picture directly below that you see the eye on the left is in focus but the other eye is slightly out. The same thing for most of the one's below that. The effect is enhanced that closer you are to your subject. In the Christmas tree shot I'm across the room and the tree is slightly out of focus. In the picture below it, I'm right up in Gryphyn's face and the depth-of-field is much more noticeable. You really have to pay attention to focus on the eye's with this type of lens, if the camera focuses on the end of the nose the eyes will be slightly out.
Last question: when you're taking Gryphyn's picture, does he always look at you and act "right"?
No. Usually never. But that's the case with most kids.
I make sure there's plenty of light - this keeps your shutter speed quick enough where they aren't blurry from moving. Having the 1.8 lens will help tremendously with this - it lets in much more light. Then I shoot fast and shoot often. The last picture of Gryphyn in the post is the only keeper I came away with after about 10 minutes where he wanted to chase the dog, bury his head in his blanket, play with the blinds, bite my nose, bite mom's nose and pull me down and bounce on my chest. He used to be much easier, I think I burned him out. Imagine that :)
Vahn loves the camera though. He comes alive for it. I've taken it out and started shooting him when he was throwing a fit and he started smiling and laughing for me while he still had tears rolling down his face.
My head hurts. I haven't thought about this stuff for a while, it's just sort of ingrained when you live and breath it everyday. Trying to put it in simpler terms and figuring what to mention and what to leave out is kind of challenging. It's all relatively important but different things come into play based on your individual skill level.
If anyone is still reading this and actually found it helpful - leave me a comment. This took me a few hours to put together, I'd just like to get an idea if anyone's benefiting from it.
I promise to put some pictures up with the next post so it's not so lame.
