Jump to content

Recommended lens for dogs! <Warning-contains images>


Chazphoto

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think a 50 is the most useful, but all work, 35 and 50 below in no particular order, I have god some good shots with 18,21,24,28 and 75 but trickier with wide

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

OK, OK, I'll come to heel. Some of you may think I've gone for a long walkies with this one - or may be that I'm just barking mad.

 

Seriously, I have enjoyed all the responses and really appreciate the advice, warm welcomes and superb photographs. I've been juggling a lot of work commitments and therefore unable to respond (which is also the reason for another post about quick ways of viewing DNG files without Lightroom to hand!). So here's the background to the question and some responses to comments.

 

I've been snapping photographs for 30 years as an enthusiastic amateur. I also happen to love and admire dogs and have been privileged to live with some great ones over the years. Like Rick, I also tend to photograph dogs wherever I go, though without his success (yet). Photographically, my great loves have been Contax SLRs, Zeiss lenses and the Contax G2, with which I took a photograph of one of our springers in motion that should not have been possible with that camera. AF SLRs were a Minolta Dynax 9, Contax N1 and now a Nikon and I think I like them in that diminishing order. A brief foray into the X-Pro 1 led me to a Leica M9 and I'm smitten. The Nikon will have to do for AF digital, longer lenses, fast-moving pooches and so on, but the Leica will be where my "real" photography gets done. And it's going to be a challenge, I know.

 

Currently, I just have a Voigtlander 35/1.4 MC to play with. If I can figure out how to attach photographs, I'll post one dog shot taken with it. I think that the Ron Scheffler shot proves that you can use wides to take great dog photographs, but when trying to do a head & shoulders portrait, the 35mm creates a slightly exaggerated perspective which isn't that pleasing. I've also found that with the smaller dogs even at 0.7m the 35mm includes more background than I always want. I need to look back through some other photographs to see if I can work out my preferred focal length for dog portraits, but with a lot of that work on film and no EXIF data, I'll be working it out from experience.

 

And from experience, I suspect that my 85mm f1.4 lenses on all the SLRs will be the main source of keepers and there're may be some good ones with the Sonnar 90mm/2.8 on the G2, if I managed to get the focus on target. So yes, the photographer's choice of perspective and type of photograph is what really matters and mine will tend to closer cropped, head-shots, expression and character. I'd also say "yes" to those that say lens doesn't matter and you adapt to what you have and take the photograph (make the image, really) that your creativity plus the lens allows you to make. There is a difference though between planning and improvising and this was a question about the planning side of things.

 

In terms of lens choice for the M9, I am strongly attracted to what I read about the Zeiss C-Sonnar 1,5/50 and am also thinking about the Summarit 75mm or Elmarit 90mm in the longer term. Can anyone tell me whether the closer focusing distance of the 75mm will get a tighter crop than the 1m limit on the longer 90mm?

 

Cheers

 

Chazphoto

Link to post
Share on other sites

75 does work well for 'portraits', this one in low light ISO800, f1.4 1/25th, 75 Summilux

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I hope that this works (I'm still new to all this digital stuff!). Here's a dog shot with the M9 and Voigtlander 35mm/1.4. ISO 800 and 1/45 - no record of the aperture. Converted to JPG using an online converter (I haven't got around to opening LR4 yet) and resized using Windows. Is suspect that you will all be able to tell me a better way to do this (please do, because the original 34.7Mb file is a lot better!), but anyway. Thanks again for all the help.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some gorgeous shots in this thread.

Especially when you consider the inherent difficulties of the subject.

 

If you liked your old 90 sonnar, be aware that there is a legacy M-Hexanon 90mm f/2.8 lens that is based on a sonnar design - could be worth a look but focus shift on a telephoto could be problematic. Personally I opted for the elmarit M and use it for portraits of all creatures. Prices have gone up in the last few years though, so a new 90/2.5 summarit might be the better deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

An old Summicron 35 (circa 1971) can do well.

This was shot in 1972 with that on an M5 and scanned in.

 

The pup is long one. The young lady has bigger kids of her own.

Much bigger. But that is a different story.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I took this with a Voigtländer 50/1.5 Nokton, but have since sold the lens.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to the OP, here's one with a 28mm at f2, 1/1500th. Amazing how little 'O' knows whats what and is already on her way when the ball is behind/above her

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

75 Sumilux gets my vote,

 

Joel

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Elliot Erwitt is a very successful "dog photographer" and I believe he mainly used a 50 mm summicron.

 

I was going to suggest taking a look at Ellot Erwitt's book Dog Dogs for plenty of ideas. There are some amazingly timed shots there.

 

Nick

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hektor 2.5/5 cm. According to Saint Oskar, a lens for dogs (and a dog of a lens).

 

 

Spontaneously I would have said any Hektor, given the pedigree of the lens name :)

 

My personal favourite would be the 2,8cm f6.3 Hektor suitably stopped down.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Timing and patience - and a large dose of vision. These seem to be common ingredients for the excellent work on display here. Curiously, I've found myself less shy asking people if I can photograph their dogs, than I would be asking to photograph them.

 

I still think that 50mm to 75mm is the better focal length, but so many shots show the vision for a wider angle can work too.

 

Chazphoto

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my Kasper.

50Summilux asph on M8

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...