Shooting without thinking: which lens?

[costa43]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

40 minutes ago, hansvons said:

Excellent shots! Did you punch in a bit in the portrait? I guess only a bit, as the DOF is pretty shallow for an f4.0 and the close-up framing. The rendering of your wive's face is pleasantly flat, a virtue you rarely find with wide-angle lenses, a signature of many Leica lenses (there are exceptions like the 24-90 and probably other lenses I never shot with). The flatness makes noses and the head generally less pronounced and egg-shaped. My 35mm Summicron shows that, too. Voigländer's 35mm Color Skopar 2,5 is different and renders faces unfavourably dimensional. That's why I sold it despite its unique compactness.

Thank you. No crop on either pic, the framing is straight out of camera. I was at or around 0.7m here wide open at f3.8 for the portrait. I was also pleasantly surprised with the lack of apparent distortion. 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[pippy]

5 hours ago, f8low said:

...One day I want to try something like a 24-70 zoom for a drastic change. To me that's more interesting than having two primes...

 

3 hours ago, hansvons said:

...This what I used when shooting documentaries......Its versatility is super important if content trumps form. But the workflow with such a lens can make you lazy and make you move less as you can frame via zoom and not via feet, the latter offering new perspectives.

I don't have enough time at the moment to offer a full reply but did want to make a comment on this aspect.

I had never owned a zoom lens in my life until I bought my first DSLR in 2008 (the lens was bundled with the body) so using one was a novelty. Nor had I ever had a camera with a 'Semi-Automatic' or 'Automatic' exposure setting. Nor Auto-Focus. This thing was an Unexplored World...

The camera (plus a few primes and a longer zoom) was bought purely to be used for my pro work so for a number of years it stayed safe at home and I continued to use my film cameras for my holiday snaps; at that time a Nikon F2 and a Leica M2 with 35mm / 50mm lens pairings for both.

Then came the time where I thought I might as well take the DSLR so from then on I only took that camera with the zoom. What happened next was totally unexpected; holiday after holiday and year on year the content-quality of my snapping went into freefall until the point was reached when, at the end of one trip, there were no pictures at all which I liked. I had become so lazy in my approach to photography and taking pictures had become so easy that my creative / thought process effectively stopped working. This was a shock to the system and a rather rude wake-up call. It was after this particular holiday that I realised I once again needed to start thinking before I start snapping and I bought my first digi-M.

It was a good decision.

Philip.

Edited December 5, 2023 by pippy

[a.noctilux]

Sometimes, difficulties in life make us being more creative.

When it's too easy, we ( = me of course) are too lazy to think or behave as human being (...think ! ).

 

[Babylonia]

Coming from another part of the community ("Other" L-mount), I hope within this part of M-lenses I can still express my unbiased ideas on this topic.
As it is more of a general photographic approach / thought.  So don't shoot me.  🤪

At least other users also do have a wider frame of thinking.

vor 7 Stunden schrieb Smudgerer:

Actually I don't own a M lens above the 50mm mark anyway, above 50mm I find, ( for me ), that a SLR/DSLR/EVF system is a far better choice and it's also where the use of zoom lenses makes some sort of sense too,.....

The reaction of   @jaapv   is just the way of what I am doing "mostly".

vor 6 Stunden schrieb jaapv:

I mount the lens I need beforehand and only switch if needed by a drastic change of subject. 

It depends on the type of photography one does, though. Wildlife requires for instance a long telezoom plus a camera with short zoom.
I guess that this is the case as the subject determines the image and the photographer to a lesser extent.

To keep keep luggage "light".  I try to avoid loads of equipment as possible. But still the list of gear can be "growing" easily.

Depending on the intended purpose, I choose the items to take with me.
And have a particular lens on the camera attached beforehand already, which I think best suits the subject.

Doing architecture - in my case (L-mount)     16-35mm zoom
In other cases. That lens but also a carbon tripod + 3D head + 50mm/1.4

Doing people / portraiture as by arrangement.  50mm/1.4   and   85mm/1.8    (And maybe as a spare 35mm/2.0).
Depending indoors or outdoors:
Indoor:      extra low weight flash equipment, stand + umbrella.
Outdoor:   collapsible reflection screen.

Without a predetermined goal, just minimal gear with me.  Camera with the lens that suits my way of approaching subjects.
Just the  35mm/2.0

Keep in mind, as I am using S1R 47 megapixel.  I do have some “spare” in using a particular focal length, by cropping the image.
But not particular by coincidence “later” when processing the images.  But already beforehand, when taking pictures.
As I always try to compose the image by a given format as much as possible.
I have some personal presets, in such a way.  That by 2x click of a button the entire screen / EVF of the camera is used in “1.4x crop mode”
So the complete full area EVF (and back screen) is used showing the image by this. (IMO 2x cropmode to far off for reasonable Mp resolution).

By that e.g. having only 35mm/2.0 lens attached (and no other lens with me).
I can use the 1.4 crop factor ----> related to 52mm focal length image area.
Looking to the EVF it looks like you are looking through a “real” 52mm attached lens.
And still having ~23.5 Gigabit available resolution available.  (RAW mode is just the full res area  -  JPG cropped).

Same for e.g. using 50mm/1.4       By1.4 crop factor ----> related to 70mm focal length image area.

Specially portraiture of people, were the most detailed skin structure (at 47 Megapixel) mostly is not liked.
(And have to process images softening the skin anyway).
These cropping methods is a handy extra bonus / workflow for fully satisfied quality images.

More or less comparable as by the options using a 60 Megapixel Leica Q3  having a fixed lens.
(I like the story at YouTube of  “Three Blind Men and An Elephant / Hugh Brownstone” ).

 

[BernardC]

Coming from a film (cinema) background, I was taught early that I had to know my lenses. I remember the first job I did with a real soundman (as they were called back then). He asked which lens we were using, and kept the boom mic just above the frame line instinctively, even though there was no video assist and the scene involved a complicated camera movement.

Even when shooting with a zoom (which can save a lot of time on a low-budget show), experienced crews usually stick to common focal lengths, so that each departments knows what will be in-frame. It's a sure sign of inexperience when a director want to look look at every possible option before a crew can set up. You just want to hand them a camera, send them off, and tell them to come back when they've figured-out the difference between a 32 and a 50.

I follow the same practice with my personal work. I'll usually have no more than three lenses in my kit, and decide up-front which one to use. From that point on, I "see" what my lens sees, and choose my camera position accordingly. As with most things in life, practice helps you progress from conscious thought to instinctive action. Eventually you''ll get to a location and unconsciously walk to the right spot for your shot. As the song goes "you may ask yourself, how did I get here?" In this case, it's familiarity with your tools, and years of practice.

[pippy]

On 12/5/2023 at 8:40 AM, hansvons said:

"...defaulting to one focal length is desirable as vegetative previsualisation is much easier to obtain. Why’s that? Because shooting without thinking will take you to the next level. No moving your feet, no wondering what to do, no re-framing and lens swapping because all of that is done unconsciously and quickly. Only your subject’s action, focus and exposure may require some attention.."...

I'm interested in learning how others feel about this. Thanks!

As you have probably realised, Hans, from my previous quote in the thread which you referenced here I don't adopt this "One Lens To Rule Them All and in the Darkroom Bind Them!"(*) approach.

All my photographs taken with my Leicas are purely for my own ends. They are never taken to satisfy a client (or anyone else!) and, as such, I can be as free - or not - as I like with my methods. All the same it's rare that I don't think about what I'm about to shoot. I understand why he takes this approach and why he has become both popular and influential but - just for me personally - the shooting-style of Daidō Moriyama is not one which I find attractive in terms of results nor, when I have adopted the approach myself, ever remotely successful. That, of course, is all down to me!

I normally have two bodies with me (one b'n'w the other colour) and will usually have different f/l lenses on each. Depending on where I'm going - whether I know what I will find there or am coming to the place afresh - the choice will almost certainly be either 28mm + 35mm or 35mm and 50mm. These lenses will almost always remain on the body to which they were attached at the outset; it would only be under very unusual circumstances that there would be any lens-swapping going on.

I won't post the whole text from the earlier post but will cut'n'paste this comment which is the most relevant for this thread;

"First (image) was taken on the 50mm purely as a 'safety-net' pic just in case the seated figure got up to leave. Second, using the 35mm, was taken a handful of seconds later after I had given the scene a little bit more consideration and moved to a more favourable position..."

This is how I normally go about things. If time isn't on my side (as in the earlier situation) I will grab a snap then think about how I might improve on what has been taken. Sometimes, as on this occassion, the improvement (IMO) came about by a change of position and using the '35mm body' instead of the 50mm. Sometimes it's a positional change from the elements - usually people - within the scene. Sometimes I might like the scene exactly as it is but wait until an unexpected element intrudes to give the scene a bit more interest. Most often, however, the subject matter will - in the main- be inanimate and, having a bit of time to consider the scene before pressing the shutter-release, I will be perfectly content with what I grabbed first-time (the first frame is often the best in multi-pic situations anyway) and move on to other things. And so on......

All of these approaches require a bit of thought; some more than others.

A while ago I came across an article on Cartier-Bresson where the author posted one of HCB's contact sheets which included one of his better-known images and the photographs he had taken of the same scene both from before the famous pic was captured as well as those which followed. I found the sheet fascinating as it illustrated how he went about working the scene. There was also one quote from him regarding a contact sheet in a general way which I thought interesting enough to write down;

"A contact sheet is a little like a psychoanalyst’s casebook. It is also a kind of seismograph that records the moment. Everything is written down – whatever has surprised us, what we’ve caught in flight, what we’ve missed, what has disappeared, or an event that develops until it becomes an image that is sheer jubilation..."

I'll try to find the article in question.

Philip.

*With apologies to J.R.R. Tolkien...

EDIT : Here's the article concerning HCB. Enjoy!!!;

https://petapixel.com/2016/05/25/contact-sheets-story-behind-every-photo/

Edited December 6, 2023 by pippy

[hansvons]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

20 hours ago, BernardC said:

He asked which lens we were using, and kept the boom mic just above the frame line instinctively,

I met these guys, too. I was always excited to see the mic dancing in the viewfinder. Will he botch the take? Never did, always outside the frame lines.

20 hours ago, BernardC said:

Even when shooting with a zoom (which can save a lot of time on a low-budget show), experienced crews usually stick to common focal lengths,

Yes. I had moved that habit over to stills photography when I owned the 24-90. I always selected the focal lengths before aiming at the subject. Mostly 35mm.

 

20 hours ago, BernardC said:

I follow the same practice with my personal work. I'll usually have no more than three lenses in my kit, and decide up-front which one to use. From that point on, I "see" what my lens sees, and choose my camera position accordingly.

Seeing what your lens sees and choosing your camera position accordingly is precisely what I mean by shooting without thinking. 

I brought that down to one lens, the 35mm. But I only photograph for my editorials or my research work; no "proper" clients are involved anymore (what freedom!). So, if a subject doesn't work with 35mm, I move on. BTW, I like photographing without a camera, kind of mentally snapping images of my environment and visualising how that had looked with a 28mm, for instance, or a 90mm. I have done that since I started my career, looking at how light shapes faces, shadows, colours, and shapes. Once you are in this, you can only look at the environment by photographing it mentally. Won't go away. Tried it. Sold everything when I had quit the industry. Now I own two film-Ms and an SL2-S. Unresolvable addiction.

 

20 hours ago, BernardC said:

Coming from a film (cinema) background, I was taught early that I had to know my lenses.

I found out about two years ago that concentrating on my favourite lens, not being bothered anymore with choices, helps tremendously to focus (no pun intended) and helps reach the next level. 

[IkarusJohn]

I agree with Hans’ proposition in the opening post.

Photography for me is not about the gear you have, but what you do with it (even as I type this, that statement sounds asinine).

I hate changing lenses while I’m out, and I hate fiddling with gear.  So, the proposition does work for me (as commented in the other thread in my exchange with Philip).  If I have a 35mm, I struggle a bit as I try to get the image I want (I find I have to think and move more with this focal length as it is neither here nor there - too tight for a wide, too wide for a more detailed shot).  Too many 35mm shots I see deal with the subject poorly - they could have been more striking taken closer or further away.

I guess what I’m saying is that it’s all about the subject.  Philip’s images of the man on the bench really show how I feel.  The first image taken with the 50mm doesn’t capture what Philip wanted.  Could he have moved and reframed with his 50mm?  I think not.  Conversely, moving and taking the second image from a closer and lower perspective got the image he wanted.

My point?  With one lens, your choices will need to play to the strengths of that lens.  You move and reframe to get the image you want.  I find this more satisfying.

Edited December 6, 2023 by IkarusJohn

[Jeff S]

5 hours ago, pippy said:

 

A while ago I came across an article on Cartier-Bresson where the author posted one of HCB's contact sheets which included one of his better-known images and the photographs he had taken of the same scene both from before the famous pic was captured as well as those which followed. I found the sheet fascinating as it illustrated how he went about working the scene. There was also one quote from him regarding a contact sheet in a general way which I thought interesting enough to write down;

"A contact sheet is a little like a psychoanalyst’s casebook. It is also a kind of seismograph that records the moment. Everything is written down – whatever has surprised us, what we’ve caught in flight, what we’ve missed, what has disappeared, or an event that develops until it becomes an image that is sheer jubilation..."

I'll try to find the article in question.

Philip.

*With apologies to J.R.R. Tolkien...

EDIT : Here's the article concerning HCB. Enjoy!!!;

https://petapixel.com/2016/05/25/contact-sheets-story-behind-every-photo/

A related discussion…

If you don’t already have it, Philip, I highly recommend the expanded Looking In edition, with Frank’s contact sheets from The Americans.

Jeff

[Jeff S]

On 12/5/2023 at 3:40 AM, hansvons said:

…previsualisation…

As a “minor” aside, this term was used by Minor White, who distinguished it from “post-visualization.”  Ansel, on the other hand, thought the term redundant, and instead called it visualization.

Jeff 

[Fedro]

sorry if it is too simplistic, but for me I find that whichever lens I put on after just using that lens for a little while I start seeing pictures in that focal lens

particularly true with a 28 a 35 or a 50

[Ko.Fe.]

Shoot without thinking is common method. Some Magnum, UK based member was talking about not to long time ago.

Well, in his case it is not accurate. After years and decades in photography it is so short to make decision and the rest, it feels like no thinking.

Lomography ten rules (or so) had one as don't think, shoot.

It was easy with camera which original Lomographers started with.

To me this "without thinking" came after growing into close range, WA photography.

I often walk, see something interesting close to me and I'm so into it, I'm not thinking to take picture of it.

So, I came to conclusion what my best photos were taken with shortest possible thinking, but more like very quick reaction on something near me.

Tele lens or zoom are not for it.

I think most of those photos were with 35. Where here is something in it.

28, 21 are more convenient for tight or take it all and wide.

50 is already tele for me. Limiting.

Specifically on M, I always have to think about exposure.

If I would still have time and money to kill, I would continue of doing it on meterless M4-2.

I walked with it and every time light changed I adjusted it

This was giving me great confidence and convenience. 

Unfortunately it doesn't work this way with digital M. Shutter speed dial is not as good as at my M4-2. Where I could switch shadows, light or bright without looking at the dial, but by just very distinctive clicks. No digital M has it.

But it is important part of intuitive, not thinking process.

I think in addition of getting rid of the back screen, Leica should install classic film dial on those special edition digital Ms.

The less clutter is on dials, camera body and in viewfinder the less thinking will be involved at the moment picture is taken.

 

Edited December 6, 2023 by Ko.Fe.

[pippy]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

...Photography for me is not about the gear you have, but what you do with it...Philip’s images of the man on the bench......The first image taken with the 50mm doesn’t capture what Philip wanted.  Could he have moved and reframed with his 50mm?  I think not.  Conversely, moving and taking the second image from a closer and lower perspective got the image he wanted.

My point?  With one lens, your choices will need to play to the strengths of that lens.  You move and reframe to get the image you want...

I agree with everything you say. OK; A little bit more of a back-story to the images posted in the other thread.

As stated the first image posted was grabbed very rapidly as a 'safety-net' in case things changed quicker than my ability to re-frame with the 50. Between the 'First' (50mm) and 'Second' (35mm) pictures shown in the thread I had already changed position and re-framed with the 50mm which gave me a more pleasing image than the grab-snap. As it happens, of course, I also had the 35 and, as it transpired, just enough time to re-compose with the 35mm / second body.

Had I only the 50mm with me then I would have been perfecty satisfied with this other (unseen) image. Even if the gentleman had stood up directly after I took the grab-pic there was sufficient mileage in terms of cropping to give me a pic which would have been fine given the circumstances; the image as posted (0.3 degree tweak for horizon-levelling apart) was shown uncropped.

There's more to the story, of course. Personally I do love the possiblity of being able to switch between a pair of f/lengths rapidly and using two bodies makes this simple. As most of my images are printed-out in monochrome normally it makes very little difference which body is fitted with which lens. On this occasion, however, things were quite different. It was clear that capturing the scene on the colour body would be by far the better option but as the Monochrom was in my hands when I came upon the 'tableau' that's what I went with first (and second!). Fortunately I had enough time to swap to the colour-camera and move my feet even more...

Philip.

Edited December 6, 2023 by pippy

[pippy]

45 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

A related discussion…

If you don’t already have it, Philip, I highly recommend the expanded Looking In edition, with Frank’s contact sheets from The Americans.

Jeff

Thanks very much for the links and suggestion, Jeff; greatly appreciated!

I have had a look through the 'Les Americans' contacts ages but don't have a copy. But hey; Christmas is approaching and The Wife doesn't know what to get for me!...

I will have a good read through the 'Looking for contact sheets' thread later on tonight when I have some time to myself.

Thanks again!

Philip.

[pgk]

Without thinking could be described as thoughtless of course😁. Perhaps a better description might be something around 'reflex' photography? Or does that have camera type connotations?

I have to say that it is often my first image of a subject which I find to be the one I prefer. I'm sure that this has is a lot to do with initially 'seeing' an image, which might include pre-visualisation, maybe. With sufficient experience it is possible to 'see' an image and simply raise the camera, home in on the composition and take the photo. I for one tend to pre-set exosure manually meaning that much of the time I only have to adjust focus (also pre-set to some extent) and compose. And these can be sorted very quickly on an M.

[IkarusJohn]

I have both the expanded edition of Looking In - Robert Frank's The Americans and Magnum Contacts.

What I found fascinating about Robert Frank is that he took an enormous number of photographs in his year long amble through the US, resulting in only 83 images in the published book.  They reflect his presentation of the US in the 1950s; but they were also largely images taken on the spur of the moment.  That is much of their charm.

Conversely, legend has it that not only did Cartier-Bresson use only one lens on his M3 but that he also shot blind for some of his images and he just handed over his negatives to be processed and printed, having limited interest in the end result.  In the Magnum Contacts book, they found that Cartier Bresson had destroyed many of his contact sheets, leaving only the final published image, the inference being that he actually exposed many more frames for his "decisive moment" images than would appear.  Like Robert Capa with his famous Spanish Soldier image, Cartier-Bresson took more images than he let on.  Nothing wrong with that, of course - but the myth is deceptive.

For myself, much like others here, I will often see a scene unfolding, grab my camera (change the lens if I have time to and I need to) and take a number of images.  It helps if I'm not fooling about with ISO, aperture, shutter speed, cropping setting and resolution - that's the beauty of the M system for me.  Frame and focus.  I've never used the C for continuous on the shutter - my  timing is better than than.

[pippy]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

..that's the beauty of the M system for me.  Frame and focus....

M-D Typ-262's Rule!!!

😸 😸 😸

P.

[hansvons]

On 12/6/2023 at 2:04 PM, pippy said:

the shooting-style of Daidō Moriyama is not one which I find attractive in terms of results nor, when I have adopted the approach myself, ever remotely successful. That, of course, is all down to me!

Hi Philip, I was swamped and wanted to find time for a proper answer. My apologies for the delay.

It is interesting that you mention Moriyama. Like Meyerowitz and many others who photographed society in the streets of their cities, his most remarkable work comes from a time when society was changing. Looking at these images from Japan in the 1960s and 70s today, it feels like being in a lecture on sociology history. Perhaps that is why their contemporary work is not so well known because taking photographs on the street always means capturing the every day in its own time. It is difficult to achieve a timeless level in this area, even if it is possible, as we know from the rare examples that have made it into the collective artistic memory. Moriyama worked out of pent-up anger and a deep interest in the dark side of society (at least, that's what his crime-scene-like photographs tell me).

You could say: if the spectres don't haunt you, you can't do it. 

Another good example of this sense of life is the work of filmmakers like Fassbinder, Herzog, Wenders, Achternbusch and visual artists like Beuys, Immendorf and Richter, whose (early) work was determined by the never-answered German-centric question "What did you (dad and mum) do in the difficult times (Nazi Germany)?". We also have that in GB too, only with  different themes (dire straits of working-class England, punk rock, Thatcherism, loss of the manufacturing sector, The Troubles ...)

That was THE question of their generation. I don't have such a dramatic question that has to do with life and death. I belong to Generation X. It took me 35 years to figure it out. It's about nature and climate protection, a kind of reparation for my blindness, belief in endless consumption (I worked in advertising!) and what I failed to do when it mattered.

The conclusion that no art is without spooky ghosts is perhaps a bit short, but you get the idea. But I'm sure we agree that feeling the zeitgeist is crucial. Simply copying a style we like only leads to, well, a copy. 

But I'm not done with Moriyama yet ;). He says: "Don't stop and think." This is, of course, wrong, literally, but it fits well with my feeling that there is a sweet spot in setting up a camera that supports the feeling of "photographing without thinking" by approaching the subject with your gut feeling and operating the camera almost vegetatively.

 

On 12/6/2023 at 2:04 PM, pippy said:

I will be perfectly content with what I grabbed first-time (the first frame is often the best in multi-pic situations anyway) and move on to other things. And so on......

Yes, the first idea is the best idea in 90% of cases. I learnt that from making documentary films. That raises the question: How can I ensure the first shot is technically and artistically perfect? I

I've only been working with still images for 3 years. I started with the SL2-S and the Zoom 24-90, thinking that maybe there was a point to autofocus in still photography. I learnt that I'm a lost cause and have to focus manually because moving focus points with a joystick doesn't give me any joy. 

Then I thought that maybe I could find joy in reviving my film days by shooting stills on film. I realised that the R4 I bought in 1992 was beyond repair and bought an R6 (I own a range of R lenses for film production). Focusing the 35mm Summicron R worked well, and the results were good, but it took longer than I had hoped and caused me to miss important action. That's why I bought an M4P. Now I have a twin set of an M4P and an M6, both fitted with a 35mm lens.

 

On 12/6/2023 at 2:04 PM, pippy said:

Most often, however, the subject matter will - in the main- be inanimate and, having a bit of time to consider the scene before pressing the shutter-release, ...

As part of my efforts to promote the protection of nature and the climate, I often take landscape photographs. I photograph them the way other people would photograph scenes in a city. I don't use a tripod, I don't lay in wait for hours for the right light, cloud, etc, and I'm not interested in the "perfect" mood as others have done so elaborately (some with great success (Adams), most with a great sense of kitsch). 

Below is a recent shot with the M4P and the 35mm Summicron ASPH, which, to me, is the perfect 35mm.

 

Hans

 

Beach #11:

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hansvons]

On 12/6/2023 at 6:57 PM, IkarusJohn said:

My point?  With one lens, your choices will need to play to the strengths of that lens.  You move and reframe to get the image you want.  I find this more satisfying.

Yes. Well put!

[pgk]

On 12/6/2023 at 5:57 PM, IkarusJohn said:

My point?  With one lens, your choices will need to play to the strengths of that lens.  You move and reframe to get the image you want.  I find this more satisfying.

I can and do go out with just one lens (a 35mm) BUT with several lenses I can play to the strengths of all. 3 fixed focal lenses are, for me, a sweet spot - 21/45/75 - and increase versatility.

FWIW underwater (my speciality) there are two choices - macro or wide. Macro is almost invariably a fixed focal whilst wide can include zoom or fisheye. With a wide zoom I have found that the vast majority of shots are taken at the wider end and despite modern advances I've defaulted back to the traditional widest fixed focal - 20mm. Depending on whether I have macro or wide on I see a dive in totally different ways either missing small detail if on wide, or overview if I'm using macro. Changing lenses underwater means carrying two cameras which is difficult given their size (to say nothing of double the cost). So I do appreciate the ability to carry more lenses on land perhaps because of this.