# As I grow older....



## sanj (Jan 9, 2017)

As I grow older, getting the shot is becoming more of a priority than technical nit picking. As a result: 
a) I prefer zooms to prime lenses as I can get the correct composition faster and not miss on acton/story. When I see the final photo the modern zooms look sharp enough to me, I many times can't tell if it was a zoom or a prime. 
b) I am ok with f2 or 2.8 verses f1.2 or 1.4. The difference in background blur is minimal but the 2.8 lenses are lighter and focus faster. (Besides modern cameras are excellent at higher ISO...) 

Does anyone else relate?


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 9, 2017)

sanj said:


> As I grow older, getting the shot is becoming more of a priority than technical nit picking.
> ...
> Does anyone else relate?


Hi Sanjay! 

In short I'd say it that way (as a lot before): "The best camera is the one in your hand!"

Long version: it all depends on what you're shooting:

event, action, sport, wildlife, etc. photography requires the "getting the shot, getting the moment" approach, so versatile and fast gear (zoom, fps) should be preferred
if you have time or even the need to plan your shot you can also think about the best technical approach (which lens, which angle, best light, etc.)
and of course there is nothing more important than at least a decent usable sharp focus (except for some artsy work)

Personally I preferred zooms in the past while I now prefer a good mixture of both zoom and primes.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 9, 2017)

Does the trend end with a smartphone being good enough?

Or maybe just being regular?


----------



## sanj (Jan 9, 2017)

I know of an extremely talented photographer who has reached the iPhone stage. I have not. It does not have the lensing, speed or IQ to get the shot. 

Since I am after 'getting the shot', iPhone does not qualify.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jan 9, 2017)

I tend on going in the opposite direction. As I get older, I find myself using primes more often and slowing down to get the shot. That's the nice thing about photography, we both are interested in getting "the shot" but can approach it from different aspects.


----------



## sanj (Jan 9, 2017)

Well yes I agree slowing down does help at times (not always - street and wildlife being examples). But the point is, even when slowing down very rarely do I find the results of primes better than zooms. Rarely if ever, I stop myself while looking at a photo and saying "Wow that was a prime."


----------



## Besisika (Jan 9, 2017)

AcutancePhotography said:


> I tend on going in the opposite direction. As I get older, I find myself using primes more often and slowing down to get the shot. That's the nice thing about photography, we both are interested in getting "the shot" but can approach it from different aspects.


I am in between the two of you for different reasons.
When outdoor, I use zoom (mainly the 70-200 and 100-400) for both sports and portraiture. Both are as sharp as primes and give me flexibility, and I prefer their perspective+compression.
When indoor, primes are still irreplaceable due to low light and space and almost one of them always gets in the way. I reach out for the 85 1.2 and 35 1.4 ART.
When shooting videos, outdoor I always use the zoom as they take the same ND filter (as well as the 24-70 f4). Indoor, always prime due to space. I only use zoom when told not to move around.


----------



## Zeidora (Jan 9, 2017)

AcutancePhotography said:


> I tend on going in the opposite direction. As I get older, I find myself using primes more often and slowing down to get the shot. That's the nice thing about photography, we both are interested in getting "the shot" but can approach it from different aspects.



Same here. I don't own a zoom, used to have a couple. Fast glass is not for its speed, but rather better image correction otherwise. I rather go out with a distinct objective (yesterday was mushrooms) and less gear, than bringing the entire arsenal along. It would be hard for me to carry all my dSLR stuff, not to mention LF. The "light" pack is >40 lb already.


----------



## sanj (Jan 9, 2017)

Zeidora said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > I tend on going in the opposite direction. As I get older, I find myself using primes more often and slowing down to get the shot. That's the nice thing about photography, we both are interested in getting "the shot" but can approach it from different aspects.
> ...



Exactly what used to slow me down, am moving away from that. Finding freedom and creativity. Each to his own I guess.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 9, 2017)

As I grow older...

I think content and composition of photographs is far more important than equipment. All modern cameras and lens are pretty good. The latest bells and whistle's are becoming less useful
I care less about MFT charts and more about whether a lens does a reasonable job for me.
I care less about acquiring new gear and try to use what I have.
I spend more of my money going to new places that on gear.
I stay a few more metres back from the raging sea.
I understand the value of good light.
I wear gel pads on my knees as I've learn better landscape photographs are taken closer to the ground but kneeling is getting harder.
I am more prepared to walk away with no photograph that take poor photographs.
I rate beauty less. It's not that interesting after a while. Its great fun photographing beautiful models but the photographs are meaningless. Interesting faces of ordinary people are much better subjects.
I'm less concerned about what Nikon and Sony are doing. Canon are doing just fine - nothing too exciting but the gear works and is robust.
I've learnt that on forums people have an amazing ability to be completely dismissive of other peoples opinions. People seem to lose their kindness and sense of fair play just to prove that they are right. It's a pity when we loose our humanity.


----------



## chauncey (Jan 9, 2017)

I'm 73 y/o, have been into this insane hobby over 8 years and only shoot primes.
Am also heavy into PS CC....am anal retentive as to image quality.


----------



## Zeidora (Jan 9, 2017)

sanj said:


> Zeidora said:
> 
> 
> > AcutancePhotography said:
> ...



Slow is good. That is possibly the biggest thing I learned from LF. Ten LF shots in a day is a lot. LF-zooms? The closest is a triple convertible. The camera weight forces me to be in good shape, which I see as a plus.


----------



## sanj (Jan 9, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> As I grow older...
> 
> I think content and composition of photographs is far more important than equipment. All modern cameras and lens are pretty good. The latest bells and whistle's are becoming less useful
> I care less about MFT charts and more about whether a lens does a reasonable job for me.
> ...



Thank you so much. This is what I am thinking.


----------



## sanj (Jan 9, 2017)

chauncey said:


> I'm 73 y/o, have been into this insane hobby over 8 years and only shoot primes.
> Am also heavy into PS CC....am anal retentive as to image quality.



I understand. But my point is that as life moves ahead and I learn more about the actual impact of photography, I find the difference between f1.4 and 2 is not really so much and the IQ difference between modern zooms and prime is rarely visible.


----------



## sanj (Jan 9, 2017)

Besisika said:


> AcutancePhotography said:
> 
> 
> > I tend on going in the opposite direction. As I get older, I find myself using primes more often and slowing down to get the shot. That's the nice thing about photography, we both are interested in getting "the shot" but can approach it from different aspects.
> ...



I see your point and agree. 
But I am at a point where I would go with JUST the new 24-70mm indoors and leave the 85 and 35 behind. Although I love my 85 1.2 and my prime 35, I find that in the end photo many times I can't tell the difference. I keep my 85 1.2 and don't sell it for one purpose only: Walk on the street of Bangkok and such at night to take photos in available light.


----------



## sanj (Jan 9, 2017)

chauncey said:


> I'm 73 y/o, have been into this insane hobby over 8 years and only shoot primes.
> Am also heavy into PS CC....am anal retentive as to image quality.



I have been into this insane hobby over 35 years and when I was 8 years into it, I thought EXACTLY like you sir.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jan 9, 2017)

chauncey said:


> I'm 73 y/o, have been into this insane hobby over 8 years and only shoot primes.
> Am also heavy into PS CC....am anal retentive as to image quality.



Is there a connection between prolonged sitting to work with PS CC and the retentiveness?

I definitely don't carry around as much never-needed-stuff in a backpack. Two lenses and a CP filter, sometimes a tripod. That's it even for traveling. 

I do like to have a prime for lower light and shallow DoF.


----------



## Ian_of_glos (Jan 9, 2017)

At what age is this likely to happen? I have now reached 60, and I find that I am using primes more than I did 2 or 3 years ago. They are easier to use and I am just not happy with the results I achieve with some of my zoom lenses. Also, in most cases my prime lenses are smaller, lighter and faster than any of my zooms. Usually I know what I am going to be photographing before I go out, so I don't need to carry a lot of different lenses with me.
We are all different though, and I am sure that many people prefer the flexibility of a zoom.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Jan 9, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> As I grow older...
> 
> ...I've learnt that on forums people have an amazing ability to be completely dismissive of other peoples opinions. People seem to lose their kindness and sense of fair play just to prove that they are right. It's a pity when we loose our humanity.



YES! Very well stated.


----------



## Boyer U. Klum-Cey (Jan 9, 2017)

At over 800 months in baby language math, I think I have a 24-70 on, more often then not. My LightRoom library confirms the 24-70 theory. More & more, I find myself making the tough choice: "What do you really need, and how are you going to carry it?" Fortunately, someone invented bags with both shoulder and belt straps for the days when the internal decision making process fails to reach consensus. 

And, of course, the iPhone 6s, as long as you have no intention of printing, does get the shots(usually washed down with a beer), eh?


----------



## MrFotoFool (Jan 9, 2017)

For me, changing lenses is a pain and I prefer a standard zoom and telephoto zoom. I used to have one good digital body (first a 5D2 and now a 5D3) and a film body and an infrared body, plus other stuff (five EF lenses, a flash, a 1.4 extender, a couple EFS lenses for the infrared, etc).

It was too much to carry for only occasional use, so I just recently traded in the extra cameras and EFS lenses and the extender and flash (I can't remember the last time I used a flash). I traded it all for a second pro digital body (1D mkIV). On a quick trip last week I took 5D3 with standard zoom (L series) and 1D4 with telephoto zoom (L series). No changing lenses and I was in heaven.

I do have one prime for low light events, a Sigma 85 f1.4 (my only non Canon lens). It is nice to have when I need it, but most of the time I leave it at home.


----------



## dak723 (Jan 9, 2017)

I'm not sure age has that much to do with it. Perhaps it is more about changing priorities as you age or get more experience. I come from an art background, so composition has always been a high priority - so I haven't used a prime lens since about 1995. It's all about the totality of the shot, so sharpness has never been a priority and I've done just fine with the zooms and non-L glass. Even sold my L glass when I saw that there was no discernible difference in my 8" x 12" prints (I rarely print larger) between the L glass and non-L. My best selling print was taken with the original 6MP digital rebel and 18-55mm kit lens, which is a constant reminder that so much of the advances with each new generation of cameras is mostly hype.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jan 9, 2017)

Hector1970 said:


> I wear gel pads on my knees as I've learn better landscape photographs are taken closer to the ground but kneeling is getting harder.



Kneeling ain't so bad, it is the getting up that get's harder. When I kneel for a photograph, I am gonna be there for a while. ;D


----------



## AlanF (Jan 9, 2017)

sanj said:


> chauncey said:
> 
> 
> > I'm 73 y/o, have been into this insane hobby over 8 years and only shoot primes.
> ...



Young upstart! I have been into it for 60 years, and shoot with whatever is best for the purpose - and which I can carry and hold.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 9, 2017)

I've sold almost all my prime lenses in favor of zooms. I don't think its age related, I miss shots while changing lenses, so now I typically only have to change between 70-100 and 24-70. I'd buy another FF, but so far I've managed the one change when I needed it. Changing from 17 to 35 to 50 to 85 to 135 was just too much for theater photography where I want to isolate a actor, group of actors, or the whole stage. Sometimes the need to do that happens quickly.

I loved my 135mm L, but it got little use once I bought the zoom. I don't need wider than 24mm or longer than 200mm for this type of use.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 9, 2017)

I think the universal here is the desire to simplify things. It seems that with more experience many people come to the conclusion that the simpler the better. For some, that might mean zooms, for others it might be primes. For me, it's the challenge of reducing the image itself to its core – which if far harder than the choice of lens.


----------



## JPAZ (Jan 9, 2017)

I relate to just about everything said here. My usual travel "kit" weighs 15 to 16 pounds, depending on what I choose, and that load seems to be getting heavier and heavier. So the two issues are: 1) what's happening to me physically as I age (the thing I don't want to admit at times) and 2) what's happening to me philosophically. I spend more time just looking and watching than I once did. All too often, I used to get so involved in "getting the shot" that I'd miss "the moment." I was just recently at the base of a lovely waterfall. Some around me were climbing all over the rocks or laying in the pools, and gathering many wonderful angles and images. I did find a good spot and captured a few nice photos with a couple of lenses. But I spent more time just sitting and enjoying the setting. So this is what is happening as I age.

As far as my kit is concerned, I am trying to carry less, but am just not there, yet. FWIW, I have a friend who shoots M4/3. He gets some really nice images and his kit (body, EVF, 3 lenses) fits in the pockets of his coat. Makes me wonder..........


----------



## docsmith (Jan 9, 2017)

I get joy out of a number of different aspects of photography. That is why it is such a great hobby. I enjoy the technical aspects of the gear, I enjoy pixel peeping (sometimes), I enjoy post processing when I turn what I think is an ordinary shot into something I really like, but most of all, I enjoy being there, taking the picture, thinking about composition or even those moments right before I click the shutter when I am taking the scene in. To me, photography makes most things more interesting and also allow you to relive the event again.

So, as I get older...will some of that change? To an extent, I hope not. I can see de-emphasizing the gear, but I find what our gear does so miraculous, I'll likely always marvel at it somewhat. But I still marvel at flying on an airplane, which I do a couple times a month. 

As for gear, I am mostly zooms (16-35 f/4 IS, 24-70 II, 70-200 II, 70-300L, and 150-600S) but I have to say that primes fill important niches that can really allow a lot of creativity. Mine include Rokinon 14 f/2.8, TSE 24 II, 50 Art, and 100 L macro.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Jan 10, 2017)

While I can't quite match AlanF's 60 years, I'm well over 50 years into this game. Some days my G15 and "P" mode are all I need ["P" does stand for "professional" doesn't it?]. Other days it is a backpack full of stuff and all "M" mode. I must admit that my m4/3 gear is getting more and more use lately - it truly is smaller and lighter especially for telephoto where I'd likely want to crop anyway. With m4/3 I can carry both a wide aperture prime and a pancake zoom in my pocket. I still prefer the ergonomics of my Canon gear (those m4/3 buttons can be awfully tiny and close together -- shooting with gloves on can be challenging with m4/3).

Years ago, being an IQ snob, I shot mostly MF & LF film. I look back at some of the shots I though were great then and realize how excellent digital has become - even the smaller sensor sizes. Yet, I still like the look of TRI-X even when the grain is gravel sized from pushing it to ASA 1600.


----------



## AlanF (Jan 10, 2017)

old-pr-pix said:


> While I can't quite match AlanF's 60 years, I'm well over 50 years into this game. Some days my G15 and "P" mode are all I need ["P" does stand for "professional" doesn't it?]. Other days it is a backpack full of stuff and all "M" mode. I must admit that my m4/3 gear is getting more and more use lately - it truly is smaller and lighter especially for telephoto where I'd likely want to crop anyway. With m4/3 I can carry both a wide aperture prime and a pancake zoom in my pocket. I still prefer the ergonomics of my Canon gear (those m4/3 buttons can be awfully tiny and close together -- shooting with gloves on can be challenging with m4/3).
> 
> Years ago, being an IQ snob, I shot mostly MF & LF film. I look back at some of the shots I though were great then and realize how excellent digital has become - even the smaller sensor sizes. Yet, I still like the look of TRI-X even when the grain is gravel sized from pushing it to ASA 1600.



The Canon M5 has Canon ergonomics and the size of m4/3 with the advantage of a larger sensor. You can have the best of both worlds.


----------



## SteveM (Jan 10, 2017)

30 yrs ago I shot with a bag full of primes, when you got too much dirt in the camera (Canon F1n) through changing lenses in the field, you'd take the lens off, hold the camera upside down and shake it out....well nearly anyway. A dirty sensor today is considerably more hassle and potentially damaging, so I put a lens on for the day and it stays on (usually the 24-105), a bit like a pair of trousers. I know what I'm going to shoot when I go out so I rarely have an issue. Some of today's zoom lenses are seriously sharp wide open such that sharpening in ps is almost not needed. Three examples, 24-70 f2.8 mkll; 70-200 f2.8 mkll and the 100-400 mkll. I've got a small selection of fast primes which I use when I have something very precise in mind, they rarely get used as the zooms are just so good and flexible.


----------



## ScottyP (Jan 10, 2017)

The list of f/2 zooms is not long. 

I use a 35mm as my walk around. I just detest noise so I avoid high ISO. Leaving the 35 on the camera keeps me covered when I find myself going indoors. I find it galling to have to dial up ISO 3200 or ISO6400 or worse even on full frame if it could be avoided. If I printed most of my shots and I was looking at 5x7's or so all the time that would bother me less but when nearly everything you see is on a 32" monitor, high noise and low detail are really ugly. The 3 stops between f/1.4 and f/4 make an enormous difference. 

I use the 70-200 for nearly everything else.


----------



## wildwood (Jan 10, 2017)

.....the more I long for a Thunderbolt X interface linking my brain and macbook pro


----------



## old-pr-pix (Jan 10, 2017)

AlanF said:


> old-pr-pix said:
> 
> 
> > While I can't quite match AlanF's 60 years, I'm well over 50 years into this game. Some days my G15 and "P" mode are all I need ["P" does stand for "professional" doesn't it?]. Other days it is a backpack full of stuff and all "M" mode. I must admit that my m4/3 gear is getting more and more use lately - it truly is smaller and lighter especially for telephoto where I'd likely want to crop anyway. With m4/3 I can carry both a wide aperture prime and a pancake zoom in my pocket. I still prefer the ergonomics of my Canon gear (those m4/3 buttons can be awfully tiny and close together -- shooting with gloves on can be challenging with m4/3)...
> ...



Good point. I really wanted to like the original M when it came out; but the autofocus was soooo slow even with v2 firmware. I guess that soured me on the M series for quite a while. I should give it another try. Only remaining issues may be: 1) I've since made significant investment in m4/3 bodies and glass and 2) the native lenses for M are still limited and comparatively large. Thanks to camerasize.com here are some 'equivalent' comparisons for m4/3 lenses I use (based on f-stop and focal length, not DOF - let's not get into what's really equivalent).


----------



## sanj (Jan 10, 2017)

Maximilian said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > As I grow older, getting the shot is becoming more of a priority than technical nit picking.
> ...



Yes Maximilian. Agree. I would need a prime only for real low light situation.


----------



## sanj (Jan 10, 2017)

dak723 said:


> I'm not sure age has that much to do with it. Perhaps it is more about changing priorities as you age or get more experience. I come from an art background, so composition has always been a high priority - so I haven't used a prime lens since about 1995. It's all about the totality of the shot, so sharpness has never been a priority and I've done just fine with the zooms and non-L glass. Even sold my L glass when I saw that there was no discernible difference in my 8" x 12" prints (I rarely print larger) between the L glass and non-L. My best selling print was taken with the original 6MP digital rebel and 18-55mm kit lens, which is a constant reminder that so much of the advances with each new generation of cameras is mostly hype.



By age I meant "photographic age".  

And yes, it is the totally of the shot, which I am leaning towards. 
And that does not mean 'compromise'.


----------



## sanj (Jan 10, 2017)

wildwood said:


> .....the more I long for a Thunderbolt X interface linking my brain and macbook pro



Bwahhhhhhh.


----------



## sanj (Jan 10, 2017)

ScottyP said:


> The list of f/2 zooms is not long.
> 
> I use a 35mm as my walk around. I just detest noise so I avoid high ISO. Leaving the 35 on the camera keeps me covered when I find myself going indoors. I find it galling to have to dial up ISO 3200 or ISO6400 or worse even on full frame if it could be avoided. If I printed most of my shots and I was looking at 5x7's or so all the time that would bother me less but when nearly everything you see is on a 32" monitor, high noise and low detail are really ugly. The 3 stops between f/1.4 and f/4 make an enormous difference.
> 
> I use the 70-200 for nearly everything else.



Scotty. Are you using full frame or crop sensor? I find the grain on my new Canon full frame absolutely acceptable at 3200. But your standards may be different. But to me, especially when prints are made, I can't see the high ISO grains. Not one bit.


----------



## sanj (Jan 10, 2017)

docsmith said:


> I get joy out of a number of different aspects of photography. That is why it is such a great hobby. I enjoy the technical aspects of the gear, I enjoy pixel peeping (sometimes), I enjoy post processing when I turn what I think is an ordinary shot into something I really like, but most of all, I enjoy being there, taking the picture, thinking about composition or even those moments right before I click the shutter when I am taking the scene in. To me, photography makes most things more interesting and also allow you to relive the event again.
> 
> So, as I get older...will some of that change? To an extent, I hope not. I can see de-emphasizing the gear, but I find what our gear does so miraculous, I'll likely always marvel at it somewhat. But I still marvel at flying on an airplane, which I do a couple times a month.
> 
> As for gear, I am mostly zooms (16-35 f/4 IS, 24-70 II, 70-200 II, 70-300L, and 150-600S) but I have to say that primes fill important niches that can really allow a lot of creativity. Mine include Rokinon 14 f/2.8, TSE 24 II, 50 Art, and 100 L macro.



Poetry


----------



## ScottyP (Jan 10, 2017)

sanj said:


> ScottyP said:
> 
> 
> > The list of f/2 zooms is not long.
> ...



I'm on full frame. ISO 3200 can work. A stop higher and it gets worse. Also I'm not so much talking about noise and grain as the loss of fine detail in eyelashes and so on. Most especially if you have to crop the image at all.

I suppose you could list tight framing ease in the plus column for zooms though.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 11, 2017)

I do feel that having bought many versions of lenses starting with FD and FL lenses, and lots of weird ones that now when I see yet another 70-200mm lens being rumored, I say ho-hum, I've owned all the previous versions, and am happy with the current one. It seems like just yesterday that it was announced.


----------

