# The Long and Short of it. 2 Photos from the same Place



## TexPhoto (Dec 4, 2014)

I was always annoyed by the "zoom with your feet" statement. Sometimes you can't. I usually can't. At a recent baseball game I was allowed on the TV platform just past the outfield fence. It's marked 400 feet about 5 feet in front of me in the below 2 photos. I am standing on metal box about 10 feet wide 4 feet deep, and 7 feet high, no railing. The TV guy is next to me so I can't move much or shake the box. 

Anyway, the long photo is a 7D with a 400mm f2.8 IS and 1.4X extender. The wide photo is a 5D and 8-15mm. Both photos have some cropping. 




Untitled by RexPhoto91, on Flickr




REX50013 by RexPhoto91, on Flickr

*Do you have any similar pairs of photos taken from the same place without taking a walk? Let's see.*


----------



## dgatwood (Dec 4, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> Do you have any similar pairs of photos taken from the same place without taking a walk? Let's see.




Apologies for them being a little underexposed, but IIRC this was getting pretty late in the day, and the sky was a lot brighter than the landscape.

16mm (16–35 L II)




35mm (16–35 L II)




70mm (70–300 L)




300mm (70–300 L)




1260mm (70–300 L at 300mm w/ stacked 1.4x and 3x teleconverters).


----------



## Sporgon (Dec 4, 2014)

But dgstwood, you could have zoomed with your feet in your example ! 

I suppose in reality all lenses are compromises of one sort or another. If we could get an f1.8 zoom that went from 24 to 400, weighted 8 oz and cost $400, had the same IQ and size of a 35/2 IS the we would all be using that lens.


----------



## adhocphotographer (Dec 4, 2014)

Wildlife is another place where you can't always walk in to take a shot.... either for safety or because the subject is skitish... Great example though TexPhoto


----------



## michalk (Dec 4, 2014)

I do not think that the phrase 'zoom with your feet' was coined to suggest that you should only use one prime lens and attempt telephoto shots with a fisheye lens. 

Both zooms and primes have their pros and cons. Use the tools that are best for the job.


----------



## Cosmicbug (Dec 4, 2014)

Astrophotography- walking towards the subject makes little difference to the perspective...


----------



## dgatwood (Dec 4, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> But dgstwood, you could have zoomed with your feet in your example !



No, the 16mm shot just wasn't quite wide enough to show the foot-tall fence with the "keep out" signs.


----------



## TexPhoto (Dec 4, 2014)

Cosmicbug said:


> Astrophotography- walking towards the subject makes little difference to the perspective...



But my fisheye is a zoom! Oh the irony.

I was not trying to call out anyone out the zoom with your feet side of the house. I was basically stunned with the two photos and wanted to talk about them.


----------



## TexPhoto (Dec 5, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> Apologies for them being a little underexposed, but IIRC this was getting pretty late in the day, and the sky was a lot brighter than the landscape.



I think you need a little tweak there. Looks like the landscape is 100% in the shadow of clouds at that moment. I don't think there is anyway to get a good photo in that situation. But hey post processing challenge time! (Hope that's OK)




123 by RexPhoto91, on Flickr


----------



## dgatwood (Dec 5, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > Apologies for them being a little underexposed, but IIRC this was getting pretty late in the day, and the sky was a lot brighter than the landscape.
> ...




Sure. Have fun. I have processed copies in LR; I was just too lazy to do the extra work of shoving rendered versions out to my website alongside the RAW files over a slow network connection.


----------



## fragilesi (Dec 5, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> I think you need a little tweak there. Looks like the landscape is 100% in the shadow of clouds at that moment. I don't think there is anyway to get a good photo in that situation. But hey post processing challenge time! (Hope that's OK)
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Blimey, give me your e-mail address, I have about 2,000 photos for you to process ;D


----------



## fragilesi (Dec 5, 2014)

TexPhoto said:


> I was always annoyed by the "zoom with your feet" statement.



Really like the close-up . . .


----------



## mnclayshooter (Dec 5, 2014)

Cosmicbug said:


> Astrophotography- walking towards the subject makes little difference to the perspective...



;D


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Dec 5, 2014)

I would imagine that landscape photography near cliffs would not be condusive to "zoom with your feet" either. ;D


----------



## distant.star (Dec 5, 2014)

.
Are you saying telephoto lenses make objects appear closer than they actually are?


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Dec 5, 2014)

PropeNonComposMentis said:


> I make my own "Glass", and lens'.


Really? Yikes that's pretty cool. I would like to learn more about this.


----------



## niteclicks (Dec 9, 2014)

The first is with a 40D and 800mm scope, the second 5DIII and 300mm. Both have been cropped.


----------



## bjd (Dec 9, 2014)

Cosmicbug said:


> Astrophotography- walking towards the subject makes little difference to the perspective...


Doesn't that really depend on how far you walk? ;D


----------



## Northstar (Dec 9, 2014)

tex...i like your baseball shots! 

here we have the awesome 24-70 2.8ii for basketball baseline action.

three different shots from the exact same spot within a 6 minute window.

all shots at ISO 6400 on a 1dx


----------



## jdramirez (Dec 9, 2014)

I don't, but I'll give it a go next time.


----------



## bwud (Dec 11, 2014)

Taken from my yard. One is with the camera on an HTC One smart phone. The other is at the long end of the tamron 150-600 on a 5D. Any guesses which is which?


----------

