New Tech, Disappointed with Upgrades and The Human Eye
I recently viewed a live chat session with four professional photographers from the U.K. who were responding to viewers who had paid to submit their questions to the panel.
Their answers to the questions were varied and creative, here are a few that I found the most interesting, hopefully you will as well.
First up was “Have you ever been disappointed when you upgraded a piece of your camera gear? The group was unanimous in calling out Gitzo tripods, all four had theirs break and need repairing so buyer beware on that item.
A second unanimous response to the same question was a major disappointment with mirrorless cameras, they all felt that images are too sharp, flat and have no character. This response will be sure to annoy a large number of photographers but I have heard this before so perhaps a more common observation than you might think.
Next up, a question on new technology led to a lively debate on the new Canon R8 which was the featured camera. Three of the four were critical of camera manufacturers using more technology to compensate for poor techniques by photographers who really don’t understand or who have not bothered to learn how to create a good image. They were annoyed with features like “40 Frames Per Second” that encourage photographers to “spray and prey” in hopes they will get at least one image worth keeping. They mentioned a new tool which allows the photographer to take pre-photos or “Raw Burst Mode”, something I had never heard of but apparently by half pressing the shutter you can take a shot of what was going on prior to you fully depressing the shutter. I have no idea of why anyone would desire this feature but regardless, they panel didn’t like it. Having to tell the camera what you are focusing on in advance of taking a shot by selecting options like “Birds” or “Cars” or “People” as well as features like “Advanced HDR” were also touted as examples of technology replacing actual learned skills.
And finally, a discussion on a topic that I have seen a lot on photography sites lately, “what focal length is the most similar to the human eye”? Most sites identify the 50mm focal length but the panel did not agree and put up some very interesting diagrams to challenge the 50mm assumption. The panel believed that people are confusing field of view with magnification. Science tells us that we have cells in the human eye that give us the ability to magnify what we are looking at when we focus on a specific item within in our field of view.
To start with, normal vision, or when you are looking at nothing in particular, is at 58-59mm focal length. However, when you are actively trying to focus on something specific like “is the person coming towards me a member of my tribe or are they carrying a spear”, these cells typically focus in at 35mm for an overall left to right scan, 85mm for something in the middle distance or, 400mm for something far away.
So, if you are looking for the most “comfortable” amount of magnification in your images that matches the magnification ability of the human eye then 35mm, 85mm and 400mm are the focal lengths to use. However, if you are trying to focus on a very wide field of view then the 14-16mm focal length will give you the most comfortable look, similar to the human eye.
The Panel suggested trying to use only these focal lengths on a photo shoot and that should demonstrate their point, I’m going to suggest we should all give that a try and see for ourselves. I seem to remember an article on Ansel Adams saying that he only used 35mm and 85mm lenses, but I could be mistaken. But if you say that Ansel Adams said it, who can argue with you?
So there you have it, Post #1, don’t hesitate to comment or suggest topics for future posts.