Street lenses

[Odin]

I have converted from SLR (Minolta) to dSLR 20D.

I need your input for selecting a street lens as I mostly take pictures of people in their everyday life (outdoor mostly) and I like to keep a certain distance to not make any disturbances.

I have thougth about a 70-200 (or 300).

As so many others I have fallen in love with the L's. But I wonder if I should empty my wallet for a f/2.8 or go for a f/4 (smaller/ligther/less$$$).

The "IS", is that something for this kind of purpose or is it just a nice-to-have gadget?

Any 3rd party lenses worth looking at?

Thanks

[tim]

Welcome to the forum :)

Have a read of this thread (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56752), then come back and ask more questions. Take a close look at the Tamron 28-75, meant to be close to L quality at about 1/3 the price. IS is helpful for some purposes. 70-200 is a great lens, but unless you want to take photos of people from a distance it might be a bit long.

[Odin]

Thanks Tim,

I guess it is time for long studies at this forum.

[Odin]

Thanks Tim,

I guess it is time for long studies at this forum.


I will need a tele, and I just thougth if I should jump into it or crawl...


Regarding f/2.8 vs f/4, any comments?

[Rigby470]

Odin,

I'm like you. I'm debating the f/4 and the f/2.8 options in the 70-200. Without a doubt, one of them will be my next purchase.

Keith

[picture-this]

For street pics your oviously doin hand held in funny light situations so IS is great for that. You might have to Camoflage the lens a bit as it's big and white. Street photos seem like they will have lots of shadows so I guess you may want a fast apeture but if not maybe the 70-300 DO would be more stealthy for you.

[Odin]

I went to the local shop today...
As I currently live in Japan I have those heaven-like shops all around me.....
Who said temptaion?

The 70-200 f/2.8 IS L is a real pice!!! ***k, how can you guys walk around with such serious weapons? Well, size matters but as it allways seams; it leads to some more spending. I then need a new bag! I like the hip belt style and the best I found was a Lowepro Off Track but I doubt it willl fit the lens. Then I guess I'm left with the US maker T.. (sorry forgot the name) but it had off course an eaven more searious price tag...

Does this ever end...???? I bougth a beauty called 20D, and now my cards are overheated only by passing through the shop.

[karusel]

A street lens? 35mm 1.4L

Also, if you really want the distance without disturbing them (=dragging attention) it would be wise to avoid large screaming white lenses. 200mm 2.8L would be it in this case.

[Odin]

Those photos are awsome, but as I mentioned earlier (or did I??) I like taking pictures of people as you. However, it looks that most of your photos are taken with a greater mm.
By the way, yes, 35 mm is good but I do not like to be to close disturbing the settings.

And what looks from your pictures karusel, you are more into models. I just like to capture those ordinary "boring" guys out there...

Thanks anyway, 1.4 softens the background quite nicely.

[CoolToolGuy]

Take a look at the EF-S 17-85 IS lens. It covers a range equivalent to 28-135mm (in full-frame or film terms). It is compact, lightweight, black - many of the attributes good for a street lens.

As for a tele-zoom, the EF 70-200 f4L gets a lot of good press. It is smaller and lighter than its f2.8 brothers. It is white, but the image quality is superb.

Prime options would be the EF 100 f2, the EF 135 f2L, and/or the EF200 f2.8L. The 'L's are expensive but they are, especially the 135, outstanding. All three of the primes are black.

Have Fun,

[Odin]

Buy the way, why are so may of you guys (americans???) conserning about the white colour of the lens...????

I understand if are a papparazie you want to sneak around as a tourist, but do realy so many people care anyway?

As I have experienced nobody gives a d... as long as you are not up to enter the Hilton daugthers.

In Asia and Europe this is not a big issue.

Please coment I'm eager to learn about cultures and your experiences.

[rdenney]

I will need a tele, and I just thougth if I should jump into it or crawl...


Regarding f/2.8 vs f/4, any comments?

If you want to shoot people on the street with a lens as long as a 200, then you have to consider weight and also conspicuity. Even the 70-200/4L is a largish lens with a white barrel that will attract attention. There won't be enough distance to keep your subjects from knowing they are being photographed, but it might be so far that you can't interact with them to make it cool. Thus, you might make a few people mad.

And the 70/200 2.8 is still bigger and heavier.

The IS will give you about two stops slower shutter speed than you would normally be able to hand-hold and maintain acceptable sharpness. Remember that the 1/focal length rule only works with the full frame (if you intended to make the same size prints), so you lose that one or two stops of handhold-ability just from going to the smaller sensor.

The 70-200 will be equivelant to a 115-320 on your Minolta, which seems rather long for street photography.

If you want a lens that gives you a good working distance, good speed, and that remains as inconspicuous as possible, consider a 50mm prime lens. The 1.8 is optically excellent, quite cheap, but it's noisy and slow on the focusing. The 1.4 is optically even better, not as cheap (but cheaper than any really decent zoom), and has USM focusing that is quick and silent. Both would be much less obtrusive and intimidating to street subjects than a long zoom, but both would give you some working room (the same as an 80 on your Minolta). No L-series lens at any price will exceed the optical quality of either one of the 50mm lenses.

But if it's a zoom you want, I would go with something that ranges from normal to moderate telephoto, which is 28-70ish. Those will also be small. And there are good affordable lenses from the third-party producers in this range that are also reasonably fast (constant f/2.8). They'll be similar to a 45-120 on your Minolta, which seems to me a good range for street photography. If you want IS, Canon has the 28-135, though it gives away one of those two stops in the maximum aperture. And Canon also makes the 24-70/2.8L, if you really want to spend lots of money. It goes a bit wider than normal, and will be like a 35-120 on your Minolta, which is pretty useful. Bring your checkbook. (Sigma has both a 24-70 and a 28-70 in constant 2.8 maximum apertures and at their EX quality level, and the others do likewise; lots of options at this focal range.)

Rick "who would be nervous if someone pointed a white-barreled Canon zoom at me from across the street" Denney

[rdenney]

Buy the way, why are so may of you guys (americans???) conserning about the white colour of the lens...????

Scratch most Americans, you get people who value their personal freedom and privacy quite a bit more than in many cultures.

But in most places, it seems to me there is nothing that will rob dignity faster than someone pointing an expensive camera with a large and consipicuous lens into the daily living conditions of people who spend lots of time on the street. There's a reason why all over the world small and fast-handling rangefinders like the Leica have been the preferred camera for street photography.

There is also the safety issue. America isn't the only place where hanging around on the street with an expensive camera might get you knocked on the head.

In most cultures, photography is an intrusion into someone's privacy, and requires some interaction to build the relationship necessary to make it permissible. It's not just America where it would be rude to photograph someone without their permission. In fact, Americans are probably more relaxed about it than in many places.

And, finally, there is a legal issue. If you publish a photograph that presents a person as a model (i.e., it's conspicuously a picture of them as a person), then you need a release from them before you can publish the photograph. And that's not just true in America.

Rick "who values privacy" Denney

[who me?]

For a street lens, I settled for less and bought the 24-85 from Canon as I was looking at the 24-70. The 24-85 is light, compact and at 3.5-4.5 not a fast lens but not a slouch either. That is the great thing about the 20D, you can up the ISO without much problem when needed. The focus is fairly quick and it is quiet. Unfortunately, I feel I need more range on the long end and am looking at the 28-105. Unfortunately, no one makes a really good lens in this focal length. All seem to be average. Too bad Canon doesn't make a F4 or F2.8 L lens in this range. Even a L in the 35-135 range would be great. I guess I am just dreaming though.
AND, just for the record, the white lenses do attract attention BUT, you gotta love them for the great quality of build and pics.

[CyberDyneSystems]

My opinioms on Street lenses concur with many of the above recomended,.

I want small, lighwieght and black as well.

If a long zoom is desired the ultimate "Street Sniper" is the 70-300mm IS DO

My favorite primes are;
135mm f/2L
85mm f/1.8 USM
and 28mm f/1.8 USM

The 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro works well too!

I save my white lenses ofr Wildlife and gigs.. where the color does not attracy attention.

[CoolToolGuy]

If a long zoom is desired the ultimate "Street Sniper" is the 70-300mm IS DO


I forgot about that one. I have only tried it out in the store. Biggest downside is the cost - but it is stealthy.

Have Fun,

[EricKonieczny]

I use the 28-105, 3.5- 4.5 for my walk around. In fact it is my only lense right now, but serves me welll and a wide range.

With the Hood, it is not not very big. Its not L but for the price it does a good job.

I am purchasing a ultra wide prime and the 70-200, 2.8 to cover a wide range of subjects.

[karusel]

I forgot about that one. I have only tried it out in the store. Biggest downside is the cost - but it is stealthy.

Have Fun,

Oh dear, I forgot about the 70-300 DO IS as well... Also, if the picture quality mady by that lens is good enough for Luminous Landscape guy, shooting some jungle people or something, then hey, it should be quite sufficient for street shooting, right?

[CyberDyneSystems]

Well, I differ from Michael Reichmans opinion in this way,..

I DO think it's quality id good enough for street shooting and most other forms of photography I do casually..

I do NOT think it is good enough for my passions,. which are Nature/Wildlife photography,. and performance/event photography.. but that's just MHO.

But it's certainly in there in the high end "walk around" lens ;)

[cc10d]

I second the nomination of the Canon 70-300 DO IS as a very good lens to use in most situations. Especially if one wants to be as inconspicious as possible. The longer part gets you further away and yet can still come fairly close at the shorter end. It is about the same size as the Canon 28-135 IS. Lots of range in a small package. Definitely not an L lens but better than the lower cost varieties. The IS is very quick. It does not replace my L's but if one is lokking for candids it is one of the best. Also Lightweight to carry as compared to the physically larger lenses mentioned.

[Sean-Mcr]

Most of Henri Cartier Breesons work was with a 50mm. http://www.photology.com/bresson/

[blue_max]

The 85mm 1.8 gives you a fine, fast, quick focussing, light, discrete, slightly telephoto for sensible money.

It makes a great portrait lens as well and with it's low light ability, may get the pic when many would struggle.

So many choices. Unless you know the kind of shot you will take, you will have to tailor your shooting to the lens chosen. Good luck and please let us know what you choose and how you get on.

Graham

[condyk]

Not really sure if it's what you really need, but you did mention the 70-200 F4: the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 sits nicely between the F4 and F.28 price wise and is equal quality wise in my view. I sold the Canon F4 for the Sigma. Very impressive but not for 'street images'.

I would go for the Tamron or Smaller Canon 28-135 IS zoom as both have more 'instant framing' flexibility than a prime (not a big deal, but it helps me). I am happy with my 50mm II, but people and street stuff not really my bag ... more a wildlife dude!

[blue_max]

Most of Henri Cartier Breesons work was with a 50mm. http://www.photology.com/bresson/

If Bresson had owned a zoom, he might have become famous.

:lol:

Graham

[Sean-Mcr]

If Bresson had owned a zoom, he might have become famous.

:lol:

Graham


I've got one...

Can't wait to be famous:lol: :o