Have you ever sat down and thought...

Talley, I'm worried cabin fever from this storm has driven your GAS into overdrive, and this thread is a subconscious effort to justify to yourself buying a whole new system to go with your Canon gear

Good question.

Good responses too. Yes I have thought about it.

Sure i haven't needed to spend what I have for my kids benefit, most of it is because I have a little ocd and love having perfectly clear photos to look at on my 27 inch imac. But the kids don't suffer financially.

The 24-70 is still one of my best buys. I justified it for a few reasons. I wanted the best, that way if there is a problem with the photo I absolutely know it was me and not the gear, but mostly so that I have a one lens solution for days out, inside, outside. For a day out I can take a pic of the kids, and landscape shot the next second, without faffing on changing lenses. I also use it for their b'days inside/outside. Stick it on, snap when I need to, no changing lenses, it does pretty much everything. More time with the kids etc and savouring moments.

Others things I do...
My imac is in the lounge so I can work on photos without being too anti social.

I always take just the 35mm on holidays abroad, basically a fix point and shoot that creates awesome looking pics.

I leave the 35mm on in between using my camera so that the wife can just grab the camera and take pics easier when I'm not there.

When going out as a family I only every take one lens, sometimes the 85 gets an outing. 70-300 for the zoo, that sort of thing. 24 -70 most of the time.

Sometimes the camera stays at home and I just use the phone for snaps (we are lucky how awesome the phone cameras are nowadays, might as well use them).

When I need light just flash on camera to avoid messing on with other lights (majority of times you can get awesome results with direct flash for fill or bounce). Mal, I agree with the above though that the pic above of your daughter in the rain is awesome).

We print our pics into photo books. We have 6 volumes now since we've had children. The books are all the same format and look great. The kids love looking through them and are still a little confused by the fact they were babies once!!! Awesome memories (and tack sharp memories at that )

Think that's it.

On the other hand, I have my eye on the new 85. I will see the difference between 1.4 and 1.8, but my family certainly won't. So this one is purely selfish

MalVeauX wrote in post #18442350
A good photograph doesn't have to have the best quality in certain ways--the best photograph tells the story. I think its hard sometimes to split away from pixel peeping, worrying about grain or not, sharp or not, blurry or not, etc, and instead go back to focusing on what the photograph's purpose is, which is to basically hold a memory and re-tell the story.

This exact dilemma is why I think my favorite thread on POTN is the family photojournalism thread. It grounds me and reminds me what photography is for, from the perspective of family use and purpose./35877231060_1​7c693fd5e.jpg[/IMG]IMG_8417 by [URL=[URL]https://www.​flickr.com/ph

I really agree with you on this ... and that the family photojournalism thread is wonderful . It gets away from that notion that a great photograph is mostly a technical thing and about perfection at the pixel level, or about smoothly attractive, beautifully lit, elegantly presented, and PP corrected models or ... ... . or, even, that its about artistic composition.

Ultimately ... whatever the genre ... photography is about capturing an interesting moment in a compelling way. The better the technical quality of the photograph, the better that moment will be captured and projected. But there has to be real content in the first place. The Family PJ thread has that in spades.

Talley wrote in post #18442205
Anybody ever say to themselves... what gear would fit the family needs best?

No.



I do have some options at sumilar focal lengths, and I have a 6D and SL1. I'm also capable of lugging around the 6D, 16-28, 24-105, and 70-200 2.8 IS all day even hiking in the mountains. Not that I always choose to do it, often I take just two lenses on day hikes. Sometimes just one.

I should probably take more video of the kids but I really do not like editing video as a hobby.

I really don't give my camera gear a second thought, except for lighting, and I really want to spend some money on a Parabolix set up.

That, in a nutshell, is why I don't shoot video.

Still photography is something that I find I can use in a lot of ways, and which people can passively interact with. This can be as simple as photos hung on the wall, to pictures I used as decoration for a graduation open house we held for my eldest this summer (it's a midwest thing, if you are scratching your head about graduation parties).

Even something like a slideshow of stills running on the side of a sports team final banquet, it's again, a thing that can be passively interacted with.

Video demands attention, and I find that it is very rare that people are going to want to sit down and watch amateur video of most anything. For sure, people mostly don't want to watch an 8 year old dance recital or something.

Even that 8 year old, once grown up, is probably never going to sit down and watch their younger self. I'm not against the quick grab of some special moment etc, but my kit is set up to shoot stills of the kinds of things I shoot. I can't imagine crafting a set of equipment around 4K video because I don't know what I would do with the product.

As for travel, I find a 5D3 + 24-105L pretty much does what I need and it is portable enough for me. I have an older micro 4:3 system, and when I bought it I figured it for travel. But really, it isn't small enough to fit in a pocket and so it isn't really that much different from the 5D + one lens for portability.

To me "portable" fits one of three zones.
1) Small enough to fit in my pocket, thus always with me. Today this is my iPhone 7.
2) Small enough to fit in some kind of small bag, light enough to not be a bother.
3) Big stuff, ranging from your typical 70-200/2.8 on up to the supertelephotos.

The vast majority of the stuff we are talking about (Fuji, Sony, dSLRs) sits in category 2, and I find the differences within any one category make little difference in how I use the gear.

I'm probably the minority on this, but a 35mm and 50mm is all I've been using lately. I don't shoot my family all the often, but I do friend photo journalism every day. I've downsized my kit to a Olympus E-M1, a Mitakon 25mm (50mm), and an Olympus 17mm (34mm). Never had any problems capturing moments. I used to lug around my 7D, 24-105mm, 35mm f2, 24mm STM, and sometimes an adapted Nikon 50mm f1.4. Downsizing felt amazing, and my shoulders and back thank me every day.

The more I shoot family, the wider I go it seems. I've done a lot at ultrawide at this point, both indoors & outdoors. It was a very different approach to go from a long telephoto with fast focal-ratio to an ultrawide angle with full depth of field. I like it though. My go-to lens when I have no clue what's happening is the 35mm F2 IS though (on full frame). If I know I'm in a tight space or with a group, 17-40L. If I want soft background isolated portraits, 90mm F2.8 VC or 135L depending on working distance needs. Sometimes, I'm just using the EOS-M + 22mm F2 STM pancake, which is a similar FOV as a 35mm on full frame, so this one substitutes often for my 5D/1Ds + 35mm when I want a small package and don't mind the added DOF (it has great ISO performance too, I will shoot it at ISO 3200, 6400 without hesitation, ISO 12,800 with a little preparedness).

Very best,

I'm honestly impressed about the strides that smartphone cams have made and am excited to see the quality of these things grow closer to ILC cameras. Multiple lens/sensor cameras have a lot of potential...the faux bokeh in the iPhone plus and note 8 is pretty cool...doesn't always behave the way a true fast aperture lens does, but it achieves the intended purpose of isolating your subject from busy backgrounds. The LG V30 has a secondary camera with a stupidly wide 120 degree fov. I think that sooner than later we'll see three lens smartphones covering use, normal, and telephoto focal lengths.

For now for my family stuff I use the rx1rii. Small enough to being anywhere and never feels creatively limiting. I capture a lot on this thing. It's stupidly expensive, but honestly, family photos are more important than anything else I shoot so it's worth spending money on the fam. My wife always gets on me when I take nice photos of everyone else but don't have enough of the family.

My buddy went through both versions of the R1... Didn't like it's wide open performance.

Talley wrote in post #18444270
My buddy went through both versions of the R1... Didn't like it's wide open performance.

I actually find that lens on the RX1 is better than any ILC 35 I've used...very sharp wide open

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/UBKG​8z

Nice capture.


I thought about it but ended up going w/ the X-T20 for travel/wife camera. The X-E3 is coming out soon and I want that for me.

No matter how you slice it the fuji w/ a 23/2 or 18/2 or 27/2.8 and the XE3/XT20 is within an ounce or two in weight to the Sony and within 7-10mm in size in any direction and has almost double battery life and is also 1/3 of the price as well. The money saved could pay for a trip. XT20 also has a pop up flash which works great for those times it's needed. Also using the 23/2 the weather sealing is most likely much better than the Sony which could be of benefit when traveling w/ family.

Not disputing the R1 it's just a different animal. I'm sure it's almost double MP and higher ISO performance will destroy the fuji but then again I ask...

Do you really need 42MP snapshots of kids smiling in front of a statue or on the beach?

Is that camera best for the "family"?

mystik610 wrote in post #18444282
I actually find that lens on the RX1 is better than any ILC 35 I've used...very sharp wide open

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/UBKG​8z _DSC9712 by Carlo Alcala, on Flickr

Need to try Leica M and a 35 1.4 Summilux FLE asph....

To topic, I moved from DSLR (Canon) to Leica M. It started in 2012 with the purchase of an MM. I did all of my personal work with an MM and a 35 1.4 and fell in love with digital rangefinders that I completely moved to Leica digital even for my pro work. (just added the Leica M 10 to the stable). My only regrets is I didn't do it sooner.

So I did a lot of thinking before the move. Thought that I'd miss my 200 2L. I don't. Leica and Zeiss glass are so good. Not only sharpness but they way the render. Then there is the Leica rangefinder shooting experience. Not for everyone but for those it is for there is nothing better.

Great family shots that a buddy has done.
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/14412​83

this link also
http://www.fredmiranda​.com …/topic/1506341/​0#14161650

Talley wrote in post #18444311
Do you really need 42MP snapshots of kids smiling in front of a statue or on the beach?

Is that camera best for the "family"?

I get this argument ... except for one thing. If I am travelling with my family, I'm hoping I get the opportunity to capture more than just snapshots ... it's not my main mission but I'm hoping the chance comes along to take an occasional really good shot. It may be 'just' a candid of one of the kids caught unawares; it may be something that catches my eye along the way; it may be something I get up especially early one morning and make a big effort to capture. If I get ... or I can make ... that chance, I want to have a camera that will allow me to make the most of it.

EDIT: I wrote "just snapshots". That's wrong ... snapshots are really important, they are family memories. Let's say 'only' instead.

Ya. But take you and your wants out. Then ask yourself what would the kids and wife and grandparents etc what would they like to get out of the family photography. How would they want to experience your shooting or the lugging around. My buddy for example takes his 1dx and his whole bag and travels with it and when it comes time for zoo trips or museums or whatever he rents a stroller just to carry his gear. Is that what the family wants or his wants.

I think Mal has it spot on. His pictures are awesome and he has a minimalist approach.

I could see that Sony working for a family. Outside the expense which if you can swing it then who cares it fits the family needs well.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #18444325
Need to try Leica M and a 35 1.4 Summilux FLE asph....

To topic, I moved from DSLR (Canon) to Leica M. It started in 2012 with the purchase of an MM. I did all of my personal work with an MM and a 35 1.4 and fell in love with digital rangefinders that I completely moved to Leica digital even for my pro work. (just added the Leica M 10 to the stable). My only regrets is I didn't do it sooner.

So I did a lot of thinking before the move. Thought that I'd miss my 200 2L. I don't. Leica and Zeiss glass are so good. Not only sharpness but they way the render. Then there is the Leica rangefinder shooting experience. Not for everyone but for those it is for there is nothing better.

Great family shots that a buddy has done.
http://www.fredmiranda​.com/forum/topic/14412​83

What about family needs to capture the kids sports. How does that Leica do then?