shooting candids...

Longer lens or shorter lens?

  • long lens - more discrete

    Votes: 49 48.0%

  • short lens - stop being a chicken

    Votes: 12 11.8%

  • well you see there are so many variables, it depends entirely on the situation, for example.......

    Votes: 21 20.6%

  • Oooooh a poll! I wanna see! I wanna see!

    Votes: 20 19.6%
  • Total voters
    102
Sparkles33

Sparkles33

Suspended / Banned
Messages
5,226
Name
Nattelie
Edit My Images
Yes
When you shoot candids, do you prefer to shoot on a longer lens or a shorter lens?

I personally prefer to use a longer lens - I stand out like a sore thumb anyway without the camera, so the less of me they see, the more candid they are. The weird thing is that in some candid images that I've taken, you would swear that they are looking at me, but they definatey weren't.
 
Long... I don't have the cohonnas to get in peoples faces and take shots.
 
dohhh...candid really means...they dont see you...or feel your presence
 
Its got to be 50mm+ (ff) really, I think, otherwise your going to have to be very close.
 
mrcrow said:
dohhh...candid really means...they dont see you...or feel your presence
Click to expand...

Yeah I know that, but with a 50mm one still has to be pretty damn close.
 
Not much of a candid taker - apart from anything else, at my size, it's hard to be inconspicuous, especially with a D700 in hand! So, it's either getting close with a wide angle and grabbing the person out of the sidelines (on FF, with a 12-24, I can aim well wide of the subject and still cdatch them!) or staying a way away and using a tele. I usually use the up close and wide option though. Been meaning to experiment with the Zigview Live and the camera dangling but pointing slightly up
 
Paulie-W said:
Long... I don't have the cohonnas to get in peoples faces and take shots.
Click to expand...

Yes, Paul, we've seen how you handle that long thing! :eek:

Personally, it's not that hard to be inconspicuous with a 50mm. It's not a case of making sure they don't see you, just making sure they don't realise you've seen them. ;)
 
mrcrow said:
dohhh...candid really means...they dont see you...or feel your presence
Click to expand...


More or less - candid just means unposed and natural in my book. Doesn't mean you have to 'go long' though...I think you get more immediacy and a better sense of 'contact' by being close-in.

For that reason I shoot wide or medium.
Telephoto shots are just posh 'sniper-surveillance photos' IMO...

This http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=2755602#post2755602 could be construed as a candid, for example, even though the subject was well-aware that he was being photographed...
 
Paulie-W said:
Yeah I know that, but with a 50mm one still has to be pretty damn close.
Click to expand...

i didnt mean a 50mm lens...as i said if you're prescence is felt..and this is easy..have you never felt someone is watching you...
the further away the better
300mm or so
then the compression is better and the dof less...so you just get an impression of the person or situation

sorry i wasnt clearer...i voted big lens



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

this lady lives in the ground and still has bound feet
 
Arkady said:
More or less - candid just means unposed and natural in my book. Doesn't mean you have to 'go long' though...I think you get more immediacy and a better sense of 'contact' by being close-in.

For that reason I shoot wide or medium.
Telephoto shots are just posh 'sniper-surveillance photos' IMO...

This http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=2755602#post2755602 could be construed as a candid, for example, even though the subject was well-aware that he was being photographed...
Click to expand...

chacun a son gout...i have a zoom attached to my camera at all times:|
 
wontolla said:
I find if I get too close, the subject engages with me, ie looks at what I am doing. Not candid then!
Click to expand...

I understand but then I shoot before they see me. I pick my target and already have the type of shot I want in my mind.
 
A gripped 5DMKII and a 70-200mm f2.8 isn't exactly the most discreet set-up but it's what I prefer to use... It's not one of my most favourite types of photography but I'll have a crack at it every now and again. :)

Si
 
The only time I've tried it so far I was using my 17-55 at about 35 or so mm. My subject was looking straight ahead and I was to the side. Everyone else noticed me except them. My intention is to try more of this with my nifty 50.
 
I don't shoot strangers but for my family I shoot with what ever lens gives me the effect I'm after.
 
To be honest, I prefer short, and think you should try use short where possible. But sometimes you just need to go long. It's like every area of photography, there are no hard fast rules. I've seen some corkers (in my opinion) taken at 300mm that, because of the situation, couldn't have been taken short.
 
I think the most interesting candids are of people 'doing stuff'. I've only ever attempted candid photography once with my DSLR, and found it surprisingly easy to do it unnoticed at 50mm, because the people were engaged in their own business so much they just didn't pay any attention to what I, or anyone else, was doing.
 
In terms of street photography generally wide/medium length lenses are the preffered choice. Certainly those that do it well would never use 200/300mm lenses. A 50mm prime is a good choice.

In terms of general candids it doesn't matter so much. At a wedding you get the shot with whatever is attached to the camera - usually something like the 70-200 for wedding candids.

I think the OP needs to define the term "candids". Judging by the general response I get the impression we're talking about street photography here, where the subject is a stranger (hence the "chicken" replies).
 
The Oxford English Dictionary definition of Candid is: • adjective truthful and straightforward; frank.

So, I don't think it matters if the subject sees you as long as you catch the moment and it's not posed.

The 70-200 on my Mk III is ideal for me.
 
I wouldn't term what I do as "candid" but in my attempts to get the stars of motorsport in something other than a forced grin pose my weapon of choice is the 70-200.

However, it probably only works because they are used to cameras around them - a normal person on the street would be like "WTF?!" and most non-photographers always think the 70-200 must be more like 1200mm and can take a picture of orbiting satellites so clear that you can read "CCCP" on the side of them...

So my use of the 70-200 is more to stay out of range at which you might engage in conversation in the pit lane, rather than a "Japanese sniper in a tree" job.

If I was trying to blend in, I'd drop the grip off of my D300 (or not use a D3!) and probably stick something like a 85 f1.4 on - those babies are tiny. Not seen the 135 in my hands, but that might do too.

How not to blend in - last weekend I took some rider portrait shots with a 200-400 - now thats excessive :D
 
I only have one lens, a 50mm so I have no choice. If I was interested enough in that area of photography I'd buy a longer lens but I don't do it that often, and I find for most purposes a 50mm 'will do'.
 
I've never taken a 'walkaround' candid photo so I'm gonna go and try this afternoon! I have the week off work, so if I like it I may discover a new side to my hobby.

I've only got 400d + 17-40 L, 55 - 250 and a 50mm Sigma macro, so I'll start with the long one. As I live in rural Norfolk I'm bound to stumble upon plenty of ropey old farmers who can't run fast enough to catch me (OMG - hope they won't be armed!).
 
ryanyboy said:
I think the OP needs to define the term "candids". Judging by the general response I get the impression we're talking about street photography here, where the subject is a stranger (hence the "chicken" replies).
Click to expand...

Candids as in unnoticed, taking images of anyone, anywhere, going about their own business.

The "chicken" was just humour ;) as in "stop being a chicken and get closer without being noticed"
 
Informal or natural; especially caught off guard or unprepared

i have seen some 'posed' candids...and they won prizes..

similar to that crass programme...you have been frames
 
It all depends on your personality and vision. Candids are not my cup of tea, but I would opt for 135mm f/2L or at least 85mm f/1.8 lens. You have to have excellent communication skills when you go down to 50mm and wider.
 
bresson?

1554.jpg


used smallish lenses
 
ryanyboy said:
In terms of street photography generally wide/medium length lenses are the preffered choice. Certainly those that do it well would never use 200/300mm lenses. Really? A 50mm prime is a good choice.

In terms of general candids it doesn't matter so much. At a wedding you get the shot with whatever is attached to the camera - usually something like the 70-200 for wedding candids.

I think the OP needs to define the term "candids". Judging by the general response I get the impression we're talking about street photography here, where the subject is a stranger (hence the "chicken" replies).
Click to expand...
 
Not that I do many but my Sigma 70-200 is my choice most of the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top