Lenses, Film, & Dry Storage
by Wes Kisting
There are plenty of lens, film, and dry storage options for photography, but no one choice will be "best" for every scenario and every photographer. As always, the right choice must be dictated by your personal preferences and the specific conditions you expect to encounter. What follows is a crash-course introduction to lenses, film, and dry storage. Use this article as a starting point to work out your needs and preferences, but plan to do a lot of additional research before you commit yourself to buying a specific lens, film speed, or dry container.
Lenses, An Overview
Opinions about camera lenses are becoming increasingly divided. Once, conventional wisdom held that the budding photographer should spend as little as possible on the camera body, and as much as possible on lenses—an opinion derived from the (generally accurate) idea that the quality of the lens has a much greater impact on the quality of the resulting image than the camera body. In recent years, however, some so-called cheap lenses (even pre-packaged "kit" lenses and surprisingly broad-ranging "zooms") are beginning to offer remarkably high performance-per-dollar. In some cases, these cheap lenses may offer better sharpness, less distortion, and significantly lighter weight than their high-dollar counterparts.
Does that mean the old saying about "put all your money in lenses" is no longer valid? Not necessarily. But it does mean that you shouldn't dismiss cheaper lenses simply because they're cheap. On the other hand, top-dollar lenses typically offer a few attractive advantages for the price: more rugged construction (metal, not plastic), lower optical distortion (better glass and coatings), more convenient controls (a more substantial manual focus ring, a depth of field scale, etc.), and high-end features like "vibration reduction" (VR, a.k.a. "image stabilization"). In the end, only you can decide whether or not these features are "worth the money." The best advice I can offer is to try before you buy, and then to buy the most affordable lens that meets all of your needs.
Finally, you don't need an entire arsenal of fancy lenses to capture great photos. I regularly carry only two or three lenses on my paddling trips. Highly specialized lenses (fisheye, super-telephoto, etc.) may be extremely useful under certain circumstances, but only you can decide whether they are truly "necessary" to own. To me, the weight, bulk, and hassle of packing and unpacking a whole repertoire of lenses is not worth the effort or the expense. Great photographs are an important way to preserve the memories of a great trip, but a complicated photography system should never get in the way of your ability to enjoy the trip itself. My advice? Keep it simple.
Film vs. Digital: The Lens Conversion Factor
IMPORTANT: The lens ranges listed below are expressed in relation to digital SLR cameras (DSLR), with the comparable lens range for film SLR cameras listed immediately afterward, in parentheses. All references to lens ranges elsewhere in the text pertain to DSLR cameras, and should be converted accordingly for film SLR users.
On DSLR cameras, the size and placement of the digital sensor affect the angle of view which the camera records onto the sensor from the lens. Consequently, when attached to a DSLR camera, any lens will lose a little breadth at the wide end and gain a little reach at the telephoto end (compared to how the same lens would function when attached to a film camera body). To avoid confusion, just pretend that your DSLR has a 1.4X teleconverter permanently attached: Calculate the film-equivalent range for any lens attached to your DSLR camera body by multiplying the focal length range by approximately 1.4 or 1.5 (roughly 140 to 150%). For example, if you attach an 18-55mm lens to your DSLR, its "coverage" (range and field of view) will perform almost exactly like the 28-80mm general purpose lens which is so popular on film SLR cameras (18-55mm x 1.5 = 27-81mm).
Wide-Angle: 18mm or less (film: 28mm or less)
Technically, lenses up to 24mm (film: 35mm) might be considered "wide-angle" lenses by many photographers, but the impressive sense of wide open space that people associate with the term "wide-angle" really begins, in my opinion, at 18mm or less. As lenses delve below the 24mm mark, a noticeable amount of curvature begins to creep into the shot. For some photographers, this distortion can be a desirable effect, and if used to good purpose, it can add an interesting quality to some shots. With my Nikon D50, I use the superb $500 Tokina 12-24mm f/4 lens, which is built like a tank and offers performance to rival its twice-as-expensive Nikon counterpart. It took awhile to justify the expense to myself (and to my wife), but it has quickly become one of my favorite lenses.
Below, I've posted a side-by-side comparison to show the coverage of 18mm and 12mm lenses, respectively. In the 12mm example, the red rectangle marks the outer boundaries of the shot captured at 18mm.
Notice that the 12mm lens captures a significantly wider field of view, both from left to right and from top to bottom. Despite only 6mm of difference in focal length, the 12mm lens actually provides twice as much coverage as the 18mm lens! Now you see why wide angle lenses open up a lot of terrific photographic possibilities, especially when you shoot in tight spaces where you can't step back far enough to "take in" the whole scene with a longer lens.
General Purpose: 18-55mm (film: 28-80mm)
If you only buy one lens for your SLR camera, the classic 18-55mm general purpose lens is an excellent choice. Some lenses will offer more reach at the telephoto end, such as 18-70mm, but whatever lens you choose for general purpose, I recommend choosing one that goes at least as wide as 18mm (film: 28mm). Since landscapes often make up the heart-and-soul of a paddling trip, you'll almost certainly find yourself using the 18-22mm focal lengths most often. Of course, if you stumble across an intriguing close-up (like a passing pod of dolphins or a candid shot of a fellow paddler), you'll appreciate the ability to dial in closer to the action with the moderate magnification that 55mm affords. I keep my Nikon 18-55mm lens mounted on my Nikon D50 about 70% of the time. Although this is a "kit" lens, and worth only about $170, I am consistently amazed by the results it can produce—a superb example of how "cheap plastic lenses" keep getting better and better, as I mentioned above.
Telephoto: 55-130mm (film: 80-200mm)
Some photographers may disagree, but I think 130mm is the practical upper limit for on-the-water photography, especially if your lens lacks "vibration reduction" (VR). Without VR, 130mm will rarely prove useful from the seat of a kayak or canoe, as even mild motion on the water can severely blur your subject. It's not impossible, but it's unlikely you'll come away with a razor sharp shot. Practically speaking, 80mm (film: 120mm) is probably the useful upper limit on the water, unless you're shooting in glass-calm conditions under bright sunlight or using a lens equipped with "vibration reduction." Regardless, when you go ashore, the extra 80mm of reach offered by a 200mm lens will open up a number of great shots that would otherwise go uncaptured. I carry an 80-200mm telephoto which, mounted on my D50, bridges the range from Telephoto to Medium-Telephoto and allows me to pull in close to wildlife.
Medium- / Super-Telephoto: 130mm and beyond (film: 200mm and beyond)
Except in their most expensive form, most medium- and super-telephoto lenses are large, heavy, and difficult to pack safely without purchasing a specialized waterproof case. Few paddlers will benefit from carrying a 200mm or higher lens. Since hand-holding is out of the question for steadying a lens of this size, and since any movement will be magnified many times over by the lens, these are strictly an "onshore" lens. Don't expect to capture anything except abstract impressionist art if you try using a medium- or super-telephoto lens on the water. Realistically, these lenses are best suited to capturing intimate wildlife photos, but since a tripod is almost mandatory for producing sharp, acceptable results, these lenses can require sizable additions to your packing load beyond the bulk of the lenses themselves.
Teleconverters
Teleconverters offer a cheaper, lighter, more efficient way to increase the "reach" of your lenses, albeit at some penalty to image quality. The most common magnification factors for teleconverters are 1.4X and 2.0X. Attach one between the camera body and the lens, and the teleconverter will multiply the focal length of the lens by its magnification factor. Thus, combining a 1.4X teleconverter with an 100mm lens will mimic the power of a 140mm lens (100mm x 1.4 = 140mm), but with slightly poorer sharpness and a slightly slower exposure.
Obviously, the appeal of teleconverters lies in their ability to add extra focal length to every lens in your repertoire without actually adding the bulk, weight, and cost of the longer lenses it mimics. The downside of teleconverters lies in their inevitable degradation of quality. Not all teleconverters are created equal. If you're keen on getting one, purchase the best one you can afford—from a reputable lens-maker using high-quality optical glass. This will minimize the degrading effects and maximize its usefulness. Also, be aware that teleconverters with smaller magnification factors (1.4X instead of 2.0X, for example) typically yield sharper pictures than their higher-magnification counterparts.
Macro Lenses
Macro lenses are super sharp, close-range lenses which allow you to capture fine detail in tiny, detailed subjects, like the petals of a flower or the wings of a fly. Personally, I don't carry a macro lens and I've never felt that I needed one. On the rare occasions I want to capture a very small subject with intricate details, I use my 18-55mm lens (fully zoomed, at 55mm) and bring it as close to the subject as possible (up to the minimum focus distance). The results may not be quite as sharp or large as they would be with a high-end "macro" lens, but the results can be extremely impressive.
Check out this straight-out-of-the-camera photo of a bee, which I captured using my "cheapie" 18-55mm kit lens—no tripod, no macro lens or close-up filter. Printed full size, the bee at the center of the picture will overfill a 4 x 6 photo. Only you can decide if you really need a true macro lens which can do better.
See a few more of my close-up photos in my article Composing Great Photos, or see a 100% crop of the bee above by scrolling down to the bottom of my article Selecting Image Format & Quality.
Film Choices: Type and Speed
The two main types of film are print and slide. Print film is the type most people have used. When you're done shooting your photos, you drop it off at any one-hour photo booth and presto—you end up with nice, colorful prints conveniently mounted on photo paper and ready to share with your friends and family. Certainly, print film is the cheaper and more convenient option for photos you only intend to put in a scrapbook. Its major advantage is its high tolerance for operator error. The technology in print film and modern cameras is so good that if you just toss a roll of print film into your camera and set your camera to "Automatic" mode, the color, clarity, and contrast of your images will be very good in 90% of the pictures you take (unless, of course, you forget to take off the lens cap or shoot through a dirty lens).
Slide film demands more skill (the resulting photograph is more sensitive to exposure settings, and thus, less "forgiving"), but it offers many significant advantages over print film. To begin with, slide pictures produce higher quality photos, with greater clarity, sharper detail, better color saturation, and higher contrast. The costs to buy and develop slide film are higher than for print film, but slides allow you to set up amazing slideshows to "wow" and dazzle your friends—recreating your adventures in a way that print film cannot. Since slide film is the industry standard for magazines and other publications, it also offers you the opportunity to try getting your pictures published, which can be a very rewarding experience. If you would like to make digital reproductions of your slides, some affordable consumer scanners like the Epson Perfection 3170 Photo come equipped with slide-scanning ability and produce excellent results. If you still want to make a scrap book, you can also have prints made from your slides at most photo processing centers.
Whether you're using print or slide film, every film has a "speed" which describes how quickly the film absorbs light. The most common speeds include 100, 200, and 400, though many professional slide-film users use slower speeds, like 64. Theoretically, 200 speed film absorbs light roughly twice as fast as 100 speed film, allowing you to cut the exposure time in half (either by increasing shutter speed, reducing aperture size, or both) when snapping a photo with the higher speed film. This is exactly why most higher speed films come packaged as the "recommended" choice for fast-moving subjects (such as sports photography) or low-light conditions. But this doesn't mean that faster film is better. In fact, quite the opposite: The slower the speed of the film, the sharper and more brilliant the final image will be, but the harder it will be to capture sharp, clear shots in dark and low-light conditions without introducing blur or distortion into the image.
Before I switched to digital, I almost always shot 100 speed slide film on my kayaking trips because the vast majority of my shots were taken in full or near-full sunlight during the summer, when exposure times are quite short even at ISO 100. Rarely, if ever, did I find myself shooting in conditions too dim for 100 speed film to handle. Really, the only trouble with 100 speed film involves trying to capture moving objects in dim conditions, in which case the need for a longer exposure time (compared to higher speed films) increases blur and distortion in the final image. But again, I rarely found myself needing to photograph moving objects in dim light, so this was never really a concern to me. Those who plan to do a lot of late-evening or night photography might opt to shoot higher speed film. Alternatively, you could just settle for photographing stationary subjects while using some kind of make-shift tripod (a log, a flat rock, or some other stable resting surface for the camera) to capture sharp night photos at ISO 100.
Dry Storage vs. Convenient Access
Here's the quintessential dilemma for every paddler-photographer: How do you protect your camera from the water, but keep it within easy reach, ready to shoot at a moment's notice? Well, the answer depends a lot on your gear. With an SLR camera, it's probably going to be a hassle slipping it in and out of a dry bag all day, but this is a necessary evil to prevent water damage. A slicker option is to purchase a watertight hard case like a Pelican case or Otter Box. For canoeists, Pelican cases are excellent options, but for kayakers, they can be awkward to pack, needing to be strapped somewhere on the fore or rear deck, where they can be accessed relatively conveniently but without interfering with your paddle stroke or lay-back rolls. I pack my Nikon D50 SLR camera and two lenses inside a foam-padded Pelican 1300 case and strap it over the stern hatch. If I have to, I can reach behind me to grab it, but it's always a hassle. Unfortunately, that's the nature of sea kayaks: There aren't a lot of convenient places to stow something as large as an SLR camera—at least not within easy reach.
For kayakers, a better solution might just be to simplify the camera system and use a smaller, more convenient point-and-shoot camera. Many compact digital cameras on the market are surprisingly powerful and extremely packable, making it possible to store them safely in a small waterproof case. In terms of sheer no-fuss usability, this is by far the most convenient photography system I've discovered. I pack my Nikon Coolpix 5200 5.1-megapixel camera inside a tiny Pelican 1010 Micro Case and stow the case inside the cockpit, in an under-deck bag. If need be, I can retrieve the camera, snap a picture, and stow everything away again in under 30 seconds. Although I also pack along my Nikon D50 for on-shore photography and rare on-the-water shots, the Coolpix 5200 has become my camera of choice for 99% of the photo-ops that arise while I'm on the water. In fact, it's so capable and convenient that sometimes it's the only camera I pack along.
For more about the advantages that compact digital cameras may offer, read Compact Digital Cameras.
This article courtesy of:
