gollywop
Veteran Member
Lest, of course, your desired perspective is from the middle of a lake. Then you're better off substituting that ladder for a dingy.
--
gollywop
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
"Zooming with your feet"
- Thread starter Dheorl
- Start date
--
gollywop
99thMeridian
Member
- Messages
- 40
- Reaction score
- 11
The question is not whether "primes only" has merit, it is whether moving closer is the same thing as zooming in, which it is not.
richardplondon
Forum Pro
I've never seen this claimed. They may have said you could get a person to be the same size in the viewfinder by doing this.
But the advice to "zoom with your feet" is IMO absolutely NOT about trying to take the exact "same photo". Besides being fundamentally impossible, why would you particularly wish to do this anyway? The aim is to get a BETTER photo in your particular circumstances... rather than, obstinately standing in the same place using some lens which does not accommodate the subject suitably - or, which fails to portray it subjectively as you want - out of self-spite.
For a given subject, the type and tactic of pictorial "solution" will generally be different, for different focal lengths. That means moving around, in pursuit of an entirely different end result in each case. And this idea of "zoom with your feet" partly says: no excuses, do whatever is needed using the equipment you have rather than what you wish you had.
Analogy: a piece of music tends to be performed differently on different instruments, according to the "musicality" requirements of each one. And that is how using primes is for me - while, I find the zoom lens more analogous to using a synthesiser, which can emulate the sound of many instruments quite well sonically, but which always somehow fails to produce the characteristic results of the real thing, for performance related reasons. I repeat: just talking about my personal experience here.
BTW while the origin of this saying may have come from contrasting zooms and primes to some degree, people aren't ONLY advised to "zoom with their feet" when they are using primes - but with zoom lenses also.
Not sure I understand your point here - it would be done the same way, regardless of camera or lens. Again, no excuses - take lots of shots and stitch them, if your single lens does not give you a broad enough field in a single shot. In any case, the proportional relation of subject to scene is a working distance / geometry issue, not a lens / optical issue.
Last edited:
MikeInOr
Senior Member
- Messages
- 2,120
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 1,206
I have no issue with a photographer that wants to only shoot with primes. More power to them!
What bothers me is all the threads along the lines of: Buying my first inter-changeable lens camera and going to buy these 4 primes because I read somewhere that REAL photographers always use primes because they are better! I always try to enlighten these people by suggesting that zooms have gotten MUCH better in the past several years and let them know that I have several primes that never get used because of incredible quality zooms making the primes redundant.
A typical response is: I need primes for low light shooting! To which I explain that the DOF over about f/2.8 is really quite thin and not all that usable in most situations. You really want fast primes for really thin DOF's and f/2.8 usually has a thin enough DOF to make a subject pop out from a nicely blurred background making wider f-stops usually not used very much. I have a beautiful 30mm Sigma f/1.4. Other than playing around to see how thin the DOF is at f/1.4 I have never taken a real picture at f/1.4.
I then suggest that they might want to buy a high quality zoom and give it a try before tying up a bunch of money in primes that they might not find as useful as they thought they would be down the road... which I wish someone told me way back when.
If someone has a bunch of primes and likes to shoot with only primes my response is: COOL!
What bothers me is all the threads along the lines of: Buying my first inter-changeable lens camera and going to buy these 4 primes because I read somewhere that REAL photographers always use primes because they are better! I always try to enlighten these people by suggesting that zooms have gotten MUCH better in the past several years and let them know that I have several primes that never get used because of incredible quality zooms making the primes redundant.
A typical response is: I need primes for low light shooting! To which I explain that the DOF over about f/2.8 is really quite thin and not all that usable in most situations. You really want fast primes for really thin DOF's and f/2.8 usually has a thin enough DOF to make a subject pop out from a nicely blurred background making wider f-stops usually not used very much. I have a beautiful 30mm Sigma f/1.4. Other than playing around to see how thin the DOF is at f/1.4 I have never taken a real picture at f/1.4.
I then suggest that they might want to buy a high quality zoom and give it a try before tying up a bunch of money in primes that they might not find as useful as they thought they would be down the road... which I wish someone told me way back when.
If someone has a bunch of primes and likes to shoot with only primes my response is: COOL!
Last edited:
MoreorLess
Veteran Member
- Messages
- 5,976
- Solutions
- 4
- Reaction score
- 3,481
In my experience "zoom with your feet" tends to be mentioned most often by street shooters and within there own field I can somewhat understand it. Granted the perspective of different focal lengths can have a part to play in street shooting but compared to say landscape shooting its arguably not as vital.
AlphaTikal
Senior Member
Get a tripod and frame before you zoom. An active tiltable lifeview will be helpful. Or use your phone while in wifi tethering mode.
Ian Stuart Forsyth
Senior Member
You would think that this should not be too much of a problem as a great deal of photographs here can already get bent out of shape over their camera gear.
C
Christof21
Guest
Very good post, even if I don't agree 100%.
F2.8 (APS-C) does not have a dof that thin, it depends also if you shoot with a wide angle and where is your point of focus. Even at f2/8, you can have dof, really !
What you don't say is that in low light, you can change your way of shooting to maximize IQ and to take advantage of you wide aperture. . I try to shoot with a wider angle or shoot portrait where shallow dof is a bonus.
Personnaly, I would be happy with a high quality f1.8 (aps-c) zoom lens. That' s why a FF can be a solution. Just buy a FF with a good zoom, and then you don't need primes !!! With m43 for instance, you really need primes, that's why I don't like this format.
Last edited:
crashpc
Veteran Member
Yes, this topic is great source of misunderstanding.
Zooming with your feed became "standart" especially for point and shooters (and maybe people new to zoom used for primes). It happend, some people only zoom to get close, and that´s wrong.
But in the time, many people got the knowledge, and as everything, especially for one who knows things, it becomes to be "over-eaten". Okay, okay, we all get it! One should use right phrases for right situation. It´s very bad when somebody says "zoom with your feet" only because you have zoom lens on your camera. It´s just ridiculous and plain wrong. But there are many times when zooming by feet (for the perspective) is essential.
What I found for myself, that I usually don´t need exact particular FoV. I go wide, I go medium, or I go tele, and that´s it. Three milimeters of focal range doesn´t mean much for my photography. That way I can be happy with few primes, because I get in the FoV range I feel comfortable for that shot, and then I zoom with my feet a little bit, if anything isn´t perfect. Works for me, works for many people, and for many people it will never work. It´s how world works...
Now as I don´t depend on FoV that much, I can buy few killer primes, and cover my range from let´s say 24 to 300mm with very sharp and very fast lenses in ranges from f/1.4 to f/2.8. It will make difference in my photography for sure.
Zooming with your feed became "standart" especially for point and shooters (and maybe people new to zoom used for primes). It happend, some people only zoom to get close, and that´s wrong.
But in the time, many people got the knowledge, and as everything, especially for one who knows things, it becomes to be "over-eaten". Okay, okay, we all get it! One should use right phrases for right situation. It´s very bad when somebody says "zoom with your feet" only because you have zoom lens on your camera. It´s just ridiculous and plain wrong. But there are many times when zooming by feet (for the perspective) is essential.
What I found for myself, that I usually don´t need exact particular FoV. I go wide, I go medium, or I go tele, and that´s it. Three milimeters of focal range doesn´t mean much for my photography. That way I can be happy with few primes, because I get in the FoV range I feel comfortable for that shot, and then I zoom with my feet a little bit, if anything isn´t perfect. Works for me, works for many people, and for many people it will never work. It´s how world works...
Now as I don´t depend on FoV that much, I can buy few killer primes, and cover my range from let´s say 24 to 300mm with very sharp and very fast lenses in ranges from f/1.4 to f/2.8. It will make difference in my photography for sure.
I'm not saying you shouldn't move around with a zoom to get the best photo possible, I'm saying that a lot of people assume that that same photo would be possible with a prime if you just walked backwards or forwards a bit which is clearly wrong. A lot of people however claim that this is possible, and that zoom users are lazy and buy a zoom so they never have to move.
I've never heard it used in such a way.
I guess if you've never had a decent zoom I can understand having that feeling. And one or two very special primes are unequalled.
I've never seen that. I've heard of people advising trying different perspectives with the zoom, but why would you "zoom with your feet" when you have a lens to zoom with?
How is taking lots of shots and stitching them the same way as zooming out? Not to mentioned how hard getting a clean stitch is with large foreground elements. I personally don't carry around a nodal pano head with me, and if you do surely it kinda ruins the simplicity of primes a lot of people claim.
richardplondon
Forum Pro
Saying so would certainly be both unfair and foolish. I am not sure who IS in fact saying this.
I wonder if you are making too much of the observation often made while expressing a liking for prime lenses, that with primes you physically cannot stand still and zoom. This simply means that these people find it helpful that the equipment's fixed presentation of the subject naturally encourages and reminds them, that they may need to move their viewpoint around, in denying them the option not to do so.
Sometimes people talk about "directness" or "simplicity" in this regard; that is a matter of psychology and personal preference and acquired familiarity. Not of technical or artistic superiority.
Someone else may regard it as more "direct" and "simple" to vary your field of vision by turning a ring, rather than by selecting a different lens out of the bag. And that's an equally valid viewpoint to hold, of course.
Both people are just saying, one or the other approach comes more naturally to THEM.
You seem to have latched onto only one usage of this particular cliché.
Sure, people like using particular equipment, because of the shooting experience, and also because of the results they personally get. One person may find that this favourite equipment tends to be prime, another may find that it tends to be zoom. Or a mixture. No biggie.
But IMO you seem to be struggling a bit with, or at least resisting, the idea that someone might sometimes actively PREFER shooting with a fixed focal length, for reasons other than optical quality.
It really can be just that simple. There is no need to bring technical superiority, or tribalism, or aesthetic condescension into it.
Just as: people don't shoot B&W because they have never experienced "decent" colour.
Seriously?
Zooming with your feet IS trying different perspectives... if you are not also changing your focal length while doing do, then the subject gets unavoidably bigger and smaller in the viewfinder as part of that; you are dealing with just a subset of all the framings which you could have had with a variable lens. But a subset of the infinity of all possible pictures, is still an infinity - the whole scene is altering regardless, as well; things are coming into and out of view, changing proportion, etc as well as altering over time, and being presented through the filter of some human being's personal vision.
Geometrically the same, I meant. If you simply don't have a sufficient wide-angle with you, then it makes no difference whether you don't have a zoom wide-angle, or you don't have a prime wide-angle
.Sure, though incidentally (in pure physical terms), a compact prime can work very nicely on a nodal rig; when lighter, with a shorter distance to entrance pupil, therefore shorter lever arm, demanding less solidity of construction in all the elements. Similarly, I have found it far easier to achieve acceptable hand-held pano results with that (again, in pure physical terms).
tbcass
Forum Pro
Yes, the idea is to combine "feet zoom" with optical zoom to achieve your objectives.
If that's the context in which you've heard the phrase used, I can see why it bugs you. In the decades since zoom lenses have become the norm even for point and shoot film or digital cameras, I have seen the phrase "zoom with your feet" used in numerous books and articles to encourage novice photographers to not simply stand in one place and zoom the lens in and out to compose a picture. Some have even argued that a zoom lens is not a good beginner's tool. Philip Greenspun's article "Building a Digital SLR System" is one example available online and encourages the beginner to start with a normal focal length prime lens.
"The novice photographer who starts with a zoom lens typically uses it in lieu of backing up or stepping forward. An experienced photographer visualizes the scene first, chooses a focal length, then gets into the appropriate position to capture the scene with that focal length. It is much better to get a lens with a fixed focal length, learn to recognize scenes where that lens can be used effectively, and then add additional lenses once that focal length has been mastered. So even if you have the $1000+ to buy a high quality zoom and the muscles to lug it around it is probably a poor choice of first lens." http://photo.net/equipment/building-a-digital-slr-system/?p=2
Of course, this is just talking about the beginner and says nothing about the suitability of a zoom lens for the experienced photographer.
C
Christof21
Guest
I understand but in my opinion, this is a bad advice. Because the opposite is more true.
With a fixed focal length, I don't have the choice. If I want to shoot a subject, I have to be close enough to shoot it. I will not really "play" with perspective.
I remember the first time I had read this advice (I was a beginner). And for me, the author was wrong.
crashpc
Veteran Member
It really boils down to ones preference. I started with zoom, and now I shoot only primes. Everyone needs to find his way. While general teaching can help, it won´t be best for everyone. That´s the deal 
AlbertTheLazy
Veteran Member
I teach beginners. My advice to them for reasonably static scenes is to leave the camea in the bag and walk around until they see the picture they want, including the perspective. Then to get the camera out and choose the focal length (by zoom or by changing primes) to get the framing they want.
Their training includes an understanding of the fact that perspective is controlled by relative distances and not by focal length, and we play with stuff like steep perspective as a creative tool.
Obviously there are times where a long or wide lens needs to substitute for the right viewpoint, or where unpredictable action can make a zoom a better choice than a prime, but that is easily taught in my practical workshops. How much of it sinks in though...
Their training includes an understanding of the fact that perspective is controlled by relative distances and not by focal length, and we play with stuff like steep perspective as a creative tool.
Obviously there are times where a long or wide lens needs to substitute for the right viewpoint, or where unpredictable action can make a zoom a better choice than a prime, but that is easily taught in my practical workshops. How much of it sinks in though...
C
Christof21
Guest
My answer was not about preferring prime or zoom.It really boils down to ones preference. I started with zoom, and now I shoot only primes. Everyone needs to find his way. While general teaching can help, it won´t be best for everyone. That´s the deal
But a zoom is better to work with perspective. I think I use my feet more with a zoom than with a prime because I have the choice between different perspectives.
C
Christof21
Guest
Excellent ! I like your advice to forget the camera and leave it in the bag. You are a good teacher then.
I think you're right, and that is exactly the intent of the advice to use a single focal length. For any subject, there are differing theories and approaches to instruction. For some, the beginner has enough to occupy his attention with in learning about composition, quality of light, aperture choices for depth of field effects, and shutter speed choices for motion blur. The added complexity of the effect of different focal length choices can be put off til other things have been mastered. Some photographers may find that they can have a satisfying, life-long photographic hobby without ever having multiple focal length choices to deal with (e.g., my grandparents never had zoom lenses or even cameras with interchangeable lenses, yet they loved photography and took great pictures for many decades).
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum