Tuesday, June 19, 2007

Q & A #1

I've been getting quite a few questions regarding photography lately. I thought it'd be helpful to post them here along with my answers. Here's the first:

"It looks like you did great stuff with the 16-45 as you continue to do
with the others. I take it the combination of a dedicated WA Sigma
10-20 and midrange 28-75 zoom appealed to you more, but I'm curious as
to why?"

My response:

You pretty much hit the nail on the head. I had the DA 16-45 and the Tamron 28-75 which is a great combo. The overlap was nice because you don't have to change lenses every 5 seconds. I used them together for about 9 months and was very satisfied.

But I found that I was taking a lot of photos at 16mm and still not getting the photos I wanted. It wasn't until two of my shooting buddies told me that I needed to get an UWA lens because the 16-45 was cramping my creativity that I realized I needed something wider. So I sold the the DA 16-45 and bought the 10-20.

The DA 16-45 is a great lens. I never had issues with it and it was a pleasure to use. However I get so much more out of using my 10-20. In fact I really don't miss the gap between 20-28mm that much. And as you can see, I've been able to produce great shots with the 10-20 that I would have never been able to recreate at 16mm. The 10-20 is probably my second most used lens after my 28-75.

For my style of photography the 16-45 is neither long enough nor wide enough, so I'd rather carry two lenses one wide, one long to give me better options.

No comments: