I just got back from a business trip to Philadelphia and really missed having my Panasonic 7-14 (which I stupidly left at my cottage), so I was stuck with my 14-42, 45mm macro, and 14-140. The 14-42 stayed on my camera almost the whole time - only used the macro in the butterfly exhibit at the Academy of Natural Sciences.
Next week I have to fly to NYC and I know I'm going to miss the avility to go wide even more. My cottage is about 4 hours round trip and a day off work away, so I really don't want to go get it.
I checked the local places that rent, and none of them list the 7-14.
I see the following options:
- buy another 7-14 (preferably used) and then sell it. Unfortunately they seem as scarce as hen's teeth on the used market, especially where I live (Toronto).
- buy a 9-18 and then sell it. They're also rare around these parts, but they are cheaper.
- buy the 12/2. Is 24mm EFL wide enough for NYC ?
- go manual focus. But I am not great with manually focusing quickly, and things will be hectic with my kids along so I'd prefer not to have to do that.
Am I missing anything obvious that won't cost me a bunch of $$ ?
And, should I bother going long with the 14-140 (or longer, with the 100-300 that I also have) if I have the 14-42 ? Should I leave the 45/macro at home ?
I love the 12/2...it's an awesome lens that spends more time in my bag than my 7-14. It's very versatile and very high image quality, small and sharp. That said, if I was going to be spending a good bit of time shooting in NYC, I'd absolutely want my 7-14 in the bag (like you do).
However, since you already own the 7-14, if you were going to get the 12/2 to keep, I'd just go that route as 24mm will be wide enough for MOST types of shots, just not the super extreme stuff. It's a good focal length for a single lens.
However, if you aren't really interested in the 12/2, or have no intentions of keeping it long-term, I'd go with the 7-14 or 9-18 and resell if you can find one that you aren't going to take a big loss on.
That answer really depends on how you like to shoot. The 7-14mm is a great lens of course, but I found that when I owned it and the 12mm f2.0 at the same time, i hardly ever used the 7-14, just didn't really find myself shooting ultra wide that often.
What I did find myself using was the 12mm, wide open at f2.0 quite a bit, which for my photography was more useful and opened up some shooting situations I wouldn't of attempted with a 2 stop slower lens.
On the other hand though, some people LOVE ultra wide and the 7-14mm is fantastic, probably the best ultra wide zoom I've owned short of the Nikon 14-24. So..... if thats you, then I'd probably do what you have to to get one for your trip.
My bread and butter focal length for NYC is 28mm. Unless you are shooting exclusively indoors in tight spaces, the 12mm is probably a good compromise (for an apparently awesome lens).
B&H have the 7-14 and the 9-18 (with $100 instant rebate) currently in stock. If you order today you'll definitely have it by the end of the week. Their Purolator shipping option is cheap and typically 2 days to Southern Ontario. Or you could buy it there, though you would have to pay the NY sales tax (then HST on top of that if you declare it on your return).
For NYC, I personally like both wide and long. I guess it depends a lot on what you like to photograph, but for me in NYC, I see a lot of interesting geometric compositions in building details and having a tele to isolate such compositions is useful. On the wide end I have found 21mm FF equivalent useful for in-tight street shooting, but the thing with building photos is with an ultra wide you're going to get that dramatic perspective distortion shooting up that ends up looking all the same after a while...
FlyPenFly wrote:
get a fast 35mm equiv lens for nyc for street.
Think that would depend on if the OP enjoys street photography or not. Someone who loves architectural or urban landscape photo's could have rather different focal length needs and aesthetic taste regarding people in their photography.
Lets face it, one person may think a homeless guy sleeping on a bench makes their photography "street" or some sort of testament to the human condition or what not, while another person may think it distracts from their carefully framed study of mid 19th century design on a given street.
If you want to really get the buildings while down in the trenches of Manhatten you're going to need something wider than 35mm. 35mm is good for street life but not wide enough to captures large enough swathes of the city. I'd say 28mm is when you're hitting almost wide enough, 25mm would be ideal. The 7-14 sounds like it would have been perfect cause sometimes the super wide look can be used to real good effect in the city, there's usually enough visual interest.
Definitely a personal thing but as someone who lives and works in Manhattan, the world doesn't need more photos of our buildings from street level looking up. There's 5 billion of them on flickr. Some of them even good.
rscheffler wrote:
Same for the Grand Canyon, Niagara Falls, Golden Gate Bridge, etc., etc., why bother, since it's all been done already anyway!
But if you think that way then you might as well just give up photography all together.
Use one of those photo recognition look-up apps on any of your images and you'll see that you have nothing original. It's ALL been done before! Thankfully photography isn't about capturing uber-original images! So just shoot what you like and have fun!
Thanks everyone ... I will think hard about making the drive to pick up my 7-14. It does seem a shame to not have it for a trip that seems so perfectly suited for it. I may also take a look at adding the 12mm to my collection.
As for the notion that NYC has already been done enough, I find that a somewhat dismal outlook. There's probably no subject matter left in the world that hasn't been photographed by better talents than myself (and really, probably, most of us). If I felt constrained by this reality, I would have nothing left to photograph. Fortunately, I take pictures only for myself and my family, so because we are the only ones who need to enjoy them, I still allow myself to take pictures.
Bifurcator wrote:
But if you think that way then you might as well just give up photography all together.
Use one of those photo recognition look-up apps on any of your images and you'll see that you have nothing original. It's ALL been done before! Thankfully photography isn't about capturing uber-original images! So just shoot what you like and have fun!
Well, I don't think that way. I wrote it with a sarcastic intent.
tmark wrote:
I take pictures only for myself and my family, so because we are the only ones who need to enjoy them, I still allow myself to take pictures.
This is precisely why there are '5 billion' NYC building photos on Flickr, which is fine by me. For most of us, photography is a means by which to document our experiences for our own enjoyment. If others happen to like the images as well, great! IMO, once you start keeping a mental checklist of rules to abide by, the fun is gone.
It may be my style but, when using wide angle lenses with my family, I like to compose with them prominently in the frame but with a large bit of context. I feel the 35mm focal length is nice and personal but I like the wide look. Its good to have choices though and one certainly isn't better than the other. Tough I don't see why taking a wider angle lens means you'll be doing the cliched upturned city photo, thats more a fault of the photographer who doesn't leverage the focal length in other ways.
I live in NYC and most of the time I use the 14-140. It's been perfect for everything during the day, and when night falls, the 20mm has been perfect. I don't have the 7-14 but the 14-140 has been more than perfect.
I love NYC! It's an awesome city to shoot street or architecture. I believe in making the best use of what you have. The last time I was in NYC, I had the G1 with 20mm (that was the only micro four thirds lens I had back then) and a Canon 350D with 70-200 f4L. I ended up using the 20mm with G1 combo the most and it was wide enough for what I was trying to do. And yes, you can always come up with an interesting shot if you're going without any pre-conceived notion about what you want to shoot . If you think you're going to go really wide, get the 7-14mm, it will hold its value. Else, just go with the gear you have and see if you can overcome the limitation of focal length, it'll probably get you some unique perspectives.
The thing that I really liked about Manhattan was the conversation the buildings/structures have with each other and that is what I was trying to capture. Here's one with the G1+20mm combo that might help you get an idea:
I wrote it with a sarcastic intent. 