rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.3 #9 · Limited or All-round Gear? | |
RustyBug wrote:
Event Coverage
vs.
Your personal engagement / purview of the world
I appreciate this distinction. Event coverage can be further defined as whether it's for a client or yourself. If for a client, have they hired you to work to their standards/requirements, or have they hired you based on your 'style?'
Event coverage can imply packing everything and the kitchen sink, just in case. For me, for typical 'social' events, I've distilled the gear I carry down to a 28-70/2 with which to emulate the look I like from fast primes, but without the hassle of frequent lens changes. Because I am a frequent lens changer when shooting primes (for example with a Leica M kit). The zoom lets me work fast in dynamic situations to maximize coverage. On the tele end I will use a second body with either a 135 prime or 70-200, depending on the situation. This is additionally augmented by a compact UWA prime for those rare 1-2% use cases when 28mm isn't wide enough. This works for me because it's a kit that I feel works fluidly, where I can just concentrate/focus on what's happening in front of me without thinking too much about gear. I don't think using zooms is a cop out. 
For personal work, I may still bring a range of lenses. For example with the Leica M, it will be 21, 28, 50 and 90. But often I find on a given day that I will use one or two more than the rest. It just depends on how I'm 'seeing' the environment around me. And there have been days when the most used lens was the 90. But usually it's either 28 or 50. During the 2010s this was my primary travel kit and I didn't really miss not having longer than 90mm. I'm sure I 'missed' shots best done with 200 or 300mm, but that wasn't what I was looking for.
---------------------------------------------
johnvanr wrote:
David Allen Harvey once shot Formula 1 with his Leica M kit. That's an obvious prior choice, for example. Not sure I could do that.
When I was younger I covered F1 for 4 months of one season. All except one of the races were credentialed, so going into those it was the usual set of 2.8 zooms and a super-tele. And as such, the images were the usual range of 'car portraits' or trying to get something interesting of the drivers while they made their way through the paddock area (didn't have pit lane access while cars were on the track). This was a situation of producing work for the needs of others, because it was the only way for me to cover such an event. The one non-credentialed race though was a different approach with just a WA zoom and 70-200. I just wandered around the general admission areas and shot what I could of the on-track action. But in hindsight, I should have totally ignored that aspect and focused more on the spectators and the 'character' they brought to the event. This was early in my photography and admittedly, that weekend I was disappointed at not being credentialed and 'missing out' on ideal track-side race action coverage. In hindsight, I didn't fully appreciate the opportunity this presented to document the spectator side of the F1 experience. I did shoot some of that that weekend, but didn't really embrace it. Looking back, this is where going in with a Leica M kit, or similar range of lenses, would totally make sense. And it would work on the credentialed side too, if you accepted not getting the typical long lens 'car portrait' shots (equivalent to bird portraits on the forum here ). But other car-on-track shots would certainly still be possible with an M, plus all the stuff going on in the paddock and pits (if you had access), plus on the spectator side. It's really just a matter of adapting coverage to what works for that limited range of focal lengths. I think for me it's just a matter of accepting that this is what I have to work with and finding/seeing compelling images within that range. As someone else already mentioned, there is virtually always something to photograph, whatever the lens choice. For me it's a matter of filtering out compositions that require lenses I don't have with me and zoning in on what I can work with. And if it's personal work then really there is no one else to satisfy other than yourself, meaning the consequences of 'failure' are purely a learning experience and not what they would be with a paying client.
|
