Photographyblog, Lens by David Noton

What would be your dream "money no object" photographic system? Let's just forget about the actual cameras for a bit. In an ideal world with no mortgages, tax demands or gas bills to contemplate what lenses would you have in your bag? I remember as a fledgling photographer looking at the Nikon lens brochure and drooling over the purposeful black beauties with shining, bulging optics; I wanted the lot. I was reminded of those days recently on one of our workshops where I met a guest who owned every lens Canon makes. By his own admission many had never seen the light of day. I had visions of him on a glorious day umming and ahhing over which glass to load in the Lowepro, endlessly pontificating and never actually making it out the door. For me now after a quarter of a century (!!!) as a pro the allure of the hardware has dissipated, lenses like cameras and all the rest of the gubbins we accumulate are tools which must earn their keep. And at the end of the day you can only carry a chosen few on your back up that hill at dawn.

So what do we actually need, and how do we choose from the bewildering array available, and crucially how do we get the best out of them? This month I'll be looking at what to consider when putting together a system starting with the mid range optics, then next month I'll consider the world of long lenses, and then finally we'll go wide. When deliberating over lens options tough choices and compromises have to be made, and make no doubt about it making the most of the expensive optics you already own is more complex then initially meets the eye.

Now we all know that the most important pieces of kit we own are our eyes, and no amount of expensive equipment is going to make our pictures better; that has to come from within. Also I would always suggest that if there's a choice between spending your hard earned spondoolies on going off on a photographic trip or buying a new L series optic going for the experience over the hardware is the way to go; its far better to do things rather then own things. But let's be honest, we all love lenses and photo stuff; we can admit it to each other. And if I know you, you're going to do both. So we'll consider your options.

The Athabasca River at the Meeting of the Waters, with Mt Hardisty beyond, Jasper National Park, Alberta, Canada. Canon 1Ds mkIII, 24-70mm f2.8 lens @ 38mm

Where to start? What focal lengths to choose; zooms or primes, fast or slow, and at what cost? Instantly we're being forced to make difficult decisions. Let's just get a few things straight. I'm going to be making an assumption that we're all talking about using full frame DSLRs. So for those with the small sensor cameras the principles remain the same but the focal lengths will be different. A medium wide angle on a full frame camera is a standard on a APS-C/DX frame cameras. That's because the angle of view of a lens is determined by its focal length and the image area; the physical sensor size. And a standard lens, the one that equates closest to the perspective we actually see with our eyes, has a focal length that equals the diagonal dimension of the image area. So a bigger sensor has a wider angle of view for a given focal length. That's a Big Issue. It's why landscape photographers such as I without a shadow of a doubt need full frame sensor cameras like the Canon 1Ds or 5D and the Nikon D3 series to be able to really exploit all the wide angle options, and its why wildlife and sports photographers often opt for APS-C or DX cameras such as the Canon 1D series to give their long lenses extra reach. But I'm going to nail my colours to the mast here and say that I've never seen half frame cameras as anything other then a cropped down image area, so for the purposes of this piece we'll stick to talking about full frame optics, otherwise we'll all get in a horrible fuddle.

Imagine you are starting with a clean sheet and putting together a new SLR camera system from scratch. We'll not get too sucked into the debate about what make you're going for; we don't really want to get into that endless Nikon v Canon holy war. Suffice to say these two giants dominate the world of DSLR photography and consequently have comprehensive lens ranges. There are other pretenders; Sony, Olympus etc, but really, for now, in the professional world at least it's a two horse race. I'm wedded to the Canon system, and am one of those sad types who watch major sporting events on TV to try and count the ratio of white to black lenses in use in the photographer's pit. I came over from the Dark Side some five years ago as a result of Nikon's then insistence on sticking with small sensors, but now things have evened out somewhat and they both offer superb high-resolution full frame sensor cameras. So let's look at the lens options in generic terms and try and get a handle on what decisions will have to be made, because there are a fair few.

First things first you'll have to consider what your camera is for. Sounds obvious, but will it be a general tool for tackling all sorts of things from summer holidays with barbecues under grey skies to family portraits and your son's football matches? Or are you a wildlife specialist looking forward to spending long lonely hours hunched in a damp hide waiting for an owl to do something? Or are misty dawn patrols shooting ethereal landscapes your bag? Immediately you've a decision to make; do you need a flexible general-purpose system or a specialised one? For me it's the former. I am a landscape devotee, but I also regularly stray into travel, portraiture and reportage, plus occasionally wildlife and even sport, so I have an arsenal of lenses some of which are general purpose and others more specialised. But how ever many lenses you have compromises have to be made, both on choice at the time of purchase and then in the field. Life is complicated.

What would be ideal? Well lets start with say a 16mm to 500mm zoom, optically perfect from wide to tight, with no distortion, small and compact with tank like build quality and a super fast maximum aperture of say f2 with Image Stabilisation thrown in. Oh, and the auto focus needs to be bang on too, all for a reasonable price of a few hundred quid. Sounds good? Dream on. Immediately we've identified a few dilemmas. Let's start at the beginning with zoom range.

Sunflowers and vegetables on a market stall in Aix-en-Provence, Provence, France. Canon 1Ds mkIII, 24-70mm f2.8 lens @ 38mm

OK, 16-500mm is a bit extreme but there are zooms available with very wide ranges such as 28-200mm. That is a range that covers most situations, so for many one lens would more or less do, surely? The trouble is I'm not that keen on being called Shirley, and any lens that tries to do it all is inevitably going to be a jack of all trades, master of none. It's a trade off between convenience and quality, and in a nutshell the wider a zoom range is the more compromises the manufacturer has had to make with performance. Compromise; that word is just going to keep cropping up. You see a zoom that performs well as a medium telephoto is unlikely to deliver the same quality at the wide angle end of the world, and vice versa. How will this be apparent? Barrel distortion, flare, soft corners, unsharpness to name a few; all these nasties creep in when all is not right optically. Of course, this is all relative. There are some very clever people making lenses in Japan. But if you want to get the very best from your £2k+ camera this is something to ponder. How important is it to you? Only you can decide. By definition zooms contain a lot of glass, many elements that not only refract light as they're supposed to but also bounce those rays around internally causing flare. By contrast prime lenses; those of fixed focal length, contain a lot less glass. Few compromises have to be made in their design so they're lighter, optically superior and easier to make. But they are lot less flexible.

Back in the mists of time I used prime lenses only; I didn't trust zooms to give me the optimum crispness I demanded. But then sometime in the early Nineties in the hills near Chiang Mai, fiddling with filter threads, I realised I was spending a huge proportion of my life bending over my camera bag getting back ache swopping filter rings from one lens to the other. By then lens technology had advanced such that the perceived notion was the quality differential between the best zooms and prime lenses was almost imperceptible. That was of course in the film era. Now the evolution of 20+ megapixel sensors has put the spotlight back on this debate. There is no doubt that if optical quality is your sole criteria then prime lenses are the way to go. But the difference in many cases is so minimal in my view it isn't worth losing sleep over. Up close and personal to an A2 sized print you'll see sod all difference. Zooms are so useful, offering focal lengths and cropping flexibility unachievable with even the most comprehensive array of prime lenses. They also save time and compared to carrying multiple optics, weight. Weight; we'll come back to that. And the time issue isn't mere laziness creeping in; when gorgeous light beams are painting the landscape in momentary visions of wonder the difference between a few seconds of zooming and recomposing and a hasty fumbling lens change with cold fingers can represent the fine line between a masterpiece on a memory card with subsequent euphoria and a desolate evening of remorse. But for now let's just try and come to a conclusion on zoom range.

The best of the zooms with relatively modest ranges deliver highly impressive performance. We'll be looking at wide angles and long toms in the next columns but for now lets look at mid range options. The narrower the zoom range the better the performance. In the Canon range for example the 24-105mm f4 loses out at the wide angle end performance wise to its more modest ranged brother the 24-70mm f2.8. The latter is a lens I would never be without, endlessly useful. But then you may think the trade off in quality to get the extra range is worth it. Compromises again.

Optical performance has to be at the heart of all lens decisions. Now we can all enlarge our images up to 100% in Photoshop and analyse corner sharpness to the N'th degree. Actually I get the impression there are some in the twilight regions of the world wide web who do nothing else. It can be a bit obsessive and we have to remember that doing so is analogous to standing with our noses pressed against the margins of an exhibition-sized print. We are right to be meticulous, but at the same time we need to remember that no lens however good is quite as sharp in the corners as it is in the centre, so a sense of pragmatism is necessary. Sensor resolution had surpassed the ability of some lenses to match. There seems to be a bit of catch up going on now with new models and updated lenses being constantly announced. But it is possible to become a bit of an anorak about it all. Ultimately we need to make decisions on what to use then just get on with the business of making pictures.

The next dilemma we need to confront is the bulk of our lens. Size matters. Us landscape photographers routinely need to march over the hills and far away in search of the definitive view. Trudging up slopes with a heavy bag and tripod on the shoulder is what we do, our penance to balance the joys of being in the perfect spot at the most magical times of day. But clearly anything we can do to cut down on weight is handy. Here we have another compromise to contemplate. Fast lenses with maximum apertures of f2.8 have large front elements and are consequently bigger and heavier. The advantages of fast lenses are tempting; bright viewfinder images, differential focus effects, quick to focus, superb in low light and with fast moving action. Lenses with front elements like dinner plates are beloved by sports photographers for these very reasons. They are marvels of lens technology and a joy to use, if you don't have to cart them far. Let's face it most sports photographers only have to walk from the car park to the touchline. (I guess that sweeping statement may generate a few e-mails!) But for us mortals reliant on foot power we have to ask is the speed worth the extra weight?

The round tower rising out of the mist at dawn at Glendalough, Wicklow Mountains, County Wicklow, Ireland. Canon 1Ds mkII, 24-70mm f2.8 lens @ 45mm

And there is another major downside; fast lenses cost a fortune. Solely for landscape work it would seem fast expensive heavy lenses are counterproductive. But the annoying thing is to just muddy the waters further; fast lenses tend to be optically better then slower ones. And once you've used a fast lens there's no going back, they are addictive. Nothings ever simple, is it? I use f2.8 or faster lenses throughout my range. I just have to live with the weight on my back. And in a dark crowded Marrakesh souk the advantages of a fast lens become immediately apparent as I drop the background pleasingly out of focus. At least in the mid range focal lengths we're talking about this month fast lenses aren't too mammoth. Predictably my 24-70mm f2.8 is my most used lens. For landscapes, reportage, portraits, whatever, I can't imagine a single use that this lens wouldn't be handy for. Longer or wider lenses may be sexier but few have earned their keep as this one has. Nikon, Canon and all the independents make their own variants of this ubiquitous zoom.

The mid range lens choice should be the first and arguably most important acquisition. Get it right and the other options both longer and wider will fall into place. A mid range zoom is an obvious starting point, but there are alternatives that are more compact and faster; standard primes. The trusty 50mm lens that used to come as standard with all SLRs is obviously not as flexible as a zoom but is lighter, optically superb and affordable. The angle of view and perspective of a standard lens gives a pleasing, natural balance between foregrounds and backgrounds. The bog standard variants of these lenses are also fast, typically f1.8, and super fast variants up to an incredible f1.2 maximum aperture are available. Use a lens this fast for the first time in a market in Bolivia and life will never be the same again. I have a slightly longer then standard 85mm f1.2 piece of glass. For intimate portraits with a sense of place in crowded and bustling environments there's no optic like it. The super fast aperture delivers outstanding low light options and differential focus effects, but at a price; size, and cost. For its focal length it's a bulky beast and the F1.2 aperture increases the Bad News to six times the price of its f1.8 brother. Worth it? It's all about compromises.

A woman nr Vang Vieng, Laos. Canon 1Ds mkIII, 85mm 1.2 lens

Clearly portability, convenience, performance, flexibility and size are all factors to consider along with the crucial optical quality. So too is build quality and the bottom line, price. Generally the old adage that you get what you paid for is true in the photographic world, although with the wealth of information and test reviews we now have available to us on the internet there's no need to take that as read. The big question is do you go for camera brands or independents? Significant savings can be made by going for lenses made by Sigma, Tokina or Tamron over the likes of Canon or Nikon. And it would be wrong to think that the performance of the independent's optics is inferior; in some cases they're superior. I am however going to stick my neck out here and assert that generally the build quality of the Big Boys is more rugged then the independents. The fact that most pros use Canon or Nikon pro spec lenses says it all. How important to you is that? My gear has a hard life, in out of planes, lashed by wind, sand, snow and rain, up mountains and bouncing around in the back of 4x4s. Say no more. But no pro is impervious to the cost of equipment. If it's not earning its keep, it goes. Generally the way I look at it now is that the money I used to spend on film and processing every year now goes into continually updating my system with replacements and additions. I now only use one system so all the available resources can go into ensuring that it is a comprehensive and flexible system. I am continually blown away with the quality available from the 21 MP full frame sensor cameras like the Canon 5D mkII and 1Ds mkIII, but to get the very best results impeccable technique and optical quality is crucial. So if you are contemplating acquiring some new glass your options are clear. Cash in on your bodily organs, auction your parents on ebay, pawn your lady's jewellery or flog your bloke's car and sell off the kids for medical experiments; just make sure you get the best lens you can.

Next month we'll be looking at long lenses and considering some of the specific dilemmas presented when choosing them. I'll also be examining how to make the most of these long toms and what pitfalls they present when using them in the field. And the following month is all going to be about wide angles. It's a real lens feast.

Biography

http://www.davidnoton.com

Born in England in 1957, David spent much of his youth travelling with his family between the UK, California and Canada. After leaving school David joined the Navy in search of further travels and adventures – and it was while sailing the seven seas that his interest in photography grew. After several years at sea he decided to pursue his passion for photography and returned to study in Gloucester, England. After leaving college in 1985 he began work as a freelance photographer specialising in landscape and other travel subjects, which over the last 25 years, have taken him to almost every corner of the globe.

David is now established and recognised as one of the UK's leading landscape and travel photographers. His images sell all over the world – both as fine art photography and commercially in advertising and publishing. He has won international awards for: British Gas/ BBC Wildlife Photographer of the Year Awards in 1985,1989 & 1990 and also writes regularly about landscape and travel photography for a number of national and international magazines. David has worked for numerous clients including British Airways, Sainsbury's, Geo, Toyota, Qantas, Sunday Times and the Telegraph. During the last twenty years he has also worked extensively for the National Trust covering much of the UK's landscape and coastline, which has featured in many high profile publications and several highly acclaimed photographic exhibitions. Most notably:

'New Vision' Contemporary Art Photography – AOP Gallery
'The Coast Exposed' – Maritime Museum Greenwich and the Lowry
'Climate Change – in Britain's Back Yard!' – London, Nottingham, Wales, Belfast, Bristol

“l'm still passionate about photography. All aspects fascinate me; from capturing the first light of day on a frosty landscape or making the most of a bustling market in Vietnam to portraying the dignity of a wrinkled face in China.”

David spends much of the year travelling with his wife Wendy. When not travelling they live in England, near Sherborne in Dorset.

All images in this article © David Noton