people (walkabout with my new nikkor 18-200)

[barleymalt]

Finally picked up the 18-200 today being used to shooting with the kit 18-55 I must say it was quite a life changing experience. Anyways here are some shots I took. It's my first go at shooting people so please let me know where they need improvement!

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

 

[tirediron]

A good start, but in a word: "Exposure" You need more of it. All of these are under-exposed by anywhere from 1/2 to probably 2 stops. Also, be aware of cropping off small bits of people such as the top of the subject's head in #2, and the elbow in #3. Cropping body parts is fine if you have to, but always try and do it boldly and avoid bisecting limbs at joints, or laterally.

What metering mode/method did you use for these?

 

[barleymalt]

Thanks for commenting. It must be that I like dark images because people have been telling me I underexpose ever since I started but I still do it on purpose.

These were shot in manual. Metering was done pretty randomly throughout. Sometimes I just point the camera straight ahead, take a shot and adjust until I find an exposure I like. They looked waay overexposed whenever I listened to the meter and I ended up deleting most of those shots directly.

 

[cailinp]

3 is my favorite. I love it. A lot of Grit to it. It seems under exposed but I still love it.

I have been eyeing that same lens for weeks now. Only have the 18-55mm now. Would you say it is a must have? I really really want to be able to invade peoples personal space and take some good pics. Sounds wierd but I love the pics of random unsuspecting victims!

 

[SwissJ]

I can smell your fear in most of these. Don't wait till the pedestrians walk past you before you raise the camera.
#3 is my favorite, cause I can see his face :thumbup:

 

[barleymalt]

I see what you're saying SwissJ. I still feel a little uneasy about pointing a 200mm lens in someones face as they're going about their business but I guess most people won't really mind.

And cailin, if you're interested in that lens just do yourself a favor and get it. I was going to get the tamron 18-270 at first until I tried out the Nikkor at the store. The tamron had left me feeling a little bit "meh", while the Nikkor just felt like a dream. So I decided to spend the extra 400 bucks and just eat noodles for a month if I have to..

 

[SwissJ]

I see what you're saying SwissJ. I still feel a little uneasy about pointing a 200mm lens in someones face as they're going about their business but I guess most people won't really mind.

You and me both. I'm still working on it myself, but I got some great advice in one of my earlier threads a couple months back...
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...oto-gallery/202550-street-photography-cc.html

 

[KmH]

Nikon's 18-200 mm is likely the worst lens value in their current lineup.

It is a mid-quality lens both in build and image quality.

According to DP Review;

Conclusion - Cons

• Pronounced distortion across much of the range
• Extremely soft at 135mm
• Rather average close-up performance
• Zoom creep

Just occasionally, the old cliches are still the best, and with the 18-200mm VR the phrase 'jack of all trades, master of none' springs immediately to mind. It's a lens which delivers somewhat flawed results over its entire zoom range; where it's sharp, it has heavy distortion, and when that distortion comes under control at the long end, it loses sharpness. Its close-up performance is reasonable, but not spectacular, and overall it will likely be outperformed optically by a cheaper combination of standard and telephoto zooms.....

So when all is said and done, we have to understand that superzooms are essentially about making some optical compromises to provide the broadest possible range in a single lens, and it's up to each individual to decide whether those compromises are acceptable. I wouldn't recommend the 18-200mm to someone whose primary interests were either architecture or wildlife, for example, but for the photographer who wants to shoot a little bit of everything and not have to change lenses, it's more than fit for purpose.........

At least now, you know what the trade offs are.

 

[rusty9]

yeah i've heard a lot of times that the more zoom the lens has, the lower the quality

 

[Polyphony]

I like #2 and #3. Nice work for your first time.

 

[barleymalt]

Nikon's 18-200 mm is likely the worst lens value in their current lineup.

It is a mid-quality lens both in build and image quality.

According to DP Review;

Conclusion - Cons

• Pronounced distortion across much of the range
• Extremely soft at 135mm
• Rather average close-up performance
• Zoom creep

Just occasionally, the old cliches are still the best, and with the 18-200mm VR the phrase 'jack of all trades, master of none' springs immediately to mind. It's a lens which delivers somewhat flawed results over its entire zoom range; where it's sharp, it has heavy distortion, and when that distortion comes under control at the long end, it loses sharpness. Its close-up performance is reasonable, but not spectacular, and overall it will likely be outperformed optically by a cheaper combination of standard and telephoto zooms.....

So when all is said and done, we have to understand that superzooms are essentially about making some optical compromises to provide the broadest possible range in a single lens, and it's up to each individual to decide whether those compromises are acceptable. I wouldn't recommend the 18-200mm to someone whose primary interests were either architecture or wildlife, for example, but for the photographer who wants to shoot a little bit of everything and not have to change lenses, it's more than fit for purpose.........

At least now, you know what the trade offs are.

Well that may be but this lense produces bright, rich, vivid images and is super flexible with the huge range. I love it to bits!

Good link Swiss thanks for that.

 

[tirediron]

A good start, but in a word: "Exposure" You need more of it. All of these are under-exposed by anywhere from 1/2 to probably 2 stops. Also, be aware of cropping off small bits of people such as the top of the subject's head in #2, and the elbow in #3. Cropping body parts is fine if you have to, but always try and do it boldly and avoid bisecting limbs at joints, or laterally.

What metering mode/method did you use for these?

Wow, they look a LOT better on my home (calibrated) monitor. Nice work.

 

[white]

I think #2 is your strongest image. I like the light on her leg, the chain, and the word on the bag.

 

[LCARSx32]

I actually like #4 the best, subject wise. I'm left wondering what the kid's waiting for. Where's he going. He looks a bit nervous. Apprehensive.

 

[rickabobaloey]

I really like the second image the best, out of the first post.

It's a really nice capture. There's a bit of mystery to what the guy is looking such a calm, serene, gaze. The movement of the person on the street in the background also adds to the peacfullness that the subject portrays.