Ugrading the Photographer: attempt # 2
So, yesterday’s post turned into a bit of a disaster when, after several hundred words, my work suddenly disappeared and I was left with the picture and no text. I would have thought that that was impossible with WordPress but, as I can now testify, it most certainly is.
Anyway, I was talking about a trip a couple of us went on to the moonlight market at our local Waldorf School. It’s usually a good outing and there is the added bonus that there’s a selection of musicians and bands playing. This time, if any further excuse were needed, I wanted to give my new Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 lens a run.
I bought it for the limited purpose of shooting people, particularly musicians, in low light, and it seems as though the purchase has paid off. I still took a lot of drek, as you do in marginal conditions, but my hit-rate improved a lot since I only had a slow kit lens to work with. The picture of Durban muso Rowan Stuart, in the previous post, is one of my favourites from the shoot, ironically taken with my plastic 55-200mm lens, but there were a good few others that I also like.
A month or two back, I read a post on Thom Hogan’s Blog (July 13, 2009) on how you could get the best return if you had, say $2000, to spend on your photography. His conclusion was that, in most cases, the money would be better spent upgrading the photographer, and not the kit.
When you think of it, it’s a version of the old truism that most of the cameras and lenses are better than most of the photographers and so, even if you think you need better kit, you probably don’t. Good training is Thom’s answer, and I’d add to that, self-study through books, magazines and videos.
In this case, I had hit the limit of what I could do with my slow lenses, so I opted for a minor upgrade, but I also invested in photo books.
More of which, later…