Elderly Photographer using longer focal lengths as I age

[Frank Petronio]

I think it's sloth, it is harder to frame and do a good wide angle shot, that's why you rarely see any but a handful. But I can point to thousands of long-lens portraits that are just perfect, same for details and close-ups and all the usual predictable subjects. Slap a long lens on and everything looks like art.

Except it's just like a lot of other people's art because so many do this. First zoom all those DSLR users run out to get is the good olde 80-200 so they can be "pro".

Wides are just as bad when used unimaginatively, but at least you have the potential of getting something unique and special. But isolating some detail with a longer lens to "see the unseen" sounds pretty trite to me.

That said, get eye exams and take your Preservision so you don't start getting tunnel vision like the lenses!

[John Bowen]

Hi Bill,
Hope you are well.
The second lens I purchased for my 4x5 was a 120. I've had it for 25 years and haven't had it on the camera 25 times. Likewise I purchased a 240 for 8x10 about 6 years ago. Same thing, it hasn't been on the camera 6 times. My favorite lenses are 210 for 4x5 and 450 for 8x10/7x17. I occasionally use a 355 or 305 on the 8x10/7x17, but seldom encounter an image that requires the 240. As you know, my primary subject matter is landscape.

Happy image making,

[vinny]

Everyone here is elderly. Except me and two other guys.

[Struan Gray]

I have always 'seen' in 2/3 normal and 3/2 normal. The photographs I have made which still hold my attention as photographs tend to be the mild telephotos. This hasn't changed much with the years.

Most people seem to move to wider angles as they shift to larger formats. I'm the opposite. I rarely take a small-format image longer than normal, and I very rarely take a 4x5 photo with a lens shorter than 240 mm, often longer. The main reason I've not tried 8x10 is that my arms are too short :-)

[Noah A]

I'm one of the two non-elderly folks Vinny mentioned. But when I was in college I shot everything with a 20mm lens on 35mm. Now for 35mm I prefer a 35mm lens and for 4x5 I really prefer nothing wider than a 115/120. So who knows, by the time I am elderly maybe I'll shoot everything with a 300...

[turtle]

These things come in slow cycles If you live long enough you may end up using super-wides.

PS I am the other young guy. So thats the two of us accounted for now.

[Vaughn]

Long lenses are for old people who are too lazy to walk closer to their subject...

Now where did I put my 24" RD...

Vaughn

But sometimes, wide it is:

My Three Boys, Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park
Platinum/palladium print
6.25" (159mm) on 8x10
f45 at 30 seconds on FP4+

[Sal Santamaura]

In the 63 years since you began photographing, the extent of "human pollution" in the environment (as well as the detritus of humanity, e.g. buildings, vehicles and actual trash) has increased radically. It makes sense that, faced with all that clutter, you'd use longer lenses to isolate something worth shooting from the general crap.

[Brian Ellis]

I'm the exact opposite.......

Me too. For years and years I owned a 90, then an 80mm, lens but almost never used them. A 210 was by far my most frequently used lens, followed by a 150 and a 300. Then as the years went by I started using more and more wide angle. Today I seldom use anything longer than a 150mm equivalent. But I'm not sure it's a matter of age. I think we just evolve in how we see things as time goes on.

[Noah A]

In the 63 years since you began photographing, the extent of "human pollution" in the environment (as well as the detritus of humanity, e.g. buildings, vehicles and actual trash) has increased radically. It makes sense that, faced with all that clutter, you'd use longer lenses to isolate something worth shooting from the general crap.

Or you could just photograph the general crap! The problem is if you shoot with a 75mm lens, the crap in the foreground looks much bigger than the crap in the background.

I think that extreme focal lengths in either direction tend to make things easier for the photographer. Wides tend to provide instant drama, long lenses can isolate the subject and make it easier to make things 'perfect' as Frank said. Of course this is a gross and unfair generalization. There are times when both types of lenses are necessary.

Personally I like the lenses just on either side of normal. My favorite is the 115/120 focal length. It can fit a lot into the frame without overly exaggerating the size relationships of elements within the frame. Likewise a 210 is a bit longer than normal and can work when you just can't get close enough to shoot with the wider lens, but it's not so long that it drastically compresses elements within a scene, and it still can include a lot of context.

The more I shoot 4x5, the more I lean towards selling off all of my extra junk and just sticking to the 115/210 combo.