Nicely explained. I'm always mindful also that sharpness of an image at the furthest distance isn't really worth worrying over. Its such small detail in the photo. Its how your eye would see it in the real world anyway.... especially my eyes. 😄 Top vid. Nice 👌 👋
Robin, thank you. A question. is wide angle wider than natural vision - how else can you define it meaningfully. ( nice low angle of the sewer pipe ) As for Allowing my images into an AI - who knows where they will end up. i would rather make human errors than forget that photography succeeds only because of the human element.
Yes, it's all about the angle of view but it's difficult to define what the angle of view is of the human eye because of how our brains work. Most of the time (historically) 28mm was accepted as the start of wide angle.
I was on the verge of buying an expensive wide angle lens. Now instead I will use my zoom lens at 24mm in the way you described and I expect I won't need another lens. Many thanks.
@@RobinWhalley I have really bad knees (I do a lot of low level macro stuff). I've found a low tripod and a small light folding camping stool helps massively. Carrying a little extra kit is better than bending near the ground for me. Until the stool sinks in soft ground and you land up flailing on your back like an upturned turtle, buts that's another story for another day.
Have you found any use here for small tripod like accessories like the Joby gorillapods or the Playpod. Light weight and close to the ground support? or just not necessary?
I do have and sometimes use a Gorillapod but it tends to be for video. Most of the time I can shoot handheld but if I need to use a tripod I use one that I can get close to the ground. It's a feature I always look for when buying a new tripod. With most of my tripods I can remove the centre colum and spread the tripod legs to get very close to the ground.
It was a GoPro 10 which I used for the entire video. I recorded in the 5.3k maximum resolution which allows me to crop and zoom in when editing the video. The zoom sequence you see was all done with software in edting.
Thanks Steve. Yes it is surprising as its the fact that I keep forgetting this myself when I get caught up in the moment of taking the shot. Next time you see me working from a fully extended tripod give me a nudge.
I guess you were using the lumix g9 for the shots. The first lens was probably Leica 12-60mm f2.8-4. What was the second wide angle lens? Nice shots and tutorials!
Hi Robin, I'm going through your videos and I must say, they are as varies as there are focal lengths in lenses! LOL. This one in particular is packed with eye opening information! Thank you! Cheers, Ray.
Haha. It's probably why my channel never took off. I'm too varied in what I cover but then again, I tend to cover the tools I use (including the odd camera)
Such a nice explanation, you packed a ton of good information into that short video. The way you describe taking the shots in this video is actually how I've been using it when traveling on my 24mm prime lense over the years. I just take them all handheld, it's such a joy being able to change the position so easily and play around with it in such a short period of time compared to setting up a tripod etc. Even though 24mm might not be a super wide as pointed out in your example you really need to focus on keeping a steady level if you want the lines to be straight. I don't think I would have guessed the 24mm correctly if this wasn't my go-to focal length for this things. I simply figured it looks kinda familar and the distant objects are not tiny yet. Super wide angle shoots can indeed look awsome but I fail to make them consistly look good. I actually mostly ignore ensuring getting distant things perfectly in focus, set a suitable focus point at the front like you pointed out or if there is no nearby point to focus on I just focus on the background and the wide angle ensures everything critical is in focus anyways. I'm curious now, at which body height do you typically hold your camera when using 24mm focal length when taking snapshots of standing people around you when they are the main focus of the image? 24mm is wide enough to have a dramatic impact on how the images turn out depending on whether you shoot at waist level (with the display angled upwards), you holding the camera at arm's height or actually bringing it to eye level like when using the EVF? When people are close (let's a maximum distance of 2-3 meters) the images get a very different feel and the effect is very pronounced compared to a more typical choice of like a 50mm. I actually mostly take these photos from waist level to create an interesting perspective, maybe you have some good insights on this topic as well.
Thanks for the great feedback. To answer your question, I rarely take photos of people other than if I'm in an urban setting. Then I tend to use a 35mm lens as my widest field of view. I probably wouldn't shoot someone using a 24mm lens. At 35mm I will work from probably standing or perhaps a waist height. I'm typically not trying to emphasise the field of view though.
Glad it was helpful and thank you. Yes, I've used Paramo for around 20 years but only because I'm a keen hill walker. If they are good enough for mountain rescue they are good enough for me.
24mm is the just about the widest viewing angle one normally needs. If you need more stuff brought into your picture (e.g. a complete rainbow) you can always do a panorama or stitch 3 or 4 frames together. If you go much wider with your lens to get the characteristic wide angle perspective the foreground tends to become really huge and dominant and at the same time the background steps back a couple of light years. 😊
24mm can be plenty wide enough for most images when used correctly. Many of the images that look like they were captured using much wider lenses tend to be split focal length images created using two different focal lengths and then combined in the likes of Photoshop.
@@RobinWhalley I have never heard of anybody stiching different focal length pictures together. I do not really see any point in doing so, even if the stitch algorithm is actually capable of combining them.
It’s how you can create extreme foreground close up and still have a large looming mountain in the background. For example a 16mm foreground with a 35mm background. I’ve seen it used a lot in recent years. You just need to work out how to make the transition look natural, usually it’s a rock edge or something.
Nicely explained.
I'm always mindful also that sharpness of an image at the furthest distance isn't really worth worrying over. Its such small detail in the photo. Its how your eye would see it in the real world anyway.... especially my eyes. 😄
Top vid. Nice 👌 👋
Very true! Thanks for the great feedback.
@@RobinWhalley you're welcome. 🍻
Great tip, and excellent, to the point video (as usual), thank you!
You're very welcome. Glad you liked it.
I like this style of video. Great information explained in an easy to follow way. Thanks
Glad you liked it! Thank you.
Excellent, simple photo tip. Bang goes your sponsorship from wide angle lens suppliers :-)
Ha-ha. But hopefully it will save people needlessly spending lots of money on super wide angle glass.
Robin, thank you. A question. is wide angle wider than natural vision - how else can you define it meaningfully. ( nice low angle of the sewer pipe ) As for Allowing my images into an AI - who knows where they will end up. i would rather make human errors than forget that photography succeeds only because of the human element.
Yes, it's all about the angle of view but it's difficult to define what the angle of view is of the human eye because of how our brains work. Most of the time (historically) 28mm was accepted as the start of wide angle.
Really good pedagogical technique. Lkd&Subd. Cheers.
Thanks 😂
I was on the verge of buying an expensive wide angle lens. Now instead I will use my zoom lens at 24mm in the way you described and I expect I won't need another lens. Many thanks.
Great to hear. I hope you find the tip works. The only problem I've found is my back hurts after a long day.
@@RobinWhalley I have really bad knees (I do a lot of low level macro stuff). I've found a low tripod and a small light folding camping stool helps massively. Carrying a little extra kit is better than bending near the ground for me. Until the stool sinks in soft ground and you land up flailing on your back like an upturned turtle, buts that's another story for another day.
Have you found any use here for small tripod like accessories like the Joby gorillapods or the Playpod. Light weight and close to the ground support? or just not necessary?
I do have and sometimes use a Gorillapod but it tends to be for video. Most of the time I can shoot handheld but if I need to use a tripod I use one that I can get close to the ground. It's a feature I always look for when buying a new tripod. With most of my tripods I can remove the centre colum and spread the tripod legs to get very close to the ground.
what camera did you use for take video scene at 5:26?
It was a GoPro 10 which I used for the entire video. I recorded in the 5.3k maximum resolution which allows me to crop and zoom in when editing the video. The zoom sequence you see was all done with software in edting.
Good video Robin, amazing how much wider a lens looks when it’s closer to the ground.
Thanks Steve. Yes it is surprising as its the fact that I keep forgetting this myself when I get caught up in the moment of taking the shot. Next time you see me working from a fully extended tripod give me a nudge.
Thanks Robin...very informative as ever.
Glad you think so! Thank you
I guess you were using the lumix g9 for the shots. The first lens was probably Leica 12-60mm f2.8-4. What was the second wide angle lens? Nice shots and tutorials!
Glad you liked the video. The two lenses I was using are the Leica 12-60 and the Leica 8-18. Both are excellent.
Hi Robin, I'm going through your videos and I must say, they are as varies as there are focal lengths in lenses! LOL. This one in particular is packed with eye opening information! Thank you! Cheers, Ray.
Haha. It's probably why my channel never took off. I'm too varied in what I cover but then again, I tend to cover the tools I use (including the odd camera)
A useful reminder! Thank you👍
You are welcome! Thank you.
Amazing what a big difference that small change makes. Thank you!
Yes it does! Thank you.
Good tip, thanks!
You're welcome. Thank you.
Even a 50mm lens could look wider than it is with this technique.
It can, but then you would get obvious problems with depth of field.
@@RobinWhalley Shooting wide open and using a shallow depth of field can be a nice option sometimes too although it depends on the subject.
@@RFranks Yes, I can't disagree with that. I have some nice shallow depth shots on the Pier.
Thanks for the tip, very helpful! Was Steve your model in the final image? You probably had to buy him a Bakewell Tart to sign the release! 🤣
Ha ha. I was in ninja mode so he didn't see me.
Such a nice explanation, you packed a ton of good information into that short video. The way you describe taking the shots in this video is actually how I've been using it when traveling on my 24mm prime lense over the years. I just take them all handheld, it's such a joy being able to change the position so easily and play around with it in such a short period of time compared to setting up a tripod etc. Even though 24mm might not be a super wide as pointed out in your example you really need to focus on keeping a steady level if you want the lines to be straight. I don't think I would have guessed the 24mm correctly if this wasn't my go-to focal length for this things. I simply figured it looks kinda familar and the distant objects are not tiny yet. Super wide angle shoots can indeed look awsome but I fail to make them consistly look good. I actually mostly ignore ensuring getting distant things perfectly in focus, set a suitable focus point at the front like you pointed out or if there is no nearby point to focus on I just focus on the background and the wide angle ensures everything critical is in focus anyways.
I'm curious now, at which body height do you typically hold your camera when using 24mm focal length when taking snapshots of standing people around you when they are the main focus of the image? 24mm is wide enough to have a dramatic impact on how the images turn out depending on whether you shoot at waist level (with the display angled upwards), you holding the camera at arm's height or actually bringing it to eye level like when using the EVF? When people are close (let's a maximum distance of 2-3 meters) the images get a very different feel and the effect is very pronounced compared to a more typical choice of like a 50mm. I actually mostly take these photos from waist level to create an interesting perspective, maybe you have some good insights on this topic as well.
Thanks for the great feedback. To answer your question, I rarely take photos of people other than if I'm in an urban setting. Then I tend to use a 35mm lens as my widest field of view. I probably wouldn't shoot someone using a 24mm lens. At 35mm I will work from probably standing or perhaps a waist height. I'm typically not trying to emphasise the field of view though.
Really appreciated this. It's great to get concise, well-presented information. Many thanks.
Thanks. It's great to know you found it helpful.
So well explained!!! Excellent video. Thank you!
You're very welcome! I'm glad you enjoyed it.
Very informative video, beautifully explained. Note the most vital photographic accessory, a Paramo coat!
Glad it was helpful and thank you. Yes, I've used Paramo for around 20 years but only because I'm a keen hill walker. If they are good enough for mountain rescue they are good enough for me.
@@RobinWhalley 😊
Great video,just keep going 👏 👍 💪
Thank you.
Good advice and excellent examples.
Glad it was helpful! Thank you.
Excellent! Thank you!
You are welcome! Thank you.
Glad I found this tutorial.
Glad it was helpful! Thank you.
Thanks for this.
My pleasure!
24mm is the just about the widest viewing angle one normally needs. If you need more stuff brought into your picture (e.g. a complete rainbow) you can always do a panorama or stitch 3 or 4 frames together. If you go much wider with your lens to get the characteristic wide angle perspective the foreground tends to become really huge and dominant and at the same time the background steps back a couple of light years. 😊
24mm can be plenty wide enough for most images when used correctly. Many of the images that look like they were captured using much wider lenses tend to be split focal length images created using two different focal lengths and then combined in the likes of Photoshop.
@@RobinWhalley I have never heard of anybody stiching different focal length pictures together. I do not really see any point in doing so, even if the stitch algorithm is actually capable of combining them.
It’s how you can create extreme foreground close up and still have a large looming mountain in the background. For example a 16mm foreground with a 35mm background. I’ve seen it used a lot in recent years. You just need to work out how to make the transition look natural, usually it’s a rock edge or something.
@@RobinWhalley Ah, I see what you mean. More of a composition than an actual mathematical stitch of the receding perspectives.
Yes, that’s exactly how it’s done. Sometimes it looks great. I may need to consider a video on the subject.