Two new images I took recently in London. July, 2025.
'Vogue' A colourful girl in East London, I liked the juxtaposition going on here. Taken with my Lumix LX100, because I like to travel light.
My latest street portrait, (a phone shot of my camera screen) not worked on them yet but spent a day recently in Sheffield, a great place for street photography. I always shoot in raw mode for several reasons, one I just enjoy working on them, and I also end up with large files great for printing large. Took it with my Canon 6D and my Canon EF 24-105mm f3.5/5.6 IS STM lens, don't be fooled by the lack of a red ring this lens is super, I have a few lenses including some with red rings (L lenses) I enjoy using this one, in fact I prefer it over the f4 L version mk 1, not tried the mk 2. For those unaware a raw file is like a digital negative, unlike a jpeg which can be used straight out the camera a raw file needs working on. It retains all the information, data etc its possible to get from the image rather than the cameras own processing messing with it.
I'm available for talks, photo walks and seminars worldwide... Joking 😃 I am not one for blowing my own trumpet, I don't really need to my work speaks for itself. I have turned down offers of exhibitions at some great venues for various reasons, such as the Brick Lane gallery in East London, they just want too much £ up front, all these galleries operate a bit differently and there is no guarantee of selling anything to recoup the costs involved. I was keen to do one in Havana, Cuba (Cuba, how could one not do it) but unfortunately the Lockdowns happened and it never got off the ground!
Another one of my Street Portraits selected by the guys at Lensculture
"The Competition Gallery is a highly curated group of images showcasing the best photos"
Lensculture Portraits awards 2025
A collection of my street portraits, old and new. A work in progress, an exhibition in the making.
I recently got the Canon EF 24-105mm f3.5/5.6 IS STM lens, I was undecided but having now tried out the f4 ‘L’ incarnation there’s really nothing in it! In fact I prefer the look and also the handling of the variable aperture STM one. Considering the Canon 6D is good in low light the smaller aperture at longer focal lengths is irrelevant, I can put the 6D on a 1000 iso in dull light such as today 20/12/2024, stop it down to f11 at the long end 105mm and it looks sharp across the frame, and very sharp where you actually focus at. (I wouldn’t go any more than f11 due to the diffraction effect when smaller apertures can start having a detrimental effect)
If I’m up close and personal as I usually am when doing street photography... and its dull/overcast I can always pop my portable flash on, as I did with the above image of a street portrait in Doncaster, South Yorkshire, UK. @ ISO 100, f5, 1/60s, direct flash, taken with said Canon EF 24-105mm IS STM variable aperture lens @ 35mm focal length on the Canon 6D. An overlooked, underrated lens, whereas in reality it’s a solid performer with great optics.
The benefits IMO of the variable aperture one far outweigh any advantage of the constant f4, indeed if there are any advantages? Better build quality for sure on the f4 but the other one isn’t going to fall apart on you, it’s not built like a kid’s toy! One of the main advantages of the ‘L’ lenses are the build quality and weather sealing, and is where a lot of the extra cost goes, great if you photograph in torrential rain or thunderstorms, but I’m a bit of a fair-weather photographer I like a bit of sunlight.
In fact my reliable sources tell me this lens performs better with the new Canon mirror less cameras than both the constant f4 AND the newer f4 mk2 model! There’s a lot of snobbery in the photography world, “photographers” more into the equipment than actual photography (and don’t the manufacturers know it!) many “photographers” would look down their noses at the “old” equipment I prefer and choose to use over mirror less, etc. Reality check… the only camera that really matters (even more than a Leica 😀) is the one in your head! That’s where images are really made, sometimes I even construct an image in my head than go out and make it happen. The camera is just a tool in-between you and your vision, creativity and the subject.
A recent street shot from Leeds City market, West Yorkshire, UK. Taken with the aforementioned (previous post) Canon 6D and Canon EF 17-40mm f4 lens, a perfect range for my type of street photography, up close and personal.
I had been thinking of getting another DSLR mainly because they arent making any more! If you are familiar with my blog posts you will know I prefer them over mirrorless for a variety of reasons, if not and interested look at my previous posts… already covered it extensively! I was considering getting a 7D mk2, but after much deliberation I decided on the Canon 6D I’ve had it a few months now actually, I love how light and compact it feels compared to some rigs I’ve used, even feels lighter than my 7D mk1. Also got the Canon 17-40mm f4 lens to go with it, (I already had some prime lenses that are full frame compatible, the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 STM lens produces super sharp images on the 6D) 17-40mm is a perfect range for my street photography, also got the Canon EF 24-105mm f3.5/5.6 IS STM lens for a bit longer reach should I need it, (Its also a very useful range on my 7D crop sensor) some people give it a bad rap, but it’s a fine lens really, sharp, and with the 6D being good with high ISO’s not being a wide aperture lens isnt such a problem, the IS helps too. Anyway, I will mostly be using the 17-40 and the primes with it.
Took me a while to find a decent one, being an old camera (all my cameras are old, but very capable in the right hands) most I saw were quite the worse for wear! I got one in like new condition with a low shutter count from my favourite used dealer, Harrison cameras of Sheffield, UK. Didn’t take me long to bond, for want of a better word, with the 6D, and I’m enjoying using it! I always shoot in raw mode whatever I am using, as I enjoy processing the files, I find the raw files from the 6D effortless to work on! Cant wait to see some large prints from it, its all the quality of a 5D mk3 in a lighter body, albeit with some minor sacrifices which aren’t a problem for me, in fact I prefer the lighter body (and the cheaper price) I find it funny that some describe the Canon 6D as an “entry level full frame camera” Entry level, really! I was using full frame cameras before digital was a thing! Even large and medium format…full frame cameras! 😂
I will still use my Canon 7D, it’s a quality image making tool and I have some fine crop sensor lenses to go with it, and off course I also have my trusty compact camera the Lumix LX100, another great image making tool and useful for travelling light and fast. Can’t imagine wanting any more camera bodies, if anything I might get some more lenses but don’t even need them really? As I’ve already said I am not interested in mirrorless cameras (apart from my compact) and I think we reached peak image quality a long time ago, how much IQ does one need? Surely the actual image itself, the subject, the framing, the creativity of photography is far more important and to the point. An average image taken with the most expensive equipment money can buy...is still an average image! “The photographer is the instrument not the camera” – Eve Arnold. Indeed, the biggest variable is the person behind the camera, ergo your equipment is to a certain extent…Irrelevant.
Another one of my images selected by the Lensculture editors for their online gallery, this one for the street photography awards 2024. Dont know about being selected, I want to be elected 😀
I also have another street shot ‘Hull Fair 2023’ in the next open exhibition at Ferens Art gallery 2024. Hull, East Yorkshire, UK.
"Congratulations! One of the photos you entered has been selected by our editors to be featured in the Portrait Awards 2024 Competition gallery. The Competition Gallery is a highly curated group of images showcasing the best photos"
Hull Marina, East Yorkshire, UK. One I made earlier with the aforementioned Panasonic Lumix LX100. A camera also known as the Leica Typ 109 (strange name for a camera) the Leica dlux 7 and the Lumix LX100 mk2. All more or less the same camera, the “improvements” in the LX100 mk2 IMO are gimmicky and irrelevant.
Mirror mirror on the wall which is the best camera of them all, the right answer is of course whichever you prefer, because for years now most cameras are capable of producing good quality images, even some phone cameras! But I thought I would put my thoughts in writing because I often get asked why I don’t like mirrorless cameras, its not that I don’t like them, it’s just a matter of preference, and here’s why…
Firstly coming from the pre digital era, I have in the past used big bulky 35mm film cameras like the Canon EOS 1N with booster attached, (yes I know smaller 35mm cameras are available, I’ve used and had many different cameras over the years) I prefer the look, feel and handling of a DSLR, to me it resembles what I would describe as a real camera.
I much prefer an optical, see through the lens, 100% coverage viewfinder, its clear and precise and what I see I know I will get in the frame as I don’t like to crop my images, I prefer to use the whole data and resolution etc available, and I love the skill, discipline of getting it right at the time of taking. People with mirrorless cameras often show me how “great” the EVF is…sorry but I’m not seeing anything better, if anything it often looks worse!
Batteries last longer, I’ve not even purchased a spare battery yet for my Canon 7D because it lasts so long!
Lenses are cheaper, because everyone follows fashion, (I have always been a dedicated unfollower of trends and fashions) and must have the latest whatever, you can get some fine lenses for DSLR’s at cheap prices. I have an array of very good lenses which I like and rate, can’t see the point in spending a small fortune for more expensive lenses for a mirrorless system? I’m not even really interested in “full frame” cameras for the same and other reasons. Btw, I always shoot full frame because I don’t crop! Whereas most people I know who use “full frame” cameras heavily crop their images…ergo they are not shooting full frame!
Image quality, (read my first paragraph) people who use mirrorless seem to think the IQ is much better, again I’m not seeing it! I know plenty of people who use them and when I look at their images I’m not seeing anything better regarding image quality, don’t take my word for it, look for yourself @ streetshootetim. Having said that what constitutes a great image has little or nothing to do with image quality. And an average, boring image taken with the best equipment money can buy is still going to be an average, boring image!
Pop up flash, the pop up flash on the Canon 7D is very good… for a pop up, I often find myself using it for street portraits. Something you don’t get on mirrorless cameras, some might do I’m not familiar with every camera on the market, but most mirrorless cameras don’t have an inbuilt pop up flash, apart from compact cameras. My compact Lumix LX100, unusual for a compact doesn’t have a pop up flash, but I’ve got a good Olympus flash that matches up well with it after a little modification.
All things considered… why on earth would I ditch something I prefer for something a lot more expensive and for something that I don’t prefer! And that’s not going to benefit me artistically or any other way, only I can create better images not the camera.
The art of photography is fast becoming the art of “my camera is better than yours” or the art of focusing on the equipment over and above any other considerations? I dread to think where its all going, especially with this AI, will cameras of the future suggest better framing your image, alter and enhance it to such an extent that the person operating the camera might become redundant!?!
I would go so far as to say that there’s so many variables at play, peoples experience in processing being the obvious big one (I always shoot in raw, I enjoy processing raw files and it gives me all the dynamic range I need) but lots more variables too, that in fact it ALMOST makes the equipment side irrelevant! Personally I couldn’t care less what someone uses or doesn’t use, I only wrote this because I often get asked about it. Show me the results, at the end of the day that’s all that matters, its irrelevant how you got there. If anyone asks me what camera I use I feel like yawning! And reply with “my eyes” Update: 20/1/25 since writing this post I have got the Canon 6D, which I mostly use now. Another fine DSLR.
Thought I would try the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM lens having used the older incarnation for a while, initially I was put off it by people online saying that it makes a rattling noise as if parts are loose inside and that the AF is noisy…I sometimes wonder about these people, have they got a bad case of OCD? In real world use its not an issue, the AF noise isn’t noisy at all, I barely notice it? And in every day normal handling of the lens I don’t hear anything unusual? Don’t know about you but I don’t hold a lens up to my ear and start rattling it about, looking for a problem that’s not there! And it’s a fine lens, love it. Pin sharp wherever you focus on, and I love the fact its f2.8 throughout the zoom range, it operates not unlike a prime lens! I took this at Hull fair in low light, ISO 400, f5.6, 1/125s on my Canon 7D, and I didn’t even have the IS switched on! Take reviews of equipment online with a pinch of salt (unless you hear it from me 😂) you don’t know how experienced or competent these people are and the internet, especially Utube is awash with self appointed experts. I once fancied trying an old Canon EF 35-135 lens from film days on my crop sensor, everyone online was saying its pants, I got one anyway, absolutely nothing wrong with it! Quite a good lens for what it is. The main thing is to learn how to get the best from your equipment, after that its all about the Art. Unforunately the art of photography is becoming the art of my camera is better than yours!
”The photographer is the instrument not the camera” – Eve Arnold.
Photography wise the fair is getting boring for me, I never see anything new or different, even the rides are in the exact same spot. In fact I find it an assault on the senses, and not in a good way, but in a crass, vacuous way. There seemed to be a glut on all things Octopus this year?, 2023. Even as a kid I didnt really get it. My old Ma says I would never go on any rides, the best part for me was seeing all the varied stalls down Walton street (they look indistinguishable now) getting a goldfish in a plastic bag, a bow and arrow set, or a crossbow 😂 As toys they were pretty effective and fun...for a kid. We couldnt wait to get out the following day to get up to mischief playing with them. Ethics and political sensibilities together with addiction to screen time has taken away real fun for todays kids, IMO.
From my recent stay in London, one of my favourite places for street photography, obviously a bigger city makes for more opportunities to get good street shots. Though I have had one or two, or three good ones from my Home town of Hull in East Yorkshire, but I just love the vibe in big Cities, I kind of feed off the energy of it all. I saw this homeless guy begging in Central London, I know there’s many hustlers and chancers who spin a yarn but this guy seemed genuine to me, if not he puts far more work into it than whatever he gets from it! I watched him for a while from a distance and was incredulous to see some people blatantly filming him on their phones like he was some kind of tourist attraction! I was thinking how to approach it and decided to just show just his feet and the sign, which was all that was needed really. I did talk with him and asked if I could get him anything, he asked for a hot chocolate drink, I got him one and left a few quid for him too. In the words of … “When I see a man like this sat in a shop doorway cold and freezing. There’s no way I’m going to walk past him without making a statement” – Don McCullin. Only he was talking about Whitechapel in the 70’s, this is from central London in August, 2023!
This one, below, is a bar worker taking a break in Soho. The reluctant poser, she didn’t want me to capture her image and I had to give her some chat to let me take it. I couldn’t let it go, loved the colours going on here, reminded me of a classic painting, she had a real cigarette too, it's usually all vaping now. I had planned to have a wander around Soho and before I went came across this book ‘London after dark’ by Geoffrey Fletcher, which had a chapter on Soho, it’s a great read full of gems about all the old haunts and its characters, with some fantastic full page illustrations. I took it as a good omen, confirming my idea. Over 4 days I took approx 30 images, and will use less than half that. Though I save them all, I find editing as in choosing work to show is a skill in itself. Check out my instagram page @ streetshootertim for the rest. Btw, Geoffrey Fletcher is the guy who also wrote ‘The London nobody knows’ which was made into a short film, narrated by James Mason.
I spotted this cool girl in the town today, (20/7/23) it would have been criminal not to get a portrait of her. She was just visiting from the Netherlands…I knew she wasn’t local…1 she had a good command of the English language, and 2 she was way too friendly. 😂 Taken with my Canon 7D and a wide zoom, a Canon efs 10-18mm (I just happen to have that particular lens on as I had some wide shots in mind) with the pop up flash popped up, something not available on full frame Canon dslr’s or the latest wonder of wonders mirrorless. I always shoot in raw for a variety of reasons, I end up with larger files for printing large if need be, and why not capture all the data possible from the sensor to give you more to work with, if need be. But I hardly needed to do much on this one, it looked great straight out the camera, the raw file! Apart from a bit of vignette I often like to apply (real photographers couldn’t care less about corner sharpness) a bit of contrast and a bit of colour vibrance. I never crop my images now, again I want the full benefit/resolution of the sensor, and I just love the discipline of not cropping, I would rather use the right lens, move backwards or forwards etc to get it right at the point of taking. Also even when not cropping your image…in a way you still are cropping, the camera and lens can only take a small frame of what’s available, the bigger picture…ergo the very nature of photography is all about cropping. Yeah, it does make sense if you think it through.
I took this image recently, in a dimly lit bar, decided to
use the pop up flash on my Canon 7D, (something not available on full frame, or
the latest wonder of wonders mirrorless) and its pretty good…for a pop up
flash. It got me thinking about shooting in low light and using
high ISO, I hear photographers, and see online lots of chatter praising certain
cameras high ISO performance…great for certain genres of photography. As a
stills photographer mainly doing street/social documentary 99% of my images are
taken in daylight. And I suspect most photographers who rave on about high ISO
performance mostly shoot in good light anyway. The second image below, my old Mother on her tablet. Taken with a Sigma standard zoom lens at
f2.8, ISO 800, I just used rudimentary noise control tools in lightroom, and it looks pretty okay to me, acceptable. I
suppose I could always get the latest edition of lightroom with the dedicated
denoise tab, or I could get one of the dedicated low noise plug ins. Tripods
are also available, anyone remember those. 😆
The point I am making is all this chatter about high ISO performance is pretty irrelevant in the real world, definitely for me it is. Why would I want to spend a small fortune on a full frame DSLR, or mirrorless just for something I hardly use, to solve a problem I and most other photographers don’t really have! Obviously I appreciate people buy various systems for varied reasons but I’m just talking about low light photography here. If money was no issue I probably wouldn’t be making these blog posts on equipment? Maybe I would just be spending lots of money on equipment that the camera sellers, advertisers and the internet chattering classes tell me that I need?
(Update: Since writing this blog post, I got a Canon 6D which happens to be a low light beast! Should I need it. Main reason I got it was because they aren't making any more DSLR's apart from Pentax)
I don’t want to sound like I am against new technology, but new technology is not always better IMO. I prefer the look and feel, handling of a DSLR with an optical 100% viewfinder, and that pop up flash on my ancient 7D often comes in very useful, even in daylight. I also use a Lumix LX100 compact camera if I want to travel light and fast, it’s a very capable camera too, and no slouch in low light with its f1.7 Leica lens.
I took this street portrait a few months ago in Leeds, actually in a shop. Her natural beauty caught my eye, thought she looked like a young Audrey Hepburn. And the background also caught my attention, gives it a surreal look, (HC Bresson was influenced by the surrealists in Paris, it shows in his work) I couldn’t resist getting a few portraits of her. It turns out she is the daughter of the actor Mark Jordon, Heartbeat, etc. He reached out to me on Instagram asking if he could buy a print, and praising my photography. We exchanged a few messages, obviously I didn’t know him before then but he sounds like a very generous, genuine, good guy…”a great eye you have, sir” he said. I love getting great comments/feedback from people who know what they are talking about, people who work in the visual arts, I often get really good comments from artists and good photographers saying things like “you have an amazing gallery” it means more to me than hundreds of likes. In fact Instagram is a bit of a mystery to me in that respect, I see some really great photographers who hardly get any attention, or likes and I also see some really mediocre, boring photography getting hundreds, thousands of likes! What’s all that about?
When I went (mostly) digital I sold all my high end film cameras, still got a few old film cameras though, and for some strange reason I often get the urge to shoot some film. Just put an old roll of film from my fridge (food stuffs are available too 😃) in this little gem, an Olympus OM1. The viewfinder looked a bit hazy, I was struggling to distinguish what I was trying to focus on, someone suggested it could be my eyesight, on the contrary…the reason I’m seeing what I’m seeing, or not seeing is because I have good eyesight. I took the focusing screen out and cleaned it with lighter fuel (it just evaporates without leaving any kind of residue) using a cotton bud, but you need to be careful tiny bits of hair can be left behind from the cotton bud, I gently blow on it afterwards to get rid of it. I also cleaned the mirror with a lens pen/brush, same thing you need to be careful as bits of hair can be left behind. The internal optics of the viewfinder is clear, it’s in great condition for its age, been looked after, used but not abused. Might replace the light seals when I get around to it.
The viewfinder looks clear now and I can actually see what I want to focus on. I will share some images from it when I get around to it. Its interesting and fun to sometimes go back to basics, with an all mechanical, all manual film camera, I don’t bother with the meter, I like to guess the exposure when using old cameras like this, its easy to do, and modern film has a wide exposure latitude anyway. Once I scan the print to share online, from the negative or the print…it becomes a digital image! So just cut out the middle man and use a digital camera, which I do for the most part. I can understand the appeal if someone is really into film, the challenge of making prints in the darkroom etc, a skill in itself! But personally, I don’t miss messing around with chemicals and setting it all up, give me the digital dark/light room any day.
There must be tons of articles etc on the subject of full frame Vs other formats, but I’m coming at it from a different angle, as in real world usage. No doubt full frame is better in low light, and probably better image quality. However there are so many variables at play that will counteract this. But firstly, I can’t remember the last time I was struggling in the dark to get a low light image, if I wanted to do some low light photography I would use my Lumix LX100 and a tripod, leaving the camera on ISO 100. With my 7D I don’t like to go above ISO 800, though 1600 is usable. Using my Sigma f2.8 wide open I have done some low light portraits and managed to end up with good results at ISO 800. Most of the time I am shooting in daylight, or twilight.
People I know with full frame cameras tend to crop a lot, even when they show me images on their screens it’s zoomed in, cropped. Ergo, its not full frame! This practice also doesn’t make full use of various focal lengths...for example if you crop an image taken with a 28mm, it might end up looking like it was taken with a 50mm? One of the reasons I got a 7D was because of the 100% viewfinder, what you see is what you get. I have gone right off cropping, I love the discipline of getting it right at the time of taking, (right as in framing) and that way it isn’t losing anything from the image in terms of resolution/size. So it’s quite possible that images from my 7D are more “full frame” than some images taken by photographers with a “full frame” sensor camera? Do the math.
Lots of other variables at play too, the photographers skills, knowledge when it comes to processing, and the most important variable of all is the photographer themselves. What’s the point of having a perfectly exposed, sharp, top quality image of a boring, badly framed, uninteresting subject? And how exactly can image quality make said image any better? And how much “image quality” is enough? Is there such thing as peak image quality? Probably yes, considering people don’t have perfect vision. A foggy, unsharp image may have more artistic merits, be more captivationg than something with excellent image quality…have you got the picture yet? (Pun intended 😂) “The photographer is the instrument not the camera”
Also most people these days simply share images online, and hardly ever make any actual prints! Making all of the above meaningless! My first dslr was a 6.3mp Canon 10D and the A3 size prints from it were beautiful in terms of image quality (it was just a slow camera to use in terms of its processing engine, especially compared to modern cameras) and I’m sure it would be capable of printing larger than A3.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFncHWMuWX0
Heres another good video on the subject by Joris Hermans...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOx3Y52EPNI
I like this one even better, by Craig Roberts, e6Vlogs
A couple of street shots from my last visit to London (Sept, 2022) I decided to take my Lumix LX100 compact just for the convenience of travelling light. It’s a very capable camera (though just a tool, the photographer is the real instrument) as long as you don’t start cropping. I’ve gone right off cropping, I love the discipline of getting it right at the moment of taking, which is in itself a form of cropping, you can only take a small frame of the complete scene with a camera. The cropping and creativity starts the moment you frame the image via the camera.
I only have one complaint about the LX100, the flash that comes with the camera seems flimsy, not built to last and they often don’t mine stopped working soon after I got it. After doing some research online I discovered it’s a common problem and people are using an Olympus flash unit as a replacement, the FL-LM3. But it needs modifying to fit and work on the camera, the part of the flash unit that slides onto the hot shoe is too long for the contacts to match up. There are some Utube vids of people using sandpaper to take it down a bit, I thought there must be a cleaner, simpler way of doing it. I used a sharp craft knife and simply scraped off layers until it was a good fit, using the original flash unit as a template.
It’s a lot better than the original flash, it also has tilt and swivel capability which the original one doesn’t. I often like a bit of flash for outdoor street portraits, as fill in light or just to make the colours pop.
Oxford Street Reflections, taken with the Lumix LX100
