Online reviews & Hull Fair

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.

Two very different portraits.

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.  

 

Cool girl

 

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.

Get some light on the subject

 

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.

LX100 specs

    

Interesting turn of events

 

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?

Back to basics

 

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.