Bruce wrote
> I'm very surprised how many of the photos were taken using focal lengths
in the telephoto range.
>
> Bruce
Speaking for myself, I find the whole vista of a panoramic view in an open
site, often contains material that does not make a positive contribution to
what I might envisage or imagine. In such circumstances a telephoto often
provides the only solution to composing a satisfactory picture. Take for
example (I think it is image 49 of the current TOPE) part of a landscape
taken with a 135/3.5. The whole vista from that location was probably huge,
but the 135 enabled one beautiful element to be selected out of it.
A shot I saw months ago on somebody's site (probably Joel's or John Lind's -
can't remember), was made using the 300 and was of a butte or cliff-sided
mountain with a pretty substantial storm-cloud giving it the treatment. That
shot woke me up again to the possibilities of the 300. Yet a 300 selects a
very small part of a vista.
Also, with landscapes as in other situations, there is no possibility to retain
a particular composition and take the shot with a different focal length lens.
Walk forward or back and you fall into a river or over a cliff or trees get in
the
way - and so it goes ...
Brian
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|