I feel like I've been in a serious slump this semester.
In general, when I look back at my photos from last year or even last fall, I feel like I've lost something in the intervening months. It's not like I'm not shooting--on the contrary, I've shot well over 2000 frames on my D7000 and I shot probably a dozen rolls of film this semester on N2020. But of all the shots I've taken, only about 700 or so were ones I shot for my own pleasure. I shot hundreds and hundreds as part of my officer position in my fraternity, which is to be expected, but those almost seem to be turning out better than the ones I've taken for fun. Film has been an interesting experience, and I really enjoyed the almost zen-like process of developing and printing, but I can't easily maintain my film shooting next year as I won't have darkroom access and I don't have a space where I can really just sit and develop film.
Today the weather was gorgeous, so I decided to take a break from studying for finals and went to the Cleveland Botanical Garden. Great light, lots of flowers in bloom, almost nobody there. I feel like I got some decent shots with my Tokina, but with the rest of my lenses, I've just been really bored/nonplussed recently. In fact, my Tokina is probably the only lens I have right now that I really enjoy shooting with on a regular basis. It's sharp, beautifully made, and the focal length is making me really think about perspective and where I position myself relative to my subject. Having been such a huge sucker for shallow depth of field and great bokeh, I've been forcing myself to stop down to f/8 or f/11 and get shots that focus more on the whole composition as opposed to just a single isolated subject. Overall it's been a fun exercise, but I now I'm finding it harder and harder to get those shallow shots I love.
Which brings me to my other two lenses. I've had my 70-300 VR for a year and a half and my Sigma for a year, and both of them are still leaving something to be desired. With my 70-300, I've never been terribly impressed. Below 135 I think it's a brilliant lens as it's razor sharp, focuses fast, and just seems to have a "pop" that I really love. And the fact that I can handhold down to like 1/15 at 70 mm is great. But once I get out to 200 and beyond, I hate this lens. It doesn't balance well in my hands, so even when I've got plenty of light I have trouble shooting much below about 1/100. Also, it just seems horribly soft out that far, and I can't ever seem to consistently get good photos. My Sigma on the other hand, was a fantastic lens when I first started using it on my D5000. But since then, I feel like it just wasn't meant for my D7000. Stopped down to about f/4 it's great, but wide open it misses focus way too often for my tastes, and it doesn't focus in live view.
I'm almost to the point where I'm ready to just sell both lenses and get new gear. Seeing as I rarely need f/1.4 and pretty much can't use it anyway, the prospect of switching to a 35 f/1.8 and making a bit of money back in the progress is really appealing. As far as my tele, the only time I seem to use it these days is when I'm shooting IM games for my fraternity, which I hate anyway because it's always too dark to really get good shots with this slow of a lens. I also really miss having a midrange zoom. It may be one of Nikon's cheapest lenses, but some of my favorite photos were taken with my 18-55 VR. I'm tempted to just abandon having a long tele for the moment and then just getting by with either a short to moderate tele prime or just a zoom with a decent telephoto region.
The lens combos I've been strongly considering recently are:
16-85 VR or 17-55 f/2.8 + 180 f/2.8 or maybe a 105 f/2.8 macro -> Both zooms are supposed to be phenomenal lenses on crop bodies, but there's a huge amount of overlap with my 12-24, so that makes it seem a little impractical.
24-120 f/4 VR -> Stabilized, supposed to be pretty sharp overall, and a great range, but people don't seem to talk about this lens too much...
28-70 f/2.8 AF-S -> Gets me a little more reach over the 17-55 but still gets me f/2.8. Only problem is that 28 isn't all that wide and it's a freakin' brick.
Tokina 28-70 f/2.8 or f/2.6-2.8 -> Cheap, lightweight, and supposed to be pretty sharp overall.
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 -> Same as above, but Tamron always has such dinky build quality...
Overall, I don't know what to do. Maybe I'm just crazy.
In general, when I look back at my photos from last year or even last fall, I feel like I've lost something in the intervening months. It's not like I'm not shooting--on the contrary, I've shot well over 2000 frames on my D7000 and I shot probably a dozen rolls of film this semester on N2020. But of all the shots I've taken, only about 700 or so were ones I shot for my own pleasure. I shot hundreds and hundreds as part of my officer position in my fraternity, which is to be expected, but those almost seem to be turning out better than the ones I've taken for fun. Film has been an interesting experience, and I really enjoyed the almost zen-like process of developing and printing, but I can't easily maintain my film shooting next year as I won't have darkroom access and I don't have a space where I can really just sit and develop film.
Today the weather was gorgeous, so I decided to take a break from studying for finals and went to the Cleveland Botanical Garden. Great light, lots of flowers in bloom, almost nobody there. I feel like I got some decent shots with my Tokina, but with the rest of my lenses, I've just been really bored/nonplussed recently. In fact, my Tokina is probably the only lens I have right now that I really enjoy shooting with on a regular basis. It's sharp, beautifully made, and the focal length is making me really think about perspective and where I position myself relative to my subject. Having been such a huge sucker for shallow depth of field and great bokeh, I've been forcing myself to stop down to f/8 or f/11 and get shots that focus more on the whole composition as opposed to just a single isolated subject. Overall it's been a fun exercise, but I now I'm finding it harder and harder to get those shallow shots I love.
Which brings me to my other two lenses. I've had my 70-300 VR for a year and a half and my Sigma for a year, and both of them are still leaving something to be desired. With my 70-300, I've never been terribly impressed. Below 135 I think it's a brilliant lens as it's razor sharp, focuses fast, and just seems to have a "pop" that I really love. And the fact that I can handhold down to like 1/15 at 70 mm is great. But once I get out to 200 and beyond, I hate this lens. It doesn't balance well in my hands, so even when I've got plenty of light I have trouble shooting much below about 1/100. Also, it just seems horribly soft out that far, and I can't ever seem to consistently get good photos. My Sigma on the other hand, was a fantastic lens when I first started using it on my D5000. But since then, I feel like it just wasn't meant for my D7000. Stopped down to about f/4 it's great, but wide open it misses focus way too often for my tastes, and it doesn't focus in live view.
I'm almost to the point where I'm ready to just sell both lenses and get new gear. Seeing as I rarely need f/1.4 and pretty much can't use it anyway, the prospect of switching to a 35 f/1.8 and making a bit of money back in the progress is really appealing. As far as my tele, the only time I seem to use it these days is when I'm shooting IM games for my fraternity, which I hate anyway because it's always too dark to really get good shots with this slow of a lens. I also really miss having a midrange zoom. It may be one of Nikon's cheapest lenses, but some of my favorite photos were taken with my 18-55 VR. I'm tempted to just abandon having a long tele for the moment and then just getting by with either a short to moderate tele prime or just a zoom with a decent telephoto region.
The lens combos I've been strongly considering recently are:
16-85 VR or 17-55 f/2.8 + 180 f/2.8 or maybe a 105 f/2.8 macro -> Both zooms are supposed to be phenomenal lenses on crop bodies, but there's a huge amount of overlap with my 12-24, so that makes it seem a little impractical.
24-120 f/4 VR -> Stabilized, supposed to be pretty sharp overall, and a great range, but people don't seem to talk about this lens too much...
28-70 f/2.8 AF-S -> Gets me a little more reach over the 17-55 but still gets me f/2.8. Only problem is that 28 isn't all that wide and it's a freakin' brick.
Tokina 28-70 f/2.8 or f/2.6-2.8 -> Cheap, lightweight, and supposed to be pretty sharp overall.
Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 -> Same as above, but Tamron always has such dinky build quality...
Overall, I don't know what to do. Maybe I'm just crazy.
