Thread: Street with a 70-200

On way home from France, stopped off for lunch in Honfleur, Normandy. Only had my 5d packing a 70-200 f2.8 with me. (didn't wanna leave that combo in the car) Tried street with some interesting results from shooting f2.8 at the thick end of the lens. Very shallow dof which I thinks suits these subjects. Shan't be doing it again in a hurry, but interested in effect.


street with a 70-200 by petach123 (Peter Tachauer), on Flickr


street with a 70-200 by petach123 (Peter Tachauer), on Flickr


street with a 70-200 by petach123 (Peter Tachauer), on Flickr

I like the shallow DOF. That first photo really works for me.

It's funny that as soon as longer focal lengths and shallower depth-of-field is used, street photography takes on a completely different feel; more remote, less intimate. An interesting experiment, nonetheless.

I really like the first Pete, and like the third pretty well too. As Nic says it really changes the whole feel, sometimes in a way that works, sometimes not. I've gone out with long lenses to do street shooting a couple of times. In both cases I came back with some decent shots, even a couple of good ones, and both times I really felt weird about the whole thing and didn't really enjoy it. It holds no appeal for me as a shooting experience, but I can't deny that it can work well in the right hands. That first shot, of the crystal clear guy through the tunnel of shallow DOF, is really pretty brilliant.

Well done sir, but don't let it happen again!

-Ray

cheers guys. I know what you mean re the long lens. It made me feel more voyeuristic than getting in close and sneaky beaky. In plain sight with a big black box and ivory tube I felt very exposed. I am pleased with no.1 though, the 2.8 and great IS allowed me to hold still long enough to bang a couple out.

And I won't do it again..........................

long lens street - less intimate, more distant

It has a lot of appeal and tells a different story

really interesting images

- more experimentation maybe

Thanks for posting - food for thought

I think the first one is great, works really well.

Hmm ... More voyeuristic for sure. Less intimate, I disagree. By taking photos from a far, there's slim chance that the photographer is interfering with the natural course of whatever he or she is trying to capture, while sometimes being even "closer" to the subject. I suppose the experience itself for the photographer is less intimate. But the photos themselves can be more intimate. Just thinking out loud.

i think they are all really good- very sharp and the shallow depth of field works !

How is shooting with a long lens any more voyeuristic than "getting in close and sneaky beaky" shooting from the hip? It seems to me like it's merely the difference between one peeper using binoculars to look in on the neighbor while the other hides in the bushes and peers through the window. Now, going right up to folks and shooting without hiding is a different story - I get that that is much different - not only in feel but in interaction. Otherwise, catching a moment is catching a moment - just like catching a butterfly is catching a butterfly - whether you have a 2 foot or 10 foot long net.