Framing can mean two different things. The first is what you choose to include in your image and, maybe more importantly, what you choose to leave out. The second is using elements within your scene to create a literal frame around your subject. Like a frame within a frame. Both are worth understanding, and both can completely transform an image.

What you leave out matters as much as what you keep in

This one doesn’t always feel obvious when you’re starting out. However, what you choose to exclude from a frame can be almost more important than what you include. It’s one of the genuinely difficult decisions you make as a photographer: Is this element important? Does it add something, or is it just noise? Should it be in the corner, along the bottom, or cut out entirely?

Take a simple example. Say you’ve got someone on the left side of the frame, clearly shouting or reacting to something. As the photographer, you might be close enough to include whatever they’re reacting to. However, you could also choose to leave it out. And that decision changes the whole feeling of the image. Without the other subject, there’s ambiguity. The viewer doesn’t quite know where the energy is directed or what’s causing the reaction. It becomes a bit of a mystery, and that can be way more compelling than spelling everything out.

This also comes up a lot with cleanliness. When people first get into street photography, a lot of their early shots are really messy. Too much going on, too many competing elements. That’s often a framing issue more than anything else, the instinct to include everything in the scene rather than cutting in tighter and being more selective about what actually needs to be there.

Less is more, a lot of the time. A person walking down a busy street might be far more striking if they’re the only person visible in the frame. Add a bunch of other people around them, and suddenly it’s hard to tell who the main subject even is. The image loses its focus.

A slightly longer lens (50mm and above) helps with this a lot. You can get tighter without having to physically close the distance, and it naturally cuts out some noise. It’s particularly useful when you’re shooting in harsh light, and you want to focus in on details, geometric shapes, or blocks of color rather than trying to make a messy wide shot work.

You don’t have to show the whole subject

Another framing decision that people don’t think about enough is whether your subject needs to be fully in frame at all. Showing only part of a subject, a hand, a leg, a pair of hooves on a fence, can make for a far more interesting image than showing the whole thing.

There’s something about an incomplete subject that draws the viewer in. It leaves something to the imagination. If you can only see part of something, you start to wonder about the rest. What does this person look like? What’s actually going on here? And that curiosity, that little bit of ambiguity, can make the difference between a photo people glance at and one they actually stop to look at.

It’s especially effective when you’ve got two subjects and one of them is only partially visible. The viewer has no idea what that partially-visible subject actually looks like beyond what you’ve chosen to show them, and that incomplete picture creates a kind of tension.

Showing everything can sometimes feel a bit flat; there’s nothing left for the viewer to fill in. A hint or a clue is often more powerful than the full reveal. It’s almost like the difference between a good short story and one that over-explains itself.

The more you become aware of this, the more you’ll naturally find yourself looking through the viewfinder and thinking, ” Do I actually want the whole person in this shot? Do I want the whole car? Or is there something more interesting in just showing a part of it?”

Frame within a frame

Then there’s the other kind of framing, using elements in the scene to physically frame your subject within the image. This is something I use all the time, and once you start looking for it, you’ll see opportunities everywhere.

It doesn’t have to be a literal rectangular frame. It could be the opening of a tunnel, a break in a chain-link fence, a broken window, an archway, the position of someone’s arm, or two people on either side of your shot. All of these create a kind of natural border that draws the eye toward whatever is inside them, and that’s a really powerful compositional tool.

Something that works particularly well is having the framing elements slightly out of focus. It’s not a rule, just a personal preference, but when the frame itself is soft, and the subject inside it is sharp, it creates a real sense of depth and separation. It just feels more immersive.

If you want to see this done at its absolute best, look up Saul Leiter. His photography uses framing and reflections and shadows in this really unconventional, beautiful way, all shot on a long lens, and it’s some of the most stunning work I’ve ever seen. He takes these basic ideas and pushes them somewhere genuinely extraordinary.

Keep it in your back pocket

Frame-within-a-frame isn’t something you need to force into every shot. But it’s a really useful thing to have in your mind, especially when you’re in a new location, and you’re not quite sure what to shoot or how to approach something. Start looking for frames, and you’ll suddenly see them everywhere: gravestones, car windows, doorways, the gap between two buildings.

And those kinds of shots are almost always more interesting than a straight-up landscape or vista. There’s something going on, something to look at, a reason for the eye to travel through the image. That’s what good framing does.

Whether you’re deciding what to cut out of your shot or actively hunting for something to frame your subject with, it’s one of those things that separates the photographers who are just pointing and shooting from the ones who are actually thinking.

The post The Art Of Framing in Photography appeared first on Adorama.

“I don’t know where to start.”

“I’m not good enough.”

“I don’t want to look desperate.”

“I don’t know what to say.”

“I’m running low on followers.”

In this article, I’ll help you stop overthinking and show you how to find your first paying photography client with three strategies to try this week.

Clarity Checklist

But before we start looking, let’s run through a quick Clarity Checklist. 

1: What do you want to photograph? 

“Everything” is not a good answer. Look at your best photos and pick one or two things you genuinely enjoy and are good at. 

For e.g. Portraits, Events, Cityscapes.

2: Who is your client? 

Again, “Everyone” is a bad answer. Get specific. 

“Small Business Owners” is still vague. 

“Small Independent Shops in my local area who need good photos for their Instagram Pages” is a good start.

3: What is your pitch? 

Why should they choose you? You need one clear sentence to tell them how you help them. 

This is a simple formula: “I help [type of client] with [specific problem] by [what you do].”

For e.g. I help “Small Family-Owned Businesses” who are “competing with larger chains” by “creating a human, trustworthy face with my portrait photography.” 

This is quite specific, clear, and built for the person you’re talking to. The aim is to match your skills with their problems.

But before we start looking for paying clients, let’s get clear on what you’re offering.

Use this fill-in-the-blank exercise to help you get started:

Now that you’re clear on what you offer and the who you serve, it’s time to find your first photography clients.

There are three places to look, and the first one is the easiest.

4: Your Warm Network 

The people who already know and trust you. 

Start with friends, family, colleagues, neighbours and even old classmates. They like you, trust you and may have even said “You should charge for this.” Plus, they’ll tell their network about you.

How to go about it:

1. Make a list of 30 – 40 people without overthinking it.  Include current and former colleagues, extended family, neighbours, people from your gym or hobby groups. Who you’re serving and what you’re offering (based on your Clarity Checklist) will guide who is in this list.
2. Send them a personal message, not a “Hey Everybody…” post. 
3. The Script:

“Hey [Name],

I’ve finally taken the plunge and I’m taking bookings for [type of photography] sessions. This is my starter package: [length of session] with [X number of images] for [price].

I’m building my portfolio and looking for the right people to work with. 

No pressure, I’m just spreading the word. Let me know if you or someone you know may be interested.”

Do’ and Don’ts:

Don’t send out a mass email or a generic social post. And don’t apologise for asking. You’re offering a service that people need.

Your warm network is the easiest place to start. Now let’s think bigger.

5: Complementary Local Businesses

“Who’s already serving your ideal clients?”

You’ve reached out to your Warm Network. Now it’s time to think more strategically.

Brainstorm about who else serves the clients you want. Makeup artists have clients who need headshot photographers. Real estate agents have sellers who need property photographers. Venue owners work with event planners who need event photographers.

These businesses already have your ideal clients walking through their doors. And these clients trust them. So when they recommend you, that trust transfers to you instantly.  

It’s a warm lead, someone they trust is already vouching for you.

How to go about it:

1. Make a list of 10-15 local businesses who serve the same clients you want.
2. Offer something concrete: a free headshot session for their team, or product photos. Check their website and socials first, identify where you can help them and be specific.
3. Reach out to them with a short, low-pressure message.

The Script:

“Hi [Name],

I’m a [type of photographer] based locally. I noticed you work with [the same clients I want to reach].

I’m looking to connect with local businesses, and I’d love to offer you something: [specific photography offer you identified for them] There’s no catch, I just want to introduce myself and show you what I do.

If you’re happy with the results, we could talk about referrals or working together in the future.

Let me know if you’d like to have a quick chat.”

Do’s and Don’ts:

Don’t ask for a favour. Lead with the offer, something that’s useful to them. Then let the conversation grow.

The first two places to look for paying clients push you to be proactive. Now let’s make it easy for paying clients to find you.

6: Local Directories & Online Marketplaces 

You’ve done the hard bit by reaching out to people one by one. Now comes the easy bit, the Passive Visibility. This is putting yourself out in places where clients are already looking for your services.  Now you’re making yourself findable. 

How to go about it:

• Set up your Google Business Profile. It’s free, takes 15 minutes, and puts you on the map. Add your services, best photos, and contact details. And ask friends and family for reviews.
• Join Local Facebook Groups. Identify community groups, small business networks, and neighbourhood pages and post a short, friendly message.  

Post Template

“Hi everyone,

I’m a local photographer based in [your area]. I specialize in [type of photography] and I’m offering a starter package for [specific need].

If you or someone you know may be interested, I’d love to hear from you. Happy to answer any questions.

Here’s a link to my work: [Insert your portfolio link]”

Do’s and Don’ts:

Don’t spam. Keep it local and helpful. Remember you’re a creative not a sales bot.

7: Local Directories like Craigslist.

Craigslist is still one of the largest classifieds sites globally. For a beginner, it’s a low-cost option: a one‑time $5 fee to post in the ‘Services’ category. And it puts you in front of people who are already looking for a photographer.

You pushed yourself out of your comfort zone and reached out to your warm network, people who support your (potential) clients, and you’ve listed your services your online. And finally…

You’ve Landed Your First Paying Photography Client. What Next?

To make the transition from “someone who takes good photos” to “someone who takes their side-hustle seriously” do this:

1. Take a deposit. 20–30% upfront protects you and sets a professional tone. 
2. Use a simple one-page contract. Cover what you’re delivering, when payment is due, and what happens if they cancel.
3. Show up on time. Or even a little early.
4. Deliver what you promised. A few extra images or an early delivery will keep you top of mind.
5. Ask for a testimonial. Right after delivery, when they’re still excited, ask for a short testimonial and permission to share it
6. Ask for a referral. When you see they’re happy with your work, ask them if they know anyone else who might need photos, and say that you’d love an introduction.

Remember, each client you serve well is a doorway to the next one.

Now for a quick summary of the three places to find your first paying photography clients.

Final Thoughts

Your first photography client doesn’t have to be perfect, they just have to say yes.  That yes proves that what you’ve been overthinking is actually possible.

Pick one place to start this week. Send one message, make one list or reach out to one local business. Then let the momentum carry you forward.

Want To Go Deeper?

If you want to go deeper on how to find your first photography clients, I’ve written four articles that cover the foundations: clarity on who you serve, crafting your message, fixing your website, and landing bigger deals. Pick the one that feels most relevant, or read them all.

The post Three Places to Find Your First Paying Photography Clients as a Beginner Photographer appeared first on Adorama.

But rather than just let you figure it out all on your own, I thought I might as well put together the 5 film photography mistakes I see all the time.

1) Using a bad film lab

When I first started shooting film, I was taking my film to a high street lab. I didn’t even really question it at the time, they just develop your film, right?

Wrong. If you don’t shop around, then this could be costing you a lot of money and a lot of quality.

First of all, some labs could be charging you a hell of a lot to develop and scan film. And if you don’t know what the going rate is, then you could be spending tonnes and tonnes just because you never bothered to check.

Secondly, the quality of film scans varies a hell of a lot. This depends on the scanner the lab uses. Plus, it depends on what kind of preset they use when they scan the film.

So you could end up spending a lot of money and still getting bad scans at the end of the process.

So make sure you shop around for labs and find out what people are saying locally. Or, you can take a look on Reddit.

2) Not printing your work

I shot for years without printing any of my work. I’d just get the scans sent to me, put them on my phone, put them on Instagram, you know the drill.

But the thing is, when you finally start printing your work, you start to see it completely differently.

Whether you hand enlarge your work in the dark room or print your scans, your work suddenly enters the physical world. Then, the way you think about it changes.

You’ll never regret printing your work. It can become a gift, you can put it on your wall, you can sell it, trade it with another photographer. Do whatever you want.

Print your work, bring it into the real world, see it how it was meant to be seen.

3) Not exposing properly

This is something I see pretty much all the time and in film photography it’s usually not that hard to remedy it.

Film hates to be underexposed. If film is underexposed, then you’ll nearly always lose a lot of information in the shadows, or even the midtones of an images.

The easiest way to stop this from happening is to overexpose your film by 1 stop. This can usually be done on your camera using the exposure compensation dial. Alternatively, you can do it in camera by just allowing your light meter to go a bit further above the middle line.

Of course, this isn’t a completely specific way of perfectly exposing every time. However, it is a great way to avoid the kinda underexposure that completely ruins your shots.

It’s also a more intuitive way to shoot, whereas if you’re constantly doing external light meter readings and all that jazz then you can’t really focus on all the other really important stuff (like composition).

4) Thinking you need a Leica

There comes a moment in every single photographer’s journey where they think, hey, I know, I should buy a Leica, that’s going to be the thing that’ll take me to the next level.

Or maybe it’s not a Leica, maybe it’s a Contax, either way, this is a universal experience. This special camera will change my life and make me the photographer I want to be.

And hey, maybe it will, but chances are, a simple SLR will probably do just as well for you.

The gains you get going from a $50 to a $150 camera are much more obvious than $150 to $5000. But I guess, if you have $5000 lying around, go ahead, have fun, buy whatever camera you want.

Generally, though, I’d suggest trying to find the camera that suits you best. The Nikon FM, F100, Canon EOS1n, Canon A-1, Olympus OM1n. These are all fairly affordable cameras that can get you great shots. Perhaps a camera with autofocus works for your style, or maybe aperture priority. 

Figure out what you need, rather than what’s supposed to be the best.

5) Not editing your scans

This is one of those things that shouldn’t be controversial but it is. 

The truth is, wherever you get your film developed, you’re generally getting a scan that doesn’t really have that much personality because that gives you the ability to tweak it so it looks right.

There seems to be this belief that you should just leave a film photo completely unedited but the reality is you could get your film scanned by 10 different scanners or 10 different labs and every scan would look completely different.

Plus, film photos have been edited in the dark room for years, now you can edit them in Lightroom.

Often, even just adjusting the tone of your image will completely change it and make it look a whole lot better.

Edit those film scans, you won’t regret it!

Final thoughts

Shooting film photography is about learning and having fun. Hopefully, now your life will be a little easier, you’ll save money and get better film photos on the regular.

The post Film Photography Mistakes All Beginners Make appeared first on Adorama.

No, me neither.

But autumn is genuinely the season I look forward to most. It’s mostly because of the weather everyone else complains about. The mist, the flat grey light, the rain that never quite commits to being proper rain. All of that is far more useful to you as a photographer than another cloudless afternoon.

Here’s how I shoot the best photos in autumn light.

Overcast autumn light is stranger than people think

Overcast days are weird, because the light you get is really soft, and it’s coming from directly above. There are still layers of light in the scene, there always are. However, it’s much less noticeable because the contrast between shadow and highlight is so low.

That’s the thing people get wrong. They see grey sky and assume there’s no light to work with. There’s plenty, it’s just doing something different.

First of all, it’s worth thinking about what kind of overcast you’ve got.

Is it cloudy but the sky is still really bright, that sort of glowing white ceiling? In that case, you want to make sure you’re exposing for the shadows, or at least for what’s actually going on in the frame rather than the sky. The sky doesn’t matter. Your subject and the rest of the frame do.

If you meter for that bright sky, you’ll end up with a beautifully detailed cloud and a subject that looks like a silhouette in a witness protection program.

Of course, with digital you don’t need to worry about it quite as much. If your photo is a bit underexposed, you can lift the shadows a long way, and they’ll still look fine. Modern sensors are ridiculously good.

For a film photographer, it’s the other way around. Expose for the shadows and let the rest fall where it wants to. Film will hold onto highlights far better than it holds onto anything you’ve lost in the dark.

Now, if it’s overcast and just grey and a bit dark feeling? That’s one of those rare moments in digital photography where you don’t need to underexpose at all. There’s no point. Everything is going to feel fairly monotonal whatever you do.

And that’s where you want to shift your attention to storytelling. Focus on your subject, your composition, interesting angles, getting closer than feels comfortable. That stuff will do the heavy lifting for you when the light and the depth aren’t doing it.

I’m not a big lover of shallow depth of field, but on a day like that you could drop down to something like f/4 just as a treat.

Mist and fog do half the work for you

Mist is the one I’ll get out of bed early for. And that’s saying something, because I don’t get out of bed early for much.

What fog does is separate everything for you. It takes a messy, cluttered scene, a row of trees, a car park, a street full of stuff you would normally have to work around, and fades the background out until you are left with clean layers. That’s compositional depth handed to you for free, and it’s the hardest thing to create on purpose.

A couple of things worth knowing.

Your camera’s meter will almost always underexpose in fog. It sees a frame full of bright grey and assumes it’s looking at something well lit. So, it pulls everything down and you end up with dingy, muddy pictures that don’t look anything like what you saw. Dial in some positive exposure compensation. Plus one is a decent starting point, plus one and two-thirds if it’s really thick.

Autofocus also struggles, because there’s nothing with any contrast for it to grab onto. If you’re shooting into a wall of white and the lens is hunting, find an edge, a branch, a lamp post, a person, and focus on that instead.

Long lenses are your friend here. Fog compresses beautifully, and something around 85mm or longer will stack those layers up on top of each other in a way a 35mm just won’t.

And go towards a light source if you can find one. Headlights, a window, a street lamp, low sun burning through. Fog turns any point of light into a visible beam, and it’s the closest thing to free drama you’ll ever get.

Autumn color and how to not ruin it

Everyone shoots autumn leaves. There’s a reason for that: they’re lovely.

The trap is that soft overcast light and orange leaves are such a pleasant combination that people stop making pictures and start just pointing at trees. A photo of a nice thing is not the same as a nice photo.

What helps is the same as always. Find a subject, put something in the frame that has some scale or some life to it, and treat the color as the backdrop rather than the point.

Overcast light is genuinely ideal for this, by the way. Direct sun on autumn leaves blows out the highlights and turns the color into a mess. Soft light lets the color sit there properly saturated. That is why every landscape photographer you’ve ever met gets quietly excited about a grey forecast.

Fall rain, which is the point of all this

Here’s my honest opinion. Rain is the best photographic weather there is, and almost nobody shoots in it because it’s uncomfortable.

That’s the entire advantage. Everyone else has gone home.

Wet ground turns every light source into a reflection. Puddles give you a whole second version of the scene to work with. Umbrellas give you shape and color and a bit of humanity in the frame. People move differently in the rain; they hurry, they hunch, they cluster in doorways, and that gives you gesture, which is the thing most street photography is missing.

Practically, a plastic bag and an elastic band will keep most cameras alive. A lens hood keeps drops off the front element better than you’d expect. Take a cloth, because one drop on the glass will ruin frames without you noticing until later.

And shoot into the light if you can. Rain is close to invisible against a bright sky and very visible against something dark, so backlighting is what actually makes the drops show up.

The point of taking good photos in fall

None of this is a technique you need to master. It’s mostly a decision.

Autumn light is soft, low, changeable and about four hours long. That could sound like a limitation until you remember the alternative is harsh midday sun for months. The mist arrives, the rain arrives, the light goes flat, and every one of those is a different set of pictures rather than a reason to leave the camera at home.

So put a coat on, accept that you’re going to be slightly damp, and get out while it’s still doing this. It doesn’t last long, and then it’s just cold and dark for ages.

Take care, and go and take some photos.

The post How To Get The Best Photos In Autumn Light appeared first on Adorama.

My Lens Journey as a Wildlife Photographer

If you consider entering the amazing world of wildlife photography, please don’t imagine you will need a $15,000 lens straight away. My journey started with a budget, basic, third-party zoom lens: the Tamron SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 Di VC USD G2. It cost me around $1,400 when I bought it.

The generous 150-600mm zoom range allowed me to gain experience with various types of nature photography and identify the typical shooting range I would prefer for wildlife photography. For me, the sweet spot is between 400mm and 600mm.

However, even though the SP 150-600mm f/5-6.3 was giving me range, it wasn’t giving me light. In theory, the maximum aperture is f/6.3 at the long telephoto end, but in practice, I found the lens to start performing well only at f/8. By performing well, I mean taking bright, clear, detailed shots. The limited aperture affected brightness, ISO settings, depth of field, framing, and composition. I would have to use a shorter focal length, increase ISO, or wait for better lighting, all options affecting my photography and workflow. I was more set on technicalities than on storytelling.

Stepping Up to Prime Glass: The Z 400mm f/4.5

As soon as I could afford a better lens for wildlife photography, I bought one. It was the Z 400mm f/4.5, a prime telephoto lens with a focal length at the lower end of my requirements, but fast, sharp, and bright. It cost around $3,500, which at the time was a big expense for me.

The maximum aperture was f/4.5 in both theory and practice, and it provided the brightness and level of detail I needed. I didn’t have to wait for the sun to come up, hurry to finish shooting before sunset, or avoid shooting in the shadow. The photos were beautiful, smooth, and crystal clear. The only problem was that I missed good shots because of the reach. It would take all that I have to get close to wildlife. I got better at using camouflage, which is a good thing, but I also missed a lot of shots. This is how I arrived at my next big lens investment: the 600mm f/4 TC. 

The Battle of Specifications: Nikon NIKKOR Z 400mm f/4.5 vs. Nikon NIKKOR Z 600mm f/4 TC

Both the Z 400mm f/4.5 and the Z 600mm f/4 TC are designed for Nikon’s Z mirrorless camera series. As I have a Z8 camera, it makes sense to me to choose from Nikon’s compatible lenses.

Focal Length

The obvious difference between the two lenses is, of course, the focal length. The first offers a fixed 400mm focal length, while the second offers a fixed 600mm focal length. However, the 600mm f/4 TC has an ace up its sleeve: a built-in 1.4x teleconverter that extends the 600mm focal length to an astonishing 840mm.

How far you can reach is not the only feature to consider. The minimum focusing distance also matters, especially if you photograph a broad range of wildlife, not all of which is at great distance. The 400mm f/4.5 allows you to focus as close as 2.5 meters. The 600mm f/4 TC’s minimum focusing distance is 4.3 meters. If you are in the forest and a hedgehog, rabbit, or squirrel walks just in front of you, you have a better chance of getting a good photo with the 400mm lens.

Build

Both are well built, but the 400mm f/4.5 is significantly lighter. They are robust, dustproof, splashproof, and weather- and wear-resistant. They also feature built-in image stabilization and advanced optics to minimize chromatic aberrations and other distortions. From a quality standpoint, both are great, but the 600mm has a really professional feel.

Brightness

Another feature concerning me, and any wildlife photographer for that matter, is brightness. In wildlife photography, all you have is natural light, and you need gear able to cope in less-than-perfect conditions.

The 400mm lens offers a maximum aperture of f/4.5, and I appreciated the difference it made to my workflow and extended shooting duration compared with my previous lens. However, the 600mm f/4 TC goes a step further. A seemingly small step that makes a big difference. Your concern should be depth of field, but even though it seems insignificant with just a 0.5-stop difference, when coupled with the longer focal length, the result is much better aesthetics in the photos taken with the 600mm. The drop-off in sharpness comes faster. But it’s nice to have options instead of being stuck in a limiting setup.

Autofocus

In terms of autofocus, both lenses are fast, precise, and quiet. The 400mm f/4.5 has a responsive stepping motor (STM). The 600mm f/4 TC has Nikon’s latest, near-silent Silky Swift Voice Coil Motor (SSVCM), which is snappier and more accurate, again leading to more keepers. The focusing is also quieter, which comes in very handy when recording videos where silence is key. That being said, I never had any issues with the focusing motor being audible in my recordings on the 400mm f/4.5 

Weight and Portability

We should also talk about weight and portability because there is a significant difference between the 400mm f/4.5 and the 600mm f/4 TC. The 400mm lens weighs approximately 1.2kg, while the 600mm lens weighs approximately 3.2kg.

Carrying such a heavy, bulky lens is challenging both physically and in choosing a camera bag. You need something to accommodate a huge camera-lens combo and will likely need support when shooting, whether it is a tripod, a big rock, or your backpack. 

In comparison, the 400mm lens feels like a breeze now. I would shoot mostly handheld, walk around with the camera slung over my shoulder, and carry it in any camera bag I had at home. So this is a real change in my workflow. I have to sit still rather than walk around, but I also feel that will lead to better photos because wildlife is less alert when you are motionless with the camera on a tripod. It is easier to capture natural behavior when sitting still. Because you have the longer reach, you can also stay well outside of the fear zone where they begin to think about fleeing. 

For me, weight and size aren’t decisive factors, but they might be for you, so consider your workflow and requirements carefully before stepping up to the next lens. Moreover, you may need to include the cost of new accessories in your budget (e.g., a large camera bag or backpack, a sturdier tripod, etc.).

Sharpness and Background Rendering Comparison

Comparing specifications is fine when you have no better option, but I prefer to make small, customized, practical comparison sessions. So, I took my loyal model, Peter Pandi, into the garden and photographed him using the widest aperture settings with both lenses (and with an ext. 1.4X teleconverter).

The focal length difference is obvious and shows you why the 600mm lens is a better companion on long wildlife photography expeditions, like my most recent one in the Norwegian Fjell.

Peter Pandi is a nice guy and lets me photograph him up close at 10 meters, but with the Norwegian muskoxen, the minimum safety distance is 200 meters. It would have been impossible to photograph them in the open field with the 400mm lens. It is not only the sharpness that jumps out at me, but also the background rendering, which looks way superior in comparison. 

Why the Investment Pays Off in the Field

After conducting the forest experiment and taking the 600mm lens on a multiday expedition, I concluded that the shift in quality is real and noticeable. For me, stepping up to the 600mm f/4 TC is worth it.

This is where the real justification for getting the expensive 600mm really becomes visible. As a professional wildlife photographer, you are expected to deliver flawless photos consistently, and that is why I think of the 600mm as a bread-and-butter lens. It is the one that will make sure I don’t waste too many mornings in the field, scaring wildlife away, trying to get closer, or coming home with photos that look soft because I have to crop them in post. 

Therefore, if you’re a pro or going pro wildlife photographer, I suggest that you step up from your budget zoom lens or the all-you-could-afford-last-year prime telephoto lens and go for something that gives you reach, light, and creative freedom. In my opinion, the 600mm f/4 TC is the perfect match for my Z8 camera and my workflow, but I wouldn’t exclude the Nikon NIKKOR Z 400mm f/2.8 TC if 400mm is enough reach and you just need the extra light, or the older Nikon NIKKOR 500mm f/4E FL ED AF-S if you use a DSLR camera. Of course, I’m referring to Nikon camera-compatible lenses, but I’m sure there are similar options for any camera model.

Final Thoughts

My lens journey as a wildlife photographer took me to the exquisite NIKKOR Z 600mm f/4 TC via the slightly modest in reach but not in quality NIKKOR Z 400mm f/4.5. Each step was a discovery based on empirical data, field experiences, and many trial-and-error phases. Years ago, when I bought my first telephoto lens, I didn’t know I would get here. I didn’t plan my journey. Instead, I allowed and encouraged myself to explore, learn, make mistakes, understand what I want to photograph and why, and then decide what gear will help me bring my stories to life. I’ve enjoyed every step of the way so far, and I look forward to my next adventure with my 600mm lens.

The post Stepping up: Nikon NIKKOR Z 400mm f/4.5 vs. Nikon NIKKOR Z 600mm f/4 TC appeared first on Adorama.

An Emphasis on Micro Four Thirds

While LUMIX also has nicely filled-out compact point-and-shoot and full-frame lines, the LUMIX G Series Micro Four Thirds lineup and innovations are worth exploring.

What started as a Four Thirds collaboration from Olympus and Kodak morphed a few years later into a collaboration between Panasonic and Olympus, resulting in 2008’s LUMIX DMC-G1, the first mirrorless interchangeable MFT camera.

The new mount was an open standard, clearing the way for smaller companies like Blackmagic Design and DJI to quickly adopt MFT for cinematic and drone use, something Panasonic/ LUMIX also embraced.

Micro Four Thirds: What It Means in Practice

If you haven’t shot with MFT before, there are some things you need to know, both good and not so good. For example, the smaller sensor helps reduce power needs, leaving plenty of capacity and space for LUMIX and other MFT brands to pack camera bodies with extra features like strong IBIS or in-camera LUTs.

Also, in general, MFT gives you the equivalent of double the reach and depth of field compared to the same lens specs on a full-frame sensor. That’s absolutely just a rule of thumb, not the detailed technicals, but it works to keep in mind in the field.

The smaller sensor’s 2x crop factor means you effectively get a crop when shooting, rather than later in editing. Your 300mm lens will look like you shot on a 600mm lens for a full-frame camera. Depth of field will also be larger, with an f/8 behaving more like f/16, although you aren’t changing light that drastically.

Note: The DOF is based on stepping back to frame how you would on a full-frame camera. IF you don’t step back and accept the crop, the DOF remains the same.

Another quirk of the MFT sensor is more noise, or more noticeable noise at lower ISOs than larger sensors, at least. You’re packing a lot of data into a small space, and that contributes to noise showing up earlier, especially in low-light situations. In the same vein, that smaller sensor means you can collect only so much data in one shot, and MFT sensors typically average 20 to 25MP.

Shooting With a Lumix Camera

I recently spent the better part of a month shooting with LUMIX, and there’s a lot of love. But a few things broke my heart as well.

Three things I fell in love with: 

• Fabulously tactile controls, especially the dedicated top buttons for ISO, white balance, and exposure compensation on the G9II.
• Sane menu setups. Many systems have complex menus that leave even long-time brand acolytes scratching their heads. Lumix’s easy-to-navigate menus were a breath of fresh air. There was no need to adjust a dozen settings before starting out. I was able to pick it up out of the box and quickly make minor adjustments on the fly without deep research into menus.
• I was pleasantly surprised with RAW images straight out of the camera. The color handling and lighting often needed very little editing compared to other brands’ RAW images. 

Three things that broke my heart:

• No mechanical sensor protection when the camera is off, so you are left constantly fighting sensor dust when changing lenses.
• Buffer speeds were sometimes disappointing when shooting the G9II, and I frequently missed action and wildlife sequence shots. While the buffer size itself is good, it clears rather slowly to the card even with a fast HDSC card.
• Charging via USB is common, but even with better battery life, many of us like to keep multiple batteries charged. Relying on in-body charging alone makes that cumbersome. Treating external battery chargers as an add-on with several models, rather than included with camera bodies, is a personal pet peeve.

Lumix Lenses

Impressive sums up my thoughts on Lumix and Leica DG lenses. Even the kit lenses, like the Leica DG Vario-Elmarit 12-60mm f/2.8-4 ASPH, were solid performers with tack-sharp focus and quick autofocus. I found myself leaning heavily on the kit lens in many shooting situations.

Like LUMIX cameras, the lenses have a solid retro feel to them, more substantial and metal to the hand than most brands without adding a lot of weight.

Honestly, my only issues with the LUMIX and Leica series lenses I tested were that 1. the camera bodies are so lightweight that even small lenses tip them forward on flat surfaces and 2. even the tiniest bump popped off the lens caps.

Portability

It’s hard to argue with less carry fatigue. Lightweight bodies plus being able to use smaller lenses thanks to that 2x crop factor meant less energy spent carrying the gear and more available energy to hold the camera at the ready while waiting on subjects. Not super noticeable on short treks, but when you’re hiking a few miles to get to a location, it makes a big difference.

Favorite Features

Brands always emphasize all the bells and whistles of their gear; that’s the norm. But what really struck me with LUMIX was that the bells and whistles were useful, not just more marketing hype.

Granted, exact features vary by body, but my favorites from working with the LUMIX gear were:

• Built-in LUTs: I’m always going to like the freedom of RAW editing, but the convenience of well-done LUTs, including a Leica Monochrome, for ready out-of-camera JPEGs is incredibly freeing for most shooting situations on the G9II and GH7.
• Outstanding IBIS: The smaller MFT sensor has made truly outstanding in-body image stabilization possible. I was able to capture usable shots as slow as one second handheld.
• High dynamic range options: Features vary between bodies in LUMIX’s MFT lineup, but options like dynamic range boost (DR boost), in-camera stacked-shot HDR, and HLG (Hybrid Log-Gamma) profile all add more flexibility to your shoots.
• Subject detection: Like all brands’ subject detection modes, LUMIX’s are occasionally hit-or-miss, but I was glad to see they perform fairly strongly most of the time. It was also nice to see that some models, like the GH7, differentiate between cars or motorcycles and trains and planes as well.
• Extra resolution: Handheld or tripod mode options to stack burst shots for up to 100MP (depending on model) give you that detail boost you need when you know you have to deeply crop after the shot.

Panasonic’s LUMIX Micro Four Thirds Camera Lineup

The LUMIX G Series features MFT sensors and offers great flexibility from top-end pro shooting to pocket travel cameras to drone use. One thing that really struck me about the LUMIX G Series lineup is the versatility. It isn’t just for one type of photographer or filmmaker, and even the budget-conscious entries offer a lot of performance.

LUMIX BGH1 Box Camera

Great for: Multi-camera livestreamers, solo videographers, event videographers, drone/gimbal/vehicle video

Created for video, the BGH1 is built with cinematography in mind. Designed for drone, gimbal, and vehicle mounting, the Lumix box camera features powerful remote controls and live streaming options.

LUMIX GX85

Great for: Budget-conscious hybrid shooters, minimalist photographers/videographers, street photographers, travel photographers

Its compact profile, paired with the power of larger bodies, makes the GX85 a great option for travel and street photography. Five-axis dual IBIS using optical and magnetic stabilization meets sharpness, thanks in part to the lack of an optical low-pass filter.

LUMIX G85

Great for: Adventure travel photographers, solo content creators, vloggers, street photographers, beginning hybrid shooters 

A bit chunkier than the GX85 but still compact at about half the bulk of a standard DSLR body. The G85 gives you a more substantial body to hold while staying compact enough to carry easily in almost any situation, with a more ergonomic grip than smaller cameras.

LUMIX G97

Great for: Content creators on the move, storm chasers, budget-conscious travel videographers, hobbyist photographers, budget-conscious shooters, photographers preferring in-camera editing

The G97 ticks a lot of boxes. From great IBIS and 4K video to in-camera live composite and color styles, it frees photographers from long editing sessions on the computer with usable output straight out of camera.

LUMIX G100

Great for: Vloggers, social media content creators, casual hybrid shooters, travel content creators

Pocket-sized compact freedom for content creators with a focus on video. It shoots QFHD 4K video at 24p or 30p and HD at 60p plus strong video image stabilization for moving while shooting without a gimbal.

LUMIX G100D

Great for: Mobile content creators, vloggers, travel videographers, creators with a USB-C workflow, adventure travel videographers 

This updated version of the G100 swaps the micro-USB port for a Type-C USB port. Plus, it features advanced video image stabilization and updated viewfinder technology with a smooth OLED for a better shooting experience.

LUMIX G7 

Great for: Tight budget videographers, photography students, street photography, beginning YouTube creators, shooters needing a lightweight body, photographers needing tactile controls 

Meeting tight budget constraints while still delivering strong features and quality output, the G7 helps level the playing field for beginning creators. The ability to pull a photo from a frame of video in-camera beautifully balances today’s creators’ needs for video and photo without needing a second shooter or interrupting the flow of a shoot.

LUMIX GH7

Great for: Professional filmmakers, indie filmmakers, wildlife videographers, YouTube creators, sports videographers, documentary makers, photographers exploring high-end video

Still a hybrid camera but geared for motion, the GH7 gives filmmakers and creators access to next-generation sound with 32-bit float recording with an adapter and also records internally in Apple ProRes RAW. Combined with phase detection AF, which adds subject-type recognition, the GH7 offers action and wildlife shooters (video and still photography) more reliable focus in rapidly changing situations.

LUMIX GH5II

Great for: Direct-to-platform live streamers, adventure travel photographers and videographers, indie documentary filmmakers, storm chasers

An update to the GH5, the GH5II adds even more freedom from long-editing sessions for filmmakers with wireless livestreaming, simultaneous HDMI output and preloaded V-Log L. It meets videographers in the moment they’re shooting for fast production without leaving behind the features still photographers count on.

LUMIX G9II

Great for: Landscape photographers, architectural photographers, event and portrait photographers, gear minimalist photographers, hybrid shooters with a focus on stills, street photographers, hobbyist wildlife photographers 

Geared for still shooters but still video capable, the G9II is a top-end workhorse for almost any photography type. Powerful IBIS, high-resolution photo stacking, real-time LUTs, and great RAW color handling give every photographer something to love. 

Should You Make the Jump to LUMIX?

Whether you completely ditch your old system or add LUMIX as a new tool in your existing lineup, there are a lot of options to fit your style. Plus, if you’ve ever grumbled under your breath about overly complicated menus or feel your current camera ecosystem has gotten pointlessly overcomplicated, LUMIX could be a strong contender to add to your workflow.

If you aren’t ready to ditch everything for a jump, indulging in a personal fixed-lens everyday camera might be the breath of fresh air you need. Check out what Fernando Martinez has to say about the Lumix L10 difference.

The post Why Micro Four Thirds Still Matters: A Deep Dive into the Lumix Family appeared first on Adorama.