Showcase Nikon 200mm f/2 VR - Part IV

Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
1,643
Location
Central, FL USA
I could not hold back any longer, Andrew's work is far from a one trick pony. Not only are his pp skills at a master level but his composition, use of color and space is about the best I have seen on this forum.
This is not directed at anyone in particular but more of a general statement as to what I have seen on this site. If anything is a one trick pony are the countless shots I see of birds just standing there or flying against a bland blue sky that do not exhibit any bit of compostional skill when taken. Yet you hear all the huraahs and atta boys when the image is pretty lacking. If you take out the cars out of Andrew's images, and replace them with any other object, 90% of his images would still be very strong.
Andrew keep posting, big fan of your work over here... :)
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
1,643
Location
Central, FL USA
Oh, and Colin,
You are one of the photographers that shoots birds and follows through with good composition and it shows across the different subjects you shoot whether landscapes or people..
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2010
Messages
35
Location
Minnesota
Whoa!

A different car would be great I agree.
Hoyl cow are you aggressive! Colin, I think you greatly undervalue the 200 f/2 as a portrait lens, which is what I believe is its intended purpose. I have looked at your work and it is excellent, but I consider you to be much more of a landscape/bird shooter than a wedding/portrait shooter. I wonder whether you could do the 200 f/2 justice?
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
1,643
Location
Central, FL USA
one last part to add.
Any person that is trying to hone their skill in photography, whether a seasoned pro or beginner can always learn by looking at other photographer's work. We all have different ways of viewing a scene. When I look at Andrew's work I look at his interplay of colors, dramatic lighting and the way he composes the scene to make the car look like a work of art. So no matter what the subject is, we can definately learn from other photographers, we never stop learning unless we want to.
ok...so Im rambling on again
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
7,499
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Hilarious. Some people spend way too much time nitpicking every little detail on other people's pics.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
3,508
Location
North East, UK
Real Name
Colin Carter
Hoyl cow are you aggressive! Colin, I think you greatly undervalue the 200 f/2 as a portrait lens, which is what I believe is its intended purpose. I have looked at your work and it is excellent, but I consider you to be much more of a landscape/bird shooter than a wedding/portrait shooter. I wonder whether you could do the 200 f/2 justice?
i used to own the Canon 200 F2 before i switched and liked it alot and it got alot of use for weddings / portraits etc but i never got he nikon version as i prefer the 85 f1.4G now for portraits / weddings etc

the 200/2 is just to much of a pig to carry around along with all the other gear i take
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
6,721
Location
So Fla
no wonder I don't post in here anymore
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Oct 2, 2012
Messages
279
Location
UK
Am I interested in buying a 200 f2 - yes
Do I browse this thread to see what people are doing with it - yes
Would it be my sole reason for buying one - no
does it matter if visual echo takes pictures of the same car a lot of the time - no
is the composition and presentation of his images always of the highest standard - yes
why do nice people argue endlessly on internet forums about next to nowt - haven't a clue
 
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
4,043
Location
Missouri
And Andrew, I have no idea what made you bring up the blur. You have your style and I have mine. Can't you just leave it at that?
Your style is faking dof? OK, sorry didn't know that.

You don't hear from me when you post radioactive portraits :wink: You never ever hear from me about it, because I respect and admire your work.
Radioactive? Whatever you say man.

But what I found most perplexing is that a few months back, you sent me a PM begging me to share what and how I do my processing. You were willing to learn then and I helped you, but I never thought that you will turn around and use it against me later on. I learned my lesson I guess.
Joseph, you have lost your mind, I have never begged you for anything, I asked about something I didn't look closely enough at, and later found to be fake, you never helped me with anything.
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2009
Messages
7,499
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Your style is faking dof? OK, sorry didn't know that.
No, you missed the point.

Joseph, you have lost your mind, I have never begged you for anything, I asked about something I didn't look closely enough at, and later found to be fake, you never helped me with anything.
okay... if you say so :wink:
but just because you found it not to be your liking, doesn't mean I didn't help you.

Let's move on..
 
Joined
Dec 3, 2012
Messages
6,519
Location
N Idaho
Am I interested in buying a 200 f2 - yes
Do I browse this thread to see what people are doing with it - yes
Would it be my sole reason for buying one - no
does it matter if visual echo takes pictures of the same car a lot of the time - no
is the composition and presentation of his images always of the highest standard - yes
why do nice people argue endlessly on internet forums about next to nowt - haven't a clue
When I was looking at this lens I looked here and at other of shots taken with it at various places on the net. The real WOW factor for me was when I stopped in at a shop that had a couple of them in stock, let me put it on a D800 and try it out. If you can't do that, I'd recommend renting on for a few days. Even after all the discussion here about it and PS, I still beieve it is an amazing piece of work.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2008
Messages
2,276
Location
GA
Curious.

What makes it different than faking sharpness, colors, contrast, etc.?
And we've officially gone full circle (and the point has been proven). But i'm going to back out now since this forum is too sensitive to any kind of debate, critique or form of criticism.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
525
Location
Canada
I could not hold back any longer, Andrew's work is far from a one trick pony. Not only are his pp skills at a master level but his composition, use of color and space is about the best I have seen on this forum.
Probably the wrong choice of terms, but he's hardly anything other than a automobile specialist. Nothing wrong with that, just gets boring after a while regardless of how well its all presented.

As someone else noted, his portraits are sometimes cooked pretty bad and they all too frequently lack even light on the subjects faces which shows a real lack of creative lighting skills and way too much focus on the background composition. In the same way that I obviously need to spend a bit more time working on ways to use photoshop more creatively, Andrew's portrait skills need about the same amount of work in scene and subject presentation . You can have all the best camera gear in the world and beautiful subjects, but if you don't modify your light well and don't employ seasoned skills of direction then the portraits will look rather dull and emotionless. Peter Hurley isn't a wealthy headshot guru for nothing. :]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
525
Location
Canada
Here is an important point about the 200f2 and those that are singularly obsessed with its shallow DOF. Check Andrews photo here:

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Considering the significant subject distance here its a great example of a photo that clearly doesn't need to be shot with a fast lens like the 200f2 to create the effect seen in the photo. At f2 the entire front end of the vehicle is in focus, so calling that shallow is just a bad use of language. Could that have been done with a 70-200 f2.8 and looked almost exactly the same? You bet your life. Would it have been as sharp. Not a chance.

The only way to really capture the unique qualities the lens offers at its widest aperture is to keep your subject close. It was, after all, designed specifically for arena sports where the photog is right up front in the action. Are Andrews car photos awesome? Yes. Are they a true exemplar of what is offered from the lens? Not really, most of them can be shot quite easily with another lens of the same focal length without much change to speak of. The portraits, despite the lack of light management on the subject, are closer to exemplifying what one would call the unique quality of telephoto compression and shallow depth of field. Its not the shallow part thats unique about it, its what the compression does to the scene that we all fawn over.
 
Joined
Sep 27, 2010
Messages
745
Location
Washington
the 200/2 used for track T&I.

all at f/2.2, so not quite wide open...what was I thinking?

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom