Facing Limitations to Improve Your Photo Taking Ability
The Canon EOS R paired to a Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM that I gushed about last week is just about as close to Nirvana as any imaging device could ever be. It can do just about anything to get the perfect shot, given the flexibility the pairing offers in range of focal lengths, close focusing distances, high ISO sensitivity in low light, lower shutter speeds from image stabilization, and effortless focus tracking - all assembled together in a relatively lightweight package that won’t break your back after a full day pounding the pavement.
In my opinion, there is no other pairing as perfect as the EOS R and the RF 24-240. It is simply the best camera and lens combination for family vacations, children’s birthday parties, and any other noteworthy get-togethers or life events. Nothing else packs as much of a wallop as the one-two punch of the EOS R and the RF 24-240 in tackling most conventional photo opportunities. It’s like having a portable all-in-one camera with many lenses of varying focal lengths - all ready and raring to do whatever you throw at it - even in suboptimal light.
For that reason, the EOS R with the RF 24-240 seems boundless in what it can do, since it is not hamstrung by as many practical limitations. Seldom are you too far out of reach, or not wide enough for sufficient coverage, or not close enough to optimally frame a composition. Moreover, it also gives you the option to be inclusive or isolating towards the subject, in addition to the option of compressing or expanding the background distance to the subject in substantially bringing closer or increasing environmental coverage in documentation.
High praises indeed. But if I really do like the EOS R with the RF 24-240 as much as I have stated, then why do I continue to eschew this pairing in favor of rangefinder film technology from the last century? In doing that, am I not rejecting the many advantages of boundlessness in limiting myself to just one focal length along with the inflexibility of much slower film regardless of inconsistent light conditions? In addition, am I not adding drama to my photo taking by needlessly hamstringing my efforts with unwanted compromises in composition?
It was thus a couple of weeks ago when I found myself once again in such a precarious situation. The weather report had promised clear skies and sun for the afternoon. But when I got to the location, the clouds gathered and started to rain on my parade. As a result, my original plan to shoot in daylight film at the normal range was dashed. I mean, it is not as if I want my partner-in-crime to get her hair wet. Because of that, we were forced to take shelter under cover away from the open where my choice of lens and film was no longer appropriate.
Still, I did have a fast lens with me. My predicament was not the end of the world. I could have easily remedied my limitations by shooting wide open. However, the prospects of only capturing shallow depth of field images in suboptimal light did not appeal to my recreational approach. Having to exert the necessary effort to hit tack focus on each and every image shot would have felt too much like actual work. Because of that, I continued to linger around the margins for the rain to subside long enough for me to shoot in good light out in the open.
Periodically, there would be a break in the shower. But it never lasted long enough for me to continue without running for cover again. Eventually, I had to bite the bullet and face the music. This photowalk cannot wait out the passing rain. The light was going to fade in the late afternoon. Either way, I had to work with the limitations of my circumstances. I was stuck with Agfa Vista 200 and a 50mm lens to work my magic under subdued light in less open spaces already filling up with people also seeking for cover from the intermittent downpour.
Work my magic I did to save this photowalk. There really was no other way. When there was a break in the rain, I went out into the open to shoot under better light. When it started again, I had to seek for shelter once more. In doing so, I had to shoot wide open, given the change in available light. But, that can become tedious after a while. Fortunately, I also brought a flash with me. I always bring one, since it can mean the difference between capturing content or nothing at all - seeing how it can save me from unforeseen circumstantial limitations.
Unfortunately, even flash photography comes with its own limitations. You can only fire off your flash when the light coming from it is the dominant source in the image capture. Otherwise, there will be a difference in color balance between the foreground and the background. Of course, this problem can be saved with the addition of color gels for your flash - assuming it was brought along. But if I did have the forethought to bring color gels with me, I would have definitely been more prepared in having the forethought to bring some faster film too.
In practice, most enthusiasts typically shy away from flash photography, given its perceived complexities. But in reality, nothing can be further from the truth. Flash photography is actually much less difficult than shooting wide open with a fast lens. After all, you are forced to stop down, given the low shutter synchronization speed of conventional flash photography. This increases depth of field, which simplifies your focusing. Best of all, the use of flash photography also simplifies the metering process, since it completely does away with it.
You see, the exposure setting of your camera is already predetermined by the shutter synchronization speed, the speed of the loaded film, and the aperture setting (which has to be stopped down considerably, given the level of discharge even at minimum power). So as long as you discharge the correct amount of power for your shooting distance and synchronize your flash to your camera’s setting, your exposure will be right. As a result, metering is not needed since it is the flash which you have set that exposes the image - not the available light.
Flash photography - especially with film - does take practice to figure out with regards to how much power to discharge and how much to stop down. And if not for the weather not staying on script, I would not have had another opportunity to pad my experience with more practice in confronting limitations. Mind you, it is not as if I welcome bad shooting conditions, since it can adversely affect the outcome in documentation. But, much of what we learn as photographers do come from the manner in which we face circumstantial limitations.
Circumstantial limitations also came into play with my lens. At the 50mm focal range, I often found it too tight in coverage when shooting in confined spaces and communal areas filling up with people seeking for shelter from the rain. Essentially, finding ways to overcome the challenge of capturing the subject at the 50mm focal length with less isolation requires an increase in shooting distance. On a sunny day, that is not a problem. But when it rains, increasing that distance for more coverage might not always be possible in tight spaces.
And if there are more people about - as in my case with folks waiting out the rain - the issue of photobombing becomes a concern. Typically, photobombing at the 50mm focal length enters the frame between the subject and the camera. Because of that, decisiveness is necessary in shortening the time between composition and the act of documentation. Failure to do that can test the consideration of passersby outside the frame waiting for you to take the shot, thus resulting in indifference that leads to unwanted photobombing in-frame.
Also worth noting, photobombing behind the subject could also become a concern at the 50mm focal length, owing to compression bringing the background closer to the subject. Admittedly, the tighter angle of view will not have the same coverage of a wide angle lens to inadvertently capture stray passersby in-frame. But owing to the compression bringing the background closer, whoever is inadvertently caught in-frame will be brought closer to the subject and therefore appear visibly more prominent at 50mm than on a wide angle lens.
Ideally, I would like to have brought a wider angle lens to shoot closer up for greater environmental coverage. But having the right lens… or the right film… or even the EOS R with the RF 24-240 would not have put me in a position to confront circumstantial limitations. Ultimately, it is through this exercise in figuring out how to work with limitations that gives me the practical experience of dealing with adversity, which essentially is just real life happening. Life is not always picture perfect, but as photographers, we are still tasked to make the best of it.
Mind you, it is not as if I want to go out of my way to make my life unnecessarily challenging. But if I must deal with bad shooting conditions, I might as well get something out of it in hopes of becoming more prepared the next time, given the benefit of experience. At least then, I will have the learning curve to know what to do.
All images have been digitized on a Pakon F135, automatically cropped from full negative during the scanning process, and fine tuned very slightly in Adobe Lightroom. Images with more editing disclosed in the captions.
All film shot and developed at box speed.