5 Unpopular Opinions I Have About Photography

5 Unpopular Opinions I Have About Photography

Last year, I spoke to a number of leading industry professionals and collated 29 of their combined unpopular opinions. This year, so that people can put a face to the opinion, I'm going to give 10 of my own.

The 50mm f/1.8 is one of the first lenses most photographers buy, and it certainly was mine. Every photographer appeared to endorse it, and unlike the other glass I had my eye on, I could keep my organs. Over the years, I've used it less and less, and while I spent some time debating a 50mm f/1.2, I didn't pull the trigger, but not because the staggering price as such, but rather the focal length.

For me, the 50mm is a half-measure, and not a good one. If I want to take wide portraits, or street shots with a narrow depth of field, I'm reaching for a 35mm. If I'm taking portraits with a little more subject separation or less of the scene involved, I'm grabbing my 85mm, 100mm, or 135mm. The 50mm doesn't fit comfortably in any camp, and if it were the same price as 35mm and 85mm lenses, I suspect far fewer people would have a 50mm in their bag.

2. Being a Great Photographer and Being an Expert on the Photography Industry and Cameras Are Not the Same Thing

This one bothers me in two ways. Firstly, I see people criticize the shots of some of the best camera reviewers in the industry because they're not taking incredible images with a review unit. Some of the best experts we have in this industry in terms of camera knowledge, industry knowledge, and historical understanding are not the best photographers in the world, nor do they have to be. You can be an expert without shooting magazine covers and high-end commercial campaigns.

Similarly, just because someone is a leading photographer creating the most beautiful images you've ever seen doesn't mean they have a clue about the industry or cameras in general. Industry knowledge and photographic prowess are not the same thing and often do not coexist. Don't discard a knowledgeable camera reviewer's opinion because they didn't take Vogue images with it, and don't presume somebody taking images for Vogue necessarily knows much about the camera industry.

3. I Don't Care If You Just Shot a Wedding or a Magazine Editorial With a Mobile Phone; It's Not Hard Anymore

A quick snap with the Google Pixel 3 XL easily rivaling DSLRS of old.

I can't quite believe these videos and articles still crop up. Five years ago, if you shot a high-end editorial with a camera phone, it was noteworthy, but even then, only just. If you're doing it now, it's not remotely impressive or interesting. Modern phones have cameras so capable and jammed with tech that you can accomplish brilliant images with them in most genres. I have written a few times recently about using my Pixel 3 XL as a makeshift secondary camera body for wide-angle shots; it's not perfect, but it's damn good.

4. The Innovation in YouTube Channels Has Dropped off a Cliff

I'll caveat this point: I am fully aware of how hard it is to create consistent video content for a YouTube channel. It is a full-time job and a hard one. My grievance, however, is with the steady influx of new, fresh-faced YouTubers happy to walk in the footprints of thousands of others. They put some old cameras on a shelf behind their desk, they stick a blue LED on, and they talk about a new camera while switching between gimbal shots of the lens or body sitting somewhere reasonably nice. I can't be alone in my boredom for this, can I?

This is why I love and share the work of YouTubers who are doing something — anything — different: walking around cities in the snow taking first-person perspective video of them doing street photography, talking about taboo subjects like money, or reviewing the weirdest lenses they can find.

5. People Only Shoot Wide Open, in the Sweet Spot, or at f/22 Because They're Too Lazy to Figure out the Best Aperture for the Desired Shot

I've been sitting on this rant for a while, possibly because I was once guilty of it, but I think we all have been. The apertures that people use tend to be one of three: wide open at f/2.8 etc., the sharpest aperture, which is usually f/8 or f/9, or f/22 because they're dragging the shutter. I use all of these apertures and often. However, there are many times where those apertures between f/8 and wide open are useful. I'll give two of my most common examples.

When I shoot editorial portraiture and I'm using a tight crop on the subject's face, I want to get most of their face in focus, and while wide open might look pleasing, it doesn't do that. However, I don't want to use f/8 or f/9, because then everything (depending on my focal length and distance from subject) is tack sharp, and it looks boring. So, I will often use f/5.6 or the surrounding apertures so that the focus fall-off starts around my subject's ears.

The second example is similar. When I'm doing environmental portraiture, I want to capture all of the subject and some of the surroundings, but I don't want the surroundings to be tack sharp. But, it's a tough line to walk, because if I make the surroundings too blurry, it loses the environmental factor of the shot. I will typically work out the best aperture for getting my subject crisp and their surroundings separated enough to make the subject pop, but still discernible.

Bonus: Olympus Is Outshining Every Other Brand for Tech Innovation, but No One Seems to Care Because They’re Micro Four Thirds

Taken with the O-MD E-M1 Mark III using Live ND to drag the shutter in blindly bright conditions.

I recently spent a while in Costa Rica with Olympus and their new OM-D E-M1 Mark III, and it was eye-opening in a number of ways. Firstly, Micro Four Thirds sensors aren't anywhere near as bad as people make out. That said, I admit that for some photography, they aren't a good fit. But the biggest surprise was the tech going into the E-M1 III and some of their other recent bodies. They have spectacularly good functions, like autofocus on stars, a live ND filter, live in-body image composites, and so on. Not to mention they have arguably the best IBIS system in the world. It seems to me there are a hell of a lot of people who could really benefit from these cameras that won't consider them because they're not APS-C or full-frame.

What Are Your Unpopular Opinions?

Many of the comments will be bashing me, but in-between them, make sure you leave your own unpopular opinions (about photography — don't get carried away) and share the heat that I'm about to endure!

Rob Baggs's picture

Robert K Baggs is a professional portrait and commercial photographer, educator, and consultant from England. Robert has a First-Class degree in Philosophy and a Master's by Research. In 2015 Robert's work on plagiarism in photography was published as part of several universities' photography degree syllabuses.

Log in or register to post comments
126 Comments
Previous comments

My questions about microcontrast are these:

1 Can anyone show me photos of good and bad microcontrast taken with two different lenses of the same subject with the same lighting?

2 Can anyone show me how it makes a significant difference?

Those are worthwhile questions for any and all gear decisions.

I don't have lenses for doing that kind of comparison, but I can try to comment...

I'm not sure there's good vs. bad. A lens with high micro contrast might make skin blemishes far more visible than a client would want and a lens with low micro contrast (as a result of, say, spherical aberration) might given a softening effect that a portrait client would prefer. Conversely a client that wants detailed shots of fabrics would definitely prefer to the high micro contrast lens because they would care about those high frequency details far more.

We can skip the math in the pdf I'm linking to here, but it might be instructional to jump to page 9 and following with compares the imaging results of two differently size pinhole cameras and how the size of the pinhole affects overall contrast vs. high frequency contrast (i.e. micro contrast).
https://www.kth.se/social/files/542d2d2df276546ca71dffaa/Pinhole.pdf

The pinhole with a radius that's 78% of the focal length looks better than a pinhole that's 100% of the focal length (page 9). The same is true for the images on page 12 and again on 14. And yet when you zoom in closer onto the images, you find that the high frequency detail is higher in the image that look softer overall and vice versa.

But both pinholes could be used to create compelling images in the hands of the right photographer.

Eye AF is for lazy people...

3 & 4 are pet peeves of mine. My pet peeve: film shooters. Go ahead and shoot film if you want. I did for years and I am SO over it.

Does it bother you when you see someone shooting film in the field?

#1 seems to be more applicable to portrait or street photographers. Not only is a 50mm f/1.8 arguably the best budget portrait lens for APS-C shooters, but for full frame shooters who shoot more nature than people, 50mm is an undeniably useful focal length. I find it on my lens around 50% of the time when I'm shooting nature.

"... 50mm f/1.8 arguably the best budget portrait lens for APS-C shooters..." ssshhhhh... Don't drive the price up.

I think that the 50mm focal length is super boring. It’s not wide enough for wide angle and not tele enough for tele.
Also even though I’m a Sony shooter I’ve had a slew of Olympus cameras over the years and loved them.

#1 & #5 are dead on!

Also "Only Real Professional Photographers only shoot with Nikon or Canon Stamped on the bodies of their cameras" everyone else is just a Hobbyist, Amateur or Professional Poser Con Artist.

Quality in and of your photos matters more than the name stamped on your camera. Posing, Lighting Exposure and Composition.

I've been hearing this 'B S' since 1982/ 35mm film. I shot with Minolta(s) and could stomp the Shyte outta these 'Professionals' quality-wise but because I wasn't using a Canon or Nikon I wasn't as good as 'them', yeah right, I was better and my photos were consistently better. I would also shoot from time to time with a Hasselblad, then I was a ‘Real Professional Photographer’ but as soon as I went back to using My Minolta(s) I was an Amateur again; How’s that work?

I made the mistake of listening to them when I went digital 8 years ago and bought Nikon; now wish I had stayed with Sony. I still take Superior Photos but not because of the name stamped on my camera, because of all the 'books', yes those things you have to use your hands to turn the pages on that are found in the Library that I read, studied and even bought a whole bunch of to the point I have to turn the shelves of my bookcases over every few months or so because they bow from the weight of the books. Well that and all the actual real-life practicing I went out and did to learn my craft.

If I wear Jeans that have ‘Jordache’ sewn on the butt pocket am I all of the sudden somehow a Model? I don’t think so! But I wish!

Elitism at its best.

And? What r u trying to say? The photos in my account are years old from when I just switched from Film into Digital Photography and it was a (non-Paid, Gratis, Donated-time Gift) for a Microscopically Awareness Calendar (Straight out of the Camera/no editing) and exactly what the Client requested. When I work for a Client I provide them exactly what they request. The model also loved those photos.

So whats your issue?

I was addressing the Competitions I had entered over the years and consistently beat out these' Real Professional Nikon/Canon Photographers' Film Camera shooters.

So what is your particular issue with the photos in my Profile? My profile pic photo of myself not included because I didn't take that one.

You're saying they're lacking in some way, tell me, open my eyes. I think they are better than average considering that I was at someone else's studio, using their setup as they set it up and that I captured these images straight out of camera. What's your issue?

Anyone can come by afterward not knowing the setting, studio and setup and say using the photos you took as reference I easily could and can do better, but without using these photos as reference and not having 'artistic license ' to just do whatever you want, What Are Your Issues?

So easy to try to take someone else down a peg or two, easiest thing to do and always some peoples first instinct, because well if I can take him down a notch well than my worth goes up double the same amount of value, Don't just insinuate about my photos lacking, tell me, educate me?

What would you as 'The Master', do to make the photos better?

I think you are talking a lot without really actually 'Saying anything', just insinuating the 'Possibility Of'l which only cheapens 'Your Opinion'.

Not only that but you have no profile photo so you are hiding behind your anonymity but the only 2 photos you have in your profile are good, I do Wildlife and Macro Photography also but its not my main theme and I have scores of photographs I could and probably should load up online but I have little time 'doing-so' is not my priority so that being said, So again what's your issue?

Again I'm not motivated to 'present' all my photographic work online through these social media outlets; I have a paper portfolio as well as a digital one that I show to perspective clients when I meet with them, this is the main way I obtain Clients and work so therefore there is no need for me o offer proof that you demand to see in order to satisfy 'You', who are you? Why do you demand that I prove to You? What will it gain me? Or are you just demanding that I argue with you because you have nothing better to do than go out there and Troll and demean others?

This was just one outfit out of the entire shoot and just one of the sequences I shot, it was not meant to be an entire representation of the entire multi-hours of shooting as well as there were 10 other models that were on hand for the same said shoot and again it was originally for a calendar.

Funny how you turned this one comment into an opportunity to mount a personal attack on someone who you don't know and who's work you have no familiarity with.

But Risk nothing and continue to try to boost you 'perceived value' all you apparently need to.

Are you and Edward Blake actually the same person? I think maybe so because you demand to see my portfolio but have little to nothing in your own profiles.

Sorry, no it wasn't - my original comment was totally about Elitism about the Name that is stamped on your camera being more important than the quality of the photos you are taking
& producing; I even said exactly that in my original comment, maybe you should have read it better rather than going after me for something I didn't actually say. But again You are Demanding Proof, why?

Sorry, no it wasn't - my original comment was totally about Elitism about the Name that is stamped on your camera being more important than the quality of the photos you are taking
& producing; I even said exactly that in my original comment, maybe you should have read it better rather than going after me for something I didn't actually say. But again You are Demanding Proof, why?

Given that you are an amazing photographer why would you post such terrible images? I note your Instagram carries the same and your Facebook carries nothing of any value whatsoever.

So all my social media outlets need to/have to be stuffed only with the best of the best of the best and need to have a complete cross-section of all the Photography that I do and need to pass inspection & critique from any and all peoples on the internet, especially You? Don't you think thats asking a little much? And what do you find so awful about the photos that are there? As the Critic you risk nothing to criticize but demand your words be law, ............curious..?

Funny how this became your opportunity to mount a personal attack on someone just because of one simple comment? Why do you think that was called for? I'm curious why you needed to Troll me and then mount an attack on me?

Are you and William Johnson actually the same person? I think maybe so because you demand to see my portfolio but have little to nothing in your own profiles.

1. Commenting that ALL of your displayed work is garbage after you claim to be better than everyone else is not a "personal attack".

2. I "demand" nothing; rather, I observed your displayed work is garbage.

3. The fact I have nothing on display in no way alters the fact your displayed work is complete garbage. Your response in this respect is fallacious and irrelevant.

4. Your comment and responses would suggest you are suffering from psychological disorder.

I went further in a subsequent edit but decided it would likely hit a little close to home for the sensitive bunny.

So easy to criticize you, risk nothing, you provide nothing and then make fake profiles to support your nothing opinions, Banal, very Banal. Who are you that I need to value your opinion so? And both of you are the same person, so why make 2 different profiles to support what you the (1) person is saying? A lie told by 2 versions of the same person is still just a lie. Go play your silly games you are trivial at best.

It says a lot about you that you believe I have created two different profiles simply to criticise you. Apparently we can add incapable of drawing accurate inference to terrible photographer and psychologically disordered.

Also, a friend paying you a few dollars to take a few terrible images does not equate to running a business.

who's the friend you now mention? What friend(s) is/are paying me to photograph him, her or them? Where are you now coming up with this? You make up stuff and then tout them as facts. I don't understand why you are so invested in coming after me like this?

Those photos must have been a friend because no actual client would accept them.

You stick your dysfuctional head up every couple of days, I respond, and you view that as being "invested". More evidence of pathology.

Actually I'm not on the Internet all the time, I have a semi-busy life away from the computer, I live on my own, in my own apartment all by myself, paying all my own bills and not in my parents' basement rent-free.

Sorry actually she (the woman in the photographs you have chosen to come after me about) is not a friend, she is just one of the several various models that were at the photo-shoot that day for the Calendar shoot. As I have already said in a previous reply post but you somehow in your focused ranting personal attack on me, missed that.

You mount a personal attack on me after my making one simple post reply about ‘Elitism’ in the photography industry and come after me in a fever from all sides making base-less and untrue accusations and come after ‘my Credentials’ even though I haven’t touted or provided any to you. You have decided its well within 'Your rights' to stalk me over several social media forums and then when you find nothing there that you can further use against me you tout that as the reason that I have no reason to be offering any opinions(s) at all, Why are you so threatened by me?

I don’t know you; I have never met you and you haven’t provided me any of your own credentials and have few if any photos you actually took yourself posted in your own profile(s) yet you demand that I yield my opinion about ‘Elitism’ that I posted on the original ‘Reply Post’ which you never addressed yet decided you would come directly after me in a personal attack for having any opinion at all, Why?

You have diagnosed me with a 'psychologically disorder' touting 'evidence of pathology'; are you also a Doctor? When did you ever have the opportunity to properly examine me? I don't recall ever having you as one of my Doctors. Again you go off on a tangent about nothing, you say a lot but nothing really of any substance, you provider nothing as actual proof, but your own 'opinions' base-less as they may be along with whatever you 'inference' at the time and try to provide wrong and incorrect information as 'your evidence' and you expect that to be accepted and more than enough?

As I just said: I don’t know you; I have never met you but somehow, someway, somewhere you have decided you know everything about me, even more about me than I even know about myself? You make Base-less allegations and tout facts that one (1) aren’t facts actually but your personal uneducated/under-educated opinions and two (2) are totally untrue. You make base-less allegations and just keep coming after me for what reason? Absolutely none, I would say that makes you Extremely Invested.

My advice to you would be to get off the Internet, shut down your parents computer and climb the stairs out of your parent’s basement, go outside and get yourself a real life.

Thanks, bye.

Yeah, you're totally balanced and stable. I suggest you get psychological help.

To very briefly explain; the fact you are able to function at the most basic level within society does not change the fact you are suffering from psychosis, delusons of grandeur, and a persecution complex.

Also, your photography is still complete garbage.

if you say so. I think you are more in it for the argument and keeping my attention than you are actually making actual points Plus the longer you converse like this the more you sound like you are in middle or high school and not an actual adult, so therefore why should I want to hear from a teenager? What could you possibly have as an opinion that would be of any value to anyone especially me?..none

And yet you keep coming back.

Also, your photography is complete garbage.