Best focal length for shooting cars

It really depends on what you are taking the shot for, what your background is, and what effect you want.

shots of my old stang

Here is a shot that would use a wide angle lens for a little different angle


this is a 70-200 at 200mm to get a little more pinpoint on the car look...


It really depends on what your shot is...

and for the exposure....
always no doubt in my mind would i rather under expose a shot than over expose it...trust me..from doing tons of headshots and shoots...always always have a better chance to recover an underexposed shot than a blownout overexposed shot

my .02

 

I think the "L" indicates that the lens includes a lens hood Carlos. The "nifty fifty" I was referring to was the one that pektel linked.

 

I agree completely, it depends on the type of image you want... I tend to use a longer lens in most cases, just to reduce distortion, and have the car look more normal... I also like the "wide smile" of a car, when a wide angle is used, like the image from Brianja, or the beautifully composed image by Scott... I like both images, very well done...
some get confused, as the human eye has an angle of view of about a 35mm lens, but sees ( distortion-wise ) of a lens between a 55-85 mm, In general, when the viewer sees an image, that is closer to the way their eyes sees, it is more pleasing... anything away from normal, must be done correctly, or it will appear the lens you used, was the only one you had... distortion is good if used correctly...

Exposure... the most general rule, is to say, that is completely image dependent, of the scene at the time... if the highlights are more important you expose to keep them in range... in almost all car images, there will be specular highlights that will be uncontrollable. Specular highlights can also fool your meter, if you are not careful... I had a photo instructor who always told us... "Expose just enough, and rarely more is needed..." If you need to error, it is better to be under than over...

If you need to salvage detail in Photoshop... it is far easier to pull it from the shadows, than to add texture/detail that you blew-out of the highlights... easier to selectively reduce noise, than to selectively add texture... ( believable texture... ) Both can be fixed, with enough time/effort/cost...

as far as cropping factors go... use a lens designed for the format of the sensor, and you will never need to worry about it... a mis-matched lens/sensor combo will be less sharp... will it be detectable ? In most cases not, or not enough that cannot be corrected via sharpening... Optics of a lens focus to a single point distance, this was far more critical with film, a digital image is sharpened via software, to compensate... Camera makers have chosen to solve design issues, size issues with software, rather than matching existing lens they make, or made in the past...

Sensor sizes... there are many, which is better... who really knows... logic says that bigger would be better... but, it depends more on the software connected to the sensor... magically it is still all a whole bunch of X's & 0's uniquely strung together... wink/smile...

 

i am not a photographer... but i find that if i use 200-300mm FAR AWAY and zoom in or close, but far background would give me a good contrast and make the car 'pop' a bit more.

 

Not sure if you were making a joke or not, but the L lenses are the top-of-the range glass that Canon makes.

 

Yeah I was. :giggle: However, the L lenses do include lens hoods AFAIK.

 

wide angle

 

Hey Ben, what focal length were you at with that shot?

 

18mm with 1.5 crop so 27mm

 

Ah what body? I think my XSi has a 1.6 crop.

 

nikon d200 1.5 crop

it'd be 28.8mm for you which is just a bit of a step back to get a shot like that

 

this is where people get confused, the 18mm lens did not change, still an 18mm, with the same amount of distortions, and perspectives... what has changed, is the image circle projected to the sensor, because the distance is not normal for the lens, or the sensor size does not match, or as in most cases... both... so it is an 18mm cropped, the unknowing person would/will think, the lens has changed...

i hope this helps solve some of the confusion, and the all too common misuse of terms...

smiles...

mike

 

I don't get what you mean... AFAIK, it's an 18mm lens but an effective 27mm focal length due to not having a full size sensor. Am I right or wrong? :shead:

 

the optics of the lens does not change, the sensor has cropped the image. the 18mm will still be the 18mm, in every respect... saying that is equal/close/similar to a 27mm, leads many to think the lens has changed... someone said you just need to move a couple feet, he must think the lens has changed. the optics have not changed... actually saying the sensor has cropped the image is even misleading, re-positioned might be better choice of words... the same 18mm lens, on three different DSLR cameras, will give you the same image, as far as perspective, but if the sensors are different, the format of the image will be different, what is shown left to right, top to bottom may have changed, but the image will still be the 18mm image... calling it a 24mm or a 27mm or a 30mm... from the three cameras is confusing and misleading...

 

Have any visual examples of what you're trying to explain? I feel that would help me better understand the message you're trying to convey. :thumb:

 

this is an example taken from the Panasonic LX3 page, showing the aspect ratios, the three different formats, the same lens...

well i cannot add the image I pulled, but, here is a link to the page, about half-way down, the sunset image of the boat...

DMC-LX3 | PRODUCTS | LUMIX | Digital Camera | Panasonic Global

 

my bad, that's exactly what it is