When photographers are interested in buying a full frame camera for the first time as an upgrade from their crop frame DSLR, they often have a nagging question.  Most photographers have heard there is a difference in the field of view (how much of the scene you can see) when using the same focal length of camera on either a crop frame or full frame camera.  So, they want to know how much of a difference it will make.

If you’re brand new to this concept, you can check out this article, where I discuss the difference between crop and full frame sensors.  This is also something that I discuss in my beginning online photography class.

They usually aren’t sure how to phrase this question, so they ask something like these questions:

1. Do you have any comparison photos of the mm difference between crop frame and full frame cameras?
2. I know my crop sensor camera is cutting off some of the picture, but how much?
3. What does a picture look like at 18mm on a crop frame camera, compared to 18mm on a full frame camera?

Field of View, and How it is Impacted by the Crop Factor

Field of view simply means the amount of the scene that you can capture in one frame.  A full frame sensor is physically larger than a smaller crop frame APS-C sized sensor.  This physical difference in the size of the sensor changes the physics of how the lens focuses the image on the sensor.  The larger sensor captures more field of view than the crop frame camera if all else is equal.

The sample picture below shows a picture taken at 18mm on a crop sensor camera, and the same picture at 18mm on a full-frame camera.  The difference is quite surprising.

The inner rectangle is the photo taken with a Nikon crop sensor DSLR, the full outer picture is taken at 18mm as well, but with a full frame camera.

Focal Length Equivalents

Please keep in mind that not all crop sensor DSLRs have the same size sensor.  The crop factor on APS-C crop sensor DSLRs from Pentax, Olympus, Sony, and Nikon is 1.5.  The crop factor for most Canon DSLRs is 1.6x.  That means that if you take an 18mm lens and put it on a Canon and Nikon, the Canon picture will be slightly more zoomed in.

On the table below showing the equivalent focal lengths of a full frame and crop sensor camera, I have used the more common 1.5x crop factor.  Canon cameras will be ever so slightly more zoomed in than even what the table shows.

This chart is based upon a 1.5x crop factor, which is the most common crop factor for “crop sensor” aps-c size sensors in DSLRs.

According to the table above, for example, you would have to use a 75mm lens on a full frame camera in order to get a photo with the exact same field of view as a photo from a crop sensor camera shooting at 50mm.

WHY Does the Sensor Size Change the Field of View?

Physics, that’s why!  Remember that the job of the lens is to take a scene and focus it to a small area.  The lens creates the reflected scene and puts it on the image sensor, which records the light focused by the lens.  Naturally, the larger the sensor is, the more of the focused image it can see.  If you’re more of a visual learner, check out the picture below that explains the concept.

See how the larger sensor is able to capture the entire reflected image, but the smaller sensor can’t? That’s why! Also, notice the reflected image is upside-down. Your DSLR flips the picture around automatically.

If you’d like to learn more about how your camera works and the basics of photography, you might consider taking my 30-Day Beginning Online Photography Class.

So is Full Frame Worth the Extra Cost?

It depends on what type of photography you’re doing.  It’s easy to say that full frame is better, but that’s not necessarily true.  For example, if you don’t have the money to plunk down on extremely expensive super telephoto lenses, then you may want the crop factor of a crop sensor camera to help you shoot wildlife or sports.  If you’re a landscape photographer, then you may want to spend the extra money on a full frame camera to help you go wider.

If you are in the market for a full frame camera, however, you should really take a long hard look at the Canon 6D or the Nikon D600.  These cameras are only a few months old and are MUCH less expensive than full frame cameras have traditionally been.Further Reading:

• The Difference Between Full-Frame and Crop Sensor DSLR Cameras
• What you probably don’t know about wide-angle lenses
• Nikon 10-24mm Lens Review
• Canon vs. Nikon: What’s the difference? (Updated for 2012)

Photographer

First of all, I must say that I have resisted the urge to write this post for over a year because I know I am going to get dozens of comments saying nothing more than “Megapixels are unnecessary–I want ISO.”  I often think that photographers simply repeat what they have heard other pro photographers teach online, and stick to it instead of investigating things on their own.

Before I get nerdy on you, allow me to provide some background if you’re newer to this debate.  On a camera sensor, there are millions of light receptors (called photosites) that collect information about how much light is present, color, and other information.  It used to be, in the early days of digital photography, that camera manufacturers could only fit 2 or 3 million pixels on these sensors.  Now, a sensor of the same size can contain 30 or more megapixels.  The problem with the proliferation of mexapixels on a sensor is that it reduces the space available for each photosite.  The smaller the photosites are, the more difficult it is for camera manufacturers to create cameras that can take pictures with high ISO levels and still maintain a low amount of digital noise.  So many photographers argue that they don’t want camera manufacturers to keep adding more megapixels on a sensor, and would prefer that the manufacturers instead focus on low light performance.

I COMPLETELY understand this sentiment.  I have missed many pictures in low light environments because my camera simply couldn’t take a clean picture without adding more light to the scene with a flash.  I understand that if all else is equal, the camera with fewer megapixels will produce images with less noise because each photosite has a larger area of light to gather from.  I get it.  Really–I do.  This mirrors a conversation I had with Scott Bourne a few weeks ago at the Google+ Photographer’s Conference, where he argued that the new Nikon D800 (which has 36.3 megapixels) should not be used by portrait photographers because it has too many megapixels.  I very respect Scott, but we disagree on this point.

UPDATE: Scott commented below and mentioned an article (which I hadn’t read yet) where he explained his position in more detail.  You can read that here.

Basically, there are two reasons why I believe megapixel count should not be discounted: (1) Megapixels future-proof your images, and (2) Megapixels allow photographers to crop significantly.

Future-Proof Your Images with Higher Megapixel Cameras

My first digital camera had 2.3 megapixels.  At the time, I remember other photographers telling me that it was plenty big to show the photos on a computer or to make small prints.  Now, only 8 years later, photos from that camera are not even capable of filling the screen of my laptop.

This begs the question: Do you want your entire photo library to look outdated in 8 years?

Obviously, the argument against that point is that digital cameras have improved dramatically since my tiny 2.3 megapixel camera, and now that we commonly shoot cameras between 10 and 18 megapixels, we’ve hit a sweet spot where resolution does not need to improve.  Photographers who believe this are quick to point out that even a 10 megapixel camera can print perfect photos at 11×14″.

I believe that this argument is short-sighted.  First of all, I’m not talking about print size.  Digital cameras have plenty of resolution to make large prints, and frankly, it’s rare that I feel the need to print.  Most of my photos are viewed on computers.

Speaking of computers, computer screens are currently undergoing a major transformation.  In January 2012, the mean screen resolution of a computer was 1366 x768; however, newer computers are coming out with incredibly improved screen resolution.  The reason for the improved screen resolution is that screens are being held closer and closer to the viewer.  My 55″ TV looks fantastic when viewed from across the room, even though it only has 1080 pixels on the short edge.  But now that iPads, phones, and other mobile devices and laptops are the most common way to view the web, the screens are only a few inches from our eyes (centimeters), meaning that we are able to see sharp details better.

In fact, the new Macbook Pro Retina Display has a resolution of 2880 x 1800 at 220 pixels per inch.  While that is a dramatic improvement, it still amounts to only 5 megapixels, which is fewer pixels than any modern DSLR.  So why do I think 10 megapixels is too few?  Because I want my images to look fantastic 10 years from now.

Increased Megapixels Allows for More Cropping

This argument for more megapixels was taught to me this last year while shooting photography in Yellowstone.  I was equipped with a 600mm lens from BorrowLenses.com and a 1.4 teleconverter.  That means that I was shooting at 840mm.  The lens was like a bazooka!

Even though I was shooting with the highest-end gear and the longest lens I could find, I often found myself just barely out of reach of some of the wildlife in Yellowstone.  In one particular instance, there was a beautiful red fox posed against the white snow that was just a bit too far for my lens to reach.  My camera had 16 megapixels, but when I cropped in to where I wanted the composition to be, there simply weren’t enough pixels to have the quality and detail that I would like.  Opportunity lost.

In fact, I find that this is frequently the case.  When I’m out shooting, I sometimes frame the shot to the composition that I would like, but then return home and find that I cropped in too tight.  With more megapixels, I could always shoot slightly wider than I imagine, and then crop in to the exact spot in Lightroom without worrying about losing detail in the photo.

A prime example of megapixels over focal length was mentioned by Juan Pons a few weeks ago on his excellent podcast.  Many wildlife photographers continued shooting the Canon 7D rather than upgrading to the 5D Mark II because the 7D is a crop sensor camera and therefore adds to the focal length of the lens (if you’re new to this concept, read this article).  For wildlife photographers, long focal lengths are essential.  However, photographers discovered that the 5D Mark III (a full-frame camera and thus shorter effective focal lengths) is actually is better than the crop sensor 7D for focal length, because its increased megapixels allow photographers to crop in more with the same number of pixels than the 7D can crop in effectively with its crop multiplier due to the sensor size.

BUT WHAT ABOUT LOW LIGHT PERFORMANCE!?!??!

What photographers have discovered in the last few months since the D800 was released is that its low light performance is actually quite superior, despite the high megapixel count on the sensor.  In fact, it performs better at high ISOs than its D700 predecessor even though there are nearly three times more pixels on the D800.  Although the size-per-pixel argument makes perfect scientific sense, it ignores the reality that camera manufacturers have seemed to defeat the physics with advanced noise reduction in the camera.

Another interesting finding among photographers who are experimenting with high megapixel cameras is that, even if these cameras produce more noise, the fact that they capture such fine detail allows photographers to use aggressive noise reduction in Photoshop or Lightroom without losing a significant amount of sharpness.

You see, software tools such as Photoshop and Lightroom are capable of eliminating noise in photos, but the noise reduction always reduces the overall sharpness of the photo; however, if a high megapixel photo is used for the noise reduction, there is enough fine detail in the picture that the noise reduction does not affect the file as much, so more of it can be applied while maintaining sufficient sharpness.

For example, the D800 produces slightly more noise than the Nikon D3s, but if you apply noise reduction to photos from both cameras, the D800 file can take more noise reduction and still retain more detail.  When noise reduction is applied to a file from the D3s, the picture falls apart because there are not enough pixels of information to apply much noise reduction.  More on that here.

Therefore, if noise reduction is taken into account, high megapixel counts can produce files with less noise.

One More Thing… (Okay, maybe two)

I currently have a Nikon D800 on order (it has been on order FOREVER, so I’d appreciate it if Nikon would ship me one!).  It is a $3,000 camera and wields an powerful 36.3 megapixels sensor.  For me, this camera is nearly ideal.  HOWEVER, I want to respond to a few drawbacks that many photographers have mentioned about shooting a camera with this many megapixels.

1. Shooting portraits with too many megapixels shows too many imperfections in the skin.  HUH!!??!  I have to admit that I was shocked when Scott Bourne cited this as a main reason for not liking the D800.  Using a camera that is incapable of capturing fine detail is a horrible way to smooth skin.  Skin smoothing is extremely easy and fast using Photoshop or Lightroom.  You don’t have to take low-detail pictures just to have good looking skin.  Further, this ignores the fact that there are parts of a person that you WANT incredible detail when shooting a portrait (like the eyes, the hair, the lips, etc).

2. Shooting high-resolution cameras makes for unwieldy file sizes.  This is a very relevant argument for some photographers.  In our studio, I use a BLAZING fast computer and we have 12 terabyte network attached storage devices, so file size is not an issue in the least.  However, for photographers who do not have this type of equipment, I can see it being frustrating to work with such large files.

So yes, I DEFINITELY agree that if you’re not equipped with computer equipment to work with high megapixel cameras, then a high megapixel camera probably isn’t a great choice.

But then again, keep in mind that storage is much less expensive than a quality long lens.  A wildlife or sports photographer who can’t spend $10,000 on a quality 400 or 600mm lens could get quite a bit of “focal length” by using a high megapixel camera and then cropping on the computer.  Storage is cheaper than a long pro lens.

 Conclusion

I apologize for this post being a bit argumentative and overly technical, but I just can’t stand seeing such a good debate passing by without taking the chance to toss in my two cents  Also, I hope that you’ll at least consider things from my point of view before following the photo lemmings on the web who simply repeat the photo advice that they hear others say, because the truth is that there are some very compelling reasons to embrace new technology with high megapixels.

 Further Reading:

• Field of View in Full frame vs. Crop Sensor Cameras [Includes photo comparison]
• More than you wanted to know about noise
• The Case for Megapixels
• The Difference Between Full-Frame and Crop Sensor DSLR Cameras

Put your mouse over this picture and click “PIN IT” to add this to one of your Pinterest boards!

About this time a year ago, I wrote about the best photography accessories of 2011, and I think it’s time for an update for 2012 because this year I have found some really cool products, along with other products that remain my favorites.

Fantastic Accessory #1: Pec Pads  I can’t believe that more photographers haven’t discovered these!  I used to use microfiber cloths to clean my lenses and camera, but no matter what they advertise, it always ended up just getting more lint on my lenses.  Even if the cloth itself is lint free, it still gets lint on it from being tossed around in the camera bag.  Pec pads totally solve this problem because they are DISPOSABLE!  You can get a package of 100 for around $10 that will last for well over a year or more.  Buy PecPads on at B&H Photo or buy it on Amazon.com.

Fantastic Accessory #2: Monoprice Graphics Tablet  Have you ever watched a photography video tutorial where the photographer used a Wacom Tablet instead of a mouse as he worked in Photoshop?  Graphics tablets are incredibly convenient for working on photos, but they are usually extremely expensive.  I got a tip from another pro photographer who recommended this Monoprice tablet.  I bought one and I’m convinced as a former Wacom owner–this cheap tablet is just as good or better and only costs $50.  Buy it from Monoprice or you can buy it from Amazon.com.

 Fantastic Accessory #3: A 5-in-1 Reflector  These are used by portrait photographers to throw shade on the subject being photographed to avoid harsh shadows, and they also come with materials you can put on the large disc to reflect sunlight onto the face.  I use reflectors every single time I shoot portraits outdoors–no exceptions.  For $30, it’s an easy choice.  Buy it from B&H Photo or you can buy one from Amazon.com.

Black Rapid RS-5

Fantastic Accessory #4: Black Rapid RS-5 Camera Strap  I have used and seen many many different camera straps, but this one continues to be my favorite.  It is a sling strap so the camera is out of your way at your side rather than attacking your neck.  Once you try a premium strap like this one, you’ll never use the stock strap again.  It’s like heaven for your neck–seriously!  It also has a pocket for business or memory cards.  Buy it at B&H Photo or get it on Amazon.com.

Yn-560 II

Fantastic Accessory #5: The Famous YN-560 II Flash  If you’ve been reading ImprovePhotography.com for long, you know that I LOVE this flash!  I have used all of the expensive flash gear, but I keep coming back to the YN-560 speedlight flash.  It is a manual flash, which is the way that I (and most pro photographers I’ve worked with) prefer to shoot.  I own A LOT of them!  For 2012, this flash has been updated with the version II.  Buy this amazingly inexpensive flash on Amazon.com.

Fantastic Accessory #6:  Photoshop CS6  WHAT!??!?!  Photoshop CS6 for under $100?  It used to be that photogs had to shell out over $600 for Photoshop, but Adobe recently introduced Creative Cloud, where you can pay $49.99 per month and get access not just to Photoshop, but all of the Adobe products in the master collection (Illustrator for graphics, Indesign for layout, Premiere for video, etc).  Obviously, it violates our under $100 rule to include this since you have to pay each month, but it’s still a great deal that removes an enormous barrier to entry.  And if you figure out the price, it’s actually quite the good deal compared to buying all those programs.  Get Creative Cloud from Adobe.

Rogue Flashbender

Fantastic Accessory #7: The Rogue Flashbender  I have tested many different on-camera flash diffusers, and most of them are no better than Tupperware.  On-camera flash diffusers attach to a speedlight flash and help diffuse and direct the light so that it looks a bit better than the ugly direct flash from a speedlight mounted on the camera.  While I think most of these are over-priced marketing ploys, the Rogue Flashbender is truly unique.  Dustin got me converted on this little gem while shooting a video for our online portrait photography class, and now I’m hooked!  The Rogue Flashbender acts as a little softbox with a diffusion panel, a snoot to direct the light, and the world’s best bounce card.  For just $30 or so, the Flashbender is amazing!  Buy it on B&H Photo or get it on Amazon.com.

Online photo class

Fantastic Accessory #8: Quit spending money on gear and invest in your photography education!  I’m sorry to plug my own stuff here, but as I’m writing this I can’t help but think that even though these are really cool accessories, you’d probably see a much better improvement in your photos by spending your time LEARNING photography.  There are many great ways to learn photography online, such as Kelby Training, CreativeLive, and I also teach 30-day online photography classes for just $97.

Fantastic Accessory #9: Sandbags  If you own any lighting equipment with light stands, you definitely need a sandbag.  Seems like every photographer, including me, puts off buying one until you break your first strobe, umbrella, or softbox from carelessly using it without a sandbag and the wind blows it over.  It’s like spending $10 to save $100.  Pick this one up on Amazon or buy this one from B&H Photo.

A rain sleeve can save your shoot!

Fantastic Accessory #10: Inexpensive DSLR rain cover  Beginning outdoor photographers run for shelter when it rains, but more experienced photographers know that some of their best pictures come when a storm is approaching because of the dramatic skies.  I also use a rain cover when shooting waterfalls because of the spray from the falls.  No matter how weather sealed your camera is, a DSLR rain cover is a smart choice to carry in your camera bag.  You have two options:  a cheap disposable rain cover for around $6 if you doubt you’ll need it often, or a sturdy reusable one that will last you a lifetime for $35 if you think you’ll use it enough.  Get the cheap one on at B&H Photo or on  Amazon.  Or get a sturdy reusable rain cover through Amazon.

Fantastic Accessory #11: THE flashlight for small light paintings  Have you heard of light painting?  Dave Black is the master of small table-top light paintings and he recommends the Streamlight flashlight for his lightpaintings.  You can buy it on Amazon.com for around $15.

Monopod

Fantastic Accessory #12: A High-quality Monopod You probably won’t ever realize how often a monopod is the right tool for the job until you own one.  In situations where you’d like a lot of stability but a tripod is impractical, a monopod can make life simpler and your shots sharper.  I use a monopod when I go to the zoo with my family, when shooting sports or wildlife, when hiking with my photo gear, etc.  I found this high-quality Manfrotto monopod for $60 on B&H Photo or you can get it on Amazon.

Camera Creature

Fantastic Accessory #13: A Camera Creature!  If you shoot kids, families, or babies you need a camera creature!  It’s a cool little eye-grabbing attention-getter that wraps around your lens to make the child look at the camera.  These have been very popular on Pinterest lately (follow me on pinterest!).  Very handy item that is worth its weight in gold, but only costs $19.  Buy it at B&H Photo or get it on Amazon.

Gels

Fantastic Accessory #14: Flash Gels   A gel is not gel-like at all.  It is a sheet of transparent plastic that colors the light cast by the flash.  If you own a flash unit but you have never purchased gels, this will be the most fun $15 you spend this week.  I frequently use gels when doing shoots to get the light to match the ambient light or to introduce a creative color into the scene.  I like this set of Rosco gels that you can buy at B&H Photo or through Amazon.

Fantastic Accessory #15: A Light Tent. If you shoot products, macro, or food photography, you need a light tent.  A light tent is an easy and cheap way to achieve incredibly soft and even light for small items which are put inside the light tent.  I found a 40″ light tent with several background colors for around $55 on Amazon.

Photoshop Elements

Fantastic Accessory #17: Photoshop Elements 10  If you’d rather not take on the monthly expense of Creative Cloud for the full version of Photoshop mentioned in #6, then Photoshop Elements is for you!  Photoshop Elements is the beginner version of Photoshop, but it is incredibly powerful.  In fact, 95% or more of what I do in Photoshop can be achieved in the same way by using Photoshop Elements.  Learn about the difference between Photoshop, Elements, and Lightroom here and then buy Photoshop Elements 10 at B&H Photo or through Amazon.

Hard drive

Fantastic Accessory #18: External Hard Drive for Photo Storage  If you have a ton of photos, or if you need a backup of your photos (and yes, you do need a backup), then an external hard drive is a great choice.  You can get an external hard drive that plugs into your computer via USB for under $100 for a 1 terabyte, or you can get 3 terabytes if you bend the $100 rule of this article and spend $30 more.  I have used Seagate externals for a long time and have always had very good luck with them.  Buy this one on B&H or get this one on Amazon.com.

Fantastic Accessory #19: Outdoor Photographer Magazine. For the UNBELIEVABLE price of $11, you can get a one-year subscription to Outdoor Photographer magazine. Subscribe on Amazon.

Fantastic Accessory #20: This one is up to you!  What awesome photography item did I miss in this article?  Let me know in a post below so I can include it next time I do one of these awesome gear roundups.

 Further Reading:

• Best Photography Accessories for Under $100 – 2011 Version
• $5 Photography accessory will save your bacon
• A Photographer’s Guide to Light and Flash
• The difference between Photoshop and Photoshop Elements: A photographer’s view

Beauty. Pure beauty.

It is very difficult to recommend a DSLR camera without knowing exactly what kind of photography you’re going to do, your budget, and if you have already invested in lenses from a specific manufacturer.  However, I do want to provide some VERY GENERAL principles on what camera you might consider.

If you’re shopping for a camera and you aren’t “up” on the current models available, I think the following table will be helpful for you to decide what to buy.  This table was most recently updated on April 4, 2012.

UPDATE: Some readers have commented that they wish this article would talk about brands other than Canon and Nikon as well.  There are MANY good cameras other than the Nikons and Canons.  Sony and Pentax also make great cameras (as well as other manufacturers).  I fully believe that in the next few years, they will become mainstream and see wide adoption.  Often they are cheaper camera bodies right now, but Sony and Pentax simply don’t have the selection of lenses nor the cheaper third-party accessories available.  The reason I don’t recommend them right now is simply that there isn’t much room to grow into the selection of lenses and accessories like you can with a Canon or Nikon.  If you keep your photography simple and don’t plan on going pro or needing a bunch of lenses or accessories, then you’d be happy with virtually any Sony or Pentax Camera.

 Further Reading:

• Cleaning and Protection for Your DSLR
• Canon vs. Nikon: What’s the difference? (Updated for 2012)
• What Gear Does a Wedding Photographer Need?
• The Difference Between Full-Frame and Crop Sensor DSLR Cameras

Pec Pads

These disposable lint free wipes are WAY better than the microfiber cloths that are included in most cleaning kits.  These are better because they are one-time use, they are cheap, and they are easy to throw in your camera bag.  While microfiber cloths get dust on them from being thrown around your bag, these pec pads are in a zip loc bag and are one-time use, so you always have a dust-free wipe available.  Buy the pec-pads here.

Giottos Blower

There are many different blowers for cleaning a camera, but the Giottos one is the most popular by far.  It’s great because it has a bigger valve in the back which makes it so air is sucked in from the back and blows out the front.  Some blowers have smaller back valves, so the nozzle is actually sucking and blowing, which makes it less effective at getting the dust out of the camera.  Buy the Giottos blower here.

Lens Pen

A lens pen is a simple brush that can be slid back into the pen so the bristles don’t get bent or dirty.  Very hand to have around while shooting to clean dust off the lens.  The lens pen I recommend is actually produced by Nikon.  Obviously, it will work just the same on any other brand of camera.  I really hope you aren’t THAT loyal to your camera brand that you can’t even use a lens pen from another manufacturer  Buy the Nikon Lens Pen here.

Cleaning Solution

Put your Windex away.  Cameras need a specialized solution so it doesn’t damage the delicate technology in the camera or lens.  Remember to only use a TINY TINY bit of solution when cleaning.  Often I use no solution at all, but when I need it, I use ONE DROP!!!  The solution I like is the Eclipse Cleaning Solution.Further Reading:

• How to clean a DSLR sensor
• A Buyer’s Guide: DSLR Cameras
• Nikon 28-300mm review: Best photowalk and travel lens ever?
• Circular Polarizing Filter

Some really useful things to note about a Circular Polarizing Filter:

• In most cases, you can’t replicate what this filter does in Photoshop
• If you are shooting water and there is a glare on top of the water, this filter will cut through the glare
• A polarizer has two little rings on the front, and you have to spin it once it is on the lens to see where the effect maxes out
• It works great if you’re shooting landscapes and there’s a lot of vegetation because it takes the shine off the leaves
• You will get richer colors because you cut through the glare
• It works great when it’s a little brighter during the day as it cuts down on that brightness
• You can get the sky bluer and the clouds whiter (this you can replicate in Photoshop)
• It’s like putting a pair of sunglasses onto your lens

How do you know which brand of filter to buy? There are so many out there that it can really be hard to know what you should get. Really, all you care about is the filter thread size – it doesn’t matter what brand you get. Any brand can work on any lens as long as the filter thread size is correct. To find the filter thread size, look at the front of your lens where it has the small white text and it will usually state the filter thread size. (If you don’t find it on the lens itself, just google it.)

There are lots of good quality brands out there – Canon, Nikon, Sony, or B+W. If you’re looking for a little bit less expensive filters, you can get LEE filters, though they aren’t in stock much these days. Hoya and Tiffen are much cheaper (and will therefore be lower quality), but if you’re just starting out it’s better to get these $20 filters than have no filter at all.Further Reading:

• Oh the beauties of a polarizer!
• Do Clear UV Filters Hurt Image Quality of Photos?
• The Grad ND Battle: Physical vs. Digital Filters
• Six tips for using a polarizer

You’re looking for memory cards for your camera, and you notice there are a TON of options out there. What should you buy? What do you need to look for in a memory card, and where should you purchase this card? Is there anything specific to be aware of when you’re purchasing memory cards?

There are a few things to consider when purchasing memory cards for your camera: speed, capacity, manufacturer, and dealer.

First and foremost, it’s important to understand that memory cards can be a little tough to buy, because card manufacturers use different numbers to advertise the speed of the card. For instance, you might see a Lexar memory card marked 133x and a Sandisk card marked 20 MB/sec. It seems impossible to tell which one is faster, unless you know what the “x” rating means.  The “x” rating is equal to 150 kb/sec, so a 133x = 20 MB/sec while 200x = 30 MB/sec. However, it is important to not just look at the advertised speed of the card, because that is simply the maximum speed of the card, and this is usually not the speed you will be getting. You also need to see what the minimum is, and to do this you will need to look at the class rating on the card: a class 10 card is faster than a class 6 card.

In your camera manual in the technical specs it will tell you how fast of a card your camera can actually address. Make sure you see what your camera can do so you don’t spend money needlessly on speed you can’t use, but also make sure you have a fast enough minimum speed that you can do what you want to do. (Some camera manufacturers have worked specifically with the card makers to allow the camera to address a faster memory card, so it might be worthwhile to investigate this with your specific camera.)

Beware: a lot of photographers say “I don’t do video, so I don’t need as fast of a card.” This is wrong! Yes, video needs a fast memory card so you don’t drop frames while you’re shooting the video. 1 second of video can be 24-30 frames per second, which means 24-30 pictures are being taken at  1920 x 1080 resolution (which is tiny in comparison to what your camera can do). Alternatively, when you are shooting something like sports photography, you’re taking shots just as fast as you can and you may be shooting as many as 6 frames per second. This 1 second of photography data stored in RAW format will need significantly more memory than the 1 second of video data. So don’t pass up a fast memory card simply because you don’t do video. Often, you will need a FASTER card for photography than you would need for video!

As for memory card capacity, there are lots of choices and you will need to determine how much storage space you are hoping to have. Shooting in JPEG will allow you to store 2-3 times more shots than shooting in RAW, but remember that when you shoot in JPEG you lose a lot of ability to edit your photos. The more photos you want to take at a time, the more memory you’re going to need. And if you are shooting in RAW, expect to need 2-3 times the space you would need for your JPEG photos.

With regards to memory card manufacturers, stick with mainstream manufacturers (Lexar or SanDisk). It’s worth the extra $10 you will spend on your memory card to not have problems with your card. While 99% of the time the other brands will work fine, there is always the chance that you could run into errors with a manufacturer that doesn’t produce as good quality memory cards. Nobody wants to have a memory card fail at the end of a wedding shoot or on the last day of a cruise when you’ve already taken all your photos!

And finally, be sure to buy from a reputable dealer (B&H, Adorama, Amazon - not an Amazon subseller) because there are so many counterfeit memory cards. A representative from SanDisk recently said that 10% of memory cards advertised as “SanDisk” memory cards out there are actually counterfeit. If you don’t get the real thing, you won’t get the speed that’s advertised.Further Reading:

• The Best Memory Card for the Nikon D7000
• 9 Things Photographers Need to Know About Memory Cards
• How Long Do Memory Cards Last?
• 10 Tips for Stunning Action Photography

An aperture inside a lens

This article is a section in my 12 Photography Myths Article, where I explain what the sharpest aperture is on various lenses.  As you can see from the samples and explanation below, the answer to the question of the sweet spot aperture for different lenses depends on what lens is used.

My purpose in conducting this test is to show that there is no single sweet spot where each lens will be sharpest.  Many photographers say that f/8 or f/11 is usually the sharpest lens, but I have not found that to be true.  Other photographers say that the sweet spot is two stops from wide open, but that is also not true according to the tests I ran.  It depends on each and every lens.

How to test sharpness

The way that I did the testing for this article is to put the camera on a tripod and lock it down so there is absolutely no variable that could be impacting the test.  Then, I taped a newspaper against the wall across the room and took various pictures of the newspaper.  I used mirror lock-up (described in the 13 myths article), and I fired the camera wirelessly so that my pressing the shutter button would not vibrate the camera.

I find that shooting a newspaper is a great way to test the sharpness because you can zoom in to 100% view of the words and easily see which picture is sharpest.

I repeated this test multiple times for three common lenses: a wide angle, a 50mm prime, and a portrait zoom lens.  The specific lenses that I tested were the Nikon 10-24mm lens, the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 lens, and the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 lens.

I shot the zoom lenses at the most common focal length that I usually shoot the lenses at and shot at a distance that is common for shooting with the particular lens.  OBVIOUSLY, the focal length of a zoom will change the sharpness.  I have taken that into account by shooting at the most common focal lengths that I typically shoot these lenses at.

While I, of course, tested every single aperture on these lenses, I only show a few of the most pertinent results here.

Also remember that I am not saying that these apertures are the sharpest for every lens or even every similar lens.  The sweet spot on lenses is totally dependent on the specific lens.

Sharpness Test on the Nikon 10-24mm Lens Shot at 11mm

Notice that f/13 is the sweet spot on this lens and f/16 is the highest aperture that still achieves reasonable sharpness.

Wide angle lenses are most commonly used by photographers who shoot landscape photography.  Since landscape photography usually demands high apertures to achieve full depth of field, I have shown the most relevant aperture tests to landscape photographers here (although I tested all the apertures, of course).

Notice that f/13 is the sweet spot on this lens.  However, many landscape photographers shoot at apertures higher than f/13 in order to gain more depth-of-field.  Continuing up the line, the last aperture with what I would call acceptable sharpness was f/16.  After f/16, significant diffraction can be seen in the photo which causes a reduction in sharpness.  At f/22 (which many beginning landscape photographers tend to gravitate toward), the diffraction is very significant and sharpness is reduced dramatically.

Sharpness Test on the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 Lens

Sharpness test of the Nikon 50mm f/1.8 lens

This test was absolutely shocking to me!  Photographers buy 50mm prime lenses because they want to shoot at f/1.8.  Rarely have I used a 50mm lens to shoot above f/5.6.  When I used to shoot Canon, I loved the 50mm lens because it was sharp and had a fast aperture.  When I switched over to Nikon, I bought a 50mm and was really disappointed in the sharpness, yet I often heard people touting it as a very sharp lens.  I have been puzzled ever since and wondered if I just had a “bad copy.”

The tests reveal the answer to the problem.  When shot at the most common apertures used on this lens (wide open), the lens is a horrible mess.  It looks like someone has smeared grease on the lens!  However, if you stop down to f/7.1, the lens is actually acceptable.  Interestingly, even at unusually high apertures for this lens such as f/13, it is still reasonably acceptable.

Sharpness Test on the Nikon 70-200mm Lens Shot at 200mm

The sharpest aperture on the Nikon 70-200mm shot at 200mm seems to be f/7.1

First of all, I have always found the 70-200 to be a very sharp lens, but when I compared it to the 50mm and the 10-24, I was blown away!  The lens is extremely sharp.

While the photos were all sharp from f/2.8 all the way up to f/18, I found that the sharpest aperture seemed to be f/7.1.  Very interesting.

Conclusion

The point I am trying to make in this article is that there is no way to tell what is the sharpest aperture of your lenses without simply testing it on your own lenses.  The fable that f/8 or f/11 are usually the sharpest apertures simply is not true.  In fact, f/8 was not the sharpest aperture on any one of the three lenses I tested.

If this article was useful to you, LIKE Improve Photography on Facebook so you can get all our articles in your Facebook feed each morning.Further Reading:

• 10 Tips for Sharper Photos
• Is It Necessary to Buy the Expensive Lenses?
• Nikon 10-24mm Lens Review
• What you probably don’t know about wide-angle lenses

Best Tripods

The best cheap tripods available

Experienced landscape and wildlife photographers know that the tripod is the #1 most essential piece of gear.  Although most photographers know how important a tripod is,  far too many photographers foolishly put off the purchase of a professional tripod for years and instead buy 5 junkers before finally choosing to buy something of good quality.  Once you buy a professional tripod, you’ll be amazed at the difference in sharpness of your images.  Trust me… the tripod is essential!

However, not every photographer needs an expensive tripod.  For example, when I shoot portrait photography, I rarely shoot on a tripod.  Other than portraiture, I use a tripod 100% of the time.

Better:  Induro AT-313 Tripod

This is, by far, the best tripod I’ve used that costs anything near this price point.  At $150, this tripod is an absolute steal!  It’s tall, very sturdy, and durable.  If you’re ready for a professional tripod, then this one has my whole-hearted recommendation.  But it on Amazon.com.

Best:  Gitzo GT2540F Tripod

For photographers, the Gitzo GT2540F is like a Ferrari.  No tripod could dream of comparing to this beautiful piece of machinery.  You’ll have to rob a bank to pay for it, but you’ll thank yourself for years to come.  It is light weight, solid as a rock, durable, and easy to use.  Read more about this tripod.

If you’re interested in tripods, you’ll probably like this article where I explain the pros and cons of each of the major tripod brands.

Best Ball heads

Best ball heads on the market

It is very rare for a tripod to come with a ballhead.  Usually, you’ll have to buy a ballhead separately.  The ballhead attaches to the top of the camera and allows the photographer to adjust the composition easily.  There are hundreds of cheap ballheads on the market.  It can be difficult to know what is high quality without actually trying them out yourself.  Fortunately, I’ve done the legwork for you.

There are obviously more types of heads than just ballheads: fluid heads, pan heads, joystick heads, etc.  All of them have certain advantages, but every still photographer I have ever met uses a ballhead.  For the ballhead section, I’m only recommending two heads: better and best.  The reason is that the “better” head that I mention here is so terrific for its price that it covers both “good” and “better.”

Better:  Vanguard SBH-300 Ball head

As I’ve already mentioned, this is an INCREDIBLE ball head for the price.  I once used this ball head with a 600mm lens and it did a great job without any creep.  I have also used this ballhead for exposures of several hours for night photography and still saw no creep.  For $100, you will not find any ballhead that can compete with this piece of awesome.

There are two minor drawbacks to this ballhead: (1) it is heavy, and (2) you have to crank it down quite a bit to get perfect stability.  Some other ballheads have a lever that only requires a half turn to lock.  Read more about this cheap ball head on Amazon.

Best:  Anything made by Really Right Stuff

If you have the money to spend on the best ball head that money can buy, then you’ll want something from a company called Really Right Stuff.  Their gear is top notch.  Here’s a link to one of their most popular ballheads.  It costs $500, but it is fantastic.

 Further Reading:

• 8 Photography Splurges Worth the Money
• A Review of the Tripod Brands: Some lesser-known facts
• Do I need a new tripod?
• The Best (and Worst) Cheap Telephoto Lenses: A review

DSLR lenses

Unlike most photographers that buy either Canon or Nikon and stick with it, I switched from Canon to Nikon about a year ago.  Shooting both brands has helped me to see the advantages and disadvantages of both systems.  It also has helped me to know what the best lenses are for both brands.  Most beginning and intermediate photographers stick with their kit lenses for a year or two, but eventually they feel like they want more quality.  If that’s you, then it is time to start figuring out which lenses will give you the best results.

It would be impossible to make a list of lenses that pleases everyone.  We all shoot different types of photography on different cameras and we all have different budgets.  However, I believe this list is helpful to most photographers who want to become better acquainted with the best lenses for their camera to avoid spending money on junk.  In short, you could say that these are the “smash hit” lenses that are popular because of price and broad appeal.  There are certainly a dozen or more great lenses that have fantastic optical quality, but are more specialized to a certain group of photographers.

Outstanding Nikon Lenses

Nikon 28-300mm ED VR AF-S Lens – I know of no other lens on the market that offers such fantastic optical quality at such a low price point and with such an OUTSTANDING zoom range.  Great photowalk and travel lens and I love that it is FX format.  In fact, I would say that, for around $950, this is the best deal on any lens on the market other than the 50mm prime.  See my full review of the Nikon 28-300mm lens here.

Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AF-S Lens – This lens is outstanding in every way.  It is widely (sorry for the pun) considered to be the best wide-angle landscape lens ever produced.  I could hardly disagree.  This lens is RAZOR SHARP!

Nikon 50mm f/1.8G AF-S Lens – This is NOT the 50mm f/1.8D that we have seen for years.  This is the new, updated version of the lens that came out this year with a new silent-wave motor and improved optics that make this lens outstanding.  I was thrilled when Nikon announced this lens because I never recommended entry-level Nikons since they don’t have a focus motor that was required for the old Nikon Nifty Fifty.

Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 ED AF-S Lens  - For professional portrait photographers, this is probably the most popular portrait lens on the planet.  I personally don’t own this lens because I feel more comfortable shooting portraits with a longer focal length, but I am in the minority on this point.  This list would be incomplete without this lens.

Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II Lens – Many portrait photographers prefer shorter focal length primes for most portraits, but this lens is my personal go-to choice for portraits.  I shoot most weddings with the 70-200mm and only feel the need to switch lenses occasionally.  Sharp as a tack through most of the focal range, too.

Nikon 400mm f/2.8G ED VR II AF-S Lens - I know… I know… this lens costs more than many used cars.  However, it would be difficult or impossible to argue that there is a better sports lens than the Nikon 400mm f/2.8.  I shot it a few months ago and was BLOWN AWAY.  Can I give a more positive review of this lens?

Best Canon Lenses

Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II USM Lens - Without a doubt, this is the best wide-angle lens available for Canon DSLR cameras (but most people consider it to be slightly inferior to the comparable Nikon 14-24mm).  It is sharp as a tack, fast, and has a convenient zoom range; however, I would only recommend this wide-angle lens for photographers with full frame cameras.  If you own a crop sensor camera, then I’d get the 10-22mm.  If you don’t have any idea what I just said, check out this previous post on the difference between wide angle and crop sensor DSLR cameras.

Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L UD Lens – For architectural photographers or landscape photographers who are fanatical about depth-of-field, this lens is the perfect choice.   It’s sharp and it impresses your friends when you bend the lens.  What else could a photographer ask for?

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 USM Lens – At around $99, the price is outstanding and the optical quality for that price is very good.  For photographers who like to be close to the subject and don’t mind shooting primes for portraits, this lens is the obvious choice.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM – For professional portrait photographers, this is probably the most popular portrait lens on the planet.  I personally don’t own this lens because I feel more comfortable shooting portraits with a longer focal length, but I am in the minority on this point.  This list would be incomplete without this lens.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2 II USM Lens – This is one of the most coveted lenses for Canon portrait photographers.  While I personally prefer the convenience of a zoom lens for portraits, there can be no argument that this lens is anything other than outstanding.

Canon EF 100mm Macro Lens – This is truly a fantastic macro lens.  Perhaps its greatest feature is the silent-wave motor.  The only negative to this lens is that I generally prefer to shoot at a slightly longer focal length than 100mm for macro shots, but this is perfect for any subject that won’t move away from the lens (i.e. no bugs).  Canon offers a 180mm macro lens, but it is so expensive that there is nothing “outstanding” about it at the price of $1,800.

Canon 135mm f/2 Lens – As I mentioned previously, I tend to prefer zoom lenses for portraiture, but most pros LOVE this lens for portraits.  It’s screaming fast and has a very convenient focal length.

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L II IS USM Lens – Many portrait photographers prefer shorter focal lengths for most portraits, but this lens is my go-to choice for portraits.  I would feel quite comfortable shooting almost an entire wedding using only this lens.

Best Third-Party Lenses (Usually available for Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Pentax DSLR Cameras)

Tamron AP 28-75mm f/2.8 XR ZL Di LD Aspherical Lens - The good folks at Tamron let me test out this lens a few weeks ago.  This specific lens was INCREDIBLE!!!  It only costs around $500 and is sharp, fast-focusing, and is a remarkably good macro lens to boot.  I was focusing to within 6 inches!  Seriously, this lens is a truly outstanding alternative to the Canon and Nikon 24-70mm lenses that cost FOUR TIMES more than this lens.  I have no problem saying that this is the most outstanding third-party lens ever made.  Here’s a link to the Nikon version of this lens.  Here’s a link to the Canon version of this lens.  Here’s a link to the Pentax version of this lens.  Here’s a link to the Sony version of this lens.

Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 lens – This lens makes the list for being the cheapest high-quality wide-angle lens available.  Its fast aperture and advanced optics set it apart from the competition at this price point.  This lens is made to fit both Canon, Nikon, and Sony DSLRs.  Here’s a link to the Canon version.  Or here is a link to the Nikon version.  Or here is a link to the Sony version.

Sigma 50-500mm Lens – This is the only lens being included on this list that does not have drop dead amazing optics.  This lens produces acceptably sharp, but not ridiculously sharp, images.  It has a good autofocus and a convenient focal range, but what makes this lens outstanding is that it allows tens of thousands of hobbyist photographers to shoot wildlife and sports who otherwise would not be able to afford a true telephoto lens.  Generally, wildlife/sports lenses cost well over $6,000; therefore, the availability of this lens has broken down barriers in the industry and created opportunities for photographers.  Here is a link to the Canon version of this lens.  Here is a link to the Nikon version of this lens.  Here is a link to the Sony version of this lens.

 Further Reading:

• The Best (and Worst) Cheap Telephoto Lenses: A review
• Prime Lenses vs. Zoom Lenses
• What is the Sharpest Aperture on a Lens?
• Looking through the right lens – What is next for you?