Few Tips to Improve Your Photographs Immediately

Here are few quick tips that are in no particular order.

Below your knees and above your head. Things might look more interesting from a different perspective. Lay down on the ground or get to higher grounds.

Zoom in or out with your feet once in a while. It’s not the same as rotating the zoom ring.

Observe your subject silently. But be prepared. Few more seconds just might give you something better than a boring shot.

Sneak in a candid or two or more.

Lighting plays a major role.

With and without flashers.

Human elements add to the picture.

But nature is always glorious on its own.

Sometimes you need more than one picture to capture all that glory.

Arugam Bay

Get up before sunrise.

Wait until sundown.

Focus on the eyes.

It’s okay to frame tight.

Sometimes there are frames all around us.

But backgrounds can also be interesting.

Does your picture tell a story?

Images may not be copied, printed, re-displayed on another website or otherwise disseminated without the express written permission of the photographer.
Copyright © Jayaruwan Gunathilake. All Rights Reserved.


Singapore – 2014

It’s been a while since I posted anything in here. I don’t get to write as much as I would like to when I’m in the US. I was in Singapore about two weeks ago and managed to make some pictures. Hope you enjoy!


f/5.6, 1/200, 300mm, ISO-800


f/5.6, 1/80, 300mm, ISO-400


f/8, 2 sec, 22mm, ISO-100


f/4.5, 1/50, 112mm, ISO-800


f/5.0, 1/250, 214mm, ISO-400


f/5.6, 1/320, 300mm, -1EV, ISO-1600


f/5.6, 1/250, 300mm, -1EV, ISO-400


f/5.0, 1/100, 207mm, -1EV, ISO-1600


f/4.5, 1/1600, 128mm, ISO-400


f/5.6, 1/640, 300mm, ISO-400


f/5.6, 1/250, 252mm, ISO-400


f/8, 15 sec, 22mm, ISO-100


f/2.8, 1/125, 50mm, ISO-400


f/8, 1/500, 22mm, ISO-400


Panoramic View from Peninsula Excelsior Hotel – f/8, 10mm, ISO-100


Best of Sri Lanka 2010-2014

For today, it has been exactly four years since my trustworthy camera was ordered. After four years and almost 40,000 shots, I picked out the favorite pictures I have taken in Sri Lanka. We’ve come a long way. Hope you enjoy the pictures.














Nuwara Eliya


Sigiriya Rock Fortress




Yala National Park


Bundala National Park


Bundala National Park




Water’s Edge


Water’s Edge




Bopath Falls




Galle Fort




Udawalawa National Park








Dambulla Golden Temple


Sigiri Frescoes












Bundala National Park


Minneriya National Park


Yala National Park



Gal Viharaya_1

Polonnaruwa Gal Viharaya

Dunhinda Falls

Dunhinda Falls

milky way





Yala National Park


Water’s Edge




Udawalawa National Park


Bambarakanda Falls


Near Dehena Falls


Udawalawa National Park

Arugam Bay

Arugam Bay








Yala National Park


I don’t remember where this is


Galle Fort


Galle Fort


Salgala Monastery


Weheragala National Park


Salgala Monastery


How to Create Panoramas Using Photoshop

Panoramas are fun and useful when you don’t have a super wide lens. Sometimes even a super wide lens isn’t capable of capturing the true glory of the scene that is in front of you. Making panoramas is actually a pretty easy straight forward process. Of course with most smart phones you just have to pan it and it will create a panorama for you. I still resort to my DSLR because I love my RAW files.

There are especially designed sophisticated robotic heads that will automatically take couple hundred pictures and create huge panoramas exceeding couple of gigapixels. What I’m describing here is the standard cheap method where you take seven, eight, or nine etc. pictures with your camera and stitching them together later. Due to a phenomenon called lens distortion, you can’t simply open the images in photoshop and overlap them. You have to automate the process. We’ll get to that later.

The Setup

All you actually need is a camera. However, a tripod is extremely useful. Orientation of the camera is something that is often overlooked when it comes to panoramas. Here’s the trick. If you are panning your camera horizontally, you want to have your camera in the vertical (portrait) position and vice versa. This way you capture more scenery. When you take pictures, make sure that you have at least 30% overlap between each two pictures. It is also advised that you switch your camera to manual focus in order to have the same focus throughout the panorama. Then you just click away!

The Workflow

I’m going to use 7 pictures I took recently for this demonstration and I’m using Adobe Bridge and Adobe Photoshop CS6. Once you import your pictures into Adobe Bridge, you can select them and open them using Adobe Camera RAW. Then you can do all the global adjustments on one picture and synchronize the changes with the others by selecting them and pressing “synchronize”. Enabling the lens profile corrections is always a good idea especially if you shot your pictures with a super wide lens due to high distortion. You may do local adjustments on specific pictures to remove and fix minor errors if there are any. Once you’re done with your adjustments, hit done.


Global adjustment using Camera RAW

Back in Bridge and while you still have your pictures selected, go to Tools > Photoshop > Photomerge. This will open up a dialog in photoshop. I keep all of the settings default. There is no need to turn on “Vignette Removal” if you enabled the lens profile correction earlier because it would have removed most if not all vignetting. Then hit “OK”. This is going to take some time depending on how many pictures you have and the speed of your computer. Let it run its course.


Photomerge dialog

Once it’s done, you will get this odd shaped panorama. You simply have to crop it into the shape you desire.


Odd shaped panorama


Crop it out

Don’t worry too much about the sky because that empty space can be easily filled using a filter. You can try to fill the other areas using the same method but it’s either a hit or a miss depending on how many objects you have close by. The more cluttered it is the more difficult to fill. However the sky is almost always spot on. Once you’re done cropping, create a new layer on top of all the other layers. While the new layer is selected, go to Image > Apply Image. This will copy all you see in your photoshop document into the new layer. You can then remove all the other layers if you’re sure you don’t need them anymore to speed up the process. Then using the magic wand tool, select the empty space. Then go to Edit > Fill (shortcut: Shift + F5). Make sure you have “content aware” selected which is the default and hit “OK” and see the magic happens.

Content Aware

Content aware filter

Then you’re basically done. It is always a good idea to zoom in and see where the images overlapped and where you used the content aware filter to see if there are any minor distortions. If there are any, you can almost always use the healing brush to fix them and if not, you can just go through your regular workflow to further enhance your newly made panorama.


Final image before the regular workflow

There are obviously other software out there to create panoramas. Canon comes with a software called PhotoStitch. It almost looks like it was made for windows 95. I’m not kidding. Also, I find it weird that it does not support their own RAW files. It only supports JPEG, TIFF and several other formats. Furthermore, you can’t enter anything below 20mm as the focal length. I tried to create the same panorama with PhotoStitch but it spat out a horrible result which I’m ashamed to post here. At least they make damn good cameras. You may be able to find some good software to do the same job but I like to stick with Photoshop for the moment.

Arugam Bay

Final product

I hope you enjoyed this post and learned something new. Please consider sharing it if you think it’s useful. Thank you.


Road Trip – Sri Lanka

A road trip around Sri Lanka was long overdue. Specially as a photographer, travelling is one of the best things in life. Last week I had the privilege of travelling around Sri Lanka with a bunch of wonderful companions. Even though I was born and raised here, there are still so many places I haven’t been to. It’s truly extraordinary to witness the sceneries described to us through grandmother’s tales, history books, and folklore colored by our own imagination since we were toddlers. Smell of the mountains, pine trees, and wet soil, the sound of the monsoon rain, the eastern wind, white golden beaches, palm trees, tuk tuks ruling the streets, bright smiles, old remains of castles, palaces, and temples telling a tale of a once glorious civilization, an occasional self appointed tour guide trying to rip you off, exotic wildlife, lush green forests, and a heck of a lot of inside jokes were the highlights of our journey.

Here’s an important traveler’s tip if you plan to visit Sri Lanka: Approach the regular locals if you are in need of help and ignore most who approach you.

I hope you enjoy these pictures as much as I did making them. 


The map. We ended up traveling around 1100 kms in 8 days. Ratnapura > Kandy > Dambulla > Sigirya > Minneriya > Polonnaruwa > Pasikuda > Arugam Bay > Badulla > Bandarawela > Horton Plains > Ratnapura.


Dambulla Golden Temple. f/11, ISO 100, 10mm, 10 sec


View from top of Dambulla. 8 Picture Panorama.


Teamwork – Dambulla. f/4.5, ISO 400, 112mm, 1/160 sec


Curiosity – Dambulla. f/4.0, ISO 800, 70mm, 1/250 sec


Typical tourist shot – Sigiriya. f/11, ISO 100, 20mm, 1/60 sec


Sigiriya Frescoes. f/4.5, ISO 800, 18mm, 1/100 sec


Sigiriya. f/11, ISO 100, 10mm, 1/100 sec


View from top of Sigiriya. 7 picture panorama.


Minneriya National Park. f/5.6, ISO 400, 70mm, 1/2500 sec


Minneriya National Park. f/8.0, ISO 400, 22mm, 1/1600 sec


Minneriya National Park. f/8.0, ISO 400, 70mm, 1/1600 sec


Polonnaruwa. f/11, ISO 400, 10mm, 1/400 sec


Polonnaruwa. f/11, ISO 400, 10mm, 1/640 sec

Gal Viharaya_1

Polonnaruwa Gal Viharaya. f/11, ISO 400, 15mm, 1/100 sec

Gal Viharaya

Polonnaruwa Gal Viharaya. f/8.0, ISO 400, 22mm, 1/125 sec


Pasikuda Beach. f/11, ISO 100, 10mm, 20 sec


Pasikuda. f/5.6, ISO 400, 300mm, 1/3200 sec

milky way

Milky Way – Pasikuda Beach. 4 pictures stacked.

star trails

Star Trails – Pasikuda Beach. 98 pictures.

Arugam Bay

Arugam Bay. 7 picture panorama.

Dunhinda Falls

Dunhinda Falls – Badulla. f/11, ISO 100, 10mm, 15 sec

Horton Plains_1

Horton Plains National Park. f/8.0, ISO 400, 10mm, 1/1600 sec, -1EV

Horton Plains

Horton Plains National Park. f/8.0, ISO 400, 10mm, 1/250 sec

Baker's Falls

Baker’s Falls – Horton Plains National Park. Too many water droplets on my lens. f/11, ISO 100, 10mm, 15 sec

World's End

View from the mini world’s end – Horton Plains National Park. 8 picture panorama.

Leave Nothing but Footprints. Take Nothing but Memories (and pictures).


How to Shoot Star Trails

The night sky can be a very interesting thing to photograph, provided that you have the patience to do so. I recently started photographing the night sky even though it has been cloudy for the most part here. A couple of people already asked me how it is done. So I decided to share what I know here. Please note that there is more than one way to do this.

What You Need

  • A camera with manual controls
  • Sturdy tripod
  • Shutter release cable
  • Preferably a fast wide lens
  • Clear sky
  • A lot of time

When and Where

It goes without saying that you need a clear night sky. It is better if it’s moonless night because it’s rather difficult to see stars with moonlight. It also helps a lot if you can move to an area where the light pollution is minimal. If you’re lucky, you might just be able to see the milky way (which is an awesome thing to photograph on its own).


Set-up your camera on the tripod and compose it to your liking. Then switch to manual mode and turn your lens focus ring to infinity (maybe about a hair less than infinity). It’s always good to take a test shot first. Use the highest aperture of your lens (lowest f number), ISO 1600 or above if your camera is good with noise processing, 30 second exposures. It is important that you’re in the continuous mode. Once all the settings are dialed in, plug in your shutter release cable and lock it in the shoot position. Then it’s just a waiting game. If you don’t have a shutter release cable, a cheap solution is to use duct tape to press the camera shutter button. If it sounds stupid, but it works, it’s not stupid. The number of pictures you need depends on how long you want your trails to be. But generally you should shoot for at least more than 30 minutes to get reasonably sized trails. One important thing is that when we shoot landscapes we generally stop down the lens to f/8 or f/11 or so but when you shoot star trails, you need to have your lens wide open because you need to be able to collect as much light as possible. Even though the depth of field is going to be rather small, it is sufficient to contain your entire subject because the stars are so far away. If you have a big foreground, you may have to take several shots with the foreground focused so that you may combine them later in photoshop.

Post Processing

I use Adobe Bridge and Photoshop CS6 for almost all of my work. Import the pictures using Bridge, select them all and open them using Camera RAW. You can do all the global adjustments and sync the settings so that all of your pictures look uniform. When you’re done, do not click on “open images”. That would start opening all of your images in different tabs in Photoshop. Just click “Done” and it’ll save all of the changes you made. Once you’re back in Bridge, select all of your pictures again and go to Tools > Photoshop > Load Files into Photoshop Layers. This is going to take some time depending on how many images you have. All of your images will load into a single photoshop document. Select all of your layers except the bottom one and set the blending mode into “Lighten”.

Screenshot 2014-08-05 19.54

Setting the blending mode

You will immediately see the trails when you do this. If you have any unnecessary trails (air plane trails etc.), you can simply use a healing brush to remove them but you need to find the appropriate layer in order to do so. If they are visible, it might be a good idea to change the blending mode of the layers one by one instead of doing all of them at the same time because then you know exactly what layer contains what. This method is going to take a lot of time but like I mentioned before, you need to have the patience to shoot star trails. If your foreground is too light, you can use a layer mask to darken it. Once you’re happy with the result, you can flatten the image and go through your regular work flow. Noise reduction is almost always a must because you’re shooting at very high ISOs.

star trails

Canon Rebel T1i, EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-5.6 USM, Adobe Bridge, Photoshop CS6, 98 Pictures (my OCD sensors are tingling), 10mm, 30 Seconds, f/3.5, ISO 1600, Taken at Pasikuda (Sri Lanka).

End Notes

It is awesome if you have a full frame DSLR with a very fast wide lens but I shot mine with an entry level crop sensor DSLR and a relatively slow lens. So it’s not impossible. Full frame bodies are better at noise processing than crop bodies. So you can crank up the ISO without worrying too much about noise. 

There are two ways to shoot star trails. One is taking a lot of pictures and combine them later like I described. The other method is to take one long exposure shot. If you want to do that, set your shutter speed to bulb mode and let it go for as long as you want to. But if you do take multiple shots, you basically have everything you need to make a time lapse later. Plus you might be able to capture some milky way shots while you’re at it. I prefer to take multiple shots.

milky way

Milky Way – 4 Pictures stacked, f/3.5, 30 Seconds, ISO 3200, 10mm

This is the first time lapse video I made and I have no experience what-so-ever when it comes to time lapse photography. I basically just used Lightroom to put the images together with no post processing. The reason why I put it here is to show you that it can be done. 

Hope you enjoyed this post and if you have any questions, I’d be happy to answer. Consider sharing this if you liked it. Thank you.


Dos and Don’ts in Photography

I composed this list of Dos and Don’ts after observing/experiencing certain practices in photography. I personally am guilty of doing some of these in the past or I’m still trying to kick off an old habit. Some things in this list annoy me more than they really should, some are mildly irritating and some I really like. Always keep in mind that photography is an artistic medium and you have the complete freedom to choose how your pictures turn out. You don’t have to please anyone else but you, unless you’re getting paid and then you have to please your client. What I list here are merely suggestions. It’s up to you to decide whether you agree with them or not.

Disclaimer: This list is in no particular order. I didn’t group them into Dos and Don’ts. It should be pretty clear when you read them.

Extra memory cards

There is absolutely no reason why you shouldn’t have couple of extra memory cards. They are dime a dozen these days. I think it’s good to have several memory cards than just one high capacity card because if your card get corrupted or lost or something like that (let’s be real, shit happens) you won’t be shooting until you get a new one. Plus you lose all of the pictures you haven’t downloaded so far. As of right now I carry three 8 GB cards. It’s more than enough for  what I do.

Don’t publish everything you take

My shutter count is nearing 40,000 now but I only have 287 pictures in my flickr account. Don’t be like those people who post a status “hanging out wit ma friendssssss!!!!” and 2 hours later “…. added 378 photos to the album College Freshman Yearrrrr <3 <3 <3”. It’s natural to take couple of shots of the same subject just to be sure. But nobody wants to see 50 pictures of the same subject from slightly different angles. Pick your favorite.

Develop your own style – know what type of a photographer you are

We all have other photographers we love. But copying someone else’s style completely does not help you to grow as a photographer. Being inspired or getting new ideas from other people are fine. It’s just that you can’t hope to reproduce every single thing they do. It also helps to realize what type of a photographer you are. It may take some time and you may even love several types of photography too. I personally enjoy landscape and wildlife photography. That does not mean I don’t occasionally do a portrait session though.

Shoot for yourself

Even if you’re a commercial photographer, taking some time to shoot some pictures for yourself can be very relaxing and rewarding. I don’t do commercial/professional photography (and by professional photography I mean I don’t get paid to take pictures). When you’re being paid to take pictures, you have to please your client to keep your business running. It’s fantastic if you have the complete freedom to be as creative as you want to be but sometimes you have to follow a specific set of instructions and you may not like the way pictures come out. If that’s the case, photography might soon turn into something that you have to do rather than something you want to do. Don’t let that happen to you.

Explore new areas

I know I said that it’s important to figure out what type of a photographer you are but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try out new things. I’m planning to try time lapse photography in the next couple of weeks and see how that turns out. It’s always fun to experiment.

Don’t compare “likes” or “favorites”

Likes, favorites, shares are big in social media. It’s unbelievable what some people do to get more likes and would do anything to see their pictures go viral. This does not limit to photography of course. Don’t try to compare how many likes you got on your picture and how many likes other people got. It doesn’t necessarily mean that your pictures are bad.

Ask for constructive feedback

This is one of the best ways to learn. Ask some experienced photographers what they think about your pictures. Don’t be discouraged by what they say. Some photographers hesitate to say anything bad about other’s works because some beginners take it the wrong way. Let them know that you want to hear what they really think. Give them the complete freedom and let them completely shatter your work of art into pieces (figuratively, of course). You learn so much more this way.

Leave constructive feedback

It’s important to leave constructive feedback whenever possible. It not only helps another person grow but it also helps build a better relationship with a fellow photographer. I almost always try to say what I like and don’t like about a picture rather than just saying “good shot”. Something I’ve seen recently in photography groups is that people say “nice try” and it’s usually the same person leaving that comment on all the pictures. What the heck does that even mean? For some reason “nice try, a**hole” comes to my mind. But other than that, does that mean it’s a good try but unsuccessful? It’s a good for nothing comment. Please don’t do that.

Don’t forget to say thank you and be respectful

While in most countries you can take pictures of anything you want as long as you’re in a public place, it’s a nice gesture to say thank you if you take a picture of a stranger, especially up close. If you behave disrespectfully somewhere, you might just ruin that place for all the future photographers. If someone asks you not to photograph something, try to abide by their request even if it’s in your right to take the picture. This of course depends on the situation.

Don’t wait for new gear to be “inspired”

Unfortunately, I know more than few people like this. Don’t kid yourself that you’re going to start taking amazing pictures as soon as you get that one lens you really want. Don’t fall into this trap. When you finally get that lens, they will come up with a new that you’d want. There is so much you can do with a simple camera. If you don’t believe me, ask Google to show you some pictures taken with mobile phones and compact digital cameras.

Avoid clichés (like the plague)

Clichés are rather popular among beginners, and for a good reason too. The first thing you do when you pick up your DSLR for the first time is look for subjects. Hmmm what should I take pictures of? Flowers in the garden of course. We all know flowers are pretty and it’s okay to take pictures of those. But it gets a little old very soon. Everyone does this. I did and the photographers you admire probably did it too. It is very easy to be mesmerized by the shallow depth of field your camera can produce. It is probably the first change you’re going to notice if you’ve been shooting with a point and shoot. It is much easier to achieve a shallow DoF with a DSLR. It is not limited to flowers of course. You will see tons and tons of pictures of small objects with blurry backgrounds. This is the period where the photographer thinks he or she is an amazing photographer. Don’t get stuck there. Get out of that phase as soon as possible. You will learn much more and actually will become an amazing photographer. This does not mean that you should avoid the said subjects completely. It’s a good place to start and practice your techniques. Just kind of not so good when you keep posting hundreds of similar pictures.


I took this picture a while ago. You might have seen billions of pictures like this. There is nothing new or special about it. It’s fun but photographically worthless.

Know the right tool and the technique for the job

Different situations call for different tools. For instance, zooming in is not the same as walking closer. Sometimes it’s good to use a long lens to capture an intimate moment if you think that your presence might ruin the moment. But sometimes it’s good to walk closer to capture the details. Planning what you intend to capture ahead of time will save you a lot of time.

“Bro, this is the best camera”

It’s natural for people to ask help before they buy a camera. But why is it that there is always someone who has a definite answer for this question even before whoever asked the question explain what his or her intentions are? More often than not, the same person cannot contain the excitement and has to say “bro” after every other word. Always give unbiased advice (even if you’re a fan of a certain camera brand) and avoid the people who give you these kind of advice.

Fake lens flare, textures, and vintage filters

If there is no lens flare in your pictures, it probably doesn’t belong there either. Adding fake lens flare with photoshop looks, well, fake. It is rare to see a picture looking good with fake lens flare. Textures are very tricky. I’m not talking about taking pictures of textures but using textures as overlays. Only a very few people can actually pull this off properly. It takes a lot of practice to blend the light just right. Vintage filters are overused everywhere. Not all of your pictures have to look old. I admit, it’s fun to play with filters. I do it too. But those pictures end up in instagram not in my portfolio.


Hey look that’s a cartoonized version of myself. Ended up in instagram.

Selective coloring

This is again one of those things that rarely works well. I have like two or maybe three pictures I used this technique. Needless to say, they didn’t turn out well. I’ve seen a lot of prom pictures especially with selective coloring. When you desaturate the image and mask out the tie and the vest and the flowers, that’s where you focus your attention on. Not the important part.

Over done HDR

It is evident that most people don’t really understand what HDR actually is. This technique demands a significant technical knowledge. Sure it stands for High Dynamic Range but that doesn’t mean they HAVE to look grunge and over saturated. If that’s intentional, it’s okay but that’s not what HDR is supposed to look like. I’m talking about the pictures with a lot of ghosting, misalignment, and still considerably over exposed. That defeats the purpose of HDR. 

Too much vignetting

All your pictures have a little bit of vignetting naturally which can easily be removed using Camera RAW. I add a very small amount of vignetting if the edges look like they are burnt out. But when you push it to the extreme it looks like you’re looking through a scope.

Not everything looks good in black and white

We use the term “black and white” very loosely. Almost all the picture we call black and white are actually grayscale pictures. B&W pictures should only contain black and white just like the name suggests. Anyway, there should be a reason for you to convert your pictures to black & white. Usually high contrast pictures look good in B&W but not all.


This doesn’t look good in B&W. The picture itself is rather ordinary.


This one on the other hand looks better in B&W

Don’t use the on camera flasher head-on

I’m not completely against flashers. I use a flasher too. But using the on camera flasher head on usually produce unflattering results. It’s true that sometimes you can’t help it. It’s good to take the picture than not having a picture at all. If possible, invest in an external flasher. You can get a third party flasher for very cheap and you can easily bounce the flasher off of a nearby wall or a ceiling. That would give you much better results. When you use the flasher head on, it flattens the image and you lose the sense of depth. If you have to use the on camera flasher, use a diffuser. You don’t need special diffusers. You can even use a tissue paper to diffuse the light or if you don’t want to hold a tissue paper all the time you can cut out an old film reel case to fit your on camera flasher. It works wonders.

Don’t shoot under direct sunlight

When you take pictures under direct sunlight, you get washed out colors, harsh shadows, and squinty eyes. Look for a shade when possible. I know you don’t always get to shoot during the golden hours. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take advantage of the surroundings. Using reflectors can help even out the light and prevent harsh shadows.

Pay attention to details

It’s amazing the level of details you see when you get a little closer. You don’t always have to fill your frame with the entire subject.


Details are important

“I’ll fix it later in photoshop”

Photoshop is a very powerful tool. But that doesn’t mean you always have to rely on it. When you look through the view finder and see something out of the place, don’t think that you’re going to fix it later. It’s much easier to compose your shot differently if possible or just make the necessary adjustment. Sometimes you have to use photoshop to fix something you weren’t able to manipulate physically but not always.

Do print your pictures

I believe I said this multiple times. Print your pictures, preferably large and thank me later.

Don’t shoot too much

I don’t mean taking a lot of pictures in general. That’s a good thing. I mean taking 100 pictures of the same subject just to be sure. If you spend a little time before you click the shutter button, you will save a lot of space and time going through those pictures later. I used to take a lot of pictures. I mean a LOT. I went on a 3 day vacation couple of years ago and I took around 8000 pictures. I ended up with a handful of useful ones. Last year I travelled to Las Vegas, Arizona, and California but only took less than 500 pictures in total. Cutting back the amount of useless pictures is very important. We all take bad pictures, even the most experienced photographers do.

Noisy is better than blurry

Don’t be afraid to crank up your ISO if you don’t have enough light to take the picture. Trying to handhold a camera in very low shutter speeds almost always cause camera blur. Noise can be fixed but blurry pictures will always be blurry. I think I saw a plug-in recently that claims it can fix blurry pictures though I don’t know all the details yet.

Do carry a tripod and a remote release

You won’t even realize how much these two simple things can improve your pictures until you start using them. Tripod and a remote release open up a whole new level of creativity.

Know when to ignore technicalities

While it’s very important to know how to properly expose a picture, it’s so easy to get lost in the technical details. I’m guilty of this and I often forget what’s really important in a picture. As a result, I end up with high quality crap more often than I like to admit.


I don’t know why some people tend to publish pictures with the caption “unedited”. You chose to publish it that way. Is the viewer supposed to imagine how it would look like if it was edited and stand in awe? Publishing unedited pictures is completely fine but that caption is unnecessary. It feels like the photographic equivalent of publishing a picture with the caption “I’m so ugly”.

Composition is the key

Yes, rule of thirds and rule of space. But there’s a lot more. Changing the composition even slightly can have a significant impact on the final product.


These two pictures were taken merely seconds apart. Look how different they are!

Do learn to use post production software

Learning how to use post production software is vital. Instead of trying to master all the available software out there, it’s more productive to stick with one or two. They basically do the same thing in the end. They should be used as tools to further enhance your pictures rather than as a fall back to save terrible snapshots.

Never trust your LCD

Your camera LCD can be very misleading. It appears brighter and has more contrast than there really is. Instead learn how to read a histogram. That is a very powerful tool and it represents your pictures very accurately.

Bracket your shots

When in doubt, bracket your shots. This gives you a greater range to work on later. You might even be able to combine the shots later to an HDR image. Having a tripod comes in handy here.

Filters and hoods

It’s important to protect your expensive lenses. The main reason why I have filters and hoods on is for protection. As a bonus, they also prevent stray light from hitting the image sensor. When buying filters, invest in high quality filters. You can buy very cheap UV filters but they usually cause ghosting (light reflected from the lens bounces back to the filter and reflects some of that light into the image sensor).

Add movement

Waterfalls, light trails, and start trails are popular but those are not the only occasions where you can add movement to your pictures. Even a picture taken with a high shutter speed can still give you a sense of movement.


A slow shutter speed is not always necessary to achieve a sense of movement.

Know when to accept defeat

Unfortunately not all of your pictures are going to turn out exactly how you intended. I know it can be frustrating but be satisfied with what you managed to capture rather than thinking of what you missed. You can always try tomorrow. There are many times I waited hours and hours to take pictures of something but came back empty handed. That never stopped me from trying again the next day.


I took this picture of my baby sister when she was dancing outside. I would’ve loved to capture more of her hair but this is what I got in the moment. I could’ve asked her to pose but that would look fake.

Take a self portrait

Not #selfies. I mean a real self portrait. I personally hate to be in front of a camera. But I still managed to take some self portraits. When you’re your own subject, you get to learn a lot of things.

Watermarks and frames

I used to have a very small watermark and a frame but I gave up on them. I think they are distracting. None of the pictures I published within the last couple of years have a watermark or a frame. That’s my personal taste though.


I didn’t really like the watermark anyway

Get high and low

Not with weed. That’s none of my business. Sometimes ordinary things seem more interesting when shot from above or below.


Get high, if you know what I mean.

Sneak in a candid

There is no reason why you shouldn’t sneak in a candid shot or two even when you’re doing a planned portrait session. You might just be pleasantly surprised by what you get.


Candids are the best


Ethics in photography should be a post on its own but always keep in mind that specially when you’re photographing nature not to interfere with nature. Sure a spider web looks much more dramatic with water drops on it. If you want to take that picture, wake up early. Don’t spray water on it. You might be destroying someone’s home. Birds and other small animals make their nests somewhere predators can’t find or reach. If your actions expose those animals to their predators, I believe those pictures are worthless no matter how ‘good’ they come out. Leave nothing but footprints.


RAW vs Jpeg – Which one is for you?

I think almost every photographer (including me) is at least a little bit guilty of telling people to shoot RAW. While learning how to shoot and process RAW is of utmost importance if you are to exploit the most out of your RAW capable camera, it may not be the best option for every situation. Let’s get straight down to business and see what these two really are.

RAW files are not really image files that can be viewed directly without a special software and the files are usually a proprietary format (the exception being Adobe’s DNG format). Canon’s RAW files have the .CR2 extension while Nikon’s RAW files have the .NEF extension. It is difficult to say how long these file formats will be supported by RAW reading/processing software. However, it’s safe to assume that whenever you buy a new camera, it will include a software to read its RAW files. The problem is that newer software may not support old RAW formats. Adobe claimed that they will always support their DNG format. So some people convert their RAW files into DNG files, which is a lossless conversion (no data lost during conversion, unlike JPEG compression). This can be easily done when you import your pictures into your computer if you’re using Adobe Bridge. Adobe also has a free DNG converter available. You can think of a RAW file as a digital negative. Thus it has to be developed (processed) in the same manner that you would develop a film negative. RAW files contain all the data captured by the image sensor which gives the photographer a wide range to work with during the development phase.

JPEG on the other hand is a universal format. You don’t need any special software to open them and they are readily available for printing straight out of the camera. They are fast and easy to handle but they lack some of the advantages that only RAW files offer. 

Screenshot 2014-07-09 14.18.33

Adobe Camera RAW 7.0 – The picture you see there is a RAW file straight out of the camera without any modifications. I sincerely apologize for cat pictures! I’m a dog person. It’s not even our cat but I digress.

Pros and Cons of Shooting RAW

  • You get all the possible data from the camera sensor.
  • If your white balance is off, it’s much easier to change it later.
  • Higher bit depth. Without going into technical details, this allows smoother transition between colors. Most DSLRs take 12 bit or 14 bit RAW whereas Jpegs are 8 bit.
  • Non destructive editing. Anything you do to a RAW file will be saved in a ‘sidecar’ .XMP file. However, when you’re editing Jpegs, you have to save an addition copy if you want to keep your original.
  • RAW files can be used as evidence. If you ever find yourself in a courtroom and need to prove that a picture belongs to you, providing the RAW file pretty much ends the argument in your favor. Let’s just hope it never comes to that.
  • Higher in dynamic range. If you shoot RAW, it’s much easier to recover underexposed or overexposed areas than shooting Jpegs. Although severely overexposed details are lost no matter what.
  • Pseudo HDR – This is where you make several different files with different exposures using a single RAW file and combining them together to achieve a better result. Of course real HDR will look better but sometimes we just don’t get the chance to bracket our shots the way we want. It’s good to have a fall back option. This is a task which could prove difficult for JPEGs to achieve.
  • Easier to battle with image noise.
  • RAW files take more space. A RAW file from a 15 MP camera would roughly take 15 MB. This of course depends on other settings like ISO etc. But with storage options being dime a dozen now, this shouldn’t pose much of a threat.
  • RAW files fill up the camera buffer faster. This may become a problem when shooting in the continuous mode. Since RAW files take more space, your camera buffer will be filled after you take a certain number of pictures. Then your camera has to stop and write those files to the memory card before you can shoot again. My camera clocks in at 9 RAW files before it needs to stop. This of course depends on the camera.
  • Requires special software to view and edit and is not suitable for printing directly. RAW files need to be processed before you do anything with them. You do need a relatively faster computer to edit RAW files since they contain a lot of data. Any modern computer should be able to handle RAW files with ease though.

Pros and Cons of Shooting JPEG

  • Smaller in size.
  • Can be printed directly.
  • No special software needed.
  • Can shoot a significantly higher number of Jpegs before it fills up the camera buffer.
  • JPEG is a universal format.
  • Camera does some processing for you.
  • Lower in dynamic range.
  • White balance data, color spacing data etc. are embedded to the JPEG. It’s difficult to correct white balance later with a JPEG than with a RAW file.
  • Some data are lost during the compression. Each time you open a jpeg and save, it goes through the compression process over and over again. It is advised that you keep the PSD file and export a jpeg whenever you need and if you want to make further changes, you can always fall back to the PSD file to prevent jpeg compression multiple times.

RAW vs JPEG comparison. These two were straight from the camera. On the left you can see the RAW image and on the right you can see the JPEG. It is obvious that when you compare these two images, the JPEG looks better. The camera did some processing for you. It appears a little brighter, sharper and there’s more contrast. So if you are not planning to process your pictures at all, shooting JPEG seems to be the better option. These two pictures were taken using the RAW + JPEG option which means they were taken at exactly the same time using exactly the same settings. The RAW file is 19.52MB compared to the 5.75MB JPEG. Click on the picture for a better view.


RAW vs JPEG processed comparison. The processed RAW image is on the left and the processed JPEG is on the right. Once they were loaded into Photoshop, both pictures went through exactly the same work flow. The only difference is that the RAW file was tweaked using Camera RAW before loading it into Photoshop. If you look closely, you might see a very subtle perspective difference too. This is because I applied the ‘lens correction profile’ to the RAW image. Whenever you take a picture, there is some distortion due to the lens. Shorter your focal length, higher the distortion. It can be easily corrected using Camera RAW. Since this was taken at 300mm, there is almost no distortion. You should be able to open your JPEGs using Camera RAW too but for some reason Adobe wasn’t letting me open it. I kept getting an error message. I did some research and it seems to be a common problem. While Camera RAW offers some control over your JPEGs, it won’t offer all the controls it does a RAW file. The processed RAW image is 9.53MB whereas the processed JPEG is 6.15MB. Click on the picture for a better view.

Now, after I processed the RAW files, I converted them to JPEGs to upload here. However, when you do, you lose the advantage of higher bit depth as it goes to being an 8 bit image. If you’ve noticed on the first screenshot up there, I loaded the RAW file into Photoshop as an 8 bit image (where it says Adobe RGB (1998); 8 bit; 4752 by 3168 (15.1MP); 240 ppi – you can click on this and open it as a 16 bit image) since I knew I was going to save it as a JPEG anyway. If you want to retain the higher bit depth, converting to a TIF file is the better option. Most professional printing services use TIF files (they will print JPEGs too of course). But if you’re getting your prints done in Walmart or printing them very small or both, don’t bother. So all of this depends on your needs. 

While during ideal situations where you have control over most elements (like studio lighting etc.), RAW offers little advantage over JPEGs. The further you drift away from ideal situations, and when speed and space is not a concern, shooting RAW is the best option in my personal opinion. In practice, you will be taking a lot of pictures in non ideal situations. I’m not going to go up to an angry charging elephant to hold up a gray card against it to get my white balance correct in camera. I seriously doubt he would be happy about it. I’d much rather spend an extra 30 seconds to correct my white balance during post processing. 

pseudo HDR

Here’s an example of a pseudo HDR I was talking about. On the right side you can see the original RAW file I used to make the pseudo HDR on the left. There was absolutely no way I would’ve achieved this level of details with a JPEG. I did not have a chance to bracket my shots here either as I took this shot while I was in a moving car. Click on the picture for a better view.

Which one is for you?

By now you should have realized that photography is a very subjective field since I mentioned it over and over again. Thus there is no one right or correct way to do things. Whether you will benefit from either RAW or JPEG depends on your needs. If having absolute precision is critical, RAW is the way to go. It offers a wide range of possibilities than JPEGs. This also means that you will probably have to sit and process through copious amount of RAW files. When you keep doing it, you will find easier ways, short cuts and it will significantly reduce the amount of time you spend with one RAW file. RAW is both the holy grail and the downfall of a beginner. As a beginner, you’re likely to make a lot of mistakes when shooting and that’s okay. But if you shoot RAW, much of that can be corrected during post processing. Now, this does not mean that horrible snapshots can be magically converted into world class photographs though. I know there’s a ‘get-everything-right-in-camera’ group. Sure, if you can get everything right in the camera, that is absolutely fantastic and you will get there eventually. But I personally am not there yet. So I shoot RAW. The reason why RAW could be the downfall of a beginner is because the work flow can appear overwhelming at first and even your processed RAW files may look worse than your camera processed JPEGs. But don’t be discouraged. You can only learn by doing it. A while ago, Adobe released a free version of CS2. So if you don’t want to pay a lot of money for software, that may be a good starting place. You are going to have to make a free account with Adobe to download this or you can pick it up from numerous links available throughout the internet. I’m not entirely sure what type of RAW files are supported in CS2 however.

If your pictures are only going to end up in social media and you don’t intend to make and large prints, shooting JPEGs may save you a lot of time. If you’re taking pictures for a craigslist ad, there’s no need to shoot RAW either. Some action photographers resort to JPEGs to save the camera buffer from clocking in early. Some wedding photographers shoot JPEGs just because they don’t want to sit through 2000 RAW files. An untrained eye won’t be able to tell the difference between a properly shot JPEG and a processed RAW image.

As you can see both formats are useful in their own way. I set my camera to RAW couple months after I bought it and it hasn’t been changed since. But that’s my personal choice. I prefer the range it gives me to work with. I make large prints from my pictures for exhibitions and RAW files give me exactly the controls I need over an image. Shooting RAW however doesn’t make you a ‘professional’ (whatever that means) over night.

Modern DSLRs offer the possibility of shooting RAW + JPEGs at the same time. Why don’t people use this and end the debate once and for all? Because it takes a lot more space and while it may be the best option when it comes to the range of possibilities, it can be confusing as hell at times. You will have two files with the same file name and can be difficult to organize your files etc. This is a good option if you want to compare RAW and JPEGs because it will make the both files exactly the same time using the same settings like my examples above. It also comes in handy if you want to display/print something immediately but still want the option to process them in your leisure. This is however a terrible option when shooting in the continuous mode.

What do other people think?

Ken Rockwell says why he “never shoots RAW” and Petteri Sulonen makes his point on shooting RAW. It seems like much of Ken’s examples are rather old. He mentions how his friend was filling up his 256MB card so fast because of shooting RAW. I doubt anyone is using 256MB cards anymore. You can still buy them for like $5 from Amazon but at the same time, a 16GB card is only around $10. So why would you? Like I said before, space is no longer an issue. Ken also mentions something I disagree on; “Which should you shoot? If you have to ask then just shoot JPEG”. Unfortunately most of us were not born with all the photographic knowledge. I know I was not. I learned everything I know today by talking to experienced photographers, reading, and practicing. Nonetheless, both are interesting articles and I will leave it up to you to decide which one is best for you.


Canon vs Nikon – The Great Debate

When you’re in the world of photography, you’re bound to hear this debate more often than you really want to. It has been going on for decades and there’s always someone claiming that one is better than the other. But these two are not the only DSLR brands out there? Why don’t we hear much about Olympus vs Sony or Panasonic vs Pentax etc? Konica Minolta (now Sony) was in fact a very popular brand back in the day. Back in the 70s my father’s choices were Minolta and Pentax. I still have couple of those old lenses (unfortunately unusable) lying around the house. Canon and Nikon simply devoured the SLR market share of other brands within the last couple of decades, especially with their entry level digital SLRs which allowed a lot of people to experience the wonders of photography that previously has been a realm restricted to few professionals.


Image Courtesy – Mark Josue

So which one is better then? Canon or Nikon? The simple answer is, neither. But you knew that all along, didn’t you? It is impossible to claim that one is better than the other. Both companies make excellent, nearly identical, DSLRs capable of taking stunning images. Unfortunately it seems like photography also had religious touch. So there are extremists in photography too.

However, that being said, choosing a camera brand is probably one of the most important decisions you will make in photography. In the years to come, you will accumulate gear that is specific to your brand of choice and it’s rather difficult to switch after that point. So how does one go about choosing a brand? It’s simple really. I assume that you’ve already decided to go with either Canon or Nikon if you’ve read this far. The advantages of going for either one of these are the amount of support available, their excellent lens line up, and the availability of third party gear. Down side is that famous brand name is going to cost you and you will be paying a little bit more than what you would pay for a less famous brand with near identical features.

First you need to figure out your budget. When you do, look up several camera models from both brands that you think would satisfy your needs. Then go to a camera store and try them out. This is probably the best way to find out what brand works for you. Which one feels best in your hands? Do you like the button and menu layout? What ‘seems’ right to you? Take couple of shots using each camera to see how you like them. This will give you a far better understanding on both brands.

There are few other things that you might want to consider.

  • What do most of your friends use? Canon or Nikon? If you pick the same brand they use, it would be easier to exchange and borrow equipment from them. Photography is expensive. It’s nice to be able to borrow a lens to take a picture that you really need rather than buying a lens. But if you constantly find yourself needing a particular lens, it’s worth investing the money.
  • Do you intend to use your DSLR for videos? Then it might be a good idea to stick with Canon just because Canon is a big name when it comes to videos. They have dedicated cinema cameras which should take all of your EF lenses if you decide to upgrade.
  • What type of lenses will you be using most of the time? Both brands have excellent lenses available but it might be a good idea to take a look at what they have. For instance Canon offers slightly faster 50mm f/1.2L and the 85mm f/1.2L whereas Nikon has the 50mm f/1.4 and the 85mm f/1.4. Although Nikon does have a 50mm f/1.2, it only works in manual focus.

These two companies took slightly different routes to arrive at the place they are today. Nikon has a great legacy. They have kept their Nikon F mount which dates back to 1959 until now. So if you have an old Nikon lens stuffed in a closet, it would still work on a newer Nikon body. However, some metering modes and auto focus functions may not work without special adapters. The Nikon F mount is one of the only two lens mounts which hasn’t been discontinued since the introduction of autofocus. The other one is the Pentax K mount (aka PK mount, introduced in 1975). Nikon has been making their F mount for over a 50 year period and the only brand to do so. These are mostly Nikon’s bragging rights. While Nikon’s marvelous integration system is a great news for lifelong Nikon users, the old Nikon lenses are full of archaic technology and glasses. They won’t out do the new Nikon lenses. The rumor has it that Nikon is trying to put the medium format cameras out of fashion. Hence their D810 packed with (almost unnecessary) 36 megapixels. I’m not so sure about this rumor though. If you’re still dazzled by the megapixel count, you can check out the Nokia Lumia 1020 with a 41 megapixel camera sensor.

Canon, on the other hand, introduced a new system in 1987. The EF mount (Electro Focus) is the standard lens mount on Canon EOS (Electro Optical System) cameras. The EF mount succeeded the FD (Focal plane shutter with Dual link for diaphragm control, introduced in 1971) mount which replaced the FL (Focal plane shutter Linked, introduced in 1964) mount which replaced the Canon R mount (introduced in 1959). While this seems like Canon is inconsistent, they started from scratch to build something excellent and they sure did. Canon has also been spending a lot of resources in refining the CMOS (Complementary Metal Oxide Semiconductor) sensors which was a huge leap in DSLRs. Before CMOS sensors became popular, the CCD (Charged Coupled Device) sensor was the name in town. In the 90s CCD sensors produced much higher quality pictures. They performed much better in low light. The disadvantage was that CCD sensors were much more expensive to make. However, Canon managed to bridge this gap by improving their CMOS sensors. The CCD vs CMOS is a story on its own. There are only five EOS cameras with CCD sensors and out of those five, four of them were produced with the help of Kodak. Canon provided the body but the electronics and sensor came from Kodak. The other EOS camera that features a CCD sensor is the EOS 1D. The body and the electronics of the 1D was both designed and built by Canon but they outsourced the sensor. This should tell you how much time Canon has put into improving their CMOS sensors. Now Canon not only designs and build their CMOS sensors, they also manufacture the equipment that make the CMOS sensors. 

Some interesting points about both brands.

  • The name Canon comes from Buddhism – Bodhisattva Guan Yin. Guan Yin is actually pronounced Kannon (beats me!) in Japanese. In English, it roughly translates to Goddess of Mercy. Nikon stands for Nippon Kogaku (Japan Optical).
  • Canon’s first full frame DSLR (EOS 1Ds) was introduced in September, 2002 and Nikons first full frame DSLR (D3) was introduced in August, 2007.
  • Canon lenses are branded Canon but Nikon lenses are branded Nikkor.
  • Canon’s flashers are known as speedlites and Nikon calls their flashers speedlights.
  • Canon’s APS-C sensors are slightly smaller (22.3mm x 14.8mm) compared to the Nikon’s APS-C sensors (23.6mm x 15.6mm).
  • Canon has APS-H format DSLRs available. Nikon doesn’t. However, the last APS-H camera was released in October, 2009. I doubt they are making them anymore.
  • Nikon’s some entry-mid level cameras don’t have a auto-focus motor in the body. So older Nikkor lenses without auto-focus motors won’t auto-focus. But Nikon has been releasing newer versions of these lenses with autofocus motors. So this is hardly a problem. All Canon EF and EF-S lenses since 1987 have autofocus motors built in.
  • Older Nikon DSLRs had a lower megapixel count compared to Canon counterparts. But the tables have been turned. Newer Nikon DSLRs have a higher megapixel count than Canon counterparts.
  • You can mount a Nikkor lens on a Canon body with a special adapter but the reverse is not true. This is another reason why people who like to do videos on their DSLRs prefer Canon. You can mount almost any type of lens on a Canon DSLR with an adapter. This is due to the distance between the sensor and the lens flange. More technical reasons. Let’s just stop there.
  • Nikon (and many other brands) has great lens caps where you pinch in the middle to remove the cap from the lens. But to remove Canon’s lens caps you have to press the side of the cap, which can prove difficult with a lens hood on. You can simply put a different cap on a Canon lens though.
  • Some Nikon DX lenses (designed for their APS-C bodies) can be used on Nikon full frame cameras, though it will crop the image. Canon’s EF-S lenses cannot be used on their full frame bodies. The lens will hit the mirror.
  • Nikon’s 800mm lens is currently $17,896 and it weighs 10.1 pounds whereas the Canon’s 800mm lens is $13,999 and weighs 9.9 pounds. The reason why I mentioned these two here is because these two are the big brothers of super telephoto lenses. There are specially designed telephoto lenses (mega telephoto?) that exceeds 800mm, if you can afford to spend more than the amount you would spend on a brand new Mercedes. No really, they are easily pass the $75,000 mark. Well you probably could count the teeth (and deduce what they had for lunch) of someone who is half a mile away. At this point, those lenses are really cannons 🙂
  • Canon’s 5D Mark III (released in March 2012) currently has the highest number of focus points – 61. Nikon’s D810 (released in June 2014, 2 days ago at the time of writing this) has 51 focus points. These are extremes just so you know. My camera only has 9.

Now that the history lesson is over, I should say that both companies have been around for a long time. Although they did certain things quite differently, both produce excellent optical equipment. So if someone tries to tell you that their 50mm lens works better than yours, ignore that person much like you would ignore people who claim they are better than other people because they wear a different type of hats.

The bottom line is that go get yourself a camera without wasting too much time pondering which brand is better. The sooner you have a camera, the sooner you can take pictures, which is the ultimate goal here. Honestly, in order to see any difference between these two brands, you would have to push your camera to the extreme but the majority will never have to do it. I probably won’t either. If you’re still asking this question, it’s very likely that you don’t have enough experience in photography to distinguish any minor differences that they may have. There are so many photographers out there whom I respect immensely. Some use Canon, some use Nikon, and some use other brands.

Personally, I shoot Canon. My brother shoots Nikon and like I said before my father shot with Minolta and Pentax. The reason why I went for Canon is simply because I had to pick one and I just happen to pick Canon. There are no camera shops out where I live. The few shops we had in our capital exploited the little DSLR market they had here. They were charging an insane amount of money (like couple hundred dollars more than the actual price) for each item they sold. Luckily, things seem to be changing for the better now. Anyway, I didn’t have the luxury of walking into a shop and trying them out. I read reviews online and decided what I wanted to get. I ordered mine from Amazon, shipped it to a friend, and got him to bring it back to Sri Lanka. I was not disappointed with my choice. Make sure you like what you get and get what you like. If you keep thinking that your camera is crap (it isn’t), you won’t be making any good shots with it.


Things to Know Before Buying a Lens

If you’re just starting out photography and bought your first DSLR, it’s very likely that you got it with the kit lens. Different camera bodies come with different kit lenses. Higher end bodies usually come with pro grade lenses whereas entry to mid level bodies come with regular lenses. For instance, the Canon 5D Mark III (Canon’s current flagship camera) comes with the EF 24-105mm f/4.0 L IS USM which is an excellent lens. Mid level cameras like the Canon 60D, 70D, or 7D usually come with either the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM or the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS UD or the EF-S 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. Finally the entry level cameras come with the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM. Although some of these lenses are excellent glasses, they do have their limitations. Of course, you can just buy the camera body and get any lens you want. I do strongly suggest that you play around with your kit lens before you consider getting a new piece of glass because the more experience you have, more easier for you to figure out what type of lens you want to buy next, rather than winging it.

Once you’re either fed up with your kit lens or pushed it to its limits and finally decided to get a new lens, you need to be able to make the choice. What I’m trying to do here is to suggest several things you could do, in order to make a smart choice. Even though I explained a bit about lenses, how they work, and some lens lingo, I didn’t really say what to look for when you’re buying a lens. There are several questions that you need to ask yourself before buying a lens.

What kind of a photographer are you?

Are you the type of person who enjoys taking beautiful sceneries, cityscapes, seascapes etc.? Then you’re looking for a lens with a focal length below 35mm for landscape/architecture photography. If all you take are portraits, you are going to need something in the range of 70-135mm. If you’re fascinated with tiny little details and would like to see a whole new world open up to you, macro lenses are your calling. If birds, wildlife, or sports interest you more than anything, you’re looking at telephoto lenses. This is why I said it’s important to play around with your kit lens for a while, until you figure out what type of a photographer you are. Otherwise you might just buy a lens out of the blue and might end up not getting its money’s worth.  Of course if you enjoy every type of photography (nothing wrong with that), get ready sell couple of body parts unless you’re loaded because it is going to cost you!

When and where will you be shooting most of the time?

Once you finally figure out what type of lens you need, you need to think of the occasions you’re going to use this lens. Is it going to be inside or outside? What kind of light available to you? Do you have the opportunity to use a tripod? If you’re going to be shooting under low light conditions most of the times, you should probably invest in a lens with a wider constant aperture like f/2.8 (or f/4.0 on super telephoto lenses) throughout the focal length range and has image stabilization. Unfortunately these lenses are expensive than the others. Usually wedding photographers and event photographers use these type of lenses. If you’re shooting landscapes etc and getting a wide angle lens, the maximum aperture is not a huge deal because you will be stopping down the lens to get a deeper depth of field anyway. Also, more often than not you can afford to use a tripod. You don’t really need image stabilization with wide lenses or when you’re using a tripod. In fact, it is advised to turn off the IS if you’re using a tripod because the lens will “look” for movement when there is none and create not as sharp images. Most lens manufacturers have couple of different versions of similar lenses. For instance, Canon has four 70-200mm lenses and all of them are pro grade lenses.

  • Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L USM ($709)
  • Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM ($1349)
  • Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM ($1449)
  • Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS II USM ($2499)

The prices are from Amazon at the time of writing this. So what makes the difference? The first two lenses can only open up to f/4.0 which means they won’t be ideal for low light situations. The second one has image stabilization. So it would be a little bit better than the first one. These two lenses however, weigh less significantly compared to the other two. Canon doesn’t make the third one anymore because they came up with the second version of that particular lens. That’s what “II” means on the fourth lens. But you can still find the third one if you really want. All four lenses are equipped with USM (Ultra Sonic Motor). This makes the lens focus faster and virtually silent. The bottom line is that these lenses have different functions, different dimensions, and different weights. Knowing what you really need can save you a lot of money because while it is very desirable to get the fourth one, you may not need it.

How much weight are you willing to lug around?

Let’s be honest here. There are so many people who will get a DSLR but rarely use it because it’s too heavy. Until you get used to your camera, it does seem a little heavy. However, the lens can make all the difference in the world. This is especially true for pro grade telephoto lenses because they are built like tanks. Pro grade telephoto lenses are made with metals unlike regular lenses which are made with high grade plastic. They have a lot of lens elements contributing to their weight too. These can easily weigh anywhere between 3.5-4.5 kilograms (~8.5-10 pounds). These lenses are near impossible to handhold due to their weight and magnified camera movement. So you’re going to have to carry a tripod – a tripod that is capable of holding these beasts. A $30 tripod won’t cut it. These tripods are heavy and expensive too. It may sound easy to carry around but remember that you will most likely to have this around your neck for couple of hours at least. Therefore, weight is a serious thing to consider before buying a lens. So if you think weight is not going to hinder you from taking photos, by all means get these lenses. They produce very high quality images. Although I’m going to be very sad if I see a $12,000 lens sitting on a shelf unused.

Do your homework

Reading reviews is a great way to find out about a particular lens. There are so many unbiased reviews out there and there is no reason why you shouldn’t read them. Not only the professional reviews, read reviews from consumers to see what they think about the lens. Most online stores, such as Amazon, has customer reviews. They are usually very helpful. If you want to justify buying this lens, go to flickr and search for the lens you have in mind. This will bring up pictures taken using that particular lens. Make sure it’s the correct lens because sometimes flickr tags can be misleading. You will either inspired by the results or look for another lens. You’re about to spend your hard earned money and lenses are not cheap. So it’s important to be well-informed.

Try it out before you buy it

There are so many services/companies that rent out lenses for a reasonable price. Take your potential choice on a “date”. See how you like it. All the reviews can be positive but only you can decide if it’s the right choice for you because you might just find something annoying about the lens. Renting out lenses is a great way to learn a lot about lenses. This is also very useful if you’re a portrait photographer but you need to get that one landscape shot or similar situations. It’s obvious that you don’t want to spend couple hundred dollars on a wide angle lens if you are not going to use it often. Renting a lens is the smart choice here (or borrowing it from a friend).

General purpose lenses

This may be the solution for those who want a “do it all” lens or for those who are too lazy to change their lenses. These lenses have a big focal length range, from wide angle to telephoto. If it sounds too good to be true, it’s because there is a down side too. The downside is that these lenses sacrifice a little bit of optical quality for convenience. Of course these lenses come in several levels too. So if you buy a pro grade general purpose lens, the optical quality would be much better than a regular general purpose lens. But if you want to do a specialized type of photography like macro or fish eye, general purpose lenses won’t cut it. You wouldn’t go to a gynecologist for a brain surgery, would you? Lenses are kind of like doctors in a sense. If you want a fantastic job done, a specialized lens is the way to go. Others may or may not screw you over, although not to the same level a doctor would.

There are some lenses that can do multiple jobs. I think it would be fair to call them “multi purpose lenses” rather than general purpose lenses. The 100mm f/2.8 macro lens for instance makes an excellent portrait lens specially when coupled with a full frame camera. You won’t be sacrificing any optical quality here.

MTF chart

This could very well be the most technical way to compare two lenses or even learn how a particular lens performs. If you want an objective point of view on a lens, it is vital that you take a look at its MTF chart. MTF stands for Modulation Transfer Function and it measures the optical performance of a lens compared to a hypothetical perfect lens. You can find the MTF chart of a lens usually in the camera manufacturer’s website or in some review websites. Keep in mind however that different manufacturers may use different measurement standards. Therefore it won’t always be possible to compare two lenses from two different companies. But this would hardly be a problem because most of the time you’re sticking with one camera brand anyway. Explaining how to read an MTF chart is a very lengthy process. So I’m simply going to redirect you here where they have done an excellent job explaining all the details.

Hopefully this will help you to make an educated choice when it comes to buying a lens. If you have specific questions, I would be happy to help you out in any way I can.