Re: First DSLR - Please help me learn how to use it
John,
I think there's a whole lot to be said for the "minimalist" approach when it comes to creativity, art and such -- and I suspect that's more or less what you're describing. And yes, I agree w/ that at least in principle. I think when we're given too much "power" (or advances in tech, etc.) to do stuff, we often end up choking (out our actual creativity, "seeing the forest, not just the trees", etc) on it all and maybe shoot ourselves in the foot w/ things that are actually not needed.
Many good programmers feel the same way about the "tools" in our field too though our work is definitely far more strictly science/math and craftsmanship (w/ some bits of creativity thrown in) while photography resides toward the other end of the spectrum.
For instance, when it comes to photography, at least this (semi-)serious amateur finds it very helpful to learn whatever it is via some sort of "minimalist" approach, ie. stripping away all the extra stuff that's not needed. Well, not that I always (or even often) deliberately do so, but that's how things tend to work out, ie. one step at a time. And same is true w/ other things like the violin, which I started learning a couple years ago.
Anyway, one example is learning to see what the lens sees (and to improve on composition and visualizing the shot). I find it much easier to learn to see (and work more quickly) w/ a fixed lens than a zoom lens -- or at least, keep the zoom lens at a fixed focal length (or two) for similar results. While the average person might assume that zoom lens is more convenient and quicker to use, well, it is to a degree (and is mostly a surface level thing, IMHO). I find that a fixed lens (at least in the slightly-wide-to-short-tele ranges) frees me to see the shot I want far more quickly, and then if need be, just zoom w/ my feet -- this latter bit doesn't work as well for the very wide end nor the long tele end. There are also other smaller side benefits as well, but that is the biggest one for me. And in the process, I learn to visualize better and more quickly for the focal lengths I tend to use.
And even w/ a zoom lens, it's not like I often need all the in-between focal lengths that my fixed lenses don't cover -- I (and it seems most people) end up using the 2 extreme ends of each zoom lens (and maybe 1 other middle point) for maybe 80-90% of the time anyway unless we're talking about some sort of superzoom. In fact, I don't even like my Nikkor 18-70DX enough to bother to use its short tele end at all -- I only put it on my camera when I expect to need the wide end (and usually end up only using it as an 18-35mm lens) mostly because I didn't have a good alternative.
I had actually been toying (for a long time) w/ the idea of getting one of those 12-24mm (or similar) APS crop lenses to replace the wide end of my 18-70DX for exactly that reason -- well, that and better quality optics
-- (and just stick w/ my 35mm prime for the next step in the range).
Anyhoo...
BTW, I just took the plunge on a Nikkor 70-300mm VR -- it's supposed to be a good quality consumer telezoom. If I like it enough, I will probably sell off either my Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 (most likely) or my Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 prime. Ideally, this would let me go lighter (and add IS capability) w/out losing too much in quality -- I'll still have a good f/2.8 lens for the circa 180mm point whichever I sell off (plus I still have my 85mm f/1.8 prime for the shorter end). Ok, enough of this "shop" talk before I reaffirm John's suspicions about me...
But seriously, John, I do think at least some of us are hearing you though putting things to practice well could be another matter entirely. Don't give up on us.
_Man_
This was one of the main reasons I upgraded to the 70-200mm f/4 IS L lens. The lens is tack sharp wide open at all focal lengths, and still outperforms the 70-300 with a 1.4x TC attached.
