I hadn’t been to Catalina Island in a long time and decided it was time to take a trip to get in some photos. Catalina Island is a really popular day trip destination for the Southern California crowd. It’s like a mini tropical island but just off the coast of Southern California and one of my favorite places.
Catalina Island is definitely a unique place. It changed hands a bunch of times until the Wrigley chewing gum family took over in the early 1900’s and shaped it into what it is today. If you want to go there the most popular way is on a ferry like the Catalina Flyer in Newport Beach or Catalina Express which has service from Long Beach, San Pedro and Dana Point. You can also get there by helicopter, boat, and plans charters. There are very few cars on the island and there aren’t any available to rent. A lot of the cars are odd little mini-trucks I’ve never seen anywhere else. To get around you can rent golf carts, bicycles, or go on a vehicle tour.
For you folks who don’t want to go back through the original review here’s a quick refresher. There are plenty of other website options out there but if you want a hosted website platform that provides functionality for complex Rights-Managed and Royalty-Free licensing, print fulfillment, and client management, the best options are Photodeck or Photoshelter. The result of that review was that both systems are decent website platforms for photographers. My thoughts were that Photodeck had a better mobile experience, video upload support, and no commission fees. Photoshelter had a public buyer portal, virtual agency option, and more print vendors.
One of my Chicago River photos was licensed by the Chicago Tribune for the Chicago Law 2015 section of their website. The Chicago Tribune is one of Chicago’s oldest and most popular newspaper and media companies. The Chicago Tribune was founded in 1847 and printed its first edition on June 10, 1847. The Chicago Tribune is owned by the Tribune Publishing Company which also owns the Los Angeles Times, The Orlando Sentinel, and other popular media companies.
Milwaukee skyline pictures are now available as prints and stock photo licensing. When people think of city skylines I don’t think Milwaukee Wisconsin is top of mind but I’d say these turned out pretty nice. Downtown Milwaukee has some interesting building architecture and the Milwaukee lakefront makes for a unique setting with numerous break-walls and parks.
I recently added several new print products including aluminum metal prints, metallic paper prints, pearl paper prints, and Giclee cotton rag prints. The pearl prints have a really unique pearlescent finish. This is in addition to the traditional professional photo paper and canvas prints that I’ve always offered. New larger sizes of up to 40×60 are available for most products.
Picture of Milwaukee skyline at night. Picture includes the Milwaukee lakefront, Milwaukee Art Museum, University Club Tower, and Northwestern Mutual Tower. Photo is high resolution.
Picture of Milwaukee Skyline and Lakeshore State Park. Picture includes the Lakeshore State Park Inlet, University Club Tower, Northwestern Mutual Tower, and Milwaukee Art Museum. Lakeshore State Park is a Wisconsin State Park with walking trails and public recreational activities. Photo is high resolution.
Milwaukee skyline at night picture in purple. Photo includes the Milwaukee lakefront, Milwaukee Art Museum, University Club Tower, and Northwestern Mutual Tower. Photo is high resolution.
Part III of the Sony FE 24-240mm F3.5-6.3 OSS Full-frame E-mount Telephoto Zoom Lens Review. In this review I wanted to see how the 24-240 stacked up against my Sony 35mm f/1.8 prime lens on the APS-C sensor Sony NEX-7.
Sony 24-240mm (SEL24240) vs Sony 35mm F/1.8 (SEL35F18) on a Sony NEX-7
After I posted my first review of the new Sony 24-240mm I checked out other reviews and reader comments. Some people were saying that the initial 24-240 tests were looking pretty good while others were saying it’s not good enough for them and they’ll stick with their fixed focal length prime lenses. As I read more zoom versus prime comments I began to wonder how much of a difference there would be between the 24-240 and a prime lens. The last time I compared my 18-200mm to a prime it actually didn’t do too bad. So I decided to check the 24-240 against my Sony 35mm f/1.8 which is known as a pretty sharp lens.
Comparing the image quality of a general purpose zoom lens against a fixed focal length prime lens is somewhat unfair. By default, a prime lens will almost always have better sharpness, less distortion, and much better optical performance in just about every way. But, a prime lens can’t zoom. And that’s the main tradeoff. With a zoom like a 24-240 you get decent optical quality with the convenience of not needing to change lenses. With prime lenses you get excellent optical quality but need to switch lenses if you want a different focal length.
So the question becomes, is the quality difference so much better with prime lenses that it’s worth the effort of changing lenses instead of using one zoom lens to cover a large focal range? It depends on a person’s needs. If you’re a studio portrait shooter you may mostly use something like an 85mm f/1.4 and on the rare occasion you need to switch lenses it only takes a few seconds. For a landscape photographer, changing a lens during bad weather conditions may not be an option and could mean missing that spectacular blue light shot.
So let’s take a look and see how the 24-240mm and 35mm compare at 35mm f/8 on the Sony NEX-7. While this doesn’t compare different focal lenths it should at least give a general idea of how the zoom does against the prime.