I’ve been experimenting with long lens portraiture recently; I’m finding it interesting and challenging. Two weeks ago, I decided to use a long lens to shoot part of a Client Black & White Portrait Commission, in hopes that would be acceptable.

Fortunately, my Client really liked the effect. I used a Canon 5D Mkiv and mostly the 200-400mm end of an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM. This combo is nice and light for the handheld “natural light dance”; I tend to move around a LOT when working with natural light and a tripod/monopod would just be a hindrance. I will also try the EF 600mm f/4L IS III USM next time I have an opportunity; I will share how that works out for me (it’s a little heavier, but still very usable handheld). I’m really enjoying this long lens portraiture experimentation; wondering if others here have tried this approach?

Here’s one example, a 241mm portrait currently being processed from the series (with the Clients permission); the Series Title is “L'assignation; Parc des Espions”.

I found this article useful, as well as the other color management articles on the same website https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/monitor-calibration.htm

To my mind, a certain shade, say green, is represented in the file by a set of numbers that the software and monitor has to then interpret to display. If my monitor shows me a certain green but yours shows a slightly different green for that same number, the picture might not look how I intended it to you. Calibration applies a standard for that green and tries to adjust the monitor to get as close to the standard as possible so if we both have calibrated monitors the green should be close to the same on both. Print as I understand it goes farther because you then also use a printer and paper profile to soft proof to see how the printer will render that green.

Personally I have a Canon R, but I also own several Canon EF L lenses and Sigma EF Art lenses. What I have observed from Canon is that they are rolling out some significant RF lenses that are optically superior to their EF counterparts however at the same time the Canon R has not had near the success that the 5DMkIV has enjoyed, already Canon has dropped the price of the R in what I can only assume is an effort to attract more sales.

The problems I see are several, one is that many photographers are just not ready to make the move to mirrorless especially those who shoot sports action or action in nature because of the focus tracking and momentary loss of the EVF during shooting. The R is not considered to be a professional level camera because of a few missing features such as a second card slot and dials. And lastly the expense of the new RF line, so far only one lens has been produced in the $500 range, one in the $1000 range, and the others are between $2000 and $3000 and we are not even talking about their big Whites yet as they have not been yet produced and probably will be the last lenses they produce in that line because of the tracking problems.

I guess my question is that with so much emphasis being placed on the RF lenses, where does that leave the Canon faithful who are dedicated to their DSLRs?