Best Canon Lens for Microstock

100 if not 1000 searches are conducted a day for the answer to the above question: "What is the best Canon lens for Microstock".

Ahhh, a difficult question, with no real answer. Microstock is just the selling of the images to a company. the TYPE of images you create are completely upto you. And the lens you need is directly related to the type of images you plan to make.

For example, lets say you desire to shoot nature footage and photos for microstock because you love hiking and nature and own a nature reserve or live near the forest. You would have very different needs from a microstock photographer wanting to submit food photography, created in his studio. Because what you specifically want to shoot makes the subject matter vary, it is an impossible question without knowing what you, the reader, specifically wants to shoot.

What we can do is go over the lenses from each category, in a rough over-view. First, we'll divide lens types into 2 categories: Studio/Travel. Studio involved prepared shots, in prepared light, with controlled environments. Where as travel involves outdoor photography in exotic locations.

Also keep in mind that this is a list of the creme' of the creme' so to speak. This list is not cheap, this list is not easy to come by, this list is for a serious photographer, it's expensive, but it has some of the best glass that is still consumer grade.

STUDIO: Food/Macro


For close up food photography and/or Macro photography, there are 2 lenses that are spoken of repeatedly!

Tamron 90mm/2.8 Macro : A very sharp lens especially at the price point, with image stabilization to boot. Useful in food and macro photography since it is sharp in the middle and a 1:1 magnification with a Fstop of 2.8 for very shallow DOF when desired.

Canon 100mm/2.8L IS or Canon 100mm/2.8 non-IS : Both offer amazing optics, the difference being IS (Image Stabilization) and about 500$. You cant go wrong with either one really.






Note that both of these lenses can also be used for portraits, but its really in the Macro world where they shine.


STUDIO: Models/People


There are a few lenses here that are "staples" of this area of photography, including a telezoom that some may have overlooked for "studio" work.

First, I'll mention that a Prime lens is amazing in a controlled environment. As such, we'll discuss the 50mm 1.8

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 : This bad boy is one lens that I recommend EVERYONE get, it's cheap cheap cheap and allows for a very shallow DoF when wide open. It is not sharp when fully open, but stopped down to 2.8 or so and it becomes a fairly competent lens with many options! Not a zoom, this will require your feet to "zoom" in and out, because it is a prime lens.




Next  we'll discuss the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L:This lens is considered to be a great studio lens for many reasons. It is sharp as a razor and has great contrast. It's "downfall" if you will is no IS, in reality though, it may not be a necessary thing to have for *most* studio setups, since your model and "lifestyle" shoots dont usually have your models swinging through the air, nor running 30 yard sprints.

Lastly, I'd like to mention the 70-200mm Canon f/2.8 IS ii Telephoto: This lens is amazing in contrast and background compression. It is used very often for headshots and for outdoors work for its ability to compress the background and create a creamy texture despite being at a "stopped down" f-stop. The lens provides very acceptable images at f/2.8 though and will be a God send in a low light shooting environment where distance is unchangeable.


TRAVEL: Walking Lens


A walking lens is basically a lens that is acceptable for a wide range of applications and uses, with little compromise to Image Quality. There is one favorite in this category. The Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS is a great lens with an acceptable and convenient zoom length. It includes IS for necessary moments and low light shooting and has great image quality!



TRAVEL: Wide Angle Lens


Landscapes and panoramas your thing? You want to take an HDR of the swiss alps? Maybe a panorama of the grand canyon? You'll need a wide angle lens (or want one, at any rate) to take in as much of the scene as you can. You can go fish-eye (but the distortion is significant), but sticking no distortion free we have one clear winner that even topples the Canon version, in my book. The Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 ATX lens. The lens is superior to the Canon version, in that it has a 2.8 aperature throughout the whole range, where as the Canon version is 3.5-5.0fstops. This lens can go from wide to slightly less wide, to accommodate both Crop sensor and Full Frame Cameras. Great sharpness and contrast, a must for the landscape aficionado!

TRAVEL: Wildlife Lens


This area is for the stock photographer interested in Lions, Tigers, and Bears (Oh My!). The same lens I mentioned above, the 70-200mm Canon f/2.8 IS ii Telephoto is where you want to be here. Yes there is a 300mm lens... yes it has good optics *(not the 75-300mm f/3.5-5, those optics are fairly bad!)*, but the cost is very high on the 300mm good telephoto. A better option here is to add a Canon EF 1.4x iii Extender. It adds length to your lens at a very small quality cost. A 2.0X version exists, but it will not be as good in the quality department.

+-----+------+-----+-----+-----+

I hope this list has been helpful! In the meantime, happy shooting and remember, it's not the gear that makes the photographer.... its the skill/talent. Even horrible cameras can produce amazing results in the hands of an expert. That said though, the glass is the most important part of any photographers arsenal, know what you need and if you are unsure, i HIGHLY recommend renting for a week, to see if the lens fits your needs before you buy. A great place to rent is http://www.lensprotogo.com/! Quality rentals!

-David

HDR and Microstock, does it do well?

Hello readers,

Today I would like to discuss how your images are seen on stock websites and, indirectly, how HDR photography (or tonemapped photography, if you prefer) seems to do so well. First we need to touch upon the first point of the above sentence, how your images are seen. As an image buyer, I type in a few keywords, and get literally BOMBARDED with hundreds, if not thousands, of images. All of these images are about the size of 2 postage stamps (thumbnails) and although I can mouse over and see them slightly zoomed on many sites, it's still a small rendition at best.

What does that mean for you... the seller? Well, you must consider that although your image might be amazing seen full screen in the areas of composition, color, and message; it must also be all of these things in a thumbnail version. The issue here is that as a thumbnail there is very little you can see, aside from color. Thus, a very very very important piece of the microstock puzzle is making sure your images have sufficient "pop" even when seen as a thumbnail, to draw the eye of the purchaser.

HDR due to its colorful look and saturated tones, seems to do very well in microstock when done right. Even when done in a "realistic" manner that adds color and tone without a cartoony feel, it can really make or break an image (and thus, it's thumbnail). So I would highly recommend that anyone who might want to give it a try, do not hesitate, it's worth the attempt.

A great website to learn a little about the HDR process is stuckincustoms.com. Trey, owner and photographer of the site, does a great job explaining a bit of the process in the tutorials section and giving some great tips. Even though he particularly does not like Microstock in general (disliking the model of the system and the monetary gains) I must admit that his style would lend itself very well to sales. Give it a look over and see if you like it!

-David

New Agency Emerges! - Cutcaster Review.

Hello readers :) Wanted to fill you all in on a new agency that started up just recently. This "new" startup is anything but truly new, as it's founder has a *very* long history in the microstock world and has the credentials to do microstock right. The site has a few features that are of particular interest to microstock sellers:

-High commission rates for sales.
-Upload system is a snap, with FTP access as well and no upload limits initially.
-You can set your own rates/prices or use their "CutCaster Algorithm" to calculate what your image should be worth.

You should definitely check it out. Click the link above to sign up!  I'd recommend it as a "potential winner" as the site is still new... fingers crossed, they will do well. Keep in mind that due to the site being new, sellers will need time to realize the benefits and flock towards the site, hold steady, patience is a virtue, and keep those uploads going.

As a side note, they also have a very interesting Caption Contest. I'd hit the link and check it out, best caption for the image gets money deposited to the account (First, Second, and Third place applies). Good luck readers! :)

-Dave

Istockphoto: Changes to earnings!

Hello readers!

Just wanted to inform you that, if you have not already caught the message, there seems to be a change occurring at istockphoto concerning the amount of money that *non-exclusive* parties will receive per image. I would highly recommend you check out the forum postings at istockphoto if you contribute or plan to contribute, as it may influence your decision.

Many photographers have pulled their entire portfolios from istockphoto, due to the changes (and were are talking some big name portfolios too). Hopefully, it will not affect your income *too* much, but I feel there will definitely be a hit on the income from that site due to the change.

Jumping into Video, Audio got you down?

Hello readers :)

I wanted to take todays post to comment on the upcoming trend of video in microstock. You've heard this before, on my blog atleast. Believe me though when I state that I am not the only one who sees video as the wave of the future. I'd like to comment a bit about creating video when using a DSLR.

If you happen to own a DSLR capable of video, I do hope you give it a try. You would most likely own either a Canon 7D, or a Canon 5D Mark IV if it's a relatively new camera (and you shoot Canon). It may be one of the Nikon equivalents as well. In either case, A few points to note.

Audio, in general, is difficult to capture with the in camera microphone. Most of the time all you will get it a muffled static noise as wind whips over the microphone ending.
Solution? None really aside from using an external mic or an external sound recorder and later syncing the sound and image in post (neither solution is very great).

The good news tho is that most microstock agencies dont care if it has sound as most clients will most likely overlay their own audio/music/effects over the clips. My advice is to cut the audio completely either in camera or in post. Not only will you avoid the headache of external mic's and such, but you'll be able to increase your memory card capacity by a good ~18%.

I hope it helps :) and goodluck!

Artifacting, Noise, Rejections, and Coping

One of the hardest things to overcome is rejection. This applies to all things in life of course but in microstock you will (most likely) get A LOT of it, especially when you first start out. It can be difficult to spend a few hours preparing a few items to shoot, processing them in post for a few hours, then pridefully uploading them. A few days later you get a big fat "rejected" email.

What are your options at this point?
A). Throw the camera out the window.
B). Panic
C). Panic and then throw the camera out the window...?

Of course there is no need to get hysterical (although enraged may be the better word for the feeling). Rejection is a part of the game. Microstock companies have thousands upon thousands of photos to sort through and although when microstock first began it was much easier to get items approved, these days they can be much more selective.

What does this mean for you? The aspiring photographer behind the lens? Quite simply you have to practice and get better, no way around it. Learn from the issues and don't hesitate to hit the forums for a bit of info from fellow photographers. At times, the forum may be brutal, but they are good teachers, if difficult ones.

I'd like to mention some of the most common rejections and how to fix or alleviate the issues.

1). Artifacting. Artifacting is the degredation of an image, seen as blocks of interpolated information.

This technical issue is commonly created by the quality settings in-camera, in post-processing, in RAW settings or scanner settings. Artifacting can also be introduced into an image from the result of other factors such as excessive level adjustments.
A little bit more about compression: The JPEG file format uses a lossy compression method. In order to make the file smaller, information is thrown away, or lost. The quality setting that most image editing programs and digital cameras have when saving JPEGs determines how much information is lost. At a certain point with lower quality settings the removal of information during the compression process can become visible in the form of compression artifacts (places in the image where too much detail has been lost). Too much JPEG compression can become visible either in the form of a general loss of detail, or grainy/patterned areas (especially in flat spaces, such as skies).
Compression artifacting can be introduced by the camera and/or by your image editing software at lower quality settings. Also, re-sizing, re-sampling, and re-saving can all degrade the quality of a JPEG image, so one should be careful about re-saving JPEGs. If for example, a photo was re-saved 4 times (even at a quality of 12 or Best) the image quality will become worse each time as pixel information is thrown out each time the file is saved. With this in mind, it is obviously best to start with the cleanest image possible. You may want to double-check your camera settings to make sure it is saving at the highest quality. If you continue to have issues you may try shooting in RAW/NEF mode, export to TIFF and then save as JPEG at the highest possible quality (level 12) with minimal or no post processing effects. Sometimes even trying a new RAW converter could be beneficial.

2). Noise (pixels of varying color where there shouldn't be): most commonly created by digital cameras, especially in darker shadows or under low-light conditions and exacerbates the compression issues mentioned above. You might want to double-check to make sure that your camera's ISO/ASA setting is at the lowest number (usually 100). In digital cameras, higher numbers (200 or 400) will always result in more noise (just as with film).

istockphoto vs shutterstock

Hello readers!

Today I wanted to give a quick update on my microstock earnings through these two companies. Please keep in mind this is based on my own experiences... and "your mileage may vary" as they often say. With that disclaimer added, let's jump into my thoughts so far on these two companies when compared side by side.

So far, based on my own numbers, Shutterstock seems like the clear winner by a landslide. Not only has it been considerably more difficult to have images accepted at istockphoto (images that at dreamstime are doing quite well) but of those that have been accepted, I have been little return when compared to Shutterstock. I manage to obtain more approved images at Shutterstock, that also sell faster, and more frequently. The upload process is also quite easy at shutterstuck (much more so than istockphoto, unless you use the third-party API called "DeepMeta", which helps put them on par).

My vote? Goes to Shutterstuck, hands down, for the best microstock website to upload your images to.