A Quick Analysis OF What Gear I Used Most In 2018

Taos Pueblo, Taos, New Mexico; Cemetery and ruins of the San Geronimo Church, destroyed in 1846 (click to enlarge)
Olympus E-M1 Mark II, 12-100mm f/4 lens @ 14mm; 1/250th sec. @ f/8; ISO 200

Each year I look back and do a quick technical analysis of what gear I used most, what lenses I used most and what focal lengths I employed most often, etc. in order to give me some insight as to where my photography is going.  I do compare year to year as well.  Here is a quick rundown on what I found by looking at my images' metadata in Lightroom CC Classic.  I've drawn some conclusions at the end.

When looking at the number of images I made, here are the numbers and gear used.  These are all RAW format.

Total images made during 2018:                               16,988  

Olympus E-M1 Mark II                                               10,163
Olympus Pen-F   (purchased July 2018)                          243
Total                                                                        10,406
Percentage                                                                61.2%**

Fujifilm X-T2                                                              4797
Fujifilm X-T3 (purchased late October 2018)                1697
Total                                                                          6494
Percentage                                                                38.2%**

**Also, I made some images with some miscellaneous cameras so the above figures don't necessarily add up to 100%.

I next look at which lenses I used most.  Here is a breakdown on those statistics.

Top 5 Olympus lenses used:

Olympus 12-100mm f/PRO lens                                    4753        45.6%
Olympus 300mm f/4 PRO lens                                      3464        33.2%
Olympus 60mm f/2.8 macro lens                                   823          7.9%
Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 PRO lens                                  420         4.0%
Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO lens                                388          3.7%
The rest of my Olympus lenses                                      558          5.3%

Note: the 300mm f/4 PRO lens was used exclusively for wildlife photography.

Top 5 Fujifilm lenses used:
  
Fujifilm 16-55mm f/2.8 lens                                        2757        42.4%
Fujifilm 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 lens                               1793        27.6%
Fujifilm 50-140mm f/2.8 lens                                        780        12.0%
Fujifilm 23mm f/1.4 lens                                              406          6.2%
Fujifilm 35mm f/2 lens                                                 359          5.5%
The rest of my Fujifilm lenses                                       499          7.6%

Note: the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 lens was used exclusively for wildlife photography.

I next look at the focal lengths I most frequently used throughout the year.  Lightroom records metadata for each focal length so, instead of looking at all of the focal lengths individually, from 15-840mm (FF equiv.), and trying to make some sense out of that huge number, I group them around the classic prime lens' focal lengths so I can get an idea of which "general" ones I've used most.  If I didn't, I would have 830 focal lengths, a millimeter apart (Fujifilm's are listed by 10ths of a miilimeter so you can multiply that 830 by a factor of 10!).  I really can't analyze data like that.  Also, I have to translate the two formats (APS-C and M4/3) into full frame fields of view (FOV) when doing my analysis so I am comparing apples to apples.  For easy reference, all focal lengths listed below are in terms of full frame field of view.

For example, 24mm would represent images made from 10mm through 26mm.  The 35mm figure would represent images made from 27mm though 40mm, etc. all the way through the list.  That way the grouping gives me a general idea of the relative focal lengths I've used in proportion to others.

  24mm                                                                             9.3%
  35mm                                                                           10.5%
  50mm                                                                             6.5%
  85mm                                                                             9.5%
  120mm                                                                           6.8%
  200mm                                                                          11.9%                                  
  300mm                                                                            3.0%
  600mm                                                                          14.8%
  840mm                                                                          27.2%

Next, I like to look at what ISOs I used most.  This isn't as valuable as the other data lsited as the ISO is pretty much dictated by the circumstances I encounter at each scene.  But it is nice to know what proportion of ISOs I used most.  The top 5 ISOs I used were:

ISO 200 (base ISO on the X-T2 and Olympus) 57.7%
ISO 800                                                         9.3%
ISO 400                                                         6.2%
ISO 3200                                                       4.0%
ISO 500                                                         2.7%

ISOs above 2000                                            7.7%
ISOs above 3200                                            1.5%

One thing I will say is that I consciously set my ISO to 800 quite a bit on my X-T2 as, in the analysis of the sensor by the site Photons to Photos, ISO 800 has better noise characteristics than ISO 640 and ISO 400.  In fact, ISO 800 has the same noise characteristics as ISO 320 in an X-T2.  Fujifilm and Sony develop their sensors and firmware to have "dual gain architecture."  Basically, that is like having two base ISOs.  In the case of the Fujifilm cameras, ISO 200 and 800 are pretty much the same when it comes to digital noise.  So I skip the ISOs in between.  The downside of this is losing just a little dynamic range, however.

Some of my conclusions based upon this data.

1)  I shot fewer images last year than I did in either of 2017 or 2016.  I shot 24% fewer images in 2018 than in 2017 and 49% fewer images than I made in 2016.  I think one of the reasons for that is that I did not get to go on my annual late fall/early winter wildlife weekend, which normally results in a few thousand exposures but I don't yet know what would be the reason for the rest.  Maybe I'm just shooting fewer images.  More contemplative?  I'll have to figure out why.

2)  There are two reasons the Olympus E-M1 Mark II was used for a much higher percentage of my photography this past year than in 2017.  For comparison, in 2017, I used the Fujifilm X-T2 56% or the time and the E-M1 Mark II 44% of the time.  

First, last January I made a decision, as an experiment, that for the first 6 months of the year, I would use the Olympus gear almost exclusively to ascertain if I could be totally happy with the micro4/3 format.  

Second, the Olympus has become my "grab and go" camera, not because it is better than my Fujifilm gear, but simply because of the versatility and excellence of the 12-100mm f/4 PRO lens.  In other words, as I head out of the door, I can quickly pick up the camera and that one lens and cover most things I may encounter.  If Fujifilm had a lens that covered the same focal length range and is of the same excellent image quality, I would pick up my X-T3 instead as I prefer using Fujifilm cameras.  But they don't.

As an additional comment about the lack of a similar Fujifilm lens, the closest Fujifilm comes to the 12-100mm f/4 PRO Olympus lens is the Fujifilm 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 lens.  I truly wish I could find an excellent copy of this Fujifilm lens so I could utilize my X-T3 and that lens in a similar capacity.  However, from everything I have read and seen, some copies are excellent and some are just okay.  I don't want to chance getting an okay copy and having to send it back and potentially repeat that process until I receive an excellent copy.  If you know someone who has an excellent copy, and I mean excellent physically as well as optically with the box and all accessories, and is willing to sell it at normal gear prices, send them my way.   Please!

3)  Since my cameras' and lens' metadata is recorded in Lightroom in precise focal lengths, such as 32mm, 33mm, 34mm, 35mm, 36mm, 37mm, etc., it is futile to try to analyze each focal length for use in absence of surrounding focal lengths.  The differences between focal lengths are minor.  Fujifilm makes it even more difficult as their focal lengths are recorded in tenths of a millimeter—33.2mm, 33.3mm, 33.4mm, etc.  To try to make better sense of what focal lengths I tend to use in what proportions, I try to "group" close focal lengths together into approximate classic prime lens focal lengths to get a clearer idea of my photographic vision.  In other words, 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, etc.  It seems that I tend to shoot moderately wide and moderately telephoto for the majority of my imagery.  You can disregard the longest focal lengths as those are singular in purpose—wildlife.  If I didn't shoot wildlife, I wouldn't even own those lenses.

4)  I'm certainly a zoom lens guy.  I use zoom lenses in much greater proportion than prime or single focal length lenses.  Rightfully so.  They are so much more versatile and the good to great ones are just as sharp as prime lenses.  I probably should quit buying prime lenses as I don't use them enough to justify the costs. 

The two lenses I used most are the Fujifilm 16-55mm f/2.8 and the Olympus 12-100mm f/4 PRO.  No surprise there.  They are both very versatile, cover a nice range of focal lengths and are superb in image quality.

The two Fujinon prime lenses I used, the 23mm f/1.4 and the 35mm f/2, got relatively little use.  I might as well not have used the 35mm f/2 as almost all of the images I made with it were made at an aperture of f/5.6.  I could have used the 16-55mm f/2.8 lens and gained some versatility, albeit being a heavier and bulkier lens.  I used the 23mm f/1.4 lens wide open for about 25% of the images I made with it.  However, 66% of the images I made using this lens were made at f/4-f/8 with the majority of those at f/5.6.  I think carrying and using it still is worthwhile as those 25% of my images were made in low light where f/1.4 really helps out.  In fact, they were "birthday party" photos for one of my granddaughter's birthdays held at a roller skating rink.  Very bad lighting!

As for the two prime Olympus lenses, the 60mm f/2.8 macro was used 87% at f/8 or f/11.  Naturally, a smaller aperture for greater depth of field with macro subjects.  This makes sense.

The 300mm f/4 PRO lens, without and with the MC-14 1.4x tele-converter, which I utilized exclusively for photographing birds, wildlife, etc., was used wide open much of the time—46% of all of my images.  The second most used aperture, f/8, was used 32% of the time.  I employed f/8 when the light was good and shutter speeds shorter than 1/1600th sec. were, more often than not, not needed.  I also noticed that a fair amount of time, I stopped down the lens 1/2 stop.  That is probably due to me hanging on to that old rule of thumb from my film days (when the lenses weren't nearly as good as they are today) that a lens is not good wide open.  Sometimes stopping down a half stop improves it significantly.  In the old days, the rule of thumb was that a lens was sharpest stopped down 2 stops.  That doesn't necessarily apply today.  It may in some cases, but not universally.  I don't need to stop down 2 stops with the 300mm f/4 PRO as it is pin sharp wide open, without and with the MC-14.  

5)  I don't often shoot with really high ISOs.  I only use ISOs 2000 or higher only 7.7% of the time and ISOs 3200 or higher only 1.5% of the time.  So when I hear camera reviewers putting so much emphasis on high ISO performance, it is pretty much meaningless to me.  I don't compare cameras based upon how high an ISO a camera's dials are marked or image quality at ISO 6400 or above.  I almost never use those.  If I do, I'll put in some extra work on the images to reduce noise, etc.

6) It seems I use typical wide-angle focal lengths about 20% of the time, normal to short telephoto focal lengths about 23% of the time, medium telephoto about 15% of the time and extreme telephoto about 42% of the time.  Since I use the extreme telephoto focal lengths only for wildlife, if I take them out of the equation, I can summarize that I use wide angle a bit less than half the time, normal to moderate telephoto about half the time and medium telephoto about a third of the time.  That is a pretty even distribution and kind of surprises me since the lenses I use most are in the middle focal lengths.


7)  When I use a zoom lens, I tend to use the focal lengths at opposite ends of the lens than the focal lengths in the middle.  For example, if I’m using a 16-55mm zoom lens, for whatever reason I will use 16mm and 55mm at a much higher proportion rather than the middle focal lengths.  I’ve noticed this trend in the past and I still don’t understand why I choose the extremes of any particular zoom lens.

8)  I don't shoot many super wide angle images.  Years ago, I used to have very wide angle photographic vision, but I've changed over the years.  Don't know why.  Subject matter, I suppose.

9)  The 600 and 840mm full frame fields of view focal length images were all made when out photographing wildlife.  The rest of the my images are spread pretty equally among wide angle, normal and short telephoto.  I suspect that reflects my diverse subject matter and my self-identification as a generalist photographer rather than a specialist who only photographs certain subjects.  The 60mm focal length images are all macros using my Olympus 60mm f/2.8 macro lens.  I shot more macros than I remember!

I may have some additional conclusions, but this post is long enough.  If you have any questions, just ask.  

What are my photographic plans for this year?  Probably about the same as the past many.  However, as I wrote a while back, I'm a little bored with grand landscapes.  It seems to me it has all been done before and, although they can be beautiful, they seem to hold little interest for me.  Of course, that doesn't mean I won't make the occasional landscape, or an intimate landscape, if I come across a beautiful scene.  I may try to do more urban and people photography.  I just don't know.  Time will tell.

I hope you will take the time to analyze your own photography periodically.  It can assist you in the evolution your photographic vision and assist in making purchase decisions for the future.

Join me over at Instagram @dennisamook or my website, www.dennismook.com. 

Thanks for looking. Enjoy! 

Dennis A. Mook 

All content on this blog is © 2013-2019 Dennis A. Mook. All Rights Reserved. Feel free to point to this blog from your website with full attribution. Permission may be granted for commercial use. Please contact Mr. Mook to discuss permission to reproduce the blog posts and/or images.