Corinn and Jeff, 7.31.09

Corinn and Jeff had the sense to get married on a wonderful day (my mother’s birthday — Harry Potter’s too, if you’re interested). Sadly, the weather was not *quite* as wonderful. But that didn’t keep their spirits down for a second. After a beautiful Catholic ceremony led by a longtime friend of Jeff’s family, they had a great party at the Greentree Country Club in New Rochelle. As you can see from the photos, they never stopped making sure that they and their guests were having a great time.


View full post »

Rochelle - Love love love the boots

Maria - your photos always are beautiful, which lenses are your favorite, you said something about a sigma 50mm 1.4 another favorite? or the most common lenses do you use?, please tell me. …AND… ANOTHER BEAUTIFUL WEDDING YOU ARE SO GOOD!

Billy Oblivion - Oh *man* I wish the dolt who shot my wedding had the talent you have in your left pinky.

Simon - Amazing work, but it’s your consistency that I find incredible. Every one a winner, every time, yet without a hint of safe-and-boring. Major respect for going WAY beyond what most people expect from a wedding photographer.

Battle of the Sexes

Ryan Brenizer Photography

Sometimes, I try to turn challenges into opportunities. One of the toughest times to shoot is peak mid-day. This is counter-intuitive to the layman: “Photographs need light! Let’s shoot when there’s as much as possible!” but the sun is a very harsh, extremely strong light source, and there are few less attractive places to put a hard light than directly over someone’s head. (Coming directly from below is worse, but for obvious reasons that doesn’t happen very much with the sun).

So we try to work against it or overpower it. But there’s the second problem — overpowering the sun is about as hard as it sounds. Wee little flashes only do well if they’re close, which limits the sorts of compositions you can do. That’s why I’ve taken to doing multi-frame composites recently, so I can get the flash close to my subject in a big frame and then quickly digitally erase it later.

But there are other ways — who says the light source can’t be in the frame? Who says you can’t have some fun with it? The rooftop garden at the Met is absolutely one of the brightest places I’ve been in New York, other than the waterfront. I used every trick to get “normal” frames well-exposed, and then dipped into the abnormal.

Steve Elmer - Absolutely ace Ryan. A trip to the abnormal side is a pleasant one :) Very fresh Mate :)

Stephanie and Phil: 7/18/09

I knew the second that Stephanie and Phil said the words “West Point” that their wedding would be fantastic. Phil is a member of the renowned West Point military band, and if anyone knows how to enjoy themselves, it’s the military and musicians. They are both unbelievably sweet. Stephanie is a school-teacher, so instead of a limo we got to ride around in a bumpy school-bus with a driver who was either insane or far too used to G-force testing. The reception hall was beautiful and so was the day.

But the best part of the wedding was their first dance. They began to “Unchained Melody,” beautiful, touching, precisely what someone might expect. And then … SCRAAAAAAATCH! went the recording, and the entire wedding party broke into “Thriller”! The crowd, as you may imagine, went nuts.


Secret “Thriller”!

Landon - I love the natural light / high ISO shot (2nd from the bottom). Your photography is inspirational. Nice work.

Daniel Csiky - fantastic pictures, ryan!
I love to watch your slideshows!
pls. never stop!! :)

rgds, Daniel

Dennis Pike - These are great. I shot a wedding at West Point about 2 months ago. I find that you and I are shooting in the same places more and more, the coolest part is our photos look COMPLETELY different. Although I’m sure skill has a little something to do with that

Steve Elmer - The groups shot of the Thriller Dance, is by far my favourite shot of the week!

Rules for Shooting Wedding Couples

We’ve had Rules for Shooting Groomsmen and Rules for Shooting Group Photos, so now it’s time for the big one: Rules for shooting couples.

1. This is the most romantic day of their lives. Play on that energy and capture it.

2. These photos aren’t just for them. They’re for the parents, they’re for the children they might have down the line. Bring class to the image, and it will be a lasting work.

3. Watch your backgrounds. Nothing ruins a romantic photo faster than unwanted clutter.

4. Weddings are, by their very nature, ritualistic. Sometimes even tried and true poses can be classic and fresh just because it’s them.

5. All of these are good rules, but not all clients are the same. Elegance and beauty are important, but so are individual personalities. If they’re a bit nuts in the best possible way like Dara and Chris, don’t be afraid to show that off. (Of course, there are a lot of couples — one would say the vast majority — for whom this shot wouldn’t work. And that’s cool, too.)

Jonas Peterson - Great shot, Ryan.

Ryan Brenizer - I had a feeling you’d like this one.

Samo Rovan - Hey Ryan,

you made my day with photo, but especially with rules. :)

All best from Slovenia,

Dennis Pike - I dig these posts, the ones where you talk about the rules, then break them, I can always get behind that kind of thinking

alan - Ryan, simply elegant, ha ha. I bet it took more time to compose THIS shot than one of your more classic poses. “Flagpole sticking out the head” – simply great! :)

Nirwen - Great site. Keep doing.,

Konrad Bazan - Very cool Ryan! :)

Juan Pablo Velasco Fotografía - perfect

Just an Expression

Ryan Brenizer Photography

A big part of the work I do on wedding days is the collecting of expressions. I love people’s faces, and I never get tired of finding telling, emotional-but-not-embarrassing expressions that capture the essence of a person in that moment.

By and large, these aren’t shots to base a portfolio around. If you submitted them to a contest, the judges would toss it away. If you submitted them to a high-end magazine, they would furrow their brows: “I don’t get it! This is just a picture of a person. Weddings aren’t about people, they’re about centerpieces!”

Magazines do a great job at what their supposed to do, but their clients, the readers, are generally people ABOUT to get married, looking for ideas. I work for people actually getting married that day, who have chosen to surround themselves with loved ones. If I can get photos that not only look cool, but bring out the quirks and way of being that these people carry with them, I’ve done my job. I call these my “That’s SO…” photos. I want to take shots that make people say “That’s SO my dad!” or, “That’s SO my crazy college roommate Bill.” I think these present a tremendous value to the couple, their friends and families, above and beyond just it being a good photo.

When I left my job as a photographer for Columbia University Teachers College, my (very cool) boss said something that puzzled me at first. “You take photos that actually look like your subject.”

At first, this seemed like the most underwhelming complement ever. Imagine showing someone your favorite image of a flower and them saying “Yes, that’s definitely a flower!” But, after considering it, I was elated. As valuable as it is to take a photo of someone who looks like they’re having their photo taken, or who is in Pose #68 from the Posing Rulebook, if I can take a photo that makes you feel like you know that person at that point in time, that they have independent essence and personality, then I feel like I’ve done my job.

The trick to photographing expressions is to use your peripheral vision and be very, very fast. I use fast-focusing cameras, fast-focusing lenses, and take hundreds of thousands of photos a year, so I’ve gotten pretty used to making my stuff work immediately. If you have slower lenses, the trick is to keep the focusing area close to where you want it so it doesn’t have to hunt much. This is the secret to getting great moments with, for example, the glacial Canon 85mm f/1.2.

(But I like centerpieces, too.)

John Heil - awesome post and shot! those are most often the clients favorites!

daragh - You could also use Canon’s 85mm f/1.8 lens for photojournalistic work at that focal length as it is one of the fastest focusing lenses they make and certainly within the price range of anyone who also has the glacial f/1.2 version.

katie - do you have any recommendations on some snappy nikon lenses?

Ryan Brenizer - One of the very snappiest around is the 24-70.

Show Your Worst

100 percent out-of-camera (except for border and logo)

I’ve started a new thing this month — posting my day-of slideshows publically to my Facebook.

As a branding idea, photographers are told this is quite possibly the worst thing you can do. You’re supposed to show only your best work, carefully culled and processed to the best of your ability! The very last thing you should show your public are a bunch of pictures you picked out from the thumbnails and are straight out-of-camera, or with less than five seconds of editing. What are you, nuts?

Maybe. Oversharing IS a common photographer’s problem. I certainly remember seeing work of photographers I admire when I was just learning the basics and thinking “Oh my God, they’re human!” if they ever put forth something mediocre.

Everyone takes mediocre photos, of course. I think I took a photo of my foot yesterday, just because it was still there.

But I hope I’m on to something. Wedding photography is Different. It emphasizes consistency in a way no other demanding field does — Good Always will beat Brilliant Sometimes. It’s one of the few fields where it actually really matters how good the 100th best photo was you took that day. These things dovetail into day-of slideshows.

Of course, there are lots of benefits. Clients LOVE seeing photos the next day. You get out of the gate before someone else posts really bad photos to their Facebook and everyone assumes you took them. Everyone loves photos of themselves.

Better, though, doing a good day-of slideshow is HARD. Doing wedding photography right is already really, really hard, and day-of slideshows add a few more “reallys.” Hard is good. Do things that are hard, and you’ll never be shown up by the random guest with the professional gear.

Just this year, I’ve had wedding guests that were professional cinematographers, trained by Ansel Adams, photography teachers at major institutions, and all sorts of other intimidating things. If wedding photography really does flourish under a unique set of skills (I think it does), and if you’re a specialist, you should be aiming to do things they cannot. But those things will be the Hard Things.

I’ve been spending my entire life making things unnecessarily hard on myself. Now I think I’ve finally found a use for it.

Lynette J - Further proof that you are my photography hero ;) I am going to try this at my next wedding…now I just need to get my “worst” to look as good as your “worst”. Nice post!

Sarah Alston - Brilliant post. I love it, and I keep on loving you!!!!!

Sheila - I have said it a million times,you are inspiring and what I love most of all human.You can’t be perfect all time .Although you are darn close as far as what you share with the rest of us.Thank you for all that you share not only with your photographs but wisdom as well.

sergey - fantastic post. Everything you said applies not only to photography, but to every aspect of any skilled profession. You make wonderful pictures as what seems to be effortless click of a button on a camera and yet its a practiced art. Good to see that you are a human and admit it.

Chris Lin - “just because [the foot] was still there.”

Don’t jinx it! ;-)

Too hard on self - I constantly make it hard for myself too.

The thing is most of the times I fail to comply. IT’S too hard..

Maria - next week I´ll go to the Texas for Nikon 50mm f1.4! (in my DX 75mm) Now, I definitely will try to take my photos more beautiful 100 % out of camera! …..and the Brenizer Method of course :)
, and if not for that there always have NX2, aperture, photoshop :p.


Lyndon - Wow, even your worst looks good. No wonder your photos look so amazing :)
So glad you decided to do that piece for Photojojo. Might not have seen your work otherwise!
Looking forward to seeing more.

Ryan Brenizer - Thanks! I didn’t write it; it was written about me.

William Bay - Good to see you’ve come over to WordPress. Now you’ll have to design it to look like the rest of your site (or build your entire site on it).

Interesting thoughts on the day of slideshows. I think whereas other photographers will be overly critical, clients will love to see something up so soon, and many times better than casual guest snapshots.
I try to get a handful of my favorites up the next day. But can imagine a full slideshow from the ceremony would be very impactful.


*BTW Dennis Leary rocks, and I laughed my ass off at that comment.

David Redding - So glad you have a site I can comment on!

I absolutely love this shot! and it being sooc really shows your stuff.

Gotta ask though…where is that rim light coming from?

Ryan Brenizer - Riverside Church has some serious lighting, and in a VERY rare case, I was shooting from the back of the altar toward the audience.

Emily Porter - Love this mentality and this shot, Mr. Brenizer.

Rochelle - I think that’s a great way of thinking – but do remember that your worst is pretty much the rest of the population’s best! :o)

Daniel Stark - great post!!

Balok Imagenes - Wow!! all your work is fantastic. Congratulations!!

Bethany - Thank you for being one of the pros to admit that you don’t always take extraordinary photos.

I just quit following a blog that was moderately interesting because they posted yet another, “I’m a pro, look at how silly an amateur photographer is with an expensive camera they’ve not yet learned to operate and that I didn’t even show how to properly focus before handing it to them, I never take a bad photo, blah blah BS,” entry. Personally, I think people that put forth this line of thought are elitist liars – there’s no way they could possibly take 100% fantastic photos; or they themselves are simply a higher level of amateur who’s been paid a few times. It’s an attitude designed specifically to limit competition by making people new to high-end photography (such as myself) feel bad about what they’re learning to produce.

In fact, I find the people that truly have the mad skills are usually the humblest ones around, the most willing to share what they know, generally encouraging toward others, and rarely ever have to try hard to elevate themselves – what they produce does it for them.

Looking forward to reading more of your blog :)

Marianne - Never heard of you before right now, and I feel like I will be coming back to this page from here on out. This post is hilarious and wonderful, and I agree with the spirit of everyone that has posted…perhaps one day my best will be in competition with your worst :) Keep it up!

Kat Braman - what a great shot and I love the post! definitely my goal to do this at my next wedding.

jtimages - WOW wonderful,…what else is there to say?? GREAT job!!

Unfortunate Reflection

The cabbie wouldn’t get out of my way in time, so I went with it.

In my twisted mind, this is one of the funniest pictures I’ve ever taken. Good thing the couple has a great sense of humor.

jeremy - not sure if its just me but all of the info on the page is jumbled together. im running the latest IE.

just wanted to let you know.

Ryan Brenizer - Is that still happening? Looks fine to me.

jeremy - looks good now. could have been my work pc

For You Blue

More extreme white balance? Nope — this is exactly what the scene looked like in real life, thanks to the crazy night lights at the High Line.

I’m always looking to do something a little different from the norm with clients, and when it’s warm enough more and more I say "hey, why don’t we do the shoot when it’s pitch black out?" Even popular engagement spots like the High Line take a very different tone at night — during the day, this spot looks like a random airplane hangar.

Thanks, Bill, for holding the Lowel video light on this one!

Some Raw programs are more equal than others

I’ve discussed before the possibilities of using extreme white balance shifts in your photography — it’s a common practice to hit an outdoor subject with amber light on a tungsten setting to make the sky deep blue, like so:


But why stop there? It’s the digital era. If I’d hit them with a flash gelled deep pink, I could get crazy greens in the background. Or I could make that blue totally saturated.* It’s a way to get that crazy gelled-background look with just one light.

But some raw programs are much better at extreme shifts than others. Adobe Lightroom is great at making things super-warm, going to 50000K, but can only go as cold as to neutralize an old tungsten light bulb — anything lit by red is out of luck.

This isn’t just an issue for your own crazy lighting — if you shoot concerts or anything extremely theatrical, you often have to deal with lighting managers who are clearly on some sort of loosely-controlled substance. That’s where unlimited shifts come into play. RAW Developer is pretty good at this, with an auto setting that will use whatever crazy setting seems right, but is still limited compared to my favorite, Nikon Capture NX. With the “set gray point” option in the white balance, you can set it to essentially anything you want. For example, here’s some crazy lighting from a wedding singer, as it looked in real life:

090705-204635 _85.0 mm f_1.6 (2).jpg

Here’s the best that Lightroom could do with it (cropped slightly differently):

090705-204635 _85.0 mm f_1.6.jpg

But here’s what a simple adjustment in Capture NX did.

090705-204635 _85.0 mm f_1.6 (1).jpg

Look! She has skin tone! See how the open flame went to a crazy green? Non Nikon users may want to try their own maker’s software or RAW Developer.

UPDATE: By popular demand, here is what Apple’s Aperture can do. This actually taught me something I didn’t know — in Aperture, the white balance dropper can get you into extremes that the slider alone can’t do. While the settings for this read 2000K, -150, it was actually far more extremely shifted than if you had just manually moved the slider.

2009-07-05 20-46-35.jpg

*(Be careful lighting with greenish tones, it can highlight skin imperfections)

Eric - Ryan,

Did you try using the white balance dropper tool on the guy’s shirt collar in the bottom left of the frame?

I tried it with your JPEG image and think it turned out closer to balanced than the second shot above. I didn’t get the warm skin tones like on the bottom shot, but I think I could get more out of the NEF file in Lightroom. Her teeth also worked pretty good with the dropper tool.

Ryan Brenizer - That’s because you’re working the JPEG image that I already got halfway there. Adobe is a bit more wild with their JPG white balance, since it’s a different scale. But the Lightroom image was at the maximum settings (2000K, -150)

Greg - Good info. do you have a feel for what Apple’s Aperture can do as a comparison?



kwb - And, it’s “Raw” instead of “RAW.” Check any Adobe manual. Raw is not an acronym. Otherwise, nice.

Ryan Brenizer - It’s not often I run across someone more pedantic than myself. ;-)

Ryan Brenizer - @Greg: View the update!

Max - This is a really good post – getting good colours especially skin tones) in lightroom has been almost impossible for me so its good to see that other programs can really do much better. LR is so bad that I started to get seriously paranoid about shooting under fluourescent light!

Just out of curiousity, what is your most commonly used Raw prog? Your pictures always have perfect skin tone!

Ryan Brenizer -

Just out of curiousity, what is your most commonly used Raw prog? Your pictures always have perfect skin tone!

Overall, Lightroom by far because of the incredible speed. But the photos presented o the blog are a split between Lightroom and NX.

Mike - Nice comparison! I found out last year that Lightroom’s temperature settings aren’t sufficiently low enough especially for specialized infrared work.

One solution, albeit clunky for the type of corrections you suggest in this blog, would be to be to create a custom camera profile for use in Lightroom to get extreme colour temperatures (i.e. for good IR photos I need a temperature in the range of 1600-1800K) – here’s a discussion I started on flickr about this:

Once again, clunky to do, and not precise, but there is a way to get extreme colour temperatures in Lightroom by building your own camera profiles.

kw - Aperture is truly a great program. I’ve been using it for long time for processing both nikon and canon files. It’s too bad people don’t see the power of Aperture and what it has to offer. With Nik plugins I never have to go to photoshop much anymore. Never used Nikon nx or Capture NX 2. I have used LR and much prefer Aperture. Just my two cents.

Thomas Lester - Hey Ryan –

I’m an Aperture user and am aware of the dropper being able to go extreme (off the sliders). However… as you can see in your sample, Aperture gets the temperature pretty close, but seems to almost always screw up the tint. I almost always have to re-adjust the tint even when using a grey card target. And it’s not always consistent. Sometimes it’s heavy on the pink side, sometimes it’s heavy on the green side.

Did you try the dropper in LR? I would think that it would behave similarly to Aperture.

BTW… I love Capture NX2, but I just can’t wrap my head around an efficient work flow since CNX2 stinks for Digital Asset Management and it’s SLLLOOOWWWW….

Ryan Brenizer - I’ve never had LR’s dropper go extreme.

Kyle - Going to see what Canon’s program has to offer as far as white balance goes. Skin toes are my achilles tendon.

And YAY, Ryan has a blog we can all comment on!

Eric - “That’s because you’re working the JPEG image that I already got halfway there.”

Actually, I tried the dropper on the first image, not the second one that had already been processed in LR. Thanks for the update in Aperture though.

Sean McCormack - Steven Erat sent me over for a look.

Using the DNG Profile Editor you can quite easily make a much cooler white balance and save it as a profile.

I use this technique for Infrared, but it would work equally as well in this application.

Maria - Hi!, you always use Lightroom for editing because I´m your fan and I tried Aperture, photoshop and NX2, but always finish some effect in photoshop, If don´t edit a lot of photos which program do you say that is the best for more quality (forget the speed) and the photo before the aperture edit is finished in NX2 ? but started in Lightroom?

—I love you Ryan (your work) you inspired me-

Ryan Brenizer - Thank you Maria! Your comment is a bit hard to understand because of the language barrier, but in terms of absolute quality I will usually go with NX, with photoshop for fine detail work.

Dolly - I absolutely love this post. Those pictures of the background are my absolute favorite.

Simon - Thanks so much for this Ryan, this is the one problem with LR for me…View NX works way better for those rare shots where LR fails. Now if Nikon would only make it work faster and not charge extra for NX2 I’d be much happier.
Love the new blog BTW, long-time fan of your Amazon blog…

Alex - Ryan – Dealing with the white balance is always something hard for me. Could share some handy hints about what “simple adjustment” you did in NX to get this awesome skin tone out of the sluggish enlightenment.
Love your new blog too btw.

Ryan Brenizer — New York City Wedding Photographer : For You Blue - […] More extreme white balance? Nope — this is exactly what the scene looked like in real life, thanks to the crazy night lights at the High Line. […]

Craig Cacchioli - Wedding Photographer - An interesting insight. Obviously, different software has different tricks, but I never expected to see such a marked difference!

Hello (again)!

I was trying to get this a BIT more finished before the Grand Opening, but I’ve been blessed with an incredibly busy shooting schedule, and wanted to give new readers some content to look at. For now, here are some links to “Brenizer Method” content!

As some of you might have realized, despite the PhotoJojo title, this is all about LESS depth of field than is normally possible, not more.

Here are some images that show off the technique (You can also search Flickr:)

Wedded Bliss

A Bridge Just Right


The Dreaming Tree

New Life to a Tomb

A New World

While the Iron is Hot

Ceci n

Chris Bartow - I’ve been messing around with the Brenizer Method today and I always seem to run into the same problem. On the edges of the photo I always end up with lines that don’t line up. Check out the highlighted branches on this tree as an example.

I try not to move the camera too much. I think this may be an issue with CS2 photomerge that works better in the newer versions.

Any tips to fix this?

Ryan Brenizer - Really complicated lines can mess programs up, and CS3 is a big jump up from CS2 in terms of stitching. There are some free programs out there that actually do a pretty good job.

Mark Terry - Very nice shallow depth of field effect. Couldn’t you get similar results from Alien SKin’s Bokeh filter? I mean, if you’re going to use Photoshop magic to combine multiple photos to get one image, would you consider it out-of-bounds to create the same thing just using a filter?

Ryan Brenizer - You can do blurring with a simple Gaussian filter, but it really doesn’t look the same, either in true 3-d dimensionality or rendering of highlights.

Daniel Stark - Sweet blog, Ryan!

Tried your method the other day – -check out the results:

The thing is, is that Elements doesn’t do a great job with the merging so I have been doing it by hand! (Ugh!) I’ll have to try out the free programs.

Rochelle - I stinkin’ love the new blog.

Bert - Ryan, when I shoot wide open with 50mm f/1.8, there is always vignetting along the edges of the photo. After I stitch together the photos, I will get clear lines where individual photos converge, due to the earlier vignetting. Any advice on how to solve this?

Ryan Brenizer - Which stitching program are you using? If you have enough RAM, Photoshop will blend the vignetting away.

Mark Terry - Have you tried Bokeh? You can find many examples on Flickr of amazing results. And no, I don’t work for Alien Skin, I just happen to think this program is pretty amazing. Comparing it to Gaussian Blur is like comparing a D3 to a disposable camera. Maybe not quite that big of a difference, but still large.

I’m glad I found your blog through PhotoJoJo – I’ll be reading it religiously…

Ryan Brenizer - But no filter actually knows which parts were slightly closer to you than others. Passable either with a LOT of masking or only in extreme cases

Ryan Brenizer - And thanks!

Bert - I am using CS3 with 2GB RAM in Vista. Is that not sufficient?

Benson - Ryan, I can’t stop reading your blog (it’s now 2am here in my country).

I’m practicing this method a lot but it seems like CS3 is having a difficult time stitching images taken indoors. What should be a 20+ photo panorama only includes 10+ thus my image is incomplete. Maybe too much similarities in the color of the walls?

Also, can you use flash with the “Brenizer Method”? The last and 3rd to the last photos seem to use it. If so, does the flash fire in every shot you take?

{Jen & Jeff} The Engagement | Creative Ottawa Wedding Photographers | BH Photography - […] been working on a couple new techniques. The following photo is a variation on the “Brenizer Method“, which was developed by Ryan Brenizer, a wedding photographer from New York City. Although […]

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP ( doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP () and so is spam.

Stitching with a macro - […] Ryan Brenizer Effect. He uses it mostly on people, but I wanted to try it on items. The idea is to use several photos […]

REPOST: Jill and David

(Most of my posts from March until August are only on the Amazon blog, but I have a few on local draft:)

I got the rare pleasure of second-shooting a wedding with Dave Robbins, the fantastic union of Jill and David. (And that’s Dav-eed, he’s French). I don’t get to second-shoot much for the best of possible reasons — I have too many of my own weddings to shoot — but it’s always fun when I can to try new things, feel my way through a different pace, and just see things from a different angle. There’s no slideshow this time, so I included slightly more photos than normal.

The wedding itself was a fantastic ceremony overlooking the city from the Hotel on Rivington, after which all of the guests marched through town behind a group of musicians, ending up at the stunning Angel Orensanz Foundation. From there it was a big, unending party, with a fantastic band, a musical interlude where the flower girls sang a song the groom’s father had written, and great speeches. In my favorite moment of the night, as one of the best men was giving a speech, his daughter crawled up the stage, tugged on his pants leg, and wouldn’t let go until she was picked up. I love the natural searching instinct of children, and am probably doomed when I have my own, since I spend so much time silently hoping they never do what they’re told.

090426-154331-50_mm copy

090426-162315-50_mm copy

090426-163339-27_mm copy

090426-170159-48_mm copy

090426-190441-40_mm copy

090426-191256-24_mm copy

090426-200504-85_mm copy

090426-203815-35_mm copy


RKB_0802 copy


marilou - I absolutely love these. Wish you had been at my wedding!

Mystery Must-Have Lens Arrived!

(testing out the post-via-iPhone goodness … it’s good to have a supported blog!)

I just got a package in with a Nikon lens i will review. At first glance, i’d have to say this might be the one lens I recommend to just about every last Nikon DSLR user. Any guesses?

Adrian Charles - A cheap, fast prime. Nikon 30 mm f/1.8?

Andrew Lusk - 35mm 1.8?

Mark Gregory - 24-70mm f2.8?

brett maxwell - 200 f2!

Josh Mitchell - 28mm f/1.4D

Ryan Brenizer - @Brett: Haha, if everyone wants a free bicep workout.

Ryan Brenizer - @Josh: I wish.

Marlo - Perhaps the remake of the 18-200mm?

Paul Benjamin - I can only assume it’s the ne 70-200mm f2.8. My logic is as follows…

Not the 50mm f1.4 you’re a Sigma user and so you couldn’t unreservedly reccomend the nikkor.

24-70mm 2.8 is not so awesome on APS-C

17-55mm is the opposite.

14-24 is great but a bit of a speciality lens…

Perhaps one of the micro nikkors, or a new 85mm everything else either works on FF or APS-C or is a speciality lens…

Larry Chua - 70-200 VR II

Dominik - 50mm 1.8!

Adam Shingleton - I want to know what it was!

C.F. - 85mm f1.4……

Bill Reynolds - New? 16-35 ƒ4.

Reworked? 24-120, 135/2 or 180/2.8.

Wish list: any ƒ3.5 or ƒ4 zoom, such as 16-85, 24-105, etc. — for walkabout


John LaPlante - Ryan, love your site…would really like to know what lens you’re talking about…I have been looking at your wedding pics, but haven’t seen too many posted with what would be a 70-200VRII…so I’m curious…what be this lens?