Drive By Shootings in Queens, NY by Amy Medina

Drive-By Shootings in Queens, NY
by Amy Medina

When most people think of New York City, they think of Manhattan, and while yes, Times Square, Central Park and Soho are all amazing places to photograph, you’d do yourself a disservice not to cross a bridge and get yourself into Brooklyn and Queens.

I recently thought this would make a great series for a book, until I discovered from a friend that a taxi-cab driver in New York City already published the idea himself. Regardless, I love to embark on what I call drive-bys. Often, when my family and I are driving around on a weekend, exploring the sites and sounds, I keep my eyes keenly focused on the sidewalk ahead of us. If I see an interesting scene, I attempt to set my camera and capture it as we pass. With practice, I’m getting pretty good at this; getting the shot I want, framed and focused as I’d hoped. Pre-focusing, high shutter speeds, good timing and a bit of luck are really the key. I love framing them like a slice of sidewalk life, where the overall setting is as important as the people in them; and to me, they have a bit of a unique look being from the perspective of a car. Distant, but close. Intimate, but separate. I’m not sure how to describe it…

Though nothing will ever change my love for the Leica M8, which itself makes a good drive-by shooter, I’ve recently been shooting quite a bit with the Pentax K-5. Combined with the pancake limited primes, I’m finding it an immensely enjoyable kit, especially for street photography. It’s comfortable to hold, light and fairly small, with a bit of a retro look that doesn’t intimidate people (similar to the M8 or M9). And it’s QUIET… amazingly quiet. I’m finding that for street photography in general, the DA 21mm and DA 35mm Macro are stupendous performers.

So, all that said, here are the latest of my drive-bys… most of which are from this past weekend (July 3rd). They all capture life on the sidewalks of Queens… and a few different communities within the Borough itself. I hope you enjoy them!

Follow me on Facebook:

on Twitter:

[ad#Adsense Blog Sq Embed Image]


  1. Amy,
    Well your Drive By shots sure have unleashed a torrent of opinions. All I have to add is “Thank you!”
    Back in the early ’70’s, on very hot summer nights, my young wife and I stood on line at the Ice King of Corona. I was there and that photo brings back the feeling of the street as it was and is today.

    Good job, Steve

  2. I really like these shots and I think the technique works very well. The ice king of corona shot is so great because of the interaction you captured. It has a sense of humor that can be easily appreciated. I smiled. There’s also good movement and I would never describe it as
    Clumsy. They all have a great sense of place IMO. Keep up the good work.

  3. Sorry you had to spend so much time responding to critiques. A couple of these are really special and I enjoyed the distanced perspective as opposed to the “in your face” style of street that is prevalent.

    The “King of Corona” shot is an award winner in my book.


  4. Amy,

    I loved the second shot with the El and the building.. the composition is fantastic. Would love to see more of the streets you walk..


  5. I never got a chance to do much street photography but here are some shots I took way back in the 60’s. They were shot in Greenwich Village in Manhattan, on film of course.
    [img] People.jpg[/img]
    [img] Street.jpg[/img]
    [img] 4.jpg[/img]

  6. man, these sure remind me of this:

    Woman Waiting to Take a Photograph, by Dave Eggers

    “The woman is a young woman. She wants to make a living as a photographer, but at the moment she is temping at a company that publishes books about wetlands preservation. On her days off she takes pictures, and today she is sitting in her car, across the street from a small grocery store called “The Go-Getters Market.” The store is located in a very poor neighborhood of her city—the windows are barred and at night a roll-down steel door covers the storefront. The woman thus finds the name “Go-Getters” an interesting one, because it is clear that the customers of the market are anything but go-getters. They are drunkards and prostitutes and transients, and the young photographer thinks that if she can get the right picture of some of these people entering the store, she will make a picture that would be considered trenchant, or even poignant—either way the product of a sharp and observant eye. So she sits in her Toyota Camry, which her parents gave her because it was two years old and they wanted something new, and she waits for the right poor person to enter or leave the store. She has her window closed, but will open it when the right person appears, and then shoot that person under the sign that says “Go-Getters.” This, for the viewer of her photograph when it is displayed—first in a gallery, then in the hallway of a collector’s home, and later in a museum when she has her retrospective—will prove that she, the photographer, has a good eye for irony and hypocrisy, for the inequities and injustices of life, its perfect and unmitigated absurdity.”

    For me, while definitely not bad pictures, I don’t see anything great either. Typical street-photography, with too much thought to composition and nothing compelling going on within it. I don’t care what lenses, cameras, or methods people use (whether on foot, hanging out of a car window, or on the back of an elephant) all that matters is what is in the resultant image. If I have to search through a picture to find something of interest, then I think it has failed. Photography is about the art of the moment, and therefore something about it should be instantly striking. Perhaps, you shouldn’t try so hard. The great one’s find you, and when they do, they will scream. I think there is just too much distance, too much talking in your pictures, and not enough listening, not enough intimacy.

    Either way, to each their own, and I’m glad you and others enjoy these. And I hope you take any criticism given, to be constructive. It’s great to inspired by what you like in others photography, but even greater to be able to see what you don’t like about your own photography in that of others, that will make yours better.

    Continued luck with the world and how you choose to see it.

    • Thanks for the well-thought-out reply Nym. Of course, I find it ironic that you suggest there is too much thought to composition while another says my composition sucks… LOL – it goes to show how subjective the “art form” of photography really is. Some enjoy a good look to find all the details that make the scene interesting to them, some prefer simplicity and beauty, easily seen (and neither view is wrong). Simplicity is normally what I go after in my still lifes and seascapes. Street photography is more a challenge to me… no matter what the results in the viewers opinion. The fact I enjoyed taking them, and that I have received many replies, both challenging and complimentary is reward enough.


      • 1) the fact that your photos ‘inspired’ many to not only comment, but critique should make you feel flattered. i myself, would be more impressed that so many people took the time to write about their impressions whether ‘positive or negative’, rather than just say ‘nice’ or ‘this sucks’. it’s a shame that critique has to almost always be interpreted as being negative, and shunned away from. the fact that you weather ‘critique’ so well, is a testament to you as a person, and your photo’s as well. kudos.

        2) consider the source. i know absolutely nothing about photography, other than what i personally like to look at and what i dont. i’m guessing that a great majority of those who frequent this website are of the same sort. if robert frank and william klein, were here offering thoughts, perhaps then your ears should perk up. til then, shoot what makes sense to you, what makes you happy. the beauty of the world is that everyone sees it differently, my critique was that with some exception, while good pictures, they just kinda look like everything else you’d see on flickr or elsewhere labeled as ‘street photography’.

        3) if street photography challenges you… it’s my novice opinion, that you should just relax and take it as it offers itself to you. don’t disregard luck and instinct, and don’t over think things. i think the main allure of ‘street’ lies in the chaos of it, that anything can and will happen. and if you want to get the most out of it, you have to immerse yourself in it, give yourself up to chance and luck, and take your mind out of it. those who reduce street composition to a ratio between a series of lines and boxes, defeat the essence of the thing and ought better be suited to photograph post-offices.

        4) i’m with you on the whole simplicity thing. even if the scene is vast, it can still seem simple. it’s all in how it is rendered, how it is seen. if it makes sense, even if disturbing, then the composition is probably good. if not, then probably not. i came across this local photographers work and this picture to me is an absolute fucking masterpiece, truly a piece of photographic art and should be displayed in a museum somewhere, someday. we don’t get a lot of the big-city streets out here in texas, and while i’m not sure it would qualify as ‘street’, it is by essence a candid shot of a stranger in relation to his surrounding environment, and thats what i think it’s all about. whether ‘in your face’ or from a distance, it should be striking. to me, this is mindblowing in it’s simplicity and beauty, but thats just me

        keith davis young:


  7. Amy,

    Very nice. Love the shots. I for one, do a bit of street photography now and then. Its feels interesting to me, but I get the same kind of mixed reaction when I show them to friends, as you are getting here now. Some like it or really like it, some don’t. But that doesn’t stop me 🙂

    Interestingly, on July 3rd, I was also doing some street/people/general photography in NY, though in Central Park area only. The weather that day was crummy though. Was using a Pentax K5.

    Here are some shots I uploaded to flickr in case you are interested:


  8. I like the photos. Very good. I am living in Germany and sometimes watching a sitcom named king of queens. Maybe I recover the places where you took the photos.

    Where does the king of queens lives? In Ithaca or Pettit street? 🙂

    • Thanks Carolus 😀
      I don’t watch King of Queens, so I don’t know where it is supposed to take place. Most of it was probably shot in California, though cut-aways were probably random B footage shot in Queens.

  9. Hi Amy,

    I’m also here to lend a voice of support for your work, including this latest article and set of photos. I always find your images inspirational.

    As for definitions of street, candid, voyeurism, etc., I don’t really care… the inspiration behind a photo is only known to the photographer/artist – period. I am free as a viewer to decide whether I like a given photo or not, but I would never try to dictate to you how or what to photograph, as some here appear to be doing.

    Anyway, back to the point: I enjoyed this set, especially “Ice King of Corona” and the elderly gentleman walking by the building… interesting that you’ve caught him at the moment the door window detail is sitting over his head, like a crown.


    • The photo “Ice King of Corona” would have worked (for me) had it been better composed, not every photo has to be perfect sure but this one just feels clumsy.

      the man walking past the house being caught at the moment the window in the door was above his head is a good photo but taken from a moving car was it luck that the scene appeared this way?

      I shoot premiership football in the UK for an Irish newspaper/online and a lot of what I take is down to luck but if you take enough shots…..

      shooting from a moving car may get you good, bad or sometimes great photographs but you really need to ask yourself was it I who took that great photograph or was it the camera

      • Tyler, I have countered your points several times, but you want to beat a dead horse. As I already mentioned previously, with MANY of the people in this set, there is not a lot of movement at all… in most cases, they were all standing still. That last two really are the ones with people in motion (the old man walking, the shoppers on the sidewalk). With the old man walking, I saw him coming along rather slowly and my goal was to catch him and the gated windows to his left. The fact he is within the doorway way a bit of luck, but the other elements were as I had envisioned. We were maybe moving along at 10-15 mph at that point, coming up to a stop light.

        With ANY photography including people there is always a bit of luck involved. People move. Whether shooting from a car window or on the street itself, you have to learn to predict their movement as much as is possible (and in lots of cases it isn’t). I do not shoot sports professionally, but have done so occasionally for family, and there is a LOT of luck involved. However, good timing is a skill I assume you’ve learned over time, and good timing is something I have always had a knack for.

        On this day I shot about 30 photos, 1/2 of which I was satisfied with, that came out in a the way I had anticipated or hoped. I recently shot my niece playing lacrosse and shot about 20 photos, 10 of which ending up the way I planned/wanted. As stated previously, I don’t “take enough shots” to get what I want (as you put it). I see what I want and go after it once… if it comes out, great.


        • Oh, and PS: King of Corona I would have framed almost identically had I been standing still in the middle of the street. The subjects are about 95% where I wanted them. The lines of the photo are straight. The sign and awning are both straight with the top edge of the photo. The only thing I don’t like is the bottom edge of the windows at the top of the frame. I’m not at all sure what you think is “clumsy” about it.

          • What you missed is the Parkside Restaurant across from the Ice KIng. It is one if the Best Restaurants in New York and if you didn’t eat there you really missed something.

        • sorry Amy I must have missed the post you made when you countered all of my points so let me start again.

          This collection is amazing, each as perfect as the last

          I apologise unreservedly for my original critique

    • Peter… the four young men over-serving the women was enough to make me laugh when I spotted them. Apparently, that place is somewhat “famous” in the area as well… known for their great italian ices. My husband was telling me how he read about the place as I was taking the picture. I bet he thought I wasn’t listening 😉

      Thanks for the support!

  10. nice job Amy. I’ve been following your work for awhile on facebook :). you can’t win everyone over, but just keep doing what you do and people like me will admire it.

  11. I had a website for years called drivebyLA which I’m going to very soon, I hope, resurrect as a photo blog. I shoot street photography in Los Angeles from a moving car. I do that because for my ENTIRE life I’ve been taking pictures in my head of what I saw on the street. Digital photography gave me the opportunity to actually take those images and capture what I saw in my head. Now I’m shooting them on film with an M7. Yes, I’ve shot events in LA for years and I also shoot sports for a national publication.

    But I’m capturing what I see happening on the streets of wherever I am. I don’t ask for anyone’s permission or approval. I know when I’ve gotten what I want but I also know that I or anyone else might only be at the beginning of our photographic journeys. Everything I’ve done might be preparation for what I’ve about to do.

    I don’t EVER get on the internet to tell a specific someone that their pictures somehow don’t work for me. But a LOT of street photography doesn’t work for me. Some of my own shots no longer work for me. That’s just life in the process. Some of the most celebrated street shooters ever shot thousands of images to get handfuls of great or iconic shots. The greatest documentary and street shooters from Cartier Bresson to Dorthea Lange and Winogrande talked specifically about the unplanned and spontaneous and how paramount those things were to their photography.

    But a lot of photographers just can’t hear that. Or they think there should be controls over the degree of spontaneity that goes into creating shots. They’re going to establish boundaries for the rest of us around what the proper processes are or what perspective is permissible and how much thinking and pre-planning is required for a ‘good’ street image.

    You paid for your gear. I did, too. No one is paying for my film but me. There is only one you and you will only pass through this world once. You see what you see from where you are, if it interests you and you’re ever more discerning eye, shoot it. Shoot the pictures you want to shoot. Let the people who are compelled to get online to tell other photographers that their photography is wrong or that it just doesn’t work for them go out and take their own ‘correct’ images and then they can sit around and admire whatever they see in their own work.

  12. It doesn’t matter or detract from photographs if someone is sensibly concerned about their less than safe surrounding or even actually afraid. Or whether they are merely lazy or in a wheelchair. I’d rather see shots from a paranoid than most of what I see.

    These are different processes and different processes produce different results. AND perspectives. And there will invariably be photographers (we hope) who both literally can’t see those perspectives and also aren’t interested in photography made through that process. Those people are certainly free to go out and shoot from their perspective and work through their process. If they’re not photographers then I guess they’re legitimately limited to simply criticizing images that don’t work for them.

    I’m not judging these pictures. I actually haven’t given them a good look. But there’s certainly a controlling perspective at work in these comments regarding the propriety of shooting from a car that spills into even how much pre-planning and thinking (we all think at different speeds and about different things) SHOULD go into an image and how many images can be made in order to get one great shot.

    Who in a thread on the internet can establish that there are controls over what constitutes the ‘right way’ of doing something in regard to something that SHOULD be as incredibly varied in the approaches to it as street photography is? You do what you do looking for what you’re looking for and you keep looking and shooting until you’ve acquired the shots that represent what you’re trying to say, show, or document about that which you are shooting.

    • ??? Now that’s bizarre. It’s a long comment (of course) but even breaking it down into smaller pieces it won’t post.

  13. I guess I just generally like very, very few shots out of the thousands that people post online every day saying they’re “street photography”. To me, it seems like many people just snap away at anything and everything, often without rhyme or reason – anything goes, and any picture is a “good” picture in street photography. HCB’s “decisive moment” becomes irrelevant – it seems these days that any moment is a decisive moment.

    • Ah, but true of any photography really. Someone who hates animal or bird photography will not at all notice or be impressed by it… they’ll just find it boring. I love still lifes and landscapes typically, but some would find that work incredibly boring, no matter how beautiful. It’s all so very subjective. Sometimes I myself look at street work and wonder what everyone is on about, why “they” all think it’s so good and I don’t… because really, what touches one person will not touch another. I love Eggleston’s work… but lots of people hate it.

      • fair enough… which is why I said this doesn’t work for *me* – it might work for others though. Keep shooting what inspires you!

  14. I enjoyed the images, some some than others, and some I will appreciate more after a third or fourth look. Knowing that these were recorded from a moving vehicle DOES affect the way I look at them, knowing that composition had to be so very quickly done. (There; no usage of the words “shot(s)” or “shooting” at all.) I can certainly see how a car would give one a unique ability to get close to a subject, without causing a reaction, as folks who are going about their business near a street typically ignore the occupants of moving cars, and would rarely expect the passenger inside a car to be actively photographing the scene. Being on foot, with a visible camera, does indeed cause folks to alter their behavior, unless the area is one typically full of tourists with their cameras. These images were recorded outside the tourist-y areas. For that matter, simply being of the “wrong” ethnic or socioeconomic status, will make people alter their behavior. A moving car in the city is analogous to the wildlife photographer’s blind, but with the added challenges of a motion, not faced by one using a tripod and remote shutter release from a static position.

    • Thanks Rex. I will say that while you’re right about the car serving as a sort of “blind”, more people notice than you’d think. Probably because I’m hanging out the wide-open window with my camera! What is interesting is that at least in NY, people are much less sensitive about their picture being taken than they are out in the suburbs (where I live). I suppose it’s because the streets in the city are nearly always full of people all day long, so there just isn’t some expectation of privacy when you’re surrounded by hundreds in a small little area. I get more odd looks and “no photos!” requests out in the burbs than I ever do in or around the city.
      I didn’t set out to use the car as a blind… for me it was really just another way to capture my enjoyment of the streets while site-seeing from the car, when we don’t get out and walk around. I don’t deny it somewhat serves as one though, and definitely provides a different point of view.

  15. Great article.  I really like these shots, especially the straight on compositions of the populated side walks.  

    I also think this article does raise some interesting debates.  Shooting photos of people and especially children on the street is a controversial subject these days, and some people can not agree where the is line drawn between art and voyeurism. 

    I personally think the act of taking images from the safety and seclusion of the car does go against the grain of street photography, in the same way that using a super zoom or telephoto lens does.  IMHO I feel you become separated from the subject, an outsider looking in.  Unable to truly immerse yourself in situation and become one with the moment.  By using a wide angle or standard lens, you have no choice but to present yourself to the subject and without asking permission, explaining by the act of raising your camera to your eye within a visible and close proximity, you are taking photos of them and it’s not a secret. 

    However as in these images there is no denying you can get excellent results that although may have an atmosphere of segregation, would not look out of place hanging along side any street shot shot by any camera on any lens at any time.

    Good work and interesting idea 🙂

    • I enjoyed your feedback… and I do agree with you about wide-angle lenses. My 21 and 35s are quickly becoming a favorite for street/people work, because of that intimacy you describe. However, I do think at times it’s a false intimacy, only because with a wider angle lens you don’t always appear to be pointing the camera at the subject you are photographing… they can easily be under the illusion you aren’t shooting them. Wide angle can be just as “sneaky” as telephoto.

      I think the segregated atmosphere of this “drive-by” series is what I like about it… it’s almost like being an imaginary fly on the wall to a day-in-the-life. If that makes any sense at all…

      But I won’t let it be an excuse not to be out on the street more taking more “typical” street photos! 😀

  16. Amy, I wanted to lend my voice of support and admiration for your work and project that you have presented here. It’s always suprising what emotions and sentiments are drummed up by posts such as yours and mine, but as Steve’s site gains in popularity, there will be more “varied” opinions, which is fine by me…it’s always frustrating when people don’t offer constructive criticism, rather panning a photograph without comment. Thankfully, some folks about provided detailed feedback.

    I for one very much enjoyed the series and see them as an extension of your vision and creativity. You are an inspiration to us, out there taking photos and making magic with your cameras. Keep up the great work, and see you in a couple of short weeks!


    • Thanks Jim… that was my favorite of the day, and became my “PAD” Photo. There was a shot earlier in the day that I missed… a woman holding a baby up, kissing it, while standing in her apartment doorway, but I didn’t see her in time… the window one almost made up for it 😉

  17. You mention these are “drive-bys”, which make me assume shot out of a car (too scared to walk around in Queens/Brooklyn?). Thus the distance/lack of connection between scenes and photographer. You are outside of the scene, a distant bystander, peeking throught he fence. Therefore some of above comments, I assume. Random snaps, not pulling in nor telling stories. Sounds harsh, I know, but I’m never impressed about my shots out of a driving or standing car either.

      • Gee Amy, right across from the Ice King is The Parkside, my favorite Restaurant in NY period. No need to worry about this area, The Parkside is owned by Tough Tony and a good many of the clientele here are mob figures. Your photos evoked some fond memories of the area. Thanks for the memories!

  18. I am very surprised -and disappointed- by some comments here, those are very good candid shots. Very nicely composed and each telling a (or a few) little story(ies). Thanks for sharing.

  19. I am a little surprised and taken aback at some of the comments here.
    Image #1: Nice street image and, with a little studying, I find the two young girls looking out the window with the street signs to give a sense of place intriuging.
    Image #2: Love the juxtaposition with the el just off of the building.
    Image #3: Like the textures of the wall and the little girl. Do wish there was a little more detail in the shadows but…..
    Image #4: This one held my interest the least. Not that it is a bad street image just that I could not decide on the main subject here.
    Image #5: Love the distance from the building. With all the workers looking out and the two girls looking in, this has what I would imagine would be a curbside appeal to many New Yorkers.
    Image #6: Not a bad image but this one also did not hold my interest. Seems to need a little something to connect the graffitti to either the diner inside or someone who is missing from the image.
    Image #7: Love the “Open 24 Hours” signs around the street vendor. Again, a nice street candid to me.
    Image #8: This one is my favorite. I connect instantly with the old gentleman and his posture as he goes by this building that clearly says “stay out”.
    Image #9: For me, there is so much going on in this image. People looking in several directions, going in different directions, stopped, etc., etc.
    So, as Amy says, to each their own. And Stephen B also nailed it to some extent. For me, photography of ANY KIND is very subjective. As Bryan Moss states in his book “Photosynthesis”, there are folks that shoot the river filled with the blood of war and celebrities and there are folks that shoot the banks that are filled with ordinary people going about their lives in ordinary ways. For me, I shoot the banks as a local photojournalist looking to capture the ordinary in a little bit of an extraordinary way. Photography means so many different things to so many different people. And what is street photography other than a bunch of “snapshots” per Jay.

  20. Good images, but the title of the post made me cringe.

    I know the word/phrase “shoot,” “get that shot,” etc. have been in the lexicon of photography for a long time, but the inference is just too close to the language of weaponry. Yesterday, three people were seriously wounded in my hometown of Tucson in a real guns drive-by shooting. Photographing from a moving car offers a different perspective, but the use of a phrase that frames the act of taking pictures with abhorrent violence doesn’t help photography.

  21. Agree with Amy here, photography of this kind is very subjective, some like these and others want more ‘classic street grit and emotion’ but it might be comparing apples and oranges. The picture of the two faces peering out of the window I really liked and the two girls standing at the take away food counter (clearly being over-served!). I dug in my archives for a ‘drive by shot’ and found this one. A lot of luck involved and depends on what you are trying to achieve.

  22. The sixth photo is very good but the rest don’t seem quite right, a mix of bad composition (to be expected I guess) and lack of interest.

    seems a bit like taking photos for the sake of taking photos, unless the car is stopped I don’t really see how you can honestly know what it is you are going to capture.

    didn’t Google street maps already do this?

    • If you find they lack interest for you, I can’t help you with that – to each her/his own, but bad composition I just don’t agree with. Appreciate your thoughts, but you missed the point of the article I suppose (where I actually explained how I know what I’m going to capture). It’s a challenging exercise, even if you don’t yourself feel I was successful. You’re of course entitled to you opinion, but Google Street Maps? Really? That’s just you trying to be funny, if not a bit mean.

      • The sixth photo is good, it feels balanced, it tells a story so I understand why you displayed it, I’m not trying to be mean but this seems like a lazy way of taking photos, the parody in your title of this article to me feels closer than you intended, hit the trigger when you see some one and hope you hit something.

        If I’m wrong then you’ll have no problem telling me how these photos work and what they offer the viewer

        • No. I’m not working with luck. If you read the article, I say that a little luck comes into play, but I actually look for people and things I find interesting first. I’m not shooting 1000 shots and hoping for 5 good ones. It’s not intended to be lazy (as someone who embarked on a “picture-a-day” project I wouldn’t say I’m lazy – LOL)… it is intended to be a different way to shoot the street… and a way for me to enjoy photography in yet another way.

          I can’t tell you what they offer the viewer… that’s up to the viewer to decide. Several of the comments here might give you some of their perspective.

          What is so very interesting is the idea that because I’m telling you how I did it, it changes your perspective of the photos themselves. Not to say you still might not like them, but I wonder how they’d be received if they were just shared as street photography. Guess we’ll just never know.

          • I’m some what confused, was your car stationary when you took these? if it wasn’t then I don’t see how you were able to see your subject as you wanted it and then have time to raise the camera to your eye, compose and take the shot if your car was moving the scene would have changed.

            Luck therefore plays some part in each of these, good or bad its partly down to luck.

            I’m not looking to get in to an argument, if you are happy with these then that is all that matters, I am just offering my opinion.

          • Tyler… not every photo shows a huge amount of movement. The mother and child in the window for example. The woman vendor. The man eating. Even the little girl on the sidewalk. Even the old man walking. In a span of maybe 5-7 seconds, spotting them and taking the shot (with the camera pre-focused most of the time) isn’t all that difficult and is going to be pretty close to what I envision it to hopefully be when captured. And if you’ve ever driven through Queens or Brooklyn, you’d know that it’s unlikely you’re doing more than 20-30 mph at the most… slower when there’s an upcoming stop sign or light. This is a BUSY area.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.