tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-88874499901866997092024-02-21T21:46:05.585-08:00Racing DaylightOne automotive photojournalist's musings on cars, cameras, lenses, guitars, politics, and anything I feel like writing about on any given day. Don't bother me, I'm working here!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.comBlogger103125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-84150889475550909522014-01-07T10:45:00.000-08:002014-01-07T10:45:11.490-08:00Nikon Case-in-Point: New D3300Well, Nikon's latest announcement at the CES show just confirms the point I made the other day. They have no interest in producing "pro-sumer" bodies, or even doing much in the way of new Pro-DX bodies at all. The D3300 has all of the same features of the D7100, at a lower price. Simpler menu and controls, and much simpler AF system, with an 18-55mm VRII lens for $650. Why would most people buy the D7100 any longer? They're just aiming for bragging points at the Best Buy sales counter, that's all. Filling an already-saturated market with more consumer fluff at the cheapest price possible is not a winning strategy. Still no replacement for the D300… <sigh> No up-armored, faster D7100 yet… But, you CAN glimpse the new D4S at the CES show, and its $6500 price tag. Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-63441828201946133082014-01-06T12:17:00.002-08:002014-01-06T12:17:52.349-08:00D600 Follow-UpSo, I've had this thing for four and a half months now… The answer to the question no one has asked me ("So, how do you like it?") is this; I like it, but having it isn't critical to my core business. Yes, there are things a full-frame sensor can do very well. BUT… and this is important to note, Most of Nikon's current products are consumer-driven offerings, not photographer-driven. In short, their main cameras are NOT professional-grade equipment. Not even close. You can buy a D4, or a D800, and that's it if you're a pro. Your choices are limited to FX sensor, slow but incredible resolution or fast but lower resolution. And don't get me started on the build of their lenses. The D600 is a ground-breaking consumer device, no doubt. It has great resolution, but comes with a kit camera which isn't good enough to challenge the sensor. Old D-series lenses are better by a fraction. Nikon offers great lenses, sure, but for people like me who live in a challenging market and cannot cost-adjust for the extra expense, these $1k+ lenses remain out of reach financially. Do I need them? Hell, yes. Can I justify the cost when pixel peeping? Hell, no. Are Canon's basic lenses better? I don't know but I'm almost curious enough to buy a used 7D and borrow some lenses to find out. I cringe when I think of all of the money I've spent changing systems in the last ten years. I started with Canon and switched horses to Konica-Minolta. Then when KM was tripped up by Sony and offered nothing competitive for nearly three years, I switched to Nikon and bought a very capable D300. I still occasionally use my D300 today; with a sharp lens it is still a monster camera for track use. The viability of the D300 has kept me from trying a Canon 7D… until now. While my old KM 7D bodies weren't the fastest focusing bodies on the market, when they locked focus it was damn sure always on the subject. No false locks. They nailed it, or they didn't focus at all. No in between. That's my main complaint with Nikon's CAM system. I can never tell what it is doing. Focusing on different types of materials, or focusing on different surface angles produces different AF lock results. Sometimes forward of the subject, sometimes aft of the subject, but 100% frustrating. I thought that using an all-Nikon lens system might improve things, coupled with the latest D600 body, but sadly, it appears I was wrong. I just don't feel like I can always trust the Nikon AF system available in my price range. I'm left wondering what to do next. Canon's 7D is practically ancient technology in AF and sensor quality. The 6D is rumored to not be as good as the D600 I currently have, and Canon's next-up model is the 6D Mark III, something clearly out of my price range.
MFGs, if you keep producing mediocre mid-level products, you WILL go out of business. Honda and their long-running Civic comes to mind. Great car, decent price, keeps customers coming back when they want a bigger or better model later in life. Does my recent issues with the AF in the D7100 or the D600 make me want to jump up to Nikon's more expensive cameras. Not really. Until Nikon figures out how to train their assembly techs better so that the AF crosses line up exactly under the boxes, and how to make their AF system work without as much Artificial Intelligence doing thinking for me, I don't see that their cameras will do what I need to the degree I want it done. And that's a fact I find deeply troubling, especially in light of the reviews which think the new Df focuses no more accurately than the D600 I currently own. Only Sony offers something in the A99 which might be an acceptable substitute. Not too sure on that price or battery life though. Would have liked to return to the CES show this week and try them out at the Sony booth but I suppose I can always try to just rent one someday if I'm really curious. Honestly, I can't see how, with the same sensor as the D600, it could be any worse.Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-89756638764508113452014-01-06T11:36:00.000-08:002014-01-06T11:36:23.490-08:00100 Posts!Wow, my little blog has crossed the big 100! Considering I've not garnered 9k hits yet, it's not that this is very significant to many people, but it is to me. Remembering to post something is a bit of an issue for me; I promise to try harder in 2014!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-61709738346372751332013-12-11T20:03:00.000-08:002013-12-11T20:03:10.113-08:00Sigma issued a bulletin which states its older lenses could have "OS and AF issues in Live View" on Nikon's new D5300 and Df bodies. I've let Sigma know that I thought their older lenses have serious AF system flaws with the D7100 bodies I tried too. Outer AF points were severely back-focused. Only the center 9 points could be trusted. I used a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 HSM OS, a 70-200mm f2.8 HSM OS, and a 30mm f1.4 "Dirty Thirty". All were incredibly sharp on the center points with low chromatic fringing. None focused properly on any of the three D7100 bodies' outer AF points. All focused properly on my D300 body, but that wasn't the point. I needed them to work right on the ultra-sharp D7100's 24mp non-AA filter. They simply wouldn't.
This isn't to say that Sigma builds a bad lens. They build a very good lens, and they make their quality lenses in Japan. There's a lot to be said in that. Nikon has evidently decided to change something in their AF system and how it operates, and this leaves third party lens makers scrambling. Only screw-drive designs will not have a problem, as the body itself has control over proper focus. Again, this defeats the purpose of buying modern lens designs with high-refractive glass, anti-reflective coatings, and Hyper-Sonic ring motors for faster focusing. If it cannot repeatedly nail the focus with the AF system in the body to which it is affixed, then it's not worth the money.
For 2013, I cycled through a bunch of lenses trying to come up with an "optimal quality" setup without spending the big Nikon buck. Alas, I've come to believe that Thom Hogan might be right; it just might not be possible to use third party lens makers at this time. My D300 can shoot anything, everyone has it figured out. I'm not sure about the newer cameras now, and it becomes incredibly frustrating to carry a camera and lens out on a shoot and not be able to use more than one-third of its AF points, or 3D focusing, or multiple points, simply because there's some sort of communication issue between a lens and a body. The choice becomes this; shoot with cheaper Nikon lenses which work, or shoot with expensive Nikon lens which work. There's no in-between. And that's sad.
In a disappointing turn, the cheaper Nikon 35mm f1.8G I purchased would only focus properly on low-contrast objects about 25% of the time. Sharp, but wildly inconsistent. And made in China. Read into that what you want. This boy will only buy Japanese-made glass from now on, and probably just the pricy stuff from Brand N. It'll be a long time before I'll be able to save up for some of these expensive pieces. <sigh>Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-58826700129401619452013-12-11T19:46:00.000-08:002013-12-11T19:46:18.498-08:00Nikon's new Df body; Need it or not?What a brilliant camera, released two years too late! THIS is what I wanted as a D800 body; robust build, dedicated manual controls with a menu system still available for increased flexibility, backwards and forwards lens system compatibility, quick and precise AF, and no stink in' video. I'm sorry, but from what I've seen of DSLR video on my D600, my 15 year old Sony Handycam focused better. Sure it's got higher resolution by far (1080p) than my old Sony, but what good does it do when the lens is constantly racking the focus back and forth every time the subject moves a little. Frustrating to use for this non-video guy… I'll stick with taking photos!
That said, the Df is basically a D610 in knight's armor, and as a working pro, this has some appeal to me. I loved my old Konica-Minolta 7D bodies (plural, I owned two of them!) and their dedicated controls. That made work in the field so easy and fast. Want to change the ISO, just grab and twist a knob. Exposure compensation? Just a quick twist away. The old KM trumps the Df in the fact that it had built-in image stabilization with every lens, but as I've scrimped and saved enough over the years to be shooting with VR lenses for the most part, this has become a moot point. I'm still not convinced that the free-floating VR does not manage to mess up some shots all on its own. A good tripod still greatly increased the capture rate, and will cost a new shooter thousands of dollars less. Even the most expensive tripod will still be vastly cheaper. I still take a monopod with me to the track. Can't beat it really.
So, if the specs are mainly the same, why is it so much more expensive than a D610 (or D600, which is what I'm shooting, along with some carefully placed puffs of air on my sensor to clean off the infamous "dust spots")? What's Nikon's reasoning with this? Magnesium is super-expensive? The Df's 16mp sensor offers 8 less megapixels than a much cheaper D600. Is its ability to gather light that much better? Perhaps. I'd like to get my hands on one for an automotive shoot (hint, hint NPS, I'd like to borrow one please) and see just how dramatic the dynamic range is. Dynamic range is key to successful car photography. Metal and paint and glass tends to reflect every photon of light right into the lens. Miracle coatings on the lenses and ultra-low dispersion glass helps, but only so much. The larger pixel sites on the 16mp sensor should capture better blacks, and better colors overall. That loss of 8mp represents more than my first three camera bodies had each (6.1 seemed to be a de facto starting point for camera designs in 2003 and 2004). 16mp is more than enough. 12.4mp from my veteran D300 has proven to be more than enough to, and in print, I cannot distinguish between D300 and D7100 photos (the D7100 was 24mp, so an apples-to-apples comparison). The D600 can be just slightly distinguished due to the better background blur and less telephoto compression.
So, does the D4's sensor justify the price jump all by itself, without as fast a shutter as a D700, or the deeper buffer of the D700? Or the better 51-point AF system from the D3/D700/D4? Or the built-in flash as a dedicated wireless flash controller? Or the dual SDHC card slots of the D600/D610? Hard to say. This appears to be a real photography buff's camera. A throwback to the days of all manual control but with the added convenience of a full compliment of digital controls on the back. It will appeal to people who fear large file sizes and ever-increasing disc storage requirements. It will shoot beautiful photos, of that there is little doubt. Is it a D4 for less than half the money? Most certainly it is not. Will it find traction in today's very competitive market? I don't think so. It's like a six-cylinder sports car; even mighty BMW has abandoned the weary straight-six in favor of more cylinders and increased torque. Megapixels are torque, and Nikon already has a V-8 beast in the form of the 36mp D800 or the even sharper D800e, both of which feature an internal Magnesium frame and weather seals. To toss the Df into this market today seems unfair. Two years ago it would have been as heralded as the D700 was after the D3. An excellent D700 can be had for less than $1,500 now, making the Df's lofty $2,799 price seem, well, princely. By comparison, any D600 is a screaming deal, with the same FPS as the Df, and a host of features which make it work better with the Nikon system. People who have the D600 or D610 won't switch. D800 users will turn up their noses, as it is not significantly faster, nor does it offer dual card slots (remember when NO camera had them, how did we survive the dark ages?) or the pop-up flash.
I think this will wind up being an albatross… Meanwhile, the D300/D300S users are screaming for a true pro-level DX-sensor D400 (no the D7100 didn't measure up). Will we get one, ever? I know from shooting cars for a decade that the DX format works very well with car-sized objects. The increase in DOF is nice. The longer reach from a 200mm lens at the track means I can carry less gear and still get shots with the equivalent value of a 300mm lens without the extra weight of the bigger glass. Just by carrying one extra camera body. So, c'mon Nikon… Where's the D400? Will we ever see it?
On a side note, I'd like to point out that I've earned three magazine cover shots with my D7100 during the short time I had it, including a full-cover shot on the current Fast Fours & Rotaries of Daniel Song's awesome FRS-GT built for the 2012 Scion Challenge. I liked the D7100, but had issues with my Sigma lenses and the D7100 AF system. I'll be touching upon that in my next post though, so no need to mention it here. Just thought I'd share the news with anyone who happens to read this far through my gear rants! :D Have a great night!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-68482711643789953002013-08-19T12:13:00.001-07:002013-08-19T12:13:49.928-07:00Thumbs up: Vivitar extra capacity EN-EL15 batteryI have to give credit where it's due; the Vivitar extra capacity EN-EL15 battery works very well. Lasts a long time, just like the Nikon one does. I was miffed that Nikon went to a new battery, but the long life of these batteries in the D7100 is rather amazing. Banging off 1000 shots at a time, even with chimping and VR use, is amazing.
On the other hand, the Vivitar VIV-PG-D700 is worthless, as is Vivitar's repair service. The plastic gear inside the thumbscrew assembly which attaches the grip to the body can be easily stripped. Vivitar will not offer a replacement gear, even though the grip can be taken apart and the assembly could be replaced. In short, if you need longevity, buy a used Nikon MB-D10 instead. It did run the camera in its high-speed mode when powered by 8 Sanyo Eneloop batteries and didn't generate any electronic faults with the D300 interface, so I suppose that's one mark in its favor. Vivitar, spend a few bucks more per unit for metal gears please!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-14721868406630365092013-08-19T12:03:00.002-07:002013-08-19T12:03:56.669-07:00D7100 out, D600 in!Okay, so perhaps I haven't been the most diligent blogger on the web, and perhaps I haven't updated this in six months (precisely, in fact) but I vow that will change. Why? Because I've bought a D600, and like most people, I'm gonna have to talk about it.
First, why change from a sharp 24mp D7100 to a sharp 24mp D600? Simple; less DOF. In my quest to make my photos pop, I've found a style I like. Unfortunately, this style revolves around shooting f1.4 lenses on full-frame sensors. Big problem. I didn't own either of those items. So, a change was in order, and Adorama's market-crushing sale price on factory reconditioned D600s packaged with 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 VR lens was just the thing to sway my mind. Second, the larger pixels of the D600 make for better light gathering. How much better? I don't know yet exactly. The D600 uses a Sony EXMOR-R derived sensor, which features a backlit sensor design. All of the signal paths from the pixel sites run through the back of the sensor, so the microlenses onthe front use up almost all of the available space for a huge increase in light-gathering. The D7100 uses a sensor from Toshiba, and I felt that noise definitely crops up in the higher-ISO photos in low light. It's not bad, and certainly not enough to sway people away from the D7100 as it is a very fine camera. Third, did I mention less DOF? Ha! It has become so important to me that I'll say it twice!
Here's my thinking... I did the math and realized that, in order for a DX APS-C sized sensor to have 1.5x reach with FX lenses, it must also increase the circle of confusion by 1.5x, unnecessarily blurring lenses which weren't designed to be used that way. Case in point; I've always had a Nikon 50mm f1.8D around, and I've never been impressed with it on my D200, D300, D7000, or D7100 (all the DX cameras I've owned basically). It's just not as sharp as I'd prefer, and has fringing issues. The D600 guys simply rave about this lens though. Clearly there's something going on with an FX lens on an FX sensor which is simply "right". I also crunched numbers and realized that a 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 lens on a D600 will offer less DOF at 50mm and f4 than a 17-50mm f2.8 lens at 35mm and f2.8 on a D7100 (both at 10 feet from the subject). That makes the "kit lens" supplied from Nikon with the D600 a very useful addition. Since prices had been hovering around $1590 for a reconditioned D600, when the Adorama deal dropped at $1599 INCLUDING the 24-85mm lens, I had to jump on it. Selling off my APS-C gear (except for my trusty and fast D300) makes it a complete wash in terms of dollars spent, something I didn't think would be possible at the beginning of the year.
In short, I'm going to FX and I'm not looking back. The D300 will stay around though as a very useful track-day, high-speed panning tool where the 1.5x of extra reach is appreciated with my 70-200mm f2.8 lens. It's 51-point AF system and the ability to shoot at 7fps all day with a battery grip and fast CF card make it a worthy companion to the D600. In spite of Nikon's insistence upon releasing only slow cameras (D600 at 5.5fps, D7100 at 6fps, and D800 at 4fps), someday they'll have to either revamp the high end DX line and do a D400, or just straight to a higher speed 24mp FX body (D700X anyone). With my system repositioned now in 2013, I'd be first in line next year for a D700X with robust frame and seals and the capability of doing 7fps. Bring it on, Nikon!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-323835165315600432013-03-19T16:37:00.000-07:002013-03-19T16:38:28.075-07:00The D7100 Arriveth! My short review...And the Lord looked out over his creation and said, "What has Nikon never built?". The answer came back from the People; "A super-high resolution DX body." So the Lord touched the sensor engineers and the executives and the marketing people and said "Let it be so." And it was. And all was good, briefly. Then he People said, "But Lord, why are the outer AF points back-focusing?" And the good Lord replied, "Focusing system is off? Even I can't help Nikon with that."
So, the moral of this story is that the D7100 is, at this point, a terrific high-res body with some cool new features... and only 9 AF points in the center you can trust with your work or hobby photos. I'm sure they'll be able to fix this with a proper calibration, but we're just a few days into the launch, so a properly calibrated set of AF setting for repair centers is going to be a month or so down the road.
Meanwhile, get out there and use those center points, folks! Focus then recompose, just like our D600 brethren!
I'll be back with more later as I investigate the camera over the next few days but for the moment, rest assured that image quality is of no concern at all. It's excellent!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-79501795101367678852013-03-15T14:38:00.001-07:002013-03-15T14:38:16.450-07:00My D7100 On The Way!Okay, so anyone who has ever read my blog knows that I'm a bit of a pixel-peeper. With just 12 megapixels available from my D300, I have to be. I'm competing in a print world against fellows with 20 and 21mp Canon bodies, or 16mp Nikon D4s and 36mp D800s. With the ability to "throw away pixels" and gain sharpness through image resizing/resampling to a slightly smaller final product, these guys (and gals) can shoot with softer f1.4 lenses and still creat tack sharp images with excellent bokeh. When I send in a folder to an editor, probably the first thing they do in the evaluation stages is to pick through all of the photos to find the compositions they like. Then they move on to chosing the best based on light and sharpness, and send those on to a layout team. My lowly 12mp images have to be spot-on even to compete with those from the Canon 7D or older Sony models. Technology moved on and Nikon, instead of simply upgrading the sensor in the D300/D300S models to the latest and greates, instead chose to revise the good-selling D7000. This camera actually remains in the lineup for a while longer, which I think is a smart move by Nikon. Not everyone needs what the D7100 has to offer... but I do!
24 un-aliased megapixels! Yowza! High speed crop mode which makes my 70-200mm f2.8 image-stabilized Sigma lens into a monster 140-400mm f2.8! And in this 7fps cropped mode, it will STILL have 15 megapixels! Bravo! That's a nice feature a pro like me will put to good use at the track. Weather-sealing? On par with the D800. I'll take it. 51 AF points and D4 focus-point processing? Sure, as that's one area where the D300 wasn't terrific. There are too many random colors on race cars for a D300 to be very good at picking one point of the 51 available and sticking with it. I've never found that the "magic AF mode" which allows the camera to determine the subject has ever worked well with the D300. In fact, the times I've used it, it always seems to miss the single best child's expression, or never-to-occur-again track-side collision. If I shoot in Focus Priority, sometimes it won't allow the shutter to be released at all. If I shoot in Shutter Priority, I get shots, but they may or may not be in focus where I want them to be. Such is the life of a D300 user. I will say this; it has performed far better after being reset to factory specifications by CRIS Camera in Tempe, Arizona. It's better, but by no means perfect.
I'm not suggesting that the D7100 will be perfect. Like many, I have concerns about the shallow buffer for RAW files, although I don't shoot RAW files at the track, and the robustness of the plastic internal body and front plate. I would have preferred that the metal lens mount be attached to a metal mirror box/internal frame assembly, but perhaps Nikon has their reasons for the switch. In my discussions with Thom Hogan, but he and I feel that there will be a D400 forthcoming later this year. I think it will come in around $1,700, and I think he believes it will cost a little less. The point being, both of us see a market for a high-speed, durable body DX "pro" camera, and think that Nikon will see it that way too.
Meanwhile, I will be happily shooting my D7100!. I've had two D300s and haven't had one of those 150k-cycle shutters fail yet so I harbor no trepidation about the one in the D7100. Personally, I've never been concerned about shutter life because, by the time I get to that number, another camera will have arrived with further sensor improvements. Don't kid yourselves either; this D7100 appears to have a monster sensor. Sample photos I've seen indicate it can shoot at ISO 1600 with little to no grain "noise" which afflicts my D300. I did try a D7000 briefly as a stop-gap measure, and while the sensor does some great things, the AF didn't. Hence my refusal to buy a D600 with that inept AF system. The "focus and recompose" approach doesn't work with high-speed cars on the track. The wider 51-point setup of the D300 has points where they are most needed, and the D7100 follows its lead whether in DX or super-crop mode. In fact, the super-crop mode may offer the best possible world; being able to shoot an 85mm f1.8 or f1.4 lens as a 170mm f1.8 or f1.8! Super bokeh, baby!
Something else I liked about the D7000 and was happy to see on the D7100; dual SD card slots. SDXC cards are the fastest things I've for the least amount of money. Cranking 45 mb/second onto a 16mb Lexar or SanDisk SDXC card, at a cost of less than $20 per card is a Godsend for my business. I have one of the fast SanDisk Ultra cards, and I suppose I'll buy two more (or the Lexar equivalent) just for good measure. The 16gb cards test out as "faster" than the cards with more space, and with the buffer size limited, I'll take the fastest card I can get! I'm hoping I'll never need that sort of write speed, but if I do, I plan to have it. Boy Scout's motto: Be Prepared!
I know it will be difficult for my one regular reader to wait patiently for an update, but I promise I'll get to one somewhere after the 19th of March, hopefully with photos too! Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-60086059263273312272013-02-04T13:17:00.000-08:002013-02-04T13:17:07.742-08:00D7000 is no D300I came, I saw, I didn't like it. Why is it so difficult for Nikon to realize we'd like an 18mp non-anti-aliased sensor in a D300S body? Why, why, for the love of Pete, why, Nikon? You work so hard for years to create a "pinnacle DX system", then throw it all away by refusing to release a D400. Why? Is it because the camera with the specs I've listed above would be too close to the very expensive D4 in resolution and performance at a much lower price point? Whatever the reason, I feel jilted. I don't want a mirrorless Nikon compact. I don't want the price and slow FPS of the D800. I want a speedy pro DX body. This year. Is anyone at Nikon listening?Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-38045398003779453082013-01-23T15:56:00.000-08:002013-01-23T15:56:02.716-08:00Dead D300Well, I didn't quite make it to the end of 2012 with a fully-functioning D300, so the Mayans were partially correct. The AF system in my beleagured D300 decided that shooting on the right spot 50% of the time was okay, so that's what it started doing. That was the final straw for me. I ordered a reconditioned D7000 from Adorama since there's STILL NO D400 BODY AVAILABLE! Jeez, Nikon. What's it take to get an updated pro-level D400 out of you?
I must admit though, aside from overall speed, and the number of AF points, the D7000 is in most categories an upgrade from the D300. I'm not married to this thing. To me, it's just a tool to take car photos. Just as long as it does that reasonably well, I'll continue to resist my urge to dump all of this gear and jump to Sony or Canon. Yes, I said "Sony". I looked briefly at the A77 at the CES show, and it is a monster camera. I'm not sure if I like the EVF because of some of the strange ways Sony chooses to use it. Like for previewing photos... I like using the big screen on the back of the camera and it is disconcerting to have them keep popping up in the viewfinder. Sony's programmers should create an "OVF mode", which simulates the always-on look of an optical pentaprism. No complaints with the sharpness their 16-50mm f2.8 lens can generate, nor with what I saw from the 24mp sensor. I did not get to play with the A99 so I cannot render an opinion on it. Looks nice on paper though!
Back to work for 2013 and looking to buy another Nikon wireless Speedlight and a 20mm super-wide prime lens. Although the Promaster 17-50mm f2.8 (Tamron) I picked up at the end of 2012 isn't bad, it doesn't have the superlative quality of a true prime. Plus, it's only really sharp at the wide end. Going past 24mm causes bad things to happen. Bad things, man. Sigma has a nice looking 20mm f1.8 prime so I'll probably check that out. I might be able to find one for $500 if I shop carefully. I'll find something though. I always do!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-34252180499441156342012-09-04T09:58:00.002-07:002012-09-04T10:18:02.407-07:00Time for a new(er) lensI'm happy to report that the work done by C.R.I.S Camera in Phoenix, AZ appears to be holding. They cleaned the camera and the AF system, and reset it to factory AF specs. This involves a very specific, computerized operation with a very expensive 50mm lens made by Nikon especially for this purpose. All of my lenses now focus on the intended point, most of the time. The camera still has occasional misses under less-than-optimal contrast conditions, and this is still something of a mystery to me, but there's little I can do about that. Nikon has not yet announced the D400 though Nikonrumors.com did report a list of expected features back in July which has me interested in it if it is based on the D3200 sensor and Sony's EXMOR-R backlit technology. The pixel sizes are truely going to be dinky so I wonder how well it will resolve in low light. I've also wondered if the camera stock destroyed in the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Japan might have been D400 bodies. If the D3200 launched with 24mp and there's still no D400 announcement forthcoming, this is entirely out of character for Nikon, who typically demonstrates a "trickle-down" approach. Where did the D400 go? The D300/D300S is completely outclassed in today's market.<br /><br />It looks like Nikon's planning a coming-out party in Dubai on September 13th, and everyone's thinking it'll be the D600. While I've argued for a "Digital FX Rebel" for years from one of the makers, I figured it would go better with a 12mp sensor. If Nikon throws a 24mp sensor in it for the $1600 ballpark, that should generate insane sales. But... it only has a 1/4000th second shutter? Not exactly something which will make pros happy. What is Nikon doing? No true D700 replacement, no D400 replacement, new DX G lenses released but no new DX pro-level body? Baffling...<br /><br />Seeing as how I need to survive a bit longer with my D300 body, I went ahead and bought a 17-50mm f2.8 lens. It's only a Promaster-labeled version of the reknown Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 lens, with a screw-drive internal focus system, but it should be enough for me. I can't shoot detail shots with my kit lens, a Nikon 18-55mm AF-S. It makes the background too sharp, and when the photos are reduced in size for print, everything looks like a snapshot. I've been using my Nikon 35mm F1.8G lens quite a bit because it is so sharp and has excellent bokeh, which allows me to place the focus point of the viewer exactly where I want it. Hopefully, this new (to me) Promaster will do the same.<br /><br />The longer I shoot, the more my photography comes down to controlled color, sharpness, and contrast. I find myself continually lusting for exotic f1.4 optics which will work on my APS-C sensor. Unfortunately, said optics also come with exotic prices, which is why FX shooters have all the fun. They can cozy up to f1.8 lenses and still have creamy, dreamy backgrounds, even when their photos have been reduced for print or web display. The reputation of the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 is that it can be shot at f2.8 and it is sharp there. Now I merely have to wait for delivery... and of course, the all important first few test photos!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-34485538689462396742012-06-14T14:07:00.001-07:002012-06-14T14:07:32.515-07:00Heh. I just saw that I had 177 page views last month. Thom Hogan's ByThom.com website probably generates more than that every ten minutes! If you need to know more about the Nikon cameras, he is da man! I have to publicly thank him for help in diagnosing my Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG HSM OS issues last week. It turns out my three-month-old lens lost all of its internal programming. It went from focusing on-point all of the time to requiring +5 AF Fine Tune at 85mm and 100mm, and -15 at 200mm! C.R.I.S. Camera in Chandler, Arizona is now looking at it under warranty. I expect to have an update on it today. Hopefully it doesn't require parts (AF module) from Sigma, but I fear that will be the case. When an electronic device loses its internal pre-programmed memory for some unknown reason, it is almost a sure bet that simply stuffing the programming back in will not work. My first Sigma 70-200mm lens did the same thing, and the work order from Sigma indicated they had to replace the module.
I do find it interesting that the lens can be programmed to automatically correct for front/rear focus issues. This suggests to me that there is an internal group of elements which has its own small motor drive, which is used to tune the lens on a sliding scale from 70mm to 200mm. Maybe with a zero point at 105mm or something like that. I'm truthfully not sure how they do it but I find it fascinating!
I also want it to work properly from now on. There's not much worse than getting home from a single day car show and finding out that some of your shots that you thought were fine were instead complete garbage. It is hard to make a living that way.Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-82471540803866491102012-06-14T13:55:00.002-07:002012-06-14T13:55:29.462-07:00So today we get newly leaked D600 photos... Where's the D400? Where's the 24mp, 8fps, weather-sealed, magnesium body D400 with its EXMOR-R technology-enhanced sensor? I want the low chroma noise of the D800 in a DX sensor with the pixel density of a 54mp FX sensor, Nikon! Oh, and you can leave off the AA filter at that resolution for a super-crisp image. I'm waiting, Nikon!
Was the D400 being stored downstairs at the Sendai factory? Were boxes and boxes of them (or their component parts) trashed by the tsunami in March 2011? I figured that this Sendai-built body would have appeared by now. Then again, the Sony A77 took a much longer time to appear after the earthquake then I thought it would. It is only just available now, and I expected it before Christmas last year, just like the D400.
After seeing just how much low ISO shadow detail can be recovered from the EXMOR-R sensor in the D800, and how litle chroma noise is evident in the images, I am genuinely interested in both the D600 and the D400. C'mon Nikon! Show us your hand!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-83861162804999996092012-06-06T10:20:00.001-07:002012-06-06T10:20:58.078-07:00Camera purchase bullet points...I forgot to note in my last post the issues with simply buying a new camera right now.
1. The D300S is long in the tooth and only has 12mp. It also may be plagued by the same AF sensor degradation issue I'm having now.
2. The Canon 7D is attractive, but has been on the market for a while and is due for a replacement very soon. Buying one now would simply leave me with a competent-yet-obsolete body I'd have to use for the net three or four years. Plus, I'd have to buy lenses and flashes for it.
3. The new Sony A77 is brilliant in some areas, and not so brilliant in others. Panning at the full frame rate would be difficult due to the EVF blackout. The aggressive noise reduction could be a problem too. 24 megapixels would be nice on a DX sensor, but shorter battery life would not be appreciated at all. And then there's the need to buy very good glass to make the most of the sensor's resolution.
4. New cameras are on the way from Nikon. Everyone knows this. Therefore buying a D300S or D700 now would result in a HUGE dent in resale value even as early as next year. Buying something else would lock me into having to use that camera for a few years in order to cost-justify the purchase (aside from the obvious need since my current body has this AF issue). That means when the new cameras do arrive this fall, I would be unable to purchase one of them (the D400 or D600) again leaving me behind the times in terms of resolution and other improvements.
This is a very frustrating conundrum...Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-29207106390108553602012-06-06T10:02:00.000-07:002012-06-06T10:02:16.829-07:00More AF issues... In further testing, I have confirmed that my D300 body only shoots three or four properly-focused pictures for every ten that I attempt. This even with shooting at a high enough ISO, shutter speed, and using only the one central AF point. This issue masks itself with shorter focal length lenses because the distance between proper focus and out-of-focus areas isn't as great as it is with my Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG HSM OS lens. Clearly, this is an issue with the AF sensor and as such, cannot be resolved by further adjustments of the AF and main mirrors.
Since the D400 and D600 have yet to be announced, prices have not dropped on used D300S or D700 models. The wonderful D800 is so far above the D700 as to be in a class all of its own; its release has not really affected the D700 prices as much as I'd hoped. The Sony A77 looks encouraging, but reports of an overly-aggressive noise reduction element in the programming scares me a little. I like to work with JPGS and not RAW files as it eases my workload and makes me more profitable, and having overly-soft JPGS would be discouraging. Also, I'd have to change lenses again, something I REALLY don't want to do. So c'mon Nikon, get your act in gear and get these new cameras out on the market soon!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-13366837770999870062012-04-14T08:33:00.002-07:002012-04-14T08:53:19.197-07:00Formula Drift Long Beach (Whew!)Well, that was a fun and exciting two days at the track. I shot close to, or over, 4000 photos with my camera, and while I did get a huge number of useful photos, I wasn't as happy with my work as I have been in years past. One small focus point issue ruined some shots on the first day, while spot metering issues bit me the second day. A careful review of the settings in my camera reveal that both issues were self-inflicted. Grrrrrrrr. Oh well, solved them for the next time now. <br /><br />Speaking of next times, I'm supposed to go to Global Time Attack at Buttonwillow next weekend. Long drive, and expensive for gas. I hope all of my trip planning works out. This will be a huge expense for just one story, but I really need it for Banzai Magazine.Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-32519332191287924722012-04-03T14:41:00.002-07:002012-04-03T15:18:44.947-07:001st Event with Sigma 70-200mm OS HSMLast weekend I was out at Firebird International Raceway for the NASA-AZ event. Despite scalding temps (90 degrees in the spring? Hotter over the pavement of course) the lens worked fine all day long. My D300 was having an intermittant power short problem in the connection to the lens, but removing the mount ring from the body, tightening down a few hidden screws, and reinstalling the ring seems to have corrected this issue. I couldn't make my Nikon lenses do this but they aren't nearly as long or as heavy as the big Sigma.<br /><br />Nest weekend is the start of my "crazy season", with Formula Drift Long Beach kicking off the year in style. The image stabilization works for panning, somewhat, but as with all OS systems, they're designed to pan with humans, like runners, and not cars. I'll be taking my monopod and using it a LOT, as that's simply the best way to get a good photo, sharp photo. <br /><br />In sunny, high contrast conditions the lens resolved details down to the carbon fiber level on passing cars. Posed shots show fantastic detail, almost to the level of my 35mm prime lens. In lower light, it was fun to shoot at f4 and f2.8 for the background bokeh. The Tamron lens was a little better for color and smooth bokeh, but there's nothing objectionable about the Sigma's output at all. It will be a fun time in Long Beach Friday and Saturday.Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-54372215852770684472012-03-27T11:49:00.004-07:002012-03-27T11:57:50.186-07:00New Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG OS HSM reviewSadly, in real-world use, the AF in the Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 lens was simply far too slow and inaccurate. Also, from the 150mm-200mm range, my particular lens was useless at f2.8 due to front-focusing softness. So I returned it to B&H Photo and Video (a retailler I recommend).<br /><br />In its stead, I ordered Sigma's 70-200mm f2.8 EX DG OS HSM. The jury is still out on this one but on initial observation it appears to produce quickly-focused, sharp, blur-free photos at all focal lengths. It is a tad softer at f2.8 and 200mm, but not objectionably so. It also sharpens up nicely all the way to f8, and retains much of that clarity through f11, where the Tamron was dropping off due to diffraction. I think the color and the bokeh might have been a little better with the Tamron lens, as the backgrounds took on more of a washed-out pastel feel, but unfortunately, sometimes the subject did too. This is unforgiveable in a modern AF lens design.<br /><br />This Sigma lens is double the price of the Tamron though, so this expenditure is not to be taken lightly. It is still a full thousand dollars less than Nikon's VRII. As always, I'll let everyone know what I think of it once I've had the opportunity to photograph more car-sized objects with it. I've got lots of trips planned very soon! Time to get shooting!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-62452181621121667552012-03-27T11:41:00.003-07:002012-03-27T11:49:01.265-07:00BOOM! AGW theory is DEAD!http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/22/more-evidence-the-medieval-warm-period-was-global/ <br /><br />That sound you just heard was Al Gore's head exploding. Here's the money quote from the paper; <br /><br />"Our most recent crystals suggest a warming relative to<br /> the LIA in the last century, possibly as part of the regional recent<br /> rapid warming, but this climatic signature is not yet as extreme in nature<br /> as the MWP."<br /><br />To summarize, our current warmth ain't nothing compared to the Medieval Warm Period, when Vikings farmed Greenland where now there is only permafrost. Today not only is farming impossible with manual tools, there's no way to dig a grave with a shovel through that frozen earth. Vikings buried their dead there for nearly 400 years, and they didn't have the benefit of a Caterpillar-built backhoe to do it. If global warming covered the entire planet during the MWP, then the causal factor cannot, must not be CO2! It must be exterior to the planet's ecosystem. Or in other words, it's the sun. <br /><br />Ha!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-51813664938207804382012-02-21T15:13:00.000-08:002012-02-21T15:30:17.605-08:00Tamron SP-AF 70-200mm f2.8 LD Di Initial ThoughtsWell, for monetary reasons, I did not buy the hella-awesome Nikon 70-200mm VRII. I don't like knowing that the 200mm focal length shrinks to 160mm up close. Instead, since I've been mostly happy with my Tamron 70-300mm VC lens, I thought I'd try their well-reviewed 70-200mm f2.8 lens. Was it everything I'd hoped a modern f2.8 "pro" lens should be? Read on and see.<br /><br />I'll start with the good news; from 70mm to 140mm or so, even at f2.8, it's one of the sharpest lenses I've ever used. I think I have a pretty darn good Nikon 35mm f1.8G DX and a good Nikon 50mm f1.8D, but the Tamron does an even better job than both of those at eliminating chromatic and spherical abberations. There are no fake colored lines separating light and dark areas at all, and at f2.8 the image is crisp. I'd say the lens is resolving as much as the sensor can show at this point. Color balance is good, and the metered images appear to be no brighter or darker than any of my other Nikon lenses. By f3.5, the depth of field has started to grow, and sharpness extends to the edge of the frame on my D300's APS-C sensor. Life is good.<br /><br />Now the bad news; AF can be spotty in low contrast situations, and on some objects, like a hummingbird in shadow, may not focus at all. Also, between 150mm and 200mm, the lens front focuses, making it softer and eliminating the tack-sharp focal point it has up to that point. Between 150mm and 200mm, using f4 is practically required to gain enough DOF to get your point of aim in focus. The difference is startling when you get it right though. Using my single AF center point, the Tamron also can have issues nailing the focus in just one shot. As others have said, if you're shooting objects without a lot of motion, this is a fine lens. I'd use it for a studio portrait lens ina heartbeat. For shooting race cars though, I may have to us 9 or 21-point AF modes in order to ensure that the lens locks onto some point as the car goes past. More testing will be required this week to determine how well this will work.<br /><br />Overall, my impression is that this is a well-made product, with decent design and construction. It works best on my camera with an AF Fine Tune setting of +11, with every focal length up to 150mm. Beyond that, I have to set it up around +18 if I want to shoot at f2.8. This makes it an interesting compromise between image quality and price. The bokeh though, is tremendous, and it cannot be underestimated how much smooth bokeh helps out a good composition. I do like the bokeh it produces... a LOT! That may be the deciding factor which keeps this lens in my case for a long time to come.Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-85313257930505156422012-02-03T11:23:00.000-08:002012-02-03T11:32:00.499-08:00The QuandrayIt is tax time again... Do I finally splurge for the awesome-but-flawed 70-200mm f2.8 G VRII, knowing that it is much shorter at long focal lengths, or the older-and-slightly-less-awesome VRI with its soft corners on FX bodies? I don't have an FX body now, but I want one. Or, do I get a third party lens and hope for the best again? I do feel the need to be shooting at long range with f2.8-f4 apertures, to get that OOF background compression, but I want excellent sharpness and pleasing bokeh all at the same time. <br /><br />All of the options are making my head hurt somewhat. It just seems like there's no correct answer for this question in the Nikon system. Canon, on the other hand, has it nailed with a super-sharp 70-200mm f4L IS, which delivers the same sharpness as their much-vaunted IS II version of the f2.8 big dog. And, they do so at around $1100, making it an great choice for someone on a budget. Where Canon drops the ball is in the lack of on-camera wireless flash control (yes, the 7D has it finally). I don't care much for the image quality of the 7D straight from the camera. <br /><br />There are simply no perfect choices which meet my needs, my budget, and my image quality expectations. Very frustrating!Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-41275550508456217112012-01-27T08:11:00.001-08:002012-01-27T09:08:47.748-08:00New camerasThe big news since the last time I bothered to update this blog, has been the introductions of the Nikon D4 and the Canon 1DX. Nikon's built one heck of a flagship DSLR and they're undercutting Canon's price by about $500 or so. Now, to a pro that's not much money for a device which will last 4 years or so. About $.34 per day actually. Is that a big enough difference to make someone who has invested in the Canon lens system jump ship? No. Is it enough to sway new buyers? Certainly. That's where Nikon's hoping to gain ground on Canon's HD video lead. Make no mistake, this really is the first salvo of a price war.<br /><br />The second salvo should land on February 7th, if Nikonrumors.com is correct about the launch date for the D800. With a reported 36mp, this is probably a development of the Sony EXMOR-R sensor, using Sony's "backlit sensor" architecture. I believe I read the original tech paper from Sony back in 2008, a relative eternity in sensor years, but all references to a 36mp EXMOR-R sensor have been scrubbed from Sony's website. There's plenty about the EXMOR-R, but no mention of total megapixels, leading me to believe that current in-development sensors are far beyond 36mp right now. If I were a betting man, I'd say Sony's playing around with sensors in the 48-60mp range, on a 36mm wide sensor. With the ability of the backlit sensor to gather light, cutting the pixel size in half is not as big of an issue as it once was. Why not say this now? Simple, because Nikon's about to release a 36mp D800, and since Nikon's buying the sensors, they do not want Sony talking about what could be upcoming, even in a distant future. <br /><br />There's even been some talk that there will be two D800s released; one at 36mp without an anti-aliasing filter, the other at a lower resolution (possible using the D4 sensor, but slower speed processing and operation). With the D300S and D700 being listed as "discontinued" on Nikon's global corporate site, I think the D400 might become a 16mp FX body, leaving the D7000 as the hi-res APS-C sensor prosumer body. If the D7000 is selling well, why cannibalize its sales with an up-market D400? I, for one, would welcome an FX D400 as an "entry-level FX body" without some of the robustness of the D4. As long as it offers the pop-up flash and wireless flash control of the D300/D300S/D700 bodies, I could see it as a sub-$2000 FX market monster.<br /><br />This would leave the D800 positioned as the FX challenger to the Canon 5D mkII and mkIII bodies, probably priced in the sub-$3000 price range, if not by much. A DX-sensor D400 would have to come in with 18-24mp to upstage the D7000, and above 18mp, might take a hit in the image quality department due to anti-aliasing filter requirements for smaller pixels; see Canon 7D image softness complaints. To an extent, this can be processed out but all things equal, prosumers would likely be happier with very sharp 16mp FX sensor output than slightly soft 18-24mp images which have to be processed more. And THAT is what an entry-level prosumer DSLR should produce; clean, sharp, colorful images straight from the body. <br /><br />A D800 with 36mp will begin to challenge the limitations of lenses revealing flaws in your lenese you never thought they had. Such is the nature of technological advance. I think Canon has the advantage here with their Florite glass. Nikon, leveraging Sony's technical might and sensor-producing talent, might be poised to "upset the apple cart" with these next two cameras buy going both for a hi-res 36mp non-anti-aliasing body, and a "lower cost FX body". I've long argued privately that Canon should have produced an "Rebel FX" with their 12.8mp sensor from the original 5D. The popularity of 35mm film cameras wasn't just because they could take snapshots, it was because they could capture artistic photos with terrific out of focus backgrounds. They could use amazingly-sharp professional lenses, slapped onto a body which was less durable than a professional's unit, but which could still get the job done for intermittant family. Many of those durable film bodies are still working today. This is what the market needs. Will it be Canon, or Nikon, who delivers it first?Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-2492530251423424062011-11-07T14:29:00.000-08:002011-11-07T14:31:22.400-08:00SEMA 2011I went, I saw, I came home and wanted to beat my little Project Fubar Miata into a worthless hunk of metal with a sledgehammer, then roll it off to an irrigation ditch and leave it for aliens to discover long after the human race has blasted itself into oblivion. This car is going to need soooooo much work to be at the SEMA show level... <sigh>Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8887449990186699709.post-85975744740991721132011-10-19T10:54:00.000-07:002011-10-19T10:59:45.967-07:00Canon 1Dx thoughtsDamn! $6,800? This sure makes a second-gen 1Ds mkII look like a deal now, if you can find one in good shape. Looking at Rob Galbraith's site has me questioning the AF performance of Canon's top cameras now. Rob doesn't have any complaints posted about the 7D though, but since it's not a full-frame body, it's not on my list. <br /><br />Dear Canon, what I'd like is a 7D body with the sensor from the original 5D. 'K? Thanks! I want the separate AF processing chip and the wireless flash control built-in. And that creamy narrow DOF that a full-frame body possess. Would this be too difficult for you? This way I can take advantage of the excellent sharpness your lenes exhibit.Eikenberry Photographyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03301810268339147732noreply@blogger.com0