Small gear thoughts (with lots of distracting photographs)

I made it a goal this year to purposefully try and think about different types gear.  I decided trying a small carry everywhere camera, and a large format pinhole camera.

This is about the small camera.  More specifically, this a bit of a retrospective of nearly a year with my X100s.

I have taken it Tennessee, and I have even written a bit about it before.  But, I have carried it with me nearly everywhere I went everyday since I bought it.

This had an immediate effect.  I stopped using my cell phone ( as much ) for taking pictures.  I started taking pictures of my kids in restaurants with it.  I used it to document such things as metro's incompetence, dinner, random things that caught my eye because of color or light, etc.  Yes, this was all stuff I had done before with the cell phone, but, at least from a technical quality point of view-- these are much better than if I had used a cell phone.

I can imagine some of you are thinking, yeah, but you own dSLRs you could carry one of those around and do the same thing.  Yes, I *could*, and I did carry an SLR around nearly every day for a year or two prior to picking up the small camera.  But, I didn't use it nearly as much.  In fact, I think the only good it did me was make my back stronger.  It certainly didn't help fill up my picture library with high quality images of everyday moments.  There are a lot of reasons for that, none particularly good.  It was effort to get an SLR out of a bag, my SLR attracts attention, its pretty loud, and did I mention it attracts attention?  In any event, none of those things matter to me if photographing is my primary focus, but for a quick shot it is paramount.

I have also used it for more staged and/or serious pictures too.  It works very well there too.  I tend to work pretty methodically and slowly making those kind of pictures, so the speed disadvantage an x100 has compared to a dSLR doesn't impact me.

This has made me consider picking up one of Fuji's interchangeable lens X-cameras and potentially selling all my SLR gear.  Unfortunately, there are a few things I do that would fall flat if I tried that, and I don't want to support two camera systems.  One is expensive enough.  But, the thought still lingers.

I doubt there are too many people out there that are still on the fence about buying one of these little cameras-- but if you are go try one.  It looks like a an updated model will be out soon so you have 3 generations to choose from!

Okay, this may have been written to give me a reason to put up a lot of different photographs from the year that don't really warrant their own post, and don't easily fit with anything else.

New Camera ( the latest in my not really a review set )

First I want to apologize, this is a gear post.  I try not to do much of that here, I don't think most of you are interested.  Pictures are more fun.  But, a few maybe interested, so here goes...  There are also some links to some other posts and pictures in here, so it might be worth scanning through for them. 

I haven't bought a new camera or lens in almost 2 years.  This is fine by me, buying stuff upsets my stomach.  A lot.  There is only one thing on my want list ( 35mm/1.4 ), but it is only a want, it can wait.  But, that changed this week.

For a long while I have found it important to have a set of backup gear with me for every photo outing.  If someone is paying me, it should clear why that is important.  If it is a personal project that I have invited someone to participate in it may be less clear.  But, I feel if someone is giving up their time for my photo project I should do everything within my control to actually bring home some useful and good images, even if I manage to drop a camera off a cliff, or in a river, or its shutter blows up, or.... .

For this reason I have been using a D200/D700 pair, before that it was my F100/D200 as a pair, and before that it was an N80/F100 pair.  This goes back about 15 years.

Those of you familiar with Nikon's cameras probably know a D200 isn't quite the same as a D700.  The biggest difference, for me at least, is sensors are different physical sizes. Also because of its (lack of?) light sensitivity it needs to be used more like film than a current digital camera.  That is okay if its role is purely backup.  I know how to use it for the images I want.  But about a year ago, I started trying to use both cameras in concert with one another.  This introduced complexity and problems, and I began thinking about using two cameras that were more similar in how they were used.

I had decided that I would probably add a second D700 to the mix.  Then the tsunami hit.  The camera became impossible to find, and if you could find one the cost was astronomical, especially for such an old design.  By the time things really calmed down the D4 had been announced, and I wanted to see what the "small" professional FX sensor-sized camera would like.  Nikon announced the D800 shortly after.

The D800 wasn't exactly what I wanted, I don't need so many pixels.  But, I'm guessing that in the near future (or maybe ever), Nikon won't build exactly what I want.  After some thought I decided it was better to buy a camera of new design over a second D700 [which have gotten very easy to find again].

So I bought one as soon as I found it in stock. [ Nikon always has supply issues with new, relatively popular gear-- always, always, always... buy Canon stuff if you don't like the game of finding gear.  I don't buy enough stuff to worry about it, so I tolerate this. ].

So far, I think it will satisfy my purpose. The two cameras behave similarly enough I can use them side by side.  I'm pretty excited about that.

My first shots were of the dog-- I have a theory that most expensive cameras and lenses are sold to people who use them to only take pictures of dogs and cats.

I like to carry on traditions.

I haven't done much shooting with it yet.  But here is my "not a review" anyway.  I don't have to use it much more to know it feels almost exactly the same as my D700, and most of this review is a comparison to the D700.  I also doubt my first impressions will change very much.  I haven't installed  LR4 yet to use it's files in my "normal" workflow, but that will be in the near future, I want to make sure I can go back to LR3 and backups in case the switch makes some of my current projects go egg-shaped.


D800 (not a review)

Image Quality
Its good.  There isn't really much more to say.  It controls noise well at high enough ISO, the resolution is beyond ridiculous, and the colors and such are what I have learned to expect.  I also think its quite silly to worry about any of this with the modern crop of dSLRs.  They are all good from the very bottom of the ranges to the very top.  If you are looking at buying a camera and worry about this, stop, it's silly at this point.


The Physical (the important part to me)

The build is good.  I'd feel comfortable making this rainy-day picture with it, just like before (my camera, lens, and I got soaked).  Overall it feels a little lighter than my D700.  This is fine by me.

The buttons, for the most part, are layed out in exactly the same order as the D700.  This is good, my fingers know where to go, and I don't have to think to use this camera.  If I'm thinking about the camera, I am generally not thinking about the picture.  That would be a problem.

The default directions of the meter indicator, and exposure compensation controls are "backwards" from old school Nikon cameras-- but you can customize them back to "normal" if you prefer that way ( I do, remember I don't want to think about the camera and I learned the old way ... though its backwards from every other camera manufacturer! ).

Some things are improved from my D700.  The selector pad on the camera's back is much more solid.  It has a satisfying clunk to it.  From the day I unboxed my D700 I thought its selector was loose and squishy.  The frame rate selector dial is much nicer than the D700.  I also like the card door, and battery door better.  Small improvements to be sure, but noticeable.

The only thing I don't like about the layout is the position of the exposure compensation button and the mode button.  They are in the same general place as on earlier models, but a third button (for video) is near them.  With the new arrangement it is an awkward reach to hit the mode button with my index finger.

The autofocus feels a little faster than any camera I have used before.  For me to really know I will need to use it a bit more.

Finally the shutter feels a LOT quieter than the D700.  It sounds a little more like the D200.  I think this is a good thing.  Although, it might be a consequence of the the frame rate on the D800 is slower than the D700.

I haven't used the video mode yet, but I am looking forward to it.

Overall I am excited about the new toy.

But, now, please excuse me my stomach is still in turmoil from buying this, and I should attend to it.

A bit of playtime

Its been a little while since my last post. I think I wore myself out with the Photowalk. I didn't stop making pictures. I spent a lot time experimenting with things on the post-capture side of things. I like doing this with interesting things I capture daily with the cell-camera. The main reason is because they are small files, they don't tax my aged computer! I've been playing with real cameras too, I'll post some of those in the near future.


What else has happened since my last post? Nikon announced some new goodness. The thing that has me interested the most is the D300s. Yeah, I know, I just got a new camera. Yeah, I know its expensive. Man, you guys talking in my head are starting to sound like my wife, but hear me out. My photography related goals require having a backup camera. I know the D300s is a DX sized sensor, but I have lenses that mimic the views I get on my D700, so that is a non-issue. Besides, right now I already have cameras of different sensor sizes backing each other up. I also like the smaller sensor when I pop on my telephoto lenses, they never have enough reach anyway! The control layout of the D300s and D700 also appears to be exactly the same. Nice. However, the real reason I want a new DX body is... if I get a new one then I can ship my D200 off to be converted to an Infrared camera. I really want to do that right now, but the necessity for "proper" redundancy in my gear holds me back. Will I get a new camera soon? Doubtful, but its nice to know when I do decide to a good choice exists.

Choosing a camera

This post has no images. So, those of you who (rightly) expect images can find a nicer photo-blog post than this one. This is a completely gear centric post, designed to help me avoid ordering a camera right now. I will spend my time making this post instead.

I haven't talked much about why I choose certain cameras. Mostly, because I think its silly, but hey, maybe someone out there will find it interesting. I already know I will be benefit from this post.

Okay, first and foremost, the single most important thing to me about an SLR camera is : It must have a Nikon F-mount. If it doesn't, chances are good I will not be able to get my lenses to work on it. Thems the breaks. I'm sure there are other camera companies out there besides Nikon, Kodak, and Fuji. I imagine they probably make pretty decent cameras (and maybe even copiers and TVs too!) , but it doesn't matter Their camera bodies are useless for me! Its also helpful if the camera supports autofocus with Nikon's non-AFS lenses. I desire metering with non-CPU lenses, although that is not critical.

The camera must have a standard ISO hotshoe.

ISO, shutter speed, and aperture should be easily manipulated-- ideally shutter speed and aperture should have separate controls. I really hate when there is only a single dial, and you have to push and hold a button to switch between the two controls.

Even in this digital world, I use a depth of field preview button pretty regularly. For some reason I haven't quite got the knack of grabbing a shot, and blowing it up on the LCD.

I always set my cameras up to use the back-of-the-camera autofocus button. I remove autofocus completely from the shutter release. Therefore it is critical that a camera allow this.

I prefer my camera to be rugged. Mostly because I do dumb things like let my camera bump into trees, or sit on my car floor, or leave it out where my three year old can reach it.

I prefer CF cards over SD cards, but it really doesn't matter. The only reason I prefer them is because of their physical size. I find it much harder to misplace a CF card.

You may have noticed I left off things like resolution, ISO performance, frame-rate, etc. This is mostly because I find all current cameras meet or exceed my needs in any of these areas. I am interested in printing only up to 11x14 most of the time. I still find my D200 does amazing things up to ISO 800. This maybe because I come from film, and maybe because I usually don't find noise that big deal if the picture "works". If it "works" it "works", even if there is golf-ball sized film-grain (or digital noise). Sometimes, the noise maybe the only reason it DOES work.

Unfortunately, two of my wants on the list knock the mid-line Nikon cameras out of consideration. However, I can't complain too much as I still have 4 current cameras to choose from when the time comes to partner my D200- D300, D700, D3, and the D3x. I am heavily leaning towards the D700.

I realize what I want in a camera doesn't fit everyone. I don't expect it too. Afterall, we are making different photos, and we use our stuff in different ways. I also don't feel cameras that do not meet all of my criteria are junk. Almost anything out there now will help capture good images. The items I listed simply allow the camera to get the heck out of my way faster.

Awesome, I have wasted enough time, that I can't wander off to Amazon...

I wish I had my camera...

I do not feel the need to carry my camera everywhere with me. I know a lot of people do, in case they come across they must photograph. The types of things I would want to photograph that I hadn't planned on generally fall into two categories. First, some events I should just watch and let my memory remember them. The second type are events that it would probably be in my best interest to run away from. Not having a camera for either of those does not bother me.

But sometimes...

Today I saw very cool light playing outside. It had been a dull and lifeless morning, but by late afternoon the clouds were breaking up, and warm colored sunlight was laying on everything it touched. I love the cold steel-grey skies contrasted against golden light. I looked out the window and wished I had my camera.


I didn't have my camera, but I did have a camera of sorts. My phone has a camera. So I grabbed it and made a few pictures. I made one from inside the building, and then held off on the rest until it was time to go home. I needed to make the other ones because, as you can see, the image from inside the building is a little lacking. Or maybe, it just plain sucks.

After I had made these, I felt I should post them up here. Images like this represent a change in my photographic-philosophy so to speak. Many times in the past I refused to photograph things I felt would be snapshots, or I didn't have the "proper" equipment to make a "good" picture. Within the last year or so, I have changed my mind. I now feel, that the mere act of creating something is important. It doesn't matter how great the result is necessarily. I have some pictures I would not have otherwise. Like Kathryn playing an angel in a Christmas play. I would not have made that before, it really is "only" a snapshot. But-- its an important one.

I will say, that I am a little irritated I had to install software to pull the images off the camera. I find that somewhat inexcusable.

I like the final image in this set the best.

Ouch, equipment, fail

It snowed again. This time it was nice fluffy snow, the kind that would move if you sneezed on it. It was much easier to move than the water-logged snot-thick stuff I had so much trouble with earlier this year.

After I was done moving snow, I looked around and thought a color infrared picture incorporating the snowfall might look cool. I wasn't sure what to expect. I imagined, that with the proper grey point choice, and a swap of the red and blue channels ( a trick I learned from this month's issue of Practical Photography ), I'd get something with blue sky, colored (red or blue, my imaginer broke thinking about this) snow, and various shades of eery white on everything else. I geared up my borrowed D1h with my 24mm lens, stuffed a Hoya R72 filter in my pocket, grabbed a tripod and headed outside. I lined up a pretty cool shot with a line of boulders in the foreground leading back to some trees, and an open triangle shaped patch of sky. You can imagine, beautiful isn't it? I checked the depth of field. It all looked right. I added the filter and clicked the shutter.
Usually, when I press the shutter, cameras make a nice little ker-chink sound.

This time, however, the camera made a keerg-buz kinda sound. I didn't know what that meant, but it did not instill any confidence. After coming back in and investigating, it appears that the battery is no more, or in need of some rejeuventation. I'm running a couple deep cycles on it, and I hope it comes out of its funk. The camera's weak hot-pass filter is quite a blessing for making near IR images, even if it is only 2.7MP. I want it functional! [Update: Battery is toast]

I thought about posting this with no images, but photo-based blogs with no-image posts tend to irritate me. So, I decided to put up some of my recent play images. Normally these toy images aren't meant to show, but to keep loose, and generate ideas for future "serious" images. Its an opinion I have that anyone who wants to be a photographer, should photograph. Even if its garbage, push the button, keep loose, watch for things, evaluate what you get. By showing these, I think I'm violating the unwritten rule implied by my opinion, which is only show your best stuff!

Shortcomings? What shortcomings?

I have heard the phrase "a poor craftsman blames his tools" many times. Every time I hear it I wince a little because the poor craftsman also chose his tools. Tools matter, and it takes knowledge to choose them. However, the take-home message from that proverb is do not blame poor results on poor tools.

My tools are light, lenses, and cameras. This particular post will focus on cameras.

My current camera is extremely old for a dSLR. Its almost 3! Does this make it bad? No. Its not bad. It compares well with newer machines, until you start raising sensitivity more than 2 stops beyond base ISO . Then, you can easily see how much better the newer cameras perform.

My daughter was in her first school production tonight. I wanted to get a few shots. I know, from past experience, that it takes ISO 1600 and an aperture opened to at least 2.8 to get remotely close to a decent shutter speed. To make it worse the stage lights seem all over the map in terms of type and color.

I started having a conversation with myself.
Self, do you want pictures from this production?
Yes.
You will need ISO 1600.
I know.
The files look like poo at that ISO.
Yeah, I know they are noisy, and the color...

Wait... color?

At that point I realized what I was going to do. These pictures were going to be made in Black and White! This helped me achieve a few things. First, I no longer had to deal with the mixed lighting in the venue. Second, I do not view noise as a problem in black and white images. I find rough and tumble, grainy B&W images preferable. When I used film regularly I never used a B&W film slower than than 400. My favorite was Delta 400 pushed to 1600 - 3200 and developed accordingly. To say I like B&W grain is an understatement. I love it!

I could have have decided my tools were too limited to take any pictures at this event. I could have shot away, and then hemmed and hawed about how crappy my camera performs in those conditions. I could have broken etiquette, like so many others, and used a flash. But I thought through the problem, and came up with what I consider a great solution. I grabbed a few decent frames, ones that may even appeal to my sense of aesthetics. Yes, they are "just" a dad's documentary snapshots from a typical audience seat. But, sometimes snapshots can say important things. These say "Hey world that is my girl up on stage!"






It is probably best I say it in pictures, instead of standing up in the middle of the performance.

Photo Notes : Available light snapshots from audience seat. ( The mic boom arm, just adds tons don't you think? )