Archive for the Category ◊ Photo gear ◊

22 Apr 2009 So You have a new DSLR: Step three
Greek Shrine

Greek Shrine

Step three: learning to edit.

OK you have been taking lots of photos, you’ve been using jpeg + raw as your file formats. And you have been using the jpeg files to upload and do any printing. You are now ready to move up to some editing on the files. You can start with edits on your jpegs but in some ways that can be more difficult than editing raw files. Jpegs can take light editing, some sharpening and maybe some tonal adjustment. But any serious editing will cause the images to develop very ugly artifacts like banding and posterization. We will get into that when we talk about raw files in another post. Right now lets list some of the available free editing software on the web. So far as I know these editors will only work on non-raw file formats. Jpeg and .tif formats mainly. Some of the best known are:

And Mac users have a freebie that is included on their system, iPhoto or some such. Your camera also may have come with free editing software of modest capability. Canon cameras come with DPP and Nikon users can get the pretty good Nikon editor but it isn’t free.

Paint.net is an open source project and it has developed a large community of developers who are supplying a good variety of plugins which have greatly extended the capability of the basic product. This is a good choice for a basic editor.

Adobe Photoshop Express comes with 2 GB of free gallery space, and a free photoshop.com address, and it connects directly with Flickr, Photobucket and some other online galleries. The tools allow you to do basic editing like sharpening, cropping, resizing and other simple tasks. These are implemented with a wizard type interface which is simple and easy to use. If you select one of the tools you will see a string of thumbnails at the bottom of the image showing how different levels of the tool will affect the image. You click on the thumbnail to apply that level of the adjustment.

Editors with raw support.

Sooner or later you will want to move to real editor. And the three best supported editors are:

Why Adobe products?

Why do I limit the list above to Adobe products? The primary reason, in my mind, is the fact that there is a vast online support community for these products. You will find literally thousands of online websites, tutorials, podcasts, and video tutorials on these editors. If you participate in online lists almost all the users will be using one or another of these products and you will easily get help when you get stuck. I have never failed to find a number of online tutorials or other help when I use Google to search for a way to do something in one of these apps.

Besides online user help Adobe itself provides a very comprehensive online support capability including forums and user groups and there are literally hundreds of published books available on each of these editors. Amazon shows 183 books for Photoshop CS4 and 202 books available for Photoshop Elements 7. Corel Photo Paint X3 by contrast has 3 books available. GIMP 2.6 has 14 books. Apple Aperture 2 has 26 books.

Elements

PSE 7 is the current version of Photoshop Elements and it will allow you to do raw file conversions and just about all basic editing on your images. PSE has a lot of wizard type interfaces to guide new users. And it comes with a pretty good photo organizer. I think this is the best choice for new users who need raw support or who want better editing capability. If you work at developing your editing skills you will eventually start wanting to do things that cannot be done in PSE and that is the time when you should start thinking about moving up to Photoshop. A good online community for PSE is found at this PSE group.

Some good introductory books:

Lightroom

Some people find Lightroom to be a middle ground between PSE and Photoshop. But it seems like every Lightroom user I have heard from also owns Photoshop and uses that for the more intense editing procedures. Lightroom is aimed at production photographers, people who need to batch process large numbers of photographs. Perhaps someone who is shooting senior portraits by the hundreds. You can easily apply the same corrections to an entire batch of shots. This is possible in PS but not as easy and I’m not sure how well it would work on large batches. LR also has a very powerful photo archiving ability, it makes it easy to find your photos whether they are on your hard drive or have been moved to an external storage device. LR has the same raw converter as Photoshop: Adobe Camera Raw. Lightroom lacks the ability to select certain parts of the image and apply effects just to the selected area. That is when LR users move over to PS. Glenn Michell has some thoughts on the two.

Online support: Yahoo Lightroom group

Some good introductory books:

Photoshop

Photoshop is simply the best editor available. Over the years many competitors have attempted to catch up with PS but they never succeed. I think the reason that they fail is this: they usually come up with a fairly good basic product. Maybe something in the PSE range plus a few more features. But to catch up with the vast capabilities of Photoshop they need a large group of programmers and time to write and debug all that code. So they need to sell copies of their first effort to finance the further development and they always seem to run out of money before that happens. Now PS is the best, but it also has a huge user community who has been using it for a decade or more. As new features are added many of those users are used to the arcane and difficult user interface and vociferously resist the least change in the way things work in PS. That means that new features are grafted on to the current user interface making it that much harder to learn. Old features never go away. John Nack has commented on this built in resistance to change from the user community.

Adobe of course has the large developer force, time and money to make sure that they stay far ahead of any competition. They have been steadily adding more power and capability to each new version. And I have yet to feel like a version upgrade is worthless from them. New versions are on a three year schedule lately. So Photoshop is difficult to learn, partly because of all the baggage it is carrying around from the past. It is also darned expensive, about $650 US for a new purchaser. Upgrades are running around $200 every two years.

Also Photoshop has a schizophrenic nature, it is both a graphics editor for graphical artists and it is a photo editor. Photographer may well never use many of the tools in PS since they are targeted at graphic artists. But it can do things that no other editor can do, and it can usually do those things in many different ways. But that will come at a cost to you.

Lynda.com has many online tutorials for PS (as well as many other applications) and they have 30 plus hours of video tutorials just on learning how to use the selection tools in PS. 30 hours for one feature. I watched them and worked thru the examples but still don’t think I understand everything about the tools. So this is why I urge people not to spend that $650 unless you are sure that you are ready to tackle this difficult editor.

A major online community for PS can be found at: listmoms

Good books for CS4
Editing webpages

There are some excellent websites that cover editing technique. Like mostsites they are specific to Photoshop but if you know your editor you can probably adapt the techniques to your editor.

Cambridge in Color which is Sean McHugh’s site is one of the best that I know of. It has a slightly technical reading level but has very good coverage of a most basic Photoshop techniques. Be sure to look at Sean’s photo galleries while you are there.

The Light’s Right the site owned by Glenn E Mitchell has a great set of tutorials that probably a bit more advanced than Cambridge. He has a 300 page ebook on sharpening for example. There are also a number of video tutorials. The essential read on this site is the ‘pop’ series of articles but you will want to read more than those. Mitch also has a blog and some excellent photo galleries.

The Luminous-Landscape is owned by Micheal Reichmann and a lot of other writers often contribute including Jeff Schewe. He has a set of video Magazines that can be downloaded (not free) that have some intensive looks at various aspects of photography. He also has the best intoduction to Printing and Color management that I have seen. It’s a 6.5 hour video which he sells on site. This is call From Camera to Print, and it is on the advanced side and probably of little value unless you have Photoshop and a serious printer.

There are many guides and tutorials on this site but they are not as well organized. You have to look for the gems. The trip is well worth the effort. Try the Understanding series.

Commercial Tutorials

Lastly let’s look at the two major commercial tutorial sites.

The first is Lynda.com. They offer a wide variety of video tutorials covering most Adobe and many other software packages. The instructors are excellent on the whole and the price is reasonable: $25/month for full access.  Lynda is mostly limited to software training tho they have a few more general photography sets. You can get a free month of Lynda as a gift when you register CS4. The courses range from the basic to the advanced and can get very advanced.

KelbyTraining is Scott Kelby’s site and I have only used it when they were offering a free look when they started up. At that time I thought it was very limted and Nikon centric, but I hear that they have added many new instructors and have photographic technique as well as software training courses. Cost is $20/month. I’ll give it another whirl sometime soon. Kelby is the author of many very popular photography books and his books often live at the #1 position on Amazon.

And that wraps this post up.

01 Apr 2009 So you have a new DSLR

Big Cypress
Big Cypress

New Users Corner

It’s here

Your spiffy new DSLR has arrived and you are wondering, what next? Naturally you will charge up the battery and head out to do some shooting. But if you are new to DSLR cameras the results may be disappointing when compared to your old point and shoot.

Why is that true? Because unlike P&S cameras, DSLR cameras demand that you do a lot of the thinking that the camera did for you when you used the less powerful model. DSLRs are not just bigger and more expensive point and shoot cameras even though camera manufacturers advertise them as if that was the case.

If you feel a burning desire to buy some things for the camera then get a couple of extra batteries, Sterlingtek is a good place to find them at less than a quarter of the cost from your manufacturer. You can find them on Amazon and eBay too but won’t know who you are buying them from.

A couple of extra memory cards is a good idea. 4 GB is a good size to my way of thinking. That will usually hold a day’s casual shooting but it doesn’t hold so many shots that it would be a disaster if something happened to the card. If it gets lost or ruined in some way. NewEgg is a good source as is Amazon.

If you are using the high speed UDMA Flash cards then you will want a fast UDMA Card Reader. Otherwise a slower but cheaper USB2 Card Reader will do. I never have thought it makes much sense to use your $1000 camera to do the job a $18 card reader can do faster.

Getting a Cleaning Kit is also a good idea. I like the Giotto Rocket blower as the first line of defense against dust on your sensor.

I would wait to buy lenses or other major accessories. You of course need to decide what you need and when. But the way you look at these items may change a good deal in the next few months. You could buy something and then come to regret the purchase as you learn more.

The three steps

So to become master of your new camera and to learn good photographic technique you need a plan of action. And I have a three step plan for you:

  • Step one–learn how your camera works.
  • Step two–learn basic photographic technique.
  • Step three–learn post process editing for your files

By taking this process in small bites you can make noticeable progress and see that your photographic skills are improving.

Step One

Learning how your camera works can be a tedious process. The first and really vital step in this process is to do the dreaded: read the manual. Find a quiet place where you can have an hour or so alone and get the manual in your hands and the camera in your lap. Read a section of the manual and then find the things that were mentioned on your camera that you have in your lap. Try the different functions and menu items. Do this a section at a time, it may take several sessions.

Now you will not remember all this stuff. But you will recall that there was a way to do something that you are puzzled about and you will be able to find it in the manual weeks later. I carried the book in my camera bag for the first year after I got my first DSLR. And should still be carrying it since I frequently need to look up items four years later.

I have heard of people photographing the manual and saving it on a memory card so that they can pop the card into the camera and read that section on the LCD. That was a step too far for me.

I actually worked on doing a section a week for months. I’d work on recalling how to set focus points one week, and I’d do white balance the following week. Even tho I had 20 years of using SLR cameras, before I bought my first DSLR, all these complex functions were new to me.

While this is going on, visit your camera manufacturers website. They will have a lot of training material available. Usually in short video clips.

If your manual is just too confusing there are third party books on a lot of camera models. I have not read any of these but I have occasionally heard comments from people who seemed to find them useful.

And you can just get on Amazon and search for your camera model in books or videos.

Shoot, shoot and shoot some more

While all this is going on, keep on shooting. The more the better, and look at your work after you have a shooting session. Think about how you could improve your images. Remember once you have a digital camera it costs you nothing to take photos. I estimate that it took me 1500 shots or more before I thought that I had a basic grasp of camera operation.

During this step I think you are better off learning about your camera than you would be trying to learn shooting modes. However using jpeg modes on your camera teaches you nothing. What does the camera do exactly when you put it in night mode or sports mode? Most likely you won’t have any idea, and how can you learn from that?

So I suggest putting your camera in program mode, your camera may call it P mode. That is something for you to check in your manual. The camera will also probably select focus settings for you. Leave the other settings at default settings unless you have a reason to change them.

Set the file size to large jpeg and you may want to think about using the raw+jpeg file option if your camera supports that. This might be especially important if you are shooting some event that is important to you. The camera will then save two copies of each image file. One as a large jpeg and one as a raw file. Don’t worry about the raw files now, but later when you learn how to post process your images, you could go back and reprocess those shots. So just save those files for the time being. For now just use the jpeg files to email or get prints made.

The camera will probably set the metering mode to evaluative which is fine at this stage. Concentrate on learning to frame shots and understanding your camera.

OK are we ready to move on to the next step? That will be in the next post.




01 Apr 2009 Buying Compact Flash Cards
 |  Category: general, Photo gear  | Tags: , ,  | Leave a Comment

Big Sur naval Station

Big Sur Naval Station

Buying Compact Flash Cards

Just a short post.

This post will only apply to those of you who use cameras with Compact Flash (CF) cards. Almost all point and shoots have switched over to Secure Digital (SD) type cards but most DSLRs still use the higher quality CF cards. Canon and Nikon have turned to the dark side with their XTi and up Canon models (the xxxD series) and the D80 and up (Dxx series) for Nikon. They use the slower SD cards.

Over the years I have always been of the opinion that people have been wasting their money by buying cards that are too fast. Camera bodies only operate at some maximum speed and buying cards that work at higher speeds is just wasted money. Some people argue that the  higher speeds are useful when downloading the cards from the card reader to the computer. But that is only true if your card reader and computer both support the higher speeds. I just let the download happen in the background while I read email or do something else so I have never been in all that much of a hurry anyway.

In the Canon 30D and Nikon D70 days camera bodies only ran at 8 MB/sec or so and almost any reasonably fast CF card was faster than that. So it made no sense whatsoever to spend 3 times as much on the the Super Ultra Fast version when the plain old fast version was fine. Camera body speeds have crept up until the 40D/D90 are in the 11-13 MB/sec range so buying 133X or 266X cards was justified. Still a lot cheaper than the top level cards which work at 40 MB/sec or faster.

Also buying premium brands never made a lot of sense either. If you go to NewEgg and check out the buyer reviews, and there are a fairly large number of reviews, and those reviews are good then so far as I can see you are safe buying the card. Now does that guarantee that your card will never fail, of course not. But I have heard of all sorts of brands failing including SanDisk and Lexar brands. I have personally bought and still have cards from Transcend, PNY, Kingston and RiData and have never had one card fail. One additional worry you have with buying SanDisk cards is the flood of counterfeit SanDisk cards on the market. They do have a very high failure rate. So only buy SanDisk cards from a major safe vendor.

However with the advent of video capable DSLR cameras manufacturers have really jumped camera write speed up. This can be seen on any of the Canon bodies with the Digic 4 processor ( 5D Mk2 and 50D) and in the Nikon D300/D700 bodies. The write speeds are now in the 30-35 MB/sec range and you are now wise to buy a top grade card. The newest Canon Ti has video capability but uses a SD card which would seem to be problematic. Of course the Nikon D90 does the same.

Ron Gailbraith has updated his database of camera and card speeds and it is well worth browsing through for information about this subject. He has a good write up on CF card technology as well as the difference in CF and SD cards. CF cards have built in electronics to speed up data transfer rates that SD cards lack.

Tom’s Hardware has a recent review of the upper end cards that show that the Transcend cards are just as fast effectively as the pricey SanDisk cards. A SanDisk Extreme III 8GB card is $105 from Amazon while the Transcend TS8GCF300 8GB 300x is a little cheaper at $82. The 266X Transcend TS8GCF266 which is rated at 40GB/sec is only $68 from NewEgg.com. Those prices are only true for the day I post this of course.

This could obviously be a major expense if you are upgrading from one of the older model cameras and have a bag full of older cards like I do. I suspect that you might do just fine with 266X cards unless you are doing video captures. Then you probably do want the max speed.

So if you have a pre-Digic 4 camera from Canon then you should be just fine using 133X cards. Even the speed demon Canon 1Ds MkIII only writes at 20 MB/sec and the 1D MkIII is 15 MB/sec. The same is true for older Nikons the D70 and so on. If you have newer models then you may need to buy at least some faster cards for video capture.

If you want maximum transfer speed from the card reader to the computer then you need to be sure that your card reader is UDMA compliant.

29 Mar 2009 Lens Types

Treeline at 200mm
Treeline at 200 mm

New Users Corner

Lens types and terms

There are a confusing number of different lens types available for DSLR cameras along with equally confusing terminology.

  • Zoom lenses
  • Ultra-zoom lenses
  • Prime lenses
  • Macro Lenses
  • Focal Length and aps-c
  • Wide Angle lenses
  • Ultra Wide Angle lenses
  • Telephoto lenses
  • Oddball lenses

Zoom lenses

If you come from the point and shoot camera world then you are familiar with zoom lenses. They are lenses that have a variable focal length range. The kit lens that comes with most DSLR bodies is always a zoom. Often a 18mm to 55mm.

Zooms are versatile lenses and are relative new comers on the photography scene. Twenty five years ago they were rare and expensive. Computer lens design software combined with computer controlled lens grinding equipment has made them ubiquitous. These lenses in the less expensive versions tend to be on the slow side.

Things to watch out for are: does the lens change length when it is zoomed. Lenses with internal focusing do not and are more desirable than the ones which do change length. Does the front of the lens rotate when the lens is focused or the focal length is changed? This can cause problems with certain filters since some, like polarizing filters, need a a certain position to work as you want them to do. That means you have to readjust the filter everytime you focus.

Prime Lenses

treeline at 50mm

Treeline at 50mm

Before there were zooms there were primes. These are lenses with a single fixed focal length. Some people prefer to called these fixed focal length lenses rather than primes.

Prime lenses are often faster, meaning they let more light into the camera. They can be lighter weight than zooms. And they are usually considered to be optically superior in many cases. The sharpest lenses are are almost always primes. This is because the lens design is simplified for a prime lens over a zoom lens which has to physically move lens elements around in the lens barrel as the focal length is changed.

Of course with a prime lens you have to use the two footed zoom, you will need to move closer and further away from the subject with your feet instead of twisting the zoom ring.

Some extremely fast primes are made like the Canon f/1.2 lenses in 50m and 85mm. Canon has even made a 50mm f/1.0 lens. These ultrafast lenses are specialist lenses and tend not to be as sharp as normally fast versions. That f/1.0 lens is four stops faster than a kit lens at f/4 which means that if you shot at 1/25th of a second with the f/4 lens you could have shot the same scene at 1/500th of second with the f/1.0 lens or 1/250th of a second with a f/1.2 lens.

The longest telephoto lenses also are primes. Canon has made a 1200mm f/5.6 lens and the rumor is that they would still make one if someone was willing to pay for it. They do have a 800mm f/5.6 lens currently available as does Sigma. Sigma also has some very long telephoto zoom lenses.

Macro lenses

Macro lenses are one area where you cannot believe what you are told by the manufacturers. Strictly speaking a macro lens is a lens which which can focus down to 1:1. That means the image size on the camera sensor is the exact same size as the real object. Something one centimeter wide at 1:1 will create a one centimeter wide image on the camera sensor.

However manufacturers advertise some of their zoom lenses as being macro lenses. This is always a pure and simple lie. All macro true macro lenses are prime lenses, although I suppose a manufacturer could design a zoom macro, none do so. Besides focusing very closely macro lenses are very sharp as a rule. They are also commonly used as portrait lenses. Primes are commonly made at a f/2.8 aperture which means they are moderately fast lenses.

Owning a macro lens will open a whole new world to you as you can zoom in on bugs, slugs and flowers along with anything else that you fancy shooting. A macro around 100mm in focal length is often recommended as a good starting prime since it will let you get a little further away from the subject than a 50 or 60mm lens will and is lighter and cheaper than the 150mm or 180mm lenses.

Lens Focal Length

What makes a lens a wide angle or a telephoto? The 35mm camera industry has adopted the 50mm lens as the normal or standard lens. There are all sorts of mythology attached to how this came about but the truth of the matter seems to be that Oskar Barnack the designer of the Leica 35mm camera back in the 1930′s seems to have settled on the 50mm as lens on that could be produced for a good price with excellent optical properties.

The normal focal length range for a 35mm format camera extends from about 45mm to 55mm and lenses with less than those focal lengths are known as wide angle lenses. And lenses with greater than those focal lengths are known as telephoto lenses.

Complicating the situation for DSLR cameras is the fact that most DSLR bodies use some form of the aps-c sensor size rather than a full frame 35mm sensor. These are commonly called cropped frame sensors. Olympus uses another even smaller sensor called the four thirds sensor.

Effectively what this means for owners of aps-c cameras is that they need to multiply the stated focal legth of their camera lens by a crop factor to get the effective focal length. Now this doesn’t explain what the real situation is but for everyday use you can think of it that way. So for Canon cameras you would multiply by 1.6 which would mean that a 50mm lens is actually a 80mm lens. No longer a normal lens but now a short telephoto. Nikon uses a 1.5 crop factor making the 50mm lens an effective 75mm and Olympus uses 2X making a 50mm effectively a 100mm lens.

Perhaps a better way to think of the situation is this, imagine you take a photo with a 50mm lens on a full frame camera and print out a 8X12 inch print from the image. If you take a pair of scissors and cut out the center 62.5 percent of the print that would be what the Canon aps-c sensor sees and what you would get in your image file. The percentages for Nikon’s and Olympus’s would vary but the situation is the same. You can see from this where the term crop sensor comes from.

Now this as a practical matter has some consequences for you. Lenses tend to be the sharpest and have the least amount of distortion in the center of the frame. Crop sensors only use that central part of the image and thus make some marginal lenses work better than they would on full frame sensors. That is good. Since you effectively multiply the focal length that 300mm lens is now a 420mm lens. That is good. But what you win on the telephoto end you lose on the wide angle end. That 30mm wide angle is now a 48mm normal lens.

The normal lenses are considered to have about a 45 degree Field of View (FOV) which is the angle that they ‘see’. If you look at that image I placed in the prime lens section, it was taken with a Sigma 50mm f/2.8 Macro lens. Since that lens is effectively a 80mm lens is has a 25 degree or so FOV.  Look at the trees in the center of the skyline, now look at the shot on the top of the post taken with a Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS set at 200mm and the same trees are much larger, the lens FOV is smaller, efectively about 7 degrees. The shot down in the ultra wide section was shot at 11mm with a Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 lens. It has an effective FOV of 100 degrees and the trees are just visible but you get to see a much wider view of the grass flats.

Wide Angle lenses

Traditionally wide angle lenses ran from 40mm down to 28mm or so. With a rare and expensive 24mm occasionally seen. With the crop sensor effect this means that you need a range of 25mm to 16mm or so to give you the same effective  (FOV). And on the Olympus you need 20mm to 14mm.

Wide angle lenses let you take a wider shot of the scene. You can squeeze more people in on a group photo and you can get a wider panorama view of landscapes. Kit lenses (18mm to 55mm) cover a wide angle to short telephoto range.

Ultra Wide Angle Lenses

Treeline at 11mm

Treeline at 11mm

Because of the crop sensor effect a lens that would be considered to be very wide angle on a full frame camera, is not so on a crop sensor body. To get the same FOV on those bodies you need a very wide angle lens, and these are called ultra wide angles. They generally range from 10 to 12mm at their widest end and go up into the 22mm range at the top. A 10mm lens on a crop sensor body give the same FOV as a 16mm on a full frame body.

The Canon system has lenses that are designated as EF-S mount and those lenses protrude into the mirror box of the camera at the back end. The smaller aps-c mirrors clear that end of the lens when the camera shutter fires, but the larger mirror on a full frame body would slam into the lens with disastrous effects. Thus those lenses are designed not to fit on full frame bodies. Lenses with the EF mount fit on all Canon bodies and most canon lenses are EF mount.

Other systems, so far as I know, don’t have this problem. But they still have lenses that are designated for aps-c use only. The lenses will physically work on full frame bodies but they are optically designed for aps-c sized sensors and will not illuminate the full sized sensor. This is called vignetting. The Tokina lens I used above only works at 15-16mm on full frame bodies for example.

These ultrawide angle lenses will produce distortion. This not because the lens is defective it is because you are squashing the very wide angle image onto a flat surface. The distortion can be dealt with in editing software like Photoshop if it bothers you. I rarely bother since I just accept it as a part of the ultra wide lens use.

You can minimize distortion by good camera technique. You need to hold the lens parallel to the ground. Tilting it up or down will increase the perceived distortion.

Fisheye lenses.

The lenses we have been talking about so far in the wide angle category are rectilinear lenses. That is they produce a image that fills the sensor from edge to edge and while they are distorted the distortion is not extreme. There is another type of wide angle lens called a Fisheye that makes no attempt to minimize distortion. They produce round image circles with a LOT of distortion. Julie K has a gallery with some of these shots that you can look at.

Peleng lenses are a cheap way into the fisheye world. I believe they only work in manual mode which probably isn’t a major problem with this type of lens. And you may need an adapter to use it on your camera. Sigma, Canon and Nikon all make higher quality fisheyes.

I’ve never felt attracted to this type of lens and have never owned one. These lenses may not produce a full circle image on aps-c sensors. And there is software called defishing software that attempts to convert the images into rectilinear form.

Telephoto Lenses

Telephoto lenses have focal lengths greater than the normal lens. The provide narrower FOV, all the way down to 2 degrees or so with a 800mm lenses on an aps-c sensor.

Short telephotos are popular as portrait lenses since they tend to have a pleasing perspective. Look at Ken Rockwells site linked above for some of his ideas on the subject.

Longer telephotos are needed for nature and critter photography. Many people think you need at least a 300mm lens for most bird photography and many people use 400mm lenses. Lens prices for prime telephotos tends to skyrocket at the 300-400mm range. A very high quality 300mm f/4L IS lenses runs around $1200 at this time. The 400mm f/5.6 is about the same but doesn’t have IS and is slower too. But the 500mm f/4L IS is $5800. So for most people a 300 or 400mm will be the absolute end of their lens buying possibilities.

Zoom telephotos exist in three types for Canon lenses. There are the cheap low quality lenses sold to new users in the 70-300mm range. These junk consumer grade lenses are slow and have really poor optical quality. I think they lead many new users to give up in frustration since they will blame their inability to duplicate high quality images on their lack of skills when a large part of the problem is the lens that they are using.

There is a perennial argument in photography circles over what is the most important factor in making excellent images. Some people claim that a highly skilled photographer can take great shots using poor equipment. That may be true, tho I have my doubts, but the truth of the matter is that most photographers are not at that level of skill. On the other hand buying expensive gear will not help you make great images if you lack the skills to use it. I know of people who have sunk ten of thousands of dollars into gear and still make mediocre photos.

So in my opinion having equipment that is suited to your skill level is important. Poor equipment matched with not so great skills is going to lead to poor photography.

Canon has an intermediate level of lenses. The Canon 70-300mm f4-5.6 IS lens is a pretty good lens with IS. It runs about $550. For slightly more you can get the very excellent Canon 70-200mm f/4L lens without IS but it is a very sharp lens with very good autofocus speed. It is a good way to get started with L glass. And there is a little known but good quality lens available if you can find a used copy. The Canon 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 EF lens. Not the macro version which is firmly in the junk category. You can often pick up one of these gems for $250 or so from Keh.com. It is sharp and has good autofocus speed. The one defect is that the lens runs out to its longest length when allowed to hang down. A minor irritation.

Again I don’t know enough about Nikon lenses to make recommendations. They have at least two grades of lenses, the consumer grade junk and the excellent top grade. I don’t know if they have a mid grade range of lenses.

Lens Speed

Lens speed is related to the widest aperture of the lens. The lower that number the more light it allows to hit the camera sensor. And that means that you can use it in darker environments. Indoors for example without flash use.

Your kit lens will be a slow lens with an aperture range in the f/3.5-5.6 range. That makes these lenses very hard to use in low light. Happily both Canon and Nikon sell excellent low price 50mm f/1.8 lenses. The Canon runs around $85 and I think the Nikon is slightly more. These lenses are called plastic fantasticks since they have cheap plastic construction but good optics. These lenses will let you do low light photography.

Canon makes a whole series of fast prime lenses starting with the 50mm f/1.8. There is also a better quality 50mm f/1.4. There series continues with the 85mm f/1.8, 100mm f/2, 135mm f/2 and 200mm f/2.8 lenses. The prices start around $300 and get up to $600 when you get to the 200mm lens. These are not L lenses but they have very sharp optics and fast autofocus. And of course they are all ‘fast’ lenses meaning they have a wide maximum aperture. If you can break your reliance on zoom lenses these are an excellent way to expand your lens collection.

Oddball Lenses

Lens manufacturers make all sorts of odd special use lenses. Some portrait photographer like a soft look so Canon makes a 135mm soft focus lens. I’m not sure how much value it has in the era of Photoshop.

There are lenses that produce intentionally distorted images, LensBaby. They make no sense to me but someone is buying them.

There are lenses with swing and tilt adjustments for architectural and product shooters. The Canon TS-E series. These lenses are so important to some photographers that they have switched camera systems so they can use them. Nikon finally came out with one in 2008.

And I’m sure you can find other oddball lenses if you look hard enough.

Summing Up

Well so much for my 1000 word goal, this post is almost 3000 words. A lot of the opinions above are my opinions and there are people who will not agree with them. They can get their own blog I guess, heh. Next up in the New User Corner will be a post on what new users should do next once they have that DSLR in their hands.

I’m planning a post of CF card speed in between tho.








21 Mar 2009 Buying lenses
Killdeer

Killdeer

The New User Corner

Buying a lens

Buying a lens is a serious project, or at least it should be. Camera bodies come and they go after a few years. But a good lens will outlast many bodies. There are plenty of photographers who are still using lenses on their new DSLR that they may have bought back in the 1990′s or even earlier for a film SLR. Thus you should buy the best lens that you can fit into your budget. Waiting until you save money to get a better lens is often better than buying a cheaper low quality lens now.

However there is an active market for used lenses so you can probably sell a less worthy lens for a good fraction of what you originally paid for it. I unwisely bought a Canon 55-200mm lens when I bought my first DSLR ( a Canon 350D and that lens is not the current version with IS). I think I paid a bit over $200 for it and was able to sell it a couple years later for $155 on eBay. So you can correct early lens buying mistakes without a lot of pain.

What do I look at when buying a new lens?

  • Focal Length
  • Lens optical quality
  • Maximum aperture
  • Autofocus speed
  • Build quality
  • Other factors like weight, IS, and noise. And always price.

Focal length

What usually prompts me to start thinking about buying a new lens is when I notice a gap in my lens collection. Or if I feel that one of my current lenses has some blemish on its desirability in my eyes. My last lens purchase was to replace a current lens which I felt had too much flare and ugly hard to edit out flare at that. But I would think that focal length or focal length range in the case of a zoom, would be the most common reason that people decide that they need a new lens.

I have heard from some people who think that they must have a lens that covers every possible millimeter of range from the ultrawide to the long telephoto. I don’t really think that’s true. Right now I have an ultrawide 11-16mm Tokina and the next lens up in my collection is a 50mm prime. I don’t feel any burning desire to cover that gap from 16mm to 50mm. That is what feet are for. You can walk nearer or farther away from a subject and cover the gap without the expense of adding another lens to carry around with you, which will make your camera bag that much heavier too.

Just a note I am going to cover the various lens focal ranges in another post.

Once you have decided on a focal length range it is time to start searching the review sites. Some of the ones I use frequently are:

Fred Miranda’s reviews are all user reviews and as such you have to read them in bulk and not accept any one review as being too important. I always assume that someone who is angry about some product is more likely to get online and write a nasty review than someone who is satisfied is likely to get online and write a favorable review. But that being said, if I see a high number of nasty comments I tend to take them seriously. Fred Miranda seems to have an undeserved bad reputation among Nikon users.

Photodo and Photozone reviews are more technical and are based on actual objective testing. So they will give you an idea of the quality of the lens. Digital Picture is oriented towards the Canon equipment line and has spotty coverage. There are a number of other test sites and using google with the lenses model designation will find more reviews. I also check out the manufacturer’s sites:

I guess a word or two about lens manufacturers is called for here. You first source for lenses is your camera manufacturer. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Pentax, Olympus and others. But third party manufacturers have cracked the camera manufacturer’s codes and produce good lenses. I feel that with the highest grades of lenses from Canon and Nikon those companies are still producing the best lenses. That would be the Canon L grade lenses and the equivalent Nikons. I do not know enough about the other camera manufacturers to comment on their lens quality.

Many of the lens manufacturers provide MTF diagrams on their lenses and look at those can help you judge the lens quality. This is a semi-technical undertaking and the charts were produced by the lens manufacturers so have to be taken with that in mind. The not so technical among us may prefer to skip MTF charts.

Below the top grade lines of lenses the third party companies are in the race with Canon and Nikon producing some very good glass and just like Canon and Nikon producing some junk grade lenses too. You absolutely need to carefully research the lenses you are thinking about buying. No matter who makes them.  They all make bad glass and you don’t want to be stuck with one of those.

The third party companies do have a certain reputation. Sigma has been historically fairly safe to buy from but recently they have been getting a lot of complaints about the quality control of their telephotos. One lens rental company has stopped carrying Sigma glass because of the high level of complaints. This situation may have already turned itself around. Tamron has had a reputation of having poor quality control in the past but may be getting better. Tokina has had the reputation of producing ‘built like a tank’ quality lenses but with less than stellar image quality. They still make well built glass but have produced a number of excellent high quality lenses recently. They have the smallest number of models in their inventory however.

Those comments are just based on my subjective observations and may or may not be true at any particular time. You should form your own opinions. And they are not meant to discourage you from buying from third party manufacturers. I own lenses from Canon, Sigma and Tokina and very much like the ones I have. Tamron just never floated to the top when I was done making my evaluations but they do seem to make some nice consumer grade zooms. I just haven’t been interested in those lens ranges.

All of the companies do have a reputation of taking lenses back and recalibrating them or replacing them fairly promptly. But this should make you want to buy from a vendor with the highest reputation so you’ll have someone else to complain to, if you have a problem.

You can also seek advice from Yahoo groups if you are a member of a list there or from local camera clubs if you are lucky enough to have one near you. The least useful source of information is a camera store or big box store. The salesmen get higher bonuses for selling certain products and are thus likely to push those on unwary buyers. You may be lucky and have a camera salesmen, that you know, who is highly ethical.

Magazines also publish reviews but these have to be read carefully. The magazines live by selling advert space and they are not going to enrage a big advertiser by writing an overtly bad review. But if you read the reviews with this in mind they often drop lots of hints. Phrases like the ‘best that can be expected of a lens in this class‘. Faint praise in other words means it is a piece of junk, stay away from it.

Lens optical quality.

Lens quality and cost are somewhat related. You can expect that a better quality lens will cost more since higher quality and more expensive materials are used to make it. Exotic glasses and difficult to grind lens curves are also more likely to be used. Take a look at this video to see what goes into making a $6400 lens. There are several other videos in the set.

The same review sites above will also give you an idea of the lens quality. Lens contrast is also an important part of the optical quality. Some very expensive lenses have the reputation of producing low contrast images. Lenses can also add slight color casts. Some have a reputation of producing ‘warm’ images for example.

Maximum aperture.

The larger (which actually means the smaller the number is) maximum aperture of the lens is also tied to its price. Faster glass costs more and the lens will be heavier. The Canon 70-200mm f/4L lens costs about $600 while the f/2.8L faster version costs $1200. One extra stop doubles the cost of that lens. It also changes the weight from 1.56 pounds to 2.8 pounds.

Better lenses also have a fixed aperture, those lenses above are always f/4 or f/2.8 no matter what their zoom position is. Cheaper lenses will have variable apertures which generally get slower as the lens is zoomed out. Consumer grade telephotos will often start at f/4 at their low end and as you zoom the lens out they will change aperture up to f/5.6. This makes them more difficult to use in low light situations.

Another linked feature is that better lenses usually have non-rotating elements which means that a filter used on the lens will not rotate when you focus the lens. Cheaper lenses will sometime have rotating elements which means that filter will move and you will have to reset it every time you focus. That is important if you use polarizing or special effect filters.

Autofocus speed.

Autofocus speed is how fast a lens focuses. If you are trying to track a flying bird or a running child you want fast autofocus speed. Again better grade lenses often but not always have faster autofocus speed. Some very expensive lenses are notoriously slow to focus and if that is important to you, then check it out carefully. Macro lenses are one class of lenses which often are not quick to focus but most people feel that is less important in that type of lens.

Build Quality.

Like other features this generally tracks price. Some manufacturers have a better reputation, at least in their better grade of lenses. Canon, Nikon and Tokina make sturdy lenses. But it can vary from model to model so check out the one you are interested in. Sometimes you just accept a cheap build quality to get a good optical lens and a low price. The Canon and Nikon 50mm f/1.8 lenses are examples of this. Plastic construction, good optics, and very low prices make these good buys.

Other factors.

There are a lot of other factors that may influence your decision. Is the lens really noisy, some are. Noisy in this case means loud. Does it have IS (if your camera uses lens based IS). I don’t think IS is all that important in shorter lenses but once you get to 200mm and beyond it gets to be very important. The weight of a lens can be an issue. That Canon 70-200 mm f/2.8 IS version weighs 3.5 pounds. Add that to the Canon 5D mk2 body which weighs 2 pounds and you are holding the equivalent of a 5 pound bag of potatoes up to your eye and hanging it from your neck all day.

How the lens focus and zoom rings work can be an issue. Some lenses un-spool and run out to their longest focal length when they hang down. That can be irritating.

And of course price can be very important. No matter how much that Canon 600mm f/4L seems to be exactly what you need, that $6400 price may keep you (and me) from getting one.

Summing up.

So buying a lens can be a long process. But it is one I usually enjoy. It gives me an excuse to search all of those sites. I usually start out with a general idea what I’m looking for, a ultrawide zoom or a long telephoto for example and narrow the list down to 3 or 4 possibilities. Then I use the review sites to focus in on one or two models. I usually ask on a Canon list or two to get thoughts from people I know.

All this takes months for me. I often make a decision but have to start saving up to get what I want. But it is all worth the effort if you get a great lens that you will still be using 10 years from now.

13 Mar 2009 Urban Night Shooting
Color balanced lighting

Color balanced lighting

Urban and Industrial Night Photography

Shooting in Urban and Industrial sites poses it’s own set of problems.

  • Safety issues
  • Color Balance
  • Access

Safety

The safety issues were discussed in the first post of this series for urban areas. If you are shooting in industrial areas, like the one above or abandoned sites, then those have their own sets of problems. Industrial areas will have high temperatures, steam, electrical dangers, fall hazards, moving equipment and traffic problems. You should never be in these areas unless you are familiar with the dangers, have permission to be there or are escorted.

Shooting at abandoned sites is popular but the dangers there can be real. These sites are not maintained and there can be uncovered pits, fall hazards and the possibility of a wall collapsing and falling on you. There can be enraged security guards and maybe guard dogs to deal with too. You don’t want to end your shooting adventure in a hospital or jail. I would be sure to have someone along with you for backup in case there is a problem.

You can also run into urban outdoorsmen living on these sites who may not welcome the intrusion.

Equipment and Exposures

The equipment you’ll need for this type of shooting is less than for dark environment shots.

  • Tripod
  • Remote release
  • Flashlight with gels
  • Lens Cloth

The equipment is discussed in this post

Exposure durations will most of the time be less than dark areas with the possible exception of abandoned sites. They can be very dark. Just take a guess and watch your histogram. Adjust exposures up or down based on the histogram peak. Too far to the left, add shutter time and if too far to the right then reduce shutter time. ISO should be low, 100 or 200 and try a mid range f/stop like 5.6 or 6.3 to start.

Color Balance Problems

Take a look at the shot above. This site shows at least 5 different types of industrial lighting. Starting at the tower on the left I see blue, orange, green, yellow and white lights. Probably several different types of sodium lights, HID and mercury lamps are present.

I just don’t worry too much about color balance unless it is obnoxious. There is no way you could ever correct that shot above. But I actually like the effect in that shot.

But sometimes, if one light type predominates on the scene, you can tweak the color temperature or use curves to correct the color in post processing.  And sometimes with yellow or orange lighting you will want to do some correction. I don’t try to guess the color temperature and set it on the camera either. I just use automatic white balance and shoot in raw. I do my adjustments in Photoshop and ACR.

Light Painting

This type of shooting is natural for light painting, you can put a gel over the lens of your flashlight and add light and color to the scene.  The traditional way to get gels is to get a sample kit from one of the manufacturers like Rosco. However the manufacturers are not giving out the sample kits like the once did. You can try to request one but it might take some creative form-filling-out skills to succeed.

You can buy gels from B&H and others but you’ll end up with a huge sheet which will be a 100 year supply of that one color. So there is no great solution. Too bad these people don’t sell the sample kits. It would be worth $20 to get a sample kit.

–update– I have a comment that say that B&H does sell the Rosco sample kits for less than $10. I just spent 10 minutes trying to find the sample kit but could not; but Rosco has thousands of different items on sale at B&H so I may have used the wrong search terms.

Finally

Like other night shoots these images will also require a lot of post production. But you can produce wonderful images. So get out and give it a try.

07 Mar 2009 Night Photography Gear

Amusement park ride

Amusement park ride

What do you need?

Lets take a look at what gear you need to do night photography in dark environments. I say dark environments because there is actually another type of night photography: urban and industrial night photography where there may be a lot more ambient light. Like the shot above. I’ll talk about that sort of work in another post. This post is about gear for long exposures, at least 10 seconds up to many minutes.

Safety First

John D Moore has pointed out that we need to first think about safety while engaging in any sort of photography but especially night photography in unfamiliar areas. He has an excellent PDF file available on this subject which you should read.

Gary Crabbe recently took a dive off a 40 foot cliff at midnight and woke up four hours later  much worse for the experience. So be like a boy scout–prepared. Try to look around where you plan to shoot during the day to get an idea of the hazards and the lay of the land. Carry a flashlight when moving around and use it.

Equipment

My basic night photography outfit consists of:

  • A sturdy Tripod
  • A remote release and/or intervalometer
  • At least two flashlights one small and one larger more powerful light
  • Gels and Strobe(s)/Flashes (if you will be doing light painting)
  • A timer, watch(with light) or intervalometer
  • Extra Batteries
  • Something to sit in–ie a folding canvas chair
  • A microfiber lens cloth

Tripods:

Lets look at tripods. You really must have a sturdy tripod, and that means a heavy tripod unless you can pay for one made out of the exotic materials like Carbon Fiber. A lightweight flimsy tripod is worthless and can dump your $1000 camera and $700 lens on the pavement. Carbon Fiber tripods can cost twice as much and don’t seem to me to save that much in weight for the extra cost. But a flimsy tripod will not hold the camera steady for 10 or 20 minute exposures.

A cheaper alternative is Amvona who sells Hong Kong knock offs of Bogen tripods. I got mine from them when they were selling on eBay. It is a copy of the discontinued Bogen 3021 (which was selling for over $200 at the time, I paid $40) and is steady as a rock and very well made. The one problem I had was the feet fell off so I ended up gluing the feet to the legs and have had no trouble since then. You should check eBay to see if they are still selling there.

If you buy an Amvona I would not buy the tripod head from them, especially not the pistol grip looking one. I cannot comment on the newer ones they now have. The quick release failed, on my copy of that, and dropped my 350D and Sigma 15-30mm five feet onto a rock ledge.

Make sure you get a set of legs long enough for your height. legs that only open to 58 inches will not be much use if you are six foot two. The tripod needs to be able to support the weight of the camera and the heaviest lens, I think you want one the supports 9 or 10 pounds minimum.

Most tripods in this class will have leg spikes that can be extended to dig into the ground if you are on soil and not pavement. And some will have a hook at the end of the center post, that you can hang a weight from, to make them even more rigid. The extra weight would mostly be of use in windy conditions or if you had the tripod set up in an unstable position.

Tripod heads:

I’m not going to say much about heads. A good one is better than a cheap one. But they can get very pricey. I have an Acratech head and very much like it but my wife was taken aback when I wanted a $275 tripod head for Christmas. Really Right Stuff also makes excellent heads. I’m sure new users are saying you paid how much for a ballhead!? But a good one will help your photography and will lock the camera in an immovable position thru these long exposures. Manfrotto-Bogen make fairly good heads that cost a lot less. the Acratech and RRS are mid-priced heads not expensive ones, hard tho that may be to believe.

Remote releases, intervalometers and timers

To shoot one of these long exposure shots you need to lock down the shutter for the length of the exposure. You put the camera in Manual mode(M) and select Bulb (B) as the exposure duration. B holds the shutter open as long as the button is held in by your finger or by a locking remote control. You cannot hold the shutter button down for long periods without jarring the camera so some sort of remote control is needed.

You can get a remote release either as a wired version or a wireless radio type that has a receiver that plugs into the camera and a transmitter that you can trigger from a distance. There are infra-red triggers but you need to be in front of the camera to use them and they are reportedly of doubtful reliability. You can buy a remote from your camera manufacturer or use a third party version. Those seem to work well enough and are a fraction of the cost. Be sure to get a locking remote because your finger will get mighty tired holding that button down.

You can even make a remote. That link is for the Canon XXX series (350D, 400D ect.) but you can probably use Google to find a version for your camera body. The eBay remotes are so cheap that it hardy seems to make sense to make one. I’m not going to put up a link for those since it would probably go bad in a short time. One word of warning, Canon XXXD series cameras do not use the same plug on remotes as the XXD (30D, 40D ect). So be sure to get one that works on your model.

If you have a plain remote you will need some way to watch the time; either a watch with a light or some other timer. People are using small kitchen timers with a light. You can pick up one for less than $15.

The best way to do this is to buy an intervalometer, that is a remote that has a built in timer. You can set a single time or even set a series of shots with a duration and interval that you set. Again manufacturer and third party versions are available. Most intervalometers work as remote releases too so you won’t need both.

Flashlights, strobes and gels

I carry a couple of flashlights with me. A small led light for looking at the camera settings. And a bigger three cell led with 150 lumen output that is so bright you cannot look at the light. That is for light painting. The gels are to change the color of the light. We will get to light painting in another post. The big light is also good for picking your path in the dark.

Flashes or strobes can be used for light painting too.

Batteries and chairs

Your camera will eat batteries in very short times when you are doing long exposures. The camera uses power to hold the shutter open and I’d guess that my cameras have 60-90 minutes of shutter time in a fresh battery. That somewhat depends on the camera temperature. But 60 minutes means that 6 10 minute exposures will drain your battery. So carry extras. It is discouraging to have the light change from OK to absolutely wonderful and have your battery die.

The chair is somewhere to plant your body in while you wait for those 10 minutes to creep by (actually 20 minutes). I carry one of those ubiquitous folding canvas chairs that can be had for $12 or so.

Lastly carry a lens cloth and keep an eye on your lens. Night conditions are often damp conditions and your lens can fog up. And it’s no fun to get home and find a lot of photos that look like they were taken thru a shower curtain.

Well I see my word count is up over 1200 and I promised to keep these posts reasonably short so we will talk about actually taking night shots next time.

03 Mar 2009 Comparing Brands
 |  Category: Photo gear  | Tags: , , , , , ,  | One Comment

Rainstorm

Rainstorm

Taking a look at the different systems

The two biggest companies in the business of making Digital Single Lens Reflex (DSLR) cameras are Canon and Nikon. Between them they control something around 85% of the market. The smaller actors are Sony, Pentax and Olympus and the tiny actors are Sigma and Fuji.

Not only are Canon and Nikon the companies with the biggest market share but they are the two companies that have been making DSLR bodies the longest. They have more lenses and accessories available for their equipment than any of the rest. Pentax was a very important company in the Film SLR market. They introduced the first popular SLR camera many years ago. But they failed to get involved in the change to digital until recently. Olympus made film SLR cameras but also is a late comer to the digital world and they also made a very foolish decision when they move to digital. They have locked themselves into a smaller sensor size than the other companies. The use the 4/3rds system which is a half sized sensor.

Sony has made sensors for the Nikon bodies for years but has recently decided to jump into the DSLR market themselves. The top of the line Sony is getting very good reviews.

Lenses

Let’s take a look at what is available in the lens market for the various brands. This will include the manufacturers own lenses and the main third party lens manufacturer’s offerings (Sigma, Tamron and Tokina).

Canon Nikon Sony Pentax Olympus
Manufacturer’s lenses 62 52 21 25 22
Sigma 44 44 33 34 12
Tamron 21 21 15 10 0
Tokina 8 8 0 0 0
Total 135 125 69 69 34

This is not an exhaustively researched table and could well be off a bit.

Canon and Nikon are more or less tied but the others lag far behind. Canon produces about 5 or 6 new lenses a year and they have much more money and a larger staff than the smaller companies. How many years would it take for Pentax or Sony to catch up with Canon and Nikon at the rate of 4 or 5 lenses a year.

Flashes

Looking at available flashes, flashes that fully support the camera electronics and exposure control:

Canon

Nikon

Sony

Pentax

Olympus

Manufacturers own

6

8

5

4

4

Other brand units

26

33

5

11

8

TOTAL

32

41

10

15

12

We see the same story. Nikon does a little better than Canon, but all of the others are left in the dust. Again this is a quick reference table from the manufacturer’s websites and B&H. So errors are possible. Sony hotshoes use the old Minolta style that is incompatible with almost all other flashes.

Macros come in different focal lengths, generally running from 50mm to 200mm. The shorter lenses are lighter and cheaper but have a short 1:1 focus distance which makes doing bugs difficult since they fly off. Longer lenses are expensive and heavy but have a longer focus distance. Looking at some popular lenses, let’s see what the availability is for different brands.

Brand

Canon

Nikon

Sony

Pentax

Olympus

Number of macro lenses

5

4

2

2

2

Only the manufacturers own lenses are counted. Sony, Pentax and Olympus only have short macros. One of the Canon lenses is a super macro.

Another common lens used by bird photographers especially is  a 300mm lens. These come in two apertures f/4 which is cheaper and lighter and f/2.8 heavier and a lot pricier. Again looking at what the manufacturers offer:

Brand Canon Nikon Sony Pentax Olympus
300mm f/4 $1210 $1124 None $1170 None
300mm f/2.8 $4100 $4500 $6000 None $5900

Again Nikon and Canon have the better selection and prices as low of much lower than the other three. The Canon and Nikon lenses have Image Stabilization the others do not.

I just randomly spot checked some of the more popular lenses. I didn’t try to look at consumer grade lenses, I’m sure they all have plenty of 70-300mm and 18-200mm type junk lenses.

Image Stabilization

This is the last subject I’ll look at in my biased overview. Canon and Nikon have both settled on in-the-lens stabilization. The other three have in-the-body stabilization. While at first glance it might seem to be better to have stabilization in the body, that does not turn out to be true for lenses where you really need stabilization.

The reason for that is that the body stabilization can only work on short lenses because these systems work by moving the image sensor to compensate for lens movement. The longer the lens the longer the distance the sensor has to move and once you get beyond 100mm or so the sensor cannot move far enough to compensate for lens movement.

The in lens system works by moving elements inside the lens. Thus each lens is optimized for it’s focal length. Canon has an explanation here. Bob Atkins has a general overview here.

Another benefit of the lens stabilization is that you can see the stabilized image in the viewfinder, not the case with the in-body IS. Of course Canon and Nikon have a big investment in IS lenses so that comes into the calculation too.

The truth of the matter is that you don’t really need IS on short lenses. Most people can handhold a 18mm lens down to 1/20th of a second or so. But those long lenses are heavy and hard to hold and they really need IS.

So What?

So what does this mean? When you buy into a DSLR system you are not just buying a camera body. For example, I have one good camera body and one old one. Say they are worth $1400, more or less, right now. I have 6 lenses, a 1.4X extender and some extension tubes. Total value around $4000. (Darn my wife better not read this). So switching to a new body would be fairly painful, but replacing all those lenses  would be impossible. And unlike a lot of other photographers I do not have a lot invested in dedicated flash units. So a serious photographer can easily have four to six times the cost of the bodies he has, tied up in other gear.

So buying into a system, where you soon hit a wall when you want to add a new item that you just have to have, can cause real pain. If that item doesn’t exist for your system. I just listed flashes and lenses above but there are many other system accessories. Wireless triggers, remote controls, intervalometers, focus screens, vertical grips, wireless transmitters and the list goes on and on.

I mentioned the Sony non-standard flash above.I know one budding photographer who found herself unable to use studio flashes with her new Sony camera. She had to sell it at a loss and buy a different brand.

Think!

So think long and hard about buying into one of the lesser brands if you have the least idea that you will get serious about photography. Yes some of the cameras are decent, and maybe some of the lenses. But overall the systems are not. If you are sure that you won’t ever want to expand what you have, then buy whatever you fancy.

—UPDATE —

Roger Clark suggested that I should point out that Canon has prime lenses in 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 800 and maybe 1200mm (rumored to be available if you will pay them to make one) and Nikon has 200, 300, 400, 500 and 600mm primes. Sony, Pentax and Olympus all have no prime lenses longer than 300mm. This is important for bird, wildlife (think of that African safari you always wanted to go on) and sports/action shooters as well as photojournalists. They all want and use long prime lenses.

Canon also has a couple of very fast f/1.2 lenses and you can even occasionally pick up a 50mm f/1.0 (used only, since they are out of production). These are popular with wedding shooters who shoot in dark rooms using available light.

—Another Update—

The final step in buying a camera is to go to a shop that has the models you are looking at and try how they feel in your hands. People often have love at first touch with a certain model. And these cameras are quite different in how they sit in your hands. The lower grade models are on the small sized end and may be too small for someone with big hands. But other models may be too big for someone with small hands. The control layouts are also different. How it feels to you is a major consideration.

01 Mar 2009 The Defects of Point and Shoot Cameras
White Egret

White Egret

What is the problem with Point & Shoots?

Point and Shoot cameras (P&S) have a number of defects and many of them can be traced to the small sensor size in the bodies. A DSLR sensor is about the size of a large postage stamp but P&S sensors are the size of a fingernail. Those tiny sensors have just as many pixels squeezed onto them as the larger DSLR sensors have. That means the pixels are tiny and very close together. Sean McHugh explains this in more detail. Roger Clark goes into great technical detail about this issue on his website. Some of the problems caused by these small sensors:

  • High apparent noise level and diminished ISO
  • Loss of Depth of Field Control
  • Decreased dynamic range

The high noise apparent noise (see below for a comment from Roger Clark) level of these small sensors mean that even tho the camera manufacturers may show higher ISO values in the camera controls those high ISO values are unusable.
Depth of Field (DOF) is how photographers control the zone of sharp focus in an image. It is one of most important creative factors that photographer use to control what the viewers see. A photographer can show a person in sharp focus but throw everything behind that person out of focus and thus concentrate the viewer’s attention on the subject and not the background. And because of the physics of small sensors and the lenses that they use on those cameras you are unable to control DOF. Everything in the image will be in focus, period.

(Note on this: see below for a comment from Roger Clark)

You can see this for yourself by playing with this calculator. For example at 55mm and at f/4 a Canon DSLR has a zone of focus of 1.1 feet at a distance of 10 feet. A Nikon Coolpix P90 has an infinite zone of focus. When you use this calculator you need the real focal length of your camera’s lens not the 35mm equivalent. Usually dividing the shown focal length by 8 or 10 will get you in the ball park. So a P&S that show 60mm is probably actually around 6 or 7 mm in reality.

The dynamic range (DR) of an image is how much difference exists between the deepest blacks and the brightest whites that the image will show. DSLR cameras with 14 bit processors will have a distinctly higher DR at low ISO and will maintain higher DR all the way thru their usable ISO range. P&S cameras start of with lower DR at low ISO and this drops rapidly as the ISO is increased.

Other defects

Some other defects of P&S cameras are:

  • They limit the user to jpeg files
  • They have small memory buffers
  • They use a slow focusing mechanism for the lens
  • The camera processors are slow
  • They have long shutter delays
  • They use up batteries quickly

DSLR cameras can use raw format for the image files. These raw files have many advantages. Too many to go into here but they are a vast benefit to serious photographers. Michael Reichmann’s Luminous Landscape has a good article on the subject. There were a few P&S cameras that allowed the use of raw format but manufacturers have mostly eliminated that feature on most of them. The only apparent reason would be to drive people to buy a DSLR to get raw. P&S cameras all capture the image in raw but convert the raw images to jpeg before you can get to the file.

There are actually people who hack the firmware on cameras to add raw capability and I notice there is a list on Yahoo devoted to that subject. I have been a bit perplexed by those hackers since I don’t know what you could do with a P&S raw file. Raw files are not images, they are the actual data that the camera sensor captured. A raw file converter takes that file and converts it to a real image. But no commercial converter software will take any of those P&S raw files.

A memory buffer is where the camera stores the file until it is fully written to the flash card. DSLR can often hold 20 or more images in a buffer but P&S are lucky to hold a couple of files.

DSLR cameras use a lens focus method that depends on the camera having a mirror, called phase detection, P&S cameras have no mirror and are stuck with a much slower method called contrast detection.

DSLR cameras use a fast processor, sometimes involving dual processors that are much more powerful that the microbrains used in P&S cameras. And of course they can make use of the much greater amount of memory in the camera.

All the points above are the cause of one of the major points of irritation on P&S cameras. The very long period of time that elapses between the time the shutter button is pressed and the camera actually takes a photograph. On some of the worst examples this can be one full second. And by the time the camera actually makes a photograph that special thing that junior was doing is only a memory. This is called shutter lag.

The shutter lag on DSLR bodies is usually around 0.05 seconds or so. Pressing the shutter button most of the time fires the shutter instantly. This comes from the fast focusing lens, the fast processor and for multiple shots the big buffer. Current DSLR cameras can shoot somewhere between three and ten shots every second. And keep that up until 20 or more shots have been captured. Something between a half of a second and one and a half seconds to capture five shots. A P&S takes between six seconds and 25 seconds to capture 5 shots.

And last thing I’ll mention is the incredible way P&S cameras eat batteries. A DSLR will be able to take thousands of shots on one battery charge. The batteries last for days or weeks depending on how many shots you take. My sons Canon G series camera uses the same type of battery as my Canon 40D and he is using the battery charger all the time. The 40D body is much larger than the G and the lenses are vastly larger and heavier and move faster but the batteries last much longer.  I doubt he can get 200 shots on a charge. And that camera is no different than other point and shoots in that respect. I don’t know why it is, perhaps running the LCD kills the battery. But they go fast.

Should most users move to DSLRs?

In my opinion and despite all the advantages of a DSLR, I think the answer is no. DSLRs are darned hard to use, the manuals are thick and you cannot ignore what is in them. Manufacturers add all sorts of ‘shooting modes’ to the lower end DSLRs to try to pretend that these are super P&S cameras but they are not. And many people who buy them expecting that they can continue their point and shoot practices are soon unhappy with their new and expensive DSLR.

I often hear complaints by new DSLR owners that their cameras are producing ‘bad’ images. Well the images are fine but the DSLR user has to understand how to make good images, he has to do a lot more thinking and has to understand photographic technique. Plus most DSLR images need post processing, you have to learn how to use Photoshop Elements or even Photoshop (there are a lot of other software packages out there) to make great photographs.

And obvious solution to the problem of people wanting something better than a P&S and the complexity of DSLRs would be a automated camera with a large aps-c sized sensors and LCD focusing. People have been calling for this type of camera for years. But no manufacturer will make one. It is a mystery, perhaps DSLR manufacturers do not want to introduce a model that would compete with their DSLRs. But there are camera companies that do not make DSLRs or if they do sell darned few of them. Why don’t they produce such a model?

If you are serious about being a better photographer, then of course a DSLR is the only way to go in their price range right now. But be prepared to work hard to master the camera, read the manual, buy a book or two and shoot a few 1000 shots before you begin to get a good feel for using the camera. Having a background in film SLR cameras will make the switch easier but it will still be difficult.

Next up: comparing DSLR systems

—UPDATE—

Roger Clark has this comment:

“The correct way to put this is that the small sensors actually have LESS noise
at all levels, from shadows to highlights.  The problem is that the small pixels collect so little light that they have very LOW SIGNAL.  The factor that we see in images is not absolute noise but signal-to-noise ratio.  So the small pixel cameras have low signal-to-noise ratio at all levels from shadows to highlights compared to the larger pixel DSLRs.”

use that link to his site above to get a much fuller discussion of this.

28 Feb 2009 So you want to buy a camera
Woman Fisher

Woman Fisher

Buying a more capable camera

If you are using a point and shoot (P&S) camera by which I mean any camera that uses the LCD panel on the back as the primary method of focusing and composing, and are feeling constrained then this post is for you. Cameras that you might come across fall into several types:

Camera types:

There are actually large format, viewfinder type digitals available but I assume no one reading this has a hundred thousand or so to buy a camera with. The prices of these cameras runs from $100 or less for P&S, $500 to $8000 for DSLR, $1000 to $7000 for Digital RF and somewhere over $15000 for a MF Digital body without a lens.There are still film cameras out in the wild and they can be found in each of the types above. And there are vendors that sell used cameras in good condition. You can pick up a DSLR for $300 or so from them.

My primary experience is with P&S and DSLR so I’m not going to talk about the rest of the types. I have owned a series of P&S cameras starting with a Canon A40 and ending at a Canon A95. Prior to owning those cameras I had owned a number of film SLR cameras, Exacta and Minolta bodies. I had a darkroom set up and did my own B&W prints and tinkered with a color system.

The problems with P&S cameras

I had stopped taking photos for well over a decade when I bought my first P&S. I enjoyed those cameras, but by the time I got to the A95 the charm started wearing off. What finally made me decide to make the move to a DSLR was a very frustrating series of shots I took out in the desert at Kodachrome State Park in Utah. My daughter and I spent an hour trying to get a good close up shot of a single flower in the middle of a desolate plain. I could not force the A95 to focus on what I wanted it to focus on. And since we live in Florida I don’t get the opportunity to go the Kodachrome State Park when I would like to.

The Canon A series of cameras is actually very capable for a P&S camera. It has manual controls and Aperture and Shutter priority modes. It theoretically has a manual focus mode but it was worthless. Basically it, just like every other P&S camera cuts the photographer off from full control of the photographic process.

Photographic control

The photographic process amounts to controlling the amount of light that reaches the camera film or sensor in our case. We control that by changing:

Aperture is the opening inside the lens, called a diaphragm, that lets light pass thru the lens. The more the diaphragm is open the more light gets to the sensor. Shutter speed is how long the shutter remains open to let light get to the sensor. And I like to think of ISO like the volume control knob on your stereo system. The more your turn that knob the louder the sound gets, but at some point the sound begins to get noisy with hissing and squeals. The more expensive your stereo is, the louder you can play it without distortion.

Briefly speaking point and shoot cameras have a limited aperture control. Often you will see them with a control range of f/2.5 to f/4 or so while a DSLR will generally run from f/2.8 to f/22. That depends on the lens and you may be confused by the f/stop terminology but just note how much wider it is on the DSLR right now.

P&S cameras will often have a limited shutter speed range, maybe from 1 second to 1/1000th a second. DSLR cameras are unlimited on the slow end but have a setting at 30 seconds and normally run up to at least 1/3000th of a second.

And P&S cameras have a very limited ISO range. Many are only usable at ISO 100 or 200 while DSLR cameras are currently usable up to ISO 3200. The P&S may have higher ISO settings shown but they are rarely usable since the images would be terribly noisy.

So that is enough for one post, I’ll continue this with more details on the next post.