When the sun goes behind the clouds, many photographers pack away their cameras. But there is no bad light if only one finds a subject to match. Soft light is perfect for landscape photography during an overcast day or after sunset looking east (which implies shooting at “sunset point” in the morning*). Soft light is also beautiful for portraits, except perhaps for very rugged men.
I have recently abandoned digital photography and will sell all my digital cameras. Andreas Gurski shoots film and earns millions, so there must be convincing arguments.
1959 Chevrolet Impala, La Habana Centro. Nikon Z7, Z 24-70 f/4 @ 24 mm. Distortion correction with the generic profile in ON1. Nothing is really straight in Havana, but it is not that warped.
The word badass has both negative and positive connotations, unlike the separate words bad and ass suggest. The positive meaning describes something impressive, admirable, and cool. The negative meaning refers to something frightening and tough.
The tail fins on the 1959 Chevrolet Impala (here in La Habana Centro) are badass. Fins started to appear on American cars in the early 1950s and peaked at the end of that decade. The pinnacle is the 1959 Cadillac Eldorado Seville. The fins supported the concept of design obsolescence; although quite technically similar, the cars and their fins grew bigger every year, so that customers could clearly see the difference between the models.
The geometric-distortion aberrations* of the Nikon 24-70 f/4 S for the Z6 and Z7 mirrorless cameras are definitely badass, whether or not they are a matter of concern will be the subject of this post.
My Laotian photo model: Nikon Z7 with 24-70 f/4 @ 70 mm, f/5.6
I thought long and hard about the title of this blog, which is a record of my first impressions with the Nikon Z7 kit, including the FTZ adapter and the Z 24-70 f/4 lens. The title shall not suggest that the Z7 is a bad camera, far from it.
The internet is already flooded with hands-on VLOGs from paid-for press events, unboxing videos, and full reviews of the Z7 image quality, although the only available software yet to digest the Z7 RAW files are ACR and Nikon NX-D. But as long as we cannot look behind the curtain and check the amount of in-camera cooking of the RAW and JPEG files, and there is no way to calibrate the color, it makes no sense to post 100% crops of sample images. And I can’t really call this a review.
Under a far too bright sun (from a photographer’s point of view), the classic car competition “Concours d’Elegance Suisse” at the Château de Coppet attracted 85 historic cars classified in 15 categories, all defined by a Jury that is also involved in the Concorso d’Eleganza Villa d’Este in Italy and the Pebble Beach Competition in the USA.
While the 60th anniversary of the legendary Aston Martin DB4 and the Ferrari 250 GT Coupe Pininfarina were celebrated by two dedicated classes, the exhibition also included gems such as the Hispano Suiza H6B, Delage D8-120, Bugatti Type 57 S, and the Mercedes-Benz 500K, among others.
This event was a good occasion to bring out my new Nikon D850. Shiny cars in the bright sun are indeed a torture test for the camera’s dynamic range. Judged in many reviews as perhaps the best (last) DSLR on the market, it is surprising that the D850 is still not on stock everywhere. And with the recent QA problems, I had to wait until I could test the flange and sensor alignment in the shop – before pulling out the credit card.
On a recent trip to the colonial cities around Mexico City and on the Yucatan peninsula, I was blown away by the colors in the cities and villages. In Europe, nobody would paint a house in saturated pink, blue, or orange, and in most places, this is even forbidden*.
Mexican culture, in general, is bursting with color, from vivid-colored textiles and folk art to buildings in a large color palette. But it wouldn’t fit if I simply posted some colorful images of a recent trip. There is almost always a technical aspect to discuss. This time, it’s the oversaturated colors due to wrong camera calibration and/or RAW converters serving the demand for vivid-looking images.
Pantheon, Paris, France
Getting rid of digital noise in a single picture often leads to a loss of image detail. Noise is traded against smudge. On the other hand, astronomers have long been using computational imaging techniques for low-noise photography. What distinguishes the approaches in this area, versus techniques used on a single exposure, is the fact that adding and averaging data reduces noise without giving up on image detail.
Fuji GFX 50S. Quite compact for its sensor size, but still best mounted on a sturdy tripod.
Regular readers of this blog will know that I am lusting for larger formats. This is, of course, a matter of personal preference that results from my established shooting style and two Linhof view cameras waiting for a second life. In the film days the situation was easy; bigger was better. But in the digital world not everything scales with log2.
I could have created click bait by reviewing the hyped-up Hasselblad (X1D) and Fujifilm (GFX 50S) earlier, but wanted to wait until the initial bugs in the firmware are sorted out and Lightroom and/or CaptureOne support the RAW files. Now it’s about time to have a closer look because there is a new option: the 45 mega-pixel, Nikon D850 that is supposedly a leap further in almost all respects.
The question is if I would supplement my workhorse Nikon D810 with the D850 or replace it with a medium format system. There must be compelling reasons for a switch though; most importantly, an expanded shooting envelope in terms of handling and reliability (mainly high ISO capabilities and image stabilization), and image quality (resolution, dynamic range, and tonal separation).
Look at prints, not megapixels.
The truth is in the print; what looks good on the screen doesn’t necessary hold in print (and vice versa). Having gone through the first set of cartridges and pile of paper, I am glad that I haven’t deleted my original files. In a number of cases I had to return to the RAW files and process them with adjusted settings. Let me explain:
Size matters; but not as much as you may think.
If all your equipment were stolen, the insurance settlement was generous, and you had to start all over, what would you procure? This question is actually not too academic, because it happened to a friend who had bought my Nikon D800e with the 70-200 f/2.8 VR-II as well as some other bits and pieces. All bygone.
What is the best all-purpose camera in 2017, with the right balance of image quality, versatility and handling? One may argue that instead of learning to handle a new camera, it’s better to go out and shoot. And this is why I wouldn’t be tempted to change systems, unless this enlarged considerably the shooting envelope on grounds of resolution, dynamic range, high-ISO performance, and image stabilization. But if everything was stolen?
Look at images, not megapixels.
This series of posts will be on getting serious (I hope) about fine-art printing. In the film days I didn’t bother developing and printing myself; first I didn’t have the space for a darkroom and then I was reluctant to deal with the chemicals. But more importantly, there were plenty of overnight development labs in town and professional print makers that had a certain affinity to art. Color rendition wasn’t really an issue to discuss over a 4×5 slide on a color corrected light table. And I had a lot of prints done, as they were the only way to enjoy images, except perhaps for 6×6 slide projections.
Iquacu falls. Fuji Velvia 50, f/32, 2 seconds. No ND filter needed.
Neutral density (ND) filters reduce the amount of light that enters the lens. ND filters are often used to achieve motion-blur effects with slow shutter speeds, blurring water or cloud motion, reducing depth of field in very bright light (when 1/4000 or 1/8000 of a second is not short enough for the large aperture), or to reduce the visibility of moving persons.
Christmas Tree Bokeh; Nikon Coolpix A, f/2.8
In photography, bokeh* is the rendering of the blur produced by a lens in the out-of-focus parts of an image and is thus affected by the aperture, iris-blade construction, lens design (aberrations), and diffraction (Airy diffraction patterns). Photographing point-like sources of light such as Christmas-tree illumination is the best way to check the quality of bokeh, i.e., uneven or sharp luminance transitions, ni-sen (Japanese for double lines), irregular textures, and color fringes.
But there is no general consensus of what good or bad bokeh is. If you like it, it’s good, if you don’t like it, it’s bad. The same with Christmas celebrations, gifts and cakes. Some don’t like it at all. But if you had it, it might as well be smooth, round, and creamy rather than nervous, polygonal, and harsh.
And remember; to optimise bokeh keep reducing the distance between yourself and the subject while increasing the distance between the subject and the background.
In this sense, have a bokehlitious Christmas. SR
*The word bokeh is derived from a Japanese word, which means something like “fuzzy” and is used to describe, among other things, the “flavour” of out-of-focus areas in photographs; “boke-aji.” Mike Johnston, Editor-in-Chief of PHOTO Techniques magazine from 1994-2000 and now running the website “The Online Photographer”, added the “h” because English speakers would mispronounce boke like “joke”, instead of the “bo” as in bone, “ke” as in Kevin, and with equal weight on each syllable.
Focus stack from 19 images. Automated capture using Helicon Remote and post-processed with Helicon Focus.
Now as part 1 of this post has had time to settle, let’s press on. Focus stacking is one of the techniques know as Computational Photography, which include panorama stitch, high-resolution sensor shift, multi-exposure HDR, and light field. All these techniques involve multiple images that are blended in post-processing to a new type of single image or scene representation; opposite to techniques in digital photography that work on a single capture, such as filtering and color adjustments.
These techniques may promt the question about ethics in photography. I have absolutely no problem with time-lapsing out people, for example. Over-saturation and over-sharpening, or turning the colors of a lake in Scotland to those of the waters at Anse La Digue is another matter. And nobody would consider the surrealistic photo-illustrations of David LaChapelle as dishonest work, while this is exactly what Steve McCurry, or his now fired assistant, are accused of producing. In my opinion the problem lies not in the image itself, but its incoherent caption and the false message that the image is supposed to support. But I am digressing.
Focus stacking is particularly useful in situations where the scene has a large range of depths in the subject space compared to the shallow depth of field obtained for a given sensor size, focal length, and aperture combination. It will also be a way to make sense of the future FF sensors with 50+ megapixels, where diffraction will counteract the increase of accuaty by stopping down and compromise image quality for depth of field. Moreover, focus stacking can be useful to reduce noise in astrophotography. So there is nothing dishonest here; it is an attempt to optimize the conflicting elements of image quality: noise, diffraction, lens-aberations, and depts-of-field.
There is, of course, the alternative of using tilt-shift lenses, but this is constrained to inclined focal planes (continuous depth maps), for example in landscape photography. The subject of the image below would also qualify.
My target for testing lens alignment. Almost a nice image in the autumn fog.
A year without new gear hasn’t been really successful. And although we have seen a lot of new equipment this year, there was nothing to merit a complete system change (to the Sony mirrorless or the Pentax 645, for example).
After the disappointing test of the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 VR, I thus treated myself to a Zeiss Distagon T* 25 mm f/2.0. Great deals can be had on these “classic line” Zeiss lenses, because they will be replaced by the Milvus lenses. The Milvus 50 f/1.4 and 85 f/1.4 are new designs, while the others are basically avatars in an Otus gestalt.
The public library in Stuttgart, Germany. All you need to test corner to corner sharpness, lateral and longitudinal chromatic aberrations, flat field, out-of-focus rendering, and geometric distortions
I love my holy trinity of Nikon f/2.8 zoom lenses covering a total range of 14-200 mm focal length. The mid-range zoom AF-S 24-70 mm f/2.8G ED N (short G-version) has become my workhorse and go-to lens with its most versatile zoom range; from wide-angle landscapes and panoramas, to portraits and events. Not that it is lightweight, but the built quality is excellent, the out-of-focus areas are smooth, and there are very little chromatic aberrations along the entire zoom range and at all apertures. The lens snaps into focus instantly and silently and it never hunts, even in most challenging lighting conditions.
Zeiss Otus 85 f/1.4 Apo Planar shootout. 100% crops, click to enlarge. From left to right: f/1.4, f/2.8, f/5.6. Top: Nikon PC-E 85 mm. Middle: Otus 85. Bottom: Nikon 85 f/1.4 G.
Yesterday I picked up some accessories at Euro-Photo Puig in Geneva, where they had on stock a Zeiss Otus 85 mm f/1.4 Apo Planar T*. This is a mouthful of a name, so I call it Otus 85 from now on. I had the opportunity to take a couple of sample images, however, not out the store’s door as originally planned. It had started snowing, which rendered the scene useless as test for sharpness and micro-contrast. So what else is there to photograph inside a photo store than a nice vintage camera?
From left to right: Nikon AF-S 70-200 f/2.8 G ED VR II, Nikon AF-S 85 f/1.8 G, Nikon PC-E 85 f/2.8 Micro, Hasselblad Zeiss CF 80 f/2.8 Planar T* mounted on a Photodiox adapter.
Fighting hard against GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome), I still have four ways to arrive at 85 mm focal length. I may therefore check out some widespread myths about lenses: 1) Prime lenses are better than zooms. 2) Vintage lenses are ill suited for digital sensors because they are not telecentric, that is, the ray angles at the edges of the sensor exceed the acceptance angle of the microlenses, which results in reduction of color saturation, and color fringes. 3) The 35 mm lenses have a better resolution than medium and large-format lenses, simply because they need to cover only a smaller caputure area and can therefore be made from more expensive glass.
The contestants
I hated the Nikon AFS 70-200 f/2.8 and the Canon equivalent, because having set up my large format camera, I was more than once harassed by photographers carrying these lenses. Considering their form factor it does not need much to imagine what some guys are compensating for.