Upcoming Celestial Events

There's an annular eclipse coming up in May, and Venus will transit in front of the Sun in June.  The transit in particular is of some interest, since the planet will not make the transit again for over 100 years.  Hopefully I'll be dead when that happens.  While I didn't set out to do astrophotography when I bought my camera, I'm considering picking up a solar filter and a teleconverter (probably a TC-300 to mate to the 400mm—turning it into a 1200mm- f/11-equivalent lens on my d7000) to try to capture both events.  I'll probably do some tests on the Moon if I make the purchases.  I'm also considering extension tubes, which could have some interesting effects on the 400 as well, particularly in macro ranges.

Developing Negatives Digitally

This past Christmas, my siblings gifted me a gently-used Nikkor 55mm f/3.5 AI Micro lens.  I have been wanting to fool around with a macro lens for awhile, but especially for the purpose of developing old negatives.  I visited Costa Rica in 1997 and Germany in 1999, back before I'd even thought about digital capture, and while I doubt I got much in the way of good pictures, digitizing the film seems like a fun project.

My parents also have some old slides (what a trip through the way-back machine that's been!) that I figured I could digitize as well.  My father was a photographer in his own right back in the day, and he lent me his lightbox to play around with.  I have to see if I can get his old bellows to work with the lens (that would be a minor coup), but if so, I should be able to make some pretty solid prints.

My experience with Walmart's digital scans is pretty poor.  They have a nice Fuji process for printing (which I prefer to Kodak's), but their scans are barely 1.5 megapixels and lack any sort of quality.  While I can and have doctored the images in the Gimp, it's really not nearly as good as you can produce with a suitable negative development workflow.

Focal Length and Compression

It's been awhile since I've been writing here.  This isn't because I haven't taken any pictures—it's because I have little time in my personal life to write much of anything, to say nothing of a photography blog.

However, I recently acquired a Nikkor 400mm f/5.6 AI-S and 85mm f/1.8 (AI'd).  Manual focus isn't everyone's thing, but I have enjoyed it a fair amount, and these are focal lengths of some interest to me, and help to illustrate how the longer focal length tends to "compress" a scene.

Here's a picture from the 85:

Fire hydrant?  85mm f/2.8, 1/5000s @ ISO 400

While they're not super obvious, there are clearly buildings in the background some distance away.  A somewhat equivalent picture from the 400:

400mm f/5.6, 1/1600s @ ISO 800

I did not take the most extreme care to ensure that the scenes were identical, but hopefully the compression is fairly obvious.  The background "feels" so much closer in this image than it does in the previous.  This is due to the compression induced by the focal length.  What this means is that the longer focal length (i.e., telephoto lens) tends to bring the background closer while the shorter focal length (i.e., wider angle) will present a scene with greater depth.


And just to make you jealous, a moon shot from the 400; it's cropped, run through unsharp, and has been color corrected some:

400mm f/8, 1/1000s @ 800 ISO; hand-held

More Megapixels isn't always Better

Just like processor speeds were the catch-all number used to sell computers in the late 90s and early 2000s, megapixels are the hot number in many camera advertisements. This seems to have cooled down some recently with the gradual deceleration of sensor sizes; the lack of new gigantic sensors means that other distinguishing features need to be used to differentiate competition.

There are several practical consequences to more megapixels, and many of them are bad, at least if you're not making larger prints. (Six megapixels will get you very clean 8x10 prints.)

For example, pixel density can be a barrier to relative sharpness. The resolution of a lens is finite, even though it's continuous, and when you exceed the limit of resolution on the glass, you'll find that the details get a little more muddy. (So for example, my 50mm f/1.8 AF-D still shines on the d7000, but the 28mm f/3.5 AI-S shows its age.)

Another issue with increased pixel density is that the camera is more sensitive to your body movement. While this is usually more obvious with longer focal lengths, I've noticed in my recent 10MP bump-up that it's harder to get equivalent sharpness with the same shutter speed. This makes sense, since more samples means a magnified view relative to a smaller pixel density. In essence it's like putting a magnifying glass on the image: you're bound to see things in higher magnification than you would see otherwise.

This sort of issue is made worse at longer focal lengths. I was pleasantly surprised by the sharpness of the AF-S f/4-5.6 55-200mm lens when I got it, and the 18-200 was pretty much the same. But the 70-300 at equivalent focal lengths is often blurry at the same shutter speeds.

This is one of the more immediate things I noticed when I started using the d7000: it takes a steadier hand than I'm used to, and I'm sure part of it has to do with those extra megapixels crowding that sensor. On the plus side, though, it definitely does allow for more spectacular shots when you need the center of frame just so.

Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 AF-S VR

As I'm planning on traveling a fair amount this year, I leapt on the chance to get this lens at almost half off MSRP when I found a refurbished one available online.

If you've shot with me for any length of time, you know that I prefer prime lenses to zooms, mostly because it helps me think more about composition. Primes also have the advantage of being lighter, faster, and generally smaller than their zooming cousins.

That said, there are times when your feet won't get you there, and zooms are undeniably handy for their convenience. I had the DX 18-200mm VR super-zoom and rarely used it, and I gave my DX 55-200mm (part of a trade+cash sale of the 18-200) to my sister with the d40. I opted to get this FX monster as the replacement.

Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 AI-S Review

My thoughts on the d7000 are still coming, but I wanted to share a few on a recent acquisition: the Nikkor 28mm f/3.5 AI-S. I got this for $50 (+$5 shipping) off of EBay, and it was well worth the price. The d7000 treats this just like any other lens thanks to its "non-CPU lens" data features.

If you've paid any attention to my previous posts, you'll know that I have a 24mm f/2.8 Non-AI lens as well, which isn't compatible with the d7000—it won't mount. I was pretty disappointed by this. The reason I got the 28mm f/3.5 was to replace the 24 in my line up. While I'm sorry to say that the 28 so far hasn't been quite as nice, I'm pretty pleased by its performance (especially for the price).

Most remarkable in my experience is the excellent ghost control (these are shot with a plain-jane $10 Tiffen UV filter):

My Hot Little Hands

The d7000 has arrived. I'll be doing some testing with it (shooting around) and adding some review-style comments as time allows.

Initial impressions:

• my Non-AI lens does NOT fit; I had simply mistaken the marketing text. I'm debating about doing a DIY AI conversion, which will be less expensive than buying a new lens.
• The action button is a lot spongier than the d40's or even the d90.
• AF is fast and nice to have on the 50mm.
• The ability to change things with buttons instead of menus is nice, but maybe not $1200 nice.
• Silent mode really is pretty quiet.
• 6fps is pretty fast.
• That LCD is good!
• Dual card slots? Sweet.
• High ISO performance? Pretty performant.

I'll have more later, with some reference photos and thoughts.

Giveaway

I gave my sister the d40 for Christmas. I've kept silent about ordering the d7000 for awhile because it was intended to be a surprise (which it was, more or less). I gave her the 55–200 as well as the kit lens, anticipating that I'll get an 85mm prime sometime to hit that range. I don't know which of them I'll get.

As soon as it comes in (I've been waiting since 4 November!), I'll post impressions, reviews, and, of course, pictures.

The inaugural photography outing with a group of friends will take place 22 January; hopefully it'll arrive by then.

Nikon d7000

As anyone who follows Nikon knows, the d7000 dropped today. Amazon is offering pre-orders, and I plan on grabbing one as soon as I'm comfortable with my bank account balance.

There are some decent reviews online, but the main one of interest is the one at dPreview. It's hands on and has lots of good news.

Issues of interest to me:

• Hi ISO performance (100–6400)
• 100% viewfinder coverage
• AI lens metering
• AF-D lens compatibility (duh)
• Dual SD card slots
• Magnesium alloy weather-sealed case

There are a couple other interesting points, but I suspect it'll be a great upgrade, and the final one before I do anything with a full-frame camera. When I get my hands on one, I'll try to put up a review.

My Gear

Probably the easiest thing to write about, since it's more technical than technique, if you take my meaning, is equipment.