Unedited "Nikon" E-mail

A friend of mine recently purchased a Nikon D60 kit, and came to me and asked about photography tips and ideas. This is my unedited response...

Here are a few basic pointers:

APERTURE
1. Most people tend to set it to "A" (Aperture) mode. That way, you'll be changing the f-stop (the f/4.5, f/22, etc) with your thumb. Notice
how it affects your shutter speed though. The smaller the f-stop, the bigger the "hole" and the faster the lens. "Fast lenses" are considered to be f/2.8 or less, and they cost much more.

2. The other reason why a smaller f-number is so expensive is because of the awesome bokeh (bokay, not boka [it's Japanese]). It's basically
the blurriness of the background. The smaller the f-number, the shallower the depth of field, which makes focusing really important. Shallow depth of fields make the subject pop from the background. You're probably used the a point and shoot which has a huge depth of field, meaning everything will be in focus no matter how hard you try (because of the small sensor size more than anything else). Example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/usumbs/2928331506/in/set-72157607890358270/

SHUTTER SPEED
3. Shutter speed is basically x, where 1/x is in seconds. A shutter speed of 500 is plenty fast, shooting at 1/500 seconds, etc. Pay attention to your focal length. As a rule of thumb, you don't want to be shooting less than 1/(focal length) as your shutter speed. So if you're zoomed all the way out to 200 mm, you don't want to shoot slower than 1/200 sec or 200. This is a simple way to avoid camera shake.

ISO
4. For a D60, I'd recommend staying within the ISO range of 100 to 400. It isn't much, but it's usable. Anything beyond 400 will get you a lot of grain. ISO is basically sensitivity of the sensor. The higher it is, the more sensitive. The higher it is, the more noise you're going to get. Sometimes, it has a nice effect. Most times, it doesn't. The higher end models D3 ($7000+) can shoot without noise up to 32000 ISO. It's a different generation of stuff. Pretty amazing.

LENSES & CROP FACTOR
5. For lenses, Nikon uses DX to mean crop body, for digital. Older lenses, or more "pro" lenses don't have the DX, meaning it's a full-frame lens. For camera bodies, they are crop-body be default, and are full-frame cameras with FX. Full-frame is real 35 mm and is simply awesome. bodies cost more. lenses cost more. and you get real focal length as printed on the lens. For a DX lens, if you zoom in to 200 mm, at a 35 mm equivalent, it is 200mm x 1.5 = 300mm (where 1.5 is the crop factor of your camera body). Canon is typically 1.6. If you apply a full frame lens at 200mm on your DX, you'll get 300 mm also. But.... if you throw a DX lens on a FX body, you'll get problems. Because the sensor is so much bigger in the FX, the DX lens is smaller and you'll get a black "border" around your photos. Do you see what I mean? DX is cheaper if you're not looking for full frame but it won't work on the FX bodies. Full-frame lenses work on all.

6. For the D40 and D60, you'll want to look out for AF-S lenses. These are the newer lenses with the focusing motor built-into the lens. This is because the D40 and D60 cannot control it from the body. D300, D3, etc, higher end ones, can focus with lenses without these motors. It kind of sucks because older lenses that are AF rather than AF-S can't automatically focus on the D40 or D60. You can still use it, but only with manual focusing. And manual focusing sucks... for casual shooting. It's useful sometimes.

OTHER
7. Nice choice with the Nikon. What kind of things are you interested in shooting? And any particular lens are you looking to buy in the future?

8. Click some ads:
http://blog.usumbs.com/2009/01/what-you-leave-out-photography-tip.html

9. http://kenrockwell.com/ This guy is crazy, and I don't think he's a good photographer at all. He has a lot to say and he is very controversial online. Don't take anything he says as opinion seriously, but you can learn something from this guy. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/index.htm I think he is a jerk and most people online don't like him (says he's a quack).

(Do you have a photos page or site I can follow?)

Please excuse my writing. I do not want to proofread it or fix capitalizations.

Good luck. Write back.

Next Lens, Next Body

I have finally decided that my next lens will be the 105mm f/2.8 macro lens by Nikon. I would forgo the necessary "kit" range and stick to my guns of the 30mm and a 105mm, both primes, and both very fancy.

The problem is, I don't know if I'll have a camera for the lenses to accommodate. Haha. While the D90 is nice, I am not completely satisfied with it. Plus, seeing the direction of video in DSLRs and what good implementation could be(a la the 5D Mark II) and what bad implementation is (the D90), it would be a smarter decision to wait for Nikon's second generation video DSLR.

Plus, another excuse is that money is tight (which it undoubtedly is), and it would be unwise to splurge on something that is not critical and essential.

Narrowing Down the Lenses

I've been doing some research on the higher-tier system I want to use with the D90 (should I get it in the future).

Currently, I'm using a Nikon D40 with a NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6, a NIKKOR 55-200mm f/4-5.6, and a Sigma 30mm f/1.4. I've been looking for a more rugged and better build system (maybe faster and better image quality too). I have narrowed it down to these few, having considered essential features, reviews, build quality and their cost bracket.

AF-S DX NIKKOR 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED
AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED
AF NIKKOR 24-85mm f/2.8-4D IF
AF-S NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED VR

For the more fancy stuff:

AF-S Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR (likely to be my next lens)
AF DX Fisheye-NIKKOR 10.5mm f/2.8G ED

I just wish Nikon would come out with more updated lenses, namely the wide and normal primes. Any recommendations?

Sigma 30mm f/1.4 EX DC HSM for Nikon

Yesterday was a momentous day for me and my photography hobby (or perhaps, misplaced addiction). After work, and directly to Penn Station via the LIRR, my friend and I went to B&H to purchase my first real lens (albeit, not a genuine Nikon lens; how sad!).

I came prepared with research and consideration for the Nikon 35 mm f/2, Nikon 50mm f/1.4, and Sigma 30mm f/1.4, in that order of preference. Some how, I left the store (having paid $200 more than I wanted to) with my third choice--the Sigma. Thanks a lot, Ricky.

I went in skeptical of the Sigma, and I still am. I had never liked Sigma's rough focus and zoom rings, and its top quality still didn't feel as good as Nikon or Canon's own lens. But compared to the two Nikon lenses (which do not autofocus on my D40, a fault of having a cheap camera body), the Sigma was nicer overall.

The Nikon lenses was designed for film cameras nearly 20 years ago. They had an extremely smooth focus ring and were much smaller than the Sigma. The Sigma, as I had expected, had a nasty focus ring. Then I thought, since it has the benefit of autofocus, I wouldn't really need to be touching the focus ring anyway! Or at least, for the most part. The Sigma had other problems of its own, but I did not notice them and wouldn't have noticed them if not for the reviews I read online.

I immediately dismissed the 50mm because that wasn't the focal length I really wanted. The final decision came after I made a few test shots with the Nikon 35mm and the Sigma 30mm. The Sigma was faster and had noticeably better bokeh. See below for a rough comparison. This is Alan in the blue, and I thank him.

NIKON 35mm: A little dark.

SIGMA 30mm: Brighter than previous using about the same settings.

NIKON 35mm: Decent Bokeh. Poor Focus (I'm not used to manual focusing).

SIGMA 30mm: Much Nicer Bokeh.
To me, this purchase is significant in a number of ways: 1. Dedication now to the Nikon brand, even though I didn't buy a true Nikon as my first lens. 2. Exceeding the beginner-level braket of lens quality and cost. 3. Finally getting a feel of what sharpness and aperture really mean. 4. Understanding how a crop-body camera affects lenses and lens choice. 5. Tying Adrian in lens-count and leading Ricky by one. :-)

----------

It felt as if I can shoot anything and the lens can make the shot magical. I took some test shots at home. I shot my sister first. Pictures came out nice, and the lens worked quite well in the dark. It's definitely not what I'm used to in a lens, although I notice I now need a flash (or two, or three). The lack of sharpness is likely my fault. Heh.


Note: For editing my sister's photos, I only cropped; nothing more. Alan's photos were straight from the D40.

Canon, Again ...

I went to the mall yesterday, and while I was there, I checked out the DSLRs at Best Buy. I had originally say, in Canon vs Nikon and Camera Comparison, that the I did not like Canon's UI. I spent a little more time with it, particularly with the Rebel XSi, and I realized that they are not much different. It is a mere case of getting used to the subtle changes.

For the XSi, I had originally said that it was "hard to access absolutely any manual controls." Now, I rather enjoy the simplicity of the functions. While it is definitely harder to do things as compared to comparable Nikons or higher-end Canons, it wasn't actually too bad.

I still say that overall, Nikon DSLRs are uglier with more easily accessible functions and buttons on the body. I guess that is a tradeoff. I am still undecided, but I will not dismiss Canon DSLRs as quickly as I have initially.

There is time yet before I get my camera. Perhaps I'll wait for the Canon 50D. Heh.

Canon vs Nikon

After going shooting with Ricky and his Canon 30D in Central Park, I am torn in my decision of usability, brand, and gadget philosophy. My goal is to figure out and decide which brand (Canon or Nikon) is most like Apple and which I can put my trust in. I have found good reasons for why Canon is more like Apple, but as I continue to think, I have also found good reasons for why Nikon is more like Apple. I guess figuring out the more Apple-esque brand is just my way of rationalizing my intuition's decision.

Basically, I have gotten too used to the functionality of my Nikon D40, and when I tried holding and shooting with the Canon 30D, it was extremely awkward to use, and doing the most rudimentary operations seemed to take additional steps than on the D40. This might be a simple thing of getting used to, but I am unsure.

I am surprised to find myself lean toward Nikon's system of doing things now.

[C]: Very pretty and has a huge amount of support from many Canon DSLR-using friends.

[N]: More exterior buttons and less pretty, but it is extremely usable. It has a smaller market share than that of Canon. (But then again, so does Apple.) Nikon users, I find, are more "weird" than Canon users. (But then again, so was Apple back in the day.) Nikon focuses primarily on optics and cameras, while Canon does printers, scanners, calculators, etc. (Apple was always a computer-focused company, though it has just recently expanded to music and phones.)

Aspect Ratio for POTD

After playing with the D40 yesterday, I have decided to switch POTD's aspect ratio from 4x3 to 3x2. The result will be more of a widescreen view, thereby making things appear better that they are. Check out today's POTD.

In case you did not know, most cameras (of the point-and-shoot variety) give an aspect ratio of 4x3. This is similar to what televisions project as letterbox. These days it just doesn't look too appealing. DSLRs on the other hand, shoot in 3x2 (or 6x4) and it is more standard. After being reminded of this fact, I will be switching the POTD aspect ratio to 3x2. I will still shoot with the Sony N1, however. I just have to be more careful with my framing, since I will fix it in post.

Edit: There is a 3x2 mode on my point-and-shoot that I forgot about. Nice...

Cascadilla Trail

Today after spending over four hours in the machine shop (getting lucky in the morning for a lottery on one of the machines in the early morning), I decided to do something out of the ordinary. It was such an awesome day out today, I decided to go shooting with my Nikon.

I will cheat with today's POTD by using a D40 photo, rather than from the Sony N1 because I had too fun walking down and back Cascadilla Trail. I saw more people there than I had expected but all was well. I got into photographer mode, and I did not care. It was very relaxing, and I throughly enjoyed it. Because of the high contrast between shadow and sun, most of them came out odd. Just 18% were deemed good-to-show by me, mainly because of this huge difference between shadow and sun, and because a lot of what's in the gorge is repetitive. Haha I need some help, but I hope you like the pictures, on Flickr.