Quick
Links & Comments
News and commentary of interest to Nikon and Nikon F-mount users
Sigma Lenses Announced
Feb 22 (news)--Sigma announced several new lenses, some tweaked from previous versions, one new:
- 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM: Basically an optically stabilized version of the older lens, now with FLD (low dispersion) glass.
- 85mm f/1.4 EX DG HSM: If you're tired of waiting for the Nikon refresh, here's an alternative. Unfortunately, no OS.
- 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM: Another update with OS and FLD. Sigma also claims it is slightly wider than the previous model.
- 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 DC HSM: for DX bodies, basically their equivalent to a 12-24mm.
- 50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM: another OS addition, though no FLD glass. Filter ring is now 95mm.
A Compact Compact Review
Feb 22 (news)--I've posted a short review of the Canon S90 compact camera.
Updates/PMA News
Feb 22 (news and commentary)--It's one of those busy times of year for camera, software and accessory announcements due to the Photo Marketing Association show going on this week in Anaheim.
- Bibble 5.02 is available, which adds support for 26 additional cameras. But the big addition is that the program now features Soft Proofing.
- onOne Plug-in Suite 5.01 was published, providing a number of performance and stability enhancements.
- Capture One 5.1 now supports the Nikon D3s and adds a few new editing tools, including a better color editor and a clarity function.
Canon isn't at PMA (and announced it's new cameras prior to the show). Nikon is at PMA and showing the previously announced Coolpix cameras and lenses. Sony has gone into preannouncement mode, talking about their future mirrorless camera (a lot like a GF1 or E-P2, only with a bigger sensor) and future DSLRs (the inevitable A700 replacement, which will get video).
This last bit may explain some Nikon inaction, as well. It seems clear from Sony's non-announcements of future cameras that they will be using a new APS Exmor sensor of unspecified properties. I suspect that Nikon will be, too, for cameras such as the D90 update expected later this year, and perhaps for others, as well. What's holding up Sony's newest sensor? Probably video. The game has been seriously upped: new sensors need less rolling shutter impact, higher frame rates, and you want to back that with better video formats (AVCHD, for example). It's clear that's what Sony is doing for the A700 replacement, so the question then becomes: is Nikon still going to use Sony sensors below FX? And if the answer to that is yes, then there really aren't any appropriate Sony sensors for better Nikon models currently available--they're due shortly.
Personally, I suspect that Nikon is still going to use Sony sensors for DX bodies (and of course Coolpix). The economics of shared sensor production are just too necessary to keep costs down. The higher-priced FX bodies can support non-shared sensor costs.
Nikkor 200-400mm Review
Feb 15 (commentary)--Seven years in the making. So much for snap judgment. But if you want to see what I finally have to say, the link is over there on the left. [Update: I've now received 200+ emails that say I'm right about the distance and TC issue, 5 that say I'm wrong.]
Which 16?
Feb 15 (commentary)--A few of you took me to task for saying that the DX user is at a disadvantage to the FX user when it came to the 24mm (equivalent) focal length. We do have a few ways to get to 16mm: 16-85mm VR DX, 10-24mm DX, 12-24mm DX, and the FX 16-35mm and 14-24mm. So it's not that we don't have lenses that'll get us the 24mm equivalent for DX that prompted my comment, it's that they're all sub-optimal in some way. Take out the huge, filterless 14-24mm and all the options are slow (even f/2.8 isn't exactly fast). Thus, anyone who needs to get to 24mm on DX in low light finds that they don't really have a good DX option (and remember, the D300s is already a couple of stops worse than a D3s at high ISO values).
The only shooters that are reasonably happy with the 24mm equivalent in DX are the landscape and casual shooters. That's because the landscape shooters will all stop one of those zooms down to f/11 or so anyway, and the casual shooters will simply like the VR on the 16-85mm and put up with the maximum aperture being somewhat restrained. That leaves the event, sports, architectural, and night shooters all unsatisifed, which is why I wrote what I wrote about DX in the next article.
But to answer a question that did come up: if you had to have 24mm equivalent on DX, what should you use? Casual users: 16-85mm. Landscape shooters: any of the available options.
Which 24?
Feb 9 (commentary)--Let's just make an assumption for a moment that you're an FX user and you shoot at 24mm a lot (I do). It's a natural focal length for getting depth into your pictures (foreground/background) without going "too wide." Indeed, I'd say that 24mm is the modern "wide angle go to focal length" (it used to be 28mm; long before that it was 35mm).
With Nikon's recent introductions, the FX user is now presented with a plethora of choices of how to get there: 24mm f/1.4G, 24mm f/2.8D, 14-24mm f/2.8G, 16-35mm f/4G, 17-35mm f/2.8D, 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D, 24mm f/3.5 PC-E, 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6G, 24-85mm f/2.8-4D, and 24-70mm f/2.8G. Holy motherload, Batman, what should we put on the Batcamera?
Let's do some pruning right up front. I don't believe the 24mm f/2.8, 24-85mm f/2.8-4, and 24-120mm f/3.5-5.6 cut the mustard. All are optically inferior to the other choices at 24mm, in my opinion. That still leaves us seven choices, so we need to winnow the list more. The sad thing is that, even with all these choices, not all types of shooters are going to be satisifed with their choice! Let's take a shooter's look at the options:
- Landscape shooter. The clear choice is the 24mm PC-E. It is sharp edge to edge even on a D3x (non-shifted), plus gives you the ability to control DOF more. You don't need fast apertures or AF, and the lens has filter rings. Slam dunk. Honorable mention: 16-35mm f/4G, 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5D, and 24-70mm f/2.8G.
- Event shooter. Here's the unsatisifying choice: 24-70mm f/2.8G. The satisfaction falloff comes because of the lack of VR. While not always necessary, it would be handy to have and make this lens a slam dunk. Honorable mention: 24mm f/1.4G for helping remove backgrounds.
- Sports shooter. Split decision: 24mm f/1.4G or 24-70mm f/2.8G. Depends upon the venue. Inside and dark? The 24mm f/1.4G. Outside or decently lit? The 24-70mm f/2.8G, mainly for its versatility to do other things. Honorable mention: 14-24mm f/2.8G.
- Street shooter. No clear choice unless we're talking about night shooting. Technically, you need a good, accurate DOF scale and a long focus throw to do "zone focusing." The Zeiss 25mm starts to look better than the current Nikkors in that respect. Honorable mention: 24mm f/1.4G (especially for low light street work).
- Star trails, Aurora, other night work. Probably 24mm f/1.4G due to coma correction and fast aperture. Needs to be tested to be sure.
- Architectural photographer. 24mm PC-E.
- All prime shooter. 24mm f/1.4G probably. Honorable mention: 24mm PC-E.
The interesting thing to me is what happens when I need to do multiple types of photography on the same trip. I end up carrying multiple 24mm options. This was already true (I carry the 14-24mm and the 24mm PC-E much of the time). Do I now add a 24mm f/1.4G to the bag, too? This just goes to show how tricky lens selection can sometimes get.
There's no perfect lens for every situation, thus you often have to carry something that is a compromise for some of the things you might photograph. The question is where you compromise.
For me, the compromise I tend to give up is autofocus. That's because I find the 24mm PC-E suitable for much of the wide angle work I want to do. So the question for me is whether I continue to carry the 14-24mm or replace it with either the new 16-35mm. It'll all depend upon the far corners with a D3x and whether my thin filters vignette on the new lens. For others (event and night street shooters, for instance), the 24mm f/1.4G is a clear "put in the bag."
So, good job Nikon: you've given us FX shooters plenty of 24mm options to consider. There's still DX to consider (they have almost nothing at 24mm equivalent), though, plus a lot of other focal lengths to give us more choice at.
Just a Reminder
The short articles on the front page of this site change as often as every couple of days, as little as once every two weeks. Right now, however, we're coming into a period where there's been rapid change. So if you're not checking the site often, be sure to check out the Archived 2009 link, below, as there may be a handful of items you missed. (Yes, I know about RSS. But I won't offer that until the site redesign is done.)
Archived Front Page News and Articles
Archived 2010 byThom comments and news
Archived 2009 byThom comments and news
Archived 2008 byThom comments and news
Archived
2007 byThom comments and news
Archived pre-2007 byThom comments and news
Nikon announcements summary 2001-2009
|
These are long-form workshops are taught with my assistant (max 6 or 7 students per instructor). They are not inexpensive, but they are meticulously planned, intensive, and as engaging as any workshop you've ever encountered. At present, these are the only workshops I plan on doing through the end of 2010. If you're interested in any of these workshops, click on the link for the workshop to get the PDF file describing it. Follow the directions in the PDF to sign up for the workshop. At present, the Botswana and Patagonia workshops are full and wait list only signups are being taken.