Nikon D200 First Impressions
The Nikon D200 is a semi-pro DSLR suitable as a backup camera for a pro or the main camera for a knowledgeable enthusiast. It's been quite few years since it was introduced, but it holds up quite well if you understand its strengths and weaknesses.
In my opinion the primary strengths of the D200 are that it can matrix meter with manual focus AI and AIS lenses, and that it is built very solidly with good weather seals. If you are coming from pre-AF Nikon film cameras, your investment in manual lenses is preserved. The camera is fairly heavy, but balances well with heavy lenses. Personally, I find that heavier cameras are easier to hold steady, but your mileage may vary. The D300 shares these features with the D200, but includes a much improved sensor for shooting at high ISO's. However, the cost of a D300 is approximately 3x the cost of a good used D200. So, if you are wanting to step up to a more responsive and semi-pro level DSLR, the D200 is a bargain.
The quality of images from the D200 are very good, but require some post processing in order to achieve best results. For instance, I believe that there's a slight magenta cast that is noticeable when photographing people with light colored skin when using JPG output. For me, optimal quality is achieved when shooting in RAW and post processing in your program of choice. I find that Photoshop Elements 8 + the updated Adobe Camera Raw 6.1 works very nicely. If you are using this combo, I recommend increasing the luminance noise reduction, increasing sharpening, and increasing the masking control to apply sharpening only to high contrast transitions in the image.
Overall, I really like the D200. It is tough and provides great quality images if you are willing to work a bit. If you need better default JPG output and a lighter body, then I would recommend a new D5000 or D90 with a kit zoom lens. See below for a few examples from the D200 + a Nikkor 35mm f1.4.
Bokeh from Nikkor 35/1.4 AIS
Bokeh with Nikkor 35/1.4
M42 Standard Lens Comparison
Last summer I acquired a K-mount to M42 adapter for my Pentax K100D DSLR. Until now I've done very little shooting with the various M42 standard lenses that I've acquired over the years. I thought it would be fun to compare the M42 lenses against each other and against the Pentax kit lens.
My comparison is hardly scientific, but I believe it is precise enough to say whether there is a significant difference in lens performance under the conditions I created. My test conditions are simple enough. Photograph a static image under incandescent light using comparable focus, aperture, and shutter speed. I set a custom white balance on my DSLR to obtain more realistic color. ISO was set to 200. The only real problem I encountered in testing was obtaining similar focus with all of these manual focus lenses. In the end, the focus was close enough for my purposes. If the focus was slightly different between shots, I simply concentrated on comparing the in-focus portion of the photos. I didn't test under a variety of conditions. That will probably come later. I'd like to test for resistance to flare and purple fringing.
Here's a chart of the tests I conducted:
Photo Lens Aperture Shutter Length Frame Number Length ============================================================================== 1 Auto Sears 55mm 1:1.4 f1.4 1/40 55 #100-8439 2 Auto Sears 55mm 1:1.4 f4 1/15 55 #100-8440 3 Auto Sears 55mm 1:1.4 f8 1/4 55 #100-8441 4 Sears Auto EE 50mm 1:1.4 f1.4 1/40 50 #100-8442 5 Sears Auto EE 50mm 1:1.4 f4 1/15 50 None 6 Sears Auto EE 50mm 1:1.4 f8 1/4 50 None 7 Cosina Cosinon Auto 50mm 1:1.8 f1.8 1/30 50 #100-8446 8 Cosina Cosinon Auto 50mm 1:1.8 f4 1/8 50 #100-8448 9 Cosina Cosinon Auto 50mm 1:1.8 f8 0.4 50 #100-8451 10 Pentax DA 1:3.5-5.6 18-55mm AL f5.6 1/6 50 #100-8454 11 Pentax DA 1:3.5-5.6 18-55mm AL f8 0.3 55 #100-8455
Click on the link below to compare images.
 |
| M42 50mm Lens Test |
After carefully comparing each image, the conclusion is fairly simple. Any of these old M42 lenses is great for low light shooting on a DSLR such as a Pentax K100D. The Auto Sears 55/1.4 is a tiny bit soft at f1.4, but it's difficult to know for sure given that the depth of field is so shallow at f1.4. Regardless, the images were very sharp by f4 and beyond. If you had to pin me down, the Cosina photos where very good at all apertures. The Pentax kit zoom compared quite well to the primes, maybe a little bit softer, but very good nonetheless.
When would you want to use a fast M42 prime? Well, you certainly wouldn't use it for action or following your kids, but it's perfect for most anything else that doesn't require fast focusing. Setting exposure on the K100D is as simple as pushing on a button which stops down the lens and sets the shutter speed. In addition, you get all the benefits of in-body shake reduction. The other nice thing about old M42 prime lenses is that they are cheap. Modern fast AF lenses are not cheap, but these M42 lenses with speeds as fast as f1.4 cost next to nothing. If I recall correctly none of my lenses cost more than $10. In conclusion, I've got to say that all of these old M42 standard prime lenses were a lot of fun and very useful. I hope to test them in more challenging conditions in the near future. In addition, I will be testing a few 135mm lenses.
Digital Point and Shoot Versus Film Point and Shoot (Part 1)
Introduction
The purpose of this article is to discuss the relative merits of digital and film point and shoot cameras to help you decide when one or the other is appropriate to your needs. Both photographic mediums have strengths and weaknesses. I think it's a good idea to lay them out and look at them with an eye toward practical use by normal family photographers. In the end I would like to find out if there is any noticeable difference in photos between digital and film when the cameras are used in a similar way.
The Contenders
First, let's meet the contestants. I'll be evaluating several cameras.
- Canon A560 -- The Canon A560 digital point and shoot is a well regarded budget digital. It lacks image stabilization, but overall is good choice for those who want a good camera without breaking the bank.
- Fuji F20 -- What the Fuji F20 doesn't deliver in megapixels (6Mp), it delivers in great image quality; especially when compared to comparable cameras at higher ISOs.
- HP 720 -- This camera was not especially fast or feature filled, but it did a good job for an early digital point and shoot. It is included for comparison just to see how a 3.1Mp camera will fare compared to its modern cousins.
- Pentax IQZoom 90WR -- The 90WR distinguishes itself from the other cameras with built-in weatherproofing. It can withstand rain and snow as well as a short dunk in the water.
- Canon Sure Shot Classic 120 -- The Sure Shot Classic 120 was considered at the top end of the Sure Shot Series. It has a number of features useful to the advanced amateur such as a custom setting to remember preferred settings.
- Olympus Stylus Epic (mjuii) -- The Stylus Epic is widely regarded for producing sharp photographs. The main drawback compared to the other cameras is lack of a zoom lens. It also lags a bit in the number of available scene selections, but that's not a big deal. I thought it would be interesting to include this camera although I'll probably step back or get closer to the subject when possible to produce comparable photographs.
With the exception of the Olympus (which has a fixed focal length lens), all of the cameras feature zoom lenses, scene selection, and flash. In their day, each of these cameras was considered a good quality camera for general use by casual photographers.
Methodology
As much as possible I'll try to use the cameras as most casual photographers will use them. I'll also point out situations when a feature of a camera might be used but typically isn't. A feature that comes to mind is custom white balance available on most digitals. I will carry all of the digital cameras and one of the film cameras for each round of testing. I will photograph the same subject with each of the cameras in turn. There will be several rounds of testing with a different film camera used in each round. Why am I using just one film camera per round? Cost. Which is one of the disadvantages of digital if you want to conduct tests such as this one.
Scenarios
- Scenic sunny
- Scenic sunset
- Action
- Macro
- Indoor flash
- Indoor no flash
- Portrait
- Water or beach scene
- Backlit
- Dark Subject
- Light Subject
- Cloudy
One advantage for digitals in all of the above scenarios is that you get a preview of your results on the LCD. If the photo is blurry, improperly exposed, or framed improperly you get immediate feedback and can take another photo. From what I've seen, casual photographers will often re-take a photo if it is framed improperly such as group shot or sports shot, but will less often re-take a shot if the exposure is slightly off or the subject is slightly blurry. In fact, slight blurriness is difficult to see with a normal LCD on a point and shoot. My usage scenario will be to take the photo and not look back unless there was some gross mistake. I'll try to keep the attitude and behavior of a casual photographer.
Film Selection
I had to think about this one for a bit. A typical point and shoot photographer will not normally use pro films from Kodak and Fuji. However, pro films can be used with great success in a point and shoot. In the end I decided to use one pro film for reference purposes. Consumer film will be used for most scenarios.
- Fuji Superia Xtra 200
- Kodak UltraMax 400
- Kodak Portra 400VC
- Kodak UltraMax 800
ISO
Digital has the advantage of being able to use a number of different ISO settings. A casual photographer will not change the ISO unless it is automatic. Because ISO is a conscious decision for the film photographer, it is more likely that casual photographers will pick a film suitable for their usage scenario. I will therefore use several different film speeds in my evaluation. Given the number of film cameras and film speeds, I would have to burn a lot of film. I will therefore have an ISO test for one round where I will use ISO800 film and all digitals will be set to ISO800 if possible.
Printing and Scanning
All film will be scanned and printed at Costco. Costco offers good quality 6Mp scans for very little money. All digital photos will be printed at Costco as well. I'll let Costco print at default settings for both film and digital to replicate the typical consumer experience.
Enlargements
Certain photos will be selected for enlargement to 8x10. The photos will be compared for quality.
Getting Started
I plan to start testing Saturday, May 24th using all of the digital cameras and the Pentax IQZoom 90WR load with either Fuji 200 or Kodak UltraMax 400 film. I plan to publish results by the following Saturday, May 31st.
Turkeys near Fruitland Washington
Last weekend my dad came out for a visit so we decided to take a drive and look at some real estate that looked interesting. On the way we spotted a group of 20 turkeys near Fruitland Washington. I managed to take a few pictures as they flew away. Cool stuff.
Day at the Zoo
After being sick for a week, it was great to get outside and walk around in the fresh air. The family and I went to the Woodland Park Zoo for a few hours. Matthew was armed with an HP Photosmart 720 Digital, my wife had her Fuji F20, and I carried a Pentax ME Super with a 135mm f3.5 lens. It was a warm day in Seattle, so all of the animals seemed to be out and about. The tigers and bears were impressive, but the most spectacular showing came from a peregrine falcon and an owl. One of the raptor curators was out letting the birds fly. The owl captured a mouse, while the falcon dive bombed a fake bird that the curator was swinging from a rope. Here are some pictures: http://picasaweb.google.com/kellymjones/WoodlandParkZoo20070217 The 135mm lens worked well, but I think a 200mm or 300mm lens is now on my wish list.
Fuji F20 outdoors
I took my wife's Fuji f20 outdoors for some shots in bright sunshine. I've read some reviews where there is criticism of the f20 due to purple fringing and over exposure. Frankly, I thought my shots of various well lit subject were very good overall. As a comparison, I shot the same shots with my K100D and didn't see much difference in terms of blown highlights. If highlights were blown, they were blown on both cameras. The f20 images were sharpened a bit more than the K100D, but otherwise the images were mostly the same. I was worried that f20 would not perform well in sunny conditions, but that doesn't appear to be the case.
Fuji F20 First Impressions
I bought my wife a Fuji F20 for her birthday. Originally I had wanted to buy her a Canon SD700 IS, but I couldn't justify paying twice the money. All of the reviews about the excellent low light capabilities of the F20 are true. It takes great photos all the way up to ISO 2000. 4x6 prints at ISO 2000 were perfectly acceptable. There was a little bit of noise in the dark parts of the print, but very nice regardless. We haven't used the camera outdoors except for just a handful of shots. It will take some time to evaluate the overall photo quality of thiscamera. The very high quality of ISO 800 makes it tempting to set it at that speed and forget it. This would probably help my wife in taking blur-free shots in the daylight and natural looking shots indoors. The camera starts up very quickly and is small without being difficult to hold. Overall, I'm very impressed.
Using an old flash unit with the Pentax K100D
Just for kicks I attached an old Vivitar Thyristor 2500 flash unit to my new Pentax K100D. To get it to work correctly, just use it the same way you would use it with manual film SLR. I set the K100D to manual mode, zoomed to about 35mm, set the flash to normal lens distance, "blue" auto mode and ASA200, set the shutter to 180/sec, set the aperture to f5.6, and fired a way. The photos turned out great. I angled the flash to 45 degrees, set the aperture to f4 and it worked great too. The character of the photos was better than the built-in flash, but not as convenient.
And Now for Something Completely Digital
I've taken an unexpected break from retro film photography due to a surprise gift for my birthday. I received a Pentax K100D digital SLR. Cool! I've spent part of the weekend learning how to use the camera while the other part of the weekend has been devoted to recovering from a nasty cold. Combine that with very rainy and miserable weather, and I haven't been able to get out much with the new camera. I've uploaded a few pictures here. One thing that is obvious using this camera is that I get the same feeling of lack of control when using it in automatic mode. It's a very similar feeling to using the n6006. It's not that I can't have control, it's that all of the features
take some time to learn. In the end it's all about being able to capture what you want, and that's almost as difficult with a nice DSLR as it is with a point-and-shoot or 70's era film SLR. In the end I'm sure I'll get it all figured out.
The K100D has some very useful features such as anti-shake and good performance at high ISO. The anti-shake is wonderful and works as advertised. The anti-shake along with good high ISO performance allows for great existing light photos. Rather than setting the camera to a noisier ISO 1600 or 3200, it can be set to ISO 400 or 800 with very good results because of the anti-shake. It doesn't help if the subject is moving, but overall it's a great low light camera. I'm definitely going to compare its performance to the FM loaded with Fuji NPZ 800 film using a 50mm f1.8. Another nice thing going for the K100D is that it will use old Pentax K-mount lenses which means I can get very high quality lenses for cheap; especially compared to Canon and Nikon lens prices.