"Good Glass Is, As Good Glass Does"

You might be able to tell by the Post title, that this is a little bit of a different piece. And no: it isn't some sort of a Confucius saying..... it's adapted from that famous and fictitious Alabaman, Forrest Gump of course.

I realize that I've spent a lot of the last couple of months talking about cameras, lenses, and flashes. Unlike my other topics, such as computing equipment, who's function is self-evident, photography equipment demands a higher level of proof. By nature of the beast, we want to see what it does. For the last 2 weeks, I've been doing just that; culminating in last night's visit to the Chinese Lantern Festival at Fair Park, here in Dallas. 

It gave a perfect sample of something that most any family photography might encounter. An outing that offered challenging lighting, subject material, sometimes awkward shooting angles in a crowd, and an event that demanded to be recorded! 

I carried my high-powered camera, the D300, but mounted the 18-70mm (27-105mm eq.) lens instead of the 18-200mm super-zoom. I didn't need reach, but needed the extra half-stop of light that the shorter lens gave me at the long end. I gave up the VR function of the longer lens for that. I'm sure, looking at the lighting in the pictures, you can see why. Although I carried the flash, I didn't use it at all. I'm sure most of you understand that virtually none of the colored lights would have shown up when using the flash. I'll actually show you an image later where I used a flash, how and why I did it. 

In this case, the stage lighting was plenty to get the performers, but I had to also get the colored lights of the stage as well. So, I ended up using a very high ISO, which the D300 does very well without too much "noise" so I would high enough shutter speed to stop the action. In actuality, I didn't want to completely stop the action, I wanted to have some sense of motion without completely blurring the performer. And that's why I used the manual focus, 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor that my brother sent me. Sure, I would have loved for it to be a little "longer", but it was OK, at the 75mm that the APS-C sensor sees it at. This ultra-fast lens allowed me to see a VERY bright image in the finder which helped with the focusing. 

For these other pictures? I used the AF zoom for it's ability to frame exactly from the angle I wanted to use. It turned out to be easier than I thought since the "lanterns" themselves gave off plenty of light which leaned more toward "daylight" than night. Everything was fine as long as you didn't get too much of the night around the subject(s) to throw the camera off. 

Before we go away from the D300 and the 50mm Nikkor, here's another reason for it's use. Not only is it very sharp (barring photographer error), it can also give you as thin of a depth of field as you want! Check out this Crepe Myrtle "berries" encased in ice from our early December storm. 

 

Now, on to the D40 and it's stable of manual focus lenses that I've been jammering about. The first picture is of course from the same ice storm, but it was shot with the $15, Tamron Adaptall 300mm lens. The second is from some time later to demonstrate it's sharpness, contrast of color rendition. 

Then last weekend, we ran up to northeastern, Oklahoma to see some relatives. This happened right after the arrival of the Tamron Adaptall-2 28-50mm lens. It was the pricey acquisition at $40, but hey; we all need to occasionally splurge..... right! It was quite challenging to focus in the indoor pool of our hotel, but the unique underwater lights gave a very interesting effect. So I decided to play around a little. I knew if I adjusted for the ambient light, I could get it, but then, I'd have a fine picture of a pool. If I wanted my kids to be visible in the picture, I'd have to use a flash. As it turns out; I found to my dismay that the Quantaray XLF-50 is Nikon iTTL automatic ONLY!!! As such, will not work with a manual lens mounted. So I went completely manual, shot some test frames, to find that; what I read some years ago was true. If you use a slower shutter speed, it lets in more ambient light, and the flash cycle will stop the subject motion in the foreground. Using the D40's pop-up flash; as you can see, it did just that! My other pictures were of our relatives which of course, I don't want to use without their permission, so you'll have to trust me in that the D40 handles beautifully with the 28-50mm Tamron and that it's a perfect carry camera for random stuff.

Now you know. I actually do shoot photographs with the bargain equipment that I seek out!
 

The Compact DSLR System: Part 2

Every time I think of a compact camera "system", I think of this thing. Introduced in 1978 into a world where the mystique of James Bond had yet to be diluted. After the first few of the film series, there was always the inevitable interlude with "Q" where he would briefly go through the new gadgets for that particular episode. Over the years, there have been assorted knives, cameras, guns, explosives, and specialized vehicles. They all seem to be delivered in some sort of specially fitted case. Maybe that explains my obsession with cases! Anyway; I digress. It's really the completeness of the "system" that I want to discuss in this part of my Compact DSLR System series. 

As amazing as today's DSLRs are, they still can't do everything by themselves.... not if you want them to be any good at it! I must say though, compared to the days of yore, there is quite a lot in there: automated frame advance (no need for a winder/motor drive), pop-up flash, kit zoom, and all manner of other abilities that used to take some random gizmo that needed to be bought. All that being said though, if you want to get the most out of your camera, you do need to assemble a "kit" of sorts, even today.

So, let's look at my kit. I think we can dispense with any further discussion on how I derived at using the Nikon D40. All of you will be able to come up with your camera based on your needs and financial commitments. Let's start at the len(es) then. My intention is to be able to go from a "normal" wide out to a rather long telephoto. For my needs, that would be a 35mm camera equivalent of 28mm to 300mm which translates to be 18-200mm in APS-C (or DX), which is 14-150mm if you are doing 4/3rds or m4/3rds. For me, the base lens will be the Tamron 28-50mm zoom which gives me a range of 42-75mm eq. I can throw in the 70-150mm Vivitar made by Kiron which has a matched multiplier giving me 105-450mm depending on whether I have the MM on or off. My alternative is to use the Tamron 300mm f/5.6 prime lens instead. What about wide? I have my 18-70mm AF-S Nikon for that. 

Funny story about this lens. After spending a weekend with the new Tamron 28-50mm zoom, I started wondering what I'd have to give up if I wanted a little more reach. This led me to the 24mm focal length which would be about equal to a 35mm wide-angle. While researching that idea, I found that Nikon had/has (?) in AF-S of 24-85mm AF-S in their line-up. It looked to be not too expensive at between $70 and $125. So I started looking at it's physical size to make sure it wasn't going to overpower the D40. I found that the filter diameter was 67mm....... hey wait-a-minute!?! That set off alarm bells in my head! It sounded all-fully familiar! Yeah; that lens is virtually identical in size and weight to my 18-70mm AF-S Nikkor that I use for portraits mounted on the D300. The 35mm eq. is 28-105mm! Don't need to buy a lens at all! So basically, I'm done with glass. Maybe, I'll pick up an "E Series" 28mm which would function as low-light (f2.8) or a "pancake" lens. 

So basically, if I want a really small kit to take places, I can pack the 18-70mm and the 70-150mm and be done with it. Two lenses and one convertor would give me the eq. of 28-450mm coverage! Wow, that's pretty slick. If I throw the 28-50mm into the luggage, then I can mount that in case I want a very small "walk-around" lens, which is the physical size of an old "normal". There's a couple of things, yeah.

The Quantaray XLF-50 (Sunpak RD2000), I picked up last month. Very small, not a bunch more powerful than the pop-up, but can be bounced and has a diffuser panel.

And there's the bag. I'm going to use a tiny little Timbuk2 "messenger" style bag, that'll hold the camera, the flash and at least one other lens, along with batteries, memory cards etc. It's great since it completely doesn't look like a camera bag, folds flat, when I need it to, and cost $6 at Goodwill. And that, folks, is pretty much all there is to my compact DSLR system.

So, now that we're done (of course I'll do more later), let's total up. Starting point was the $175, that I sold the D50 for, then of course, the D40 with the 18-55mm "kit" lens was bought for the same amount. Zero sum at this point. The lens sold for $99, and it cost me $10 to ship it, bringing that transaction to $89, which puts me in the plus range. The 28-50mm Tamron was $39.99, which makes the "package" cost to me to be about $135. I had previously bought the flash to go with the D50 so there was no $$ involved with it. So, even if you put the Tamron 300mm ($15), AND the forthcoming 85-210mm ($18) into the equation, on top of the eBay transaction fee from selling the "kit" zoom of $8, I'm still a few bucks in the plus range! I got all this all for the price of the willingness to focus.

Android Tablet: My Photographic Secret Weapon!

Actually; I didn't know. I had a tablet, but I wasn't using it. My wife uses tablet(s) in relation to school. The kids did school work, AND play on theirs, but me......? I've had a tablet for some time now. Got it just about for free, AND it's a nice one too! 

But other than playing Solitiar or Ma Jong Tiles while waiting for the kiddos to finish some activity: PeeWee Baskball practice, Cub Scouts, little girl birthday party, about the only thing I did on it was read. Zinio (when it doesn't crash) has been nice. I've basically ended all paper magazines and switched to the electronic version. Not only is it cheaper, but I don't feels as guilty for contributing to the landfill.Other than that......? You could hear the crickets chirp.

OK, I do use it as my Bible, and I've gotta tell you, it's GREAT for that. I use eSword, which is free, and it's so much easier to find things, plus you can also switch between translations, find maps, get commentaries, and dictionaries as well. All kinds of stuff. It's really awesome in this application....., but again the reading. So is it just a reader? That was the question that I was asking myself not too long ago. That is until, I found it's true purpose in my life.

Photography! No, I don't mean this....., which might be the dumbest thing out there right now.

I mean using a tablet as a repository of photographic tools! Gracious! It's awesome for this! I've just started scratching the surface, but it appears the number and variety of APPs out there are ridiculous, and the vast majority appear to be free. 

It all started with this; the Weston Master III. It was produced from the late 50's into the 60's, and I have one that I love. I was thinking the other day, that using the D40 with the old manual lenses requires me to set everything manually on the camera. That's all fine and good when you aren't in a hurry and can just take several images, checking each and making the necessary adjustments. What if you don't have time, or just want to shoot a few photos and run? I needed a light meter for that. So I started digging around in my drawers to see what I could come up with, and this was the best available. It's old, but it still works. Unfortunately, these old selenium meters aren't the best for low light. What to do? I could get out there and try to buy a newer CDS, or Silicone cell meter, like a Gossen Luna Pro, but you never know whether it's going to be working either! Plus, many of them used mercury batteries which aren't available any more. As this idea was rolling around in my head, I was reading some of my photography magazines (electronic version of course), when I ran across mention of Android App light meters. Further more, I found a YouTube video comparing a few of them.

After a little research and trying out a couple, I found this: The LightMeter App. It struck a cord with me, because it's graphic UI is basically set up like the old style meters that I'm used to using. Of course, this really isn't a good example since if you've probably already figured out, this sort of thing isn't really conducive for use with a big tablet, they are designed for a Smartphone (on which I've already downloaded a few). But that's just an example of what's out there.

There are lots of things; like this field calculators such as the PhotoTools App that can help a photographer calculate depth of field as related to aperture and focal length of lens, Sun Surveyor Lite and Golden Hour to help you know exactly when the light will be the best and the angle that the sun at in your location at a given time. There's Map-A-Pic that you can use the GPS and store good locations for future use for yourself or share with others.

Then there are organization (and sharing) apps so you don't have to wait to get home to see your images on something bigger than 3". There are any number of image editors to allow some level of adjustment in the field before you put your cherished photos out there for everyone to see.

And then, there's the whole world of remote control via smartphone/tablet. I've used the Helicon Remote which seems to interface fine with my Nikon D300, but I haven't tried it with the D40 yet. I've also come across one called the DSLR Remote that's supposed to do either cable or IR. So now, when I go out with my camera(s), there's virtually always, a table or a smartphone with me.

The Lost Compact DSLR System: Part 1 1/2

At the beginning of 2001, it was reported that Olympus and Kodak was joining forces to create a consortium, based on a new standard for digital photography. Since then, Kodak has sadly folded, but the group has gone on to add more members. Of course the "old" standard is now pretty much dead, or some would say that it's morphed into the current "mirrorless" version of micro-4/3rds. 

No, that's not me, or my dad for that matter. That..... is the famed Yoshihisa Maitani. He joined Olympus in 1956 at the age of 23, and would go on to create the Pen, Pen F, and the M-1 (which we know as the OM-1) system while working for that company for the entirety of his illustrious career. Yeah, I have a little bit of a "man-crush" on him. 

Just looking at this cut-away of the Pen F; makes my jaw drop a little bit. It's a single lens reflex, but the mirror box has been turned sideways and so there's no tell-tale penta-prism. The guy is just unique.... and so were his designs. 

In the last few posts, I've been talking about the concept of the compact SLR which he pioneered when the OM-1 was introduced in 1972. The comparison with the then contemporary Practica is stark. One could still pass for modern today, and the other would look at home on the front seat of a Edsel. 

But to me, an even more astounding comparison is this image of if and the Nikon F fully configured for "combat" in their "professional" get-up, complete with motor drives..... WOW! No surprise that some pros were woo'd away to at least give it a try. 

This image is of the E-420. In September of 2006, it's almost identical predecessor, the E-400 was launched for Europe only. However, the Spring of 2007 saw the introduction of E-410, along with the E-510, and E-610 siblings. While the 510/610s had more features, the 410 pretty much had the same capabilities. This would be true of the follow-up model, E-420 as well. In these machines, Olympus finally fulfilled the promise of really compact dimensions that the smaller 4/3rds sensor should have given all along. 

When compared side by side, the differences between it and the Canon EOS Rebel XTi don't jump out at you, but it's really the disparity in mass that's the big thing here. Much of that is due to the size of the Canon lens. It takes a lot more glass to move the difference in light necessary to cover the larger sensor! So, with the bigger sensor, doesn't that make the Canon the clear winner here? Technically true, but in real life in the hands of photographers that these cameras are aimed at? Not even..... the difference isn't going to be anywhere near apparent. So, what do you gain? Well: there's size, there's weight and..... there's innovation. This isn't disparaging of Canon, or any other company for that matter. It's just that Olympus has carved their niche in the photographic world through innovation. They were the David of the Japanese camera manufacturing world and they still are! 

From the very beginning, Olympus has been committed to having a complete professional system. Like Nikon, Canon, and now Sony (previously Konica/Minolta), they have everything under the sun. But more importantly, there's a level of commitment to their product that some manufacturers simply don't have. 

If it's all that awesome, why don't I shoot with it, instead of Nikon? It was a close thing. My cameras could very well have been the above pictured E-3, and E-410 vs. the D-300, and D40 that I have sitting on my desk right now. When I made to switch to DSLR, it was one of the systems under consideration. The main difference came down to my desire to have at my disposal the literally millions of lenses that have been made for the Nikon "F" mount. That, and the availability of the 18-200mm VR super-zoom that not even Canon had at the time. However, I often wonder what it would have been like if I would have gone with Olympus instead of Nikon. 

I will tell you one thing: I'd have been darned irritated when the consortium dropped the old 4/3rds standard when they brought out m4/3rds in August of 2008! But if you don't mind using a "dead" standard and are happy with the lenses that were available for it, then this is a really nice system to be using. They are a little bit harder to find, but they send to sell for less than similarly equipped Canon, Nikons, and even Sonys. So, if yo have a penchant for the quirky, this might be the system for you.


 


 

The Compact DSLR System: Part 1

It's the summer of 1977, and the Konica Autoreflex TC had been introduced the previous year. I'm 16 and standing in a little camera store on University Ave., in Lubbock, Texas looking into a glass case, much like this one at the object of my desire. Things are just so intense in your teenage years. So much so that you can often get a ghost of it when some certain song plays, or you smell something in the air..... I often talk to my Psychology classes about how our memory and how it works....., but of course, they are teens themselves, so they look at me like I've "lost it". Anyway, I remember this camera so clearly that years later, when I'm standing in the space that store had been at, which would become ironically a maker of awards and momentos, called Paddle Tramps, that I can completely bring back the sense of that time. ...... Anyway; I had settled on wanting this camera because 

1. I wanted what every other camera buyer of the time did, a compact system SLR, and 
2. I didn't have any idea that the Canon A-1 was about to be released!

Why compact, and why, the TC? Five years before that, in Cologne, Germany at that years Photokina show, Olympus had set the SLR world on it's collective ear with the introduction of the M-1, later renamed the OM-1 due to Leica's protests over some unimportant model that they had previously used that designation for...... Anyway, all that aside, this not only propels Olympus from respected outsider to the wunderkind of the camera world. 

Every since it's introduction 13 years before, this had been the face of the now dominant Japanese photographic industry! This represented what was then new: combat photography from the jungles of SE Asia, student protest on college campuses, California counter-culture, and moon rockets! All gone in one fell-swoop! Big, old, heavy, dusty and out-of-step! The OM-1 and later the OM-2 sent every camera company in the world scrambling to get something put together that was going to be competitive. Good grief; even professionals were trying out the new camera (although they would mostly return to the Nikon F-2/3, and Canon F-1 soon enough). However, in that space of time between about 1973 and 1977, everybody was going small. Unfortunately, I couldn't afford small. Actually, I couldn't afford Olympus. The Olympus was almost as expensive as the pro Nikons and clearly out of the range of a teenager with part-time jobs.....which left me with the Konica TC. It was a system, and most importantly, it had shutter-priority automation, where you set the shutter speed and the cameras set the aperture. This is what every aspiring photojournalist wanted (or so I believed anyway), because you could be certain that the shutter speed could stop the action. Let those who shoot flowers use Aperture priority! Of course, most importantly, it was cool, small and did I say cool!?!

Fast forward 30 years, and we have gone from film to digital, and oddly, we also went through the whole growth in size path to compact dimensions.....again. Understandably, in the early days of DSLRs, the electronics were still relatively large, so the cameras needed to be bigger. Subsequently, like anything electronic, the successive generations have brought the components down in size as more and more powerful processors and integrated circuits have come into use. The last two major barriers being the elimination of the focusing motor from the body of the camera by using "ring-motors" inside the lenses themselves and the removal of the top info panel on all-but high-end cameras in favor of a larger control LCD on the back of the camera itself. I know what you are thinking: I'm not going to get into the whole "mirrorless" issue today, since I'm classifying those cameras as different than the DSLRs that we're talking about. Not worse, not better, just different.

For this, we have to go back to 2003, and the camera that started the DSLR revolution (at least as far as the consumer market is concerned), the Canon EOS 300D (or Digital Rebel on this side of the pond). It and it's successor, the 350D (built on the same chassis) was and still is the yard stick that all future compact DSLR are measured against. See the layout? The grip, control wheel, the mode dial on the left of the penta-prism? The lack of major controls on the right side of the body? If it looks familiar, huh; that's because, every manufacturer has copied this layout in the last 10 years! 

This change is pretty much the only reason for the major difference in size from the D50 to the D40. Yes, the removal of the focusing motor cuts a bit of height, but not enough to be a difference maker. No; the change from the CF card to SD, makes no difference. They only did that because the expected market for this type of camera is an up-grader from "compact digital" cameras to "beginner" DSLRs. And not having to buy a new card makes it easier for them. Don't believe me, go find a picture of an Olympus E-410/420. It's tiny! It uses a CF card. 

Where am I going with this? It's that the major sea-change originating from the Olympus back in 1972 has finally settled in to the digital realm as well....if you are careful. When Olympus originally made the design changes that they did, it wasn't just cosmetic. It was a change in philosophy. It wasn't just the camera either, they literally redesigned everything in the system to fit the new camera. Eventually it would effect the entire industry. I came to understand what that meant when I put my small (18-70mm f.3.5-4.5) zoom on the D40 and realized that even that lens was a little big. However, when I grabbed my "old" glass made in the late 70's after all the manufacturers redesigned everything, that I found the correct fit. 

 

The Tamron 300mm f/5.6 and my Vivitar 70-150mm f/3.8 fits the D40 like they were designed for it. That's because that they don't have motors built in to them, are made of brass and engineered from the very beginning to work with the Olympus OM-1s and Pentax MXs of the world. As you can see, after the Canon 350D, other cameras have come along and gotten even smaller. Left to right, you have the Olympus E-420, the Pentax K-x, then the Nikon D40. 

The lower end Nikons and Canons have grown a little since the 300D and D40, but last month, Canon released the EOS SL1, which puts them "back in the game". What I'm saying is, that it doesn't have to stop at that 40mm "Pancake" lens (I'm all too aware that BOTH Canon and Pentax "pancakes" in their line-up now). 

I clearly remember every month when my issue of Modern Photography arrived, I'd go right over to the great Herbert Keppler's column and read his thoughts. Quite often, he would be extolling the virtues of a lightweight, compact camera matched with high-performing, but equally lightweight lenses. From those articles, I learned the basics of how to create a traveling kit. You add all this together with a nicely performing compact DSLR, then you have the modern version of what Y. Maitani envisioned 40+ years ago.