Dancing on the Edge of Shadow and Light

Cool things can happen on the edge between shadow and light.  This fan palm was at such a magical spot.  It was among some plants that were shaded from the sun by a wall.  However, the palm was a little higher than the other plants, and it alone was illuminated by backlight, causing it to glow against the shaded background.

RELATED POSTS:
Using Midday Sunlight

Read More

Lastolite Brolly Grip Review: Soft Directional Light Anywhere

This is a preliminary review of the Lastolite Brolly Grip.  This unique lighting accessory allows you or an assistant to hold an umbrella, making it possible to get soft, directional light almost anywhere, without setting up.

In this review, I wanted to focus on using it by myself, without an assistant or light stand.  I also wanted to have a lot of sample shots to show the real-world potential of the Brolly Grip.

When there is no feasible surface to bounce from, one of my favorite light modifiers is a handheld umbrella, a technique that I read about from Bob Krist.  I put together my own version here and later found a rare handheld umbrella made by Propet (reviewed here).  The Propet handheld umbrella worked well, but it had two significant weaknesses: First, the coldshoe does not hold a flash securely (on one occasion, my YN560 fell into the water).  Second, the screws on some of the parts tend to come loose and are not easily replaced.  Plus, the Propet handheld umbrella itself is very hard to find.  In the last couple of years I've only seen it listed on eBay three times.

When Lastolite announced the Brolly Grip I was intrigued even though I already had the Propet bracket.  I thought it was somewhat pricey but not ridiculously so.  I finally took the leap and was surprised that it was actually out of stock.  After a few weeks of waiting, my order came a couple of days ago.

The Lastolite Brolly Grip with Nikon SB-800 and a Creative Light 25" Shoot-Through Umbrella

The Brolly Grip is made of a light but very durable plastic with a matte finish.  The top part of the handle has a removable cold shoe.  The cold shoe can be rotated if you loosen the thumbscrew that holds it in place.  The cold shoe can also be faced backwards if you prefer the grip to be tilted the other way.  The cold shoe doesn't have a receptacle for a locking pin and instead holds the flash through friction and pressure.

The grip holds the flash horizontally, placing it close to the axis of the umbrella, maximizing the use of the umbrella surface.  However, this leads to other problems with optical triggering as discussed below.  It also requires a flash that has a head that can be raised 90 degrees.  The grip has a downward angle of around 30 degrees.  I find this useful for holding the umbrella above the subject or as far off to the side as possible.  If you have a light stand or boom, this could also help you add short light or possibly even a back light (see here).

Just above the grip are two holes for an umbrella to accommodate an 8mm and 10mm shaft.  The bottom of the grip has a hollow receptacle for a 5/8 studs commonly used in light stands.

Strangely, there is no thumbscrew to hold the umbrella.  Instead, you just slide the umbrella shaft in and it is held with friction by an o-ring inside the shaft.  This leads to a few problems as discussed below.

Lastolite has a video demonstrating how the product is used:



SOFT DIRECTIONAL LIGHT ANYWHERE

Lastolite's demo shows good results but the photographer had the benefit of an assistant.  What about the rest of us who don't have VALs?  One of the key benefits of the Brolly Grip after all is the possibility of using it by yourself.  Is it really feasible to use it alone and does it really provide soft directional light in real world conditions?

I took my son to a playground and had the chance to use the Brolly Grip in sunny outdoors with no bounce surfaces available.  I used a Creative Light 25-inch Translucent Umbrella.  For my flash, I used a Nikon SB-800 triggered optically via CLS Advanced Wireless Lighting, using my Nikon D300's popup flash as a commander.  I held the Brolly Grip with one hand and the camera with the other.  When I was holding the Brolly Grip with my right hand, I would cradle the camera below the lens and press the shutter with my ring finger (it helps that I don't use a battery grip and my Tamron 17-50 VC isn't a huge lens).  An alternative to this finger stretching method is to use a remote shutter.

Anyway, here are some of the shots:

Here are some shots where the flash use is more overt:

For testing purposes, I also made some comparison shots showing the difference between ambient only versus the shot with flash (note: in the first and third comparison, the flash shot was already edited in Lightroom; the second set of comparison shots are straight-out-of-the-camera):

Even though I was using a small umbrella and I could only reach so far to the side with my arm, the light does look reasonably soft and directional.  Certainly not always as soft as bounce flash but a huge improvement over direct flash.  Plus, unlike bounce flash, I didn't have to worry about the color of the bounce surface.

CRITICISMS
I have some issues with the design.  First of all, the umbrella holder doesn't have any kind of thumbscrew or clamp to hold an umbrella securely.  Instead, there is a thin rubber o-ring inside each slot to hold an umbrella with friction.  On one hand, it is easy to insert an umbrella.  On the other hand, there is a risk that the umbrella might slide off.  I'm especially worried about the inevitable wear on the o-ring, which may make the grip more loose in the future.  Another disadvantage is that your umbrella shaft must be exactly 8mm or 10mm.  That worked for two of my umbrellas but my 19" reflective umbrella was tapered so it's too loose for the 8mm.  I also don't know how well the slots can hold umbrellas with hexagonal (as opposed to round) shafts.  My workaround for this issue is to wrap a little tape around the shaft to make the shaft thicker and allow it to be held more tightly.

The second biggest issue I have with the design is the cold shoe.  The cold shoe does not use a 1/4-20 hole.  Instead, it uses a non-standard size.  This makes it hard to use a third party cold shoe such as Nikon's AS-19 Flash Stand or a Frio Cold Shoe.  If you have a thumbscrew that is long enough, it is possible to use a Frio.  However, I haven't found a thumbscrew long enough to use with my Nikon SC-29 TTL Cord.

I have a few other minor gripes such as:

• the grip angle is non-adjustable, making it less useful when paired with a light stand;
• I wish they included a 1/4 and 3/8 spigot so that the grip can be used with a tripod.  Might as well include a hole in that spigot too so that the lower thumbscrew can securely hold the spigot and prevent the grip from rotating.

TRIGGERING OPTIONS
One of the challenges with the Brolly Grip is the need for reliable triggering.  If you're using the grip handheld, then the simplest solution is a TTL cord.  Triggering would be very reliable and simple - just like using the flash on-camera.  Plus, you can position the flash in any direction without having to worry about whether the flash will receive the signal.  Unfortunately, because of the non-standard screw size for the cold shoe, you'll need either a long enough screw to attach the TTL cord to the Brolly Grip or you'll need a shoe-to-1/4 adapter.

Using a radio trigger is another alternative.  There are many reliable radio triggering solutions such as a Radiopopper.  On the other hand, radio triggers with TTL capability are quite expensive.

The remaining alternative is optical triggering.  Optical triggering is not ideal with the Brolly Grip for at least a few reasons.  First, the Brolly Grip places the flash horizontally.  On most flashes, the sensor for optical triggering faces the front or the side of the flash (on the SB-800, the sensor faces mostly to the side but slightly to the front).  When the flash is placed horizontally, the sensor can only face one side of the flash.  With the Brolly Grip that means that if you use switch the grip from one hand to the other, the sensor will face away from the popup flash. My workaround for this is to hold the grip upside down if I switch hands.  If I will use that side for a while, then I rotate the cold shoe so that the flash sensor will again face the popup flash.

Second, if the Brolly Grip is used outdoors in bright sunlight, then a popup flash as commander may have difficulty putting out enough light to be detected by the remote flash.

Despite these limitations, optical triggering isn't so bad in the real world.  Most of the time I was able to trigger the SB-800 successfully with my popup flash.  Sometimes, when the SB-800 wasn't triggered, all I would need to do is to move the flash a bit forward to bring it within the scope of the popup flash.  Considering that I was shooting mostly in bright sunlight (i.e. almost the worst case scenario), I would say that optical triggering is a realistic alternative, even if it isn't ideal.

Picking flowers for mommy

USABILITY
We've already seen that it is possible to get soft directional light with the Brolly Grip.  However, how practical is it for real world use?

In my view, if I have the option to use bounce flash, I would prefer to bounce for simplicity, softness and directional control.  If bouncing is not an option but the ambient light is good, I might use a ring flash instead as fill for simplicity and ease of use.  For other situations when bouncing is not an option and the ambient light is not favorable, a handheld umbrella would probably be my preferred solution.  In that regard, the Brolly Grip is the best handheld umbrella I have right now.

UMBRELLA OPTIONS
The Brolly Grip can be ordered by itself or as a kit with a 19.7 inch (50cm) shoot-through umbrella (also available separately).  I already have a couple of small umbrellas (a 19 inch reflective and a 25 inch shoot-through) so I just ordered the grip.  I later found out that Lastolite also makes a 36 inch (90cm) TriFold Umbrella that folds down to just 10 inches.  I've ordered the TriFold Umbrella and will post about it shortly.  If you want to see a list of other small umbrellas, check out this post.

RELATED POSTS:

1. Handheld Umbrella - An Excellent Light Modifier
2. Handheld Umbrella Indoors
3. Small Umbrellas
4. Ultimate Handheld Umbrella - Propet Umbrella Bracket
5. Creative Light Shoot-Through Umbrella
6. Do Small Modifiers Work? 
7. 12 Alternatives to Bouncing from Ceilings and Walls

DISCLOSURE: I'm not affiliated with Amazon or Lastolite nor am I sponsored by them.  I bought the Brolly Grip for my own use and am providing this review for informational purposes.  I do have an Amazon Associates account and in this article I've linked to Amazon pages for the products mentioned, which means if you purchase the product I will get an approximately 4% commission (without any additional cost to you and which is a welcome way of supporting this blog).

MORE SAMPLE SHOTS

Read More

Winning a Photo Contest

Winning a photo contest both is and isn't a big deal.  It isn't a big deal in the sense that a real artist would care more about expressing his or her idea and less about the audience reaction.  On the other hand, I believe that art is a form of communication that becomes perfected when it is received by another person in a meeting of minds.

I entered the shot above in a photo contest and it was one of the winning entries.  This is the second year in a row when I've had a winning entry in this contest and I thought I'd talk about the approach I used in making this photo.

Ideally, I would like my photo to be something that is worth looking at.  It's not enough to be beautiful if it's something that has been done before.

There are amazing photos that simply demand attention because everything comes together perfectly.  For example, while hiking in the mountains, you capture a scene where dramatic clouds have crepuscular rays shining through them, illuminating a colorful and picturesque town in a valley with a vast field of green grass, with colorful flowers in the foreground, complete with butterflies.  And there's a triple rainbow in the background.  If you get a miraculous scene like that, then obviously that shot would win any contest where that photo falls within the theme.

Most of the time though, I'm working with a mundane subject that people have already seen many times before and I have to work hard to make the shot deserve another look.

First, I make sure that the photo doesn't have any defects.  By defect, I mean anything that detracts from the photo, such as a distracting object in the background.

Second, I make sure to control the most significant aspects of most photos: composition, lighting, exposure and color.  If any of those fundamental aspects are less than good, then the shot likely will not meet the required threshold.

Third, if possible I try to have a strong secondary element in the shot.  All photos have a primary subject or theme. However, I try to make the photo so that it has a secondary element or theme that is also worthy of attention.  For example, a photo could on its face be a portrait but the background is itself an interesting subject.

Is it a candid portrait or is it a landscape photo?  It's both!

Lastly, I think of as many ways as possible to make the photo special.  I ask myself, what would make someone interested in this particular photo?  It could be any number of things:

• a beautiful subject
• an exotic location
• a powerful facial expression
• an interesting or unusual point-of-view
• perfect timing
• amazing texture
• amazing details
• interesting shadows
• humor

The possibilities are infinite!  In my view, the more "points" I can add, the stronger the photo becomes. Usually I think of at least 4 points, although a very special point could count as 2 points on my scale.

EXAMPLE
The shot above is of one of the buildings at Los Angeles International Airport.  I thought about shooting it at sunset while there were dramatic clouds in the sky (not so common in the dry Southern California weather). Finally, there was a storm that created the conditions for dramatic clouds.  For this shot, I used my Nikon D300 and the versatile Tamron 17-50 2.8 VC.

Minimizing distractions: When I got to the spot where I wanted to take a shot, I looked for the best vantage point with the fewest street lamps and trees.  At the time I was taking the shot there were also crows flying around.  The crows were not appropriate for the photo so I waited for the crows to fly away before taking the shot.

Composition:  I chose a slightly longer focal length (75mm equivalent) to make the clouds appear a little larger than normal (relative to the building) and to get fewer street lamps and palm trees in the shot.  See here. In framing the shot I placed the building according to the rule of thirds.  I waited for picturesque clouds to move into the background to complement the subject.

Exposure:  Exposure can have a couple of meanings for me. First, it means the overall exposure value chosen.  In that regard, important highlights and shadows should be retained.  Second, it means the selection of aperture, shutter speed and ISO within the same exposure value in order to achieve the best results.  I selected an aperture of f/11 to give me deep depth of field (to keep the building and clouds sharp).  At f/16 I become concerned about diffraction.  I also focused not at the building, but at a point that was closer (around the closer streetlamp), in order to maximize depth of field with the hyperfocal distance.  I chose the base ISO for lowest noise (according to pixel peepers, ISO 160 is the real base ISO for the Nikon D300).  I selected a shutter speed to get an exposure value that would retain details in the highlights of the clouds.  That turned out to be 1/13.  That's pretty slow but I wasn't concerned because I was using a tripod.

Lighting:  I chose to take the photo while there were cloudy skies, instead of harsh direct sunlight that would have made the building washed out.  There was also one other lighting decision as discussed below.

Color: To get the most intense colors in the clouds, I waited for the last rays of sunset to hit the clouds.  The other thing I did for color is to change the white balance.  I altered the color temperature and tint to get the colors in the shot.

Secondary Element:  The literal subject of the photo is the building.  However, another significant secondary element is the clouds.  Without the clouds, this photo would look just like any other of the hundreds of photos of this building.

Special Effects:  Here are the points I was able to put together for this photo (some already referenced previously).

1. Golden hour.
2. Dramatic clouds.
3. Interesting reflection.  I caught the sunset in the reflection of the building.
4. Contrasting light conditions.  The reflection of the building here is facing west.  As the sun began to set, west of this building, the clouds were already in dusk.  Because of the reflection, two different "time zones" with distinct light conditions were captured in the shot.
5. Spotlight.  I waited until the clouds overhead parted slightly to shine a "spotlight" on the building (that's why the left part of the building is brighter than the right part). This not only highlighted the building but allowed me to get a darker exposure for the clouds (relative to the sunlight), making the clouds even more dramatic.

So there you have it!

RELATED POSTS
What's the point of having different lenses?
Environmental Portrait: Go Short or Long?
Brushing the Sky
Mitchell Kanashkevich's Captivating Color

Read More

When NOT to Use Lens Correction in Lightroom

One of my favorite Lightroom features is lens correction, which can correct vignetting, chromatic aberration and distortion.  I find this really useful because my lenses are not pro-grade and suffer from these issues.  With lens correction, my photos look like they are from more expensive lenses. :)

I used to assume that I ought to apply lens correction to all my images.  However, I found out that sometimes, it's better not to use lens correction (or to choose which issues to correct for).

I recently took a portrait of my family and some family friends.  I used a Tamron 17-50 VC at 17mm, which exhibits very noticeable complex distortion (the middle of the image bulges).  Here's what the distortion pattern looks like:

Notice that the middle of the closet door bulges, but the top and bottom do not.  This is one of the weaknesses of this otherwise great lens.

Anyway, back to the portrait that I took.  Here's the image without lens correction:

Here's the image with lens correction:

If you look at the "corrected" image, the faces of the people at the edges look more distorted (and less flattering) than those of the uncorrected image.  Take a closer look at my son's face, which appears skewed in the corrected image.

So in this case, I chose not to apply the lens correction.

Fortunately, Lightroom also allows not just turning lens correction on or off completely, but also selectively applying the lens correction to correct vignetting, chromatic aberration or distortion or any combination of those issues.  You can also select the degree of correction of each issue.

RELATED POSTS:
Intro to Lightroom
Tamron 17-50 VC First Impressions
Creating a lens correction profile for JPEGs

Read More

Happy First Birthday, Sophia!

We celebrated our daughter's first birthday with an intimate lunch party for family and friends.  These are some of my favorite party photos that I've taken.

Red velvet cake by Susie Cakes

Maty as the balloon monster

Read More

Photoshop Elements 10 Depth of Field Effect

I tried out Photoshop Elements 10's depth of field effect on the shot above.  It's a big improvement over the original shot:

The original shot.  What's with the evil eye, lady?

This is one effect that I can't pull off in Lightroom.  To create the appearance of a shallow depth of field with PSE 10, I used the guided mode to walk me through the steps.  First, I used a selection brush to identify the subject.  Next I clicked on the button "add blur."  Finally I dragged a lever to determine the intensity of the effect.  It's a pretty simple process, although a similar result can probably be achieved using a gaussian blur with a layer mask.

Read More

Quick Tip: Additional Camera Profiles

Here's an old tip but it's something I have to remind myself about every time I reinstall Lightroom: If you have Adobe Lightroom or Camera Raw, you can install additional camera profiles that will allow you to emulate the color modes from your camera (neutral, vivid, etc.).

I learned this tip from Mitchell Kanashkevich's Understanding Post-Processing (reviewed here) but I've also seen it been mentioned by Matt Kloskowski.  Anyway, here's the link:
http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/entitlement/index.cfm?e=labs_cameraprofiles

Just download the file and double-click to install.  You'll then find new camera profiles available (under "Camera Calibration" in Lightroom).  FYI this works only for raw and DNG files.  Also be aware that the types of profiles that are available are camera-specific.  For example, Nikon raw files will show D2X Mode 1, D2X Mode 2, etc. while Canon raw files will show Canon camera profiles.

Read More

Nikon P300: Cheap Enthusiast Compact Camera

Choosing a digital camera is easy.  Choosing an inexpensive but good digital camera is a bit more challenging.  Each camera touts its own fancy-sounding features, some of which are just gimmicks, making it hard to pick out cameras that have the features that really matter to us photographers, at a reasonable price.I was looking for a camera that had these qualities:
- low noise for a compact camera
- zoom with a wide angle (28mm or wider)
- PASM, decent controls
- flash exposure compensation
- scene mode for my wife
- decent video capability (at least 720p, preferably with continuous autofocus and optical zoom).
- no serious problems
- around $250.
Based on those criteria, I chose the Nikon P300.  Hit the jump for a review.


My wife was looking for a compact camera and within our limited budget, I picked the Nikon P300 for the reasons I posted here.  On paper, the P300 seems to have many of the strengths of the Canon S95 and even some of the new features of the Canon S100 at a substantially lower cost.  More importantly it had all the important features I absolutely needed:
- low noise: was almost the same as the class leaders
- wide angle: as wide as 24mm
- PASM, decent controls: yup.  It even has two dials.
- flash exposure compensation: yes.
- scene mode for my wife: yup.
- decent video capability: 1080p in stereo with continuous AF and optical zoom. Super slow motion also available.
- no serious problems: none that I could find.
- around $250: yup.
I went ahead and ordered the P300, and received it a couple of weeks ago.  Here are my impressions, broken into a few categories: basics, controls, shooting, video, strobist use, image quality.  Finally, I close with some comments on what it's like to shoot with this camera compared to a DSLR.

BASICS

• Extremely light.  Other people have said it but it still surprised me.  The camera seems half as light as my phone.  It actually isn't (the P300 is 189g with battery and SD card vs. 137g for the iPhone) but it still feels unreal. 
• The build quality itself seems ok, though almost all parts seem to be made of plastic.
• The size is about right - on the large end of "pocketable."  Thicker than the usual slim compact camera.
• Battery life is acceptable.  Just enough to last me a whole day of shooting with moderate use of flash and videos.  The battery life meter is not very reliable. It appears 'full' for about 90% of its life, when suddenly it will appear half depleted then fully depleted within a few minutes.
• An external charger is optional.  Would have been nice if Nikon included it.  Without an external charger you have to use the camera to charge the battery.

CONTROLS

• The menus and buttons are very responsive.  This is something that I've taken for granted but it is an issue with some cameras such as the Nikon P7000, so it's worth mentioning here.
• Controls and interface are intuitive (at least for me, a Nikon DSLR user). I haven't had much need to look at the manual, except for special automated functions I'm not familiar with.
• Some often-used functions are buried in the menus, including ISO, flash exposure compensation, and video resolution and frame rate.  However, there is a quick menu access to "vividness" and "hue".  Argh.
• Deleting images takes several button presses.  This is somewhat annoying.

SHOOTING

24mm

• I find the focal length range very useful.  At the wide end, the lens is equivalent to 24mm.  I did not find myself wanting a wider focal length (but if Nikon wants to make it even wider next time, that would be great!).  On the tele end, I found it long enough most of the time.
• Focusing speed is slower than a DSLR but is acceptable.  In normal conditions it's not an issue.  It's only when it gets dim that it becomes noticeable.  In fairly dark conditions, it can struggle to acquire focus even with an AF assist light.  I noticed also that it is easier to focus when using the wide angle than tele (presumably because of the larger aperture at the wide end).
• I have no complaints about focusing accuaracy.  However, in Auto mode (where the camer chooses the focus point), the camera sometimes seems to have some difficulty picking out the intended subject from the background.  The camera chooses a correct focus point about half the time, unless I purposely put the subject near the center, acquire focus, then re-compose.  The P300 does have face priority focus which works better and picks out faces relatively well.
• The automatic and semi-automatic exposure modes give me an exposure that is usually close to what I intended, but the camera tends to select slow shutter speeds instead of shooting at higher ISOs.
• ISO display.  By default, Auto ISO is active.  However, one problem when Auto ISO is active is that the ISO isn't displayed.
• Live histogram.  A live histogram (luminance only) shows up when you're adjusting exposure compensation in P, A or S.  The live histogram is reasonably representative of the histogram of the actual shot (assuming flash is not used).  However, there is no live histogram in manual mode, which I found weird.
• Manual mode.  The manual mode is so-so to use.  On the plus side, I had no difficulty getting used to changing the shutter speed or aperture using the P300's dials.  The light meter was also easy enough to see.  On the down side, the only metering modes are matrix and center, which defeats using the manual mode for the zone system.  Spot metering would have made the manual mode much more useful.
• Night Landscape mode.  One of the automatic features of the P300 that I appreciate is a night-shooting mode.  What this does is to take several photos then combine them (albeit slightly cropped).  I'm not sure what the P300 exactly does when it "combines" the images but for parts of the photo that don't move, the image does look clean and not so blurry even without a tripod.
• HDR Backlighting mode.  I haven't tried this yet but it appears to function like the iPhone HDR shooting mode.  The camera takes a couple of shots and combines them to capture a wider dynamic range of highlights and shadows.
• Panorama mode.  The P300 has two panorama modes.  In the Easy mode, you press the shutter then move the camera around you, either in 180 degrees or 360 degrees.  The problem with this mode is that it doesn't really know how far you've turned, so I find it very difficult to reach 180 degrees or 360 degrees.  Instead, the recording usually stops well short of the angle selected.  The part that does get recorded looks ok though.
• The P300 has another panorama mode that facilitates stitching a panorama using the supplied Panorama Maker 5 or other software.  In this mode, you take a shot of the scene then the edge of the scene you took is shown on the side as a translucent image which helps you align the next image.  When you take that image, it is again shown as a translucent image to facilitate alignment of the next shot and so on.

IMAGE QUALITY

• Let's start with the bad news.  The image quality is ok for small prints but for prints larger than 8x12 for example, the image is not very detailed.  Even at the base ISO setting of 160, tiny details look smudged.  Although the nominal resolution is 12mp, it holds far less detail than my 10mp d300.
• The other limitation to the P300 is that it only does JPEGs not raw.  That means that you have less latitude to adjust white balance (for correction or creative purposes). Usually I find the white balance to be slightly on the warm side.  I don't mind though.
• With respect to color and contrast, straight out of the camera, the images look a bit flat. I prefer to add a +1 to the Vividness setting for a little punch. Vividness +2 is also ok though the skin tones look unnaturally orange.  If you have Lightroom it's easy enough to apply a medium contrast tone curve or a customized tone curve to add a bit of punch.

Straight out of the camera image:

straight out of the camera

Edited with Lightroom 3:

With minor edits in Lightroom

Those are the most significant limits I can think of.  The good news is that if you don't pixel peep, the image from a P300 can be made to look similar to that of a DSLR in terms of color and contrast.  If I print a 4x6 image from the P300 and a similar one from a D300, I have difficulty distinguishing the images.  At 8x12, I can spot the difference readily if I pay attention to very tiny details but might easily overlook the differences if the P300 image were mixed with D300 shots.  For a non-photographer like my wife, she cannot tell the difference while looking at an 8x12, even when I tell her what to look for.

Below are two files so you can compare for yourself.  I took shots of a nearly identical scene with identical lighting using the P300 and the D300. I then tweaked the images slightly in Lightroom: I first applied a medium contrast tone curve to the P300 image (by default the tone curve is linear).  I also adjusted the D300's color temperature to make it a bit warmer.  Note that this is NOT a scientific comparison - I took these comparison shots on a whim so there are many differences between the two that make the comparison non-scientific.  For one thing, the exposures are very different.  I used 1600 ISO with the D300 whereas the P300 chose an ISO of 320.  Shutter speed of the D300 is 1/100 while the P300 is at 1/30 increasing the chance of blur.  Nonetheless, if you want, you can print a 4x6 and 8x12 for comparison:

P300 sample (click to download).


D300 sample (click to download).


Here's another pair for comparison.  Without looking at the filename or EXIF and without zooming in, can you tell which was shot with the P300 and which one was shot with a D300?

In terms of noise, I prefer to keep it at ISO 400 or lower if possible.  800 is ok with me although details start getting lost.  At 1600, the image looks smudged but usable.  ISO 3200 is not great but is somewhat tolerable if you have no better alternative.  Here's a sample of the 3200, with further adjustments in Lightroom:

Shot with the P300 at 3200 ISO, with noise reduction (and desaturation of purple chroma noise) via Lightroom 3.

1400 ISO straight out of the camera - no adjustments except resizing to 1600px.

VIDEO

• It is very easy and convenient to record videos thanks to the dedicated video recording button.  No need to switch shooting modes or anything.
• For normal scenes, the video quality is good enough that I don't miss my Canon HD camcorder.  The P300 even has optical zoom and full-time autofocus during video.  The audio is not great but is acceptable.  Finally, the P300 has an AE-lock during video that can keep the exposure constant.
• I also like the slow-motion video modes.  The slow-mo videos look cool.  Too bad you can't switch to slow-mo on the fly (instead you have to go through the menus).
• The only thing that prevents the video from being a perfect substitute for a dedicated camcorder is its performance in dim lighting.  There are a couple of things that make the video mode less useful in dim conditions.  First, unlike many camcorders, there is no slow shutter mode (for extra dark conditions such as filming fireworks).  Second, there is no video light (on my Casio Exilim EX-V7, the flash assist could be used as a video light).

STROBIST USE

Off-camera flash triggered optically with the P300

One of the reasons I chose the P300 over other compact cameras such as the Canon SD4000 is the prospect of using it with an off-camera flash.  I'll make it brief - it *is* possible to use this with off-camera flash but this is *not* a good camera for strobist use.

Yes, off-camera flash use is possible via optical sync.  The popup fires only in TTL but at least there's a flash exposure compensation up to -2.0 FEC.  If your external flash has a digital optical slave (i.e. one that can ignore TTL preflashes, such as the YN560) or is a Nikon flash with an SU-4 mode (such as the SB-900, SB-800 or SB-700), then you can indeed use manual off-camera flash with the P300.

Even with the ability to reduce flash exposure compensation (FEC), however the on-camera flash produces noticeable shadows when the subjects are near walls.  I also find that even with a -2.0 FEC adjustment, the flash still tends to be fairly bright.

I took this shot with a P300.  The popup flash was on TTL -2.0 FEC but the shadow of the flash is still visible.

The other problem is that the lens has a variable aperture throughout the zoom range (f/1.8 at 24mm or f/4.9 at 100mm).  Given that your external flash can only be used in manual or auto mode (not TTL), then you may have to keep adjusting the power whenever you zoom.

If your priority is to get a camera that will seriously be able to shoot strobist style, I would instead recommend getting a camera with a hotshoe or a PC sync port.  It will be more expensive but you won't have to mess with the optical sync.  I would also look for a camera with a lens that has an aperture that doesn't change as much as you zoom (e.g. Fuji X10, Olympus XZ-1, Lumix LX-5, Samsung EX-1). Alternatively, you can buy a compatible external flash to allow TTL operation.

SMALL CAMERAS VS. DSLRs

When we got the P300, I viewed it as little more than a fancy point-and-shoot, not a real tool for photography.  How could it hold a candle to my DSLRs?  My Nikon D70 costs less (when bought used from ebay) and has better features than this.  I would say that if someone is looking for a DSLR substitute, they would indeed be sorely disappointed with the limitations of these small cameras.  Detail, sensor noise and depth of field control are just some ways that a DSLR handily beats these small cameras.  There is just no comparison.

And IMO, that's the point.  After shooting with the P300 for a while, I see it simply as a completely different tool, not meant to replace a DSLR.  It's like using a DSLR is similar to oil painting, while these small cameras are similar to using watercolors.  You get far less detail and far less control but that's irrelevant - it's just a different kind of photography, imho.

I think I'm also beginning to understand what Neil and Zack have been saying about the appeal of small cameras like the X100 and this P300.  It felt relaxing (mentally and physically) not to have to haul around a bag full of camera gear.  I can imagine it's like being a professional speechwriter.  Although you can compose beautiful prose, sometimes you just want to communicate casually and not be forced into thinking about the world-changing ramifications of your work.  At the same time the P300 has most of the controls I need to create the image that I want, which leaves me to think more about the photo itself and less about the gear.

So if you're looking for a cheaper way to have a DSLR or DSLR-like features, this is NOT the way to go.  This is not a substitute for a DSLR and I would argue that no compact camera can ever replace a DSLR, now or in the future.  Get a used DSLR instead.  I got my Nikon D70 for $200 on ebay.

If you're looking for a smaller DSLR substitute, this is probably not the camera for you either.  You may instead want to check out the mirrorless cameras, which tend to be smaller than DSLRs.

If you're looking for a small AND cheap DSLR substitute, then check out the entry-level mirrorless cameras.  You won't have the best controls and will miss some features (e.g. wireless flash) but it is possible to get in the game for around the same cost as a high-end compact:

• Olympus E-PL1 with 14-42 ($379).  4/3 sensor (2x crop).
• Sony NEX-3 with 18-55 ($461). APS-C sensor (1.5x crop).
• Sony NEX-C3 with 18-55 ($599).  APS-C sensor (1.5x crop).

If you want a camera that you can bring anywhere and shoot discreetly whenever you feel inspired to do so, and you would like to be more concerned about composition, color, capturing the moment, and beautiful light from available light sources than about maximizing sharpness and capturing the most minute details, then a compact camera may be right for you.  In that regard the P300 fulfills that role for around $250.

The biggest drawbacks of the P300 compared to more expensive enthusiast cameras are: slower lens (on the telephoto end), no raw mode, and no hotshoe.

DSLRs and compact cameras: simply different ways of shooting

OTHER HIGH-END/ENTHUSIAST COMPACT CAMERAS UNDER $600:
Unless otherwise noted, all of these compact cameras have full manual controls, low noise (for a compact camera), raw mode, wide angle, image stabilization, a hotshoe and 720p video or better.  They are all under $600 (the approximate cost of entry-level DSLRs).  I did not include interchangeable lens cameras due to the significant difference in size.  The prices shown here are subject to change.

• Canon S95 ($336). 28-105mm f/2-4.9. No hotshoe.
• Nikon P7000 ($339).  28-200mm f/2.8-5.6.  Much cheaper than P7100, can use an external flash as commander.  Optical viewfinder. Disadvantages: slow menu, raw takes 4-5 seconds (cured with firmware 1.1).  Some samples have a lens cover that does not fully open.
• Samsung EX1/TL500 ($354).  24mm-72mm f/1.8-2.4.  OLED screen. Articulating screen.  Disadvantages: limited video (640x480 @ 30fps).
• Lumix LX-5 ($369). 24-90mm f/2-3.3.  Manual video controls available. Disadvantages: fiddly lens cap. Poor weather sealing on some samples.
• Canon S100 ($429). 24-120mm f/2-5.9. High-speed burst. Slow-mo video. No hotshoe.
• Nikon P7100 ($499). 28-200mm, f/2.8-5.6.  Can use an external flash as commander. Optical viewfinder. Fixed P7000 defects, has articulating LCD.
• Canon G12 ($499). 28-140mm f/2.8-4.5. ISO dial. Articulating LCD. Optical viewfinder.
• Olympus XZ-1 ($499). 28-112, f/1.8-2.5 (!). OLED screen. Built-in wireless flash commander (!). Disadvantages: no AE-L button, strong noise reduction on JPEGs.
• Fuji X10 ($599). Equivalent to 28-112mm, f/2-2.8. Fuji EXR sensor.
• Sigma DP2S ($639). 41mm f/2.8. APS-C sensor (1.5x crop).  Disadvantage: limited focal length.

MORE P300 SAMPLES
Meanwhile here are a few more samples from the P300.

Read More