Better Family Photos: nikkor

Last weekend I took our kids to Disneyland - just the three of us. It was my first time to bring them there by myself, so instead of my usual two camera combo, I just brought one camera and one lens - the Nikon D600 and the Nikkor 24-70 2.8G.

In this post I will discuss how the combination performed in terms of:
- versatility
- image quality
- autofocus speed and accuracy
- low light performance (autofocus and image quality)
- dynamic range

(Click on the pictures for higher-resolution versions. FYI no additional sharpening was used - only LR defaults. All shots were handheld with no flash. Except as otherwise noted, I did not apply noise reduction, clarity, vibrance or saturation.)
VERSATILITY
I was initially concerned that I didn't have a telephoto lens or ultrawide angle lens with me, but the Nikkor 24-70 2.8G covered many kinds of shots, from scene setters to close-up portraits. To me, the 24mm had a similar feel to my Tokina 11-16 and the 70mm portraits felt tight enough to isolate the subject.

Traffic Jam. 24mm

36mm. Clarity +15

45mm

56mm

70mm

IMAGE QUALITY
For controlled shots, I found the images were sharp, even wide open at f/2.8.

The 24-70's bokeh is reasonably good in my opinion, though not in the same league as the Sigma 50 1.4:

The one thing that I was not impressed with was the amount of flare I was getting. Please note that I did have a UV filter on (reviewed here), so I will look into this again in the future, without a UV filter. UPDATE 10/12/12: I found that the rear element of my lens had a smudge in it. I have since cleared the smudge, but I suspect the flare that I saw was from the smudge. Will retest.

AUTOFOCUS SPEED AND ACCURACY
Consistent with previous tests, I found the D600's autofocus to be very good, speedily acquiring focus on active subjects. Although the focus point was not always perfect, a high percentage of the shots had more than acceptable focus. As expected, it was a lot easier to get good focus with an aperture of f/4.0 or f/5.6 than f/2.8.

I was surprised that the D600 and 24-70 were able to focus quickly enough to capture fast-moving subjects, even when I had no time to select the AF point. The ride was at full speed in the shot below and IIRC the camera was on Auto Area AF with AF-C:

LOW LIGHT PERFORMANCE
Although we visited Disneyland in the daytime, we did drift into more dimly lit areas and it also got dimmer toward the end of the day. On previous trips, I probably would have used flash under the same circumstances but on this occasion, I wanted to see what the Nikon D600 could do. In my opinion, using high ISO in dim lighting is a more realistic test of a camera's high ISO performance than using a well-lit test scene. (Note: The scenes below might look brighter than they actually were because I adjusted the contrast.)

From prior testing, I found that the D600's high ISO performance was exceptional for the viewing sizes that I normally use. I therefore allowed the Auto ISO to choose any ISO, all the way up to 25600. Sometimes, the camera would choose weird ISO settings like 8063. Not sure why but it wasn't an issue for me. Anyway, here are some high ISO samples. No noise reduction used except as noted.

2800 ISO

8063 ISO

I can play too! 10,159 ISO

One thing that I like about the D600's high ISO is that it can still retain detail. I prefer a noisier but more detailed image than one that has no noise but also no detail. Another benefit of the D600 is that because of its high resolution, noise reduction is more effective if and when applied.

20,000 ISO. Noise reduction +30. Saturation -22.

25,600 ISO. Noise reduction +50. Clarity +31. Saturation -20.

I also want to note how well the D600's autofocus performed in these low light conditions. The last couple of shots above were in a very dim room lit by a low-wattage incandescent bulb. The last shot was at 25600 ISO, f/2.8, 1/80, or about an Exposure Value of 1. It was dim enough that it was hard to see into the shadows with my naked eyes. IIRC the AF assist did not activate because the AF point wasn't in the middle. Even in such extreme circumstances the D600 and 24-70 focused with no hesitation at all.

DYNAMIC RANGE
One thing that I was looking for in the D600 was its dynamic range. I have a Fuji S5, which I love, and I wanted a camera that would have a dynamic range that could match that of the S5.

When we visited Disneyland, the sun was blazing, providing a good opportunity to test the D600's dynamic range. Here are some examples that amply demonstrate the D600's DR:

In this shot, Belle was wearing a satin-like glove which fell under direct sunlight. Nonetheless, none of the details of the glove were lost.

This following scene was extremely backlit. It was hard for me to see much more than silhouettes against the sun's glare. It was the kind of scene that is the specialty of the S5. The D600 performed just as well, retaining all details with the exception of specular highlights (note that the delicate diffuse highlights, such as the glossy surfaces of Dumbo were not blown out).

Now I have to come clean about a couple of things. For these DR shots, the straight-out-of-the-camera didn't look like the final images that you see here. Second, I had to adjust the automatic exposure of some of these shots. You'll see what I mean when I post in more detail about the D600's dynamic range. In the meantime, here are more samples.

MORE SAMPLES

Smile for daddy!

Over the weekend, we visited Knott's Berry Farm, one of the first theme parks in the U.S. What I like about Knott's is that the lines are much shorter than those of Disneyland therefore we get to experience more rides within the same amount of time. I also think Knott's has a more interesting variety of rides for young children like our 5-year old, and has more thrill rides (though not as many as Magic Mountain). Although the production value is not as high as that of Disneyland, it is still quite high.

During our visit the heat was intense, reaching 95°F (35°C), just one degree below the all-time record of 96 for that area, and 10 degrees hotter than the average for this time of the year. With the sun blazing overhead, the dynamic range was very wide. I used two different exposure strategies to deal with the dynamic range.

PROTECTING HIGHLIGHTS
When the ambient is very bright, it is very easy to exceed the highlight range of a digital camera and blow the highlights. I used to not care so much about it myself. In the shot below, you can see that the highlights from the sunlight-as-kicker have no detail at all.

However, when I started learning about shooting film, I became more attentive to highlights. With print film (negative film) I have tremendous latitude for exposing highlights, and it's almost impossible to blow highlights. With digital, once a certain threshold of light is reached, the sensor can't record any more details, and all I suddenly get is white (i.e. blown highlights). Blown highlights are therefore one indicator that the image was shot digitally.

(BTW there's nothing wrong per se with looking digital. It's just a personal preference. I grew up during a time when digital video was used mostly for lower-budget movies and shows.)

On this occasion I was using two cameras, the Fuji S5 Pro and the Nikon D90. They have different amounts of shadow range and highlight range therefore I used different exposure strategies. In the shots below, I took some test shots to show the effect of the exposure strategies. For the S5, I took a baseline shot using its 'standard' dynamic range mode, and another shot at the same exposure but this time activating its full 400% dynamic range (you can ignore the absence of a highlight on the neck of the baseline shot -- the sun was going down and a shadow fell on the cheek and neck of the mannequin head). I also took a pair of shots with the Nikon D90: first a baseline shot with a normal exposure, and a second shot that was deliberately underexposed by two stops. BTW these were at ISO 400, the widest dynamic range for the D90.

In postprocessing I adjusted the shots to recover the highlights and in the case of the underexposed D90 shot, to normalize the exposure as well. Here is the result:

With the S5's standard mode, there was almost no highlight recovered. Conversely, with the 400% dynamic range mode, all highlights were fully recovered. There was not a single pixel that was blown.

With the D90's normal exposure, I was able to recover a few of the highlights but you can see large patches that were blown (the temple, cheekbone and the entire side of the neck). However, with the deliberately underexposed shot, most of the highlights could be recovered. There is only a patch of lost highlight near the base of the neck.

Full resolution S5 400% DR with adjustment (click to download)

Full resolution D90 -2EV with adjustment (click to download)

The downside of this deliberate underexposure is the greater amount of noise in the midtone and shadow areas (after all, I needed to increase exposure 2 stops in postprocessing to compensate for the underexposure). For me, I usually prefer having extra noise (and using noise reduction) than losing relevant highlights.

---

Back to Knott's Berry Farm. The sky was cloudless for most of the afternoon, so with the S5, I used manual exposure and set the exposure for the shadow. Here's a sample shot, straight-out-of-the-cam:

Looking only at the LCD screen, the bright patch of pavement might seem worrying (IIRC it was blinking), but I was confident that most, if not all, of the highlights would be recoverable with the S5, so I concerned myself with getting an adequate exposure of shadow areas to minimize noise.

And here's the adjusted shot (not a single pixel was lost).

As for the Nikon D90, I set the exposure to avoid losing highlights as much as possible. First, when judging the exposure I paid attention to the blinkies and histogram, dialing down exposure as needed. Second, I used the 'Extra High' setting of Active D-Lighting, which meant that the camera would underexpose slightly to avoid losing highlight detail. For JPEGs, it would also boost the shadow and midtone areas to compensate for the underexposure. However, I was shooting raw, so the boosting would be done in postprocessing. Here's a sample shot, SOOC:

If I looked only at the LCD screen, it would look very underexposed. However, I knew that for my purposes, this was the 'correct' exposure. Here's how the shot looked after adjustment in post-processing.

Most of the highlights were preserved. There is only a small patch lost, near my wife's elbow.

Here are a few more shots from our visit. I used two lenses, the Tokina 10-17 fisheye (paired with the S5) and the Nikkor 28-105 3.5-4.5 AF-D (with the D90).