GGS LCD Screen Protector III Review

After deciding that my Nikon D90 was a keeper, I ordered a GGS screen protector for it.  I've used it before and found it far clearer than the BM-8 LCD plastic cover included with most Nikon DSLRs (a few such as the D3 and D5100 don't have one).  Recently I also found out first hand about its protective capabilities.

There is now a new 3rd generation version of the GGS available for some cameras.  The biggest difference is that instead of the screen protector being affixed to your LCD screen with an adhesive, the screen protector clips on just like the BM-8.  The 3rd generation GGS is also supposed to have a film to prevent shattering, thus reducing the risk of damage to the camera in case the GGS breaks.  Another difference is that the 3rd gen GGS includes an anti-fog protective cover for the eyepiece.  Like the top LCD and main LCD covers, the viewfinder cover is also made of glass. Remarkably, the price is about the same as the classic GGS.

Both the viewfinder cover and top LCD cover attach via stickers around their edges.

With the viewfinder cover attached, I could not fit my generic rubber eyecup over the viewfinder.  However, an original Nikon DK-21 rubber eyecup can fit over the viewfinder with GGS cover.

The viewfinder looks just as clear as it does without the viewfinder cover.  I could not tell any difference.  As for its anti-fog properties, I put my camera briefly in the refrigerator and did not see any fog develop inside the cover or viewfinder.

The main LCD protector clips on the LCD just like the BM-8 plastic cover.  However, unlike the BM-8, the GGS protector includes a black frame around it that fits the camera snugly.  The fit is tight enough that I could not slide a piece of paper in between the cover and the LCD unless I used the very thin kind of thermal paper used for receipts.  Even then I could only get it through one of the corners.

On Amazon, there is a review that criticized how easily the main LCD cover falls off.  However, with my D90, the protector stays on firmly.  It's certainly not more easily detached than the BM-8 cover.

EDIT: Pls. see comment below from reader Opt.

The frame matches the camera's body pretty closely, so that it's not easy to spot it at a casual glance.

There is a small hole on the bottom left corner of the main LCD cover.  I believe it's there to prevent fog. It might allow dust to enter between the LCD cover but at least the cover is easily removable.

The new protector appears to be about as clear as the old one, although there is a very slight ghosting that I didn't see in the old protector.  This is probably due to the larger gap between the protector and the LCD.

So far, I am satisfied with the new 3rd generation GGS protector, and I would probably buy it again instead of the old protector because of the viewfinder cover.  The main LCD cover might allow dust to get in between the cover but that's outweighed by the decreased risk to the LCD because of the new film and because of the larger gap between the cover and the LCD.  In addition, if the cover is damaged, removing the cover presents absolutely no risk to the LCD.

I will update this review if I find that it's unduly susceptible to dust or being dislodged.

Read More

Yongnuo YN-560EX (EX600) Preliminary Tests

UPDATE: See the more comprehensive review here.

I just received the Yongnuo YN-560EX last night and did some tests.  FYI the YN-560EX (formerly EX600) is a manual flash with wireless TTL via Canon or Nikon's wireless flash commanders.  I was excited about this model because it's only $109.99, less than the YN-565EX (which has wireless TTL as well as on-camera TTL and costs around $160 for the Nikon version).  I believe it is currently the cheapest wireless TTL flash available.

I will post a more comprehensive review later but for now here are the results of my quick tests:

• Build quality: seems about the same as the YN-560, but the LCD screen makes it look more polished.  The buttons are also different from the YN-560 and are hard plastic instead of squishy rubber, another improvement.  The hotshoe is mostly metal (the middle is plastic - perhaps to allow the flash to break away instead of tearing out your camera's hotshoe) and has a locking pin.  Doesn't look cheap at all.
• Includes a flash stand and a nice-looking ballistic nylon case (similar to the case for an SB-900 or SB-800, though with slightly thinner padding) with a compartment for the stand.
• Recycling: very fast.  At full power, seems to recycle in about 2 seconds with eneloop NiMH batteries.  I have to test whether it's really fully recycled or it's just indicating that it has recycled when it hasn't yet.
• Power: advertised as having a guide number of 58 meters.  However when I tested it briefly against my SB-800 at 105mm zoom, the 560EX's output was noticeably lower, perhaps by as much as 1/2 stop.  My flashmeter is out for repair but it's one of the things I will test when I get my flashmeter back.
• Interface: I liked the simple interface of the YN-560.  I was wondering with the new LCD interface of the YN-560EX whether the interface would become more complicated.  I found the interface very easy to use.  The only time I needed to look at the manual was to activate advanced options (sleep settings, manual power level increments, LCD brightness, quick startup)
• Head rotates 180 degrees in both directions.
• The front of the flash, where other flashes have an AF assist indicator, has brightly flashing LED lights when the 560EX is used as a slave to indicate that the flash is ready.
• Has a 2.5mm jack instead of PC connector.  Could make it easier to connect it to accessories such as radio triggers.
• Wireless mode: just like the YN-565EX you can select either wireless Nikon slave or wireless Canon slave.  In addition, there is the usual S1 (optical slave) and S2 (optical slave with delay for TTL).

With both the Canon and the Nikon wireless modes, you can select any of 4 channels and any of 3 groups (A, B, C).

I tested the Nikon wireless slave mode with the Nikon D90's popup commander and an SB-800 as master flash.  With the popup commander I was able to control the 560EX in channel 1, group A either in manual or TTL.  I was able to adjust the power manually and was able to adjust the flash exposure compensation.  I briefly tested channels 2, 3 and 4 and they also seemed to work.  However, when the 560EX is set to Group B, it seldom worked (perhaps 1 out of 10 shots), no matter which channel I used.  What's unusual is that I can see the flash firing but the flash is not in sync with the shot.

UPDATE: With my Fuji S5, it works in both Group A and B.  Will try to test with other cameras.

Using the SB-800 as commander, I was able to control the 560EX in group A, B or C, either in manual or TTL, apparently in all channels.

Some of the other tests I'd like to run:

• TTL accuracy / similarity to SB-800
• wireless mode sensitivity compared to SB-800
• Does the wireless mode still work even when I am using other flashes in other groups?
• I will try to meetup with a friend who has a Canon to see if he can control the flash.
• testing whether the recycle at 2 secs. is really to full power.
• flashmeter measurement

If there's anything else you'd like me to test, just post it in the comments or email me at info AT betterfamilyphotos.com.

Read More

High-Key Passport Photos

My wife needed new passport photos.  It's much more convenient and economical to have passport photos taken at a store somewhere like Costco.  On the other hand, by taking the shots myself, my wife could get as many shots as she wants to her satisfaction.

I have posted about DIY Passport Photos previously.  On this occasion, instead of a quick two-light setup like I did last time, I tried a slightly more elaborate setup just for fun (and practice).

TRIGGER

If I had several wireless flashes, I could have controlled all my flashes remotely with the popup flash using Nikon Advanced Wireless Lighting.  However, I only have two such flashes at the moment, therefore I decided to trigger the flashes using a combination of the Radiopopper JrX Studio and optical triggering.

LIGHTING SETUP

For my background, I used the Fotodiox 5 ft x 7 ft popup background, the same one I used in my recent portrait session. I illuminated the background with two speedlights aimed diagonally at the background.  Having two speedlights instead of one has a couple of benefits.  First of all, each speedlight individually will use less power, allowing quicker recycling.  Second, if aimed properly, each speedlight can fill in any shadows produced by the other speedlight, making the light on the backgound as even as possible.  I aimed the lights diagonally (similar to an "x" pattern) so that the light on the background would be more even instead of having a gradient due to the inverse square law.

The speedlights for the background were a Nikon SB-26 and a Nikon SB-24.  The SB-24 was controlled and triggered by a Radiopopper JrX.  The SB-26 was triggered optically with its built-in slave.

I also added a hair light (visible in the shot above).  For my hair light, I used an SB-80 controlled and triggered by a Radiopopper JrX with a honeycomb grid (to avoid flare).  The flash was mounted using the CowboyStudio boom.  However, instead of attaching the boom to its included stand, I attached it to a Linco 8408 8 foot-lightstand.  I noticed that the weight of the boom and flash was enough to cause the sturdy light stand to bend slightly (it's not barrel distortion).

For my key light, I used two umbrellas, one umbrella on each side of the subject, aimed at around 45 degrees.  This was the setup my co-author mshafik suggested, and is actually the setup that is also suggested on the Department of State website.  Shadows from the left umbrella would be cast on the right but would be filled in by the right umbrella, and vice-versa, thus producing a very evenly-lit photo.

I used a Nikon SB-800 with a 60-inch shoot-through umbrella, and a Nikon SB-800 with the 42-inch Lastolite Trifold shoot-through umbrella.  I chose shoot-through umbrellas because their light is less directional than a beauty dish, softbox or reflective umbrella, plus I would get some bounce off the ceiling, walls and floor, making the light as soft and as even as possible.  For absolutley minimal shadows I would have placed the umbrellas at camera height.  However, I placed it higher than that just for the slightest bit of modeling.

Both flashes were mounted on Linco 8310 lightstands with a Frio coldshoe on the cowboystudio D adapter for the 60-inch umbrella, and my old umbrella adapter (also with a Frio coldshoe) for the trifold umbrella (because the 8mm trifold shaft is too wide for the D adapter).  Both flashes were triggered optically with the Nikon SB-800s on SU-4 mode.  It would have been nice to have more Radiopopper JrX Studios to control the SB-800s but I only have two JrX Studio receivers, which I already used for the hair light and one of the background lights.  I didn't use the JrX for the key lights because I was going to be shooting near the key lights anyway, so it wouldn't be difficult to adjust their power by pressing the buttons.

Here's how the whole setup looked:

EXPOSURE

Because the subjects were stationary in a fairly controlled environment, I chose to use manual flash exposure instead of TTL.  Using manual flash in these circumstances would give more consistent results than using TTL.

First, I decided on the balance of flash and ambient.  In this case, for maximum control and sharpness, I decided all the light would be from the flash.  Using only flash as my light source allows me to have full control over the intensity, quality and direction of the light.  In addition, the effective shutter speed would be the flash duration, which is very brief (even at maximum power, it never gets slower than 1/800).  The high effective shutter speed would help increase image sharpness (by minimizing blur from camera shake and subject movement).

To use flash as my only light source I had to minimize the ambient by setting the shutter speed to the sync speed (1/200 for the Nikon D90).  For maximum image quality, I set the ISO to the base ISO (for the Nikon D90, 200).  For adequate depth of field, I initially selected an aperture of f/4.0.  At these settings, the ambient was underexposed by around 3 stops (though not completely gone).

To set the flash exposure, I would have liked to use the CyberCommander's flashmeter.  However, I need to have the CyberCommander sent to Paul Buff for a minor repair.  To help set my exposure, I used the Fotodiox Tri-Fold Reflector, a multipurpose reflector.  The Tri-Fold Reflector can be used to set focus or white balance, or be used as a gray card, or to set a white point and/or a black point.  On the reverse is a silver reflector which can be used as fill for portraits.

I asked my son to help me hold the gray card side of the reflector.  I then took a shot with the gray card filling up most of the frame.  By doing so, I could see where the gray of the gray card was showing up on the histogram.

Originally I had the aperture at f/4.0.  With the flash power settings I had chosen, the histogram of the gray card was showing that the gray was to the right of the midpoint, implying overexposure.  To reduce exposure, I could either power down the flashes, move the flashes further away, decrease the ISO or narrow the aperture.  Moving the flashes further away was not a good option for me because of lack of space.  Plus, although the falloff would be more even due to the inverse square law, the farther the umbrellas, the smaller their apparent size would be, and the harder the light would be.  Decreasing the ISO was not a good idea because I was already using base ISO (further decreasing the ISO would be similar to overexposing the image).  Between powering down the flashes or narrowing the aperture, I decided to narrow the aperture so I could increase the depth of field and get into the sharper aperture of the lens.  It would also further reduce the ambient.  I adjusted the aperture until the histogram of the gray card shot was showing most of the pixels to be in the middle of the histogram, which was f/5.6.

To make sure the exposure would be correct, I had to maintain the flash-to-subject distance, so I asked my subjects to stand exactly where my son had stood for the gray card shots (next to the sofa).

COMPOSITION

Because the intended result was a headshot (i.e., I was not trying to capture the background), I needed a long lens and chose the Sigma 50-150.

I started about 8 feet or so from the subject, and my focal length was initially about 70mm.  I changed this throughout the shooting session.

Pop quiz: let's say upon taking a shot, I found that the subject's nose looked too big or the face looks too narrow.  Do I: a) use a shorter focal length; b) use a longer focal length; or c) none of the above.  The answer is 'c'.  Perspective distortion is controlled by the distance from the camera to the subject, not the focal length.  If the subject's nose looks too big or the face looks too narrow, I am standing too close and need to move backward.  This is why the Department of State's website suggests standing at least 4 feet away from the subject.  Standing too far might not be good either -- it can make the subject's face look wider (which may or may not be better, depending on the subject's face).

You probably know about the rule of thirds.  It's just a guideline not a law but I shoot more or less according to that most of the time.  But when shooting passport photos, I have to remember instead to put the subject close to the center because passport photos (in the US) have specific requirements about the amount of space above and below the head, and rules about the permissible size of the head.

In this first shot (of my father-in-law), I incorrectly took the shot with the head too high in the frame.  I later found that there was not enough space above his head, so I had to create that space in post-processing.

wrong framing for passports

This was a better way to frame the subject:

better framing for passports

In fact I could have put the face even closer to the middle.

BTW, in the US, the required photo is square therefore it doesn't matter if you take the shot in landscape or portrait orientation.  However, if I use portrait orientation it's easier for me to estimate if I have enough space around the head.  As a rule of thumb, I frame the shot so that I capture a small area beyond the shoulders.  You'll see later on that for the US passport requirements, that's about right.

Just for fun, my wife also wanted to take an impromptu shot with our daughter.  The flat lighting for a passport photo is not what I would use for a portrait like this, but it was just a casual shot anyway.

POST PROCESSING

When postprocessing for passport photos, you have to be a bit careful.  The exposure, brightness (gamma) and contrast all have to be neutral.

To confirm the exposure, I looked at the shot of the gray card (which is supposed to be middle gray).  To my surprise, the pixels were to the left of middle in Lightroom (this taught me not to trust the D90's histogram).  To fix this, I hit the 'auto' exposure adjustment in Lightroom.  Normally I don't trust auto exposure but in this case, the auto exposure would adjust the image so that it would be approximately middle gray, which is exactly what I wanted.  Turned out that this required a +0.85 ev adjustment (so the original f/4.0 aperture would have been close to correct).

I also adjusted white balance, which was easy.  All I had to do was use the white balance dropper on the gray card.  I then applied that exposure and white balance settings of the gray card shot to the rest of the shots in the session by syncing the shots, and just for good measure, using the 'match total exposures' command.  Because I shot in manual mode and was using manual flash, the adjustments that work for the gray card shot would also work for all the other shots in the session.

After the white balance and exposure adjustments, I edited the catchlights.  I don't like how there are two white dots on the iris (makes it seem like the subject has two pupils or something).  I also corrected skin blemishes.

I then exported the image as a JPEG to use an online cropping tool to get the correct size.  Previously I used epassportphoto.com.  Now the Department of State has its own cropping tool, and it's free (though somewhat unfortunately named).

To use the tool, you just hit a button to upload your shot, then you position the image, dragging the image and zooming in and out so that the crown of the head to the bottom of the chin fits within the permissible range.  Then you click the crop button and save the image.

The resulting image will be a 600x600 jpeg.

Unfortunately it's not easy to print this out as such (photo labs probably won't print 2 inch x 2 inch photos).  (That's one advantage of ePassportPhoto.com - the resulting cropped image is ready to print at 4x6.)

Instead, what I had to do was to make a collage so that it could be printed on the more standard 4 x 6 inches.  First, I opened the cropped photo in Photoshop Elements.  I selected all of the image, then added a border by clicking on the Edit menu and selecting Stroke (Outline) Selection... I chose an outline size of 1 pixel (choose "inside" instead of center or outside).  This added a very thin border around the photo.

I then resized the canvas to 1800 pixels x 1200 pixels.  Then I selected the photo and pasted copies side by side 3 photos wide and 2 photos tall.

I then ordered a print of the photos on 4x6.

As I said, it's a lot of trouble for passport photos.  But at least the subjects will hopefully be happier with their photo. :)

RELATED POSTS:
DIY Passport Photos
Sigma 50-150 is TIGHT
What's the point of having different lenses?

Read More

Preview of New LAX Terminal

Los Angeles International Airport is in the process of renovating its international terminal, partly to accommodate larger aircraft such as the Airbus A380.  If you'd like to get a preview of what the new terminal will look like, check out the fly-through video (warning: 230+ MB) which uses the same autoCAD files that are used for the construction.

I had a chance to join a tour of the construction site.  If you watched the fly-through video you might recognize some of the structures.

BTW for these shots I used the Nikon D90 and Tokina 11-16.

About the last shot - it was taken about 10 feet above the platform where we were standing.  There were no ladders or other surfaces to climb on.  Instead, I took it with the aid of a gadget that I will be reviewing next week.  ;)

Have a great weekend!

Read More

Choosing the Exposure for Dynamic Range

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).

For when my kids are a little older

Knott's has a Peanuts-themed area for younger children, Camp Snoopy

A junior version of the elevator drop

We didn't spend as much time as we wanted because of the scorching heat, but we still had fun.

Read More

Chasing Butterflies with the LX5

A couple of weeks ago, I had the opportunity to take a tour of a preserve in order to watch the El Segundo Blue Butterfly, an endangered species found only in a small area of the dunes of El Segundo, California.


The El Segundo Blue Butterfly (Euphilotes battoides) is a sub-species of the Square-Spotted Blue Butterfly.  It is a small butterfly, about the size of an adult fingernail.  Its life cycle is completed within a year, during which time it lives as a butterfly for only one week (sometimes two weeks).  During that one week, the butterfly has to mate and lay its eggs.

Unlike other blue butterflies, the El Segundo eats only one kind of plant (both as a caterpillar and as a butterfly) -- the coastal buckwheat.  In 1976, less than 500 butterflies remained and it became the first insect listed as a federal endangered species.  Through conservation efforts, the El Segundo population has recovered, with approximately 120,000 butterflies counted this year.

For this project, I chose the Lumix LX-5.  I thought that the deep depth of field would help in capturing shots of the butterfly.

We had the help of an entomologist with us and he pointed out the coastal buckwheat plants, where the butterflies would most likely be found.  He also told us that butterflies try to conserve their energy by avoiding the wind.  So if you have a friend stand in a way that blocks the wind from a certain spot, there's a good chance the butterfly will rest at that spot.  Also if it is a windy day the butterflies will tend to stay close to the ground or bushes.  Even with those tips it was very challenging and required a lot of patience because the butterflies don't stay in place and fly away when we get near.

The closest I got to a butterfly was about a foot and a half.  So, contrary to what I expected, I did not get to use the macro capabilities of the LX-5.  Instead, what would have been more useful was having a long lens.  The LX-5 is the equivalent of 90mm at its longest, which is not very long.  However, the LX-5's built-in stabilization was handy for stabilizing the shot not just for taking the shot itself but also while framing the shot.  To help the image be as sharp as possible, I used a high shutter speed and a narrower aperture (keeping in mind that the diffraction limit of a point-and-shoot is wider than for a DSLR).  Given the relatively constant light (due to the cloudless sky), I used manual exposure mode, selecting the highest shutter speed (1/2000), the highest ISO that I consider acceptable for the LX-5 (ISO 400) and varying my aperture between f/4 and f/5.6.

Focusing was also a challenge because of the very busy background.  Even though I manually selected the autofocus area, it was hard for the camera to tell which one was the subject.  I usually had to refocus several times.

With some patience I was able to capture several shots of the butterflies, which I cropped in post to enlarge the view.

I plan to participate in next year's watch for the blue butterflies.  I plan to use both a point and shoot as well as a DSLR (so that I could use a longer focal length; I would just have to use a much smaller aperture for depth of field).

Read More