Photos of Nikon D600 leaked

Just as Nikon officially announces the Nikkor 24-85 3.5-4.5 VR budget full-frame standard zoom ($599), NikonRumors.com posts leaked images of the D600.  Some notes:

1.  It does have a screw drive for the AF motor.

2.  The exposure mode dial looks very similar to that of the D7000, including the U1 and U2 custom modes.

3.  Just like the D7000, it has the Ai indexing tab, allowing aperture control for Ai or Ais lenses

4.  Has the new dial-based AF controls just like the D7000.

5.  I could be wrong but the top rubber cover on the camera's left side (user point of view) seems to show a headphone jack and the word beside it could be MIC (i.e. external mic).  Would be awesome for video.

I'm very much looking forward to the D600, and I'm 95% sure I would buy one.  It's got my name on it. ;)

Read More

Abstract Fun

In one of the rare times I put effort and setup a light stand and an umbrella to shoot my girls, I decided to make use of this burst of energy and shoot some artificial flowers that we bought recently to decorate the house. It has an interesting shape and some glittery material applied. Click through to read on.

My default flash photography is on-camera bounce flash, and I usually get the results I want for quick candid shots of my kids doing various things, however, this type of lighting creates very soft, almost even light. But this time I wanted more direction and fall-off, so I used a reflective umbrella with a black backing, and started fooling around with angles, shadows and light fall-off.

One of the interesting things I found was the violet shades at the edges of light reflected from the umbrella, I thought it looked cool, so I tried to position myself and the light to get more of that effect. And I like the results.

I was using my 5D Mark II with the 24-105, all shots were taken @ f/5.6, I used the 580EX II on-camera as a trigger with no output during the actual exposure, and the flash inside the umbrella was my newly acquired Yongnuo 560 II with the LCD screen, an excellent cheap manual flash.

My next post will be the first part about my recent desert trip to Fayoum - Wadi El Rayan.

Read More

Filters for Protecting Lenses: High-End vs. Budget vs. Dirt-Cheap

With digital photography, using filters to achieve special effects has become much less common, with the exception of neutral density filters, graduated ND filters, and circular polarizers.  The other exception, with some controversy, is the use of filters to protect lenses.  Typically, UV filters or sometimes skylight (warming) filters are used for this purpose.

In this post, we compare images from lenses without any filter, with a budget filter, and a high-end filter.  The filters I tested were:
(a) a high-end filter, the Hoya HD Hardened Glass 8-layer Multi-Coated Digital UV Filter, around $70 for 77mm.
(b) a budget filter, the Hoya skylight filter (standard version, not multi-coated), around $20 for 77mm.  Note: the skylight filter has a warming effect, so for purposes of this comparison, please take that into account as part of the filter design and not an inherent characteristic of budget filters.
I've also included a separate test for an ultra-cheap generic UV filter.

I tested the filters on two lenses:
(i) a flare-resistant lens, the Nikkor 24-70 2.8G on a Nikon D3; and
(ii) a lens that is [supposedly] susceptible to flare and ghosting, the Tokina 11-16 2.8 on a Fuji S5 Pro.
Both lenses use 77mm filters so I was able to use the same set of filters for the tests.

Hit the jump for the samples.
NIKKOR 24-70 2.8G
For the first lens to test, I chose the Nikkor 24-70 2.8G because it has a nano-crystal coat, which reduces ghosting and flare.  The 24-70 thus represents a lens that is flare-resistant.  I tested two angles: one where the sun was directly in the middle of the frame and another where the sun was at the corner of the frame.  I didn't use the lens hood.  The images were taken in raw, but I applied no processing, so these are SOOC, at full resolution.  You can view the slideshow below or click here for the web album instead (the images are also downloadable).


Observation: In the first set of images with the camera directly facing the sun, the most noticeable differences are in the area above the window of the shed.  In the second set, with the sun at the corner, the most significant differences are near the corner of the house nearest the small window on the middle/left.

TOKINA 11-16 2.8
For the second lens, I tested the Tokina 11-16 because it is a wide angle lens and is reputedly prone to ghosting and flare.  You can view the slideshow below or click here for the web album instead (the images are also downloadable).


Note: in the last shot, with the sun at the corner and the budget filter, the exposure was 1/3 stop higher (must have accidentally nudged it).  Please take that into account.

Observation: In the first set of images with the camera directly facing the sun, the most noticeable differences are in the area above near the window of the shed. In the second set, with the sun at the corner, the most significant differences are near the small window on the middle/left and the lower right corner of the frame.

COMMENTS:
Personally, I was somewhat surprised that there was not a bigger difference between the budget filter and the high-end filter.  Kudos to Hoya for producing a budget filter with relatively good quality.  Nonetheless, I would much prefer to use the HD filter.  If the lens isn't expensive enough to justify the cost of the HD filter, I may as well not use a filter and just rely on the lens hood.  [On the other hand, if you are the type to frequently go into dusty or gritty environments, I could see how having at least the budget filter (if not the HD filter) on all your lenses.]

As between the HD filter and having no filter, I think the difference is small enough that I would prefer to have the HD filter for my more expensive lenses (e.g. 24-70 and 70-200).  If those lenses got damaged it would really make my heart sink, so the very slight image degradation is an acceptable tradeoff in my view.

GENERIC FILTERS
Oh yeah I did mention those ultra cheap filters, didn't I?  Just because the Hoya standard filter wasn't too bad, doesn't mean that you'll get the same results if you get an ultra-cheap generic Made-in-China filter.  I have tried those in the past and those will definitely reduce the contrast in your image.  Here are a couple of comparisons (no pixel peeping required).  These were from a Nikon D80 and a Tamron 28-75.

no filter

crappy filter

no filter

crappy filter

In fact, the shots above were the moment I realized how noticeably a crappy filter can affect the image and I stopped using filters for protection from that point forward until I got the HD filter for the 24-70.

BUYING FILTERS
One more word of advice: there are plenty of fake high-end filters out there.  I strongly recommend buying from a reputable seller to make sure you're getting the filter that you're paying for.  If you find one that's on sale for a substantially lower price, I would think twice about buying it.
I bought my Hoya HD filter from Amazon.  If you would like to support this blog by buying from Amazon as well, just click on this link.  You can also help our blog by sharing links to our posts in social media (Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus, etc.) or your website (if you have one).  Thank you for your support.

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Lenstip.com and Optyczne.pl tested and compared several UV filters here:
http://www.lenstip.com/113.1-article-UV_filters_test.html
http://www.lenstip.com/120.1-article-UV_filters_test_-_supplement.html (including the Hoya HD)

Read More

Lightroom 4.1 Defringe Tool

Have you downloaded Lightroom 4.1 yet?  If not, you're really missing out.  Check out this shot:

This was shot with a Tokina 10-17 fisheye.  I am working on a review of that lens but for now note that the Tokina fisheye is very susceptible to purple fringing and chromatic aberration:

Lightroom 4 includes a command to Remove Chromatic Aberration but Lightroom 4.1 takes this further and adds an additional tool for removing aberration: the Defringe tool.  It has an eyedropper and all you do is click on any purple or green fringe color.  Check this out:

Boom! Gone in just one click!

If you look closely there is a little bit of green fringing.  Just click the eyedropper a second time, this time on green fringing.

Now both purple and green fringing are gone.  Tokina should include a copy of LR 4.1 with every lens they sell! :)

Read More

Tokina 11-16: Ultrawide for Low Light Portraits

In this post, we review the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8, a crop-sensor lens with a fast constant aperture and a reputation for sharpness.  Is it worth the extra cost?  Hit the jump for our review and samples.

EDIT: Added comments re chromatic aberration, ghosting and flare.

Just a couple of months ago, I got an ultrawide lens, the Sigma 10-20 f/4.0-5.6 (reviewed here).  I unexpectedly found it very useful for people photos, not just for shots of locations.  The one thing about the Sigma 10-20 that I was not completely satisfied with was the aperture.  It was a slow lens.  For locations and inanimate subjects, it was perfectly fine.  When there was plenty of light or when I was using flash, it was also excellent.  However, for available light photos of people in indoor or dim light, the aperture was a little too slow.  Subjects would appear blurred, not so much from the camera movement, but the movement of the subjects themselves.

Sigma 10-20: noticeable blur from subjects' movement due to the narrow aperture.  f/4.5, 1/10, 1600 ISO.

After shooting with the Sigma for a while, I began to consider upgrading to the Tokina 11-16.  First, the Tokina has a constant 2.8 aperture.  I would be able to shoot at double the shutter speed compared with the Sigma.  Alternatively, it would be like having one extra stop of ISO.  Second, reviews of the Tokina say that it is a very sharp lens.  The Sigma was quite sharp for me, but hey, an even sharper lens would be great.  Finally, the Tokina has a trick that the Sigma doesn't have: even though the Tokina is a crop sensor lens (like the Sigma) the Tokina can actually be used on a full frame camera (with limits).  So I sold the Sigma that I loved so much and got the Tokina 11-16.

DESCRIPTION
The Tokina 11-16 is Tokina's second ultrawide lens for crop sensor cameras, and it looks virtually identical to its older sibling, the Tokina 12-24 f/4 (which is also a well regarded ultrawide). 

The Tokina 11-16 is part of Tokina's AT-X PRO series, which is Tokina's line of professional grade crop-sensor lenses.  It's made of plastic and it feels rather light but solidly-built.  The Tokina features a Focus Clutch Mechanism which allows you to easily switch from autofocus to manual and back merely by pulling or pushing the focusing ring.  When pulled back, the focus ring disengages the focus mechanism from the camera's focusing motor, allowing the user to set the focus manually.  Pushing it in re-engages the focus mechanism.

PERFORMANCE ON APS-C

Tokina 11-16 on Fuji S5. f/8, 1/500, ISO 200

I first tried the Tokina outdoors.  Not surprisingly the Tokina had stellar performance under these conditions.

Even when used wide open, the Tokina 11-16 has corner-to-corner sharpness.  These shots are all at f/2.8:

Note: vignetting was added in post-processing

However, the primary reason for my upgrade was to be able to use it for people photos in dim light, especially when I can't use a high ISO.  Well, I got to use it under exactly those kinds of conditions.  Specifically, I had used it with a Nikon D70, not exactly a low-light performer (it maxes out at 1600 ISO).  Here's a shot:

Tokina 11-16 on Nikon D70.  f/2.8, 1/80, ISO 1600.  Ambient light only.

Part of what made this shot possible is that the Tokina is sharp even at f/2.8.  However, perhaps an even more important factor here was that at f/2.8 I was able to get a shutter speed of 1/80 (at 1600 ISO), which helped me get a sharp shot even with the dim light.  Exactly what I wanted.

But wait - there's more!

PERFORMANCE ON FULL FRAME

As I mentioned before, the Tokina 11-16 can be used on a full-frame camera.  The widest focal length available on full frame depends on your tolerance for vignetting and the intended frame ratio.

At 14mm, there is heavy vignetting in the corners.  However, if your frame ratio is 1:1 (square) or close to it, 14mm may be usable.

14mm on full frame

Similarly, 15mm may be usable with a frame ratio of 4:5 or possibly even 5:7.

15mm on full frame

At 16mm, there is still some vignetting at the corners, but in my opinion, the entire frame is usable. 16mm might not sound super wide, but remember that that's the actual 35mm focal length, i.e., it's equivalent to a 10.67mm APS-C lens.

16mm on full frame

The fact that the Tokina 11-16 can be used on a full frame is very useful because I can take advantage of the full frame high ISO capability AND the fast f/2.8 aperture to get shots in marginal lighting conditions.  Case in point: Disney's Small World.  It's quite dark inside and to make it even more challenging, you're on a little boat that is always moving.  Let's see what shots we can get here.

Yes, it is possible to get sharp portraits under these conditions:

True, I had attempted shots at small world before, using the Sigma 10-20.  But there are a couple of big differences.  First, I was able to use a wider aperture of f/2.8 instead of f/4.  Secondly, I was able to use the entire full frame sensor, instead of just an APS-C crop.  Using a crop means that the noise will be magnified, effectively diminishing the high ISO potential.

With the Sigma 10-20, noise is much more visible because of the APS-C crop, and the slower shutter speed results in more noticeable blur

CHROMATIC ABERRATION, GHOSTING AND FLARE
The Tokina 11-16 is supposedly very vulnerable to ghosting and flare.  Among the shots I've taken, I have yet to see one where there is flare that noticeably reduces the contrast across the frame.  By contrast (excuse the pun), I have several examples of flare with the Sigma 10-20.  As for ghosting, I also haven't seen much of it from the Tokina 11-16.  Again, I recall seeing more examples of ghosting from the Sigma 10-20.  For what it's worth, please check out the new post testing filters for protecting lenses.  You'll see examples of ghosting from this lens as well as another lens, the Nikkor 24-70 2.8G.  Considering that the 24-70 2.8G has a Nano Crystal Coating that is supposed to reduce ghosting and flare, and considering that the Tokina was tested at a much wider angle (16mm equivalent vs. 24mm), I believe the Tokina 11-16 had reasonably controlled ghosting.
The Tokina 11-16 does have a vulnerability to chromatic aberration and purple fringing.  However, Lightroom 4.1 has a couple of tools to reduce chromatic aberration and purple/green fringing.  Check out our post on Lightroom's Defringe tool.  The lens I used there was the Tokina 10-17 Fisheye, but the 11-16 has similar amounts of purple fringing.  You'll see how well Lightroom controls those fringing issues.  Personally, I'm not really bothered by purple fringing and now that LR has those defringing tools, I'm even less concerned about them.  Just my opinion.

CONCLUSION
Here are my thoughts on the Tokina in comparison with the Sigma and similar ultrawides:

• In terms of sharpness, in my opinion I think both the Sigma 10-20 and Tokina 11-16 are sharp.  I would probably not upgrade to the Tokina 11-16 merely for sharpness per se.
• If you use an ultrawide to take a lot of people shots (or shots of moving subjects) in low light, the extra stop makes it more likely that the shutter speed will be high enough to keep the shots of the subjects sharp.
• The Tokina 11-16 can be used on a full frame camera, so if you have one, the Tokina is even more useful in low light.
• The Tokina is not as long as the Sigma 10-20, but I almost always use the Sigma at 10mm and the Tokina at 11mm anyway, so that's not a big deal.
• The one thing I would have wished for on the Tokina 11-16 is a built-in autofocus motor.  I believe an ultrawide is much more usable when you have a camera with a swing out LCD to allow you to take shots from unusual angles.  Unfortunately, the only Nikon cameras with swing out LCDs (D5000, D5100) or remote live view (D3200) don't have autofocus motors, so the Tokina 11-16 can't autofocus on those bodies.  (Canon users have no such issues.)  The new version of this lens is now available (see here) and costs just $40 more than the first version.

MORE SAMPLE PHOTOS
Here are some more samples from the Tokina 11-16 from a recent trip to Las Vegas.

EVEN MORE SAMPLE PHOTOS

Amazon customer gallery

Read More

Canon EF Lenses Chat: Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Review

Chandelier at an old place called Rihana

Now that I've taken close to a thousand shots with my Canon 50mm f/1.4, it is a good time to do my review, it is probably going to be quite long, with lots of smaples (see? I do what I want other reviews to do, but unfortunately they don't), so if you want the short version, here it is, it kicks ass. Click through for more details.

P.S. You can click on any picture to see a 1200px version.

INTRODUCTION

The 50mm focal length is not new to me, you might remember my pursuit of a 50mm equivalent lens on my crop sensor DSLR, I ended up with the under-estimated Canon 35mm f/2, it was my do-it-all lens, but since I switched to full frame, I wanted that focal length back, below were my choices (auto-focus filtered):

• Canon EF 50mm f/1.8
• Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
• Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM
• Canon EF 50mm f/2.5 Macro
• Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX

And here is my reasoning for ending up with the 1.4 Canon, I have previously owned the Canon 50mm f/1.8, and in short, apart from great sharpness at f/2.8 and smaller apertures, it was not that good, slow noisy and inaccurate focusing, lots of nervous bokeh, and not very sharp until f/2.5, so I skipped it. The 50 f/2.5 Macro was ok, but I wanted a faster aperture and a better focusing mechanism. The Canon 50 f/1.2 was out of my price and size range, so that's a pass too.

Choice was down between the two 50 f/1.4 lenses, the Sigma and the Canon, having tried the Sigma myself in Malaysia (albeit on a crop sensor), I was awed by it's excellent bokeh, and Mic confirmed the same in his excellent review with some bokehlicious samples (if you haven't ever watched DigitalRevTV, you have to, search it on youtube), but alas, for some reason, the Canon versions of most 3rd party lenses have lots focusing issues ranging from inconsistency, to hunting in low light, to just plain back and front-focussing, and that's a real shame, because it put me off from both the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4, the solution is to go through several copies until you find one that works with your body, and I wasn't going to do that.

So, by exclusion, I had no choice but to get the Canon 50 f/1.4, so how did it go?

This shot was taken almost one hour after sunset in the Fayoum desert, bounce flash to the left

THE CANON 50MM F/1.4

I was worried about getting the Canon over the Sigma for a couple of reasons, although the Canon is designated as USM, it doesn't have true ring USM focusing (which is very quick and completely silent), but rather a micro motor which is famously prone to breaking sometime during its lifetime. The other reason is that reviews claim that it is very soft wide open and not really that sharp until stopped down to f/2.8.

Well, I am here to report that I am very satisfied with the Canon's focusing, it is reasonably quiet, very consistent at all apertures, and features full time manual focussing override, as for focusing system failure, we'll see this over time, some people say because the front element extends slightly during focusing, it is more likely to get bumped, however I am using it with a lens hood all the time. I like the build quality, it is solid with a metal mount, but the focusing ring is not very smooth (because of the focusing mechanism), it feels like grinding when used manually. Size is perfect and discrete, and having f/1.4 is great, but they say it is totally unusable at that aperture, oh, is it? Let's find out.

Full frame is real fun when you want to control DoF, even stopped down

WIDE-OPEN PERFORMANCE

This lens drove me crazy for the first couple of weeks I owned it, focusing was very inconsistent, sometimes back-focusing, sometimes the other way around, so I started playing with MFA on my 5D Mark II and ended up with +2 MFA, and I was happy with wide-open performance, but shortly after that I found more inconsistency, close shots were ok, but farther shots were out of focus, until one day I was shooting my sleeping daughter and found the focus was way off, but consistently off, so I started fiddling with MFA for the zillionth time, and this time ended up with +13 MFA, it was the magical number, suddenly all my furstration with the lens went away, the lens was singing and I went berserk running everywhere inside the house and the garden shooting everything wide-open, with amazing results, totally unexpected, it was a user error all the time, and fortunately, I've learned how to do MFA properly.

Now my lens is quite sharp wide open with a nice bite, and with nice soft out of focus bckgrounds, stopped down to f/2 makes it real sharp and at f/2.8 it is as sharp as I remember my 50mm f/1.8 is, which is very sharp. How I got focused shots at +2 MFA (and other settings I tried and worked ok for some shots) is beyond me. What's more interesting, non of my ring-USM lenses ever needed MFA (and I tried it to make sure lenses were as sharp as they would get), this included the 85 f/1.8, 100 f/2.8 L, 200 f/2.8 L, and 24-105 f/4 L. My other non ring-USM lens I tried on the 5D is the 35mm f/2 and it needed a +5 MFA, glad it was perfect on the 60D.

All the examples you're seeing next are shot wide-open.

PetroSport club at sunset, those chairs in the background were very close

Bowling Center

PetroSport club, I like the balloon caolors

A pink rose

Rihana, old gramaphone, my friends thought of this shot

Rihana, old artifacts everywhere

IMAGE QUALITY

Excellent, good color, good contrast, quite sharp wide-open and down to f/2 (after that it gets real sharp) with a nice bite to the images that makes some of them look three dimensional like the examples below.

PetroSport club

Rihana, another old chandelier

Bokeh is much better than the 50 f/1.8 and my Zuiko 50 f/1.8 (still have it, will post about it again), and it gets dreamy wide-open especially when you're shooting close. I never faced any chromatic aberrations with this lens. My only complaint might be the slightly octagonal-shaped highlights when not shooting wide-open.

Capturing on the Galaxy Note, Bowling Center

Rihana

Rihana

Rihana

Chocolate Fondant, Crave Maadi

WRAPPING IT UP

I like this lens a lot, it is my default lens when I go anywhere because of three very important reasons, size, fast aperture and focal length, something about the 50mm perspective seems attractive, I use it for semi-wide shots, wide/close portraits, close-up details and literaly all kinds of shots. After getting the correct MFA, focusing is always sopt-on (by the way, I am using single point focusig 100% of the time, with AI Servo continuous focusig, and back button focusing).

Sharpness is really good wide-open and easily exceeded my expectations (reviews bashed it really bad), of course it can use more sharpness, but I am satisfied with what I am getting. The size is also perfect, wth my current lens lineup (50 f/1.4, 50 f/1.8 Zuiko, 100 f/2.8 Macro, 200 f/2.8 and 24-105 f/4), the 50 is the smallest lens I have and the only one that fits wth the camera inside my Lowepro Zoom Toploader 45 AW.

So do I recommend this lens? Yes, anytime and everytime, the price is very good, the size is perfect and the optical performance is satisfying wide-open, and stellar stopped down, below are a few more samples. What do you think?

Old timer, Kafr Al-Sheikh

Sometimes clouds do very strange shapes

Hey, where are you going? Bowling Center

Watching an interesting shot, Bowling Center

Girls ganged up on this poor guy to extract the ball from his clutches, Rihana

Having absolute fun, Rihana

That's a BMW E39 in the background, love its shape

Countryside, Kafr Al-Sheikh

RELATED POSTS

• Canon Lenses Chat - Part 1: Standard Zoom Lenses
• Canon Lenses Chat - Part 2: Telephoto Zoom Lenses
• Canon Lenses Chat - Part 3: Prime Lenses
• Canon EF 35mm f/2 Review
• Quick Review: Canon 85mm f/1.8
• Macro Talk: Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM 
• Canon EF Lenses Chat: Canon EF 200mm f/2.8L II USM Review
• Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Review

Read More