The CreaturePERMALINK

I’ve been recommending The Creature from Jekyll Island for a few years now. In my synopsis I wrote: “...why is the eventual collapse of today’s banking system a nearly foregone conclusion?’. The scheme teeters, inches away from the precipice. Some people worry about a measly 7% drop in the stock market. That’s nothing compared to the real risks, like not getting re-elected!

We’re all lucky that so far the financial ponzi scheme (also known as the US dollar, Euro, Yen, etc) hasn’t collapsed. But give it time. If everything goes well, the looters in Washington will kick the can down the road just far enough to take the heat off themselves and “fix” the problem.

The Creature from Jekyll Island—
A Second Look at the Federal Reserve

There is no “reserve”, there are only warehouses of paper and ink (and electronic variants). What the world needs is real money. Not the fiat money every country in the world uses today, but the real thing, tied to something that time has tested and cannot be faked: physical gold and/or silver. Then the politicians won’t be able to embezzle it by making more out of thin air. Which is why we will all have to suffer more and longer before it ever happens.

Wrapping up the Zeiss ZF 18/3.5 Distagon reviewPERMALINK

I’ll be wrapping up my review of the Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 Distagon over the next week or so. I have prepared additional material which I’ll be posting into the review in the next few days. Regrettably, quick weekend trips to Yosemite with impatient children does not allow for more than quick grab shots, but I managed to make a few interesting images on the Nikon D3. Black and white shooters in particular might find the 18/3.5 a very interesting lens.

Nikon D3 + Zeiss ZF 18/3.5 Distagon @ f/9

SanDisk Extreme III 16GB for $14.95PERMALINK

It’s rebate time again at SanDisk. Rebates are available on many sizes of Compact Flash and a few SD cards, and per-card rebates rise for buying more. But please see my rebate scam warning in the May 1, 2007 blog entry. As of 2008, we should all be very well trained to never buy unless it’s rebate time, which occurs often enough to plan on as the only sensible way to buy storage.

Skip the newest and priciest Extreme IV cards (unless you’re a machine-gun shooter who needs very long bursts), and instead load up on the Extreme III cards, which I’ve been using for 20 months now with zero problems.

I do like the Extreme IV cards, and they are a bit more responsive, but at 10X the price ($24.95 vs $244 for 16GB) I’ll stick with Extreme III cards. I use the one 8GB Extreme IV card that I own as my “daily shooter” now; the rest of the time, the 16GB Extreme III cards provide oodles of space.

Future-proof your investment by sticking with 16GB cards (or at least the 8GB models). These will remain useful even in future 40 megapixel cameras with 50MB RAW files.

I used to lug my laptop around for backup on trips. But with cards this cheap, it will stay at home, saving 10 pounds or so (laptop, case, charger, cables, external drive).

Buying one 16GB Extreme III card nets you a $90 rebate, buying three nets you a $300 rebate. That can mean a price as low as $14.95 per card, if you buy at the Adorama or B&H price. But be forewarned: the rebate cutoff is Oct 11, so make sure the actual sale happens prior to then. Both of those retailers seem to be out of stock currently.

If you own a Nikon D3, put one 16GB in each slot, and set the camera to write to both cards—instant backup!

If you own a Canon 1Ds Mark III, you can do the same thing (“Rec. to multiple”). But you have to buy Compact Flash for one slot and SDHC for the other slot, a long-standing Canon design enigma.

Last but not least: label your cards so you can tell them apart, and so that you can know which are ready to shoot, and which need to be downloaded.

DiskTester and diglloydTools now part of DAPPERMALINK

DiskTester (hard drive performance and reliability testing) and diglloydTools (memory reliability testing) are now included free to diglloyd’s Advanced Photography (DAP) subscribers, a $31.90 value! Sorry, these utilities are for Mac OS X only.

Seagate 1 Terabyte SATA II hard drives only $122PERMALINK

I discussed the Seagate 1 terabyte and Samsung hard drives on April 9th. Prices have dropped with the imminent arrival of 1.5GB models. While I prefer the “NS” version (enterprise class ST31000340NS), the “AS” version ST31000340AS is a killer deal at only $121.99 at zipzoomfly.com. (I don’t make any commission at zipzoomfly, they just have rock-bottom prices). Amazon has the same drive for $139.99 and free shipping through amazon prime, use the search box at right, searching for ST31000340AS.

If you have a Mac Pro, or external enclosure that accepts SATA drives, this is a great time to add a drive or two for performance (single drive or striped RAID) or reliability (mirrored RAID) or extra storage. A 3-drive striped of the Seagates can sustain over 300MB/sec, and a 64GB partition on those drives makes a terrific Photoshop scratch disk. See also my Hard Drives page.

California Buckeye nutsPERMALINK

I’ve written [1, 2, 3] on this California native tree before and indeed one picture graces the cover of Zeiss ZF Lenses. It’s an elegant tree, though I have yet to make the image I see in my mind’s eye. Someday. I’m nuts about the buckeye and perhaps someday will document it fully.

Below is a recent sampler of its fall crop, using the Nikon D3 and Voigtlander 180mm f/4 APO. The thick husk contains a medium brown and shiny nut which drops in late November. It’s too bad they’re inedible (poisonous) without some serious leaching, or three of them could make a fine lunch.

 
Flowers and nuts, along with next year’s buds

A non-viable nut, cracked.

Photokina 2008: Wither the Nikon D3x?PERMALINK

Joke of the day: Two neutrons walk into a black hole.

(CERN physicist humor)

Photokina is well along, and no word from Nikon on the long-rumored leap from 12 to 24 megapixels in a “D3x”. These things take time, but it does mean that Nikon loses momentum in the minds of users for every day that a D3x is delayed, with Canon offering both the relatively inexpensive EOS 5D Mark II as well as the pricey EOS 1Ds Mark III. Let’s hope it’s a delaying tactic to garner more attention late into Photokina.

Methinks that Nikon could drop the price of of the Nikon D700 to $2000 or so to raise the perceived value relative to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, which no matter what the build quality or feature set will be judged superior to the D700 because of 21 megapixels and 1080p video.

The issue of image quality couldn’t be more night and day: one person finds that the D700 just does not satisfy for 25" prints, and another person is absolutely thrilled with its low light capability. This is why we need choices, and I delved into this yesterday.

Focus accuracyPERMALINK

I’ve been writing about focus accuracy for some time now. No lens test is any good unless it’s checked and cross-checked, and it’s one reason that more and more I use field shots in judging lens performance. Field shots or “3D” shots are also hard to do when comparing cameras/lenses, but they are the reality of making actual images, which is what the end game is. Choosing one lens over another demands the ability to consistently achieve good results; it doesn’t matter if the lens is world-class if (for example) it can’t be focused consistently.

The guys over at slrgear have lens testing down to a science, inventing their “yellow submarine” to do focus bracketing. That’s something I’ve been doing for years now, but not having the lab space I do it manually, cross-checking results with different cameras, field shots, etc. There are surprises and lenses perform differently at different distances, so field images really matter.

Another problem is that the sharpest results in the center aren’t necessarily optimal for the frame as whole; this can be seen shooting a series of focus-bracketed shots, where “giving up” a tiny amount in the center can yield a superior overall result. Few of my images rely on center sharpness; most are off-center.

Field curvature assumptions are also a problem. The Zeiss ZF 28/2 Distagon has enough field curvature to make a very noticeable difference at the 5.5 feet cited in the slrgear article. See my Dec 29, 2007 blog entry (rice pounder) for an example where the corners are sharp, in spite of being several feet behind the center.

The bottom line: field shots of a wide variety of subjects are still the best way to evaluate lens performance for real images, especially if your shooting involves certain distances or types of subject matter. That is what I do in my Zeiss ZF Lenses review. The myriad effects a lens produces (the “look”) are often what matter the most in terms of visual impact.

Canon EOS 5D Mark II commentsPERMALINK

In yesterday’s entry, I called Canon’s 1Ds Mark III and 5D Mark II “lukewarm” but didn’t explain what I meant. One reader questioned why I called it the “Mark Time”, a term which I now realize suggested my disdain for the 5D Mark II, which is not at all the case—I want one! I meant the “Mark Time” comment more generally as applying to any brand, but I did not make that or the reasons clear.

As I write this, I see the Nikon D3 and Canon 1Ds Mark III sitting on my desk to my right. Were I to grab a camera for all around shooting at any given moment, it’s the D3 that I’d pick up 80% of the time. But why is that?

When I make a satisfying 12MP image with the Nikon D3, its 12MP are good enough for my needs most of the time. It’s also about low-light performance or even the cleanliness of the image at ISO 200. I like shooting at dusk and for that the D3 is superb. There are so many good photographs to be made that have little or nothing to do with 12 vs 21 megapixels. And when megapixels matter, the lens quality must be there and the focus must be perfect.

So by “marking time” I mean that we get more of the same (mostly) with the EOS 5D Mark II, Leica S2, etc, not a leap forward in sensor technology such as 30-stop dynamic range (true or firmware based), elimination of de-bayering (true color), no anti-aliasing filter, monochrome options, etc. In short, we’re not getting the choices we could be getting (yet), because the mainstream focus is still marking time on megapixels—that’s what sells these days. And I’m not too unhappy about that, as I like megapixels as much as the next person.

There is one big exception to foregoing with the Canon 5D Mark II, and that is the convergence of video and still images. Offering 1080p video in the 5D Mark II is a big reason I’ll want to get one. I’ve always disliked having to carry a separate tape-based camcorder, and so I rarely do. The utility of combined video and stills has always been there, just poorly executed (crappy stills on a good camcorder).

The 21 megapixels of the EOS 5DM2 is a huge crowd-pleaser (myself included), but the practical advantages of 21 vs 12 megapixels exist mainly in theory for many uses/users. Most DSLR users (who aren’t pros or even serious amateurs) would be better served by a wide dynamic range 6MP full-frame camera offering the ability to shoot at 1/500 sec @ f/5.6 in near darkness. But even many pros would like such a camera.

Which brings me to my first theoretical dream camera: The NiCan DR6 and DR6m, offering a 6MP full-frame sensor with 16-bit dynamic range and images at ISO 1600 with the noise of the Nikon D3 at ISO 200. Along with a monochrome version offering ISO 6400 at the same noise level.

The second dream camera, acknowledging the megapixel advantage for some applications, is the NiCan DR42, offering a full-frame 42MP sensor with ultra-clean ISO 25 and 50 for those tripod-based high-res shots. Low ISO and low frame rate would be just fine for shots needing that kind of resolution.

I used to shoot (and still have) a 4X5 view camera. If you’ve never seen a well-executed 4X5 “chrome”...well it’s a thing of beauty. An 8X10 chrome is even more gorgeous. With large film formats, we have the best of two things: impressive tonality as well as impressive detail.

Which brings me back to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II: it’s a nice step in the right direction, but at 45° to the target, which is high resolution with all the other goodies: wide dynamic range, low noise without banding or artifacts, focus stacking, elimination of lens aberrations, etc. My “marking time” comment simply means that optimizing some of those other areas while staying in the 16MP range would be a tradeoff I’d welcome.

Leica is back in the game — Leica S2PERMALINK

It’s great to see Leica back in the game with the newly-announced 37.5 megapixel Leica S2 (6.0 micron pixels), and a whole lens system to boot (now we know what’s been keeping the Leica elves busy!). This is not a camera I can afford (we’re likely talking $50K with a decent set of lenses), but many pros can, and if that’s what it takes to make Leica profitable, terrific!

Leica’s new S2

We need as many players as possible to keep the Darwinian forces in play, especially given Canon’s lukewarm offerings of the 1Ds Mark III and EOS 5D Mark Time (oops, Mark II). Canon’s ploys remind me of Epson’s goal of always producing printers that are one ink too short, magically producing a smidgen better model each year or so.

While the pint-sized Leica M8.2 rangefinder with its fabulous new lenses is appealing, the S2 shows that Leica is serious about surviving—after all, Leica has always been about quality in one form or another. Introducing the S2 line requires a major commitment, and sooner or later this will filter down to the R line and a full-frame M9.

The interesting question is why Nikon or Canon don’t exploit their heft and soak up the mid-range market, starving potential future competitors of oxygen. They quite possibly could do this with top-flight sensor technology in a 36X24mm form factor, avoiding the hassles of larger sensors (which need new lenses, etc).

Olympus/Sinaron Digital Zuiko 35mm f/2.8 shift on Canon EOS 1Ds Mark IIIPERMALINK

Just added to DAP is coverage on the Olympus/Sinaron Digital Zuiko 35mm f/2.8 shift lens on the Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III (DAP subscription required). If you haven’t subscribed to DAP yet, you’re missing out—lots of great content existing and planned.

Library of Congress Prints & Photographs Online CatalogPERMALINK

Reader Jim N pointed me to the incredible Library of Congress Prints & Photographs Online Catalog (PPOC). Included are a wealth of historical images, many of which can be downloaded as high resolution TIF files (some images have “no known restrictions on publication” and others do have restrictions). Old glass-plate images, daguerreotypes, etc are all online. Cool stuff, if you have the time for browsing.

From the US civil war era, glass plate negative

28mm shift lenses on full frame — Schneider and NikonPERMALINK

Just added to DAP is a supplement to 28mm Shift Lenses, covering performance on full-frame cameras (DAP subscription required). If you haven’t subscribed to DAP yet, you’re missing out—lots of great content existing and planned.

Financial meltdown and fiat moneyPERMALINK

Scared by what’s going on in Washington/Wall Street, with the printing presses running at capacity to avert a worldwide financial meltdown? With it all being “fixed” by the same crowd who created the problem? You should be scared. It’s no joke, especially with two guys running for President who are clueless about what’s going on. Who’s going to bail out the Fed? Find a mirror.

As I’ve recommended before, now is the time to read about fiat money in The Creature From Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. Or you could just find a nice beach, and make like an ostrich. Could a global currency collapse and a depression also be around the corner? Deflation*** is already here. Read.

*** credit is drying up for consumers and businesses, a contraction in the money supply, and one big reason the Fed is pumping huge quantities of money into the system—but it’s not working.

Read The Creature, then let me know what you think.

Part 3 of Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 Distagon ReviewPERMALINK

Part 3 of my review of the Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 Distagon is now online (ZF subscription required with or without DAP). Please see the revision history for details on what’s been added: comparisons with the Nikon 14-24/2.8 and Canon 16-35/2.8L II, bokeh, examples, vignetting on the Canon 1Ds Mark III and more.

Multiple new comparisons in Zeiss ZF Lenses

Many aspects to lens performancePERMALINK

There are many aspects to lens performance, some subtle, and some not so. One aspect is clearly evident in the image below (distortion).

When I review lenses, I look for all sorts of things, and provide real insight into what a lens actually does with real images—this sort of knowledge takes quite some effort to acquire even when you’re aware of all the possibilities. No doubt I miss a few things, but I don’t miss very much, and I share it all in my full lens reviews such as Zeiss ZF Lenses. That’s why even if you’re only a little interested in a Zeiss ZF lens you’ll find the review tremendously helpful in understanding lenses in general.

Nikon D3 + Zeiss ZF 18/3.5 Distagon @ f/8

Zeiss ZF Lenses review: what’s includedPERMALINK

Some readers have asked about inclusion of the 18/3.5 Distagon in my Zeiss ZF Lenses review (it’s already there, about 2/3 complete). And the next question is what about the 21/2.8 Distagon. The 21mm f/2.8 Distagon likely won’t even be available until early 2009 (based on past experience with Zeiss timelines). But I’ve already stubbed out the review with what’s known, and will include Zeiss factory comments, charts, etc when they become available as well, as I’ve done with the 18/3.5 Distagon.

Purchasing the Zeiss ZF Lenses review means you have online access for a full year, with my stated intention that renewals will be at a fraction of the original cost (exact amount TBD). This is great value: it means that future lenses are included for a year beyond the original purchase date. So if you’re interested in Zeiss ZF Lenses, there’s no reason to wait: the 18mm and 21mm are going to be done well before this time next year.

Subscribers may also download the review in its entirety for offline viewing and reference upon request. Contents of the downloaded version are updated quarterly and/or upon completing major additions.

One of the reasons I moved to a subscription model was to be able to offer regular updates, and to provide increasing value over the course of time; a 300MB download (400MB before long) made that a problem. The ZF 18/3.5 review will be finished by the end of September, and other supplementary material will appear from time to time.

All prior Zeiss ZF Lenses customers were emailed account information on September 23rd allowing online access, which means that even those who purchased it in December 2007 will enjoy the 18/3.5 Distagon review in its entirety, since I expect to complete it by October. Those readers also enjoyed the addition of the 28/2 Distagon, at no charge.

Carl Zeiss announces 21mm f/2.8 DistagonPERMALINK

Carl Zeiss has announced the 21mm f/2.8 Distagon in Nikon, Canon and Pentax mounts. It’s unclear how its pedigree relates to the Contax 21mm, but the Contax version has been highly sought after for outstanding performance (this might explain the usage of the word “legendary” in the Zeiss press release, though what “modernized” means is unclear).

The general construction is similar to the 18/3.5 Distagon, with the flaring business-end and its 82mm filter threads. The list price of $1750 is the highest yet in the ZF line, which one can hope is indicative of superlative performance.

Of particular interest to me is the close-focusing ability, down to a 1:5.3 reproduction ratio. This is not as close as the 25/2.8 Distagon at around 1:2.36, but much closer than the 1:12 offered by the 18/3.5 Distagon. The 1:5.3 ratio is also about the same as the 28/2 Distagon at 1:5.0 and the 35/2 Distagon at 1:5.4. Being able to focus very closely is a big plus for weird stuff, and I like weird stuff.

The 21mm f/2.8 Distagon will of course be incorporated into my voluminous Zeiss ZF Lenses review, see my comments on this above.

Zeiss ZF 21mm f/2.8 Distagon T*

Carl Zeiss Launches New 21mm Super Wide Angle Lens for SLR Cameras
Distagon T* 2,8/21: A legend returns

Thornwood, NY, September 2008: The legendary Distagon T* 2,8/21 is now being introduced for SLR cameras with EF, F and K bayonets. Thanks to its excellent performance, this modernized version from the former Contax system sets new standards in this focal length class.

“The outstanding correction of chromatic aberration enables photos without color fringes even in high-contrast light conditions”, says Martin Klottig, Marketing Manager, Carl Zeiss Camera Lens Division. “Even at full aperture, the floating element design ensures optimum edge-to-edge image quality over the entire focusing range. And even in difficult light conditions, the new Distagon provides excellent results thanks to its T* coating, optimum reflection reduction and exceptional chromatic correction.”

The shortest possible distance setting of only 0.72’ / 0.22 m makes the lens ideal for impressive perspectives. Typical applications include architectural, journalistic and landscape photography.

The Distagon 2,8/21 is available with an EF bayonet (ZE), F bayonet (ZF) and a K bayonet (ZK). It is suitable for both digital and analog full-format SLR cameras. Delivery of the Distagon T* 2,8/21 is scheduled to begin by the end of this year with the ZF and ZK version. Availability for the EF mount version will be announced shortly.

Last day for DAP discountPERMALINK

See details in Sept 13 entry.

Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon coming?PERMALINK

DigitalKamera.de reports on a new Zeiss ZF/ZE/ZK 21mm f/2.8 Distagon.

Specifications include a 90° field of view (diagonal), 16 elements in 13 groups, 1:5 close focusing (nice!), a “floating” element design for high image quality at all distances, 82mm filter threads, 600g weight, and a price to match (1400 euros, US price likely similar).

Carl Zeiss announces Canon EF-mount “ZE” lensesPERMALINK

Carl Zeiss has announced that it is expanding its line of SLR lenses to Canon EF mount. The big plus for Canon users is that the lenses are electronic mount so that all features work from the camera body (aperture control, exposure modes, focus confirmation). The lenses remain manual focus.

The first two lenses will be the 50/1.4 Planar and 85/1.4 Planar, with more lenses to follow. Optics are identical to the Zeiss ZF line for Nikon (confirmed by Zeiss US). Quoted pricing appears to be higher than the equivalent ZF models, but until the street price is established by lenses actually for sale, this remains to be seen. Zeiss certainly has a marketing challenge ahead in the Canon world where Canon offers four 50mm lenses and two 85mm lenses, including the stellar 50/1.2L and 85/1.2 aspherics.

 
Zeiss ZE 50mm f/1.4 Planar

 
Zeiss ZE 85mm f/1.4 Planar

One disappointment for Nikon users is that Zeiss so far has not offered electronic “CPU” versions for Nikon, relying instead on the 1980's mechanical AI-S mount. Coastal Optics can do it. Voigtlander can do it, ditto for Tamron and Sigma, so why not Zeiss? Presumably it's the usual intellectual property issues, but other vendors seem to have it worked out.

More optics for everyone
ZE: Carl Zeiss SLR Lenses Now Also With EF Bayonet

Thornwood, NY, September 2008: Carl Zeiss is expanding its successful line of SLR lenses with the introduction of the Zeiss ZE Lenses with EF bayonet for all analog and digital EOS camera models.

As with all EF compatible lenses, the new ZE lenses from Carl Zeiss transfer all information exclusively via electronic contacts. This means that all exposure modes such as programmed auto exposure, shutter priority, aperture priority and manual setting are supported. The aperture setting is controlled from the camera body and the automatic focus confirmation remains available to an unlimited extent with these manual focus lenses. With digital SLRs, the lens data and all exposure data can also be accessed via the camera’s EXIF file. Even E-TTL flash metering is supported.

The first lenses to be available will be the Planar T* 1,4/50 ZE and the Planar T* 1,4/85 ZE in the last quarter of this year. Further focal lengths will be added to the line within the next few months.

 
Zeiss specifications for ZE 50/1.4 Planar, 85/1.4 Planar

Voigtlander Ultron/Nokton review updatedPERMALINK

I’ve added new material on Nokton 58/1.4 sample variation, ergonomics, more details on alternatives, and a resolution chart for the 40/2 Ultron aspheric. Please see the revision history for links/details (DAP login required).

I like the Voigtlander lenses enough that I’ve purchased my own copies of the 58/1.4 Nokton SL II and 40mm f/2 Ultron Aspheric SL II. If you buy them, please use the links at the top right of this page to help support this site—thank you!

Aside from price (great value) and optical performance (excellent), why might you want the Voigtlander 40/2 Ultron ($379) vs the Zeiss ZF 35/2 Distagon ($826)? Here’s why:

Zeiss ZF 35/2 Distagon vs Cosina Voigtlander 40/2 Ultron aspheric SL II

Part 2 of Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 DistagonPERMALINK

Part 2 of my review of the Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 Distagon is now online (ZF subscription required with or without DAP). Please see the revision history for details on what’s been added: resolution charts with comparisons to the Nikon 14-24 and Canon 16-35, more examples, bokeh and more. But for some users, a more fundamental assessment might be all that’s required: the “neck factor”:

Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 Distagon size comparison

A third and final part will conclude the ZF 18/3.5 Distagon review: in-the-field comparisons with the Nikon 14-24 and perhaps the Canon EF 16-35/2.8L II. Of course, the entire review is an ongoing effort and new material will appear on a regular basis.

Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III + Zeiss ZF 18/3.5 Distagon

DAP Special Pricing ends Sept 15PERMALINK

The previous-customer discount for diglloyd’s Advanced Photography (DAP) ends Monday September 15. Don’t miss it! If you’ve ordered (or do order) any of the following Pro Reviews, you are eligible for the discount until that time. Please see the DAP table of contents for current and planned content.

Tip of the Day: Don’t take “as built” lens quality for granted PERMALINK

It’s a brand-new lens, right out of the box. It should be perfect optically. If only real life worked that way!

When buying a new lens, resign yourself to the tedium of verifying that it’s not a bad sample. Do it right away, so you can return or exchange it. Amazon.com makes this particularly easy to do. (When buying, please use the links on this page for purchases—thank you). Periodically check your important lenses; they can go out of whack for no apparent reason (this happened 3 times with my Nikon 17-35). Nearly always, the factory service can fix the problem, but why start with a bummer? Of course, buying used entails additional risks of abuse by the previous owner.

The best way to verify performance is to shoot two samples of the same lens and/or shoot against a reference lens of the same focal length, keeping everything locked down, exchanging only the lens; this rules out everything but focus error (assuming you’ve done everything else right).

  
Performance should be symmetric about the center eg left/right, top/bottom

Digital sensors, which are perfectly flat and also very high resolution, mercilessly show anything less than perfect optical alignment. A mosaic like the one seen above (actual pixels crop) makes a perfect target for spotting such problems. Be sure to focus perfectly, and align the camera to the subject squarely, and be aware of both horizontal and vertical. However, tilting the camera up is OK, so long as you look for symmetry, and have reasonable depth of field. Choose a target that allows near-infinity focus to make the job easier.

In my personal experience, somewhere between 20-30% of lenses are optically “off” in some way or another right out of the box. I’m referring to both Canon and Nikon based on experience with 40-50 lenses. While I don’t write up every bad experience, you can read about several experiences in Brand-new Blur. Some problems are really awful; others are more subtle.

Zoom lenses and shorter focal length lenses seem to be the worst offenders; I've had no problems with high-end telephoto lenses. Finally, do not forget the lens mount itself.

Next tip/question...

Zeiss ZF Lenses UpdatePERMALINK

To my Zeiss ZF Lenses review, I’ve added several more sample images for the 18/3.5 Distagon along with an aperture series for the 50/1.4 Planar. See the revision history. (ZF subscription required).

Nikon D3 + Zeiss ZF 18/3.5 Distagon

Voigtlander 58/1.4 Nokton and 40/2 Ultron asphericalPERMALINK

I previously reported on Voigtlander offerings on June 10th, June 1st, and June 5th, and last November 11.

Just added to DAP is my extensive review of the Voigtlander SL II 58mm f/1.4 Nokton and 40mm f/2 Ultron Aspherical (DAP subscription required). If you haven’t subscribed to DAP yet, you’re missing out—lots of great stuff planned.

Cosina Voigtlander Ultron 40mm f/2 SL II Aspherical

Cosina Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 SL II

Comparisons with the legendary 58mm f/1.2 NOCT-Nikkor are included, as well as with the Nikon 45mm f/2.8P and Zeiss ZF 35mm f/2 Distagon, along with numerous full-frame examples on the Nikon D3.

Trail Ride
Nikon D3 + Voigtlander 58/1.4 Nokton @ f/8

Question of the Day: How many cores? How much cache?PERMALINK

Question: Should i get a dual core or a quad core for RAW processing? I have found your article Digital Photo Professional Batch Processing Performance Tip when i was doing searches about that. I didn't find any info on the ability of DPP to use the maximum potential of a Quad Core.

See Multi-core Computers for background understanding of performance issues. The latest DPP 3.2 on Mac OS X 10.5 is more efficient, using four cores a good portion of the time for a single batch job. Running two batch jobs simultaneously can almost fully utilize four cores.

Two batch jobs (right) in Canon’s DPP uses 95% of a four-core Mac pro
One batch job (left) still uses all 4 cores a good part of the time

For everyday use (web browsing, mail, etc), more than two cores is overkill, and even for Adobe Photoshop, most activities struggle to use even two cores fully. Therefore, dual-core is plenty for most uses.

However, as soon as you start using specialty programs or commands, four cores are well worth the investment, especially considering the overall system cost. Examples include DXO Optics Pro (blog entry), Nikon Capture NX 2, Genuine Fractals, Digital Photo Professional, any video-processing software. Also, if you’re trying to work on something while a batch job runs at the same time, those extra cores make the machine usable. A 2.8GHz quad-core is a better idea than a 3.0GHz dual-core for most photographers, and typically costs about the same.

Question: Do you think it's better to get an SATA HDD with 32Mb cache or 16Mb? Because I did read that for multiple files manipulation (in my case, lot a of photo transfers by a firewire card reader) it can be an advantage. Elsewhere, i read it's useless. Don't know what to take to have the optimum transfer rate to smooth my work flow.

The Firewire card reader case is a non-issue; any current SATA desktop hard drive can easily keep up with even the fastest card reader. That’s assuming SATA drives; USB-based ones are horribly slow, Firewire ones are faster, but they still suck compared to SATA.

The SATA hard drives with 32MB cache are faster for multiple reasons; the extra cache is only one of several performance improvements typically seen. Disk speed matters during batch processing, saving and opening files, etc; for that a striped RAID of two fast drives is perfect. All of this doesn’t matter if your machine has inadequate memory.

See also Mac Performance Guide.

Next tip/question...

Tip of the Day: Shoot another formatPERMALINK

You shoot a _____ (fill in the blank). Go rent something really different for one day. For example, if you shoot a DSLR, rent a 617 film camera and shoot 5 rolls of 220 film that day. You’ll have fun, guaranteed. Or rent that 600mm f/4 and play.

Next tip/question...

Harvest’s endPERMALINK

Corn has one season*, we have many. Make the most of them.

Harvest’s End
Nikon D3 + Zeiss ZF 18/3.5 Distagon @ f/16

* so do women, before marriage

Question of the Day: 18mm, 25mm, 28mm?PERMALINK

Question: My interest is photography of "places and things", i.e. outdoor and landscapes. I was under the impression that a wide would give great DOF from close up to infinity, would you choose this above a 25 or 28 mm for that application or do I just not get it?

It's really hard to shoot an 18mm well for landscape; it's a lot of space to fill up (sometimes toes and legs do the trick by accident!).  I do not recommend 18mm as a first lens. A favorite landscape lens of mine is the 85mm f/2.8D PC-Micro Nikkor!

To dispel the myth that a wide angle provide enormous depth of field, subscribe to DAP and check out the sample images in the Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L II review. It’s mostly about magnification, not focal length. The use of tilt is the only way to get truly deep depth of field. For this, you need specialty lenses like the Nikon PC-E 24mm f/3.5, the Nikon PC-E 45mm f/2.8D or the PC-E 85mm f/2.8D (Canon has 24mm, 45mm and 90mm equivalents).

If you shoot the same scene with an 18mm vs a 25mm, you’ll get similar depth of field provided that the magnification of the subject is the same. Photograph a rock in the landscape, making it the same size in the image with both focal lengths, and there will be modest differences in actual depth of field, though the required perspective change (to maintain size) will heighten the effect, making the 18mm seem to have more DOF, mainly because more distant objects will be much smaller! Human visual perception dominates here—the 18mm will appear to have more DOF, but the image it renders will be vastly different as well.

Don't choose a lens based on non-choices like depth of field. Choose the focal length that matches how you see or what kinds of images you want to make.  Of the 18/25/28mm choices for landscape, my first choice would be the 25mm for "places and things", but that's me.  The 28mm would be great also, and at one stop faster, great for low-light shooting. For all around use, I’d go with the Zeiss ZF 28mm f/2 Distagon.

While the Zeiss ZF lens line is terrific, and used for most of my shooting, the Nikon 14-24mm zoom would be a better *first* choice for the wide angle range, for its versatility. On the other hand, a fixed focal length forces more careful compositions and teaches better than a zoom can.

Next tip/question...

Tip of the Day: Understand PerspectivePERMALINK

Perspective (the relative size of objects in relation to each other) is governed only by the distance to the subject.

The image of my mailbox below is not deformed, it’s just the result of honest rendering of its optical size front-to-back relative to the camera, a reality equation our brain largely hides from us with the size invariance principle: things stay about the same size within a relatively wide range of distances. Visual cues matter; this is (mostly) why the moon looks huge on the horizon.

In this case, the front of the mailbox is about twice as close to the lens as the rear, which it means its image really is about four times as large (2X2). Hint: most women don’t like to be photographed up close with an 18mm lens!

One of the few mailboxes teenagers haven’t destroyed
Nikon D3 + Zeiss ZF 18mm f/3.5 Distagon

I’ve always found extreme wide angles to be a challenge to shoot; there’s lots of space to fill! A longer focal length makes it much easier to isolate the subject without distracting elements.

Next tip...

Nikon 70-200VR Special ReportPERMALINK

Just added to DAP is my special report on the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF, including a comparison to the Nikon 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF.

I previously reported on the 70-200VR in Mush in the Corners; this special report in DAP now analyzes how it performs compared to the venerable 180/2.8D ED-IF.

Nikon PC-E Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/2.8DPERMALINK

The last of the three new Nikon PC-E tilt/shift lenses is now appearing in stores. I’ve previously discussed the 24mm f/3.5 and the PC-E Micro NIKKOR 45mm f/2.8D. The PC-E Micro-Nikkor 85mm f/2.8D completes the trio (see Nikon specs).

Nikon PC-E Micro Nikkor 85mm f/2.8D

The 24mm and 45mm models seem to be chronically out of stock. You might want to act now if the PC-E 85mm is on your list.

I likely won’t buy the new PC-E 85mm, even though it’s no doubt a slightly better lens. Why? I own the existing model already, and while it is not as convenient to work with on Nikon bodies as the newer PC-E version, it works great with an adapter on Canon and offers outstanding image quality in infrared. The PC-E (electronic aperture) lenses aren’t really practical to use with an adapter on Canon EOS, which is disappointing for us dual-brand shooters.

For the 85mm focal length only, you could also consider a nice used copy of the previous model, which is still sold new—no doubt some users will trade up, which means bargains on the old one. The existing model uses a plunger to stop down the aperture. Since it’s a delicate lens, don’t buy a banged-up one.

Get the Nikon PC-E lenses at B&H Photo or Adorama. Search for "Nikon PC-E".

Tip of the Day: Never go traveling without a backup camera PERMALINK

Murphy’s Law says that as soon as you travel more than 100 miles from a camera store, your camera’s chance of failure quintuples! This happened to me on a trip to Lake Tahoe with the Nikon D1. It happened to a friend of mine who took two EOS 1V film bodies to Iceland, both of which shattered their shutters the same day. And it happened twice to Arnold Crane with Leica R film bodies in Beijing, where 2 of 3 bodies failed from water (rain) and another one (separate trip) in San Francisco (bad mirror). Arnold reports switching back to Nikon as a result, but the truth is that any brand can fail, whether or not the camera is the top-of-the-line or not.

An acquaintance bought a brand-new Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II for a fall-color trip a few years ago. Slinging his tripod over his shoulder, he watched it plummet (along with the 100-400 zoom) 20 feet into shallow Maine seawater and rocks, shearing the lens off. Bad exposure on that shot.

Of course, you need to gauge the cost of the trip against the cost of redundant spares. But suppose you spend $10K on a once-in-a-lifetime trip to Africa or Antarctica or the place of your dreams. Or maybe it’s “only” an unusually special occasion for a loved one, but one that can never be repeated.

The point is to assume that a failure will occur sooner or later. This applies to camera bodies, batteries, lenses, chargers, computers, etc. Duplicating everything isn’t feasible, but at a minimum you should have twice the storage you think you need (in case the laptop or download device fails) and you should have two or more camera bodies and two or more lenses. Buy the cheapest body available, rent one, do something to make sure you aren’t left empty-handed.

For camera bodies, a nice usability bonus is not needing to switch lenses between one body. Lenses need not be identical, but more than one lens means you have something to shoot with. And this is one darn good reason to take at least one sturdy Zeiss ZF lens as a backup—complicated AF lenses with electronics do fail (and so do manual ones!).

Finally, for remote trips, you can “fail” too—so be sure to sign up for air ambulance service, which costs around $300 for the year, offering 1000X the protection. Doctors offices sometimes carry fliers for them.

Next tip...

Special pricing on DAP for previous customersPERMALINK

Fall Star
Nikon D3 + Zeiss ZF 18/3.5 Distagon

If you purchase or have previously purchased any diglloyd Pro Reviews, be sure to take advantage of the special limited-time pricing on diglloyd’s Advanced Photography (DAP) by the cutoff date. For more on DAP see yesterday’s entry and the DAP main page and Contents page.