Alas dear Fuji, I knew you well.

It's been a while since I posted on nzdigital (about three months), but I haven't been quiet during that time - anything but. I've been posting, instead, on my 'other' blog; The Fuji X-Files. It made sense, since I had invested heavily into the Fuji mirrorless system with the X-E2, and had a Fuji-centric blog waiting and ready to go.

And I enjoyed the Fujifilm X-E2, I really did. Well, at least I thought I did - until recently. Let me explain...

Lake Kaniere. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f11 @ 1/80th, ISO 200.

A few weeks ago I decided to film a video for my Youtube channel, comparing images taken with a full frame, APS-C and micro four thirds camera. I just happened to have all three sensor sizes together at one time, and thought it might make for an interesting video? And it certainly was interesting, and enlightening, but not quite in the way I had envisaged it would be. 

I went into the 'experiment' with a fairly clear idea of what I thought the outcome would be (not very scientific, I know), since I've shot on all three sensors over the years and know that they can all perform fantastically. All can produce clean, clear and sharp (more on that soon) images - at least at the sizes I need to print or display my work at. I took all the images at the same focal length, with the same effective aperture, and all in RAW so I could get the very best out of each sensor.

The three cameras I tested were the 24MP full frame Sony a99, my 16MP Fujifilm APS-C X-E2, and my son's Olympus OM-D E-M5 16MP micro four thirds. Above is the edited RAW images, with a 100% crop from the extreme left edge of the frame, from each camera. The full frame 24MP image has the edge in sharpness and clarity - of course it does. But having said that, the Olympus E-M5 micro four thirds image gives an impressive performance - with the very cheap 14-45mm kit lens no less - and isn't that far behind. But what shocked, surprised, and upset me, was how poor the Fujifilm X-E2 result was! It might not be quite as obvious from the images here on the web, but compared to the Sony and Olympus, the X-E2's 100% crop from the left edge is horrible! Soft, mushy and just plain horrible! Bugger 😞

On closer inspection, it looks as if the Fujinon XC16-50mm kit lens that I've been using has a slightly de-focused left side of the image, since the right side edge was indeed sharper. So chalk that up to a lens issue and move on. Whew!

Things will surely get better if we look at the central portion of the image - all shot at an f11 effective aperture, all on a tripod. Well, hang on there Bucky. Not so fast. Once again, it might be hard to tell from these web images, but - once again, the Sony and Olympus look very sharp, while the Fujifilm X-E2... not so much.

This time the result is not so much blurry, as just every so slightly 'mushy'? Detail just isn't as distinct and 'crisp' on the Fuji as in the Sony and Olympus images. On-screen, they all look fine. Sharp and clear enough. But pixel-peep at 100% and the Fujifilm X-trans sensor is definitely more 'mushy' in rendering detail. If I was being kind (hey, I'm trying), I'd say it produces a more 'painterly' image - maybe more filmic, than the other two? Great if that's the look you're going for.

Now normally I'm not a pixel-peeper. Really, I'm not. And I'm also not someone who has to have the 'cleanest' image possible with zero noise/grain present. In fact, with the Fujifilm cameras, I'm actually purposefully going the other way and introducing grain into the image. I like the fact that they can produce very film-looking images straight out of camera - when I want that look. But I'm also not the first to have noticed a general 'softness' with Fuji RAW files that aren't there with other systems.

This image softness has mostly been attributed to Adobe Lightroom's handling of the Fujifilm RAF files (yes, I'm using Lightroom). It's a common, and oft discussed issue, with a couple of work-arounds.

First, third-party plug-ins can take over the RAW development engine inside of Lightroom to process the RAF files. This is the 'fix' preferred by those who wish to stay within the Adobe ecosystem.

Second, ditch Lightroom all together and move to Capture One for processing RAF files in the future. Capture One has worked closely with Fujifilm, and are known to have a much superior RAW processing engine for RAF files than Lightroom. People have reported much sharper images processing in Capture One than Lightroom. So fortunately, there is a fix.

Having said all that, I'm not laying the blame only at the foot of Adobe. I have to at least consider that the lens has something (a lot) to do with IQ and sharpness. I've been shooting the X-E2 mostly in jpeg, and letting the camera process the image. If you do this, then a lot of the inherent lens issues will be 'minimised' by the processing software. So that what you get out of camera should be fairly sharp, corrected images. Not so with RAW. The RAF's are unadulterated data - warts and all - and it seems that maybe the XC16-50mm has quite a few warts?

So, having established this, I made two decisions immediately. One - get a new lens, and two - start processing RAF files in Capture One.

And that's exactly what I did. I purchased the 23mm f2 prime (35mm equivalent fov) and downloaded Capture One Pro for Fujifilm (which just happened to be on special). Problem solved - right?

Well actually, no. On the lens front, I'm sure that I am getting sharper results with the 23mm prime than I was with the XC16-5mm kit lens. No doubt. It's a lovely little lens, and a joy to use.

But, when I went back and re-processed the RAF file in Capture One, I got the exact same result as I had when I used Lightroom. The Fuji file still looked 'painterly' rather than crisp and sharp. Bugger (again) 😢

After that, it was a bit like one of those inkblot tests. Once I had seen it, I couldn't 'un' see it. I started going through my back catalog of images and looking at photos at 100% (I really am NOT a pixel peeper!). If I clicked on an image at random, then I could almost always tell if it had come from the Fuji because of the painterly pixel structure. If I clicked on an image, enlarged it, and thought "great, that looks better" then it was invariably from another camera sensor (usually a Nikon). And once I started playing the 'spot the Fuji fuzziness" game, then that was really the beginning of the end for me and Fuji.

Motukiekie Beach. Fujifilm X-E2 with Fujinon XC16-50mm

I've had a lot of fun using the Fujifilm X-E2, and made a lot of amazing images with it. It's been another piece of my mirrorless journey puzzle, and shown me that I can get along with smaller cameras. But it's also been a bit of a struggle, I'm not gonna lie. The X-Trans sensor is a unique beast, and many struggle to tame it satisfactorily. It's especially difficult if you're an otherwise satisfied Lightroom user. 

Shooting jpegs and using images SOOC (straight out of camera) is a serious option to consider with Fujifilm - their film profiles are really that good. And boy, have I had a lot of fun (and wasted a lot of time) with custom film profiles. The combinations are almost endless. Which again, unfortunately, presents something of a problem. I've programmed, changed, and reprogrammed the custom film settings on the X-E2 dozens of times - tweaking, reshooting, tweaking and reshooting again - only to end up changing them all later anyway. They are fun, but for me they've also been time-wasters, and something else for me to obsess about with my photography (me, obsessive? never!?).

So I've decided - for better or worse - to move on from Fujifilm (what a shock). I've used it for about a year now, which is fairly good going for me and a camera system historically 😕 I haven't really been a one-camera-one-system guy for years now. Variety is, as they say, the spice of life.

There is, however, one love that I have returned to time after time. And I think she is calling me again... 

I'm pretty sure I was using a Nikon before I switched to Olympus, and I know I was using a Nikon D300 before switching to the Fujifilm X-E2. My first digital 'love' was the Nikon D70, tearing me away from my 20 year affair with Canon. Nikon has been the stable home in my system-swapping career, and I hear her calling me again... 

I've also thoroughly documented my struggle (love and hate relationship) with 'going' mirrorless, since I'm still convinced (as are many) that mirorrless is the future of photography. But... having grown up using SLR style cameras, the DSLR has a strong emotional, and physical, attachment to me. As soon as I pick up a solid, hefty, magnesium alloy DLSR body, it feels like coming home. They just feel so 'right'. So wonderfully good in the hand. And try as I might - and I have tried - mirrorless cameras, with all their bells and whistles, just do not feel as good to hold and use. This is a hugely underrated part of enjoying photography. How does the camera 'feel' in you hands. Does it make you want to pick it up and use it for long periods of time? For me, Nikon's just do.

Of course all of this would be moot if money was no object. It would, of course, present a whole new raft of problems - but if money was no object, then I would definitely be buying a mirrorless camera. But not a tiny wee thing like a Fujifilm XT30 or Olympus E-M10III - something solid like an Olympus EM1x or Fujifilm XT4 with grip attached. Actually, what I think I would do is wait for the new Nikon Z9. I think that's going to be a stellar camera for Nikon. But alas, I haven't won lotto (that I'm aware of anyway), so budget is, as always, a major factor.

I'm going to Christchurch this weekend (as I write this). I've sold my Fuji gear already, have a few other bits and pieces to sell, and with the money I am going to buy another camera and lens(s). I don't know exactly what I will get, but at the moment I'm thinking it will be a Nikon DLSR. Something like the D7000 pictured above. Or maybe, if my budget can stretch and I can be convinced that its sensor is clean, a full-frame Nikon D600? It will all depend on what the store has in its secondhand department at the time.

Then again, there's a very nice black and silver Olympus OM-D E-M1 for sale as well. And, as we all know, the future is mirrorless! 

Lake Mahinapua with the Nikon D300

I've been using the Fuji X-E2 (and  X-E1) a lot lately (see the last few posts) and really enjoying it. Much to my surprise, it's fast becoming my camera of choice for all my photography. So where does that leave my Nikon D300 DSLR?

White Heron at Mahinapua. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 17-80mm f3.5/4.5. f/8 @ 1/10th, ISO 800

I'm not sure, to be honest. I've talked many times on this blog about my love for DSLR's, even though I've tried my best to switch completely to mirrorless. I managed it for a while when I was using all Olympus micro four thirds gear, but the pull of a solid DLSR has always been to hard for me to resist. The Olympus gear gave way to a Canon 50D recently, which then quickly changed to the Nikon D300. I have always enjoyed using the Nikon D300, and still do. It's a beautifully designed camera that always inspires confidence whenever I use it. But since I've 'discovered' the Fujifilm X-series cameras, it's sat in a camera bag unloved, and I've almost literally had to force myself to shoot with it.

Lake Mahinapua with a D300. f/11 @ 6 secs, ISO 200. ND64 Filter + Cokin ND Soft Grad

This weekend past (as I write this), I decided to give the D300 some 'love', and take it out on a sunrise landscape shoot. Even then, with the decision made and my camera bag packed the night before, I almost changed my mind in the morning.

I know many people harp on about this, and I hate to be one of them, but the main reason I almost changed my mind was because of the weight. With the camera body, lens, vertical grip and various accessories (tripod, filters, spare batteries etc), I definitely need a reasonable sized backpack to carry it all around in. Because of this, I find myself justifying what I do and don't bring along with me. I decided, for example, to leave my 70-210mm home rather than carry it around all morning and not use it. It was going to be a landscape shoot after all. Big mistake!

The first image of this blog - White Heron at Mahinapua - was the scene that greeted me as I arrived, pre-sunrise, at Lake Mahinapua. Boy, could I have used that 70-210mm lens that I decided not to carry with me!

I'm not a 10 pound weakling whose incapable of carrying around hefty camera gear, but I am 51 and not 21 anymore. So the less weight I have to carry with me, the better. And that's just all there is to it. The Fujifilm X-E2, with 16-50mm lens (and 50-230mm that I will probably get eventually) is much smaller and lighter, and fits in a much smaller bag, so I'll be more likely to carry it all with me on every shoot. And just as importantly, I won't be sacrificing anything in terms of image quality.

Mahinapua Jetty Monochrome. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 16-50mm f3.5/4.5. f/11 @ 4 secs, ISO 200. ND64 filter + ND Grad

But I digress (slightly). This post isn't about the X-E2, it's about the Nikon D300. And as I've already mentioned, it's a lovely camera to use and a joy to shoot with. So back to the landscape shoot...

Unfortunately, sunrise on this particular morning was very disappointing, since it was hidden behind cloud cover. So it was on to plan 'B'. And on a dull, grey morning with a large body of water and no colour, what's a landscape photographer's plan 'B' mostly consist of? That's right people - long exposure monochrome images!

I screwed on a 64ND filter to the front of the lens - blocking 6 stops of light from entering the camera - giving me an exposure range of around 3 to 6 seconds at f11. Surprisingly, I could still make out an image through the optical viewfinder, and as long as I manually placed the focus point of the camera over an area of high contrast, it had no trouble auto focusing.

Mahinapua Jetty among the Reeds. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 17-80mm f3.5/4.5. f/11 @ 4 secs, ISO 200

Because I had already decided that the images would translate well into black and white, I decided to shoot RAW + Jpeg, and set the camera to monochrome. This way, I could see the final monochrome jpeg when I reviewed the image on the lcd screen, but still had the RAW file if I changed my mind and actually wanted them in colour. As you can see from the image above, I did decide that the colour version also worked.

Since the exposures were so long, I also set the camera to shoot with a 2 second delay. This is very easy to do on the D300 - just a flick of the drive mode switch on the top of the camera. I could have used a remote release cable instead, but I find that the 2 second timer delay is just as effective, and you don't need to set up any extra cables.

Moody Mahinapua monochrome. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5/4.5. f/11 @ 1/6th sec, ISO 200

Despite the lack-luster sunrise, I came away from Lake Mahinapua with a few images that I was happy with. The D300 performed flawlessly - no complaints whatsoever. We are spoiled for choice when it comes to cameras, for all levels and budgets. Now that digital has been 'mainstream' for over 15 years, there are a plethora of great cameras to choose from. And since digital technology devalues so quickly (unfortunately), cameras that were expensive 'state-of-the-art' cameras only five or six years ago, can now be had very cheaply. That's a huge 'win' for anyone getting into photography who doesn't have a lot of money to spend - or even for someone like me who is a very seasoned photographer who doesn't want to (or need to) spend big dollars on the latest and greatest.

Will I keep the D300 and continue to use it? Considering how little I paid for it, then yes, I may very well keep it so that I can scratch that DLSR itch every now and then? But I already know that it's not going to be my 'main' shooter. That honor (is it really an honor?) now belongs to the Fujifilm X-E2.

Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. Here today...

The winter has been pretty dreary here of late, so I haven't had a lot of opportunity to get out with the new cameras. Last weekend however, it cleared up on Saturday evening, and I took the opportunity to get out with the Nikon D300 and my newly fixed Tokina 11-16mm f2.8.

Between a Rock and a Hard Place.
Nikon D300 with Tokina 11-16mm f2.8
f11 @ 1/320th, ISO 1600

I was quite excited to try out the Tokina since having fixed the focusing issues it was having (see post here). I do tend to struggle with the ultra wide angle lenses though - composition can be tricky, and there are a few other 'issues' you need to be careful of.

Firstly, since there's so much glass on the front of the lens, you need to be very aware of flaring and the position of the sun relative to the front lens elements. The 11-16mm has a lens hood supplied, but because they take in such an enormous field of view, the lens hoods tend not to be too deep. So care needs to be taken when composing with the sun anywhere close to the front of the lens.

The other issue you can often have with ultra-wides is when using filters. I have purchased some new filters for the Tokina, which has a reasonably large 77mm filter thread. For this trip I had attached the landscape photographers must-have filter, the Polariser. I ended up purchasing a Kenko branded polariser, which apparently is owned my Tokina, so I figured they would be a good match. But when using any polariser with a wide angle field of view, you have to be careful that the darkening polarising effect looks smooth and even across the frame - especially in the sky. If you polarise too much with an ultra-wide, the sky can look a little blotchy and unnatural. So look carefully through the viewfinder as you spin the polariser to make sure things are still looking fairly natural.

9 Mile Beach. Nikon D300 with Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. f11 @ 1/80th, ISO 1600 (Blended image)

I ran up against the 'polarising effect' when I set up to take the image above. I wanted to polarise as much as possible for the foreground so I could cut out the glare in the water pools and include as much of the reflection of the hills as possible. But when I did that, I was getting very blotchy blue areas in the sky.

To combat this, I took two images. One polarised heavily for the foreground, and another polarised lightly for the sky to remove the blotchy areas. I then processed both of the images in Lightroom, and blended them together in Photoshop.

The keen-eyed among you may have picked up on a slight issue with the images posted so far. They were shot, incorrectly, at ISO 1600! I had obviously been playing around with the camera at home a few days before and had boosted the ISO to take a couple of photos. I have tended, in the past, not to use Auto ISO, but to set it as low as possible manually. But this also means that I need to remember to check what ISO I'm on before I start shooting. And this time, I didn't. ISO 1600 isn't completely unusable with the D300, with some judicious noise reduction applied in Lightroom. But still, it isn't ideal...

Starfish. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. f5 @ 1/15th, ISO 800

Fortunately, I realised that I was shooting with the wrong ISO eventually and started to set it accordingly. Unfortunately, it was more towards the end of the evening when the light was very low.

Another thing that was very low on this particular evening was the tide. I had decided to head out along the coast, to a place called 9 Mile Beach. At low tide, there is a chance that starfish clinging to the rocks will be exposed. I've struggled to photograph these starfish for many years, and haven't ever taken images of them that I'm happy with. But I was certainly keen to try.

Starfish on the Rocks. Nikon D300 with Tokina 11-16mm. f/6.3 @ 1/20th. ISO 800

Focusing on getting images of the starfish at the end of the evening, in very low light, was my downfall. Even though the tide was very low, and I could move around the rocks fairly easily, the starfish were still down quite low and not really that easy to get to. I had just taken a photo on the Tokina of the starfish low down on the rocks, with the hills and houses in the background (see image above), when I noticed some starfish a bit closer up. I decided I should use the Nikkor 18-70mm instead for a closer composition, so I needed to change lenses. At that moment, disaster struck!

Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 front element - with debris

I had changed lenses by doing what I always do - taking off the old lens and placing it loosely in my camera bag before quickly adding the new lens on the front of the camera, so as not to expose the sensor to the elements longer than is absolutely necessary.

Having achieved this, I went to take the lens cap off of the 18-70mm so I could use it, and promptly dropped it in a rock pool at my feet. Bugger! I bent over to retrieve the lens cap from the pool and dry it off, but I had failed to secure the Tokina in my bag properly. You don't have to be a genius to guess what happened next! Out dropped the Tokina, onto the rocks, and I watched as it fell down the rock face, bouncing around as it went, falling directly into the sea!

I'm not proud of the string of expletives that issued forth once I realised what had just happened. I was able to retrieve the lens from the sea (eventually) since it was such a low tide that was ebbing in and out - but the prognosis was obviously very grim. Of course the lens is destroyed, and unfortunately, my insurance policy has a $250 excess. The lens only cost me $300 secondhand, so even if I made a claim, I'd only get $50.00NZ out of it.

In a career that has spanned over 30 years so far, this is only the second lens I've ever ruined. So I guess that's not too bad over the long haul. I was enjoying using the lens, and am obviously upset that it's now completely ruined. But I also still struggle using an ultra-wide, so I'm not sure whether I'll even bother replacing it with the same (or slightly different) lens? If I'd dropped my Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 I'd definitely be replacing it. But the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8? I'm not so sure....  

Fixing my Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 focusing issues

In my last post, I took my 'new' Nikon D300 out for a test-drive. The D300 is one of my favourite cameras of all time, so I was really looking forward to using it. I got some decent images driving along the West Coast Road to Westport (see last post), but it wasn't without its concerns.

As primarily a landscape photographer, I guess one of the first lenses I look at adding to my arsenal is an ultra wide of some description. Not that I think an ultra wide is the be-all and end-all of landscape photography - not at all. They are, in fact, incredibly difficult to use properly. You can't just slap on a 10mm lens, get absolutely everything in the frame, and expect to take fabulous images every time. If that's your modus operandi with an ultra wide lens then you're going to be disappointed with your images 99.99% of the time. But I do believe they have a place in every landscape photographers bag.

There are many options when looking for an ultra wide, although you also have to take into account the crop factor when using an APS-C sized sensor. Fortunately for Nikon shooters, the x1.5 crop applied to their lenses is not as bad as the x1.6 applied to Canon's. A 10mm lens on a Nikon D300 equates to a 15mm full-frame field of view, whereas on a Canon 50D you're looking at 16mm. That may not sound like a lot, but when you are getting down around the ultra wide angle numbers, 1mm can make quite a difference.

Be that as it may, there are still a lot of options out there to keep all users happy. Some of the most popular wide to ultra-wide offerings come from Tokina, who seem to have concentrated their attention on the wide end of the lens market. Tokina have always impressed me with their build and optical quality, together with their wide zoom range. They also seem to be fairly well priced, especially on the second hand market. The lens that caught my eye when I started looking for an ultra-wide was the Tokina 11-16mm Pro DX f2.8 and it wasn't long before I grabbed one on Trademe (NZ's version of eBay).

Tokina's advertising for the 11-16mm f2.8 as an astro photography lens

I was super excited to get the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 for a couple of reasons. First, I think it fits the bill perfectly in terms of the focal lengths I was after to compliment my standard 18-70mm lens. 11-16mm equates to around 16-24mm in the full-frame field of view, which is about as ultra-wide as I'll ever want to go. I had also read reviews that said it was a seriously sharp lens, and that edge distortion was extremely well controlled for an ultra-wide. I'm sold so far.

The second reason I was excited to get this lens was for its potential for use in astro-photography. Tokina even market this lens as being perfect for astro on their website (see above). I've never ever shot astro photography seriously. I've never really had the lens for it. But with a wide, fast, sharp (see Tokina's advertising again) lens like the 11-16mm f2.8, serious astro photography was now a real possibility. Very exciting.

My excitement turned to horror however, when I put the Tokina on my D300 for the first time. I had lined up a nice coastal landscape scene, set the aperture to f8 and the ISO to 200, and pushed the AF-On button to focus. And the Tokina went ballistic! It hit infinity focus and then whirred, clicked and shuddered like it was having a epileptic fit! Aaarrgghhh!!! This is NOT happening!?! For me, this was an entirely new lens/camera combo. A complete unknown quantity. Anything could be wrong! Was it the camera? Was it the lens? Was it the AF contacts?

I set about trying to eliminate certain possibilities and causes. I unattached and reattached the lens, just to make sure it had made proper contact. Still a focus issue at infinity. I took the battery out of the camera, then popped it back in and tried again. Still no joy. I then decided to try another lens. I attached my Nikkor 18-70mm to the D300, set up the shot again, held my breath, and pushed the AF-On button. Smooth, silent and precise focus. Yay! And Bugger!!! The Tokina has a focusing problem.

When I got home that evening, I emailed the guy who sold me the lens and let him know it had an obvious focusing issue, and that I would like to return the lens and get my money back. His reply - "Not my problem. The courier must have broken it". Houston, we have a problem.

The lens had arrived perfectly packaged, with no signs of damage, and the lens itself was in physically excellent condition. I knew it wasn't a courier problem - it was a focusing issue. When pushed a little further, the guy acknowledged that he was a Trader who hadn't actually owned the lens himself, but that he had tested it out on his D800. His full-frame D800. He'd 'tested' a DX lens, designed specifically for crop sensor cameras, on his FX full frame camera, and there was no focusing issue (according to him). Nevermind that the only focal length you can use on an FX camera is 16mm! Hardly a comprehensive 'test' of a lens I would have thought? But still, his answer remained the same - "Tough. No refund".

I lodged a dispute with Trademe (eventually the guy just stopped answering my emails), and then started a little investigating into focusing issues with the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. What I discovered both shocked me, and heartened me. It shocked me in the sense that I began to discover that this might in fact be a fairly common, and known, problem with this particular lens. But I was also heartened at the same time because there seemed to be a fix for the issue that you could perform on the lens yourself (with a couple of basic tools and the nerve to do so).

The Trademe dispute process took about a week (I have no idea what they did to try to persuade the guy to give me my money back), but ended with no resolution (surprise, surprise). Time to take matters into my own hands and 'fix' the lens myself...

The 'tools' required for the job

I had found a very useful Youtube video by Christian Schmeer here. If there's a Youtube video made about how to 'fix' this issue, then it's obviously a common problem!

Plenty of people had commented on how it had fixed their infinity focusing issues on their Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 - and only took 10 minutes to do themselves. The video is excellent, and walks you through visually the step-by-step process. It is a little daunting to start pulling apart a lens and unscrewing components, but it really is quite straight forward - and ultimately, what have you got to loose? The lens ain't really working too well how it is anyway - right?

Basically what you do is pull the clutch mechanism around the lens down to MF and carefully pull the rubber focusing ring down out of the way (on top of the zoom ring - see photo). Take the tape from around the lens and keep it to reuse when you have finished - but be careful because it will curl up and stick to itself very easily.

Lens focusing ring exposed.

Once the tape is off, pull down the plastic collar that the tape was hold together, and then pull up the focusing ring, just like you would if you were re-engaging autofocus. This will expose a slot that has a tiny screw right in the middle. Actually there's three of these slots, each with a little black screw in the middle. Make sure you are looking at the little black screws, and not the larger gold ones that can be seen in the photo opposite. You will have to rotate the focus ring to find all three of these slots and screws as at least one will be hidden behind a plastic collar.

Apparently these are the infinity focus selectors, and they are in the WRONG place! Instead of being in the middle, these screws should be all the way to the right for Nikon cameras to focus correctly to infinity, or all the way to the left for Canon cameras to focus to infinity!

What!? Why the heck wasn't this done in the Tokina factory? These lenses are sold as either being Nikon compatible, or Canon compatible - so you'd think they could get the infinity focusing screws in the right place before shipping them out to Nikon or Canon customers? But no. Let's just slap them in the middle. She'll be right! Really? The mind boggles! 

Screw is in the middle. Should be moved all the way to the right for Nikon!

I know it looks a little scary, tampering with a completely exposed focusing ring on your lens, but if you go slowly and work methodically through the steps, it's a relatively straight forward procedure. Once all three screws are placed to the right for Nikon cameras (moving one of the holes to the right will move all three), you can reverse the dismantling process to put the lens back together again. 10 mins - quarter of an hour tops, and jobs done. But does it work...?

You betcha! Worked a treat - for me at least (and for many others who have left comments on Christian's Youtube video). I did have to go back in and have a second go at it - make sure that your screws are placed ALL THE WAY to the right, since this really does control the infinity focusing selection.

Infinity focusing test. Nikon D300 with Tokina 11-16mm f2.8. f11 @ 1/60th, ISO 400

Once it was all put back together, I took the lens outside for a quick infinity focusing test, and it locked on focus every time without so much as a stutter! I still find it incredible that Tokina would ship a lens out to customers with known focusing issues. Also makes me wonder what the previous owner of the lens (not the Trader I purchased it from, but the actual photographer who owned the lens before me) thought was happening? Maybe they didn't use it very often? Maybe they never used infinity focus (hard to believe for an ultra wide angle)? Apparently Tokina have 'fixed' this issue with version II of this lens. I should darn well think so.

I wasn't thrilled to find my Tokina had a focusing problem, and I certainly wasn't happy that the seller I purchased it from was prepared to brush me off and ignore the issue so easily. I'm also not that thrilled that Trademe seem completely powerless to do anything about it.

I am, however, happy that there is a fairly simple 'fix' for the issue. And that in completing the procedure it seems to have restored my lens to good health! Long may it continue...

Nikon D300 arrives

My 'new' Nikon D300 arrived last week and I had a chance this week to try it out. It was a mixed bag to be honest. Some good, some not so good, and some horrendous! Let me explain...

Coast Road King Tide. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. f8 @ 1/640th - ISO 200.

First, the good. I really do love the weight, the feel, the ergonomics - and even the shutter sound - of a Nikon D300. It's an amazing tool, and a real photographer's camera. It took me a couple of days to set up - creating four different custom settings for all types of photography I might find myself shooting. Generally I will have it on Group A: Landscape/Travel. But I've also set up groups for Sports, Portraits/Wedding and finally Point & Shoot. The Point & Shoot setting is really only for times when I might hand the camera to somebody else to take a photo, since all the other groups are set up for back button focusing - removing the focus control away from the shutter button. Point & Shoot is, instead, a fairly standard configuration.

I had to travel to Westport for work soon after the D300 arrived, and decided to take it with me for a couple of shots on the way up and way back, just to give it a quick test. I'm so glad I did.

Only 10 minutes down the road, I stopped to take a photo along the coast because the tide was high (it was a king tide) and the light was wonderful.

Coast Road King Tide 2. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. f8 @ 1/400th - ISO 200

I jumped out of the car, attached the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 that had also arrived for the camera, and set myself up to take my first image with the D300. Pushed the AF-On button on the back to engage focus and; whirr-click-whirr-click-whirr-click - the Tokina went ballistic! Confused, I focused about one-third into the frame, and the lens locked on focus. I then recomposed and focused on the hills at infinity - and the lens went ballistic again! Bugger! No matter what I did, when I tried to focus on infinity, the lens shuddered, clicked and whirred uncontrollably. Not the way I had hoped my first shot with a new camera system would go!

Was it the camera, or was it the lens? I turned the camera off, then on again - still no joy. I took the lens off and then back on again. Still no luck focusing at infinity. So I took the lens off, replaced it with the Nikkor 18-70mm, and crossed my fingers. Prefect focus at infinity. No clicks or whirrs - just beautiful silent focus. Damn. The Tokina 11-16mm has a focusing problem.

Coastal Sea Spray. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. f8 @ 1/400th - ISO 200

For the rest of the day, I stuck to the Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5, which is no bad thing. It's a truly cracking lens. I have no idea why Nikon stopped making it. I guess they have a plethora of 18 to 120 or 140ish focal length lenses that kind of make the 18-70 somewhat redundant. But for me, the 18-70mm is almost the ideal walk-around lens that will stay on my D300 90% of the time. As already stated it has near silent and super quick focusing. It also has a fairly solid construction (with a metal lens barrel), and a reasonably fast aperture (1 stop faster than the other Nikkor consumer grade zooms). The 28 to 105mm equivalent focal range is a classic range - bigger than the 28-80mm range, but not as excessive as the 28-200mm super zooms that create a few more image quality compromises.

No, it's not all perfect - there's some vignetting wide open at the 18mm end, and barrel distortion as well. But nothing that can't be fixed either immediately in-camera, or later on in post. The images I get from this lens are gorgeous. Sharp even wide-open, but even sharper when stopped down a stop or two. For the price (around $120 - $150NZ) it's an absolute no-brainer of a walk-around/travel lens.

Great Coast Road View. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. f8 @ 1/160th - ISO 200

But I purchased the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 as my 'main' landscape lens, so I was a bit bummed that I couldn't use it. Further investigation as to the cause of the focusing issue is required, and I will follow up in another post and let you know how I get on.

I also noticed another 'quirk' with the D300 - battery indication. It seems to be having an issue with showing a full charge of the Nikon batteries (and they are Nikon original batteries, not cheap Chinese knock-offs). I know the batteries have a full charge (I've charged them myself), and that they should last upwards of 1000 shots. But I can take a few images with the indicator at full charge, then turn the camera off, only to have the level read '0%' when you turn the camera on again 5 minutes later! Taking the battery out of the camera and popping it back in resets the level to 100% again and your good to go. But I'm never sure whether it's going to show me full power, or no power, whenever I turn the camera back on. Annoying....

I've Googled the issue and it seems that updating the firmware to the latest (1.11) can sometimes fix the problem. Also, cleaning contacts for the camera and battery is a good idea. I've done both last night, so I'll see how that works going forward.

Coast Road View 2. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. f8 @ 1/100th - ISO 200

The camera arrived in good condition cosmetically, except for one small thing - the rubber around the hand grip was coming away at the side (by the CF card door). This is also a common issue. Both D200's I've had have suffered from the grip coming loose - around the thumb area at the back of the camera. On the D300 I could pull the hand grip rubber back quite a way to expose the bare plastic underneath. Not ideal, and something that will drive me crazy. So I decided that was my first 'fix'. Initially I tried some double sided tape to see if that would hold it down enough? No joy there. So, in the end, I resorted to a couple of dabs of industrial strength super glue (being careful not to use too much) and it worked a treat. Don't think the rubber grip is going anywhere in a hurry, and it now feels very secure and comfortable in the hand. Job done!

Coastal views. Nikon D300 with Nikkor 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. f8 @ 1/100th - ISO 200

So yes, It's a mixed bag really. A few cosmetic issues that are being dealt with (if a battery issue could be called cosmetic), a major lens disaster that I'm following up on presently, and a few images in the bag that I'm happy with.

I didn't expect it to be perfect (hoped, but didn't expect), since it is an 11 year old camera. But then again, it has only done 30,000 clicks, so it's got plenty of life left. The peeling rubber was an easy fix. And I'm hoping that the battery issues also turn out to be sorted with a contact clean and firmware update? Time will tell on that score.

The Tokina lens focusing issue... well, that's going to take a little more sorting out I'm afraid. It may even get to the lens dismantling stage? But that's another post for another time...

Nikon D300 wins - this time...

Every year around winter time, I sit back and take stock of my photography gear. Literally. I do a kind of a stock-take, making a list of what I have, and what I use (or more importantly - don't use). I do this for a couple of reasons. First, I'm a bit of a gear horde and love to collect all sorts of cameras and systems I discover throughout the year. And second, I have a very small office space in which to keep all this gear. So an annual stock-take (and clear out) is part of my photography routine.

I decided this time around that I was going to sell off some of my film gear I wasn't using. Especially the 35mm stuff. When I shoot film (and I regularly do), I prefer to shoot my medium format Bronica over 35mm. So a lot of 35mm film equipment was sitting around not being used. Decision number one; sell some 35mm film gear.

Having done that, I then began to ponder over the digital gear I'm currently using (which I also seem to do every year). I don't shoot professionally any more, apart form the occasional wedding for friends. So my gear 'needs' (not wants) have changed over the years. In the last two posts, I've written about the Olympus Pen EP3, and how I still prefer to use a dedicated camera system for photos. But I also suggested that this was a very close thing, and that my iPhone could very easily replace the Pen in the near future. Especially if I can get some money together to upgrade to an iPhone 6s Plus or maybe even iPhone 7.

Anyone who has ever followed any of my ramblings on this blog will also know that I'm not wedded to any particular system. Quite the opposite. As a photography educator, I actually like the fact that I use almost all the systems. So that when I have someone turn up on a workshop with a specific issue, I can usually help them navigate menus and buttons particular to their camera. It does, however, mean that I'm changing systems a lot.

So with some money from the sale of film bodies, I began to ponder over my current Canon digital gear. I love the ergonomics and handling of my Canon 50D, and the Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 is a stellar lens, especially for the price. I have even been buying up a few little bits and pieces over the last few months to add to the kit (some spare batteries and an intervalometer). But I have always been a little unsure about the 15MP sensor that Canon used in the 50D.

Canon released the 50D towards the end of 2008, when the megapixel wars were in full swing. Many of the camera lines were being 'updated' simply with a slightly higher resolution sensor, and companies pushed the limits of the technology so they could be the first to release cameras with more megapixels. With the 15.1MP sensor in the 50D, I think Canon pushed it too far too soon. It's known as a fairly 'noisy' sensor, exhibiting some noise even at ISO 100.

Of course noise is somewhat subjective. Photographer's tolerance levels to noise in an image will vary widely. I actually have a fairly large tolerance for noise in an image. I still shoot film after all. But I do think that Canon pushed the 15.1MP sensor out before it was ready. I may be wrong, but I think the 50D and 500D are the only cameras that use the 15.1MP sensor? That probably says a lot right there!?

So if the Canon 50D isn't for me, then what is? What do I need as a predominantly landscape-based photographer (with the occassional wedding thrown in)? A quick google search for 'best' landscape cameras all came back with the same specification - full frame. This is born out by most of the Youtube landscape photographers I follow. The common theme is either a Canon 5D Mk4 or Nikon D850 (or Sony A7III). All full-frame cameras. And all horrendously expensive! Not only in terms of bodies, but also lenses. That Canon 'L' glass might be nice, but it sure ain't cheap! So that would be a 'no' for going full frame then - right?

Hang on - don't dismiss full frame so quickly just because of price. Full frame has been around for quite a while now, and maybe the bargain of the decade is the Canon 5D Mk1 - the original full frame classic. OK, it's only 12.8 megapixels, as opposed to the 5D Mk4's eye-watering 30.4 megapixels. But I've argued dozens of times on this blog that 12 megapixels is the 'sweet spot' for sensor size IMHO. And the 5D's 12MP's are on a full-frame sensor! So for someone like me, who hardly ever crops their images, 12MP is seriously more than enough. Seriously.

The other good news with the 5D Mk1 is that enough time has passed since its introduction (2005) that it is now an absolute bargain on the secondhand market for a full frame camera. Bodies in good condition can be had for around $450NZ and sometimes even cheaper. That's a fairly achievable entry point for full frame camera goodness! So I started looking around for a 5D body, and even put in a couple of bids on Trademe (NZ's answer to eBay).

Never one to shy away from a complete system change (as mentioned earlier), at the same time as I was looking at Canon 5D bodies on the used market, I also looked in to other options at roughly the same price. The Fuji system has always interested me, so I looked at a couple of XT-1's. Sony has also intrigued with the A7's, but unfortunately even the A7 original goes for more than I was willing to pay. And that's when I saw it. A low-ball auction price for a used, but not abused, Nikon D300.

Me and the Nikon D300 / Canon 5D association go way back. We have history together. Unresolved history.

Long story short, back in 2010 I was using a Nikon D300 system after my Canon 5D (that I was still paying off but was out of warranty) died on me. The information in the viewfinder stopped working and was going to require an electrical circuit board replacement. Wedding season was fast approaching - I had a few weddings already booked - and I needed a new camera. I started my digital journey with the Nikon D70 and had even shot my first wedding season with it. So when I needed a new camera to replace my 5D I decided to try Nikon again, with the D300. I loved that camera, but eventually did manage to get the Canon 5D fixed, so I had a tough decision to make (which I wrote about here).

Long story short (again), I went with the Canon 5D. But it was a decision I rather regretted. Fast-forward eight years, and it looks like it's a decision I can reverse this time around. Having initially convinced myself that I 'needed' a Canon 5D full frame for landscape photography, it was the D300 that was calling the loudest. And that price! It was almost insanely low. So I ended up bidding on the D300, thinking it would go much higher than my bid. But it didn't. I won it for $176.00NZ - body only - with just shy of 30,000 shutter actuations (the D300's shutter is rated for 150,000)! That's just crazy talk!

The D300 is a joy to use, and hits my 12 megapixel sweet spot perfectly (at 12.3MP). No, it's not full frame, but I'm not anti APS-C sensors. In fact, I prefer the 1.5x crop of the Nikon sensors over the 1.6x of the Canon. It's just that teeny bit wider. ISO range is comparable to the 5D, as is noise even though it's a smaller sensor.

Of course it hasn't arrived yet, so I'll have to reserve judgment on overall condition til then. But it has only had one owner in its 11 years, so on average he's only taken around 2700 images per year with the camera. That's not heavy use in anyone's language.

Since it was sold body-only, and since it was such a bargain (we'll see), I also had enough money from my film camera sales to buy a general, all-purpose lens. I went straight back to Trademe to find one of my favourite lenses of all time - the Nikkor AF-S DX 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 IF ED!

This is the lens that first came out with the D70. I guess you could call it a D70 'kit' lens? But this ain't no kit lens in the traditional run-of-the-mill 18-55mm kit lens cheapo plastic sense of the definition. This 18-70mm is a cut above. Both optically and in build quality. It has a metal mount, weather sealing, an excellent focal range (27-105mm equivalent), and is fairly 'fast' at f3.5-4.5. It has ED glass, silent and quick internal focusing, and excellent image quality (albeit with a little vignetting apparent wide open at the 18mm end). It ain't perfect, but I love this lens. I snapped one up as soon as I found a decent 'Buy Now' price ($150NZ with free shipping).

Now that I had decided to dive back into the Nikon system, it was full steam ahead with selling my Canon 50D gear. As I write this I have already sold a few items and have just a few more to go. This has facilitated my second (and third) lens purchase(s). Next on the list of 'must-haves' after the Nikkor 18-70mm was a fast prime - the Nikkor 50mm f1.8D. Nikon's version of the nifty fifty (although better built than Canon's version of this lens).

The 50mm prime is often the first lens purchase for someone looking to improve their images on a budget. The fast f1.8 aperture is ideal for low-light, and gives buttery-smooth background bokeh. A great cheap portrait option on APS-C cameras, since the 50mm focal length crops to a mid-telephoto 75mm f1.8 field of view. It may not get a lot of use, but since it's so small and light, it's no big deal to carry it with you on the off chance you may need a small, fast prime lens.

I've said this before, and I'll say it again - I'm not a big telephoto shooter. As a landscape photographer, wide-angle is more important to me (initially at least). So of course my third (and final) lens purchase (for a while at least) needed to be a wide angle landscape lens.

Enter the Tokina SD 11-16mm f2.8 IF DX AT-X Pro. On an APS-C camera like the D300 (which the lens was designed for) it equates to about a 16-24mm full-frame lens. Plenty wide enough. And fast for a wide angle with a constant f2.8 aperture. Looks to me like a perfect astro lens, and I can't wait!

I've been wanting to do some astro photography for a very long time, but have never had the right lens for it. I get the feeling that this has now changed! Tokina even advertises this lens on its website as an astro lens. Wide, fast and sharp! And that's according to the reviews I've read online. I'm a big fan of Tokina lenses on Nikon cameras. They are all very well built, with excellent image quality, and they often produce lenses that sit outside the 'normal' focal ranges of all the other brands. I think I recall reading somewhere that Tokina was started by two ex Nikon engineers who left Nikon because they weren't being allowed to design unusual focal length zooms. That's a story for another time maybe? A review of the 11-16mm f2.8 Tokina will definitely follow once I've had time to play with it.

So there you have it. My switch back - this time around - to the Nikon D300. It should be here any day now. I'll let you know what I think of the actual body once I have it in my hot little hands. Exciting!