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!

Olympus Pen EP3 sensor struggles

In my last post I talked about why I would still choose a compact micro four thirds camera kit like the Olympus EP3 to take travel photos with - over just carrying around my iPhone. At the moment.

This is likely to change, probably in the not too distant future. I'm looking at 'upgrading' my current iPhone 6 to a 6sPlus, or maybe 7 - ostensibly for better video. But I'm sure the camera upgrade will also be nice to have as well.

For the time being though I prefer the ergonomics, extra control and far greater lens selection of the Olympus EP3, especially if I can get an evf accessory to go with it (anyone out there in internet land got one they would like to send my way?). The larger m4/3rds sensor is also nice to have and offers a slight IQ boost as well, although it does have its limits. I discovered what these are traveling home from our recent trip to Christchurch.

Olympus EP3 unedited RAW capture

For all of our trips over to Christchurch this winter we have been blessed with fantastic weather. And none more so than on our last trip back. Heading towards the West Coast at about an hour before sunset, the clouds and light over the mountain range was simply beautiful. I just had to stop and capture what I was seeing - with my Olympus EP3.

Fortunately, with just my wife and I traveling, we aren't really constrained by time (or bored kids), so I've been able to stop and take my time shooting the landscape. Having said that though, it is mid winter, and was absolutely freezing cold getting out of the car. After only about 5 minutes I couldn't feel my fingers anymore, it was quite windy in places, and I had only brought my flimsy travel tripod with me. All of which is to say that I didn't want to spend hours setting up shots and bracketing hundreds of exposures. I was working fairly quickly.

As you can see above with the unedited RAW capture of one image, the dynamic range in the scene was off the chart, requiring at least some bracketing to capture all the information. So bracket I did - mostly. But I'm also pretty sure that with some of the images I took, the histogram on the lcd screen of the EP3 was telling me that I had captured the information, without clipping the highlights or shadows? In fact, I'm pretty sure that's what it was telling me about the above RAW image (but I could be wrong)? If it was telling me that, then it lied. Because once I got the images into Lightroom, it became obvious fairly quickly that some of the highlight areas had blown completely. Still, there was something there, so I decided to work on the image anyway.

Springfield light. Olympus EP3 with Zuiko 14-42mm lens. f11 @ 1/250th, ISO 200

The final image, cropped to a pano format to hide the blown out clouds, is ok - but it required a lot of work to get it looking like that. Maybe that's not surprising, given the RAW file? But a lot of the work was in dealing with the noise from the smaller senor. Even with the initial poor exposure (my fault), there was more noise in the image than I was expecting using it's lowest ISO 200 setting.

Heading home. Olympus EP3 with Zuiko 14-42mm. f9 @ 1/250th, ISO 200

Even when the dynamic range wasn't too vast for the sensor to handle, working on the image in Lightroom was always about balancing how much noise was left in. I guess this should be no great surprise? The laws of physics will tell you that smaller sensors = more noise. It's just a fact. But I guess I'd been a bit spoiled with my previous micro four thirds cameras (the EM5 MkII and EM1), whose 16MP sensors I found quite remarkable. It's no surprise that the more 'consumer' oriented 12MP EP3 isn't in the same league - especially when the sensor is pushed to its limits.

Don't get me wrong, the image above isn't horrible. In fact I like it a lot. But I have had to do a lot of noise reduction work on it to get it to where I'm happy with it. Of course, in strong and evenly lit conditions (during most of the day) when the sensor isn't being pushed to its limits (see images from previous post) the noise at ISO 200 is negligible. Yet still probably more apparent than on my Canon 50D.

Waimakariri River Lookout. Olympus EP3 with Zuiko 14-42mm. f9 @ 1/25th sec. ISO 200. 3 exposure blend in Photoshop

Of all the images, I guess I'm most disappointed with this one. I don't think the final image does any justice to the scene I saw in front of me and tried to capture. And despite freezing my butt off getting it, I took my time with this image to make sure I had what I needed.

I bracketed exposures (2 stops either side) to make sure I had the dynamic range covered, and once again still found that the highlights had blown. Shadows struggle to hold any detail and quickly turn to mud, and contrast seems low - on all the images I took with the EP3. Even with good light during the day, the clarity and dehaze sliders are used immediately in Lightroom to bring some life back into the images. Maybe again this is good? Maybe RAW files are supposed to be flat? Well, maybe. But having done this for quite a while now, I feel that the images coming from the EP3 just need that much more? And it's very apparent that the images from the 12MP m4/3rds sensor don't handle vigorous post processing manipulation.

The Waimakariri River Lookout was processed using Photoshop's merge to HDR function - which gave a lot more control, and a better result, than Lightroom's version did. I can't say for definite that I would have got a better result had I used my 15MP APS-C Canon 50D, but I get the feeling that I would have. I used the 50D on a previous trip (post here) - in better lighting conditions to be fair - but I still like the 'look' of those images much more than I do the ones coming from the EP3.

Maybe all of this is just user-error? Maybe I really don't know what the hell I'm doing (very possible). I know a 'professional' doesn't blame their tools etc, etc.... But this is the first time in a very long time that I've been so disappointed with a set of images, and struggled so much to process them to my liking.

So maybe it is the sensor on the EP3 reaching (and in some cases exceeding) its limits? Maybe it wasn't made for high dynamic landscape work? Or maybe I'm just a little deflated since my 'vision' wasn't matched by the final result? Maybe I can't answer that question objectively at the moment? And maybe, just maybe, the next time I go away I might bring my 50D with me for those landscape shots taken in tricky light on the way home?

Brighton Rocks! (with apologies to Queen) - Olympus Pen EP3 at New Brighton

In a very recent post here, I described how my wife and I have been traveling over to Christchurch a lot recently. The trips continue, although it may be slowing up soon? I'm enjoying the long weekends, and I'm also enjoying the chance to use a different camera kit each time I go. Last trip, I decided to travel light and bring my Olympus Pen EP3 along for the ride.

Beach Walk. Pen EP3 with Zuiko 14-42mm II. f4 @1/500th - ISO 200

On the Monday morning, after my wife's appointment, we decided to head out to New Brighton. Neither of us had been there for many years, and while it was a bit chilly, we thought we'd go for a walk along the New Brighton Pier. When we arrived, I parked the car in a carpark along the beach and the shot above was the first thing I saw when I got out of the car. On some of the images, there was a man walking his dog up the path. But in the end I preferred the shot where I waited for him to crest the hill and move out of the frame. I think this works more on a visual level as the path now invites the viewer to walk along it, rather than already have a figure occupying the space?

New Brighton Pier. Olympus Pen EP3 with Zuiko 14-42mm. f5.6 @ 1/250th - ISO 200

The light wasn't anything special - it didn't even look this good (it's amazing what the Clarity and Dehaze sliders in Lightroom can do for a flat image). I really only took some 'record' shots as we wandered around mid-morning. But then again, that's what the little micro four thirds Pen EP3 excels at. It's a very compact, very lightweight, yet very capable travel camera - perfect to record those day trips wandering around a city being a tourist.

New Brighton Beach from the Pier. Pen EP3 with 14-42mm. f5.6 @ 1/250th - ISO 200

As we wandered along the pier there was some reasonably nice light looking out across the beach. I envisaged this photo in black & white as I was taking it. The scene was already very monochromatic, so converting to black and white (later in Photoshop) was always the intended result. Once again, I've made use of the clarity and dehaze sliders, as well as some slight burning and dodging to boost the contrast in the image. I don't think I've taken it too far - black and white images seem to be able to handle a little more vigorous processing - but it is easy to push things a bit too much. Especially with the smaller 12MP micro four thirds sensor. I prefer my b&w images to be slightly more contrasty than normal colour images. I was taught a long time ago, in my film days, to create a print with "black blacks and white whites", and that's what I always try to do with my monochrome images. Who said that paper-white and absolute black was a bad thing?

Brown speckled Seagull. Pen EP3 with Zuiko 40-150mm f4/5.6. f5 @ 1/400th - ISO 200

Not surprisingly, where there is a beach, and where there is a pier, and where there are people fishing, there will always be seagulls! And these were some of the biggest, noisiest and bolshiest seagulls I've ever come across. I think the seagull above is a juvenile - but it was the biggest damn seagull I've ever seen! The photo doesn't really do it justice since there's no comparison for scale, but it was 'big'. If it is a juvenile, then I hate to think what size it will get to as an adult!

The shot was taken with the small, lightweight, but exceptionally sharp 40-150mm f4/5.6 telezoom kit lens. It weighs practically nothing, but has an 80 to 300mm reach (in 35mm full frame terms). This is another reason why the small micro four thirds EP3 is an ideal travel companion.

New Brighton Grafitti. Pen EP3 with Zuiko 14-42mm. f5.6 @ 1/100th - ISO 200

It was getting a bit chilly on the pier (and we were both recovering from the flu), so we decided to head into the township and check out the New Brighton CBD. Unfortunately, it's not a pretty picture. New Brighton has struggled to attract visitors to its shopping area for a long time, despite having the beach and the pier right on their doorstep. I can remember going there over 20 years ago and thinking it was struggling to attract people. Twenty years, and several earthquakes later, and the prognosis is a lot worse. Lots of empty, dilapidated shop fronts and buildings are the norm, with only a sprinkling of outlets open for business. Very sad. There was, however, some very cool graffiti to photograph - so that's what I concentrated on.

The Best Things in Life... Olympus Pen EP3 with 14-42mm. f4.9 @ 1/60th - ISO 200

In terms of a micro four thirds camera, I have a bit of a love-hate relationship with the EP3. I love its styling and retro looks, its compactness and light weight, and it's a fairly responsive wee camera. It's quick focusing (much better than the previous EP models), has 'enough' megapixels, and supports the vast range of super primes that both Olympus and Panasonic produce.

But I hate (and I mean hate-with-a-passion in the strongest sense of the word) the fact that it has no evf (electronic view finder) built into the camera. Yes, I get it - adding an evf would have made it more bulky, and ruined the slimline form factor they've got going on. Don't care. I would have lived with a little extra weight - and form factor be damned - I want functionality! And yes, I know you can get add-on evf's for it - and if I end up keeping the EP3 long-term then I think that's exactly what I'll do. I really do hate the 'hold-the-camera-out-at-arms-length-and-use-the-rear-lcd-screen" method of composing - and taking - an image. It's just so wrong on so many levels. I'm prepared to live with it on a cellphone, because it just is what it is. But this is a camera for crying out loud. Please don't make us buy an accessory just to get an evf! Ooops - too late...

"I yam wot I yam". Olympus EP3 with 9mm fisheye lenscap. f8 @ 1/125th - ISO 200

Ok, despite my pet peeve, it's still a fun camera to travel around with. I just think it would be even 'funner' with an evf! 😁

Plonk the 9mm Olympus fisheye bodycap on the front and you have a truly pocketable camera (albiet with a fixed f8 fisheye lens). I love the fisheye look - used sparingly. With a subject like the graffiti wall above it works perfectly. And it's pretty sharp too - especially centrally.

The camera with three lenses (from 9mm fisheye up to 300mm telephoto), spare battery and spare SD card, fits into a camera bag not much larger than most women's make-up cases. Carrying it around all day is truly a breeze. Why wouldn't you?

New Brighton Graffiti 2. Olympus EP3 with Zuiko 14-42mm. f5.6 @ 1/100th - ISO 200

Being a slightly older generation 12MP micro four thirds camera (it was released in 2011) means that the sensor does have its limits - as we'll see in my next post (oh you tease!). It gets noisy fast at higher ISO's and in lower light, it's 'only' 12MP on a smaller than APS-C sensor, and it doesn't have the high dynamic range capabilities of later micro four thirds or DSLR cameras with larger sensors.

Yet as can also be seen in all the images in this post, if you use it in half-way decent light, at the lower ISO's, then the results are sharp, punchy, colourful and impressive. Would I continue to carry this in preference to my iPhone for travel pictures? Yes, I would. Why - you ask? And it's a very good question.

Pier Side. Olympus EP3 with Zuiko 14-42mm lens. f5.6 @ 1/125th - ISO 200

Why? Because it's a far more versatile system for taking photos with. As already mentioned, I can go from fisheye to 300mm with the change of a lens. It also gives me more control over the final image and how I want it to look - especially with apertures. The micro four thirds sensor might be small, but it's still bigger than an iPhone's, and background blur is more achievable (look at the seagull image). IQ (image quality) is probably quite similar, although I'd still give the edge to the larger micro four thirds sensor in the EP3. And of course, until I get an evf accessory for the Olympus, both still force you to use the 'compose-with-the-lcd-screen' method.

So I would say that, on average, the dedicated camera system is still the way to go - for me at least. Still, two or three years ago I wouldn't have even considered the comparison. It would have been a 'no contest' win to the EP3. But times they are a changing. I am using my cellphone to take more travel images. And I can carry around a few tiny additional lenses to increase the capabilities of the iPhone's native lens. Maybe an EP3 vs iPhone 6 image quality comparison is in order? I feel a new blogpost coming on...