Mutable Conclusions

Gone to Wordpress

2008-10-22T09:56:00.000-07:00

I just got the memo : Wordpress obsoletes Blogger.

Most of the blogs I read regularly moved to Wordpress long ago. For some reason I stuck with Blogger for 114 of my wordy, graphic, painful posts (to write). Blogger’s editor is so rife with bugs that I switched to writing directly in HTML earlier this year. At least post previews sort-of worked.

To make the change all the more dramatic, Wordpress imports your entire Blogger blog automagically – text, formatting, images, categories, comments and all. The conversion was essentially perfect, I had to retouch a handful of posts only because I had abused blockquotes. If Blogger had an import feature, it would be a text box where you can re-type them.

Welcome to Wordpress:

http://ogiroux.wordpress.com/

Idle Daydream

2008-10-22T05:55:00.000-07:00

Photograph like an engineer.

2008-10-21T18:58:00.001-07:00

Analytical Solutions

I first studied mechanical engineering at a school that prides itself in being the deepest into theory out of four major universities that serve the Montreal area. Most of the time I spent on the school bench was devoted to the quest for the holy grail of engineering that is the analytical solution. As I look back, I think engineering scholars suffer from a “physicist complex”, in that deep down they wished they really were physicists and not engineers. Professional engineers get little kick out of playing pretend-physicist.

Numerical solutions are easier to get, sufficient for most of all purposes, and you could teach juniors how to set them up for a vast space of problems. Comparatively few people can set up theoretical arguments with sufficient modeling to come out with more useful precision in the end. Yet the analytical solution remains a source of pride for its author, even when he/she is aware of this.

Why? First, the analytical solution is an achievement that lifts the author above the ordinary. It’s a statement about his or her discipline and sustained concentration. Second, the analytical solution presents itself untainted by crude errors borne in the physical world. The solution’s limits were agreed upon from the outset by the stated simplifying assumptions and thereafter the solution is presumed to be free from error.

Thus the analytical solution is perceived to be more worthwhile, even when it is more painful and/or less useful.

Analytical Photography

Ack! What a blood-curling term we have here. Photography is art!

I don’t know what percentage of the population is made up of art historians, but I don’t think my family is a good barometer for popular interest. Within one degree of separation I count two art historians, yet within even two degrees I am the only engineer that I’m aware of. I mention this cultural bias to prepare you for what I’m going to say next.

Analytical art is not an oxymoron. There were periods in history, particularly during the renaissance, where artists were obsessed with technical minutia, for example harmonics, perspective and human proportions. They have argued about color for thousands of years. Recently (in terms of history) so-called “method” actors formalized the simulation of emotion even, to the delight of millions. Basically, analysis comes into play when art is concerned with depicting something real.

Most art today is not intended to promote analysis of its expression, however, and here is the defense of contemporary art. Displays of art now invite analysis of a hidden message instead. Nevertheless, many aspects of contemporary art involve advanced techniques and technology which must be mastered to make the art appealing and draw the audience to the message. This definitely applies to photography.

Analytical photography, I define now, is meticulous technical photography that would not be considered art today. In the current context, that means photography that has no message or doesn’t fit in a coherent body of work with an overarching message.

Engineer Photographers

There is a deepening interest in analytical photography today. Dozens of discussion forums filled with analytical content, huge vaults of perfect generic images, and a vocal community hungry for technical prowess are evidence of this in my opinion. This community includes professionals and amateurs alike, and for all the effort they pour into photographic analyses there are very few in it that produce artistically meaningful work.

I am part of this community. I do not produce artistically meaningful work.

At this stage I see myself as an “engineer photographer” and I mean it derogatively: a photographer in search of the analytical solution. This is a sort of manifesto for the moment.

My wish is to grow past this stage.

Moore's Law in Action

2008-10-18T08:53:00.000-07:00

The guys at "ifixit" have taken apart one of the MacBooks...

It's really astonishing how small the computer inside the computer is.

New MacBook shocker

2008-10-14T20:58:00.000-07:00

I don't post about non-photo technology very often, but this is really special. The new MacBooks are as plainly awesome as computers get. I didn't expect this, personally I always liked the "Pro" so much better.

Apple has got to be afraid that MacBooks will steal sales from MacBook Pros now that they're so close. I guess the gamble is that MacBooks will steal more sales from the crappy plastic Uninspirons over yonder. I sure would dump mine in a heartbeat if I could.

Icing on the cake : it's an all-Nvidia line up in this family of notebooks that makes up ~30% of the volume in the USA. Not only that, but graphics is also the main differentiator between the basic model and the "Pro" model. It's a good day for GPUs today.

Discovering Fun

2008-10-14T08:36:00.000-07:00

This weekend was Canadian Thanksgiving. Here’s a short visual diary, free from photo-babble.

We packed up the family+dog and drove up there, made good time too with just 5.5 hours.

Vermont was pretty much like this the whole way.

We went apple-picking and the MacIntoshes were phenomenal.

Mommy building up enthusiasm.

In the afternoon we took my daughter to slide for the first time – she’s 9 months now.

She didn't get it the first time.

But after a couple of times... that's pretty cool!

Ok. I’m ready, let’s do it!

That’s my toy.

It's better alone with grandma.

Cheers,

Op-ed: The Leica M8 would make more sense as a B&W camera

2008-10-09T10:52:00.000-07:00

Hello,

My name is Olivier and I am addicted to the idea of owning a Leica M camera.

My problem (trying to service my addiction ;^) is that I can’t justify it. I have no interest in debating the issue of price, except that the non-trivial cost warrants a thoughtful and level-headed justification. At this time in October of 2008, the M8.2 fixed just about every known issue with the camera except the most important one: the less-than-stellar digital imaging system.

There are four basic things that are wrong with this system…

1) IR sensitivity pollutes images with either a magenta or a cyan cast. This distortion of the source data is really permanent damage to the image – correcting the cyan cast inevitably amplifies noise in the red channel.

2) Risk of developing color moiré pattern from high-frequency detail. Again the source data has to be improved for outputs to be free of moiré.

3) Poor performance at sensitivities above ISO-800 compared to the competition today. The benchmark to compare against is not color negative film, that’s a don’t-care, it’s modern professional DSLRs in the same market category (D700/5D-II)(ignoring that they cost ½ as much). The M8 needs to see a 1.5 - 2 stop improvement to be competitive in this environment.

4) While good, resolution is not class-leading. Leica lenses deserve better.

One thing that I think is not wrong with the M8 is the 1.33x crop factor. It offers an excellent balance of quality overall, without skewing the system towards telephotos too much. I imagine the cost would rise with a 1.0x sensor, which would only serve to make justification more difficult. The Leica lens stable is full of good choices for the 1.33x factor too, for example the 28/75 pairing for which many interesting permutations are available.

Entertain this thought experiment if you will… what if the M8 lost its Bayer color filter array? Change nothing else, just strip away the CFA and turn the M8 into a black & white camera.

Let’s see how this would affect the four issues I listed above:

1) IR sensitivity is much less of an issue. Magenta casts appear as luminance variations that are not as distracting, cyan cast appears as light fall-off. Full-resolution IR photography becomes an option using a filter on the lens to block visible light.

2) Color moiré is no longer possible. High-frequency detail is recorded simply as fine detail, in all its glory.

3) Sensitivity improves by 1.5 - 2 stops as the color filtration no longer consumes light; all wavelengths contribute to luminance.

4) Real world resolution improves by 1.5x - 4x depending on situations because no interpolation is necessary to produce image pixels. 10MP is a terrific resolution for a monochrome sensor.

The result of this single modification, a simple ECO for Kodak, would be a stunning black-and-white M8 camera. One that can stand its own in the modern competitive environment, and would now be priced appropriately taking its tradition into account (assuming the price is the same).

Neat Photokina Blog

2008-10-05T14:38:00.000-07:00

Some of the best chronicles of this Photokina 2008 are in David Farkas' blog, over at http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/

If you only have time to read only one of his posts, I would read this one where he recounts a very intersting discussion with Peter Karbe (the Canadian in charge of Leica's optical program for the past few decades). He reveals tasty morcels left and right, but my favorite is the one where he let slip that the 50mm Summilux-M ASPH is an APO design, had been from the start. They never advertised it publicly because they felt it would sound weird for a 50mm to be labeled APO, so they only advertised it on its sister lens the 75mm Summicron-M ASPH.

Notice the different shade of glass elements, indicating different glass chemistry. Click to enlarge. Linked from here.

In another article I found a really neat discovery. Not only did Zeiss display a cut-out 2/100 Makro-Planar T* lens, that's super cool, but that lens was a relative of mine too. The very same person verified its assembly and test.

This isn't all there is on David's blog, so go check it out.

[Apparently David got his trip paid for by his employer store. I'm not saying I endorse the store, but it looks like a good place to get high-end boutique stuff.]

Fun with Canon's interview

2008-10-03T11:07:00.000-07:00

DpReview just posted an interview with Canon Camera’s head honcho. It was… unenlightening really, just spin. So I’m going to spice it up by replacing Mr Maeda’s answers with my own decryption of what he said each time.

Disclaimer: what follows is sarcastic humor, spiked with a tinge of truth. The questions are all real, but the answers make up my satire.

It's me, FakeMasaya.

I'm older and Japanified.

DPR: Let's start with DSC and the announcement of the G10. We're seeing a lot of pent-up demand for a better quality compact, perhaps with lower megapixels / bigger pixels or bigger sensors. What our readers want to know - and what we want to know - is this; is there any chance of Canon making high-end compacts that don't have more pixels, but have better pixels, to fill the big gap between DSC and DSLR?

FakeMasaya: Phil – can I call you Phil? – it’s simple, no. We looked at our brand power and we determined we could continue to grind Olympus into dust without listening to customers’ demands. That’s called branding, and our plan is to stick to it.

DPR: Which leads on to our next question. What benefits can we expect to see from the use of CMOS sensors in compact cameras?

FakeMasaya: Hmmm, smell that branding. So good.

DPR: Is this (CMOS sensor compacts) something we're going to see more of in future models?

FakeMasaya: For sure, Phil. We’ll use these “CMOS inside” stickers, here, to indicate to the customer which products have the best margins for us. It’s our way to provide feedback to the customers.

DPR: So at the moment is there still an image quality disadvantage to CMOS in a small sensor?

FakeMasaya: Look – I’ve got this 1Ds Mk-III on the left, and a small-sensor compact on the right. By putting my “CMOS inside” sticker on the compact, here, I’m saying it’s on the level of the 1Ds Mk-III. If it makes no sense to you, it’s because you’re not in the target market for this, it makes perfect sense to them.

DPR: We ask because the standard set by EOS cameras using CMOS - in noise terms - is very high, and there's an expectation - realistic or not - that this will be reflected in compact cameras using CMOS sensors.

FakeMasaya: Exactly! You can expect us to build our marketing campaign around this expectation. We’re calling it “Canon MOS”, that’s what CMOS stands for really, we’re getting the trademark as we speak so nobody else can make this claim.

DPR: Do the compact camera systems use the same proprietary on-chip noise reduction systems as the EOS sensors?

FakeMasaya: That’s none of your business Phil.

DPR: Now we have tiny compact camera sensors with over 14 million pixels are we getting to the point where resolution is being limited by the lens?

FakeMasaya: Not at all Phil, not at all. Our JPEGs always contain 14 million pixels in them, irrespective of the lens quality, so we’ve got quite a bit of headroom still in the G-series lens.

DPR: So our point is, why keep going? If you're already at the point where adding megapixels brings no benefits why do it? As a market leader could Canon not take a stand on this issue…

FakeMasaya: See I’m standing right here, and the issue is over there. That’s how I stand on the issue, well I don’t actually stand on the issue as you can see. Does that answer your question?

DPR: Moving on to SLRs, cameras such as the EOS 50D and 5D Mark II are stretching the capabilities of lenses harder than ever. What are your priorities for lens development?

FakeMasaya: Excellent question Phil, but I find your lack of faith in the “L”s is disturbing. I can reveal that we are working very hard on a new firmware that will deliver more resolution on all our shipping cameras, by increasing the default sharpening from “high” to “crispy crunch”. We’ve been looking at the 5D and D700 reviews out there and we’ve determined that default sharpening is really the biggest advantage of using Canon L lenses instead of Nikkors. Upcoming “L” lenses will communicate to the body to make sure sharpening is applied even to RAW files, and can’t be disabled. That’s a genuine innovation from Canon you won’t see anywhere else.

DPR: Are we likely to see EF-S - and APS-C cameras in general - moving to the entry level, with full frame moving towards the mid-range / EOS 40D/50D sector of the market? Is there any danger that EF-S will be pushed out of the market altogether long term?

FakeMasaya: Phil, as you know, there will always be women and children to which we can market APS-C. (Editorial: I kid you not, he said this) It’s true that Real Men™ as a market resonnate with the larger, bulkier cameras that offer more hubris and higher margins. Our plan is to not disturb this pricing structure too much for as long as possible, basically we’re going to wait for competitors to stick their necks out first.

DPR: Some professional users have expressed concern about the fact that the 5D Mark II offers the same resolution and a more modern processor than the EOS-1Ds Mark III, making the 1Ds Mark III seem a little dated. What are your thoughts on the relative positioning of the two products?

FakeMasaya: Whiners.

DPR: One of the most common complaints we've seen about the 5D Mark II is that it still has the same AF system as the original 5D. Why is this?

FakeMasaya: It’s simple really, I fired the entire auto-focus team last year. Not only did this lower R&D costs overall, but the old technology is cheap to make too. It’s part of my plan to turn the 5D Mk-II into a pricing weapon, a zweihander made of cash, should any competitors stick their necks out like I said earlier.

DPR: Would you ever consider removing the anti alias (low pass) filter - or using a lighter one - on high end, high resolution models such as the EOS 1Ds Mark III, to improve pixel level sharpness, removing any moiré in software (like medium format cameras)?

FakeMasaya: That’s just stupid. No.

DPR: Currently the contrast-detect AF on Canon SLRs is very slow; given that video and live view are now part of the DSLR landscape are you planning to do anything to improve contrast detect AF?

FakeMasaya: I’m glad you asked. After I fired the auto-focus team I decided that in the future, all focusing will be contrast-detect. We hired a bunch of interns and they’re working on it.

DPR: At the moment in live view on the EOS 50D you offer a silent shooting mode that uses an electronic 'first curtain', starting with the mechanical shutter open. Is it technically feasible to offer a fully silent mode that uses a totally electronic shutter - using the sensor alone to produce the exposure?

FakeMasaya: Oh yes. In fact, that will be the key feature of the 60D that will differentiate it from the 50D. That and a video mode built in such a way that it doesn’t threaten the 5D Mk-II at all.

DPR: Will movie capture be working its way down into models further down the range? Is there a reason that the EOS 50D, for example, doesn't have video capture?

FakeMasaya: We are planning to bring this capability to each market segment when we feel we’ve successively extracted all the profit we could from the higher segments. It was important to include it in the 5D Mk-II first because otherwise it would have been easily challenged in the market – whereas now it’s easy to deflect criticism just by mentioning the video. That worked out great and our plan is to do the same with the 60D.

DPR: Are there any issues with the sensor 'heating up' when shooting extended movie clips?

FakeMasaya: I don’t know, I haven’t used it. Vincent tells me his private helicopter’s rotor cooled the camera sufficiently.

DPR: All the buzz at this year's Photokina has been around the concept of the 'mirrorless' interchangeable lens camera following the launch of Micro Four Thirds. Is this an area Canon is interested in?

FakeMasaya: It’s cool. We enjoy it when our competitors take big risks like this, so we don’t have to. If Olympus manages to make money from this, you can be sure we’ll be right there to crush them into the dust.

Fall at the Boston office front-door

2008-10-03T11:01:00.000-07:00

The two trees in front of the office have been begging me to shoot them all week. Weather really started cooperating yesterday. It’s rare that weather makes me happy, but yesterday afternoon I had an extra bound in my step from the brisk air and glorious sky.

This morning is also the first time I that I shot my new Zeiss 100mm Makro-Planar T* lens outside for more than a test shot. The last two images are examples of its handiwork.

Photography 101: Check your results in the field

2008-09-26T09:57:00.000-07:00

It's a terrible thing when you discover only too late that your photographs fall well short of expectations. What was once a common occurrence with film cameras should not happen to you with modern digital cameras. The key appeal of digital over film – free and instant development – is more than just a convenience feature, it’s a total revolution in quality control!

Taken to an extreme, the rule is simple: any photograph you could take again, you should check. Then repeat the photograph as needed.

When you check on your results, look for a few things:

First, is this the picture you wanted to take? Did the composition turn out different than expected? Feel free to experiment and try again, there are no hard rules here, good composition is what floats your boat. We’ll cover some popular arrangements later.

Second, is the image sharp where it needs to be? The previous article discussed how to improve focus with your camera, and you should want to know how you’re doing in practice. This isn’t easy to do on a small screen, and it’s ok if slight errors slip by unnoticed. Poorly-focused images should simply be re-taken when possible.

Finally, decide if the image brightness looks right in general. Is it too bright or too dark? If the image is grossly incorrect then the camera may simply be in the wrong mode accidentally. Don’t sweat small variations, if it’s not obvious then it’s fine.

Note that even with perfect focus your images will not be sharp if there isn’t enough light. A simple rule of thumb is this: if you couldn’t comfortably read a book in your picture’s light then there probably isn’t enough. We’ll cover ways out of this situation in other articles, the key being to look for ways to get more light.

For human subjects, you can help the camera correct brightness errors by framing differently or changing your angle on the subject. If you can eliminate objects that are too bright or too dark, and make sure there are no sources of light inside the frame (e.g. the Sun and its reflections), then you’ll make the exposure computer’s job much easier.

It’s clear that testing your results early in the field challenges you to improve upon them. Varied issues call for varied remedies, and the full array is dizzyingly complex. The simple approach is to identify each time what challenges most your camera’s capabilities and to remove that factor one way or another. The reward of this process is better images.

The important first step is to take a few seconds to review them before the opportunity to take them again is gone forever.

Photography 101 : Master the half-press

2008-09-25T10:37:00.000-07:00

Modern cameras are bristling with buttons, but when it comes down to it there is only one you need to master: the shutter release. How hard can mastering one button be? When this button is the only one that actually does something, it might deserve some attention.

There are two independent computers in your camera. The most obvious one allows you to browse pictures and menus on the rear LCD, but it is more of an accessory to the camera because it doesn’t operate the camera. The main computer coordinates your camera’s critical operations: exposure metering, automatic focus, flash calculations, image capture.

You interact with the main computer by providing decision hints and by triggering its action. Hints are varied and can be as simple as “you decide”, for example when using picture styles or “green” mode. All actions are triggered by partially or fully depressing the shutter release – this distinction is the key to control your camera effectively.

The main computer’s operational tasks are split into two phases. In the first phase it prepares to take a picture by focusing the lens and measuring the luminance of the subject to determine exposure parameters. Then in the second phase, the picture is captured by activating the aperture, mirror and shutter mechanisms.

Many novice users do not perceive these two phases separately because both are triggered immediately when the shutter release is depressed fully and quickly (e.g. by hammering the button). To insert a pause between the two phases, only depress the shutter release partially (you’ll feel a light stop) and then hold it down. This is called the “half-press”, and while it is maintained the computed settings of the main computer are locked-in. Further pressure from a half-press position will execute the second phase and take the picture with these settings.

Why would you want to pause after the first phase? There are several advantages.

First, this gives you a chance to review the computer’s choices before committing them to a picture. The most important choice you should evaluate is focus. Did the camera actually focus on the subject you intend to photograph? If it chose wrong, let go of the shutter release and repeat the half-press, the camera will try again.

Second, you get a chance to re-frame the image with current settings before taking the picture. Most cameras have 5 or 9 focus points you can choose from for off-center compositions, but many debutant photographers are uncomfortable with focus point selection and elect not to use them. Also, seasoned photographers know the center point is typically the most sensitive and accurate under difficult conditions. For simplicity, you may want to always focus with the center point irrespective of the framing you want in your picture – the half-press enables this.

Third, some operations of the camera take time and add delays that get in the way of capturing a fleeting moment. Focusing the lens, for instance, can take a few seconds under some conditions. If you predict a photo-opportunity is imminent, you can pre-focus the lens with a half-press and hold until the moment arrives. Obviously this works best for stationary subjects.

Fourth, when you can predict a photo-opportunity but not exactly where it will occur, use your camera’s continuous-focus option. When continuous-focus is enabled the half-press locks in all settings except focus, which is then re-evaluated at high frequency for as long as you hold the half-press. You must follow your subject’s sideways motion but the camera will track its distance automatically to keep it in focus.

Finally, if you are using a lens with an image-stabilization function (IS or VR) then it too operates continuously while holding the half-press. The VR mechanism needs a second or two to engage fully, during which time it learns how your hand is moving. It benefits greatly from holding the half-press for that amount of time before taking a picture, so it is worth integrating this pause into your shooting habits.

Note that the benefits of the half-press aren’t reserved for DSLR users, most pocket cameras also support it with most of the same benefits.

Your camera is full of features that claim to deliver improved image quality, but the truth is that there is no feature with benefits more compelling than the half-press. Nor are the other features as easy to master as using a single button. At a minimum you should be able to reduce the chance of coming home with blurry pictures of your vacation, and that’s the whole point of using this camera in the first place.

I hope you enjoyed this article, there will be more coming.

Off my chest

2008-09-24T11:41:00.000-07:00

Q: So why did I choose the D700 over the 5D Mk-II in the end?

A: A wedding photographer’s sample images showed me what I needed to know. That is that the 5D Mk-II doesn’t really eclipse the D700 at ISO-800+. It is better, yes, but it doesn’t have a commanding lead over the Nikon.

Why is it relevant how big the lead is? When is better not better?

I agree that an imaging lead is a strong selling point, so long as the list of other pros and cons for each camera is comparable. The reality is that it isn’t that close however. The Nikon is a modern professional camera bristling with Nikon's latest technology, and much of the 5D Mk-II is from a twice-warmed-over 20D.

Here the relevant features of the D700 are:
1) Solid metal body with weather seals
2) 51-point grid AF with luminance/color tracking
3) Built-in i-TTL wireless flash commander, with free fill flash
4) Configurable Auto-ISO that combines intelligently with A/S/M modes
5) Coupling to Zeiss ZF with all metering modes, focus indication with direction and EXIF

If the sensor doesn’t make the sale on its own merits, then the 5D Mk-II has little that’s compelling in comparison. Its live view mode is more intelligently designed, okay.

Of course the wildcard here is the video feature. I will be the first to admit that I was really looking forward to it. I may be a very conservative photographer, but I relish the challenge of making professional-quality video with everything that entails (e.g. planning, lighting, placement, focus, editing).

This said, still photography comes first and the 5D Mk-II was not the best still camera package from my point of view, so my amateur career in video will have to wait.

There. It’s said.

That's it for '08 acquisitions

2008-09-20T15:37:00.000-07:00

I don't know myself very well apparently. There I was in the middle of the night last night, wide awake, consumed by doubts vis-à-vis my Canon plan. Samples are up in various places now, and I can't say they are unanimous in goodness. I kept going back to the D700 in thought.

It threw a wrench in a plan that I needed to be smooth as a baby's butt. At this point I doubted my wife was going to entertain much more languishing indecision on my part.

To push aside any confusion: the ISO-100 shots from 5D Mk-II previews are gorgeous. Here's one from DpReview for instance...

Er, wow. Go here to view it large.

I extracted very small portions of this image, each 0.1% of the original, and found tiny pictures hiding everywhere. Detail is frankly amazing, you can see creases in people's clothes when they're standing on the ship! Clearly from ISO 100 to 400, the 5D Mk-II is a force to reckon with - something to delight landscape, architecture and macro shooters.

Then there are the high ISO shots, where things are less good. Forum dwellers swoon over them, but honestly they're suffering from mass blindness (love is blind as they say). Every high ISO sample one I'd seen was soft, with mashed-up pixels left behind by extreme noise reduction. When the sharpness was acceptable (or a 12MP downsample was, to be really fair), I perceived the dynamic range was constrained and colors were uninspiring. What's a people-shooter to do with these results?

The 5D Mk-II thus seems to redirect the 5D "brand" from the low-light wonder to the small-pixel wonder. This brings two interesting challenges. The first one is that if you don't shoot often at ISO 400 or less, then you get nothing from all these added pixels you paid for (both paid in $ and paid in noise/DR/color). The second one is that there are very few lenses out there that will give you this many clear samples, and focusing them correctly is going to be a challenge for humans and machines both.

Which brings us back to the D700... a known quantity for quality and a reasonable balance of abilities and difficulties...

It brought *me* back to the D700 anyway. At this point I offered my wife some closure on this whole adventure, and made an executive decision. I believed the D700 is the smart choice for me, and I committed to it.

This transaction wrapped up the gear acquisitions for 2008, leaving neither unused earmarks nor leftover brownie points. Yep. My Christmas present is probably going to be living room blinds. ;^)

My kit at close of season '08. Sold the rest.

All I was looking for really: an ordinary ISO 1000 shot for a D700.

I'm looking forward to spend the time to master this camera as, I believe, I had finally mastered the D80. So what's next? Well 2009 is a whole 'nother year as they say, and still I've got more german goods on my mind. ;^)

Oh, and this won't stop me one bit from blogging-up the remaining '08 news with my own perspective...

New addition to the family!

2008-09-18T17:11:00.000-07:00

The 100mm Planar!

A portrait this time, this is from a default LR2 conversion:

Typical Zeiss color: mostly neutral tone, a tinge of cold, but with high contrast and micro-contrast.

So far it behaves well. I had stratospheric expectations of course, and it meets them. It’s a bit too long for portraits on APS-C however, but will be fantastic on FF.

The only issues are:

1) It’s very difficult to manually focus 100mm @ f/2 inside 15 feet with more than 30% certainty.
2) The lens is all over the place with chromatic aberrations @ f/2.

Both these issues improve a lot by f/2.8, and by f/4 the lens is indomitable. That's pretty much exactly like the 2/35 actually, except that one’s better on CA. That's good, that means my experience with the 2/35 carries over to this lens.

Canon's answer to T*

2008-09-18T06:48:00.000-07:00

Even lenses get "Mk II" versions.

With the 5D Mk-II getting all the attention, it would be easy to miss a very important launch. The new 24mm f/1.4L Mk-II has something special that other "L" lenses don't. We'll soon know if it'll save Canon's repution when it comes with wide-angle lenses.

Not the 2 aspheres and 2 exotic elements. (Nice design though)

The new secret sauce is in the coatings...

Sub Wavelength structure Coating
The 24mm F1.4 L USM II sees the debut of Canon's new 'Sub Wavelength structure Coating' (SWC) technology. Considered by Canon to be considerably more effective then their existing 'Super Spectra Coating', the new coating is applied to the inside surface of the front lens element, and is designed to minimize flare and ghosting caused by secondary reflections between the sensor surface and the lens elements, which can lead to significant image degradation in digital SLRs.
The new biomimetic coating is inspired by features found within the eyes of moths, and uses a nano-scale structure to reduce dramatically the amount of internally-reflected light in lenses that contain large curve-radius elements. It is therefore particularly effective with fast wideangles such as the new 24mm F1.4L II USM.

This is basically a response to Nikon’s “Nano” coating, which from engineering descriptions works the same way as SWC.

In turn both of these are responses to Zeiss' T* coatings, which I suspect aren't so technologically advanced as they are generously applied. In an interview with Nikon engineers the main guy let slip that they were gunning for T* when they brought the technology behind Nano to photographic lenses.

Nikon has a bit of a lead here, having deployed Nano in these lenses so far: 14-24, 24-70, 105 Micro, 60 Micro, 16-85, 300/2.8, 400/2.8, 500/4, 600/4.

In the end this is pretty awesome news for the “L” lenses going forward. To me that suggests that some of the old classics will see new versions, now that there's a compelling check box to add.

The third Musketeer

2008-09-17T06:02:00.000-07:00

After all the speculation on the name, it's actually called "Mk II".

I have some mixed feelings this morning, in the wake of this announcement. Make no mistake, I think the 5D Mk-II is awesome, enough so to cause me to switch away from Nikon (*GASP*). My home has been a bastion (temple?) of Nikon's for years, but that's going to change now.

Hence I take back what I said about the D700 earlier... this is the best platform to shoot Zeiss ZF. There's no other component to my decision, the best lenses deserve the best sensor. I couldn't care less about "L" lenses, and I'm actually a bit scared of the Canon UI.

Now that I've professed my belief in the product, I must say there are some questionable design choices here.

The most obvious one is that cheap-o auto-focus system. Nine points, with one cross-type!? WTF Canon dudes? These days Nikon ships semi-sentient 51-point full-control grid AF at their $1600 price point. Good thing I don't plan on buying auto-focus lenses, I guess. :^/

The second issue may or may not be one. They're being a bit coy about the weather sealing; in my opinion if they had gone all the way they would really harp about it. So we're looking at mid-range level protection in what's otherwise a very high-end camera. :^/

Just one more for the moment: did you see that battery grip? It's still the awkward style grip with a big stick that reaches into the battery compartment. Not planning on getting one of these either, but it's lame. :^/

The other guys are going all-out and Canon's just cruising along. That's my impression today.

I'm excited to line up for a 5D Mk-II, but I still hate Canon's corporate machine.

*Addition*

This is a really awesome sample in its original version. So much so that I couldn't put it on Blogger, and I had to recompress it a touch just to put it in Smugmug to link to it.

This is a lot of resolution, too much for that lens anywhere off-center.

Holy cow, I'm excited by the 21mm Distagon!

2008-09-16T17:40:00.001-07:00

There's a brochure PDF now, but no charts yet.

If you've been reading my blog for a little bit (nearing post #100!), then you'll know I've linked to this Distagon 21 MM PDF a couple of times (1,2,3,4). Most recently that was in a post discussing the 18mm Distagon's launch. I wasn't very excited by that lens, and hoped the 21mm would be resurrected instead...

Well I didn't have to wait a long time. :^)

I'm just ebullient with excitement now!

The optical design did change a little bit, see the rear groups below. I expected that after Zeiss had replied to my questions earlier this year. They said ROHS rules were preventing them from shipping the previous design as-is.

Here's a comparison:

New design: 16 elements in 13 groups.

Old design: 15 elements in 13 groups.

Let's hope the new design lives up to its predecessor's reputation. Can't wait t get my hands on the charts. I bet Lloyd Chambers will get them soon.

The german summary

2008-09-15T08:55:00.000-07:00

Both Leica and Zeiss chose this day for their press events. Here's a summary, all from my point of view of course...

ZE is for EOS.

Ooh, electronics.

There’s a PDF with some stories here.

Zeiss’ ZE have the same optics as the ZF lenses, plus electronic communication and minus aperture rings. All metering modes are supported, only focus remains manual. The 1.4/85 is also prettier in EF mount. ;^)

It’ll take a while before all the ZF lenses are available in ZE. At first they’re launching with only the 1.4/50 and 1.4/85. Not the best picks IMO, and that’s probably a pass at the Japanese market. If you’re interested in ZE optics you should wait for the 2/35, 2/50 and 2/100 to come out and get one or more of those.

Or not wait, and just get the ZFs on adapter rings. This is something that’s on mind right now. The ZEs could never be fitted to mount on anything else than an EOS camera, first due to the shallow and wide mount, and second to the fact that only EOS cameras speak EOS-an. In comparison the ZFs can be fitted onto virtually any mount with cheap adapter rings, and they do not suffer electronic problems by virtue of having no electronics. So someone shooting ZFs is really free to migrate between body systems over the decades that these lenses will serve. Food for thought.

The Distagon 2.8/21 is coming back!

Looks like it takes pricey filters.

This is the biggest news today in my book.

Currently only revealed in this article in German. Should cost approx 1500$ when it gets here in 2009. Add this one to the short list of “must haves” (for a Zeiss fan) above. The probability that I will get one is approx 100%.

4/85 Tele-Tessar T* ZM.

In that same article they also announced a 4/85 rangefinder lens, an obvious missing piece of their Zeiss Ikon set. Now they offer a clear choice of alternatives to Leica for every focal length: the 2.8/21, 2/35, 2/50 and now 4/85 are all price/value winners. If only they had a digital version of the Ikon camera…

Now the Leica news :^/

So there’s a “new” camera, called M8.2, and it’s basically irrelevant. They changed the red dot to a black dot, and the paint is more durable now (*correction: it's durable paint instead of black chrome, collect them all*).

Here’s an eye chart that the Leica-users forum put together...

New photographic jewelry, and then some junk too.

Standing out is that 50mm f/0.95 Noctilux-M ASPH, listed >$10K. A trophy lens really, there’s no practical reason for it, since the best way to get a solid 2 extra stops of performance would be to fix the M8’s sensor. It’s not like the M8’s rangefinder base is actually long enough to accurately focus f/0.95 anyway. Ironically it’s the 55-yr old M3 that will do best with this lens, and 400ASA B&W film is perfect for that f/0.95 aperture.

It’ll be interesting to see if this is based on a super-sized 50mm Summilux-M ASPH. I expect these two are closely related, and so I don’t think this is Leica really flexing their muscle today.

Next are the 21mm & 24mm f/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH. Now the 21mm is interesting because it’s something we’ve never seen before, I don’t think. This is where I think Leica is making a loud and clear statement: they have the technical ability and the design talent to pull it off, to their quality standard no less. Can’t wait to look at the charts for these.

Finally the other lens on the right above is the “populist” appeal, it’s the 24mm f/3.8 Elmar-M, priced just under $2K. I don't really get the point of this lens, from a customer's perspective. It’s bracketed by potentially better choices on either side: there’s already an excellent 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M ASPH for 1800$ and the top-of-its-class Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Biogon T* ZM that sells for 1100$. The new lens would need never-before-seen MTF to be competitive, IMO.

I wasn’t hoping to see any new lenses from Leica, personally. I wanted to see a new camera with an okay sensor and lower price – something you could pair up to the 28mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M ASPH for about $4~5K total. Hey I'm not asking for "cheap", just "competitive", or is this too much to ask?

Conclusion

Zeiss is firing on all cylinders. ZE will rake in good money, and the Distagon 21 is going to feel like the second coming for a whole class of photographers...

Leica plays to their base with a classic from the Leica book. Although I'm very critical of this move, it's probably going to net them reasonable money from their audience.

Convolutions of the Mind

2008-09-10T10:53:00.000-07:00

I've radically changed some aspects of my photographic worldview over the last few days.

I've come to terms with the idea that Zeiss ZE is almost certainly for EOS, and that the 5D Mk-II (or 7D, or...?) is almost certainly going to raise the bar to the same extent the 5D did years ago. After all the wishing it not be so, I think nobody ever really surpasses Canon at sensor design.

Sean Reid's excellent review of the D700 puts that camera much closer to the older 5D than I had anticipated. I had expected some kind of clear lead, but what's there is faint to say the least. In the end Reid's review is making a really good case for 1Ds Mk-III being in a league of its own (Lloyd Chambers demonstrates as well, here too). This is the league I expect the 5D Mk-II will join, and to bring one better, i.e. basically just adding gapless microlenses to the excellent Canon 21.1MP sensor.

This (would, in theory?) upset my worldview because it's clear to me that there is more imaging quality to be got there than by combining Zeiss ZFs with the D700, which was my plan up until now. The existing ZF lenses on the 1Ds Mk-III produce more impressive images than they do on the D3.

People close to me were shocked, to say the least, that after... after the messianic D700 finally got here... that I would speak openly of maybe switching systems. I reassured them that I wasn't going to leave the F-mount, but that I may embrace the Canon technology. What does that mean?

It turns out that a ZF lens on an F-to-EOS adapter ring is about as functional as the same ZF lens is on an F body, and probably similar to a ZE lens (in theory). It's also the case that the ZF on an adapter is a lot more future-proof than a ZE lens is, because the latter could never be fitted to anything else but the EOS mount. So by continuing on my current journey, switching to full-manual and expanding my piece of the ZF line, I'm actually freeing myself from a specific camera system and opening up to a real choice among bodies.

So we'll see... there's no point in talking about switching until there's a product out there, but if the right product comes along then I might in fact buy a Canon body.

I hate how everything stacks up on the 15th. It's annoying. I would have preferred a spread over the week... ...

Waiting with bated breath

2008-09-06T17:35:00.000-07:00

As I understand it the press embargos for Photokina product announcements all must end on, or before September 15th. So Zeiss, Leica, Nikon and Canon... all must play their cards between now and then.

We know for a fact that Zeiss will announce support for a new mount that day. I know most of the planet wants it to be Canon's EOS but I doubt it.

I fully expect Canon to launch the 5D Mk-II, and I fully expect it to be superior to the D700 on the basis of image quality. However I don't expect Canon to offer truly professional quality for construction and non-imaging features (like auto-focus). That would shock me, frankly.

I've been vibrating with anticipation ever since I heard that Leica & Canon might be cooperating on a new product. Herr Kaufmann promised a significant non-lens announcement for the M system. I think I join many enthusiastic amateurs when I say that I pray for a digital CL... I already know which lenses I will buy if they announce one. One can hope.

I'm not sure what Nikon will announce. I wouldn't be surprised at all, but very disappointed, if the D90 is the only thing they have show at Photokina.

Nine days to go.

WTF: another cheap plastic zoom?

2008-08-28T13:00:00.000-07:00

A short bit of Nikon bashing now.

Is the new 18-105 VR kit lens really what the Nikon camera system needed at this juncture? How many do we have now? Just for the DX system we have all these normal zooms in the lineup: 18-55 II, 18-55 VR, 16-85 VR, 18-70, 18-105 VR, 18-135, 18-200 VR, 17-55.

That's eight lenses, at least half of which are completely redundant, and maybe two of which are actually good. Couldn’t they just use the new 16-85 VR for the D90 kit, and call it a day in the cheap crap department? That is probably a much better lens anyway and it's actually delivering more value to the line up instead of bloating it up.

And how many DX primes do we have by now? Not a one (**). Now I don't think we'll ever see one, DX being a second-class system and all that, but for Pete's sake the prime lineup needs some love right now!

(**) We've got the 10.5mm DX fisheye, but I wouldn't call that a general-purpose lens.

Nikon bashing done. Whew, that needed to get out.

The D90 changes the game

2008-08-28T12:16:00.000-07:00

I’m sorry to have to break the news for Canon fanboys… but in terms of mindshare the 50D is pretty much done, stick a fork in this one.

It's not that it's not a fine camera, but that it's just - you know - it's old school now. The game has changed and Canon has the honor of having launched one of the best products of the old era right on the eve of the new era. I do mean eve as meaning the day before. That's such poor strategy, I wonder if they thought that was going to steal Nikon's thunder.

I'm not interested in the "video's not the point" mass-scale denial going on right now because I think the marketplace will vote with their dollars and that they will see it very much as the point. I can't imagine a buyer from the "mom and pop" crowd walking into a camera store, looking to spend $1K and some change on a good family camera, and choosing the 50D over the D90 because it has "more cross-type phase-detection points". LOL.

Where to go to learn about the D90? Firstly there's the video on Chase Jarvis's blog. He also had this very quotable opinion blurb that sums it up nicely:

After using this camera and pushing it to it’s limits, I can honestly say that it’s a camera that will deliver stunning, emotive pictures--and MOVIES for Pete’s sake! MOVIES!--to an entire spectrum of amateur photographers. And that’s exciting.

That video is also available linked from the D90 microsite which has lots of other marketing prose, and then there's the Dpreview preview of course.

Finally there's the brochure PDF from the Nikon Imaging website. Remember what I said about the 50D's weakness earlier this week (that it wasn't innovative enough)? Check out the first page of the PDF. You can't make this shit up.

Yeah, Nikon had that thought too.

It's been such a terrible year for Canon: AF problems at the high end, uninspiring products in their bread & butter range, nothing new or innovative in sight... They need a world-shaking 5D Mk-II so badly right now.

The 50D... yawn?

2008-08-26T13:03:00.000-07:00

The one-liner: the 50D looks like a fine camera.

The long version:

If Canon is planning a major coup with the 5D Mk-II, then they’re certainly not tipping their cards with the 50D. The 50D is a safe play, straight from the book, and that’s just Canon’s preferred way to play the game.
The 50D’s claim to fame is to have the potential to produce the most detailed images from an APS-C camera yet, and of course to undercut the D300 in price. The move to gapless micro-lenses should give it D300-level sensitivity with 25% more resolution at the end of the day. I have no doubt that Canon did a fabulous job with the sensor as they always do.
I conclude the 50D is the king of the most visible and most vocal market segment today, but for how long? The 50D’s weakness is that it’s not very innovative. It’ll be easy to displace it with something innovative.
Compared to the D300, the 50D is cheaper. Plainly. The value statement is about equal because the D300 is more camera for more money, given that you are willing to accept there are qualities in cameras that are not just image quality (it's the most important item but not the only item).

If the rumors about the D90 are true (i.e. that it shoots HD video through live-view) then I think the 50D is in trouble. Otherwise, I think it's on solid ground. We'll see very soon.

Tripod testing results

2008-08-25T10:35:00.000-07:00

A good friend was kind enough to lend me a Gitzo 1327 for testing (and my education). It was an eye-opening experiment to say the least. I had to tell my friend that he cost me money by lending me this wonderful toy.

Test Subjects

Bogen 3001N + Bogen 3025 head
Gitzo 1327 + Bogen Compact Ball/Plate

Note: I put my current head on John’s legs and my old head on my current legs.

Experimental Parameters

Camera:	Nikon D80
Lens:	Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 AF-S VR ED-IF
Focal length:	200mm (300mm effective)
Speed:	1/4 second
Aperture:	f/8
ISO:	100
Distance:	~13 feet

Note: The D80 is a mid-range camera and doesn’t have a mirror lock-up mode. It does have an “exposure delay” mode that waits ~¼ second between flipping the mirror and opening the shutter. I varied this parameter.

Note: The 70-200 has VR and I chose to also vary this parameter. At first I assumed VR would be the enemy so I disabled it for most shots. Towards the end of the experiment I switched it on – with surprising results.

Reference Image

This image was taken at 1/250 second under flash power. The result is free of motion blur, and is about as sharp as the 70-200 gets @ 200mm (its weakest length). There’s just a touch of softness compared to D80’s maximum available resolution, with is only achievable @70mm on this lens or with more exotic glass.

Note: No images have been sharpened in this test, including this one.

Note: All images are 100% crops from an area covering roughly 1% of the total frame.

Bogen-vs-Gitzo: w/ exposure delay & w/o VR

This is the obvious first test, which I will dub the “prosumer” test. The D80’s exposure delay mode is a poor-man’s mirror-up, and is indicated for this kind of shooting. As per popular wisdom, VR is turned off.

Both tripods produced results that are softer than the reference shot, but would hold well to scrutiny by most ordinary viewers. There’s a very minor edge to the Gitzo here, but you have to look pretty hard to see it.

LEFT: Gitzo. RIGHT: Bogen.

Bogen-vs-Gitzo: w/o exposure delay & w/o VR

This is the “prosumer in a hurry” test, in that we all know we should disable VR/IS on a tripod but we may not always take the time to set our cameras for an exposure delay / mirror up. This is how I my use my own tripod most of the time, and I expect most of you too.

Armageddon is the result.

The Gitzo produced very soft results here, perhaps usable but just barely. The Bogen however produced useless garbage.

LEFT: Gitzo. RIGHT: Bogen.

Bogen-vs-Gitzo: w/o exposure delay & w/ VR

This is the “consumer” test. You just put the camera on automatic, plunk it down on the tripod. Leave VR on. Don’t change settings.

Both tripods improved over the previous test.

The Gitzo produces usable results now under these conditions, somewhere in-between the previous two tests. The Bogen also improved but still isn’t as good as the Gitzo was w/o VR, I wouldn’t use this result.

LEFT: Gitzo. RIGHT: Bogen.

Conclusion

I have a few take-home messages:

Mirror-up / exposure-delay is essential for tripod use in the “danger zone” of 1-second to 1/30-second exposure times.

The D80’s exposure-delay mode may not be as good as a true mirror-up (speculation) but it’s certainly no joke. It delivers real value.

The Gitzo carbon tripod is substantially better than the Bogen aluminum tripod to dampen vibration.

If you don’t have a mirror-up / delay mode, keep VR / IS on when using a tripod.

This is probably all true for long lenses, 200mm effective and above. Not sure if it's such a good idea to keep VR on for shorter focal lengths. I will make another experiment later with a normal or wide length.

It's capital to note before leave that besides improved effectiveness the Gitzo product's construction is head-and-shoulder above the Bogen product. The higher price is pretty clearly justified. Sigh.