Jan 29, 2014 | Field Reports
Got a gear question you want answered? Send your gear questions to me at Gear Questions and I’ll do my best every Wednesday to answer as many questions as I can. Keep in mind the answers are just my $.02 worth and you have to take what works for you and embrace it and ignore the rest. So here’s this weeks questions ….
I have a Nikon D700 and 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 200-400 zooms and a 200 macro. I’ve not always been happy with the critical focus on my photographs. Do you run the ‘AF fine tune’ option in the camera menu when pairing a camera with each lens? How do you go about the testing procedure?
Thanks,
Rob
Rob, it would seem GearHead Wednesday opened up this debate even greater because as like you, many others emailed after the its posting. Other than the resolution chart, for the untrained eye to determine if an image is blazing sharp or just sharp is near impossible! And training the eye to “see” this level of sharpness takes time and at least for most my peers and myself, the making lots of large prints (24×36 or larger) and closely examining them. And like I mention last, I have seen only a couple of lenses that were the issue, the rest of the time it was pilot error.
Now you mention the term “critical focus” and you have the who’s who of Nikkor glass there. In the equation you present crticial focus x great glass, if you’re not seeing the results you think you should have, the weak link is the body (or photographer). Now the D700 should have no problem delivering great quality, so if it’s not with ALL those lenses, personally I would send it in to Nikon and not mess with AF Fine Tune. The odds you have all bad glass are a bit slim.
Back in the day, before the web, digital photography and mass hysteria, when a photographer thought he had a bad lens, there was a basic philosophy in determining if it is the lens or the photographer causing the issue. It was this: “If you get one sharp image, the issue is the photographer.”
So to directly answer your question (the same answer as last week), I do not AF Fine Tune, never have. My testing is simple real world shooting as I described last week. I would add one additional thing this week. If you look at all the great shots from history, the number of those great shots that are tack sharp, you can easily count. What the world needs is not more technically perfect photos. What the world needs are more photographs with passion.
Hi Moose,
I’ve been enjoying your sharpness series and practicing the techniques but there is one thing that always seems to get in the way. I have to have my glasses on; no ifs or buts about it. I’ve tried to wear contacts but I just couldn’t get it to work. So what I’m looking for is an alternative that you may have seen work for those of us who have to wear glasses as compared to you pushing your eyeball right up to the glass in the eyecup.
Thanks much and keep up those fine blog articles and videos.
Jim
Jim, my heart goes out to you because you have an issue I’ve been looking for an answer to for three decades. And with NO luck! I don’t wear glasses to shoot so personally don’t have that issue but have heard from many photographers like yourself who do, all asking the same question. Here’s all I have to offer you.
Many manufactures make diopter correction eyepieces. They are coming harder and harder to find but they are available. Of course, this means you own a DSLR that has a replaceable eyepiece which is also coming harder to find. While this works for some, not for most eye glass wearers. The best answer I’ve ever seen is having your optometrist make a custom eyepiece for you based on your script. Yes, you have to remove your glasses to make this work, but that permits you to use proper handholding.
One other thing I have been playing with the past couple of months comes from my new glass frames for my reading glasses. I don’t shoot with them, couldn’t see a thing if I did. But the frames are carbon fiber, incredibly light and more importantly, incredibly strong and flexible. The lens gets smudged but you can press the camera against the glasses for proper handholding technique! It works really well with these frames, but they are not inexpensive. And that’s all I’ve got to offer you, regrettably.
Moose,
Taking a trip to Nebraska to photograph Sandhill Cranes. I own the Nikkor 300 F4 and the 1.4x TC and it’s a great setup. My question is do I spend money on renting a 200-400, 80-400 or 600 or alternatively buy the 1.7x or 2.0x teleconverter? I realize for the week, I’d spend more on the TC, but I get to take it home. You have said in previous GearHead Wednesdays all the TCs are great, but will 420, 510 or 600 be “enough” length? Not easy to answer since you don’t really know how close I’ll be, but I’d guess 20-40 yards. Maybe a better question Is the flexibility of the zoom (e.g. 200-400 with or without TC or 80-400) essential in blind shooting? Will I spend too much time switching TCs and not enjoying the view?
Regards,
Beau
Beau, you raise a great question with some really great options and points! In one sense, you really couldn’t go wrong with any of those combos. Having photographed the cranes on the Platt many times, this is an easy question to answer. It’s all up to the cranes! I’ve gone to the blinds with just about every long lens you can imagine and since the cranes have never some in close enough even for 1200mm (600 w/2x), focal length is not always the key. If I were to be going there this April (regrettably, I won’t be), I would have the 800mm w/TC-.25 (1000mm) and 80-400VR3 and that’s all I’d want. Last year, I had the 80-400VR3 and used it the entire time with success.
Keep in mind a simple saying when it comes to bird photography. If you don’t go out with your longest lens, you’ll comeback short.
But the issue is where the cranes decide to land and roost and that depends on water levels in the Platt. Since we use blinds the majority of the time, being close physically is real simple when the birds comes close to you and that’s what has always been the issue.
So my answer to you would be, take as LONG of reach you can afford and then cross your fingers the cranes came and say hello. On a side note, the Platt and the cranes is one of the greatest wildlife spectacles on the planet. Even if you don’t come back with the great images, you’ll be richly rewarded by your adventure!
Hi Moose,
I currently shoot with a Nikon D7000 and am looking to upgrade but can’t afford a D3 or D4. What would you suggest? I enjoy shooting wildlife and landscapes. Thanks for your help!
Olwen
Olwen, you have a great question commonly asked. Since you’re shooting with a DX body and talking about FX bodies, I’m assuming you want to change. With that in mind, I would highly recommend either the D610 or the Df. These are both great bodies that are half the price of the D4.
If you’re thinking about staying in the DX format, then I would recommend the D7100. Many say it’s a year old and time for a new body to come out. To them I would point out that everything is getting older and there is always something new coming out (much different from the days of film.) And waiting means you’re possibly missing taking amazing photos. I encourage photogs to not wait for something possibly coming out that might be the miracle body. The photos are here today! Find the best body you can afford today, buy it, embrace it and make those photos and then share them!
Jan 27, 2014 | Field Reports
K&M Adventures is taking on the the elements with a winter Oregon Coast Adv, 19-23 March, 2014! The storms have been great, this is going to be a killer trip! This magnificent region is one Kevin & I have journeyed to and photographed many, many times. The coast in the winter is a spectacular photographic playground as Mother Nature chisels away at the rock! As you might notice, I think it’s a great place for B&W and is the same region featured in my Kelby Training Black and White Landscape Class. You’ll wanna fly into Portland on the afternoon of the 19th (by noon) and fly out on the 24th (after 2pm). We’ll pick you up from the airport and escort your around until we take you back to the airport. That, along with instruction are all included for the price of $2195 (we have one opening). We spend from breakfast until last up together shooting, eating, shooting, digital darkroom, laughing and other things you just can’t imagine! Which means you might find yourself in front of a subject you never imagined. (Unlike our other Adventures, there will be a lodging change half way through the trip. Lodging not included in the price). And after those long days, you want to kick your shoes off and relax. Give the office a call 760.924.8632 and we’ll get you all signed up!
Jan 22, 2014 | Field Reports
Got a gear question you want answered? Send your gear questions to me at Gear Questions and I’ll do my best every Wednesday to answer as many questions as I can. Keep in mind the answers are just my $.02 worth and you have to take what works for you and embrace it and ignore the rest. So here’s this weeks questions ….
Moose
A year ago I bought a Nikon D-800 that I was happy with although the pictures weren’t tack sharp. Later I bought a 24-70 f2.8 which also wasn’t sharp. Took the camera and lens to the local camera shop and they told me that even using the maximum AFA fine tuning it was still off. I returned the lens. Later bought the 80-400 Nikon and couldn’t get a tack sharp photo.
Bottom line-send the camera to Nikon and now it is tack sharp.
Question-What do you do when getting new equipment to ensure that it is functioning properly and focusing accurately? Do you just shoot some pictures or do you use focusing targets?
Lynn
Lynn, glad to hear you’re getting the results you want, that’s important! When I get a new piece of gear, body or lens, I marry myself to that piece of gear for a couple of weeks. And I shoot, shoot, shoot! No matter what it is or its main purpose, I will use that piece of gear for everything I shoot to understand what are its strengths. Real world shooting is how I “test” any piece of gear, no targets or newspaper tacked to a wall. Now keep in mind that the photographer is just as important a variable in the “great image” equation as the gear. I start my shooting with an odd old tradition of taking a picture of my big toe (long story) and then I normally point it at the dogs, my wife, the house, but never a focusing target.
In all my years of testing and shooting gear, I’ve only come across a handful of lenses where they were truly the issue (and these were three different brands) for image softness. And especially with the D800, I heard a lot of “sharpness” issues for shooters. All the issues I got to see and test personally were what I call politely, pilot error. The D800 captures a ton of detail, good and bad. I wish I could have shot with your system prior to it being sent in because while very rare, these things do happen and I would love to have seen it first hand.
Hey Moose,
Do you ever calibrate your telephoto lens with your camera bodies? And if you do, what do you consider an acceptable range for the AF Fine Tuning value?
Randy
Randy, this is a real common question and regrettably, my answer is real disappointing. Nope, I never have calibrated a lens/camera and in talking with my peers, so far, haven’t found a single one who does as either. Do folks do it? Oh heck ya. Any many swear by it. Does it hurt image quality? I’ve not seen anything to suggest it does. I did shoot once with a body and three lenses that were calibrated and to be honest, I didn’t see any “wow” in sharpness it delivered. Does it make a difference? I have meet some photogs who swear by it, but personally I have not had issues with my sharpness that this would cure.
Hi Moose,
I currently shoot with a Canon cropped sensor camera and like the extra reach that the 1.6x crop factor offers for wildlife and sports photography. As I contemplate a move to a full frame body and how that might impact my lens selection, I have the following question:
Using a 400mm lens an example, if I’m able to fill the frame with a subject on my cropped sensor, which of these scenarios will offer the best image quality?
· 400mm on a cropped sensor camera. Subject fills the frame.
· 400mm on a full frame sensor camera. Crop the image in post to fill the frame
· 400mm + 1.4x or 1.7x extender on full frame sensor camera to fill the frame.
I currently shoot with a Canon 7D and am considering a Canon 5D-MK-III
I enjoy Gearhead Wednesdays. Keep ‘em coming!
Dan
Dan, less focal length often produces the best quality for most because it isn’t as dependent on perfect technique for good results. As focal length increases, so must ones technique to get that sharp image (might refer to Long Lens technique video). With that said, as I mentioned in last week’s GearHead, I’ve shot with all the teleconverters (even Canon over the decades) and never had any loss of quality. Sensor size doesn’t matter, it’s all about the photographer’s skills brought to the click.
Like many photogs, I have the impression you’re over thinking this a whole lot. First and foremost, the size of the sensor isn’t the keystone factor here. How close physically you get to the subject is the keystone factor. “Get close physically and use optic to isolate” is something I’ve been teaching for a long time. Sensor size nor focal length matters to image size when you zoom with your feet. It does matter in how much of the background is incorporated and there lies the storytelling.
I’ve had an Epson 4900 for a year or so, and I printed on it fairly regularly. I had to go out of state for about six weeks, and when I came back home I was anxious to print some photos. I tried to print some test prints and they came out looking bad, indicating many clogged nozzles. After several cleaning functions the problem remained. I called Epson servicing and they determined a new print head had to be installed – at a cost of more than what a new 4900 would cost me. Even the service tech advise to throw out the printer and buy a new one, rather than fixing this one. So, it appears my 1 1/2 year old Epson 4900 is destined for the dumpster, after a life time of printing less than 300 prints. How do you avoid clogged print heads on your 4900? The service tech indicated this printer is meant to be turned on once, and to be run continually (do not let it sit idle for more than a day or two). Do you run prints on a daily basis? This is just not practical for most of us. Now I’m worried about getting a replacement printer. Should I use a printing service rather than buying a new printer? Any thoughts or suggestions?
Thanks,
Rob
Rob, you are not the first to have this issue or this problem. My best friend had the same thing this past summer. I’ve had my Epson 4900 now since prior to the world knowing about them and it just keeps pounding out the prints, the count over 5000. Clogged heads seems to be a constant thread and I regret that I’ve not had that issue with either my 7900 or 4900 to have a solution. And I do everything technically you’re not supposed to do. I live in a very dry environment, humidity usually less than 10%. The 7900 might go a couple of months between printing. The 4900 is on at least once a month and with both, when I do a printing session, it’s an all dayer.
Unlike what many avoid, I have the AutoClean turned on and while it does technically use more ink and ink is expensive, I don’t have these issues. Normally, I turn on a printer 30min prior to use. 15min prior to printing I manually run the cleaning cycle. Then I go to printing after that cycle is done. And there are times while printing, things come to a halt as it has to clean again even though I might have manually done it just one print earlier. And with that, I’ve not had, knock on wood, any issues with my printers.
I ~really~ don’t like how “disposable” nature of printers when it comes to problems, but I can’t change that. I can tell you that my best friend did have his print heads swapped out and has been printing like a mad man ever since without an issue. I swear by my 4900 and would recommend getting another one to you. Wish I could be of greater help!
Moose,
Thank you for Gearhead Wed! Even if some questions are not questions I have, it is always good to retain knowledge in case of future problems.
I am a longtime follower of your blog and have read your print lab series and still have problems printing effortlessly. Then I saw your blog report on PrinTao 8, and will say, this looks like it would be easy to use. My gearhead question is as follows:
I have an Epson 4900 but I do not print frequently. Sometimes I may go two or three months between printing. I now am faced with nozzle clogs because of infrequent use and cannot seem to get clear. The printer is fairly new (2 years old) with probably only 50 to 75 prints total. Once I am able to get the nozzles cleared, what is the best maintenance to use for printers with low volume printing. And maybe how to unclog and keep clear the nozzles?
Thanks
Ray
Ray, glad you saw PrinTao, it really does a great job! As you can see above, you’re not alone with this issue. I’m hoping that some of above will help you. Keep in mind that the ink is not a liquid, it’s a funky “powder.” While I have no proof, nor has anyone said anything to me about this, but I have always felt that my lack of issues might be related to the fact that before I insert a new cartridge, to say I shake it, is an understatement. Now logically, you wouldn’t think this would make any difference as the system is charged. But it is the only thing I do about the printer that is not in the instruction book.
Moose,
I am looking for some guidance. I currently have a D7000 that I use primarily for wildlife and nature photography. I am getting great shots with the lenses that I currently have( DX: 40mm, 55-300 mm and share 18-55 with my son). I am considering investing in the 17-55 f2.8 and letting son keep the other for his D3100. Question is, is the 17-55 f2.8 that much better than the 18-55 f3.5-5.6. The reason I ask is I am considering upgrading to a D610 next year and getting a used F6 so that I can shoot film.
Regards,
Jay
Jay, it’s great you’re doing photography with your son! I can tell you first hand, there simply is nothing more rewarding (especially when they get the better shot!). If I understand the unlinking part of your question, you want to buy a lens now for a DX sensor that you can use later when you move to a FX sensor. If this is the case, the 17-55f2.8 is a DX lens and while it will attach and work on the FX camera, it won’t totally cover the image area. With all of that in mind, I would recommend going with something like the 16-35AFS or 18-35AFS if you want to move it up to FX. If I’m not understanding this correctly and you’re not moving to the FX sensor, than I would definitely second your choice of the 17-55f2.8!
Moose,
