The essence of photography

Rega Turntables
shivam

How do you incorporate new lens profiles into Photoshop? After selecting 'lens correction' I am able to autoscale the image by choosing Nikon Corporation - D90- lens model. But the geometric distortion, chromatic aberration and vignetting options only get highlighted when I click on the lens profile. Unfortunately I don't have lens profiles for my current lenses - 50mm 1.8D and 85mm 1.8D.
 
50 mm f/1.8 is almost distortion free. What did you expect of a lens design that has been continuously perfected for over half a century ?
I use Nikon Capture NX for correcting distortions in other Nikkor Lenses. For other lenses, I use profiles in photoshop which can be found on various websites. You'll have to search for them.
 
50 mm f/1.8 is almost distortion free. What did you expect of a lens design that has been continuously perfected for over half a century ?

50mm 1.8D, 50mm 1.4D, 85mm 1.8D, 85mm 1./4D, 105mm 2.8D and 135mm f/2DC are all Nikon masterpieces. Nikon is said to be using using the 50mm 1.4D for testing their new cameras. Perhaps once my upgrade itch is over, I will simply settle down with a D700+50mm 1.4D+85mm 1.8D. Awesome threesome!

Both the lenses I have at the moment fall into the normal-short telephoto range. I am still learning what I can (and cannot) do in the 75mm - 127.5mm focal range offered by them on my cropped sensor camera. Any lens I buy in the future would have to be equally distortion free and sharp. I believe that most zooms at any price point would not be able to satisfy this criteria.

Over the next couple of years I would like to buy a Nikon FX camera + a wide-angle (at least 24 mm and f/2.8) and a telephoto lens (at least 200mm and f/2.8). The camera choice is a two legged race between the rumored D600 and the discontinued D700. Budget: 80K. But at the moment there is no clarity about which wide-angle and telephoto lens I should buy. 24-70mm f/2.8 G and 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lenses look attractive, but they are expensive and perhaps a little too heavy for my taste. The other lenses I am considering are FX primes like 20mm 2.8D, 24mm 2.8D, 28mm 2.8D and 105mm 2.8D micro. Perhaps I will compromise a bit and buy the do-it-all Nikon 18-200mm VR II. Used 18-200's can be found for roughly 20K.

I prefer primes but I would like to have one zoom lens, as 'Bhagwan' is fond of saying, just for the jazz :)
 
Last edited:
My dream is to have these (or maybe one or two of these, if not all)-
Leica SLR system with their lenses
Nikon FX with Zeiss ZF.2 mount lenses
Leica rangefinder.
 
Coming back to photography musings :

Few things that me and wife, we both have learned over the years -

1. When photographing birds, the longest focal length in the bag is always smaller than what is needed.

2. The lens mounted on the camera is not the one that can take the shot when I am in a hurry.

3. When I need to use the flash, there is no flash available or there is no place to bounce it.

4. F**k*** butterfly won't stay at one place to let me focus.

5. Someone has to close his/her eyes in a group photo.

6. When I carry my tripod or monopod, I'll never come across a shot that actually requires using one.

7. When we were using films, they were always of the wrong daylight balance or wrong color characteristics. Now with digital the settings for the daylight balance and ISO are always wrong for the shot to be taken since we didn't change them from the last time.
 
I am pleased with the progress I have made since I switched from matrix to centre weighted and spot metering. My recent pics seem to be cleaner and much better 'lit' than the earlier ones. I am finally getting an inkling of how to capture light with a camera. Light which imparts an inner glow rather than an editing software induced external brightness. I feel more confident that I will be able to focus on ordinary, everyday subjects and be able to catch something interesting in them. My older Flickr photos no longer satisfy me and I have deleted many of them. Many more will gradually follow them into the trash can!

But for the moment I am reasonably happy with some of my recent pics.

topiary park | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Earlier I wouldn't have bothered to shoot this pic. Because the dull, dirty greyness of the tower against a dull grey sky, would have yielded a dull, lifeless picture with low contrast and no dynamic range. I shot this pic in the aperture priority mode at f/5.6, which is possibly the sharpest aperture on the 50mm 1.8D. I spot metered on the light grey, lower part of the tower, locked the exposure and then refocused on the upper, darker part of the tower. The spot metering correctly exposed the light grey, under exposed the dark grey and over exposed the even lighter grey of the sky. The sliver of pale golden sunlight reflecting from the trees was a bonus from the rain gods. I like this picture a lot, not because it yielded anything spectacular, but because I managed to pull a crispness and contrast out of the scene which was not visible to the naked eye.
 
One thing that you should try is -

Take the shot using spot metering and calculation with Ansel Adams Zone system.
Next, click the same shot using matrix metering.

Leave out dark filters for these shots. Compare a few shots to see what you are able to achieve more.
 
Shivam,
There are some LEica R body and some lenses available here in Munich in some stores.

But why Leica R? For the lens?

I think Fuji is coming out real good and steady.
Try X-Pro1, I had a brief try, it feels quite good and quite lighter than Leica.

Leica lenses are much costly here in Munich than in US, although they are made in Germany:sad:
 
Sumanta

A few months ago I had contemplated buying a Finepix X100, since it has been a huge success story for Fuji. I liked the idea of having a Leica lookalike camera with traditional controls for aperture, shutter speed and exposure compensation. I liked the idea of a fixed 35mm equivalent lens with an f/2 aperture. I was impressed by the lifelike colors and skin tones of some of the pics taken with this camera on Flickr. The official price was 68K but a dealer was offering a sealed unit for 60K. I was also offered a six months old unit (shutter count 1800) for 52K. I bought it home for a day but I could not focus properly with it. Could be my fault or could be that the focusing system is flawed. I found the menu operations and scrolling wheel quite uncomfortable and quirky. I believe the Fuji X-Pro 1 is a slightly more advanced version of the X100 with similar looks, strengths and weaknesses. I find both of them a little overpriced as compared to the conventional DSLR's. If I wanted a compact prosumer camera, I would look at Sony's Nex 7 which is in a similar price range. Of course all Sony products look typically Sony. There don't do the vintage, retro, european look.

Fujifilm X-Pro1 mirrorless camera review -- Engadget

Fujifilm FinePix X100 In-Depth Review: Digital Photography Review
 
ajay124 said:
Sumanta

A few months ago I had contemplated buying a Finepix X100, since it has been a huge success story for Fuji. I liked the idea of having a Leica lookalike camera with traditional controls for aperture, shutter speed and exposure compensation. I liked the idea of a fixed 35mm equivalent lens with an f/2 aperture. I was impressed by the lifelike colors and skin tones of some of the pics taken with this camera on Flickr. The official price was 68K but a dealer was offering a sealed unit for 60K. I was also offered a six months old unit (shutter count 1800) for 52K. I bought it home for a day but I could not focus properly with it. Could be my fault or could be that the focusing system is flawed. I found the menu operations and scrolling wheel quite uncomfortable and quirky. I believe the Fuji X-Pro 1 is a slightly more advanced version of the X100 with similar looks, strengths and weaknesses. I find both of them a little overpriced as compared to the conventional DSLR's. If I wanted a compact prosumer camera, I would look at Sony's Nex 7 which is in a similar price range. Of course all Sony products look typically Sony. There don't do the vintage, retro, european look.

Fujifilm X-Pro1 mirrorless camera review -- Engadget

Fujifilm FinePix X100 In-Depth Review: Digital Photography Review
Click to expand...


I too considered the Fuji's for a really long time and dropped the idea. And yes my experience with my Lumix LX3 made me realize that a poor menu and button design can kill the joy of photography - and the many reviews strongly hinted at a kludgy menu that robbed intuitive and quick control tweaks. Now I am planning to sell my LX3 and my buying decision is wavering between an Olympus OM-D E5 versus a DSLR with a 12-50mm and an additional 40-150mm lens. However I am yet to decide which of these lens to procure that will give a shallow depth of field, work at full aperture at all ranges and also produce very little barrel distortion at 12mm (24mm equiv for 35mm) and that are sub $600 range.

Any suggestions?

--G
 
Last edited:
A rule of thumb that I have learnt with digital cameras - always buy the most inexpensive camera body that serves your purpose and buy the most expensive lens that your pocket permits.
 
Shivam said:
A rule of thumb that I have learnt with digital cameras - always buy the most inexpensive camera body that serves your purpose and buy the most expensive lens that your pocket permits.
Click to expand...

Having used the Yashica 35, I am wholly stuck on retro or vintage look and feel with manual dials and controls for most operations. What body do you suggest?

--G
 
gobble said:
I too considered the Fuji's for a really long time and dropped the idea. And yes my experience with my Lumix LX3 made me realize that a poor menu and button design can kill the joy of photography. Now I am planning to sell my LX3 and my buying decision is wavering between an Olympus OM-D E5 versus a DSLR with a 12-50mm and an additional 40-150mm lens. However I am yet to decide which of these lens to procure that will give a shallow depth of field, work at full aperture at all ranges and also produce very little barrel distortion at 12mm (24mm equiv for 35mm) and that are sub $600 range.

Any suggestions?

--G
Click to expand...
I have an older 510 but feel D E5 with a 12-50 and that amazing 45 Prime would be great. in fact a 14, 45 and a 45-200 (from panasonic) would also be a great addition.
I think any Fast lens can give you a good DOF..a 45/1.8 should just do the job well
Four Thirds | Micro Four Thirds | Products(Lenses)
Olympus M.ZUIKO Digital 45mm f/1.8 Review | PhotographyBLOG

My Problem is i already have a couple of Four-third lenses which are not easy to sell off
 
gobble said:
Having used the Yashica 35, I am wholly stuck on retro or vintage look and feel with manual dials and controls for most operations. What body do you suggest?

--G
Click to expand...

Get a Nikon D200 body if you can find one. This has a lot of functions from manual days. You can even use the aperture ring of the lens to control aperture or use many old lenses without electronic contacts, with evaluative metering. There is a depth of field preview button too.

The in-camera processing is not very good. So click raw and then post-process.
 
I was using Pentax cameras (dSLRs) for nearly 3 years. It has very good price benifit as you can use old lenses. But people in India do not look at Pentax as an option. I still have 2 Pentax lenses that I use on my NEX. I like NEX.
I do not use menu much, infact not at all. I shoot with programme mode with necessary EV compensation that I think is right, or else use spot metering. So, I hardly go into menu.
Fuji is slow in processing and in user interface. NEX7 is a good option for me, but I would rather prefer another lens than another body unless I get it cheap.
Still Fuji win for its missing AA filter ending with superb sharpness. Sony also has a low AA filter which I like.
If I get a good Leica lens, i will buy one for my NEX3.
I am yet to print big prints from capture of this little monster's sensor. It has to be better than Pentax's K20D and some primes that I used to have.

One request, if any of you have used Pentax primes for sell, please do let me know.
 
gobble

"I am yet to decide which of these lens to procure that will give a shallow depth of field, work at full aperture at all ranges and also produce very little barrel distortion at 12mm (24mm equiv for 35mm) and that are sub $600 range"

I don't think you will find any DSLR lenses in the sub 600$ range which will satisfy all your conditions. There are very few zooms which offer the 12-18mm focal range. Most zooms offering this range would have substantial barrel distortion.

Achieving shallow depth is difficult with entry level/prosumer zooms as their widest aperture is usually f/3.5. Even this aperture is variable and only available at the wide-angle end, where it is not normally required. At the telephoto end, where the need for subject isolation normally arises, the widest aperture budget zooms offer is f/4.5 or f/5.6. Some Pro zooms offer the luxury of a constant aperture across the entire focal range, but they cost an arm and a leg. Nikon's 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 have mrp's of close to 2000$.

It is difficult to build a zoom which is clean and sharp across it's entire focal range. Inevitably it will work well at some focal lengths and be iffy or a disaster at others. The longer the focal range, the more dicey it is to build a good lens. A 5x zoom like the 16-85 would probably give more consistent results across it's focal range than a 10x zoom like the 18-200.

Zoom lenses are heavy and unwieldy. They require a weighty body to properly support their weight. A big DSLR + a big zoom looks threatening, invasive and (imo) not very cool.

Zooms require a lot of glass and manufacturers may compromise by adding a lot of plastic in the body to keep the costs down.

For all these reasons I prefer primes. A zoom merely gives you the convenience of shooting at various focal lengths with a single lens. But it sacrifices a lot of other good stuff. For me the interesting apertures for portraits and close ups are f/1.4-f/2.8. And for shooting landscapes and general stuff I usually opt for f/5.6-f/8. The f/3.5-f/4.5 is a no man's land where I seldom venture. Beyond f/8 diffraction normally sets in and most lenses don't perform very well.

The widest constant aperture which Nikon provides in its 100K+ wide angle, normal and telephoto zooms is f/2.8. While the 50mm 1.8D prime gives you a f/1.8 for 5.5K. Incredible!
 
Last edited:
One of the things that I like about digital is the ability to create settings which mimic various film rolls.

I use Nikon Color mode I with normal to low saturation with automatic tone for effects similar to Kodak Portra films.
Nikon color mode III with medium high sharpening, auto contrast, enhanced saturation for mimicking Fuji Velvia.
Similar mode as above with medium high contrast and normal saturation to mimick Fuji professional films.

Combine this with the various ISOs and it's like carrying a bag full of films, loaded and ready to be used in a single camera body !
 
Award Winning Diamond 12.3 Floorstanding Speakers Offer
Get the Award Winning Diamond 12.3 Floorstanding Speakers on Special Offer

Similar threads

V
Bitlocker + Win11 Pro 24H2 edition = Secure Boot is mandatory???
Replies
2
Views
242
vishalrao
V
A
Vinyl to digital on the fly 🫢
Replies
0
Views
2K
Amarendra
A
D
My review of the Fosi Audio V3 Mono
Replies
5
Views
2K
jai1611
J
C
Cables for Connecting the Streamer to DAC
Replies
8
Views
4K
Sopra
S
corElement
The journey of building my own workstation desk
Replies
13
Views
1K
Yelamanchili manohar
Yelamanchili manohar
Back
Top