Serious art?
Yesterday, I was listening to NPR, National Public Radio. Normally, I don’t listen to it, but my car is in the shop right now and I have a rental, so no satellite radio. 
I was listening to a program called All Things Considered, I believe. The topic was a Brazilian artist, whose name escapes me. This artist, first name Romario, I believe, is becoming more popular because some of his art is being displayed inside of museum; formerly, most of his art was commissioned for use in shopping malls and various outdoor venues. Among this type of artist, he was well known and sought after by shopping mall architects, builders, etc.
When asked about how he felt about his art finally getting displayed in a museum, his simple reply was: “That’s nice, but it’s not necessary. I like for my art to be where people can see it and get something from it.” He went on to say that he used to do all of his work on the sidewalks and that is what gave him joy and that shopping malls, in his opinion, where the perfect venue for his work.
Later in the program, they had some quotes from different art critics who said that finally his work is becoming ‘respectable’, ‘worthwhile’, and ‘serious’ because it is getting accepted in museums. However, there were some dissenters who said that his work was a ‘derivative’ of this person or that person, blah, blah, blah.
It’s interesting how people can attribute the worth of art based on where it is being shown. Same work, different venue, different ‘value’. Critics are such a joke! I’m glad that this guy has his a good head on his shoulders and doesn’t get caught up in those foul winds that are being spawned from the mouth of the critic!
Musings on the D700
Back in September of 2007, I wrote about the exciting new Nikon D3. After all, it had been a long while since Nikon had introduced a new camera AND it was their first full frame camera; this, after letting Canon have control of the full-frame (FX) market for about 3 years. Well, the boys and girls at Nikon have stepped up and announced another full-frame camera. The Nikon D700!
The D700 looks like a direct competitor to Canon’s 5D. A digital camera with a full sized 35mm sensor at a price of about $2,999, somewhere between the D300 ($1799) and the D3 ($4999). Not bad at all! It, again, kind of raises my geek alarm. 
I hate when that thing goes off because it keeps ringing, and ringing, and ringing!
But, again, for those of us already invested in number of DX lenses, the transition would be a bit costly, assuming that we wanted to take advantage of the FX sensor. The D700 provides 12 MP, full frame, or 5 MP (DX). Kind of seems like a waste to shoot with DX lenses on this baby.
The main reason for having an FX sized sensor is to shoot ultra-wide angle lenses such as the 16mm f/2.8, 20mm f/2.8, or the 12-24mm f/2.8, each bringing their share of pain to the wallet! Another advantage of the larger sensor is lower noise at high ISO; however, I wouldn’t think that this would be a primary reason to spend an additional $1,200 over the price of a D300.
Certainly, I would consider purchasing this camera if I had all non-DX lenses, but the opposite is true; merely forking over to Nikon another $2999 of hard-earned cash is not the only issue. Another issue is the support crew that I would need to buy with it … my same reasons for not getting a D3. Sigh… Perhaps when all prosumer cameras are full frame and the cost of those lenses go down, maybe, just maybe.
I’m interested to see what this new introduction will do to the price of existing Nikon lenses that are used with 35mm film cameras. They will work on both the D3 and the D700. By the introduction of this camera, I would suspect that suddenly these lenses would become more valuable, even though they are not auto focus.
Depreciation costs
Lastly, after the introduction of the D300, I watched in horror as the value of my D2x plummeted like a lead balloon. Down! Down! Down, it went. Down to where a D2x in excellent+ shape with low mileage (shutter actuations), say < 20,000, might fetch, if you’re lucky, slightly over $1,200. A well used one, still in excellent shape, with shutter actuations of 40,000+ may get you $1,000, if you are lucky! Mind you, Nikon’s shutters are rated at 150,000 actuations MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures), meaning that about on average, shutters fail at 150,000.
Probably most of the people who are looking at these numbers will not even come close to exercising the camera to failure. My camera has 40,000 actuations in 24 months, which is about 1,665 pictures/month or about 55/day. Even at that rate, it would take about 5.5 years to bring the shutter to failure by using the ‘remaining’ 110,000 shots, assuming that it would break at that time.
I wonder what the introduction of the D700 will do to D3 sales. Hmmm. I don’t think that they’ll affect D300 sales much. That’s a different group.
Oh well. Something to think about. I think that the folks at Nikon are doing the right thing in taking back the market. Maybe I’ll jump on the bandwagon when this current crop of cameras start depreciating … and they will!
For the Newbies: Choosing a digital camera
Wow! This is a big topic and there is no definitive answer. It all comes down to a matter of preference and intent. What do you like? What do you plan to use it for? There are as many different answers as there are individual letters in this post! Much of the choosing is about experimentation and personal preference.
What type of soap should I buy?
If you’ve ever been to the grocery store and stopped to look at the impressive array of most anything; it can be confusing to shop. Just take a look at the detergent section, for example! You have powder, liquid, high-efficiency, with fabric softener, with color-safe bleach, mountain-fresh, rain-scent, small size, medium size, large size, best-value size, Tide, Dreft, Purex, generic, store label, etc!!! Arghhhhh!!!! Mind you, they all do the same things. Some of them slightly better, others … well, they just impart a different smell!
About those cameras
The camera market is no different. There are lots of manufacturers, each offering slightly different versions of the same thing. They all perform the same function. They capture a digital image of whatever you point them at. You just have to make a decision on which flavor you prefer.
If you have read my articles on aperture and shutter speed, then you know that being able to control these features allows for a great amount of latitude in your picturing taking. You can become quite creative if you have control over these items.
I think that if you plan on experimenting, creatively, then a camera that allows you to control aperture, shutter speed, ISO, etc. should be in your future.
Digicams
Cameras, such as the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-H50, have lenses that are permanently attached to the body. The big advantage here, especially for someone new to digital photography, is that everything you need is already there! You needn’t buy anything extra, save for a tripod, and some filters, if you want. You can control aperture, shutter speed, ISO (sensitivity), etc. Because the lens is permanently attached, you have no problems with dust getting onto the sensor, so there are no cleaning worries. This camera, for example, has an optical zoom factor of 15x. It can go from a modest wide-angle of 31mm, all the way to a respectable zoom of 465mm. Optical zoom factor being derived by dividing the larger zoom number, 465, by the smaller, 31, giving a factor of 15. It’s safe to ignore any propaganda about digital zoom. It’s crappy! It’s simply a magnification of the scene using mathematics!
EVF a word of caution
One word of caution here. Unfortunately, these cameras have electronic viewfinders (EVF); rather than seeing the actual view, you see the equivalent of a video image. Either that, or you get to look at the LCD screen. It depends on what you like. I’ve never felt comfortable composing in an LCD. Since I started with a film camera and was used to seeing the image through glass, it was rather difficult to get used to an EVF. In fact, I never did get used to it. It’s like the difference between looking out of the window vs. looking out of the window through a video camera. It’s not the same. Also, update speed is a problem. The EVF does not update fast enough to follow action. Period. This, in my opinion, is a very big down side, but don’t take my word for it. It’s important that you check it out for yourself. Go to the store and compare, for example, a D40x and Sony DSC-H50. See which you like better. They are both in about the same price range. Initially.
DSLR
The good thing with these cameras is that they have a mirror that bends the light into the viewfinder, so you are actually looking at the scene that you are going to photograph right through the lens. Crystal-clear.
Again, these are cameras and they take pictures; however, because they have removable lenses, they allow you to be a bit more selective in your lens choices, but they also add another layer of confusion. In the above example, you had a camera that had a lens that covered the range from 31-465mm. Now, you may have purchased, for example, a Nikon D40, which comes with a lens that covers 18-55mm. Well, you’re a bit short now. You’ll need to go out and buy, perhaps a 55-200mm, and a 200-500mm to cover the same range. More $$$. Also, you’ll have to change lenses, etc. All this is fine, if that’s what you want to do. Also, now that you can change lenses, you’re allowing those little dust bunnies inside of your camera. You’ll either have to learn how to clean it, or send it back for cleaning, which is more $$$. The flexibility does not come without a cost. To add another small item, each new lens that you add to your bag, adds a little bit of weight. You have to carry it.
Which is best?
It depends on what you need. There is no best, though brand-loyalist might keelhaul you if don’t agree with their point of view. Discussing which camera is best is akin to discussing religion, politics, megapixels, or shooting raw vs. JPG! It’s just flat out dangerous! Within a group of similarly priced cameras, all of the features are going be about the same. Manufacturers are adding lots of post processing features into the cameras, like color correction, cropping, changing to monochrome. These are better left for after the fact, rather than inside of the camera. It’s much easier to see what you are doing on a monitor than a 2 inch LCD!
Let’s try to winnow it down.
The following is certainly my opinion and what I look for in a camera. Hopefully, reading how I do it will give you ideas of how to perform your own winnowing process. I start by asking myself what is it that I want to do with the camera. Camera technology is always changing and better cameras are coming out for less money. Don’t stress yourself trying to figure out what you’ll want to photograph next year. Buy something that suits your needs today. After all, it’s all that you know.
Are you going to shoot sports?
If I want to seriously consider sports, I have to find a camera that shoots about 4 FPS (Frames Per Second) or better. This is based on my use of cameras shooting at less than 4 FPS and >= 4 FPS. Basically, this will cut out most of the consumer-level cameras and thrust you into the prosumer or professional level cameras. In other words, you’ve crossed the $1,000 zone! Most of the consumer-level cameras shoot at about 2.5 or 3 fps. While I’ve shot sports at this speed, you do miss a lot of important moments. At lot can happen in 1/3 of a second while your camera is trying to get on to the next shot. See my photographing basketball post for more information. If you have an EVF, forget about sports!
How does it feel/fit?
OK. The next important facet, for me, is to see how the camera feels in my hands. I prefer the feel of Nikon cameras because, well, they just fit. I’ve even been told by some serious Canon users who have felt the fit and weight of my Nikons that the camera feels a lot better; however, the choice is yours. I have Nikon equipment because I liked the feel of it, plain and simple. It’s important to me. They also have the features that I like. Does your hand land comfortably on the shutter button? Are the other adjustments in a comfortable place? Does the camera make sense to you? For example, Nikon lenses attach and lock in the counterclockwise direction. Canon, clockwise. Put it around your neck. Is it too heavy? Too light? Just right?
How does it look through the viewfinder?
When you look through the viewfinder, are you comfortable with what you see? If you wear glasses, can you see the entire viewfinder with your glasses on? If you take your glasses off, can you adjust the diopter knob enough so that you can see without your glasses. Some viewfinders show about 96% to 99% of the field of view. If you are very serious about how you frame your subjects, look for one that covers 100% field of view.
Len choices vs. camera manufacturers
Eventually, your lens purchases will exceed your camera purchase. Glass is expensive. You can purchase the original manufacturers lenses, such as Nikon, Canon, Pentax, or Olympus, but 3rd party lenses may be more in your budget. When looking to purchase a DSLR, see if the 3rd party lens manufacturers like Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma make a wide array of lenses for your camera. If your are purchasing a Nikon, or a Canon, well, you probably don’t have a single worry. You’ll have a huge choice. After the top 2, things start to roll off. If you purchase, for example, a Sigma SD14, you may be constraining yourself to only Sigma lenses. Also, if you wanted something like a Lensbaby, it may not be available for your camera.
Megapixels
I don’t even want to go here because I fall back to the practical side. You cannot not tell much difference in a normal sized print, say 11 x 14, between a 6 MP camera and a 10 MP camera, assuming the same sized sensor (APS-C or Full frame). If you are not going to enlarge past this zone, well, then the issue is moot. You can function just fine with a D40 (6MP) or a D40x (10 MP), no need to spend the money on the extra pixels. Again, just my opinion and experience. I own a Nikon D40 (6 MP) as well as a D2x (12.2 MP) and get lovely prints from both of them. I’ve printed D40 files up to 13 x 19 and they look wonderful. So, you may be asking, if it’s so good, why do you have a 12.2 MP camera? Well, they are different beasts. The D40 is my lightweight walk-around camera. The D2x, my all weather, workhouse, sports shooting (5 or 8 FPS) camera. The D2x is HEAVY and not nice to carry around all day!
Sensor Size
Most DLSRs have an APS-C sized sensor. It’s about 75% of the size of a regular 35mm frame. Without going through all of the techno-mumbo-jumbo, larger sensors mean less digital noise at higher sensitivities (ISO). Also, the lenses have different angles of view when placed on the camera. Suffice it to say that if you step into the world of full frame sensors, you’ve just upped the ante!
Nikon has only one, the D3, and it will cost you $4,999. Canon has 2, the 5D, about $1,800, and the 1DS MK III, about $7,999. The big difference between full frame and APS-C is the angle of view and the ability to shoot true ultra-wide angle lenses. I don’t think that this price range is where most beginners want to tread. Perhaps after you get used to your camera, discover what you like to shoot, then you can make the decision to spend between $1,800 and $8,000.
Rent it or borrow it
If you are fortunate enough to live in a large city, or near one, that has a camera store where you can rent a camera for a day or two, take one for a test drive. See how it handles. If at the end of the day, you like it, go buy yourself one. Perhaps your buddy has one that he’d let you borrow for a little while.
In the end … it depends!
So, you see, it’s up to you. No, I didn’t recommend a camera and I only mentioned Nikon, because it’s what I shoot with. Nothing more. Hopefully, I have given you enough information where you can make a choice that will be good for your needs today.
About the pictures: Just a sampling. One with a digicam (Minolta A1), one with a point & shoot (Canon A350), three with DSLRs (D2x, D300, D40). They all got the picture! That’s what camera’s do!
For the Newbies: Shutter Speed
In a previous post, I spoke about the aperture. Now, I’d like to talk about the other half of the exposure dynamic duo, shutter speed. Whereas aperture had everything to do with the lens, nothing to do with the camera. Shutter speed is the opposite. It has everything to do with the camera, nothing to do with the lens. OK, view camera boys, back off! I’m talking SLRs!
But first, I have to answer a question: Yes? You in the back! … *groan* No, shutter speed has nothing to do with wind velocity, hurricanes, or wooden shutters! Sheesh!
A major disadvantage of some of the point and shoot camera crowd is a lack of ability to control the shutter speed or aperture. Basically, you get what the camera gives you. The camera works to get you a clear picture where everything is in crystal-clear focus. But, what if that is not what you want?
Blurring on purpose? Absurd!!!
The above picture, my son’s basketball team running ‘suicides’, was done using a method called panning. You hold the camera at eye-level and rotate at the waist while following the action. You need to use a slow shutter speed, in this case 1/8 of a second, in order to get the blurred effect. This effect gives the picture a sense of motion.
What is shutter speed?
Shutter speed is the amount of time expressed in seconds, or fractions of seconds, that the shutter curtain is open and allowing light to fall upon the sensor or film. My Nikon D300 has shutter speeds ranging from 30 seconds, on the long end, all the way up to 1/8000 second, on the high end. There is even a ‘bulb’ setting that allows you to hold the shutter open for as long as you want. This can make for some interesting night shots. Exposure = quantity (aperture) + time (shutter speed).
Fast shutter speeds
Higher shutters speeds, generally speaking, are about 1/250 second or greater. Higher shutter speeds allow you to freeze action. This comes in very handy when you are shooting sports, or some other fast paced action that you’d like to freeze. You can capture a moment in time, like the picture of this diver to the right, at the point of no return. Notice how the water droplets at the bottom of his shorts are frozen in time.
Slow shutter speeds
Slower shutter speeds allow you to capture motion over time. It gives your image an overall artistic feel. My favorite motion studies are of water. I like to set my camera upon the tripod and expose an image for multiple seconds. Of course, you have to have a fairly low light level to do this, or a filter that reduces the amount of light coming in so as not to overexpose (let in too much light) the picture. In this photo, to the left, the shutter has been left open for about 20 seconds. Everything that is stationary, rocks, plants, etc. remains in sharp focus. That which is moving, the water, takes on a pleasant blurred effect. This type of shot can only be accomplished by using a steady tripod, or some type of camera support.
Without a tripod, save for panning, slow shutter speeds can be a disadvantage because they record camera shake. You may have the hands of a surgeon, but surely you cannot hold perfectly still. Your breathing, heartbeat, and nervous system all contribute to camera shake. Additionally, where you stand, how you stand, the wind, etc. make their own contributions to this vibration. Lenses with image stabilization help to reduce this vibration, but are no substitute for a good tripod, but that’s another article all together.
It’s rather difficult to get sharp, hand-held pictures at the lower shutter speeds. A rule of thumb for selecting a shutter speed is that you shouldn’t shoot at speeds less than 1/focal length. So, if you have a 50mm lens, then don’t hand hold at less that 1/50 second. The longer the lens, the higher the needed shutter speed. A 500mm lens would require at least 1/500 of a second. Personally, I like to double that number, and prefer not to hand hold under 1/(2 * focal length). Mind you, only a very small percentage of my shots are taken hand held, save for sports.
Well, I cannot beat this horse anymore. So, I’ll just have to get another one ride off into the sunset. Until next time! (No horses were harmed in the making of this post!)
Missing pieces.
It all started with watching an Ansel Adams video. After watching that video, I watched more and more of them until I ran into a site, Cybelephotography’s Channel. I stayed here for quite a while because, quite frankly, I was captivated by the number of outstanding images that I saw.
I don’t make a big deal about being black. I think that there’s already to much categorization already. Black. White. Mexican. Muslim, etc. You can hardly watch the news without being subjected to a race/religion/nationality adjective. I find it boring, unnecessary, and downright derisive most times.
However, as I looked through the images of such greats as Harry Callahan, Henri Cartier-Bresson, and other people photographers, I noticed that something was missing. People like me. I think that inherently, people tend to stick to subjects, or people, that they are familiar with. There is a great amount of fear in the unfamiliar.
I’ll admit to ignorance about black photographers because, quite frankly, no one ever talks about them and I never made an effort to find them; however, in looking at the works of James Van der Zee, and Gordon Parks, a former Vogue and Life magazine photographer, I was impressed and inspired. Not for something so shallow as skin color, but because I saw the history of my people in their pictures. There was some cultural relevance. It felt good.
While listening to one of many podcasts that you were so kind to recommend, I heard one photographer say that he believes that one essential ingredient for improvement of your own photography is to view and collect the work of others that you admire. He said that the more you look, the more ideas that you get. It’s an interesting point of view. I don’t own any photographs, neither prints nor posters of other photographers, but I saw a few that I liked in these collections.
I will probably look for some biographies, picture books, etc. It just seems to make sense. This will more than likely be my sole collection, but it will certainly add a bit of diversity to my viewing.