Photography 101: Check your results in the field

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

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

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

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!

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*

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

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!

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

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

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

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.