Dropbox

As photographers we often have a need to share photographs easily with clients, friends and family. Whilst my Photoshelter website has features for private, password protected galleries with configurable downloads, I haven't found anything easier than Dropbox for sending proofs etc.

2GB of storage is free, more space seems reasonable at (50GB is $9.99/month) and if you use multiple computers, it's really simple to sync all of them up to your Dropbox folder. I'm particularly impressed that I can do this across Windows PCs, a Netbook running Linux and an Android phone, that's very cool. There is a Mac client as well, and, of course you can also access your files over the web without installing the Dropbox client.

TC-14e II vs TC-17e II vs TC-20e III

Teleconvertors are often seen as stop-gaps, but today's offerings, when used with an appropriate lens, they really can deliver great results. In fact, under some circumstances, they even have advantages over a longer lens, as the closest focus distance of the original lens is retained.

I have been fortunate to be able to use all of Nikon's current offerings, so what follows is my subjective impressions, based on my experience of these with the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR and 300mm f/2.8 VR (mark one versions both).

First, up the TC-14e II. This is easy: you lose one stop and gain 40% in focal length. That's it. In my experience, with the aforementioned lenses you lose nothing else - no significant drop in autofocus performance and no significant drop in image quality, even wide open. Bearing in mind that makes my 300mm a 630mm f/4 on a DX camera, that's a fantastic result. Also, the lightweight, portable, hand-holdable nature of this TC on the 70-200 on a light camera like the D7000 is a great shoot-all-day combo when lugging a bigger lens around is impractical.

So, since teleconvertors are all about adding length, what's the TC-17e II like? Well, perhaps surprisingly, it performs just as well as the TC-14e, except instead of 40%, you're getting 70% more focal length (so 300mm becomes 510mm on FX, 765mm on DX!). Yes, you lose another half-stop, but even shot wide open (f/4.8) on my 300mm, the results are stunningly good. I don't even detect much slow-down in AF performance, at least not on a D3 series body. Again, no problems on the 70-200mm, just a very portable solution that delivers great results.

In terms of adding length, the TC-20e III is obviously the daddy. This latest version of the 2x TC has an aspherical element and is supposed to deliver exceptional image quality. First of all, my disclaimer: I never use this lens on my 70-200mm. Why? Well, if I really need that extra length I just switch to the 300mm and the 1.4x. In my opinion, if you're even contemplating buying a 2x convertor to extend a zoom you are barking up the entirely wrong tree. Get the longer lens you really need or get closer to your subject (buy a hide, improve your fieldcraft, whatever), or just go with the 1.4x or 1.7x.

On the 300mm, at first, the TC-20e III delivered disappointing results. After the other two, I naively expect to click it on and go, but it's taken a while to get to grips with it and get it to deliver results near to the other TC's (note, I'm saying near, not identical to). I discovered quickly that I needed to close down 1.5 to 2 stops from wide open to avoid disappointment with the image quality.

Not a huge problem perhaps, but we're now down to f/11 on the 300mm, and that two stops has an impact on shutter speed that is perhaps related to another issue that I have found. Previously I would leave VR switched on whether the lens was mounted on a tripod or not, as per the manual, but with this TC the image quality seems noticeably better with VR off. Since discovering this, I routinely disable VR except when handholding, whether I am using a TC or not.

So, with VR off and stopped down the TC-20e III does deliver reasonably good image quality on the 300mm f/2.8 (see previous post for some examples). That loss of 2 stops is a problem when photographing small garden birds in the UK though - they move so quickly we really need to keep those shutter speeds short, so inevitably it involves raising the ISO, potentially degrading the image quality further. But, bearing in mind that these birds are so small, this compromise seems reasonable to achieve an effective 900mm lens (DX), especially when you consider the price of super telephoto lenses...

To sum it up, I could only recommend the TC-20e III if you were shooting DX (I don't see the point in adding this on a FX camera), and you really needed the longer length for specific subjects but couldn't justify the cost of a longer lens (which is fair enough as these days, new, they cost as much as a small car).

The TC-14e II & TC-17e II are harder to separate, but if you can only choose one, then the only thing that I can see to separate them is half a stop. Given that the whole point of a TC is to give you extra reach, I would wholeheartedly recommend the 1.7x, and right now it's actually marginally cheaper than the 1.4x in the UK.

More Birding

Shifted the bird feeder to a sunnier spot this morning and set up some perches, here's some of the results from this afternoon's session.

Blue Tit, Nikon D7000, 300mm f/2.8 VR plus TC-20E III (effective 900mm lens), tripod (VR off) auto-ISO 1250, 1/640 @ f/8, cropped.

Robin, same setup as above, ISO 1000, 1/800s @ f/9.

As humans, we when we think of camouflage, we would not think of painting our heads blue and white and our bodies yellow, but it sure works for this little fella.

Pancake Lenses

Judging just by the number of hits to this blog from people searching for the Fuji X100, it may well be way more popular than I estimated. I still don't get it though, at least not at the price.

Amateur Photographer magazine ran an almost gushing article in the issue published on 22nd March, but what caught my eye more in that issue was an article about 'pancake' lenses. Especially as they had a nice big picture of a D7000 with a silver 45mm pancake lens on.

For those who don't know, pancake lenses are simple fixed-focal length lenses designed in such a way so as to protrude less from the camera body. The intention is to make something light, compact and discrete for travel, reportage and candid shots. Typically, but not always, they are close to the focal length of a 'standard' lens, i.e. 50mm for 35mm/full frame digital.

The article also mentioned the Nikon 50mm E series lens, but failed to mention that there are two other lenses that may be even more suitable for the D7000, as also part of the E series were a dinky 28mm and 35mm.

The E series were produced to compliment the Nikon EM, FG and FG-20 cameras, Nikon's compact range of 35mm SLRs, launched from 1979 to 1984. The E series were cheap and did not have the robust build quality of their corresponding Nikkor counterparts. However, they are optically pretty good (but not the best), and are very compact and lightweight.

These days they can be picked up for a song, especially the 50mm which was probably sold with practically every EM (you might even have an uncle, parent or grand-parent with one of these stashed away, possibly still in it's box!). One thing to note about the 50mm lenses is that it came in two versions. The later version, which is easily identified by a silver ring around its midrift, had a little more robust feel and wider focus grips, but was actually no smaller than the Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 AiS, i.e. only about 8mm shorter than the AF-D version still on sale today. So, for our purposes, despite the thin focus ring, the older, more compact all-black models might be preferred.

So there you go, pick up a D7000* body and an E series 'pancake' lens for less than an X100. Ok, I know it's a lot bigger. Ok, I know it's a lot heavier. But it's still not big or heavy :-)

*I mention the D7000 as it is fully compatible with AI lenses, other DX bodies are not, so, as always, check the manual!

Once Round the Goldfish Bowl

In the quest for my holy-grail of camera gear, my photographic equipment life-cycle has followed this pattern, over some 25 years:

1. 35mm film - consumer grade autofocus zooms from system and third-party (cheap construction, small minimum aperture, mediocre image quality).
2. 35mm - some fixed-focal length ('prime') autofocus lenses from system and third-party (better construction, better image quality, slightly bigger minimum apertures).
3. Medium and large format, 1 or 2 manual focus prime lenses from the system manufacturer (excellent quality, heavy, bigger minimum apertures).
4. Digital - pro-grade autofocus zooms (fast, excellent quality but big and heavy, not very discrete).
5. Today - a mixture of ~30-year old prime manual focus lenses at the shorter end (fast, excellent quality, compact, light, great value secondhand, superb tactile-feel), Nikon's superb tilt-shift PC-E lenses, with a pro grade autofocus zoom and super telephoto at the longer end (see comment to 4. above).

That zoom mentioned in 5., the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR was the only zoom I owned. However, the D7000 now forces me to re-evaluate things at the wide end. Whilst my 270g 20mm f/2.8 AiS does just fine for me on a D3, the equivalent 30mm on the D7000 is just not wide enough.

Trouble is, anything ultra-wide tends to be quite heavy (400-500g or more), and/or does not allow the use of filters, (which is essential to me) or gives massive amounts of distortion. The solution? Turns out to be quite simple, and with a little bonus item as well.

Enter the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 DX, effectively 16.5-24mm. OK, so it's failed already on my first point, weighing in at 560g - but, hey, you don't get a lens built like this without it packing a few grams! Seriously, this is one well-built lens for the money. It's at least as good, if not better, than any recent Nikon zoom near this price point. The focus ring has a good feel, and the simple clutch to engage/disengage autofocus by moving the focus ring back and forth works better than expected (I'll probably leave it on manual though).

It's a 'G' type lens in Nikon speak, which means there is no aperture ring, the aperture has to be set on the camera. Focus and zoom orientation is the same as Nikon's own lenses. Comes complete with a hood, and the filter thread is 77mm, just like Nikon's own pro-zooms and PC-E lenses. I've tried a Lee wide-angle adapter and 2-slot holder and it doesn't vignette even at 11mm.

How about that weight though? Well it is a bit of a lump, but lighter than a couple of ultra-wide primes and although there are lighter ultra-wide zooms out there from Sigma and Tamron, it's nearest competitor is Nikon's own 10-24mm, which is only slightly more expensive. The Nikon does weigh 100g less, but that's reflected in the build quality.

But what about that bonus item? Well, the Tokina lens also works on full-frame! Obviously this is not what it was designed for, so there is vignetting at the wider end, but at 15 or 16mm it works just fine, if stopped down. You can even go a little wider if you crop to 5:4 (thanks to Ken Rockwell for pointing this out!). This in itself was enough to persuade me to Tokina away from the Nikon 10-24mm, which only manages 18mm on full frame, according to Ken. Obviously if you never intend to shoot full-frame then you may be better served by the Nikon, but it you truly 'never-say-never', then may be the Tokina is a better long-term investment, coming as it does, with a 'free' 15/16mm full frame lens.

Back to my evolutionary journey to photographic nirvana: save yourself some money, ignore the first three in my list above: we're in the age of digital now and none of these cuts it in my opinion any more. Which leaves you with 4 or 5, pro-grade zooms or pro-grade primes, same as it's always been really.

The choice here comes down mainly to what you shoot and where you shoot it. I don't need autofocus for many things, and I don't need to switch from one focal length to another in an instant: but if you're a sports or wedding photographer, these things are probably vital to you. The important point is buy the very best glass you can afford: treat it as an investment that should span the lifetime of many digital bodies!

One more thing, if the budget is tight, then a beaten up old fast prime, as long as the optics are good (and it's so easy to test now with digital), is worth 10 slow plastic 'kit' zoom lenses, any day. Can't get the exact focal length you want or is not having a zoom the end of the world to you? Try using your legs.