zerolight

My custom ordered James Tyler Studio Elite HD is done, and is now with the UK distributor. It’ll be with me next week. It’s the first Orange Shmear Studio Elite, a special order I put in for my guitar. More details here.

Note to Zee: this is boring, don’t bother reading.

I’ve been noticing that my photos on flickr all appear a little soft. A tiny, teeny, weeny, bit soft. This, even after switching to shooting in RAW mode. I experimented a fair bit, taking photographs of batteries no less, to see if my camera had focus issues. All was fine. I checked out my photos in iPhoto, all were crisp and sharp. Then I compared an unscaled flickr export (a plugin for iPhoto that exports to flickr) with a scaled one. Bingo, the scaled one was softer than the unscaled.

However, there is a beta of flickr export 3, which lets you choose the quality of the export. So, some more tests followed, and thankfully I found that at maximum quality, the scaled exports are just as sharp as the unscaled exports. Yay. Of course, this also gives me an excuse to post yet another photo of Rafi.

I’ve had the 40D for a few days now, and have taken it out a couple of times over the weekend (Saturday, Sunday) sampling images from the nice cheap EF50 lens, and my more expensive, mid-range, 28-135 IS. I’ve enjoyed using it very much, to the extent that I am actively trying to become a better photographer rather than a happy snapper.

In terms of image quality, the 40D is better than the 10D. Not massively so, it has to be said. But that’s because the camera body is only part of the equation, with the lenses (which haven’t changed) having a very significant affect on the resultant pictures. Images seem more detailed, a more colourful, a little sharper. However, the biggest leap is in performance. High iso noise for example, when in JPEG mode with NR on, gives very pleasing images in comparison to the 10D. Auto focus speed is very rapid, as is the cycle time between pictures, and power on is near instantaneous.

The revised menu, ripped straight from a 1DS III (less some features) is great – a particular highlight being a favourites page, where you can place short cuts to even the most buried setting. Live view, for me, is a bit useless. Maybe I just don’t know how to use it, certainly it’s not compatible with my microdrive. However if you are into macro photography, hooking the camera up to your laptop and focusing directly from the laptop screen must be a boon. There’s also more information in the view finder, which allows you to determine at pre-focus, whether or not things are likely to work out.

All said and done, I’m very happy with it. The fact that it makes me want to shoot in RAW, use custom white balance, and actually think about what I’m doing, speaks volumes. AT £500 after rebates, it’s a steal – 6 months ago you’d have paid over double that.

I had been tempted with the Nikon D300, as on paper that’s a slightly better camera. DPReview comparisons show there to be almost nothing between them in the real world. Crucially, unlike the 40D, the D300 is still priced around the 1k mark – factor in a new lens or two, and the D300 becomes a massively more expensive animal, for very little gain. It’s bigger too.

Whilst I’d like some fast Canon L lenses, I can’t justify the price – besides I really didn’t like the 17-40L I once had. To compliment my 28-135IS, down the line, I’ll pick up the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 DI-II lens as it seems to be terrific value. Then a new bag – I’m liking the Kata T214. That’ll complete the package for another 4 or 5 years. Baby steps though, the first purchase will be an EF50 f/1.8 II from eBay (cheap as chips).

I’ve debated whether to switch over to RAW from JPEG for many months. RAW supposedly provides far better image results, JPEG is quicker and easier. Is it worth the hassle. I’m not sure, but looking at these two pictures taken one after the other, it would appear that RAW images are slightly sharper, and with more accurate colour representation. It should be noted that in both images, some White Balance adjustment was necessary.

RAW:

JPEG:

I borrowed this little 50mm prime lens from John at work. For a little £60 lens, it exceeded my expectations. For the price, image quality is staggering. Any focusing issues I had were user error – I’ve been so used to IS lenses, whose image stabilisation electronics allow you to take pictures with slower than normal shutter speeds, that I was foolishly taking shots with shutter speeds too slow for the EF50.

At f1.8 it’s a really fast lens that lets in a lot of light. It really shines at portraits, even in low lighting. As a walk about lens with smaller apertures and thus more depth of field, it again provides some good pictures. I’ve created a flickr set with some samples. I also used it for a few shots inside the Botanic Gardens, and for this entire West End Festival set.

With such a shallow depth of field, focus is absolutely crucial. In fact, if you can keep your shutter speed high enough, and the depth of field at 2.8 or less, then you can get some terrific portait shots, and it’s here that the EF50 is strongest. I’d almost go so far as to say that the lens is a total one trick, full frontal portrait, pony. But that would be a disservice as it gives good results with smaller apertures too. When funds allow, I’ll definitely buy myself one, it won’t get used all the time, but it will get use – my wife and kids love to strike a pose.

I’ll post some 40D thoughts later, but food for thought, the following shot was taken with my 28-135IS at ISO3200!

This post was updated on 16th June.