Racing Daylight

New cameras

2012-01-27T08:11:00.001-08:00

The big news since the last time I bothered to update this blog, has been the introductions of the Nikon D4 and the Canon 1DX. Nikon's built one heck of a flagship DSLR and they're undercutting Canon's price by about $500 or so. Now, to a pro that's not much money for a device which will last 4 years or so. About $.34 per day actually. Is that a big enough difference to make someone who has invested in the Canon lens system jump ship? No. Is it enough to sway new buyers? Certainly. That's where Nikon's hoping to gain ground on Canon's HD video lead. Make no mistake, this really is the first salvo of a price war.

The second salvo should land on February 7th, if Nikonrumors.com is correct about the launch date for the D800. With a reported 36mp, this is probably a development of the Sony EXMOR-R sensor, using Sony's "backlit sensor" architecture. I believe I read the original tech paper from Sony back in 2008, a relative eternity in sensor years, but all references to a 36mp EXMOR-R sensor have been scrubbed from Sony's website. There's plenty about the EXMOR-R, but no mention of total megapixels, leading me to believe that current in-development sensors are far beyond 36mp right now. If I were a betting man, I'd say Sony's playing around with sensors in the 48-60mp range, on a 36mm wide sensor. With the ability of the backlit sensor to gather light, cutting the pixel size in half is not as big of an issue as it once was. Why not say this now? Simple, because Nikon's about to release a 36mp D800, and since Nikon's buying the sensors, they do not want Sony talking about what could be upcoming, even in a distant future.

There's even been some talk that there will be two D800s released; one at 36mp without an anti-aliasing filter, the other at a lower resolution (possible using the D4 sensor, but slower speed processing and operation). With the D300S and D700 being listed as "discontinued" on Nikon's global corporate site, I think the D400 might become a 16mp FX body, leaving the D7000 as the hi-res APS-C sensor prosumer body. If the D7000 is selling well, why cannibalize its sales with an up-market D400? I, for one, would welcome an FX D400 as an "entry-level FX body" without some of the robustness of the D4. As long as it offers the pop-up flash and wireless flash control of the D300/D300S/D700 bodies, I could see it as a sub-$2000 FX market monster.

This would leave the D800 positioned as the FX challenger to the Canon 5D mkII and mkIII bodies, probably priced in the sub-$3000 price range, if not by much. A DX-sensor D400 would have to come in with 18-24mp to upstage the D7000, and above 18mp, might take a hit in the image quality department due to anti-aliasing filter requirements for smaller pixels; see Canon 7D image softness complaints. To an extent, this can be processed out but all things equal, prosumers would likely be happier with very sharp 16mp FX sensor output than slightly soft 18-24mp images which have to be processed more. And THAT is what an entry-level prosumer DSLR should produce; clean, sharp, colorful images straight from the body.

A D800 with 36mp will begin to challenge the limitations of lenses revealing flaws in your lenese you never thought they had. Such is the nature of technological advance. I think Canon has the advantage here with their Florite glass. Nikon, leveraging Sony's technical might and sensor-producing talent, might be poised to "upset the apple cart" with these next two cameras buy going both for a hi-res 36mp non-anti-aliasing body, and a "lower cost FX body". I've long argued privately that Canon should have produced an "Rebel FX" with their 12.8mp sensor from the original 5D. The popularity of 35mm film cameras wasn't just because they could take snapshots, it was because they could capture artistic photos with terrific out of focus backgrounds. They could use amazingly-sharp professional lenses, slapped onto a body which was less durable than a professional's unit, but which could still get the job done for intermittant family. Many of those durable film bodies are still working today. This is what the market needs. Will it be Canon, or Nikon, who delivers it first?

SEMA 2011

2011-11-07T14:29:00.000-08:00

I went, I saw, I came home and wanted to beat my little Project Fubar Miata into a worthless hunk of metal with a sledgehammer, then roll it off to an irrigation ditch and leave it for aliens to discover long after the human race has blasted itself into oblivion. This car is going to need soooooo much work to be at the SEMA show level...

Canon 1Dx thoughts

2011-10-19T10:54:00.000-07:00

Damn! $6,800? This sure makes a second-gen 1Ds mkII look like a deal now, if you can find one in good shape. Looking at Rob Galbraith's site has me questioning the AF performance of Canon's top cameras now. Rob doesn't have any complaints posted about the 7D though, but since it's not a full-frame body, it's not on my list.

Dear Canon, what I'd like is a 7D body with the sensor from the original 5D. 'K? Thanks! I want the separate AF processing chip and the wireless flash control built-in. And that creamy narrow DOF that a full-frame body possess. Would this be too difficult for you? This way I can take advantage of the excellent sharpness your lenes exhibit.

RIP Dan Wheldon

2011-10-16T16:59:00.000-07:00

Sad, sad day in Indy Car racing. Dan Wheldon passed away in a truly awful crash at the Las Vegas Motor Speedway, leaving behind his wife Susie and two little boys. Terrible news...

One body shooting

2011-10-10T17:28:00.000-07:00

It is dang tough to shoot an event with just one body. Impossible to do it with one body and primes. I was thinking these thoughts as I was shooting the Formula Drift 2011 Season Finale at Irwindale this past weekend. Since I was shooting with for a magazine, I can't concentrate on making only artsy photos with primes. I have to be able to shoot off-the-cuff rapidly, and that means a zoom lens is required. I want bokeh, and my little zooms aren't delivering that. Decisions, decisions...

Sony A77? No, no no!

2011-10-03T11:48:00.000-07:00

Ah Sony... so many tricks, so little use for them. 12 FPS, but you can only shoot wide open because the camera can't control the f-stop fast enough? Really? Buffer only holds 13 shots? So, truthfully, the 12 FPS burst speed is useless. One second of shooting at 12 FPS, which may result in over-exposed shots because the aperture can only be wide open?

Now, shooting at 8 FPS is very fast, but again, if it can only do 13 shots in a row before the buffer is full then it may be of very little use out in the real world. This spec can be matched by any old used Nikon D300 or D700 with a battery grip, or by the Canon 7D straight out of the box.

Hard to see what Sony's thinking with this one. At least the A900/A850 twins were sheer photographic tools with zero frills. This one seems to be more "because we're Sony and we can" fluff than it should be.

Nearly October

2011-09-29T11:12:00.000-07:00

So nearly the entire month of September has come and gone, and still no new pro-level Nikon camera anouncements. I am impatient! Are Canon and Nikon playing a game of "chicken" to see who goes first and who steals the thunder?

I'd also like to point out that we are just in the infancy of digital photography at this point. Advances in sensors will likely bring about vast increases in the total megapixel count in just the next few years. The elimination of the Anti-Moire filter (also called anti-aliasing) will likely point out all of the flaws in our current lenses. It should also make capture rates much faster as the on-board processors won't have to do as much work, increasing battery life and reducing heat output inside the camera body.

This is an exciting time to be a photographer. If anyone is curious, I currently only recommend a few cameras; the Nikon D300S, D700, and D3/D3S, and the Canon 1D mkIV, the 1DS mkIII and 5D/5D mkII. These are cameras with superlative processing in-body, making for incredibly sharp and colorful photos. The 7D doesn't make my list due to a slightly stronger anti-aliasing filter which softens the output a little too much for my preference. These bodies also use software trickery to reduce chromatic fringing most evident in older lenses. Don't believe me, browse Flickr and search for combinations of D200 and 50mm f1.4D. The staggering amount of blue fringing you'll find at the edges of bright/dark transitions really cut down on the clarity, color, and contrast of the photos, especially when compared to the same lens on a D300 or D700 body.

As with all of my comments, your experience may vary, but this is what I've observed, and one of the key reasons I'm not in any rush to replace my D300. The only useful gain I can make is to go to a D700, because the contrast and clarity of the bigger pixel sites on the full frame sensor, and its better resistance to heat-induced color-noise makes it THE body for Nikon users at this moment. I can only see wanting a Canon 5D mk2 if I were making films and wanted to precisely control depth of field on a budget. The doubling of megapixels really increases the color-noise in low light, and to me, photography is all about capturing colorful photos in low light!

Afterall, why spend all that money on lenses with the ability to resolve 90 line pairs per millimeter if you're just going to stick them on a body with a cheap anti-alising filter or no chromatic fringing reduction software on-board? Ansel Adams used to point out how any modern lens is appropriately corrected at f8, and he was right! However, only the best lenses are useful at f2.8 and below, and it is those lenses which are needed for low-light situations. Car photography is inherently a low-light (or controlled light) type of art. So... pick the body with the best low-light capability for your budget (for me it's the D300 at this point) and lenses which are "appropriately corrected" for use in low light, with larger apertures, and have at it now, before you get any older!*

*All of this advice will likely be out of date as soon as the new Nikons and Canons arrive! LOL

New Nikons?

2011-09-19T14:46:00.000-07:00

So where are they? We're all the way into September 2011, and still nothing new announced from Nikon? What's the story with that?

In other news, in spite of all of the hot air from proponents of Global Warming theories, the Arctic sea ice extent did not reach the low 2007 level, was more than six percent greater, and has already begun rebounding. Part of Al Gore's 24 hour-long boring seminar on why he's right and we're all stupid took place from Hawaii, where it SNOWED that very night. Yes folks, God does evidently have a sense of humor after all! Proof can be found on www.icecap.us. Snow in September on top of Mauna Kea ocurred on the night of Al's broadcast about "climate reality". Heh. Now that there's funny!

Old photos, new thoughts

2011-09-08T21:57:00.000-07:00

So, two weeks ago, while browsing through old photos looking for a car I'd misplaced, it suddenly dawned on me that my current photos, shot with my Nikon D300, are FAR sharper and more colorful than those shot with my first camera, a Canon D60. They are also better than those shot with my second camera, a Minolta Maxxum 7D. This was shocking, because I had been impressed with the Canon (photos of my kids still hanging on my wall from this one), and really impressed with the Konica-Minolta (image stabilized all the time). In summary, take all of my raving about my past cameras and throw it all in the trash!

In other news, still no announcements from Nikon. Will we even see a D800 or D400 before Christmas? I wonder.

Alas! Nikon disappoints me again.

2011-09-01T21:49:00.000-07:00

The 24th of August has come and gone, and still no new D4 or D800 camera bodies from Nikon. Does anyone else feel this way?

New Nikons on the 24th?

2011-08-09T12:49:00.000-07:00

So, supposedly we'll finally be seeing the new Nikon D4 and D800 around the 24th of August. A Wednesday. Hmmmmmmmm. I think it's about damn time! It might be the case that these were nearly ready to go back in March, but the massive earthquake and tsunami messed up the time table. I was thinking that Nikon did their announcements earlier in the summer, with the actual shipping dates arriving before Christmas. If they don't get them out on the market soon, with the stock market crashing, and the dollar's value dropping, it'll be hard to see how we'll be able to even afford new Japanese cameras over here.

Happy Birthday!

2011-08-01T20:29:00.000-07:00

To ME! Ha!

Prototypes versus Production

2011-07-25T16:27:00.001-07:00

Could just ONE car company bring out a nice looking sports coupe which looks EXACTLY like its prototype? Is that so much to ask?

New Nikons soon?

2011-07-22T14:41:00.000-07:00

The buzz is out that there's two new full-frame bodies coming from Nikon at once. People are concerned that it's a bit wierd that there's to be a D4 and D800 released at the same time, but not if you think about it from the video standpoint. Nikon is still playing catch-up to Canon in this area, so look for the D800 to be a "5D mkII fighter" with a big sensor.

I wonder what this will mean for the long-awaited D400? Will it fall in the 18-20mp range as anticipated? Will I even care, being that there will be a plethora of available D700s dumped on the market once the D800 lands? Mmmmmm, D700 deliciousness at discounted prices! Yummy! I can't wait for August!

2011-07-19T13:05:00.000-07:00

It's been too long since I've uploaded photos to my blog so here are a few I like. this is Apollo Performance's very nice WRX STi, shot with my two trusty SB-600 flashes and my Tamron SP AF 70-300mm Di VC lens.

2011-07-19T13:03:00.000-07:00

How's this for a night shot with two SB-600 flashes and my Tamron SP AF 70-300mm Di VC lens?

Light blogging recently

2011-07-19T12:56:00.000-07:00

Sorry for the lack of updates. Hectic end to my wife's school year, frantic preparation for a long summer trip, followed by a two-week long home-repair bender upon our return. Everything is beginning to return to normal now in the house, and I can finally get back to my writing. I'll be sharing some of my thoughts from photography that I had during my trip too, in a day or so.

Meanwhile... still no new cameras from Nikon or Canon, but there are more rumors now. Nikon, really... a 20mp D800 at $2500? Did you not see the Sony A850? Or the Sony A900? Canon, The 7D looks great on paper, but feels a little like a toy in the hands. I guess something had to be given up to hit that $1400 price point, right?

Tamron, could we please get the VC system in your 70-200mm f2.8 Di LD lens? Soon? The market needs an alternative for the super-pricy Nikon 70-200 VRII.

Bye-bye Nikon 80-200mm f2.8

2011-07-19T12:46:00.000-07:00

Well, Nikon, I tried your good old 80-200mm and when it's good, it's really good. But when it's off, like it is constantly for the AF system error at minimum focus distance, it's really horrible. Having seen this same performance from my old Sigma lens up close, I'd say the Sigma's optical formula was based on the Nikon 80-200, as they shared minimum focal distance AF errors and focus shift. I have a Tamron 70-300mm Di VC lens and it has no problems even when used on the same D300 camera body. When I analyzed my shooting, I figured out that I wasn't using the f2.8-f4.5 range anyway, because I didn't like the softness in the images. Above f5.6 both my Sigma and my Nikon were acceptably sharp, but if I'm going to shoot at f5.6, I can do that with my significantly-cheaper Tamron 70-300, and have image stabilization to boot! Yes, the Tamron VC is incredibly good. It enables me to take sharp, colorful, contrast-boosted shots in situations where I had to go to f2.8 before (f2.8 on my previous two lenses suffers from light diffraction inside the glass elements, causing less contrast and color, and a reduction in apparant sharpness). It's good enough that I'm considering getting Tamron's 17-50mm f2.8 Di VC lens in a month or two, making it time to sell off both my 50mm f1.4D (which I never shoot below f2.5 due to focus shift) and my 17-55mm f3.5-5.6 AF-S kit lens. There are benefits to be had from the Tamron, and if I can capture engine bay details at f2.8 or f3.5 between 35mm and 50mm of focal length, I'll be incredibly happy with the new Tamron. Now to save my pennies...

Climbing Aboard the Nikon Wagon

2011-04-26T13:34:00.000-07:00

Well, I've turned a page and made the move to a a more Nikon-centric lens collection with the addition of an AF 80-200mm f2.8 ED-IF "two-touch" unit. Focusing appears to be fast if a bit torquey. And, I'm happy to report, aside from the weird "AF false lock" problem that all of these lenses have with Nikon's DSLR logic, it is sharp at all apertures. Most importanly of all, the bokeh is really nice! You simply don't realize how much you miss smooth and creamy bokeh until you don't have it any more. With my prior "pro" lens, I was forced into using too much f-stop to obtain sharpness, and the penalty in the loss of bokeh took my photos from appearing "artistic" to looking more like snapshots. The new 80-200mm appears to solve this entirely, being sharp down to f3.2, just as long as I don't ask the lens to close-focus at 200mm focal length!

I can live with that; I don't need a macro lens.

I've also found that I have a hankering for a 35mm wide-aperture lens. There are two possibles; the new 35mm f1.8 G DX or the older 35mm f2D. Both offer considerable sharpness at f2.8, and both would be wider than my 50mm f1.4D and offer more DOF. My 18-55mm AF-S f3.5-5.6 just doesn't open up wide enough for my liking. If they'd made that lens an f2.8-4, with the middle ranges being f3.2 to f3.5, I don't think anyone would ever complain about it. It just needs a little more light and more bokeh. It can be plenty sharp at f8, but, and I'm surprised at this, my Tokina 12-24mm f4 is sharper at 24mm and f8 than the little Nikon DX zoom. The Tokina does cost four times as much though, so the old adage applies. "You get what you pay for!"

Well, lately I've paid for a new D300 body, a new 80-200mm f2.8 lens, and want to add a 35mm lens too. Someday a 180mm prime lens might arrive, but it won't be until long after Uncle Sam's sent me next year's tax dollars, that's for certain!

In with the NEW!

2011-03-16T15:21:00.000-07:00

Just got a new(er) D300 body. Have done one photo shoot with it. The output appears to be much sharper than what I could achieve with my "old" D300. Obviously, the old one needs to visit the Nikon Service Center here in California soon!

I had quite a bit of fun on this shoot!

The Great Interconnectedness of Things

2011-03-16T15:08:00.000-07:00

First of all, my thoughts and prayers go out to the population of Japan. That is one seriously put-upon group of people currently, and they deserve our support. We buy their cars, their electronics, their technology, etc. All of that has come to a screeching halt while they attempt to find the pieces and put them back together. Northeastern Japan will never be the same. I fear there's an entire generation lost, as photos have not shown a great deal of school-aged kids when showing families. At the time the quake struck, those kids would have been in school. Schools, plural, which were then washed away when the tsunami hammered the coast. If you can afford to donate, donate all that you can. Here's why:

We import their cars, and sell them at local dealerships around the country. This drives tax revenue for the states. Think of what a shortage of those cars would mean to the already low tax base? Even more state insolvency, that's what it means. We buy their electronics too. Long term shortages of these products will do the same thing as a shortage of cars, but on a smaller scale. It's a net cumulative effect which could have very dire consequences in our economy here in the US.

Finally, there's the looming threat of runaway nuclear reactors (3) and outgassing/radiation from burning or warming fuel rod storage pools (6) at the TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi power plant, all of which contain very damaging forms of long-term radiation. As someone who works outside to do photoshoots, dealing with long-term damage from the sun is a big concern of mine. Sunblock is an essential part of an outdoor photographer's kit. I'm wondering how long it will be before some clever soul creates a nuclear-proof sunblock lotion bolstered with potassium-iodine? While I don't fear glowing clouds over Los Angeles, the down-the-road implications of lung or skin cancer due to trace amounts of radioactive particulate matter entering my body doesn't exactly thrill me. Life is always tough, but it beats the heck out of the alternative.

I'm sure I'll have more to say about this in a day or two.

I can reset your Nikon AF system!

2011-01-25T14:36:00.000-08:00

They say that necessity breeds genius, right? Well, I've spent enough time playing with my own Nikon D300's AF system screws that I'm now 100% confident that I can reset anyone's Nikon digital camera which uses the dual-mirror, dual-stop adjustment system. The D90, D200, D300, D300s, D700, D3, D3s, D3x, and possibly other models like the D40, can all be adusted so that your lenses will focus on the selected spot, every time. Photos will pop with clarity and contrast like you've just purchased a new camera.

Your AF system focuses based on the position of a small mirror behind the main mirror inside your camera. This mirror rests against a small stop which isn't secured with any more than a very small Allen socket-head screw with an offset cam attached to it. As the screw is turned, the AF system brings the focus from near to far and back to near again. A second screw in the front does the same thing for the main mirror, changing what you see through the viewfinder. "Soft focus" is when the point of aim does not match where the AF system thinks it should be. AND... it's a lot more common than you think.

Would you like the confidence which comes from being able to manually-focus your camera on the head of a pin? Do you rely on your camera to make a living? Are your indoor or low-light shots currently a little fuzzy matter what you try? Is infinity out of your grasp in your landscape shots? If so, contact me, and I'll fix it for you. Why wait 6-8 weeks for Nikon to look at it. I can turn it around in just a couple days. AND, I can do it affordably, for just $50.00 plus insured shipping.

If I can't set it, or if I find another issue, then you don't have to pay me. It's as simple as that! Give me a call at 760-799-0368 if you have any questions or concerns, or email me through this blog and I'll share before and after photos from my own D300. You won't believe the difference an adjustment can make!

Testing AF systems

2011-01-20T18:52:00.001-08:00

Okay, after reviewing information available on the internet about various famous camera brands and models, I've come to the conclusion that perhaps cross-type phase detection AF sensors occasionally have focusing issues with bright subjects, no matter what brand. I've read reaports about the 1D mkIII being problematic when introduced, with some owners requiring an entirely new mirror box to be fitted to the cameara. I've heard of front-focusing complaints from D300 users, D700 users, 5D users, and the list seems to go on and on. I'd like to test of few of these on my own, if anyone would like to contribute a camera body or two.

The test is simple; shoot a brightly colored and lit car at a wide open apeture, over a rough surface like gravel, from a tripod, and note for a series of 10 separately-focused photos, how many are focused right on the nose of the car. In theory, if the car isn't moving, the score should be 10 out of 10. Right now I'm not sure my D300 is doing that. Every so often, using Single Point AF, it will focus completely in front of the subject, resulting in a clear focal point ahead of where I've intended it to be. When shooting a car a distance away, this gross error can be large and extremely annoying. Especially when it's caused me to waste really good light, like what happened this past Sunday on a shoot.

So, in essence, I want to "audition" new AF systems. I want to know, over the last 5 years or so, who has produced the most accurate AF system. Then I want to purchase one! Immediately! I am tired of blown-focus photos.

And, lest anyone think that perhaps it's user error, I shot with two Konica-Minolta 7D bodies which were as durable and accurate as I could have wished, no matter what I shot or how ham-fisted my efforts were. I simply pointed and it nailed the focus. They weren't "fast" but they got the job done again and again. I expected this level of competence from the Nikon D300, and thus far have been disappointed. Time for a change...

Shame on you, Nikon!

2011-01-10T13:06:00.001-08:00

The award for the most disappointing, underwelming, half-assed display goes to Nikon. By a landslide. No great glass on display. No 70-200mm f2.8 lens at all, and it didn't look like there was anything longer than 85mm in the single display case. There was a room, upstairs, in the back, and two glass display cases with a selection of cameras, the highest one being a D3s. That's it. No photos on the wall, no magazine covers, nada. A couple black couches and some Pepsi on a table (without ice even). Really.

Canon brought a stage decorated as a rain forest with Cirque du Soleil type dancers hanging from ropes attached to the ceiling. Photos on display everywhere. Nikon had just two "reps"; Canon had more than I could count, and that's just at the camera body station.

A big win for Canon at this trade show, obviously...

The 1D mk4 is a killer camera, but it's not made for guys with big hands like me. The support ridge under the shutter button is too small (narrow) and in the wrong location, forcing me to have to apply uncomfortable finger-tip pressure, to hold the camera with my right hand. It's surprisingly slender front-to-back. And it is fast! Very, very fast, with seemingly amazing low-light gathering at ISO 3200. That was quite surprising. Perhaps that body is worth the money? I rarely shoot in such low light, and if I did I don't know that I wouldn't be using a tripod anyway. I love low-ISO photos for their lack of grain and color noise. Not sure I need such terifficly-high ISOs for my work.

It takes one push on the "play" button AFTER a photo is shot to pull up the picture, and 12 pushes on the "+" button to magnify all the way in to see how sharp it is. Bad Canon, bad. I thought I read a review which said there's a one-touch custom function which goes to 100%, but no one at the counter knew how to set that up. Also, Canon bodies were not reset to "default" settings after each person put one down. By Sunday, when I browsed the show, it took me 5 or 10 minutes just to get it to the point where I could shoot a photo. The first question a rep should have asked is "What do you need your camera to do for you?". Followed by "Are you familiar with this model?" Very poor salesmanship from the Canon reps, and even worse (if possible) from Nikon.

I'll be interested in seeing if they improve at any photo expo trade shows later this spring. Obviously, there were no new introductions from either MFG... Which is total BS because we all know they have new stuff in development. Canon obviously feels that in-camera video is the wave of the future, and the 7D is certainly an impressive body. The AF is a touch slower than the 1D mk4, and of course it feels substantially lighter. My D300 feels more robust. The 7D does have crazy-high ISO too, like its big bro. It appears to be a very good "semi-pro" body for the APS-C crowd. Adding the wireless flash is nice, but they didn't have a flash in the case, and weren't showing or telling folks about it. If they were car salesmen, they would starve!

CES= interesting but disappointing from the pro-shooter crossover standpoint.

The BIG NEWS for CES 2011!

2011-01-05T21:47:00.000-08:00

So far the biggest news, for me, is that there's simply no big news at all from Canon or Nikon. Nada. Zero. Zip. No planned new product announcements for Nikon. Do they simply not care, or are they planning something whoppingly fantastic that we'll all (Nikon users) want to rush out and buy as soon as we here about it?

I'm sensing a lull in the action from the majors, and the longer this dry spell continues, the more antsy I, and other pro photographers, are growing. Do we replace used cameras with the same model again, and then curse when some new piece just pops out of thin air later in the year? Some people shoot FAR more photos than I do, and they really burn through shutters. For them, buying a new camera isn't an issue. For me, when I make just one camera purchase every three years or so, selecting the right camera is a REALLY BIG DEAL. Because of this, and the lack of news from Nikon, I've been carefully considering a few Canon bodies. That means new glass (I don't use many lenses) and new accessories too, and a whole lot of expense. Which is why I always look around tax time...

Could someone please point out to the majors that I'm not the only one looking to spend tax return money on camera gear? Perhaps a little better timing of your new cameras would help separate me from my funds...

Time for some new photos!

2010-12-30T19:07:00.000-08:00

Ok, I promised new photos from the Tamron SP 70-300mm f-5.6 DI VC USD, so here they are! BTW-memo to Tamron; please shorten the name of your lenses!

BTW-DXOMark has tested this lens and doesn't think very highly of it. I feel they may have had a bad sample because it tested just so-so on every Nikon body. I've tried it on my D300 and a friends D700 and was amazed at how well it worked with the full frame sensor and giant light-gathering pixels. It's almost enough to sway me to buy a D700!

Clicking on a photo will bring up a larger version of the photo. The eyes are cropped 100% from the first photo. All were shot on my D300 in 14-bit RAW and converted to JPG by Photoshop CS4.

What makes a camera "great"?

2010-12-30T18:33:00.000-08:00

On the eve of the CES show, I've been giving some thought to the weighty topic of what, exactly, constitutes a "great" camera body. It's not the sheer number of pixels a manufacturer can cram on one sensor (although the ad people would have you believe that). What use is 21 or 24 megapixels if the AF is so slow that you miss the shot? Or if the frame rate drops so slow in 14-bit RAW as to nearly make the camera as slow as a point-and-shoot? Of course, I'm exaggerating for effect, as none of the higher-end prosumer or professional camera bodies are nearly this bad, but it highlights a point; camera MFGs are driven by what they think photographers need, or more importantly, will buy. And they're also governed by their own corporate culture, which is a big factor in Japan.

My needs are interesting at the moment. On one hand, I'd love to have high megapixels, for high detail capture. On the other hand, I want the cameras to blast off a high frame rate. Finally, I want incredible clarity and sharpness from my images. The D300, on paper, looks mighty capable. 12.3 megapixels, with a lot of color capturing potential, and decent resolution. What it does not deliver is speed (falls to around 2.5 FPS maximum in 14-bit RAW color mode) or clarity (have you seen straight from the camera JPGS?). So... I can shoot slowly in RAW, and take forever converting each image by hand (no, CaptureNX does not do a great job with batch-processing RAW files; blacks get blotchy), or I can shoot relatively fast (5-6 fps) in 12-bit color and suffer the wrath of camera-butchered JPGs. Thom Hogan assures me that Nikon camera bodies are the sharpest, when shot in RAW. But what happens when I need faster performance. Nikon has no answer for that.

Then there's Canon, whose current pro bodes, the 1D MarkIV and the 1Ds MarkIII, are the fastest things out there. A burning 10 fps for the 1D model, and 5 fps for the 1Ds (which is processing 21 megapixels!). The Canon D700 is marginally faster in JPG mode, but has 9 megapixels less on it's full-frame sensor. Where the Canon's deliver sharp, clear JPGs from the camera, the Nikons don't.

So, if I am to move from the D300, which way do I go. Either way, for a pro-level body, it's a ton of money. If I stick with Nikon, I don't have to swap out my lenses (although I wouldn't mind because Thom also assures me that AF speed and accuracy will improve if I'm using Nikon lenses). If I go to Canon, the price goes up, especially for image-stabilized "L" lenses.

What about a combination of older Canon "1D" body and a sharp L lens like a non-IS f2.8 70-200mm lens? Both can be had for less than the cost of just one new Nikon D700. If I'm dealing with these questions, how many others are too? Tax time is right around the corner, and camera MFGs need to realize this, and begin to time new camera releases for this important time. Will there be any fantastic new camera bodies from Canon or Nikon at the CES show? I sure as heck hope so, and that the prices will be more in line with our new world economy. My career is hanging on it

Nothing much to say. This is good.

2010-12-21T18:27:00.001-08:00

Anyone at all who follows my little blog knows I typically have a lot to say about any subject, however, lately, I haven't felt like saying much at all. There's work to be done, and the D300 it focusing well now, so I haven't had cause to complain. In truth, I should be complimenting that little bugger. It's robust, produces amazing colors, exposes photos generally well, if a little on the light side (I think the shutter is slowing down now), and offers adjustments for almost every possible feature a person can think of... except... fully-customizable AF points. There should be more AF point options. Like a diamond-shaped box of points, a straight-line of points, or three vertical lines of points. My point being, simply having 51 schizo points in a 3D self-predicting matrix, or 51 "dumb" points, or 21 or 9, all arranged in rectangular orientations, is not adequate.

My first digital camera had just one AF point. My first DSLR, an old Canon D60, had three. My Konica-Minolta 7D bodies had 11, but some were wider than others, which worked better for diagonally-framed panned shots of cars. The D300 takes the cake for the body with the most useless AF points. Only the 9 in the center are super-sensitive cross points, able to pick up both vertical and horizontal lines for contrast. The other 42 points are like an NFL team's Special Teams unit. Sure, they're useful occasionally, but if you depend on them to win the game you're going to be sorely disappointed.

What I find myself doing, is simply using only one point. Period. Why? Because I control it fully. It doesn't migrate around the image, choosing semi-random spots based on similar contrast and brightness to the original focus point. Nor, do I ever have to wonder "Did I nail the focus on that critical image? Should I shoot it again?". Light is fleeting. Doing what I do involves shooting cars at sunset or sunrise, in sometimes less than optimal conditions, and doing so in a rapid manner. Reshooting photos because the 3D-Tracking 51-point AF mode missed the key point in the photograph is silly and time-consuming, which then wastes light I can never get back. Does this make me a control freak? I sure hope so!

The next time you go to purchase a camera, ask yourself, does it have the capability to focus EXACTLY where I need it to focus, time after time? You'll find you'll be making far better photos with a camera with just one AF sensor, than a camera with one hundred!

New Tamron lens; Hubba hubba!

2010-12-21T16:59:00.000-08:00

Just got the new Tamron SP AF 70-300mm LD Di VC, and I've got to say, this is the first time I've had a "Wow!" moment with my Nikon D300 body. I had the chance to shoot some models in Texas last month (November 2010) and all I can say is, "What is Tamron thinking selling this lens for as little as they do? Every review says that the image stabilization is like "magic" but until you try it, I guarantee you've never seen anything like it before. One caveat, it does not work as well for slower speed panning as you might think. There's a good reason why (I suspect). When the camera body refocuses, as it does in Continual AF mode, the VC system attempts to "recenter" on the new point. If you're using just one AF point, it's not too bad, and the image only jumps occasionally in the viewfinder. But, if you, like many people, like using the 51, 21, or 9 point AF modes, the action of the VC becomes a bit helter-skelter. Often, it jumps right as the shutter is released, causing just a little bit of unnecessary blur in the resulting image. I found the best panned images came from turning off the VC, at the 1/125 and 1/160th second shutter speeds I was using as a test. It badly needs a panning mode switch.

With that said, however, it is pure magic for kids, people, pets, and anything much slower moving. Image sharpness and contrast is excellent, even wide open, on the Nikon D300 APS-C sensor. Don't look at this as an expensive consumer-grade zoom lens. Consider it a very sharp, image-stabilized 70-200mm f4.5 lens with the added benefit of another 100mm of focal length. A viable alternative to Canon's 70-200mm f4 "L" IS lens which has just come out, but at less than half the street cost. THAT is money you can take to the bank!

I'll have some photos to share, posted in a little bit.

Tired of Waiting!

2010-09-22T13:11:00.000-07:00

Well, I guess I'm like most of the former Minolta users now. I'm tired. The formula was very simple initially; take the latest sensor and install it in a 7D body. We liked the 7D body. It was robust. It was ergonomic. It had everything conveniently placed, designed as it was by people who actually take photographs. The AF system worked well, and could PREDICTIVE FOCUS on moving objects. It's downside was that it "only" had 6.1 megapixels when it debuted.

Simple, right?

Evidently not, if Sony's chosen to discontinue the A900 and A850 cameras, along with the APS-C sized A700 body, all during the same 10 month span, without introducting any sort of replacement at all. See, I didn't buy an A850/900 because I didn't like them. I didn't buy one because life got in the way of those plans, and I've had two new, hungry little mouths to feed over the past two years. In 2008, the A900 debuted. By mid-2010, it's gone. For those of us starting to get our feet back under us, this effectively removes Sony from any consideration at all for a new camera purchase.

Way to go and shoot yourself in the foot. Is this what your marketing geniuses told you to do?

So that's it for me. I'm done waiting. I'm going to sell all of my Minolta gear. Minolta is no more, and the only ghost which remains is clearly uninterested in the needs of a professional photographer.

Double ARRRGGGGGHHHHH!

2010-09-21T09:51:00.001-07:00

Sony, what is wrong with you?

Well, the word I've read and the photos I've seen this morning from Sony's Photokina 2010 booth have been semi-disappointing. HOWEVER... there was one interesting thing I noted. The "prototype A700 replacement" is listed as using "translucent mirror technology"! It wasn't listed that way at the PMA show this spring, though it looks as if they're using the same model mock-up.

As I'd thought once before, out loud, in this blog, it is easier and cheaper to build boxy cameras without all that flappy-mirror nonsense inside. If they have chosen to revamp their A750 to take advantage of the new EXMOR-R sensor's "double light gathering sensitivity" by installing it in a pellicle mirror camera, I say "Bravo!" to them. That might give them the capability to debut an 18mp body which will shoot 10 frames per second in 12-bit color. Even if the sensor and processor can do 14-bit color, I don't see Sony adding the memory or processor speed to crunch those kinds of numbers to the A7xx series. Perhap in an A9xx body, maybe. In fact, if they're doing this for the A7xx, it's as close to a sure bet as it possibly can be that the A9xx will also share this pellicle design, as it will undoubtedly have the 36.4mp Full-Frame EXMOR-R sensor they developed, or a variant thereof. 35 or 36 megapixels with 10 frames per second speed would trump everyone's current and forecast DSLR bodies.

I can see a sizeable increase in battery life coming, without the mirror assembly. I can also see an increase in autofocus precision, though overly bright subjects might cause a problem due to a lack of contrast if they don't reflect properly off the pellicle mirror.

Of course, this is all just conjecture on my part, but my guess about the pellicle mirror design reaching the A7xx appears to be on the mark. I'll go out on a limb and state that I think this will definitely reach the A9xx body too, and this is the reason there's no A9xx or A7xx ready for Photokina. Disappointing for me, as I was expecting there to be some sort of progress displayed in the Alpha area this week. At this moment, it appears Sony's not ready to completely tip their hand.

It's clear that Sony wants some sort of technological advantage over its rivals in the DSLR market, more than simply a megapixel advantage, and that they're unwilling to compromise on their ideas just to have a better display at a popular show.

So here's my guess as to the updated A7xx specs:
New name- the Alpha A75 (fits with the current A33/A55 nomenclature)
18.2mp or higher pixel count from the EXMOR-R design APS-C sensor
Pellical mirror with constant Phase-Detection focusing
10 FPS or better
Magnesium body with seals (why not if the body's cheaper to make without the mirror assembly)
1080p movie mode (like I care about that, I'm a photographer!) with real-time focusing for SSM lenses (3rd party lens makers had better step up their lens programming updates! Sigma, I'm looking at you!)
Dual card memory options, Compact Flash and Memory Stick Pro

Let's see if my crystal ball is correct.

ARRRRRGGGGGHHHHH!

2010-09-20T14:06:00.000-07:00

Okay, so Photokina starts tomorrow in Germany, and Sony's been so tight-lipped about their upcoming introductions that no one has any info on the web today, at all! No leaks, no "here's what they're going to introduce", etc. How do they expect us to get all crazy about their new cameras if they don't release any teaser information? Will Photokina serve as the "teaser" and no cameras will be available for 6 more months? While this would give me time to save for a full-frame A950, or APS-C frame A750 body, it doesn't make me very happy. I hate waiting.

Why the long wait? Do they simply want to milk the most out of the A900/A850 platform while they're still in stores? Does Sony's marketing arm know that they're losing sales every day their new cameras aren't on the market, and the offerings from Canon and Nikon are? I'm sure they must. Inventory Management 101 must have been in their college course curriculum somewhere! Wil the cameras instead be instantly available as soon as Photokina is over? In time for Christmas 2010?

All of this puzzles me, as word came out recently that the A580 wouldn't be available until the first quarter of 2011! Yikes! They introduced that camera in August! That makes for a 5 month ramp-up time in a hotly-contested category! Perhaps this is normal in the industry, and other makers simply wait until they have the cameras ready to ship before releasing the news. Still, weren't bodies made available to reviewers for testing? Hmmmmmm, phased roll-out around the world? I really don't know, and am simply asking a ton of questions aimlessly in hopes that someone at Sony might actually read this and respond to me.

I won't hold my breath!

Adjusting the Nikon D300 Auto Focus system

2010-08-26T15:55:00.001-07:00

Caution: I am not a repair technician. This is just what I did on my own D300 body.

First, there are two hex screws inside the mirror box on the left side (right side as you're look face-on at the camera). The one closest to the mounting ring adjusts the focus of the AF-focused image on the viewfinder's screen. It provides the mirror's stop position. The second, and more important screw is behind the main mirror, and adjusts the stop for the AF system mirror. This is the main one you'll want to adjust if you're having a focus issue.

Use a fixed focal length lens. Use a fixed focal length lens. Use a GOOD fixed focal length lens. If you don't have one (which is known to be properly calibrated) go and rent one. I had months of trial-and-error using my reasonably-expensive Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens until I realized that it was subject to about a 1.5" focusing error at 6 feet (minimum focusing distance for that lens). Using my 50mm f1.4 was a cinch, and I ended up finally nailing the focus in just a few minutes time with it. Once you have it set at a small, but sharp f-stop (I used f2.0 on my f1.4 lens, it still has very narrow depth of field), check it with all of your lenses (and teleconverters).

The hex screws work on eccentric-shaped pins. Moving the hex wrench up moves the pin back, moving the hex wrench down moves the pin forward. There is a VERY small range of adjustment needed to move the focus point quite a bit. For the front hex head, up on the stop pin moves the focused image closer to your eyeball. Down on the stop pin moves it farther from your eyeball. It is a reflected image off the mirror, after all. Attention: Do not adjust this until AFTER the camera is taking sharp photos, confirmed on your monitor. For the rear hex head, down on the pin moves the focus FARTHER from the camera, while up moves it CLOSER to the camera. In this case you are moving the image forward and back on the focus sensors mounted in the floor of the mirror box. Hopefully your lens is doing its best to resolve the image properly at the sensor plane.

If you find you're taking big swings at it, something is wrong with your lens (as I figured out somewhat late). Any focusing error up close will be grossly magnified when shooting in the distance. If you optimize your AF system witha front-focusing lens, shooting at infinity will be impossible (it will all be blurry).

On the bright side, if you've gotten to the point where you want to try this and you simply cannot send your camera to Nikon for 3 weeks, give this a shot. It's fairly difficult to massively screw up your camera beyond the point it already is, and if you do, there's always Nikon Service to fix it.

BTW-I used both the "Sensor Cleaning Mode" to adjust the screws and occasionally simply lifted the mirror carefully with my finger and used the allen key on it. Be prepared to have to dust off your sensor if you use the "Sensor cleaning mode" as all sorts of dust will land on it while the shutter is open.

Good luck!

More Nikon Autofocus thoughts

2010-08-25T15:03:00.000-07:00

First, never attempt to reset your focusing with a zoom lens. My 70-200mm f2.8 Sigma has a close-focusing error at minimal focus distance, and this was causing me to screw up my attempt to reset my AF system on my D300. I was zooming in on something close (to better see where the area of sharp focus was). Once I went to the Nikon 50mm f1.4 body, things went much smoother. Now I'm getting pretty much laser-like images, all the way down to wide open settings, so I'm much happier.

Second, using single-point AF in the dark sucks on the D300. Cars in the darm (on a lit track) must not offer as much contrast for a single point to grab onto. Eventually I went to the 9-point grouped sensor setting and began to get sharp photos. It's very frustrating switching through the modes and getting shot after blurry shot. The 51-point "3D mode" simply does not work well for cars. There's too much area covered by the points, and it often grabs focus on a point outside the area the car occupies, resulting in out-of-focus photos. At a track, where there's often a white wall visible in the dark, the Nikon AF will CONSISTENTLY find that white wall in 51-point mode. Grrrrrrrrr. 9-point AF works well. I'd love to see Nikon add a 15-point mode, where it adds 3 more sensors to the left and right of the 9-point square, for a more horizontal configuration friendlier to cars. I don't need the additional 6 vertical points of the much slower-to-focus 21-point mode. Pretty please, Nikon? Can I have this in the next software update? I'm sure no one is reading this blog.

Third, though my 50mm f1.4 is the sharpest lens I own by far, its incredibly-slow focusing system will NOT capture cars in real-time. I discovered this in Long Beach in April, at the Formula Drift event, and rediscovered it in Las Vegas last weekend. My cheap 18-55mm Nikon "kit" lens is faster (though not by much). As a result I wound up using my much heavier Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens through the night. Boy did this make my arms tired!

That's all for now!

Misc. Sony thoughts

2010-08-25T14:40:00.000-07:00

Photokina is nearly here and what this? Finally! A hint, a sniff, a wiff of something juicy coming from Sony!
http://ylovephoto.com/en/cat/slr/sony/sony-alpha-950/http://ylovephoto.com/en/cat/slr/sony/sony-alpha-950/

An A750 to be announced at Photokina! An A950 coming too? Possibly with 32mp and four processing Bionz processing engines? Well, that would just float my boat! Also rumored, an A820 which is essentially a rebadged A900? Hmmmmmm, this would be a very good lineup, if all of these cameras hit their marks.

My guess at prices:
A750 $1,199 USD 16.2 APS-C frame, dual-Bionz (translucent mirror and high frame rate of 8-9 FPS?)
A820 $1,699 USD full-frame, 24.6mp dual-Bionz (translucent mirror and 5 FPS again?)
A950 $2,250-2,500 USD 32 megapixels?!?! (translucent mirror, 5 FPS frame rate?)

What would wedding photographers pay for a high-res photo tool which doesn't go KER-THUNK when a photo's been snapped? I know noise was a criticism rightly leveled at the first generation of Alpha full-frame bodies so perhaps this is an example of Sony thinking "outside the box"?

Whatever the case, I'm getting excited for news from Photokina now. Just a month away! Sony, don't let me down!

Of the bunch I'm the least confident in my guess about the A950's price. I can only see Sony as being very aggressive at this point, due to the economy and market forces. If, like Thom Hogan suggests, they're killing off the 24mp FF sensor, and have some to use up, then the A820 could be the last that we see of that one. On the other hand I do think it's likely that they could introduce a significantly faster A950 using this same sensor, but with more processing power behind it, to take the old A900 chassis and launch it into the frame rate of the D3/D3X bodies.

But what about the translucent mirrors they're using on the A560 and A580 bodies. Hmmmmmmm. Those are quite interesting. Canon used to do that a long time ago with their "N"-denoted film bodies (as a high speed, sports-ready camera). I might be VERY interested in an A750 with 16.2mp (though only APS-C sized) and a really high frame rate with continuous auto focusing. That's something they have an issue with in the A700/A850/A900 bodies as I've pointed out before. For all sorts of "normal" photography, they're fine. For motorsports, not so fine.

From the mechanical standpoint, it would be FAR less expensive to go to a translucent mirror on the FF bodies. Quieter, cheaper to produce, and possibly the first with "electronic shutter" rather than an actual blade shutter. The shutter might not get the axe with this series of cameras, but certainly this shows that Sony is thinking about doing away with the shutter altogether.

Recent Learnings

2010-08-16T15:06:00.001-07:00

First, my Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 doesn't focus right up close. It close-focuses. When I adjust the D300's focusing system to work up close, then it far-focuses on far subjects. The problem is in the lens, not the body.

Second, I learned from Thom Hogan (Nikon shooter par excellence and camera gear writer) that the D3/D700 uses Nikon's first in-house developed sensor. I thought it was a Sony sensor. Nikon is rumored to be doing a new sensor for an upcoming "D4" body, and won't use the 24mp Sony sensor from the D3X, so Sony's rumored to be considering dropping full frame camera bodies completely. The A900 is out of production, and the A850, while still available, is not currently in production either. No idea what Sony's going to do for a replacement. Thom has some very good guesses on his website so look him up if you want to know more.

This news makes my upcoming camera purchase decision just that much more difficult. Will there be any A900/A850 bodies I can buy? Will there be a better "D700" coming out this fall? Will the new Sony A700 replacement be of sufficient quality and construction to tempt me to an APS-C sensor of 15.2mp?

Decisions, decisions, decisions...

Still no new Sony A7XX?

2010-08-06T22:07:00.000-07:00

Hmmmmm, I've read on a couple sites now that Sony might have something like an A950 coming down the pipe this fall, with a 32MP EXMOR sensor. I wonder if that will be the new "back-lit" design that the Sony technology newletter was talking about?

Sony, if you happen to ever read this blog (unlikely) I'd sure appreciate an A900 body with the sensor from the Nikon D3/D700 cameras. That's it. That's all I need. If you're feeling the urge to be competitive, you could stretch it to 14 or 15MP on a full-frame sensor, but don't do that if you're going to dramatically increase image noise.

Thatisall. You are dismissed! LOL!

Nikon D300 focusing system flaw?

2010-07-27T18:02:00.001-07:00

After working with my camera for the last 4 days I have to ask; does the Nikon D300's AF system have a focusing flaw? If I shoot my Nikon 50mm f1.4D from f1.4 to f2.0 (one and a half stops) it will consistently focus ahead of the point of aim (POA for shorthand). At 2.2 it's reasonably sharp for its very shallow depth of field (DOF). From f2.5 and on up, it's fantastic! Now that I have the AF system placing the point of focus and POA together at the sensor plane I can finally see some terrific results at wider apetures. Prior to my readjustment, f5 or f5.6 was the minimum I could use on my big Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens. Forget about f2.8-f3.5... they don't exist! Now, however, even f3.2 is on the mark, though just a tad soft. I was practicing in the middle of the day. In low light I'm sure f3.2 would be fine.

But this leads me to the great "focus shift" or "aperture shift" question... Is the D300 flawed? I get the same behavior with two high-quality, wide-apeture lenses. One is just a D lens, but it's a well-respected, tack-sharp lens. The other is expensive because it's got big glass elements inside and zooms to 200mm. In my book, both should be useable all the way to their minimum apetures. Through the viewfinder, the images look sharp when focused (don't forget this is with the lens wide open) but when exposed, what you get at the imager varies wildly with changes in the f-stop. If you adjust the camera so that f1.4-2.0 is useable on the 50mm D lens, then the AF is massively pushed too far back at f5.6-f8. I've been doing this for four long days now, in the CA desert heat, confirming results on my laptop, and as sure as a bear craps in the woods, I can reproduce this one hundred percent of the time. I even know exactly how far to turn the AF mirror stop to make the point of focus walk closer or farther.

Now my "kit lens" an 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 lens will do just a little bit of this, but it's wide open values aren't as great as the f2.8 of the Sigma or the massive f1.4 of the Nikon D prime. The only other lens I have to try is a Tokina 12-24mm f4 which has to be "pushed" +20 in the AF Fine Tune setting even AFTER the AF system's been adjusted! It clearly has an issue which will probably require going in for service. Truthfully, I use this lens for precisely two photos with ever car photo shoot. I'm not going to miss it very much while it's away having its tiny electronic brain fiddled with. Besides, it does actually work at +20 and f4, and I gain a ton of depth of field at f8 to f11, so it's not really troubling me. It's the 50mm and the big Sigma I use ninety percent of the time.

So why does the D300 do this? I originally bought a 50mm f1.8 for this body back in 2008, and sold it in 2009 because it had this same trait. I thought it was just a flaw with that Chinese-made plasticky-cheap Nikon lens. Has anyone else noticed this with their D300 or D700 (which uses the same AF system)?

You don't know what you've got 'til it's gone!

2010-07-27T17:47:00.000-07:00

File this under Camera Gripes v3.0: Eye-start auto-focusing... Not something you really think about if you don't have it. The camera starts focusing when you squeeze the shutter button down, right? Well, have you ever thought about the motion this induces into the camera body? Probably not. I hadn't, until I was trying to reset my Nikon D300's AF system, and was shooting a ton of photo each day with my big, heavy Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 lens attached. That's quite a handful on the already-stout D300 body! Squeezing down on the shutter with tired fingers, by the third day I was noticing a dramatic amount of camera shake. That's when it dawned on me, Minolta knew this years ago! My 700si film body has it. My Konica-Minolta 7D digital camera had it. I just didn't think it was something I'd really miss all that much. Guess what? I do. I really do miss it. I'm tired of my hands hurting from gripping this heavy body while squeezing a shutter button at a wierd angle (it's the right angle for fingers, but the wrong angle for camera shake) or having to squeeze the AF-ON button on the back of the camera. Eye-start was bloody brilliant!

And there's STILL no word from Sony about a replacement for the A700. Yes I've seen the photos and vids of the camera from the PMAs. It looks nice, but a bit underwhelming. For once it would be fantastic if Sony produced that body for the "pro-sumer APS-C" crowd, and unleased a full-frame-with-pop-up-flash body for the pros who'd like to use the Minolta wireless flash system. That Minolta system DOES work better than the Nikon variant, I must say honestly. More range, more control, easier activation, no hidden menus in each flash unit. I can see advantages to both systems though.

Am I going to be stuck buying a Sony A900 when my taxes come in next February? 24MP is enticing, but unnecessary compared to a light- and color-sensitive FF sensor like the D700 has. Doesn't Sony want to be in that market or do they have some sort of "exclusive" deal with Nikon for a sensor that they themselves produce?

Life's little irritations!

2010-07-22T11:58:00.000-07:00

Politics: Get off GW Bush's back, everyone. He had a Dem Congress since 2006 (currently the lowest approval rating of any Congress ever!), and all of this country's fiscal problems can be traced directly to Democrat-enacted laws and policies. Democrats control the bankrupt states, and bankrupt cities and yet, somehow Obama got elected by promising "Change". He has totally failed to deliver "Change" from the crap which has gotten us into the hole we're in. He promised no new taxes, budget cuts, pay-as-you-go, pre-bill-signing "sunlight" periods, and has reneged on all of these promise so far. Obama fans, how long will you continue carrying the water for this embarrassment of a President?

Sony: Get off your conceited butts and deliver a full-frame replacement for the A700 already! Geez! The KM 7D was a brilliant camera which was released about two years too late to save Konica-Minolta. You are continuing that disastrous trend. The A750 needs to be released TODAY in order to compete with the Nikon D700 and whatever Canon makes in the cheap full-frame market. Oh wait, neither Canon nor Nikon make a "cheap" full frame camera anymore, unless the Nikon F6 can be counted.

On focusing: Why is it so difficult to have a camera which focuses properly 100% of the time. With tiny viewfinders and no cross-prism focusing aids, it's impossible to hand-focus a DSLR. AF systems need to recognize this fact and step up the game!

Camera Gripes, V 2.0

2010-06-08T16:43:00.000-07:00

Newbies shoot in bright sunlight, and overexpose everything. Pros want to shoot in as low a light level as they can possibly get, and want to underexpose to create "mood". Newbies outnumber professionals by at least 10:1, if not more. As a result, we get the Sony a550; a camera which answers none of the questions that professionals ask while solving problems newbies never knew they even had.

Sony, where's the A700 replacement and will it have the full-frame sensor you make for the D700, and a handy pop-up flash so it can control the wireless flash system?

On the other end of Sony's schizophrenic lineup is the A850/A900 cameras. So close in specs that they might as well be the very same camera, yet one sells for $1900 and the other for $2699. Neither one will control the wireless flash system. Just a hint guys, Minolta built film cameras for at least two DECADES with full-size viewfinders which could control the wireless flash system!

So, please build a full-frame 12.4 MP camera with pop-up wireless flash control! Soon!

So things are hectic with 3 kids here...

2010-06-07T14:27:00.000-07:00

Yeah, my blog's become like an orphan lately. There's really no good excuse I can offer except to say by the time 9 PM rolls around each day, I'm fairly well exhausted. The kids just suck energy right out of you with their needs, whining, and constant messes. When they smile it's heavenly. When they scream it's ear-shattering, and not conducive to coherent writing. Ah well, there will have to be some changes happening this summer, that's for certain. With all three kids and my wife home all day long, my nerves will be toast!

In other news, oil is still leaking into the Gulf. (C'mon BP, get your act together before Obama bans all oil-fueled devices!) Helen Thomas just got herself canned by being incredibly-insensitive to Israel's desire not to be bombed into oblivion by neighboring arab populations. I saw a great quote the other day. "If Musims laid down their weapons, there would be peace. If Israelis laid down their weapons, there'd be no Israel." Fact: rockets were shipped by Iran to Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Fact: Hamas bombed civilian populations in Israel with these rockets. Where's the condemnation for that? Israeli commandos boarded a ship running a legitmate maritime blockade of WEAPONS; all other aid gets through to Hamas and the Gazans.

In acts of unbetold transparency, the Obama White House has offered positions to at least two individuals running in Federal elections. That's a big-time felony, but will it ever be investigated? Nope. Making this even better is the fact that Rep. Sestak wasn't eligible to hold the "non-paying advisory position" on the WH security council because he's a sitting politician! So were they simply stupid, or did they offer him a sweeter, paying position in the WH, and he told them where to stick it? Are they lying about it now? They cannot blast him in the media though because NOW that he beat Arlen Specter in the Dem Primary, they need him to win that seat. He's going to run on an anti-Obama platform this fall. Just watch and see...

Obama went to PA last week, and only one politician came out to meet him at the airport. Heh. Sarah Palin goes ANYWHERE and people flock from all over to hear her speak, including politicians! Heh! November will be fun.

Baby Jack's now 5 months old, and eating constantly. I've never seen a child eat so often at 5 months old. No, he's still not sleeping through the night, as much as I'd like him to start doing that very soon. My wife Betsy's just happy she gets to go through a summer without being pregnant for the first time in two year! Yes, we live in a desert, and yes, summers are predictably miserable. Evidently they're worse if you're pregnant, or so she says. LOL

New month, new post!

2010-04-06T13:54:00.000-07:00

Ah ha! April is here, and with it, warm spring weather in the desert. Just a few months away from the start of the summer Monsoon season! Yay! Okay, so I do enjoy lightning storms. So sue me.

On another note, my business is finally picking up again. There's the Formula Drift opening round to shoot in Long Beach this coming weekend, the Full Race R14 to shoot next week, more cars in LA being finished currently, and the 25th anniversary of the Fabulous Fords show in LA on April 25th (I don't think that's a coincidence). Must "write like the wind" now! Heh.

Going to Buttonwillow Raceway

2010-03-24T15:32:00.000-07:00

I'm off to the track this weekend. Unfortunately, not behind the wheel of a fun car. I'll be shooting other peoples' fun cars. Not fun. Work, truthfully. I'm hoping it won't be too hot, and that I can avoid serious sunburn while there.

On a happier note, my baby boy, Jack, has doubled in weight since his birth January 4th! Way (weigh?) to go, Jack!

Obamacare or Else!

2010-03-24T15:25:00.000-07:00

Well, they've passed it, but is it Constitutional? Can the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution be used to FORCE someone to participate in commerce under the penalty of taxes or jail time? It all depends on who you're asking. Liberals see no problem with government expansion into this facet of their lives. Conservatives have a huge problem with it, and want nothing to do with being forced to buy anything.

Disingenously, Dems are claiming that this is like having to purchase car insurance. No one is forced to buy a car. Likewise, no one is forced to drive. You can own a car WITHOUT having a driver's license, and simply never drive it. You can have a driver's license and never own a car. It is the ACT of driving the car on the road which requires insurance, and that happens to be a STATE requirement in order to protect anyone you might hit with your car while driving. So, being forced to purchase insurance, for no other reason other than being alive in the United States today is like being required (by a State) to have valid insurance in the event you wreck and cause serious harm to someone else's life or property. Um, that doesn't compute, guys. Try again.

Do Democrats "Get It"?

2010-01-20T10:54:00.000-08:00

I don't think that they do. Several members of the House and the Senate have gone on record last night and this morning, after Scott Brown's historic victory, and have said that they need to "rethink the health care bill". That's not what I heard voters saying in New Jersey, Virginia, and Massachusetts. That's not what the tea party rally in Washington DC, in front of the Capitol building said when we filled the streets and the Memorial grounds with bodies holding signs. We didn't say "go back to the drawing board". We said "NO"!

Perhaps it's something in the liberal mindset which prevents them from connecting with the people they seek to rule? It's the old "we're better educated, better funded, and more experienced, so we'll tell you what to do" approach. And guess what? It's just been rejected thrice.

I'm sure a wiser man than I could draw a lengthy parable about Jesus and Peter's thrice-heard denial, and the the rejection of the policies of Barack Obama by the independents, and some conservative Blue-Dog Democrats. I won't.

I don't simply want Barack Obama to fail. I want him to go away, and take his Socialism with him. I think the people of Massachusetts feel the same way. I'm beginning to suspect that the Dems in both Houses of Congress might soon share this view too.

Climate Change: When It's Cold, It's Hot!

2010-01-11T15:55:00.000-08:00

Winning the award, by a mile, for the stupidest "Climate Change Claim" I've ever heard has to be "All of this cold is due to Global Warming." Now, for those who follow the AGW craze, you already know that warm ocean currents control our climate. This is nothing new. Al Gore and his minions have all claimed that we've been warming the oceans, melting the ice caps, and causing unusually-severe weather world-wide.

Only we haven't. Yes, the El Nino/La Nina swings from warm to cool in the Pacific do drive changes in the Jet Stream, but it has always done this, and likely always will. Just because we've recently learned about a process doesn't mean it hasn't been doing it for years. But, according to AGW scientists, apparently THIS winter's Modiki (Japanese for "different") El Nino is not in the same location as past El Nino's were. So the Jet Stream has changed position wildly, bringing stinging cold and snowstorms to the US.

The AGW nuts are chanting "See, we told you so!" They're claiming "extreme weather" because, lately, there just hasn't been much of that. No crazy Category 6 hurricanes. No "Night of the Twister" tornado outbreaks. Just lots of cold air blowing down from the northlands. They're claiming this "cold" is because we're just "too hot".

I have observed, in my life, that it is the Sun which warms us. No Sun, no warmth. Now, if the Sun happens to be doing something funky (and it is at the moment, with the lowest solar output since we've been monitoring it) it would be prudent to perhaps examine the relationship between the Sun and the warmth on this planet.

Naw, that would just be too easy.

Here's my theory... As the Sun's output (and solar wind) has dropped, the upper atmosphere has contracted significantly. It's gone from 400 miles deep down to about 250 or so. Don't quote me on the exact figures. Sure the Sun's output has gone lower, but now the light has less depth to bounce through, and diffracts less, possibly warming the mid-latitude oceans more. Translation? Hot summers still, and freaky winter weather caused by the length of time it takes the ocean to cool back down as winter comes on. The El Nino pools cause the jet stream to go crazy, and it's the Jet Stream's path which scooped up the cold and brought it south. The Pacific is in a cool PDO (look it up) phase, as is the Atlantic's AMO too. This, if the sun continues to heat the oceans in the same way next year, could lead to a repeat of this year's winter.

And a general cooling trend for the planet overall. Hey, I didn't say it was a great theory, but it's miles better than saying "AGW causes harsh winters"!

The Hubris of Mankind

2010-01-04T13:43:00.000-08:00

It dawned on me the other day that we really have not seen what sort of weather this planet is capable of unleashing. How do I know this? I'm not a "climateologist" or highly-trained meterologist. I'm just an orginary guy, not that much different from the rest. So, what makes me so certain that we haven't seen the whole picture yet? Three words; ice core data.

You see, in case you didn't know this, we've been drilling cores of ice out of the ground in Antarctic and Greenland for years. Each year's new layer of ice tells us a great deal about the climate of the Earth, going back millions of years. It's, in fact, the ONE reason we should know that we have nothing to fear from the "global warming craze". This link reveals some interesting charts: http://joannenova.com.au/global-warming/ice-core-graph/

Forget the 800-year lag in CO2 results, that's just a red herring. Look instead at the temperature. The bottom of the page shows the entire 420,000 year record from the 1998 Vostok ice cores (Vostok is the Russion Antarctic station near the South Pole). Notice how the temperature goes up briefly every 100,000 years? There's a total of 5 peaks on the graph, including our own brief modern history in the last 8,000 years. The peaks are ALL warmer than out modern phase! Every single interglacial period has been AS WARM or SIGNIFICANTLY WARMER. They've also always been followed by a rapid decline in temperatures once more. Always.

So... to sum this up succinctly. The last 8,000 years have been an unusual abberation in our climate. All of the weather patterns we've observed in the history of mankind have been a part of this abberation. If each interglacial period is roughly 10k years in length, and there have been five in the last 420k years, then we've not witnessed 370,000 years worth of weather patterns which CAUSE ice ages.

Yet, somehow, we're supposed to believe that we're the "kings of the Earth" as far as weather and climate predictions go? I do believe that we're in for a very rude awakening some day.

Climate-Gate for Dummies: Why you should care.

2009-12-07T09:51:00.000-08:00

Climate-Gate for Dummies: Okay, for people who don't have the time to read up on what's actually going on, and perhaps to help the Mainstream Media journalist decide to get of their hands, here's my summation of what happened and why this is critically important.

1. Tree ring data. Why do we care? Because a wider tree ring can be an indication of a warm, longer growning season. What happened: The data gleaned from the tree core samples began to diverge from actual weather station readings in 1960. Weather stations were reporting warmer temps, while the tree ring data bagin to drop. What the scientists in this scandal did was to add MODERN temperature data TO the historical tree ring sample between 1960 to 1980 to "bring it in line" with the other readings. After 1980 they've disregarded the tree rings completely and have substituted other readings without stating this on their charts. This is the "divergence" talked about in the Mann emails. Once an estabilished historical methodology (tree rings) differs from something as straight-forward as temperature readings, we need to ask "Why".

2. The missing Medieval Warm Period. What is it? The area in history when the world was significantly warmer. Vikings FARMED Greenland, which is today covered in concrete-hard permafrost and ice. Grapes were grown in the UK, where we cannot grow grapes today. Alpine valleys were farmed in Germany and in the Alps where today, they can't be farmed due to snow.3. The Code. What is it? The source code, written in Fortran 90, which shows how that data has been artificially-altered to form a more dramatic "hockey stick". The "Little Ice Age" temps have been lifted artificially. The more recent two decades have been dramatically lifted using a parabolic curve, so that each year looks significantly worse (warmer) than the last. Why do we care? Any numbers you stick into this program will form a "hockey stick" when graphed. It's not scientific; it's a political tool generated in order to scare people into thinking there's a runaway greenhouse gasses warming trend. For the last 10 years we've been cooling, ever since 1998! Cooling for a decade!

And they can't explain why... Why do we care? The scientists, Mann, and even NASA's Hansen, have all "resampled" their data to remove, or minimize, the high temps of this period. This makes their "hocky stick graph" look more alarming, with a severe rise to 1998's peak. In actuality, 1998 as a single year was in no way close to thawing Greenland! Since then we've cooled dramatically.

4. The UK-MET. What is it? The national weather service of the UK. Why do we care? On Saturday, the UK-MET announce that they've pulled their "global warming forecasts" in order to "reexamine the numbers". UK-MET received all of their land-based temp data from, you guessed it East Anglia's CRU! That means they've looked at the Fortran code, and the emails and said "uh oh"! As they're an official agency within the Ministry of Defence (their spelling) , and as such directly inform the British government and the IPCC, this is a HUGE deal!

They expect this to take 3 years.

So what does all of this collectively mean? It shows that these scientists were pushing Global Warming at all costs. The emails show the pressure they were willing to level at ANYONE who wanted to publish a paper counter to their views. Anyone who wanted to be a "climateologist" needed to be "on the bandwagon" or face a blacklisting from peer-review journals. If you cannot get your work published, you could lose funding.

If the reports from the CRU, showing global warming, have been falsified, then similar-appearing reports from NOAA and NASA, PSU, and other universities, MAY ALSO HAVE BEEN FALSIFIED, or tainted with tampered temperature datasets.

NOAA and NASA have both been hit with FOIA information requests in order for the public to gain access to the raw temperature data used over the last 150 years. Neither agency has complied, in violation of Federal Law. NASA's James Hansen has been stone-walling for two years.

Hansen is possibly the biggest global-warming cheerleader, and argues for a ZERO-CARBON EMISSIONS plan starting immediately. Have a good laugh about that the next time you savor a Coca-Cola or a beer. They're all carbonated with CO2!

5. Conspiracy to commit fraud in the Media. 56 news agencies printed the SAME editorial today urging action at Copenhagen. No bias folks, move along now, nothing to see here!

6. ABC, NBC, and CBS, along with CNN have chosen to go along with the "hacked emails/don't mean nuthin'" theme song over the weekend, if they've even mentioned this at all. You'd think the network which gave us "false but essentially true" reporting would jump at the chance to use the Climate Gate data to "reprove Global Warming".

BUT... governments are taking notice. Australia, Denmark, Saudi Arabia have all tenatively gone on record now stating there needs to be an "investigation of the science involved". Bravo chaps! If the heat stays on, perhaps this will snowball, and we'll finally get an accurate and honest accounting of our global climate.

Still think I'm crazy? Read this: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/25/uh-oh-raw-data-in-new-zealand-tells-a-different-story-than-the-official-one/

Harry_Read_Me.txt Climate Gate Revelations

2009-12-05T09:27:00.001-08:00

Okay, on first look Climate-Gate is like realizing your white wife of more than 10 years was once a black man, and wondering from where the hell your three red-headed children really came! I've started looking at the comments posted by the programmer "Harry" in the "Harry_Read_Me.txt" file (I've got it, and if you'd like it in a .doc form, just send me an email and I'll happily email it over) and some of them are pretty scary. It's amazing just how poorly written the code must be that Harry is attempting to fix. Harry's work on the CRU project evidently dates from 2006 to 2009, and this file is 274 pages of frustration, source code revisions, work-arounds, and data-manipulation.

Based on Harry_Read_Me.txt, none of the reports from the CRU could have possibly be claimed to be based on "fact". They're all 100% bullshit.

Digital Camera AF systems

2009-12-01T06:56:00.001-08:00

First of all, these are my thoughts, based on my experiences, and are not to be taken as fact.

On third-party camera lens inconsistency: Are ya'll sure it's the lens? Here's the reason I ask. I own a Nikon D300. It takes a pretty nice photo. Sometimes. In examining its inconsistency I found that at f8 and above, the depth of field is masking pretty consistent back-focus errors. The sensors in the body are focusing, but the image generated at the imager focal plane is "pushed back".

Now the D300 is a wonderful body, and it has this feature called AF Fine Tune, where you can walk the focus point back and forth by up to 20 "points". I'll call them points because they've got no real equivalent in actuality. The distance of focal inaccuracy varies based on the distance away from the camera body. So... the body can be adjusted. This is a great idea BUT it doesn't solve the fact that it's the BODY which has a problem. It demonstrates this problem with my Nikon 18-55mm kit lens, and with my Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX HSM Macro lens. One lens was $129, the other $899. You tell me which lens has the better engineering inside! Same issue with both lenses.

A Nikon body has a hex-head screw inside the mirror box which serves as a "stop". Actually, it has two of them, one for the viewfinder mirror, and another one, farther back, which sets the position of the AF system mirror. Ah HA! Now, as my camera has aged over the course of a year, and I've shot with it professionally, that little mirror has slapped countless times against its stop screw. I think it has moved the screw slightly.

Here's why this is important: even if you adjust the system using AF Fine Tune, you cannot manually focus properly. The eyeball result at the imager (from the big mirror) does not match the result from the AF sensor's mirror, and the AF sensor mirror controls what the lens thinks it should be doing. Nevermind that the stock D300 focusing screen is woefully inept for manual focus precision, it's simply impossible to come away with a manual focus setting which is "correct" at the imager plane when the system is out of whack.

With the AF Fine Tune you can set an overall camera "default", and you can set a plus/minus position for each lens. you can also set it to "On" or "Off". If it's "On" then it uses the stored lens setting. If it's "Off", it uses the system default. Since this setting behaves like a percentage, and not a physical distance, not only does the focus error change for every distance range, it changes for each lens' focal length too! 18mm behaves differently than 55mm which behaves differently than 200mm. General rule of thumb is this; the greater the distance, the larger the focus error. At least this is true with my D300 camera body.

So why is this important? Third party lenses are retro-engineered, based on the examination of OEM MFG's camera bodies and lenses. Physically, they need to be spot-on, or as close as possible to accurate. Now, given that the AF system's mirror can be misaligned quite easily, where the elements in a camera lens cannot (if they're properly installed and within their limits inside the lens' internal mechanism), does it make sense to blame the third party lens manufacturers, or the mass-produced camera bodies?

To sum it up, I feel if there's a sharp area somewhere in your photo, blame the camera, not the lens.

The Death of Predictive Auto Focus

2009-11-24T11:53:00.001-08:00

Sony had it. They bought it from Minolta, who developed, as some might remember, the first Auto-focusing cameras. The Konica-Minolta 7D was a marvel. You could point it at an oncoming car, at speeds up to 180 KM/hour, and it would nail the focus. Not on the windshield, not on the rear of the car, but on the nose. The front bumper. On any point where those big sensors could find good contrast. It wasn't the fastest focusing camera, but for motion, it was amazing as it could calculate the speed an object was traveling, and adjust the AF to stay ahead of the object. It could even calculate whether the object was accelerating or decelerating! Nice, eh?

So how do the others I've tried stack up? Let's see:
Sigma SD-14- AF not fast enough, no predictive focusing.
Sony A700- AF is lightning quick-but no predictive focusing means that the front bumper is soft while the driver is sharp. Disappointing really, as they now own the patents to the predictive AF algorythyms.
Nikon D300- AF is even faster than the A700, especially with Hypersonic Focusing, or Wave Motor focusing, BUT... it doesn't predictive focus either. The noses of cars are still soft while the driver is sharp. For panned shots the focusing speed is amazing, but it cannot calculate speed and trajectory at all like the old KM 7D could.

I've not tried any of the Canon gear, but the photos I've seen posted online indicate that their AF system doesn't do predictive focusing either. With modern lenses reporting distance when focused to the body, it's not difficult to calculate how far a vehicle has traveled in a set amount of time.

Will Sony ever use this technology again? They'd earn my business if they did!

The Islamic Conundrum

2009-11-24T11:37:00.000-08:00

Here's how I see this issue; Islamic Supremists would like nothing better than to stage a massive new attack against the United States. We are, after all, in the words of the Iranians and others, "the Great Satan". However, the United States buys oil. Lots of oil. From the Saudis, from Egypt, from other Middle Eastern countries steeped in Islamic culture. So even though the radicals would love nothing better than to kill us all, wiser heads in government know this wouldn't be a great idea.

Splinter groups like Al-Queda and the Taliban are not beholden to any government. They practice hardcore Sharia Law. Therefore, their actions are NOT restrained and represent the greatest threat possible against our country. They are funded through donations from radicalized mosques around the world, or by sheer terror and confiscation of local property and possessions. They actively supress every form of freedom we cherish. They hate us for our love of freedom. No matter what we do, no matter what Obama says, nor how many leaders he bows to, these groups will not stop hating us. Period.

Best Buy has chosen to wish everyone a "Happy Eid Al-Adha" on their Black Friday ad, yet they won't use the word "Christmas". They're instead referring to this as the "Holiday season". You know what? I don't need anything from Besty Buy as badly as they need to sell stuff. The Eid al-Adha is the celebration of sacrifice, as in they go out and sacrifice goats, not as in Lent traditions.

The day Muslims go out of their way to wish us a Merry Christmas is the day I'll shop at Best Buy again! I see no need to wish a "Happy Anything" to people who declare that I should submit to their religion or die.

Obviously Best Buy can't see that connection.

Sony to unveil Alpha A700 replacement soon?

2009-11-01T19:59:00.000-08:00

Now, anyone who reads this blog at all knows that I'm into photography. Here's the short version: Sony has 5 consumer DSLR bodies below $1000. They have two full-frame DSLR bodies at $1999 and $2699 respectively. The Alpha A700 was their "in-betweener", coming in initially at $1599, the was dropped to $1299. Last month they hacked the price down to just $899, a sure sign that camera's going away. So what are they going to do for a "prosumer" body?

Here's my guess... Sony makes both the 12.8 MP full-frame sensor in the Nikon D3 and D700 bodies, and the 24.6 MP sensor in the Nikon D3X, and their own Alpha A900 and A850 bodies. They've already undercut the D3X by $4500, and undercut the D700 by$300 (with their top-of-the-line A900 no less). BUT... they don't have a mid-level full-frame 12.8 MP sensor camera body, with the pop up flash like the D700 has, and the out-going Sony A700 had. That flash is a wireless flash system controller, so unlike the A850 and A900 bodies, you don't have to purchase an additional flash to serve as a wireless controller. This is a big feature to prosumer buyers.

I'm thinking that Sony has not one, but TWO bodies on the way. They'll have an APS-C sensor body at the $1299 price point, probably with the newer 14.2 MP sensor they're using in the A550 body, with their "Live View" stuffed inside like the A550, and image stabilization. AND... they'll have a full-frame, image-stabilized body with built in flash, right at the $1599-1799 price range. Personally, I'm hoping for the $1599 price. Call them the "A750" and the "A800" bodies.

Possibly they'll both be full-frame sensors... Currently the A850 is the cheapest full-frame sensor camera from anyone in the market today, but it's not fast enough to entice the high-speed sports photographers from Nikon/Canon systems. Many of them are still shooting D3 bodies, and are completely happy with those. Not many takers for the $7999 D3X, even though it boasts incredible resolution from it's massive sensor.

Does this make it a good time to buy into the Sony/Minolta lens system? I think so...

Of elections and conservatives...

2009-11-01T19:56:00.000-08:00

So... for ya'll non-political folks, the special election in NY-23 has become very interestin this weekend.

First, a little background: Dede Scozzafava (I think I got her name right) was picked by the local GOP committee to run as a Republican, though she supports Democrat proposals and is married to one. Doug Hoffman didn't think this was a good idea, so he decided to run as an "independant conservative". The national RNCC gave $900,000 to support Dede, Doug's been fending on his own with donations from normal folks. Newt Gingrich endorsed Dede, Sarah Palin endorsed Doug. After polling came out this weekend (Friday) which indicated she was going to lose badly, trailing even the Democrat in the race (in a district which has voted R for 140 years!) she decided to drop out. Late Saturday night, she basically anounced she was throwing her support behind the Democrat still in the race! She's supposed to be a Republican and she's supporting a Dem! WTF? Her reason? Because she wants someone committed to bringing the pork back to her district!

So now the pollsters are up in the air. Some say Hoffman, who has valid conservative creds, wins in double digits. Others say it's too close to call (+ or - one point either way at the moment). Which way will the 20% who supported Dede go? If they go conservative, they'll vote for Hoffman. Dede's name remains on the ballot, even though she's dropped out. Although she threw her vote to the Dem, her campaign manager supports Doug Hoffman! What does that say?

This is an important race if only because Doug's been supported nearly completely by us, the grassroots conservatives around the nation who want to send a message to the GOP. The message is simply: we won't accept RINOs as candidates. We won't support the GOP if you continue to run RINOs. This Election Day could be a precursor to a huge 2010 uprising, and I can only say it's about damn time!

Building a guitar

2009-08-17T21:17:00.000-07:00

I turned 40 this month and that got me to thinkin' about stuff I'd always wanted and never owned. I don't think I'm ever going to have a Ferrari or Lamborghini, but I can say I've owned an old Porsche once. I bought a Gibson Les Paul last year after flirting with the idea for nearly a decade. I found one which simply sings; I didn't want to put it down in the store, and I still don't want to put it down when I play it today. I brought it home and even though I'm still paying on it, I love that darn thing!

Many of the things which top my list of Items to Own are guitars: I've had a vintage Charvel Model 1 (when they weren't considered "vintage" or "exceptional"). I've owned a Jackson Soloist and though it was a made in Japan model instead of a USA-built one, it was a great guitar all the same. But, until recently, I'd never owned an Ibanez guitar. The problem was, whenever I found a nice one, I never had the money to get it, and when I had the money, no nice ones were to be found. I decided in July, that I'd simply build one.

EBay has some great deals. Someone's junk is another person's diamond in the rough. I found a seller offering an old 540S body, also known as "Golden Age Sabres". These were made of mahogany in the Fujigen factory in Japan in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I've played several nice examples over the years at stores around the country, including new ones in 1990 or so. I even own a 1990-1991 Ibanez catalog! So... I began my "40th Birthday Guitar" with an old Ibanez body.

Lipstick Red wasn't really my color; I stripped it with a chemical stripper which revealed a thick polyurethane semi-transparent coating underneath. Evidently the Japanese didn't bother with filling the grain in the mahogany with proper woodworking skill. They simply dipped each body (or sprayed) in a thick plastic coating and sanded it smooth. Over this base a silver flat was sprayed, then a glossy red, then a clear coat. The chemical stripper peeled off only the paint. It took hours of sanding to remove the sealer coat! Ugh!

Once stripped and sanded, I cleaned it thoroughly with compressed air, then with a tack cloth. I managed to salvage my old can of tung oil finish from my garage, and used the last of the gooey contents to stain the mahogany darker. It's a very rich-looking finish. From there I assembled it with Ibanez pickup rings and a factory cast-metal neck plate, a nice Carvin maple neck with an ebony fretboard, and a set of Seymour Duncan Dave Mustaine Signature Live Wire pickups I'd purchased at the Seymour Duncan clearance sale for $44! Yup, the pickups only cost me $44. They're an amazing dark chrome finish, and are low impedance; powered with a 9 volt battery. I used a Switchcraft stereo pin jack to complete the Live Wires circuitry, and brought my little beastie to life. I still had to get a bridge though...

Well, it took me almost a full month to scrimp and save and beg editors to pay me for outstanding invoices. I got paid, and bought a chrome Gotoh Floyd Rose bridge. They're wonderful pieces of metal, and quite possibly the best locking bridge ever created. When it arrived last week I eagerly assembled the final parts. I pounded the studs into the body (the Gotoh studs are exactly the 11.3mm, identical to the Ibanez holes), threaded in the posts, and test fit the bridge. The spring block stuck out of the back of the guitar approximately one quarter inch! Whoops. Off to the machine shop went I, and off went 10mm of brass. Thankfully, gotoh drills the mounting screw holes 21mm down into the top of the block, so trimming it down is a cinch! Thank you, Gotoh!

Finally, all assembled, everything clearing properly, tuned up and intonated, and it's everything I hoped it would be; a vintage-aged 20 year old mahogany Saber body with a modern neck and hardware. Grover locking tuners, active pickups, best bridge ever, and Dunlop straplocks complete a best-of-everything screamer.

Hmmmmm, that almost seemed too easy! What should I build next?

Covers Everywhere!

2009-08-17T21:04:00.001-07:00

Okay, so as a freelancer, I don't get to choose what a magazine will run on the cover. I take it as a matter of pride and accomplishment when I manage to get a car onto a big magazine cover. This month, August 2009, I've got TWO covers out simultaneously! The first is from Performance BMW, the magazine which gave me my first shot at writing a story. Thanks Louise! www.performancebmwmag.com Go there, check out Issue 119. That's an order!

The second mag is Banzai. I've written for them nearly as long, and Joe Clifford there gave me my first cover many years ago. It was a half cover, but I won't hold that against him! Issue 94 at www.banzaimagazine.com . Of course, I didn't build either car, but I was responsible for creating the photos.

Big props must go to the Unity Media art department (both are published in the UK by Unity Media) as they take my photos and work magic on them to bring out details I couldn't even see through the view finder. If you don't believe me, grab a copy of Banzai at a Barnes and Nobles or Borders and just marvel at the details captured in the G35 headlamp assemblies! Unbelievable!

Next month, Nissan Sport magazine will be running an R34 Skyline story of mine on their cover, and Mustang Enthusiast magazine will serve up APR's wide-body, turbocharged S197 Mustang! This year started slow but perhaps it will end with a BANG!

Oh, and my third child is due in January! If my wife follows the trend set by the first two kids, this one will arrive by Christmas! No better gift in the world, really...

God speed, Mr. Polsfuss!

2009-08-13T11:09:00.000-07:00

Les Paul died today, at 94 years of age. A good, long life he had, full of hit music, wild inventions, and a true "verve" for living. We should all be so lucky!

Painting fools!

2009-07-30T11:13:00.001-07:00

My wife's "nesting" again, pending the birth of our third child in January, so we've been painting rooms. Did the living room, the kitchen area, the dining area, lots of borders and edges, and now she's attacking the wallpaper border in the eldest child's room with an intensity normally reserved for rottweillers eating steak. Needless to say, I've been busy. I've also been tackling a "birthday project"; rescusitating an old Ibanez 540S Saber guitar with all new parts. I've got a Carvin neck, Seymour Duncan "Dave Mustaine" Live Wire pickups, and just need to earn more money so I can buy a Gotoh Floyd Rose bridge for it. I had to strip the old Lipstick Red finish and then sand away the clear sealer/polyurethane finish underneath in order to reveal the wonderful mahogany wood. It's looking nice so far, better than my painting skills!

My birthday's this Saturday and I'm certain my guitar won't be finished by then, but the house sure better be! LOL

Lazy Dog Days of Summer

2009-07-21T09:41:00.000-07:00

Well, we've finally reached the heat out here in the Desert Southwest. It's been so hot lately all we can do is sit inside and hide from it. As a result, I'm editing photos for Airgunweb.com, and finishing up the last few stories in my laptop. I'll have to head out onto the road again soon for some fresh cars.

40 years ago this week, Mankind first walked on the moon! That's a fantastic achievement! What have we done since then?

Happy 4th of July!

2009-07-06T16:53:00.000-07:00

I didn't say it over the weekend because I was busy enjoying it. I strutted around in an American flag button-down oxford by Redhead. It was a Father's Day gift from Cabellas on the west side of Phoenix, Arizona. Everyone needs one of these shirts!

A big Thank You to all of our armed forces for defending our freedom while we're out shopping! Hoo-rah guys! Kick ass and take names!

Cover of August 2009 Performanc BMW Magazine!

2009-07-06T16:49:00.000-07:00

Heh, I've got to say it! I am one happy camper right now! As a freelancer I don't get to pick which cars become cover features. I'm always pleasantly surprised later. In this case it was Louise Woodhams, the editor of Performance BMW magazine from Unity Media in the UK who made the call to feature Gromafab's very cool (and very powerful) car smack-dab in the middle of their August 2009 cover (my birthday month!)

Now, if that money for the story would arrive... LOL

End of month crush

2009-06-30T14:59:00.000-07:00

Being self-employed has its benefits, but it also has a few downfalls. The largest one is pretty simple; if you don't write anything, you don't get paid. It never ceases to amaze me how much time it takes searching for cars and getting editorial approval. There are countless phone calls and emails I have to make each month and then, by the time I reach the last couple days, I always notice I haven't written much. Yikes! This month has been the same as it always is, with my wife at home to help with the kids now that school's out for the summer. This has left me free to write, so the income level will be a bit better down the road. We're not doing the "BIG SUMMER TRIP" this year to visit relatives back east so perhaps we'll save a bit of money. I doubt it!

Les Pauls and Red Maple tops

2009-06-18T08:58:00.001-07:00

Okay, here's one of my favorite discussions... Gibson wants you to believe that all Maple-topped Les Pauls sound the same. The original, highly-valued Les Pauls were built using soft Red Maple from the Michigan area. This tree's grain is substantially different than the much harder, denser Eastern Rock Maple and Western Bigleaf Maple varieties.

In no way can Red Maple sound like the other two. The flamed maple used on the '58, '59, and '60 Sunbursts wasn't even the best flamed maple that Gibson had. The best stuff went to their acoustics and semi-acoustic guitars!

When I asked Gibson if they're using "Red Maple" specifically on their very expensive Custom Shop VOS guitars they replied "we buy maple from all over". It all gets lumped into their drying facility with little distinction paid to the species. A Custom Shop builder can select whatever they want, but they're not forced to use any specific variety. I believe this accounts for the variation in tone that can be found in production Les Pauls today. Some sound like "strings over concrete". Others, like the 2008 Les Paul Standard I own, sound amazingly full and rich, with softened highs which simply sing. My guitar has the reddish "mineral streaks" in it common to the softer Red Maple, which grows in the mineral-rich soil of the Northeastern United States and Canada. Red Maple is known to have more inconsistent figuring than Eastern Rock or Western Bigleaf. In fact, if you see a guitar with wide, "quilted" figuring, it's almost a sure bet that it's Western Bigleaf!

You can do your own research online now, if you don't believe me. There are density charts which have been created by woodworker supply chains and conservation/management groups which indictate the density of Red Maple is several orders below that of the other main species.

Or, you can head to a guitar store which carries PRS guitars, and check out a McCarty model. The McCartys were supposed to be built with "Michigan Maple" as that's what Ted McCarty told Paul to use. And if Ted likes it, that's good enough for me!

Gettin' down to it

2009-06-18T08:53:00.001-07:00

The time has come once more to write... not on this blog, but on the stories I create for magazines. I've been busy here at the beginning of June pitching story ideas to editors. I've picked up a few new ones which will have to be shot in LA and Vegas in the next week or so. This is what I do; the life of a freelance photojournalist.

We (the family) are also heading to LA for a mini-vacation next week. We've got two adult passes to Knott's Berry Farm so we're going out for a couple days. I've got a Volvo to pick up and review for www.autoguide.com and I need to pick up one more car to shoot while I'm there. I hate to waste the trip and return without having done at least a little work. I'm just that way.

The Second Amendment

2009-06-04T16:03:00.000-07:00

Okay, I hold this amendment near and dear to my heart, though I don't own a powder-burning weapon. I fail to see how anyone can misconstrue the phrase "...the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The first portion of the sentence "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state," only applies to militia service. At the time of the Bill of Rights (in 1791), our Founding Fathers knew that the service of a "standing army" would be needed from time to time. Said "militia", comprised of young and able-bodied men from around the country would, by necessity, need to be "well regulated". I.E. they needed to be organized and armed. Let's not forget though, in 1791, that staffs, walking sticks, swords, and knives were all considered to be acceptable "arms" whenever the need arose.

Today, try carrying a sword around anywhere! You can't. It's forbidden. Need to carry that bid hunting knife on your belt? You can't. It's forbidden. Where in the hell did the federal government and state governments get the idea that they could forbid any weapon they chose?

In fact, where does it say in the Constitution that either the State or Federal government is in charge of "public safety"?

Here in California, you can have a gun in your house, but you can't store it loaded. You can have a gun at your place of business, but it can't be stored loaded. If you need to shoot it in order to protect your property, in most municipalities, it's ILLEGAL to discharge a firearm. Pull out a sword for your own defense and a lawyer somewhere will have kittens! You're allowed the option in CA to apply for a "concealed weapons permit" but, because decisions are left to the office of each county sheriff, in Riverside County, where I live, they haven't granted a CCW permit in decades. In Orange County, they're granted almost automatically. This can't be "constitutional". When will someone challenge it using the 2nd Amendment and the 10th Amendment?

The 10th Amendment

2009-06-04T15:55:00.000-07:00

Currently I'm a bit fascinated by the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America. More specifically, I like the part where it says "The powers not delegated to the United States", meaning our Federal Government, "nor prohibited to it by the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

If Congress passes a law enabling nationalized health care, can I sue to refuse to pay into their system? Can I sue to refuse taxation on an employer-provided health plan if they term it "additional income"? If there is no Constitutionally-granted "nationalized health care" amendment, then any action taken by Congress on this matter, as I see it, is null and void on a personal level.

What if, collectively, the people actually PAYING taxes all signed on to the lawsuit as plaintiffs? If we all refuse to participate and let people not paying any taxes join up as they want, would that simply force the Federal Government into the direction of bankruptcy faster than they're already charging on their own?

I'm afraid I do not see where the actions of our elected Federal officials in any way benefit our great nation.

Diminishing Marginal Returns

2009-06-01T15:24:00.001-07:00

This past week I sold the very nice set of Enkei RPF1 wheels I was running on my RX-8 for its magazine stories. I liked them. They were lightweight, looked fantastic, and most importantly very durable. Unfortunately, they're 19" wheels, and all of my spare tires were for 18" wheels. Buying new tires simply to drive around on fancier wheels is the very epitome of "diminishing marginal returns". The more the price goes up for the tires, the less of a return you get on your money (in this case miles traveled). Since I'm no longer showing my car at events, it's not necessary to have the 19" wheels...

On the other hand, the money has been recycled into another "writing hobby"; a new airgun! Not just any air rifle, mind you, but a new-to-the-market Benjamin Marauder! Suffice it to say that the boys at Crosman were tired of hearing how the US simply couldn't compete in the manufacturing of a quality PCP (pre-compressed propellant) rifle. The Brits, the Germans, even the Koreans were simply cleaning our clocks, at all sorts of price points. First, the introduced the very-affordable Benjamin Discovery which looks like a boat oar with two metal tubes attached to the narrow end. It's an impressive hunting rifle with good accuracy, no recoil, metal construction (except for the trigger area) and great velocities. It as sold, as they say, very well! Released just last year it's out-sold all other PCP models. Instant classic! I'm planning a "Discover-M" project with a stock from James Linthicum and a Discovery I'll have to obtain later. When I somehow finally get paid more money...

In the meanwhile, Crosman listened to what users said they wanted (better stock, adjustable fill pressure, adjustable velocity, match-grade two stage adjustable trigger, floating barrel, multi-shot) and this May kicked the doors down with the new Marauder. Since everyone was nearly out of the first batch, I grabbed a .177 Marauder today from Compasseco.com. They've still got one left if you hurry! I don't have a pump at this point, and when it arrives, I won't be able to do anything more than simply look at it. Heh. But I'll have one... It's like a quadraplegic buying a limited-edition Harley-Davidson... he can't ride it now, but hopes to one day! Carrot in front of the horse, that sort of thing.

If you're into air rifles, and you're American, and believe in tryin' to buy America-made products, THIS is going to be your next major purchase. I'm anxious to see if it lives up to the hype. The Discovery did so I have my hopes for the Marauder.

At the same time, more of my reviews have been posted at www.airgunweb.com. Cruise over there and take a look at "Hammerin' Hank", "Wadcutter Weapon", and "Weapons-Grade Fun" for examples of my writing, if you're curious. If you happen to learn a little about air rifles along the way, well, that's not a bad thing, is it?

Memorial Day thoughts...

2009-05-25T18:20:00.000-07:00

This should be renamed "Hug a Soldier Day". We go about our insulated daily lives, worrying about when our kids have to be at soccer practice and what to eat for dinner while they, the US Armed Forces, worry about keeping people at bay who would like nothing better than to kill every American they could. All because we, Americans, offer the freedom to everyone to believe as they see fit. No restrictions based on political party, religion, race, or gender.

In the case of the ongoing Western Civilization vs Islam undeclared world war I have to wonder just how long it will be before there's open armed conflict similar to the Crusades. There are two competing systemic world views here, one which offers freedom, and the other which only offers tyranny and oppression disguised as a religious edict. Can you purchase an Islamic sports car? Can you fly in an Islamic airplane? No, and no, because there's no innovation in Islamic countries. There's no tolerance of "difference" and it stifles creativity to the point where, were it not for oil wealth, life in most Islamic countries would be only little better now than they were in the 11th Century. As it stands now the stingiest nations as far as contributions to foreign natural disasters are all Islamic countries, in spite of the massive wealth. Would the really be the case if the "Religion of Peace" were truly a religion at all?

On today, of all days, we should remember those who have fallen while fighting this fight for us. This conflict isn't going away anytime soon...

Sigma lenses good, SD-14 not so good.

2009-05-24T18:52:00.000-07:00

Sometimes you swing at a pitch and hit a home run... sometimes you don't. Here's what I've learned this weekend about cameras;
1. The Sigma 180mm f3.5 Macro is good. Very, very good! It's the only thing which kept me from sending the back-focusing SD-14 body back to Cameta Camera immediately.
2. The Sigma 17-70mm f2.8-4.0 lens is also a very nice piece of glass, for a standard-use zoom. It's solidly built with internal focusing which makes using a polarizer a snap. The dual-barrel extention for the zooming is smooth and precise, and best of all, unlike my cheap Nikon 18-55mm lens, the barrels don't flop up and down! I might have to buy one of these...
3. The Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 is solidly built too, but can't match the sharpness of the 180mm Macro. In fact, it's soft enough to make telling the difference between a properly-focused photo, and an improperly-focused photo difficult. Again, this illustrates just HOW GOOD the 180mm Macro really is in terms of sharpness, contrast, and definition.

The 180mm Macro lens on the SD-14 body, with an upsized pixel output of 4573 x 3048 is ALMOST sharper than the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 on my Nikon D300 body. Comparing JPEG to JPEG photos. Now, mind you, I was looking at other cameras because I considered the output from the D300 to be "soft". By comparison to the SD-14, and the other two lenses supplied from Sigma USA (thanks guys and gals!) the D300's output looks like it was rendered with a laser. The fault doesn't lay with the Foveon X3 chip though, but rather it's lack of pixels. Forcing the Sigma Photo Pro software to nearly double the size of the image just isn't going to work for professional use. At it's native-size output, it's an incredibly sharp camera! Upsizing every photo just won't work for magazine print use, I'm afraid. That's a bit of a disappointment for me.

Foveon, get busy on a full-frame sensor, dudes!

Townsend Bell takes 4th at Indy!

2009-05-24T18:46:00.000-07:00

Okay, so Townsend's just a friend of a friend, and I've only worked with him once for a "drifting BMW" article, but still... I root for him whenever he gets the opportunity to drive a race car. This year at the 100th running of the Indianapolis 500 he went from 24th to 4th! Great job, TB! Of course the media all focused on Danica, Marco Andretti, Helio, Dan Wheldon, and all of the stupid rookie wrecks (rookies should be forced to race in their own race at Indy in rubber-coated cars!) rather than on Townsend's great achievement. They didn't plan on him being a factor and obviously had no background material prepared. That's a shame.

And NASCAR's been rained out for Sunday... Looks like I'll have to watch the F1 race from Monaco on my DVR now! :) Jenson Button supposedly won; the British will be insufferable now! LOL

SD-14:It ain't fast!

2009-05-20T20:00:00.001-07:00

Okay, it's also been said that the SD-14 isn't a camera for sports shooters. This is no lie! If you're shooting ANYTHING that moves with this camera, purchase the fastest Compact Flash card you can find! The write times for X3F RAW files are very slow. I think my old Canon D60 was better! Certainly every camera body I've used since 2005 has been faster. I've been using a 4 GB Hitachi Microdrive and I think I can watch the grass grow while the SD-14 writes data to the Microdrive! Switching to a SanDisk 512MB card was better. Possibly the Microdrive is idled in between photos, so it has to spin up every time it goes to work. I don't know, but it sure ain't fast.

I will say that focusing with the 180mm Macro's HSM has been generally quick, if it's already in the range needed. If it has to rack all the way to it's minimum focus distance and back out again, whatever you're trying to shoot will probably have grown bored and wandered off by the time the lens gets back to proper focus. Images are coming out slightly soft at nearly all ranges, unless I touch up the focus by hand, which leads me to think it's the camera's AF sensors which are out of whack. In particular, the far left sensor does an incredibly poor job of focusing. Or, I should say, it tells the camera's brain that it's in focus, when even to the eye, it's nowhere even remotely close to correct. The center cross-type sensor is much better, but will consistently "far focus" on cars, trees, fire hydrants, etc. In the case of my neighbor's truck, sitting across the street from my house, the tires and curbing on the opposite side of the truck are in better focus than on the side facing me. That's an error of four or five feet! Not good.

Again, I find I'm now waiting on the lenses from Sigma in order to determine if the fault is inside the camera body, or the 180mm f3.5 Macro lens (which I might add was a used, but beautiful, lens).

SD-14 Initial Thoughts

2009-05-20T19:42:00.000-07:00

For better or worse, here's my .02: The SD-14 has the best pixel-per-pixel results in the industry today. Unfortunately it has too few. On the surface this might seem like contradictory statements, but let me explain.

As far as picking up details and rendering an accurate representation of the light at each pixel location, the SD-14's Foveon X3 sensor is the best. At it's native resolution of 2640 x 1760, I don't think there's a camera out there which can beat it for lifelike quality. However, that's a small number of pixels overall. Yes, there truly are 3 times that number when you count all of the red, green, and blue pixels in the 'stack' in the sensor. However... and this is important, the native image is only 2640 pixels across. If you print out 8"x10" photos, this will work at roughly 225 dots per inch for your printing. If you've got to "go big" the only solution is to use Sigma's Photo Pro software, and convert the X3F RAW file to its 'Super Hi' JPEG image output, which comes in at a whopping 4608x3072. For all of you pixel peepers out there, that's more pixels than Nikon's D700 and D3 full frame CMOS sensors can generate! It's extrapolated pixels though, which means the image grows softer when viewed full size on a screen. Will it print better? I'm going to have to talk to the wizards at Imagemark in Phoenix, Arizona to find out for certain.

This particular SD-14 body I received appears to have a problem with focusing slightly too far on distant objects, when used with the Sigma 180mm f3.5 APO EX Macro DG IF HSM lens I just bought from KEH.com. Nice lens though! When focused properly on something, the details it can resolve are amazing. When the loaned lenses arrive from Sigma USA early next week I'll have a better idea if it's the new SD-14 or the 180mm lens which has the problem. It could be that the lens is slightly out of adjustment too as far as where the HSM is telling the camera it's stopped when focusing precisely. Whatever the cause, it's more than a little frustrating.

I hate going out on a limb and saying that the output from the SD-14 doesn't quite match the Nikon D300. Pixel-per-pixel, at 2640x1760, the SD-14 rules! At 'full size', the D300 rules. Since I was mainly shooting photos of a car at a normal distance, the advantage went to the D300, which appeared to nail the focus, if having slightly less finite detail in the overall image.

Will the SD-14 be better with different lenses? I don't know at this point, and the suspense is killing me!

Sigma SD-14

2009-05-15T16:15:00.001-07:00

Tell me how smart it is to have ordered a camera body with out any lenses for it? Well, the price was amazing at Cameta Camera ($349). So amazing in fact that they've raised it to $399 now. Adorama and B&H still have them listed at $709 and $719 respectively. Adorama doesn't have any.

Here's the good news; Sigma USA is going to loan me a few lenses (hopefully) next week, to try out for a few weeks! Yay! Looks like I might have a 10-20mm, a 17-70mm, and perhaps a "long zoom" to play with for a while. Mid-week I found that KEH.com had a Sigma 180mm f3.5 Macro used for a whopping $599. That deal was too good to pass up, so that lens is on it's way here, but won't arrive until Monday the 18th! I'll be sitting out front waiting on the UPS truck all morning...

Camera looks solidly-constructed, if a tad slow at image capture. The SD-15 is supposed to be an improvement when it arrives shortly. I have yet to install the Sigma Photo Pro software on my Sony Vaio laptop, but I'm sure the 32-bit Windows Vista will handle it just fine. I bought that extra memory for a purpose! Yeah, perhaps it's not a s good as a Mac iBook, or whatever they're calling those aluminum-chassis notebooks, but it was also $700 less, uses the same Intel chip, and is just as fast. I can live with that for net price of my SD-14 body and one decent 17-70mm lens!

Speaking of... the MTF charts on www.sigmaphoto.com for the 17-70mm f2.8-4.5 are really good! I'm surprised. At the 70mm end it looks like it might be sharper than the big 70-200mm f2.8 APO EX DG II at the short end! All wide angle lenses lose something in the corners. For the Foveon X3 chip this isn't a huge problem because the sensor is only 20.3mm x 13.8mm in size. This means MTF chart data only applies to just past 10mm from the image center. Within that range, many of the Sigma lenses are darn good! Will they work as well on a 35mm wide sensor? No. Will the ability to extrapolate data from the 2,652 x 1,768 "photosites" mean that photos can be upsized and saved to JPEG without nasty jaggy-edged artifacts cropping up? I'll find out... Monday.

Bayer Filter jaggies

2009-05-14T09:15:00.000-07:00

Okay, it's time to get a little technical... My new Sigma SD-14 camera arrives today! They were $1,400 a year ago, but some retailers have been essentially wholesaling them this spring because the new SD-15 body is coming any day now. I bought mine for just $349 from Cameta Camera in New York. I've dealt with them before on the purchase of my Nikon D300 body, and they always have great prices it seems, coupled with fast service. Just don't expect to hold a conversation with them!

So why am I, a Nikon owner, thrilled to be receiving a $350 camera body I don't even have a single lens for yet? Simple. The Foveon X3 sensor! Right now, there are just three types of digital sensors; CCD, CMOS, and the Foveon. For the CCD and CMOS sensors use what's called a "Bayer filter", which is a screen of microlenses to split the incoming light into it's respective primary color frequencies, red, green, and blue. The internal software in the camera uses logic to deduce the exact average color value to assign to each "pixel photosite" based on the "brightness" at the red, green, and blue sensors. It does not actually see the color, just levels of brightness or darkness. In the process of recombining the data, sometimes there are these little bright blotches in the photos. I call them "bright jaggies". They typically appear at points where the sensor has a difficult time determining the exact color to assign to the pixel. I actually suspect they're a logic error in the extrapolation software, but that's just a theory.

Anyway, once you know what to look for, you can see them everywhere in photographs taken by CCD and CMOS imagers. The troublesome thing is this; they don't really exist. They're the result of camera error!

So why is the Foveon X3 sensor different? Because it doesn't use a Bayer filter! It senses light directly at each photo site, at three different depths in the silicon chip. Blue on the top, green in the middle, and red at the deepest point, because as the longest wavelength, it penetrates the farthest. The software required to output this information is far less complicated than the Bayerized method. Anyway, this "stacked sensor array" is extremely accurate for colors and sharpness, which is why I'm interested. The total number of pixels output from the sensor is smaller than other current imagers, but can be up-sampled in software like Photoshop very successfully.

And, it lacks those "bright jaggies" I hate... This is going to be an exciting camera to use!

Cars and sunlight

2009-05-12T16:33:00.000-07:00

Okay, one of the things I like to see in a nice posed car shot is wonderful sunset light. I don't always get it though. When I schedule a photo shoot I look in advance to see what the weather might be like. California does have a very high percentage of great sunsets but you'll quickly find that not every sunset will work with a particular location. In my photos below, you can see that my favorite spot has these great low rocky hills deep in the background. They catch sunset light perfectly, and are just short enough to allow for some blue sky in the top of the frame. This has been my "go-to" location when I can get people to drive to where I live. I'm currently searching for more striking areas in Los Angeles, but I haven't had much luck lately out there. Too many trees, telephone poles, and overhead power lines. It can help to head down to Orange County, but was just there a couple weeks back and really didn't get a location or a sunset I liked. As a result, an editor didn't like my photos and I'm going to have to reshoot that car. Reshoots are expensive and waste time. Thankfully this doesn't happen much to me...

Anyway, with a great sunset and some careful positioning, you can shoot a car with just one flash and have it look very natural. On the other hand, some editors prefer "flashed up" posed shots... no sense in arguing about it. I just shoot to satisfy their taste and everything's fine. I hope to expand my collection of flashes very soon, but first I've got to test out the Sigma SD-14 I just ordered. I've searched quite a few user groups but haven't found many car photos. Macros and portrait photography, and quite a bit of landscapes and buildings too. Hopefully I'll get to add to the collections!

Tripods and Cameras

2009-05-10T22:06:00.000-07:00

I always tell budding photographers to buy the biggest damn tripod they can manage to carry, if they're going to shoot low light photos. I use a hefty Bogen tripod with sturdy aluminum legs and a Manfrotto/Bogen pan/tilt head with the handy quick-release plates. Very secure... I could probably mount a howitzer on it and still have a steady platform! Having a camera with a mirror lock-up function also helps. I used to use this feature consistently with the Konica-Minolta 7D bodies I used (two of them, I liked them so much). I thought I needed to go to a newer, higher megapixel body, so I sold them off and tried a Sony Alpha A700. The stronger AF motor in that body immediately broke AF shaft in my Tamron LD 70-210mm f2.8 lens I'd used for years. On top of that, when I went to the track the next day, in addition to having to manually focus my "long lens" shots, there was a problem with the image sensor, and all of the photos looked "washed out". Finally, the A700's auto-focus system was no where near as good as Konica-Minolta's "Predictive Focus" system. Sure the 7D would only shoot 3.5 frames per second, but you got 3.5 excellent shots each time you pulled the trigger! A man can get used to that sort of treatment. It made photo selection much easier. Just pick the in-focus one with the framing you like!

So... the A700 went back to Best Buy... I bought it when it was new and couldn't afford the Sony 80-200mm f2.8 lens. All of the Minolta "G" lenses had been sold off already. Sigma hadn't released their updated version yet, and I couldn't find another 80-200 Tamron LD anywhere. I was screwed. Since I needed SOMETHING, I dove into the Nikon system. The D700 hadn't been released in March 2008, so I ordered a D300 from Cameta Camera in New York. The first "long lens" I tried came from Best Buy again... a Nikon 80-200mm f2.8D. It had an issue with close focusing.

I take that back... first I bought a D200 used from eBay, only to find out that it had "hot pixels" throughout the imager, and a chromatic abberation/focusing issue. While that camera went to Nikon Service, I ordered the D300 from Cameta Camera. The D200 eventually returned in all of it's 10.2 megapixel glory, but by that time, I'd been won over by the super-saturated colors the D300 had to offer. I couldn't go back... I sold the D200 on eBay and never looked back.

Fast forward to now, and with the Sigma SD-15 on the way any day, and retailers closing out the SD-14 at $349, I bought one. Sigma USA might give me a little lens support, and loan me a few of their nice lenses to try. I'm intrigued by the non-Bayerized direct-captue imager in the SD-14. I've been following it since I first started with my Canon D60 (it was in the SD-9 body then) and 70-200mm f4 "L" and have been intrigued by its potential. I can see the artifacts in the output from the D300, although it's very good. Sharpening is required to fix what the Bayer process "disassembles" from the incoming light, and unfortunately, leaves "sharpening artifacts" if you go too far. Perhaps these aren't as visible in print due to the nature of ink and paper, but they sure are visible on my laptop screen.

Will the SD-14 be better? My 7D bodies were only 6.1 MP and I was routinely earning magazine covers with the sharpness from those big pixels on that DX-sized sensor. What will the sharpness look like once I've got a mirror lock-up function again (the D300 lacks this) and the ability to directly sense all three primary colors at each pixel. To say I'm anxious is an understatement!

Nikon's wireless system has been good, but not quite as good as the KM 7D's wireless flash was. It's not as reliable. Who the hell at Nikon thought that putting the light-trigger sensor on the SIDE of the flash was a great idea? When the flash head can rotate, you put it on the front so that you've got maximum flexibility and rotation either way! Duh. I've made it work (see the Stasis Engineering Audi S5 for proof of that), but it sure could be better. Too many menus between you and the darn flash controls to be fast in the field! Every second wasted in a menu is at least one lost photograph you can't get back during the "magic light". At sunset, we really are "racing daylight" if we're to get all of our photos done during the magic hour!

Still, a good photographer can work what whatever tools he's given. Perhaps I'll buy a Sigma DP-1 if I like the photos from the SD-14, and I'll prove that it's "not the camera, it's the photographer who makes the photos"! Light, composition, framing, focus (LCFF) matters far more than the camera equipment... up to a point. I'll say this just once... a truly life-like photograph typically has impeccable focusing and resolution. If you're aiming to create "art", that's an entirely different story, and Bokeh begins to come into play. For a great PHOTOGRAPH, image resolution is key. If you want to subject to pop out on paper, it's got to be tack-sharp. Sharp enough to cut your finger on the straight lines...

I had that with the Konica-Minolta 7D bodies... but for some reason, not with the Nikon D300 I own. If I can figure out how to get the stupid image-in-post to work, I'll show you a cat photo I snapped with the kit lens the other day which meets my definition of "tack-sharp". In the meantime, check out the yellow Acura NSX below for an excellent example.

2009-05-10T21:19:00.000-07:00

Current Equipment:
Right now I'm using a Nikon D300 body coupled with a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 APO DG EX HSM lens, a Nikon 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 "kit lens", a Nikon 50mm f1.8D that I never use unless it's almost black outside, and a borrowed Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 lens I'm trying out as a super wide-angle solution for a low-angle motion rig I'm building. That seems to be one of the shots editors prefer, so I'm going to give it my own "low light" special twist.

I don't like filters. I try not to use them at all. Photos taken without them appear sharper and less-clouded to my eyes. I do have a UV0 filter on either my kit lens or the 50mm, and I've got a regular polarizer which really screws up the metering (I have to compensate manually, which is actually quite easy, just take the polarizer off and meter, then put it on a meter, then adjust and shoot!). A regular polarizer if much cheaper than a circular one, in case you're wondering. This method works, and is extremely cost effective, since I found the filter used on a clearance table at Tempe Camera in Phoenix, Arizona a few years ago. I've got another 72mm polarizer I use on the Sigma lens occasionally. Shooting at the right time of day (evening) helps to minimize the need to use a polarizer though. I don't use any neutral density filters. I think I should buy a few and try them on the low-angle rig though, so I can slow down the shutter speeds to the needed range during brighter periods of the evening.

more to come later...

Current Magazines

2009-05-09T23:04:00.000-07:00

Currently I'm writing for these magazines:
Performance BMW, BMW Car, Banzai, High Performance Imports, Fast Fours, Hot 4s, Street Machines, Mustang Enthusiast, Mopar Enthusiast, Pontiac Enthusiast, Corvette Enthusiast, Japanese Nostalgic Car, Nissan Sport, Subiesport, Rotary Speed, and Forever Miata magazines.

Also for these two online websites: www.autoguide.com and www.airgunweb.com.

This doesn't mean that's all I'm limited too... if I feel the urge, I'll write about anything at all!

Past magazines include:
Modified Mustangs, Modified Luxury and Exotics, Bimmer, Roundel, Excellence, S3, Track and Racecar, Mazda Sport, and Grassroots Motorsports.

Magazine covers I've earned over the years as a freelancer include:
Banzai, Performance BMW, BMW Car, Mustang Enthusiast, HPI, Modified Mustangs, Subiesport, Fast Fours, and S3. Some of these were simply inset photos on covers, but hey, that's still a feather in my cap as a freelancer!

Hit the ground running

2009-05-09T22:56:00.000-07:00

Okay, right out of the gate I'm going to show you some of my favorite photos from the last five years. This is going to take a little while. When I get a bit better at this whole blogging thing, I'll search for a "gallery" application so I can add it to the page, and perhaps host a bunch of photos up on Flickr, making it easier for all you nice folks to see these cars.

I promise you though, there won't be a boring one in the bunch!

BTW- "Racing Daylight" is a pun which encompasses both the challenge of finding that ever-elusive "magic light" at the end of the day, and a nod to the motorsports I love.

Racing Daylight- an automotive photojournalist's passion

2009-05-09T22:07:00.000-07:00

Welcome to the first of what I hope will be many interesting posts, reviews, and conversations on two of my favorite passions; automobiles and photography. I'm Eric Eikenberry, and this is my story. Back in 2004, after being canned from my semi-cushy job at the local car dealership I sold an old Datsun 240Z racecar (Did you know that "racecar" is actual "bottomless moneypit" in some languages? It's true, look it up!) I'd fixed up. I turned that money into a computer for my wife, and some decent digital photographic equipment, and I essentially launched my own career change. Yup. I was the "change I was seeking", I just didn't know it until I was fired!

Now, more than four years and numerous magazine covers later, I'm a well-published, relatively-unknown freelancer still in Southern California, and still doing what I love. Photographing and writing about automobiles.

I'll be adding information about all sorts of gear I've tried, including a small section on air rifles, and another on electric guitars. Stay tuned for an exciting ride!