Blog

Shot Discipline for Image Quality

What is good shot discipline?

Beginners often ask me settings. Questions can be as vague, as “What settings are good for a wedding”. They are often talking about shutter speeds, ISO, and aperture values when asking this. Of course, this is a question that has no real answer, however I do understand why people ask it. Of course, settings are built around the very scene you wish to capture, and the style and way in which you wish to capture it. This is then dependant on a multitude of factors, including the camera and lens combination, the light, subject, overall scene, motion, the photographer’s creative vision for the picture and more. There is no way we can issue settings for a wedding next July and hope they will work in any way. What we can do however, is build an instinctive understanding of shot discipline at our fingertips which serves us for each and every scene and subject we shoot. Then we truly become masters of the final picture and achieve the results we want in any given situation. It is only by training oneself to really intuitively understand settings and therefore exposure, that we are really ready to shoot something like a wedding. For example, as a photographer, if you are going into a wedding and the pressing concern in your mind is exposure settings; then you are as they say, simply not ready to shoot a wedding.

ISO - Maximising Quality

Regarding the above question, technically speaking, the best settings are the ones which allow your ISO to be at it’s lowest, or closest to base value, whilst keeping the subject sharp and in focus with no motion blur. Why do we do this? I see this all the time, even on websites with photographers’ that should know better - they even write their settings below the picture as if they make sense to be using them, as if they are some holy grail. We know that the best image quality exists at base ISO. That includes, overall dynamic range, noise, colour, shadow detail, and everything else. Because we know this, we should stop taking pictures with settings such as these of static objects - ISO 1600, 1/4000, f/2. If we are at ISO 1600, we are already sacrificing quality and we simply don’t need to. We don’t need a shutter speed of 1/4000 to handhold a photograph of something that isn’t moving, especially with a short lens like for talking sake, a 35mm prime. We can drop down to ISO 800, 1/2000, f/2. We can drop down again to ISO 400, 1/1000, f/2. We can then get to ISO 200, 1/500, f/2. Then we can drop to ISO 100 with 1/250 and f/2. If we need more shutter and the lens opens up to f/1.4 we have even more options. If the lens is under 135mm, there will likely be zero issues. Now we are, for many cameras, at base ISO using some very simple mathematics.

I tend to control ISO myself, as I rarely move it unless the situation changes, and all my camera’s have a dedicated button to do so (this is so important, never shoot with camera’s that don’t have this option). I do not like auto ISO as it does poorly with backlit or front lit subjects and it simply cannot achieve what my minds eye can.

Shoot RAW

Unless you absolutely need JPG for some time pressured thing, or other reason, I highly recommend never using it for shooting. You have bought a nice camera, let’s use it’s full range and ability. Better yet, if we screw up, RAW can save us later on. Shoot RAW, there is no debate on this, if you want to maximise image quality this is the mode you need to be using. With Nikon, choose the uncompressed or lossless compressed RAW setting.

White Balance

White balance tends to matter less when shooting RAW format. WB can be changed in software, when developing the RAW file later. However, there are certain reasons to set a manual WB. In disciplines such as astro photography, when it is common practice to stack multiple hours of data together, we need a consistent WB for that process. Other times when you might consider a pre-determined WB would be a scene that can be measured with a WB card, or to save time with processing consistency in post processing.

Best Shooting Modes

Aperture Priority - When shooting a wedding, this would be the mode that most would use. Let the camera’s computer do some of the heavy lifting. Control ISO yourself and aperture and focus on light and composition. Flash, would involve moving to manual mode as this allows better control of background exposure
Manual - The mode that all landscape photographer’s live in. I also like this mode for shooting portraits that are slower and more deliberate.
Other Modes - Shutter Priority, I am not a fan of. I can simply use aperture priority and look at the shutter speed. I have never personally seen the need for this mode, but if it works for you, there is of course nothing wrong with using it for shooting anything you need. Auto, also not a fan of, just forget about it unless you are handing your camera to someone very inexperienced.

DSLR Mirror - Up Mode

If shooting with a DSLR and doing static work, use this mode. It helps limits vibrations. It can often be coupled with electronic shutter mode, in most modern DSLR cameras. Consider exposure delay mode when shooting like this, with any camera.

Metering

Ensure that you can capture all the relevant scene data in one shot. If not, consider bracketing (tripod required). Use the camera meter and histogram in order to do this. There are many techniques to consider, the most logical one I will touch on here is exposure to the right (ETTR). This is a technique where we use the camera histogram to push the data as far to the right without clipping any highlights. This allows the best shadow detail and fidelity to the overall file, and allows the file to be the most malleable in post processing. This is a topic that I will eventually get to in more detail. NB - note that camera manufacturer’s are lazy. We still don’t have RAW histograms, and the generated histogram in camera is based off of a JPG preview. This is better than nothing but RAW histograms would be the ideal solution. It is therefore important to try and stick to a lowered contrast picture control setting when shooting.

Focus

It goes without saying, that it pays dividens to learn how to use your camera’s autofocus system. Most of the good one’s are not difficult to learn and with some practice, hopefully master. Ensure if you are shooting static shots, that you are in focus and take time with it to confirm best sharpness has been achieved. If shooting fast moving subjects, move into a fast FPS continous shooting mode and use a dynamic focus mode in order to get the best results. If the shot is not in focus, it is often (not always) not useable.

Picture Control

Picture controls can be thought of as unimportant, because of course we can change this all later, and it depends on the final edit software, as to how the image is displayed on a monitor. However, as I alluded to earlier, if you are trying to capture quality data, having a high contrast picture control will not let you see the clip points of the highlights or shadows. Due to this, I recommend to use a neutral profile on most cameras. Flat can also be used, but I find it so faded in so many settings that it can be distracting using it. I consider switching to it in scenes of ultra high contrast, for example at sunrise / sunset times I do use it, along with bracketing of exposures for blending in post processing.

Focal Length and Subject Size / Motion

It is very important to consider what I have detailed above. I have spoke about a static subject. The game changes when we increase focal length, and / or increase the MP density of the sensor, if we wish “per pixel focus” (perfect looking focus at 100% views on large monitors which show no motion blur). With longer focal lengths we need to contend with motion of the viewed frame in the view finder (which could show up in the end picture if we are not careful). Things like Vibration Reduction (VR) and IBIS can prevent this issue, or at least, reduce it. Longer focal lengths, or being closer to the moving subject itself, magnify the view into the scene, and will also magnify the blur if a subject is fast moving, relative to our sensor. If a subject was running at the camera, I may not want to drop my shutter speed too low. This is something that simply comes with experience. The easiest way to build up experience is to test it out on static subjects, such as museum pieces. See how long you can get your shutter speed whilst keeping a sharp shot, and see how close you can get to base ISO. Then try varying speeds of moving subject, with different lens focal lengths.

In the above shot, my son was basically motionless. I could have probably dropped down to ISO 400-500 easily and the resulting shutter speed would have still been adequate to stop any slight motion present. It is important to consider though, that despite good shot discipline being a cornerstone of good photography, it shouldn’t get in the way of such. That is, if the settings are close to perfect and the moment presents itself, do not bother wasting time to adjust something as meagre as dropping half a stop of ISO. You could miss the picture! Look at the meter, quickly adjust if required and shoot the picture. Here is another, very static scene, now we only have the motion of the photographer and camera / lens combination to consider…

Notice the settings. I am at base ISO of 64 for this picture because I know I can confidently handhold a 24mm prime at 1/40 shutter speed. This is a really practical example of why I always practice good shot discipline. Notice the outside area to the upper right of the frame which is spilling up with bright overcast daylight? If I were at ISO 200, 400, that area could have become blocked up white. (We know that as ISO increases, dynamic range lowers). In museums, we rarely want or are allowed to bring tripods to bracket exposures - so by practicing with this technique, I was able to gather all the data at the scene in one RAW file, and process it with a luminosity mask to bring it all back, producing a pleasing well rounded shot. What I love about shots like these, is the sheer depth and 3D nature you can impart into a 2D image. It really is quite beautiful, and it is the reason I simply love using prime lenses such as these (and not slow aperture zooms) to create pictures like this.

The next time you are out shooting, think about good shot discipline…if you aren’t already, shoot in RAW format, drive the ISO of the camera and use manual mode, or Aperture Priority, driving the exposure compensation buttons to control the scene in front of you.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Nikon 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.4D and 50mm 1.8D Primes

Introduction

When I shoot people, my objective is to make them look great, hopefully in addition to making an impactful picture overall. With the advent of high resolution camera sensors, we have to be very careful these days otherwise we easily obtain nasty 'digital’ looking images with too much sharpness, and too much post processing going on. I have many influences, however most are not photographer related. Rather, I am personally very influenced by paintings. Iconic work by Gainsborough - ‘The Blue Boy’ stands out for me, the work of Sir Joshua Reynolds and the influence that had to bring to life the fantastic Barry Lyndon. 17th and 18th Century paintings have a great deal of qualities about them that overall make the subject memorable and beautiful, and make me want to emulate them as much as possible. I am also a huge fan of Renaissance paintings. Notice none are particularly “sharp” feeling when viewing them. More on this later.

Lenses are obviously a huge part of how we have the camera interpret the scene, after all the obvious givens such a light, subject, decisive moment. I found an affinity that never left me after picking up a mixture of 50mm primes from the Nikon D700 days, ala 2010. I have been shooting with these little lenses for well over a decade now on my DSLRs (yes I still use DSLRs, despite owning Z equipment now). Many will say that optically they have been superseded (and yes, for certain applications, such as astrophotography, I would not specifically buy them for as they have too many aberrations near wide open apertures to be a staple for this genre*). However, for portraiture, and the photography of “things” / “stuff” I find them very satisfying to use. For me, a 50mm is a lens that should be nice and light, and ready to go anywhere. I don’t want to lug one of these huge brick like 50/1.2 lenses about. Nikon’s 50mm f/1.2S lens is frankly ridiculous for a 50mm, and it’s length mostly exists to protect the lens from focus breathing (this only affects video shooters). I am not going to tell you that these little prime lenses are optically the utter 'la crème de la crème, in terms of numbers and specifications, or lens MTF resolution. They won’t pass your graphs and spreadsheets game, however they are able to produce beautiful images with a bit of practice, they are small, light and relatively speaking inexpensive options that really can create and impact an individual look to your pictures, if that is your thing…

When shooting portraiture, generally I do not prioritise ultra sharp lenses. I find most modern primes to be sufficiently sharp for this task, so this really is a lower priority on my list. I need to reiterate this basic point whilst we are talking about image sharpness, for me, even babies with perfect skin look better with a slightly softer lens that produces some level of spherical aberration at it’s widest apertures, essentially, to be shot with a lens that is tuned to being used for portraits. Spherical aberration is a biggie when it comes to portrait-tuned lenses; over correcting it in a lens design tends to adversely affect bokeh and the focal plane transition. This aberration goes away as we stop down, so lenses that have high correction tend to be very sharp from their widest aperture, and conversely lenses that are a bit softer and have a glow wide open generally are under corrected. With the 50mm lenses that I own: I use them on both full and crop framed sensor cameras, giving either 50mm or 85mm equivalent views respectively.

The 50mm f/1.4G - Good for low light, and keeps bokeh balls round even stopped down. This was shot at f/1.4.

It is important to consider, that your shooting likes and wants may not align with mine or the next photographer. I will admit to using a very mixed bag when it comes to lenses across different genres, and I have that luxury in order to do so as I have been shooting for some time. At night, for my astro work, I would be using a completely different lens, compared to during the day shooting like I am in this blog post. This also might go for landscape too, however I have successfully used all of these 50’s for landscape shooting also, because stopped down they mostly match modern lenses anyway. You might also prefer a very sharp portrait lens. There are situations where I have reached for my 35/1.4 Sigma Art lens because I wanted a bit more sharpness on my subject at the focal plane, and was less bothered about the resulting bokeh. I will not say the bokeh of the sigma is bad either, again it is different and altogether a subjective quality. I have shot plenty of what I feel are good pictures with the 35 1.4 art lens. If you are someone that isn’t particuarly flush I do not recommend you choose and own x4 50mm lenses for each situation or shooting scenario. You should obviously choose one that you think will work for you most of the time. I hope this guide reveals something about that process and helps inform.

50mm is not always thought of a portrait focal length, however there is a lot one can do with a 50mm lens such as these, and it of course depends on your subject’s overall size. 85mm prime lenses are more thought of as classic portrait lenses, as the longer focal length keeps us further from the subject, and thus reduces perspective distortion. That said, 50mm lenses spend more time on my camera bodies than any other prime lens, and they are absolutely viable for portraiture. Some great portraits, particularly environmental portraits (as I am showing in most of this article) have been taken with 50mm lenses. I think it is important to know the rules, then be able to break them when needed. (I reiterate, a portrait can be taken with any focal length). I like to have options (I’ll explain why soon), which is why I have three 50mm primes as it is my favourite focal length. Combined with my 24-70/2.8S, I have x4 50mm focal lengths to shoot with. Crazy? Perhaps, however when you begin to see what I show in some of this article, it opens your eyes. I currently have the 50mm 1.4G and the 50mm 1.8D along with the 50mm f/1.4D primes for f mount. I sometimes shoot these via the FTZII adapter to be able to use them on my Z8 Camera. Sadly these are manual focus only, as Nikon is lazy and made the bare basic adapter they could. See my discussion on why Nikon needs to make an FTZIII with full autofocus support for all screw driven lenses here. All three of these lenses play differently, and have various strengths and weaknesses. All of the Nikon 50mm lenses vignette quite a lot wide open, however this is a characteristic for this type of photography that I like to stamp on my images, with the caveat that it is totally adjustable later on anyway. The 1.4G has smoother bokeh, and is tuned slightly more to the gaussian blur end of the spectrum in terms of the backgrounds it can produce especially when at close range, alas:

Note that, with this lens, it can produce quite a smooth background bokeh in the right circumstances. For low light portraiture, I feel it works better than the 50mm 1.4D and 1.8D, and I very much like what it does in terms of focal plane transitions, here is a good example showing some good bokeh and beautiful focal plane transitions:

Now let me show you the much older 50mm 1.8D prime, which produces a much rougher background bokeh most of the time, but has absolutely zero distortion and produces, in the right circumstances, a great 3D effect. This can occur quite convincingly to the eye, if all the scene elements line up accordingly, the basics - like light, camera to subject distance, subject to background distance, the scene geometry etc. This is a topic I might explore in greater detail in time.

Notice the less smooth, (rougher) background blur here. I am closer, different light, different day, different aperture, different lens. however despite all that I can tell you from years of shooting with these lenses that this 1.8D just draws differently. I like this look. During the day, I really like using the 1.8D lens, because it imprints something unique onto the picture. In fact, as you probably guessed, this is what this blog post is about - all three of these lenses draw very differently and it all depends what you want from your picture. Here is the smoother 1.4G again:

But what about the f/1.4D you ask? This lens is similar to the 1.4G, but it has a softer look wide open, with much less contrast which adds to this. Again, not a bad thing - these things must align with your shooting style and objectives for your picture. The 1.4G improved upon wide open sharpness and contrast in it’s design, and definitely has less chromatic aberration. It also benefits from some coating magic, that the older 1.4D does not have. This means that there is a distinct glow and loss of contrast when using it wide open due to it having bags of spherical aberration. This really gives the ‘Barry Lyndon’ look when shot indoors, especially around candle light. However, as I said it is not necessarily bad news if your shooting wants align with mine, and as said, can produce quite a painterly image, notice the glow effect to the subject’s face because I have used it wide open at f/1.4:

The 50mm f/1.4D is the clear leader out of these 50mm lenses in terms of focus speed. It is blisteringly fast, another huge plus point to owning one. There are of course, other differences. Both of the older D designs are a little more blue shifted in their final outputs. The 1.4G lens is a hint shifted towards a yellower output in the resulting RAW. The D lenses both have much sharper, more defined and ultimately pleasing sunstars. So if you want to use the lens at night stopped down on city lights, or during the day at times such as sunset to make beautiful diffraction spikes off light sources, these do much better, the G is simply no use in that regard, and compared to most modern Nikon F or Z lenses, these are by far the most pleasing that I have seen. I really dislike shooting night scenes like these or sunsets where the sunstar is poor and mushy. It really takes away from the bite you can get when they look supreme, like they do here:

50mm 1.4D Sunstars are excellent — 50mm f/1.8D Sunstars. This was only shot at f/5.6! I don’t need to be at f/16 to obtain this effect. Modern Z lenses are terrible for this, even stopped down they are not great. Note the 1.4D is very similar to this picture. *The 1.4G isn’t great for this.*

The older D lenses, definitely have more out of control aberrations going on wide open, most which improve on stopping down. In a very real sense, with the 1.4D you get a dual personality lens, as long as you like the wide open look, stopping down quickly takes out the glow, and brings in super levels of sharpness right up until f/8. I rarely use this aperture, unless doing school studio style portraits though. Generally the biggest difference I see is, the 1.4G is slightly sharper wide open, and more contrasty than the 1.4D, however it is still what most would call ‘soft’ compared to modern primes. Again, this is not necessarily a bad thing. I’ve been creating with these lenses for years and I can tell you people like how they look in the pictures, and I don’t have to spend days prepping them with blur filters etc, or spending huge amounts of time with techniques such as frequency seperation on skin. People want to look like movie stars, they don’t want to see all the lines on their face, especially as they get older.

The flattest, least distorting of the three primes is the 50mm 1.8D which has basically zero, which has it’s applications on it’s own. I find the 1.8D is sharp very close to maximum aperture and I use it during the day a great deal, even wide open as I love the look it produces.

Both the D lenses produce a more pronounced flare pattern. Sometimes it can be a red / yellow defined area, sometimes a ring around the image (I actually oddly like it sometimes) but we really have to expose the front element to serious levels of off axis sunlight to get this:

This image was taken without the lens hood (which does not come with the lens). This flare would have potentially been avoided with the hood.

The 1.4G lens flares less than both D lenses, but it can still occur with this lens too. None of this bothers me too much - I often like a bit of flare in my images, depending on the scene and subject. In the above image, it would involve some complex photoshop work to remove. Flare can also occur when more stopped down, and produces the ‘film-like’ lens element pattern flare we see when the sun is in the frame, or another hard light source. This I always like to leave in, as it gives a very organic look to the resulting picture.

Here is the 1.4D lens shot at sunset on a D810 body (shot taken 24th December 2024). This is about as ‘weak’ shot discipline as I’ll use. What do I mean by this? See here. For this particular shot, I pushed things. I dropped down to ISO 64, knowing that this winter sunset scene was a little light starved in terms of quantity of available light to stop motion. This left me with a good metered exposure of 1/50, ISO 64 and f/1.4. It had to be f/1.4 here to maintain this. I waited until he was still, used good hand holding technique - and got a ‘pixel level’ sharp shot. Why am I doing this? Well, ISO 64 is a little bit of a Nikon miracle. It is the reason I have been able to make this shot feel like you are right there, from every piece of highlight, right down to the shadows. I used the 50mm f/1.4D because it is my favourite daylight 50mm. Not hard to see why, it has bags of microcontrast and creates an image more akin to a painting, than something that came off a digital sensor:

Next up is a picture with the 50mm 1.4D at night. This is an entirely different kettle of fish when we are speaking about low light. In these situations, this lens produces a softer, more painterly feel to the final result than the 1.4G or 1.8D would, however there are some issues in the bokeh that now show up that aren’t as evident during daylight hours. You can see that the bokeh in the background is rougher than the 1.4G lens in these situations, and does suffer from ‘outlining’ in the bokeh:

You can also note, as with all Nikon f/1.4 primes, there is off axis mechanical vignetting. Notice the bokeh balls centrally are quite rounded, however as we move off axis, they become pinched. This is simply the restrictions of the mount in designing fast lenses. You will find on Z mount, that the edges don’t do this in the same way. It’s one of the reasons Nikon designed the Z mount with a greater diameter and smaller throat: for lens design.

A 50mm lens is also great for ‘close up’ shots which aren’t macro. We can get quite tight onto subjects and really compose the heck out of the scene to make an impact:

Nikon D200 with 50mm f/1.4D. (acts as 85mm FOV). More like a painting than a picture during daylight.

Below is the 1.4D with a stopped down aperture on a bright spring day. Notice the backgrounds I am showing with the 1.4D compared to the newer G. The G is smoother, but I still like the effect of the older D lens. Sometimes I feel this rougher background helps to trick a type of 3D pop effect to the resulting image:

Here is another using the 50mm f/1.4D prime lens, now in a wedding scenario. Notice that the background bokeh is definitely a little more rough. Some may not like this: we are tuned to prefer gaussian blur type bokeh in the photography community. However, I think it is very characterful, and helps produce, when other supporting elements are within the frame, a 3D effect to the resulting picture:

Here is the slightly smoother 1.4G. I have tried to show a similar subject to background / lighting situation here. You can see that the 1.4G has smoother backgrounds, generally speaking. It does have a nice focus transition too. Closer up, the 1.4G has smoother, more modern style bokeh.

As previously mentioned, all of the nikon 50’s (and mostly all fast lenses on the old mounts), produce a bit of cats eye bokeh, especially with close up subjects to varying degrees. This is due to mechanical vignetting at the mount diameter. I quite like the overall look most of the 1.4G lens for pictures such as these:

Nikon D810, 50mm 1.8D @ f/1.8. It’s crazy bokeh really gives a punch during daylight.

Which Lens?

There are some obvious differentiators here. The first difference can be price and size. If money matters, the 50mm 1.8D can be had for a song. Easily the cheapest. It is quite well built considering, and even has a metal mount and a sort of in built lens hood that works well. This lens is the smallest Nikon 50mm prime lens available, and it can easily fit in the pocket or even jeans. Few lenses can do this! The 1.8D lens has no manual focus override switch, so in order to do this you have to switch it on the body. This isn’t really a big deal and I never really use this function on DSLRs which focus the lens easily anyway, both fast and accurately. The 50mm 1.8D is very sharp stopped down just slightly. It has the least distortion and by f/2.2-2.8 it is very contrasty. Even wide open I find it so pleasing, even in hard light during the day. It has a strong 3D effect to the files when everything measures up in the scene, including the light. Stopping down causes stop sign bokeh because the lens has 7 aperture blades, so the diaphram is not as rounded, however this gives as I have shown, much nicer and more prounonced sunstars. Like the 1.4D there is zero weather sealing. A great, lightweight day shooting lens. All three lenses produce chromatic aberrations in differing amounts, the G lens being slightly better. This encompases both longitudinal (spherochromatism - purple / green infront and behind the focal plane in an image), and lateral CA, which appears on things like tree branches against bright backgrounds. I’ve not laboured on showing these examples much in this article because they are so simple to correct if they show up in post processing. The 1.8D is small and uses a 52mm filter thread which does not rotate, taking filters easily if required.

The 50mm 1.4D is more expensive still. Not always a great choice at night, as it produces smearing over light sources and has the most chromatic aberration of the three, but of course it can be stopped down slightly to massively improve this. During the day, it produces nice painterly pictures, but has very low contrast effect wide open (again, this effect is easily cleaned up by f/2). This lens has by far the most chromatic aberration of the three. In certain circumstance it can be a little tougher to correct because it can cause slightly thicker than normal purple transitions at backlit focal planes on the subject in certain situations. It has a good 3D look to the files. Stopping down causes stop sign bokeh because the lens has 7 aperture blades, so the diaphram is not as rounded, however this gives as I have shown, much nicer and more prounonced sunstars. Like the 1.8D there is zero weather sealing. I like it’s overall look despite these optical flaws / characteristics. Like the 1.8D, the 1.4D lens has no manual focus override switch, so in order to do this you have to switch it on the body. This isn’t really a big deal and I never really use this function on DSLRs which focus the lens easily anyway, both fast and accurately. The 1.4D is a small lens (the in between of the three) and takes 52mm filters which do not rotate, the same as the 1.8D.

50mm 1.4G Bokeh is smooth and more gausian blur type. It suits scenes such as these.

The 50mm 1.4G is the sharpest wide open, and the most contrasty, however it is important to reconcile that it is no where near the levels of sharpness obtained by even more recent lens designs. It’s bokeh is smoother than both of the others, and when stopping down, the bokeh balls stay rounded, and it probably has the best focus transitions of the three. It has a good 3D look to the files in my opinion. It is the most expensive. It has a rubber gasket, which I feel more confident using it in inclement weather. I have owned it for 14 years and never had an issue in this regard. The 50mm 1.4G has the least outlining on bokeh behind subjects out of all of these lenses. I recommend the 50mm 1.4G for low light, especially if shooting stopped down slightly, because the bokeh stays rounded due to it’s 9 bladed aperture. A huge boon for this lens, is that if you own a body without a built in focus motor, it will still autofocus. The 1.8D lenses above, require a body that plugs into the lens and controls autofocus. You can check if your camera has this ability, otherwise you will be using manual focus with the 1.4D and 1.8D lenses. Note that that 1.4G is slower to autofocus than the D lenses. (Nikon try to lie about this and state things like ‘faster, more precise autofocus with the G lenses’), however the facts speak for themselves. Owning all of these lenses, easily reveals to me that the 50mm 1.4D focuses the fastest out of all of them, and by quite a margin. All of the D lenses without focus motors are noiser than their more silent G counterparts when shooting, but all of them focus faster than any 50mm G lens. The 1.4G lens is the largest of the three lenses by quite a noticable amount, and unlike the other two lenses, it comes with a lens hood. It uses an odd 58mm filter thread which does not rotate.

Whichever you choose, (or if you decide to add multiple 50’s) I stress that these lenses are great for people and stuff / things. They are quite characterful, not perfect optically, however can produce beautiful, painterly results. The most important thing I consider is the overall render of a lens of this type. Do I like the type of picture it provides? Your milage is going to vary on this, and you may find that neither three are right for you. This said, I wanted to touch on some of the differences between them here. This is clearly not a scientific test, but my thoughts of what I have seen with using these three over many years. I did not include the 50mm 1.8G Nikkor that came out after the 1.4G, because I have never shot with it. From what I have seen from reviewing hundreds of images, it is ever so slightly sharper wide open than all of the others, however IMO has the worst bokeh. This, of course is subjective. Because it has quite a lot of distortion, the worst bokeh, and it is a 1.8, it doesn’t fit for me, and I am happy with the three that I own and use in this article.

Nikon Z 8, 50mm 1.4G @ f/3.5 on a star tracker mount, March 2024

*For Astrophotography work (as shown above, a single tracked frame from a huge mosaic image - see my astro landscape gallery), although I wouldn’t tell anyone to go and buy these lenses specifically, especially for wide open work (they are not well corrected for the task), the irony is I regularly use the 50mm 1.4G at 2.8-3.5 on a star tracker, with acceptable results. I am considering what to buy in the future to allow me to shoot around f/1.8-2.5, at night. It is important to note, that all three of these Nikon 50’s have severe astigmatism if shot wide open at night. This will make the stars in the corners look like little seagulls, rather than points of light. This affect takes a few stops to dissipate, which is why you don’t see it on the above image, shot at f/3.5.

Final Thought

Remember that owning one of these AF-D lenses which does not have a focus motor built-in, means their longevity is going to greatly surpass any G lens that has an onboard autofocus motor. Moving parts eventually wear out. The more complex the design, the more likely this happens quicker. Lenses such as the 50mm 1.4D and other classics such as the 85mm f/1.4D, will long surpass their G level counterparts. While it might seem like an antiquated technology to have the camera body physically plug into a little socket on the lens to turn the helicoid, in order to move the lens elements to focus the image; it just works. I also ask you this, does it really matter how a lens focuses to you? Generally speaking, I do not see them to be any less accurate than the G lenses in terms of focus precision, another flat out lie that Nikon marketing tell us about the new G lenses. Also, further to this as mentioned earlier in this article, most of the G lenses are actually slower to focus than the D versions. As you can probably tell; I’ve written this article as a photographer who likes to obtain a certain look from lenses. Make sure your views align with mine before taking my advice and spending the money.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Let’s leave this with a couple of drinks, because I seem to have a shot a lot of them with this lens…

Steve

Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer 2i Star Tracker

The Star Adventurer on a 055 Manfrotto Tripod

I have been using the Star Adventurer 2i for four years now and it is a mount that has enabled me to capture some beautiful astro landscape images and also photograph objects in the deep sky. When I first obtained this mount, I had no idea I would be venturing deeper into the sky to photograph galaxies like Andromeda, or star clusters close up like the Pleiades. When I first received the mount in 2020, I practiced first in my garden and I recommend all users do this where possible.

The Build

Unpacking this star tracker, the first impressions are that is is solid and well built. It requires a tripod (ideally carbon fibre to minimise vibrations, but I have photographed plenty with an Aluminium tripod and it has been fine). This star tracker comes with Wifi, and I will discuss later why this is such a boon if you want to keep things as simple and efficient as possible when shooting under dark skies. Save for the plastic reticule, used for polar alignment, the build of the SA 2i is of very good quality. The knobs and dials all have a quality feel to them and the mount can be powered by x4 AA batteries (I use rechargables), or via USB connection to a powerbank - a really nice function and quick to connect in the field. The pro pack, comes with a metal declination bracket and counterweight (I bought an extra weight for balance - this is crucial for great tracking at 200mm). There is also a ballhead attachment, which I use for astro - landscape pictures, allowing focal lengths of about 85mm and under to be attached via it. The polar scope is nice and clear. I do recommend a right-angled polar scope attachment, to save your neck when trying to align. The included equatorial wedge is of good quality - and much better than some other star trackers in this price point. It has never given me an issue in terms of it’s overall build quality.

Declination bracket for long lenses showing the polar scope connected over this for polar aligning

Polar Aligning and Balancing

When getting setup in the garden, the first challenge is to setup the SA in proper polar alignment and the mount being properly balanced in order that it functions and tracks well. This seems daunting it first, however with some practice you will get faster and better at doing so, like any task. In the northern hemisphere this process is simplified by requiring only to align to one star - Polaris. What you will find is, Polaris isn’t exactly the North Celestial Pole. The NCP is actually located in a circle around this star. The Star Adventurer app, which can be downloaded from Play store, enables information on how to align everything, depending on your location and the time of night. When I first received this star tracker, I luckily had a clear night a few days later (doesn’t always happen), I started with an 85/1.4 prime to give me a bit of a challenge. Polar aligning involves attaching an individual plastic part - a reticule into the SA which illuminates the polar scope and enables alignment. I was pleased that I could get 4 minutes right off the bat with the alignment I set. I didn’t try any more than this as I was pleased I could achieve pinpoint stars for 4 minutes at this focal length. Balancing involves moving the counterweight on the declination bracket so that with the clutch disengaged, no resulting motion occurs. It’s a case of bearing in mind some basic mechanics: Moment (turning force) = F (force) x D (distance). Put simply, use the lever arm on the bracket to place the weight in the place that causes no motion when the mount (clutch) is unlocked.

Nikon Z 8 and 70-200/2.8S with proper configuration and Declination bracket use

Using Wifi and the app

As I alluded to earlier, the Wifi functionality and the Sky-Watcher App really bring this system to life, and make it very simple to use. Classically, if you wished to control a deep sky session with a camera and a mount, you need to use either a laptop, an Asiair, or at the very least an intervalometer connected into the camera. The great thing about Wifi funcitonality, and the app, is that I don’t need any of this extra clutter when I am outside freezing myself to death photographing deep sky objects. I can simply connect to the mount via the phone app, and all I need is one cable running from the camera into the mount. From the app, I can control exposure length, spacing between exposures and even dither in one axis. (Dithering is a process that involves instructions for the mount to move the field of view slightly between exposures so that when stacking images, things like fixed pattern noise and other nasties such as hot pixels get cancelled out of the stack). Essentially this process improves your data and I nearly always use this. Wifi in this mount (indicated by the 2i in it’s title) might seem trivial, however it has made everything so simple to use. I previously tried an Asiair with DSLRs and found it fiddly and had issues with live view. I get very little time under dark skies. I either have cloud, or worse rain, or extremely high winds, or a moon to contend with. On nights that I have time to do this, I don’t want to spend time with laptops and cables running all over the place, troubleshooting one problem after another, with a setup that takes an hour to start shooting, then the same time to break it down at the end of the night. Speak to any deep sky astro shooter - they will tell you they have wasted many nights not taking images. Instead they have been tearing their hair out trying to fix some random technical issue.

The Star Adventurer app is simple and well thought out with no connection issues ever

What can you achieve with the SA?

Essentially, this mount is suitable for tracking skies from extreme ultra-wide angle focal lengths, such as 14mm right up to about 200mm with decent exposure times, with no guiding. I am able to get pinpoint stars at 200mm with 2 minute exposures (be aware of course, that 200mm and 2 minutes needs practice to nail consistently). People are shooting this mount at 400mm and even 600mm, but bare in mind they are binning a portion of their sub exposures due to periodic error and completing very short exposure times of 30 seconds or less to prevent trailing. I have been asked before why I don’t guide - I see many shooting at 135mm-200mm and adding in guiding, it is just not required, as I am proving. None of my pictures are guided! Remember what I said earlier: simplicity is the greatest invention, Guiding would add another camera and cables into the mix, with all the problems associated with it such as laptops and Asiairs to control the device. I will say though, that if you are shooting with a large equatorial mount at a focal length of 600mm and up, you know what you need and it is obvious that to achieve decent exposure times, such as 3-5 minutes - you are going to have to guide. However, we are not speaking about that. I suggest you place the limit of this system at 200mm and forget guiding. If you want to try some ultra deep pictures for fun on this mount, go ahead but keep the exposures short. This system isn’t really meant for that. That would be where the larger mounts come in to play.

About 4 hours of exposures from bortle 4-5 using the above setup

Small Deep Sky Objects with the SA 2i

So since I have said we are topping out at 200mm for the most part, how do we fill the frame with small objects? Well, the answer is: we don’t, but there are several strategies which will help. The first is looking at your camera. I recommend a high megapixel camera, shot in crop mode, or a crop camera. The reason for this is, generally speaking you will get more pixels on target and fill the frame with them better. For example, a Nikon Z 8 (45MP full frame sensor) shot in x1.5 crop mode, gives just under 20 megapixels. The second part to this is enacted in post processing, called drizzle. So let us take Andromeda as an example. Now it isn't the smallest deep sky object, but having it fill the frame is hard at 200mm, but as you can see, I have made a half decent picture of it. Part of this is down to when you process the resulting stacked image, the object physically gets larger. After we have put the camera into crop mode, or selected a x1.5 crop body to begin with in PP, we can do something called drizzle integration. This was developed by NASA. This is a method of obtaining more detail in your resulting file, meaning, if done correctly, we can produce a file larger than 20MP, perhaps put it back to 45MP, and thus crop it much more aggressively in post, enabling a closer view of your deep sky object. To benefit from drizzle, you must have a lot of data, multiple hours. The data also must be dithered, as I mentioned earlier - this mount allows for that. If you are using another mount that doesn’t do this - then this technique won’t work. This along with the other points raised here is one of the many reasons I highly recommend the SA 2i.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Comet C2022 E3 (ZTF) shot with the Star Adventurer mount and a 70-200/2.8 lens, Camera - Nikon D850

Acratech GXP Ballhead

Arcratech GXP Ball Head — Acratech GXP Ballhead with Arca Swiss style plate

I have been shooting with this very special ballhead now for around nine months. I had heard of Acratech years ago, and noted they were a highly sought after brand based in California. In recent times, I updated (or added to) my current tripod by purchasing a Gitzo Mountaineer Series 3 - finally being properly serious in the tripod department. Not a cheap investment, and more on that later. I was searching for a new, excellent ballhead to pair it up with. I searched around and explored / mulled options for a good few weeks - which is mostly how I make all my decisions photographic. What always impresses me is solid engineering concepts. This thing looked very different, and with the Acratech name branded on it - caught my eye immediately. I watched this video on youtube which I have got to admit, totally reeled me in, called Acratech Ball Head Performance. Watch as Scott, drops a two-tonne truck onto this ballhead, and it does nothing to it. He freezes it, drops it in sand. It comes out unscathed, undamaged, fully functional. I am sorry if this doesn’t do it for you but to me and my background - I simply love when someone designs something and puts their heart into it and better still, gives you a 10 year guarantee with it. I love people that stand by their designs and products - this sort of behaviour speaks to me. (More on this later)

The Build

This Ballhead is constructed of aircraft quality 6061-T6 Aluminium and is C.N.C (computer numerically controlled) manufactured, which basically means - to very high tolerances. All threaded fasteners are machined from stainless steels and all bearing surfaces are machined from a special copolymer similar to Teflon. The ballhead has a very solid and substantial feel, weighing in at 450 grams, yet able to support a weight of just under 23kg. There is a very handy and accurate spirit level too that comes with both versions of this GXP head. All the knobs and dials have a quality feel and are locktited to and designed not to be able to come undone or fall off. Unlike other ballheads, this is an open design, which means sand, grit etc does not affect it in the same way that it could with other ballhead designs. This is definitely a plus. There is even a lovely 360 degree dial on the base with a moveable marker - perfect for panoramic / star tracker usage. I have used this as my main ballhead for landscape and astrophotography for some time now and I have never had more trust in a product. I love the solid feel, the overall construction, the solidness of the clamp and the fine adjustment of the dials. I use the marked base for astro work to give me nice overlaps too - it all just works and nothing gets in the way of it’s function, cold, heat, or even dropping a two-tonne truck on it! (I try to avoid this, though).

Panoramic Function and Star Tracker Use

The GXP also has a very nice panoramic function. Using the provided allen key, in the field, the whole thing can be turned up side down by removing the quick release clamp and installing it on the base (it is a very fast thing to do and sounds more difficult to do than it actually is - it’s easy), allowing for panoramic images to be taken without the requirement for a levelling base! It really is win win if you hate getting the whole tripod level for functions such as this, and will aid your pano stitching software and improve your end result with things like distortion and stitching. For star tracker use, which I do a great deal of it works really well. With a camera like the Nikon Z 8, I have done away with bothering to use a shaky V platform to level the ballhead, and now I just use the GPX directly connected into the star tracker declination plate. I am able to do this up to about 85mm no problem and still stitch the panorama no problem. (85mm is where I stop with panos - I find any more than this and it is torturous, I prefer 50mm maximum most of the time). The reason I am able to do all this is the Z 8 camera is so sensitive at night, I can swing the camera to the right positions using the LCD monitor and the GXP keeps everything ultra stable as the shot is taken.

Which one is right for you?

There are two varients of this ballhead, a standard clamp which is what most of us are used to when using arca - swiss style clamp systems. One simply places the plate into the clamp and tightens it down with the knob. The other option is a locking lever. Faster of course, however I prefer to stick with the standard so that there are not differences between my other ball heads. This could lead to problems at night, at worst, equipment falling from a height and being damaged. It is for this reason that I try to keep consistency with these types of things. I like to have the spirit level my side of the camera, so this means with the standard clamp, the knob is at the side you don’t see when clamping. I got used to this very quickly and have had no problems ensuring a snug and secure connection to my camera.

Where to Buy?

In the UK these babies can be difficult to come across. I highly recommend looking at Bob Rigby Photographic, who are official UK importers of Acratech products. Their service and advice is second to none and they always go above and beyond with aftercare. They have both style’s of GXP and other Acratech products on their website which come usually in only a few days maximum. Regarding Acratech themselves, I’ve actually been in conversation with the founder and CEO, Scott Dordick when I accidentally scraped one of the adjustment knobs off a rock during a minor fall. Via the team at Bob, he simply sent a knew knob with instruction on how to fit it. He reassured me that if any servicing or the like was ever needed to post it back to him and he would look at it. Now that is peace of mind that is missing in a lot of products these days, and the old adage: you get what you pay for. Whilst not a cheap product at all, this absolutely applies here, and a user can waste so much money buying multiple inferior products. Coming in at around about the same price points as RRS ballheads of this level (B-40, B-55), I feel I snagged all the advantages and none of the disadvantages of a what I feel is the best ballhead on the market today for landscape / astro use with the caveats mentioned in this short review. Highly Recommended!

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Nikon Z 8 Camera

A Mini Review from Summer 2023

This is a long one, with some rambling, so get yourself a drink and get comfortable!

So I have mainly been a DSLR shooter for well over a decade. I have multiple bodies - from a D200, D700, D810 and a D850. The Z 8 was my first buy in to mirrorless, as I felt it was a d850 in a mirrorless form. I think this is a fairly accurate view despite it also being a baby Z 9 if you take for granted that the Z 8 obviously outstrips the 850 in focus, FPS and video modes. I will be using this camera to do astrophotography - both astro landscape, and deep sky. Along with plenty of regular landscape photography and portraiture. So I don't require great speed or fps but the other aspects of this body finally drew me in to Nikon’s Z mount.

First off...the Z 8 is beautiful: It looks stylish. It is sleek, curved but carries the hard edges synonymous with the Z mount styling. The top screen and clover layout of buttons on the top left of the body have made a return in mirrorless world and this is a great thing indeed. I like the LCD monitor which flips both ways and is highly detailed. It takes time to feel confident opening and closing it initially though. The playback and menu buttons have moved to a more logical placement on the bottom right ala the Z 9. Button placement is nicely done and there are plenty to limit menu diving like Nikon’s previous mirrorless bodies. (It is however, annoying however that Nikon took the VR switches off it's lenses; forcing a menu dive). Customisation of the Z 8 is excellent; you can be confident that you will be able to set up everything how you like it to be. The focus mode button is back. The grip is comfortable and really reminds me of the 850. The light up buttons: a boon for Nikon but a crying shame for Canon or Sony shooters that don’t have this! The EVF / LCD switch easily, automatically when appropriate, and this has been well implemented overall. The EVF is bright and smooth (it drops into choppy mode to save energy at times, the time at which it does this can be user adjusted or shut off completely and kept ultra smooth. I find the EVF resolution good, especially when reviewing photos I can see and zoom to check focus has been attained with no problems. The LCD monitor is great, ala the D850 and it tilts in both axes finally, something I believe should have been done along time ago in DSLR land. Battery life is not very different to me compared to a D850 because of the way I used the D850. It was mostly used with the LCD monitor on - thus there is no change in this aspect for me. If you only used OVF, you should buy an extra battery or two. I did wonder if I'd get the same life as say shooting the D850 with LV only vs the Z 8 in 'LV' mode and I do. This was important as I spent a lot of time with the d850 in silent mode, using the LCD exclusively. This limits shutter wear on deep sky astro and landscape time-lapse and prevents vibrations. Another logical reason to get the Z 8 for me, I thought. I love the extended shutter speeds up to 15 minutes. I don’t really use the 10-pin socket much at all now, (however I do need that for connecting into my star tracker so I am glad it still exists) and I used to extensively because I am a long exposure photographer for a lot of what I do - either during the day or at night. This has improved my user experience as dealing with remotes generally speaking can be a faff. This is however, a function should have been in DSLRs years ago. (I note the Z7ii had this). Further to this...I have always said to myself that a Z 8 will not, for the most part change my photography and that's fine, you wouldn’t want that to be the case anyway. For me it is going to he about user experience and new possibilities. This leads me to starlight view. This is a huge boon for someone like me who spends nights under dark skies. No longer do I have to stand about wasting time with high ISO test shots on rare clear nights that we get here in Scotland. I can compose with starlight view fast and easily, then take the shot. This is quite liberating! It also helps in deep sky photography to frame up the target (more on this in the coming months perhaps). I can feel more connected to the scene now and have now with me, night vision, it is so sensitive it will pick up faint aurora in this mode, that my eyes cannot see. This along with the screen means I stay warmer and get shooting faster. I'll no longer need to lie on the ground to get those vertical shots. I'll also be able to easily power the camera all night with a battery pack and a simple USB-C connector. Autofocus from what I have seen so far is excellent. The new processor really bests previous Nikon mirrorless models and although I still find myself moving points about, I like the large boxes and letting it find eyes within them etc. Even with my 24/1.4G nikkor through the FTZ II, it nailed most shots of my son fast moving towards me. Simple stuff affects user experience!

I would like to see some minor things. It might just be me but I would like the option to see a battery percentage like my phone rather than these little 90s looking blocks of a battery to simulate remaining battery lifespan. I'll live though. One thing that I did notice...the on off switch is very 'sharp' feeling compared to the DSLRs. I understand the ‘Z’ styling but let's not cut our fingers Nikon, again I can live with it. (2024 edit - I strangely got very used to this now and don’t notice it). Okay elephant in room for anyone that is serious about data collection. RAW histograms. Granted this isn't just Nikon; all the camera companies need to take this seriously; especially at this price point. This would really allow pushing the data as far to the right as possible (the shot on the monitor would look terrible but that would be corrected later - you would achieve technically perfect exposure for the sensor that could be developed and worked on in post processing). I can get close to this without RAW histograms, but just that little bit more would be nice since we are shooting with a ‘big boy’ camera. I'd like to see Nikon provide a mode for deep sky astro guys like me to turn off the peripheral shading correction applied to RAW files or any data filtering on the files applied to assist with daylight photography, which can sometimes cause concentric rings to form when stacking hours of data of a night. (More on this as I test). Couple other minor things spring to mind that Nikon should be doing. Nikon ought to allow adjustment of the f/5.6 aperture when focusing at f/5.6 or smaller apertures by way of a menu function, for example in studio with strobes or speedlights the system can struggle because it is trying to improve focus shift by focusing stopped down. This has an obvious detrimental affect on focus precision and it should be that Nikon allow an on/off of this function for studio guys, eg a setting that allows ‘force focus at maximum aperture always’. Allow me to resize and move the histogram on the EVF and LCD monitor. I repeat this again...RAW histograms too! Oh and one more. LCD automatic brightness. Nearly all phones do this. They go up to max in bright sunlight and dim back when we go inside. This shouldn't be a thing at this price point to have to manually adjust it every time. The Nikon D800 had this and then it has never returned in a Nikon body since. People need to learn to expose properly and easily get confused with LCD brightness, however I believe it should be a function for those that know. Nikon should allow the inbuilt profiles to be disabled whether or not they are enabled / disabled in the camera menu. I am hearing and experienced with some lenses they stop you enabling a vignette correction for example unless you had it enabled in camera initially (the metadata in the RAW file passes to Lightroom - if it ain’t in there, it ain’t coming up in LR to be able to correct it, save for f mount lenses through the FTZ II adapter). This makes little sense and is not helpful. Crop modes. Why the heck so we not have 4:5 I will never know? Someone at Nikon has physically went in and took this out from previous models! It is quite stupid of them and they should put it back in and avoid more nonsensical stuff like this going forwards…(2024 update - still no 4:5 crop mode in camera, you know, the one that has been in the D800, D810, D850 but now is missing in action. Nikon, come on!).

Apart from these minor gripes I cannot fault the Z 8. It is literally what I hoped it would be. Paired with my initial lens of choice, the 24-70/2.8S - can produce absolutely stellar results, in fact some focal lengths on that lens approach / beat prime like sharpness, details and rendition. I am very much looking forward to doing long exposure photography with this lens. (2024 edit - oh it is good!). This was another reason I wanted a Z 8 and to go mirrorless with Nikon. This lens is that good; it is probably the best in class 24-70/2.8S ever made for any 35mm format.

Lastly video. Very impressed. Especially with the 24-70/2.8s which is pretty much silent and just holds focus to the subject. I am enjoying not having to focus pull manually! I am not a huge video shooter, however I have been doing more of this. They need to look at waveforms and a couple of other functions for the really serious video guys but I have to say I am seriously impressed as Nikon’s video implementations have classically been lacklustre and this has all changed now.

So what's next? I am waiting to see what Sigma do with regards to primes. I would honestly bite their hand off to get a native 14/1.4 (I love their 14/1.8 for f mount and still own it). I would like updated 24/1.4 and 35/1.4 and 50/1.4 primes from sigma for Z mount. Nikon’s 1.8 offering does not have class leading aberration correction, albeit is fair. Nikon’s 24 and 35 1.8 lenses released really are so-so lenses when it comes to a serious astro shooter like myself. I looked at their 1.2 glass for a second knowing the conclusion I would probably form quickly - they are simply too massive and heavy to use on a star tracker, what’s worse, they offer no benefit. I cannot shoot them at f/1.2 (no one can make a reasonably priced, shootable f/1.2 prime lens for astro, believe me). For me, the perfect balance has always been f/1.4 with good correction. Give me 1.4 for aurora and meteor showers (think clear aperture, see detailed explaination here), and enable me to shoot at f/2.2-2.8 with clean stars into the far corners and I am happy, relatively.

What about DSLRs? I sold one...my D850, as it had high value and helped to partially fund the Z 8. I'm keeping the rest, and might even pickup a mint d810 as a spare to my current d810. I love OVFs! As much as I love the Z 8 EVF and the bells and whistles it brings...I think I'd personally prefer to stare through an OVF all day if shooting sport or wildlife as any EVF is technically like looking at a TV screen. If I shot sports, I honestly think I would have stuck with OVF for a long time, or perhaps forever. The way most modern landscape photography is carried out is via the screens, no the OVF, so you can see why mirrorless mattered to me. (Regarding the Z 8, I mention this, not because the EVF is bad in the Z 8 - it isn't, and not because I am an old timer; I am not). Again this comes back to one of the many reasons I wanted to grab the Z 8 body - I don't use the finder as much on that body anyway. 10 years ago I'd have sold everything and went mirrorless then ended up realising my mistake and having to buy back some DSLRs for different purposes. Using the principal of ‘tool to task’ - there has never a more pertinent expression when it comes to deciding on a camera and lens to work for your needs rather than against.

Sligachan Isle of Skye Long Exposure — Snowcapped Cuillins from Sligachan, Isle of Skye. Z 8 with 24-70/2.8S

Nikon really aimed high here and got it right, for the most part. The price was / is high, however it will come down. I bought quickly like the d800 days, as I have been waiting a long time (how those savings accumulated thankfully). I applaud the lack of shutter in this camera. I think it was the right decision and will likely make the camera last even longer than it would otherwise. Like I said...I think shooting studio flash work I'd be using an OVF but that's just me...we have to consider that these aren't custom made cameras to our own specifications; however that non withstanding, logical upgrades and firmware adjustments where appropriate can certainly be requested, and debated.

Some further thoughts which I will continue to add to for those on the fence. I updated my 24-70/2.8 lens firmware there to 1.20, in order to take advantage of linear MF, now activatable in the menu. I must say, the focus throw can be made huge (720 degrees and over) and it makes focusing manually butter smooth. I am interested in this for critical astro applications (albeit not in particular with this lens), but this will be great for landscape photography which is mainly where I will use this lens. I like to do the focusing manually and confirm it is optimal for the scene. Combined with starlight view, this is going to be amazing at night. (2024 edit - it is). The 20/1.8 will be good to use with this feature. This should really allow me to nail balance between the centre frame and corner to manage astigmatism and coma, which was a nightmare with DSLR monitors at night which where made less sensitive - they sat at 60 FPS even in darkness which is pointless! In DSLR land (especially the earlier models) it was hard to actually see the stars sometimes in order to do this critical focus pull, ironically one felt a bit blind at night. The 14-24/2.8 tempts me for astro and landscape use but I note it does not have this feature - I wonder why, and hope they will bring it to it. I love to get critical focus in landscape manually, too. (2024 edit - I now own this lens and have been using it for about 8 months’ now - it is indeed very easy to compose an UWA shot with starlight view).

Following on from this, I still cannot believe how bad Snapbridge still is all these years on. It can barely connect half the time, and if it does it disconnects, fails 3/4 of the way through the process (and it can take while to get there, fail and you have to restart the process and hope it will work). Nikon please hire a better software person, an app person please. This is not a Z 8 complaint but since it could be an amazing part of the Nikon ecosystem I mention it here. Why am I still having to remove a card from the camera to update firmware on a lens? The camera can connect (should be able to) to Snapbridge, and it should be a simple option there to update lens or camera firmware going forwards? I cannot see one, nor connect right now to confirm however it is very clunky for 2023. It really would be great if this was fixed and improved overall for user experience. (2024 edit - Snapbridge is a bit better, and firmware can be updated via Snapbridge, so some improvement here).

Lastly can I point out how well built this 24-70/2.8 is? It is also so sharp right in the corners at most focal lengths and apertures it really can sit with the best of lenses, fully sealed and it looks smart too, still remaining one of the lightest 24-70/2.8 lenses ever and probably optically the best which is no mean feat. (PS the display button should automatically adjust to outdoor and indoor brightness, like I previously mentioned that the back LCD should too ala phones). Nikon, if you ever update this lens, put in the VR switches on the body please…

Ramble complete,

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Quiraing Isle of Skye Scotland Nikon Z 8 — Quiraing, Isle of Skye Scotland. Nikon Z 8 with 24-70/2.8S

The Nikon D200 - Colour King

The Daisy in Summer shot with the CCD Colour Legend that is the Nikon D200 — The Daisy. This was shot by my at the time, 8 year old son. I love this picture - Nikon D200, 24/2.8D prime. Notice the almost painterly appearance it has, helped by the slightly rougher bokeh of the 24/2.8D lens and the beautiful colours of the D200.

NEW - Updated D200 Article here.

The History

I always like to have a camera with me these days. For a while, I stopped unless I was in “Serious Landscape or Astro-Photography Mode,” and I just used my phone - which I was never really that happy with except in a pinch - like maybe at a theme park or something where I absolutely felt I could not bring a camera in with me, or if I did it would be a real annoyance all day. I used to lug the big cameras everywhere, for every occasion - I am speaking about FX Nikon DSLR or mirrorless bodies like the D810, D850, Z 8. I love using them, however they aren't lightweight systems, so in recent times I've made a much more concious effort to free myself from that weight and use a Nikon D200 with an 18-55 mm f/3.5-5.6. Such a brilliant combo, and sometimes I pack a tiny 50/1.8 prime too. With regards to weight; it feels like I don’t even have a camera with me at all. The CCD colours are just sublime. I love the way this sensor draws. The D200 gives me a different look to the other cameras, and I really like using it. I know many would be screaming at their screens reading this, telling me “oh buy a Z 7, it’s lighter, that will work,” or something along those lines. However a long time a go a friend of mine from overseas who used to shoot the same body I did at the time - the D800, was experimenting with CCD bodies from the classic era of digital tech. At first, I thought he might have been crazy to ditch something as technically proficient as a D800 for this, however over time I began to see what he was speaking about. (And no, I didn’t ditch the high resolution cameras).

Horse Portrait D200 — Nikon D200 with 18-55 mm f/3.5-5.6

The Tech

The D200 has a special mix of a 10MP Dx CCD sensor and a strict colour filter array (CFA). A CCD sensor stands for a charge-coupled device, which is an integrated circuit containing an array of linked, or coupled, capacitors. The CCD sensor was indeed very common at the onset of digital camera tech - with many companies using them in their cameras. What tended to happen over time, was that as the demand for cleaner high ISO increased, cameras with these sensors tended to fall apart in terms of their noise performance, so demand for different tech came about. Along came CMOS sensors, which filled this need, and they slowly became in vogue, whilst also becoming cheaper to produce. With regards to CCD sensors, the specific part that makes or breaks them with regards to colour, is called a Colour Filter Array. A colour filter array (CFA) is a mosaic of colour filters (generally red, green and blue) that overlays the pixels comprising the sensor. The colour filters limit the intensity of light being recorded at the pixel to be associated with the wavelengths transmitted by that colour. Some people make the mistake of thinking all CCD sensors have ‘good’ colour. Whilst there might be some secret sauce in these sensors (which is beyond the scope of this blog post), it is the CFA that differentiates said colours, allowing punchy and subtle saturated colour. More CCDs in the early days had stricter CFAs, thus they became associated with the trait of having good colour, which is of course a subjective quality. The CFA then, in a very real sense, differentiates and separates each colour so that if done optimally / correctly, subtle colour gradiations can be recorded and made vibrant and punchy. The general trend over the years, was to achieve cleaner higher ISOs, that manufacturers’ weakened the CFA properties in cameras generally compared to early digital cameras that had CCD sensors. This allowed more light to pass and be recorded by the sensor, (thus helped with noise performance) however it also muddied colours and individual graduations don’t tend to show as well, or as punchy. Some colours even skew a little, yellows might slip to green tinged etc, other colours might contaminant others. Some people will tell us that they can get any file to look like a D200 RAW file, or any other camera. I’ve yet to see proof of that yet, but I suppose if it is possible, it would be a lot of work, so why not just use the camera that does it off the bat? The power of the CCD and a strong CFA is easy to see in the D200 - colour separation makes the different colours pop like with Kodak Ektar film or Kodachromes. To reproduce the same color micro contrast tones on Sony CMOS files, you’ll need to fine tune every different colour separately and fabricate presets depending on the lighting too - that is a huge task. Further to this, you will have to be very careful during RAW development that you don’t cause the already saturated colours to go ‘nuclear’ when dealing with the subtle tones. That isn’t a workable solution in my mind…I’ll just use a D200, rather than trying to pretend I own one.

NB: Despite these being my thoughts, I still recommend setting up appropriate picture controls in camera and in your software as your best starting point for your edit style and goals.

Learning

I read all about this stuff that my buddy was showing me, however I mostly continued ‘business as usual’ shooting with bodies like the D800, D810, D850, bringing out the D200 I eventually bought for my son only occasionally. I will be honest, I still use these a huge amount, they have bags of dynamic range, and they are obviously no doubt better at night. I am not for a minute advocating everyone pick up old bodies and just use them - unless of course you feel this fits for you. However, in buying a D200 for my son several years ago to get him along on trips with me, I have found myself using it more and more. I managed to find this copy on ebay with only a couple of hundred shots on it and in absolute mint condition, for next to nothing. I unfortunately blew the highlights a little on his knee at the bottom left, in the pure excitement of him opening the D200 box. This was not a staged photograph!

Birthday Boy Present — D810 capturing the D200 as unboxed for his birthday with a 50/1.8 prime

Since that day, we have both used this body a great deal. For what I call reportage landscape photography, it is excellent, and works well. We have even used it for long exposure photography, despite it’s lack of liveview functionality. I am using it a great deal whlist I wait on long exposures completing on my Z 8 camera.

What the D200 is for

I am sure many people reading this are still extremely fixated on megapixels. Some of this might come from pressure from other shooters, or a preconceieved idea that more is better. I used to be a little bit like this, however not nearly as extreme as some of the pixel peeping crazies we see in forums. I am very used to shooting high megapixel bodies and have good technique because of this. I am no stranger to 36 - 60 megapixel files, and I make panoramic pictures regularly. I am a technical shooter through and through. I maximse data collection at the scene. I use good technique, solid equipment and expose in order that I can get the most out of each file as possible, most of the time for daylight work that involves exposing to the right (ETTR) and if dynamic range exceeds the sensor capture range, bracketing shots. All that said however, I am not beholden to this megapixel thing so many seem to be, and I am so glad I freed myself of it. The Nikon D200 has 10 Megapixels across it’s large Dx sensor. I find them absolutely plenty and I use a 4K proart monitor to edit on. The D200 should be clamped to base ISO, or as near as it as possible at all times. Give it light. Expose as far to the right as possible so you will be able to bring up some shadow detail later in the RAW, bracket if required. RAW convertors have given a new life to early digital tech. We can do a great deal more with these files than we could in 2005. The D200 has a maximum native ISO of 1600, however as I point out - there are better tools for that task if needed. I do like using primes on the D200 - one of my favourite is the nikkor 24/1.4G, giving a nice 35mm equivalent view to full frame on this dx body. If I am hiking / walking / taking the D200 out for serious landscape work, I pop the 18-55 lens on it. I may seek to add a wider dx lens for this purpose, at some point in the future. I do love my foregrounds…

Chlid using big boy camera — D200 shooting with a 24/2.8D prime - taken with D810 and 50/1.8D

Legacy

The Nikon D200 has a big legacy for me. This is the sad part of the whole story. My buddy, Brandon, passed away in 2022, suddenly. He was a young man with a wife and two young children. We spoke every day without fail usually, even if it was just about something we’d read or something about a camera or work. When the news came in that he was gone, this led to the longest period of me not shooting since I started. It lasted a couple of months until I started picking up the cameras again. This might seem like a short period of time, but you have to remember - for someone that had a camera in their hands almost daily, that is a long time in the grand scheme of things. We couldn’t offer much. What can anybody do in a situation like this, except to affirm that if they need anything, they are here? It led my son and I to express it the only way we knew how to properly justify what we felt. We made a picture. That picture is below, shot with the Nikon D200 and a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art prime lens. The concept of this picture is obvious, however the technical side was to ensure a natural shadow pallate with a smooth and controlled highlight rolloff, without it feeling like it has had the HDR treatment. This picture was shared online and has been viewed many times - it is very touching to me. I have had many people contact me to say that it inspired them to pick up a D200 which is really nice to hear. And some it just made them pick up and use the camera that they have - which of course is also lovely to hear that someone has been inspired to get out and use their gear.

Nikon D200 colour — D200 with Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art prime

I’m going to leave you with my buddy’s best D200 process settings to get the most out of the camera that I still use to this day. Feel free to give them a go. Make sure you tweak your picture control settings. In camera matching ‘Neutral’ for Adobe Lightroom works well. Adobe Colour also works, but is much more contrasty so you may have to make allowances for this. The settings are listed below:

WITHIN ADOBE LIGHTROOM

These are my optimal RAW default settings for Nikon D200 files in Lightroom:

Under the "CALIBRATION" adjustments group:

o Set Red Primary channel to Hue -15 and Saturation +15. (This corrects for Adobe's orange skin tone bias with Nikon cameras)

Under the “LENS CORRECTIONS” adjustments group:

o Set “Remove Chromatic Aberration” is checked under the Color Tab.

o Leave Vignetting and Distortion sliders set to off.

Under the “DETAIL” adjustments group:

o Leave Sharpening at its default settings (40, 1.0, 25) with a masking of 50.

o Set the Color noise slider to 0 and the Luminance noise slider to 0.

Under the “TONE CURVE” adjustments group:

o Select “Linear Contrast” as the baseline tone curve.

Under the “BASIC” adjustments group

o Set "Adobe Color" as the default camera profile.

o Set 5650K +10T as the WB default (as most pictures are daylight).

o Set Shadows to +25 as default. (Look for a natural setting that simulates the eye).

o Set Vibrance to +25 as default.

o All other slider settings at 0.

Save all of these as our D200 default settings on import. When you open files for editing in Lightroom:

o Verify that the white balance is accurate and adjust it if not. Cloudy looks good around 6650K +10T and artificial lighting requires dialing in like usual.

o Now shift-double-click the Highlights label to auto-set clipping protection for your WB. Don’t be worried about big numbers like -71, etc. You want the color clipping protection it affords. If you change your WB later, re-do this step.

o Fine tune your mid-tones with the Exposure slider. I use my Lightroom exposure preset tree (shared earlier) to quickly preview the optimal mid-tone point. Often I’m backing the exposure down -.33 or -.67 in order to get the highlights safely to the left of the “Whites” range. This will leave the image a bit under-exposed and dull but I use Nik’s Pro Contrast filter to brighten the image back up in Photoshop later. That boosts both highlights and shadow areas with the added benefit of boosting local contrast (which adds to the 3D Pop).

o Push up the black point so that it just barely clips. When processing portraits I make sure no blacks are clipped in eyes/hair. I don't touch the White Point slider anymore these days.

o If skin tones look way too strong bring Vibrance down to taste. +25 is good as a default but occasionally I have to use -10 simply because the lighting saturates the colors more than usual.

o Adjust noise reduction to taste. If I’m a little above base ISO or pushing up exposure by +.67 then I’ll use Color NR +15. If I’m above ISO 400 or pushing up exposure +1 or more I’ll use Color NR +25. Otherwise I’m at 0 for both Luma and Color NR.

IN ADOBE PHOTOSHOP

o Open Nik Color Efex Pro 4 and choose “Pro Contrast” from the left panel. Leaving the Color Cast and Correct Contrast sliders at 0%, push up only the Dynamic Contrast slider until the image feels right. This will raise the brightness of your highlights back to normal while still generally protecting your colors from clipping. 20% to 30% is safe for almost any image including those with people. Some images without people in the frame can take 50% or even 70%. I have Photoshop actions setup to automate this function at 10% increments from 10% to 100%.

o Add saturation. I use Photo Wiz’s ContrastMaster filter to boost saturation as it automatically figures out a natural looking result for the ambient surroundings. Sometimes it over-boosts skin tones, however, so I leave them as is and reign skin back in with Viveza2 as described below. If you need a copy of ContrastMaster let me know.

o Fix local exposure issues or local over-saturation issues with Viveza 2. I find that mildly oversaturated skin falls back into place with Saturation of -15, strongly oversaturated skin falls into place with Saturation of -25.

St Monans Scotland — Nikon D200 with 18-55 mm f/3.5-5.6 at St Monan’s Scotland

Nikon D200 CCD Sensor — The Nikon D200 Body

So what is next? Well, I would like to pickup some other bodies from this era, such as a D60. For now I will continue with the D200 to see what I can produce over the coming months into the summer and perhaps another blog post will come about from that. You can now enjoy that post here.

Have a look here, when a youtuber did a comparison of the venerable D200 vs the modern Z7 camera and found with hilarious results, that most people by far preferred the images coming off the D200. New isn’t always better.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve