Blog

The Nikon Z6iii Has A Dynamic Range Problem

Introduction

As you will know if you read my articles; I use very strict shot discipline in my pictures and because of this, I am a huge proponent of base ISO dynamic range shooting. It is obvious that Nikon do not consider the new Z6iii to be a landscape camera, it has - low resolution by modern standards, and a significant drop off in maximum dynamic range compared to the Z6ii. Despite this, I see many proclaiming that it is “amazing” for this task, so let’s look at the evidence as to why it is not the best tool to task for this genre.

A Significant Erosion of Dynamic Range

Because the Z6iii incorporates a partially stacked sensor (the first of it’s kind I believe), early testing shows that the camera pays a price for it’s faster readout speed over the Z6ii. Photography website Petapixel have stated they reached out to Nikon about Bill Claff’s sensor test results on the camera and they of course gave the usual “newer is better” rhetoric. If their response is the be believed (I’ve no known reason to question why Petapixel would make this up) it is a response straight out of the management damage control handbook. If you have a brain inside your skull and are willing to test the Z6iii against the older Z6ii, you will see that this is a complete lie on Nikon’s part. There are many tests now online that back up Bill’s sensor data, the camera is far nosier in the shadows when you have to balance exposures in post. (Not that we needed this, Bill has clearly a track record of delivering in this regard and only a fool would be questioning his results at this stage in the game).

Let's examine the facts from photonstophotos.net. Maximum dynamic range compared to the flagship Z 8 is a difference of approaching one stop - 0.82 EV. (And it is about same difference between the Z6ii and Z6iii). That's significant if dynamic range is a priority when someone was / is already shooting with the Z6ii. Which, I might add, if you are a landscape shooter, it damn well should be. Otherwise, why not just use a tiny sensor camera or a phone, right? Why lug a huge full frame camera about to have dynamic range that micro 4/3 can obtain? There are plenty of DX cameras that have this dynamic range or better! We cannot always bracket in all circumstances and having access to the best dynamic range and RAW file malleability always helps when processing. Looking at the data again, we can see that the Z7ii is even slightly better, making the distance between those two reach over one stop. Therefore, the difference between the Z6iii and ii is obvious and someone pushing their exposures, (trying to eek out all the data from a single RAW) will notice it. I would certainly call it significant because the human eye / brain can interpret around 20 stops of light, so any erosion of near a stop is a real backwards step when currently, the best in class in 35mm format is the d850 at about 11.62 EV, hence the following is what we see (Tip: If you have trouble seeing these graphs on mobile, just pinch zoom into them):

The Z6ii vs Z6iii photographic dynamic range

  • Z6iii maximum -10.46

  • Z6ii maximum 11.28

  • Z 8 maximum - 11.32

  • Z7ii maximum - 11.60

I must say that it is frustrating to see an important image quality marker degrade for speed in ML land (this isn’t any problem on dslrs as they don’t require fast read outs). We are taking one step forward and two backwards with some mirrorless cameras in order to achieve fast readout speeds. It is clear that this engineering problem has not been solved. However, I think that it is obvious and Nikon are well aware and not expecting landscape shooters to buy this particular camera. However, as usual youtubers’ that are landscape photographers (and the rest) have the camera and are reviewing it.

Of course, this lot are all part of the marketing machine, with their affiliate links, ready to tell you, step right up; buy, buy, buy! You must have this, I bought mine from here and you can too! I emplore you to ignore anyone that receives product from a company to review pre-release, or an ambassador of any product on a companies’ pay roll! Think about this for a second. They have a vested interest to obfuscate. If they are too critical, fat chance they'll receive anything else in future which would mean it will affect their youtube channel. I almost laughed writing this; however it is the reality of the situation. I watched several youtube videos for research before I wrote this piece and it was the usual hyperbolic nonsense -“I didn’t think the Z6iii would be good for landscape photography; but it is amazing honestly” (paraphrasing). Not a mention of dynamic range or the like. Yes as you can probably guess, I found most of these videos painful and cringy to watch. None of the many videos I watched touched on dynamic range with this body…perhaps they know to keep their mouths shut if they know what’s good for them? Some big photography websites came out and clearly stated the dynamic range issue this camera has, then walked it back recently saying it didn’t matter, really! Some even commented on how “amazing” the Z6iii is for wildlife shooting? Did they forget it is full frame (which isn’t always what wildlife shooters want), has a substantial backward step in dynamic range and is, relatively speaking low resolution for wildlife standards? Every camera I see being reviewed or previewed - whatever they want to call it, is ‘amazing’, ‘fantastic’ or ‘must have’. So what does that make the previous? It’s amazing how judgement and integrity goes out the window when money is involved, isn’t it? But glittering prizes and endless compromises; shatter the illusion of integrity…

Dynamic range is one of the wider reasons I'd love to see a mirrorless landscape camera optimized for something like ISO 16-400 with an as slow as you like readout speed, that doesn’t care a hoot about high ISO. Sensor tech has hit a wall for a long time now though and from where I stand, people are completely obsessed with high ISO. Most photography forums have endless, boring debates about high ISO and noise reduction. Many shooters are mistaken that aperture doesn’t matter now because of high ISO abilities in modern cameras are as they proclaim “so good now”. I mostly never go above ISO 500 for any camera* because I understand the ISO invariance for each one I own, and if I am in true low light situations, I always use fast aperture lenses. Photonstophotos.net is an excellent resource for discovering how you can best use your camera for maximum image quality.

*There are some caveats to this when shooting deep sky style astrophotography images. Read more about this in my shooting guide here.

Compared to the D850

Let’s look at the class leading D850 compared to the Z6ii and iii. The Z6ii was doing very well to approach the D850 so closely at it’s base. The rest of the chart is hair splitting at best. It is pertinent to note; that the Z 8, which I do own has a slightly inferior dynamic range to the D850. This is slight (around 1/3 of a stop difference) yet still I’d prefer not to move in this direction if possible. I think in time, we won’t see this trend. What caught my eye with the Z 8 were the multitude of upgrades I had been looking for years for and my general dislike of the Z7 and Z7ii cameras stopped me from adopting any Nikon mirrorless - read more about this here. If the dynamic range erosion was almost a stop, I really would not have bought the camera. It doesn’t enamor me moving backwards, rather than forwards. The most important item is the end result, so extra bells and whistles will always factor lower in the equation for me than the resulting end image file; which has no regard or care for if it were obtained with a dslr or a mirrorless camera.

RAW File Malleability

For Landscape Photography, the below picture is a good example of why singular RAW file dynamic range matters. This was shot in 2012 with a Nikon D800. A six minute exposure capturing the beautiful low lying cloud streak across a November skyline at this iconic location. The light was gone after the six minutes. Bracket you say? I’d like to see you try, and personally I’d rather not have to when I don’t need to. Rather, I relied on the huge D800 dynamic range and double processed this file in RAW development to capture the range of light in the sky right down to the shadows. The less dynamic range a camera has, generally speaking the much less malleable it will be. We don’t want this for this genre, or indeed really any genre that values the sort of principals I am speaking about here. This is why when you hear someone waffling on about the Z6iii being a good camera for this genre, I believe you should take their advice with a huge grain of salt:

Scotland’s West Coast at Gourock with the Nikon D800 - Singular RAW file development

I read all the time about newbie photographers who seem to think that they don’t need to pull files much to get results. I would like to see their images! Because the linear RAW file data presents itself in a way that does not look lifelike to me. Shadows need pulling and highlights need taming, then there are the midtones to think about in order to even begin to approach what my eye is seeing; this is despite whatever picture control is being used in camera / post-processing. Regardless of whether a shooter wants realism embedded in the final result or not; it can only be considered a pro, not a con to have this option of better RAW file malleability. (The D850 remains to this day the best camera on 35mm format I have ever used for this, the Z 8 is a close second).

So what is the Z6iii for? People who wish better autofocus and better video performance over the ii at the sacrifice of dynamic range. It is clear that Nikon felt they had to push the rather slow readout rate upwards from the Z6ii camera which has lacklustre autofocus capabilities, and problems with rolling shutter in video. These are issues that did not face DSLRs for still imaging - I would rather shoot with a D800, D810, D850 or D750 over this camera and it’s compromise. I’d honestly rather pick out a old dslr that can be had for peanuts, mint and second hand without this compromise to it's function whilst we seem to remain in this transition between mirrorless cameras without compromises such as we see in the Z6ii. Or just hang on to your Z6ii until they are done piecemealing the tech to us. All companies do this, and only the shmucks are in there every generation updating their kit for stuff like this; it’s even worse this time that it is a backwards step. There are so many competent options now that compromises like this do not impress me one iota. Some websites are stating the old ‘oh people are not comparing apples to apples’ when talking about maximum dynamic range. Well, I am afraid we are. They are all cameras, and the maximum dynamic range metric at base ISO is an important one. It is irrelevant whether that camera only achieves base at 100, or ISO 64. We want to know what the absolute maximum attainable dynamic range is, and we can compare that across cameras. Forget about the settings. Just the maximum achievable dynamic range. It has also been stated that the difference is only half a stop between. This is completely wrong. As I have shown, between the Z6ii and the Z6iii it is an erosion of approximately 0.82 EV.

Of course someone could “make the Z6iii” work for them, and get around this in certain situations. If they ever have to rely on a singular shot and push it, like I have shown, the results will be less than ideal and you will have nasty amount of noise (no, don’t think AI noise reduction is the way to go - it simply isn’t). Why select tools that are clearly just a product of piece-mealing that include a backwards step in technology to move something else forward? I dislike this approach. Before you rush out to buy; getting caught up in the hype I am seeing on so many internet forums, consider that the camera you already own could indeed be besting it. This won’t shift any stock on amazon, or boost any youtubers’ view counts though…

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

Steve

How To Shoot Captivating Drone and Aerial Photography

Introduction

I have been using a drone in my photography kit for a couple of years now and have shot with it across Scotland. Scotland is a fantastic place to shoot landscapes from the ground or the air; we are really spoiled here in that regard. The particular drone I use is the Mini 3 Pro from DJI, however, the information in this guide applies to every drone and all aerial work.

Loch Tulla, Scotland

Which Drone for Aerial Photography?

The Mini 3 Pro has been what I have used for several years now. This is, without a doubt the best drone for no hassle photography in my opinion; and I still continue to use it. In fact, I am just back from flying it today. It is lightweight, small and convenient and fits in my bag. This was one of the driving factors to choosing this drone in particular. Fly anywhere (almost), with the least restrictions in most countries and it has surprisingly good image quality for a small sensor camera. As you know if you have been reading my blog for awhile now, I come from using pro level 35mm Nikon DSLRs such as the D800, D810, D850 and Z8. If shot in raw, bracketed and processed delicately, these files are really nice.


What Makes A Captivating Aerial Picture?

Light, subject, composition…It is always the same three things you need to hold in your mind with any photography. There isn’t much you can do about the subject - if you have arrived at a location where you do not like the subject, drive or hike someplace else. The light, is a similar item, and is often a waiting game. Like regular, ground based Landscape Photography, it is usually a waiting game and experience - mixed with some luck that gets the goods. The chances of success are always increased by the frequency of being out there in the landscape itself. The more times you are experiencing nature, the more likely you will see and hopefully record something special. But how do we really do it you ask? What am I doing to collect the best information at the scene in order to process it later and create an image like the above?

The Settings for Success

  • Base ISO (ISO 100 for the Mini 3 Pro Drone)

  • Bracket everything in all but the least contrasty light (you can ditch what you don’t require later)

  • Fix white balance to 5500K for consistency and alter later if needed

  • Shoot in the native sensor format, with no trick modes. (12MP for the Mini 3 pro).

  • Enable the histogram on the controller and balance exposures

  • Learn how to effectively exposure blend using luminosity masking or another modern method

The above points will set you on the correct course for capturing and processing the best possible data.

Framing and Composition

Framing and composition are prime with all photography. Nothing changes now that we are airborne. We do have some things to consider however. If you are shooting with a drone that has a fixed lens, you have to think about perspective distortion. This is the type of distortion that presents itself from being too close with a wide angle to a subject (it has nothing to do with any inherent distortion present in the lens itself). The effective field of view of the Mini 3 Pro is 24mm in full frame format. This, I have found works well generally speaking for most pictures I make with the drone. We of course have, the option of horizontal or vertical framing too, which is freeing. Some subjects, depending on their placement within the frame will distort more than others with either orientation, so it is something we should factor in when taking pictures from above.

With all aerial photography, we need to think about how much sky we want in the shot. This should be a constant consideration; looking towards the sky, checking where the sun is in the sky - because we technically, in most cases do not want to be shooting directly into the sun or harshly sun-lit cloud. Usually this sort of light is too harsh for decent landscape photography, so the same principal applies here. Be cautious, as in normal ground based Landscape Photography, of blue sky days. They generally just don’t work, however there are exceptions to that rule.

Another big consideration is the importance of separation of scene elements when building your composition:

Eilean Donan Castle, Scotland

One of the reasons the above shot works well photographically, is that the height of the drone is such that the top of the castle does not intersect with the background land. It is nicely separated. It is a newbie error to under-estimate separation in a photograph. It is said that just being slightly higher or lower can change a good photograph into a great one. It’s all about separation here. Consider the importance of the height your drone is at relative to the subject, the angle it lies at relative to the scene and the amount of sky you place within the frame. The other reason this picture works well in a photographic sense; is that the sun was behind the drone, and illuminating the scene with late evening light, which is of course softer and better in quality than harsh midday sun. Of course, another perhaps obvious reason it works well, besides good light and composition; is that it is just an interesting subject and has a vast appeal. The grand scene often speaks to the most people in terms of landscape photography. Location is everything with aerial photography - I don’t care what anyone says, there are many places I don’t even bother to bring a camera out. However, that is me, and your mileage may vary, as might your interests.

There is an overall balance of the sky and land here, with a slight dominance given to the land (ie in the end, the subject of the photograph after all). Notice that I have not placed this into a strict rule of thirds composition. The horizon is not on a third, as we are so often conditioned to think it must be. If I did that, I'd have lost the power of the sky and its contributing drama in this image. I would have also lost the beautiful cloud framed by the darker cloud above it (there is a natural vignette here produced by the clouds and we want to use it to draw the eye down. We do not want to cut through the brighter white cloud area in the sky just below the darker cloud at the top). The light is such that the sun is behind the drone, effectively illuminating the castle with dark looking clouds behind - often an ideal situation and one I strive to find as much as possible for these types of picture. I find castle shots rarely work with blue skies, so watch for those when shooting subjects that suit more dramatic skies.

Let’s go back to the first picture I shared in this article. What makes it so good you might ask? (you might also not ask this!)

Loch Tulla Light, Scotland

Sometimes there is simply no magic to teach; no wisdom to impart, other than be there - much like the old landscapes F/8 and be there thing. Anybody could have taken this picture; however I did. I was there. No one else observed this moment; and no one else has it. This is what makes it special to me, and what makes all of photography special is that nostalgic factor. The essence of capturing a memory of a person, time, or place. We need to be there enough times, expose ourselves to the mundane enough times, that eventually we might just see something transformational. Something perhaps made even better; because no one else witnessed it.

Composition Breakdown

To delve a little deeper into this particular frame, fairly centralized subject, (the loch), it’s large and bright so is acting as a strong focal point. The dramatic dark clouds at the top of the frame add a natural vignette which draw the eyes down onto the scene below - just as we would wish in a picture such as this. In my mind, I couldn’t have framed this any other way; the loch had to be right there front and centre. It’s made even more powerful, by the strong S - shaped leading line into the scene from the bottom. For me, it gives it a sort of Jurassic Park vibe, albeit the Scottish version (let’s face it, that can only be a good thing, right?).

The Hermitage, Perthshire - Scotland

An Autumnal Picture

This image was shot in late autumn a few years ago in Perthshire. This is a three shot vertorama. In essence, a vertical panorama comprised of three pictures joined digitally in Photoshop. This might not look like it, however this is an exceptional field of view. If you have visited the Hermitage in Scotland, it will be a bit more obvious. To compose this image involves stitching the individual frames together, and bracketing the top frame - blending in the bright sky with a luminosity mask to get the natural dramatic sky without burning the tops of the trees dark. This has some complex initial stitching and the like however the actual image is very realistic. For the most part my edits are to reflect nature. Do not get me wrong, I still spend ages on mostly every picture I bother to share, however it is mostly subtle changes I am making. Dodging, burning, drawing the eye, blending exposures if required are the corner stones of what I do for this type of work. I often gravitate towards learning things in life that a) I need to know how to do well and b) I care enough to want to know more. In that sense, like many, I have developed my area of interest. I think many people might be like this also; however what I am trying to impart here is the very real sense that post processing skill is so crucial to obtaining the best result from RAW data which the camera captures. In this vein, if you want to know more about Luminosity masking - probably the single biggest factor I learned to elevating my editing and therefore photography style, click here to check out Jimmy McIntyre - the exposure blending expert who taught me so much as was extremely gracious when I reached out to him for further advice. You can also find him by a simple google search if the link breaks. I will try to keep on top of that side of things for this website. You will see he has used one of my images on the page I linked to also. Education will raise our game much more than a new camera or lens will. The sooner we realise this, the faster we will achieve what we want.

Stac Pollaidh, Coigach - Scotland

Photographing the Far North of Scotland

A strong leading line in this last picture in this article, which leads to the iconic Stac Pollaidh in Coigach. For this picture, I simply waited until I got the hint of light on the mountain and sent the drone up, knowing that the road would be the underpinning of the shot. Very simple; yet very effective. The one major tip I would give to anyone about landscape, or drone photography is to not over darken skies in post processing. Doing so often looks amateur and unrealistic of course, however more importantly, skies loose their drama and energy when they become too dark. This shot here is an example of this principal.

Stac Pollaidh beautifully demonstrates a glacial landscape. Around 22,000 years ago at the peak of glaciation, the Stac peak poked out of the top of the ice sheet - and it shows. The weathered peak shows freeze / thaw features leaving sharp rock exposed. The gentle, lower slopes of the Stac are from glaciers which spent thousands of years carving out U-shaped valleys (glens) all over Scotland. It is humbling to realise that the rock that formed this mountain is at least 1 billion years old. That’s about one quarter the age of the Earth itself!

Loch Buine Moire

Here is a final picture I have to share today, which I will leave for you to decide how and why I have composed it the way I have done. Drone and Aerial photography is all about trial and error to begin with. It’s about learning how to collect the best data at the scene, predominantly through base ISO usage and bracketing, and processing the files using modern luminosity masking techniques afterward to obtain a natural result.

Closing Thoughts

Keep your drone away from people as much as possible, even if you are allowed to fly it near or over them, such as with lighter weight drones. Not everyone is going to be enamored by drone use. If I ever land near to someone they tend to think they are about to be attacked by a giant, genetically modified, human eating wasp from hell. Go by stealth, don’t attract attention and try to follow the rules is my best advice in this genre of photography. This is not because we are doing anything wrong per se; however why attract needless drama when you simply don’t have to?

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

Steve

Lower Quadrant Framing Photography Compositional Technique

Introduction

For me, one of the most impressive uses of this technique in recent times is from a TV series. The beautifully crafted cinematography in Mr Robot shines a cut above most of what I see on TV and continually uses this technique to create and relieve tension between characters whilst building the story. One of the reasons I perhaps find it so effective is I find it easy to identify with which gives it a more powerful voice. Cinematographer Tod Campbell uses lower quadrant framing to create beautiful results that tell the story, shot to shot. Visual tension builds from the very first scene and continues to do so as we learn about Elliot. As my English teacher always told me: ‘show, don’t tell’ and that is exactly what this character study does. The series portrays the protagonists’ boldness, isolation, and loneliness perfectly, as he slowly identifies societies’ problem with greed and material possessions. This is in part to this technique of placing the characters in carefully thought out places within the frame in each and every scene we come to see them in. Everything about each scene is constructed beautifully, from the acting, sets, lighting and colour toning, to the composition and angles we observe the characters from.

Distracted by Television - 50mm f/1.4D

Not every picture needs to be a masterpiece. Some are merely a record of the scene. This was taken back in 2017 when I was first testing out this technique; admittedly probably never properly understanding it until more recent times. In this scene, the use of the technique in question explains that my son was completly lost watching a cartoon on the TV. He was almost completely unaware of my presence. There is a loss of balance in the frame, and a gaze that is opposite to the usual, expected convention of gazing into the negative space I created on the left of the picture.

Notice the soft, spherical aberration of the lens used wide open at f/1.4 which adds to the dreaminess of the scene and gives it a subtle glow look. I’ve spoken before about how I prefer lenses that produce this effect for portraiture, with the ability to reduce it by stopping down a stop or so. Read more on this here.

Rule of Thirds

Rule of Thirds

The Bride - Notice the two main subjects closely follow the rule of thirds, but not perfectly - 50mm f/1.4G

One of the most conventionally used techniques to frame shots, both cinematically, in artworks and paintings and also for photography; is the rule of thirds. The frame is divided up into nine pieces via intersecting lines. The subject is placed on one of the third intersection points - 1/3 or 2/3 of the way up or across the frame. This technique is simple in itself to use and it is seen absolutely everywhere. It is a good general rule to help with composition and balance, however it can be broken, or used in alternative ways as I have mentioned before. There is no pure magic to simply placing a subject onto a 1/3 intersection however. It’s not a magic compositional trick. As you can see above in my overlay, it is not something you should try to pin exactly on these points. As you may have seen in my Decisive Moment blog post, the frame boundaries and the objects around the edge frames can be important compositional anchors to either further direct the eye, or give the shot important context and we should consider this when framing the shot. You can see that in this particular composition I used a close to a rule of thirds frame, however not quite. I could have moved the camera up to place the lower left girl onto a third. I decided not to. She isn’t the main subject and if I did so, I’d loose some of the beautiful background context above the bride.

Lower Quadrant Framing

Quad framing grid Photography

Quadrant Framing - See below for the full size view

Quad framing, or lower quadrant framing as it is often known; feels like an uneasy version of the rule of thirds; however used creatively, it can have dramatic effect. The frame is split into four pieces this time. The placement of the subject in the lower corners of the frame, and the direction they are facing, along with the context of the background, directly influences the mood created. Quad framing is a play on positive and negative space within the frame. Another way to look at this part of composition over the more simplistic rule of thirds, is the relationship between the subject and the surrounding space. The subject is the “positive space”, while everything surrounding the subject is the “negative space.” If we increase the amount of negative space around a subject, we can increase the scene tension. It can almost feel like we are loosing the subject off the edges of the picture. This can in turn give a sense of oppression. That the subjects are small in the world they occupy and feel that way also. Their visual weight becomes smaller within the context of the frame. In photography and art, we are taught to create negative space and have the subject face gaze into that space - never must we have for example; my son in the picture at the beginning of those post above, be looking right out of frame, with the negative space on the left! However, that is exactly what we can do with this technique, to create an uneasiness, or a certain mood. It can create a disconnect between characters on screen. Or perhaps signify that they stand alone. By doing this, and perhaps even having the subject face in the direction opposite of the negative space in the frame, can construct a feeling of isolation or loneliness. It can also say something awkward about the scene; or that the subject feels under duress. Perhaps the scene does not depict something nice and rosey; that there is some kind of heavy metaphorical weight hanging over the subject. Or in some cases, as I have done below, it says more about the place the subject is present in. It is important to mention, you could apply this to the upper corners in certain scenes and ways, and you have the option of tilting the lens up slightly or down towards the subject to apply further creative effects. All in all, you can see why it is a technique used so often in the incredible Mr Robot TV series, which is ultimately about the crumbling of so called civilised society.

Coffee Shop, Ala Mr Robot - 35mm 1.4 Art

Lens Considerations

For this to work well, you want good control over the background. Because of this, I highly recommend a fast prime, 35mm or longer. Having a fast aperture, f/1.8 or larger helps with light gathering and control of the out of focus elements around our subject. When using extreme, off axis compositions it matters even more that the lens chosen has close to zero distortion. You will of course, be able to avoid perspective distortion easily by using a longer lens and not being too close. As mentioned, for full frame, I suggest the shortest focal length for this technique be around 35mm. 28mm may be possible if the lens has a very flat field and you aren't too close to the subject / they aren't human. A flat field 50mm prime works really well to get close. And obviously, portrait lenses like 85’s will be great here too. Get out of thinking that all distortion can be fixed in post. It sometimes just does not play out that way. Why not just select a lens with controlled distortion from the get go? I live with 35mm, 50mm and 85mm primes for this. Next, we want a relatively sharp lens off axis. I am happy as long as the subject isn’t blurry to my eyes on a 4K monitor. I will say that I am fond of the Kubrick picture Barry Lyndon, which uses super fast primes to shoot in candlelight. They aren’t the sharpest lenses on the planet, certainly by modern standards, but look at the candlelit scenes in this film and you will see why I love that look. I go by feel, not numbers or measurements of lenses. If you worry about flare, add that to the list of properties to look for. For me, I love flaring effects, so I actually look for lenses that add characer here. The 50mm f/1.4D Nikkor does this in spades. With the sun behind the subject, it will flare bright red and yellow / green areas if caught at the right angle. Another favourite is the 85mm f/1.4D Nikkor, a classic portrait lens with zero distortion. Not only does it give a beautiful rendering, if flares nicely and provides beautiful bokeh. I also do enjoy using a 35mm f/1.4 as I did in the above picture.

Upper Quadrant framing - 50mm f/1.4D

Upper Quadrant Framing

Often with pictures like the above of my son playing The Forest on my 32” 4K Asus Proart (that I mainly bought for editing, however it works beautifully for 4K 60 FPS gaming); I like to give huge volumes of negative, or background spacing. His head is firmly placed into the top left corner. Almost nothing is in focus here, as the depth of field is so shallow. I can also use the bright central area that f/1.4 glass gives to give a glow to the scene. This is a shot similar to what I described could be done earlier in this article; use the very top of the frame, and either stay level as I have here, or look downward to the subject - filling the remaining negative space effectively. This makes compositional sense here for several reasons; the shot is about him being transfixed to the game. The surroundings are therefore a dominant piece in the picture. Also, if I show more of him, I show less of what he is doing which would make little sense here. I could also have focused on the monitor, however at this aperture, he would have gone completely out of focus and I did not want that. I could have stopped down, however then I could not have shot at ISO 500 and kept all the dynamic range for the screen and shadow areas. Use aperture to your advantage at all times!

The next time you have a prime lens of about 35mm and upwards, spare a thought for lower quadrant framing (or indeed, upper quadrant framing) and see if you can break out of monotonous rule of thirds composition techniques.

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

Steve

Leave the Noise in your Photographs! (Techniques For Low Light Shooting)

Glowstick Girl. Absolutely pushing the limits of the D810 sesnor and fast aperture prime lens, the 50mm f/1.4G nikkor in ultra low light. ISO 12800, 1/40, f/1.4.

Introduction

Noise in images seems to create a huge panic amongst photographers these days, and I honestly do not know why this is. For a long time I have mostly preferred very low levels of noise reduction, or none at all in images I produce. I dislike the plasticy look that even advanced AI noise reduction programs achieve if pushed too far; and most of the time it just does not look natural to my eyes. I have some exceptions to this rule, for example in deep sky astrophotography work where I use it a little bit more due to the overall process involved; it almost feels more necessary, as it is normal practice to photograph extremely faint deep sky objects and stack many hours of images together to make the final image.

What I seem to see in forums and in discussions, is that this by product of producing a still image is so ugly that it must be removed, and in many cases, totally removed in that we get smudged, lifeless backgrounds of noiseless strata. I think that there are plenty of camera’s out there that produce a very organic, dare I say it, film like grain that doesn’t distract from the image, and at time’s that itself might even enhance it’s “realness” depending on the situation. We should remember most noise is hidden unless coasting 100% views of the image which no one does except us. The forerunning image in this article mostly captures my thoughts on noise. Leave it in. I’ll normally use it at a setting between 15-25, depending on the picture. This forerunning picture was set to 20, a reasonable setting for this extreme condition. Many would go much further with noise reduction. We would push it further, then the face becomes very plasticy looking, as do the PJ’s. We could take that even further, and mask out the face / body and just hit the background with NR; but then we get a real disconnect between the background and the subject. If I occasionally do this, I do it very gently so it is not picked up (like all good edits should be). This picture is a very extreme example. Most pictures do not require this level of touch up to obtain a great result. The advice I am going to impart in this article will keep your noise to an absolute maximum, allowing you to make great pictures even in ultra low light conditions with a little bit of know-how and practice.

Nikon D810, ISO 400 at f/1.4 and 1/125

Close up showing Noise (Pinch zoom if on mobile)

In this first example, I have used no noise reduction; because it simply isn’t warranted. Better to have details than smudges. Using good shot discipline, as I have done here, allows me to avoid any noise reduction in this case. You can see why I love shooting with the Nikon D810, despite still owning the newer mirrorless cameras. It’s sensor produces a very film like grain at moderate to high ISOs (400-6400 ish). There is no way I’d want to rid this from the image. Be aware, it is difficult to show the exact grain without doing a 100% crop - this isn’t one because it ends up being too small.

Settings

You will notice that in for example, Lightroom, (ie camera RAW in Photoshop) that there are some settings in the noise reduction panel to be aware of. There are sliders for the amount of total global noise reduction, and specific slides for luma noise, and colour noise with sliders to aid their application. For luma noise, I tend to use zero for most work, especially daylight landscapes. Even portraiture, I use very little or any, even if we are speaking about higher ISO portraiture in low light (of course with some directional light too hopefully).

I tend to ensure that colour noise is between 5-35 (this varies image to image); too high a level smudges any singular colour backgrounds together and leaves artefacts which are quite ugly in nature (that plasticy look again). They are very easy to spot in defocused backgrounds with fast lenses. Too low a setting and individual RGB pixels are seen which can really take away from the background of the image. Test this out for yourself and you will see what I mean. You’ll get better results than just leaving it at the default of 25 all the time.

Pinball Kid

In this example my son is playing his pinball machine and was too warm - deciding to go topless. An unusual, but humorous picture nonetheless, I always have a camera about in the house. This image was processed in Lightroom to reveal the massive dynamic range, and pull out the scene so it looks like what my eyes saw. When first assessing the RAW file, I could see very little into the shadows. The reason the file looks like this as it is presented in a linear looking form and has no curve or contrast adjustments applied to it yet. It was very simple to adjust the curve and shadows to bring out the D810’s beautiful dynamic range. Care must be taken to not just pull sliders about without reason, adding +100 to shadows will really bring out noise in situations like these and will worsen the image globally, reducing contrast and at times giving a horrible muddy, HDR look to the resulting picture. We don’t want that. What we want to do is produce a picture like what our eyes saw. Here are the majority of the settings applied to this RAW file, a relatively simple edit in this case:

The reason I have had to boost by +1.6 on exposure; is because I shot at the dual gain point of the D810’s sensor to maximise it’s dynamic range. The rest of the settings are self explainatory. Notice the slight upward curve point applied at the right of the leftmost hump. This increases midtone contrast and brightness. I have faded off the end of the blacks slightly to soften the image in the deepest tones, indicated by the applied leftmost point. I did a very basic singular mask on his face and highlights of his body and that was it.


Noise Reduction Settings

For this file, I left the settings at my default of 25 for colour NR. any lower, and bright R G B specs could be see in the darkest areas (like the vignette in the corners and the low lying exposure zones). Too high a setting, 35-55 for example, and the green background smudges into a horrible plastic one toned blob, we don’t want that, it’s not a good look. Yes I could clean further with the AI addition in LR, or elsewhere, but I left it in this time (it looks bad here bceause it is super magnified). You can see I haven’t applied any luminance here bccause in this particular example, doing so dropped the detail in the scene to levels I did not like. AI NR used sparingly, can work however as I will show later on in this article.

100% Crop


100% crop. NB focal plane on eyes outwith shot

This is the natural noise “grain” from the sensor, and I like to keep it real. If you have ever printed an image, you would know that noise just doesn’t really show up much. My advice to most shooters is to drop the time wasted on noise reduction and focus on something more worthwhile with the above simple caveats, and consider that yes, for deep sky astro work, things are a little different. Remember, that your mileage may vary. Whilst I feel that cleaning up too much of a file and making it too perfect destroys the realism, especially there are several factors that influence that - for example removing a rock in a landscape etc, you may not. Where does it stop? For every shooter, there will be a different place where they consider the edit has gone too far. As long as you are happy with your result and progess as an editor, you are on the right track.

NB - Please be aware that it is difficult to show you exactly what these files look like here. Image compression applied by the website tech can product some artefacting and blockiness can appear in deep blacks, not present in the end result on my monitor.

Extreme Low Light with the D810

Let’s look at an image that I made in November 2024 of my son in the back of the car on his tablet computer playing games. I shot this at too low of an ISO - 400. Despite the D810 being pretty invariant, I should have shot it up at 3200-6400 to get less amp glow and magenta cast on the right which I fixed in post. To my eye, this was much darker. All I could see was a tiny glow on his face, and the light from the tablet. The surroundings of the scene - the car door, and the window above with the glint of a car’s tail lights was barely made out by my vision, showing how incredible these cameras actually are for a fast shutter speed shot. This above image is the result of AI noise reduction in Lightroom. I used a setting of ‘25’ for it. This shot was boosted 4 stops in post! I can do this because as mentioned, the D810 is mostly invariant when doing so, however even if I shot at ISO 3200 etc, there is so little light that there would be very similar amounts of noise. This is when I will use moderate amounts of AI noise reduction, or sometimes a combination of Lightroom’s manual NR, and then AI NR.

Adobe AI Denoise

This is my preferred method of NR, being a Lightroom / Photoshop editor. It keeps this process in the family, and only takes a few seconds to do, and it also means I don’t have to waste money on other dedicated programs. However, for a while I kept getting blue / purple colour casts when using this powerful technique. I found out after some digging that it was nothing to do with graphics cards or out of date drivers in my case. I found out, that it needs to be applied first, or at the very least, before any masking is applied. You see, Denoise AI looks at the pure RAW data, and disregards any edits you have made to the raw file. It then calculates the setting you input, and then places those further edits you made, back over the file after it completes. If you have used complex masks and the like, it seems to be that the calculations get messed up and we sometimes experience strangeness such as the colour casts I was seeing. Since experimenting, I no longer have this problem. Sometimes it is useful to create a virtual copy of the file in lightroom. Do your edits on the initial RAW file, and see how much NR you will need. To the virtual copy undo all edits, then apply the NR, and simply sync the edits from the original RAW file over to it after it completes. This way, I never get casts and I will admit to it being a very powerful technique, when used with care.

Final Thought

Do not be like everyone else in this game who obsesses over noise in photographs. It’s the worst trait of photographers today. (Apart from those dudes that show up at dark sky sites when I have been there all night, lighting stuff up with torches!). Consider how much NR you need and apply it tastefully. I highly recommend Adobe Denoise AI in lowered amounts. Think about the scene. Let’s make it feel like film, and less like digital. For the most part, it’ll turn out whole lot better than the plasticy look I see everywhere now…

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

Steve

The Decisive Moment

Boy and Dog, Nikon D850 with Sigma 35mm 1.4

Composing the Moment

Sometimes, in fact often, making a good picture is about waiting. Life is a waiting game in so many respects. To achieve a picture that is cohesive and produces an emotive response, we need to wait until the scene comes together in order to let it pack it’s fullest punch, so to speak. This is true of most forms of photography, from landscape to portraiture.

The decisive moment is a matter therefore, of timing, vantage point and composition. These three are inextricably linked. The light can work for or against us in these situations where it is most likely something will happen. Let’s examine these three points. Timing is the first obvious one. We don’t want to capture subjects at weird angles, with eyes blinking, squinting faces, odd poses etc. Most people understand this basic conecpt about photography. Vantage point is especially important in most scenes. Sometimes you just need to be a little higher or a little lower to change a good picture into a great one. It’s all about seperation. If I had been lower to the ground here, I would have had the subject interfere with the background radiator, and I wouldn’t gain the lovely seperation we have here. I would have also put too much window into the shot, which would have weakened the shot by pulling the eye out of the scene to a very bright area. Composition is the final, very obvious point. We need to piece the scene together in a logical way that garners the most impact.

For the particular scene above, my son was playing his Nintendo Switch on the TV, and my parent’s little dog, Lottie, was sitting with him as she often did quite content. She was there for quite some time but compositionally, from where I was sitting especially, it did not work as a photograph. I spent a bit of time just watching, no camera, but sitting in the place that would form a nice composition if she moved into the correct place, and he held where we was. I ideally wanted the dog at the corner of the rug, which forms a nice solid arrow towards our subject, Lottie. This along with a placement residing more or less along a third line, balances out the strongly weighted left scene I had in front of me before she moved into that spot. Remember, we have to be flexible here. I can’t put them both perfectly on thirds and just think I am some compositional master. It doesn’t work like that. This is about balance; and I need to show the TV set that my son is looking towards also, in order to give the photograph proper context. I like that they are both looking outward of the frame on the upper left and lower right sides, this actually further balances the overall scene. The lifted paw in slight motion blur, and the slight space between the floor and the paw along with the shadow of the dog on the flooring gives it a dynamic feel. The chair on the right frames the right side, such that the TV does on the left, further balancing the scene that would have still been a little left - heavy without it. It also alludes that this is a living room, of course.

Some compositional basics

The Equipment

If you are using zooms to shoot scenes like these, you are missing out on some goodness. Zooms with f/2.8 apertures are obviously slow compared to fast primes in the f/1.2-1.4 range (x4 less light) and steal opportunities to make a more impactful shot without using flash, which would have absolutely startled and freaked out the little dog. I wouldn’t have been able to achieve the cinematic feel I have here with slow apertures either. I would loose the isolation, the vignette and some of the pop I am getting from this prime lens. You will notice in cinema, that the Director of Photography will pull focus between subjects when they are speaking etc. Often this just causes a subtle blur on the person not talking at the time. We have created this effect here, you can see my son is slightly out of focus, it drives the eye away from his large size in the frame towards the dog. The lens I used here is a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art, teamed up with a Nikon D850, the best DSLR ever built, period. It goes without saying, I would have had no problem shooting this with a D800, or D810 body. In terms of focal length for this scene, 24mm would have been far too wide (subject size would diminish unless I got very close), and 50mm too tight to reveal the important compositional markers hidden about the room and the subjects.

The Settings

As per my usual shot discipline, I am at base ISO here, in order to maximise quality. Importantly, I knew I did not want to blow the window highlights, as this bright area would pull the eye away from our subjects. I used; ISO 64, 1/100 and an aperture of f/1.4. I exposed to the right of the histogram, without clipping anything to have the maximum processability of the resulting RAW file. I wanted to be at f/1.4 for two main reasons. This aperture on a fast 35mm prime at close range, nicely isolates subjects and gives a subtle fall off, which further directs the eye. The second reason is that the natural lens vignette is a useful tool; it is most present at f/1.4 (I have slightly enhanced it in processing). By shooting wide open, the vignette helps me calm down the window area within the histogram boundaries, and keep the shadows in a better place. If I shot at f/4, there would have been zero vignette, and I would have had to back off the histogram more to the left side, meaning noisier shadows, and worse quality overall. The shutter speed of 1/100 is sufficient at this distance to freeze a slow moving subject such as the dog, however allows the tiniest hint of motion at the leading paw which I like (I could have gotten more of this by stopping the aperture down a shade, but it is at the risk of the dog becoming overall, too motion blurred and ruining the shot).

The Processing

Good processing should be unseen for the most part; in the sense that it is subtle and the edits cannot be physically noticed. The processing should bolster the story of the scene and further direct the eye. Everyone has their edit style, and most people have a constantly evolving style that only gets better through experience. I know mine has improved vastly, even just these last few years.

The next time you are shooting anything, just think where the scene elements will be the most impactful. Balance everything up, work with the light and process in order to further direct the eye and the story you are trying to tell.

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

Steve

Mirrorless vs DSLR

Cameras are just Tools…

Think about those four words. If I were a sports shooter, who stared through the finder of a camera all day, or even for significant periods…I would actually likely not be shooting mirrorless. Same goes for portraits, weddings too really. I mean how hard is it to move a little AF box about? Why would you want to look at a TV screen all day? I love the OVF of DSLRs for weddings, portraits and deliberate shooting that can use the viewfinder. The reason I prefer ML, is when in astro or landscape mode, when it is traditional to use the back screen…ie essentially what a mirrorless camera is, a feed directly from the sensor, in finder or on the back LCD monitor. Everyone will have their use case, however it seems crazy to me to want to move away from an OVF for things like portraits and weddings; things that involve long staring and waiting for the shot through viewfinders (most tend to not use the LCD monitor and hold the camera at arms length). I personally think DSLRs are greatly suited to these tasks.

Okay, so why do You have a Z 8?

I spent a huge percentage of time in my recent years with cameras, almost exclusively using the live view function of DSLRs, or the LCD monitor as it is called on mirrorless cameras, barely touching the OVF. This is for landscape and astro work. I spend huge amounts of time in darkness, and the Z 8 ditches the old test shot routine at night as the monitor is so sensitive, I can compose in the dark and just shoot! I also gain a dual flip screen, which stops me laying on the freezing ground in winter to take vertical shots. I wanted to upgrade all my primes to a decent zoom, it made little sense to go with the old f mount zooms which are outclassed now, a couple of other factors - but the major being the way I used the camera. For portraits - heck, I still use the D800 and D810 cameras with their huge OVFs.

There is no huge difference in image quality with any of these cameras, from the D800, D810, D850, Z 8. There are some subtle differences and they should be considered by shooters who really push their files. You know who you are. So that means if you have a Dxx body think about the real reason you are upgrading. In fact, if you really are a image quality zealot as I am, the D850 is the best technical quality of all of these bodies…That said, in real life, compromise is always afoot, however I had many logical reasons to add the Z 8 into the mix for my shooting. However, when thinking of a tool to task camera, everything has pros and cons.

The biggest one I have found for the Z8 is the shutterless design means you can be gambling in LED lighting situations. Nikon has tried to mitigate the banding problems with fine tuning of the exposure time options and a photo flicker reduction mode etc but really, this isn’t a camera for weddings. I highly recommend making sure you have flicker reduction enabled in the menu of the Z8. This gives slight shutter lag but helps prevent banding. I have enough to think about on a wedding day without messing about fine tuning exposures to get banding under control, so I keep this mode enabled. I want no banding in any situation! Seriously, for wedding days and portraits… I'd just use dslrs. (They also work better with flashes). Don’t buy into the hype of mirrorless for those genres. Yes you can buy a z7ii or whatever in mirrorless land (which has a shutter and thus won’t have banding issues in certain light), however you’ll have much poorer battery life and will be essentially staring a TV screen all day whilst you focus and compose and relentlessly look for pictures. In my mind, this makes little sense and this is very different to the landscape genre whereby it is common practice to use the back screen more. Thus we were always using the monitor to make pictures: this was and is the way 99% of landscape shooters work.

Regarding the banding which can come about with shutterless mirrorless cameras…Case in point, upstairs in my home is full of LED lighting. The Z8 is a disaster when it comes to this; I cant focus on composing and shooting because ive got this crazy banding issue distracting me. However I can grab my d810 dslr and shoot at any shutter speed with zero problems. And best of all my battery will last all day (for weddings and portrait sessions and the like). Like I said…turn on flicker reduction in the Z8 menu and keep your eyes peeled.

Mirrorless Advantages

  • What you see is what you get view finder, with live histogram *

  • Eye AF and some other technical goodies which can for certain situations be a boon for certain shooters

  • Access to most modern lenses **

  • USB charging

  • Can technically have smaller full frame bodies (they aren’t much lighter or much smaller if you compare like for like however)

  • Video implementation and functionality is greatly improved over dslrs

  • Ibis

  • Potentially total silent shooting (sometimes ibis isn’t silent)

DSLR Advantages

  • The sensor is only on when taking the picture

  • Much better battery life

  • Optical Viewfinder

  • Better on and off camera speedlight flash support and AF assist beams work with red light

  • No issues with banding from LED lighting for any of the dslrs used as intended with the OVF - this is a big one if you shoot weddings / events / portraits. This is only an advantage when comparing to shutterless mirrorless designs though that are forced to use their electronic shutter

  • Build quality and ergonomics - especially if using the super magnesium based bodies such as the D810, D850

  • If you own one, you already own one - seem obvious, however…You just saved money and have some advantages to boot

Like mostly everything in life, there are pros and cons. This should be thought of in the context of your work, your shooting style, the way you do things. If you use your DSLR like a mirrorless camera - ie you are always on the back screen and are not taking advantage of the OVF, this along with other considerations may sway you to switch (or better add mirrorless, as I did).

* I have noted that people that know how to use a camera meter, do just about as well shooting with a DSLR in terms of obtaining a proper exposure, as they do on mirrorless. It is that simple. If they are messing up exposures on DSLRs, it shows more work is needed to understand the tool that they are using. What I tend to see is mirrorless doesn’t necessarily help - screen brightness throws them off as much as not understanding how metering works does. So whilst some might view this as some huge advantage, it is a weak one in my mind.

** Access to modern lenses may not be as important as it sounds, depending on the shooter. You might be perfectly happy with your lenses; newer is not always better.

Final Thoughts

I almost wish I did not ‘need’ to add a Z 8 into the mix. Why? I don’t like wasting money! However, I could not overlook how much easier using the Z 8 makes my life, especially when shooting at night. If you are content with what you use: be content. Only you know how you work and that should be the paramount concern. The final image on screen is all that matters. Most of the time the only obstacle to success is figuring out how to work out that thing about 2 inches behind the viewfinder…

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

Steve


Aurora Borealis - May 10th / 11th 2024 G5 Aurora over Scotland

Approaching the Balvaird Castle Light Show - Nikon Z 8 with 14-24/2.8S @ f/2.8, 20s, ISO 800

A Geomagnetic Storm

Intense aurora displays are generated following massive explosions originating from the sun known as 'coronal mass ejections'. These explosions release clouds of hot plasma containing billions of tons of material travelling at around two million miles per hour. When this material reaches Earth, it interact with Earth's magnetic field to cause events called geomagnetic storms.

The strongest geomagnetic storm in over two decades dazzled photographers and astronomers in May 2024. The G5 storm culminated in a remarkable display of the aurora borealis overnight on May 10th–11th, and was visible from many areas worldwide, including extremely low latitudes that have simply never seen the likes of this type of display, or possibly never seen aurora ever.

This picture is has been crafted to show the true nature of the colour present in the night sky. Shot with a WB of 5500K, if our human vision was as sensitive as a camera, this is what we would see, a warmer colour than we can visualise at night due to the purkinje effect. The purkinje effect describes the situation in human vision: as light levels decrease, the perception of warm colours drops off dramatically, especially the red end of the spectrum. Because of this, it is very important to observe the night sky with dark adapted eyes, especially in the case of aurora. This is why we often see the night sky as black / grey or blue toned. To properly have eyes adjusted for light levels this low, one must observe for at least 30 minutes and avoid all forms of artificial light during that time. That means get off your phone and observe the sky, not apps. People that say that the aurora is only good / visible on camera, are often observing the night sky with un-adapted vision and have been staring at bright phone screens which destroy any dark adaption the eye has underwent so far. Of course though it must be said that very faint aurora will not register with most regular eyes. I also recommend switching to dark mode on your phone, because the white light weakens perception of the dark tones in images and is generally not good for your eyes.

In the northern hemisphere, we would normally be searching the northern horizon for Aurora, however it was different that night…

Facing South-East - Corona

With powerful storms, aurora becomes a huge event around the world, and increasingly powerful storms allow it to be seen in all directions, varying throughout the night.

Aurora Colours

A basic knowledge of chemistry dictates that gases produce differing colours when they are heated. On Earth, the most abundant elements in our atmosphere are Nitrogen and Oxygen. Nitrogen tends to produce the pinks and blues if they occur, and the greens tend to come come from oxygen.

This picture above shows the aurora borealis corona facing south-east. (Corona, being like the origin point). Unheard of, and occurring in only the most powerful of displays, it seemed like there was Aurora across the whole sky, even at zenith. (Think of zenith as the sky directly overhead when standing at a location).

Pink Aurora Pillar

I spent some time focusing on compositions that avoid severe key stoning to the castle. Key stoning occurs when we use wide angle lenses close to subjects and tilt the camera and lens combination up or down. This causes large objects with straight edges, such as this castle to lean back or towards the camera. Our brains naturally correct this effect that our eyes will be “seeing” also. This caveat drove the use of some central based compositions, along with where the northern lights actually featured in the sky.

The Aurora Arc

This was an initial picture I made throughout the ever changing Aurora that night. This is facing North where we could see the vast green aurora arc with pink pillars above it. The castle seemed to be perfectly aligned with the base of this arc.

Looking north, we can see how powerful the display was. Here we can see the constellation of Corona Borealis (top right), quite fitting on this night. The rays reached zenith during the night.

Green Aurora Tracks

Although key stoning is generally ugly, I had to show these bright aurora tracks looking up a the castle here. Despite obtaining these images, I still wish I stayed out all night. I called it a day at about 2:30pm as I had a long journey to make the next day.

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

Steve

The Nikon D850 - Still King Years Later

Read about the also excellent D810 Camera here.

Introduction

This camera is the seminal Nikon DSLR, culminating in Nikon’s years of DSLR development into an extremely well rounded do - everything camera. So many people have dumped it, and other very capable DSLRs and moved to mirrorless. I am a much more tool to task type of shooter, who values the beautifully large optical view finders in Nikon’s D8xx series cameras, and the strengths which they play to.

Specifications

  • 45.7MP BSI CMOS sensor

  • 7 fps continuous shooting with AE/AF (9 with battery grip and EN-EL18b battery)

  • 153-point AF system linked to 180,000-pixel metering system

  • UHD 4K video capture at up to 30p from full sensor width

  • 1080 video at up to 120p, recorded as roughly 1/4 or 1/5th speed slow-mo

  • 4:2:2 8-bit UHD uncompressed output while recording to card

  • 1 XQD slot and 1 UHS II-compliant SD slot

  • Battery life rated at 1840 shots

  • 3.2" tilting touchscreen with 2.36M-dot (1024×768 pixel) LCD

  • Illuminated controls

  • 19.4MP DX crop (or 8.6MP at 30fps for up to 3 sec)

  • SnapBridge full-time Bluetooth LE connection system with Wi-Fi

  • Advanced time-lapse options (including in-camera 4K video creation

Access to a Vast Lens Catalogue

All f mount bodies have access to an expansive lens collection from Nikon and other third parties such as the wonderful Sigma, Zeiss, Tamoron, to name a few. There is simply no way that you won’t find peace in the vast amount of options out there. Special mentions go to the Sigma 40mm f/1.4 Art - a very special astro / landscape lens which is still class leading to this day. The 28mm 1.4E Nikkor on f mount, which again is utterly superb still. The 24mm f/1,4G dual personality lens which gives a beautiful softer wide open rendering and an ultra sharp stopped down landscape scene. There are so many options to choose from that you simply cannot go wrong.

D850 Image Quality and Dynamic Range

The D850’s image quality in 35mm format is still class leading, many, many years after it’s release in 2017. Even the Z7II, which on paper is very close, cannot beat it. (it’s actually slightly worse, because if used to the absolute limit, the Z7II autofocus grid is hidden in the data if pulled too hard especially in serious applications such as deep sky work the autofocus grid can be seen. This does not occur ever in DSLR’s as focusing is carried out off sensor). So even present day, nothing is touching this sensor. Let’s look at the D850’s class leading sensor stats from photonstophotos.com:

(Tip: If you have trouble seeing these graphs on mobile, just pinch zoom into them). This sensor clocks in a whopping 11.63 stop of dynamic range at base ISO of 64. Not only this, the RAW files are so malleable (which these charts don’t necessarily tell us) in post processing. You can pull a file any which way and it holds up. It saves you if you screw up when taking the image. The shadow latitude is absolutely insane. One can expose for the highlights, and drag the shadows up to get a realistic image, without horrendous noise or banding like with other brands. It is simply ridiculous how good this sensor is.

Dual Gain Design

Similarly to the D810 before it, if needing to boost an exposure excessively in lower light - it is best to shoot at ISO 400 due to read noise. (note the little bump upwards in dynamic range here on the graph). What this means is, if in low light shooting portraits, or astro foregrounds, increasing dyanmic range in camera is the same as doing so in post. This is called sensor invarience. However, the reason it is best to keep it at 400 and boost later, is you will retain dynamic range, particularly highlight data. If you crush it up to ISO 6400, your dynamic range will have dropped. The key here, boost it in post. During daylight, to get the best latitude, it is obviously advisable to shoot at ISO 64. The BSI part of the sensor design means the light gathering elements of the sensor are closer to the surface of the chip. This means, that the D850 is even better than the already good D810 at high ISO, and it can be pushed even further. The D810 can produce a slight magenta glow if pushed really hard, at high ISO.

ISO 64

ISO 64 is a magic ISO where one can feel free of dynamic range problems or constraints. For example, if you shoot Sony, Canon or Fuji, you are simply missing out. It’s ironic for the sony shooters. Nikon sensors are made by Sony; however Nikon tune them and get more out of them than Sony do. ISO 64 is a landscape photographers dream with so much latitude that exposure brackets are needed less and less. NB: Of course, still needed in certain situations.

Electronic Front Curtain Shutter and Electronic Shooting

This one is really useful for us landscape and particulary, astro guys. Yes it stops vibrations, (however I had no issues with the D810, which offers EFCS, but not electronic shooting). However, what this does provide is less wear on the shutter at night. Astro often involves many, many exposures, particularly if doing time lapse photography. Using this mode means the shutter stays open and the shutter actuations count will not rise with exposures. The electronic shutter is a huge boon for this type of shooting because of this, potentially prolonging the shutter life of the camera as well as dealing with any vibrations.

Optical View Finder

The D8xx series have supberb optical view finders that give a superb in the moment feel: you are looking at the scene at the speed of light with zero lag, and zero feeling of tunnel vision with constant use. They are easy to use and compose with. Information on the LCD panel below is sufficient and gives all the details one would want. The only minor thing they should have popped in here is the battery life remaining. (It does come up when critcally low). Optical View Finder Advantage. Mirrorless tech now is a ways away from the first major iterations: for example the Z7, in that camera’s like the Z8 have hardly any or no perceptible lag when shooting. Despite this, there is still a case to be made for a large and bright optical viewfinder found in Nikon’s D8xx bodies. There are several things I would touch on here. There is no lag with these designs; light comes at us at the speed of light through such finders. Secondly, in genres such as wedding / portrait and others that involve long staring contests of the photographer looking through the finder, optical finders are still relevant. Think about this for a second. DSLRs do not need to power an electronic feed for you to see and compose your image. You can have your settings down and simply wait for the decisive moment. Doing this with mirrorless involves chewing through batteries simply waiting when it comes to mirrorless cameras. This may or may not affect a shooter; however it is important to consider. The last advantage can also for some be seen as a disadvantage. For me, it is nice to observe subjects without any electronic representation. As long as one knows how to meter and understands exposure, this is generally not an issue. Shooters now are growing up in a world of smartphones where they need to see what they are going to get on the mirrorless screen. However, even things like brightness can through people shooting like this off. Of course, the other side of this coin is that in low light, mirrorless cameras can have the advantage in that they can elecronically boost the signal. When you think about it, since DSLRs have liveview, this should have been technically possible with DSLRs too, just not via the optical finder.

LCD monitor

The LCD monitor is extremely high resolution and adjusts to a level that it can be used in bright sunlight. It should, like the D800 have auto brightness, like all phones do. It seems Nikon considers it’s user base confuses brightness with actual image exposure perhaps and removed this function? It tilts in one axis only, my only complaint is that I would prefer a dual axis tilt screen, like the Z8 and Z9 now have. (This becomes really useful when doing low lying vertical orientated shots, especially at night).

Autofocus and FPS

The autofocus in the D850 is another evolution of the D810. The D810 can’t match the D850 in sports, but this was never really my forte. I have shot some equestrian events, and some motor racing and have always been able to nail it on the D810 and make pictures with fast lenses. That said, close fast moving subjects on the D850 have a higher hit rate with this camera. There are lots of modes and options to make the camera do what you wish it to do. The camera shoots at 7 FPS in full RAW mode, producing gorgeous, highly editable files.

Build Quality

The build of this camera reminds me of the D700. The whole D8xx range is superb and although feel like bricks, can take some punishment and come out unscathed. I have never had an issue with this camera in this vein. Simply holding it in your hand confirms the feeling of a well crafted tool. It feels superb and ergonomic and solidly built.

Use Cases:

Deep Sky Astro

I have a tutorial on this here with the D850 used for years to photograph the deep night sky. For this camera body, shoot at a higher ISO for this specific purpose and ignore what I have said above about limiting to ISO 400. Nikon camera’s can produce concentric circles when shooting at too low an ISO and stacking multiple hours of night sky data (commonplace in deep sky astro of course), then stretching it to reveal faint signal afterward. Start at ISO 800 to reduce your chance of problems in this regard.

Landscape Photography

You are in good company if you particpate in this genre. For 99% of shooting, you will be at ISO 64. To maxmise IQ, in lower light, ISO 400 should be selected (dual gain point, below that, the sensor is ISO invariant). I don’t need to say anything more about this camera for this genre as it is tried and tested. In 35mm format, nothing beats it.

Sports

A large bright OVF is what a sports shooter should consider. They spend vast amount of time watching and studying before pushing the shutter. A lot of that time, is spend with the eye pressed up to the finder. Do you watch to watch TV all day? With the OVF advantages (and battery), along with excellent reliable AF and amazing lens selection, you cannot go wrong if you like using a body this size for sports (some prefer the larger nikons).

Portraiture / Weddings

Another obvious win for this camera. Yes it lacks eye AF, but you really don’t need this, not really. Image quality for portraits is excellent, skin tones are sublime and the files are so malleable as with the other genres, this camera is tried and tested.

Macro / Copy work

I am not a macro shooter per se, however I can see no reason why this camera would not be perfect in such disciplines. The high quality, high megapixel sensor will take care of all needs in these situations.

Final Thoughts

I would not have added a Z 8 into the mix if the D850 had a few things:

  • A higher sensitivity in lower light for astro purposes, helping vastly when constructing panos (mosaics) of the night sky

  • A dual tilt screen

  • USB charging

  • I wanted to upgrade my landscape lenses to zooms and wished the latest lenses (24-70/2.8S), (14-24/2.8S with front filters)

If you are a sports shooter, shoot weddings, or portraits, candid or in a studio with lights - think long and hard about why you want to move everything to mirrorless. The main reason I added a mirrorless body was because of the way I was using the D850. I was using the monitor most of the time these last few years, as per common landscape / astrophotography practice. So I am not missing the OVF in that regard. As soon as I want to shoot people, a wedding etc, the DSLRs come out. Don’t necessarily ditch all your DSLRs for the new toys. Tool to task…

As you can see from above technically, I have lost a small amount of image quality at base ISO and at around ISO 400 where there is a small dip in the camera’s range. For the Z 8, we either shoot at ISO 64, or at 500 for this reason (500 is the dual gain switch point in this model and means more stretching and cleaner images can be had, then trying to drag up an ISO 400 shot). At base ISO, the image quality loss is small, but it is still mildly annoying that we have a kind of one step forward, one step back game going on here. Due to the stacked sensor, the Z 8 has about 1/3 of a stop less dynamic range. It makes it’s RAW files slightly less malleable and yes - I have noticed it. Most will not however, and it can be mitigated by good shooting technique. So no need for the sky to fall; however if you want class leading image quality at an absolute steal of a price - you have just won a watch if you pick up a D850, especially right now, or forever…Because of this, it remains Highly Recommend.

Read more about my other Highly Recommended camera - the D810, which is still class leading even today.

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

Steve

Milky Way Core over Dunnottar, Scotland. Nikon D850 and 50/1.4 prime lens with a star tracker

Freezing Motion in the Still Image

Nikon D800 with 135mm f/2 DC prime lens

Freezing motion in the still image is actually a very simple concept - we just require a fast shutter speed. How fast you ask? That depends on what we are trying to freeze in the frame. For fast moving objects with longer lenses, generally we are going to need shutter speeds of a few thousandth - 1/1000, 1/2000 etc and upwards. If we are talking about someone walking, depending on the subject to camera distance, lens etc, we might only need 1/500 even on a high resolution sensor. Let’s look at the example above shot at ISO 100, f/2, 1/3200. If we look at a close up we can see more clearly. The depth of field at this close range with a large sensor such as the D800, we can see the the plane of focus is very fine (it’s on the eyes of courser, however at the bottom left of the picture, water droplets come close into this plane, hence appear sharper). This is a good example to illustrate that everything is perfectly frozen here; but some of the droplets are within the depth of field more than others. I could have gone even faster here with my shutter speed if needed. (I could do that by simply doubling the ISO to get double the shutter speed).

I am shooting in aperture or manual with all of my work. Aperture is a great mode because it allows conscious control of aperture and therefore the shutter speed (by simple knowledge that opening the aperture will quicken the shutter speed, and vice versa), however you get a little more help with the onboard computer in the camera than you do with manual mode. This means generally you can react quicker to a changing scene that happens in front of camera. Aperture works so well, because we know that in bright light, if we use a wide aperture, we are going to get a fast shutter speed, even at base ISO. So all it takes for scenes like these is aperture priority mode, the widest aperture the lens shoots at, be it f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, base ISO and an occasional glancing at the shutter speed readout in the viewfinder. If it drops lower than you want, simply up the ISO (or if possible, open up the aperture). This way of working gives great control, and speed / flexibility. Outdoors with fast lenses, it is very easy to stop motion like this. However, if we wanted to do the opposite - just stay at base ISO and close down the aperture. In aperture mode, the camera will drop the shutter speed (which again you can continually glance at in the finder), and as you get to lower speeds, the water will blur across the image. It all depends on the desired effect. Learning these things until they become intuitive is very important to mastering the craft.

Lens Design and Selecting Tool to Task Lenses

Introduction

How do we select a lens for a subject? This depends on many factors. Sometimes, one of those factors may take more of a priority over another. Say, for example, I am a landscape photographer. However, what if I am a landscape photographer on an extreme budget? Well, I might suggest looking for the most bang for buck camera and lens combo one could probably buy. A older Nikon DSLR such as a D800 in great condition, with perhaps a reasonably priced mid ranged zoom, or maybe an older mirrorless body with an accompanying lens suited to their shooting style. If money is no object, or say, less of a concern, the game changes a bit. They might be splashing out on a Nikon Z 8, or a Sony a7R V etc and the very latest zoom or prime kit. The same is the case when we select a lens for shooting. The priority is balanced with budget and intention, how the image will be used and displayed etc. This said, even despite the D800 being quite old now, it has phenomenal dynamic range and image quality. (In capable hands, I still consider it world class. It is only budget now, because it is older).

However, getting back to lenses, what if we really think about why some lenses are better suited to certain shooting applications? If we put initial cost of owning a lens aside, how do we then select a lens after that? Should we shoot landscapes with a lens tuned for portraiture? What about the other way around? Should we try shooting the night sky with lenses that were never intended for that purpose? What happens if we do these things? Why can’t lenses be perfect for every subject?

Balance

A lens designer is an architect of optics that must balance science with art. This isn’t dissimilar to a photographer. We hopefully balance technical craftmanship with art, to hopefully produce an image that produces an idea, a feeling, a journey, an expression of emotion. Someone I speak to often about lens design - someone who knows way more about this than me, once told me that lens design is a balancing act; a veritable horse trading of parts - a give and take in a very real sense. The designer can trade and optimise one thing, which will perhaps be to the detriment of another optical property. And this is why, truly great lenses often fall into different categories, of course by design. This is exactly why, we should at least consider which lenses we are using to shoot which subjects. Would another lens work better? Many of us do this by looking at reviews - I will myself admit I do enjoy doing this. Despite doing so however, for many years I have begun to question the efficacy of tests for a lens clearly designed to be shot (or is optimised overall) for infinity shooting, being tested with a close up scene in a studio or a garden? What would that really tell me about a lens that was clearly optimised for something else entirely?

We have never lived in more sophisticated age than we do presently for lens design, and it has only gotten better. Lens design is dramatically improved vs decades ago by computer aided design, and relatively speaking, manufacturers’ are able to provide us with excellent lenses compared to thirty years ago for reasonable prices. 35mm format photography now approaches medium format in quality when optimal lenses and technique are melded together. The designer has access to tools they simply did not have in those times past.

Aberrations

All optical equipment has to contend with the properties of light, with regards to how it refracts through lens elements. An aberration simply refers to the deviation of a light ray through a lens causing blurred images, or areas of an image which are blurred / degraded in quality. There are many types of aberrations which can hamper final image quality that the designer must contend with and balance. The big ones are, vignetting, distortion, field curvature, chromatic aberration, comatic aberration, spherical aberration and astigmatism. Many types of aberration improve when stopping a lens down through it’s aperture range, however some do not - which dismantles the old cliché that all lenses are the same by f/8: this is simply not true.

  • Vignetting - This is a peripheral shading (darkening) of the side frames and corners of the image. This tends to affect faster lenses more and always improves when stopping down, due to the aperture blades of the lens obstructing the outer light path as the lens is stopped down.

  • Distortion - An obvious optical problem is when the lens distorts things like vertical or horizontal lines or objects. Lens distortion is different from perspective distortion (the distortion we see when using an ultra wide lens on a person close up). Distortion can either be barrel or pincushion, or sometimes a mixture of both.

  • Field Curvature - This occurs when light rays do not attenuate to the same focal plane, we are left with potential dead spots were the lens isn’t sharp (or it is less sharp). Field curvature can come in different types, wavy etc.

  • Chromatic Aberration - There are two types. ‘Longitudinal CA’ occurs when different wavelengths of colour do not converge at the same point after passing through a lens, also known as bokeh fringing. The second type, called ‘lateral CA’ occurs when different wavelengths of colour coming at an angle focus at different positions along the same focal plane.

  • Comatic Aberration - Also known as ‘coma’ is an aberration that occurs when light rays from the edges of the image pass through glass elements over the changing shape of the lens elements, they vary in magnification and become stretched out. This aberration only affects off axis light. In astro work, stars on the periphery / corners of the frame can literally look like little comets.

  • Spherical Aberration - This occurs when light rays focus on different planes after passing through a spherical surface. Rays that pass off axis refract more than rays passing horizontally through the centre of the lens and thus cause this. The rays that pass through the elements off axis refract so much they can focus in front of the intended focal plane. This can cause a blur / glow in images at fast apertures. Sometimes this is desirable in small quantities and is balanced with other aberrations to optimise a lens for a specific task.

  • Astigmatism - Known as the ugliest optical aberration. Astigmatism occurs when the lens elements fail to focus image lines running in different directions in the same plane. This one doesn’t really go away as we stop down the aperture of a lens (I have previously spoken about how not all lenses are the same at f/8, and this is one of the reasons). As we stop down, the increasing depth of field can mask a lens with some astigmatism in it, but often not fully account for the problem. Astigmatism causes softness to the edge frames in many lenses, in astrophotography it produces winged seagull shaped stars at the edges.

Lenses for Landscape Photography

Loch Garry - Nikon Z 8 with 24-70/2.8S

Generally speaking, most landscape photographers want lenses that portray a very detailed and realistic interpretation of the scene. Landscape photographers need an accurate representation, and where possible, a lens which imparts nothing onto the image other than the scene in front of it. This includes fine detail, such as in grasses and rocks at near and far distances. Generally speaking, a good landscape - tuned lens is optimized to provide as much low, mid and high frequency MTF structure as possible. Controlled aberrations, sharpness balance across the frame (rather than just centrally), control of coma, astigmatism, flare and other optical phenomena are important to shooters in this genre. Lenses for landscape photography use tend to be f/2.8-4 lenses at their maximum apertures. The are usually designed to work best at mid range apertures such as 5.6-f/11 where they will be used most of the time. Lenses for this genre benefit from being sealed from dust / moisture to protect from inclement weather conditions. One thing I would highlight here is, there is a great deal of confusion from our community regarding lens speed. People will often balk at the suggestion of using a fast aperture lens for this genre of photography, because it is likely, mostly, going to be used stopped down in the field. It is understandable why they think like this, however it is a fallacy - we must consider that some aberrations do not go away as we stop down. Sometimes the faster glass just works better overall, even stopped down.

Lenses for Portrait Photography

Boy and his Balloon - Nikon D800 with 85/1.4D prime

Lenses for this genre have completely different aims. The best ones are obviously designed and built to make people look good. Out of focus areas have much more priority in the design, things like spherical aberrations and coma are adjusted in different ways than in landscape lenses to balance the background out of focus elements, with the sharpness of the subject and the focal plane transition areas. Lenses for this genre tend to have faster maximum apertures in order to be able to produce large areas of defocus (bokeh) in front and behind of the subject. These lenses tend to be optimised for use at their widest, or wider first few apertures, whilst still being able to balance scene fine detail when stopped down at close range.

Lenses for Astro Photography

Orion over the Quiraing, Isle of Skye - Nikon Z 8 with 14-24/2.8S

This genre is by far the most testing for any optical equipment. Point light sources, which are essentially what all starlight is to us, is a torture test to even the best of lenses. The three big ones in astro photography that we want to see controlled; are astigmatism (winged stars on the corners of the frame), coma (comet shaped stars out with the central axis) and chromatic aberrations (purple / green halos around areas of high contrast). If the designer can balance this with a good level of sharpness, especially across the frame from wider apertures, and a reasonably fast aperture to boot, the lens should excel on starlight.

Dual Personality Lenses

At the Arcade - Nikon D810 with 24/1.4G, a true dual personality lens

There is a very real situation whereby a lens can be a master in two disciplines. Let us consider, a fast aperture prime lens, for example the 50mm f/1.2S Nikkor. Clearly built as a portrait lens, and designed to work on people, it produces beautiful rendering at it’s first few apertures and at close ranges. However, use it at infinity, stopped down and it technically speaking is an excellent landscape lens also. There are many examples of such lenses. An older design that this applies to, is my 24/1.4G nikkor. Wide open and stopped down to the first few apertures, this lens is a bokeh, focus transitional rendering piece of magic. However, use it on a landscape at f/5.6-f/11 and it is extremely capable. I find this quite curious, and I have often bought lenses with this personality in mind. I used the 24/1.4G for many years as both an environmental portrait and landscape lens. What I like most about a lens like this is it’s ability to give a cinematic look in pictures such as the one I have shared above, and also be very proficient and showing vast amounts of detail and contrast when used stopped down on landscapes. It is perfectly capable in both disciplines. Needless to say, I like owning lenses that can do this, and as much as I like using zoom lenses for landscape photography, I love using primes. on people / objects. I keep the zooms for landscapes now.

NB - I shot most of my landscape work with prime lenses up until very recently.

 

All pictures and text © Steven Robinson 2025