Published on the American Thinker March 15th, 2022

Let me tell a story. It details probably the most important event in the suppression of the drug Ivermectin for treatment of Covid-19 a medication that had the potential to have saved many lives.

Dr. Teresa Lawrie is an MD, and the leader of the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy in Bath, UK. Her incredibly tedious job is to statistically evaluate medical studies and provide data to the National Health Service so that clinicians can decide on therapy guidelines. In Britain, she is been referred to as “the conscience of medicine”.

Andrew Hill MD, Ph.D. is a virologist and from his bio, a senior visiting Research Fellow in the Pharmacology Department at Liverpool University. He is considered an expert on therapy for HIV/AIDS. He is also a consultant to the World Health Organization. He is considered a very powerful voice who can influence medical practice worldwide.

UNITAID is a not-for-profit organization whose website states that it “connects innovators who develop better health products with people who need them the most”. It is been heavily funded by the Gates Foundation.

Apparently, in late 2020, studies began to accumulate looking at the potential of the drug Ivermectin in the treatment of SARS Co-V2. This antiparasitic agent was also known to have antiviral properties. This attracted the attention of both the WHO and Dr. Lawrie’s organization. The WHO contracted with Dr. Hill to evaluate the data. Independently, the Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy took on the same task. This involved performing a meta-analysis. This is a process where studies on a topic are collected and are analyzed for their quality. The best studies are pooled and the results analyzed. There are very well-established protocols for this.

Dr. Hill and Dr. Lawrie completed separate analyses and the results for both were exciting. There seemed to be a real benefit to using Ivermectin as a treatment for Covid. They concluded that the reduction in deaths could be as much as 60 to 85%. Both were comfortable with the quality of their results.  According to Dr. Lawrie, they compared notes and together pledged to push hard for the rapid approval of the drug, given the prevailing pandemic.

In January 2021 Dr. Hill was among the scientists who testified in support of Ivermectin the NIH’s COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel. Subsequently, the NIH changed its recommendation from against the use, to neither for or against the use, the same designation given to convalescent plasma, and monoclonal antibodies, both of which have been subsequently used for Covid. Ivermectin continues to carry that recommendation on the current NIH website.

Then something odd happened. Dr. Hill finally released a preprint of his meta-analysis, with all of his data. But the conclusion of the paper questioned the quality of the data and called for more research. This was obviously an opinion severely at odds with his previous stance. Many people, were taken completely by surprise, most prominently Dr. Lawrie. She arranged for a meeting via Zoom. Here is a link to a documentary that describes these events, and includes a video of the actual meeting. It is completely infuriating.

During the meeting, Dr. Hill admits that people from UNITAID had input on his conclusions. You can observe his demeanor and draw your own conclusions.

Dr. Hill’s promise of continued support never materialized. In fact, he ended up withdrawing his meta-analysis due to accusations that one of the included studies was fraudulent. To my knowledge, the fact of that has never been proven. Interestingly, because Dr. Lawrie’s paper included more studies, she was able to remove that same questionable data without affecting the outcome significantly.

Another interesting fact: shortly after all of this, Dr. Hill’s parent organization, Liverpool University, received a $40 million grant … from UNITAID. This was to set up the “Centre of Excellence for Long-acting Therapeutics” which would appear to be part of Dr. Hill’s department of Pharmacology. Coincidence?

As Dr. Lawrie notes in the documentary, over the intervening year, there have been many more studies on Ivermectin as well as striking observational data supporting the drug’s efficacy. Yet despite the NIH’s “neither for nor against” position, the drug has become essentially unavailable in the states, and physicians have been disciplined for its use.

In the meantime, based on one company-sponsored study each, two expensive new drugs Pfizer’s Paxlovid and Merck’s Molnupivinir were quickly granted emergency use authorization and are becoming readily available. I for one, am glad of this. Paxlovid in particular may save lives. There is no safety data, however for either, unlike Ivermectin which has been literally given to billions of people and has been proven to be extremely safe.

I have no passion for the drug Ivermectin. I certainly do not have any financial ties to the medication. That I think, is the problem, because essentially no one does. This is likely why there have been no well-funded large studies. And if Ivermectin is indeed efficacious, it would threaten the profits made on vaccines, and now on the new antiviral medications. As I approach the end of my career, the thought that a promising treatment for Covid 19 has been actively discouraged is very troubling to this physician. It makes me wonder what other cheap and effective off-patent therapies have been similarly suppressed.

Thanks, Dr. Hill.

Thanks for nothing.

 

 Early April in northeastern Pennsylvania is the point where one can realistically hope for the first sporadic signs of spring weather.  Here, temperatures, if we are lucky, are in the mid to high fifties. If it is unusually warm, a few of the maples may begin to bud out. Our predominantly oak forests however, stubbornly resist any show of foliage.  In fact though, is it the oaks that are more prudent; for a limb-breaking snowfall, even now, is not unlikely.

In this climate, people search for any touchstone to mark this season.   For many people in our region, it is the first day of trout season.

Now if you are a fly fisherman, you can fish during a great deal of the calendar year.  Pennsylvania proudly boasts some of the finest fly fishing in the country. Whether we’re talking about the upper Delaware River, The big and little Lehigh Rivers, The northern reaches of the Allegheny River, or the limestone creeks of south-central Pennsylvania, the state is a popular destination for anglers.

There is, however, a second culture of fishing in the state.  It is a culture some would call “put and take”, In other words: people who, unlike the fly fishermen, actually tend to eat the trout they catch.  These are the people that show up in force on the first day of the regular trout season.

 

For instance, located at the nearby Nescopeck State Park; Lake Francis is a 9 acre relatively cold water impoundment, which is traditionally stocked with Brown and Brook trout on the week before the season. Now by early May, on a walk around the lake, you may encounter two or three people with a line in the water. But on opening day Saturday, it is not an exaggeration to say that the fishermen are literally shoulder to shoulder. This is true at many other lakes where trout are stocked.

It is the abundance of hatchery trout that draws them, fish that are perceived as being “easy marks” compare to the wily native Brook Trout.  They readily feed on the most mundane of live bait and even canned corn, which is said to resemble the feed they are given in the hatchery (I’ve even seen fly patterns designed to mimic trout pellets).

Now many of the people there are family groups with children. For them, it is a great day to introduce their kids to the joy of fishing with a high likelihood they may actually catch a trout or two. Others are like friends I grew up with: people for whom having trout in the freezer was a way to extend their food budget. 

But there are trout stocked also in the streams and rivers. Even on that day in April, if one explores a bit, it is possible to find isolated riffle, or pool stocked with the same naive hatchery fish. When I have fished on that day I always gravitated towards solitude.

 If it is like my childhood, despite the crowding, one will find the same people at the same spot on the lake or the stream year-to-year.

They’re there for the fish, the tradition, and hopefully, the first bit of spring.

I am not a generally a wide angle shooter. When many years ago, I began to get serious about outdoor photography  I, like many other photographers just starting out, assumed that proper landscape photography was most appropriately done with short focal length lenses encompassing a wide field of view.

It seems to me this is a very common beginner’s mistake. I quickly found out that capturing scenes that are attractive to the naked eye using such lenses, often created a visually uninteresting, unfocused image. Too wide a field of view can leave an image without much of a focal point, with which to draw the viewer “into the picture”. Wide angle lenses also offer little magnification of distant objects, and can make a scene, for instance with a backdrop of mountains, appear uninteresting relative to the photographers own visual viewpoint.  Longer focal lengths work better for this.

But ” wide’s” have certain advantages.  They can make linear objects appear longer and more dramatic.  They do this in the same way they  deemphasize distant objects; by making the end of a fence line, or road appear further away.   They have better depth of field than longer lenses.  This can all be used to one’s advantage.

I have noticed over the years, that a lot of my truly wide-angle lenses like my Tokina 12-24 mm for DX, did not get much use. I seemed to gravitate into shooting mid-range and mild telephoto zooms and primes for landscape, which in my mind allows better isolation of the subject, and improves with prominence of the background  as well as the bokeh  of most of the photos I produce.

Nonetheless, when Fujifilm introduced its XF 14mm f2.8 R optic, I just sold some equipment, and had a little extra cash. Because of the affection I have for the system, and the excellent reviews of this lens,  I figured it would be reasonable to acquire one for myself, and perhaps reinvigorate my wide-angle photography.

I ordered one up from B&H in New York, and as it often is the case, it arrived on the next day.

The lens itself is fairly large. If anything it’s a bit larger than the XF 18-55 mm midrange zoom lens with which it shares its petal shaped sunshade . It has a detented aperture ring, a fairly broad focusing ring, and in a touch reminiscent of my Tokina glass, a slip clutch that allows a quick switch from auto focusing, to manual focusing.  It also has a focus distance scale embossed in the front of the lens.  It is the best finished of the XF primes that I own.

Like all the XF lenses, it feels extremely well-built, and balances nicely on my X Pro 1.

You can read the reviews. Pretty universally, the lens is thought to be quite sharp, pretty much edge to edge by f4. Also in different from other XF lenses, its native and distortion is very low, and there is little, if any correction required in software.  This is great for architecture, but sometimes leaves one wanting, if you’re looking for that slightly fish eyed perspective that can make some portraits and street shooting visually interesting.

I do not intuitively shoot with wide-angle lenses.  For me it is a challenge, but certainly a joyful one. Given the drab browns of early spring. I find myself looking for unusual patterns particularly in shadow and light, and opportunities to find color in the bland surroundings.

My copy of the lens seems as sharp as advertised.  Autofocus is slightly slow, but again you’re not going to use this lens for sports or action photography.  I think it is better specified for deliberate shooting.  Flare is extremely well controlled.

The time of my testing of the new lens, was coincidental with the availability of Camera Raw version 7.4, the final release. I had already played with the release candidate, and was eager to see whether the final version offered additional benefits.

I developed a number of X Pro 1 images, with Capture 1 Express, and then again with the newest version of ACR. I didn’t notice much difference between the release candidate, and the final version, but I agree that Adobe has clearly improved the raw file extraction since its earlier efforts, probably to a point where in most situations the differences between its capabilities, and those of competitive raw converters, are minimal.

Trust me, I spent a lot of time on the sharpening of both images. Still, particularly in looking at prints, I think for fine detail, looks more natural and dimensional in the Capture 1 (and the Fuji Raw File Converter) results.

Yeah, I know, the ACR image has a different color signature, than the one done on Capture 1.  Try as I might in ACR, I had a really difficult time duplicating the color balance on the second image which to me  were the colors that I was seeing at the time the image was shot.  I think this is an idiosyncratic situation, and not typically a problem for ACR.

You can be the judge, but to my eye, color aside, the second image looks much better,  slightly in terms of detail perhaps, but with significant improvements in micro contrast.  To me it just looks more real.  And it prints that way also.

All this aside, I think this additional lens, and the improving  options for raw file conversion are really great enhancements for the Fuji X interchangeable lens bodies.  I continue to love shooting with them.

Oh, and I’ve pre-ordered an X 100s.

It’s going to be a fun Spring.

Man I hate progress. Just when you think you have the perfect camera body (or audio gear, or smartphone, or automobile); just when you think your little automotive or electronic universe is perfect, some snooty set of engineers, employed by a busybody manufacturer, goes ahead and makes an improved version of your toy.

You find yourself staring at the brochure (or more likely now the web page) for the new creation.  You breathlessly review the device’s new specifications and capabilities and just hoping that its ancestor, which you currently own, has not been made completely obsolete by the new arrival.

Unfortunately, the manufacturer has no desire to take you off the hook, or to give you any comfort in the knowledge that you currently possess a device that is still adequate to the task.  Their marketers want very badly to convince you that it is absolutely essential to sell your current device and possess their new offering which is so much more advanced, that you might as well not even own your current camera (or audio gear, or Smartphone, or automobile).

And it works.  One by one the pages of eBay sprout multiple new auction offerings of the old device, as their owners work to raise the capital so that they acquire the new model. And generally, it will be a model, that if you’re lucky, is perhaps 5% better overall than the device it replaced.

But when the UPS man finally arrives with your new toy, for you the consumer…no, the aficionado, your universe is complete. You’re back on top.

Now, we’re all I think, to some degree or another subject to these impulses.  You wouldn’t be reading this blog if you weren’t interested enough in camera gear and photography to waste a portion of your day perusing these articles.

And I wouldn’t be writing these articles if the subject didn’t interest me.  But it’s important to keep one’s head squarely on one’s shoulders.

Nikon has just released the D7100.  I’ve written extensively on its predecessor articles which you can read here and here.  I thoroughly enjoyed the D7000 and it will continue to hold a valuable place among my collection of camera gear.

The new camera has several interesting advances:

It sports a 24 megapixel Toshiba sensor, which  is similar to the 36 megapixel sensor of  the D800e in that it lacks a “low pass” filter.  It should thus have noticeably better resolution than the D7000, which has only 16 megapixels with a filter.  Nonetheless, the current resolution has proven to be very adequate for most of my needs ( the image above for instance, was significantly cropped).

Though more megapixels can be useful,  they  will be so only if they do not if adversely affect the low noise levels, and particularly the wide dynamic range of the current D7000 sensor. In fairness however, most often with Nikon sensors, the newer ones are strikingly better than their predecessors in most attributes.

The D7100 has a new autofocus system which is said to be more sensitive than the old one.  The autofocus points are also more broadly spread across the frame.  That’s a good thing.

There’s some improvement in burst speed, add a new crop factor (1.3x) which yields an image reduced to 15 megapixels, but allows you to access the camera’s highest burst speeds (seven fps in the crop mode, as opposed to six fps for the D 7000 in full resolution).

There are improvements to video capture including the addition of stereo microphones.

And like the D600, there is now a lock button on the mode dial.

To me, as a landscape photographer, the usefulness of upgrading to the D7100 would entirely depend on the sensors characteristics.  If the increase in resolution is accompanied by simultaneous dramatic improvements in high ISO performance (an achievement Nikon does tend to pull off) then the newer camera may be worth acquiring.  If the gains are in resolution alone, that I suspect I might acquire one when the market is right, i.e.; when the used market for the D7000 is still good, and the 7100 refurbs or discounts start to appear.  Time will tell.

Remember I own a D 600 which makes resisting this new offering much easier.

Obviously we need  fo people  to purchase goods, if we’re ever to improve the economy of our country, and for that matter, that of the globe.

But as always I urge caution when new models of our beloved equipment become available.

For unless they offer significant improvements in capabilities, specific to your usage patterns, then the newest model is unlikely to be a good investment.

Now, none of this applies to you if you own a much earlier camera body, particularly one that is a couple of steps below the 7000 series.  If you need what the D7100 offers, and can afford it, then by all means enjoy.  I believe you’ll be buying a fine photographic instrument.

However always remember that the addition of a new model does nothing to alter the quality and function of its predecessor.  I suspect we could all improve our output as much, by better utilizing the features of our current camera gear as by buying the newest model.

Take a deep breath and think, before you push that “confirm purchase” button on the screen.

In the last several months, I’ve had a fair number of changes to my equipment collection.

When I acquire something new, I like to write about it, whether it’s a “keeper” or not.  We’ve talked most recently on these pages about the Fuji X Pro 1. Given some new developments involving the technology surrounding that camera, there will be more to say.  Now however, I want to talk about a camera acquisition I also have alluded to recently, the Nikon D600.

I acquired this device shortly before the X Pro 1, and was shooting it extensively up to the point where the Fuji arrived.  As the Fuji was the older camera, I decided it would be more appropriate to  offer my comments on that camera first, as I was already late in the game.

Now, on to the D600.

The D600 is closely related to previous Nikon DSLR designs, particularly to the D7000.  Its body design follows a pattern seen in that “serious prosumer” camera bodies that Nikon has put out over the years.  Happily, the specifications keep improving with each generation, to a point where they have become very credible professional tools on their own; less robust perhaps than the D800 or D4, but more than adequate for fairly heavy use.  Now I am a somewhat leisurely landscape photographer, who will not be climbing in the Himalayas, or repelling off some cliff in the Amazon Basin. For me, these cameras are a nice combination of ruggedness, yet with reasonable weight.

Perhaps the most important new feature on the body of the D600 is a locking button on the mode dial on the left upper top.  This eliminates one of my main objections to that control style, vs. the three or four button knob  in that location on the D700/800/D4 bodies.   Every so often I will shoot with for instance, my D7000, only to find the mode dial has moved either to “program”, or to full manual; the latter setting particularly screwing up the exposure.  With the D600, this should no longer happen.

There also some changes to the video controls on the camera, which are admittedly less interesting to me.  When compared to the D7000, the D600 body is “puffed up” by about 10% visually.  All of the good things about the earlier camera have been retained (and I really enjoy that earlier camera).

There are certainly some wonderful websites such as DPreview, where you can read an in-depth description of the camera functions, and menus.  As always, I hope to convey to you the experiences of an “average” user and how the cameras features impact my photography.

I have had a somewhat jaded approach to this camera.  I admit being somewhat thrilled, but slightly intimidated, by the quality the sensor and its high-resolution.  I’ve discussed here before that I have a less than robust collection of FX appropriate lenses.  Other than some prime lenses, I own a 17-35 mm, f2.8, as well as the 70-200 mm f2.8.  My best midrange zoom seemed to be a Tokina 28-80 ATX f2.8, which has not always been well reviewed but I always thought was quite sharp, at least on DX.  I began to consider purchase of some serious glass, perhaps starting with the Nikkor 24 -70 mm F2.8.  I looked through my lens collection to see what I wasn’t using, and could sell to fund this expensive purchase.  The Tokina seemed a likely candidate for a quick eBay sale and I began to look for the box and packing materials.

But then it occurred to me that just maybe, I ought to consider shooting the D600 with the Tokina lens.

This particular lens, out of production now, is roughly as massive and heavy as the legendary Nikkor 28-70 mm F2 .8.  The lens is beautifully finished with a black crinkle surface.  Over the years its weight and size have tended to relegated to my storage closet as I have many DX lenses that seemed as sharp… and were a lot lighter.  Nonetheless, I figured I ought to at least give it a try before selling it.  I mounted the lens on the D600 and went hiking (with a tripod) in nearby Nescopeck State Park.

All I can say is wow!  To my eye, this is a very fine FX lens, and is extraordinarily well matched to the 24-megapixel Nikon sensor.  Contrast and detail are outstanding even at the edges of the frame.  I say this, even after shooting the extraordinary 60 mm Fuji “X” lens.  I’m not it selling it now.

I shot the 17-35 mm lens which is certainly excellent, though not quite so clear edge to edge.  It’s still a wonderful optic, and to me it should certainly not be discarded on acquisition of the D600/800.  The 70 – 200 mm VR lens (the first version) also to my eye looks fine, very sharp in the center and only slightly less so at the edges. Generally with a zoom of that range, I don’t care about the little vingnetting described by reviewers (which is easily corrected on processing), or whether the corners are absolutely sharp (version 2 of that lens is said to be better optimized for FX).  For now I see no reason to upgrade to the newer version.  That having been said, the main problem with all of these lenses is that they are seriously large and bulky.  You’ll need a serious backpack to carry good FX glass, plus a tripod for great remote landscape photography.

There is another option. With the Nikon primes I own, the D 600 is wonderful.  Shooting for instance with one of the excellent 50 mm Nikkors, is a delight.  A handful of primes would seriously reduce what you would carry on your back.

I did acquire with a camera the “kit lens” the Nikkor 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G VR lens.  This is in fact a fairly reasonably sized midrange zoom with image stabilization.  I’m not a lens snob, and I’d hoped this lens would be similar to the 16 – 85 mm VR DX glass, which is essentially parked on my D7000 and is quite sharp and contrasty.  Unfortunately at least my copy of the lens was lackluster at best, and I returned it. Interestingly, the little Nikkor 28-70 f3.5 I wrote about here, looks better to my eye on the D 600, than the newer lens.

I shot some comparison photos as is de rigueur for these camera tests.  I shot my usual test subjects with the D700, the D600, both with a Nikkor 50 mm f1 .8, and compared them to the X Pro 1 with its 35 mm f1 .4, (which on DX has nearly the same field of view)both at F 5.6.  For the record, I developed them using the same raw developer (which currently cannot currently be named) which is said to be the best developer in particular for the Fuji files and also great for Nikons.  I did not always use standard settings, but attempted to best optimize each image.

Here’s 100% crop of images I shot at ISO 320 on the X Pro 1 and the D 600

Here’s a set at ISO 3200, including shots from the D 700:

In either the low or high ISO images, I think it’s clear that the Nikon has an advantage in resolution.

I think the high ISO noise rankings (higher is better) would be D 600 > X Pro 1 > D 700.

I’m impressed with the Fuji.  The difference in resolution between it and the Nikon seems clearly less than the eight megapixels the sensor sizes would suggest.  This is probably the cause of the removal of the anti-aliasing filter on Fuji.  Again, I think the high ISO images suggest that the D600 is better than the Fuji, which is slightly better than the D700.  That camera, even allowing for the different image magnification of its smaller files at 100%, clearly has less resolution, and noise suppression than the other two.  It’s amazing how good these imagers are getting.

I’m actually rather impressed that the Fuji does not lose ground to the Nikon D600 as the ISO numbers increase.  The newer Nikon in my mind however, is a clear winner here.

I should also mention that in playing with the files, the dynamic range of the camera seems very high.  This camera appears to have some of the same abilities to lift the shadows as its older sibling the D7000.  It also does a very nice job at highlight detail retention.  In this regard it feels almost like my old Fuji S5 pro.  On a raw image, you can dial back what appears to be a blown out sky or snowfield, and find that there is significant detail available.

One issue with this camera has to do with the autofocus.  There been reports that the performance of the autofocus on this camera is mediocre, compared to cameras higher up in the Nikon line.  To me the autofocus always functioned well, but my main frustration was the rather restricted area of autofocus points in the viewfinder.  This is very frustrating for landscaping.  It can be very difficult to bring a focus point for instance on a spot in the periphery of the image.  Then I realized that a simple solution for this is to move to “live view” while, particularly on a tripod, which brings to bear the camera’s very adequate contrast detection autofocus system which can cover the entire frame.  Problem largely solved.

One other issue I think deserves discussion.  Some very thoughtful photographers have written about the importance of using careful shot discipline, if we’re to extract all of the high-resolution of these devices.  As the megapixels increase, it seems logical that we may increasingly rely on camera stabilization devices, whether physical or electronic, in order to prevent motion blur.  The larger mirrors in the full-frame digital SLRs such as the D600 can cause issues with camera motion when they swing up and out-of-the-way on shutter activation.

Also with FX Nikon cameras is that the few image stabilized lenses available tend to be rather large and not particularly fun to carry around ( excepting the little  Nikkor 28-70).I did do some free hand shooting with the D 600 and noted that it was fairly difficult at times, to prevent motion blur, unless one used at least a monopod. Now I don’t shoot thousands of frames every day, and there are pro shooters who are so steady, and have such good technique, that this may not be a problem for them.  For me however, I need to be careful.

For these reasons, I believe that mirrorless devices such as G series Panasonics, and the Fuji X cameras, which are smaller than full-frame DSLRs and offer lenses with image stabilization, will likely be my choice for free-hand shooting.    I find, for instance, that the mirrorless cameras are much more forgiving in this setting.  I get much less motion blur with even the non-stabilized 60 mm lens (90 mm equivalent) on the X Pro 1 then I do with shorter lenses on the D 600.

At any rate, that Nikon D600 is a wonderful camera and will add significantly to most shooters capabilities, both out in the woods, on the street, and in challenging low light situations.  For me the camera’s weatherproofing makes it a natural choice for use when it’s raining and snowing, and its small size and lightweight but sturdy build make it a good companion out in the wilds.  The only disadvantage of the FX format is the need for larger lenses, and some sort of camera stabilization.

When you comply with its needs however, the results are wonderful.

Once again as the holidays approach, it’s my pleasure to announce the new for 2013 Allied Rehab/John Heinz calendar,  published each year to benefit the pediatric programs at those institutions. 

Once again and is my privilege to provide the landscape photography, which depicts places and seasons from throughout the Allied Rehab service area in Northeastern Pennsylvania.

The system’s pediatric programs provide services to children, starting in the very early age, and often extending until they reach their teens.  They provide assistance to children with a variety of conditions.  Though medical insurance is accepted by the program, those with an inability to pay are provided care for little to no cost.

The  printed calendar depicts not only local scenery, but something more precious, the images of those children served by the employees and staff of Allied Rehabilitation.

It can be purchased at the Allied Services Website, or at any Allied Services facility throughout Northeastern Pennsylvania.

FRONT COVER: One Last Maple Leaf

In the highlands of eastern Pennsylvania, the first fall of snow often occurs in late October or early November before the trees have completely shed their leaves.  I shot this particular image in my neighborhood,  in the beginning of what became a fairly substantial snowfall just prior to Halloween.  I was struck by the contrast of the brightly colored maple leaves, in comparison to the somewhat drab appearing hemlock branches in the background.  It mimics a style of photography where one starts with a color image,   then selects a particularly colorful object in the image, and then converts the rest of the image to black and white.

In this case nature did the work for me.

JANUARY: The Sleigh Ride

Once again the Lands at Hillside serves as a setting for a calendar image.  The Lands at Hillside is a non-for-profit organization whose mission it is to preserve several old historic farms in our region.  They maintain the properties as a dairy operation, preserving traditional methods of farming and avoiding processed feeds, and hormone augmentation of the dairy herd.

I remember that morning several winters ago, when I was invited to the farm to witness the first use of an old sledge acquired by the farm.  My friend Will, who handled driving duties, at one point got the rig moving at a pretty good clip, an event which I was happy to photograph.  It was a marvelous day, and a joy to experience this wonderful traditional form of winter transportation.

FEBRUARY: Winter Fun at Lake Silkworth

I remember driving home, as I recall, from Ricketts Glen State Park down route 29 through the village of Lake Silkworth on a cold winters evening when, out of the corner of my eye, I noticed this scene .  Several people had taken to riding their ATV’s in a circular track on the snow-covered lake, as if racing for some imaginary trophy.  I watched for a time, and then realized that there might be a photograph in it after all.  I grabbed my Panasonic G1 which was sitting next to me on the seat, found a good vantage point, and shot several images one of which you see here.  I’m not sure it’s most aesthetic image in the calendar this year, but I enjoy this depiction of  people finding  joy in the winter, when the cold and snow cuts off the summer pleasures of lake living.

MARCH: The Statue of Liberty

The Sunday prior to Saint Patrick’s Day has become a joyful celebration in downtown Wilkes-Barre, and a wonderful landmark to denote the coming of spring.

I know, I know… Scranton has the third biggest Saint Patrick’s Day parade in the nation, dwarfing the celebration held in Wilkes-Barre.  But I like underdogs.

I’ve been going to the Wilkes-Barre event for probably 20 years now.  In the beginning it consisted of about 200 of my fellow Irishman watching a 15 minute parade of fire and garbage trucks, and a few modest floats, before repairing to the pub for a pint of Guinness.  It is now grown to a wildly successful event with crowds all throughout the parade route;  enjoying the many new bars restaurants and shops in the revitalized downtown.  In fact there’s a part of me that somewhat wistful for the old event, which was held on Saturday in direct competition with the parade in Scranton.  Changing it to the Sunday afterward increased the availability of parade participants and spectators alike.  And because most people work the following day, the crowd tends to remain “family friendly”.  With its success, there are new issues.  It’s now hard to park in Wilkes-Barre on parade day. Even worse, it can be a struggle to find open bar space to enjoy that Guinness, once the parade has ended (and it goes on a long time now).  Still I’m delighted with the success of the event and look forward to photographing it every year.

APRIL: The Daffodil

Sometimes simple subjects are the best.  I was walking in a neighborhood the Clarks Summit region when I noticed what I suspected was one of the first daffodils to emerge from the warming soils of spring.  I chose to shoot it from the rear of the bloom, a somewhat unconventional depiction of the blossom.  I shot it with a long lens and a wide aperture, in the hope of blurring the pine tree in the background in a pleasant way.  It seems to work, as our committee were fairly unanimous in their selection of the image to represent the month of April.

MAY: The Bridge at West Nanticoke

As I’ve discussed before, when one wishes to find early or late scenery with our four season climate, and mountainous terrain, it is often useful to go down to the river where spring starts  early, and fall finishes late. 

On this cool rainy day, I was exploring in the area of an old railroad trestle on the Susquehanna River at Nanticoke.  This scene, with the newly emerged, rain dampened maple leaves in the foreground, and the bridge in the background seemed interesting, and I shot several angles on it.  It is typical of early to mid May and our region, with the foliage emerging, but the climate seemingly reluctant to let go of the chill of early spring , and to embrace the warmth of summer.

JUNE: Dragon Boats

One of the underappreciated assets of the region is the Susquehanna River which meanders through the Wyoming Valley.  I often think the region has a modest psychological aversion to the Susquehanna, based on a variety of factors, including the local sense that it is somewhat polluted, its propensity to flood and cause great damage,  and the need for physical barrier (dikes) between the city and the river because of this propensity.  I think that the refurbished dike system, with its portals that improve access to the river, are beginning to allow us to exploit this wonderful resource.  There is much it has to offer.  One only has to spend time in other cities such as Boston or Philadelphia to realize the river is a potentially great recreational resource.

I think it’s wonderful that in June of every year (unless the river is over its banks); the region celebrates the Susquehanna with a Riverfest which is headquartered at Nesbitt Park.  There are a variety of activities including a kayak and canoe trip between Pittston in Wilkes-Barre.  There are food vendors, and educational exhibits largely involving the environment.

One interesting event is the dragon boat race, where local businesses assemble teams and compete with each other in a paddling race.  I shot this image during a practice session.  I know at least one of the teams pictured is composed of members of the Times Leader staff.

In many ways, the Susquehanna River is the very reason for the existence of Wilkes-Barre and the other towns up and down the Wyoming Valley.  I am glad that we have begun to celebrate its existence.

JULY: A House in Moscow

This is a simple image, but I think it conveys a pleasant sense about small town living in northeastern Pennsylvania.  I shot it on a Sunday morning in July, sometime late in the month.  To me there is something quite charming about this home. I love the beautiful stone chimney, the patriotic bunting, and the open porch, which in particular, is so much a part of the tradition of small town life.   .  The morning light is important to this image, trans illuminating the flowers, the shrubbery, and the decorations.

AUGUST: Scranton Skyline

I spent a good portion of my life in and around Scranton.  I went to college there, met and wooed my lovely wife there, and visited my in-laws over many holidays and summer breaks.  I really like the town.

It is much different from Wilkes-Barre, where I now spend most of my time.  It feels like a bigger city with a larger grid of downtown streets, and a lively tavern and restaurant community. 

I was walking on the square one late August day this year, when I encountered a reception for the freshman class of the University of Scranton, my alma mater.  It was being held on one of the grassy areas adjacent to the courthouse, with upperclassmen, dressed in “U of S” tee shirts mingling among the crowd.  Tables and tents were festooned with purple and white balloons, and I took several images of the event.  Afterwards I continued my walk, and this view of the skyline caught my eye.  When I returned home and began to edit the photos, I was unhappy with the images I had taken up the reception, but was happy with this photo and its depiction of some of the iconic features of the Scranton skyline.

SEPTEMBER: Garden at Moosic Lake

Labor Day always seems slightly sad.  Even if it is a glorious summer day as it often is,  it tends to denote the end of the cultural(if not the meteorological) season  of summer.  The children  will soon be back in school (if they are not already) and I believe that we adults lose a sense of empathic joy that we feel as we watch our children and grandchildren enjoy the summer vacation much as we once did.

There’s a temptation on Labor Day, to pull in the dock, and stow away the canoes, and to pack away the outdoor furniture.  We begin to retract our lives back into our homes in anticipation of the fall and winter.  Yet I am convinced that September to mid October are the loveliest months to be enjoying the outdoors, with cool, but comfortable temperatures, increasingly colorful foliage, and a dwindling insect population.  A patio fire pit, which can be out-of-place on warm summer nights, can be a great comfort and joy on cool fall evening.

If we let Labor Day stand for the end of summer, then we risk missing the best part of the outdoor season.

OCTOBER: Pumpkin Patch at Grassy Ridge

Obviously, the foliage season in the fall, offers a wealth of opportunity for landscape photographers.  This image of a pumpkin patch was captured in Noxen, on a beautiful October day this year.  I came upon the Grassy Ridge farm stand on the corner of routes 309 and 29, and asked permission to photograph the premises.  The owners were very gracious, and I spent about 45 minutes at the location acquiring a variety of photographs, including the one you see above, and the image and apple baskets gracing the back cover.  I shot the image with my Fuji film X100, a compact camera that allowed me to be inconspicuous, among the families enjoying a fall outing on that beautiful day.

NOVEMBER: November Corn

This image was acquired on a late fall evening in NewtonTownship.  The sun had just set, and the crisp fall later was rapidly growing colder.  I remember shivering slightly as I set up a tripod to make sure the image would be sharp despite the fading light.

In this image (which was featured in another article on this site)  I took advantage of the vivid sunsets one sees in the late fall and winter which I understand are due to the decreasing moisture content in the air as the atmosphere cools.

DECEMBER: The Kirby House at Christmas

The Kirby Episcopal house is a local landmark that I am proud to say, is part of the community of Glen Summit where I reside.  It is a gorgeous estate, originally built in the early 20^th century, by the Kirby family (the founders of Woolworth’s chain).  The main house is constructed of stone said to have been acquired from the Susquehanna River in the valley.  The gorgeous interior has been lovingly maintained and looks much the same as it would have when the Kirbys were in residence over the summer months.

There are multiple buildings on the property, with tennis courts,  a swimming pool and beautiful, ornate oriental gardens that often draw wedding parties looking for a place to capture post nuptial images.

It was a summer home for the Kirby family, until they donated it in the 1950s to the Episcopal diocese of Bethlehem.  It is now run it as a conference center, and is offered for use at a modest fee to nonprofit organizations.  It is busy throughout the summer months.

JANUARY 2014: Winter Scene, Butler Valley

I was driving in southern Luzerne County on a sunny January morning in 2011.  As usual I had several cameras on the front passenger seat of my car. There had been snow over the last 24 hours, putting an end to the drab brown winter landscape that had existed prior.

I spotted these two beautiful animals before they spotted me. I grabbed my D700, on which was mounted a 70-200 mm lens.  I got out of the car, and used a nearby fence post as a sort of makeshift monopod, to steady the long lens.  The longer focal length  allowed me to take several “candid” images before they sensed my presence and moved toward me out of curiosity.

  

I believe a camera upgrade ought to offer real advantages, over the equipment it replaces. 

People obviously do have the right to spend money on what they want. It’s easy though, to become deluded into thinking that new camera equipment will make you a better photographer, will make your images sharper, and your prints better; when in fact your time and money would be better spent on photographic instruction, better lenses, or a sturdier tripod.

That having been said, I(using my impeccable judgment) bought a new camera body several weeks ago.  I had a choice between purchasing a 36 megapixel, pro-level Nikon D800 “refurb” for about $2400, or the newer 24 megapixel Nikon D600 for roughly $2,100.  After considerable thought, I chose that the D600.  It was not the difference in cost that drove my decision, but rather the different characteristics of each model that prompted my choice.

The D 800 is unequivocally the pro-level body.  It is entirely made of magnesium, and is roughly the same size and feel of my D700.  It is sturdy and weather-sealed, and suitable for the rigors of full-time daily use.  Like many professional level bodies it feels as though it would make a pretty good weapon.  I admit that I love the feel of these devices, the weight in my hand, and the deliberate nature of the controls.

As a part-time landscape photographer however much of this robustness is of little advantage to me.  I shoot 3 to 4 times weekly and do not have to abuse my equipment the way that for instance, a full-time photojournalist would. And, I am happily not really concerned about the bragging rights of owning the Nikon “flagship”.

The D600 is built in a matter very similar to my D7000.  It too has a stout magnesium frame, with metal on the top and bottom, but rigid plastic on the front and back of the camera.  It also feels very sturdy, but not nearly as weighty as a pro level body.  It too, is well weatherproofed.  Though it has the viewfinder eyepiece of the more consumer oriented Nikon bodies, the viewfinder covers 100% of the captured image, which is actually an improvement over the viewfinder of my D700.  On the left upper surface of the camera, it uses the consumer level rotary dial to select camera modes, rather than the four button pro arrangement of the D800.  On the D600, they have added a small locking button on top of the dial, to prevent inadvertent control changes, an addition which is well appreciated.  Given this change, I now have little preference for either of the control designs.

The D600 is definitely lighter, and smaller than the D800.  Given my style of photography, this is a definite advantage, especially since much of my work involves hiking over considerable distances to arrive at shooting locales.

I like that the D600 uses the same battery, and the same remote release, as the D7000.

Now, on to the matter of the imagers.  Certainly a 36 megapixel imager, particularly one as fine as the one utilized by the D800 would be irresistible choice.  It is the top rated imager by DX0 Mark and is well-known to have extraordinary dynamic range as well as very high-resolution.  But high-resolution comes with disadvantages.  One of those problems has to do with lens diffraction, which on higher resolution sensors becomes a problem at tighter apertures.

There is also the matter of the sheer size of the files created by a 36 MP imager, and the storage and processing power that they require.

As I’ve stated elsewhere on the site, one can make a perfectly good 20x 30”print from a 12 megapixel large imager camera (micro 4/3 and larger) given good glass and good technique. Generally, this is as big as I need to print. Remember that, for really big prints, stitching multiple images into one is easily accomplished through Photoshop and other imaging software.

The 24 Mega pixel full-frame sensor on the D 600, rates just below that of the D 800 on DX0 Mark site.  More importantly, in terms of its high ISO capabilities, it rates higher than all Nikon cameras, save the vaunted D3s, higher even than the D4, which is also full frame, but only 16 megapixels.  To me this means that it can replace my D700 as a natural light event shooter (though my Fuji X100 remains my favorite for this work) while still serving as my optimum landscape camera body. Remember, this imager has the same resolution (but is otherwise more capable) as that of the $7000 Nikon D3x, a body I have lusted after for years.

If you look at the D600 sample images on DPreview, you can see that the high ISO images demonstrate a fine grain, with mainly luminance noise, and little color noise.  In my experience this cleans up very easily with Photoshop.  The D800 images reveal considerably more color noise to my eye.  This is certainly expected, given the smaller photo sites of the higher resolution imager.

Given this, and because I believe the 24 megapixels is all that I all that I really need, I chose the D600.  I’ve begun to shoot with it, and hope to post my experiences in the near future.  

If its capabilities match its performance on the camera review sites, then I may have a lightly used D700 for sale on Ebay.  Given the quality of the D600 imager, the money from that sale had better be spent on good Nikon glass.

Stand by. I’ll have more in a bit.

 

From a photographic standpoint, If not meteorologically, autumn 2012 has come to an end in this part of the Northeastern US.

Aesthetically, it was a pretty good season this year. Some of you may recall my complaints about the foliage last year.  I think last year, the fall colors were adversely affected by the very wet conditions we experienced in the late summer and fall in 2011 (remember Hurricane Irene).

 This year was much more normal, with maples and oaks producing strong red foliage to compliment the yellows and oranges of other species.

 

The foliage turned fairly early this year. Our usual peak, here in Northeastern Pennsylvania occurs in mid October.

 I started shooting up on the Pocono plateau in late September, and finished in the valley in late October.

The fall shooting came to a rather abrupt end with “super storm” Sandy. In our region, fortunately, that storm’s impact was quite modest (our hearts go out to those who are still struggling to rebuild). It did however strip the remaining leaves from the trees and thus abruptly end the autumn shooting season.

Not even the river valleys had any residual color.

And then, I travelled to Boston, so that my son could visit prospective colleges. There, autumn was still very much in progress. It was like a reset.

 For now however, in the Appalachians of Pennsylvania, shooting opportunities will be limited until the first snow falls.

My thoughts on the D 800 have generated lively discussions on the Forums at Dpreview and FM.

Now before I start sounding like certain other self-important people on the blogoshere, I want to say that: #1 a lot of the discussion centered on what an idiot I must be to not see the grand plan, and #2 my ignorance regarding  lens choice for this camera. One person was kind of “stalking” me on the points I made in the article, posting multiple reformatted versions of his critiques. It was a little creepy.

All this aside, I learned a lot hearing from people on the Nikon FM forum and the Dpreview  forum dedicated to pro Nikon DSLRs, which is why I post there. A lot of professional, knowledgeble photographers contribute, which can make it challenging to “wade in” with an opinion.

We’ve long been told that the reason that the larger-sensored high res bodies can cost so much is that the cost to manufacture the sensors is high, and the yield is low. This was said to justify the US$3000 difference between the D3 and D3x. Now we have a 36MP FX chip  in a US$3000 weather-sealed body. What happened?

I can only presume that either:

A. they lied about the extra cost of the D3x chip, or B. more likely, something’s happened to make the cost of manufacturing the imagers go way, way down.

Maybe it has something to do with how they’ve refubished their manufacturing  status post earthquake/tsunami.

Perhaps we’re getting to a point where sensor cost will be less important, and that the camera bodies features will be the cost driver. Sort of like in the film era, when a new F5, the most premium Nikon film body made, cost  US$2000 (but the derivitive 6mp Kodak DCS 660 cost US$30,000)

I think we got a flavor for this first with Canon and their  5D series, and then later when Nikon placed their brand new 16mp sensor not in a D300s replacement, but (according to some) “wasted it” in a prosumer body (albeit a very good prosumer body).

If this is true, then in the future Nikon higher-end bodies, you could put any sensor in any body style. Want a smaller, lighter camera, and only need 150,000 shuttter clicks then there’s a Dx00 with your choice of FX sensors available. Ditto if you need a more rugged, longer lifespan instrument.

Maybe, given the price of the D800, there can be a D4x with 36mp, the body and shutter of a D4 and with 8 fps shooting speed…for US$6500.

We’re entering a new era of digital photography. I think I’m going to like it.

I’m still gonna need better lenses.

I am not a particularly good businessperson.

I run a solo medical practice which in these days is folly by definition. I do photography, and sell images off and on. I write a blog for free.

What I’m trying to say, is that I may not be the best person to criticize an iconic leader in photographic imaging like Nikon, in their business decisions.

But…. the web has created a forum for ill-informed and under-qualified people to comment on topics where they are out of their depth.

So here I go.

Nikon has introduced the long rumored 36mp FX format D 800. It is considered to be the replacement or upgrade for the for the 12 mp FX d700, still a favorite among working pros for its modest size and weight, robust body and weather sealing, great  image quality, and wonderful low light capability. It‘s slightly crippled by what is now thought to be a limited frame rate of 4/second.  The D800 will sell for around US$ 3000.  As a landscape photographer, I may well buy one.

The physics of the D 800 sensor (pixel pitch) suggests that it will perform similarly to my DX format, prosumer D 7000. This is no bad thing, as I am rather happy with the files from that imager. The older D700 however has superior low light capability, overall cleaner images (megapixels aren’t everything) and more than sufficient resolution for most uses. Want to print  20″x 30″… not usually a problem.

Addendum: newer samples posted on the web suggest that the D800 high ISO capabilities may be equal to or at least approach the D700.  If so, wow!

What I don’t understand is the logic of Nikon’s current model lineup.

The flagship Nikon supposedly is still the D3x, which at US$8000 and 24 mp, has 33% lower pixel count,  roughly the same high ISO capability as the D800 (or maybe inferior) and is $5000 more expensive. The D3x has some advantages, such as a somewhat more robust build, vertical shooting position, and a longer shutter life, but the advantages don’t seem like enough to justify the price differential.

Announced right before the D 800, the D4 is a US$6000 FX 16MP rapid fire (11 frames per second) high-end body pro camera body (similar build to the D3x), which we assume will be very strong also in low light situations. It’s aimed at sport photogs and photojournalists.

It has a new and very capable autofocus system (but the same as the D800). It has outstanding video features, which are also essentially identical to its significantly cheaper, higher-resolution and newer “brother

I “get” the concept of the D4. Resolution beyond a certain point isn’t that important, but for shooting sports, speed and autofocus is everything.  The D800 frame rate is significantly slower.

I think of all the bodies in the Nikon lineup, the D4 is best tailored to for its intended use.

So why make the D800 36 MP? Why did they not recycle the D3x sensor, perhaps improved, but in the smaller body form of the D700 ( something like they did with the  D3 and the subsequent D700), and save the 36MP sensor for a D4x? Who will buy D3x now? And just how many megapixels can we jam into an FX-sized chip before negatively impacting the file quality?

I do hope they will continue to produce a D700, or a similar body well into the future. May be there could be a D700s with the D4’s sensor.

It is also worth considering that such high-resolution sensors require very high quality lenses, and very disciplined shooting techniques to exploit their full potential. This may be why Nikon realizes that the D4, the true working photographer’s camera, will be just fine with half the D 800’s megapixels.

The good news is that Nikon just put their highest resolution sensor, in a body I can probably afford. The bad news is that I may need to invest in even better lenses than I own, to make it work.

I might just rather have access to the D4 imager, at an even lower price.

I can do a lot with 16 million really clean pixels.