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.

 

The winter of 2017-18 is over.  At least chronologically.

As I write this, it is the first full day of spring.  For the third time this March, a Nor’easter has formed off the coast of the Outer Banks and is making its way north.

It is now spreading snow over the Appalachians, and points east.  Forecasts for this storm have been wavering, but I think that between 2 and 6 inches over the elevation or I reside is likely (5″ eventually fell).  Though I do yearn for spring, the upcoming weekend is forecast to be sunny and pleasant.  It will likely offer one more opportunity for cross-country skiing before I put my equipment away.

It has been a strange winter.We had a little snow earlier in the year, and then extremely warm February.  By groundhog day it seemed likely that we would drift right into spring (though the groundhog disagreed).  Winter is cruel that way.

Then came March with its storms which in our part of the Poconos have maintained an adequate snowpack for recreation.  Today’s storm continues that trend.  And the warm weather, at least according to the meteorologists, is not yet in sight.

The last several months have been a busy time.  Given my position as a pulmonary physician, this winter’s flu epidemic kept me on my toes, running between patient rooms, gowning and re gowning to avoid the spread of the virus to other patients and hospital staff.  I have been overseeing some renovations at my home, including a new home office and photo studio.  Earlier in March, I spent my usual late winter week in the Adirondacks.  There was plenty of snow for skiing and snowshoeing as well as photography.   This will serve as my excuse for the lack of attention to the site over the past month or so.  Now happily, the flu epidemic has waned, and my renovations are largely done. It’s time to put pen to paper (so to speak).

In the time since my last article, mindful of my good experience with the rather modest XF 18–55mm zoom legacy lens, I focused my attention on its bigger brother, the XF55-200mm f3.5-4.8 OIS zoom that hearkens from the same time period.  I have written about this lens before.  Ironically, I published its original review almost exactly the same time of year back in 2014.   Now with the higher resolution sensors available on newer Fujifilm bodies, it was worth digging out of my roomy new equipment cabinet for a second look.

Over the years, this is proven to be a fairly rugged lens. Though I used it fairly frequently in its early years, cosmetically it looks roughly the same as when I took delivery.  At 55mm, and without its deep lens-shade, the lens is fairly compact, though it telescopes awkwardly as one increases the focal length.  It tends to look weird on a rangefinder style body such as the X Pro 2, though it handles just fine.

The focus and aperture dials remain smooth after 4 years of ownership.  The lens continues to exude high-quality.  Though it is not officially weather-sealed, I have used it multiple times in rainy or snowy conditions without any difficulty.

 

In my normal photography with the Fuji system, I tend to favor mild wide lenses like the 23 mm lens in my X100 series cameras, combined with a mild telephoto such as my XF 56mm f1.2.  With the 50-200mm I tended to shoot from its short end, out to about 160 mm, because as it approaches 200 mm, sharpness is known to deteriorate slightly.  It thus tends to be an outdoor lens, as it is not nearly fast enough, (nor razor sharp wide open like the Fuji primes ) for natural light indoor photography.

Particularly on a “long” lens. the addition of optical image stabilization (OIS) is extremely convenient. It definitely increases your “keepers” if your subject is static.

Now I love being a prime lens snob. To be honest, though, the quality of both of the original “kit” lenses is somewhere between more than adequate to awesome, Used within their limitations (good light, slowly moving subjects) they are no impediment to producing quality prints of landscape subjects. This suits me fine.  If I want to go back to shooting sports and fast-moving wildlife, I would probably invest in a use or refurbished Nikon D7XXX body to use with the  70-200 f2.8 VR Nikkor that still lurks in my studio.  For what I do, this Fuji telephoto zoom works just fine.

 

Fujifilm makes several other long zooms including a robust 50–140 millimeter f2.8 which would also suit my focal length needs, and allow more light for fast action and dusk/dawn shooting.  It is $1500 new and weighs more than twice as much as the 55-200, attributes that are not particularly interesting to me.  Like my Nikkor 70-200mm, it has sufficient size/weight to require a tripod mount. Thus, for me, it would be likely relegated to shooting from the car. That kind of shooting I tend to do with my heavier Nikon gear.

I still prefer prime lenses, both for their inherent quality and for the discipline they instill in my shooting.  But I can see maintaining a camera bag, with the 2 zoom lenses, and a more SLR-like camera such as an X-T10/20 body. This would be fairly light, and a very easy “grab” when headed out into the outdoors for some impromptu exercise. 

Given the quality of images I have seen these two lenses, such a gear bag would likely spend a lot of time by my side.

 

In the highlands of Northeastern Pennsylvania, meteorological summer has passed by, without stopping to say hello, or even waving as it drove past.

I can’t say there was no hot weather, but for the first time in many years, I don’t remember any even slightly uncomfortable nights sleeping in my non– air-conditioned bedroom (most summers we have a week or so of nighttime temperatures in the mid-70s).

I suspect that my friends with boats and/or swimming pools were disappointed. I, however, loved the pleasantly warm days, and crisp nights. So the climate trend that I described in June, which helped to abort a gypsy moth infestation, continued for the next 2 months.

For a variety of reasons, I have not had a great deal of photographic output over the summer. I think that the summer season often distracts me from photography with a number of different diversions, and discourages me from photography in a number of ways. From the biting insects that plague me when I try to I set up my tripod, to the monotonous green landscapes, and the sunrises that are inconveniently early, I tend to lose some enthusiasm over the warmer months.

Usually, my interest in a new piece of gear stimulates me to get out and shoot, but at this point, I’m extremely content with the gear that I have. This is particularly true of the X100F, and the X Pro 2. I really don’t crave the next upgrade in focusing or sensor resolution.

I read with interest the introduction of the Nikon’s new flagship DSLR, the D850.  I should really be lusting after this camera, with its state-of-the-art backlit 47mp sensor, its 9 frames per second speed, but I’m not.  Two generations old now, my 36mp D800E still looks new, works beautifully, and produces gorgeous files that look great in as large a print size as I am likely to create.

Maybe I’ll buy a refurbed one in a couple of years.

  Also though, I can’t escape the feeling that big bulky DSLRs are like dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous; about to be overwhelmed by the smaller, more convenient and increasingly capable mirrorless cameras which are becoming a more dominant force in the market.

Meanwhile, things photographically are looking up.

 Here in the Poconos, the leaves are beginning to change color, and the sound of katydids punctuates the crisp night air. The big cinnamon ferns in the forest are beginning to change to a sort of golden brown, while the deer transform from the red coat of summer to their cold weather coat of gray. Sadly, the humming birds have disappeared south.

For my wife and I, there will be an upcoming trip to the Adirondacks, to enjoy Oktoberfest, and “peak leaves”.

There is also the fresh introduction of the Fujifilm XE-3. Hmmm.

There should be plenty to write about, and photographic in the upcoming months.

Stay tuned.

 

 

 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.

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.

  

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.

A Pretty Good Little Lens.

I think we all understand the advantages of larger camera imagers. Really we do. On SLRs, “full frame” imagers the size of 35mm film (FX imagers in Nikon speak) can provide cleaner output particularly at high ISO settings.  They allow wide angle, short focal length lenses to have their full field of view. They allow us the shallow depth of field many photographers, particularly those shooting portraits, tend to desire.

Much is also written about the subjective quality of images produced by larger chips.

For landscape photographers, shooting DSLRs, these characteristics are less compelling.  Most of the time, we are looking for lenses with a larger depth of field so that more of the scenery we are shooting is in focus. The ability to go wide is not unappreciated, but there are many “DX” lenses that offer a wide field of view.

The burden of full-frame imagers includes larger, heavier lenses which need to be toted around in order to obtain the full measure of quality the sensor can produce. These larger lenses tend to be more expensive.  The cost of a Nikkor 24-70 mm f 2.8, arguably the finest mid-range zoom offered by that manufacturer, is roughly $1900 US, at B+H Photo as I write this.  Price aside, this big, beautiful optic weighs almost 2 pounds. This is significantly more than the weight of the D700 to which it would be attached.

Because of these issues, over the years, I have developed several workarounds for using my full-frame cameras in the field.

The first work around is that I don’t actually use FX very much for landscape work.  My D7000 body for instance, is more compact and has more resolution.  The smaller DX sensor utilizes lenses that are lighter and less expensive.  I think in particular of my Tamron 17-50 mm f2.8, or my Nikkor 16-85 mm f3.5 both of which are excellent landscape choices.

The second work around is my use of “prime” lenses when I do venture out with full-frame. This appeals to both my lazy, and my cheap side, as these lenses tend to be inexpensive and light.  They also tend to be very high quality, especially at the modest price point at which they can be acquired.  Their small size and weight has made the D 700 very manageable for hiking.  There is however the need to carry multiple lenses, and the problem of changing them in the field, sometimes during conditions that might tend to foul the sensor.

So I’ve been looking for a small FX capable lens, a midrange zoom, of reasonable quality, but small and light enough to keep things manageable on the trail.  Preferably, it should be a modest cost.  And I think I’ve found it.

The Nikkor 28 – 70 mm F3 .5 is a small AF-D lens made in the 1990s.  It is an old school design, of polycarbonate construction, with a metal lens mount, but like many of the AF-D lens line of the time, well made and finished.  It is very reminiscent of my Nikkor 50 mm f1.8, and my 85 mm f1.8 in terms of build quality.  It is slightly smaller in size compared to the latter.

I became interested in the lens when I saw it on multiple websites reviewed quite favorably, especially given its astounding price point.  (I bought mine for roughly $70.00 on EBay).

Now I love a deal..  For $70.00 I’m definitely willing to “take a flier” and see whether it could be a useful addition to my photo kit.

I try hard not to be a “lens snob”.  Certainly there is a minimal quality level that a useful lens has to meet.  I believe that the right scene, the right set up, and the right shooting technique, tend to trump ultimate lens quality.  If the optic has reasonable center and peripheral frame sharpness, with decent contrast, it will not be the reason your photographs sucks. You may have to shoot at F5-F8 for the lens to perform well, but hell I tend to do that anyway, even with better glass.

I took the lens with me this week on several hikes.  I was easily able to carry the D700, with the zoom attached in my small camera bag.  It focuses using a screw drive, and so it requires one of a higher-end Nikon bodies for it to properly auto focus.  On the D700, it focused quite quickly and accurately.

One anachronism about this lens is its rotating front element.  This means that the front of the lens spins with the focus ring. This makes the use of a polarizing filter somewhat awkward in that one has to constantly readjust the filter every time the focus is changed by the photographer, or by the autofocus.  The lens is also unusual in that it tends to shrink and grow with both with zooming and focusing.

An advantage regarding filters on the 28-70 mm is that they are only 52 mm in diameter and thus considerably cheaper than the 77 mm filters on the pro-level lenses.  The rotating front element problem can be dealt with by focusing manually (so nothing moves without your permission) and carefully adjusting the filter to maximize the colors in the viewfinder.  I quickly got used to this technique.

So for the ultimate issue… what is the quality of this $70.00 lens? Actually, it’s quite good.  Obviously an f3.5 lens is not as “fast” as more extravagant models.  For a landscape photographer used to shooting in a reasonable light and on a tripod, this is not much of an impediment.  I find that the optical quality lens is quite good.  I’ve included in this article some sample images shot with this lens both in the field and indoors.

By way of comparison I offer the same image acquired with a similar vintage Nikkor 50 mm f1.8 which is well known to be sharp, and have low distortion.  I shot both at 50 mm and f 5.0 with the camera bench mounted. All processing was the same.  Here is 100% magnification of a peripheral portion of the scene shot.  I think that you can see the differences between these two lenses are fairly minimal.

Now I have no doubt that bigger pro-level Nikkor glass may be better quality, but the tradeoffs of weight and bulk mean that this diminutive midrange zoom is rather useful in its own way.

One last issue.  Apparently this lens is someone obscure.  When I developed photos in Camera Raw shot with the lens, the automatic lens correction defaults to the 70-200mm f2.8 settings. On the PTL Lens plug in for Photoshop, the corrections ar based on a Sigma 28-70mm f2.8. I have no idea whether this is deliberate or accidental, but the lens is not mentioned on the  former software’s Nikon lens list.  Regardless, the corrections in terms of distortion and vingnetting seem modest.

In summary I think for myself shooting this is a worthwhile little optic.  It’s small and rugged enough and frankly, if I drop it off a cliff, or into a pond, I can afford a $70.00 I will require to replace it.  And I think it has sufficient quality that it should never get in the way of capturing an excellent image.

After all, isn’t that what we truly require of any lens?

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.

These are the images from the 2011-2012 John Heinz, Allied Rehabilitation Calander.which we produce each year to benefit the pediatric rehabilitation programs at both campuses.

This is the third year  for this publication, for which I am honored to supply the photographs. I thought it might  be interesting to offer more information on the images that were ultimately chosen for this year’s calendar as well as the equipment used to acquire them. I hope it adds to the enjoyment for those who of you who have one  hanging on your wall. If not, you can purchase one here.

Cover: White Horse at Hillside

Panasonic Lumix G1, Lumix 14-45 f3.5

It’s no coincidence that our cover images have tended to be
shot at this unique location.

 The Lands at Hillside is a regional treasure, a non-for-profit organization whose mission is to preserve one of the most beautiful and historic farm properties in
Northeastern Pennsylvania: the historic Conyngham farm on Hillside road in Dallas Pennsylvania. The farm as currently run promotes sustainable agricultural practices, with grass-fed cows producing milk free of supplemental hormones. This milk can be purchased, along with many other natural food and craft items, at a retail outlet on the premises.

The farm also serves an educational site, where children and adults can be introduced to the dairy industry and milk production, as well as environmental issues. It is my honor to serve on the Board of Directors of this fine institution.

The image itself was captured in mid-February of 2010. I
recall hoping to photograph the animal out in the field, against a snowy
backdrop. However, a charming if frustrating characteristic of the species is
curiosity. Once a horse senses your presence, they invariably have to
investigate, a behavior that has spoiled many potential pastoral landscape
photos over the years. I do think however, that in this case,  the image captures nicely,
this element of his personality.

January: Winter Scene, Bear Creek Lake

Nikon D2x, Nikkor 17-35 f2.8

Bear Creek Village is a wonderful and historic summer resort community built around an impoundment at the confluence of several streams at the base of the Pocono Plateau.
The village and its surroundings are very picturesque and I often find
myself shooting there when conditions are right.

This image was captured in January of 2008 after a six-inch
snowfall freshened the appearance of the existing snowpack in our region.

The D2x combined with the excellent  Nikkor 17-35mm f2.8 lens, allows
impressive depth of field and detail to be revealed.

February: Hemlock Temple

Nikon D7000, Nikkor 16-85 f3.5

When most people think of Rickett’s Glen State Park, they  tend to think of
the Falls Trail, and the multiple beautiful waterfalls along the way. There is
however another area in the park that I love to visit. On the south side of route 118, beyond Adams Falls, is an area known as the Hemlock Temple, an example of a
true old growth stand of White pines and Hemlock.

Though not quite as impressive as “Forest Cathedral” at Cooks Forest State Park in western Pennsylvania, it is beautiful nonetheless, with huge conifers, some of which were adolescents when Columbus reached our shores.

On that day last February, I was snow shoeing among those
stately giants. The snowpack was deep and the trail unpacked, as it is not well
visited in the winter. It was a bit of a struggle to explore.

I remember shooting this image the lens stabilized on the
crook of two crossed ski poles to dampen the effects of a bounding heartbeat.
It seemed to have worked.

March: Barn at Herrick’s Corners

Fujifilm S3Pro, Tokina ATX 28-80 f2.8

March in our part of the Northeastern
US is for me one of the most challenging photographic months.

Winter is fading leaving behind a landscape scarred by
snowplows and cinders. Nothing much will bloom until April. Opportunities for
shooting landscapes are slim.

March can also be a snowy month.  Now I like snow, but by St Patrick’s Day,
most people want it to just go away. Those people probably include those of you who buy this calendar. So I usually try to find snowless images.

Given the lack of action in the natural world, I find myself
shooting a lot of images with barns and buildings in early spring.

This particular image was shot near the Elk Mountain
ski resort in Late March of 2006.

I like the collection of cars and farm equipment in the
field which I suspect remains there to this very day.

You can tell it’s late in the month by the slight red blush of the maple trees in the background as their buds swell in preparation for the warmer times coming.

April: Stone Wall, Lackawanna State Park

Nikon D2x, Nikkor 16-85mm f3.5

By April, particularly late April, things are starting to
happen. Buds are opening, trees and flowers blooming.  In late April of 2008, I visited Lackawanna State Park. This is a nice “day use”
park with a number of nice visuals. I was particularly taken by the intricate network of
stone walls that exist throughout the park.

I was drawn to this scene in particular by the sunbeam that
broke through a gap in the hemlocks to illuminate the spot.  I left the subtle sun flare in the image for the final version (it’s 2/3 of the way to the right, on the very bottom of the photo).  I think it adds context to the image.

May: Spring Blooms in Butler Township

Panasonic Lumix GH1, Lumix 14-45 f3.5

This spring seemed to take a long time to be fully realized.
April was wet and cold seemingly suppressing the “leaf out” until much later
than usual. In early May, we finally had a period of warm clear weather and the
foliage erupted with what seemed to be pent-up energy.

This image was shot near my office in Drums, after work was concluded for the day. The blooms to me seemed to be bursting out like fireworks, and I remember feeling grateful for the warm sun on my face, and for the thought that spring had finally, really arrived. It was featured in this article on the site.

June: Early Summer Corn, Hamlin

Fujifilm S5 Pro, Nikkor 16-85mm f3.5

I found this scene in late June 2008, returning from Goose
Pond Boy Scout camp, having just dropped off my son for a week with his troop.

I remember driving past, and observing the farmer, cultivating his hilly fields. By the
time I stopped and set up he was driving downhill, which didn’t seem as
aesthetic. I waited until he turned around, and proceeded uphill again, before
tripping the shutter.

By the way, note once again, the use of the Nikkor 16-85mm
f3.5 on another Nikon mount DX sensored camera. This is a versatile, high
quality lens with image stabilization and crisp optics. It is a light,
relatively inexpensive lens that I find really useful. If you’re a Nikon DX
shooter, add it to your kit. You won’t regret it.

July: Kayaks on the Susquehanna

Olympus E 510, Zuiko 14-42mm f3.5

Some days and events remind me that life is wonderful.

In this case, it was a July Saturday in 2007 when my son Gus and I attended the annual river trip sponsored by the North Branch Land Trust. It was a wonderful event. We entered the river near Wysox, and “put out” at Laceyville. It was a great day. It is easy to forget what a wonderful resource is  the Northern Susquehanna.

During the 4 hour river trip, we saw Bald Eagles, Blue Heron
rookeries and scenery gorgeous at a level that we don’t often connect with our
region.

I met a large number of friendly people.

I took this image at the lunch break when everyone “put in” on
the river bank. I was struck by the beautiful background and the brightly
colored kayaks in the foreground. The use of a circular polarizer on the lens really enhances the colors of the boats, the foliage, and the sky.

August: Monarch and Goldenrod.

Nikon D700, Nikkor 85mm f1.8

This was the scene on the Farmstead Trail at Nescopeck State Park which is essentially in my neighborhood.

It was a sunny late August day, and I decided to play around
photographically by limiting myself to the D 700 with a single prime lens. In
this case, I chose the Nikkor 85mm f1.8. I knew that the lens’ sharpness, and its ability to produce a shallow depth of field, would be major optical features to utilize.

I was walking in the middle of a field of goldenrod when I
spotted the Monarch wafting from cluster to cluster of the bright yellow
blooms.

To shoot this butterfly, I had to stalk him a bit, as he didn’t
seem to want to cooperate. Finally he landed near enough to me that I was able to frame
this image.

It was ultimately featured in an article on this blog called
“Eighty five millimeters”, which discussed shooting with a single focal length lens.

September: Black Eyed Susans at Hillside

Panasonic GH1, Lumix 20mm f1.7

Once again The Lands at Hillside are the subject of
an image, in this case, take at the rear entrance to “The Cottage” a gorgeous
late 19^th century summer “cottage” on the property that is
undergoing restoration.

The home has three stories, beautiful common rooms, multiple
guest rooms, original servants quarters, and a newly installed commercial
kitchen. It is truly spectacular facility, and is fast becoming a popular choice for weddings and other gatherings .

The small sensored GH1 normally isn’t the best choice for
shallow depth of field, but the Lumix 20mm lens I think pulls it off nicely
here.

October: Falls at Nay Aug Park

Nikon D700, Tokina 28-85mm f2.8

Nay Aug Park holds a lot of memories for me. Located on the eastern edge of Scranton
it has nice mix of facilities, including a pool complex, pavilions, and picnic areas.

There is also a trail that leads from the park down into a
gorge through which flows the aptly
named Roaring Brook. There is large waterfall with a deep splash basin
where generations of Scrantonians gathered their nerve to dive from the rocky
platforms above.

When we were students at the University of Scranton,
my wife and I often walked there in the evenings after class.

This image was captured from a tripod on observation
platform overlooking the falls in October of 2011. Note the lack of reds in the fall foliage,
the probable result of a fungus that particularly affected the maples, causing
their normally crimson leaves to “brown out”. It is said to be the result of the very wet summer and fall we have experienced this year. You can see the vertical version of this image in the article at the link.

November: Train Station at Hunlock’s Creek

Panasonic Lumix GH1, Lumix 45-200mm f4.0

November, like March can be tough for photographers. In most
cases, around these parts, the foliage is gone and the scenery bland, if not
dreary. One needs to find either foliage that changes later in the season, or
a locale where the season is delayed. In this case I chose the latter tactic.

Last November, I took a drive along the Susquehanna River
south to Berwick, thinking that the since the river flows at the lowest
altitude in the region, I might have some luck with late fall color.

Driving down route 11 I have often noticed what I understand
to be an old abandoned train station.  I pulled over and set up a tripod. I liked this angle in particular, emphasizing the buildings unusual “pagoda” architecture, and the clearly late fall look of the sycamores and maples. I used a telephoto focal length so that the trees
behind the building would be moved closer to the foreground.

December: Christmas Farm

Nikon D700, Tokina 28-80mm f2.8

Although most of these images are shot in the course of day–to-day shooting, there are definitely times when I set out to capture an image depicting a particular month or season, for use in this publication, . December, for instance is definitely a time when I  often shoot specifically for the calendar. I was thus pleased back in December of 2009 to come upon this scene, which to me evokes a sort of Norman Rockwell feel.

Now, photographing  people’s properties is legal from a public road.
I am very careful not to trespass. If I have no permission from the owner,
I try to shoot scenes that only involve what a passerby might see driving
past.

Sometimes, people are suspicious when they see me with a
camera pointed at their home. It can be easier sometimes to avoid conflict and move on.

If the scene is really compelling, I will stop and explain. That usually works.

On this occasion I encountered this scene at 4:30pm in early
December 2009. There wasn’t much light so I set up a tripod, which takes a
little time. As I worked, a car pulled in to the driveway driven by the property owner. I introduced myself, and explained the calendar, it charitable purpose, and that his home might someday be featured. He was very friendly, and seemed excited at the prospect.

I hope he likes the image as much as we did.

January 2013: Engine at Gracedale

Fujifilm E900

This image was taken at the Gracedale railroad yard, located  along route 437 in Mountaintop,. It was taken late in the afternoon, and late in January of  2007. I recall that it was quite cold and that snow was just beginning to fall. I drive past this scene every day, but at that moment I was struck by the contrast  between the bright green and yellow of the engine, and the dull greys and browns of the background.

The camera is an interesting little point and shoot, manufactured by Fujifilm.It was my “glove box camera”for many years. It produces great images and shoots in RAW, a rare feature for a compact camera in those days.

I have always like Fuji imagers. They have been known in the photographic community over the years for a flattering color profile, and high-resolution relative to the actual number of pixels on the chip. I have always felt that film manufacturers  have a natural advantage for certain aspects of  digital imaging, particularly in chip design (Kodak has produced nice imagers also). About three years ago, they stopped producing serious photo tools, filling their line with mediocre consumer cameras.

Now, Fuji is producing some wonderful cameras again. I have my eyes on several of  their new offerings.

Back Cover: October day at Lake Scranton

Nikon D7000, Nikkor 16-85mm f3.5

I have wonderful memories of Lake Scranton.
It’s another place where I courted my wife in college. I remember long walks
around the lake in the spring and fall.

I hadn’t been there in many years until I visited in October
of this year, camera in hand.

Things have changed a bit. I remember walking a gravel foot
path. Now there is a paved road around much of the lake. The scenery is lovely;  a jog around the lake remains a wonderful way to spend an hour or so exercising in the outdoors, minutes from the city.

I walked around a portion of the lake wanting an image
depicting the usual activities that occur there. We thought that this image makes
sense as a rear cover, given the vantage point from which it was shot.

Well, thanks for visiting. Feel free to explore the rest of the site. We love to get feedback.

If you bought one of our calendars, thanks for helping the children.