Every year in the Northeastern U.S.,we are lectured by meteorologist types about the linkage between the climate, and the quality of the fall foliage.

Now, it seems to me that most fall seasons are reported to be
drier than normal. This tends to result, we are told, in attenuation of the
colors of autumn leaves, and thus a dull 3^rd season.

Now it seems that whatever happens, the fall colors suffer.

This year, the spring summer and early fall were much wetter
than normal. Seasonal totals are significantly higher at this point in the year that an
entire years precipitation from as far back as 1951. It has rained a lot in the last 6 months.

And interestingly,  the foliage has suffered. Issues became apparent in mid
September when Maples, and some Oaks, did not assume their usual autumnal display
of reds and crimsons, but turned brown, and shriveled on the tree. Apparently
the wet conditions caused a normally inconsequential fungus to become a
problem, injuring several tree species, and causing their leaves to bypass the
fall colors we look forward to.

This affected mainly the reds of the season. The birches,
beeches, and some maples still turned yellow or gold. The deep crimson of many oak species less affected by the fungus, were also dulled looking, definitely more brown than red.

Many leaves just fell. By mid-October which is usually “peak
leaves” in these parts of Pennsylvania, the canopy was almost completely open, its leaves brown, and trampled underfoot.

As a landscape photographer, you do what you can to find beauty,
when nature conspires against you.. You look for isolated scenes with good
color. You include geologic or man-made artifacts into images. Or, you look for
patterns and texture.  Black and White can work when the foliage is dull. You try to make a silk purse from a sow’s ear.

Finally, on the 28^th of October, nature lobbed a softball to those of us that shoot outdoors. The Pennsylvania Mountains received nearly a foot of snow, while there was still some color on the trees. The snow created a new canvas
on which to depict the fading autumnal display, and grab a few more images
before things fade  to the dull façade of November. The white stuff lasted several days before succumbing to the late October sun.

Now, I look out my window to view a scene cloaked in the
browns and grays of the early winter. It’s early in the morning as I write this;
a heavy frost clings to the fallen leaves and grass.

There are still things to photograph in a Northeastern
Pennsylvania November. I’ve written about it here and here.

But for me, this weekend, I will put away the camera gear
and break out the leaf blowers and rakes to deal with the remains of last year’s
fall scenery,  a good bit of which now covers my lawn.

Soon, the snow will fall, and hopefully stay.

 

There are very few retailers on this planet anymore that care for their customers and strive for excellence.

B+H photo is clearly one of those businesses.

I have previously described my issue with the Panasonic DMW-LVF-1 View Finder. I called the center suggested in the letter sent by the first Panasonic facility that had returned the finder unrepaired. They claimed to be a parts center and had no repair options. I called Panasonic support again and explained the situation. They told me that they would get back to me. They haven’t as of yet. And its been over a week.

Feeling really frustrated, I contacted Henry Posner, who many of you may recognize as B+H Photo’s web troubleshooter. Henry
is active on web forums addressing the few problems people have with this
iconic NYC photography retailer. He’s helped me out in the past.

At first, Henry offered to put me in contact with Panasonic people. I’m not sure what happenned with that idea.

Now I have been given a return authorization for the item, even though it is well beyond the point where B+H would be obliged to deal with me.

On receipt of the viewfinder, they will replace it. Wow! And thanks.

Now having said all of that, I not naïve. There’s a business model at work here, and it’s a good one.

I don’t know whether B+H is operating on the moral code of taking care of their loyal customers, or whether they are merely looking at statistics and deciding that I buy enough stuff from them that this gesture is worthwhile fiscally. If they’re smart, and they are, it’s
both.

In general, if you hunt around the web, you can find photo (or computer, audio, or audio visual) gear a few bucks cheaper than the price on the B+H site.

If you truly count on your equipment however, those few dollars are absolutely worth it.

Trust me on this.

Last spring, as sometimes happens; I developed an” itch” to
buy some new photo gear.

Now logically I really didn’t need anything new. I
actually could stand to sell something as I have several DSLRs I no longer
really use, and should probably place on EBay (anyone want a lightly used
D2x?). I have most of the lenses I want, and need, and the few I lust for seem
awfully expensive too me in these times of a weak dollar. I looked around the
web scouting for a decently priced used or refurbished D3x, but unfortunately
for me, they seem to be holding their value quite nicely.

So I waited. Because I felt as though that nothing I wanted
that I justify on price.

That’s when my lovely wife Cathy saved the day. She came to
me one evening and mentioned that our 16-year old son, Gus was showing an
interest in video and still photography and wanted to know what camera we might buy him.

Aha, I thought, the answer to my dilemma! I quickly and
generously offered to give Gus my Lumix LX3, which I explained to my wife, is a wonderful camera for a budding photographer/videographer

In truth, I had been eying up the new Olympus ZX1. I have
had a variety of Olympus cameras over the
years, and have had very positive experiences. I went on the B+H site and
ordered one with an extra battery. It was delivered in the usual B+H fashion,
the next day. I was particularly excited about the “Zuiko” branded lens, the
first on any of their compact cameras.

I kept it for two days. Now as readers know I shoot a
variety of equipment and am pretty adaptable, but compared to the  LX3, the controls of the ZX1 were poorly worked out, and much more “menu driven”. Maybe I never understood the camera, but things like changing the ISO, or bringing up the histogram on the display, seemed infinitely harder on the Olympus.

I packed the camera back up, and obtained a return authorization from B+H, at the same time ordering the upgrade to the LX3 the Panasonic Lumix LX5.

Compared to shooting the Olympus,
working with the LX5 is like falling off a log.

All of the familiar controls are there on the body of the
camera. One thing I really missed one the ZX1 was the switch for the aspect
ratio of the image, which on the Lumix cameras resides on the lens barrel. The
little stubby joystick controller on the LX3 was replaced by a clickable
control wheel on the LX5 making the controls more like the G- series
Panasonics. I do miss the switch on the LX 3 that puts it into picture review
mode; I like this better than the push button on the LX5.

As most of you know, the Leica Summicron–branded lens has
been upgraded in the new camera. It retains the former lens wide end at 24mm
f2.0 but now zooms out to 35 mm equivalent 90mm at f3.3. These are optically
beautiful lenses with out the silly long zoom capabilities that compromise the
optics of other compact cameras.

Some words about accessories. I was hoping that they would
be common for both cameras but to my chagrin found out that battery of the LX5 is new, and that the LX3’s filter adapter doesn’t work on the longer-extending LX5 lens. Oh well.

Then there’s the optional electronic viewfinder. I purchased
one shortly after buying the camera. I initially loved it. To me the LX5s
compatibility with this little gem might justify upgrading to the newer camera

Though not as big and bright as the EVf built in to my GH1, it was
more than adequate and allowed me to shoot with the camera properly braced against my face like one should. It allows you to see all of the camera data,
and particularly for me, the live histogram so useful in small-sensored cameras with limited dynamic range. I loved that it would pivot upwords.

Then one morning, it would no longer focus. I called B+H but
it was beyond their 14 day return period. They suggested I call Panasonic. When
I finally got through to them they were unsure just where I should send the
viewfinder for service. Several hours later they called me and suggested an Elgin, Illinois
repair center. I boxed it up, and sent it off.

Maybe a week later, it arrived back at my door. I unboxed it
and placed on the camera… only to discover that it still wouldn’t focus.

That’s when I found the note in the box stating that the Elgin facility couldn’t help me and that I needed to send
the viewfinder to a facility in Washington State.

Now in the past, I have had pretty good luck with Panasonic service (they fixed pretty quickly, my dysfunctional 45-200mm Lumix lens) but clearly they have a problem here.
Anyway, I’ll send it off again and we’ll see what happens.

On to image quality- In general I do think the LX5 a bit
better than the LX3, particularly at High ISOs. I think it’s even better still,
even in Raw, now that I have downloaded and installed firmware 2.0. Noise and dynamic range are claimed to be improved by Panasonic (maybe the latter because of the former). To me the image quality it’s a modest improvement at best, I
probably wouldn’t upgrade for the imaging improvement alone if I hadn’t given away my LX3.

Oh and by the way, the LX5 has 720p HD video but can now
shoot in the “AVCHD Lite” format as well as Motion Jpg. Firmware 2.0 has brought enhancements to this, particularly in terms of the functionality of the Optical Image Stabilization system with video.

It should be said, that there is no free lunch regarding
small sensors, even if they are as good as the LX5. I just shot a campaign event for a friend using my D700, D7000, and when I tired of carrying around the big stuff, the LX5. I shot raw and for the most part exposed carefully.

Yet on reviewing the images, there is a huge chasm, between the quality of the Nikon
files, and those of the LX5. Viewed at 100% even at ISO 100 there is luminance
noise present. This is typically less visible in prints but still on the
computer the difference is stark.

Nonetheless the Panasonic images will be very useful for my
friend’s campaign website and for modest prints.

I guess I’m just spoiled.

Because of these limitations, the LX5 and its competitors
are not great landscape tools. They are useful for event photography,
particularly if you want to keep a low profile. I will often come to an event with
my LX 5 in one suit coat pocket, and an Olympus FL-36 flash in the other. The
two are completely compatible and allow one to create some very pleasing bounce
flash photography.

Final thoughts: the LX5 is a fine upgrade of the LX 3 and is
a very useful enthusiast’s compact camera. Its image quality is somewhat
limited like all cameras of its type but nonetheless it can create nice images
in settings that other small cameras would flounder. The design and control
features make it a joy to use and quick to learn.

If you task it appropriately, and shoot it well, you will be
very pleased with the results.

This year in the Appalachian highlands of Pennsylvania, spring
has been a long time coming.

In typical years, we get a taste of better weather starting in late
March. This year, the best the month offered was an occasional clear day, with temperatures  perhaps in the 50’s (Fahrenheit), before the snow would fall once again.

I have written earlier that I have visited a spring pond in Nescopeck State Park, on one of these tepid afternoons where the peepers had tentatively begun to sing. This seemed hopeful.

It snowed the next day.

Common wisdom was “Well, March is always lousy…wait until April. April is when things get nice”.

Well April came, and so did the rain. It seemed to rain
constantly, and without the usual consolation of warmer temperatures. Streams
and then rivers flooded; the more volatile creeks flooded in multiple cycles, as storm
after storm drifted east from the much more turbulent weather in the south and Midwest.

I know…May flowers and all of that.

Finally we at least, in mid to late April the grass started
to “green-up”. Wisps of foliage  began to appear in the forest.  The forsythia finally began to bloom very late in the month.

The season however will not be denied. Nature can be delayed, but ultimately there is a cycle which will win out over the reluctant climate. By late April maple leaves began
to erupt from their winter buds.

The first male hummingbirds returned to my wife’s feeders, eating voraciously to
cope with the lingering cool conditions.

Finally now, in these middle days of May, there are consistent
high temps in the 60’s and low 70’s.

The pent-up vernal energy seems to have exploded. Over several
days the transition to spring has been accelerated. Dogwoods, fruit trees and Azaleas are in bloom.

Even the reluctant Oaks, the dominant species in the mountain forests, have begun to leaf out. Today we will finally cut our lawn for the first time.

The birthing of spring is always more difficult in the northeast Appalachians.

This year, it was breech.

Nescopeck Creek in March ( Olympus E 510, Zuiko 14-42mm f 3.5)

 

It is exactly one calendar year since I decided to sign on to WordPress and start writing a blog.

In a year, we have gone from having no audience, to a burgeoning group of  visitors who seem to stop in regularly to see what’s new.

In a  year, we have had almost 18,000 visitors to this site. Trust me, compared to well established sites, these numbers aren’t really impressive, but they are a beginning. And we’ve been growing every month.

 We’ve had 60 posts, or roughly 5 a month.

 Of late, professional responsibilities have prevented me from more frequent postings; but in the next several months I hope that things will calm down a bit, and I will have more time to devote to writing, which I truly enjoy.

I’ve noticed a couple of patterns in terms of site traffic..

The most frequently visited posts are those related to photography, particularly, equipment reviews. Needless to say, those will continue to be featured. The big problem for me is that at this stage I have no one loaning me equipment… I review what I have purchased.

Near as I can tell, the most popular post of the year was my article on the Nikon D 7000 which continues to attract visitors.

I plan to spend time in the next several weeks searching the WordPress site for a new blog format which will improve the usability and appearance of Henry Smith’s Cottage. Bear with me.

And please keep commenting on what is published… I have truly enjoyed interacting with those of you who kindly share your thoughts.

I really enjoy the challenge of holding the attention of those of you who have visited my internet home.

I hope you will keep stopping by.

As I have written in the past, there is something cruel about early spring in the highlands of Pennsylvania.

 The winter of 2011 will be remembered in these parts, not for the large amount of snow we received (actually only 50 or so inches here where I live) but for the relentless cold that maximized its impact, and kept the ground, sidewalks and at times the roads, covered with the white stuff.

 In the forests, the snow cover was between a foot, or maybe two, for much of the winter. There was no true “January thaw”, like we usually experience.

It was so relentlessly “winter” here, that I decided to forgo my usual March Adirondack trip, and went to Florida instead.

Even there, the season’s grasp had not relinquished. We had cool temperatures during our travels, mainly in the 50s and 60s.  

There had been multiple freezes in January and February, injuring the subtropical vegetation. From Jacksonville to Cape Coral, we encountered cold-injured palms, their fronds brown, and falling to the ground. In the estuaries and tidewater areas, the mangroves were lifeless when we were told that they should have  been lush and green.

Because of this, several scenes I shot seem to work better as monochromes rather than in color.

 

 Back at home, at least for some of us, there was an upside. We had reliable cross-country skiing and snowmobiling from early January until the first week of March.

On the downside, I burned a lot of firewood and of course, heating oil.

Photographically at least , snow and cold are helpful,  shrouding what would be a brown lifeless landscape with season appropriate trappings ,  decorating the farms and forests.

Winter however, was starting finally break. Last Sunday afternoon, I walked a local trail, called “Frog Pond Way” named for the multiple permanent, and “Vernal” ponds, that it encircles.

It was a clear day with the bright spring sun warming to me to a degree beyond what the 50 degree air temperature might suggest.

The cries of a flock of newly arrived robins, the distant call of a pilated woodpecker, and the cooing of mourning doves filled the air.

In every suitable body of water I encountered, a pair of mallards paddled together, occasionally tipping their heads down to the muddy bottoms to search for food. I surprised a pair of cormorants resting at one of the larger ponds.

And at one particular pond I encountered what I consider the truest sentinel of spring. As I approached I could detect the first tentative chirping of wood frogs, beginning to search for females.

I knew that there was some mixed precipitation forecast for the overnight, but not something that should slow spring’s progression. Or so I thought. One Monday morning we awakened to find two inches of snow on the ground. Twenty four hours later, eight more had fallen. We’ve had daytime temperatures in the low thirties since, with lows in the teens.

 I cross-country skied again yesterday, the scenery once again resembling what is seen in late January.

As always, March is full of surprises.

 

Small Spruce on Black Pond (Olympus E 510, Zuiko 11-22mm f2.8)

 

 Cross Country Skiing???…that’s too much work.

I am fortunate to reside in a portion of the eastern Pennsylvania Mountains (hills, really) where snow is fairly reliable from January through March. I also have a residence in the High Peaks region of the Adirondack Park in northern New York, where one can generally add a month on each end of the Pennsylvania snow season.

Since childhood, I have enjoyed snow sports of all kinds, but for the last thirty years, skiing, has been a dominant winter activity. It’s pleasant, that in both of the locales where I reside, that most of, my friends are also skiers.

I have been an avid downhill and Telemark skier in the past, but a bum left knee has left me somewhat hobbled in this regard. While allowing a few years to pass prior to undergoing knee replacement, I continue to at least be able to cross-country ski, which in some ways I enjoy more than its more glamorous sister sports.

Cross Country Skiing has several advantages. First, it’s cheap, both in terms of equipment and venue costs. To get fully outfitted for downhill skiing (skis, boots, bindings, and poles) could cost US$600-1000. I can find a nice touring cross-country set up ( the kind of skis you’d use on your local golf course or hiking trail) for between US $250-350.

Then there’s the clothing. Alpine skiers tend to use different clothing (warmer, less emphasis on breathability, more emphasis on style) whereas, if you’re already hiking in all seasons, cross-country garb tends to be an extension of your typical outdoor layering clothing strategy.

Some of my crusty old friends still insist on skiing in wool sweaters, and knickers with knee socks like we used to do thirty years ago.  Oddly enough, wool works pretty well, except that everything tends to stick to it. You look like a snowman if you fall.

Then there is the venue. In the Adirondacks, a day of skiing at two Olympic skiing sites varies rather widely. At the time this was written (2011) a downhill ski lift pass at Whiteface Mountain is around US $80. By comparison, to ski at the Van  Hoevenburg, Cross Country Ski Center (as well-groomed and full featured as anywhere in the country), costs a relatively modest US$20. Its trail system connects to the equally lovely Cascade Ski Center where a ticket is an even more reasonable US$12. In truth, resorts such as these are a luxury.  Most of the time, I end up “backcountry” skiing on public land where typically there is no fee.

 

When I bring up the topic of cross-country skiing to someone who has never tried it, the invariable comment is something like: “that’s a lot of work”. Actually once you learn the technique, moving at a brisk pace over level or even rolling ground is fairly easy. Like all forms of athletic activity though, if pursued with vigor, it’s a formidable workout.

Photography from skis can be very fruitful. Whether on alpine gear at a downhill resort, or on a tour on Nordic skis, the surrounding scenery tends to be rather striking.

Doing photography however, while pursuing any athletic activity has its problems.  Active muscle tone and a bounding heartbeat can make obtaining sharp images a challenge. Camera stabilization is very important. Something as simple pausing for five minutes after exertion to allow your heart rate and “contractility” to subside a bit can help to avoid camera shake. Ski poles, tripods and, in fact any fixed object you encounter can be helpful.

It can be intimidating to carry hundreds, if not thousands of dollars worth of camera gear in a pack if you are not a confident skier. Hone your ski skills before packing up your most valuable gear before a challenging run. Until your pretty sure you’re not going to fall onto and crush your brand new point and shoot ( or fall on your D3 , and injure yourself), pack along more expendable equipment. If you’re not yet ready to ski with your camera equipment, snowshoes can be another, somewhat easier way to venture into the winter wilds.

I really like the Panasonic G-series cameras for skiing because they are light, moderately priced but can still capture high quality images. They are also fairly sturdy, but I still think that they would deform in an accident, sparing my spleen.

I tend to carry camera gear in a large “fanny pack” with a shoulder strap over my left shoulder, and the hip belt tight enough to inhibit bag migration. When I want to shoot, I loosen the belt, and swing the band over my right hip, towards the front, where all of the contents are convenient to access. The Mountainsmith pack that I use fits a G series camera with several lenses, extra batteries and memory, a water bottle, plus room to carry a shed layer, all without disturbing my sense of balance.

Longer, more ambitious winter trips require gear that will only fit in a larger backpack. In this case, a smaller fanny pack can be carried up front, for quick access to your camera gear.

Skiing into remote areas allows one to observe and photograph even familiar territory in a whole new light, and get some wonderful winter exercise.

 And it’s really not that much work.

 

Pennsylvania Winter Farm (Nikon D7000, Nikkor 16-85mm f3.5)

 

Occasionally, a budding photographer will approach me for advice on how to capture better images.

I think that my answer must disappoint them. I’m sure most beginners really hope that I can direct them towards the purchase of a particularly sexy piece of gear, such as a camera body, or a particular lens that will set their photography afire.

They want to talk about gear. I want to talk about composition, and technique. Particularly, I want to talk about rather mundane basics such as the nature of optics, shooting discipine, and camera, and lens support.

Not that there aren’t some great photographs blurred by subject motion, or camera movements.

Most great images are sharp, even if it is at a narrow point of focus selected by the shooter.

 Generally, for an image to be sharp, the camera and lens need to be still relative to the subject, as the shutter is released.

Now, there are many ways to properly stabilize a camera.

My first rule would be: the human body unaided, is at best, only a fair camera support.  Now true enough, a practiced pro shooter can hand-hold, and certainly achieve great results, usually far better  than an amateur. There are reasons for this. First, the pro is practiced at taking still images, much in the way a fine marksman, can draw a bead and hold very steadily on his target. It takes concentration and lots of repetition. There are places to learn this: here, and here.

 Most amateurs have lousy technique. They think that they can hold a camera, arms akimbo, far out from the body, trying to shoot a telephoto shot through a slow zoom lens, at an impossibly slow shutter speed, and still achieve Sports Illustrated quality shots of their precious soccer-playing offspring. It doesn’t work that way.

A pro understands that the proper shooting technique is to hold the arms close in to the body elbows braced against the chest or abdomen, and the viewfinder pressed against the face. Holding as modern digital camera out away from you while you frame with the viewfinder, is generally going to lead to fair snapshots, but lousy fine art prints.

Also, often pro camera gear, is heavier. This means that the poke of the finger on the shutter, and the movement of the mirror and shutter, on an SLR, is working against the greater mass of, for instance,  a heavy, metal-bodied  camera such as a Canon 1Ds mark II, rather than a diminutive plastic consumer grade Digital Rebel. It thus creates less blur-inducing movement.

 Most landscape purists use tripods… period. Many shoot large-format cameras that are too unwieldy to be practical for anything but tripod mounting.  The true purist would use, very heavy tripods with equally beefy camera mounts that add mass to the camera body and couple it rigidly to the floor or ground, essentially eliminating camera movement.

Tripods are great for detailed images. They are less useful when for hiking long distances, for discreet shooting and sometimes, for spontaneity.

 Obviously, there are available, stabilized lenses, known as IS lenses for Canon,OIS for Panasonic, and VR lenses for Nikkor. These can partially make up for camera shake. Modern Sony, Olympus, and Pentax SLR lenses are generally stabilized by the camera body itself. Whether in the lens or body, stabilization is a useful feature, but can only be counted on to compensate for modest camera movements at reasonably fast shutter speeds.

Combining a heavy tripod with a remote shutter release (or releasing the shutter by using the camera self timer) is still the best way to obtain sharp, enlargable landscape prints.  This is especially true when shooting moving water, or in low light situations.  We should probably all do this, all the time.

In fact, good technique and less megapixels, will sometimes trump bad technique with more megapixels in terms of fine detail reproduction.

I have walked, snowshoed, and skied many miles with a tripods strapped to my pack. In a target-rich photographic environment, I sometimes leave the body and lens attached to the tripod, and travel with the combination over my shoulder, much like the way Huck Finn would carry a fishin’ pole.

 Lately though, I have changed tactics.  I found that sometimes setting up all the gear to work as a purist means that there are shots you won’t take because, it’s too much trouble. I still do use a tripod on formal shooting days. But for more casual opportunities, or for situations where I think that the neighbors will react badly to my presence, I use other techniques.

Cross-country skiing is one example. I have two ski poles in hand, and often, no where convenient to carry a monopod. I will then have to improvise.

Holding crossed ski (or hiking) poles with my thumb and third to fifth finger, I can improvise a bipod with the pair. My index finger can then encircle the barrel of the lens which rests in the cross. This works pretty well.

Trees when well located can be used to stabilize things, either by leaning against them, or bracing the camera hard against the bark. A small sandbag in your bag is helpful to facilitate the latter.

Any firm stable object can be useful. Fence post and bridge rails make fine camera supports. With SLRs, it is useful to press the camera into the support, to damp the movement of the mirror. Again a sandbag is useful to position the camera on a hard surface.

Logs, the hood of your car, your mountain bike seat, even rocks in the middle of a stream, can offer a shooting platform, as well as a non-intuitive, but unique shooting viewpoint. The Panasonic G 1-G1h- G2h-series cameras are great for this as they have an articulating view screen for framing at weird angles, are physically small, and have no mirror, and thus no “mirror slap” to dampen.

Finally, most often lately, I use a monopod.  Mine is a steel Bogen-Manfrotto unit with a sturdy ballhead mounted, a ballhead similar to, if less robust than the one on my good Gitzo tripod. Both ballheads use the same camera shoe so that I can switch back quickly between support options.

The monopod is a solid, heavy steel unit. The weight is an advantage when mechanically coupled to the camera, and then to the ground. There is a rubber foot, which can be slipped off to reveal a metal spike.

It makes a robust hiking pole. I keep it in my car wedged between the passenger seat and the console where it is readily available for “grab shots”. I have also suspected it would make a formidable self-defense weapon.

For landscape photography, I extend the monopod to the length I need. I make sure all of the joints are tightly locked. I position the camera with the ball head and then lock it down tight. I find that placing some weight on the camera-monopod assembly and making sure it if firmly engaged with the ground before tripping the shutter, allows me to take very sharp images even at marginal shutter speeds. I can grab good shots very quickly with a monopod in situations where a tripod would be slow and cumbersome.

If you aspire to create photographic images beyond the average, you need to spend time learning the basics. 

These methods may seem tedious and even stifling. Always remember that good camera technique and save you from opening your compositional masterwork, the one you hiked hours to capture, only to find is a blurred, unprintable mess.

Take the time and trouble.

It’s worth it.

 

 I don’t really write camera equipment reviews.

There are a number of wonderful sites, bookmarked here, and here, who do that extremely well (I’m particularly impressed with Thom Hogan’s fine analysis, particularly  on today’s topic).  That having been said, I have been, for the past several days, shooting with my new Nikon D7000. I am beginning to form some distinct impressions.

First, the camera certainly has very good resolution. In head to head testing against my D2x, I think I can see a bit more detail from the D7000 files, but only a bit. (12 to 16 MPs of resolution is not really a huge jump).

What is evident is the cleanness of the files, which are more noise-free, even at ISO 100, than even those of the vaunted D2x which was somewhat famous for its clean low ISO images. The  five years between the two  models is a long time in digital imaging technology.

Once the ISO range starts to increase, the gap from old to the new widens very quickly. I shot nice images in my dim neighborhood pub with the D 7000 and a 50mm f1.8 at ISO 3200. In the past, I would only have attempted this with my much more expensive FX format D 700 (which seems to be still perhaps a stop better than the D7000).

The effective dynamic range seems excellent. There is considerable latitude in highlight recovery, not as much as the Fuji, but to me, far more than the D2x, or the Panasonic G- series cameras I often utilize.

The shadows however, offer another opportunity to find dynamic range, and the D7000 does not disappoint. Features of for instance, dark hemlock or pine boughs that I deliberately under exposed to preserve sky detail, reemerge with mid-tone lightening, full of detail, and without significant noise.

I love the form factor. The D2x, with a tripod shoe in place could be a nuisance to wedge into my “walking” camera bag. The Fuji S-5 was smaller (like a Nikon D200-300), and I loved the files, but sometimes you just need more resolution. The D7000 by comparison slips into the bag with ease ( I can even fit an SB 800 flash alongside it in the main pouch), and shoots images with tons of detail.

Some of my favorite lenses are useful again. I specifically think of the nice Nikkors such as the 16-85mm f3.5-5 VR, the 17-35mm f2.8, the 70-200 f2.8 VR (version I),  as well as the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, and the Tokina 12-24mm f4. As Thom Hogan has pointed out in his review; with this sensor you need good glass to get maximum benefit.

Color response is typical Nikon: a little cool when converted in Adobe Camera RAW, particularly when using flash. Skin tones are not optimal ( I’m still spoiled by the Fuji S5’s color). I haven’t tried the provided Nikon software to see whether it mitigates this a bit. Maybe JPGs are better (I rarely shoot them).

No one’s commented on the shutter. One of the real tactile sensations one experiences when using a camera body is the visceral, and audible characteristics of the mirror- shutter release.

The D-7000 has a pro level shutter (good for 150k operations per Nikon) but it sounds and feels different than my other F-mount bodies

First, to me it’s notably quieter. Given this and the camera’s small size, it suggests the d7000’s suitability for street shooting, particularly mounted perhaps with one of the fast 35mm primes available. There’s a quiet mode available, but to me it seems redundant.

The shutter release and associated mechanical events actions have a particularly smooth feel through you finger. It’s a small thing, but definitely contributory to the feeling of refinement one senses in its use. Also, for me, 6 frames a second is more than quick enough.

 I do have a few gripes. First, why didn’t Nikon spend a few extra dollars and replace the amateur type mode dial on the top of the camera, with three-button version of the upper level bodies. They already given us the pro-level drive selector below it.  This might have placated some of the camera body snobs who find this model unworthy of their talents.

Also, I guess we had to have a new battery; but now I have added another charger to the army of them sitting on my file cabinet.

So I’ll definitely keep this camera. I need to work on profiling it to improve the color output, otherwise I am very pleased.

 I think you’ll see a lot of images from this Nikon on these pages in the next several years.

I hope that they will be enjoyable.

If they’re not, It won’t be the camera’s fault.

 

When I posted “A Rebate Tale”,  I was concerned that the topic would be:

#1 Too dull.

#2 To seemingly selfish.

I did actually post the story to be a warning so that could avoid the modestly annoying situation I find my self in.

I was unprepared for the response that this post has received.

I did post a link to several photography forums that I am known to frequent.

I  subsequently had the single day record for the largest number of visitors to the blog .

And the robust readership continues several days later.

The responses which occurred in the forums were varied. Some people ridiculed me for not being careful enough and failing to fully understand the terms of the rebate.

Others told me of their similar predicament regarding the Nikon D-7000, and the Epson rebate.

Still others mocked me, for moving from pro-level Nikon bodies to what some see is an “advanced amateur” body (I continue to believe that a “pro” camera is any camera you can make money with).

Most interestingly, there was a theme among some posters that the whole issue of product rebates should be viewed with suspicion, if not outright distrust as many rebates legitimaty applied for, are never realized by the consumer.

I had a fascinating post on the site from Helen Oster who is the “Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador”. She works for a (the biggest?) competitor to B+H Photo, where I purchased the merchandise in question. She suggested that I contact Henry Posner, who is her opposite number at B+H. What a classy thing to do.

Henry was waiting for me. He already knew who I was and understood my predicament. Apparently he has the ability to scan the web for mentions of his employer and to intervene when necessary to protect the fine reputation B+H enjoys. And he found my little blog from two mentions in text, of his store. It’s a little scary.

We had an extremely pleasant conversation. He offered to check with his camera buyer to get read on when I might see the Nikon delivered (two weeks, as it turned out). He also extended he window when I may return the printer. He explained that the rebate business has been at times a problem, as companies like Epson often use outside contractors to process their rebate applications. The quality (and motivation) of those contractors affects how many rebates are issued (my summation, not Henry’s exact words).

I also talked the person in charge of rebate issues at Epson. She told me that all that needed was the invoice from B+H with the Camera and the printer shown as purchased. She reminded me that Epson has no way to track other manufacturers serial numbers, or UPC codes anyway.

I don’t trust this. Apparently the “contractors” processing claims tend to be stringent about applications or they kick them out. I also know that having the physical UPC code cut from the box prevents multiple rebates on the same purchase. I’m not going to bite on this one.

If I do get to apply for that refund, the application will be letter-perfect, with all the requirements met. It will be sent certified mail, return receipt requested.

Meanwhile, but the box is still sitting here. It’s getting a bit dusty now, but remains otherwise untouched.

Unlike me this year, it may be taking a trip back to NYC for the holidays.