Philip Freedman

I am not sure that digital suffers from a latitude problem quite as much as some people think. I have used the brilliant shadow/highlight control in Photoshop CS2 to bring up detail in deep shade areas which, before that adjustment, appeared blacked out and devoid of any detail. I was surprised that the detail was there. You must not overdo it, otherwise it looks false, but carefully done it produces photographs with excellent detail in both highlights and shadow.

 

Philip

Some test reports say the Sigma 30mm f1.4 shows colour fringing,

others say it is free from this problem. Before I buy one, please

help : Is there a fringing problem? If so, is there a simple and

effective remedy?

 

Thanks

Philip

Does anyone have both a 5D and a D200 and is able to say what the

differences are in the real world? I would be interested to know

about viewfinder, AF, AE, and general handling as well as pixel-

peeping. I have read loads of reviews, some with a Canon or Nikon

bias, and but there are not very many genuine day-to-day hands-on

comparisons posted.

 

Thanks

Philip

Giacomelli would have left it as it is or would have upped the soot-and-whitewash even more.

Philip

I greatly admire Ralph Gibson who produces photographs with

saturated but non-garish, almost deep pastel, colours. His books on

France and his latest on Brazil are good examples. I would like to

try that myself. Can anyone suggest a straightforward method using

the settings of my D70 or RD-1, or using film and scanning, and/or

making particular adjustments in Photoshop? All advice welcomed.

Philip

I bought a D Lux 2 at RG Lewis (in London) and am very pleased with photos taken nearby on a day which was cloudy/bright with occasional weak sunshine and also indoors in the nearby cafe with the camera resting on a table. I took them all at ISO 80 on the highest JPEG setting and had them printed the same day to 12x8 glossy by the nearest Fujifilm shop - the prints are very sharp and clear with no noise. I have left some of them with Len at the shop for other customers to see.

I think the Falsten Partnership are the UK distributors and have a subscription service. Try their website

I may be in a minority, but a couple of years ago I bought a lightly used Leica CL and did not enjoy using it - the built in exposure meter was much more awkward to use than that on my old M6 classic, and the rangefinder was also poorer. I traded it in quite quickly - at a loss, of course.

I also agree with those who advise that you get to know an RF before investing too much; some people miss the WYSIWYG from SLR ttl viewfinders.

Last time I went to Photo Books International 99 Judd Street London WC1H 9NE (north Bloomsbury, near St Pancras station and Camden Town Hall ) I found lots of great photographic books mainly second hand

Philip

Leica M6 50mm Summicron<div></div>

50mm is a great compromise between w/a and tele.

Since you ask, my Mona Lisa photo was taken at the Louvre, Paris in 2004 with a Leica M6, 50mm f2 Summicron on Fuji Provia 100F and converted into monochrome using Convert to B&W plug-in in Photoshop 7.

Mona Lisa phone home.<div></div>

Ken Rockwell tried - and says it doesnt fit the D200.

The Popular Photography Magazine report (see www.popphoto.com) says that the 5D delivers "excellent image quality from ISO 100 to 800 with better sharpness than the EOS 20D However both the Nikon D2X and the new D50 have lower noise levels at ISO 1600". They do not mention to D200, but refer to the 5D as giving "the best image quality you can find in a sub-$3,500 DSLR".

I am planning to upgrade from my D70 to a D200 mainly so that I can

revert to my preference for using prime lenses and then cropping

when necessary - the 6mp of the D70 does not allow heavy cropping

without loss of quality. I have a Nikon 35mm f/2 AF-D lens

(equivalent to around 50mm in 24x36) which I could use as a standard

lens on the D200; the glass is sharp although the build is a bit

plasticky. I would appreciate recommendations for well built primes

(w/a and tele) of an optical quality that will do justice to the

resolution of the D200. Nikon has its "professional" expensive

zooms marked with a gold line at the leading edge, but I am not

aware of Nikon marking prime lenses with gold lines or other

indications of top quality (although I recall that they have a heavy

85mm lens with a solid build). I also realise that some older

lenses may produce more colour fringing on the sensitive digital

sensor that on traditional film. Can anyone give me any useful

pointers please.

Thanks

Philip

I currently use a Nikon D70 with 18-70 kit lens for social event and

travel photographs and a RD-1 with 35mm f2 and 50mm f2 lenses for

street photography. They are both 6mp and use the same sensor. I

like digital and I like both cameras. However I used to use Leica M6

and R6.1 cameras with only prime lenses, fine grain film and often

just a 50mm lens, having the ability to enlarge from fairly heavily

cropped frames. I am not satisfied with the results when I crop

heavily from 6mp and then want a 12x8 enlargement, especially if the

shot was taken in poor light with an ISO setting of around 400. So

I am thinking of upgrading the DSLR to either a Nikon D200 or Canon

5D. I do not have a legacy of fine Nikon lenses to carry forward,

but I do wear eyeglasses and would prefer a decent viewfinder with a

fairly high eyepoint. I like Nikon ergonomics and price over the

Canon, but I will move across and spend the extra if I need to do

so. Help please.

 

Philip

I have used an old SB22s with my D70, setting it on "A" and setting the camera on manual (1/500 at a suitable aperture). No pre-flash so no blink problem.

 

Philip

Chromatic abberation, leading to colour fringing, seems to be a

problem when using some older lenses with new DX sensors. I am

planning to get the new D200 in a few months time, and I like to use

prime lenses rather than zooms, but Nikon has few recently designed

primes. Does anyone have experience of using lenses like the Nikon

35mm f2, 50mm f1.8 and 85mm f1.8 with the D2X (or even the D200

itself) and do they all give good quality images without fringing?

I had a Leica Digilux 2 which I did not like because the electronic eyelevel viewfinder was awful - poor picture and long timelag - and the higher ISO settings resulted in a lot of noise. The back monitor screen was excellent but I only liked using it when the camera was (rarely) on a tripod; I dont like holding cameras up in front of me and I find pressing them against my forehead whilst straining against a shortened shoulderstrap gives less shake. I now have both a Nikon D70 with the kit zoom lens and an Epson Rd-1 with a Leica 35/2 asph lens. Both cameras use the same sensor. The RD-1 had a highly inaccurate rangefinder viewfinder and whilst I loved my old Leica M6 I am now using the D70 DSLR more than the RD-1. I am beginning to hanker after a DSLR with higher resolution so that I can do more extensive cropping when necessary - my street photography prevents me from having time to change to a longer zoom lens when neeeded.

I am thinking of upgrading from my D70 to a D2X, because I have been

used in the past to the ability to crop photographs (especially

candid street photos) quite heavily and the extra resolution will

enable me to do so with less loss of detail etc. However, I have

read that on the D2X some Nikon lenses produce colour fringing due to

chromatic abberation which is not visible on the D70. Is there a

reliable summary of this issue anywhere? Does anyone have experience

of this problem? I have a Nikon 35mm f/2 AF and a Nikon 60mm f/2.8

micro AF (which I have heard works very well with the D2X) was well

as the D70 kit 18-55 zoom (very sharp but too much distortion for

shots with straight lines), and for budgeting purposes I need to know

what new lenses I might need to replace these for use with a D2X.

Thanks Philip.

My neice wants me to take lots of candid shots on my D70 throughout

her wedding weekend in Italy and insists that I get 6x4s printed

there right away to hand out to the guests as well as being able to

make larger (and better) prints when I get back home. In Venice I

probably will not have access to a laptop or PC loaded with

Photoshop or any RAW conversion software. So my questions are -

(A) If I shoot RAW+JPEG will the JPEGs be good enough to get printed

to 6x4 on an automatic shop machine? (B) Can I just hand the shop

the CF card to load into their machine even though it will have both

RAW and JPEG on it? (I will back up onto a portable storage device

first, of course). © Any other ideas? Thanks Philip

According to Ken Rockwell (see his website) you set the saturation to + in the custom menu, and at the same time choose color mode IIIa, each of which bumps up the saturation.

I want to experiment with my D70 getting some strong B&W shots of

old buildings against dark skies, as if using a red filter or

infrared film. Can I set my D70 in-camera to produce such shots? Or

should I use RAW and then apply a particular set of adjustments? I

have a Photoshop plug-in which emulates Tri-X, FP3, etc but the

results do not quite meet this requirement. Any help appreciated.

Philip

Matthew - I agree your idea of an SLR for the longer focal length lens. I have never been really happy using anything longer than 50mm on my M6. Using an SLR gives a much better idea of the final picture. If you do any close ups you might consider a macro (or micro as Nikon usually call them), the use of which is also an SLR advantage and most are fine for non-macro use although occasionally a bit sharp for traditional female portraits. Philip