With my Nikon 50mm f/1.4D being my most used lens, I often wish for something a bit wider but just as fast.  When Nikon announced the Nikon 35mm f/1.8G AF-S DX, I really thought I’d have to pull the trigger.  While I’m sure it’s a great lens (the reviews have been really favorable), I’m a bit put off by the DX designation in case I were to ever go full frame.  What’s more, it’s not really what I would call wide on a DX sensor.

Today, Nikon announced that they will be offering a AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G.  Talk about the perfect lens for my shooting style!  Unfortunately, the price tag is well out of my reach at $2199.  Oh well!  Still, it looks perfect and will be available in late March, 2010.

The other lens that Nikon is releasing here at the end of February is much more affordable at $1259.  Still out of my price range, but more reasonable.  This lens, the AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR fills a gap that many photographers were complaining about.  A relatively wide angle zoom with vibration reduction.  I can see this being a great walk around lens!

Related Reading (external):

• Nikon: AF-S Nikkor 24mm f/1.4G Announcement
• Nikon: AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR Announcement
• Announcement on PDN Gear Guide

Nikon D300s Announcement

Announced July 30, 2009 the Nikon D300s is touted by Nikon USA as “combining professional-level performance with agility and enhanced D-Movie capabilities to deliver a new benchmark for creative versatility.” This is directly out of the first paragraph of the Nikon Press Release. The press release also states that this new body is supposed to hit dealers later this month for a price of $1799.95. You can already pre-order it from Amazon – Nikon D300s for this advertised price, though they claim it won’t ship until September 13th. I’m guessing these will go fast so if you want yours when it comes out, you’re best to pre-order it now!

Difference between the D300s and the D300

So. What’s all the fuss about? The Nikon D300 was a venerable camera with a loyal following. Is there really anything added to the D300s that makes it that much better? This answer depends on how you use your camera. To start with, lets summarize what has been improved as far as features go.

D-Movie HD Video
Nikon added 24 fps, 720p HD Video – including a stereo microphone jack. However, it is important to note that the built-in microphone is only mono. Thus, if stereo is important to you, you’ll be forced to carry an additional microphone.

Dual Memory Card Slots (SD and CF)
Now here’s a feature whose time has come! It is now possible to use a combination of SD and CF cards. I’ve theorized that eventually, all Nikon dSLR cameras will move toward the small SD cards and that there will be an intermediate step where there is a dual-card series of camera. Here we are! Also, the dual card slots are configurable to either use one card as a primary and one as secondary (the primary is full, start filling the secondary) or to store different image types on each card (JPG on one, RAW on the other or, with the new video capabilities, one card for video and one for still images). Regardless, this effectively doubles the storage capacity!

Continuous 7fps Shooting
The new D300s adds an additional frame per second to the D300 shooting speed. Does this make a huge difference? That depends entirely on your shooting style and subject matter.

Up to 950 Shots per Battery Charge
This is good news for those of us who like to load up a camera, a couple lenses and head out for a day of shooting. Not that the battery life is exactly bad on my D200, but more captures per charge is always beneficial. Especially when it is using the same batteries as the D300 and D200. Those extra batteries are still a good investment that can be carried forward to an upgraded body. It also makes it possible to use the D300 or D200 as a backup body to a D300s without having to have two battery systems.

So the D300s is better?

I’m hesitant to speak to this point since I haven’t tried out one. There are clearly a few nice features, but frankly, video does nothing to excite me. I still can’t figure out why people insist on having video recording on their dSLR. If you’re willing to spend the $2000+ for a camera and lens combination, doesn’t it make sense to purchase a dedicated video camera? After seeing the video output from the Nikon D90, I surely wasn’t impressed by the quality and I have a hard time believing that a dedicated camcorder wouldn’t do a better job.

And there are other implications to adding the video. As one can see from the above photo, there is now a speaker in the bottom right corner of the back side of the camera. Looking closely, you will notice that the rear thumb grip is now smaller. Ugh… One of the things I really liked about my D200 was the large, spacious grip for my large hands. Guess that’s going away. Also notice that the memory card door is no longer operated by a lever. Instead, it’s a slide / press contraption similar to the D50 that was phased out so long ago. Nikon is also using this system on the D700, and I haven’t heard too much grumbling, but it just doesn’t feel as sturdy to me in general.

Which One Would I Buy?

Personally, I don’t think video belongs on a dSLR. Therefore, I’m not going to blindly jump on the D300s bandwagon. What’s more, I rarely shoot action which means the additional 1 fps really isn’t going to help me much. Currently, Amazon has the Nikon D300 for $1629 which is about $150 cheaper than the the D300s.

So the question for me comes down to whether the added memory card slot and the increased battery life area really worth $150. If so, go for the D300s. Otherwise, I really don’t think you’re going to miss much by sticking with the D300.

Unfortunately, yet another great review does nothing to reduce my desire to try out this camera myself.  However, I do keep reminding myself that I still have so much to learn with my present camera!

History

Up to now, there have been numerous 50mm designs by Nikon.  This lens replaces the venerable Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D lens which has been a staple for low light photography since 1995.  I own this D version.  It’s phenomenal.  For low light photography, fast lenses can’t be beat.  I can’t imagine how well this would work on a D700 or D3 with their incredible high ISO performance.  You could shoot in just about any lighting conditions.

However, over the past few years, Nikon has removed the focus motor from some of their consumer level dSLR cameras such as the D40, D40x and D60.  This means that a lot of the really good older lenses such as the 85mm f/1.4 which is touted as one of the best portrait lenses ever, is not usable by these entry level cameras.  In my opinion, these cameras were designed for the DX market of lenses which all had the focus motor built into the lens.  They were not designed for working professionals which might use these really good, but more professional lenses.

What’s New

Aside from the more obvious internal motor (which also allows seamless manual focus override by just grabbing the focus ring), they’ve made the lens a bit more complex by adding an additional lens element.  Therefore, the new lens has 8 elements in 7 groups as opposed to the older lens which had one less (7 elements arranged in 6 groups).  What this should help to fix is the softness in the corners when shooting wide open.  Not that this was very apparent, but Nikon claims that this new design will decrease this.

Also, the new lens boasts a new 9 bladed diaphram which may give a nicer look to the bokeh than the older 7 bladed diaphragm which sometimes gave a somewhat jagged 7 sided spotty look.  I’ll be curious to see how the reviews rate this newer lens.

For all these new features, the price of the new lens is over $140 more than the older version at $440.

My Opinion

As much as I enjoy the idea of the AF-S design with the real-time manual focus override, I really have no performance issues with the current version.  In fact, I use the lens so much that I rarely remove it from my camera.  Therefore, I really don’t think paying for another one is really worthwhile since I have no problems with what I have.  Plus, I usually make a distinct choice to go from manual focus to auto focus so I think I’ll live with what I have.

Plus, the version I have is really solid and should last for years.  I’m not so sure that all the newer lenses are quite as durable.

However, I do wish that Nikon would step up and start filling the holes in their current prime lens lineup.  With very few wide prime lenses still in production, I really think that those of us in the Nikon camp are feeling a bit neglected.

However, with the recent announcements from Nikon, I’m starting to have camera lust…  Not only has my beloved D200 been replaced with the new Nikon D300, but the professional Nikon D3 has come out with it’s little brother the Nikon D700.  While the $5,000 D3 is clearly out of my price range (not to mention I really have no need for such a camera), the $2,800 D700 looks very appealing.  The biggest draw of this camera to me is that it’s full frame and has some really impressive high ISO performance from the test images I’ve seen.  But it’s not quite so easy.

Nikon D300 – $1,600

While this is clearly the upgraded D200, it boasts a host of new features.  It’s quite reasonably priced for a semi-pro camera and the performance of the auto focus is supposed to be much better than my D200.  Also, it adds a nice 3 inch screen on the back which would be a huge upgrade from the D200′s 2.5 inch screen.  Not to mention the fact that it incorporates Live View which allows framing of shots by using the 3″ screen instead of having your eye plastered to the viewfinder.  This sounds great for landscape shooting.

However, on the flip side, the D300 really doesn’t have that much of a pixel advantage.  12.1 (D300) vs. 10.2 (D200).  What’s more, it’s a pretty high price to pay for a camera which has been surpassed by the D700.

Nikon D700 – $2,800

Here’s where the fun really starts for me.  While the D200 and newer D300 are both DX cameras, the D700 is FX (Full Frame).  What’s the difference?  From the beginnings of digital photography, the image sensors were smaller than the general 35mm frame from film bodies.  However, Nikon didn’t want to come out with a whole new range of lenses for their digital cameras so they made them compatible with all the existing 35mm lenses.  What this means is that the edges of the image as seen through the lens are not actually projected onto the image sensor.  This means that the D200 and D300 (having 10.2MP and 12.1MP respectively) are getting just the central part of the image projected through a 35mm lens.  For this reason, a normal 50mm lens is the equivalent of a 75mm lens on a full frame camera.  Everything is ‘zoomed’ by 1.5x.

This can be good or bad.  For bird photographers or other nature photographers where their subjects tend to be far away, a DX sensor will give an added 1.5x zoom to that 400mm telephoto lens making it equivalent to a 600mm lens.  And since the pixel density is higher on the D300 than on a full frame body, great detail can be resolved out of that central pert of the image.

However, take the flip side.  For landscape work, the DX bodies have been quite frustrating.  That wide angle 20mm prime that has been around since film days is now equivalent to a 35mm lens.  Not nearly as wide.  Certain manufacturers have been coming out with DX specific wide angle lenses, but there are a ton of really good prime lenses which are nice and wide on a full frame body but really weren’t all that nice for DX bodies.

One should not that, Nikon did indeed come out with new lenses for the DX sensor.  These lenses are smaller and lighter than their FX counterparts mainly due to the fact that they need to project a smaller image onto the sensor.  However, now that the new top dogs of the Nikon lineup are both full frame, is DX even going to be around that much longer?  It seems like these specialized DX lenses may become somewhat of an orphanded group in the not too distant future.

For my work, I really think that the full frame sensor makes good sense.  I tend to enjoy shooting landscapes and portraits and I think that it would simply be a better choice.  Not to mention that the low light (high ISO) abilities of the D700 are vastly superior to the D300, let alone the D200.

So, what’s the verdict?

What I really want is a D700 with a slightly more pixels.  The 12.1MP is nice, but I’d really like to see 16 or so for that kind of money.  However, I think I’ll get over that.  More megapixels means larger files.  Larger files mean more processing time and hard drive space.  The real hurdle is that one of my main lenses is a 18-70mm DX lens — meaning it won’t work on a full frame body!   And as much as I’d love an excuse to go out and get the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8, at over $1500, it’s another huge hit on the budget!

In the end, I really can’t justify the cost of a new camera since I’m really not making much off my present camera.  But hey — it’s fun to dream, right!

If you’re looking for me, I’ll be busy reading Thom Hogan’s review of the D700 and dreaming!

This works great for taking images of still object, such as this banana.

In case you’re wondering, the reflections on a piece of glass which is just from an old picture frame. Simple, cheap and effective. This setup works great as long as you ensure that the background (in this case a piece of white poster board) slopes gently up and out of the shot. I do this much like the poster board in the link to the commercial variety — by attaching one end of the poster board to the back of the light box at the top. It naturally curves / slopes down on the table. It’s actually much easier than I thought it would be.

As exciting as a banana is, I decided to get really ambitious and attempt to capture some water drops / splashes. I immediately realized that there were two problems with my setup.

1. The two desk lamps (with 100W equivalent bulbs in each) were not nearly enough light to get adequate shutter speeds necessary to stop a drop of water.
2. Auto focus of the lens wasn’t allowing the camera to take the picture the instant I pressed the shutter. For that matter, pressing the shutter button while trying to drip water was a bit difficult.

The second problem was actually the easier one to fix. First, I set the camera to manual focus and second, I got out my cable release. Problem solved (or so I thought).

The first problem seemed easy. Get out my Nikon SB-600 Speedlight. My Nikon D200 has the ability to trigger this speedlight remotely and so I set it in the included stand and placed it to the front left of the bowl where I was going to create the water splashes. The first couple shots showed that this was way too much light so I grabbed the flash to turn down the compensation and realized that while in CLS (Nikon’s Creative Lighting System mode which allows the D200 to remotely trigger the flash), you can’t adjust the output power of the flash unit on the speedlight itself. Hmm… Actually, you can adjust the flash unit from the camera itself. But you have to go through a decent amount of menus to get there.

After a little trial and error, I got to the point where the bowl was in focus and properly lit (something like 1/32 power on the flash with it bounced off the top of the light box).

I then realized that my focus fix, wasn’t actually working. With the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D lens, the depth of field at f/5.6 is only about half an inch at the 15 inch working distance I had. Choosing even f/11 only brings that distance up to about an inch. Therefore, it was crucial that I focus exactly on the middle of the bowl. I came up with a solution. Place some object (I used a fork) across the bowl at the center (or wherever you plan to drop the water drops). Focus on that and call it good.

From here, it was just a matter of dripping water from a small squeeze bottle into the bowl while catching the drops just as they hit the water. Easy, right?

Out of all the shots I took, I think I the one titled Water Piller the best. However, in all of these, the front of the speedlight is visible in the bowl as a reflection. Actually, there are multiple bright spots from this. In the future, I’ll have to play with blocking the direct light by putting a piece of paper or something in front of it.

After taking about 30 shots like this with only about half of them coming out due to timing the drops, I decided to try adding food coloring to the water I was dripping into the bowl. Since we had a reddish brown food coloring and green, those where what I used. After all, I was pretty much just playing around.

Overall, this was pretty much successful. I am a bit disappointed that the SB-600 does not allow manual settings while in slave mode. While I can set the flash power in-camera, and probably would for most shots, it is still a bit inconvenient when working in this way.