First outing with the Nikon 35mm f/1.8G ED FX

After over a month of waiting, the Nikon 35mm f/1.8G ED FX lens finally arrived. I had already sold my 35mm f/2 AF, and have been making do with the DX version. Oddly enough, I hesitated on buying the lens when the sale started in February, and by the time I did buy it, the lens was out of stock. Snooze you lose.

So it's off to the How Weird Street Faire (my first time) with the challenge of using a 35mm lens instead of the usual 70-200mm. It's difficult for me to get that close to a subject when taking a photo as I don't like to be in your face, but it's good to push yourself every now and then.

The results weren't bad. There were a few times when I was too far for my taste, and I had to crop the images to get the result I liked. The lens didn't disappoint though, with nice sharpness, acceptable OOF, and spot on AF. I like the results better than the AF version.

Next step is to try it out on the V1.

In the meanwhile, here are some choice shots from the event.

DX travel

I recently had the opportunity to spend a little over a week in the island paradise of Bali. Since this would be my first (and probably last) time there, I obsessed over what kit to bring for this one shot deal. I settled on bringing both the V1 and the D5200. 

Lenses became the next issue. I had two options for a wide lens on DX: the Sigma 12-24mm and the Nikon 18-55mm VR. I chose the latter as it gave me the option to go really wide (18mm FX equivalent) if needed. I ran a few tests at home and was satisfied with the result. For reach, I chose the 70-300mm VR as this would work well with both cameras.

Off I went on my long journey. First thing, the Sigma is a heavy lens. I'm used to traveling with the V1, which makes for a light and small kit. The Sigma weighs about as much as the whole V1 set. I did manage to fit most of the kit in a Lowepro Transit Sling 250.

Second issue: The Sigma has problems in the corners. The results were all over the place, varying with aperture and focal length, corner to corner. Sometimes one corner would be OK, then it would be bad on another photo, with the difference between the two being one or both of the two parameters. Yes, I should have tested this more before I made the trip, but I was pressed for time. And looking back at the test shots that I made, I can see the same issues, although not as bad.

Here's a sample taken with the Sigma at 24mm and f/8. Note how the three photos from the lower part of the image don't have the amount of detail that can be seen in the upper corners.

Third issue: Flare and the lack of a polarizer. The Sigma with its huge, curved front element is plagued by flare, even with the extra hood. This is a problem in an always-sunny, tropical location like Bali. I was also surprised to see vignetting in two corners with the extra hood attached. Keep in mind that I use this lens mostly on an FX body, and rarely use the extra hood. I thought it wouldn't be an issue on DX because of the sensor crop, but again I should have done more testing. Thankfully the lack of having a polarizer for the Sigma was solved by using the V1.

In hindsight, the 18-55mm would have been the better choice. There were very few instances when I needed to go really wide, and I could have just done a stitched shot instead.

Fourth issue: My 70-300mm VR won't VR with the D5200. Turns out VR doesn't work on the D3 either. It works fine on the V1 (which was the last body on which I used this lens); something to do with having VR always active that forces it to work. Not too much of an issue as I didn't hit any good surfing spots on this trip.

Overall, the bodies and lenses that I brought accomplished the task. Could the photos have been better? Yes, but it's too late for that. Lesson learned: don't use a once in a lifetime opportunity to test lens and body combinations.

Advances in NEF processing

When I got the 85mm f/1.8G in 2013, I was disappointed that there was a lot of chromatic aberration. This was one of the first shots that I processed from the lens, and the results were less than desirable. I contacted Nikon about it, and they suggested sending the lens in for repair. That didn't happen as I was too lazy to ship it out. 

I recently tried a copy of CS6, and now the results look fine. I've even turned off the lens correction, but it still looks a lot better than what I got from CS6.

Capture NX-D does the same job if you enable axial color aberration. I don't use NX-D much, but it's good to know that it can handle this issue.

Now I'm happy with the lens.

DX on FX

I'm still waiting for my 35mm f/1.8G FX lens (yes Nikon, have a sale without adequate stock, that's a great idea). In the meanwhile, I decided to give the 35mm DX a try on the D3. I have used this combination some time ago, but more as a test. This time around it will be out in the field taking actual photos.

The results aren't that bad. Yes, there's a lot of light falloff in the corners, and visible barrel distortion. ACR does a good job correcting those problems, at the usual expense of cropped images. I can live with the results, as long as I don't apply an overly critical eye.

If you don't fix these issues, you're left with an image that can resemble one of those old-time photos with vignetted corners and the subject right in the center of the photo. I can see using this effect on some images, but not so much for casual shooting. It is something to add to the bag of tricks.

So while I'm still waiting for my lens, here are some shots from last weekend's Chinese New Year parade with the DX lens.

More images can be found here.

Quick take on the D5200

I took the D5200 out for a try, and I must say that I enjoyed the camera more than I did the D3200. The camera is more responsive, and the articulated screen was helpful when I wanted to be a little discreet. Having all that resolution is nice, and turned out useful when I had to crop one photo by quite a bit (it's the first photo posted below). The 35mm DX and 50mm f/1.8G did a good job, though I prefer the images from the 50mm.

A top shutter speed of 1/4000 makes shooting at f/1.8 in bright daylight difficult (polarizer to the rescue). Not having a 100% viewfinder leads to surprises, but all that resolution makes it a non-issue. I'd have to shell out a pretty penny to get my FX-equivalent 35mm lens, which isn't in the cards right now.

I've been using Nikon DSLR's for over 14 years, starting with the D1. Out of that lineup, I've loved the colors from the D2H the most (the drawbacks are another story). Most of the other Nikon bodies have a recognizable quality that, for lack of a better description, I call the Sony-ness of their sensors. I've seen this on the D100, D200, D3200, and now the D5200.

Not that it's a bad thing, but it is something that stands out when I process images from these cameras. They don't quite have that pop that I see from the D2H and D3. The V1 doesn't have that pop either, but it also doesn't have that Sony-ness.

On a side note, putting a camera that smells of cigarette smoke in a plastic bag with some activated charcoal does the trick to remove the odor.

Overall I give the D5200 a thumbs up. Makes me want to hang on to it (too bad the D3200 has gone to a new home). Hmmm, can I find another cheap one out there?

More images can be found here