I might be in Love (Carl Zeiss 24mm 1.8 mini-review)

Carl Zeiss 24mm f1.8 lens for Sony NEX
Image at f1.8
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

We have all read and heard by word of mouth, about the so-called “legendary” glass made by lensmakers, Leitz (Leica) and Carl Zeiss. (this is a gear-review and yet another gear-head blog. So for you artists, you may want to skip on and read this guy’s blog. ).

 

For more than 35 years, I have shot various 35mm SLR/DSLR cameras and lenses. For the most part, I have found the better (“pro”) Nikon and Canon glass hard to beat, with good contrast, color, sharpness, and where applicable, bokeh. Occasionally, one of the third-party manufactures would rise to the top (I owned a Tokina ATX 300 f2.8 prime that I think goes head-to-head with its Nikon-equivalent; and a Sigma 14mm f2.8—likewise). But with the possible exception of my original Takumar 55m and 135mm lenses used with my Asihflex SLR, I have never owned (or even shot) any of the “legendary” glass.

All I can say is, “wow”!

I wasn’t born in Missouri (my younger sister was). But I lived there during my first 2 years of life (formative?). And I have always been “from Missouri” on these so-called “legendary” lenses. Could they really be that good? Could they really be that much better? The price tags certainly suggest that they “should be.” My friend and mentor, Ray Laskowitz, has been telling me how I would like the Zeiss glass and how I would probably relegate the other lenses I have already acquired for my Sony Nex-6 mirrorless camera to “paperweight” status. Since they weren’t particularly high-end (the Sigma 19 and 30 primes I reviewed recently), and not particularly expensive, I didn’t doubt that he was right—about their status.

These images are only “snapshots”

Carl Zeiss 24mm @f11
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Sigma 19mm @f3.2
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

But in spite of the “hype,” what I did not anticipate was my near-visceral reaction to seeing the Zeiss-rendered images on screen! All I can say is: “wow“! On most of the illustrative images here, I did nothing more than to adjust the contrast slightly in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR), and in only the case of the Redbud branch, selectively take the “brightness” down just a smidgeon. I also did moderate “capture” sharpening on all except the one labeled “unsharpened.” I have always been one to do some “cleanup” work in Photoshop and some selective sharpening and contrast adjustment and (yes, Al  ), boost saturation in many instances.

With these images I am finding myself resisting any changes to color, saturation and for the most part contrast.  There was absolutely no saturation boost (other than the addition of some “local contrast” adjustment in ACR) to any of these images.  And, they are sharp! The raw, unsharpened image of the Bradford Pear branch illustrates that (remember, it is at f2.8 and was taken handheld).

Sigma 19mm f2.8 @f3.2
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Equally impressive (and expected) is the soft, creamy bokeh of this lens. There is none of the unpleasant, circular out of focus areas I saw in the Sigma 30mm f2.8 when shot wide open. And, these images are pure snapshots. They are all handheld, taken quickly between trips to and from work during the week. I have spent but a few minutes with the lens, but cannot wait to get it out into the field and give it a real workout.

Carl Zeiss 24mm @f1.8; UNSHARPENED
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

This lens is less than a week old to me, and yet, I am pretty sure I won’t take it off the camera very often. And, this is not even a “true” Carl Zeiss lens (though it is supposed to have all Zeiss optics). It is a co-venture with Sony and is marketed and badged as a Sony-Zeiss lens. It has the Sony e-mount and focuses fast and silently on the Nex-6. In ACR, the lens correction is found, not under the Zeiss category, but under the Sony category (threw me for a loop at first, until it dawned on me to search the database for Sony lenses).

I did not anticipate my near-visceral reaction to the Zeiss-rendered images

I have yet to do any “apples to apples” comparisons (if that is even possible). The images here are as close as I can get but are at least a week (maybe 2) apart and so the subjects have “moved on.” But it is enough to be convincing, in my judgment. In fairness, the Sigma image of the Bradford Pear is at f3.2 and the Zeiss, at f11 (I was out “snapshooting” and didn’t have the presence of mind to take an image at f11 with the Sigma. Maybe I will find the time later on to try some of those comparisons. But I don’t really think it’s necessary).

For anyone who, like me, thinks this is a first class lens worth splurging for, there is even better news. Zeiss announced this month that it will offer a series of lenses aimed squarely at the APS sized sensor, mirrorless, market (currently only for Fuji and Sony). These lenses will not be badged or co-ventured. They are pure Zeiss, but will be designed to mount on these cameras and be fully functional with the bodies, including AF. I am in, Zeiss!

The Sony NEX 16-50 “E-mount” Zoom

Barn
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Last week, I reviewed the Sony Nex-6 camera body. One of the interesting features of this line of Sony cameras is the large selection of third party lens adapters available, making it possible to mount almost any mount system lens.  While most of these lenses will use the camera’s auto focus (or any other “auto” features for that matter), they will work perfectly well in manual focus mode. There is some “quirkiness,” though. Neither the camera’s onboard information, nor the embedded EXIF information will give you the aperture value, the focal length or the shutter speed value. I used the manual metering system and the on-screen “real time” histogram feature to estimate exposure. And, it appears that on the lenses which do not have physical aperture settings, the camera will default to the smallest aperture and there does not appear to be any way to adjust that. On lenses with aperture rings, you will be able to set the aperture.  Sony does make an adapter for its own lenses (i.e., the A-mount series that mounts on its DSLR cameras) that will pass the autofocus and exposure information through to the camera body and vice versa.

I purchased the Rayqual adapter for Nikon “G” series lenses (these lenses do not have a physical f-stop selector ring, but are instead all chosen by one of the camera’s “command” dials). The G adapter will work with any existing compatible Nikon “F” mount lens (or any lens fitted to the Nikon F mount).  There are a number of manufactures that offer adapters, and reviews seem to suggest that quality of manufacture is all over the place.  The Rayqual was recommended to me by my pro friend and I thought it made sense to go with something known.  The guy at Cameraquest was very accomodating.

Of course, the camera’s “APS” sensor means you will have to apply the 1.5 field of view factor to the lens. But there are some very sharp, fully manual, older lenses out there (i.e., the venerable 50mm f1.8). I played around with a couple of my own Nikon lenses and found that in reasonable light conditions, focusing (either on the back LCD or in the viewfinder) is relatively easy.

Nikon 24-70; approximately 50mm ( 75 equivalent), f22, 100 ISO

My primary motivation for purchasing this Nex-6, though, was to find smaller, more convenient setup to use while traveling and while out walking around, that would give me image quality like I have grown to expect from my DSLR setups. The NEX has the promise of doing that, in my view. But using an adapter and manual older lenses may defeat that purpose. While they are fun to play around with, I don’t want to be doing that when I am on vacation in new places. I want to shoot and have reliably good quality results.

For that reason, the Sony E  SELP16-50 F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS zoom is a very attractive lens. The 35mm equivalent of approximately 24-75mm is a pretty useful range for “street” shooting and “walking around.” Of course, 28-300 would be nice (and they do offer that option), but it comes at the expense of size, weight, and … well, expense (the E-mount 18-200 is over $800). I don’t intend for this camera to replace my D800 DSLR. It is a significant upgrade replacement to my Canon G12, though and will undoubtedly get lots of use. As such I really wanted the 16-50 to be acceptable. It didn’t have to match up to the performance of my f2.8 Nikkors.

Sharpness:

I am pleased to say, I am pretty impressed, given the challenges the lens faces. The lens, fully retracted, measures only 1 1/2 inches long (there is a serious typo in the dpreview literature – though it would be amazing to have a zoom of this range that measured only 3/16 inches  ). The overall depth of the Nex-6 with this lens attached is a mere 2 1/2 inches! The lens is image stabilized (OSS), with a minimum focus distance of just under 10 inches. Its minimum aperture (depending on zoomed length) is between f22 and f36. It is a very lightweight addition to an already comfortably light and small body.  The barn above, was shot at 50 (75) mm at f16.  You can see that at those specs, the lens produces a relatively sharp, edge to edge result.  But how does it do at wider apertures, and at other focal lengths?  You can see in the image below of the white house that, stopped down, the lens performs nicely at its wide end (note that this was distortion-corrected in ACR using its lens database).  For daylight images, I cannot think of a reason not to stop the lens down to its “middle” ranges (f8-11-16), unless trying to obtain a specific DOF result.

16mm at f16

I will leave the technical specifications, like resolving power, distortion measurements, and other things to the technocrats and pixel peepers. My criteria was whether I was going to be able to bring home some “wall hangers,” using this lens. I think I can.

My non-scientific testing involved setting the camera up in my basement, mounted on a tripod using the same image, from a stationary position. I also used the IR remote to ensure no camera movement was involved. I am still trying to master the settings and particularly the AF technology on this little unit. To the best of my observation, the IR remote did not cause the camera to try to re-focus (which is a good thing).   However, as I glean more knowledge about the AF technology in this camera, I wonder if that is really what is happening.  From what I read, the default AF system in the camera works with “contrast detection” (as opposed to “phase detection” on most DSLR cameras).  What I am learning this means, is that the camera, when set to its AF setting, is constantly searching for a sharp exposure.  So, it may just be that in good light, the AF performance is just that good, and  and locked on when the remote triggered.

What I generally concluded was that there is little difference in sharpness from wide to small aperture and from short to long focal lengths. This is particularly true (as might be expected) in the center of the lens. But I am pleasantly surprised at the edge to edge performance. Granted, this combination is not going to be an architectural setup. Nor will it be up to the standards I generally expect from a “grand landscape” image shot with a “pro-specs” lens. But for its intended use, the results were very acceptably sharp and pleasant.  All images were at 100 ISO.

50mm @ f22

50mm @ f8

55mm f5.6

Since a common concern is whether these lenses are sharp at their longest lengths, I started there. I then tried some additional, varied settings of the same image:

16mm @ f3.5 (wide open with this lens)

16mm @ f3.5 cropped for center

16mm @ f22

23mm (approximately 50mm 35mm equivalent) @ f4

23mm @ f8

Distortion:

Sony 16-55 “uncorrected” at 16mm
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Other reviewers have noted that this lens suffers from significant distortion and some vignetting, particularly at the wide end.  The “before and after shots” here confirm this.  Both images were adjusted for contrast in my ACR raw image converter (Adobe Camera Raw), run through Dfine’s noise software and the default settings Pixel Genius’ “capture sharpening” engine.  They are otherwise uncorrected except that I applied the “lens correction” facility (again at its default settings) in ACR before opening it in Photoshop.  Some of the curvature can, of course, be attributed to the user.  A higher camera position would help here, if possible.  But you can see the pronounced curvature in the first image and the somewhat “tamer” curvature in the corrected version.  You can also see noticeable vignetting in all 4 corners of the first image and essentially no trace of it in the corrected image (no filters were used in this example, by the way, so this is the “bare” lens being demonstrated).  Sony is aware of this issue.  Again, I am not an engineer (and the world is a better place because of that ) but it is my understanding that this is a design issue that cannot be overcome at this point (somebody will figure it out some day).  This is physically a very short lens for its zoom range, and also small, working on a larger sensor than many of these smaller lenses have used in the past.  To “combat” these issues, Sony has firmware in the camera that “corrects” for this.  For Nex users that are using one of the earlier models (Nex-3, 5 or 7), it is my understanding that it will be necessary to upgrade the firmware to take full advantage of this.  Caveat:  the Sony firmware correction will only work on jpg files.  For those of you shooting jpg (there is a 10-step program for you out there ), I understand from what I have read, that this works very well indeed.  For the rest of us, some correction in post-processing will be necessary.  Adobe has done a great job of incorporating lens correction algorithms in their Light Room and ACR modules, including this lens.  I don’t have any familiarity with other raw converters or post-processing software, but it would not surprise me to find something there.  I consider the “corrected” image somewhat “normal” for this type of image, at the selected focal length of 16mm (24mm at 35mm-equivalent).

Sony 16-50 “lens-corrected” in ACR
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Bokeh:

For the few who don’t already know this, the word actually comes from the Japanese, “boke,” and refers, in loose translation, to blur.  For photography purposes, it is usually referred to as the aesthetic quality of the out of focus areas rendered by the lens.  With regard to this particular lens, I can only really refer to the last 2 letters of the word in describing my reaction to the 16-50′s Bokeh:  ”eh.”  :-).

Seriously, as I have said previously, it is a multi-purpose zoom in which Sony is trying to accomplish an awful lot of engineering, including a wide focal length range, reasonably wide apertures, and above all, very small footprint.  Given its modest price and versatility, I think they have done admirably well.  I think it would be unrealistic to expect it to stack up again virtually any prime lens and particularly the Zeiss glass or any of the Leica, Nikon, Cannon, Zuiko, Voightlander, or other “legacy” lenses that can be fitted via an adapter.  As part of my overall purchase, I picked up the pair of Sigma-manufactured e-mount f2.8 primes (19mm and 30mm).  When I get a chance to get in the field and do some real world testing, I hope to report on them. for now, here are two “test” examples.  Images are not very exciting, but given the time of year here, they are what I have to work with .  The first image is at the widest end of the lens, wide open.  The second is at the longest focal length, again, wide open.  I did not do any sharpening on these two images, so they are pretty much what you see is what you get (other than whatever PS did during the jpg conversion and resize, and I can say they looked pretty sharp on my screen as they came out of ACR).

Sony 16-50 @ f3.5; 15mm
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

Sony 16-50 @ f5.6; 50mm
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

I used the same default “capture sharpening” using Pixel Genius’s “Photokit Sharpener,” and identical contrast and local contrast adjustments in ACR on all the illustrated images.  I did not do any other sharpening.

While the light was not quite as nice on the final image, I wanted to include it to show that the lens is decently sharp at the wide setting and its wide-open aperture, too.  With appropriate “creative” sharpening in post-production, I can see that this lens will produce very acceptable images.

16mm @ f3.5

My Review of the Sony Nex-6

Barn
Copyright 2013 Andy Richards

I have been casually watching and reading about mirrorless, interchangeable lens camera systems since they first came out, playing around with the Nikon 1 and the Sony Nex-3 at my local big box store. Especially when you travel, or attend public events or places, it is hard not to wish for a system which is compact, sheds the bulk and weight, and is less conspicuous. But for me, main negative has been that the small sensors simply haven’t been able to generate the image quality that we now take for granted in modern DSLR cameras. In July of 2011, I reviewed the Canon G-12, a part of the Canon G-series cameras that have been used by some pro’s as backup cameras. I purchased the G12 couple years back, wanting a compact camera for those times when the DSLR just wasn’t convenient or wasn’t going to work in the situation. Following my review, I cruised the Caribbean for a week and carried only the G-12. I thought it performed well for normal daytime lighting situations. Unfortunately, much of the imagery I seek is in low and other challenging light conditions and I found the the small sensor performance in low light/high ISO conditions to be essentially unacceptable. I think the G-12 at the time it was introduced was probably the best sensor of its size.

It’s hard not to wish for a system which is compact, sheds the bulk and weight, and is less conspicuous

About a year ago, I learned that the Sony Nex series of cameras used the same APS-size sensor that many DSLR cameras use (indeed, I am told it is an updated and improved version of the very same sensor found in the estimable Nikon D7000 — in fact, what I am reading is that, as good a performer in the low light, noise handling area as the D7000 is, the NEX sensor is noticeably better!). That information piqued my interest in a less “casual” way. I began to research this camera and ask questions. I looked at the NEX-5 at a camera show last Fall. My biggest concern back then was the “investment” in body, add-on viewfinder, and lenses. The Nex-3 and Nex-5 (their first offerings), had no viewfinder. For me, that is a deal-killer (see below). If you want a good quality viewfinder, it is an expensive add-on option to the 3 and 5 models (a very impressive little viewfinder, I might add). It just seemed to me that the combination, for a second, “walkaround” camera was too much of an “investment” for this hobby photographer. The Nex-7 added a very impressive OLED (“organic light emitting diode) viewfinder, and some more conventional control dials. Both the Nex-5 and 7 have “touch screen LCD’s on the back. The Nex-7 has a 24 megapixel sensor and a couple other software bells and whistles than the 6. Otherwise, the 6 and 7 appear to be functionally identical.

The Nex-6 appears to have hit the “sweet spot” for serious shooters

There appear to be other alternatives, including the “micro 4/3″ sensor, which is larger than the sensor found in the G-12 or the Nikon-1, and is reputed to be a “better” aspect ratio design for the smaller lenses that are made for these cameras.  My own research tells me that the APS sized sensor still has an edge over these smaller sensors.  There are also APS sensor mirrorless offerings from Fuji and Canon, Pentax, and Leica (and recently a wide angle, fixed lens model from Nikon).   Various factors ruled them out for me.   I will say that one disadvantage of the Sony system–at this point–is that they lag behind the others in variety of lens offerings.  But the Nex-6 has the very same sensor that Nikon puts in its D7000.  Together with ergonomics, price and some of the factors discussed below – this was the “deal-maker” for me.

The Nex-6 appears to have hit the “sweet spot” for serious shooters like me. Introduced with Sony’s newest “kit” lens, the 16-50 3.5 -5.6 in a very diminutive package, it has a 16 mp sensor, a retro-styled “mode dial” and dual control dials (top and back) much like those found on many current DSLR bodies. It has the same bright OLED viewfinder as the 7, and for the first time, a standard sized hot shoe (the 3,5, and 7 all have a Sony proprietary shoe that is not quite standard size). The controls appear logical and are nicely laid out. There are not so many of them that it is daunting to figure out how to fire up an use the camera immediately.  Importantly, I believe that with its ability to fit my Nikon lenses, it can now act as a backup to my D800 system in an emergency.  At the same time, I now have a camera that won’t sit in a bag and gather (expensive) dust while depreciating in value.

Here is my (non-exhaustive) roundup of the Nex-6′s most prominent features and some of my thoughts:

Available Documentation

In a word: Awful (this will most likely be my only really negative comment – and aside from the shipped documentation, is not a knock on the camera).

I am just asking that they cover the essential issues for the serious photographers to whom they clearly aimed this camera

The documentation that has shipped (both hard copy and the more modern PDF downloads from CD or the website) with almost any electronic for the last 20 years has been uniformly bad. That may be a good thing for the proliferation of writers and publishers that produce third party “missing manual” style books. But even the poorly written manuals that are in the box or available on the website usually give us at least the necessary information to understand how the basic functions work. The Nex documentation doesn’t—in my view—even do that. They have a plus-100 page downloadable manual and a similar “guide” (hard to tell any difference from my review). Neither of them logically explain anything more than the obvious (pointing out, e.g., where the power switch is; you know: the one that says both “on” and “off” on it? ), and then delving, in a superficial way, into ample coverage and explanation of all the “gee whiz” special modes and jpeg-only, features. I am not saying they shouldn’t explain those features (this is likely a camera that will appeal to and be purchased by a broad spectrum of users). I am just asking that they cover the essential issues for the serious photographers they clearly aimed this camera at.

The Nex line is touted as a highly sophisticated compact camera, suitable even, for professional use (and indeed, I know of one very talented and experienced professional who uses them daily). One must-have feature for any serious photographer—in my view—is the ability to capture in raw format. Yet the 2 downloadable pdf manuals are completely silent about which features and functions work and which do not work when shooting raw. And, there is a dearth of third party reading at this point.  One third-party book (admittedly an older book by David Busch and Alexander White, covering the Nex 3 and 5) is hit or miss on the subject. The title of Jerod Foster’s “Sony NEX-6: From Snapshots To Great Shots” should have tipped me off that this wasn’t really a book about the camera – but I downloaded the Kindle version anyway– A disappointment.  I am not saying there isn’t a place for these books.  But they are all written, in my view, as if the purchaser just purchased his first ever digital camera (maybe even first ever camera that was a step above his cell phone).  And in these “series” books written by the same author, they contain 85% generic information about how digital cameras work, exposure, f-stops, rudimentary comments about raw, how autofocus works, etc. (I just finished another one on the Nikon D800.  The author just cut and pasted 1000′s of words from his other so-called “camera-specific” books. I have read 3 of his books now and the sense of deja vu is “deafening”).  Seriously?  The D800 or the Nex-6 is the “first” camera a purchaser buys to “learn” how to photograph?  I have my doubts.  There is a book slated for publication in September. I will look forward to obtaining a copy to see where the authors go.   I am still looking for a third party a book explaining the functions and features of the Nex-6. Magic Lantern, where are you? (rant over )

General Ergonomics and Body

Several hackneyed sayings about “old dogs and new tricks” and “old habits and dying hard” come to mind here. But I am an “old-school” shooter (at least as old school as the 1970′s SLR shooters). I “grew up” with a TTL viewfinder, match-needle metering, manual focus lenses, and mechanical control dials on the camera body. The Nex-6 body was designed with that kind of “old school” in mind. The new top mode dial, (ala the similar controls on the later—venerable, but long-in-the-tooth—Canon G-series and the Nikon D7000 series), is a nice “comfort food” feature. It controls the so-called shooting mode (PASM, etc.), which are all menu functions on the other Nex cameras. Directly underneath it (mounted on the same axis and slightly larger in diameter) is a control dial. There is another control dial on the back. This is a lot like my Nikon layout (sans the front control dial), and thus familiar. I like that.

The Nex-6 body was designed with the “old school” shooter in mind

This camera, much like the Canon G-series did, feels comfortable in my hand. The right-hand grip is nice and the body has an almost leather texture. While some with larger hands may find the space between grip and lens tight, it is a tradeoff for the compact size of the camera that I think is worth while. The camera is just 2 1/2 inches deep from viewfinder to lens cap (with the 16-50 attached), 5 inches wide from d-ring to d-ring, and 2 3/4 inches high from the base to the top of the mode dial on the top right. It has a nice “heft” without being an anchor. The top control dial is easily reached and manipulated by the right thumb, as is the rear dial. This means with a little acclimation, you can make essential settings without taking your eye from the viewfinder.

Most compact cameras have been, it seems to me, designed toward the P&S consumer market. The early Nex series is certainly no exception. The 3 and 5 are completely menu driven and totally reliant on the rear LCD screen. An electronic viewfinder (EVF) is available as an (expensive) add on. The “flagship” 7 has the same built-in EVF that is now on the 6 and has two unlabeled control wheels on top of the body (in practice I am told it doesn’t take log to acclimate to their functions).

The Sony OLED EVF takes some getting used to, but I quickly grew to like it

EVF

I have shot with a viewfinder for 35 years. While there may be something to be said for getting out of the comfort zone, in this case, the viewfinder lets me isolate and “see” my image. So for me on all my cameras, lack of a viewfinder has been a deal killer. The Sony OLED EVF takes some getting used to, but I quickly grew to like it. Unlike the traditional “rangefinder” cameras that had a mechanically coupled, but compeletly separate viewfinder, the EVF is, in essence, a “live view” TTL finder.  No parallax issues and “what you see is what you get.”  I am not sure what the coverage is, but I am reasonably sure it is 100%.  The EVF is very bright and because it is not a traditional “optical”  TTL finder, it can have some unique and useful behavior. As you rotate the command dials and change either the aperture or the shutter speed, the image in the viewfinder actually grows brighter or dimmer as the exposure solution is changed!  You “see” the image come into an approximation of correct exposure. Very cool.

Another nice feature (becoming more the norm – the tech just keeps getting “smarter”) is the automatic setting that senses when you bring your eye up to the viewfinder and turns it on and the back LCD off. You can override this behavior and even turn the LCD off completely to save on battery drain.

You can also set up the viewfinder to display the important information, including a horizon level indicator and, if you wish, a real-time histogram. And, of course the viewfinder—like my DSLR—shows essential information, like exposure, shutter speed and f-stop settings.  I have set the horizon level indicator in my viewfinder and it–unlike the ones one the back LCD (my G12 had it), actually works pretty well in handheld shooting.

The potential for lens selection and use with this camera appears to have little limitation

Lens Selection

Here is where the Nex series gets interesting. The potential for lens selection and use with this camera appears to have little limitation. In order to have all the offered metering functions, auto-focus, and some of the added features, you will, of course, need to have lenses with the proprietary Sony e-mount (Sony also offers an adaptor for their DSLR-mount lenses that will allow essentially all the functions). Sony currently offers 13 different e-mount lenses (I have oft-noted that these equipment reviews are my empirical and practical observations and are anything but technical. There is an abundance of commentary on the relative sharpness and other characteristics of these lenses and I’ll leave you to your own research on that topic). My Nex-6 came with the “kit” SELP1650, 16-50 f3.6 – 6.5 zoom.

Sony 16-50 “kit” lens:    It’s all a matter of perspective (pun intended). Against my Nikkor 24-70 f2.8, the 18-55 lens that has shipped as the “kit” lens on the prior Nex-series bodies is small and light. But for a compact camera, it’s still a bit chunky and the heft is noticeable. The new 16-50 is downright diminutive. About a third the length of the 18-55, it is also much lighter, making the Nex a (barely) “pocketable” camera (think cargo or jacket pocket – not jeans pocket).

Critics say it is not a “sharp” lens (those same critics often also criticize the 18-55). Lets face it. Its a relatively wide range, variable aperure zoom, at a mid-price range. There are going to be some compromises. I don’t have an 18-55 copy, so I cannot do comparisons. But my results on the 16-50 seem pretty good to me.  The barn at the beginning of this post was taken handheld, all manual (except for AF) with specs of f16 and 1/100 second.  But, I wanted to see how it would perform at wider apertures, so I did some of my own unscientific tests.  My conclusions are that as a practical matter, the lens performs very well at almost its whole range of apertures in terms of sharpness for general photography.  I use ACR in Photoshop and routinely correct for lens aberations, using their built in database, which seems to do very well.  I will cover this lens in my next blog, as this one is already too long.

The filter size for this newer lens is an odd, 40.5mm. The only filter I generally use is a polarizer. They are surprisingly expensive for this size. I did learn in my research that because of the way AF is accomplished in these cameras, a circular polarizer is not necessary. I was able to find a B&W linear polarizing filter for a reasonable price.

Non-Sony Lenses: Here is the exciting part. For a relatively small cost, you can buy a third party adapter and use a huge selection of lenses from virtually any lens manufacturer. This is all done fully manual, but the bright EVF makes focusing easy.  One challenge appears to be that my newer Nikon lenses which do not have manual aperture rings, will not allow me to choose my aperture.  For the most part, in my likely emergency backup scenario, I will be looking for maximum DOF throughout, which is a good think, because the NEX appears to choose the smallest aperture, and require you to vary the shutter speed.  Wind, of course, may well be a concern.  When the series first came out the native “e-mount” lens selection was very small, including only 2 lenses. The Sony selection has grown to several and is likely to continue to grow. And even better, some other manufacturers are now making lenses in the e-mount, including Sigma, and excitingly, Zeiss. It can only get better.

Function button

At first, I was perplexed by this button. It doesn’t behave at all like I expected it to. On my Nikon DSLR bodies, there is a function button that you can assign certain features to. When you press it, it performs that single task (e.g., on mine, I have it shift from averaging type metering to spot metering. The documentation, once again, is hopelessly unclear. So, it took me a while to figure out that on the Sony Nex, the Function Button really acts more like a “quick menu” submenu button, bringing up a short list of settings changes.  Unfortunately, customization here appears limited.  I cannot have the “quick menu” list the functions I want it to.  I have choose from their options.  Maybe a firmware update, Sony?

Other manufacturers are now making lenses in the e-mount…It can only get better

Rear LCD Screen

The generous 3 inch by 1 3/4 inch rear LCD screen is bright and clear. It articulates some (not as much as on the 3 and 5, because the addition of the viewfinder interferes with that). But it does pull slightly away from the body and tilts to a horizontal position for those who use it. I can see its usefulness in my own shooting style in those rare occasions where I might want to hold the camera out away from me.

The 5 and 7 have touchscreen capability. That is a useful feature, especially when using the features that might require inputting information into the camera. This would be particularly true if using some of the camera’s WiFi features.

The Nex-6′s WiFi capability should be a big deal, but for now, it appears to be “DOA”

My only concern is that I am one of those guys who has a near “reverence” for the beauty and maintenance of my equipment. It is rare for me to have a scratch, ding or other imperfection on any of my gear (no matter how old), and that big, exposed screen makes me nervous. I have added a screen protector (but I generally hate the things as they are a pain to apply and rarely look good).

Battery Life

This is a mildly “disappointing” area.  Battery life could be better.  There are a lot of electronics going to suck life from the small battery.  The AF on these cameras is contrast-detect oriented and by their nature, they are pretty much constantly “searching” for focus when AF is on.  I like to use the “review” features on the back of the camera, and tend to leave them on at longer intervals than is necessarily recommended.  The bright EVF viewfinder no doubt uses some energy from the battery.  I am philosophical about this one.  A spare battery and and external charger (the camera does not ship with an external charger, btw), is relatively cheaply acquired.

WiFi

You may wonder why this is relegated to the bottom and I don’t give it much coverage. The Nex-6 is the first Nex body to ship with integrated WiFi capability. This should be a big deal! But for now, it appears to be DOA. The reason is that its implementation apparently is rivaled only by the Sony Documentation I bashed above. I still haven’t tried it, as it sounds like those who have, universally say it is wonky, doesn’t work well and is generally a PIA. I guess the good thing is that the capability is built in and one can only hope the subsequent software updates will make this pretty cool feature more workable and useful. I was pretty excited when I first read that I could use my iPhone as a remote shutter release and monitor!  I have enabled my Nex-6 with my iPhone 5, and have used it in my house as a remote.  Its pretty darn cool!  Once you figure out how to get the camera to “join” the network (it takes a master programmer – don’t expect any intelligible help from any of the available documention–you use a localWiFi connection, but once the camera logs on, it then names itself as a network and that is what you tell the iPhone to join), you will not only be able to use the phone as a remote shutter release, but the phone’s monitor becomes a live view monitor for the camera!  It was fun to play with and with my iPhone armed with a pdf manual, TPE, and GPS and Mapping software, you will have a pretty good accessory to the camera.  Lets hope they get this fixed—and right.

Things I would like to see added in new firmware or design:

Dedicated AF button: I use the back AF button on my DSLR bodies most of the time when doing landscape shooting (especially from a tripod). I turn off the AF activation from the shutter button. On the Nex-6, it seems like you could program it so when video is turned off, you could assign that function to the video button.

Custom Shooter Banks: the D800 (and other Nikon bodies) allow you to set up a couple (4 on the 800) custom shooter banks. I currently use only 2, a Landscape and an Action bank, but that would be a useful feature.

More Customization of the “Function” Button:  As I mentioned, I would like to be able to populate its short list with the functions I, in my own discretion, access the most

Tentative Conclusions:

Let me say that I love this camera–so far.  I think positives solidly outweigh the negatives.  It appears that it will be the answer to my desire for something more “usable” in conditions where setting up the “big guns” is simply not practical or convenient.  And, I think it really has some crossover potential, so that I will feel that I can achieve photographic goals with it even though I do not have immediate access to my D800.

I don’t have any illusions that it will become a “replacement” for my D800.  They are different tools for different purposes.  But it would not surprise me to see the Nex get more use on a regular basis than the D800.  My good friend, mentor, and pro photographer, Ray Laskowitz, made a very interesting, and I think apt observation.  He views the D800 the new “medium format,” in the sense that it creates such a massive megapixel image size (of course, the handling is the same as it always has been for an SLR camera).  The newer compact, APS sized sensors in these cameras like the Nex are making them essentially a more portable DSLR.   And rumors abound that there will be a (so-called) “full-frame” sensor compact in the not too distant future.  I don’t know whether I’ll consider that overkill or not.  Technology marches on.  The Nex is surely electronically equivalent to today’s DSLR models.  Imagery will, over time, tell.  I am looking forward to using it more and hopefully, from time to time, reporting back here.

Next week:  The included Sony 15-50 zoom lens.  Stay tuned …………………………..

Which Features should I Use? – Part II

Pete’s Lake Sunrise
Hiawatha NF, Michigan UP
Copyright Andy Richards 2012

In last week’s blog, I opined that most of the “gee-whiz” features on modern compact and DSLR digital cameras were occasionally useful, but not essential.  Obviously, there are some “features” on all equipment that are essential.  A digital capture device must have a sensor, a lens of some description, and a way to capture, save and transfer the digitally captured “image.” I don’t want to dwell on age, but when I started down my photographic road, the only truly  ”automatic” feature on a camera was the ability to automatically “stop down” the lens to the selected aperture when the shutter was triggered. Having a built-in light-metering system was a convenience, but not really essential and certainly not automatic. And before my time, some of the most talented photographers in history–Adams and Stieglitz come to mind—had even less “features” on their cameras. Yet somehow, they were able to make historically great photographic images. I also opined that the most important piece of equipment a photographer “owns” is the thing that sits on top of her shoulders.

The most important piece of equipment a photographer owns is that thing that sits on top of his or her shoulders

But having said all of those things, it is difficult not to acknowledge in wonderment, where we have come technologically. Lenses that “auto-focus” just continue to get better and better. “Image Stabilization” technology constantly improves. “Matrix” metering technology makes relying on the in-camera meter’s “judgment” of exposure more and more effective (and now with digital imagery’s immediate capture, the on-camera histogram display gives us immediate “confirmation” of exposure). Again, these are all tools—nothing more or less. They measure with increasing accuracy, but they are machines, tools and are far from perfection. Moreover, a blind reliance on them robs creativity! Recently, I came to the realization that my too frequent reliance on my camera’s “aperture-priority” (A or AP) setting was hindering my ability to obtain truly accurate exposure. But it was “easy” and I had become lazy. And it really made no sense. I work from a tripod 90% of the time and in those instances there is rarely a time when it makes sense not to make my own judgments about correct exposure. These “shooting modes”  (Aperture Priority and Shutter Speed Priority, for example) are very useful tools. But they are just that:  ”tools”.  They are designed to allow us to take our knowledge of (for example) exposure theory and use them to make settings easier to maintain.  Modern technology has given us some pretty amazing “help” tools.  But it is still the photographer’s responsibility to make judgments about which tool is correct for the job at hand.

It is difficult not to acknowledge in wonderment where we have come technologically

Understanding this, there are a number of features I regularly use.

Rear Focus Button

The “higher end” DSLRs often have a button on the rear of the body designated “AF” (or something similar).  On my Nikon bodies, its default setting activates the camera’s auto focus.  At first glance, this may seem redundant.  After all, a half press of the shutter release button already does this.   When I learned the utility of this button some years back from a  John Gerlach book, I almost literally smacked my own forehead. .  I assume that most major branded camera bodies have similar conventions. I shoot Nikon and have for 30 years, so it is my only experience. Your own mileage may vary, depending on whose tools you have in hand. But my Nikon bodies allow me to program the trigger for auto-focus (AF). Conventionally, most cameras start the AF mechanism by a partial or 1/2 press of the shutter button. For some hand-held shooting and for most “action” shooting, I like this. But in other cases, it is a hindrance. There are times when you want to set the camera’s point of focus independently of other settings. On the tripod, I may preset my exposure solution and may have metered off a part of the scene that I do not want the camera to attempt to focus on. But as soon as I activate the shutter release, it tries to focus again. Turning off the shutter releases control of AF is a way to correct this issue. My “landscape” shooting setting on my camera has this turned off by default. The only way to trigger the AF mechanism is to depress the dedicated AF button on the back of the camera body. It is a very useful function.  Using the rear focus button allowed me to set my focus independently of the shot in the Pete’s Lake sunrise shot.  I was able to meter off the blue sky, set my focus and then trip the shutter with my remote release, knowing nothing would change.

Not my best “grace-under-pressure” moment

The newer bodies generally  incorporate “shooting banks,” allowing you to program different features for different situations and then switch between these banks.  I have a “Landscape” bank and an “Action” bank.  I leave the conventional shutter release in the action bank.  If you do program this feature, remember you did it .  I had an embarrassing reminder of this a few years ago.  My wife’s former boss and our good friend had been appointed to a very important and prestigious position.  She asked me to bring my gear and ensure that we got some “keeper” photographs.  I had recently “discovered” the rear-button-focus “trick.”  My then D200 did not have the separate shooter banks.  I had not shot for a couple months since fiddling with, and changing the settings.  When I arrived at the location a bit early I got the camera out and was going to make a series of test shots to get the lighting, and lay of the room, etc.  My camera would not AF!  I tried everything I could think of (battery pull, on and off several times).  I was dumbfounded.  I guessed I was going to have to send the body in to Nikon for service (something — knock on wood — I have never had to do with a Nikon body).  Thankfully, the manufactures haven’t take MF away from us (yet – Congress may act on it soon ).  It weighed on my mind.  It wasn’t until I was home, later that night that I again, almost literally slapped my own forehead as I realized what had happened.  I had turned off the AF activation on the shutter button.  AF was working all the time (and yeah, all I had to do was press the rear AF button).  Not my best “grace-under-pressure moment!” .

Irwin Lake; Hiawatha NF
Copyright 2012 Andy Richards

One would think these gridlines would follow the conventional “rule of thirds,” but they often do not

Focus Screen Gridlines

Many of the higher end DSLR bodies have a feature allowing you to turn on a grid.  I always turn them on as part of my initial setup.  I have them turned on on both my D800 and my new Nex-6 (review to come soon).  I suppose there are any number of shooters out there who prefer to keep their screen free of clutter.  But for me, these grid lines help with alignment, and theoretically with composition. Be very careful here, however. I am not sure what the rationale is for this, but many of these screen grids are not set at the conventional “artistic” intervals. One would think that these gridlines would follow the conventional “rule of thirds,” but they often do not.  NIKON, are you listening? (Yeah — I am sure they read my blog regularly ).  Nevertheless, gridlines do give you some guidance about placement of elements of composition within the screen.  I have found that relying on the horizontal gridlines for leveling the image is hit or miss.  The spirit level on the hot shoe is a more foolproof solution for that.

LCD Review

On most DSLR cameras, you can turn this feature on or off. I like an immediate review, so I can watch the histogram as I am shooting. It uses more battery life, but I carry a couple extras, so it has never been an issue for me.  One thing to note.  Exposure measurement tools (see my “discourse” on tools above) are not uniformly accurate.  We can take 3 same brand cameras; same model, same batch of manufacture, and meter on the same grey card in the same light and get 3 different measurements.  For sure, they vary less today than they would have 30 years ago, but they vary.  Likewise, the histogram feature will vary from model to model and manufacturer to manufacturer.  And, if you shoot raw (and you should be thinking about that), there is another challenge.  Since the raw file hasn’t been “converted” to a recognized format (a bit of an oversimplification, but useful for us here), the camera really cannot display a histogram of the raw capture.  Instead, it does an in-camera conversion to a jpeg and displays the histogram based on that jpeg thumbnail image on your camera’s LCD.  In practice, it can vary a great deal from the actual capture results (my own experience with several Nikon body/sensor combinations tells me I can push the envelope on the highlights side a bit)).  It is worth testing this by comparing the camera histogram with your post-processing software histogram.  Remember, these are measurement tools and good craft means you will do some experimenting and your own calibration.

Spot Metering Capability

Most modern bodies now have the ability to meter using spot, matrix (a/k/a honeycomb or “evaluative”) or center-weighted methods.  Many bodies being sold at market do not have Spot Metering capability.  Most of the “prosumer” and “pro” bodies on the market today do.  Some of the “enthusiast” compact cameras now do, also (i.e., the Sony Nex and Fuji X1 model lines which carry the same “APS” size sensors as are found in many DSLRS; the “micro” 4/3 top line models like Olympus’ OM5 , the Nikon 1 and  new Coolpix A).  Spot metering is a “must have” feature, in my view, for critical exposure decisions. Even better (and even more expensive) is a hand-held spot meter.  Particularly in Landscape situations and Studio shooting, where you typically have time to plan your exposure, spot metering can be the best method of determining overall correct exposure for a given image.  For those who may not know, spot metering “points” the meter measurement at a much smaller (radius) area of the image.  Using the longest lens or longest zoom, you can center the spot on the brightest, darkest and a neutral area of the image with at least some confidence that it is measuring only those areas of reflectance.  Knowing those parameters, you can judge which areas of the image you want to be properly exposed.  This is particularly useful in an image that has a lot of contrast between the darkest and lightest area.

Mirror Lock Up

I admit that I have not done much empirical testing on my own on this feature. My seat of the pants judgment ( I did some comparison shots of some macro images shot with my film-based Nikon F2A on slide film some years back, with and without lockup at several shutter speeds) was that I couldn’t see any real difference.  There has always been some controversy over whether this is real or legend.  I know there are those who argue that its utility is overstated. But it seems that the majority who weigh in on it believe strongly that it is a significant factor in image quality. I know several photographers who I have great admiration and respect for who swear by its use. After observing their images for several years, I began using it.  It is one of those things that you can say, probably helps, and certainly cannot hurt, your imagery.   One little nitpick I have with Nikon is that if you are using their wireless remote shutter release, you cannot use their mirror-up feature. What is up with that, Nikon?

 

Mirror Lockup, in the appropriate circumstances, probably helps and certainly cannot hurt, your imagery

Aperture Priority/Shutter Speed Priority Settings

As I mentioned above, there is a danger in over-reliance on something that works sometimes.  This is one of those areas. This feature sets up the camera computer and light meter linkage to make its best guess (and yes, it is a guess) at the proper exposure for a given aperture or shutter speed setting. In Aperture priority, you set a constant aperture, and the camera varies the shutter speed in order to achieve correct exposure for the conditions. If you are concerned about sharp focus within a range (depth of field), this is a setting that can in many instances, be useful. I will now most often use it when hand-holding shots, especially if things are moving fast, in order not to have to think about too many settings. I never use the “program” settings on any DSLR for any reason!

Neither of these settings are a substitute for thinking

Blue Angels
Fleet Week Air Show
San Francisco, CA
Copyright 2011 Andy Richards

Shutter speed priority is just the opposite. You set a constant shutter speed, and the camera makes its best guess at the appropriate aperture setting for the conditions. I use this rarely, but sometimes when action shooting. In the handheld shot of the Blue Angel Jet, I had shutter speed priority set the whole afternoon. The conditions were relatively bright and I wasn’t concerned too much about too large settings; or even about depth of field, for that matter.

Neither of these settings are a substitute for thinking, and I am afraid they sometimes become that, due to over-reliance on what are some pretty darn good results from today’s modern computers (ah……I mean cameras).

DOF Preview

This is a feature that has been resident on camera bodies for many years. When I was looking for a body, I typically “specced’ this feature. This preview button “stops down” the lens to its actual aperture when the shutter is tripped. On modern SLR/DSLR body/lens combinations (modern in this case meaning from the early 60′s on) the lens is always open to its widest aperture setting while focusing and looking through the viewfinder. Only when the shutter is tripped does it “stop down” to your selected aperture. This means that what you see through the lens in terms of focus and depth of field is what would be rendered at the lens’ widest aperture. Among other things affecting depth of field, the wider the aperture, the shallower the depth of field. Conversely, the smaller the aperture, the more depth of field exists. Essentially this means more of the image from front to back is in acceptable focus as the aperture gets smaller. Lots of people pressed that DOF button on the camera and saw that everything got dark and wondered what the heck good that did? What it is doing is mechanically stopping down the lens, so you can see the effect of the selected aperture on depth of field. As for the darkening, stop it down and wait a while. Your eyes will adjust and you will see the effect on depth of field of changing the aperture. When depth of field is critical in an image, this is an invaluable tool.   In the Blue Flag Iris image, I wanted to keep the central part the blossom in sharp focus while letting the some of the edges and the entire background go softly out of focus.  I used a telephoto lens to achieve this effect, and the DOF preview function was critical to “seeing”  what the end result would be.

Blue Flag Iris
Shiawassee National Wildlife Refuge
Copyright Andy Richards

In Camera Noise Reduction

This is an in-camera computer setting. It tells the camera that when an exposure exceeds a certain amount of time (the shutter is open), to take a second frame with the shutter closed (resulting, theoretically, in a pure black exposure) and then to “merge” parts of the image. This is ingenious and does an admirable job of noise reduction, by “replacing” noisy parts of the image. I generally have this set for night time images.  The night image of a hotel in downtown Austin, Texas, was one of the very first images captured on my D700, which I purchased specifically because of its reputed image quality and particularly its noise handling characteristics.  The noise reduction utility is pretty impressive.

Austin, Texas Downtown
Copyright 2010 Andy Richards

Image Stabilization/Vibration Reduction

This is a function mostly built into lenses, although some manufacturers have ingeniously built it into the camera body itself. For those manufacturers who have built it into the body, bravo! (I don’t pretend to completely understand the science and engineering involved here, but I have found myself wondering, year after year, why all manufacturers haven’t offered this feature in the camera body rather than the lens? Obviously, part of the answer lies in the question: whether one works better than the other). For the rest of us, it becomes a decision to make when selecting and buying a lens. I read a comment recently that made some sense to me. The writer (a good friend of mine and talented photographer) said he shoots mostly from a tripod and almost exclusively landscape and does not see the need for the additional expense, nor the additional weight. Personally, I would lean toward getting it if possible. And this, even though I keep it switched off 90% of the time. But I would like to have it available for the other 10%. My 70-200 has it. My 24-70 does not.

Yukon; Skagway, Alaska
White Pass Railroad
Copyright 2010 Andy Richards

Again, this is a tool that can be overused and falsely relied upon. Vibration reduction is not a substitute for good technique. Nor will it “fix” an otherwise bad image. And, like any tool, you have to understand what it does, and more importantly, what it doesn’t do. It can give you some “defense” against camera shake (in handholding situations), assisting as much as 2 stops. You cannot “freeze” a moving target with vibration reduction. I use it where warranted and turn it off where I don’t need it. I always turn it off when my camera is mounted to a tripod on solid ground. What I will say about it is that—in the case of Nikon’s “Vibration Reduction,” it works. It most definitely helps “stabilize” the camera in hand-held situations. The image of the Alaskan Yukon was taken from a moving train using a VR 300 mm lens.