Tripods - You decide

Lisa was busy tonight, the kids were in bed, and I felt the need to get out of the house.  I ended up going to the nearest Value Village (thrift shop).  I tend to visit thrift stores a little too much, but I keep finding awesome deals.  Tonight was such a night.

I've recently run across some cheap tripods, and I've thought that I'd like a second tripod.  The problem with cheap tripods though, is that they're flimsy.  The two reasons I've wanted a second tripod is to have something to hold an off-camera flash, and just perhaps something lighter than my existing tripod.  The existing tripod is a Manfrotto 055CL with a 141RC head.  I bought the pair new at Henrys almost 10 years ago after my father got me a Mamiya 645E for Christmas.  Medium-format camera = bigger camera = bigger tripod.  So I bought the 055 as something sturdy enough for medium format.

However, for most of my shooting these days (especially since I don't really use the Mamiya since almost nobody touches the film any more), the 055CL is overkill.  So tonight's find was great - a Manfrotto 190SH tripod for a mere $6.99 (in the box).  Google suggests people want about $100 used for them.  SWEET.  The 190SH is smaller than the 055CL, and weighs in 3 lbs lighter.  Despite this, it's a very sturdy little tripod.  According the Manfrotto, the 055's go to 178cm tall, and the 190's go to 146cm.  It's rare that I need all that height (but it does happen, especially shooting over objects).

Here's the 055 and the 190 together.  You can see that the smaller 190 looks much friendlier for transporting around.  The two major drawbacks with the 190 are the screw-legs (instead of the clips) and the quick-release-less head.  I can easily put the 141RC head on the 190, so the latter point doesn't matter so much.

So, what is the right tripod.  Let's ask the professionals:

Ken Rockwell:  Tripods went out with the film cameras.
Thom Hogan:  Spend $1000US on your tripod.

So there we have it, two well known reviewers/professionals.  Ken Rockwell says that high ISO digital cameras and VR lenses have made tripods obsolete.  Thom, what about VR?  "...it's designed to take equipment movement out of the shot. It does, but it's not infallible, nor does it solve every problem..."

I suggest actually reading the articles instead of just the quotes and paraphrases that I pulled out.  Quite frankly, I disagree with both of them.

Thom:  Really, I need a $1000 tripod?  For the few times a year where I actually want/use a tripod, I need an ultra-light carbon fiber model?  I'm not exactly out in the safari carrying equipment for hours.  Thom seems to have generalized that ALL photographers will eventually want a $1000 tripod.  I assure you that these Manfrottos albeit a bit heavy, will last me for years to come.  Perhaps if I ever become serious about nature photography, or hiking with equipment all day, then I'll consider such an expensive tripod.

Ken:  Ken, Ken, Ken....   The tripod is obsolete?  Seriously?  Ok, he says it can be used for moonscapes.  First of all, the tripod is a necessity just for shooting repetitious shots.  I'm sure when he shoots lens comparisons, they're all on a tripod.  Ok, so I'm sure he wouldn't disagree that tripods are good for studio and other repetitious situations.  Shooting in low-light, that's where he's really arguing they're obsolete.  First off, not everybody has a full-frame DSLR.  Ken points out elsewhere that a "f/1.4 lens on a (cropped DSLR) should perform about as well as an exotic f/2.8 zoom will on a (full frame DSLR)".  That's 2-full stops of difference!  Also, what about loooooooooong telephotos (like the 150-500mm Tokina that I recently sold).  Even with VR, that lens would be awful to try to keep reasonable still handheld, and that's a short lens (compared to the Sigmonsters for example).  A monopod would help, but I'd still rather a tripod.

One thing that I will say though, is that I used to use my tripod to save money.  If I'm shooting at say 1/8 or 1/15 of a second, I'll fire a bunch and one should be sharp enough.  In the days of film, that equates to a lot of wasted film/money.  So the tripod was great for increasing the odds of a good shot - thus saving money.

I'll conclude by saying, if you love your fast VR lenses and think they replace tripods - then great.  If you want to use your tripod all the time (even though Ken will think you look like an 'idiot'), then do it!  Use a tripod however it will help you take the best photos.  Are you really going to care if you looked like an idiot with your tripod when that photo has made your thousands from stock sales?

Cheap plastic

Just a quick post about one of my peeves - companies that charge lots of money for plastic.  If you look at how much Nikon charges for lens caps, body caps, hoods - it is outrageous.  Apparently it sounds like Canon is no better according to a coworker.

I once bought a hood for my (former) 80-200mm 2.8 AF-D lens.  It was somewhere around $30, for a solid piece of plastic (just a round hollow cylinder).  How can they charge so much for plastic?  The markup must be at least 3000%.

So I've pretty much given up on name-brand plastic.  I wanted a couple lens hoods for some lenses.  I went to eBay and bought them each under $5.  One is an Opteka brand, the other I forget.  So no they're not Nikon knockoffs.  Wow, what a savings though.

A couple months ago I bought some Nikon body and rear-lens caps from Hong Kong.  They look like my other Nikon caps but these only cost $1 a piece.  Quite likely not the genuine article.  I'm not a fan of buying counterfeit.  I'd rather buy a off-brand like the Opteka hood.

So if anyone from Nikon, or Canon, or some other company ever reads this, please tell me how your plastic is better then the much cheaper eBay offerings.

Shooting a couple of models

Last week I had the chance to shoot a couple of models.  One model just turned 40 years old, the other just shy of 40 by a few months.  While you can tell they're not teenagers to look at them, you'd likely never guess that they were 40 years old.  They were both all too happy to pose for me.  It was an interesting shoot.

Meet the models, Maytag HA806A and HDE806.  This is the old washer and dryer that came with our house.  They've served us well for the past 5 years.  Recently the switch on the washer lid broke.  This is a small deal to fix once you get the part.  However we've been finding these old machines too small, so we decided to upgrade.

Before parting with these old machines though, I decided to have a photo shoot.  I had been meaning to try an exercise that I read about years ago.  Find inanimate objects, not too exciting (i.e. not a Ferarri) and try to make them look interesting through various photos.  This includes choice of lenses, film/medium, angles, backdrops, lighting, etc.

For this shoot, I opted for shooting the D90 in black & white mode.  I thought it would tell some nice tales on these old Maytags.  I chose my Sigma 10-20mm, Nikkor 50mm, and Nikkor 60mm lenses to shoot with (although I was tempted to deviate, I did stick with my original choices).  The Sigma proved awesome for getting in the machines and some interesting exterior shots.  The 60mm gave the greatest number of interesting shots with its close-ups.

The 50mm was a bit of a let-down.  I didn't want to shoot it wide open since I wanted a deeper depth-of-field.  This meant that I needed to stabilize my arms on top of the machine with the resulting slower shutter speed.  With my elbows on the machine, the 50mm couldn't focus close enough most of the time for the shots I wanted.  The result was that I barely touched the 50mm.

I also decided to shoot all existing light (overhead fluorescents) with the SB-800 available for some lighting of the machine interiors.

Here's some samples of what I shot.

Washer

Inside the washer

Washer temperature buttons

Washer Load size buttons

Washer tub (SB-800 is inside the tub)

The agitator (SB-800 is to the left-out of frame)

Dryer control (best viewed full-size)

Dryer control

Dryer all-aglow.  You can see where I re-shone some of the chrome with my thumbnail in the 'grille' .

From inside the dryer

For the most part, I was happy with the results - but I wasn't blown away.  I welcome any/all comments.

HDMI Tethering with the D90

This is just going to be a quick post, since life's been super crazy of late.

Something that I wondered earlier this year was if I could use Live View on the D90 over HDMI.  Google just could not answer this for me. Yes I knew I could view photos that have been taken already, over HDMI.  But what about Live View.  I simply could not find an answer.  So I picked up a cheap mini-HDMI to standard HDMI adapter on eBay from Hong Kong.

The answer:  YES, Live View does show over HDMI.  Using my 15ft HDMI cable didn't work with my 19" TV, but using the 6ft cable did.  I did however get the 15ft cable to work with a monitor using a HDMI/DVI adapter on the other end of the cable.

So for self-portraiture, or just composing photos where having huge magnification is a plus, this can work great.  Shooting without Live View will still have the previews go to the monitor/TV if attached, so a subject in front of the lens could see what was just taken (if you wanted to show them - although it might distract in the middle of a shoot though).

Hopefully this helps someone else who might be wondering if Live View works over HDMI.  Perhaps in the many months since I answered this question someone else has too, but a quick search suggested no.

Pinhole Phail

I was discussing with a coworker today about making a pinhole "adapter" for a DSLR using a body cap.  I had been planning to try this for a while, and just never got around to it.  I gave it a shot tonight.  I succeeded in taking pictures with it, but the results were not great.  However I was shooting indoors in a dark basement.  I tried many experiments with using a flash with sub-par results.  If I was to take this same pinhole adapter outside on a sunny day - I'm sure the results would be much better.  I gave up on this after about 45 mins of messing around.

So to console myself at not getting the results I wanted, I started playing with actual lenses, and started taking photos of random things.  I had told another coworker that one thing I wanted to do was to take somewhat boring objects, and try to take photos that actually make them interesting.  I gave that a shot tonight using a ZX81 that was sitting next to my desk.  I admit, there's more boring objects than a ZX81, but it's not the most exciting thing to look at.

I decided the way to make it most interesting was to use my ultra-wide angle lens, and shoot close up.  This trades in the ZX81's boring rectangular look for some funky converging lines.  The angle is much like the Star Wars opening crawl.

Because of the weird angle, lighting from on-camera is wonky.  So I used the D90 in Commander Mode, with its own flash disabled.  Then I used my SB-800 in slave mode.  Instead of firing it from above the hotshoe, I fired it straight down from above the ZX81.  The effect of this I loved.  Instead of sending a blast of light out behind the subject, the light radiated out from after reflecting off the computer.  Thus it created nice falloff in the lighting on the carpet, which actually makes the photo much more interesting.

I shot the camera in aperture priority, with the aperture down to f22.  With all the details on the keybaord, I wanted to make sure that it was all readable.

I loaded it into Photoshop, and quite liked it.  I cropped it, and sharpened it - that's it.  Somehow, it reminded me of an advertisement, from way back in the day.  So I added some text to the top an ripped the bottom from a real ad, to make my very own vintage ad.  Here's the result:

It's probably not for everyone, but I thought it was cool..

How to make the perfect burger

Not my shot, it's a capture from the video below

I've always been interested in food photography since seeing a show about it many years ago.  I remember learning just how edible that awesome looking food in magazines, or on TV really is.  I stumbled on this video and figured that I'd share.  It's quite interesting. 

Why burgers looks so good at the pictures

If you like this, I'm sure you can find more on Youtube.  I remember seeing how they make the perfect turkey years ago.  Also, not something you'd want to eat.

A blast from the past

Isn't the Internet Wayback Machine cool?  You can dig up all kinds of old sites from the past.  As some people know, I used to have a web site that I maintained for years some time ago.  One of the offshoots of the site was a photography site.  For all intents and purposes, it was a photography blog.  My previous shots at night reminded me of when I started shooting existing light, nearly 10 years ago.  Back then it was using film, so more of a challenge.  The above shot was done using an LED keychain, and an old film SLR.  I had no way of knowing the success of the shot until days later - when I got the prints back from that roll of film.  Yes, those were the days!

Here's a link to the Wayback Machine's capture of my existing light photos going back to 2004 (back before DSLR's ruled the earth).

And now for something completely different from back then...  PHOTOGRAMS!

What's a photogram you ask?  Get photographic paper.  Put stuff on top of it (in the dark, or under a darkroom/safety light).  Expose it to incandescent/normal light (i.e. enlarger light).  Develop.

The first was my drinking & driving photogram.  It was produced by breaking a beer bottle in a plastic bag, then placing it accordingly to look like it was in the process of breaking by the keys impacting it.

The second one was, well, both my hands.  Yep, I was a wishful dreamer back then.  But hey, dreams sometimes come true - in my case they did!