Blog

Noise Reduction in Photography

Introduction

Noise in images seems to create a huge panic amongst photographers these days, and I honestly do not know why this is. For a long time I have mostly preferred very low levels of noise reduction in images I produce, as I dislike the plasticy look that even advanced AI noise reduction programs achieve, it just does not look natural to my eyes. I have some exceptions to this rule, for example in deep sky astrophotography work where I use a it a little bit more due to the overall process involved; it almost feels more necessary, as it is normal practice to photograph extremely faint deep sky objects and stack many hours of images together to make the final image.

What I seem to see in forums and in discussions, is that this by product of producing a still image is so ugly that it must be removed, and in many cases, totally removed in that we get smudged, lifeless backgrounds of noiseless strata. I think that there are plenty of camera’s out there that produce a very organic, dare I say it, film like grain that doesn’t distract from the image, and at time’s that itself might even enhance it’s “realness” depending on the situation. We should remember most noise is hidden unless coasting 100% views of the image which no one does except us.

Settings

You will notice that in for example, Lightroom, (ie camera RAW in Photoshop) that there are some settings in the noise reduction panel to be aware of. There are sliders for the amount of total global noise reduction, and specific slides for luma noise, and colour noise with sliders to aid their application. For luma noise, I tend to use zero for most work, especially daylight landscapes. Even portraiture, I use very little or any, even if we are speaking about higher ISO portraiture in low light (of course with some directional light too hopefully).

I tend to ensure that colour noise is between 5-35 (this varies image to image); too high a level smudges any singular colour backgrounds together and leaves artefacts which are quite ugly in nature (that plasticy look again). They are very easy to spot in defocused backgrounds with fast lenses. Too low a setting and individual RGB pixels are seen which can really take away from the background of the image.

Pinball Kid

In this example my son is playing his pinball machine and was too warm - deciding to go topless. An unusual, but humorous picture nonetheless, I always have a camera about in the house. This image was processed in Lightroom to reveal the massive dynamic range, and pull out the scene so it looks like what my eyes saw. When first assessing the RAW file, I could see very little into the shadows. The reason the file looks like this as it is presented in a linear looking form and has no curve or contrast adjustments applied to it yet. It was very simple to adjust the curve and shadows to bring out the D810’s beautiful dynamic range. Care must be taken to not just pull sliders about without reason, adding +100 to shadows will really bring out noise in situations like these and will worsen the image globally, reducing contrast and at times giving a horrible muddy, HDR look to the resulting picture. We don’t want that. What we want to do is produce a picture like what our eyes saw. Here are the majority of the settings applied to this RAW file, a relatively simple edit in this case:

The reason I have had to boost by +1.6 on exposure; is because I shot at the dual gain point of the D810’s sensor to maximise it’s dynamic range. The rest of the settings are self explainatory. Notice the slight upward curve point applied at the right of the leftmost hump. This increases midtone contrast and brightness. I have faded off the end of the blacks slightly to soften the image in the deepest tones, indicated by the applied leftmost point. I did a very basic singular mask on his face and highlights of his body and that was it.

Noise Reduction Settings

For this file, I left the settings at my default of 25 for colour NR. any lower, and bright R G B specs could be see in the darkest areas (like the vignette in the corners and the low lying exposure zones). Too high a setting, 35-55 for example, and the green background smudges into a horrible plastic one toned blob. Not a good look. Yes I could clean further with the AI addition in LR, or elsewhere, but I like the grain (it looks bad here bceause it is super magnified).

100% Crop

Lightroom Edit Screen — 100% crop. NB focal plane on eyes outwith shot

This is the natural noise “grain” from the sensor, and I like to keep it real. If you have ever printed an image, you would know that noise just doesn’t really show up much. My advice to most shooters is to drop the time wasted on noise reduction and focus on something more worthwhile with the above simple caveats, and consider that yes, for deep sky astro work, things are a little different. Remember, that your mileage may vary. Whilst I feel that cleaning up too much of a file and making it too perfect destroys the realism, especially there are several factors that influence that - for example removing a rock in a landscape etc, you may not. Where does it stop? For every shooter, there will be a different place where they consider the edit has gone too far. As long as you are happy with your result and progess as an editor, you are on the right track.

NB - Please be aware that it is difficult to show you exactly what these files look like here. Image compression applied by the website tech can product some artefacting and blockiness can appear in deep blacks, not present in the end result on my monitor.

The Decisive Moment

Composing the Moment

Sometimes, in fact often, making a good picture is about waiting. Life is a waiting game in so many respects. To achieve a picture that is cohesive and produces an emotive response, we need to wait until the scene comes together in order to let it pack it’s fullest punch, so to speak. This is true of most forms of photography, from landscape to portraiture.

The decisive moment is a matter therefore, of timing, vantage point and composition. These three are inextricably linked. The light can work for or against us in these situations where it is most likely something will happen. Let’s examine these three points. Timing is the first obvious one. We don’t want to capture subjects at weird angles, with eyes blinking, squinting faces, odd poses etc. Most people understand this basic conecpt about photography. Vantage point is especially important in most scenes. Sometimes you just need to be a little higher or a little lower to change a good picture into a great one. It’s all about seperation. If I had been lower to the ground here, I would have had the subject interfere with the background radiator, and I wouldn’t gain the lovely seperation we have here. I would have also put too much window into the shot, which would have weakened the shot by pulling the eye out of the scene to a very bright area. Composition is the final, very obvious point. We need to piece the scene together in a logical way that garners the most impact.

For the particular scene above, my son was playing his Nintendo Switch on the TV, and my parent’s little dog, Lottie, was sitting with him as she often did quite content. She was there for quite some time but compositionally, from where I was sitting especially, it did not work as a photograph. I spent a bit of time just watching, no camera, but sitting in the place that would form a nice composition if she moved into the correct place, and he held where we was. I ideally wanted the dog at the corner of the rug, which forms a nice solid arrow towards our subject, Lottie. This along with a placement residing more or less along a third line, balances out the strongly weighted left scene I had in front of me before she moved into that spot. Remember, we have to be flexible here. I can’t put them both perfectly on thirds and just think I am some compositional master. It doesn’t work like that. This is about balance; and I need to show the TV set that my son is looking towards also, in order to give the photograph proper context. I like that they are both looking outward of the frame on the upper left and lower right sides, this actually further balances the overall scene. The lifted paw in slight motion blur, and the slight space between the floor and the paw along with the shadow of the dog on the flooring gives it a dynamic feel. The chair on the right frames the right side, such that the TV does on the left, further balancing the scene that would have still been a little left - heavy without it. It also alludes that this is a living room, of course.

Boy and Dog - Breaking down the Composition — Some compositional basics

The Equipment

If you are using zooms to shoot scenes like these, you are missing out on some goodness. Zooms with f/2.8 apertures are obviously slow compared to fast primes in the f/1.2-1.4 range (x4 less light) and steal opportunities to make a more impactful shot without using flash, which would have absolutely startled and freaked out the little dog. I wouldn’t have been able to achieve the cinematic feel I have here with slow apertures either. I would loose the isolation, the vignette and some of the pop I am getting from this prime lens. You will notice in cinema, that the Director of Photography will pull focus between subjects when they are speaking etc. Often this just causes a sutble blur on the person not talking at the time. We have created this effect here, you can see my son is slightly out of focus, it drives the eye away from his large size in the frame towards the dog. The lens I used here is a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art, teamed up with a Nikon D850, the best DSLR ever built, period. It goes without saying, I would have had no problem shooting this with a D800, or D810 body. In terms of focal length for this scene, 24mm would have been far too wide (subject size would diminish unless I got very close), and 50mm too tight to reveal the important compositional markers hidden about the room and the subjects.

The Settings

As per my usual shot discipline, I am at base ISO here, in order to maximise quality. Importantly, I knew I did not want to blow the window highlights, as this bright area would pull the eye away from our subjects. I used; ISO 64, 1/100 and an aperture of f/1.4. I exposed to the right of the histogram, without clipping anything to have the maximum processability of the resulting RAW file. I wanted to be at f/1.4 for two main reasons. This aperture on a fast 35mm prime at close range, nicely isolates subjects and gives a subtle fall off, which further directs the eye. The second reason is that the natural lens vignette is a useful tool; it is most present at f/1.4 (I have slightly enhanced it in processing). By shooting wide open, the vignette helps me calm down the window area within the histogram boundaries, and keep the shadows in a better place. If I shot at f/4, there would have been zero vignette, and I would have had to back off the histogram more to the left side, meaning noisier shadows, and worse quality overall. The shutter speed of 1/100 is sufficient at this distance to freeze a slow moving subject such as the dog, however allows the tiniest hint of motion at the leading paw which I like (I could have gotten more of this by stopping the aperture down a shade, but it is at the risk of the dog becoming overall, too motion blurred and ruining the shot).

The Processing

Good processing should be unseen for the most part; in the sense that it is subtle and the edits cannot be physically noticed. The processing should bolster the story of the scene and further direct the eye. Everyone has their edit style, and most people have a constantly evolving style that only gets better through experience. I know mine has improved vastly, even just these last few years.

The next time you are shooting anything, just think where the scene elements will be the most impactful. Balance everything up, work with the light and process in order to further direct the eye and the story you are trying to tell.

Mirrorless vs DSLR

Cameras are just Tools…

Think about those four words. If I were a sports shooter, who stared through the finder of a camera all day, or even for significant periods…I would actually likely not be shooting mirrorless. Same goes for portraits, weddings too really. I mean how hard is it to move a little AF box about? Why would you want to look at a TV screen all day? I love the OVF of DSLRs for weddings, portraits and deliberate shooting that can use the viewfinder. The reason I prefer ML, is when in astro or landscape mode, when it is traditional to use the back screen…ie essentially what a mirrorless camera is, a feed directly from the sensor, in finder or on the back LCD monitor. Everyone will have their use case, however it seems crazy to me to want to move away from an OVF for things like portraits and weddings, things that involve long staring and waiting for the shot through viewfinders (most tend to not use the LCD monitor and hold the camera at arms length). I personally think DSLRs are greatly suited to these tasks.

Okay, so why do You have a Z 8?

I spent a huge percentage of time in my recent years with cameras, almost exclusively using the live view function of DSLRs, or the LCD monitor as it is called on mirrorless cameras, barely touching the OVF. This is for landscape and astro work. I spend huge amounts of time in darkness, and the Z 8 ditches the old test shot routine at night as the monitor is so sensitive, I can compose in the dark and just shoot! I also gain a dual flip screen, which stops me laying on the freezing ground in winter to take vertical shots. I wanted to upgrade all my primes to a decent zoom, it made little sense to go with the old f mount zooms which are outclassed now, a couple of other factors - but the major being the way I used the camera. For portraits - heck, I still use the D800 and D810 cameras with their huge OVFs. There is no huge difference in image quality with any of these cameras, from the D800, D810, D850, Z 8. There are some subtle differences and they should be considered by shooters who really push their files. You know who you are. So that means if you have a Dxx body think about the real reason you are upgrading. In fact, if you really are a image quality zealot as I am, the D850 is the best technical quality of all of these bodies…That said, in real life, compromise is always afoot, however I had many logical reasons to add the Z 8 into the mix for my shooting.

Mirrorless Advantages

What you see is what you get view finder, with live histogram *
Eye AF and some other technical goodies
Access to most modern lenses **
USB charging
Can get smaller bodies
Video implementation and functionality

DSLR Advantages

Much better battery life
Optical Viewfinder
Build quality and ergonomics - especially if using the super magnesium based bodies such as the D810, D850
If you own one, you already own one - seem obvious, however…

Like mostly everything in life, there are pros and cons. This should be thought of in the context of your work, your shooting style, the way you do things. If you use your DSLR like a mirrorless camera - ie you are always on the back screen and are not taking advantage of the OVF, this along with other considerations may sway you to switch (or better add mirrorless, as I did).

* I have noted that people that know how to use a camera meter, do just about as well shooting with a DSLR in terms of obtaining a proper exposure, as they do on mirrorless. It is that simple. If they are messing up exposures on DSLRs, it shows more work is needed to understand the tool that they are using. What I tend to see is mirrorless doesn’t necessarily help - screen brightness throws them off as much as not understanding how metering works does. So whilst some might view this as some huge advantage, it is a weak one in my mind.

** Access to modern lenses may not be as important as it sounds, depending on the shooter. You might be perfectly happy with your lenses; newer is not always better.

Final Thoughts

I almost wish I did not ‘need’ to add a Z 8 into the mix. Why? I don’t like wasting money! However, I could not overlook how much easier using the Z 8 makes my life, especially when shooting at night. If you are content with what you use: be content. Only you know how you work and that should be the paramount concern. The final image on screen is all that matters. Most of the time the only obstacle to success is figuring out how to work out that thing about 2 inches behind the viewfinder…

Aurora Borealis - May 10th / 11th 2024 G5 Aurora over Scotland

Approaching the Balvaird Castle Light Show - Nikon Z 8 with 14-24/2.8S @ f/2.8, 20s, ISO 800

A Geomagnetic Storm

Intense aurora displays are generated following massive explosions originating from the sun known as 'coronal mass ejections'. These explosions release clouds of hot plasma containing billions of tons of material travelling at around two million miles per hour. When this material reaches Earth, it interact with Earth's magnetic field to cause events called geomagnetic storms.

The strongest geomagnetic storm in over two decades dazzled photographers and astronomers in May 2024. The G5 storm culminated in a remarkable display of the aurora borealis overnight on May 10th–11th, and was visible from many areas worldwide, including extremely low latitudes that have simply never seen the likes of this type of display, or possibly never seen aurora ever.

This picture is has been crafted to show the true nature of the colour present in the night sky. Shot with a WB of 5500K, if our human vision was as sensitive as a camera, this is what we would see, a warmer colour than we can visualise at night due to the purkinje effect. The purkinje effect describes the situation in human vision: as light levels decrease, the perception of warm colours drops off dramatically, especially the red end of the spectrum. Because of this, it is very important to observe the night sky with dark adapted eyes, especially in the case of aurora. This is why we often see the night sky as black / grey or blue toned. To properly have eyes adjusted for light levels this low, one must observe for at least 30 minutes and avoid all forms of artificial light during that time. That means get off your phone and observe the sky, not apps. People that say that the aurora is only good / visible on camera, are often observing the night sky with un-adapted vision and have been staring at bright phone screens which destroy any dark adaption the eye has underwent so far. Of course though it must be said that very faint aurora will not register with most regular eyes. I also recommend switching to dark mode on your phone, because the white light weakens perception of the dark tones in images and is generally not good for your eyes.

In the northern hemisphere, we would normally be searching the northern horizon for Aurora, however it was different that night…

Corona Borealis over Balvaird Castle Scotland — Facing South-East - Corona

With powerful storms, aurora becomes a huge event around the world, and increasingly powerful storms allow it to be seen in all directions, varying throughout the night.

Aurora Colours

A basic knowledge of chemistry dictates that gases produce differing colours when they are heated. On Earth, the most abundant elements in our atmosphere are Nitrogen and Oxygen. Nitrogen tends to produce the pinks and blues if they occur, and the greens tend to come come from oxygen.

This picture above shows the aurora borealis corona facing south-east. (Corona, being like the origin point). Unheard of, and occurring in only the most powerful of displays, it seemed like there was Aurora across the whole sky, even at zenith. (Think of zenith as the sky directly overhead when standing at a location).

Aurora Pink Pillar Scotland May 10th/11th 2024 — Pink Aurora Pillar

I spent some time focusing on compositions that avoid severe key stoning to the castle. Key stoning occurs when we use wide angle lenses close to subjects and tilt the camera and lens combination up or down. This causes large objects with straight edges, such as this castle to lean back or towards the camera. Our brains naturally correct this effect that our eyes will be “seeing” also. This caveat drove the use of some central based compositions, along with where the northern lights actually featured in the sky.

Aurora Arc, May 10th/11th 2024 Scotland — The Aurora Arc

This was an initial picture I made throughout the ever changing Aurora that night. This is facing North where we could see the vast green aurora arc with pink pillars above it. The castle seemed to be perfectly aligned with the base of this arc.

Sweeping Aurora bands, May 10th/11th 2024 Scotland

Looking north, we can see how powerful the display was. Here we can see the constellation of Corona Borealis (top right), quite fitting on this night. The rays reached zenith during the night.

Balvaird Castle Aurora Tracks May 10th/11th 2024 Scotland — Green Aurora Tracks

Although key stoning is generally ugly, I had to show these bright aurora tracks looking up a the castle here. Despite obtaining these images, I still wish I stayed out all night. I called it a day at about 2:30pm as I had a long journey to make the next day.

The Nikon D850 - Still King Years Later

Introduction

This camera is the seminal Nikon DSLR, culminating in Nikon’s years of DSLR development into an extremely well rounded do - everything camera. So many people have dumped it, and other very capable DSLRs and moved to mirrorless. I am a much more tool to task type of shooter, who values the beautifully large optical view finders in Nikon’s D8xx series cameras, and the strengths which they play to.

Specifications

45.7MP BSI CMOS sensor
7 fps continuous shooting with AE/AF (9 with battery grip and EN-EL18b battery)
153-point AF system linked to 180,000-pixel metering system
UHD 4K video capture at up to 30p from full sensor width
1080 video at up to 120p, recorded as roughly 1/4 or 1/5th speed slow-mo
4:2:2 8-bit UHD uncompressed output while recording to card
1 XQD slot and 1 UHS II-compliant SD slot
Battery life rated at 1840 shots
3.2" tilting touchscreen with 2.36M-dot (1024×768 pixel) LCD
Illuminated controls
19.4MP DX crop (or 8.6MP at 30fps for up to 3 sec)
SnapBridge full-time Bluetooth LE connection system with Wi-Fi
Advanced time-lapse options (including in-camera 4K video creation

D850 Image Quality and Dynamic Range

The D850’s image quality in 35mm format is still class leading, many, many years after it’s release in 2017. Even the Z7II, which on paper is very close, cannot beat it. (it’s actually slightly worse, because if used to the absolute limit, the Z7II autofocus grid is hidden in the data if pulled too hard especially in serious applications such as deep sky work the autofocus grid can be seen. This does not occur ever in DSLR’s as focusing is carried out off sensor). So even present day, nothing is touching this sensor. Let’s look at the D850’s class leading sensor stats from photonstophotos.com:

Nikon D850 Dynamic Range — Nikon D850 Photographic Dynamic Range

This sensor clocks in a whopping 11.63 stop of dynamic range at base ISO of 64. Not only this, the RAW files are so malleable (which these charts don’t necessarily tell us) in post processing. You can pull a file any which way and it holds up. It saves you ifyou screw up when taking the image. The shadow latitude is absolutely insane. One can expose for the highlights, and drag the shadows up to get a realistic image, without horrendous noise or banding like with other brands.

Dual Gain Design

Similarly to the D810 before it, if needing to boost an exposure excessively in lower light - it is best to shoot at ISO 400 due to read noise. (note the little bump upwards in dynamic range here on the graph). What this means is, if in low light shooting portraits, or astro foregrounds, increasing dyanmic range in camera is the same as doing so in post. This is called sensor invarience. However, the reason it is best to keep it at 400 and boost later, is you will retain dynamic range, particularly highlight data. If you crush it up to ISO 6400, your dynamic range will have dropped. The key here, boost it in post. During daylight, to get the best latitude, it is obviously advisable to shoot at ISO 64. The BSI part of the sensor design means the light gathering elements of the sensor are closer to the surface of the chip. This means, that the D850 is even better than the already good D810 at high ISO, and it can be pushed even further. The D810 can produce a slight magenta glow if pushed really hard, at high ISO.

ISO 64

ISO 64 is a magic ISO where one can feel free of dynamic range problems or constraints. For example, if you shoot Sony, Canon or Fuji, you are simply missing out. It’ s ironic for the sony shooters. Nikon sensors are made by Sony; however Nikon tune them and get more out of them than Sony do. ISO 64 is a landscape photographers dream with so much latitude that exposure brackets are needed less and less. NB: Of course, still needed in certain situations.

Electronic Front Curtain Shutter

This one is really useful for us landscape and particulary, astro guys. Yes it stops vibrations, (however I had no issues with the D810, which doesn’t offer this). However, what this does provide is less wear on the shutter at night. Astro often involves many, many exposures, particularly if doing time lapse photography. Using this mode means the shutter stays open and the shutter actuations count will not rise with exposures. The electronic shutter is a huge boon for this type of shooting because of this, potentially prolonging the shutter life of the camera as well as dealing with any vibrations.

Build Quality

The build of this camera reminds me of the D700. The whole D8xx range is superb and although feel like bricks, can take some punishment and come out unscathed. I have never had an issue with this camera in this vein. Simply holding it in your hand confirms the feeling of a well crafted tool. It feels superb and ergonomic and solidly built.

Optical View Finder

The D8xx series have supberb optical view finders that give a superb in the moment feel: you are looking at the scene at the speed of light with zero lag, and zero feeling of tunnel vision with constant use. They are easy to use and compose with. Information on the LCD panel below is sufficient and gives all the details one would want. The only minor thing they should have popped in here is the battery life remaining. (It does come up when critcally low).

LCD monitor

The LCD monitor is extremely high resolution and adjusts to a level that it can be used in bright sunlight. It should, like the D800 have auto brightness, like all phones do. It seems Nikon considers it’s user base confuses brightness with actual image exposure perhaps and removed this function? It tilts in one axis only, my only complaint is that I would prefer a dual axis tilt screen, like the Z 8 and Z9 now have. (This becomes really useful when doing low lying vertical orientated shots, especially at night.

Autofocus and FPS

The autofocus in the D850 is another evolution of the D810. The D810 can’t match the D850 in sports, but this was never really my forte. I have shot some equestrian events, and some motor racing and have always been able to nail it on the D810 and make pictures with fast lenses. That said, close fast moving subjects on the D850 have a higher hit rat with this camera. There are lots of modes and options to make the camera do what you wish it to do. The camera shoots at 7 FPS in full RAW mode, producing gorgeous, highly editable files.

Use Cases:

Deep Sky Astro

I have a tutorial on this here with the D850 used for years to photograph the deep night sky. For this camera body, shoot at a higher ISO for this specific purpose and ignore what I have said above about limiting to ISO 400. Nikon camera’s can produce concentric circles when shooting at too low an ISO and stacking multiple hours of night sky data (commonplace in deep sky astro of course), then stretching it to reveal faint signal afterward. Start at ISO 800 to reduce your chance of problems in this regard.

Landscape Photography

You are in good company if you particpate in this genre. For 99% of shooting, you will be at ISO 64. To maxmise IQ, in lower light, ISO 400 should be selected (dual gain point, below that, the sensor is ISO invariant). I don’t need to say anything more about this camera for this genre as it is tried and tested. In 35mm format, nothing beats it.

Sports

A large bright OVF is what a sports shooter should consider. They spend vast amount of time watching and studying before pushing the shutter. A lot of that time, is spend with the eye pressed up to the finder. Do you watch to watch TV all day? With the OVF advantages (and battery), along with excellent reliable AF and amazing lens selection, you cannot go wrong if you like using a body this size for sports (some prefer the larger nikons).

Portraiture / Weddings

Another obvious win for this camera. Yes it lacks eye AF, but you really don’t need this, not really. Image quality for portraits is excellent, skin tones are sublime and the files are so malleable as with the other genres, this camera is tried and tested.

Macro / Copy work

I am not a macro shooter per se, however I can see no reason why this camera would not be perfect in such disciplines. The high quality, high megapixel sensor will take care of all needs in these situations.

Final Thoughts

I would not have added a Z 8 into the mix if the D850 had a few things:

A higher sensitivity in lower light for astro purposes, helping vastly when constructing panos (mosaics) of the night sky
A dual tilt screen
USB charging
I wanted to upgrade my landscape lenses to zooms and wished the latest lenses (24-70/2.8S), (14-24/2.8S with front filters)

If you are a sports shooter, shoot weddings, or portraits, candid or in a studio with lights - think long and hard about why you want to move everything to mirrorless. The main reason I added a mirrorless body was because of the way I was using the D850. I was using the monitor most of the time these last few years, as per common landscape / astrophotography practice. So I am not missing the OVF in that regard. As soon as I want to shoot people, a wedding etc, the DSLRs come out. Don’t necessarily ditch all your DSLRs for the new toys. Tool to task…

Nikon Z8 Dynamic Range compared to D850 — Nikon D850 vs Z8 Dynamic Range

As you can see from above technically, I have lost a small amount of image quality at base ISO and at around ISO 400 where there is a small dip in the camera’s range. For the Z 8, we either shoot at ISO 64, or at 500 for this reason (500 is the dual gain switch point in this model and means more stretching and cleaner images can be had, then trying to drag up an ISO 400 shot). At base ISO, the image quality loss is small, but it is still mildly annoying that we have a kind of one step forward, one step back game going on here. Due to the stacked sensor, the Z 8 has about 1/3 of a stop less dynamic range. It makes it’s RAW files slightly less malleable and yes - I have noticed it. Most will not however, and it can be mitigated by good shooting technique. So no need for the sky to fall; however if you want class leading image quality at an absolute steal of a price - you have just won a watch if you pick up a D850, especially right now, or forever…Because of this, it remains Highly Recommend.

Freezing Motion in the Still Image

Boy playing with water — Nikon D800 with 135mm f/2 DC prime lens

Freezing motion in the still image is actually a very simple concept - we just require a fast shutter speed. How fast you ask? That depends on what we are trying to freeze in the frame. For fast moving objects with longer lenses, generally we are going to need shutter speeds of a few thousandth - 1/1000, 1/2000 etc and upwards. If we are talking about someone walking, depending on the subject to camera distance, lens etc, we might only need 1/500 even on a high resolution sensor. Let’s look at the example above shot at ISO 100, f/2, 1/3200. If we look at a close up we can see more clearly. The depth of field at this close range with a large sensor such as the D800, we can see the the plane of focus is very fine (it’s on the eyes of courser, however at the bottom left of the picture, water droplets come close into this plane, hence appear sharper). This is a good example to illustrate that everything is perfectly frozen here; but some of the droplets are within the depth of field more than others. I could have gone even faster here with my shutter speed if needed. (I could do that by simply doubling the ISO to get double the shutter speed).

I am shooting in aperture or manual with all of my work. Aperture is a great mode because it allows conscious control of aperture and therefore the shutter speed (by simple knowledge that opening the aperture will quicken the shutter speed, and vice versa), however you get a little more help with the onboard computer in the camera than you do with manual mode. This means generally you can react quicker to a changing scene that happens in front of camera. Aperture works so well, because we know that in bright light, if we use a wide aperture, we are going to get a fast shutter speed, even at base ISO. So all it takes for scenes like these is aperture priority mode, the widest aperture the lens shoots at, be it f/1.4, f/2, f/2.8, base ISO and an occasional glancing at the shutter speed readout in the viewfinder. If it drops lower than you want, simply up the ISO (or if possible, open up the aperture). This way of working gives great control, and speed / flexibility. Outdoors with fast lenses, it is very easy to stop motion like this. However, if we wanted to do the opposite - just stay at base ISO and close down the aperture. In aperture mode, the camera will drop the shutter speed (which again you can continually glance at in the finder), and as you get to lower speeds, the water will blur across the image. It all depends on the desired effect. Learning these things until they become intuitive is very important to mastering the craft.

Lens Design and Selecting Tool to Task Lenses

Introduction

How do we select a lens for a subject? This depends on many factors. Sometimes, one of those factors may take more of a priority over another. Say, for example, I am a landscape photographer. However, what if I am a landscape photographer on an extreme budget? Well, I might suggest looking for the most bang for buck camera and lens combo one could probably buy. A older Nikon DSLR such as a D800 in great condition, with perhaps a reasonably priced mid ranged zoom, or maybe an older mirrorless body with an accompanying lens suited to their shooting style. If money is no object, or say, less of a concern, the game changes a bit. They might be splashing out on a Nikon Z 8, or a Sony a7R V etc and the very latest zoom or prime kit. The same is the case when we select a lens for shooting. The priority is balanced with budget and intention, how the image will be used and displayed etc. This said, even despite the D800 being quite old now, it has phenomenal dynamic range and image quality. (In capable hands, I still consider it world class. It is only budget now, because it is older).

However, getting back to lenses, what if we really think about why some lenses are better suited to certain shooting applications? If we put initial cost of owning a lens aside, how do we then select a lens after that? Should we shoot landscapes with a lens tuned for portraiture? What about the other way around? Should we try shooting the night sky with lenses that were never intended for that purpose? What happens if we do these things? Why can’t lenses be perfect for every subject?

Balance

A lens designer is an architect of optics that must balance science with art. This isn’t dissimilar to a photographer. We hopefully balance technical craftmanship with art, to hopefully produce an image that produces an idea, a feeling, a journey, an expression of emotion. Someone I speak to often about lens design - someone who knows way more about this than me, once told me that lens design is a balancing act; a veritable horse trading of parts - a give and take in a very real sense. The designer can trade and optimise one thing, which will perhaps be to the detriment of another optical property. And this is why, truly great lenses often fall into different categories, of course by design. This is exactly why, we should at least consider which lenses we are using to shoot which subjects. Would another lens work better? Many of us do this by looking at reviews - I will myself admit I do enjoy doing this. Despite doing so however, for many years I have begun to question the efficacy of tests for a lens clearly designed to be shot (or is optimised overall) for infinity shooting, being tested with a close up scene in a studio or a garden? What would that really tell me about a lens that was clearly optimised for something else entirely?

We have never lived in more sophisticated age than we do presently for lens design, and it has only gotten better. Lens design is dramatically improved vs decades ago by computer aided design, and relatively speaking, manufacturers’ are able to provide us with excellent lenses compared to thirty years ago for reasonable prices. 35mm format photography now approaches medium format in quality when optimal lenses and technique are melded together. The designer has access to tools they simply did not have in those times past.

Aberrations

All optical equipment has to contend with the properties of light, with regards to how it refracts through lens elements. An aberration simply refers to the deviation of a light ray through a lens causing blurred images, or areas of an image which are blurred / degraded in quality. There are many types of aberrations which can hamper final image quality that the designer must contend with and balance. The big ones are, vignetting, distortion, field curvature, chromatic aberration, comatic aberration, spherical aberration and astigmatism. Many types of aberration improve when stopping a lens down through it’s aperture range, however some do not - which dismantles the old cliché that all lenses are the same by f/8: this is simply not true.

Vignetting - This is a peripheral shading (darkening) of the side frames and corners of the image. This tends to affect faster lenses more and always improves when stopping down, due to the aperture blades of the lens obstructing the outer light path as the lens is stopped down.
Distortion - An obvious optical problem is when the lens distorts things like vertical or horizontal lines or objects. Lens distortion is different from perspective distortion (the distortion we see when using an ultra wide lens on a person close up). Distortion can either be barrel or pincushion, or sometimes a mixture of both.
Field Curvature - This occurs when light rays do not attenuate to the same focal plane, we are left with potential dead spots were the lens isn’t sharp (or it is less sharp). Field curvature can come in different types, wavy etc.
Chromatic Aberration - There are two types. ‘Longitudinal CA’ occurs when different wavelengths of colour do not converge at the same point after passing through a lens, also known as bokeh fringing. The second type, called ‘lateral CA’ occurs when different wavelengths of colour coming at an angle focus at different positions along the same focal plane.
Comatic Aberration - Also known as ‘coma’ is an aberration that occurs when light rays from the edges of the image pass through glass elements over the changing shape of the lens elements, they vary in magnification and become stretched out. This aberration only affects off axis light. In astro work, stars on the periphery / corners of the frame can literally look like little comets.
Spherical Aberration - This occurs when light rays focus on different planes after passing through a spherical surface. Rays that pass off axis refract more than rays passing horizontally through the centre of the lens and thus cause this. The rays that pass through the elements off axis refract so much they can focus in front of the intended focal plane. This can cause a blur / glow in images at fast apertures. Sometimes this is desirable in small quantities and is balanced with other aberrations to optimise a lens for a specific task.
Astigmatism - Known as the ugliest optical aberration. Astigmatism occurs when the lens elements fail to focus image lines running in different directions in the same plane. This one doesn’t really go away as we stop down the aperture of a lens (I have previously spoken about how not all lenses are the same at f/8, and this is one of the reasons). As we stop down, the increasing depth of field can mask a lens with some astigmatism in it, but often not fully account for the problem. Astigmatism causes softness to the edge frames in many lenses, in astrophotography it produces winged seagull shaped stars at the edges.

Lenses for Landscape Photography

Loch Garry Scotland Nikon Z8 — Loch Garry - Nikon Z 8 with 24-70/2.8S

Generally speaking, most landscape photographers want lenses that portray a very detailed and realistic interpretation of the scene. Landscape photographers need an accurate representation, and where possible, a lens which imparts nothing onto the image other than the scene in front of it. This includes fine detail, such as in grasses and rocks at near and far distances. Generally speaking, a good landscape - tuned lens is optimized to provide as much low, mid and high frequency MTF structure as possible. Controlled aberrations, sharpness balance across the frame (rather than just centrally), control of coma, astigmatism, flare and other optical phenomena are important to shooters in this genre. Lenses for landscape photography use tend to be f/2.8-4 lenses at their maximum apertures. The are usually designed to work best at mid range apertures such as 5.6-f/11 where they will be used most of the time. Lenses for this genre benefit from being sealed from dust / moisture to protect from inclement weather conditions. One thing I would highlight here is, there is a great deal of confusion from our community regarding lens speed. People will often balk at the suggestion of using a fast aperture lens for this genre of photography, because it is likely, mostly, going to be used stopped down in the field. It is understandable why they think like this, however it is a fallacy - we must consider that some aberrations do not go away as we stop down. Sometimes the faster glass just works better overall, even stopped down.

Lenses for Portrait Photography

Nikon 85mm f/1.4D baby Portrait — Boy and his Balloon - Nikon D800 with 85/1.4D prime

Lenses for this genre have completely different aims. The best ones are obviously designed and built to make people look good. Out of focus areas have much more priority in the design, things like spherical aberrations and coma are adjusted in different ways than in landscape lenses to balance the background out of focus elements, with the sharpness of the subject and the focal plane transition areas. Lenses for this genre tend to have faster maximum apertures in order to be able to produce large areas of defocus (bokeh) in front and behind of the subject. These lenses tend to be optimised for use at their widest, or wider first few apertures, whilst still being able to balance scene fine detail when stopped down at close range.

Lenses for Astro Photography

Astrophotography 14-24/2.8S Nikkor Isle of Skye — Orion over the Quiraing, Isle of Skye - Nikon Z 8 with 14-24/2.8S

This genre is by far the most testing for any optical equipment. Point light sources, which are essentially what all starlight is to us, is a torture test to even the best of lenses. The three big ones in astro photography that we want to see controlled; are astigmatism (winged stars on the corners of the frame), coma (comet shaped stars out with the central axis) and chromatic aberrations (purple / green halos around areas of high contrast). If the designer can balance this with a good level of sharpness, especially across the frame from wider apertures, and a reasonably fast aperture to boot, the lens should excel on starlight.

Dual Personality Lenses

24mm f/1.4G nikkor arcade portrait — At the Arcade - Nikon D810 with 24/1.4G, a true dual personality lens

There is a very real situation whereby a lens can be a master in two disciplines. Let us consider, a fast aperture prime lens, for example the 50mm f/1.2S Nikkor. Clearly built as a portrait lens, and designed to work on people, it produces beautiful rendering at it’s first few apertures and at close ranges. However, use it at infinity, stopped down and it technically speaking is an excellent landscape lens also. There are many examples of such lenses. An older design that this applies to, is my 24/1.4G nikkor. Wide open and stopped down to the first few apertures, this lens is a bokeh, focus transitional rendering piece of magic. However, use it on a landscape at f/5.6-f/11 and it is extremely capable. I find this quite curious, and I have often bought lenses with this personality in mind. I used the 24/1.4G for many years as both an environmental portrait and landscape lens. What I like most about a lens like this is it’s ability to give a cinematic look in pictures such as the one I have shared above, and also be very proficient and showing vast amounts of detail and contrast when used stopped down on landscapes. It is perfectly capable in both disciplines. Needless to say, I like owning lenses that can do this, and as much as I like using zoom lenses for landscape photography, I love using primes. on people / objects. I keep the zooms for landscapes now.

NB - I shot most of my landscape work with prime lenses up until very recently.

Shot Discipline for Image Quality

What is good shot discipline?

Beginners often ask me settings. Questions can be as vague, as “What settings are good for a wedding”. They are often talking about shutter speeds, ISO, and aperture values when asking this. Of course, this is a question that has no real answer, however I do understand why people ask it. Of course, settings are built around the very scene you wish to capture, and the style and way in which you wish to capture it. This is then dependant on a multitude of factors, including the camera and lens combination, the light, subject, overall scene, motion, the photographer’s creative vision for the picture and more. There is no way we can issue settings for a wedding next July and hope they will work in any way. What we can do however, is build an instinctive understanding of shot discipline at our fingertips which serves us for each and every scene and subject we shoot. Then we truly become masters of the final picture and achieve the results we want in any given situation. It is only by training oneself to really intuitively understand settings and therefore exposure, that we are really ready to shoot something like a wedding. For example, as a photographer, if you are going into a wedding and the pressing concern in your mind is exposure settings; then you are as they say, simply not ready to shoot a wedding.

ISO - Maximising Quality

Regarding the above question, technically speaking, the best settings are the ones which allow your ISO to be at it’s lowest, or closest to base value, whilst keeping the subject sharp and in focus with no motion blur. Why do we do this? I see this all the time, even on websites with photographers’ that should know better - they even write their settings below the picture as if they make sense to be using them, as if they are some holy grail. We know that the best image quality exists at base ISO. That includes, overall dynamic range, noise, colour, shadow detail, and everything else. Because we know this, we should stop taking pictures with settings such as these of static objects - ISO 1600, 1/4000, f/2. If we are at ISO 1600, we are already sacrificing quality and we simply don’t need to. We don’t need a shutter speed of 1/4000 to handhold a photograph of something that isn’t moving, especially with a short lens like for talking sake, a 35mm prime. We can drop down to ISO 800, 1/2000, f/2. We can drop down again to ISO 400, 1/1000, f/2. We can then get to ISO 200, 1/500, f/2. Then we can drop to ISO 100 with 1/250 and f/2. If we need more shutter and the lens opens up to f/1.4 we have even more options. If the lens is under 135mm, there will likely be zero issues. Now we are, for many cameras, at base ISO using some very simple mathematics.

I tend to control ISO myself, as I rarely move it unless the situation changes, and all my camera’s have a dedicated button to do so (this is so important, never shoot with camera’s that don’t have this option). I do not like auto ISO as it does poorly with backlit or front lit subjects and it simply cannot achieve what my minds eye can.

Shoot RAW

Unless you absolutely need JPG for some time pressured thing, or other reason, I highly recommend never using it for shooting. You have bought a nice camera, let’s use it’s full range and ability. Better yet, if we screw up, RAW can save us later on. Shoot RAW, there is no debate on this, if you want to maximise image quality this is the mode you need to be using. With Nikon, choose the uncompressed or lossless compressed RAW setting.

White Balance

White balance tends to matter less when shooting RAW format. WB can be changed in software, when developing the RAW file later. However, there are certain reasons to set a manual WB. In disciplines such as astro photography, when it is common practice to stack multiple hours of data together, we need a consistent WB for that process. Other times when you might consider a pre-determined WB would be a scene that can be measured with a WB card, or to save time with processing consistency in post processing.

Best Shooting Modes

Aperture Priority - When shooting a wedding, this would be the mode that most would use. Let the camera’s computer do some of the heavy lifting. Control ISO yourself and aperture and focus on light and composition. Flash, would involve moving to manual mode as this allows better control of background exposure
Manual - The mode that all landscape photographer’s live in. I also like this mode for shooting portraits that are slower and more deliberate.
Other Modes - Shutter Priority, I am not a fan of. I can simply use aperture priority and look at the shutter speed. I have never personally seen the need for this mode, but if it works for you, there is of course nothing wrong with using it for shooting anything you need. Auto, also not a fan of, just forget about it unless you are handing your camera to someone very inexperienced.

DSLR Mirror - Up Mode

If shooting with a DSLR and doing static work, use this mode. It helps limits vibrations. It can often be coupled with electronic shutter mode, in most modern DSLR cameras. Consider exposure delay mode when shooting like this, with any camera.

Metering

Ensure that you can capture all the relevant scene data in one shot. If not, consider bracketing (tripod required). Use the camera meter and histogram in order to do this. There are many techniques to consider, the most logical one I will touch on here is exposure to the right (ETTR). This is a technique where we use the camera histogram to push the data as far to the right without clipping any highlights. This allows the best shadow detail and fidelity to the overall file, and allows the file to be the most malleable in post processing. This is a topic that I will eventually get to in more detail. NB - note that camera manufacturer’s are lazy. We still don’t have RAW histograms, and the generated histogram in camera is based off of a JPG preview. This is better than nothing but RAW histograms would be the ideal solution. It is therefore important to try and stick to a lowered contrast picture control setting when shooting.

Focus

It goes without saying, that it pays dividens to learn how to use your camera’s autofocus system. Most of the good one’s are not difficult to learn and with some practice, hopefully master. Ensure if you are shooting static shots, that you are in focus and take time with it to confirm best sharpness has been achieved. If shooting fast moving subjects, move into a fast FPS continous shooting mode and use a dynamic focus mode in order to get the best results. If the shot is not in focus, it is often (not always) not useable.

Picture Control

Picture controls can be thought of as unimportant, because of course we can change this all later, and it depends on the final edit software, as to how the image is displayed on a monitor. However, as I alluded to earlier, if you are trying to capture quality data, having a high contrast picture control will not let you see the clip points of the highlights or shadows. Due to this, I recommend to use a neutral profile on most cameras. Flat can also be used, but I find it so faded in so many settings that it can be distracting using it. I consider switching to it in scenes of ultra high contrast, for example at sunrise / sunset times I do use it, along with bracketing of exposures for blending in post processing.

Focal Length and Subject Size / Motion

It is very important to consider what I have detailed above. I have spoke about a static subject. The game changes when we increase focal length, and / or increase the MP density of the sensor, if we wish “per pixel focus” (perfect looking focus at 100% views on large monitors which show no motion blur). With longer focal lengths we need to contend with motion of the viewed frame in the view finder (which could show up in the end picture if we are not careful). Things like Vibration Reduction (VR) and IBIS can prevent this issue, or at least, reduce it. Longer focal lengths, or being closer to the moving subject itself, magnify the view into the scene, and will also magnify the blur if a subject is fast moving, relative to our sensor. If a subject was running at the camera, I may not want to drop my shutter speed too low. This is something that simply comes with experience. The easiest way to build up experience is to test it out on static subjects, such as museum pieces. See how long you can get your shutter speed whilst keeping a sharp shot, and see how close you can get to base ISO. Then try varying speeds of moving subject, with different lens focal lengths.

In the above shot, my son was basically motionless. I could have probably dropped down to ISO 400-500 easily and the resulting shutter speed would have still been adequate to stop any slight motion present. It is important to consider though, that despite good shot discipline being a cornerstone of good photography, it shouldn’t get in the way of such. That is, if the settings are close to perfect and the moment presents itself, do not bother wasting time to adjust something as meagre as dropping half a stop of ISO. You could miss the picture! Look at the meter, quickly adjust if required and shoot the picture. Here is another, very static scene, now we only have the motion of the photographer and camera / lens combination to consider…

Notice the settings. I am at base ISO of 64 for this picture because I know I can confidently handhold a 24mm prime at 1/40 shutter speed. This is a really practical example of why I always practice good shot discipline. Notice the outside area to the upper right of the frame which is spilling up with bright overcast daylight? If I were at ISO 200, 400, that area could have become blocked up white. (We know that as ISO increases, dynamic range lowers). In museums, we rarely want or are allowed to bring tripods to bracket exposures - so by practicing with this technique, I was able to gather all the data at the scene in one RAW file, and process it with a luminosity mask to bring it all back, producing a pleasing well rounded shot. What I love about shots like these, is the sheer depth and 3D nature you can impart into a 2D image. It really is quite beautiful, and it is the reason I simply love using prime lenses such as these (and not slow aperture zooms) to create pictures like this.

The next time you are out shooting, think about good shot discipline…if you aren’t already, shoot in RAW format, drive the ISO of the camera and use manual mode, or Aperture Priority, driving the exposure compensation buttons to control the scene in front of you.

Steve

Nikon 50mm 1.4G, 50mm 1.4D and 50mm 1.8D

I have been shooting with these little lenses for well over a decade now on my DSRLS (yes I still use DSLRS too, despite owning Z equipment now). Many will say that optically they have been superseded (and yes, for certain applications, such as astrophotography, I would not specifically buy them for*). However, for portraiture, and the photography of “things” / “stuff” I find them very satisfying to use. For me, a 50mm is a lens that should be nice and light, and ready to go anywhere. I am not going to tell you that these lenses are optically 'la crème de la crème, however they are, small, light and some quite inexpensive options for shooters wishing specific renderings that work well on Nikon’s DSLR F-Mount range of cameras.

When shooting portraiture, generally I do not prioritise ultra sharp lenses. I find most, modern primes to be sufficiently sharp for this task, so this really is a lower priority on my list. I need to reiterate this basic point whilst we are talking about image sharpness, for me, even babies with perfect skin look better with a slightly softer lens that produces some level of spherical aberration at it’s widest apertures, essentially, to be shot with a lens that is tuned to being used for portraits. Spherical aberration is a biggie when it comes to portrait-tuned lenses; over correcting it in a lens design tends to affect bokeh and the focal plane transition. This aberration goes away as we stop down, so lenses that have high correction tend to be very sharp from their widest aperture, and conversely lenses that are a bit softer and have a glow wide open generally are under corrected. With the 50mm lenses that I own: I use them on both full and crop framed sensor cameras, giving either 50mm or 85mm equivalent views respectively.

It is important to consider, that your shooting likes and wants may not align with mine or the next photographer. I will admit to using a very mixed bag when it comes to lenses across different genres, and I have that luxury. At night, for my astro work, I would be using a completely different lens, compared to during the day shooting like I am in this blog post. This also might go for landscape too, however I have successfully used all of these 50’s for landscape shooting also. You might also prefer a very sharp portrait lens. There are situations where I have reached for my 35/1.4 Sigma Art lens because I wanted a bit more sharpness on my subject at the focal plane, and was less bothered about the resulting bokeh. I will not say the bokeh of the sigma is bad either, again it is different and altogether a subjective quality. I have shot plenty of what I feel are good pictures with the 35 1.4 art lens.

50mm is not always thought of a portrait focal length, however there is a lot one can do with a 50mm lens such as these, and it of course depends on your subject’s overall size. I think it is important to know the rules, then be able to break them when needed. (A portrait can be taken with any focal length). I like to have options (I’ll explain why soon), which is why I have two 50mm primes (I actually had three at one point). I currently have the 50mm 1.4G and the 50mm 1.8D. These are slightly different lenses which play differently. All of the Nikon 50mm lenses vignette quite a lot wide open, however this is a characteristic for this type of photography that I like to stamp on my images, with the caveat that it is totally adjustable later on anyway. The 1.4G has smoother bokeh, and is slightly more to the gaussian blur end of the spectrum in terms of backgrounds it can produce especially when at close range, alas:

Note that, with this lens, it can produce quite a smooth background bokeh in the right circumstances. For low light portraiture, I feel it works better than the 50mm 1.4D and 1.8D, and I very much like what it does in terms of focal plane transitions, here is a good example showing some good bokeh and beautiful focal plane transitions:

Now let me show you the much older 50mm 1.8D prime, which produces a much rougher background bokeh most of the time, but has absolutely zero distortion and produces, in the right circumstances, a great 3D effect. This can occur quite convincingly to the eye, if all the scene elements line up accordingly, the basics - like light, camera to subject distance, subject to background distance, the scene geometry etc. This is a topic I might explore in greater detail in time.

Notice the less smooth, (rougher) background blur here. I am closer, different light, different day, different aperture, different lens. however despite all that I can tell you from years of shooting with these lenses that this 1.8D just draws differently. I like this look. During the day, I really like using the 1.8D lens, because it imprints something unique onto the picture. In fact, as you probably guessed, this is what this blog post is about - all three of these lenses draw very differently and it all depends what you want from your picture. Here is the smoother 1.4G again:

But what about the f/1.4D you ask? Well I used this lens for a good while about six years ago. This lens is similar to the 1.4G, but it has a softer look wide open, with much less contrast which adds to this. Again, not a bad thing - these things must align with your shooting style and objectives for your picture. The 1.4G improved upon wide open sharpness and contrast in it’s design, and definitely has less chromatic aberration. It also benefits from some coating magic, that the older 1.4D does not have. This means that there is a distinct glow and loss of contrast when using it wide open due to it having bags of spherical aberration. However, as I said it is not necessarily bad news, and it can produce quite a painterly image, notice the glow effect to the subject’s face because I have used it wide open at f/1.4:

There are of course, other differences. Both of the older D designs are a little more blue shifted in their final outputs. The 1.4G lens is a hint shifted towards a yellower output in the resulting RAW. The D lenses both have much sharper sunstars. So if you want to use the lens at night stopped down on city lights, or during the day to make beautiful spikes off of hard point light sources, these do much better. The older D lenses, definitely have more out of control aberrations going on wide open, most which improve on stopped down. In a very real sense, you get a dual personality lens, as long as you like the wide open look, stopping down quickly takes out the glow, and brings in super levels of sharpness right up until f/8. I rarely use this aperture, unless doing school studio style portraits though. Generally the biggest difference I see is, the 1.4G is sharper wide open, and more contrasty than the 1.4D, however it is soft compared to modern primes. Again, this is not necessarily a bad thing. I’ve been creating with these lenses for years and I can tell you people like how they look in the pictures, and I don’t have to spend days prepping them with blur filters etc. People want to look like movie stars, they don’t want to see all the lines on their face. The flattest, least distorting is the 50mm 1.8D which has basically zero, which has it’s applications on it’s own. I find the 1.8D is sharp very close to maximum aperture and I use it during the day a great deal, even wide open as I love the look it produces.

Both the D lenses produce a more pronounced flare pattern. Sometimes it can be a red / yellow defined area, sometimes a ring around the image (I actually oddly like it sometimes) but we really have to expose the front element to serious levels of off axis sunlight to get this:

The 1.4G lens flares less than both D lenses, but it can still occur with this lens too. None of this bothers me too much - I like a bit of flare in my images sometimes, depending on the scene and subject it can be okay to leave in. In the above image, it would involve some complex photoshop work to remove.

Here is a picture with the 50mm 1.4D at night. It produces a softer, more painterly feel to the final result. You can see, the bokeh in the background is rougher than the new G lens at night, which I showed above and does outline the bokeh balls a little (called onion bokeh, or soap bubble bokeh):

Here is the 1.4D with a stopped down aperture on a bright spring day. Notice the backgrounds I am showing with the 1.4D compared to the newer G. The G is smoother, but I still like the effect of the older D lens. Sometimes I feel this rougher background helps to trick a type of 3D pop effect to the resulting image:

Here is another using the 50mm f/1.4D prime lens, now in a wedding scenario. Notice that the background bokeh is definitely a little more rough. Some may not like this: we are tuned to prefer gaussian blur type bokeh in the photography community. However, I think it is very characterful, and helps produce, when other supporting elements are within the frame, a 3D effect to the resulting picture:

Here is the slightly smoother 1.4G. I have tried to show a similar subject to background / lighting situation here. You can see that the 1.4G has smoother backgrounds, generally speaking. It does have a nice focus transition too. Closer up, the 1.4G has smoother, more modern style bokeh.

All the nikon 50’s (and mostly all fast lenses), produce a bit of cats eye bokeh, especially with close up subjects to varying degrees. I quite like the overall look most of the 1.4G lens for pictures such as these. I will add some more low light ambient shots like this later when I have time to dig through the archive more:

Which Lens?

There are some obvious differentiators here. The first one, price and size. If money matters, the 50mm 1.8D can be had for a song. Easily the cheapest. It is quite well built considering, and even has a metal mount and a sort of in built lens hood that works well. This lens is also easily the smallest nikon 50, and can easily fit in the pocket. The 50mm 1.8D is very sharp stopped down just slightly. It has the least distortion and by f/2.2-2.8 it is very contrasty. Even wide open I find it so pleasing, even in hard light during the day. It has a strong 3D effect to the files when everything measures up in the scene, including the light. Stopping down causes stop sign bokeh, there is zero weather sealing. A great, lightweight day shooting lens.

The 50mm 1.4D is more expensive still. Not always a great choice at night, as it produces smearing over light sources and has the most chromatic aberration of the three, but of course it can be stopped down slightly to massively improve this. During the day, it produces nice painterly pictures, but has very low contrast effect wide open (again, this effect is easily cleaned up by f/2). This lens has by far the most chromatic aberration of the three. In certain circumstance it can be tough to correct because it can cause very thick purple transitions at backlit focal planes on the subject in certain situations. It has a good 3D look to the files. Stopping down causes stop sign bokeh, and there is zero weather sealing. I like it’s overall look despite these optical flaws / characteristics.

The 50mm 1.4G is the sharpest wide open, and the most contrasty, however it is important to reconcile that it is no where near the levels of sharpenss obtained by even more recent lens designs. It’s bokeh is smoother than both of the others, and when stopping down, the bokeh balls stay rounded, and it probably has the best focus transitions of the three. It has a good 3D look to the files in my opinion. It is the most expensive. It has a rubber gasket, which I feel more confident using it in inclement weather. I have owned it for 14 years and never had an issue in this regard. A huge boon for this lens, is that if you own a body without a built in focus motor, it will still autofocus. The 1.8D lenses above, require a body that plugs into the lens and controls autofocus. You can check if your camera has this ability, otherwise you will be using manual focus with the 1.4D and 1.8D lenses.

Whichever you choose, I stress that these lenses are great for people and stuff / things. They are quite characterful, not perfect optically, however produce lovely results. The most important thing I consider is the overall render of a lens of this type. Do I like the type of picture it provides? Your milage is going to vary on this, and you may find that neither three are right for you. This said, I wanted to touch on some of the differences between them here. This is clearly not a scientific test, but my thoughts of what I have seen with using these three over many years.

Nikon Z 8, 50mm 1.4G @ f/3.5 on a star tracker mount, March 2024

*For Astrophotography work (as shown above, a single tracked frame from a huge mosaic image - see my astro landscape gallery), although I wouldn’t tell anyone to go and buy these lenses specifically, especially for wide open work (they are not well corrected for the task), the irony is I regularly use the 50mm 1.4G at 2.8-3.5 on a star tracker, with acceptable results. I am considering what to buy in the future to allow me to shoot around f/1.8-2.5, at night. It is important to note, that all three of these Nikon 50’s have severe astigmatism if shot wide open at night. This will make the stars in the corners look like little seagulls, rather than points of light. This affect takes a few stops to dissipate, which is why you don’t see it on the above image, shot at f/3.5.

Let’s leave this with a couple of drinks, because I seem to have a shot a lot of them with this lens…

Steve

Sky-Watcher Star Adventurer 2i Star Tracker

The Star Adventurer on a 055 Manfrotto Tripod

I have been using the Star Adventurer 2i for four years now and it is a mount that has enabled me to capture some beautiful astro landscape images and also photograph objects in the deep sky. When I first obtained this mount, I had no idea I would be venturing deeper into the sky to photograph galaxies like Andromeda, or star clusters close up like the Pleiades. When I first received the mount in 2020, I practiced first in my garden and I recommend all users do this where possible.

The Build

Unpacking this star tracker, the first impressions are that is is solid and well built. It requires a tripod (ideally carbon fibre to minimise vibrations, but I have photographed plenty with an Aluminium tripod and it has been fine). This star tracker comes with Wifi, and I will discuss later why this is such a boon if you want to keep things as simple and efficient as possible when shooting under dark skies. Save for the plastic reticule, used for polar alignment, the build of the SA 2i is of very good quality. The knobs and dials all have a quality feel to them and the mount can be powered by x4 AA batteries (I use rechargables), or via USB connection to a powerbank - a really nice function and quick to connect in the field. The pro pack, comes with a metal declination bracket and counterweight (I bought an extra weight for balance - this is crucial for great tracking at 200mm). There is also a ballhead attachment, which I use for astro - landscape pictures, allowing focal lengths of about 85mm and under to be attached via it. The polar scope is nice and clear. I do recommend a right-angled polar scope attachment, to save your neck when trying to align. The included equatorial wedge is of good quality - and much better than some other star trackers in this price point. It has never given me an issue in terms of it’s overall build quality.

Declination bracket for long lenses showing the polar scope connected over this for polar aligning

Polar Aligning and Balancing

When getting setup in the garden, the first challenge is to setup the SA in proper polar alignment and the mount being properly balanced in order that it functions and tracks well. This seems daunting it first, however with some practice you will get faster and better at doing so, like any task. In the northern hemisphere this process is simplified by requiring only to align to one star - Polaris. What you will find is, Polaris isn’t exactly the North Celestial Pole. The NCP is actually located in a circle around this star. The Star Adventurer app, which can be downloaded from Play store, enables information on how to align everything, depending on your location and the time of night. When I first received this star tracker, I luckily had a clear night a few days later (doesn’t always happen), I started with an 85/1.4 prime to give me a bit of a challenge. Polar aligning involves attaching an individual plastic part - a reticule into the SA which illuminates the polar scope and enables alignment. I was pleased that I could get 4 minutes right off the bat with the alignment I set. I didn’t try any more than this as I was pleased I could achieve pinpoint stars for 4 minutes at this focal length. Balancing involves moving the counterweight on the declination bracket so that with the clutch disengaged, no resulting motion occurs. It’s a case of bearing in mind some basic mechanics: Moment (turning force) = F (force) x D (distance). Put simply, use the lever arm on the bracket to place the weight in the place that causes no motion when the mount (clutch) is unlocked.

Nikon Z 8 and 70-200/2.8S with proper configuration and Declination bracket use

Using Wifi and the app

As I alluded to earlier, the Wifi functionality and the Sky-Watcher App really bring this system to life, and make it very simple to use. Classically, if you wished to control a deep sky session with a camera and a mount, you need to use either a laptop, an Asiair, or at the very least an intervalometer connected into the camera. The great thing about Wifi funcitonality, and the app, is that I don’t need any of this extra clutter when I am outside freezing myself to death photographing deep sky objects. I can simply connect to the mount via the phone app, and all I need is one cable running from the camera into the mount. From the app, I can control exposure length, spacing between exposures and even dither in one axis. (Dithering is a process that involves instructions for the mount to move the field of view slightly between exposures so that when stacking images, things like fixed pattern noise and other nasties such as hot pixels get cancelled out of the stack). Essentially this process improves your data and I nearly always use this. Wifi in this mount (indicated by the 2i in it’s title) might seem trivial, however it has made everything so simple to use. I previously tried an Asiair with DSLRs and found it fiddly and had issues with live view. I get very little time under dark skies. I either have cloud, or worse rain, or extremely high winds, or a moon to contend with. On nights that I have time to do this, I don’t want to spend time with laptops and cables running all over the place, troubleshooting one problem after another, with a setup that takes an hour to start shooting, then the same time to break it down at the end of the night. Speak to any deep sky astro shooter - they will tell you they have wasted many nights not taking images. Instead they have been tearing their hair out trying to fix some random technical issue.

The Star Adventurer app is simple and well thought out with no connection issues ever

What can you achieve with the SA?

Essentially, this mount is suitable for tracking skies from extreme ultra-wide angle focal lengths, such as 14mm right up to about 200mm with decent exposure times, with no guiding. I am able to get pinpoint stars at 200mm with 2 minute exposures (be aware of course, that 200mm and 2 minutes needs practice to nail consistently). People are shooting this mount at 400mm and even 600mm, but bare in mind they are binning a portion of their sub exposures due to periodic error and completing very short exposure times of 30 seconds or less to prevent trailing. I have been asked before why I don’t guide - I see many shooting at 135mm-200mm and adding in guiding, it is just not required, as I am proving. None of my pictures are guided! Remember what I said earlier: simplicity is the greatest invention, Guiding would add another camera and cables into the mix, with all the problems associated with it such as laptops and Asiairs to control the device. I will say though, that if you are shooting with a large equatorial mount at a focal length of 600mm and up, you know what you need and it is obvious that to achieve decent exposure times, such as 3-5 minutes - you are going to have to guide. However, we are not speaking about that. I suggest you place the limit of this system at 200mm and forget guiding. If you want to try some ultra deep pictures for fun on this mount, go ahead but keep the exposures short. This system isn’t really meant for that. That would be where the larger mounts come in to play.

About 4 hours of exposures from bortle 4-5 using the above setup

Small Deep Sky Objects with the SA 2i

So since I have said we are topping out at 200mm for the most part, how do we fill the frame with small objects? Well, the answer is: we don’t, but there are several strategies which will help. The first is looking at your camera. I recommend a high megapixel camera, shot in crop mode, or a crop camera. The reason for this is, generally speaking you will get more pixels on target and fill the frame with them better. For example, a Nikon Z 8 (45MP full frame sensor) shot in x1.5 crop mode, gives just under 20 megapixels. The second part to this is enacted in post processing, called drizzle. So let us take Andromeda as an example. Now it isn't the smallest deep sky object, but having it fill the frame is hard at 200mm, but as you can see, I have made a half decent picture of it. Part of this is down to when you process the resulting stacked image, the object physically gets larger. After we have put the camera into crop mode, or selected a x1.5 crop body to begin with in PP, we can do something called drizzle integration. This was developed by NASA. This is a method of obtaining more detail in your resulting file, meaning, if done correctly, we can produce a file larger than 20MP, perhaps put it back to 45MP, and thus crop it much more aggressively in post, enabling a closer view of your deep sky object. To benefit from drizzle, you must have a lot of data, multiple hours. The data also must be dithered, as I mentioned earlier - this mount allows for that. If you are using another mount that doesn’t do this - then this technique won’t work. This along with the other points raised here is one of the many reasons I highly recommend the SA 2i.