Blog

Nikon Z8 Firmware Upgrade 3.00

Introduction

I am pleased to see Nikon still supporting a two year old flagship camera with new and meaningful upgrades via firmware. Nikon seem to be doing this with most of their mirrorless line and I applaud them for it. This is how business should be done in a shrinking camera market. All camera makers around at present generally release less cameras than in the digital boom of the earlier 2000’s; however companies like Nikon tweak and improve them if possible over the course of their lifespan. It’s not perfect, however Sony and Canon could take note here…

The Upgrades

1. Pixel shift shooting function has been upgraded.
- The automatic exposure bracketing can be used together with the pixel shift function, so that high-quality, high-pixel images can be obtained along with exposure change data, which is the basis for HDR synthesis.

2. Focus shift shooting function has been upgraded.
- It is now possible to use pixel shift, which implements high-quality, high-pixel images along with optimal focus detection data for each shooting section, as an option. The foundation for satisfying both the best image quality and the best resolution has been established.

3. Flexible Picture Control support has been made possible.
- After creating a personal color tone adjusted to the user's preference through Nikon NX STUDIO, it can be applied to the camera via a memory card and applied in real time as a custom picture control.

4. Focus range limit settings can now be adjusted within the camera body. - You can now directly determine the close and long distance ranges for focus detection, enabling faster focus detection without being interrupted by unnecessary interference subjects when shooting flowers, birds, sports, etc.

5. The subject detection function has been enhanced.
- The subject recognition option can now be used with manual focus lenses, and the image magnification during shooting has been expanded to 400%. In particular, when shooting close-up, after checking the screen magnification, you can return from the enlarged zoom to the actual shooting range with just one half-press of the shutter, enabling faster shooting. (This highly benefits AF-D primes through the FTZII adapter, and manual focus glass in general).

6. The high-speed frame capture function has been improved.
- [C15] option selection has been added to prevent unnecessary shooting. In addition, JPEG FINE selection has been enabled in the image quality setting, enabling high-quality images.

7. The N-Log View Assist gradation characteristics have been changed and improved.
- It is now possible to check with a more accurate specified color tone when shooting video. It has become possible to shoot video comfortably with a color tone that matches the user's intention.

8. Other updates
1) The maximum aperture focusing solves poor focus in low light when using strobes etc, where the camera would previosly shoot stopped down.
2) Date option added when playing back filters.
3) High-frequency flicker preset setting is now possible.
4) Nikon models can now be displayed when using the Final Cut program for ProRes 422HQ images.
5) The AF custom wide area has been expanded to a larger area.
6) External microphone support for shooting image voice memo has become possible.
7) Subject detection frame display is now possible when shooting with high-resolution zoom.
8) The white LED of Proforo A10 can now be used as an AF assist light.
9) Support for NX Field has been improved.

Black Linn Falls at the Hermitage, Scotland. Shot with the Nikon Z8 and 14-24/2.8S — Black Linn Falls at the Hermitage, Scotland. Shot with Nikon Z8 and 14-24/2.8S

The Biggest Thing For Me In This Update Helps Me Use AF-D Glass On The FTZII

Apologies for the long subheading, but this one is huge! Manual focus subject detection is the biggest thing in this new firmware and it is actually superb. With any MF lens; simply enable the mode and it detects eyes across the frame even when they are out of focus (obviously). Following this, one button push allows magnification level of choice over either eye and then it is simply a case of pull to focus (or stay zoomed out and use the box going green to judge). No other manufacturer has taken MF this seriously in years, bar maybe Leica. This means nearly any lens ever made can be adapted to Z (due to that short flange distance) and they all benefit from this. Outstanding! And yes, it isn’t a proper FTZIII that keeps all lenses fully autofocusing as intended, but it is a huge step forward and enables me to use AFD primes faster, and with more confidence. I tested this with my fav old Nikon 50 1.4D and legendary 85 1.4D and it worked very well.

My Take

I am pleased to see these updates. Everyone will have their wants and needs. For me, it is about time that the feature ‘Manual Focus Subject Detection’ from the Zf finally made it into the Z8 and I am very much looking forward to using it. With this mode enabled, any manual focus glass, or crucially AF-D primes, will now get a superb update. As mentioned, with this mode enabled, the shooter will have the camera see faces and eyes, allowing focus to be punched in much quicker than it was able to be up until now. My only criticism is that it took them so long to bring it. This is a big thing for me, and will be for many users. Nikon is really taking manual focus implementation seriously on the Z8 (and Zf) with this. I have previously spoken about Nikon users’ call for a FTZIII that completes full autofocus support for all Nikon’s AF lenses back to the late 1980s. See here. This means that there is new life breathed into all AF-D lenses from Nikon, and indeed, a great ergonomic boon to all manual lenses now used on the Z8. I’ll say it again, this is very good news.

Next on my most want list was the maximum aperture focus thing which as above is long overdue and should have been implemented as the way the camera operates from day one. Some may not see the significance of this, so I will explain. Up until firmware 3.00, the Nikon Z8 camera uses an aperture of f/5.6 for focusing when shooting at f/5.6 or narrower (the aperture is only stopped down further once a picture is taken). I believe Nikon put this in to reduce the effects of focus shift; however most of their lenses are pretty free of this. In doing so, they caused a much bigger problem in certain situations, take studio shooters, working with speedlights or larger strobes. In these environments, the staple is shooting stopped down, at f8/f-16. Unfortunately, this meant that focus was erratic and unreliable, because the Z8 was autofocusing through an aperture of f/5.6. This has all changed now, because if you have an f/1.4 or f/2.8 lens, you are going to get focus happening at that aperture, and stopping down to the smaller aperture, only when the shot is taken. (Essentially, exactly the same as DSLRs work, Do’h Nikon - you should have known this, no?).

Still Missing

Unfortunately the good news ends here. There are still a great number of features, and frankly disparity across Z camera firmware. One I really expected to see by now on the Z8 and Z9 (again, it’s been in the Zf for over a year at time of writing), is the ability like Sony cameras, to use the back LCD to move the EVF focus point around. Do I have to wait another year for that Nikon?

The rest of these updates? I am pleased Nikon are doing them. Unlike idiot posters on photography forums, I never begrudge others’ updates that could potentially enhance their shooting practices. However I do wonder what Nikon is thinking by their continual ignorance of basic functions that should be in all of their Mirrorless cameras as standard. Yes folks, I’m going to complain about the lack of 4:5 crop mode again here, because it really is just stupid that we are still missing this. I even contacted Nikon about this several months ago. I thought - why not, they have a website which welcomes suggestions, so I suggested. I was surprized at the email I received in response to my enquiry. I was told that they “get asked about 4:5 crop mode being added to their cameras all the time, and further to this, they appreciate many other camera’s offer this mode, but they had no plans to add it” (I have kept this email, as it amused me so much). I mean how stupid is that? The mind boggles. Further to this, it was in some early mirrorless bodies, but the moronic thing is they actually took it out! I mean seriously, what is Nikon doing here? And this is where I come back to, while I absolutely do not begrudge any updates (even if they do not benefit me directly), I cannot help wondering why they petulantly do not fix a lot of low hanging fruit like crop modes and other items in their mirrorless line. I guess I will go on wondering…

NB: Nikon, it is beyond stupid that FW 3.00 isn’t available on Snapbridge until 27th October when it became available on your website on the 1st July! You need to wake up with this stuff - and this app in general is beyond atrocious and frankly an embarrassment). I've noticed a new standard Wifi connection is now available. Wont help for FW updates, however might work for image transfer to avoid Snapbridge? Yet to test…

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Orion Constellation over Scotland with the Nikon Z8 and 14-24/2.8S Lens — Orion over the Duncansby Sea Stacks, North Scotland. Shot with a Nikon Z8, 14-24/2.8 and star adventurer mount

Photography: Simplifying Composition

The Fairy Glen, Isle of Skye Scotland — The Fairy Glen on the Isle of Skye, Scotland

Introduction

The more I am part of the photography world, the more obvious it becomes to me that the best pictures are often intrinsically simple in their composition. This leads me to ask the question; can we learn something from the way amateur photographers’ take pictures? What do I even mean by this? Before you read this, you might want to read my previous article, which links into this topic nicely: ‘Shooting For Realism' Let’s discuss…

Simplify Your Images

For me, there is a sense of being careful that my pictures don’t become too “photographer-y”. (Stop me if I am getting too technical here). Of course, what I mean by this is, the pictures becoming too complex and technical feeling, predictable or forced in terms of their compositional makeup, or that they indeed follow trends or cliches. In essence, trying to be too clever can be to the detriment of the final result. I see this all the time especially in landscape photography. The picture is obvious and clear, but we have to put a large rock in the frame, or some other obstructive element in the foreground that simply doesn’t work for the scene; or worse, get’s the the way of viewing the landscape behind it. It can even be that the image becomes too “fore-groundy”. This becomes a counterintuitive process to creating a competent image with balance.

Gourock at Sundown, Scotland — Simple Compositions send a clear, undiluted message to the viewer about the landscape and what we wish to convey

Background

What caused me to notice this phenomenon? Although I have not done this for some-time (and I will tell you why later), I used to compare the pictures I had of locations to others on Instagram and the like. What I noticed, was that amateur’s pictures, whilst often having mangled colour, or large blown out highlights in places, their compositions were simpler, and worked better than some of the pictures I or other pros (or semi-pros) were taking of the same locations. I noticed this with other people shooting for instagram and the like. Sometimes the ‘uneducated’ travel photographer, who comes at photography from ‘this is a pretty place, I am going to try and become an influencer’ actually is making better pictures than the ‘trained photographer’ who aims to flaunt their compositional know-how at each scene; of course, save for the points about exposure, colour and the like made previously. Occam’s Razor suggests that the reason for this is simply because they don’t have all this ‘technical’ mumbo-jumbo in their head when they take a picture. They are clearly just wishing to have a captivating scene immortalised in front of them. In some way’s their intentions are simpler than us; they aren’t trying to be clever, like we sometimes get caught up in. Can we learn from this? I have discussed this topic with many prominent shooters and I think we can take something from this, and be mindful of it in our shooting.

That Annoying Foreground Object Craze

Believe me, this is a very real phenomenon, and most of us have been guilty of it at some time or another. For me, it began in the hayday of the website ‘flickr’ which I am very fond of until today, despite the horrid changes the current owner has made, (including max upload of 1000 images and prevention of downloading high resolution images). Often the most common culprit, is a small foreground rock, made to look large by shooting close with a wide angle lens. Take the picture at the start of the article. The craze states I would travel down to the rocky area in this scene, then place a random large boulder right in front of my lens, and shooting it that way (usually on a third). It feels clever, but is it? Isn’t the scene as I have shown, about the interplay of light and the place itself, rather than an arbitrary rock I found which I then place in the shot, blocking the view of the place? If we take this particular scene, I think it works best at elevation: looking down on the scene. That’s the shot here. A nice arrangement of the cloud around the scene aid’s composition here; there is a space around the rock formation on the right. The light is hitting the correct parts of the scene, nothing is blown out, colours look natural. I’ve ultimately avoided this ‘problem’ in this scene by keeping it simple, and also by my choice of focal length. I shot this with a 24-70/2.8S lens, at 24mm. A wide focal length, for sure; however not ultra wide. It is much easier to fall into the ‘too foregroundy’ trap with an ultra wide angle lens. I would urge you to think about what the scene requires before commiting to a focal length and foreground. Let’s look at the picture below and be critical with it:

Because I have shot this with too wide of a lens, there is far too much foreground for my liking. Also, the relationship between the size of the rocks in the foreground, and the size of the castle is exaggerated, making the castle appear extremely small in the frame. (This is a shot about a castle, right?). What do these rocks say about the image? Answer: nothing really. I just do not shoot like this now. To give you an idea, this was shot with a 20mm lens on 35mm format. My intention was to show some foreground. It would have been done better with a 35mm, and standing back from the shore much more. Or go telephoto. But this? It doesn’t work for my eyes now. NB: I intentionally left the distance to drift out of focus. In the below shot, the foreground makes sense to the overall image. I could however, chop through the water to produce a 4:5 picture also:

The Hermitage at Black Linn Falls in Autumn, Scotland — Black Linn Falls, Perthshire

Wide Angle Lenses and Foregrounds

Some shooters get so excited about foregrounds they forget the rest of the scene; it becomes about the foreground only. This is a photographer phenomenon, amateurs generally don’t think like this. (It’s mostly a good thing too). This is a very easy trap to fall into in landscape / outdoor photography, or even astrophotography. I am of course not looking to shoot boring, uninteresting foregrounds either, however this becomes akin to the musician playing for the song, rather than to show off their technical virtuoso. It absolutely becomes about a balance of elements in the scene. The predominant place we want the eye to arrive at, and how it gets to that point is important. For the most part, the best images are inherently simple in their compositional makeup. I have pushed back from using ultra wides in recent years. Oh of course, I own them. but they are no longer the go to lens. I prefer shooting around 20-50mm for most of my landscape photography. 24mm is a favourite focal length of mine and has been for many years now; it gets used the most often (this has actually always been my favourite focal length for landscape, despite this noted phenomenon). In my shooting I do go as wide as 14mm, however I am careful of it’s use and when I do use this type of lens, my overriding aim is to produce a picture that has the feel of 24-35mm, without that distorted look that can occur due to this ultra wide perspective. This really is a trick to using focal lengths from 20mm and wider. Scene objects can get very warped when we take an ultra-wide view of the scene. Sometimes it is best to question our use of focal length in these circumstances. Sometimes it is best to take a slightly tighter slice of the scene. Photography is about what we don’t show, as much as what we do. Shooting a little tighter, with more normal and less extreme focal lengths, such as 20-35mm can aid a stronger composition, whilst reducing the ultra wide angle feeling in our images.

Make the Foreground Make Sense

If we are going to add in a foreground element, especially if it will partially obstruct a view or the like, we should make sure that it is warranted in the image. The feature should make compositional sense to be there; otherwise we are just sticking rocks in our images to fill spaces and satisfy our ego. When done correctly, and the image is about the rock formation, it makes complete sense to do. We need to think to ourselves “what is this addition saying in the context of our composition and image”.

Fionn's Rock at Glen Lyon, Scotland — When it makes sense to block some of the view. The picture is about the rock formation in this case

Final Thoughts

Despite the fact I added a few extra words to the dictionary today, it is my thought that we can learn something from the way amateurs take pictures. Don’t get me wrong here; we aren’t wanting to copy our someone who can’t get the horizon level in an image, but in other aspects as we have discussed here, we might consider simplifying things. When we are shooting it is very useful to try and distill the scene down to it’s most basic elements, being very careful to exclude anything in the scene that does not add to the overall picture and make it stronger, compositionally. If we approach the scene as it it were the first time we have ever been there or shot it, will allow us to learn, develop and ultimately produce pictures with better meaning and flair.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Astrophotography in Extremely Dark Skies

Introduction

By far and away the biggest improvement we can make to our astrophotography is visiting the darkest skies possible. In Scotland, we are extremely lucky. If we move away from the central belt between Glasgow and Edinburgh, it is quite easily to find suitable skies in which to practice the craft; and the further we move from large towns and cities, the better it gets.

Glen Lyon - Nikon Z8 with 24/1.4 prime lens on a Star Adventurer Star Tracker Mount. Exposure is 3 minutes at f/3.5

The Bortle scale gives us a rough guide on what to expect with regards to night sky quality. From 9, being horrdenously bad inner city skies, where we are lucky to see the odd star, to Bortle 1, where we can see really faint and distant objects, some even with the naked eye. You might be surprized to learn that the above picture is Bortle 2; yes there are even slightly better skies than this! Anything between 1-3 is truly excellent however. At the lower end of the Bortle scale, we can also easily expect to discern individal star colours:

Cancer, Mars, Gemini - Shot with a Nikon Z8 and Tamron 35/1.4 lens wide open for 60 seconds

Gemini in particular, is a constellation I plan to shoot a lot more of. This was a fairly impromptu picture, as I had waited a little longer than I should have to shoot it, causing it to be a little low on the horizon this night. Of course, that horizon is in the hills of Glen Lyon, and just over that ledge is a massive drop into the glen. So it’s all about positioning here. Shooting constellations is a delight in astrophotography, however the pictures have to be given careful consideration.

Looking north into Kenmore, Scotland, sits a little fishing hut at Urlar Moor. It is the perfect subject to frame up the recognisable Cassiopeia constellation as I have done here. Consider the Bortle scale as a general guide of night sky quality. Remember that looking in certain directions will often yield lower light pollution. Here, looking North, means I am not fighting through light pollution from the centra belt cities in Scotland. However, when aurora shows up, as it has done in this image, for the most part it allows us to shoot in more light polluted skies anyway, because by it’s nature it tends to fill the sky with colour, in this case, purples.

I started taking pictures on my other camera whilst one was doing a tracked exposure quite some time ago. It keeps my mind on something whilst standing in the freezing cold, and often the different thought process that goes along with it, can allow for something unique to be had. Here, I didn’t bother to turn the tracker off to expose the foreground, because I was pressed for time to get back to what I was doing (ie, the headline shot of this article), and the fact that this image is about the sky, not the ground.

The plough really looks amazing in Bortle 1-2 skies when it is at Zenith (overhead).

Three in Line - 2 minute sky exposure at f/2,8. Six minute foreground, blended.

Lastly, here is a beautiful Glen in Perthshire which always brings me back, time and time again. The sky was pink with very faint aurora.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Nikon D700 Camera Deserves Its Legendary Status

Introduction

Until July 2008, Nikon only had what is known as DX crop sensors in a smaller format cameras like the D700; the D3, released the prior year was the first full frame DSLR that Nikon made. DX sensors are significantly smaller than full frame (FX) which matches 35mm film before digital took over. At that time, it was almost seen that Nikon were not taking full frame seriously. However, this all changed with the D3 camera which surfaced in 2007, and with the release of the D700 in July of 2008. The D700 was my second digital Nikon camera that I ever bought from new in 2010 (the D90 being the first). The D90 was not a bad camera, however I lusted after the ‘proper’ full frame format and the beautiful design and ruggedness of the already impressive status of the D700. I am sad to say I sold this body several years ago, and the quite ridiculous reason was that I felt that shooting alongside high megapixel bodies with a 12MP sensor made no sense. (I gave too much weight to marketing people talking about megapixels, instead of my own inner voice). I have since realised my mistake and have very recently taken ownership of a mint condition D700 with less than 1K shots on it’s shutter. Why you might ask? The predominant reason is that is produces a very unique ‘signature’ output that is easily recognisable. I honestly note that many of the older cameras have this, a unique signature of the sensor, akin to a film stock which means post processing is so simple to do. While it's not the latest and greatest in terms of megapixels or advanced autofocus features, it remains a very capable camera for various photographic genres. The images posted here are from my first time around with the iconic D700:

Some Specs

The D700 has a 12 megapixel sensor and a very capable 51 point autofocus system, straight from the D3. It also shares it’s 1,005-Pixel 3D Colour Matrix Metering II that provides good metering, enabling accurately exposed scenes off the bat. (The D700 runs a little hot on exposure, compared to modern sensors which higher dynamic range, clearly a design intention aimed at promoting good subject exposure at the potential loss of some highlights - this is the opposite to modern sensors which have meters which tend to underexpose a little more). It’s ISO range is a very usable 200-6400. It has a vibrant 3″ 921,000-dot VGA colour LCD monitor. It is capable of shooting at 5 FPS natively, or up to 8 FPS with a grip attached. In fact, the D700 inherited most things from it’s bigger brother, all wrapped into a small, solidly built package. And that package is just as you have heard. It has a rugged magnesium-alloy construction to it’s entire base frame where all important components are directly attached and housed within it.

You may read these specifications and baulk at them. Only 12 megapixels? It only does 5 FPS? No eye detection autofocus? How can we live with this? It’s quite simple to realise, that the strengths of this camera play to it’s simplicity in producing beautiful colour and tonality in the still image. Portraits don’t require eye autofocus. I have this ability in my Z8, and whilst cute and all, and perhaps it is even nice to have in some situations, it’s not helped me make any better images, not really, not if I am honest about it. 5 FPS? Well, if you need 20 FPS (clearly you are a sports shooter then, otherwise if you are shooting portraits at this speed you are seriously misguided), then simply buy a modern DSLR or mirrorless camera and be done with it, otherwise consider why you think you need 20, 30 or 100 FPS? Do you have any idea how painful it is to look through a few seconds of pictures shot at 30 FPS to see the scene barely change between them, and have to spend time culling them? I think I did this once by accident on a modern camera and I am never going to repeat it. Lastly, let us discuss the first ‘problem’ of resolution, I have left this to the end because it is absolutely the one that seems to get most gear heads so bent out of shape over. Frame properly with the correct lens, and the cropping problem (which is of course limited with a 12MP sensor) goes away. After we put that problem to bed, we are faced with 12 million gloriously large quality pixels in a properly composed scene. Further to this, consider that resolution importance is dramatically overplayed for printing. Unless we are talking about extremely large prints, which are viewed ultra close (aka, Billboards don’t apply to this situation), the D700 will be absolutely fine. Also, of course, it will be absolutely fine if you post on social media too. People won’t notice resolution issues at all; however they will notice the unique look to the files if you learn how to get the best out of the camera.

Nikon D700 classic camera — The Bride - D700 with 50mm f/1.4D shot wide open

The D700 camera was discontinued many years ago and replaced by the D750, (much to the disquiet of the D700 fanbase), a body that was much less solidly built; it had multiple recalls and issues with flaring due to the mirror box design. (The D700 didn’t have a single recall). The D750 didn’t have the pro level control system found on the D700 and ultimately just doesn’t have the classic output that the D700 can provide. Regarding the D700, many have called it the best camera in the world in terms of price to performance, and ultimately the output it can achieve so simply. This sensor really has a totally unique tonal colour palette that is unmatched. Many say that they can match this with any camera in raw processing; I have yet to see evidence of this in real world results. There are many reasons that this camera is still considered legendary.

Ergonomics

The D700 is a beautiful looking camera on the exterior, and is an ergonomic masterpiece in the hands to those that take it into their hands and shoot with it. The button layout is solid and logical, and no menu diving is required to operate the camera properly, just like a film camera. This is how it should be. I utterly detest some modern mirrorless cameras that have removed buttons to force me to menu dive for regularly required shooting functions. This is just plain stupid. We don’t have that problem here. The optical viewfinder is gorgeous, despite showing about 96% of the frame as we look through it, never causes a problem in the type of shooting I would use the camera for. Consider that mirrorless tech now is a ways away from the first major iterations: for example the Z7, in that camera’s like the Z8 have hardly any or no perceptible lag when shooting. Despite this, there is still a case to be made for a large and bright optical viewfinder as is found here. There are several things I would touch on here. There is absolutely zero lag with these designs; the subject comes in at the speed of light through optical finders. Secondly, in genres such as wedding / portrait and others that involve long staring contests of the photographer looking through the finder, optical finders are still relevant, and dare I say it, better. Think about this for a second. DSLRs do not need to power an electronic feed for you to see and compose your image. You can have your settings down and simply wait for the decisive moment. Doing this with mirrorless involves chewing through batteries simply waiting on the picture. This may or may not affect a shooter; however it is important to consider. The last advantage can also for some be seen as a disadvantage by some. For me, it is nice to observe subjects without any electronic representation. As long as one knows how to meter and understands exposure, this is generally not an issue. Shooters now are growing up in a world of smartphones, where they need to see what they are going to get on the mirrorless screen in order to make a picture. However, even things like brightness can throw people shooting like this off, so it is best for them to go back to basics and learn how to meter and use histograms. Of course, the other side of this coin is that in low light, mirrorless cameras can have the advantage in that they can electronically boost the signal. When you think about it, since DSLRs have live view, this should have been technically possible with DSLRs too, just not via the optical finder. The shutter and mirror in the D700 are iconically noisy. Birds can fly out of trees when you take image nearby; people can hear this camera in operation. Despite this, it is reassuringly solid and that’s-that. The strap is bold: proudly displaying you are shooting with a D700 and that it is FX (full frame). This was a badge of honour on it’s release. (This was the first time that Nikon showed it’s digital full frame prowess, along with the D3 camera).

Girl at Wedding - D700 with 24mm f/2.8D Nikkor

The Principals Behind The Colour

The D700 has a colour Sensitivity metamerism index (SMI) of 83 for daylight and low light tungsten conditions. This is very strong, and gives us information about how well the camera differentiates individual colours and their individual hues. Have a look at this image from dpreview.com which shows colour separation problems from other cameras, that the D700 does not have: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53185762?image=0. Here we can see four CMOS cameras. The D700 by far pulls out the gold tones the best. The D800 really skews this hue to yellow. The reason for this is that the D700 has a much stricter Colour Filter Array than the D800 does. The sensor doesn’t actually see colour at all without the CFA component. At the dawn of the digital camera age, many manufacturers kept the CFA very strict at differentiating individual hues and saturating them properly. As time went on, and the demand for cleaner high iso increased, they were generally weakened in order to let in more light. The D700 has a CMOS sensor; however you will hear most internet chatter about good colour belonging to cameras which have CCD sensors. This is a misnomer. The reason that this is happening it because people incorrectly assume the CCD is producing the unique, or better colour than the CMOS. The D700 is one camera to prove this to be inaccurate. It just so happens that the CFA sitting atop of the sensor of many early digital cameras was more strict. The CFA generates the colour, not the sensor itself. To read more about why the CFA is so intrinsic to camera colour see my other article here. Some state that it should be technically possible to create the D700 output in a modern high resolution camera. This would involve profiling for individual illuminants such a daylight, tungsten light, etc. I have not seen anyone do this that convinces me the files came from a D700. Further to this, it would be an absolute undertaking. Why not just, you know, own a D700? The D700's colour rendering is often praised for its ability to capture subtle nuances in skin tones, with reds and oranges rendered beautifully:

Rendering

I have spent a lot of time shooting people at weddings in particular, however also outwith those situations. I am a photographer who is able to light, however the way in which life works and presents itself to us, and the impromptu nature of situations, I prefer to find light than to carry lighting gear with me everywhere I go. Do not mistake this for a laziness to learn lighting, I often still at least take a speed light with me in case. In fact, I urge anyone that doesn’t know how to use a basic set of speed lights both on and off camera, to learn the lighting craft. Then go further with the multitude of light modifiers until they begin to understand light on a deeper level. Don’t be that available light shooter because you are afraid of flash. Be it because you understand flash and use it when it is needed, and because you have begun to truly understand the nature of light.

All Smiles at Wedding - D700 and 50mm f/1.4D

I have spent a great deal of time deciphering from people on what they actually want from portraiture of their child or family member. The answer is very obvious, however so many shooters are blinded to it by years of marketing brainwashing and internet forums that discuss gear all day long. I can tell you with absolute certainty that it is utterly simple what they want; to look good in the pictures we take of them. That’s it. Stripped back, this is the essence for portraiture, which if you think about weddings in particular, is just a continual one after other portraiture session with the element of continued surprise. The D700 directly links into this goal that people have for having their picture taken. Allow me to explain. The D700 has 12 megapixels, lower by today’s standards compared with monster megapixel cameras available now on 35mm format (at the time of writing 60MP). It also has a thick anti-aliasing filter in it’s design. Both of these combined leaves a subtle blur or softness to the images, of course that can be tailored a little in post processing, but it will never look as sharp and crunchy as a high megapixel camera, and that’s a good thing. (I can already hear people telling me that you can blur things in post. It doesn’t quite work the same as native output for me, and it also takes time to do per file, so consider this more deeply). Remember what I said. The D700 helps achieve that one goal that people have. To look good. No one over the age of 30 wants to see the wrinkles and the like on their face in a still image. Portraiture should capture the essence of a person. A singular image of them that tells a story. When we look at people, our brains tend to filter out some imperfections, we don’t remember that when they smile or scowl that their face is a bit wrinkly. If we show a picture of too much reality, it’s not going to go down well. This is not what people want to see in a portrait of themselves. There can be a huge task of fixing the sharp - crunchy look in an ultra high resolution camera. It takes me to the fact I am using mist filters on high resolution sensors, in a similar way that cinematographers are doing in film to make things look less sharp and crunchy. This is also, without knowing specifically how to achieve it of course, what people want. I don’t need any of this with the D700. So many shooters have listened to the internet and bought the marketing koolaid that they needed more megapixels to be a better photographer, without considering the essence of it, and what ultimately matters most. The D700’s rendering is just right for all of this. It’s just right for skin and people. Skin tones look amazing, as do colours and tones.

Onlooker - Nikon D700 and 135 F/2 DC Nikkor

Use Case

What do I consider the D700 good for so long after it’s release. Would I use it for sports? Perhaps, it depends on the aims, use case of the end result and many other factors. It’s not necessarily the first use case I would think of, despite the fact that we absolutely could make great pictures with it in that genre. What about landscape work? Again, many capable landscape images have been made with the D700. Landscape tends to favour higher resolution and dynamic range (although there are ways around this), however again, it is not necessarily the use case I would apply to this camera either. So where would I place the D700 now? This is an easy answer, and if you have been paying attention up until now you already know it; without a doubt anything that involves people. I’m talking professional portraits, weddings, photographing ‘stuff’ and ‘things’. The D700 clearly excels at getting skin tones just right, whilst leaving the rest of the scene looking beautiful colour and tonality wise. I can already hear people talking about the D700 and it’s lack of eye-autofocus, or dynamic range, or even resolution. Come on now! You don’t need eye-AF to shoot a portrait. Dynamic range? Still plenty. It has just over 9 stops which is more than film ever had. Resolution? I’ll bet you say this and you don’t even print anyway. I’m looking at my D700 files on a 32” 4K ProArt monitor and they look gorgeous. What is your problem that you need more than this? Most of this is simply marketing chatter to make the user feel inadequate and to get them to buy the latest camera and product. You aren’t a man unless you shoot 60MP! Marketing 101 attempts to destabilise the users confidence in what they do and convince them they need something else to continue doing it. Shooters that get past this and understand this concept, tend to grow artistically and technically faster.

D700 blooming problem — D700 high ISO image at ISO 1600. Shot hand-held with a 50mm f/1.4D wide open. (It’s best to stop this lens down a touch at night)

Problems

It’s not all sunshine and rainbows shooting with an older body. As you can see from this image, the D700 (and D3, D3s) all suffer from a problem now solved in modern Nikon bodies. Note the blooming from the strong light sources in this image, which causes light to draw across the image? This is particularly strong at high ISO, however it still present faintly when I shoot this scene at the camera’s base ISO of 200 on a tripod, This limits the push-pull we can do in processing to get the files to look how we want them to in certain situations. I have PP’d this file mildy which has brought them out more here. This particular problem is the only one that really faces this particular sensor. It’s caused by the pixel well filling and causes the charge to spill over onto adjacent pixels to draw right across the image as you can see here, known as blooming. Many of the older sensor designs did this, and it is something to be aware of if owning a D700. From what I have seen, some D700’s are better than others in this regard too. Either avoid these scenes, use a different camera, or get creative and use it as an effect.

Arran from Portencross - D700 with 24mm f/2.8D

When the D700 get’s it right, it really produces beautiful results with rich colour, with barely any effort required to inject atmosphere in post processing. This image remains to this day one of my favourite, taken in 2011 on Scotland’s west coast. I shot this one using a 3 stop graduated ND filter. (Back then I wasn’t so good with photoshop). I still think grads would be useful for simple scenes like this, and more complex scenes would lend themselves better to luminosity masking which I use more now. The point of this image is to provide proof that a camera is really a tool to an end goal. No camera has enough dynamic range to capture a contrasty sunset in one shot anyway, so we will always need to make technical allowances for this.

Portrait of a Boy - D700 with 85mm f/1.4D Nikkor

Even at ISO 1000, the D700 easily pulls of shots such as the above. Admittedly, this wasn’t really a light-starved situation. The ISO was selected in order to keep a useable shutter speed for a moving baby and an 85mm lens.

Food Source - Nikon D700 with 85mm f/1.4D

Punchy, vibrant colours are easy with the D700, and the body keeps those tones where they ought to be. Whether it is the most accurate or not, it is some of the most pleasing to be found in any camera.

Conclusion

If you read my articles, you already know I use a mixture of equipment. I do this partly because, even although I own the latest mirrorless tech and lenses, DSLRs are still excellent for producing beautiful pictures as I have shown, and they already team up perfectly with the lenses I have owned for more than a decade at the time of writing. Instead of deciding to ditch all my prime lenses I have for f mount and buy them all again on z (no thanks), I kept them and continue to use them. When I am shooting astro or landscape, you will probably find me with a Z8, or D810 body, otherwise I use what I have on f. I will admit some of this happened due to me being frugal (I’ve spent enough on photographic equipment over the years, and I am old enough to know that new lenses and cameras are a fallacy to improving one’s craft solely). It went further though, to the realisation that something is sometimes a bit off in modern ultra-sharp lenses and sensors. Call it whatever you want, but for the types of pictures I like to produce when I am not out shooting landscape or astro genres, the D700 produces magic unlike no other camera, and even despite it being well over a decade old, still sees strong usage. For this reason, I still highly recommend you try a D700.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

I have had so much positive response to this article, I am continuing to add to it. Stay tuned.

Steve

Aurora Lights Up the Northern Hemisphere

Aurora Borealis lit up the skies in the northern hemisphere last night in a stunning colour burst of pinks, purples and greens. The night started off as a simple excursion and I only expected to be out for an hour or so. That quickly changed and went on all the way until 3am, a little over six hours passed in the blink of an eye. Here are some pictures I made in rural Perthshire, Scotland (I will add more to this article later). If you are here to look at the pictures, just ignore the photography detail aimed at improving amateurs’ shooting techniques and enjoy:

The headline shot is one of the last shots of the evening, before I left at about 3am, of the classic location, at the Frandy tree in Glendevon. In this exposure, I used a Sigma 14mm f/1.8 prime and when doing the long exposure foreground (at f/5.6), the red glow of my headtorch caught the area under the tree. Although I took another without this, I left this in because it just works visually here.

During the night there was a thin veil of high cloud, causing the stars to glow in many exposures, ideal for this type of shooting:

I feel it is important not to be afraid of shallower depth of field in daytime and nightime landscapes. Everything doesn’t need to be in the focal plane. The above picture is shot at f/4 for the foreground (focused on the boat), and f/1.8 on the sky. You can notice the very front of the picture is outwith this plane of focus. It leads us into the picture. I don’t want the viewer gazing into the dark foreground corners. Consider this when shooting your own pictures. Focus stacking is over-rated when you know your own end goal with regards to a picture. Notice the lack of noise, even on a compressed web resolution image? This is what taking care and being precise at the scene looks like. You gotta work to make it as best as it possibly can be. Quality over Quantity.

The following shot is made with a Sigma 14mm 1.8 lens. I also have a tracked panorama of this scene which will show even more detail. I’ll post that after I get a chance to look at it. This picture here shows constellations Auriga with Jupiter below it (left side), and centrally, Perseus. The far right is Cassiopeia. All shrowded in faint auroral glows of greens, pinks and purples:

Aurora and Auriga, Perseus and Cassiopeia. Sky shot at f/1.8, foreground at f/5.6 for higher image fidelity. (Sky was not tracked in this example).

Then came the strongest aurora of the night:

The thing about shooting aurora is that is it nearly always different. Provided we can find the right scene, it it ever changing and the patterns create a uniqueness to each picture. Below is probably my favourite from the night, just because it is so unique:

This image was a complex one to blend the foreground to the sky to create; trees can be a real stumbling block because selecting fine branches is extremely difficult. I used a luminosity selection using Jimmy McIntyre’s ‘Lumi32’ (highly recommended) in order to get a finely detailed mask, then I used brushes at low opacity to ensure every fine branch matched to create this seemless result. I also recommend Jimmy’s Raya Pro suite.

Even as the aurora slowly faded from a period of high activity, it is still easy to make a beautiful picture. A definitive image is much more than sky colours! We could shoot aurora over bins and washing lines, we could shoot it from laybys and other ugly places, however that is not going to produce a memorable picture. Who would want to hang something like that on their wall? My best advice summarised is as follows: Find a suitable location, or better locations. Use fast primes of decent quality, and ideally a full frame 35mm camera. When proecessing, do not forget it is dark at night. I know, seems obvious right? However it seems like it is not to the folks on instagram or facebook these days who seem obsessed with making night look like day with their unnatural shadow pulling. Keep it dark, and balance this by not burning out black areas unless doing so intentionally. Watch the highlights. Where possible, do a long exposure of the foreground right after. This means we can blend it and get rid of noise. It’s also why it is ideal (when you get more advnaced) to shoot with two cameras at the scene, then you are less likely to miss anything as the aurora waxes and wanes. To begin however, you don’t need much of any of this. You just need to get out there with a camera and tripod to get started. As the night went on and the temperature, which had plummeted well below zero causing ice to form on all of the equipment; I switched on my lens heaters as they began to form ice crystals. The aurora finally died away and the hours of being in the punishing cold began to affect me, I finally called it a night.

If you want to learn how to do this, see my tutorial here. If you want to know the gear I use to produce these pictures, see here.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

The Mirror Man (Still), Loch Earn - Scotland

Still by Rob Mulholland. This is a huge mosaic using a Tamron 35mm f/1.4 and a Nikon Z8 camera and Star Tracker

Introduction

Recently a stunning sculpture by Artist Rob Mulholland has returned to Perthshire’s Loch Earn after an absence of eight years. It remained in the loch from 2014 until 2017 when it was removed. ‘Still’ as it is formally known, is a 2.7 metre sculpture, covering it’s surface are hundreds of tiny mirrors. It is designed to reflect man’s relationship with the natural world. The return of the artwork is thanks to a fundraising campaign led by local community groups ‘Take a Pride’ and ‘St Fillans in Bloom’. We hope it remains here for many years to come. When I noticed Still had returned to the loch, I set out to photograph this unique sculpture under starlight.

Still with the glowing Orion constellation behind

How I Photographed ‘Still’

In order to make a memorable and cohesive picture, it takes time and effort, both in terms of capturing the best data, using the best techniques and also in processing to bring that data out faithfully. Firstly, I mosaiced the sky using a Tamron 35/1.4 prime lens. (Basically I made a huge panorama style jigsaw puzzle of the sky to gather as much detail and light as possible). I took a singular row with the camera in vertical orientation, then did another of the sky higher up, and ran across the sky. I used a Star Adventurer star tracker in order to be able to do 30 second exposures at f/1.4, ISO 800. This makes for a very clean image, with exceptional light gathering. You can see the dusty dark lanes in the milky way, and good star colour in part due to this. I then switched the star tracker off and pano’d the foreground in the same way. I took double exposures for the bright lights centre left, and horizon right. Without doing so, these areas would be blown out white, and would become very distracting in the final image, leading the eye away from the sculpture centrally.

Loch Earn from above as Orion and Taurus set in the distance

On the first night, I hiked up to this viewpoint over Loch Earn with Martin from Light, Land and Sky. This gave us a fantastic vantage point to watch the constellations set in the west. I used a 20mm to mosaic the sky here, however I am annoyed that I didn’t use a 35 or 50 in order to give more detail. Next year, we will do differently, however for now it is a nice reminder of the night under the stars, especially since it was bearable-cold, and Loch Earn was completely still for two nights. (Did you see what I did there…)

On arriving for a second night to photograph Still, aurora appeared as I attemped to photograph the sculpture. Unfortunately it was much stronger whilst getting my gear out and preparing to shoot, however you can see the glow of pink in this image. This image is an ultra wide panoramic, shot quickly using a Sigma 14mm f/1.8 lens to collect the light as fast as possible. This panoramic is built from six vertical images to give what you see here.

Finally, here is another picture I made of Still at Loch Earn showing the major winter constellations; Gemini, Orion, Taurus, Auriga and Perseus:

Still - The Mirror Man, Loch Earn — Still @ Loch Earn by Rob Mulholland

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

The Best Lenses for Astrophotography

Perseid Meteor Shower: Aperture matters! Sigma 14nn f/1.8 and Nikon D850

Introduction

Astrophotography is one of the most demanding applications we can put optical equipment through; it is in fact a torture test for any lens that has to balance aberrations across a large sensor such as APS-C or full frame, considering that a large part of the focused image will contain pin point light sources (stars). In this article I am going to detail some of the best lenses for these purposes, looking at lenses that are built to handle a wide spectrum of shooting cases. This means they will all have large apertures, to be able to deal with low light levels. In astrophotography, maximising the signal achieved from the night sky is one of the most pressing concerns when shooting, so we will be looking at lenses that function on and off of a star tracker to produce stellar results. A shooter needs to consider how they work and their goals when choosing suitable lenses / equipment. For example, if we are shooting aurora, aperture matters much more as star trackers don’t help much to gather additional signal. If we are shooting the milky way, we can use a slower lens (or a fast lens stopped down) on a star tracker. If we are shooting combinations of different items, well, this is where it starts to get tricky…

14mm and the Super Ultra Wides

Fast aperture ultra wide lenses are the lens of choice for most when they consider capturing the night sky with their camera. Ultra wides are sometimes looked down on from experienced astrophotographers, who tend to do a lot of mosaics with longer focal lengths; however I still really enjoy using them for their field of view, aperture and sheer simplicity etc. Lenses like these are excellent for strong, sky-filling aurora storms, expansive milky way views, or collective constellation shots. They are good for times when you want an expansive field of view, however do not wish to resort to a longer lens to build a pano. There could be many reasons for this, weather, time, scene geometry and more.

Sigma 14mm f/1.4 DG DN (mirrorless)

A recent design which was designed for astrophotography from the ground up. Sigma states this new optic was born from their engineers’ passion for capturing the widest, brightest, highest-resolution, and most captivating starry sky images possible. This lens is one of the best rectilinear ultra wide angle - fast aperture lenses available. It has excellent centre sharpness at f/1.4, corners are somewhat softer. It is completely useable at f/1.4, but the stars improve best at around f/2.5-2.8, with only small deformation to star shapes on the periphery and corners of the full frame image. Wide open it pretty well controlled coma and sagittal / tangential astigmatism. This lens has a massive vignette wide open (-2.5 EV corners), so you are only getting the f/1.4 advantage centrally really. It is usefully-so, quite resistant to flare compared to the Sigma 14/1.8 lens I own. It includes useful features such as a built in lens collar, and a hood which prevents lens warmers slipping into the field of view when shooting; this in combination with a manual focus lock switch, means focus stays where it was set. This lens has a rear filter slot which can be useful. It comes in at 1,170g in weight. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all lenses in this class, it’s large and heavy and currently only available for Sony E and Leica L mounts.

Sigma 15mm f/1.4 DG DN Fisheye (mirrorless)

Another superb modern optical design is this. This lens is actually arguably better than any rectilinear lens when it comes to star shapes into the distant corners. It easily beats the Sigma 14/1.4 and 14/1.8 rectilinear lenses, because a fisheye lens by design does not have to bend light as much as a rectilinear lens. The result is that the corners are just better all round. It has excellent centre and corner sharpness even wide open and is useable from f/1.4 with no real problems. Wide open it has well controlled coma and sagittal / tangential astigmatism, and stars stay as tight little round circles. It includes the usual useful Sigma features, focus lock and a hood that prevents migration of any lens warmers into the field of view. This is a lens that up until recently I probably would have instantly discounted with it being a fisheye design. However, from what I have seen with this lens, it is too good to ignore. You can always get creative with those distorted foregrounds too, so give it consideration. It includes useful features such as a built in lens collar, and a hood which prevents lens warmers slipping into the field of view when shooting; this in combination with a manual focus lock switch, means focus stays where it was set. This lens has a rear filter slot which can be useful. It comes in at 1,360g in weight. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all lenses in this class, it’s large and heavy and currently only available for Sony E and Leica L mounts.

Sigma 14mm f/1.8 DG HSM (dslr or mirrorless)

I have owned this lens since 2019 and it has been used to create many astrophotography pictures the length and breadth of Scotland. This lens has very good centre sharpness wide open, but soft corners, similar to the 14/1.4 lens described above. Wide open it has noticeable coma and sagittal / tangential astigmatism, giving little wings to the stars. I use this lens wide open, and on pixel peeping we can see these aberrations clearly. Stopped down they improve quickly however, and get close to the newer sigma 14mm 1.4 design at 2.8 (this is a consideration when using a star tracker of course, we can stop down to improve star sharps and vignette’s etc). This lens is no slouch, even in comparison to the newer 1.4 design. (For example, mid-frames actually favour the 14mm f/1.8 Art slightly). Like most fast ultra wide lenses, this lens has some noticeable field curvature to it’s design. This means that we have to be careful focusing centrally. If we choose a focal point 2/3 out from the centre frame, we can get a better sharpness balance and control some of the corner aberrations (and sharpness), much better. This lens like the others, is large and heavy, and still fairly expensive despite being older. This lens comes in at 1,120g in weight. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all lenses in this class, it’s large and heavy and currently only available for Sony E and Leica L mounts. It has one advantage over the others, in that it can be used on DSLR and Mirrorless cameras, if that matters to you, which for me does. It is available for Nikon F or Canon EF mounts, and can be adapted to any mirrorless system with the usual adapters. I use it on DSLR and on Nikon Z mount via the FTZII adapter.

Sony 14mm f/1.8 GM (mirrorless)

And here we come to a real surprise. Optically speaking, for astrophotography, I have to hand it to the Sony 14/1.8 mirrorless lens for E mount cameras, it is very good optically and much smaller than the others. I have seen some places state it is the best 14mm in terms of overall performance. It’s a great lens, however it is a little more nuanced than this. It does have clean, and fairly most pinpoint stars into the corner frames, yet of course it’s not a 1.4 like the Sigma mirrorless option, but it is much lighter (460g!). It tests slightly less sharp in the mid frames and corners than the other options, however it proves that testing for the intended subject and not relying solely on MTF charts and resolution figures is the most sensible approach when evaluating a lens. What is most astounding is this lens is about half the size and weight of the other options mentioned here at just 460g. It also includes an aperture ring which is very nice to have, usual full weather sealing and as mentioned it is tiny relative to the other options. This is a huge boon for this level of performance. If shooting Sony, it is probably a no-brainer, I would potentially choose this over any of the Sigma designs. Then again, I am a bit of an aperture nut so, maybe that f/1.4 would entice me, for Aurora. It can be adapted to other mounts, eg Z, however I caution you on doing so. Often we cannot achieve the right back focus due to different sensor stack thickness. The end result is the corners seem to play much better on the native mount when it comes to mirrorless lenses. For use on Sony E mount.

Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8S (mirrorless)

Ah, the famous ultra-wide zoom. This is probably the best one out there due to it’s relatively small size and weight compared to lenses in it’s class. At just 650g, it is well built, works extremely well on the Z mirrorless system, and it is optically the best fast ultra-wide angle zoom that I know. It even closely matches with the best sigma prime at f/2.8, no mean feat! This said though, it is a f/2.8 lens. This is the minimum I want out of an astro lens, and luckily, we get this here (forget about f/4 glass). Optically this lens is superb, even on starlight. It is best with regards to star performance at 14mm, however most of the range is good. It is weakest at 24mm, however even at it’s weakest it is still strong when it comes to astro. If you can handle the slightly slower aperture than the primes, this lens is arguably a lot more flexible. There is also of course the option to use it on a star tracker to negate the aperture difference for certain shooting. However, when shooting Aurora or meteor showers etc, we actually want the large apertures of f/1.4-f/1.8 to draw in that light. So choose wisely, based on what do you. I’ve got this lens and the 14/1.8 for that reason. It makes a big difference! I have been doing this for some time now, so have amassed different equipment for each application. See here for more. This lens is made for Nikon’s Z mount and it really is as good as I am stating here.

Orion over the Duncansby Sea Stacks, 14-24/2.8S with a Nikon Z8

20mm

20mm is a classic astro focal length, it is perfect for singular fields of view that include a good amount of foreground (remember we have access to vertical shooting), and it also works well on a tracker. Their field of view, whilst expansive, ‘chops off’ some of that really distorted look we can find at 14mm.

Sony 20mm f/1.8 FE (mirrorless)

This is a great choice if shooting Sony. It is pretty much a class leading lens for a 20mm design, and it’s only real competitor would be the Sigma 20mm f/1.4. However, this lens simply sharper across the full frame at any shooting distance than the Sigma, but it has a little more coma and corner aberrations relevant to astrophotography. These are not severely worse than the sigma, but worth noting. These two are very close in terms of performance otherwise. The main difference is the slower aperture of the Sony, however for that we get a smaller and lighter lens. It’s a case of make your choice as to what matters for you. (The sigma does have that cool lens heater retainer that I like)…It includes useful features such as an aperture ring, and full weather sealing. This lens is tiny, and it comes in at just 375g in weight. Sony have really nailed a balance between optical performance and weight, even despite the fact they have the most restrictive (narrowest throat) mount out there. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. Designed for use on Sony E mount.

Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG DN (mirrorless)

Here is a class leading lens for astrophotography. This lens wins out over the Sony f/1.8 mirrorless version because it has better star performance in it’s corners over it (think coma, astigmatism, CA etc). This has a nice little ‘lens heater retainer’ at the end of the barrel to prevent it slipping into the field of view. Great ergonomics are found here. It includes useful features such as a built in lens heater retainer; a hood which prevents lens warmers slipping into the field of view when shooting; this in combination with a manual focus lock switch, means focus stays where it was set. This lens has a rear filter slot which can be useful. It comes in at 635g in weight. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all lenses in this class, it’s large and heavy and currently only available for Sony E and Leica L mounts. It is larger and heavier than the Sony, however if I owned a Sony body, this would still be a strong contender as my lens of choice due to the expansive feature set and optical performance.

Nikon 20mm 1.8S (mirrorless)

Contender for one of the ugliest and most basic lenses I have ever seen on it’s exterior, the Nikon 20 1.8S is quite similar performance wise to the Sony and Sigma in most aspects, with regards to corner aberrations. (And yes, it easily beats the 20mm 1.8G on F mount). This lens has strange ergonomics and I am not the first to comment on it; it has a focus ring that would make a toddler blush at it’s size, making it easy to knock focus unintentionally in the dark. It is also physically very long, which is certainly a design to combat focus breathing for video. If you don’t care about video, you’d prefer the Sony over this (if you could have it for Z mount natively). It has no focus lock, and has only one lens switch on the barrel to switch focus from manual to auto, which means more menu diving (boo). A small plus to the fact it has a distal barrel design which should stop lens heater migration towards the front element. As mentioned, it bests the 20mm 1.8G for F mount, however if using it during the day, it has worse sunstars. It has a reasonably low weight of 505g and belongs only on Z mount for shooting.

Loch Tummel, Scotland. 20mm Mosaic Image

24mm

24mm is an astro focal length that can begin to isolate a deep sky object or constellation, whilst still leaving some foreground in shot. It can also be used to construct mosaics, producing ultimately more detailed views of the cosmos than using a lens such as a 14mm prime.

Sony 24mm f1.4 GM (mirrorless)

Here we have a clear class leader if you shoot on Sony E mount. This lens has basically no coma or astigmatism wide open. Very impressive, considering the lens is an f/1.4. This enables it to be used for aurora to collect the best light, and stop motion. It is of course excellent on the milky way, constellations, and any other starlight scene we can throw at it. It does have some CA wide open, with the effect disappearing around f/2. (This is an aberration which is very easy to clean in post processing anyway). It includes useful features such full weather sealing and comes in at a paltry 450g in weight, making it great for carrying. It has an aperture ring which I love (Nikon I am looking at you) and it is fully weather sealed. As with all Sony lenses for astro, keep them in E mount land.

Sigma 24mm f/1.4 DG DN (mirrorless)

The Sigma 24mm doesn’t beat the Sony here in terms of outright astro shooting, however for me, it is a clear winner over the Nikon option listed below, since it has both an f/1.4 aperture, and a better control of corner aberrations than it. It has other advantages too. This lens keeps it’s switches and focus lock like the others and shouldn’t allow lens heaters to migrate into the frame when using the hood. It has great ergonomics in fact, also sporting an aperture ring like the other Sigma lenses in this new range, along with full weather sealing. It comes in at a very reasonable 520g in weight. It can be used on Sony E or Leica L mounts with no issues.

Nikon 24mm 1.8S (mirrorless)

At present, this is the best Nikon 24mm for astro on Z mount. It has much less astigmatism (aberration causing winged stars) and coma than the old f mount 24/1.4G and 1.8G lenses, however curiously it is still not perfect, and not as good as the Sony. Again, Z mount advantage? What is going on here Nikon? I do wish it had an f/1.4 aperture however. I do not own this lens, and still use the 24mm 1.4G as I tend to use that lens between dslr and mirrorless cameras. One thing I dislike slightly about some of Nikon’s prime lenses is this simplistic approach in their ergonomics. Like the 20mm 1.8S, there are hardly any switches on the barrel; no focus lock like Sigma, a little area at the end of the lens to prevent migration of a lens heater maybe, but still…Why are the focus rings on Nikon’s wide prime lenses seemingly designed for toddler’s fingers? They are massively oversized, making it easier to knock focus by mistake at night. This is a definite downside to Nikon options I am finding, in particular for astro as it can really affect things. This along with the lack of a lock switch, means you really need to be careful of accidentally ‘adjusting’ focus when you don’t wish to at night.

Meteor Spears Auriga. 24mm f/1.4G shot at f/5. Separate 24mm shot for ground with star tracker off. 24mm is a very useful astro focal length

35mm

35mm is not often considered an astro focal length, particularly to beginners. This is because many beginners are stuck on the ‘you need to go wide’ thing for astrophotography. 35mm lenses are great for light collection (they collect vastly more light than a 14mm 1.4 lens - remember that aperture is a ratio of focal length, see the rest of the blog for more detail on this). 35mm lenses are also superb for constructing detailed sky mosaics on a star tracker.

Tamron 35mm f/1.4 Di USD (dslr or mirrorless)

Hands down, this one is the best 35mm optic for 35mm format across all brands. See here and here for more on this lens. I do not say this lightly, however there are a number of factors that bolster this statement. One is aperture. Even at f/1.4, this lens can be used with considerable confidence, and is pretty close to perfect right out to periphery of the frame and corners. Stars stay tight and rounded with very minimal problems. This is a optical feat in itself at such a fast aperture of f/1.4. This lens is extremely well built and feels great in the hands (fighting a ‘that’s what she said’ here; I took the moral high-ground). Total weight comes in at 805g and it has a sole MF / AF switch on the barrel of the lens along with the dslr standard window to see focal distance. The hood is excellent and locks into place, the lens has full and extensive weather sealing also. This lens can be found for Nikon or Canon dslr mounts, thus it can be used easily with adapters on their respective mirrorless systems. It does get a little long (dammit, twice in one paragraph!), however it really is no problem if you are out there for optical excellent, I highly recommend it. I use it directly on F mount or on the Z system via the FTZII.

Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO-Lanthar II (mirrorless)

Another class leading 35mm prime lens, the Voigtlander has the large advantage that it is smaller and lighter than the Tamron. However, it does lack weather sealing, which is a big minus point considering dew formation and inclement weather conditions we sometimes face in the field. This lens is well corrected (it is an APO design), however the 50 is a tad more controlled in the corners when it comes to the biggies like astigmatism and coma that affect our domain. The other problem is that it is ‘only’ an f/2, and Tamron has shown that we can beat this performance at f/1.4. This is still an excellent lens, well build, light at only 420g and comes with a beautiful manual focus ring to get that focus just right. It has been officially licenced and is available on Nikon Z mount directly, and it is also available on E mount.

Planetary Parade over Rural Scotland March 2025. A huge mosaic shot with a Tamron 35/1.4 lens and Nikon Z8 Camera

Milky Way over Dunnet Head, Scotland. Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art on a Nikon Z8. Notice the lack of astigmatism in the corners? I used post processing to fix this optical defect that renders stars into ‘seagul’ shapes. This is still a functional lens, however has been replaced by the Tamron 35.

50mm

50mm lenses are even less thought of as astro lenses compared with 35mm primes. I will admit it is my least used lens for astro-landscape style shooting. However, this is simply down to the numbers. I simply shoot many more views with wider lenses. There is one exception. Every year I use a 50mm lens in order to create a milky way core mosaic as it rises in late March - early April around 4am.

Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO-Lanthar II (mirrorless)

A class leading 50mm prime lens, the Voigtlander has the large advantage that it is smaller, lighter, better built and optically trumps the competition. However, it does lack weather sealing, which is a big minus point considering dew formation and inclement weather conditions we sometimes face in the field. This lens is extremely well corrected and can be used wide open. The star shapes are great into the far periphery and corners on full frame. This lens does have a huge vignette wide open, and it does mean that the collected signal in the corners is significanty poorer than it could be. I assume this is due to the fact the lens was designed to fit not only the Z mount (which it of course does easily), but also the significantly narrower E mount diameter. The other ‘problem’ is that it is ‘only’ an f/2, and Tamron has shown that we can beat this performance at f/1.4 if we have the design intention to do so. This is still an excellent lens, well build, light at only 370g and comes with a beautiful manual focus ring to get that focus just right. It has been officially licenced and is available on Nikon Z mount directly as well as Sony E.

The Milky Way Rises over Dunnottar Castle - Stonehaven, Scotland. Made possible with a 50mm lens on a star tracker.

The Milky Way Core over a secluded Beach. A huge 50mm mosaic bringing out fantastic sky details with no distortion.

Then after we have considered all this, we can use many of these lenses in a deep sky style of shooting. Here are some pictures I have made over the last few years with a star adventurer and dslr / mirrorless lenses:

Mars and Pleiades Conjunction. The first deep sky astro image I ever took. Nikon D850, 70-200/2.8E. 20 Minutes total exposure

Cygnus. 50mm f/1.4G at f/4. About 2 hours total exposure

Comet C/2023 A3 Tsuchinshan-ATLAS over Loch Earn

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.
I will leave this article open and come back to add additional lenses over time.

Last Updated 10th March 2025.

The 2025 Planetary Parade Seven Planet Alignment from Scotland

Planetary Parade 2025 from Scotland - Seven Planets — The Planetary Alignment on the 25th February from my backyard in Perth, Scotland

Viewing and imaging the Planets

What a sight we have in Scotland’s dark night skies right now, with multiple planets on display, some of them being imagable. (This should also be viewable from most places in the world). What the media doesn't explain is that some are not exactly going to be naked eye visible. Technically speaking we can ‘see’ seven planets right now - Mars, Jupiter, Uranus, Venus, Neptune, Mercury, and Saturn, will all be briefly visible in the early evening south facing sky. In this image, we can see the faint milky way arcing across the centre of the image up to the top right. This is as you can imagine, an extremely densely packed area of stars. The dark grey patches on the right of the image are caused by interstellar dust blocking our view of the stars behind it. This is why here the image appears to be void of stars and takes on a patchy appearance.

In the night sky the planets follow a curve in the sky that matches the sun, called the ecliptic. (Think of this like the plane of our solar system). Above the milky way areas at the top left, we can see the planet Mars in the constellation of Gemini with the supermassive stars Castor and Pollox to it’s left, then Jupiter on the right above the "V" shaped constellation of Taurus (You can see the arc of the ecliptic I mentioned earlier by simply joining the dots here). As you can see, the recognisable Orion is nicely nestled between the houses too at the very bottom. Uranus is just below pleiades (the blue star cluster on the right) however it is too tiny and faint to see unless viewed on a magnified version of this image, or with a telescope / binoculars in very dark skies or with someone in ultra dark skies, who has good conditions with perfect eyesight. Even then, it will appear as a small dot in our vision. If we could pan right from this image (which would be looking west, out of shot), we could see Venus on the lower horizon and Saturn not far away.

Our eyes can interpret only 0.0035% of the electromagnetic spectrum. Because of this, the reality is, we see next to nothing of our beautiful cosmos, however we can begin to see a glimpse if we try to adapt our eyes for the night. In this game, it is best to leave misconceptions about our own eyes being truth-seers at the door and open our minds to what could be out there, and what is out there when we observe the night sky.

Dark Adaption

It takes the average human eyes about 45 minutes to become dark adapted at night, however studies show that improvements in night vision can occur for up to two hours! Any artificial light immediately damages any adaption our eyes have made and we have the start the clock again. So get off your phone! We don’t see much at all at first when looking up at the night sky. However, our eyes are capable of seeing fainter starlight, planets or aurora if we allow them time to adapt to the darkness. The purkinje effect describes the situation in human vision: as light levels decrease, the perception of warm colour drops, especially the red end of the spectrum. It is very important to observe the night sky with dark adapted eyes for this reason. To properly have our 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. This is a much longer time than most people give it. This is why many struggle to see colour in the night sky. Contrary to popular opinion, stars are not just little white dots floating out in space. Here is a picture showing the variation in star colours and planets shot recently showing the alignment from a rural setting:

The Planet Parade over Scotland, 1st March 2025. This image is a huge mosaic spanning a field of view over 200 degrees. It was made with a Tamron 35mm f/1.4 Di USD lens. Top left: Mars, centre: Jupiter, and lower right horizon: Venus. (Pinch-zoom on mobile to see details). To buy as a print see here.

About the Image and How to Find the Planets

I am lucky to stay in a place where light pollution is less than in most residential places, relatively speaking. The camera and lens used to take this are extremely powerful equipment. The headline picture in this article is made up of about 10 separate images and took me hours to painstakingly join them all together to produce this final result. To form this image, I used a Star Adventurer Star Tracker and a Nikon Z8 camera. The lens I used was a state of the art Tamron 35mm f/1.4 Di USD, wide open at f/1.4. Each exposure was 30 seconds, set at ISO 64. I then took a series of images to form a panoramic of the ground with the star tracker off to get this final picture you see here. Weather permitting I hope to see and image this again from a rural perspective tomorrow night (Thursday the 27th February 2025), and if not, it looks like I might get a chance somewhere rural on the Saturday of this week. You will of course still be able to see most of these planets like this for the next week or so. The best two to see in my opinion are shown here, which is why I concentrated on this part of the sky, rather than making a ultra massive, wide panoramic image and everything then becoming lost within the wideness of the vista. Mars on the left side is particularly interesting. If you let your eyes adjust and become properly dark adapted, you will easily see it’s glowing orange colour. I find it fascinating to let my vision slowly adjust, so much that I can discern planet or star colour. That’s pretty amazing I think.(Remember, darker skies will greatly help here). This process is obviously helped by being in darker skies, away from streetlights and the further from any towns or cities, the better. As mentioned, my advice is to go somewhere as dark as possible to increase your chances, and to always allow your eyes to become properly dark adapted. This alignment is best seen early evening just after sun set, in the south facing sky, extending west through east. (Consider that this image is looking practically directly south). This alignment of the seven planets will not be seen simultaneously so well until 2040. If you can visit an observatory under clear skies, or can go somewhere rural with your naked eyes, or a telescope / binoculars, you are in for a treat. Good luck if you are out hunting.

NB: On mobile, pinch zoom on the image to see closer details. On desktop, click the image for a larger view. If you check my instagram you will be able to see a video demonstrating this all here. To buy this image as a highly detailed print, see it in my store, here.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

2025 Seven Planet Alignment as Viewed from Scotland's Dark Skies — Tracked Sky Image earlier in evening with Nikon 14-24/2.8S lens at 14mm. Mars is on the left next to the blue/white stars Castor and Pollox in Gemini, to the right the white blob is Jupiter, found in the ‘V’ shaped Taurus Constellation

Sigma 14mm 1.8 Art lens with Nikon D810. A 114 degree field of view of the spectacle

The Best 35mm Lens Ever Made for Astrophotography: Tamron 35mm f/1.4 Di USD

Star Adventurer Mount and Nikon Z8 with Tamron 35mm f/1.4 Di USD

Introduction

Sometimes a lens comes a long that is a game changer optically. As much as I strongly dislike that phrase, there is simply no other way to describe the level of perfection this lens achieves, in particular with starlight, however it also excels across other genres too. This lens came about in 2019, when Tamron instructed it’s team of optical engineers to design the best 35mm lens they could. And they achieved just that. Some might say, ‘oddly’ for the usual DSLR mounts. Why not mirrorless? I don’t know, or care, because for me it’s actually an advantage; I shoot across mounts. I use lenses on DSLRs and on mirrorless, so I simply use the Nikon FTZII adapter to use it on my Z8 body. It is important to note that Tamron have been around a long time and have vast experience to draw on; they were founded in 1950. Many lenses for the big camera companies have been Tamron designs. (One that comes to mind is the Nikon 14mm 2.8D lens which was outsourced by Nikon to Tamron for it’s design).

Why A 35mm Lens For Astrophotography?

I hear this from so many people. I think the confusion comes from the thinking that wider is better. Well that really depends…35mm lenses have huge advantages when making panoramas (or better termed, mosaics) of the night sky. Due to general low distortion that these lenses have, coupled with their fast apertures, makes them sensible lenses to collect the strongest signal from each area of the night sky in order to build a proficient picture. They are also excellent for isolating a deepsky object or constellation, or even aurora that is low on the horizon. Read here for more information. While a 35mm prime lens will include less angular view of the night sky than a wider lens, it has the huge advantage that it collects vastly more light due to it’s large clear aperture size compared to wider focal lengths and apertures:

Planetary Alignment on the 26th February 2025 showing Mars (top left) and Jupiter (lower right). This image is a mosaic of 5 individual sky pictures using the Tamron 35mm f/1.4 Di USD lens on a star tracker.

Fast Aperture Lenses

To capture faint starlight, we want the fastest lenses we have. In terms of light collection, some of the most efficient lenses at gathering light are between 24-50mm and with an f/1.4 aperture. This is due to clear aperture size (the amount of light a lens collects is based on it’s aperture and focal length. We have to remember that aperture is a ratio, thus it is affected by the focal length of the lens. A 14mm 2.8 lens does not gather anywhere near the same amount of light as a 50mm 2.8 lens does). To work out a clear aperture size for a lens, we take the focal length and divide it by it’s aperture. Thus:

For a 24mm f/1.4 lens we get:

24 / 1.4 = 17mm diameter of clear aperture

For a 35mm f/1.4 lens we get:

35 / 1.4 = 25mm diameter of clear aperture

Now let’s look at something that everyone jumps onto when shooting the night sky, or aurora. Ultra Wide Angle lenses. Now they can have some advantages, however, with regards to light collection, let’s look at the numbers:

For a 14mm 2.8 lens we get:

14 / 2.8 = 5mm diameter of clear aperture

Since clear aperture is a direct correlation of the light collection abilities of a lens, we can deduce that ultra wide angle lenses are not necessarily the best as everyone thinks they are, and 35mm 1.4 lenses are actually one of the best we can get, with 25mm diameter of clear aperture up for grabs. In contrast, ultra wide angle lenses collect ridiculously poor amounts of light compared to longer focal lengths, even when they have fast apertures (remember, it’s a ratio). However, I hear you say, ‘they let me shoot for longer because the Earth is rotating,’ etc. Yes of course. They can partly compensate for apparent star motion. However, test out how much brighter faint aurora comes out with a 24/1.4 or 35/1.4 lens and you will see what I mean here. Ignore star motion for a moment and take a 35/1.4 shot for 10 seconds, then take a shot with a 14/2.8 for 10 seconds. Notice how much darker than 14mm lens is? For further reading on this subject, please see here.

Lens Characteristics

The Nikon version of this lens comes in at a hair over 800g. The Tamron 35/1.4 comes with a lens hood that is lockable and well made compared to the Sigma 35/1.4 version I shot with for years. One reason I sought another 35mm was I had two separate Sigma 35mm f/1.4 lenses go bad on me, and my equipment is babied. Two went decentered and even despite sending to Sigma, they never seemed to get it right again. So I bought another, as I generally liked the lens, and low and behold about a year later it occurred again. Something was definitely up here; I was done with that lens by then. It should be noted, I treat this a strange unexplainable occurrence. I shoot with the 14mm f/1.8 Art and have never had issue. I can only assume there is something poor about the lens element glue within the lens; something is moving over time to cause these problems I encountered. The Tamron has a 72mm filter thread and is just over 100mm in length. and 80mm in diameter. In short, combined with it’s weight it’s neither huge nor small. I would go as far to say that for what it does optically, it is fairly compact. It is much smaller and lighter than the Sigma 40mm f/1.4 Art (1260g!). It has a special fluorine coating on the front element to repel dust and moisture and make it easily cleanable. It comes with a manual - autofocus switch on the body of the lens. Autofocus on my D810 (and Z8) is very good. There is much less variability that plagued the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 I came from; consistency is back and it is very welcomed. Autofocus is also quick (for a 35/1.4) and not too noisy. It has nine aperture blades with a circular diaphragm which actually produces nice sunstars with 18 points around light sources. It stops down to f/16, and has a minimum focal distance of 30mm. It feels solid in the hands and well built, even better than the seemingly already good Sigma 35mm f/1.4 that I came from. However, compared to the Sigma, optically it is in a different class:

The Planetary Parade 2025, shot with the class leading Tamron 35/1.4 on a Nikon Z8 camera.

Optical Excellence

Tamron released the 35/1.4 in 2019 as the 40th Anniversary of their ‘SP’ (Superior Performance) range of lenses, and stated it was the best Tamron lens ever made. It’s easy to see why once you get your hands on it. This lens also represents to me the best balance of painterly, artsy, rendering while meeting demands for critical applications such as astrophotography where we need things like astigmatism, chromatic aberration, coma, and other aberrations under tight control. Let’s look at how good the Tamron is by examining the MTF chart for the lens:

MTF (Modulation Transfer Function) curves describe to what extent the tested lens can faithfully reproduce contrast of the subject in images it captures. The closer the 10 lp/mm (line pairs per millimeter) curve (the thick line for low frequency) in an MTF chart to "1" of the vertical axis (the higher up), the higher the contrast reproduction performance of the tested lens will be. The closer the 30 lp/mm curve (the thin line for high frequency) to "1" (the higher up), the higher the resolving power and thus the subjective sharpness of the lens will be. The closer both the solid and dotted lines are to each other indicate a better control of astigmatism.

Lens performance differs depending upon directions. Solid lines show performance in the sagittal (radial) direction while dotted lines indicate performance in the meridional (circumferential) direction. When sharp lenses capable of delivering uniform optical performance over the entire image field are tested, MTF charts show curves plotted in good balance.

Performance characteristics of photographic lenses cannot be expressed with only MTF charts. There are other factors that are expressed in different methods, such as taste of softness and degrees of compensation of various aberrations. But you can use MTF charts as a general scale to measure lens performance.

Controlling the Aberrations

The major aberrations that degrade images in astrophotography are well known to us. Astigmatism causes point light sources at the edge of the frame to appear to stretch in a line, and it is something that nearly all fast wides have. Some are almost unusable wide open for this reason. Coma (or Comatic Aberration) causes point sources of light at the periphery of the image frame to elongate into comet like shapes. Chromatic aberration causes colour shifts around points of light at the focal plane, causing white light to split into it’s respective colors of the rainbow. Most fast lenses will have this to some degree, and it will often be more prevalent in the corners of the frame. Spherical Aberration will cause point sources of light to show soft, symmetric halos. SA will usually be noticeable throughout the entire image, and not just the corners as some other aberrations. Distortion will bend straight lines and cause imperfections more noticeable on man made structures. Vignetting will cause the edges and corners to appear darker than the central portion of the image. Field Curvature tends to be more often seen in older optical designs but can still exist, to some degree in modern designs. This shows up as softer areas of the frame, sometimes about one third out from the central portion. Flare is something that is going to affect daylight shooting more than astrophotography, however I am pleased to note this is under very good control also.

The Tamron 35mm f/1.4 controls all of these aberrations exceptionally well in a vast balancing act. This image below shot on a starfield accurately depicts how good it really is - if you are on mobile, pinch zoom into the far corners of this and prepare to be amazed:

Star Quality - Tamron 35/1.4 wide open, singular 6s exposure at ISO 400

Notice how, there is no real enlargement of the stars at the far corners or periphery, even on very close examination. This shot was a singular test shot from my backyard recently. I have not done any corrections; this shows the natural, easily-correctible lens vignette, and tiny touch of chromatic aberration which is easily removed in post processing. Notice further that the stars are sharp, there is no spherical aberration noted and no coma either. Star colour is picked up well with this lens when proper exposures are used to record them (more noticeable on non-moon evenings). This was a f/1.4, six second exposure at ISO 400. The truly beautiful thing about this lens is that it can be used wide open at f/1.4. Stopping down mainly reduces the vignetting in the corners, and ever so slightly improves the corner stars even more than their already exceptional performance wide open. Focus is critical with a fast 35mm prime lens such as this. Especially one that is so highly tuned right into the corners. This means, a hair back or forward on the focal ring can dramatically fine tune star shapes. You do not want to mis-focus with this lens.

Orion under Moonlight in my Parents Backyard - ISO 64, f/1.4, 6s

Closing Thoughts

I can already see it is going to be a huge improvement over my previous lens of choice for this focal length. As I shoot more with this lens, I will come back and further add to this article in due course, hopefully updating it with some more pictorial examples. (Updated 7th March 2025 with images).

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve

Landscape Photography and Shallow Depth of Field - F/8 and Be There?

Shallow Depth of Field in Landscape Photography

Introduction

The established convention when shooting landscape photography has always been to shoot significantly stopped down, that is, using small apertures. The reason for this is to increase depth of field: the amount of area in clear, acceptable focus within the picture itself. Whilst I do use F/8 a great deal, I use and consider other apertures often, for different reasons and have also for some years been going completely against convention and shooting wide open with prime lenses in landscape situations. This is not about just trying to be different or go against convention, and more about using an aperture and design for the shot that creates the strongest overall picture with all things considered. I note that there is a new craze in landscape photography to have complete front to back sharpness in a picture, which to me looks very unnatural and a little plasticy - faked, because it just is not how our eyes work.

What Does Shooting At Small Apertures Do? (F/8 - F-22)

Shooting at small apertures achieves several things:

Increases the depth of field within an image.
Allows longer shutter speeds in lowered light, or in bright light in combination with the use of a Neutral Density filter.
Usually allows the photographer to achieve a good across frame sharpness, as most lenses are extremely good by the time they are stopped down, even ones which are softer wide open.
If stopped down excessively, it can incur diffraction which causes image softness. (I’d still shoot here for the right reasons, just be aware of this). On full frame, diffraction effects come into play more around F/11, for crop cameras, at about F/8.
Normally allows diffraction spikes, or sunstars to appear around points of light with good landscape lenses.
Decreases lens vignetting.
Decreases risk of lens aberrations showing up.
In many lenses, causes increased risk of flaring between lens elements. This can sometimes be used creatively.

What Does Shooting at Large Apertures Do? (F/1 - F/5.6)

Shooting at large apertures achieves several things:

Decreases the depth of field within an image.
In general, allows faster shutter speeds across the board.
Allows a photographer to select an area of greater interest, ie the subject and further direct the eye within the shot.
Prevents diffraction effects within the depth of field / focal plane areas.
Increases lens vignetting
Increases risk of lens aberrations showing up
Reduces the risk of flaring.

As mentioned at the beginning of this article, I have for some time been questioning this standard F/8 approach to landscape photography and if honest, have become a little bored with the same by the numbers shots and apertures. My ethos for the most part (there are exceptions) is that I do not focus stack. Focus stacking often produces really unnatural ‘digital’ looking pictures because everything from the closest corner to the sky miles in the distance is in focus; there is no depth. Even where shots require a smaller aperture, say F/8 with a 24mm lens, this will not give front to back sharpness with an object near to the camera. In these situations, I often let the close corners, and the very close foreground be slightly out. I don’t want people looking right down there, I want the eye to come up to the subject and flow through the image. Sometimes the problem is we include too many subjects in our photographs and make the scene overall too complex when we should be distilling things down for the viewer. In photography, we direct the eye through a shot to our subject in many ways, including; brightness, sharpness, contrast, composition. We can also use that depth of field to be a further visual clue. Most of us have been subjected to the cliché daisy and mountain landscape shots that are paraded over the internet. Just google it and see what I mean. Notice how unusual it feels to have daisies, or wild flowers so close to the camera all perfectly in focus (and unnaturally brightened too), however also have the distant mountain seemingly be in exactly the same plane of focus? It’s just not how our eyes work. We sense this and it feels fake. (Most of the time the processing of these shots doesn’t help either, because the photographer uses very restrictive masking selections and overbrightens scene elements). For more reading on this concept, see the article I wrote on ‘Realism in Landscape Photography’ here.

When Is Focus Stacking A Good Idea?

There are of course times when focus stacking is the way to go. Notice this shot from Perthshire of Black Linn Falls in Autumn. This was shot with a 14-24/2.8S Z mount lens at 14mm. If you believe what is said online, you would think that this scene, shot at this wide of a focal length, could simply be shot at f/8 or f/11 to achieve the result you are seeing, but you would be incorrect. This is a two shot focus stack, one on the very foreground rock at f/11, and one of the distance at f/8. This allows me for this scene, to achieve a good depth of field up at the bottom front rock area which has interest here. Why did I feel this necessary? Well, it’s part of the shot, and thus it tells part of the story, in addition it is also quite bright in the scene itself. Of course I still want the viewer’s eye to flow from the bottom upwards, which I think it does here. Conversely, it doesn’t make a huge amount of sense if we concern ourselves with the near foregrounds in shots like this:

Isle of Skye Scotland, Nikon D850 and 20mm 1.8G at F/8

The very nearest grass roots, and the dark corners are not somewhere that we need the eye moving to. Thus it is realistically counterintuitive to focus stack, especially if you consider wind and moving long grass. It would not have added a single thing to the final picture. Let’s have a look at another shot which shows more exaggerated falloff in the front of the frame with regards to obvious loss of depth of field:

Depth of Field used to Drive the Eye down through the image, with a twist

This was a long exposure shot taken in summer 2020 by my then nine year old son (with a little help composing) on his D200 with a 20mm 1.8G nikkor lens. Like me, he was quickly fascinated by the effect a long exposure could provide in an image and took to it very well. I love the layers in this image, we have the obvious falloff in the corners and around the rock, but because the pool is a reflection and the tree lines at ‘infinity’ it is in sharp focus, with an unsettling hint of blur at it’s edges. We know where we are supposed to look, and the aperture reinforces this. We could have focus stacked. It would have required a good few extra frames in this example, because we where right on the ground here and ultra close to the foreground elements. However, would it really have added anything, or just taken away from the mood here? This is an interesting case. because although this isn’t really shot at a large aperture (he used F/9, and consider the D200 is an APS-C sensor camera), it still creates a very shallow depth of field effect because he was so close to the rocks, and the aperture will not be able to bring this area into sharp focus (consider the minimum focus distance of the lens too). Finally, let’s look at the headline picture in this article:

So, why am I using such a wide aperture here in this picture? Why am I not at f/11 for this scene, considering I am at a 35mm focal length and focus stacking? Well the real question I ask is, what would it have actually added? The foreground is dark, and it is better serving as a context and visual frame. This is a good demonstration of shallow depth of field used effectively within the constraints of the landscape photography genre. This particular shot was made with a 35mm f/1.4 prime lens, which was shot at f/1.8. There are several things to note here. The use of the prime is important, because we are going to be able to control the foreground blur more. In addition to this, because of the larger aperture, it will have more pleasing out of focus elements than it would be on a f/2.8 zoom lens, in terms of quantity and quality of that blur. (Note, I have upgraded to the optically superb Tamron 35mm f/1.4 now).

Further to these two points, the vignette which exists naturally at these wide apertures also further directs the eye, and places the foreground in further shadow. One thing I find landscape photographer’s do not consider much is that large vignette’s can be so effective when shooting landscapes. Using a class leading DSLR or Mirrorless body and a fast prime which vignettes decently at large apertures, allows me to control dynamic range even more effectively; it’s actually a boon, not a curse. This pushes the brightness of bright skies and white clouds down a good bit, further balancing the exposure and allows me to often capture the full range of light in a singular shot without the need for exposure blending, tripods or graduated neutral density filters. This leads me to another advantage. Sometimes I am so tired of tripods, in these conditions I grab one or two primes and head out to craft pictures. Yes, this shot was made completely hand held.

Final Thoughts

The next time you think that F/8 and be there is the only way, which is the accepted phrase for ‘use small apertures, Jim’ consider that their are other, arguably more effective ways to build a picture on a case by case basis. I often bring a 35mm prime with me in addition to a 24-70/2.8S on most trips as it allows best access to this technique. Even despite the fact that I have used a prime lens here, as I have shown in this article, even F/8 apertures will produce out of focus foreground elements when used close to subjects, giving an effective visual clue in an image to direct the eyes. I don’t want to sound like some of these youtubers with their “You Don’t Need A Tripod’ videos, because that is a nonsense also, however it is without a doubt a definite and effective technique to use in the field.

If you enjoyed this article, consider following me on Instagram or Facebook.

Steve