Please Excuse Me While I Clean My Lens

Halloween Pics

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 02:55:00 +0000

It has been a while since I posted. I wanted to get some pictures up, and I have one quick tip for you that I'll lead off with.

As usual, we wanted to get some pictures of my kids in their Halloween costumes. So, before we started trick or treating we stepped out front to take some pictures. I think you can see the obvious problem:

My kids always turn into Squinty McGee whenever I try to get any decent front lighting (or side lighting). From experience, I knew that just trying to force a bad situation would result in mediocre shots. So I pulled an audible and moved out back.

The shot at the top resulted, and I also got a few individual shots:

Total elapsed time? About 10 minutes. That's including the required herding of children and two locations. I also was able to set up this shot that I really like:

Who said that taking family portraits needs to be a chore?

Family Photos

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 05:17:00 +0000

Just figured I'd post a few shots from my new (old!) Yashicamat 124. It has some problems (that I should be able to fix pretty easily) but sometimes the problems add some character to images. These a few of our favorites from the first roll.

If you are interested in the hardware side of things, I'll be posting more over at the Used Camera Database blog.

h

Vacation in Black and White

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 16:41:00 +0000

As I mentioned in the last post, I took a number of black and white shots on vacation. I'll share some of them with you here (note: I have more to say on the technical side of shooting on black and white film, but those posts will be over at the Used Camera Database Blog).

Today, I'll just share some of my favorite photographs from the second and third rolls of film (from the Costco scans on CD). I'm going to try to scan the first set of negatives myself (more to test quality than anything else) -- so those will be a little delayed.

I've been wanting to shoot black and white for a while, but this is the first time I really got around to it. Of course, I could always convert my color images to B&W in post processing, but I almost feel... overwhelmed... when converting color (digital) shots to black and white because there are so many options and variables. I'd almost rather be restricted to monochrome at shooting time than do it in post processing.

Maybe, with more experience, I'll get to know what it to look like when I do conversions. For now, I'm still learning what will show up and what won't. For instance, in the shot below, the path through the gate is totally lost in the conversion.

On the other hand, many shots that would be mediocre in color really have a little something extra in black and white. Much of it is the contrast and the way black and white restricts you to just the dark and light spots. Part of it is that 'old-time' feel of black and white -- for that reason, I think there's a good argument for doing black and white in portraits.

For instance, this shot of my son is definitely helped by removing the color (which would be distracting):

Likewise, the frame around my daughter in this photo is brought out by the lack of color. It is too bad I missed the focus and it turned out soft! (she was hamming it up too, which usually isn't a good thing, but it worked on this grab shot).

I've always felt like black and white lends an old time serenity to shots of people. For instance, the shot at the top of the page, or this one:

This last one is a bit blown out on my kids -- I think it would be benefited by rescanning at a stop or two less exposure. It probably could have worked pretty well in color though -- the barn was red with nice texture, and the surroundings were a vibrant green.

Flowers can look pretty nice, but honestly, I think this one would have looked better in color...

Black and white does excel in terms of texture, like this old building I had my daughter try to get into. I shot a series of them, but they looked better in my mind than on film :(

I like these shots though:

And I made sure to get the family dog, Annie (who, sadly, is not going to last much longer since her back legs are no longer cooperating).

I love this shot...

Finally, I'll end with a shot of my son, hard at work. One thing about black and white film is that it handles a wide dynamic range -- this image really shows that off...

Shooting on film...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 04:39:00 +0000

I'm on vacation right now using dial up. Holy crap it is slow! Writing up a blog post pretty much took me twice as long as usual and it is now well past midnight.

Wow, I can't believe it has been almost two months since I posted. Life has been really busy and photography has not been a priority.

The good news is that I've starting to shoot more on this vacation and I'm catching the photography bug again. I borrowed my Dad's old Minolta and shot some black and white film -- I posted about it over at the Used Camera Database (it seemed more relevant there). Expect to see some of the pictures here in the next few weeks -- I was very happy with a number of them!

In other news, my 20D is starting to hesitate when I shoot because the shutter release isn't quite making contact. Not a huge deal, but it does mess up my timing a little bit and it may just be the push I need to upgrade and use it as a backup. Of course, if my shooting volume decreases again, there's not point in buying another camera.

We'll see!

Random Shot

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Thu, 14 May 2009 03:55:00 +0000

I liked this image when I took it, but I thought I was just being a bit weird.

But my wife mentioned it, which means it must have something going for it!

(Canon 100mm FD Macro f/4)

How's it going?

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sun, 10 May 2009 22:24:00 +0000

The images at the top and bottom of this post are from a quick set of snaps the other day. Other than that, I really haven't gotten to shoot much (or post much, for that matter).

I have been putting a decent amount of time in at the Used Camera Database. While I'm not yet widely publicising it (there's still a few things I want to finish up first) it is now live and includes all the EOS lenses made by Canon that I know of. This means, for any lens, you can look up current prices on eBay and current auction listings. Pretty cool, huh? Check out the lens database here.

I'll also be posting to the blog there once every day or two for the next week or so. If you'd like to follow along, check it out and subscribe to the updates. The current post describes what I have planned for the near future.

Getting Excited...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 06:42:00 +0000

I'm starting to get pretty excited about my little side project, UsedCameraDB.com.

For instance, check this out:

(click to see it larger)

Imagine if there was a site where you could look up any lens and immediately get all the info on it, live eBay listings, and previous sale price information... Wouldn't that be cool?

I'm hoping to bring the alpha version of the site live sometime in the next week!

Before then though, I need to add a few things (like a search page) and clean up a few things.

I'll post here when I bring it live!

Baseball, 2009

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 05:45:00 +0000

My son's baseball started up again about a month ago (that's him, above, repelling the ball with sheer mental strength). Honestly, I've taken some pictures but I have not really had the desire for baseball photography, or any photography for that matter, lately.

I sorted through some shots today and selected a few of my favorites, pictured here, with no further commentary. Click to see them larger!

Comparison: Sigma 400mm f/5.6 HSM vs Sigma 600mm f/8 Mirror

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:32:00 +0000

I sold my Sigma 600mm this week, but before I shipped it out I did a head to head comparison between the Sigma 600mm f/8 Mirror (Reflex) and the Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO Tele-Macro HSM. The result was interesting, but not very surprising.

I tested three lens combinations:

Sigma 400mm alone
Sigma 400mm with 1.4x Tamron-F teleconverter
Sigma 600mm alone (well, using FD-EF adapter without the optical element)

In terms of setup, I shot across my living room and kitchen to a (mostly) flat Costco ad posted on a cupboard door. A single Sunpak 383 at 1/16 power illuminated it to add more light and to avoid any camera shake (the flash effectively makes the shutter speed 1/1000th second or faster). All shots were taken at 1/200 sec, wide open (f/5.6 for the 400mm alone, f/8 for 400mm w/ tele and 600mm), and ISO 100 for f/5.6, ISO 200 for f/8. All shots were manual focus and I took at least five for each, choosing the best to display below to avoid focus issues.

Here are the full frame shots (downsampled, click to see larger... but not full-res):

Overview: Sigma 400mm f/5.6 Telemacro HSM

Overview: Sigma 400mm f/5.6 with 1.4x teleconverter

Overview: Sigma 600mm f/8 Mirror

These shots don't really show anything notable for full frame. Yes, the 600mm has less contrast, but we expect that from a mirror lens. The 600mm seems to have more vignetting too, but again, that's expected.

One thing I noticed was that both lenses performed about the same in terms of focusing -- as in, it was a pain in the a**, but in this static situation I had over 50% accuracy on nailing focus. Obviously, the f/5.6 of the 400mm wide open makes the viewfinder brighter, but in this case I didn't find that a brighter viewfinder made focusing any easier.

Next up, a comparison of 100% crops. All were from the center of the shot. These were converted from RAW with 100% sharpening in Bibble and all other settings off.

100% Crop: Sigma 400mm f/5.6 Telemacro HSM

100% Crop: Sigma 400mm f/5.6 with 1.4x teleconverter

100% Crop: Sigma 600mm f/8 Mirror

As expected, the 400mm alone is the sharpest, followed by the 400mm with TC, and the 600mm decently behind. I'd also say the 400mm alone has the best contrast and color; again, this was expected. So, if you don't need 600mm of reach, the 400mm will definitely be your best option.

But what if you do need 600mm of reach? For instance, if you shoot birds, you pretty much need whatever reach you can get. Which lens combination will give you the best reach if you want to see something really tiny or really far away?

I tested this by taking larger portions of each of the images above and upsampling them to all be at the same resolution as the 600mm image. The image below is the composite of these three images (click to see it at 100% crop):

Comparison: All upsampled to resolution of 600mm
Top: 400mm, Middle: 400mm w/ TC, Bottom: 600mm

This is where things get interesting.

In terms of best reach, the 400mm with 1.4x teleconverter gives the sharpest image. Not by a lot, but you can definitely tell in areas of fine text (like the "invent" in the HP logo). But, on the other hand, the 600mm does slightly outperform the upsampled 400mm. Again, not by a lot, and the 400mm has much better contrast, but I can definitely see more detail on the 600mm image.

Of course, these results are the lower end of 400mm image quality. Although Tamron-Fs aren't that bad, they are a lower-end teleconverter, and a Pro TC should be at least marginally better on a super telephoto. Also, these were shot wide-open; if I could have stopped down the 400mm, it would have sharpened up even more. I'm not exactly sure how much more it would have sharpened up, but I suspect it would be noticeable.

So, in the end, yes, you are much better off with the 400mm lens than the 600mm mirror lens. This was my original hypothesis back when I got the 600mm. Plus, the 400mm lens gives better contrast, bokeh that isn't donut shaped, and autofocus. It seems like the 400mm would be a no-brainer compared to the Sigma 600mm.

Until you look at cost.

The 400mm (without TC) goes for $250+. The 600mm goes for right around $100 if you have to purchase the adapter with it. In fact, mine just sold for $70 including shipping without the adapter. Ultimately, it comes down to how much money you can spend and if you are willing to tolerate the quirks of the 600mm.

Personally, I'm happy to have the 400mm, but the 600mm was a great stepping stone until I could afford it.

Anatomy of a Photo: Haptic Device

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 02:50:00 +0000

I have a spare half-hour to post so I'll go ahead and get this up, finally. The images have been ready for quite a while, but I just haven't pulled the trigger on writing the text up.

Of course, it has been a long time since I wrote an Anatomy of a Photo post. Sadly, I have no set-up shots, didn't make a note of settings, and took the shots a month ago. I'll do my best though!

* * * * *

Word has gotten out around the lab that I dabble in photography, so a number of guys have asked me to take shots of various robots and robot related apparatuses. So far, I've done at least four different shoots, not including my own robot. I have to admit, I enjoy product/technical photography -- it is fun to have a subject that doesn't wiggle, complain, need breaks, and looks cool!

While I don't consider myself a professional product photographer, I feel like I am doing a pretty good job on these shots. In fact, one of my dissertation readers commented: "Your object photos are amazing - did you hire a photographer?" Too bad it is so hard to make money in product photography in this economy!

Anyway, in this case, a guy from the lab asked if I could shoot his haptic device. I liked the way the shoot turned out (the image at the top was used in one of his presentations) so I asked him if he minded if I posted about it here. He didn't, so here we go...

* * * * *

The primary goal was to get some shots that he could use for papers and presentations, highlight the use of his haptic device, and get a few detail shots. Actually, he didn't tell me those needs outright, but whenever I do research/product shots, I always try to get a cool 'overall' view, a cool 'in use' view, and then 'detail' views based on specific contributions.

In particular, I always ask: "What is the most novel thing about this robot?" In this case, his cable transmission was notable, so I made sure to get a shot of it. Actually, the transmission shot was my favorite of the shoot -- see it at the end of this post. And, as always, click to see any of the photos larger.

* * * * *

The shoot itself occurred in a nearby conference room and was rather painless. The conference room has large brown tables that tend to look nice with a black background, so I set the robot on a table and set up some lights. Before engaging flash though, I shot a few with available light (window) for safety. Overall, I found the available light shots unremarkable so I didn't post any here.

At the start, I was undecided if I wanted a light or dark background. Often, in research papers or on the web, a white or gray background flows better (and doesn't kill printer ink). So I shot the device on a large piece of white seamless to start, as above.

The only lighting in this case is a Sunpak 383 into an umbrella at camera left. I had a large piece of foam core as fill on the other side, if I remember correctly.

After shooting a few frames and chimping, I decided the white background was not letting the device 'pop' like it should. I usually don't like white with silvery products because there is not a lot of separation between the silver and the white. So I removed the seamless and shot on the bare table:

While I liked this a little better in terms of contrast, the edges of the motors were getting lost in the background. So I decided to use a hard light from behind the object to highlight edges (again, this is the cross-lighting trick I always tend to go back to). That necessitated a swap from the umbrella to a large white wall at camera right (moving the table to get the right angle). I also added an SB-20 in deep camera left, slightly below the level of the table, to get a backlight without too much specular on the table.

Overall, I like this shot a lot better. Note how the back light evens out the table and provides a nice outline on the edges of the motors. The table itself was brought up quite a bit by the change in lighting. In particular, the key is now farther away but much larger, resulting in less drop-off.

Once I got the shot locked in, I took a series of shots in this position, moving the robot to get the specular highlights where I wanted them. In these cases, I don't mind if small portions blow out, but I want to avoid a large area (like a pulley face) completely blowing out. I also brought in a hand model when it was too hard for me to hold the device and shoot at the right angle. I could have used a tripod, but it is always easier with an extra hand! The end result was the image that opened the post.

* * * * *

One thing I've been trying to work on lately is more variation in my shots, especially for product-style photography like this. I'll do a full shoot, then realize during processing that almost all of my shots are from the same point of view. Only after the fact will I think of other unique angles or lighting setups.

So after I got a number of safe (but quality) shots, I started to experiment a little bit. The first change was to rotate the device the opposite way, using the same setup:

With the pulleys facing the key light I also took the opportunity to get some detail shots, like the shot below:

I should also mention, in terms of detail shots, you can often get away with some aggressive cropping of overall shots for web display or within a paper or thesis. It is still nice to break out the macro lens to do a few on purpose in high-res, but if you forget, you can often derive them from your main shots.

I tried a few other views and angles, but the shot above really is my favorite from the whole shoot. No specific reason, I just like the close, technical feel of it. Overall I felt the haptic device was very photogenic, primarily because the red base really provides some pop against a dark background. A little bit of color can go a long way, even for a research paper!

Hodgepodge

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:13:00 +0000

What's a hodgepodge? It means mishmash!

And that's what this post is...

After buying the Sigma 400mm with money I do not have, I'm selling off some of my older equipment that I do not need. In particular, that means my Canon 50mm f/1.8 II is going up along with my Sigma 600mm f/8 mirror lens. If you are interested, my listings are here. The 600mm has already been replaced with the 400mm, and I'm hoping to replace the 50mm f/1.8 II once I get a job with a 1.4.
I added another tool on Used Camera Database to include live eBay auctions along with historical data. Check it out if you are interested. It has been quite educational to learn how to make it work, and there is plenty more to do over there.
I haven't updated here much, and that will likely decrease even more as I'm spawning off a blog on Used Camera Database to hold that sort of stuff. If you are interested, check it out.
I'm still planning to post a few things here in the next week or two. One is an anatomy of a photo on a series of shots I did at work for a coworker. I'm pretty happy with how they turned out. The second thing is a Sigma 400mm and Sigma 600mm comparison. Trust me, I can't put that off too much because the 600mm will be in the mail in a week!
Microstock is basically dead for me. I've made pocket change for the handful of images I uploaded, but not nearly enough to actually pull any cash out and, while I want to make a post listing my stats, there's very little motivation to do so.
Lately I've been doing very little shooting, and I don't really have much planned in the near future. Once I get this dissertation submitted and a real job, that might change (or, I might have even less time!).

I've got nice veins...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 00:54:00 +0000

... or so says one of the guys I work with. According to him, they are almost too nice. (click to see them larger)

Apparently, blood is very opaque to infrared light, allowing veins to show up pretty accurately.

I'm just glad he caught me on a day that I was pretty warm and my circulation in my hands was actually going.

One of these days I'd love to experiment with digital IR photography (not just of my hands, either). We'll see -- right now I don't have a camera I can donate to IR conversion.

Shoreline Birds at 400mm

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 06:02:00 +0000

This post is going to be mostly pictures and not as many words.

The Saturday after my defense (Feb 7th) I took a bike ride out to Shoreline and searched around for some birds to test my new Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO Telemacro HSM on. I was not dissappointed and found a couple of snowy egrets, a great blue heron, geese, a hawk (not pictured since I only got it in flight at long distance), and a western grebe (I think).

As always, click on a picture to see it larger.

Most of these shots are from a snowy egret that was catching minnows or maybe crayfish in one of the drainage streams. At first I thought the bird was a bit nuts since it kept swishing its feet around and doing a little shuffling dance, then ducking its head into the water and coming up with a leaf.

Later on, I realized that the stream was full of little minnows this time of year and it was just disturbing the leaves at the bottom of the pool to stir up whatever it was eating.

A little further along I ran into a GBH. Sadly, I was a bit constrained on my angle and wasn't able to keep that leaf from behind his head (it was around the corner in the stream and I had to climb out on some sand-bags without startling it). Although, I have to admit I didn't see the leaf until I processed the image, but I don't think I would have been able to move enough to remove the leaf from the shot.

Later on, I ran across the grebe, diving in the bay. He (she?) would dive and disappear for a minute, then pop up in a new location. But he had those electric red eyes that look so cool!

The Sigma 400mm performed quite well. The weight honestly didn't bother me as much as I thought it would (in some spots I used a monopod, but most shots were hand-held). Likewise, since it was a sunny day, I didn't feel like I was banging against the limits of its light gathering ability, and most shots were at ISO 200 with a pretty high shutter speed (1/500s or shorter).

The thing that bugged me most, which is really more due to the camera, was the fact that most images were back focusing. In other words, I'd line up the center focus point on the eye of the bird, but the autofocus would focus slightly behind the bird, putting the bird's head a little out of focus. I've noticed this before on my 20D, but a 400mm lens at f/5.6 really highlights any focusing problems.

The typically thing to do for backfocusing is send the camera and lens in to the factory to be calibrating -- oftening costing $100 or more EACH. Yeah, that's not going to happen with my current photography budget. I honestly suspect my camera because I've detected the problem before. Overall, it is relatively minor (with only a slight bit of softness). As long as I'm aware of it, I can adjust the focus manually using the HSM.

Speaking of the HSM, it is really nice. With proper light, the lens focuses really fast. Definitely on par with my 70-200mm f/4's USM. I'm very glad I was able to get the HSM version and it makes clean-up of focusing problems very easy -- just focus, twitch the wheel a little forward, and shoot.

I do regret the Err 99 problem (forcing me to stay at f/5.6). The lens gives pretty sharp pictures wide open, but I know it'd sharpen up even more (and give me a larger depth of field) if I could stop it down to even f/6.3. Especially for closer subjects, that extra depth of field would be nice.

But, for $250, I'm pretty happy with the thing.

eBay Research at UsedCameraDB.com

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:23:00 +0000

It has been over two weeks since I've last posted.

The good news is that my dissertation is in the revision stage, meaning I actually have some time to work on side projects. The bad news is I've been focusing more on a new project which I hinted at before: the Used Camera Database (http://www.usedcameradb.com/).

Lately I've been spending most of my time learning (re-learning?) PhP, html, and other web stuff. And, instead of focusing on making the site pretty, I'm working on some of the utilities which should make the site really great. Ultimately, I want the site to include in-depth reviews, ratings, user comments, and used camera price aggregator which provides a one stop shopping for finding which camera (or lens or flash) and locating a good for that item at the same time.

Ultimately, I want to use the site to save myself time. No more searching for hours to find that elusive review of the Sigma 600mm FD version or get the latest price on used SB-20s. Hopefully these ideas appeal to you, too!

Of course, a big project like this starts with baby steps, so the first research utility I present is the eBay Price Research Interface. It allows you to search the previous 30 days of listings and generate a histogram of prices, some statistics, and daily statistics. Of course, there are some limitations, most notably the ability to exclude certain keywords (which is critical for getting accurate price estimates in my opinion) and limits the number of searches to 1000 each month.

Still, though, the eBay Price Research script can come in handy if you'd like to know the going rate of an item. For instance, the search pictured at the top of the page shows a distinct delineation between Canon 5D and Canon 5D Mark II prices. I've already used it a number of times to price things on eBay in the few days since I've made it.

Give it a try! If you have feedback, leave a comment or e-mail me at info@usedcameradb.NOSPAMcom (obviously, take out the NOSPAM part).

My next tasks relating to UCDB are to add live listings to the utility above and make a larger/better aggregator for more than just eBay. Beyond that, I'm also building a searchable database of camera equipment which will include a price history more accurate than any other site provides (and trust me, I've been looking!).

This will all take a while, so be patient!

On the photography side, I've got two posts brewing with some actual pictures in them. Look for them in the next few days.

Dreaming of David Hobby

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:57:00 +0000

Yes, I'm serious, Mr. Strobist himself, David Hobby, appeared in my dream last night.

Don't worry, it wasn't that kind of dream...

This is the gist of the dream (cue wavy image transition):

I'm in a car with a bunch of other guys with David driving. Oddly enough, it is my car (Honda Civic) but way roomier than usual. We're on our way to a Strobist meetup and so the car is full of luggage, flashes, cameras, and other Strobist crap.

We arrive at the meetup and David rolls up the windows before he shuts off the ignition, but they roll up really slow and laboriously. After a moments hesitation, I tell him that the car is unlikely to start again since it has a bad battery or alternator and the windows rolling up that slowly with the car on means something is likely shot. David looks less than pleased and gives me a stern look.

It is at this moment, I realized I not only forgot my flashes and stuff but I also don't even have a camera with me. I opt to not tell David this stuff as we're unloading because he's already pretty perturbed. As I'm unloading, the homeliest dog I've ever seen jumps out of the luggage. I remember that this is David's dog but I forgot how ugly it was -- it is a small white dog with very little hair (not in a good way) and a huge bottom lip that drags on the ground. It comes up to me and I pet it, even though the bottom lip feels like a big bunch of loose, hairy skin.

At this point, I wake up, wondering why the hell David is in my dreams!

Apparently my PhD dissertation has been wearing on me a bit more. I'm sure a dream analysis guru could tell me lots of important things about my relationship with my parents, but I think it is just a build-up of stress and some recent things floating in my mind. For instance, the car problem is real -- my battery isn't great, and a friend at work told us a story of a dog without a bottom jaw the other day.

The weirdest part was just the presence of David Hobby -- I've never even met the guy before and, let's face it, it's not like he plasters his website with pictures of himself!

I know I'm going to have some weird dreams as I reach the end of the road on my PhD, but please, could I just dream about someone prettier than David Hobby? I've seen plenty of beautiful women on the web and on TV -- couldn't one of them stop by?

Sigma 400mm f/5.6: Adorama and Test Shots

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 06:24:00 +0000

This morning I was already planning out some bad things I was going to say about Adorama in a post today. Specifically, they seemed to forget about mailing it out (I e-mailed them on Wednesday after ordering the lens on Sunday and asked why I did not have a tracking number yet; miraculously I didn't hear anything until it was in the mail the next day, UPS 3-day instead of ground!) and they gave me the wrong information on whether the lens suffered from the Err 99 problem.

Then, I e-mailed them this morning, and my tune changed significantly.

Here's the e-mail trail:

Me:

I received the lens and it is in good shape.

Except -- before bidding, I asked if it was fully compatible with a 20D and you said it was. This was the conversation:

Me: "Does this lens work on a 20D?"
You: "Yes, it is compatible with Canon 20D."
Me: "So, to be completely clear, this lens does not have the Sigma incompatibility that causes Err 99s on a 20D, 30D, etc. It has been rechipped (or didn't need the rechip) and works perfectly on newer cameras?"
You: "It should work fine."

But, I tried it out and it will not stop down, throwing an Err 99 on my 20D whenever I am in a mode other than A or M and whenever I try to set an aperture other than wide open in those modes.

I'm a bit unhappy about this -- not that the problem exists, because I was aware that older Sigma lenses have some incompatibilities, but that I wasn't given a straight answer about the condition of the lens so I could adjust my bidding accordingly. I would expect that a used camera dealer like Adorama would know the status of a lens or at least have the resources to verify if the problem exists. I bid on this lens with the understanding that it was fully compatible with my 20D and I am disappointed that it does not.

Is there something that can be done? What are your return policies? Is there a possibility of a partial refund if I was to keep it and save the return shipping (maybe 10% of the price)?

Them:

Good Afternoon Sean, We apologize for any inconvenience this may caused you. Would you be happy with $50.00 dollars as partial refund? Best regards Louis

Wow.

That was way easier than I thought. Of course, I had them over a barrel and they knew it -- I had clearly asked about the Err 99 problem, they had given me the wrong information, and I had bid more than I normally would have. I just did not expect them to respond within an hour and offer a partial refund (my preferred method to resolve it) for more than I had asked for. More than fair!

As Louis said (if you contact them ask for Louis!), "Our customers are very important to us."

So, yeah, I feel like I got a decent deal on this lens now. And while I thought Adorama was a little slimy before, my tune has totally changed now. Their quick response to this issue was very commendable.

Oh, and for those of you keeping score at home, note the importance of establishing a communication trail and the importance of protecting your rights and recontacting the seller if anything is wrong. EBay really is a buyer's market -- don't let yourself get abused!

* * * * *

Anyway, I was able to get some sample pics from the lens today. I was looking for a bird to shoot, but all I found was a nest!

The macro capabilities of the lens are pretty decent, but the inability to stop down (plus the really long and unwieldy focal length) make it non-ideal.

Still, though, I was pleasantly surprised by the sharpness and contrast. I'd love to be able to stop it down 1/3 or 2/3 of a stop to sharpen it up even more and gain some depth of field, but it really is pretty sharp wide open. The HSM is really fast and snappy and definitely on par with the USM in my Canon 70-200 f/4. Obviously, the thing is a tank and heavy as hell, and the slow aperture (f/5.6) makes it difficult to get good frame rates, but it worked well on the monopod.

Most of these shots were ISO 400 (with some ISO 200) and minimal editing other than a bit of contrast. If you doubt, here are some straight from the camera 100% crops (from RAW, default settings):

In my mind, camera shake and focus is going to effect the sharpness way more than the optimal ability of the lens. For the shots I nailed the focus and didn't have any shake on, the sharpness was quite good and the contrast and color were beautiful.

More on this lens in a couple of weeks when I have a chance to put it head to head vs the Sigma. I also put the Tamron-F 1.4x teleconverter on it and results were pretty good.

If you've got questions, leave a comment and I'll do my best to answer it.

Sigma 400mm arrived...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:26:00 +0000

... and I'm a little bit disappointed.

Nothing wrong with the lens, it just exhibits the Err 99 problem. I was really hoping it wouldn't :) I'm not sure if I'll pursue Adorama for it, since the price I paid is pretty decent overall even if it suffers from the problem.

It is one of those things where I'd be shooting wide open or slightly stopped down anyway, so I'm not really losing much. But the idea that I can't stop down bugs me. Either way, it is a stop-gap lens until I can get a better one, so I should be happy. And for $300, it is a darn good lens (as far as I can tell). I'll evaluate it again in the light of day (although that may not happen for a few days).

Other impressions:

It is really, really heavy.
It is very big!
The HSM is pretty nice -- seems to lock on solidly, even indoors, and it moves pretty quickly.
Solidly built (except the hood) and in good condition.
Nice case and packing.

Sigma 400mm to arrive today...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:17:00 +0000

... and I'm pretty excited.

Of course, I'm working/transporting kids until 9 pm so I won't get to try it out for a while. I may stop home quickly if it is delivered before I need to pick up the kids (not wild about a $300 lens sitting outside my door for too long). That is, assuming a signature is not required...

A few more Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO Telemacro HSMs have shown up on eBay, and I'm realizing more and more that the HSM usually does not have the Err99 compatibility problem. I suspect it was released right during the time when Sigma realized the mistake so Sigma rechipped many of them before they left the factory and others were sent back soon after purchase. That makes the HSM significantly more valuable on the Canon mount than the others since it is much more likely to allow full aperture control. In fact, there's an HSM lens currently listing for $455 with a little bit of time left, meaning mine may be worth significantly more than just $300 (if I was willing to sell it again).

There's also another lens that just went up which has two spots of mold or fungus on the front element. While fungus is generally a bad thing, it might be an opportunity to get a decent lens cheaply and then get it cleaned.

The current listings are below (this is the same search I've been using to track Tokina and Sigma lenses)...

Microstock: UGCX 2009

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:02:00 +0000

I wouldn't say I've abandoned microstock, but it has been pushed way to the backburner lately. I still have hopes of contributing a small number of images and making a little pocket change, but I'm ok if I make nothing on it. I also still have hopes of summarizing my earnings in a post here but have not gotten around to it (heck, I'll save you some trouble -- two Big Macs!).

When I first started reading about the UGCX (User Generated Content Conference & Expo) -- a conference which will including a lot of microstock authors and players -- on Microstock Diaries, I really wasn't all that interested in going. Then I realized it was only 15 miles away, the week after my PhD defense, and an Expo Hall pass was complimentary (including the keynote speeches)...

You can't beat free!

So I've registered (free expo passes are available until Jan 28th) and I'm hoping to get down there to check out a keynote speech or two and take a walk around the Expo floor. I'm not expecting much and I have no goals in going, but why not check it out?

Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO Telemacro HSM Overview

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 05:51:00 +0000

I would love to make this a grand post with lots of pictures and links and great information.

Sadly, I don't have an hour or two to write a blog post at this point. So I'm just going to dash this off and then fill in some blanks later. I figure that is better than to write a post about my decision making on buying a certain lens after I receive it (and my concerns and/or suspicions are faded into history).

A while ago I decided that I wanted a super-telephoto in the 400mm range but compromised with a Sigma 600mm f/8 mirror lens. Since then, while the Sigma has worked pretty well, it has left me wanting a refractive lens so I could actually use more of the shots for stock. Out of boredom (or procrastination) I started monitoring eBay for appropriate lenses.

The first thing I realized was just how many versions there are out there. For instance, these are the Sigma 400mm f/5.6 lenses I know of:

Non-Apo. Generally not well reviewed, and not very common. <$150 used, but probably not even worth it unless you can get it really cheap. I haven't seen a lot of them in EOS mount. Suffers from Err 99 (more on that later).
APO, but not telemacro. Quite common on eBay, with maybe 6-10 lenses posted a month. Generally seen as a decent performer, but not as good as the telemacro lenses. Easily distinguished by a smaller focus wheel. $150-$250 used. Suffers from Err 99.
APO Telemacro. A little less common on eBay -- maybe 3-5 lenses month. The telemacro lenses are very well reviewed and in some cases they've been given better marks than the Canon 400mm f/5.6 USM. A good lens with good optics, but a little on the heavy side. Easily recognized by the monster focus wheel. Most suffer from Err 99. $200-$300 used.
APO Telemacro HSM. Pretty rare -- I've seen two this month, but previous months I didn't see any. Optically identical to the non-HSM telemacro and physically only differs slightly, but includes the HSM motor (high speed manual?), a USM equivalent. The most recent version, and only released in EOS mount and (some other mount I can't remember). Some suffer from Err99, but many don't. $250-$400 used.

I've also been keeping an eye out for the Tokina 400mm f/5.6 AT-X SD but that lens is quite rare and does not show up much. Maybe 1-2 a month if you are lucky (beware the manual focus FD version).

For obvious reasons, I've only been looking at the Canon EOS mount since I want autofocus to work on my camera. The big issue with Canon versions of the Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO lenses is that most were released before the 20D/350D and newer cameras, when Canon tweaked their lens communication code and caused older Sigma lenses to not work. As a result, most 400mm f/5.6 lenses cause an Err 99 code on newer Canon cameras, locking up the camera.

All is not lost though, since the glitch is something to do with aperture communication when the lens stops down. So, if you keep the lens at f/5.6 (in A or M mode) it does not glitch as much. The down-side of that is you are always shooting wide-open, which makes good lens performance important (which is why the telemacro version is much preferable). Of course, I haven't been able to test one of these lenses, so this is speculation on my part. From a recent eBay auction, the problem is described as:

It works on all Canon EOS cameras, film and digital. However, on a recent digital body like 450D, 30D or the 5D, it must be used at full aperture f/5.6. Auto focus works well and automatic metering can be used in aperture priority mode on these cameras. Manual Focus works always well at any aperture.

The fix for the Err 99 problem is called 're-chipping' the lens, which Sigma used to do for free, but now no longer does it. From what I've heard, 're-chipping' is simply reprogramming the communication chip without even opening the lens up but they call it 're-chipping' out of habit.

Of course, on mounts other than Canon, I've seen no mention of incompatibility problems.

In other auctions, I've seen lenses with the Err 99 incompatibility marked as Not for digital (including the seller adorwin, who I got my lens from, the eBay branch of Adorama). Either way, it is worth asking the seller about the problem. Some have no clue about the glitch though, so beware if you get a strange answer.

In my case, I asked about the problem and got a relatively clear answer but am still not entirely convinced. This was the conversation:

Me: "Does this lens work on a 20D?"
Them: "Yes, it is compatible with Canon 20D."
Me: "So, to be completely clear, this lens does not have the Sigma incompatibility that causes Err 99s on a 20D, 30D, etc.
It has been rechipped (or didn't need the rechip) and works perfectly on newer cameras?"
Them: "It should work fine."

So, I'm 80% sure I'm getting a newer version with no incompatibility. I've definitely heard of the HSM version having the problem and not having the problem. Given the chance of a re-chipped lens, my lens is easily worth the $305 I paid (including shipping). The re-chipped lenses can definitely command a price premium on eBay.

Even without the chip, I was still after a Sigma 400mm f/5.6 telemacro since they are reputed to be quite sharp wide open, and most of the time you'll be shooting wide open with a super-telephoto anyway. It is a nice option to stop down to get a little extra sharpness, but not a deal-breaker.

Watching eBay for a protracted amount of time I noticed a few things that I found odd. For instance, on the lens I won, about half-way through the 10 day auction time two guys got into a bidding war and drove the price over $350. Then, a few days later I checked the price on a whim and found that both bidders were gone! Apparently they both had their bids retracted, which I've never seen before. That seemed a bit odd to me.

Another funny thing was I bid a few times (already in the lead each time) including a final bid raising my max from $283 to $293. Since I wouldn't be around when the auction closed, I wanted to make sure I had the best chance of winning it, but I didn't want to spend more than $300. Well, as it turned out, the guy who was the second place bidder made a final bid of $285. If I hadn't raised my bid by that $10 I would have lost the lens!

Another odd thing I've noticed is the same buyer going after many of these Sigma 400mm f/5.6 lenses even after he's already won one of them. I've also noticed the same seller placing at least two of these lenses up for auction at relatively high prices. I have to wonder if someone is trying to turn a quick buck by flipping these Sigma 400mm lenses. I'll keep watching and try to figure it out!

I have more to say (including the fact that I'm going to sell off a bunch of stuff to pay for this lens), but I'm out of time tonight and I need to get to bed. I should get the lens in the next week or so and I'll at least post an image or two to whet your appetite while I wait until after my defense to get some real time using the lens.

Sigma 400mm Reviews:
Photography Review
Photozone.de

I just won...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 05:49:00 +0000

... this.

(if you can't see it, it is a used EOS mount Sigma 400mm f/5.6 APO Telemacro HSM)

I got a pretty decent price ($290 + $15 S/H) especially since there is a decent chance it doesn't have the Err 99 incompatibility. Even if it does, it is still a decent price for this lens, since the HSM is quite rare and the condition seems good.

I'll be selling some lenses to cover the cost, including my Sigma 600mm reflex (once I'm satisfied the new lens is better).

More details soon...

THIS is a lens...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 06:23:00 +0000

I've been randomly searching around for 400mm telephoto primes and/or a decent medium cost macro when I stumbled on the Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 EX DG APO IF.

All I have to say is... wow. The thing weighs 35 lbs and gives you 500mm @ f/2.8 (or, if you use the included 2x teleconvertor, 400-1000mm @ f/5.6).

Too bad it costs $25K, or the equivalent of a pretty nice car.

I bet it makes some pretty nice images though!

50D vs 5D... or 1Ds Mark I?

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 05:39:00 +0000

Another in a long line of posts that I write, make it a draft so I can do one final edit, then forget about it for over a week.

I guess I am not alone in realizing that the new Canon 5D Mark II opens up some opportunities to snap up the 5D Mark I for a good price. In fact, a lot of people realized that the price of the 5D and 50D are very similar and there's a lot of debate about which is better. As you probably know, I would prefer the 5D.

Bob Atkins (bio), a very knowledgeable person in all things EOS, has an interesting post about the 50D vs 5D debate. Go ahead and read it. Yeah, really, I mean read it. Even if you shoot Nikon or some other camera than Canon, give it a quick read. There's some bigger issues discussed here than just camera models.

Ok, are you back yet?

So, I take no issue with his first point.

In fact, I think it is important for all photographers to realize that diffraction reduces sharpness at smaller apertures. I knew this somewhere in my head, but I also distinctly remember wondering a few months ago why my images at f/22 weren't as sharp as I hoped they'd be. Put simply, after f/16 or so, expect sharpness to decrease as you stop down. This happens for all cameras from all makers. Bob also has a good point about the trade-off between spherical aberration and diffraction and the basic 'sweet spot' of any lens.

On the second point I have to cry 'Bad Science!'.

Yes, I get his point; the 50D's 15.1 MP is better than the 40D's 10.1 MP and this difference shows up even with crappy lenses. If you can call the kit lens 'crappy'. Actually, the kit lens isn't that bad, which many have been saying all along.

My main issue with Bob's comparison is that the experimental evidence suggests that APS-C resolution peaks at around 12 MP (again, see my previous post for details). Honestly, I suspect it might be somewhere between 12 - 15 MP, but the point remains... of course the 10.1 MP sensor in the 40D is outresolved by the 50D!

Also, I have to say the evidence Bob provided was less than compelling -- the JPEG artifacts in those images were more noticeable than the resolution differences. I consider my eyes pretty good, but I was hard-pressed to see a big difference in those images. And for that reason, the other factors, like the cost and improved screen, would be more important to me than the extra resolution when deciding between the 40D and 50D.

Ok, maybe my cry of 'Bad Science!' was a little premature. I do see Bob's point. He's mostly poking holes in other peoples' arguments that the 50D has no increase in resolution over the 50D. And he does demonstrate that there is a meaningful difference in picture quality between the 40D and 50D even on the kit lens. It sounds like he is taking aim at those people who are trying to compare 100% crops between the cameras -- of course the 100% crop of a 15 MP camera will be less 'sharp' than a 100% crop of a 12 MP camera. I fully agree -- pixel peeping is not what makes a camera useful.

I still really wish Bob had posted some better images though. It might even be cool to see the difference on an "L" lens between those two cameras. It'd also be really interesting to see the difference between a 12 MP sensor and the 15 MP sensor, if that's possible.

* * * * *

Ultimately, I think we are splitting hairs on this 40D vs 50D comparison. If you have the cash, buy the 50D. If you don't, buy the 40D. If you are somewhere in between, compare the features (I'd consider the 50D more of a 13 MP camera than a 15 MP though) and make an educated decision.

Then focus on your pictures.

After all, a picture of a turd is still a picture of a turd whether it is captured in 10.1 MP or 15.1 MP!

* * * * *

A little addendum to this post which is (somewhat) related.

Turns out, the 5D Mark I isn't the least expensive full frame camera on the used market.

The Canon 1Ds is.

On eBay, the 11 MP 1Ds prices have dipped below $900 while the 12.8 MP 5D is still scratching $1000. A local craigslist ad had a 1Ds for $950, well below used 5D prices.

Sadly, there's a reason you can pick up a used 1Ds for less than a used 5D. The 1Ds is from the previous generation than the 5D Mark I, meaning worse noise performance and a reputation as a very large, heavy brick. On the plus side though, it is full frame and it is a 'professional' camera, meaning weather sealing and an intimidating presence.

For more, check out:

Photo.net thread: 100% crops comparing the two cameras. Not a huge difference visible.
Sportshooter thread: Echos most of what I've seen on the web -- the 1Ds has significantly worse low noise performance, a slow and hard to use interface, and weighs a ton.

If I could get one cheap, I might consider the 1Ds for a stop-gap camera. Plus, I'd look really good with a professional camera around my neck (and permanently adjusting my body to a stooped position).

But I'm still left wanting the 5D to have it both ways: full frame AND low noise performance!

2008 in Review

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 00:41:00 +0000

Last year at this time, I wrote three big posts on the preceding year.

This year, I'm going to write a little bit less.

The main topic early this year was hardware, especially the Sigma 600mm, and included some Reviews. Heck, this isn't a hardware blog, but it sure looks like one sometimes because I like hardware. I also explored RAW software to replace my aging RawShooter and settled on Bibble Pro.

My main subjects were the usual birds and insects with a little baseball thrown in.

Near the end of the year my main focus was microstock and I even set up a little studio in the garage. Of course, then I got distracted by my PhD and microstock was mostly forgotten. It didn't help that the future return was very low for the effort put in.

Which brings me up to now. I'm still hard at work finishing my dissertation and so that is the main blog I've been updating. For the future? Well, once I defend in February I'll have some more time to do photography.

I have plans for a new website which I am very excited about but I've promised myself I'll wait until I defend before I set anything up. Let's just say if you like cheap used hardware, you should like what I have in mind.

Great Starter dSLR: Canon 20D for $330!

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 19:44:00 +0000

If you missed it (because I typed in the wrong date and buried it), check out my last post, My Next Camera... a 5D?

I was searching through B&H the other day (just gained affiliation with them -- they are an awesome site for new and used equipment, some of the best prices and selection around) and I noticed something...

The used Canon 20D has dropped in price significantly.

This is a big deal. A year ago when I bought my 20D (my review) it was the second best prosumer Canon model available and commanded a price of $600-$650. Now, you can get a used 20D at B&H for $330. That's a significant discount (it is noted as a 'Back to School' special), but it appears the price of 20Ds has plummetted in the past year since the 40D and 50D have entered the market.

(Note: I'm not sure if the link above will work for very long. But, you can check current 20D prices by going to B&H, selecting Used Products in the search type box, and entering Canon 20D in the search area.)

The reason this is so exciting is because the 20D is the perfect digital SLR for entering the Canon line. For $400, you can get a great body with a good starter lens (I recommend a Canon 50mm f/1.8 ($90 new, $60 used) or even the kit lens ($50 used)) which is perfect for a photography student or budding photo enthusiast. This is the best deal I've ever seen on a starter kit, and the real difference (in terms of pictures) between the 20D and top of the line 50D is very, very slim. Yet, the difference between the 20D and 10D (or Digital Rebels) is HUGE: the 20D gives you much better ergonomics than the Digital Rebel series (if you have normal size hands; small handed people might like the Digital Rebel series better), and major improvements over the 10D like instant startup, ability to mount EF-S lenses (a deal-breaker right there, honestly), and better low light performance.

The 20D has the best value of any of the Canon dSLRs. There's no contest.

I kind of wish I'd made this post BEFORE Christmas because I suspect it might have helped out a few parents. But, better late than never.

If you are interested in a used 20D, B&H is a great place to go for used bodies. You also may be able to get a good deal on a body and some lenses on eBay -- here's the current listing of 20D's: