Aspherical Boundaries

I know that the internet has some rules regarding using Nazi analogies but this one was too good to pass by.

Incidentally, the footage used is from the 2004 film “Der Untergang“.

Not surprisingly, Nikon revealed the D3x on 1 December 2008, ending the Coolpix P6000’s short reign as Nikon with highest pixel count. See here for the news on DPReview.

The specs are a bit disappointing, since the only change compared to the D3 is the 24MP sensor, trading a doubling in pixels for lower ISO range (100-1600 as compared to 200-6400) and shooting speed (5fps (even lower for 14-bit) for 8fps). The big shock, however, is the Canon 1Ds class price tag of 8000USD.

Lots of internet people are very… angry over this, stating that the newer model is not worth 3000USD over the D3. I think I would agree.

An interesting thing to note here is that this is a demand side reaction. Less people will buy this flagship model than if it was pegged at 5000USD. Let’s look at the supply side. Assume the marginal cost of producing the D3x is the same as the D3 (not unreasonable, since Sony sells the A900 with a very similar sensor for 3000USD), and that each model costs Nikon, say 3500USD to manufacture. That means at 5000USD, Nikon will make a marginal profit of 1500USD per unit. However, at 8000USD, that profit goes up to 4500USD. This means that Nikon has to shift only a third as many units as it would have had to other wise to make the same profit. (P.S. Note I’m dealing with marginal prices, not unit prices. For those who are unfamiliar, marginal prices don’t include fixed costs, such as R&D).

I suspect no matter how much the D3x was priced at, news agencies would not have been buying them in the thousands, simply due to the D3 being a more suitable price. So Nikon couldn’t have been expecting to shift many units to start with. If that is true, the pricing decision might have been a way to keep profits high in the face of low expected demands.

I’m also assuming here that despite being vocal, the internet people don’t actually buy that much equipment. 10% of the market, maybe?

Oh, as a footnote, I’ve finally upgraded Wordpress to 2.6.5. Yah. Also installed NextGEN Gallery.

Since I made this post over a year ago, I’ve acquired a small army of Nikon manual focus lenses. I’ve bought them second hand by looking through a combination of local classifieds and eBay.

Nikon made the 28mm f/2.8 in three different optical designs:

• The 7 element model, introduced just before AI spec;
• The 8 element model, introduced with the AI-S spec, adding CRC to the older design. Still being made today;
• The 5 element model, as part of the Serie E line. Later reincarnated as the pre-D AF model.

My beaten up sample of the 7 element model is in its most common AI spec. The coating has taken quite a beating, especially to the rear element’s coating. As one would expect, however, this did not significantly impact the usability of the lens in every day use:

While this design is overshadowed by the later design’s reputation, it’s still certainly pretty good, especially stepped down a stop or two.

While trawling the tubes this morning, I came across this DPReview Discussion.

For those who don’t really want to read it, it discusses an unannounced new Nikkor, the AF-S VR DX Zoom-Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5 - 5.6 IF-ED (I think that will be the official name). From what I can see, this does appear to be a real lens that will probably get announced before PMA near the end of Jan 2008. It will replace the 18-70mm f/3.5 - 4.5 as “the kit lens that’s not built like ass”. Its role in the F mount stable will be similar to what the Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4 - 5.6 USM IS does for the EOS system and the Carl Zeiss Sony DT 16-80mm f/3.5 - 4.5 does for the Alpha.

All of this is not particularly interesting. There will always be well designed mid range zooms because that’s what people are most used to. This one adds VR and a 24mm equivalent wide end to the last model at the expense of 2/3 stops of light at the long end.

What is interesting/annoying is how unrealistic people’s expectations are. The forums are rife with people being disappointed that this is not a full frame lens. For comparaison, till 3 month ago, the widest full frame Nikon zoom lens was the 17-35mm, a 2.1x zoom that weight a kilogram, took 77mm filters and costed a whole lot. Now, people are honestly expecting a 5.1x zoom to start wider , weigh half as much, cost less than a third and have a smaller filter size than the old champion. I think some people are still waiting for that AF-S VR Zoom-UV-Micro-Nikkor 10-1000mm f/1.0 IF-ED.

Technological progress moves fast, but not that fast. Really now.

On the other hand, there’s a few lenses that could be useful and are feasible… but I’ll resist joining the bunch of wish-list-makers on the web.

In 35m photography, the 70/80mm - 200/210mm zoom is referred to as the standard telephoto zoom. Nikon has released various zoom lenses in this range over the years. The constant aperture pro models are of the most interest:

• 1969 Non-Ai Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/4.5 Single ring push-pull zoom, with full DoF markings. 15 elements in 10 groups. 52mm filters, 880g;

• 1975 Ai Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/4.5 Auto Indexing update to the previous lens;

• 1977 Ai Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/4.5 Optical update. Still single ring push pull, full DoF markings. 12 elements in 9 groups. 52mm filters, 750g;

• 1981 Ai-S Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/4 The updated model supporting the newer exposure modes. Single ring. Full DoF markings. 13 elements in 9 groups. 62mm filters, 810g;

• 1982 Nikkon Series E 70-210mm f/4 E stands for Economy. This was the most expensive Series E lens. It also featured a macro mode at 70mm. Single ring. Full DoF markings. 13 elements in 9 groups. 62mm filters. 730g;

• 1982 Ai-S Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 EDThere was actually an earlier version shown at Photokina, but there aren’t may samples of that out in the wild. This update is a stop faster and added a tripod collar. The gold ring also signifies the use of ED glass This is the last manual focus model in this line. Single ring. Full DoF markings. 15 elements in 11 groups. 95mm filter. 1900g;

• 1986 AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-210mm f/4The first auto focus tele-zoom was essentially an autofocus version of the Series E lens. This is also the last f/4 telephoto zoom. It was replaced by a f/4-f/5.6 version. Push pull zoom ring and a slim manual focus ring. 13 elements in 9 groups. 62mm filters. 760g;

• 1988 AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8 ED The first auto focus f/2.8 model. Single ring design, no DoF markings (seems the DoF lines died with MF). 16 elements in 11 groups. 77mm filters. 1200g;

• 1992 AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D IF-ED The D spec update also added a non-rotating front element. Single ring. 16 elements in 11 groups. 77mm filters. 1200g.

• 1996 AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D IF-ED This update adds the two ring rotating zoom and focus controls. Weight increases a bit to 1300g;

• 1998 AF-S Zoom-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D IF-ED Adds the Silent Wave Motor (similar to Canon’s Ultra Sonic Motor) and three focus lock buttons. Two rotating rings. 18 elements in 14 groups. 77m filters. 1850g;

• 2003 AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED This most recent update ads Vibration Reduction (as seem in Canon IS lenses, and the 80-400mm Nikkor) and G spec to the previous AF-S model. The loss of the aperture ring causes the lens to loose compatibility with MF bodies. 21 elements in 15 groups. 77mm filters. 1395g.

As of December 2007, the only feature missing from the current tele-zoom is Nano coating. This anti-reflective coating was first seen on the AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED, and subsquently applied to the 14-24mm and 24-70mm zooms and the 400mm, 500mm and 600mm VR lenses.

Sigma just announced a pair of new Fisheye lenses for cropped sensor cameras. The 10mm f/2.8 is simply a diagnal fisheye, giving 180 degrees of view along the diagnal of the picture. Nikon’s AF DX 10.5mm f/2.8G has served that function for a while now. Good to see a third party version though, especially with a ring USM motor.

More interestingly is the 4.5mm f/2.8. This is a circular fisheye. It projects a hemisphere of view onto a circle contained in the image (rest of it will be black). The first photo on this page shows you what a circular fisheye gives you. This is the first lens of its kind for crop sensors.

Nikon used to make these in various forms, most practical being the Nikkor 8mm f/2.8. This has been discontinued. Sigma makes a 8mm f/3.5 that is a lot smaller and cheaper, but also slower and not as good optically (or so I’ve heard).

Even more extreme is the basket ball sized 6mm f/2.8, which allowed you to see 220 degrees of view.

Nikon models with “S” following their model numbers denote minor updates. As such, the Nikon D70S is a minor update of the D70. It is one of many DSLRs using the Sony ICX413AQ 6MP CCD sensor (2002 vintage).

The models using the sensors include (I think this list is exhaustive):

• Nikon D100 (Feb 2002)
• Pentax *ist D (Feb 2003)
• Nikon D70 (Jan 2004)
• Epson R-D1 (Mar 2004)
• Pentax *ist DS (Sep 2004)
• Konica Minolta Maxxum 7D (Sep 2004)
• Nikon D70s (Apr 2005)
• Nikon D50 (Apr 2005)
• Pentax *ist DL (Jun 2005)
• Konica Minolta Maxxum 5D (Jul 2005)
• Pentax *ist DS2 (Aug 2005)
• Samsung G1S (Jan 2006)
• Pentax *ist DL2 (Jan 2006)
• Samsung G1L (Feb 2006)
• Pentax K100D (May 2006)
• Pentax K110D (May 2006)
• Nikon D40 (Nov 2006)
• Pentax K100D Super (Jun 2007)

This sensor was used by Konica Minolta, Pentax and Samsung to enter the DSLR market. In fact, the only guys who does not use the part is Canon (who makes their own excellent CMOS sensors) and the Four-thirds kids: Olympus, Panasonic and Leica (they use Panasonic sensors I think).

The sensor itself is 23.7 x 15.5mm. (1.52 crop factor). The resulting images are 3008 pixels wide and 2000 pixels tall. It has a base ISO of 200, and maximum ISO of 1600. A boost to 3200 is possible. Its data output speed allows a maximum frame rate of 3fps. The CCD sensor is used with a hybrid mechanical and electrical shutter. It’s not clearly documented where the mechanical shutter maxes out, but it’s in the region of 1/200 to 1/250s. From there on, it’s electrical.

The advantage of the hybrid shutter is that flash sync is possible at close to maximum shutter speeds (1/4000s to 1/8000s as compared to mechanical shutters typically limited to 1/250s). The downside is that CCD blooming occurs under extreme over-exposure (e.g. shooting directly into the sun).

When well implemented and well used, 6MP captures a similar amount of detail as 35mm slide film and is enough for prints up to 8×12 inches.

The ICX413AQ was followed (if not quite replaced) by the 10MP CCD sensor as used in Nikon D200, the ICX483AQA.

[Edit: Realised that the Epson M-Mount rangefinder most likely uses the same sensor too. Added it to the list.]

Photography is an expensive hobby to start. Before you’ve build up a sufficiently complete kit, there’s always this vague need to acquire more “stuff”. I’ve gotten as far as having focal range from 10mm to 210mm covered with several lenses. I’ve also got a flash, some filters and a tripod. A subset of this kit is my lightweight, manual focus film gear, centered around a 1985 vintage Nikon FG.

Anyways, I’ve got a 50mm lens on the camera. I could use the zooms too, but the weight generally gets a bit much for casual work. In fact, I’d like the film kit to be a lot more portable than my regular digital kit. This means no more than 2 or 3 small prime lenses. The usual lens question comes up: which ones? There is only one way to find out without buying and trying everything, and that is to use what you’ve got and see how is it being limiting.

I went up Table mountain on a day hike the last weekend, and did some shooting. I found that I’d like to go a bit wider than the 50mm. Much wider in most cases. Something in the 20-28mm range would be ideal. Alternatively, it would be nice to have something significantly longer than the standard lens for isolating parts of scenery, such as details of plants or a particular rock formation.

This reminded me of Thom’s lens recommendations: He suggests a 20mm f/4 and 100mm f/2.8 for a light kit. There is also some importance attached to having a common 52mm filter size.

Some research shows that the 20mm f/4 is pretty rare on the market. However, the f/3.5 AI-S one does seem quite available. In addition, the newer 24mm f/2.8 AI-S that focuses to 20cm is also decent, as is the current AF version. The 24mm f/2 is better, but pretty rare. The 28mm f/2.8 AI-S is good, better than the simpler AF version. The amazing is that all these take 52mm filters, and most of them weigh between 200g and 300g.

These guys were mostly designed in the 70’s. There’s a general theme of soft wide open and sharpening up quickly as aperture closes. They are not much better (if not worse) than modern classics as the AF-S 17-35mm f/2.8D, but are lighter, smaller and much, much cheaper.

I’ll be looking out for one of these guys, along with the 100mm f/2.8 (I think I know where I’ll find one of those). If I do decided to go for the lightweight hiking kit idea, I’ll add a few filters (I’m thinking a polarizer, a 3 stop ND and some sort of an orange filter for the clouds).

The one thing that also popped up on the hike was that without high ISO film, I’ll need a tripod for a lot of shots. So… about those carbon fibre Manfrottos…