graduation part 2

Here is a sample showing what happens when the meter is free to pick exposure. It's a mixed bag, as the skies are far better with the filter (left) and it helps to liven up the tree blossoms! On the other hand note how the grass is more washed out - the lower left needs some help or some cropping. The unfiltered shot has more tonal balance, but sky and blossoms are less snappy. Clearly this is something one can work on with exposure, and especially with RAW images. Since these were sample shots I just went with jpeg here, but in more highly-valued shooting I would have the RAW shots to recover some of the foreground.

If one just wanted blue skies, the polarizer would still be a great choice for this shot - I did not try that out with these images. I believe it was in my bag, but I was coming home from a long week of work so didn't do the extra effort. Next time!

graduation!

I've tried many photo fads since the 1970s, but I had never tried out a graduated neutral-density filter. These simple lenses are half-grey half-clear and rotate into position to make ultra-bright portions of the image less so. I found one online for less than $20 so figured it would be a rather inexpensive learning experience. One can achieve very similar effects in post-processing, but learning how light behaves and how computers work are separate learning experiences - so I bought it.

The shot shown here are not perfect examples, as I was in manual-exposure mode for the unfiltered (left) shot. I then added the filter, dialed down the cloud and shot again, so the foreground is exposed identically. Since one cannot pick on the cloud without the entire upper half being affected, the dark trees suffer in this shot. As I recall the meter showed this 2nd shot to be about 2/3 stop underexposed. Several levels of darkening are available using different filters, as is the abruptness of the dark-light transition. Mine shows why it cost so little, as the transition area is irregular; that really doesn't show up since it's practically in contact with the lens' front element, so for the money this performs just fine.

sports report!

Having lost a bit of flexibility in the past twenty years (it's around here somewhere), I received some new golf clubs at Christmas.  These are newfangled beasts with whippy graphite shafts and oversize heads; the head on the new driver reminds me of a butterfly net or perhaps a table-tennis paddle.  I finally gave them a test today, and oh my - I can swing at about 2/3 speed and get results similar to my teeny-head stiff-steel-shafted relics of the 1980s.  Swinging at what I think of as full speed yields random results (seldom good random though) as the shaft is flexing at the wrong part of the swing.  The irons are still steel shafts, though a bit less stiff I expect, so I need to rethink how fast I need to swing depending on which club I use.  Well, OK: not rethink so much as think.

This implies that I can get in a full round of golf and still be able to move the next day; I found that a bit more difficult the last time, sad to say.  More golf for less effort means.. well, more golf!  Also more flexibility and improved conditioning.  Sure, some will say it's not a "real" sport.. well it'll do for me.  Just consider it a nice walk in an expensive park, with a bit of stretching twisting and muttering thrown in.  Maybe a beer too.

micro 4-3rds decision

Based on a hint from my wife, I've made the call and will keep the GH1 over the G2.  She has indicated that learning more about photography would be fun, and having cameras with near-identical controls would therefore be more valuable than cameras with near-identical sensors.  That plus a bit more versatility in video - and the fact that the GH1 is in hand but G2 was still at the warehouse (though about to ship, I was told).
So our lineup is set for now.  I even have close-up lenses to stop me from buying a macro lens, but now up pops a forum post about macro lens + slide holder = great slide copier.  Drat, that sure would be handy, and much faster than my scanner...

windfall?

While realigning gear, my brother hit town with a bag of old Minolta products he found in his garage. I offered to look them over, and found two bodies and three lenses: a Deitz 35-75 zoom, Elicar 35mm f/2.8, and (gasp) a Rokkor MC 50mm f/1.4! I was compelled :^) to pick up a MC/MD adaptor for my Lumix micro4:3 camera to give the two primes a spin, and they look very nice at first blush. We shall see if the hefty f/1.4 is more compelling than my Rikenon f/1.7 or f/2, but the Rokkor sure is nicely built.

turnovers

Well, it's been a busy week or two of contemplation and action. The family budget is overdone on several fronts, and clearly photography has been one of them. A few deals fell into place which allowed me to realign my priorities, so I have a substantially "new" kit of used Pentax gear: K200d, 50-200wr, tamron 18-200 and primes.

Yes, the K-7 and 18-135wr are gone, which freed up funds to grab a used K200d, 18-200 and a 135mm f/3.5M - and still put a bunch of money back in the bank. One more decision point is coming soon on the micro-43 front, after which another deposit will be made. If more cuts are necessary, the K200/18200 package will go and I will survive with the Lumix gear (and Pentax primes).

While the Pentax cameras are 'better' in the pure sense, with features and durability the m4:3 do not match, the G1 has enough features and the ones that are most important to how I take pictures. Each has its own unique way of doing things, and the G/GH series do things I like.  Interestingly, the K200d does things more to my liking than the K-7, which was very difficult to use with my left eye due to all those buttons that my nose and right eye were crowding!  I suspect I've come full circle (or perhaps a Möbius loop?) and am using the same sensor I was using a year ago in my Sony A200.  Oh well, I took some excellent images with that camera!

I very much doubt my images will suffer in this transition, and the bank balance will suffer much less. No more deficit spending in the imaging dep't!