The ultimate online game!

Lately I havent been doing much photography, and the main reason for that (besides the obvious time it takes being a father to a newborn) is playing World of Warcraft. This game is dangerously addictive, just like any title Blizzard has released. Being an old fan of the Diablo 2 game I felt immediately that WOW was going to be good. I tried the beta version when they opened the Europe beta test and was hooked overnight. They have found a great balance of story, characters, questing, building your character, skills, professions, spells and social gaming. Some people say the graphics are too simple, but I think it works excellent for this type of game, a bit cartoonish and fairytale-like. Being able to join parties to solve tough quests is also required in this game, its pretty hard to do the elite quests solo unless you are a much higher level player than the monsters (or "mobs" as they are called in the jargon). The auction house allows you to trade stuff also, and I think they have found a very good system to keep the economy in control so that those gold, silver and coppers are actually worth something. I like the fact that you can play it the way you want, hard core quester, farming for items, or build your professions through practice and getting new recipies. Even stopping for some fishing is nice to do in this game! So if you feel your photography interest has been down a bit, nothing better than to fill your time with some World of Warcraft! :)

New LCD monitor, PC, and baby! :)

Its been a while since my last post now, and much has happened. The Canon 20D is a really great camera and I recommend it to anyone needing a semi-pro camera. Canon has also released the new 350D camera which seems like a nice starter camera. Good thing it also comes in black since I felt the grey plastic was a bit cheesy.

I guess the greatest news is becoming a father to a little baby girl! But since this is a blog about photography and related issues I wont go into the specs. :) Its everything a baby can be, except the special little thing that I'm the father. Couldnt be more happy, she is truly beautiful!

Well, I borrowed a Canon 380EX flash from my brother to try it out for some indoor baby shots, and must say I have changed my view on flash photography. When using a white ceiling as a reflector, its simple to take hand held ISO 100 shots at shutter 1/60. Got some very nice shots of mother and child with this simple setup and I guess a flash is whats in store next for my photography gear. Except that I spent all my savings on a new computer instead. :)

Yeah, first a new excellent screen, a Dell 2001FP 20" LCD! Its a very good IPS panel, the same one NEC use in its excellent 2080UX screen. But at almost half the price you cant beat the the Dell deal. It has gotten some critique for the backpanel light coming through a bit, and they are right, blacks arent completely black. But still its pretty close to perfect in color reproduction according to colorimeter tests that has been done. Be warned that a lot of LCDs today dont have true 24 bit color resolution, but actually 18 bit and emulate the colors inbetween with an algorithm that shifts colors on each pixel. A good sign is to look for a screen that has 16,7 million colors and not 16,2 (which is the 18 bit panels). The Dell screen is very nice and big, with a 1600x1200 resolution which is brilliant for working with photography. When I reviewed my photos on it for the first time I felt I was looking on slides again. This high resolution and brightness surely makes the pictures come alive compared to my 3-year old LG CRT. LCD has come a long way over the last years and you cant go wrong with the 20" Dell 2001FP! If you do have more money to burn, go for the NEC 2080UX which is even better.

The Dell 20" has both VGA and DVI inputs, but from reviews and experience, the VGA input is not very good. I'm sure its ok, but once you experience this screen with a DVI signal you'll know what I mean. Since my old graphics board, a GeForce3 Ti500, only had a VGA output I had to look for another card. I had wanted to upgrade it anyway since I like playing games now and then. So the decision fell for the new 6600GT which is good value for money. Since i also wanted to leave the old AGP world for the new PCI-Express systems I also got a new motherboard and a new CPU. The motherboard, an Asus P5GD1, is a very nice package at a decent price, and the CPU, an Intel 530J 3.0 GHz is good enough performance. Why pay almost triple the money for something that is 0.6 GHz faster? I already had a 1GB matched pair of 512MB PC3200 memory sticks in my old system so they went over in the new system, doing what they were made for, dual rate running at 800 MHz!

The new computer system is very nice to work with, and more responsive than my old, absolutely excellent for photography editing in Photoshop. I have some more ideas for the system which I will comment here in a later blog. But for now, please come with questions or comments if you have em, I'm always happy for some feedback.

Canon 20D arrives !!!

Woo Yay! (As we say at IStockphoto) The 20D finally arrived after a month of waiting for Canon to be able to deliver the camera house by itself here in Norway. My first impression after one evening of playing with it is that its a good upgrade from the 10D. First, its almost identically built with some minor changes to the buttons and layouts - mostly for the better. Second, its amazingly fast and when shooting it seems to be finished writing before I start looking on the screen. It powers on instantly and feels extremely responsive. I use SanDisk Ultra cards since these are the fastest according to Rob Galbraiths tests. With the 20D I cant see me having to wait on the camera any more.

I have not yet made any image tests to see how good the pictures are but my first trials show that its less noisy at ISO 800 and 1600, which was as expected. It also seems to cope better with keeping highlights and avoiding the abruptness of over exposure that was so common on the 10D. It focuses very quickly and works brilliantly with my 70-200 f2.8L IS. The improved focusing on f2.8 lenses is probably kicking in, but it also feels more responsive on my 17-40mm f4 lens. However, it still doesnt focus right on the wide end which makes me think that my lens have a defect. I'll have to check this out some more.

The user interface in the menus are clear and understandable. In some ways better than the 10D. Its also far more responsive than the 10D, especially when browsing images. Its also nice that I dont have to wait for it to finish writing everything in the buffer before I can access the menu or playback functions.

Its lighter and a tiny bit smaller, but it feels just right for my hands. I guess the 10D was a bit more comfortable to hold for people with long fingers, but I dont have that problem. If I should pick on something it would be that the mode dial feels cheaper and more plastic than before, its also a bit loose. The same thing goes for the CF slot which is also a bit loose. The joystick feels a little strange at first but I guess I will get used to it. Its surely a better way to move about images than the button/wheel combo on the 10D. Its also a very good for adjusting the focus points quickly.

The 20D shoots away like no other camera I have used. It feels like a small machinegun when it fires away at 5 shots a second. I actually had to turn the mode to single shot now more often simply because I ended up firing two shots instead of one. On the 10D its a bit slower so you could have the mode on multiple shot always.

The only thing I miss from the camera is a faster way to switch on and off the mirror lockup function since I use this more often. I also assume mirror lockup will be even more useful in the 20D since the mirror slap feels a bit more heavier than the 10D (although I have no proof for this).

All in all a very nice camera! Looking forward to take some real pictures with it.

IStockaholic

Up to half a year ago I mostly did photography as a hobby, going for long walks in the mountains always bringing my camera to shoot whatever I came over. Digital photography has enabled me to create photos at a higher rate than I would ever have imagined, filling up the harddisk in no time. But thats a different story all together.

My wife, family and friends kept saying that they loved my pictures and that I should start showing them to the world instead of having them lying around on my computer and some of the better ones hanging on the walls. I never really thought about it that way and wondered if I should try to show them in a gallery or something. After some months I started reading more about online stock photography sites and came to like the idea of uploading a picture, having it sold over and over again and making some money. Digital photography is becoming increasingly an expensive hobby, and I saw that my "wish-list" at B&H was growing faster than I would ever be able to afford as I ventured into different styles of photography.

I started looking around and tried an online stock agency where I could upload a small version of the picture and if there was any sale the buyer would contact me through the agency. I would get paid according to the use, so a sale could mean anything between $50 to $1000. I uploaded some pictures, nothing spectacular, about 10 pictures, and waited... Nothing happened, not a single sale still. I got impatient and thought I'll have to try more places. After some time I found another place www.shutterpoint.com where I could upload a full JPG version and set the price as I wished. It had a system where people could rate your pictures too, and it was quite fun to watch which pictures was considered good. Eventually I saw that the site seemed overly focused on the rating thing, and everybody gave 9 or 10's out of kindness - even really bad grainy out of focus pictures got good ratings from some just because they had rated kindly to others. I realised that there was just too many bad pictures there for buyers to even find the good stuff - hence less sales. In the 5 months I have been there I've sold two pictures at $25 each. Not much but at least some.

Well, then I found another place: www.istockphoto.com which I immediately fell in love with. It had its own pricing policy depending on the size of the download and each image had to be approved by an image inspector. And from the quality I saw there I knew they were very picky about the quality. I got sales almost immediately after my first uploads and I was quite hooked, regulartly uploading and checking sales. It was really addictive - and still is. Now the only gripe I have about this place is the royalty I get - only 20% of the sale! Thats not much, especially when you think of the prices where a high res picture is sold for $1.50 - veeery cheap in other words. I can imagine this place as a big blessing for designers and it opens up a marked untouched before. Thats why it is a successful business too with an amazing number of downloads every hour. I immediately noticed the popularity of this place when one of my pictures was chosen "Image Of The Week" (IOTW) with the picture placed on the front page after login. This picture is now closing 200 downlads in under a month and is set to go for the most popular page soon (it actually was there before as one of the higher rated pictures with pure 5/5 ratings until I got one 3/5 rating from one guy that dropped me off the list).

At IStockPhoto we have an expression - IStockaholic - and I must confess I am one, visiting the site several times a day to see whats selling and talk in the community which is an excellent one. If you are a designer you will love this place - you cant get better stock photography for such low prices anywhere. If you are a photographer you have to decide if you feel a 20% cut is fair. Still you will be competing with some very fine photographers, some having over 90.000 downlowads by now. In time those cents will make you a dollar... :)

New website online!

Finally finished the new website with some new pictures, a bit bigger layout and imagesize with titles and frames. Hope it also works on more browsers, I removed all fancy stuff that only worked on IE. Take a look and tell me what you think:

http://photo.lonningdal.net

In focus?

If you have been photographying for a while you might have come back after a nice trip only to find that that brilliant landscape shot has been ruined because either the things in the foreground or the distant background is out of focus! And you wonder because everything looked alright on the LCD screen when you took it. Hehe. Well everything looks fine on the LCD, and generally you cant judge an image by looking at the LCD - except the histogram to see if you have overexposed or underexposed.

So what you need is to know how you get everything in focus - from the little flower in the foreground to the snow-topped mountain in the background. As most of you know, stopping down the lens to e.g. f/22 will do the trick, but you are still not guaranteed to have what you want in focus. Its because the focus point needs to be correctly placed to get optimum depth of field (DOF). Normally this means you need to manually focus. The focus point you are looking for is called the Hyperfocal Distance and will ensure you the longest distance in focus. Naturally this changes based on the focal length (mm) and the f-stop. Fortunately this is pure math and no magic involved, and some people have been so nice to make an online tool for calculating the hyperfocal distance. Try the link below and enter focal length and f/stop, then press the Calculate DOF button. The Hyperfocal distance will be shown. You can enter this in the Focus Distance and see that it will show you the closest Near Depth you get with Infinite Far Depth (thats where the snow-topped mountain is).

http://www.dudak.baka.com/dofcalc.html

For my 17-40mm, while shooting at 17mm, if I focus at hyperfocal which is 0.525 meters, I get everything from 0.263 meters to infinite in focus! Now that should bring everything in focus. Of course you also need a tripod for shots at f/22 or your images will be all blurry from camera shake. No point in fuzzying with hyperfocal distance then.

Note however that many lenses have a sweet spot where they perform best, that means that image quality is generally best at this f stop. On most lenses this is around f/8 and f/11. So if my foreground starts at around 1 meter you dont need to shoot at f/22 to get everything sharp. Actually, if I shoot with my 17mm at f/11 at the focus distance of 1 meter I get everything from half a meter in front all the way to the back in focus.

I've ruined one too many shot by relying on autofocus so now I am keeping a table for reference so that I can quickly find the hyperfocal distance at each f-stop at the most used mm ranges (usually this is 17mm).

The dangers of f2.8 L glass

Well, having been using the new 70-200mm for some time now I must say I am very satisfied with this lens. Sure its heavy and expensive but its worth every penny if you are serious about your photography.

However, if you are coming from the average f4.5-5.6 world of consumer lenses, going to f2.8 kind of glass can make you do some mistakes. Once you have such a light sensitive lens its tempting to keep shooting at f2.8 without thinking about the concequences. Although I have been used to this aperture with my 100mm macro lens, the macro was often used in more planned shoots, closeups and tripod shots. The 70-200mm has IS and it works brilliantly handheld. However, if you are not careful, shooting at f2.8 can ruin your pictures. You have to remember that the Depth Of Field (DOF) is very shallow, which also means your focus has to be spot on. Fortunately this lens is both quick and accurate when it comes to focusing. However, there are many times I have focused at an area that was deep into the object I wanted i focus, effectively rendering the front part of the object unfocused. Unfortunately you cant see this on the LCD since everything looks alright there. You just have to think about it and make sure you focus at the foremost part (or actually a little bit further than that might work too).

Just so that you were warned! It takes practice to shoot at f2.8 and get good results. You especially need to think quickly when shooting on the move.

The Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS has arrived...

...and its awesome! It took only 3 days for it to reach my door from New York which is very fast indeed. Thanks UPS.

My first day of shooting and this lens immediately proves its worth. The kind of images I can take with this I could only dream of before. Its pin sharp even at 2.8 which enables a whole new kind of photography. My first impression out of the box the sheer weight of the thing. Its gonna take some muscles hand holding this for a long time. But on my first day out I must say its really not a problem. Just need a new strap for my camera, one that isnt so hard on the neck. The lens is at least built like a tank.

The zoom ring is a bit harder to turn in comparison to what I am used to, but that too is no real problem and I guess its good so that you dont accidentally turn it by holding the ring. However, I wished the same was true for the four buttons on the side. The IS, IS mode, AF/MF and AF range buttons are all very easy to switch accidentally. It mainly a problem when you pull it out of the bag and I have already turned off AF and IS by accident this way. Still no real problem once its up and you have checked the buttons.

The auto focus is amazingly quick on this lens too. It locks on fast and in AF servo mode it follows the target happily without a hitch. The IS is also very quick compared to what I was used to on the 75-300mm. Its also very silent. Just have to make sure I am full stocked with battery because it will empty the batteries faster (30% less time the manual states).

But the quality of the glass is amazing, combined with the IS I can handhold and shoot almost anything. Here are some pictures you can click on to see some from a first days shoot.

Tipa Awards

Well the 2004 Tipa awards have been given now, and I see that 300D got the breakthrough prize. Well although it was the 300D that "broke through" I still think The Nikon D70 is a better consumer camera, which of course is the price they got for that too. If you want to go Canon I would recommend the 10D instead.

Sandisk got the storage media price, which I think is correct also. The Sandisk Ultra II cards are really good.

Other than that I see that Epson got all the prices related to printing, which might be right. Well until they realise the thing breaks down after half a year and the usage cost is way higher than anticipated. Ok, maybe I have been burned once, and base my feelings on that. But thats me. :-)

Sigma got the best consumer lens award, which might also be right. I dont know much about this lens but it sounds like a good spec and I guess its true. My only experience with Sigma was a 24mm that would never work right on my EOS 50e/Elan2, and many friends who can hear parts falling apart inside the lens. While this was some years ago, I hope Sigma has improved their build quality. Well this is an EX lens so its the top of the line for Sigma, and if you are on a budget I guess its a good alternative to the Canon 16-35mm or the 17-40mm.

Three web sites...

... I regularly visit are:

http://www.dpreview.com/
A nice place to catch up on the latest hardware news and extensive reviews of gear.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com
Very good tutorials on how to take good pictures and post-process them as well as detailed reviews. Later they have added thorough analysis of image quality from different lenses using the DxO analyser (read about it there).

http://www.the-digital-picture.com
Reviews of the best Canon lenses and gear as well as miscellaneous accessories.