How soon before a "digital" camera becomes simply a "Camera"?

Since digital is now the prevailing type of camera, why do we still need to use the word digital when describing them? A decade ago when they were first coming onto the scene and film was still the primary format, it made sense. But now a film camera is a rare find.

I wonder how long it will be before people will assume a camera is digital when they hear the term "Camera". Or is this already happening? Will I then need to change the name of this website to LeggNet's Digital Capture?

Today's image is one of the first cameras I ever used. It is the Kodak Brownie my father received from his grandparents as a graduation gift in 1950. In case you can't tell, it is not digital.

Canon 30D, Canon 70-200 f/4L lens - 1/15 second, f/4, ISO 100

Bigger is not always Better: When an SLR is too much

On Friday night I got the chance to re-live some of the music from my youth when I attended a Def Leppard concert in West Valley City. Concerts are usually full of great subjects to photograph and this one was no exception. But if you've ever tried to walk in to one carrying a large SLR camera with a long lens you will find that they don't take too kindly to it.

This is one of the reasons I carry a small point-and-shoot camera, a Canon G7, in my kit. The G7 (which Canon recently replaced with the G9) is a high quality 10 megapixel camera in a small unassuming package. I simply dropped the camera into a pocket on my cargo shorts and walked right in to the show. The on-board image stabilization that this camera has is a nice bonus, especially when shooting in a low light environment such as a concert.

As for the concert, it was pretty cool. If I had had my preference though, Def Leppard could have taken the night off and let the opening band Styx carry the night :)

Canon G7 - 1/30 second, f/4.8, ISO 200

My Daily Carry Gear Bag

I get a few emails each month asking about my camera gear. In response, here is an image of my "daily carry" gear bag along with a list of its contents. The gear I carry is an ever-changing list, so this is as-of today.

Bag

LowePro Vertex 100AW backpack

Contents

Canon 5D body
Canon BG-E4 battery grip
Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens
Canon 70-200 f/4L lens
Canon 1.4x extender
Canon 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 lens (mainly for my backup 30D body)
Canon 100-300 f/4.5-5.6 lens (mainly for my backup 30D body)
Canon 50 f/1.8 lens
Mamiya 50 f/1.8 lens with Canon adapter
Sekonic L-358 light meter
Canon 430EX strobe
Canon G7 point-and-shoot camera (for being less obvious)
Apple MacBook
Batteries, chargers and cables
LiteDisc white/silver reflector

I have a couple other bags including a small one with my backup 30D, but this is the main rig. What do you carry when you can only take one bag? Any recommendations for me?

Canon 30D, Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 lens - 1/30 second, f/5.6, ISO 100

What do you shoot?

In the photography world, we all have our biases in regards to what manufacturer of camera equipment we prefer. Anyone who has spent any amount of time reading this blog knows that I am a big proponent of Canon gear. However, it wasn't always this way.

In my film shooting days of the eighties and early nineties, I was a large fan of Nikon. My primary cameras were the FE and FM2 models. I loved the sturdiness of these cameras plus they were "just right" in the size department. I shot literally thousands of photos between these two bodies and never had any type of failure. These were great cameras.

When I decided to make the move to digital SLRs a few years back, I did a bit of research. I knew that I would be "marrying" a manufacturer and wanted to make the right decision. It was a close call between Nikon and Canon, but Canon ultimately won. The deciding factor for me was the selection of bodies and the room to grow. This was a hard decision for me, since I had always been such a "Nikon Guy".

Here it is a couple of years later and I am still pleased that I went with Canon. However, if I had gone with Nikon I am sure I would be nearly as happy. Nikon's lack of a full-frame sensor is the only thing I think that would be holding me back.

Today, most of the photographers I know shoot either Nikon or Canon except for the occasional Olympus. The Canon Rebel line (especially the XTi) is very popular as is the Nikon D80. These are all great cameras.

Today's capture is a shot I did of my main camera, the Canon 5D, for the masthead at the top of the blog. I took this using my backup 30D with a simple one light studio setup.

What brand/model did you choose? And why?

Canon 30D, Canon 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 - 1/60 second, f/8, ISO 100

Mamiya / Sekor - 50mm f/1.8 lens

Quality construction throughout.

That's how I describe the feeling that comes to mind when I handle my 35+ year old Mamiya/Sekor 50mm f/1.8 lens. For such a small lens, it is relatively heavy. It feels as though there is very little (if any) plastic used in the build. The focus ring is precisely smooth as is the aperture adjustment. The glass looks like it just came from the factory - flawless.

I carry this lens in my kit for sentimental reasons (it used to belong to my late brother) and because I enjoy using it from time to time. I have an adaptor that allows it to be used on my Canon digital SLRs. The use of a manual focus and manual aperture lens reminds me of my photography of yesteryear. I've got to say though, it does look quite odd having this 20th century lens attached to a 21st century camera.

The shot was made looking straight down on the lens as it set on a blank CD-ROM against a black background. I used a single softbox to light the scene. I stopped the subject lens down to f/22 in hope to capture the aperture blades in the image, but the depth of field was too shallow at f/4 for them to come into sharp focus.

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L lens - 1/30 second, f/4, ISO 50

Why not a Digital Camera?

I've been asked why I put a film camera (and an old clunky one at that) on the newly redesigned masthead of LeggNet's Digital Capture .

The first reason is very simple. I had this photo in my inventory and didn't have a similar shot of a digital SLR. It was an easy capture to use until I could shoot a picture of a digital camera.

The second reason follows along the lines of yesterday's nostalgic post. This particular camera is a PETRI FT. This is the same model as my very first SLR. I received it secondhand when I was in the eighth grade. I shot many rolls of film through it in the year I used it, before upgrading to a Pentax MX. This is not the actual camera, but one I picked up off of eBay for $10. It serves quite well in its roll of an office decoration.

I'll be replacing the camera image up top with a shot of a digital SLR very soon, but for now - film it is.

Canon 30D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/25 second, f/4, ISO 100

Digital Camera Sensor Sizes Explained

I recently began shooting with a Canon 5D, moving up from the 30D body that I had been using. The major difference between the 5D and the 30D is that the 5D uses a full-frame sensor as opposed to the 30D's APS-C sensor. Terms like "full-frame" and "APS-C" can be a bit confusing, so hopefully I can shed a little light on the subject with today's post.

In digital cameras there is a sensor in place where the film used to be in film cameras. The light passing through the camera's lens projects the image onto this sensor which then captures it digitally and records the image to memory. These sensors vary in size in both the number of pixels they contain (megapixels) and their physical dimension. Most digital SLR (single lens reflex) cameras bear a strong physical resemblance to the 35mm SLR's we shot in decades past. But a difference between many of these cameras is the size of their sensor.

Taking Canon's DSLR line for example, several of their cameras have an APS-C sensor which is smaller than a frame of 35mm film. The 30D model (a camera I use) has this size of sensor. Since the sensor is smaller it only records a portion of the image the lens is projecting. This results in a "zoomed in" effect on the captured image. On cameras with this size sensor, a photographer has to take the focal length of their lens and multiply it by 1.6 to see what the equivalent focal length is. My new 5D body, on the other hand, has a sensor that is the same size as a 35mm frame of film and therefore the equivalent focal length of the lens remains the same.

In the image above I took two pictures from the exact same location with a 30D and a 5D. I used the same lens (Canon 24-105 f/4L IS) on both photos at a focal length of 24mm. By overlaying 100% size images on top of each other you can see how much more of the scene is captured by the 5D's full-frame sensor (the color 30D image is on top of the black & white 5D image).

Here is another example of the two images next to each other:


Top image taken with Canon 30D - Bottom image taken with Canon 5D

Notice how much more of the scene is captured with the 5D in the bottom image? The lens has a significantly greater wide-angle field of view. This is particularly helpful in landscape photography and architectural captures (not to mention my industry of real estate). The 1.6 crop factor sensor on the other hand can be a benefit when a photographer seeks added 'reach' for a lens. I recently used a 300mm lens with my 30D to photograph eagles and hawks in Farmington Utah. By putting this lens on the 1.6 crop camera, it became an equivalent of 480mm - a nice improvement.

In addition to the larger physical size of the sensor, the total amount of pixels is obviously different between the two. The 30D records an image of 3504 x 2336 pixels (8.2 megapixel) while the 5D records a 4368 x 2912 pixel (12.8 megapixel) image. This difference gives a noticeable quality boost to the 5D.

Both of these sensor types have their advantages and their applications. For the type of photography I shoot, I prefer the wide view and image quality of the 5D. The exception to this is when I need the added reach of the APS-C equipped 30D.

Which do you prefer?

Canon 5D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/125 second, f/16, ISO 100 &
Canon 30D, Canon 24-105 f/4L IS lens - 1/125 second, f/16, ISO 100

How to: High Speed Splash Photography

Yesterday I posted some shots of a strawberry splashing into a drink with a brief explanation of how I did the shot (see the post here). I was really surprised at the amount of email I received asking for more information on how I created the shots. To answer these questions, here is a more detailed explanation of how I created the shots.

Lighting

I use relatively inexpensive studio lights (I purchased a two light set from Adorama for under $300). These lights are fairly low power (guide # 100) but work well on close in shots. Each of the shots was made with one light placed at approximately 85 degrees from the camera. I fire the lights with a sync cable connected to my Canon 30D. If you are using a camera that doesn't have a sync cable port (Canon Rebel for example), you can fire the lights using a hotshoe sync adapter. This relatively inexpensive piece fits on the camera hotshoe and has a place to plug your lighting into. You can also fire the lights via slave from your camera's onboard flash, but this has a tendency to adversely affect your lighting.

On the lights I use either a barndoor or a snoot attachment. This eliminates the light from splashing on the background and the camera lens.

Metering

I use a handheld meter to get a true reading of the lighting output. This step can save quite a bit of time in post processing. If you don't have a handheld meter, bracket a number of shots and then view them on your computer to determine the best exposure.



Camera

My primary camera is a Canon 30D SLR. The great part about using an SLR is the near-immediate shutter release when the button is pushed. Timing is critical in catching the splashes and having a fast acting camera is very nice. I have tried these shots with a point-n-shoot camera. It is a bit trickier to time the shots, but it can be done.

I have the camera on a tripod and use a remote cable release. I drop the strawberry with one hand and fire the camera with the other. When I have a helper (usually a daughter), I have her drop the object while I fire the camera.

I prefer to shoot these shots with a telephoto lens for two reasons. The first being that it creates a narrow depth-of-field and throws the background completely out of focus. Secondly, it keeps the camera clear of the "splash zone".

Background

For a background in these shots, I am just using a black sheet. Like a said earlier, by using the barndoor attachment on the light, I am able to keep the flash off of the background thus making it underexposed and "true black".

Props

I have used several different items in my splash shots. I have dropped cookies into milk, cream into coffee, and as we see here strawberries into strawberry lemonade. In this instance my strawberry lemonade is simply water with food coloring. I try to avoid sugary liquids due to the stickiness it causes on everything it hits (occasional camera/lens included).

Studio

My studio is rather low-tech. This shot shows a typical splash-shot setup in my garage. I have long since lost the privilege of taking these shots in the house due to the mess it creates.



Post Processing

I use Photoshop CS2 (on a Mac) for my processing. These shots required very little work. I converted the image from RAW format using Adobe Camera Raw, then cropped and applied a small amount of sharpening.

Conclusion

As you can see, this is a relatively easy type of photography to do. The fun part is to just be creative. I had one comment questioning the usefulness of these shots. I really don't have a use for them. I sell an occasional splash photo on iStockPhoto, but other then that I just consider it art.

Give it a try and see what you can create.

You've come a long way, Mr. Kodak

I've got several old cameras sitting around my office. Most have some family history attached to them in one way or another.

This capture is of one of the cameras, a Kodak Brownie Flash Six-20. My father received this as a graduation gift in 1950 from his grandparents. As a child, I was allowed to use this camera and I shot many rolls of film through it. It's one of the first cameras that I remember using. Given the primitive camera and my inexperience, the resulting images were hideous. But y'know, I sure wish I had those photos today.