Hello all,
First of all, I'd like to offer my sincere apologies for my absence recently. I didn't do quite as well as I would have liked in the transition to the new job. Logistics like building commute time into my schedule and organizing my non-work commitments around the new job schedule didn't go quite as smoothly as I would have liked. Unfortunately, the commitment to the new blog was one of the biggest casualties of all of that. However, I seem to be getting a handle on things again and hope to resume a more consistently updated blog again.
I learned a long time ago that the things that one can write best about are the things that one is most passionate about. The three "f's" (faith, family and friends) are probably the only subjects that I'm more passionate than photography about. The latter is probably the simplest subject to ease back into the blogging lifestyle with, though, so I'm going to give a brief overview of my latest purchase complete with some example photographs.
I decided last month that there were two main holes left in my transition to the Nikon system -- a back-up camera body and an ultrawide angle lens. I had actually decided to address the former first once I sold my K-5 that I finally picked up from repair. However, in the interim, I made the mistake of renting a lens from www.lensrentals.com. I only call it a mistake because it really pushed me to go for the ultrawide first. A brief aside about LensRentals: Roger runs a top notch business and I would not hesitate to recommend his operation to anyone. The rental process was easy, the lens arrived quickly and the rates were similar to what I would have paid locally with a much, much larger selection of gear. Big kudos to them.
At any rate, I was toying with the idea of renting either the Tokina 16-28mm f2.8 or the Sigma 12-24mm f4.5-5.6 II for a weekend outing just to get a feel for one or the other. I liked the speed of the former, especially for trying out some Milky Way stuff this summer, but I can't help but admit that the crazily wide view of the latter did call to me as well. Ideally, the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 would fill both roles (and do so with state of the art optical performance!), but my wallet couldn't afford a copy of that. After consulting with KR a little bit, I decided to try out the Siggy Superwide.
One wouldn't think that something as trivial as a casual 5 day rental of a lens would spur one to make an $850 purchase at lunch following the return of said lens, but there it was. Over the 5 days, I came home with two portfolio grade images plus a slew of others that are at least pretty good. That sort of production can't go unnoticed, especially considering that I really wasn't trying all *that* hard to get stuff. These were just images that kind of popped up around town. I'm really curious to see how this thing will perform once I actually do take it out on a shoot with subject matter that I'll be working harder to photograph.
First things first. 12mm is really, really, mind alteringly wide. The difference between it and even 14mm is dramatic. Compared to lesser ultrawides, it's just in another category. It really takes a bit of time to learn how to see with such an exotic focal length. With a little contemplation, though, it offers creative outlets to the photographer that simply aren't possible any other way. A well executed 12mm photo will bring the viewer into the photo like no other lens can.
The next thing that struck me about the lens is that it doesn't necessarily have to seem cartoonishly wide. There are two separate reasons for this. The first is a little technical. Unlike its predecessor -- the Mk. I version of the 12-24mm -- which was actually a pretty rectilinear lens, the Mk. II exhibits some barrel distortion at 12mm. In non critical applications (e.g. architectural photography with straight lines at the edges of the frame), this actually helps kill off the sttttrrrreeettttcccchhhh that is one of the defining hallmarks of ultrawide photography. This becomes readily apparent when one tries to correct the barrel distortion in post processing. The photo loses a little bit of the field of view and the edges do get that stretchy look to them.
Even more important is the careful use of composition when using the lens, especially at the wider focal lengths. It is of utmost importance to keep the camera level and avoid having compositional elements of known size and shape towards the edges of the frame. Putting a person, for instance, at the edge of the frame is a really bad idea because the lens will stretch them into proportions that look awkward at best. However, elements that can vary in size like bushes don't give as much of a sensation of the wide angle stretch.
I've found that the lens can also be used to deliberately showcase such composition for dramatic effect. Take this shot of Rio Grande Southern Galloping Goose No. 2, for instance:
The camera was deliberately tilted down, and there are elements of known sizes and proportions (other RR rolling stock) at the edges of the frame. It's quite wacky looking, I admit, but I think it's still a successful photo. At least it's not another wedge-o-matic shot of a railroad subject...
So how does the lens perform? I guess that's going to depend on your tastes. It is NOT a Nikon 14-24mm f2.8. Used wide open, especially at the extremes of the zoom range, the corners won't look all that great. When possible, it really makes sense to stop the lens down to f8 or f11. Even then, the corners aren't going to be critically sharp, but I find that they're more than adequate. Pixel peepers may disagree. I just consider it the price that one must pay to use such a unique lens.
The other really negative bit about the lens is that it can flare really, really badly, even when the light source isn't in the frame. Even the mighty Nikkor isn't free from flare, though. Again, it's just part of the price of admission. Being mindful of light sources can help minimize flare, but it's going to show up from time to time. Not much you can do about it.
There's also one other potential pitfall for filter users. I rarely use filters, so the extreme lengths that would be needed for filter use isn't really a problem for me, but it may be for other users. The two part hood/lens cap can provide standard filter threads at the longer focal lenths, but this solution is only really viable in the 20-24mm kind of range. Use of filters at wider focal lengths will require creativity and a lot of money. Personally, I'd work on honing HDR abilities instead of trying to adapt a split ND filter, but that's just me. YMMV.
Beyond that, there isn't much to say. This is just a really unique optic that gives a photographer compositional opportunities not available any other way. It requires learning to see in new ways so be prepared for some failures early on (I'm really, really surprised that I was able to adapt as quickly as I did) and be sure to watch that your feet aren't in your photo! The rewards after those caveats are manifold and dramatic. Highly recommended.
Here are a few shots that I really liked from the new toy:
No comments:
Post a Comment