Nikon in Japan through the lens of my D70 (and my two eyes) and more!

[cyclohexane]

At the end of June, I hopped on a plane from SFO to Narita, then another one from Narita to Sapporo, to ultimately land in Hokkaido, the "mysterious" northern island in Japan.* There was a music festival in Sapporo, so we were accompanied by a large group of young musicians and their rather large instruments.* Anyhow... the post was titled Nikon in Japan...; what the heck does any of this stuff (so far) have to do with Nikon?

The answer is "none".* Now, allow me to transition to my account, featuring stuff about Nikon, and some other random tidbits.* =)* First, there were a lot more Japanese Canon users than my trip to Honshu last year.* When I went to Honshu, I saw very few Canons- Nikon was, without a doubt, king of the rock; Hokkaido, however, appears to be populated (tourists, locals, and pros...) by Nikon, Canon, and a bunch of Minolta APS cameras.* Everywhere you go, there's Fuji Superia in various speeds, plus Nexia for APS.* Nikon still seemed to be immensely popular among the "serious photographers", but I also saw numerous 5D and 20D/30D users- something not evident in Honshu a year ago.* Since this is the Nikon forum, and I'm a Nikon user, I'll share what I observed (for fun, and maybe ego reasons? LOL):

The D200 was everywhere.* So was the 18-200mm VR.* Everyone and their grandmother (literally) had an 18-200 mounted on their Nikon DSLR.* While at the Otaru canal, I saw numerous Nikons, this guy in blue being no exception:



I was personally carrying a D70, plus a 17-35mm f/2.8D zoom and a 50mm f/1.8D prime.* Not owning a D200, I was stuck with my "obsolete camera" (LOL) for the duration of the trip, as camera stores are rare in Hokkaido (unlike Honshu).* Nikon was also the choice of the other serious photographer on the trip:



...a pair of bodies (D50 and D70) to "avoid lens changes"- something most engineers I know say.* The D70 and D50 bodies aren't really well-sealed compared to my D2H (meter died, otherwise I would have brought it), and I've found that regular cleaning seems to be better at keeping dust off the sensor than avoiding lens changes.* I had dust spots in my D70 when I went to Utah without having ever changed the lens.

Anyways, back to Japan and Nikon.* Like I said, the 18-200 was everywhere.* Many Japanese are super-discriminating about the quality of their glass, yet this 10x zoom was being used everywhere.* I know they like being part of a trend when something new's around, but the 18-200 was no longer that new.* This was one of the big reasons I'm considering giving the lens a look for travel when I have some spare cash; my 17-35mm f/2.8 is not a comfortable travel lens to carry with the D70 (and no sling).

Also, film still seems to be pretty popular.* I saw quite a few 35mm film SLR users (I'm guessing they're low volume shooters) with classic Nikons like one F4 with 80-200mm f/2.8 mounted and some others.

More coming soon, after I take a needed break: my thoughts on using Nikon Capture NX, discussion of the 17-35mm f/2.8D lens, better photography than what I've shown so far in this post. LOL

[cyclohexane]

Okay, here we go... part two.

Let's start with the 17-35mm.* This lens is pretty sweet: pro build, fast focusing, the works.* It's not the best performer @ f/2.8, so if you want to shoot wide-open, look elsewhere.* The images this lens produces are phenomenal though- good contrast, color and so on.* Stopped-down, my 18-70 can come close, but the used 17-35 I've been using has better contrast by far.* A B+W 77mm circular polarizer (coated) was found on the lens for most situations.



The 17-35 doesn't have the in-your-face "BAM WOW THERE IT IS" essence seen with the 300mm f/2.8 in Nikonfreak/Julio's shots, but I found the images produced by the 17-35 to be quite endearing.* There's an intangible feeling that I just don't get with the 18-70 (maybe it's simply that I carried the thing in my left hand for the entire trip so my arm feels funny...).





Sapporo's National ("na-shen-naru") TV tower.



If anyone's got doubts about getting this lens, get rid of 'em and try the lens out.* It's sweet, and probably full-frame proof unless Nikon's stupid enough to abandon the F mount if it decides to go to the 24x36 sensor size.* The only real drawbacks of this lens are the size and weight, really, as you get what you pay for.* At f/2.8, it's fully-usable if need be, though corners improve significantly as you stop down.* What I really like about this lens is that the 26-52mm it approximates covers a range I shoot in a lot, so it served me quite well. Those of you doing a lot of people shots will probably be better served by the 17-55 DX or the 28-70, though this lens will do people just fine.

The lens hood I ordered locally some time before the trip has yet to come in. "You know how it is with Nikon... it'll come when it comes..." were the words of the salesguy.

Next: thoughts on Capture NX, and how the rest of the gear held up.

[JDArt]

Great post. Love the saturation of the photos in part 2.

[cyclohexane]

Glad you liked 'em, Jay.* I did not add extra saturation, so it's all Nikon Capture's intial handling plus the lens.

Capture NX....

This thing is powerful.

It can take this (ACR with few adjustments):



and make it into this (Capture NX, collection of quick adjustments):



...pretty darned fast, while retaining the original settings.* This was before I learned how to use control points effectively though. Personally, I prefer the first one, as I actually went back to it after the second one to get it close to what I remember seeing.

The U-point technology is certainly more user-friendly than Photoshop's "lasso the darn area and feather" or "tweak the magic wand till it's right" methods that I've been using as I'm pretty crappy at Photoshop.* For example, using the control points, I was able to selectively lighten, very slightly, the buildings here in this shot of the sky in Taipei as Tropical Storm Bilis approached. *While Photoshop can do the same thing, I found the subtle tweaks I made to this image took much less time in Nikon Capture NX.



In general, I actually like Nikon Capture NX... when it works right. *The code seems to still have bugs in it that haven't been ironed out, and I don't like how it resets all the pallete windows whenever I open a file. *I like how NX respects the in-camera settings for the initial rendering of the file, and it puts the things I'm most likely to want to change immediately in a expandable menu on the right side of the screen for easy access. *The color is better than anything I've been able to wrestle out of ACR, but that's probably a given seeing as it is Nikon's very own software. *Unfortunately, it lacks the polish of Adobe's products and has some ways to go.* Sometimes I feel like I'm clicking on something, but NX won't do anything.* I suspect that the demo was pushed out quickly to stem complaints about D2Xs RAW support and to simply let the end users become beta testers.* I remember beta-testing STEAM before Valve put it out for general use, and Nikon Capture NX reminds me of the way the STEAM beta felt.* Hopefully, Nikon and nik software won't follow Valve's extremely slow approach to refiniing STEAM, as STEAM felt about the same to me last year, and that was four years after I tried out the beta... but that's another story.

Not sure if I'm going to shell out $150 for Capture NX when my demo expires, but the colors the software produces without me touching anything are really tempting me to bite the bullet.

Next up: gear talk in general... I should grab something to eat and come back, LOL.

[cyclohexane]

The rest of the gear...

It rained in Hokkaido, and in Taipei.* A lot.* I was lamenting the dead meter in my D2H back home, because it could have shrugged off just about everything except Tropical Storm Bilis, which hit the day after I landed in Taipei.* The D70 doesn't like rain, but plastic bags proved sufficient protection from the elements.* I used tape and a pocket leatherman to make independent "housings" for each piece of equipment to facilitate lens changes.* No problems with the D70, except the already flaky DOF preview button that causes the mirror to stick up whenever I push it.* I haven't bothered to send it in, as I'm not sure that I want to be without the D70 for the long period of time it'll be gone.

Used the 50mm f/1.8D some as well; perhaps one of the best $100 USD lenses around.



Mine is starting to show significant signs of wear on the outside, but it's not missed a beat.* Great lens one can take almost anywhere, and 75mm equivalent field of view is sometimes more interesting than 50mm.* I don't use my 50mm's much on film.



One thing I forgot to touch on was the close minimum focusing distance of the 17-35.* I managed to pull off some loose flower close-ups, among other things:



While this certainly won't replace your macro lenses, it made from some interesting pictures.* The bokeh's only passable, but I found I could get some cool (or strange) effects if I played with the lens enough.* It was somewhat fun, and fun is good, right?





In retrospect, what I should have carried with my 17-35 is the 85mm f/1.4D AF prime, as it shares the 77mm filter size and would have been a more useful length, but I'd need a grand to get that lens. Working on that, LOL

Not sure what else there is to add.* I'll be sprinkling some of the (hopefully) better images in the various discussion sections sometime in the near future.* Questions, comments, hatemail, death threats, and all that good stuff can be directed to me, naturally.

[Nikonfreak]

Great stuff. I really like the captures. Thank you for sharing (And thanks for the kind word there on the 300 f/2..

I've done a little travel outside the US this year and I've also noticed that film still seems to be pretty strong abroad. In South America folks are very much still into film camera bodies and believe it or not, I saw quite a bit of F3 users and lenses from the day. In Mexico, tourists are mostly using digicams, but you see folks using the film Nikon and Canon SLR's and I saw a few AE-1's floating around. I even saw someone using an OM-2 Olympus. (how sweet was that camera in the day eh?)

The 17-35 was, and continues to be an excellent lens. I would dare say that it should do better on a digital body as the smaller sensor would tend to use the center of the lens and softness on the edges is minimized, to the extent it exists. Any flaws might be more noticeable on a D2x or D200 given the higher resolution. Heck, I started seeing a bit more flaws in the Nikon 12-24 f/4 when I went from the D100 to the D200 so I tend to be more careful with composition and that lens with the D200.

Of course the big drawback of the lens is range as more shooters look for flexibility in their lenses, but hardly a photojounalist was caught without the 17-35 in their bag at one time. It was the staple, top end lens. There IS an image quality that is obtained by using the top end glass that at some point folks begin to really see as their eye develops.

Is the 17-55 a real replacement for the 17-35 Can't say for sure. For my taste, it's too short on the long end. Some folks swear by it though and the performance is as good as one would expect from top end glass.

I like the 28-70 f/2.8 Nikkor and given the image quality, I suffer through the carry weight of it on the D200 and usually take it wherever I need a walkaround lens. If I need something for daytime street photography, I'll take the 24-85 AF-S.

The 18-200... well, I was a skeptic, but I like the lens. For travel, vacation, etc... it's really a winner.... I would recommend that lens without batting an eye to anyone looking for a one lens solution for general photography (daytime, family, vacation, etc)...
It's really good. No kidding. Michael eluded to that fact here in that so many were using it. If I could sum it up... "Believe the hype... It's real". That's not to say it doesn't have limitations... it does... know them (Just like with anything else) and you'll not be disappointed. One other thing... 67mm filter... Come on Nikon... what are you thinking? 77mm please!

Capture NX... I need to download it and try it out. I really do. With so many things on the plate, I've been hesitant to install anything and start the learning curve, but I need to do it. The software seems to have some very interesting aspects, some that I bet the next version of Photoshop may incorporate....

Great post Michael... thank you for sharing.

Julio

[cyclohexane]

I saw 8mm film for sale next to the MiniDV tapes in Cuernavaca, Mexico.* FM2N bodies are available new in Taiwan, for exhorbitant prices (think D200) as they've got a nice following in Asia.* Heck, I like film, but it's more of "have some fun/get to know it because UCLA doesn't do digital in it's art program yet".

The problem with the 17-55mm, besides being a DX lens and having ghosting issues (compared to the superb 17-35 in that regard), is that it doesn't really quite get to 17mm.* I think it was Thom or someone saying that 17mm is a generous rounding off.* Then again, the 70-200mm f/2.8 is really a f/2.833 or something, so I doubt the difference is huge.

The 18-200 doesn't take 67mm filters... they're 72mm; I can only think of three other Nikkors which take this size- 85mm f/1.4 AIS, 180mm f/2.8D AF, and the 28mm f/1.4D AF.* 67mm is just as bad, but I think a lot of amateurs probably have 67mm filters to unload when they dump their 18-70's thinking they need better.* Heck, we have two 67mm circular polarizers and a host of other stuff in 67mm, but that's because my dad's an engineer and is unwilling to accept the "negative compromise" of a step-up ring.

Also, additional humor.* I actually used the 17-35mm for birds, because we had seagulls get really, really close:





The second one above is cropped (as is the one below), but not much.* LOL

[Nikonfreak]

LOL.. that's right.. 72mm... doh. Still same question... "What was Nikon thinking..."

Darn that's close.... were you holding shrimp or something? That's awesome!

Julio

[mavb]

Michael, Thanks for sharing your trip with us. It looks as though you got some great pics to help retain the memories. I it coming. I'm enjoying reading your thread.

[cyclohexane]

Agreed on the 72mm Julio- it's still bad. I thought of a fourth lens, the ancient 25-50mm f/4 (first quality zoom Nikkor) that takes the 72mm size, but I'm struggling to think of anyone besides Bjorn who'd still have that handy. As for the gulls, they were going after the shrimp chips that we were chucking into the air- it was one of those "feed the seagulls/check out the scenery" boat tour things that the group took part in. Reminded me of trying to cross the quad during lunch in high school... LOL

Glad you liked the post, mavb.

If anyone's interested in sifting through the rest of the stuff, you're welcome to do so: Gallery