Tuto 7: Split Lighting and high speed sync flash

Hi all,

We will discuss two techniques in this tutorial: the Split Lighting and flash photography in high speed sync mode (Auto FP).

Split Lighting

Nothing complicated here, it is quite the opposite! Split lighting (which can be translated as "divide the light") is a basic lighting of the portrait photography.
The aim of this technique is to illuminate the subject by only one of its sides.

In the first example below, the subject is illuminated by a remote flash located in front of his face and slightly above the subject. The flash is used without any diffusion or reflection accessories.

In this second example, the flash is located on the right of the subject, and is used in a softbox (or light box).

This technique allows simple but powerful lighting that brings more emotion than lightings yet more complex in terms of number of light sources (this is only my opinion :).

Flash with high speed sync (Auto FP)

It is important to note that the technique of split lighting alone can not immerse the subject completely in the dark as is the case in the previous two examples.
In fact, the original background of these two shots was perfectly white, it is playing with the settings of your camera and using a remote flash with high speed sync mode that you can achieve this result (very easy to get !).

High-speed sync mode (visible also under the name Auto-FP, FP Focal plane) enables the flash to operate at high speed synchronization. In general, a flash will synchronize with your shutter up to 1/200th of a second. With Auto-FP mode, it is possible to maintain this synchronization up to 1/320e second.

Pro cameras can run up 1/8000e second. Your flash in auto-FP can operate at speeds above 1/320e but its power will quickly become insufficient.
Typically, a flash in auto-FP is used to reduce shadows on a model during a shooting outside in bright light, we will see how to use this away to achieve the result of the second shot:

1) Camera in manual mode (to be able to adjust the ISO sensitivity, aperture and shutter speed).
2) Internal flash camera in controller mode only.
3) The remote flash (here, a SB-700 in a softbox) is configured on the camera to operate in auto-FP (1/320e)
4) I set the ISO at the minimum (ISO 200 on the Nikon D700).
5) I use a very small aperture (f/16)
6) The exposure time is set to 1/400th
7) The flash is positioned a few centimeters from the face of the model, completely on his right (our famous split lighting).
8) I manually adjust the flash output to achieve the desired result.

To understand the fact of working with such adjustments: on this case, taking a shot without flash, would be like photographing your shutter: we would get a completely black picture. On this basis, we can then flash to get just enough light to illuminate the subject.

Other tutorials on portrait lighting and the flash will quickly follow.
Damien

Video: Nikon D600 hands-on review

The coolt team of DigitalRev.com has published on youtube a review of the all new Nikon D600 DLSR cheap FX body.

You can have another look at how it comapres with others FX cameras at this link:

http://fototutorials.blogspot.fr/2012/09/dxomark-new-vs-old-dslr-how-do-they.html

Damien

DXOMark: new vs. old DSLR, how do they perform?

Every two years, the photokina gives us the opportunity to discover new photo equipments and technologies.   This is also the occasion for the brands to reveal their new offers.  This year Nikon introduced the D600 and Canon the EOS 6D, two entry level FX bodies.

With the recent release of the Nikon D800/800E, D4 and the Canon EOS 5D MK3, and the EOS 1DX, I found interesting to have a look at the famous DXO mark test results for those new DSLR and the previous ones. Note that the Canon EOS 6d and the 1DX have not yet been tested, I'll update this article as soon it will be done.

On the Nikon side, the Nikon D600 shows excellent results for its class, placed just behind the D800 and D800e in terms of image quality:

The D600 does even better than the D800 in low-light condition. Despite the price difference, we can say that those three bodies offer the pretty same (excellent) performances. They do better than the recent Nikon D4 and the old Nikon D3S and D700:

The D3S still is the king in high ISO conditions, but both the D3S and the D700 are exceeded (without being bad at all!) by the new generation for color-depth and dynamic range.

It is interesting to notice the also good performances of DX bodies like the Nikon D3200 and D7000:

Except for low-light ISO, they offer equal to better performances than the D3s and D700.

On these comparison points, the Canon 5D Mk3 and Mk2 seems to be noticeably behind old and new Nikon products of the similar generations, but we shall wait for the 1Dx and 6D results to be fair:

Conclusion

For the studied aspects, I think we have two winners for two different class budgets: the Nikon D600 offers really excellent performances for a reasonable price compared to D800/D800e or D4 bodies. It is available at 2099$.
On its side, the Nikon D700 represents a really great opportunity for the occasion market, its performances are still really great and used D700 can be found at around 1500$, more or less.

Setting up bracketing on the Nikon D700 for HDR photography

As you may have followed, I moved from a D7000 to a D700. One thing that I quickly noticed is the fact that unlike the D7000, my new D700 FX body does not provide a bracketing (BKT) button (situated near the flash button on the D7000).

The option is still available, but is less accessible, hidden on menus. Well, let's see how to fix that lack!

First, we are going to set up the kind of bracketing we want. We have the choice between exposure and flash, exposure only, flash only, and white balance bracketing. In our case, bracketing will be used for HDR photography, so we are going to set it up for exposure only bracketing.

Go to the "Custom Setting Menu" and then to the "e : Bracketing/flash" sub-menu. You just have to put the "e5 : Auto bracketing set" on "AE".

Now, we are going to assign the bracketing function to the... function button (Fn). Go to the "f5 : Assign FUNC. button", and set the "Func. button press" and "Func. button + dials" on the BKT option.

At this point, we just got back the bracketing button that I missed from the D7000, at the difference that it is assigned to the Fn button.

The way to use it is really simple:

1. Set the D700 on the burst mode (Ch)
2. Press the Fn button and set the number of exposure you want to bracket (with the rear dial)
3. Always by pressing the Fn button, set the EV (Exposure Value) increment you want to use (with the front dial)
4. Press and hold the shutter button to take a burst of the desired number of bracketed photos.

To cancel the bracketing function, just set to 0 the number of bracketed photographs...

From Nikon D7000 to Nikon D700, new DX to old FX: can we talk of upgrade?

Hi everybody,

With this post, I'd like to share with you my feelings after going for a full frame (FX) body (Nikon D700) from a DX body (Nikon D7000). What is the difference between FX and DX? Can a recent DX body compete with a four years old FX body? You won't find here lab tests or the perfect truth, but just my feelings about that change, for my use cases.

I bought my D7000 when it was released (end of the year 2010). Before that, I was using a nikon D3000. At this time, I bought the D7000 because I wanted a better image quality in terms of dynamic, high ISO and resolution. I wasn't really regardant of the build quality and ergonomy of a DSLR body.

After more than one year of using the D7000 mostly everyday, I always felt that something was missing when I was comparing my photos with others taken by FX bodys. At high aperture, the subjects always seemed to be more "detached" from the background. Everything also looked more detailed and clean. I'm not talking of a huge difference, absolutely not, but it attracted my eyes often. That's the main reason why I decided to try the full format, I wanted to get this little "plus".

I took this decision at the same moment of the announcement of the new Nikon D600 FX body. After the official presentation of the D600, I decided to find a (not so) used D700. You may ask me why? The D600 would potentially offer better performances than the D700: this is the new entry level FX body that benefits from the new technological orientation initiated by the D800 (better high ISO, better definition, better dynamic range, etc.). Yes it would. But what the D700 could do four years ago, it can do it now. Its performances and capabilities looked sufficient for my amateur use, and it offers better finition and ergonomy than the D600 does (which body is point-to-point similar to the D7000's, except few little details). I think my money is better spent this way: I got a used D700 (700 clicks!) for 1500€ with a one year warranty, where the D600 is 2100€, with surely better performances (but to what extent?) and "worse" finition and materials. After few times with the D7000, the D700's ergonomy seemed to be better to me...

So here I am, I just sold my D7000 and received my almost new D700. As expected (I wanted a pro-class camera), the body is much bigger and heavier than the D7000 was. I always used the D7000 with a grip in order to handle it better, I don't feel like I'll need a grip for the D700, it feels perfect in my hands. The finition is also much better, although the D7000 was already good on that point, but the D700 and its magnesium alloy body feels like a rock!
--> D700 wins

The other point that comforts me on my choice is the ergonomy and the buttons disposition: it looks more logical to me, more accessible and usable. It's easier to change your setting while having the eye on the viewfinder.
--> D700 wins

The viewfinder, this is maybe the only point that feared me: the D7000 has a 100% viewfinder where the D700 is 95%. I read many people complaining about it, that's not my case. The lost 5%, to my mind, won't change a photograph. At worst, a crop will bring you the desired result. At the contrary, the bigger viewfinder of the D700 is a real pleasure when you come from a DX body, a really good point to me so!
-->D700 wins

The reason why the viewfinder of the D700 dropped to 95% instead of 100% (compared to the D3 when it was released) is to include a pop-up flash on the body. That is a really important point to me because I use internal flash to control remote flashes.
--> No winner, D7000 also has an internal flash.

One option is missing on the D700: the U1/U2 user profiles proposed by the D7000. Back to the D7000, I often used this modes in order to take quickly 5 braketed photos with 1EV increments (for HDR processing). The D700, unlike the D7000, allows braketing like this, without tricks, so this is not inconvenient for me.
--> D7000 wins

By taking the decision to go from the D7000 to the D700, I also accepted the fact that the resolution is lower on the D700 (from 16MP to 12MP). Is it a drawback? It will depend of you, and your need for higher resolution or not. For the most common use, 12MP is high enough I guess. To my mind, the only advantage of a higher resolution is the flexibility you win for cropping...
--> D7000 wins

The autofocus on the D7000 was pretty well supplied, with 39 points. But the D700 is a king at that level, offering 51 points and focusing faster. I also noticed that the D700's autofocus module was sometimes more accurate, especially with the Nikkor 50mm f1.8G lens (from time to time, I had front and back focus issues with the couple D7000 - 50mm f1.8g).
-->D700 wins

After all, the main reason why I went FX is FX! The difference with a smaller sensor is immediately noticeable. My favourite lens on the D7000 was the fast prime Nikkor 35mm f1.8G lens, which is equivalent on the D700 to my Nikkor 50mm f1.8G. At f1.8, as expected, the depth of field looks deeper, and the transition between the different plans is smoother. It gives a nice volume to the overall, a depth to the scenes.
I like portraits and photography of details, working as soon as possible at the highest aperture. For these works, the result is more than convincing! The only thing I could regret, but this is normal, is the crop factor allowed by the DX sensor of the D7000 (x1.5). My 50mm was approximatively like a 85mm which was good for portaits. now I'll have to buy a real 85mm lens (I finally found a good reason to buy the excellent Nikkor 85mm F1.8G!).
In general, the image just looks better on FX than on DX, it looks more detailed and defined.
--> D700 wins but D7000 is interesting for its crop factor (sports or animals photography?).

More technically speaking, the difference between the two cameras, in terms of dynamic range and high ISO capabilities, is not huge. Back in time, I already had chosen the D7000 for its low light handling. After few tests, the D700 does better but not that much. I guess sports, show or animal photographer will be more demanding than I about it!
Concerning the image dynamic range, the D7000 seems to expose a bit better on difficult scenes, but the difference is not huge here again.
--> D700 wins for High ISO, D7000 wins for DR.

So, can I talk of upgrade when going from a new DX to an old FX camera? For me, the answer is yes.
If we only consider the image quality without acting like photo-geeks (by looking at 100% crops at 25600 ISO or else), the feelings can only be better on FX.
DX could be a really good alternative if you need very long focals, thanks to its crop factor. It is obviously interesting if you have a lower budget or if you're not that demanding with the final result.
The rest is just details and personal feelings, some people may prefere a lighter body with already a good image quality, others will look at the most fast and accurate autofocus system, or the best dynamic range.
I prefer to focus myself on the feeling that my work brings to me, and it looks better since this upgrade to the full frame format.