Tripod for travels

As I'm planning my trip to Nova Scotia, I remembered how I was traveling in Costa Rica with my tripod.  I used my OPUS OT-1104BH tripod perhaps only once back then and it was somewhat big and heavy to lug around.  Because of its size, I had to keep it in my larger backpack (inside its cardboard box for easy retrieval and stow-away.)  The benefit of having a tripod that heavy was diminished by the fact that I did not carry it around on my outings.  I did not mind so much that it was heavy (sturdy).  It was not hiking long distance.  It was that it was too big.

A couple of days ago, I purchased a Manfrotto MKC3-P01 tripod off someone on Craigslist.  The tripod is rated for 1.5kg load capacity, just barely enough for my D7000 and my heaviest lens.

The MKC3-P01 has a ball head.  Once tightened with the knob, it feels quite solid, enough for 1.5kg at least.  One thing I do not like about the ball head however is the quick release plate that is sold with it.  There is no safety locking pin that I see on the OT-1104BH.  I think it is possible to release the plate by accident and see my camera dropping to the ground.  I will have to be careful with the release lever!

Anyways, the specs are as follows (taken from Manfrotto's website):

SPECIFICATIONS

	centre column	rapid
	closed length	40.0 cm
	Color	black color
	column cross section	three-faceted
	column tube diameter	22mm
	front tilt	0° / +90° head tilt
	leg angles	21°
	leg cross section	oval
	leg sections	5 number
	material	aluminum legs and technopolymer
	maximum height	165.0 cm
	maximum height (with centre column down)	136.0 cm
	minimum height	45.5 cm
	panoramic rotation	360 degrees
	plate type	quick release - with 1/4" screw
	quick release	yes
	load capacity	1.5 kg
	weight	1 kg

70-200mm

This subject comes back to haunt me every now and then.  I was at the Henry's Exposure Show with Joe.  He was at the Sigma booth trying out a few of their lenses.  While I was there, I saw their 70-200mm f/2.8 lens.  Sigma lenses come with ten years of warranty.  A seed of evil thoughts was embedded in my brain since then.  Today, I was at my niece's birthday party when I was so tempted to go back to the show to buy the lens.  The temptation was driven also by the thought that it was $1100 but after checking out its price on Henry's website, I believe it was for another lens I saw, not for the 70-200mm f/2.8.  At most, I believe the lenses had a discount of $200 at the show.  So, it probably would have costed me $1200 + tax.  That is not a small amount.  Yet, I want a 70-200mm f/2.8.  Why, I thought?  Where am I going to use it?  Weddings?  I could be a second shooter.  Parties?  Sure.  I am planning a trip to Nova Scotia.  Will I be able to make use of it there, or will my current arsenal of lenses do?  They should do, although they will be somewhat of a compromise.  In the end, I was able to fight the temptation.  I am at home, wondering how I'd feel if I had actually bought it.  *sigh*

I spend too much time hoarding lenses and not using them fully.  My new year's resolution was to make a great photo with each of my lenses.  So far, I think I have made at least one great photo with the 50mm f/1.4 lens and the 18-200mm.  The other lenses still have not had their opportunities yet.

Copper Hill Sensor Swipe

The Henry's Exposure Show is now over.  I attended the show yesterday for about five hours.  It was good.  I walked out of the show with two Copper Hill Sensor Swipe kits for wet sensor cleaning, that I purchased for $2 each from Henry's clearance section (Henry's used to sell them for $25 each!!).

A Copper Hill Sensor Swipe kit comes with an 18mm swab and a PecPad sheet.  The PecPad sheet was wrapped around the swab ready for use out of the bag, and the 18mm width of the swab was perfect for the D7000 sensor as it covers pretty the entire height of the sensor.  I used my old sensor cleaning solution I bought from Aden Camera a while ago and applied a few drops onto the PedPad.  One swipe across the sensor almost did the job--my dust bunnies were well bonded to the surface.  I had to repeat the process one more time to get a perfectly clean sensor.  (The process involved swiping across the sensor with one side of the PecPad, and then go back (or go over in the same direction) with the other side of the PecPad.)

On the second attempt, because you are not supposed to be re-using the same side of the PecPad, I decided to unwrap the PecPad and reposition the swab at a different location on the PecPad.  It occurred to me then that the PecPad is held together with tape.  Uh, yeah, tape.  Well, that was stupid I thought.  Now, I can no longer use a whole section of the PecPad covered by the tape because of potential adhesive debris left on the PecPad.  What I could do though now, is to use the other side of the PecPad and cut the PecPad into disposable strips.

I will not follow the steps given on the instruction sheet that came with the kit.  Instead, on Copper Hill's website, there are these better instructions:  http://www.copperhillimages.com/index.php?pr=Tutorials2.  Basically, you cut the PecPad into strips.  After an application, throw the strips away.

http://www.copperhillimages.com/images/StripPrep.jpg

14.7MP Canon IXUS 980 IS

Well, it's gone.  I bought the 14.7MP Canon IXUS 980 IS in the fall of last year I think but never really used it.  I did take it to a restaurant once but the problem is, I am so spoiled with the DSLRs I cannot really use a point-and-shoot anymore (for indoor shots).

To sell or not to sell

I put up my 80-400mm for sell a few weeks ago.  I kinda forgot about it.  Some scammers had replied to the ad and today, I just received another enquiry.  This last enquiry may be real--I really don't know but it could be another scammer.  Anyway, I am really wondering if I should let go of this lens.  I have taken some really nice photos with this lens and the only reason why I considered selling it is only because I take it out only one or twice a year.  Is it worth keeping it around?  I am not so sure anymore.  Will I miss the 80-400mm focal length range?  Maybe.  Do I need the money from selling it?  I could use it toward a Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. :)  Should I sell it then?  I do have an old Nikkor 500mm prime lens.  I have taken it out only once over the past four years.

I do have a habit of selling something I think I no longer like to use, only to buy it back later.  What a conundrum.

Spot Metering vs. Matrix Metering

Modern cameras come equipped with this cool feature call “matrix metering” – basically the camera’s ability to analyze the scene and “figure” out how much light is needed for the exposure.  This is a real cool and real convenient feature and I think it made photography a lot more accessible to the masses.

At the same time, just because the camera figure out the amount of time it needs to make the exposure, it doesn’t mean it’s the artistically correct exposure – this the concept I first came across from reading Bryan Peterson’s “Understanding Exposure” book.  At the same time, I was reassured by many sources (in-print, online, Nikon, or other “experts”) that Nikon has a very good matrix metering system and it works well in “most” cases.   So I have been leaving my DSLR on matrix metering all these time.

Last time, I noticed the moon was just spectacular and decide to capture the moment with my D5100.  I put the camera on a tripod, get a good focus (AF-A) and snapped a exposure, and this is what I got.

Well, it’s not bad, but I was hoping I could get something a little better…  So, I snapped a couple more exposures, and I got

 

Clearly I wasn’t getting anywhere with this matrix metering, so I decided to change it to good old spot metering and see what I can do with. 

I then decided to see what else I can with spot metering.  Simply by metering from different spots, I got very different results from the same target:

 

I think this is where Photography becomes a real art - I can, using the tools I have available and my creativity to decide how I would want to interpret a given scene and communicate that to others.   I don’t know if I would ever be fractionally successful as Bryan Peterson, but I think I have just crossed over from snap-shooters to a artistic-shooter.