After seeing the hundredth time-lapse, it can become a little difficult to appreciate the incredible sight of an aurora creeping over hills in Iceland. Do many of us suffer from "art fatigue" where seeing so much great work online can make us a little numb to incredible sights? I admit this was the case for me until I saw this time-lapse from JeffHK.
In the last decade, cell phones have made huge leaps forward in technology and capability. It's simply incredible what they are capable of these days, and the amount of processing power and features they have would have been unimaginable not so long ago. The latest iPhones are capable of shooting beautiful images and video up to 4K at 60p. Further, still, the iPhone 8 and X are capable of filming at 240 fps when shot at 1080p, which is very impressive indeed. Both of these features are currently not available in any other similarly priced phone, DSLR, or even most mirrorless cameras. Even popular DSLRs like the Canon 5D Mark IV and Nikon D850 aren't able to shoot at the same frame rates as the iPhone. The question that many people ask is, why?
When it comes to wildlife photography, high megapixel cameras aren't normally the first kind of cameras that most people tend to think of. Cameras such as the Canon 1DX Mark II, the Nikon D5, and the Sony a9 come to mind, due to their incredible burst rates, rugged build quality, and amazing autofocus systems. Tony Northrup, an avid wildlife photographer, believes the Nikon D850 to be the best camera for wildlife photography. In his latest video, Northrup describes in detail why he believes this to be true and based on the information he presents, it's difficult to argue against his points.
In the last few years, Laowa, a Chinese company, released some very interesting lenses. Several of their wide-angle lenses have been praised for excellent performance and can be bought at relatively reasonable prices. The Laowa 15mm f/2 is one of these lenses and is currently the fastest 15mm lens that you can buy. Of course, there is the Sigma 14mm f/1.8 Art, and although that lens is almost double the price, Sigma's Art lenses have developed quite the following due to their incredible performance. But can the Laowa beat it? Kaiman "Kai" Wong helps us find out in this video review.
It would seem that the Nikon D850 can do no wrong and with this latest test and comparison from Tony Northrup, the results seem even more positive. The dynamic range was something a lot of photographers were concerned about, especially due to the higher megapixel count. At ISO 64, it's safe to say that the dynamic range of the D850 is a solid improvement over the Nikon D810. As Northrup demonstrates in his video, the D810 suffered from a heavy magenta cast in recovered shadows whereas the D850 has a more neutral and pleasing look to it. At higher ISO, however, the differences between the two Nikon cameras may not be as significant.
The Canon 6D Mark II has not been the most well-received camera thus far. But how does it actually perform, and are the complaints justified?
EISA recently named the Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Art as the best DSLR lens for 2017-2018, and based on my experience with this lens, I have to agree. It is a fantastic lens and performs at a very high level, with incredible detail rendering capabilities and beautiful bokeh. For the longest time, the 135mm focal length had a little bit of a gap that really needed to be filled. Canon has their version, which although is a great performer, it just can't match the likes of the Zeiss 135mm f/2. However, due to having autofocus, many tend to choose the Canon version over the Zeiss. With the release of the Sigma version, it would seem that one may no longer need to compromise.
Dynamic range tends to be an important feature for any camera and something many photographers either boast or complain about. Canon cameras aren't really known for their dynamic range performance, but in this "two-minute video," Peter McKinnon explains how you can use the built in Canon picture profiles, to improve performance for video.
Hasselblad holds a special place in the photography community and is well known for making some of the best cameras currently available. I have been using the H6D-100c camera system for more than a year, and I wanted to see if it holds up to the perception. With its huge 100-megapixel sensor, this camera does produce some very detailed and beautiful images. The latest "orange dot" lenses from Hasselblad have all been rated up to and potentially even beyond 100 megapixels, making them very effective. With that in mind, it would seem nonsensical to compare this camera to a full-frame system, however after seeing some of the results, the opposite is true.
Medium format systems are widely known as being the best, producing the most detailed and technically superior images. The lenses are supposedly the best available too, such as the 40mm from Rodenstock which is praised for its amazing performance. If you want the best in image quality, the widest dynamic range, and the deepest depth of field with the least amount of diffraction, then medium format is the answer... or is it? Is this simply perception? If you repeat something enough does it become fact? How many people who believe this to be true have actually tried and compared the best from medium format to the best available from full frame?
When it comes to architectural photography, tilt-shift lenses are quite possibly the best option available. The flexibility and amazing image quality make them very popular amongst architectural photographers and even some landscape photographers. Having said that, there are occasions when you may want to push these lenses to their respective limits by shifting right to the edge. Sometimes the building you're shooting may be a little too close and the lens just isn't quite wide enough. In these circumstances getting the most out of your tilt-shift lens really helps. Doing this, however, creates a vignette in the image and due to tilt-shift lenses not having correction profiles, they can be tricky to remove in post.
When it comes to deciding how good a particular image is, there are three aspects that I think are most important: composition, lighting, and colors. These three properties could be described as the technical attributes of an image. There are those who have compared this image to The Birth of Venus and the Virgin Mary, based on a number of styling choices, one can see some similarities.
