Iustin Pop: Nikkor 200-500mm f5.6E ED VR tests
So, lately I've been on a telephoto lens learning curve; after the
300mm prime, I said to test a zoom lens. As I found the prime
reasonably easy to adapt to (compared to shorter focal length lenses),
I thought that a zoom (heavier, bigger) will be the same.
Oh, I was wrong. My keeper rate for the first outdoors test was quite
bad around 50% only, which (when talking only about focus/sharpness)
is much below my standards.
I started easy; some close or medium range shots, nothing special:
But then, moving to further distances, things became less
straightforward. Shooting two pictures each time meant that usually
one of them was sharp, but the other not.
I got really confused at this step; the shutter speed was 1/2000s and
I also had VR on; either VR was unneeded (i.e. contributing blur
instead of helping) or something else was going on. After much head
scratching, I think it's a combination of the following factors:
I'm happy with the detail (at this distance), however I was not able
to correct the colour due to the haze between me and the mountains;
note that the trees on the bottom of the distance were not near me,
but on the next or after-next hill. This picture confirms that with
more practice things will get better.
Coming back to shorter distances, and shorter focal lengths, things
are looking better. We were passing somewhat near some people playing
with RC-controlled planes not near enough to hear them, but near
enough to see the plane quickly flying. Switched camera quickly to
AF-C and Dynamic-21 focus, and - to my surprise - I was able to
capture four good pictures, two so-so and four more clearly out of
focus. But, for such a heavy length, hand-held and on the short
notice, I was happy; the first picture is one of the so-so ones, but I
kept it as I like the way the propeller is seen. All pictures at 290mm
plus some cropping, 1/1250s, ISO between 900 and 1800, f/5.6 (i.e wide open):
From this exercise, the conclusion is that the lens is OK-ish for
tracking, although the not-so good keeper rate tells me that I need to
be careful; I'll have to see how a subject moving not left-right, but
instead approaching or moving away from the camera would be tracked.
But enough pictures of small planes. At 500mm, but still somewhat
close, trees:
At this step I'm starting to wonder if stopping down a bit would help
with the sharpness; I'll have to test that in the future.
Walking some more, finally a bird in flight; one of the hopes when I
took the camera/lens out was that I'll see some birds, but this was
the first. 500mm, heavily cropped, but quite good result for myself
(same autofocus settings as before):
The only problem here is, as always with crows (I think these are
crows), is the black bird against the light-blue sky (not even strong
blue), which means the picture has a high dynamic range; recovering
the shadows on the bird is difficult. But in any case, it's clear the
lens can deliver, if the photographer is good.
Next, a helicopter was gracious enough to pass by (pretty close):
Two minutes later, it was quite far, but since it was going in the
direction of the Alps, it gave the opportunity for a nice shot:
This picture is less sharp, but still I like it due to composition;
not successful on small screens though, only if you see it full
screen. Light is very difficult though and about 10 seconds earlier
would have been even better (more separation between the helicopter
and the mountain).
And since we're talking about planes, let's see a plane at 500m,
directly overhead, and quite high:
This picture (@500mm, cropped, 1/2000s) has the most detail of a plane
flying high enough to have trails (not sure how to estimate, but at
least 5km, maybe more around 7-8 I'd say) that I ever took. So yes,
the lens can deliver, but it's not easy. This shot, being shot more or
less straight up, had the least distance through low-altitude
atmosphere, so it has less problems compared to the mountains
pictures. It's still not really sharp (lens wide open), but the amount
of detail I'm sold 
And to finish on a more close note:
A long focal length lens allows one to get "close" without getting
close, which means animals are not disturbed. The first picture with
the cat (not shown) had the cat less alert; ears not fully up,
although eyes were still seeking; this picture shows it fully alert
and concentrated, like it was a wild cat hunting for its survival, and
not a city cat, out just for fun.
So, summary:
But then, moving to further distances, things became less
straightforward. Shooting two pictures each time meant that usually
one of them was sharp, but the other not.
I got really confused at this step; the shutter speed was 1/2000s and
I also had VR on; either VR was unneeded (i.e. contributing blur
instead of helping) or something else was going on. After much head
scratching, I think it's a combination of the following factors:
- shooting at long range; for the pictures I'm talking about, the subject was between 800m and 1.2km; at this range, haze and atmospheric disturbances start to play a role.
- lens is heavy 2.3kg and adding the camera (1kg) it means that I was hand-holding 3.3kg, which is much more than I'm used to; the focal length of the lens, at that distance, means that any small movement (rotation or shift) translates into significant subject movement, especially when viewed at 1:1 magnification on a 36Mp body.
- there might still be some interplay between VR and shooting at this shutter speed, although not sure.
I'm happy with the detail (at this distance), however I was not able
to correct the colour due to the haze between me and the mountains;
note that the trees on the bottom of the distance were not near me,
but on the next or after-next hill. This picture confirms that with
more practice things will get better.
Coming back to shorter distances, and shorter focal lengths, things
are looking better. We were passing somewhat near some people playing
with RC-controlled planes not near enough to hear them, but near
enough to see the plane quickly flying. Switched camera quickly to
AF-C and Dynamic-21 focus, and - to my surprise - I was able to
capture four good pictures, two so-so and four more clearly out of
focus. But, for such a heavy length, hand-held and on the short
notice, I was happy; the first picture is one of the so-so ones, but I
kept it as I like the way the propeller is seen. All pictures at 290mm
plus some cropping, 1/1250s, ISO between 900 and 1800, f/5.6 (i.e wide open):
From this exercise, the conclusion is that the lens is OK-ish for
tracking, although the not-so good keeper rate tells me that I need to
be careful; I'll have to see how a subject moving not left-right, but
instead approaching or moving away from the camera would be tracked.
But enough pictures of small planes. At 500mm, but still somewhat
close, trees:
At this step I'm starting to wonder if stopping down a bit would help
with the sharpness; I'll have to test that in the future.
Walking some more, finally a bird in flight; one of the hopes when I
took the camera/lens out was that I'll see some birds, but this was
the first. 500mm, heavily cropped, but quite good result for myself
(same autofocus settings as before):
The only problem here is, as always with crows (I think these are
crows), is the black bird against the light-blue sky (not even strong
blue), which means the picture has a high dynamic range; recovering
the shadows on the bird is difficult. But in any case, it's clear the
lens can deliver, if the photographer is good.
Next, a helicopter was gracious enough to pass by (pretty close):
Two minutes later, it was quite far, but since it was going in the
direction of the Alps, it gave the opportunity for a nice shot:
This picture is less sharp, but still I like it due to composition;
not successful on small screens though, only if you see it full
screen. Light is very difficult though and about 10 seconds earlier
would have been even better (more separation between the helicopter
and the mountain).
And since we're talking about planes, let's see a plane at 500m,
directly overhead, and quite high:
This picture (@500mm, cropped, 1/2000s) has the most detail of a plane
flying high enough to have trails (not sure how to estimate, but at
least 5km, maybe more around 7-8 I'd say) that I ever took. So yes,
the lens can deliver, but it's not easy. This shot, being shot more or
less straight up, had the least distance through low-altitude
atmosphere, so it has less problems compared to the mountains
pictures. It's still not really sharp (lens wide open), but the amount
of detail I'm sold
And to finish on a more close note:
A long focal length lens allows one to get "close" without getting
close, which means animals are not disturbed. The first picture with
the cat (not shown) had the cat less alert; ears not fully up,
although eyes were still seeking; this picture shows it fully alert
and concentrated, like it was a wild cat hunting for its survival, and
not a city cat, out just for fun.
So, summary:
- lens is nice (optically), although fully open (f/5.6) and hand-held and at long distance it doesn't yet give me full satisfaction; I will need to improve my technique and learn how to properly handle it.
- in combination with a high-megapixel body (D810), it allows fun although pointless feats; pointless doesn't stop hobbies, though
- I need to go to the gym; not "more often", just start going!
Dear lazyweb,
TL;DR version
Why does 
I was first interested in the idea of using a smartcard to store OpenPGP subkeys when I joined the 
QEMU 2.5 has just been released, with 
It s been a few years that I maintain some python-django-* packages, as part of the maintenance of the OpenStack dashboard, Horizon. Currently, this consist of: python-django-appconf, python-django-babel, python-django-bootstrap-form, python-django-compressor, python-django-discover-runner, python-django-formtools, python-django-openstack-auth, python-django-overextends, python-django-pyscss.
By far, Django has been one of the biggest pain point. It moves too fast, deprecating its own API from one minor version to the next, at the rate of one minor release every 6 months.
As Django 1.9 was uploaded to Sid, a bunch of problems appeared. The 
In my previous 
I think it's pretty much clear what it is. Instead of that people should read LWN or I should start making news because it is not hard to be waaaay much better then Phoronix guy but also news that I didn't write I will not just link to it (many times not even that) and then say how I wrote article! You know, it is fine not to understand everything and ask people questions.
It has been already one week since last report and here comes next one. This week was half focused on fixing issues with 
Like 
I'm often using 
it looks like this autumn was not my best blogging time: this is the first
posting in 3 months. anyway, I wanted to give a quick overview about
my work on RC bugs. again nothing exciting, mostly just trying to fix the
ones popping up in the pkg-perl team.
If you haven't already come across it,