Rangefinder Magazine
December 2005

Click Here for printable version of this article.

Digital Photography John Rettie
Aperture, Sony DSC-R1, Nikon D200

AFTER A RELATIVE LULL in the announcement of significant new digital products during the past year, we seem to have suddenly been bombarded with some exciting new pro-level cameras and even a brand new image-editing program.

Potentially, the most significant recent announcement is Aperture from Apple Computer. In case you have not heard, it is a program aimed directly at professional photographers. It’s a postproduction tool aimed at helping to improve the workflow after capturing hundreds or thousands of images. It allows users to work directly on RAW files without having to convert them to another format for essential editing and sorting. It is not a replacement for Photoshop, but more a workflow tool that Apple hopes will meet an unfulfilled need among pro photographers.

Apple’s new Aperture program is aimed directly at pro photographers shooting RAW images.

Having said that, the program does allow non-destructive alteration of files that can be exported to Photoshop for additional editing and even then re-imported. Aperture features several unique compare and select tools that allow photographers to easily sift through large photo projects by scanning large numbers of images side by side. Like so many Apple programs, it uses the metaphor of a traditional non-digital space at its core. In this case it’s set up as a light table, where images can be arranged, resized and piled together in a free-form workspace. There’s even a loupe tool that allows portions of an image to be magnified and examined in detail without having to zoom and pan into the whole image.

Naturally, Aperture only runs on a Mac, and due to its tremendous power, it only functions efficiently on the newest Macs. Apple recommends a dual-processor Mac G5 with at least 2GB of memory, although it says Aperture will run on lesser systems, including PowerBooks with at least a 1.25Ghz CPU. It is also designed to work across multiple displays to provide a large work area.

The Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 camera (left) is slightly smaller than the Canon EOS-5D.	The flip-up monitor on the DSC-R1 is useful when shooting static subjects.

I have not yet had an opportunity to try Aperture or even see it demonstrated, but I’m intrigued to see how it will function as the information posted on Apple’s web site (www.apple.com/aperture) suggests it is a revolutionary product. Apple says Aperture is to professional photographers what Final Cut Pro is to filmmakers. Certainly FCP has caught on like wildfire with professional film and video editors, thanks to its sophistication and relative ease of use. It’ll be fascinating to see how Aperture is accepted and what, if any, programs it ends up replacing. For example, I am a great fan of Photo Mechanic, which I use for sorting images after a photo shoot and for creating web pages that editors and clients can view. I find it far faster in operation and much easier to use than Bridge, the image-sorting program included in Photoshop CS2.

Sony DSC-R1 Camera

Last month I suggested that a camera such as the new Sony DSC-R1 could become the eventual replacement for a traditional 35mm camera. My reasoning is that an APS-size sensor in a smaller body with an electronic viewfinder in place of an optical reflex viewfinder would be an advantage that would supercede a traditional-style digital SLR bodies with a removable lens.

The quality of the image of Santa Barbara model Shy Johnson, captured on the Sony (right) is almost identical to that captured on the Canon EOS-5D (left).

I have now had the chance to use a Sony DSC-R1 for brief period of time. In all honesty, I was both impressed and frustrated with it. The quality of the images it is capable of producing from its 10.3-megapixel CMOS sensor proved to be really good. In fact, I found them to be almost as good as the images produced by the newest fullframe 12.8-megapixel Canon EOS-5D camera, at least up to ISO 200. Considering that the Sony sells for $999 including the fixed 24–120mm (equivalent) zoom lens, while the Canon costs $3300 for the body alone, that’s a pretty good recommendation.

The Sony sports a quality Carl Zeiss 5X zoom lens that is actually a 14–71mm zoom with a variable aperture of f/2.8–4.8. Sony sensibly marks the barrel with focal length from 24 to 120mm, making it easier to understand. Unlike many prosumer cameras, the R1 zoom features manual zooming and it can also be manually focused if desired.

As you can see from the photo on page 101, the camera is smaller than the Canon EOS-5D. The R1 tips the scales at 2.2 lbs., while the Canon body alone weighs 2.0 lbs., and the 24-105mm Canon L lens adds an additional 1.5 lbs. If you’re lugging around a camera all day, this weight savings is attractive, especially if you need a second body as a back up.

For still life photography I found the R1 to be quite pleasant. The plastic body feels well made, although the grip could be more ergonomically shaped. It’s a tremendous advantage to be able to preview images on the flip-up LCD screen, although I’m not sure I like it located on top of the camera. Personally, I think I’d rather have a rotating screen on the back. Most of the time I found myself using this screen more than the viewfinder, just as I do with my point-and-shoot camera. However, I was disappointed that the screen was difficult to see in daylight. Hopefully Sony and other manufacturers will be able to use brighter screens before too long. After all, most mobile phone screens are highly readable in daylight.

Obviously it’s nigh impossible to use the flip-up monitor for composing action shots. Then one has to rely on the electronic viewfinder, as there is no optical viewfinder— but this is the Achilles heel of the R1. It’s frustrating to say the least as the image is grainy, and there’s a delay as you move the camera and the video image is refreshed. I tried shooting an auto race with the camera, and it was difficult to pan speeding cars with the viewfinder. In addition, it was impossible to use autofocus, as the shutter lag was far too long.

I also tried the camera on an outdoor shoot with a model on a beach. I was shooting her with the sun behind her head, and the image in the viewfinder was almost totally dark making it impossible to see her expression.

In its present stage of development this camera is not a suitable alternative to a SLR, even though there is nothing lacking in the quality of images it produces. Once Sony and other manufacturers produce an electronic viewfinder that has no lag and is bright enough to view in all lighting conditions, a camera such as this will become viable for professional use. In the meantime it’s still a really good deal for someone who shoots landscapes and still life images where they can utilize the flip-up monitor.

Nikon D200

Not many weeks after Canon surprised everyone with the announcement of the EOS-5D camera, it was Nikon’s turn to surprise people with details of the D200. Ironically, the specifications of the D200 are almost exactly those of the camera that many expected Canon to introduce instead of the 5D.

Nikon’s new D200 digital SLR has a 10.3-megapixel CCD sensor with specs close to that of the D2X.

The D200 has a 10.2-megapixel CCD DX size sensor with a magnesium alloy body that includes seals for light duty weather protection. Although the D200 is a direct replacement for the D100 prosumer camera its specs are much closer to those of the D2X. Its street price is $1699, which is considerably less than the D2X’s price of $4999, making it a great second body as well as a viable alternative to those who cannot justify the cost of the D2X.

When rumors of the D200 first began cir

culating on the Internet, everyone assumed it would have the same CMOS sensor used in the Sony DSC-R1 camera. Instead Nikon has reverted back to using a CCD sensor. At the time of writing nobody has seen any images produced by the camera. Some people still reckon a CCD produces better quality images, while others say a CMOS is better, so it’s going to be interesting to see what sort of quality the camera produces. The number of pixels is close enough to those in the Canon EOS-5D that it’s not a big deal. The big difference is the size of the individual pixels as the sensor in the Canon is physically twice the size of the one in the Nikon.

It will be fascinating to see how the lineup of Nikon and Canon cameras shakes out as we go forward. Canon has essentially the same type of CMOS sensor in each of its cameras, only it has elected to go with three different size sensors, which leads to the problem of an incompatible line of lenses. Nikon, on the other hand, has stuck with the same size of sensor in all its digital SLR cameras leading to uniformity in usage among all lenses. Yet it is experimenting with different types of sensors.

Quick Book Review

Adobe Camera Raw for Digital Photographers Only

Shooting in RAW means that you have a file that contains much more information so an image can be manipulated after capture to produce the best possible photograph. There’s no argument that shooting in RAW is more complicated than sticking with JPEG.

Adobe Camera RAW is a comprehensive book that describes in detail how to produce top-notch images from RAW files.

In the past, one had to rely on the software supplied by a camera manufacturer in order to process RAW images after capture. In many cases these programs were slow in operation and not easy to use. A couple of years ago Adobe added the Camera RAW plug-in for processing RAW images within Photoshop, making it much easier to adapt RAW into the workflow.

For those who have not mastered Camera RAW, there is a new book, Adobe Camera Raw for Digital Photographers Only (published by John Wiley & Sons, $39.99) that can help demystify the subject. It’s a comprehensive 352-page book written by Rob Sheppard that explains in great detail just what a RAW image is and how Camera RAW can be used to process images. The book sets a step-by-step outline to develop an efficient workflow as well as explains how to double-process images when needed. It even explains how to read a histogram in order to capture better images at the time of shooting. The decision when to use RAW or when one is better off shooting in JPEG is also discussed.

Apple’s upcoming Aperture program might render Camera RAW less useful, but on the other hand, if you don’t own a powerful Mac or only occasionally shoot RAW, this book is an ideal tutorial that can help you get the most out of images.