A common query on Internet forums asks how fast of a lens and how high of an ISO one needs to capture family candids without the use of flash. May folks deem the latter intimidating (to family members), awkward and for the most part impractical, so I thought it would be interesting to show how flash would compare against wide open fast glass with high ISO in a lighting environment where one could possibly entertain such a comparison.

Since I did this handheld, the compositions won’t match exactly, but they will still be close enough to compare. See how you think things turned out here in this family play-night scene.

Nikon D700 @ ISO 3200 with 24-70 @f2.8

Nikon D700 @ ISO 800 with 24-70 @f8
SB-900 (TTL) bounced from camera right

Nikon D700 @ ISO 3200 with 24-70 @f2.8

Nikon D700 @ ISO 500 with 24-70 @f5.6
SB-900 (TTL) bounced from camera right

As you can see, these are quick grabs, the types of family, slice-of-life photos people want to catch without too much complication. The flash lighting isn’t optimal, but with a quick bounce, the flash doesn’t wash out and flatten out the scene, as direct flash would do. Notice also that when the flash becomes the predominant (main) light, shadow locations generally shift from the right side of faces to the left.

This is all a matter of personal taste; there’s no right or wrong here. The ambient lighting has a warmer, quieter feel to it, so it’s definitely capturing the moment more naturally. In this case, though, I prefer lighting the broad side of the face with flash, as opposed to the relatively harsher shadows that the ambient (lamp at camera left) light created. And this brings up a good point: when you shoot with ambient, you can’t slide or move the light around (not simply anyway). You are more or less at the mercy of the ambient light you have and will constrain your shooting angles accordingly. Depending on the situation, fewer options for shots may be available to you.

For full disclosure, I’ll also point out that for the ambient lighting shots I had to perform white balance correction to mitigate overly red/orange skin tones, and I also lifted the shadows a bit to lessen some of the harshness I noticed.

At any rate, there you have it: fast glass with high ISO vs. flash. You decide which you like best and which works for you.

When shooting a portrait, especially a head and shoulders portrait (a.k.a. headshot), isolating the subject from the background is often a desirable outcome. The idea is that after we have selected a complementary background — one that doesn’t distract or take away from the subject — we should also seek to blur it as much as possible. This will further remove the background as a distraction, and by sheer contrast between subject sharpness vs. background softness, will more effectively focus the attention on the subject.

There are several tools to accomplish this, including lens selection (longer works best), aperture (wider apertures also work best, but keeping in mind what’s needed to ensure the subject’s features are sufficiently sharp), and reducing the distance between the camera and the subject also helps. But there’s another variable I often forget, as the following two photos, both shot with the same lens, same aperture, and roughly at the same distance between camera and subject demonstrate.

Headshot 1, Nikon D700 & 105 f2.0 DC @ f/4

The subject is sufficiently isolated from the background, but even at this fairly large aperture, the background isn’t as blurred as I wanted. I noticed this after taking a few shots, and asked my subject to move farther away from the background. Since we were shooting in open shade, I brought her to the edge of the shaded area, while keeping an eye on the lighting, which I wanted to maintain. With the subject farther from the background, I captured the next shot.



Both the background and the pose make for a different shot, and I was reminded once again to sufficiently separate my subject from the background in future shoots.

Previously we saw the effects of DC. Some said they couldn’t really see it, so I decided to try a scenario with better defined bokeh areas. To get this, I used glass in the background, lit with a strobe to differentiate those “circles of confusion.” Once more, I used my D700 with the 135 f2.0 DC lens. My goal was to see how I could DC, especially in the background, for maximum effect in a portrait.

For the first set, I used an aperture of f2.0 and varied DC from 2.0 Front to 2.0 Rear. To really see the effect, use a tabbed browser, right-click on the thumbnails below, and open each in a separate tab. Then go back and forth among them and check out the effect in the background.

For the second set of images, I used apertures of f2.8 and f4.0, and varied DC Rear from 2.0 up to the value matching the selected aperture. Again, view the larger images in separate browser tabs to compare the bokeh.

With this last set of samples I was trying to see whether mismatching the aperture and DC settings, especially when using a smaller aperture and the DC setting for a larger aperture, would yield softer backgrounds. It appears, however, that the softest backgrounds result when the aperture and Rear DC setting are matched. Also, while my previous attempts at DC showed what I called “subtle” effects, I think this latter set of samples shows more obvious and practically useful softness in the background that will definitely come in handy when wanting to isolate the subject from the backgroiund.

Having recently added the Nikkor 105 and 135 f2.0 DC lenses to my kit, I decided to check out the “Defocus Image Control” (DC) feature I’ve heard so much about. According to Nikon’s explanation, “DC allows the photographer to change the distortion characteristics of the lens so the ‘look’ of the out-of-focus elements in the foreground or background can be changed to produce more pleasing photos, particularly portraits.” The DC control works like a secondary aperture ring, as depicted here.

Nikon’s explanation doesn’t add much more useful practical information on how to use this capability, but as best I could tell from a few quick tests, one can affect foreground out of focus areas with the F (Front) setting, and background out of focus areas with the R (Rear) setting, always making sure the R or F setting matches the current aperture.

The following 2 sample sets show the effect, subtle as it may be, that DC has on the look of the image.

Copyright (c) 2011, Eduardo Suastegui

Click on the image to advance at will

Copyright (c) 2011, Eduardo Suastegui

Click on the image to advance at will

Here are some things I learned while shooting these images:

• As mentioned above, the chosen DC aperture setting must match the lens’ aperture. When I tried mismatching them, the subject was not in focus.
• After changing the DC setting for a given aperture, the camera must re-focus. Fail to do this, and again, the subject will be out of focus.
• Again, probably related to focusing, the subject (my pineapple, in this case) appeared to get closer to the camera as DC switched from Front, to Off, to Rear; and this seemed more pronounced for smaller apertures.
• As previously noted, the effect of DC is subtle, and as far as I can tell, most noticeable at smaller apertures, like the f/5.6 samples shown above. This may come in handy when I need to shoot portraits at smaller apertures to ensure subject sharpness and detail, but while wanting to throw the background further out of focus (with DC = Rear). The two side-by-side shots below may help illustrate this better, especially if the slide shows above didn’t show the effect of DC well enough.

Over the past few months, I’ve been re-adjusting my lens kit to better address my growing passion for portrait photography. The Nikon 85 f1.4D came first, then the 105 f2.0 DC, and last, finally, the 135 f2.0 DC. To commemorate the milestone, I shot this silly picture, shot in semi-product shot configuration, with a one light setup: shot-through umbrella and SB-600 at camera left, and a reflector for fill at camera right, both close in for the softest light possible.

Primefecta: Nikon 85 f1.4D, 105 f2.0 DC, 135 f2.0 DC
I am particularly pleased to have the 135 f2.0 DC. Since I found the 85 f1.4D more practical on my DX body (hence, giving me an equivalent 127.5mm focal length), I now will have a comparable capability on FX, where I don’t have to stand so close to my subject for headshots. I’m also looking forward to playing with the defocus control (DC) feature of the 105 and 135 lenses. More on this in the next few days…

In reviewing the images from my previous post, I decided one of them might make an interesting self-portrait.

As I usually do at the last step of my post-processing for the full resolution image, I try a couple of Unsharp Mask settings to see whether the image would benefit from it. Much to my chagrin, this one could have used some softening! Shot with my 12-megapixel Nikon D300 and 85 f1.4D at f/5.6, the level of detail is a tad disturbing and even down right embarrasing.

Here’s the good (nice detail around the eyes)…

the bad (hmm, should’ve shaved before this shoot)…

and the ugly (protruding nose hairs!)…

This result causes me to shake my head in more ways than one. With all the calls for more megapixels for studio work, etc., I am wondering why in the world I would want or need more detail.