Trash the Dress – Michelle | Wellington Wedding Photography

Last weekend, we had a Trash the Dress shoot with Michelle at a beautiful location in the Wellington region.

Trash the Dress has only been started about a decade ago, more commonly seen in the US and UK. Recently Trash the Dress is becoming a new style of wedding photography that symbolises an end to the wedding and the dress will not be used again. It is seen as a way to put a full stop to a memorable part of your life.  The name itself suggests the shoot involves trashing the dress (wedding gown) in a location that is usually out of place while artistic, dramatic and glamorous images are been taken. Of cause, the extremes to which you want it to be done (trash) is totally up to you… from jumping off a wharf or a quiet walk on the beach. If you want to be part of the new trend, having those amazing. unique and dramatic images taken, this is it ! 

As for our shoot,  the weather was a bit windy at first, but then turned fine later in the afternoon. In fact, we were working with some harsh sunlight for most of the time.

This is the beautiful place where the Trash the Dress shoot took place

Before we start, here is what we unpacked for the shoot. We used everything shown below except for the Nikon FM2. Most of the images were taken using the Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VR and VRII. Using zoom lens here would give us more control, since some places are hard to get to in water. We have also used the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 and 85mm f/1.4 for some of the shots.

Speedlight used were SB-900, SB-800 and 2x SB-600.

We started off at the shallow water first then worked our way to the deeper side for the more exciting images. The water was crisp and clear, the sun was bright, it was a blast to be shooting at such a beautiful place.

And here are some of the final images. Enjoy !

 Contact us if you are wish to have your amazing Trash the Dress or wedding images captured on your special day.

 

 

Where can I find the equipment seen on this site?

If you find this site useful and planning to purchase any of the equipment seen on this site, please show your support by purchasing your photo equipment at B&H Photo Video, or through any of the affiliate links seen on this site.

The extra 2 stops of Nikon 24mm f/1.4 – f/2.8 vs f/1.4

Nikon introduced the 24mm f/2.8D back in 1993, 17 years later, Nikon finally mastered the Nikon 24mm f/1.4G. Apart from incorporating the latest technology, such as Silent Wave Motor (SWM), Nano Crystal Coating to reduce ghost and flare, as well as including two ED and two asphercial lens elements in its construction, the major difference is having a maximum aperture of f/1.4, giving an extra 2 stops.

The Nikon 24mm f/1.4 has a price tag of  $1999 USD  which is over five times more than the Nikon 28mm f/2.8D at $360 USD.

The question is does the extra 2 stops,  Silent Wave Motor (SWM), Nano Crystal Coating and other nice additional features worth the premium price tag?

We know Silent Wave Motor (SWM) and Nano Crystal Coating are welcoming features to the lens, but how useful is the extra 2 stops, is it necessary?

The extra 2 stops pretty much give you a shallower Depth of Field (DoF), the flexibility to use lower ISO or higher shutter speed for the same exposure.

For example, when shooting indoor, typically ISO needs to be at least 1600+, sometimes 3200 even when you are using aperture f/2.8 (refer here). With the extra 2 stops, imagine you have the ability to

• use ISO  400-800 (e.g. 3200—>1600—>800) which is much less susceptible to noise or
• stop motion and camera shake using  a shutter speed of hundredth of a second (e.g. 1/25s—>1/50s—>1/100s) even when you are indoor

These are beneficial mostly to low light shooters such as those whom shoot concerts and indoor sports.

For landscape shooters and those who shoot mostly under day light, the extra two stops might not be so crucial, unless you want the f/1.4 shallow DoF.

So how does the DoF differ between f/2.8 and f/1.4? Note that we are not comparing the bokeh which is the quality of the blur in the out-of-focus areas of an image. It is important not to get mixed up between DoF and bokeh, one associates with aperture setting, subject distance and focal length, the other by lens design and construction.

The images below show the DoF created by f/2.8 and f/1.4 using the Nikon 24mm f/1.4.

 

Nikon 24mm f/1.4 @ f/2.8

Nikon 24mm f/1.4 @ f/1.4

Which image do you prefer? The extra creamy bokeh of f/1.4? The extra 2 stops of aperture at f/1.4 does create a strong isolation of the subject to the background which is normally hard to achieve at wide angle like 24mm.

 

Where can I find the equipment seen on this site?

If you find this site useful and planning to purchase any of the equipment seen on this site, please show your support by purchasing your photo equipment at B&H Photo Video, or through any of the affiliate links seen on this site.

Peter & Rosie’s Wedding Reception

Peter & Rosie’s wedding reception was held at the Mac’s Brewery, Wellington. This was the first wedding of 2011 for us. We had a pleasant time shooting the wedding reception covering speeches, cake cutting all the way to the opening dance. It was great to see friends and families travelling to Wellington to attend Peter & Rosie’s big day. Coincidently, I have caught up with a friend that I haven't seen for a number of years at the wedding. A small world and a great start to the year.

This is officially the first blog post of 2011 !!!

As usual, a bit of gear talk for this wedding, I prepared relatively light only carrying one Nikon D3 body and four lenses accessed via the Think Tank belt. Also the SB-900 as my only light source.

• Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8
• Nikon 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII
• Nikon 24mm f/1.4
• Nikon 85mm f/1.4

Of particular interest, I have taken some shots with the stunning Nikon 24mm f/1.4 which I will write about in the upcoming blog post.

Without holding you much further, here are some images from Peter & Rosie’s Wedding Reception. Congratulation !!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Where can I find the equipment seen on this site?

If you find this site useful and planning to purchase any of the equipment seen on this site, please show your support by purchasing your photo equipment at B&H Photo Video, or through any of the affiliate links seen on this site.

Shooting with Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 – Choosing a wide angle lens?

Nikon users have the option to choose from some of the nicest wide angle zoom lenses such as the luxury 14-24mm f/2.8, 17-35mm f/2.8 or the new 16-35mm f/4 VR. For something light weight and smaller, there are the older 14mm f/2.8, 20mm f/2.8, 24mm f/2.8 or the recent release 24mm f/1.4 which I have wrote about here and here.

The 14-24mm is an amazing wide angle zoom lens which Canon lacks a counterpart of. It is known to its exceptional edge to edge sharpest and well control of distortion. It is a fairly new lens released back in 2007 together with the 24-70mm f/2.8. It has 2 ED elements, 3 aspherical lenses and nano crystal coating.

I also have the 270g Nikon 20mm f/2.8 as my travel light alternative to the 1000g 14-24mm. It is much smaller in size and very travel friendly. I prefer the 20mm over the 24mm since 20mm is about how wide our eyes can see (more) and it adds a little bit of that wide angle interestingness.

I have posted a comparison between the 14mm, 20mm and 24mm FOV perspective here.

The Nikon 14-24mm is known to be a superb lens for shooting landscape and interior, but it can be challenging to use at 14mm. Often, people think ultra wide angle is use to fit everything in the frame. While this is largely correct, shooting at ultra wide angle like 14mm is all about getting closer and closer,  if done correctly you will bring your audience into the photos through your lens. The idea is to get close to your subject to fill the frame, since everything is seen further away at such wide angle. Shooting wide angle requires special attention to composition and distortion, distortion along the edges stretches out objects on the sides and corners, so pay attention to what to frame at the edges.

A down side of the 14-24mm is that it is not easy to put a filter on, due to its huge front glass element and integrated lens hood. To get around it you need to use the Cokin X-Pro adaptor ring and filter holder, some people have done it, but it won’t be cheap. If you need a filter option, you can use the older 17-35mm f/2.8 which has a 77mm filter thread. As for myself, I am not too fuss over it, when I need to use filters, I will just switch to my Nikon 20mm f/2.8 and slap on the 62-77 step up adaptor to utilise my standard 77mm filters such as CPL and ND.

So how wide do you need?

From my point of view, anything above 24mm is not really that wide, but manufacturers still consider 24mm-35mm as wide angle. If you consider our eyes have a FOV coverage similar to a 20mm, then 17mm - 20mm is about as wide as you need for normal use. Down to 14mm is considered as ultra wide and shooting at 14mm is for special purposes. A lot of shooters have questioned whether one should pick the 14-24mm f/2.8, 16-35mm f/4 VR or 17-35mm f/2.8? My view on that is for normal wide angle use, pick the 16-35mm or 17-35mm, 16mm -17mm on FX is plenty wide enough, the 14-24mm is really a special purpose lens. You will know when you really need it. Then the next question is do you really need f/2.8, can you get away with f/4?

Here is a quick decision table. Note that you can either pick the Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 or Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR depending on the lowest aperture you need.

 

Sharpest wide angle lens	Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8
Needs to accept filter	Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 or Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR
Light weight wide angle lens	Nikon 20mm f/2.8 or Nikon 24mm f/2.8
Newer Lens	Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 or Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR
Needs more zoom coverage	Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 or Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR
Better return of investment	Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8
Cheaper wide angle lenses	Nikon 20mm f/2.8, Nikon 24mm f/2.8, Nikon 20-35mm f/2.8 or Nikon 18-35mm f/3.5-4.5
Does not need to be f/2.8	Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR
Also use as a work around lens	Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 or Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR
Prefer with VR	Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR
Still thinking whether you need 14-24mm	Nikon 17-35mm f/2.8 or Nikon 16-35mm f/4 VR

As I have mentioned before, with ultra wide angle, even the amazing Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 which is known to have the best control of distortion will still see some lens distortion. Nevertheless, it is very easy to correct the distortion using Photoshop, or other similar processing software.

Since it is that time of the year and this post will serve as my last post for the year 2010. So what’s better than wrapping up a great year of 2010 with some festive images taken with the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 @ ISO1600+, f/2.8.

If you mouse over the images, you can see the image before lens distortion correction is applied.

The distortion was corrected using auto profiled lens correction in Lightroom 3 based on the lens information stored in the EXIF. Also, you can perform lens correction using DxO Pro 6 or Photoshop.

Here is where the images were taken – The amazing Water Polo Hutt at Lower Hutt, Wellington, New Zealand.

 

Thanks for visiting Kent Photography Blog, especially to those who visit regularly !!

 

Happy New Year !!

 

Where can I find the equipment seen on this site?

If you find this site useful and planning to purchase any of the equipment seen on this site, please show your support by purchasing your photo equipment at B&H Photo Video, or through any of the affiliate links seen on this site.

Think Tank Retrospective 10

A couple of months back, I have tried out the Think Tank Retrospective 20, you can check out the post here. Personally, I find the Think Tank Retrospective 20 a little too big for my taste. While I prefer a more low profile shoulder bag, in some occasion I do want to carry the 70-200mm f/2.8 VRII around. Fortunately, the Think Tank Retrospective series do come in a smaller version - the Think Tank Retrospective 10. The main differences being a couple of inches shorter  and you cannot fit the 70-200mm f/2.8 attached in the Retrospective 10.

Think Tank Retrospective 10	Think Tank Retrospective 20
Gear Profile: 1 pro size DSLR with standard zoom lens attached and 1 - 3 additional lenses 1 pro size DLSR (body only) in front pocket and 2 - 4 lenses in main compartment Technical Specifications: ID:  12” W x 9.5” H x 6” D (30.5 x 24 x 15.2 cm)* OD:  13” W x 10.5” H x 7” D (33 x 26.7 x 17.8 cm) Weight:  3 lbs (1.4 kg)	Gear Profile: 1 pro size DSLR with up to a 70-200 f2.8 lens attached and 1 - 3 additional lenses 1 pro size DLSR (body only) in front pocket and 2 - 4 lenses in main compartment, including a 70-200 f2.8 Technical Specifications: ID:  12” W x 11.75” H x 6” D (30.5 x 29.8 x 15.2 cm)*  OD:  13” W x 12.5” H x 7” D (33 x 31.7 x 17.8 cm) Weight:  3.2 lbs (1.5 kg)

Unlike the Retrospective 20, the Retrospective 10 didn’t specify it can hold a 70-200mm f/2.8 in the main compartment, but I can confirm that the Retrospective 10 can still fit an unattached 70-200mm f/2.8.

I have been using the Lowepro Stealth Reporter D200 AW for a while now. It is the only shoulder bag that I think is low profile enough. I have tried the Crumpler 7 million dollar home previously, but it is still too big for my liking.

Despite the pick of the Lowepro Stealth Reporter D200 AW, it doesn’t fit the 70-200mm f/2.8, not to mention it doesn’t fit with the 24-70mm f/2.8 attached very well too. However, It is the only shoulder bag that I find comfortable to walk around with i.e. low profile enough.

Here is a side by side comparison with the Retrospective 10 and Stealth Reporter D200 AW. As shown, the Retrospective 10 is slightly taller so it can accommodate the 70-200mm f/2.8.

Here is a re-cap of some of the nice features in the Retrospective 10 which I have already mentioned in the Think Tank Retrospective 20 post.

The padding from Think Tank is usually less compare to those from Lowepro. By that, the Retrospective camera bags are seen to be more collapsible and flexible. The style is similar to the Crumpler’s Millions dollars bags, utilising Velcro under the main flap. One of the notable feature on the main flap is the “sound silencers” which allows you to suppress the loud tearing sound Velcro makes.

One feature I like the most is the collapsible nylon pockets on both sides of the main compartment. These pockets are designed to store  flash units which makes them nice and tidy. You will notice that most of the hook and loop straps (Velcro)  can be tucked away for quicker access.

Another important feature of this bag is the very large organizer pocket inside the main compartment. It has plenty room for those spare batteries, CFs, cables, etc.

There is also an expandable front pocket (one for the Retrospective 10 and 20, two for the Retrospective 30, ) which is big enough for a spare pro size DSLR. For the Retrospective 10 or 20, you can actually fit an iPad or netbook there.

On both sides of the Retrospective, there are webbing loops which can be used to attach modular pouches. The pouches fit very securely to the webbing loops, I didn’t feel any swaying movement from the pouches when they were attached to the sides.

Here I have attached the lightning fast (left) and the lens changer 35 (right) to give me that extra holding capacity.

In my previous Think Tank Retrospective 20 post, I have commented that the Think Tank Retrospective 20 is more comfortable than the Lowepro Stealth Reporter D200AW mainly due to how the strap is attached to the bag. This is also true for the Retrospective 10.

The canvas strap on the Retrospective 10 is nicely designed; the non slip material on the pad is much better than the one I have on my Lowepro Stealth Reporter. The strap is thick and integrated fully to the side of the bag (sewed from top all the way down to the bottom of the bag). The strap of the Retrospective distributes/secures the weight of the bag more evenly in comparison to the Lowepro Stealth Reporter. The Retrospective actually uses the whole width of the strap to loop through the side buckle while the Lowepro Stealth Reporter uses a “D ring” type of connection to the side which doesn’t distribute the weight that well.

Think Tank Retrospective 10 – fully integrated strap

Lowepro Stealth Reporter D200 AW – strap connected via a D-ring

So…here is the question, What can you fit in the Think Tank Retrospective 10?

Pretty much same as the Retrospection 20, click the below image to see the attached notes.

• Nikon D700 + MB-D10 + Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 (attached)
• Nikon 70-200mm VRII (left hand side compartment)
• Nikon 24mm f/1.4 (right hand side compartment)
• Nikon 85mmm f/1.4 (right hand side compartment)
• Netbook (front pocket)

Here is how  the 24mm f/1.4 and 85mm f/1.4 are stored in the side of the main compartment. 

A common question I got asked was, “Does it fit the iPad?” The answer is Yes.

In fact you can fit the iPad in all three pockets of the Retrospective 10 (refer to below image), i.e. front pocket (top left), inner pocket (top right) and the back pocket.

The front pocket is even large enough to fit a Macbook Air (11”) (bottom left) and a Netbook (bottom right).

While the Retrospective 10 is not really water resist, mainly made out of classic cotton material, it comes with a seam-sealed rain cover for protection against wet condition. The Think Tank Retrospective 10 is a low profile shoulder bag that can fit a large amount of camera gear and accessories, specifically the 70-200mm f/2.8, as well as room for an iPad or netbook. It doesn’t particularly looks like a camera bag which conceals its appearance from the crowd. It is very comfortable to wear thanks to the integrated canvas strap with non-slip material on the pad to keep the entire strap on your shoulder. For extra holding capacity, it is possible to attach modular pouches to the webbing loops on the sides.

This is a keeper for me.

 

Where can I find the equipment seen on this site?

If you find this site useful and planning to purchase any of the equipment seen on this site, please show your support by purchasing your photo equipment at B&H Photo Video, or through any of the affiliate links seen on this site.