Nikkor AF-S 24-85 f/3.5~4.5 G

This was my first AF lens, bought long after I got my Nikon F5.  For a long time I just used MF lenses on my Nikon F5 adamantly.

I only used this lens occasionally and for a short period of time as I seldom took pictures and I discovered "pro" lenses.  I bought it from Canoga camera out in California.  I still remember the time I did my research on buying an AF lens and the moment and whereabouts when I placed the order, weird.  Back then I shot film and I was happy with the lens granted my point of reference was 4x6 prints and I must be in awe how the AF-S worked.

Now I "have to" revisit this lens again.  My pro grade 20-35 suffered from a fall and is out of commission.  I don't think I ever shot any digital using this 24-85.  I wonder if I shoot at f/8 or f/11, does it even matter?  When the lighting situation is difficult I think a f/2.8 helps or if you dig the f/2.8 or larger aperture rendition.  In terms of build, for me, as long as the mount is metal I am kind of OK with the rest.  All lenses broke from fall and impact, plastic or metal.  Sometimes I believe a lens shade helps alleviate the impact better than any metal construction.  That being said, I appreciate any well made lenses that last for decades.

Believe it or not, this lens together with its dedicated lens shade were Made in Japan.  The LC-67 lens cap was Made in Thailand.

Both Ken Rockwell and Moose Peterson raved about this lens if you ever need any affirmation of your purchase.  It's very interesting to read how Moose marvelled the lens cap LC-67 as I guess back then the squeeze-in lens cap was a rarity and the LC-67 was quite possibly among the firsts if not the first to use this squeeze-in mechanism.

S, M, L against numbered sizing

When I see S M L kind of sizing I shake my head a little.  Especially if the outfit in question is priced at a fairly high price like a $600-700 leather jacket.

I take it it can have XS, S, M, L, XL and for numbered sizing 36, 38, 40, 42 and 44.  So are they same?  I really don't know.  I tend to think when one uses SML sizing, it's just a bit unrefined and for lower priced goods.

Many if not most manufacturers still not disclosing what those letters or numbers mean exactly even for those selling online.  I think that's crazy.  Does 42 mean the jacket is 42 inches pit to pit or it means it's supposed to fit body with a chest size 42 inches?  Even for those sites that provide a size chart it's not clear to me what 42 means.  I wonder how can online retailers get away with actual measurements.  Some sites say true to size, what does it even mean?  Just give out the true garment measurements already.

I feel like eBay sellers do a much better job in general.

AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D

I don't know if Nikon USA has any rule in naming or calling its lenses but this is how it's listed on Nikon USA as of today.

So much ink has been spilled on this lens ... and I am going to spill a bit more.

This lens has a built-in hood that I have no idea how it's supposed to work, does it lock, do you just pull it out, are you supposed to turn it, clockwise or anticlockwise or something something.  I really have no idea.  Sometimes it just seems to be somewhat stuck.

The lens has an aperture ring.  What's old is new again.  I just read the new Canon R or more precisely the new RF lenses (not rangefinder by the way) has a ring that can be programmed to work as aperture.  Didn't they do that in the beginning of the time?  This lens provides defocus control meaning you can control the out of focus look either in front or behind the focused subject or you can simply leave the defocus alone and leave it in the neutral position.  The thing is if you need to work fast and you need to change the aperture, chances are you might forget to change the defocus setting following the change of the aperture.  For example you set you f/stop at f/2 and you set defocus at R2, to match the f/2 aperture you set.  Somewhere along the way, you want to shoot at f/2.8 but hey you are too busy composing and whatnot and you just left the defocus setting unchanged at R2 insteal of R2.8 as you preferred.  Not a huge deal in real world situation but psychologically it makes you feel sloppy and incompetent.  Unless I have ample time I would leave the defocus in neutral position.

Is AF fast?  This is relative and I don't have any scientific way to say one way or another.  Given that it's a prime D lens, so I assume it's not that fast by modern AF-S standard.  However, I use it to shoot velodrome cycling and I don't think it's bad or unuseable.  I tend to blame myself if I miss focus.

One thing I have to mention, some say chromatic aberration is not a problem ... I say it is.  Again it's relative.  When I shoot with this lens I make sure I check enable lens profile and remove chromatic aberration in Light Room.  On the other hand, when I use the relative modern 16-35 and 70-200 I never notice any chromatic aberration at all.  I am not saying CA shows all the time, it rears its ugly head on edges where light and dark color meet.  Sometimes when you shoot you just go I can be bothered with oh I can't use this lens or that lens because I am shooting back light with high contrast or lots of whites on the edges.  The lens basically gives a purple halo around the subject.  I suspect if I use Nikon's software it may clean up better.

135mm at f/2 is pretty shallow depth of field.  It can work to your aesthetic as much as against it.  But you have that option to deploy the lens at f/2 should you want to.  Modern cameras have astonishing high ISO performance so shooting at f/2 or f/1.4 or f/0.95 is more of a preference than a necessity.

Shooting with fixed focal length can be challenging and oddly satisfying as if you want to challenge and hence prove yourself in composition.

ImageMagick

I am a fan.  I know about less than 1% of its features but enough to admire the software and all that comes with it.

Tried to upgrade to 7.  What a challenge.  My MacPorts was outdated.  I think I installed IM via Ports.  So I tried to do it via Ports once again.   When Ports was done upgraded or actually migrated to High Sierra I was all set to upgrade to the latest greatest IM, sure I guess I could have used a much older version but.   Alas, the Ports port was still 6.9.  After going through an entire day, I was back to step 1.  I was thinking to use Home Brew to update, now I finally had enough.  I updated my Brew, not a migration mind you.   So nothing too abstruse to follow except to remove a couple of paths.  I was on 7 but the display program doesn't work.  Instead of tweaking tweaking and tweaking the path, I found another guy saying just to uninstall and brew install with X11 explicitly.  And it finally works.  Everything.  I tested my old scripts and it works too.

I modified my script to do Instagram as well.  I know so little IM and shell scripting so the script is kind of a patch work, but it works somewhat.

if [ ! -d "./ig" ]; then mkdir "./ig"; fi

for j in *.JPG
do
echo " ... instagramming $j"
test=`convert $j -format "%[fx:(w/h>1)?1:0]" info:`
if [ $test -eq 1 ]; then
convert "$j" \
    -resize 1080x566 \
    -background white \
    -gravity center \
    -extent 1080x566 "./ig/ig$j"
  else
    convert "$j" \
        -resize 1080x1350 \
        -background white \
        -gravity center \
        -extent 1080x1350 "./ig/ig$j"
fi
done


IM 7 uses 'magick' instead of 'convert' but convert apparently still works.

I need to shore up my shell scripting skill.

I purposely distracted myself installing IM yesterday.  I lost GIMP when I migrated MacPorts.  Oh well.  I don't really use it anymore as since I pay for LR.

UPDATE: 8/28/2018
I corrected the script, the portrait mode should be 1080x1350, wxh.

HTML

I miss the simpler days when HTML is just HTML with hyperlinks.  It's all about content about what it is.  But of course, CSS comes along and ruins it all.  Wow, I want to look pretty, so CSS.  I think 99% of CSS is bullshit.

Schott

I have a weakness for Schott.

Last year I drove all the way to their warehouse sales in New Jersey.  Alas, don't expect any fire sales because there aren't none.  I kind of expected that.  They aren't going to discount their leather goods.  Other stuff yes.  But not so much of their flagship items.  You are stilling looking at $600 leather jacket or more.

Years ago I got my no model number car coat from them in Soho, could be Canal Jeans, I am not sure.  The front has two pockets with flaps.  I use them too often as hand warmers which cause the flaps out of shape.  I don't know if there is a fix to it or if there is a fix that's free of charge or monetary remedy.  It's a minor thing like the flap is pointing up.  Other that that the coat is in good shape minus some very normal wear and tear.  The most disgusting thing is that I don't dry or professional clean my leathers.  I think the price is prohibitive and there is no convenience location to do that locally.

I have two 141s.  Don't ask me why.  I just do.  One is more matte or less glossy than the other.  Once is cut better at the sleeve than the other.  The 141 is a very clean cut jacket.  I bought the first one around 2007 I think.  I kid myself that I would sell one but I never did.  Size 44 seems a bit too big.

eBay is a very dangerous place, it burns holes in my wallet.

I came across this jacket that's not even marked as a Schott and hence priced not like a Schott.  I wasn't going to ask the seller hey is it a Schott that you're selling.  But the embossed buttons clearly say so.  The jacket I think is from the 1970s.  It looks good especially considered the price.  I can't help myself.  It's a 125 with the lining missing.  The pocket is very clean so you see the prior owner or owners don't use the pocket often or not often enough to soil or get them out of shape, kind of like what I did to my car coat.

My latest Schott is a 740N leather jacket.  Schott calls it pea jacket, at least on the label, instead of pea coat.  I find it a bit odd.  But hey what do I know?  A brand new one is now called 140 and fetches somewhat close to $800 quids--they just call it 740N if it's made of a blend of wool and nylon.  By the way, now I only shop used on eBay if I were to buy any Schott, the retail price on new ones is just too much for me.  Sometimes the current item is too much of a fashion item rather than the real thing.  Not that I ride any bike at all.  But if I pretend I'd like to stick with the real thing, the original thing.  There has been a number of manufacturers who supply peacoats to the Navy over the years.  Latest I read the Navy is going to stop peacoat as standard/free issue to new recruits, rather they need to pay for it if they want one.  Ouch!

a few things i like

there are a few things i like

leather jackets
cameras
lenses
computers, except pc

PROPAC CABLE NX problem

This is a cable that gave me problem.

When I got my PROPAC PB960, I opted for the Nikon version, that's the cable is for Nikon speedlight, in my case it's the Nikon SB-800.

But that cable was iffy, sometimes it worked but most of the time it didn't.  It took me quite some time to notice that.  Because, I didn't use the SB-800 often enough to notice.  The SB-800 requires 4AA batteries inside even when it's to be powered by the PB960 (the 4AA is then used for the display and other functions I guess), meaning when I am on TTL and has enough ambient and it doesn't draw 100% power I wouldn't notice the difference even it's coming off from the 4AA.  But finally I did notice the slow cycling time when the 4AA batteries depleted its power.

I don't have have other Nikon SB-800 flashes or other Nikon flashes that accept external power laying around for me to test if it's the flash or the cable or the pac unit.  But I figure in all likelihood it's the cable.  I hope it's not the PB960 itself of the SB-800.  The pac has no problem passing power to my Sunpak 120J with another cable at all and the SB-800 seems work fine.

Finally I got a hold of my friend who also owns a Nikon SB-800.  Same problem.  Sometimes it works but most of the time it doesn't.

I took a chance I ordered another NX cable on eBay.  I could have bought some quantum or paramount cable which are supposedly better made but more expensive even used, about $50 each.  The PROPAC PB980, at least the power cable is based on the quantum spec, that's my understanding.

Actually I wrote to Godox via email about the cable but of course nobody replied.  I also wrote to the original eBay seller I got it from with the pac, but to no avail.

The eBay cable came, it's practically new.  It is somewhat different from the one that came with the pac.  The new one has a shorter neck and has no sleeve and fits much snug than the original.  The original one is by no means loose when plugged into the SB-800.

no good cable with the sleeve removed just to show the neck

D810 with the NX cable attached that works.

This NX cable doesn't come with a sleeve, the 3 insertion prong is the same length though.  This one works.

SB-800, the left most hole has no protruding pin there, it's not broken it's just like that.

No good NX cable with the sleeve at the neck

the cable has 3 prongs like so.  The cable that works is very tight.  So maybe it's better made more on spec.

With the new cable, the SB-800 actually draws power from the pac as the cycling time is much faster even when the 4AA is low in juice.  The ready light on the Pac actually turns itself off as it recharges itself between flashes--I was doing a full power 1/1 manual flash on the SB-800 to make sure maximum power is used.

I hope the cable stays good.

I saw on YouTube there were similar issues with the cable, and some people suggest to turn on the pac then the flash unit in that order.  I did but still iffy.  So my experience is the cable is faulty perhaps not up to spec.  The other cable that works has some minor changes as it fits much tighter.  The absence of a sleeve probably has nothing to do with it, it could be even because it's a used cable but unlikely as the neck is much shorter to accommodate a sleeve like the original cable that I have had.

ROBERTSONS JELLY

Hot doesn't come to describe the summer of Hong Kong.  The muggy weather makes sane persons murderous and easily turns any murderous lunatics into serial killers.

To palliate the stifling heat and to keep me sane, my mom used to make Robertsons' jelly.

By chance I found them still stocked in a Hong Kong supermarket.  Can you even not like it?  I don't think you can even if you try.  Look at that cartoon strawberry jovial smile, it harks back to an innocent time when summer was lazy and idyllic at least in memory and when artificial ingredients or sugar or gluten were of no particular concern to anybody.  I particularly like the good old Hong Kong translation of the word strawberry.  It is idiosyncratic and uniquely Hong Kong.  Please do not change Robertsons.

自由題

An open topic is simultaneously a blessing and a curse.  A blessing because one has the absolute freedom to write whatever topic one chooses.  A curse as one has to come up with a topic all by oneself.  When you are assigned a topic, if you don't do a good job you can blame somebody else.  If you choose your own topic and it turns out not as good as you want it to be, you have nobody but yourself to blame.  If I ever live in a totalitarian society where my life is defined, planned and arranged from cradle to grave and I can easily blame the society for my failures.  But does it even matter?

The Unbearable Lightness of Being was one of the first movies and books I saw and read when I arrived in the US.  (The very first movie I saw here was "The Terrorizers" directed by Edward Yang and starring Cora Miao.)   The themes like light and heavy, sex and love, fate and freewill, eternal return and YOLO are well explored.  I wish I could live a life that is light, no need being a brain surgeon or a womanizer or both, like the character Tomas; and definitely not the war nor the hardships that follow.  Tomas started out light but in the end totally domesticated.  He was weighed down by the war and Tereza who clung to him like a piece of Cling wrap.  I don't know if that's just life or what.

Sweden was pretty much defined by ABBA until the world or I discovered Stieg Larsson.  Or John Ajvide Lindqvist who penned "Let the Right One In" in 2004 and later wrote the film adaption in 2008.  The story is at once bleak and beautiful both in words and in moving images.  Instead of wholesome ABBA like characters, many characters are flawed and despicable.  One of the two protagonists, Eli is cursed with eternal return for she is forever stuck in her twelve-year old self since two centuries ago.  Often time she smellS rancid.  The other one is Oskar, a boy who is incontinent and uses a "pissball" to soak up his pee so nobody knows he pisses his pants.  Oskar is the perennial easy target for bullying.  Together they become fast friends and more.  It's hard to like them but even harder not to like them despite them being serial killers.  As it turns out I am not a big fan of ABBA.

Anamorphic Lens Adapter for Mobile Phones

Moondog Labs

Beastgrip Pro

Moment

Moondog is the only company that has stock available all or most of the time, selling at $175.  It seems like it's iPhones only.  Many models are iPhone model specific except one that is phone agnostic as its interface is the 37mm screw thread.

Beastgrip Pro is more like on and off when it comes to availability, more like off most of the time; also asking for $175.  It's based on the 37mm screw thread so it's phone agnostic but pretty mount specific.

Moment is on pre-order.  The listed price is lower than $175 but the lens mount is baked to only mate with its own proprietary case.  If you've already invested in Moment or you think this closed system approach is not a problem then by all means.

In terms of alignment between the phone's lens and the anamorphic adapter, I believe the Moondog iPhone specific model and the Moment would probably give the most convenient, accurate and consistent alignment.  How difficult to align the lenses?  Not too difficult but you still need to do it if it's just a 37mm interface.

Red Hook Crit Brooklyn 11

I felt somewhat disoriented as there was some change to the course.  I felt like I was always on the wrong side of the fence.  I felt like I was always trapped at the wrong spot.  There wasn't a lot of mobility from one to another spot.

I didn't take any pictures of the qualifying heats.  I was busy taking portraits inside the terminal.  I guess it wasn't such a bad idea as I don't want to lug around my equipment under the sun.  I was being lazy for sure.

I still used what I have been using all these years.  I was tempted to rent or even buy a new D750 as my oldie D700 is getting long in its teeth.  AI coupling ring got sticky and becomes problematic if I ever used a manual focus lens or even AF lenses other than the f/2.8 as the ring got sticky and won't automatically rotate according to the notch.  In any event I basically stuck with my good old friends of lenses the 70-200 and the 16-35 and yeah the new addition 135 f/2 DC which definitely is not the kind of lens that provides convenience.

I shot the "portraits" with my Sunpak 120J at I think 1/4 power and at f/8.  I was thinking of shooting at f/11 but somehow it didn't quite work out.  I know it doesn't make sense.  But when I am in the field.  I just need to roll with it I don't have all day to adjust.  I don't think the 16-35 is the "ideal" focal length.  But is there ever an ideal focal length?  I doubt it.  I imagine the 24-70 would provide the greatest convenience for this kind of shot.  The grass is always greener somewhere.  Or the poor man's version could be simply the 50mm f/1.8 or the 35-70 f/2.8.  My ideal shot is just below shoulder, above the knees or full body length with the bike.  The 16-35 helps in full length but I would need to get really close for above knee shots and below shoulder is not even possible or the image would get distorted too much to my liking.  But I shoot what I have and adjust accordingly or rent.

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10157479883240200.1073742101.787280199&type=1&l=772ef4a303

Life Choices

When you aren't going to buy another big @ss item, you buy some cheapo accessories.  Just so you buy something.  That's the thing with photography, you can enjoy it just buying small items, like lens hoods, filters, sync cables, color gels.  You don't need to buy a $6000 lens or a %6000 camera.  Of course you can enjoy it by actually taking pictures.  Better still print it out on paper and even better, frame it and hang it up somewhere on the wall.

DVD, Handbrake, OS X, Rip

Do people watch DVD nowadays?  I know I do.  And if you check out the library there are still plenty out there on the shelf.

Do people rip DVD nowadays?  I know I do.

I haven't used Handbrake for a long time.  And finally I got it updated and not even updated I even installed the nightly build.  I feel like I am so advanced even I don't know half of what I am doing.  I wasn't going to install the nightly build, it's just the prod has a known bug that doesn't allow preview which is something I like.

I am not a fan of ripping DVD except for scholarly reason like why not.

Handbrake didn't complain so I thought I was able to rip DVD just fine, except the result came out severely pixelated and the sound was all wrong.  I have VLC installed.  So I thought, maybe I have the setting wrong as reading the Google search results indicate once you have VLC installed you should be fine.  Also, I thought the decryption thing is a binary thing like if you can't decrypt then you simply can't not with bad rip or pixelated rip, or so I thought.  I played with the settings a bit and still lousy results.  So that shook my belief that the DVD was decrypted when ripped.  I viewed the log and it did say can't decrypt DVD.

Another trip to Google.

https://www.howtogeek.com/102886/how-to-decrypt-dvds-with-hardbrake-so-you-can-rip-them/

I have Homebrew installed long time ago so getting a package isn't a big deal.

at the Terminal

brew install libdvdcss

this installed the libdvdcss

Now Handbrake can rip the DVD to your or my heart's desire.

Now another reason to buy more storage or even a NAS because of DVDs.

Life Choices

All I care about is what camera or lenses to get.

Life Choices ...

In the world of iPhone cinematography, the anamorphic lens is kind of the king.

The Moondog lab made them first, and it's the only company that have them in stock.  Beastgrip Pro started their version some time last year and they were quickly sold out and now out of stock.  Moment just joined the party and is in Kickstarter mode.  The former two price their anamorphic adapter at $175, which is kind of a steep price for a lens adapter but at the same time dirt cheap as far as anamorphic is concerned.  So it really depends on one's perspective on things.  Moment, the new kid to the mobile phone anamorphic is geared to stir things up by lowering the price, their first batch kickstarter was priced at $99 but no longer available.  I don't fully understand all those funky pricing anyway.  But the ball park is they are priced lower than the competition.  Over time hopefully all of them would come down in price.

Life Choices ...

D5, D4s, D3s . . .

If price is not a concern, then D5.  But of course everything is driven by price.

When people ask me "What camera should I buy?"  I don't know your economic profile or more importantly your psychologic profile.  I know what I want but I can never suggest what you should get.  My decision is based largely on irrational thinking.  So don't listen to me if your decision is based on fact and logic.  My own camera and lens buying decision is utterly irrational.  It doesn't matter I am usually armed with facts my decision is still largely driven by irrational thinking and passion.

Life Choices

Life is about making hard choices.
105mm f/2 DC, 135mm f/2 DC, or 85mm f/1.4 . . . .

I Hope Summer Never Comes

I got the fascination with summer but I am not a fan.

Mirrorless

I read mirrorless is all the rage and is the future.

If I live long enough, I probably will belong to that future.  But that future is probably not soon enough as Nikon hasn't come up with its own mirrorless yet.

I am a man that constantly look for distractions.  SLR has decades of bodies, lenses and myriads of accessories to meet and exceed my needs or wants.  Mirrorless, I don't know but I really don't think so.  Most old Nikkor lenses from eons ago can still mount on the newest bodies without much of a compromise; a manual focus lens sure can be mounted on the flagship D5.  Nikon as far as I am concerned is still actively developing its SLR line both cameras and lenses.  The last professional film SLR model was the F6 which actually seemed a step back from its predecessor F5 as the F6 lacks an integrated vertical grip.  Perhaps Nikon saw the digital evolution coming when F6 was in development.  We have the D5 and perhaps the D5s is in the offing.  Would history repeat itself?  Would there be a D6 that mark the end of the professional digital SLR?  Nikon may roll out the mirrorless in parallel with the SLR.  But probably would only call it a M1 if it's deemed of professional caliber.  Canon and Nikon, the bellwethers of the SLR world, stand to lose the most one way or the other if mirrorless turns out really to be the future or a big trunk of the future.  Meanwhile, SONY is really steamrolling in that mirrorless space with models coming out like every few months.