MY FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY SURVEY IS NOW CLOSED!

OK, this is it! The first large-scope survey I ever launched just came to an end. The results are now in: as promised, you talked, I listened. I already started working on a lot of changes that will make your artwork shopping experience at VIERI BOTTAZZINI FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY much more rewarding and tailored to your desires and expectations.

After nearly four months of operation, some fine tuning was very much needed; before setting off to work, I felt that hearing from you was the way to go, rather than imposing you some abstract theories on why things should be the way I think they should be and very likely lose customers in the process.

So, first of all a huge THANK YOU to the hundreds of people taking the survey for your invaluable help!

Changes on the website will be implemented starting April 2, 2013, APRIL 3, 2013 - one day later than expected - and will be announced in full in my April Newsletter, going out on the same day. If you didn't do it already, don't forget to SUBSCRIBE TO THE NEWSLETTER to keep up to date with the changes, you will not be disappointed! Plus, as always, a welcoming gift is waiting for you upon subscription.

Signing off for now, stay tuned for more...

LAST 12 HOURS TO TAKE MY FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY SURVEY!

Last 12 hours to let your voice be heard and share your views on Fine Art Photography! The survey will end tonight at midnight (CET), so hurry up: the 5 minutes you'll spend to take the survey will be of the outmost importance to help me tune my offers, products and services even more to your preferences. So far, a lot of input came in and I think you'll be very pleased to see the big changes coming up on VIERI BOTTAZZINI FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY!

Let me remind you as well that a $50 US gift is waiting for you at the end of the survey, as a small sign of my appreciation for sharing your time and experience with me:

Click here to take the survey (English)

Cliccate qui per partecipare al sondaggio (Italiano)

The survey will end tonight at midnight, CET. Once more, thank you for your time and help!

Dusk, Monument Valley

THE SIGMA DP MERRILS AND THEIR COLORS: THE TRUTH REVEALED!

As this blog's readers might already know, last November I decided to get the Sigma DP1 Merrill & Sigma DP2 Merrill, curious to see if and how these new high-level compacts would fit in my camera bag. After using them for a week in Venice, I liked them so much that I decided to keep them: I reviewed them HERE and compared them HERE with my Sony Nex-7 (which unfortunately got sold as a result), and started waiting eagerly for the newly announced Sigma DP3 Merrill. Finally, yesterday I got the DP3M in my hands completing what is (so far at least) the Sigma DP Merrill lineup: 3 cameras covering focal lengths of 28mm, 45mm and 75mm FOV and all featuring the same APS sized, 45 Mp Foveon sensor (equal to about 30 Mp for Bayer sensors).

The DP Merrill lineup: from left to right, the DP2 Merrill (45mm), DP3 Merrill (75mm) and DP1 Merrill (28mm)

Since the release of the Sigma DP3 Merrill, the Internet has been full of contradicting reports about whether the DP3 Merrill handled colour differently - or more specifically, better - than its older brothers. Some said the DP3M's colours were very different in a better way from those generated by the DP1M / DP2M, others said there weren't any differences: no hard proof was provided, however, substantiating either claim. For sure, Sigma didn't announce any changes in camera hardware or any differences in firmware that could justify such different results, but we all know how manufacturers do change minor things for the most different reasons in a product lifetime without informing the public.

When I finally got the DP3 Merrill in my hands, I was very curious to see with my own eyes and decide by myself where things stood, leaving once and for all all the Internet noise and all these more or less substantiated claims behind. So, before even taking the camera out for a spin in the real world, I decided to try and put this issue to rest doing a quick controlled test in house.

So what's the verdict? Are there any differences in output and colour handling between the DP3 Merrill and its DP1M & DP2M brothers? More, are these differences (if any) due to hardware changes, firmware tweaking or are just due to users' different post-processing? Find out after the jump!

A couple of words about the test and its methodology first, keeping in mind that my purpose here was to compare the colours of the three DP Merrill cameras, not creating the most perfect test conditions possible: what is important is that all three cameras were examined under the exact same conditions, rather than what these conditions were.

Comparing different cameras' colour response can be tricky, due to the many variables involved; in order to remove as many of these variables as possible, I shot 3 series of pictures of my unexciting subject, a X-Rite colour chart, under flash light and using three different WB settings. I used Auto WB in the first set to see what the cameras' own ideas of colours were; I used Flash WB in the second set to see how the cameras' preset WB worked; finally, for the last set I did a spot WB in Sigma Photo Pro 5.5.1 to check the cameras' colour response using Custom WB.

I used the same exposure in manual mode for all photographs and all cameras, 1/125 @ f8 at ISO 100 so that what little daylight there was in my studio would not influence the exposure; all cameras have been updated to the latest firmware available; cameras were placed on a tripod so I could be out of the flash's way during exposures; flash was fixed on a stand slightly up and camera right, and its position didn't change between shots; cameras and tripods, on the other hand, were moved closed to and further from the target chart to compensate for the different focal lengths so that the chart would show the same magnification in each image series, to prevent having different expands of white wall between the three cameras from influencing WB / colour response; finally, images have not been cropped.

I shot RAW in AdobeRGB colour space, processed the files in Sigma Photo Pro 5.5.1 applying the exact same settings for each file: contrast +1, exposure +0.5, colour set to neutral, all other setting to zero; I then exported the files as 16bit TIFF; opened them in Photoshop CS6; added a 10, 1.2, 250 level correction to each; spot-measured the colour squares using a 31px checker to have a large enough sampling area; wrote the results as RGB values in each checker and saved the images as 8bit sRGB JPGs.

For brevity, I'll leave the interpretation of each RGB value set to you, and keep to a general analysis of the results as far as the differences in exposure and colour rendering go.

First, let's look at the Auto WB series, so we can see how differently the three cameras "see" the colours if left all by themselves under a pretty standard and "easy" light such as flash light.

EXPOSURE
It is interesting to see these three cameras showing such different sensitivity to light; exposure, light, image area captured and everything else being equal. From lower to higher sensitivity, first comes the DP1M, then the DP2M and finally the DP3M as the most sensitive to light of all. The different lens designs with the consequent different angles of incidence of light on the sensors are very likely responsible for these differences in exposure. Generally, the longer and / or the more tele-centric the lenses are, the more efficient they are at collecting light: we see that happening here when progressing from 19mm to 30mm ad finally to 50mm lenses on equal sensors.

COLOUR RENDERING
First of all, note how all three cameras get the blues when left in Auto WB; all images show a pronounced cyan cast. That aside, taking into account the small variations in exposure the RGB values output of the Sigma DP1M & DP2M are pretty much identical. On the other hand, the DP3M renders colours very differently in Auto WB, even accounting for the differences in exposure. Check the red / pink checkers, the brown, the cyan (above the black one) and the yellow / orange ones, and you will see that the balance between R, G & B is very different. In short, I'd say more R, G and less B in the red / pink and yellow / orange tones; more G in the cyan above the black; more R in the brown top left. All other colours, greys included, are pretty much the same between the three cameras.

Let's move next to the Flash WB set.

EXPOSURE
Here as well you can easily see the differences in exposure between the three cameras, with the DP3M being the most generous of all three Merrill brothers.

COLOUR RENDERING
While all three cameras still get the blues under Flash WB, definitely the DP3 Merrill behaves much better than the DP1M / DP2M here. Check the grey checkers to see how R, G & B are more balanced and actually pretty close to being neutral, weren't for a slightly weak red channel. Compared to Auto WB, under Flash WB the DP3M displays more R and less B all over the spectrum, not just for certain colours as in the previous sample set; its rendering is overall more balanced and closer to reality.

Let's now see what happens with Custom WB, using the third grey spot from the left for all the images in the set below.

EXPOSURE
The usual pattern is repeated here, with the DP3M producing brighter images than its brothers.

COLOUR RENDERING
First of all, as you can see spot WB works very well and all the greys in all images are, well, neutral grey as expected. That said, taking exposure differences into account we can spot some very minor differences not only between the DP1M / DP2M versus the DP3M, but between the DP1M and the DP2M as well. Look at the red, yellow and orange squares in the DP1M vs DP2M images and you'll notice that the DP2M outputs less B in these colours than the DP1M; look at the same squares in the DP3M vs DP2M, and you'll notice that the DP3M outputs less G than the DP2M with the result of having "redder" reds and pinks than the DP2M.

Let's now try and bring this little experiment to a conclusion.

Using Auto WB or preset WB, the DP1M / DP2M behave similarly between them, while the DP3M behaves in a quite different way (while I only tested Flash WB preset under controlled conditions, casual use of the Merrills today leads me to assume this to be a general behaviour for all presets).

Using Spot WB in Sigma Photo Pro, the DP2M and the DP3M behave very closely to each other showing only some little differences in the reds and pinks: the DP3M outputs less G in them and therefore make them look "redder" to me. All other colours are very much exactly the same. The DP1M, on the other hand, has a slightly different colour rendition, showing a little more B in the red, yellow and orange checkers.

While this test was designed to show the differences between the three Merrill cameras rather than as a test of their absolute colour accuracy, I quickly confronted the values resulting from my tests above with those provided by X-Rite as a reference Colorimetric Values for their family of targets. As evident to anyone, Auto WB is way off even under such a pretty standard light as flash; Flash WB preset is getting closer to the chart reference values with the DP3M, but is off by quite a bit with the DP1M & DP2M. Custom WB is of course the closest of all, and it would be interesting to perform a controlled test in the future to see what the DP1M, DP2M and DP3 Merrill colour behaviour is in absolute terms.

As well, even if this is not exactly colour-related, I'd like to point out once more the metering differences existing between these cameras; the DP1M has the most conservative meter of the three, the DP2M sits in the middle and the DP3M has the most generous of all. While people owning one Merrill camera only or using only one camera at a time need not to be bothered by this, it can becomes very frustrating for people shooting more than one camera side by side at the same time: these users need to remember this and compensate accordingly, because just reporting one camera's exposure to the next would result in either underexposure or overexposure, but never in consistent exposures between cameras.

To sum things up, it is clear to me that Sigma changed the colour output of the DP3 Merrill noticeably when using IN CAMERA WB and WB presets. When using CUSTOM WB in Sigma Photo Pro 5.5.1, on the other hand, the output of the three Merrills is much closer to one other: so much so that most users wouldn't notice any differences at all, and that whatever differences there are can be fixed easily enough in post-processing if one so wish.

Do I prefer the DP3 Merrill output when using Auto WB or WB Presets? Yes indeed, definitely so; I hope Sigma will bring these changes to the DP1M and DP2M as well via FW updates.

Do I think that the DP1 & DP2 Merrill are unusable for serious work, or do I think that only with the DP3 Merrill Sigma finally gave us a camera than can be used professionally with ease? No, not at all. Using Custom WB, as any serious photographer would do for critical work, all three cameras produce perfectly usable colours in my opinion, eventually using some small tweaks when needed.

OK, this is about it for today, I will post my user review of the Sigma DP3 Merrill as soon as  it's ready. In the meantime, thank you for reading so far, and stay tuned for more...

DID YOU ENJOY THE BLOG AND ITS CONTENT? HELP ME TO PROVIDE YOU WITH EVEN BETTER ARTICLES WITH A $4.99 USD MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION VIA PAYPAL: IT'S LESS IN A MONTH THAN YOU SPEND FOR COFFEE IN A DAY, AND YOU DON'T GET ANY GEAR REVIEWS WITH YOUR CUPPA!

OR SEND ME A ONE-OFF DONATION:

SELECT AMOUNT:

1: $4,99 USD2: $9,99 USD3: $19,99 USD4: $29,99 USD5: $39,99 USD6: $49,99 USD7: $74,99 USD8: $99,99 USD

ONE MORE WEEK LEFT TO LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!

Don't miss your chance to let your voice be heard, you still have one more week to do so and you can be sure that the 5 minutes you'll dedicate to take the survey will be fundamental to help me make my offers, products and services even better and according to your preferences!

The first week of our Fine Art Photography Survey is gone by and with it the first few hundred answers came in. Naturally, I will wait for the survey to be over to comment on the results, but let me say that the data coming in so far are very interesting; your answers and ideas have been very inspiring, and once I will have processed all the results I think you'll be very pleased to see some big changes coming up on VIERI BOTTAZZINI FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY!

Let me remind you as well that a $50 US gift is waiting for you at the end of the survey as a small sign of my appreciation for your time and experience:

Click here to take the survey (English)

Cliccate qui per partecipare al sondaggio (Italiano)

The survey will end on March 30, 2013 - the previously set limit of 1,000 answers has been lifted. Once more, thank you for your time and help!

WHICH HIGH-LEVEL COMPACT WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE NEXT?

I just launched a small poll (you can see it on top of the right-side column) to see which one, between the following high-end fixed-lens compact cameras, you'd like me to put through my usual user-review process next: the Sigma DP3 Merrill, the Nikon Coolpix A, the FujiFilm X100s or the Sony RX-1?

Please take a second to answer the poll, and I'll do my best to accommodate your suggestions within my future review plans. The poll will be over in a week, ending on March 30, 2013. Thanks!

PRINTING BIG: FROM MEDIUM FORMAT TO COMPACT CAMERAS

What happens to the majority of the pictures that we take? Do they end up on the Internet, do they get buried on our hard drives, or do they get printed? If they do, what size do we print them and where do we show them? Finally, how this effects the shooting equipment we use?

Piazza del Campo at dawn (Nikon D3x Stitched)

Personally, my answer is simple - I print, and I print big. So, recently I started considering what smaller, portable camera alternatives there might be (if any) to shoot Landscape and Fine Art images and print them large without carrying a huge, heavy DSLR or digital Medium Format system: I wanted to see where the market is today and where it is going.

THE OLD DAYS AND THE NEW
In the old age of film, things were simple: photos were taken to be printed. Amateurs would get small prints of whole rolls and then decide which ones to keep in their albums and eventually which ones to enlarge and hung on their walls; professionals would examine their negatives, either directly or by making contact prints, and print only those photos they deemed worth in the sizes they needed for a job or a portfolio.

Today, most of us use digital cameras; amateurs and pro alike look at their images on screen, choose the ones they like and edit them (more or less often and more or less intensely according to their needing and abilities) before considering them ready for publishing or displaying.

Amateurs display their images online, where Facebook, Instagram, Flickr, Zenfolio, PBase and the like became the modern, instantly public version of our old home albums. Advanced amateurs, besides using the above online albums as well, might have blogs, dedicated personal websites and online portfolios, and post in photography forums and online communities. Professional photographers use dedicated websites both as their portfolios and to share & sell their images to their clients in digital form; they generally have blogs and use social websites as a sharing platforms for professional purposes as well, in order to build an all-round Internet presence.

Rolls (Nikon D3)

SO, WHAT HAPPENED TO PRINTS?

Today, consumers and amateurs generally print a minimal percentage of their images and when they do so they print in small to medium sizes, using either lower end services or a budget home printer. So-called prosumers and advanced amateurs, on the other end, love to look at their images on paper: they either use higher end printing facilities or they print at home using high end equipment, fine art paper and various calibrating / profiling devices. They might be printing a small percentage of their images, but they like to print large to very large and aim for a very high quality level.

Professional photographers that do need to print - not all of us do - have very different requirements, according to the different fields they work in: in my case, I print to sell FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY, so my goal is to print to the highest possible quality with today's technology in order to provide my customers with the best possible artwork. I do my printing on my own, in-house one by one, and I print up to very large sizes: therefore, I use what in my opinion are the highest quality printers and the highest quality paper available to me (Epson Pro 4900 / 7900 and Hahnemuhle).

False Kiva Cave (Silvestri Bicam / Flexi, P1 P65+ Stitched)

DISPLAYING OUR IMAGES

We can summarise what written above saying that, independently by their profession, their photographical skills, the category they would fall into as photographers and so on, people display their images basically in three different ways:

1. Online: mostly on social platforms, eventually on photograph sharing websites / personal sites / blogs;

2. Online as above; plus, small to medium sizes prints (up to A4, max A3 or 11" x 17"), printed generally by printing services (online or brick & mortar stores / malls), or with low budget printers at home;

3. Online as above; plus, high quality prints up to large sizes (up to A1 or 24" x 30" and larger), printed either in-house or using high-quality, advanced printing facilities.

GETTING TO NUMBER 3: THE CLASSIC PROGRESSION
Since the start of the digital era, progressing from Number One above to Number Three meant also having to progress (so to speak) from smaller, lighter, less expensive cameras to DSLR and digital Medium Format, with progressive increases in size, weight, bulk and - exponentially so - in financial investment. More, once in Number Three territory, to squeeze the last bit of image quality out of your gear meant to lose a lot of the benefits of modern technology as far as speed, flexibility and user-friendliness goes. Believe me, I know; I used technical cameras (Silvestri & Linhof) with digital backs for more than two years, and while I loved the slow, manual process I certainly did not love their bulk and weight that much, especially when hiking!

Sunrise at Mesa Arch, III (Silvestri Bicam / Flexi, P1 P65+ Stitched)

So, isn't there anything we can ask for or expect from camera makers to escape this curse, enabling us to make large prints with smaller, lighter and more affordable equipment? Back in the film days, when there was a very direct equivalence between negative size and print size / print quality, the answer to this question was a clear "No"; fortunately today, with digital, this equivalence - while still valid to a certain extent - is much less set in stone than it once was.

Recently, in 35mm camera territory, the 36 Mp Nikon D800E set the bar very high in terms of resolution and image quality, putting at the same time lot of stress on digital Medium Format; while it is true that an 80 Mp digital back still has much higher resolution than a 36 Mp D800E, it is also true that to make a 24" x 30" print one needs just 41.4 Mp to print natively at 240 dpi without interpolation, which is very close to the D800E's resolution; if you print it at 200 dpi, 28.8 Mp would be enough for a 24" x 30" print. A D800E is small, light and costs about 10 times less than a 80 Mp digital back alone (without a camera!), so naturally one start wondering whether it's worth to move to digital medium format at all. There certainly is a difference in the files; it is certainly better to print a down-sampled file than one at its native maximum resolution; you certainly have more editing room with a 80 Mp file; and so on. All true, but on the other hand the law of diminishing returns starts hitting hard, those differences are becoming harder and harder to see in prints, and one's back is much happier carrying less weight, which is important as well in the long run. Plus, you can always stitch images with the D800E getting back into MF file size territory and get back a lot of what you gave up by going to 35mm in the first place... In the end, I sold my Aptus 12R 80 Mp, and am now very happy with my D800E.

Torc Waterfall, Nikon D800E Stitched

The next natural step to ask oneself is whether this progress applies (or can apply, or will ever apply) also moving down from 35mm DSLR to large sensor compacts. It would be great, of course, to lose some more weight and bulk without giving up image quality: so, where are we in respect to compact cameras and point Number Three above?

Ponte dei Sospiri (Sigma DP2 Merrill)

COMPACT CAMERAS & NUMBER THREE
Short answer, we are still far from getting to Number Three proper using compact cameras. However, the good news are that in the last couple of years we got much closer than we have ever been. Various camera makers, for different reasons, started introducing to the market high-quality compact cameras sporting fantastic optics and large, high-resolution sensors that squeezed very high IQ into very small cameras, enabling professional photographers and advanced amateurs that like to print big to travel light without giving up image quality and too many square inches of final print's size. These cameras are:

- The Sigma DP1 Merrill, Sigma DP2 Merrill and now the Sigma DP3 Merrill: with lenses respectively 28mm, 45mm and 75mm equivalent, they all sport the same APS-sized 46 Mp Foveon sensor with resolution comparing to that of a 30+ Mp Bayer sensors. 30+ Mp equals to prints up to 19" x 28.5" at 240 dpi or 22" x 33" (A1) at 200 dpi;
- The Sony DSC-RX1: with a 35mm lens and a 24 Mp full-frame sensor, prints easily up to 17" x 25" at 240 dpi or 20" x 30" at 200 dpi;

Barely making the cut as far as resolution goes:

- The new Nikon COOLPIX A (28mm equivalent lens), the new Fujifilm X100S and the Leica X2 (35mm equivalent lens): at 16 Mp, they easily print up to 13" x 20" at 240 dpi, or 16" x 24" at 200 dpi.

The Sigma cameras are especially interesting in that they make up a very nice small system, with their three focal lengths of 28, 45 and 75 mm equivalent covering a lot of ground in a Landscape / Fine Art photographer's kit. The other three cameras above, on the other end, are alone in their respective manufacturer's line-up and with their 28mm (the Nikon) or 35mm lenses (the Sony, Leica & the Fuji) are more in the tradition of "single-focal street-shooters" rather than being part of a "compact cameras system" - at least for now.

Resolution, however, is not the only feature we need to be able to use these compact cameras as Landscape / Fine Art big-print machines. Besides Mp, in such a camera I'd love to see:

- A high-performance lens, sharp corner-to-corner and with as controlled chromatic aberrations and distortion as possible;
- No detail-blurring Optical Low-Pass filter (AA filter) on the sensor to increase acutance;
- 14bit RAW files;
- Filter thread on the lens;
- Tripod mount, aligned with the centre of the lens;
- Possibility to trigger remotely, electronically or via cable, and / or self-timer release;

Golden Gondolas (Sigma DP1 Merrill)

All the cameras mentioned above have some trick up their sleeves when it comes to image quality and capturing fine details, while all of them miss something. Let's see where each camera stands relatively to the points above:

- Sigma DP1, DP2 & DP3 Merrill - PROS:
Foveon sensor recording colour information at each pixel (rather than using a Bayer filter and interpolate the missing colours) with consequent increase in effective resolution and colour information; no Optical Low-Pass filter needed; built-in lenses specially developed for the sensor; lenses have a filter thread; cameras have a tripod mount perfectly aligned with the centre of the lens; cameras have self-timer release.

- Sigma DP1, DP2 & DP3 Merrill - CONS:
No remote control / cable release; RAWs are 12bit; RAWs are proprietary, and you cannot use any of the major RAW converters to develop them; no EVF.

- Sony RX-1 - PROS:
Lens specially developed by Zeiss for the sensor; lens has a filter thread; camera has a tripod mount perfectly aligned with the centre of the lens; camera has both a traditional screw-in cable release and self-timer release.

- Sony RX-1 - CONS:
Traditional Bayer sensor WITH an Optical Low-Pass filter; EVF is extra ($450 US).

- FujiFilm X100s - PROS:
Fuji X-Trans sensor with a different arrangement from Bayer reduces Moire and slightly increase colour resolution; no Optical Low-Pass filter needed; lens specially developed for the sensor; camera has a tripod mount aligned with the centre of the lens; camera has both a traditional screw-in cable release and self-timer release; RAWs are 14bit; camera has a built-in viewfinder, both optical and EVF.

- FujiFilm X100s - CONS:
Lens need optional filter thread adapter ($76 US extra); RAW files are proprietary and though support is increasing RAW converters still have problems with the X-Trans demosaicing algorithm.

- Nikon Coolpix A PROS:
No Optical Low-Pass filter; lens specially developed for the sensor; camera has a tripod mount but I couldn't see whether is aligned with the centre of the lens or not; camera has self-timer release; RAWs are 14bit.

- Nikon Coolpix A CONS:
No cable release; infrared remote control extra ($17 US); lens need optional filter thread adapter ($99 US extra);

- Leica X2 PROS:
(Probably) no Optical Low-Pass filter; lens specially developed for the sensor; camera has self-timer release;

- Leica X2 CONS:
No cable release; tripod mount not aligned with the centre of the lens; no cable release / remote control; no use of filter possible; RAWs bit depth unknown; very low resolution LCD, EVF is extra ($200 US for Olympus, $500+ for the Leica branded one);

Door Nr. 60 (FujiFilm X-Pro1)

What about interchangeable lens compact cameras? Wouldn't they be good enough to print large? Well, as far as resolution goes, the newly announced Leica M and the Sony NEX-7 are good candidates with their 24 Mp, together with the 18 Mp Leica M9 & Leica M-E (however precise framing & focus distance can be limiting factors with these last two cameras). Also viable alternatives are the Fujifilm X-Pro 1 and the Fujifilm X-E1 and (barely) the last 16 Mp additions to the Micro 4/3 lines. However, for reasons of space and clarity, I had to leave interchangeable lens compact cameras out of this article - they will eventually be the topic for a future one.

S. Giorgio Maggiore at dusk (Sony Nex-7)

I already reviewed the Sigma DP1 & DP2 Merrill (see HERE), compared them to the Sony Nex-7 (see HERE), and reviewed the Sony Nex-7 as well in its street-shooter capacity (see HERE). I will add my user review of the DP3 Merrill as soon as I get it (it should be here by the end of the month) and have some time to play with it. In time, I hope to be able to put the Sony RX-1 and the Coolpix A through my field testing routine as well; however, as I am doing this on my own dime, I cannot review cameras as fast as I would like (see below how you can help!).

So what can we ask camera makers for the future on the high-end compact cameras front? Basically, to keep going in this direction! Besides fixing what is missing in this generation of compacts, I would love to see a Sony RX-whatevernumber with a wide angle lens (18-21mm) and one with a 85-90mm lens; a Sigma DPwhatevernumber with a 18-21mm lens; a Nikon Coolpix A/b/cwhatever... you got the idea. I think that the idea of coupling a high-resolution sensor (24 Mp and up) with a dedicated, fixed-focal, high-performance optic has incredible potential and is worth developing; the market seems to have responded very well; so keep 'em coming, and we'll keep buying 'em.

This is it for today! Thank you for reading so far, and stay tuned for more...

DID YOU ENJOY THE BLOG AND ITS CONTENT? HELP ME TO PROVIDE YOU WITH EVEN BETTER ARTICLES WITH A $4.99 USD MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION VIA PAYPAL: IT'S LESS IN A MONTH THAN YOU SPEND FOR COFFEE IN A DAY, AND YOU DON'T GET ANY GEAR REVIEWS WITH YOUR CUPPA!

OR SEND ME A ONE-OFF DONATION:

SELECT AMOUNT:

1: $4,99 USD2: $9,99 USD3: $19,99 USD4: $29,99 USD5: $39,99 USD6: $49,99 USD7: $74,99 USD8: $99,99 USD

GOT 5 MINUTES? HELP ANSWERING MY SURVEY, AND GET $50 US!

Three months have passed since I ported my Fine Art Photography business online: it has been a very intense three months, and now the time has come for a little survey to hear from you, see how I have been doing and fine tune my operations in order to provide you with always better products and services.

I would really appreciate it if you could spare 5 minutes of your time to answer a few questions, and to show you my appreciation I am pleased to offer you $50 US for your time and help!

Click here to take the survey (English)

Cliccate qui per partecipare al sondaggio (Italiano)

The survey will end on March 30, 2013 or once reaching 1,000 answers, whichever comes first. Once more, thank you for your time and help!

Dusk, Monument Valley

NEW ARTWORK ADDED!

Just a quick note for today, to inform you that I added some new artwork to my VIERI BOTTAZZINI FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY website: they are all images from VENICE BEHIND THE MASK, available as always in Preludio, Sonata & Sinfonia series and coming with my unique 6-Points Warranty, an hologram-based Certificate of Authenticity, starting from just $189 US + shipping!

Some images to whet your appetite:

More after the break!

Thank you for viewing! Stay tuned, more to come soon...

SUPPORT THE BLOG! USE THE BOXES BELOW TO START YOUR AMAZON SHOPPING!

     

BLOG'S TRANSLATIONS

Just a quick note to let you know that, following many requests I received via email, I added a Google Translation option to the blog - you'll find it down the right sidebar.

While I am well aware of the limitations of Google translation, which at times works OK and at times provide results that range between barely understandable to downright funny, it is a little step towards helping non-english speakers to understand and enjoy my articles.

A COMPACT STORY: THE NIKON P7700 IN VENICE

Compact cameras developed enormously since the advent of digital photography. Just a few years back it was impossible to picture the image quality and the feature set of today's little modern beasts: we got cameras ranging from credit-card sized image-taking thingies to large sensor compact cameras, super-zoom compact cameras, rugged all-weather indestructible cameras; they feature high Mp counts, GPS, WI-FI, Android, they do photography, HD-video, fast captures, in a light, small and not too expensive package. All this is great for consumers and even prosumers; but what about serious photographers, either professionals looking for a small camera to bring along with their kit or serious amateurs for whom image quality is really important?

Nikon P7700, 1/50 sec @ f5, 85mm FOV, ISO 140, Grad-ND & Polariser filter

In my quest for such a high-quality compact camera, I looked for the alternatives offering a good zoom range, a fast enough lens, a large enough sensor with a good Mp count. Among all the cameras available, I decided to give first the new Nikon COOLPIX P7700 a try: the P7700 sports a 12 Mp, 4:3 ratio, 1/1.7" sensor (you can check Digital Camera Database for a direct comparison between different cameras & sensors); a fast f2 - f4 zoom lens going from 28 to 200 mm equipped with VR (Image Stabilisation in Nikon jargon); direct on-lens filter support; extensive manual controls. So, I bought one and brought it with me during my last Venice trip, together with the Sigma DP1 Merrill, the Sigma DP2 Merrill and the Sony NEX-7 (see HERE for my impressions of the two Sigma cameras, and HERE for a comparison between the Sigmas and the Sony equipped with Sigma lenses). So, how did the P7700 behave, was it not up to my expectation or did it exceed them? Read my user review after the break!

Let's start with a general survey of the camera and its strength/weaknesses.

Rialto, Nikon P7700, 1/50 sec. @ f5.6, 42mm FOV, ISO 200, Grad-ND & Polariser filter

CAMERA BODY & ERGONOMICS
While the Nikon COOLPIX P7700 is on the large & heavy side for a compact camera (see full specs HERE), it more than makes it up for it by offering a plethora of features and dedicated manual controls, equal to or better than what most professional DSLR offer: its twin dials, exposure compensation dial, mode dial, quick menu dial (with ISO, WB, QUAL, BKT and image controls), AE-L/AF-L button, a 4-way controller with central OK button (defaults are macro, timer, flash & focus point) which is also a third rotating dial, two function buttons and display button mean that after setting it up the first time you have almost no need for diving into the menus, which are very simple and easy to understand anyway.

In the hands, the camera feels perfect: the built is brick-solid, its magnesium-alloy body is very well finished and overall it exudes quality; the front grip and rear thumb rest are covered with some very grippy rubber, making it very easy to hold the camera safely (I'd still recommend either a neck strap or a wrist strap for insurance though); the fingers falls exactly where they need to be and all the controls are in easy reach. A Nikon DSLR user as I am will feel immediately at home, while someone not used to Nikon will find the controls to be logically laid out and intuitive enough to be able to start shooting in a few minutes.

The fully-articulated LCD screen with its 3" and 910k resolution is bright and detailed, its aspect very customisable and it works very well even in full daylight. Sure, I didn't try it under Arizona summer sun but no problem with viewing/composing pictures under the Italian sun so far.

To me, the only thing missing (easily doable in FW if Nikon wants) is the possibility to use the AE-L/AF-L button as AF-ON while decoupling AF-ON from the shutter button, as in all professional Nikon DSLR. This is the way I setup my D3X & D800E, and not being able to do so in what is Nikon's top of the line compact doesn't make much sense to me. Please, Nikon?

Gondoliere, Nikon P7700, 1/60 sec. @ f3.5, 152mm FOV, ISO 400

SPEED OF USE
While I didn't time/stopwatch any of the camera's operations, the Nikon COOLPIX P7700 feels very responsive in use. Startup is pretty instant, preview after a shot is instant, taking another shot is possible in around 1 sec.; zooming takes around 2 sec from 200mm FOV to 28mm FOV (or back); for a compact camera, focus locks quite decisively and focus speed is fast enough, even in low light (though not DSRL fast of course). Shutter lag? Once focussed, shutter lag is pretty much non-existent; of course, when pressing the shutter to take a photo without pre-focussing, shutter lag depends on how quickly the camera would acquire focus before the actual shot is taken.

Speeding gondola I, Nikon P7700, 1/15 sec. @ f5, 74mm FOV, ISO 80

Speeding gondola II, Nikon P7700, 1/6 sec. @ f6.3, 117mm FOV, ISO 80

IN USE: WHAT I DID CARE AND DID NOT CARE FOR
Rather than a list of features and menu options that you can find anywhere (and very likely done better, too), I think it's more interesting for you to know which features I loved and what I missed or didn't care for; of course, according to what you shoot your needing might be different, so take this for what it is - one working photographer's love/hate list.

Canal Grande, Nikon P7700, 1/50 sec @ f5.6, 35mm FOV, ISO 110

FEATURES I LOVED
In use, the features of the P7700 I particularly loved are:
- Fully tilting screen: it makes impossible compositions possible and difficult ones easier. What is more important, it does so without sacrificing screen size, screen resolution nor adding too much bulk;
- VR: vibration reduction works very well in the P7700, as you can see from the shots above: I got very sharp results shooting a 117mm equivalent focal at 1/6 sec, handheld, and without even using an optical viewfinder to help stabilise the camera against my face. I got steady hands, maybe steadier than most, but all the same this is pretty impressive on Nikon's side;
- DSLR-style controls: for someone like me that shoots only either in aperture priority or in manual mode, having twin wheels controls and exposure compensation at my fingertips is a definite plus;
- Auto-ISO implementation: again, a very intelligent implementation of a very useful control; you can set your top ISO between Auto 200, Auto 400 & Auto 800 and choose your minimum shutter speed as well;
- Filter thread on the lens: a definite plus for a filter lover like me, it allowed me to use the P7700 not only as a street shooter but also as an image-making tool for my VIERI BOTTAZZINI FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY business;
- A fast lens: the f2 to f4 aperture range is great for a lens that goes to 200mm FOV;
- Flash Commander mode: I love to be able to control an external Speedlight in both TTL and Manual modes from the camera - unfortunately, you can only control one group (no multi-group CLS);
- Manual focus implementation: works very well, you get a magnified center-frame area to make it easier to focus and a distance scale (though a very basic one);
- Step zoom & zoom memory: I love to be able to step-zoom between fixed focal lengths (you can even choose which ones to enable/disable) and to be able to choose the next startup focal length;

Nikon P7700, 1/500 sec. @ f6.3, 74mm FOV, ISO 80, Grad-ND & Polariser filters

Nikon P7700, 1/500 sec. @ f6.3, 74mm FOV, ISO 80, Grad-ND & Polariser filters

FEATURES I'D LIKE TO HAVE OR THAT COULD BE BETTER BUILT/IMPLEMENTED
- Lack of either an AF-ON button or of the possibility of setting the AE-L/AF-L to AF-ON while decoupling AF from the shutter button; I love this feature, I use it on all my professional Nikon bodies, and it seems strange to me that Nikon missed this. However, it can be fixed in firmware, and I hope Nikon will do so;
- Lack of built-in GPS, which would have been nice;
- Lack of multi-group CLS control: the built-in flash can only control one flash/group, while it would have been nice to be able to control at least two groups;
- Tripod socket not in line with the lens: this is a no-go for panorama stitching;
- Mode dial is a bit too loose for my taste; a couple of times I got an unwanted mode change just taking the camera in and out my bag;
- I'd like to have a better MF distance scale, the one available now goes from "Macro" to "0.3m" to "infinity" without anything in between: c'mon Nikon, someone is still zone-focussing out here! This too can be fixed in firmware, and I hope Nikon will do so;
- When the camera goes to sleep, it can only we awaken by pressing the shutter or the playback button; it would be great if pressing the "Menu" or the "OK" button worked as well;

Carts, Nikon P7700, 1/30 sec. @ f4, 30mm FOV, ISO 90

WHAT I DIDN'T CARE FOR
- In-camera editing features: while I am sure someone appreciates them, basically I never used nor probably ever would use all the in camera editing/retouching features, in-camera filters & effects and so on; I'd rather see that processing power dedicated to something else (deeper buffer, faster AF & file processing).

At Rialto, Nikon P7700, 1/30 sec. @ f6.3, 85mm FOV, ISO 400

IMAGE QUALITY
To me, features and how they are implemented are very important in that they should enable you to get to the shot in the easiest, smoothest and most efficient way; a camera that is pleasant to use and doesn't work against you is a great help towards taking better images, and the P7700 is definitely a pleasant camera to work with. It's once the shot has been taken, however, that things become serious for me - it's image quality what ultimately makes a difference between a camera I would keep and use and one I would sell. Image quality is the sole reason why, for instance, despite all their operational quirks I decided to keep the Sigma DP1 Merrill & Sigma DP2 Merrill, order immediately the new Sigma DP3 Merrill when announced and sell the Sony NEX-7 despite the Sony is the better camera by far when it comes to operation, speed and general features. So how does the P7700 fare when it comes to image quality?

Gondola ride, Nikon P7700, 1/50 sec. @ f4.5, 50mm FOV, ISO 180

Let me put it like this: planning my shooting trip to Venice, I bought the P7700 thinking I'd use it for street photography & candids, leaving the task of creating images for my VIERI BOTTAZZINI FINE ART PHOTOGRAPHY website's VENICE BEHIND THE MASK gallery to the Sigmas & the Nex-7. While there, I gave it a try for those images the Sigmas & the Nex-7 couldn't take, mostly because of their limited focal length lenses: well, somehow to my surprise the results turned out so good that I ended up using some P7700 images to create my artwork as well.

My requirements for an image to be usable and sellable as artwork in my 3 standard series are pretty simple: it must look outstanding in print and stand to close scrutiny, including the corners, at least up to 15"x20" of actual printed area. With some judicious processing and up-rezzing, I am able to print the P7700 files at 240 dpi to the standards I seek - provided that the photograph has been taken with care at base ISO or thereabouts (I'd say 125-140 ISO is as high as I'd go). I think this is a pretty amazing result for such a compact camera, and definitely not something I expected when I bought it.

How about street/candid photography and shooting in low light? Well, I think the P7700 output is definitely high enough for that as well: the camera is usable up until ISO 400 with no problem for prints up to 8"x10" and even 11"x14", especially if you shoot to convert in B&W - if B&W is your aim, I'd use ISO 800 confidently as well, leaving ISO 1600 and higher for very small prints and internet use only. However, you have to take into account that I love grain in my B&W photos so much that I add it in if it's not there to start with; in this respect the P7700 grain is very good looking, so to speak, and very film-like for those who remember film.

Nikon P7700, 1/50 sec @ f5, 74mm FOV, ISO 100, Grad-ND & Polariser filter

CONCLUSIONS
When reviewing anything, in my opinion conclusions make sense only in relation with what expectation one had before-hand. In this case, I was looking for a good all-rounder, a street shooter with good flexibility, good image quality, good operational speed, packing powerful features in a small package: did the P7700 fulfil my expectations? Yes indeed, it exceeded them actually. Is it perfect, or can it replace any of my other "serious" cameras for "serious" big-resolution, high-quality work? No, but it's a great addition to my lightweight kit, and I will definitely keep it. Below you find my detailed conclusions.

Nikon P7700, 1/40 sec @ f6.3, 117mm FOV, ISO 80

Ergonomics, speed and operations: the P7700 is a pleasure to use, feels great in the hands and all the controls are where you expect them to be. As far as its speed, the camera didn't once leave me waiting; AF is good for a compact, and so is write speed. A deeper buffer and faster AF would of course always be very welcome though. Battery life is pretty good (330 shots CIPA standard), but I'd get a second battery for a long day out shooting.

Lens and IQ: in short, the P7700's Nikkor 28-200mm equivalent f2 to f4 zoom lens is very very good. It's fast enough to allow shooting in low light; VR works very well allowing you to shoot hand-held at very low shutter speeds; colour response is balanced, without any casts; sharpness over the frame is very good in real world use, though reviewers shooting flat resolution boards would probably differ; chromatic aberrations, while present, are well controlled; distortion is very evident at the wide side (barrel) but not so at the long end (just a bit of pincushion), but is easily correctable in Photoshop - and if you shoot JPG the camera corrects it for you. Shooting at base ISO you can print up to 15"x20", going up with ISO things change, and I wouldn't print larger than 8"x10" at ISO 800 and or 5"x7" above that (if at all).

Low-light shooting: the fast lens and VR do help a lot with low-light shooting; if you need to use high ISO, I'd use comfortably ISO 400, while I'd go up to ISO 800 and higher either only in B&W or for internet use only (see above).

Taxi stop, Nikon P7700, 1/30 sec @ f5, 28mm FOV, ISO 125

Final verdict, I decided to keep this camera and add it to my light kit: this now consist of the Sigma DP1 Merrill & Sigma DP2 Merrill, waiting for the Sigma DP3 Merrill to be delivered to me at the end of March; these three cameras, plus the Nikon COOLPIX P7700, a light Gitzo tripod and a set of filters cover all I need when I want to travel light.

Riding the Canal Grande, Nikon P7700, 1/30 sec @ f5, 28mm FOV, ISO 125

OK, this is it for this look into the Nikon COOLPIX P7700. Please don't hesitate to write if you have any further questions!

Now for the technical stuff (click to go to the related product page): all pictures in this article have been shot with the Nikon COOLPIX P7700, equipped when mentioned in the caption notes with Cokin A-Series Grad-ND and Polarizer filters. Photos have been developed in Nikon Capture NX 2 and finished in Adobe Photoshop CS6.

Plug: if you like beautiful Fine Art Prints, printed masterfully in-house on Hahnemuhle Fine Art paper, want the security of my unique 6-POINTS WARRANTY and of my CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICITY, look no further: prints of my Venice images are available for sale HERE!

Plug Nr. 2: support the blog! Use the links in the right sidebar and in the text above to purchase your equipment at Amazon - it doesn't cost you anything, and it helps me running the blog and offering you more articles and reviews!

Thank you for reading so far, and stay tuned for more!

DID YOU ENJOY THE BLOG AND ITS CONTENT? HELP ME TO PROVIDE YOU WITH EVEN BETTER ARTICLES WITH A $4.99 USD MONTHLY CONTRIBUTION VIA PAYPAL: IT'S LESS IN A MONTH THAN WHAT YOU SPEND FOR COFFEE IN A DAY, AND YOU DON'T GET ANY GEAR REVIEWS WITH YOUR CUPPA!

OR SEND ME A ONE-OFF DONATION:

SELECT AMOUNT:

1: $4,99 USD2: $9,99 USD3: $19,99 USD4: $29,99 USD5: $39,99 USD6: $49,99 USD7: $74,99 USD8: $99,99 USD