D7100 and AF-P DX 70-300 VR on an Airshow

Aero India is a biennial air show that takes place on an airfield on the outskirts of Bangalore. As per Wikipedia, it’s the world’s largest air show after the one in Paris. I first came to know of it when a friend of mine armed with a Nikon D70s and a non-VR 70-300 f/4-5.6 came back with some fabulous shots way back in 2007. Ten years later, I got to visit the show with a Nikon D7100 and an AF-P DX 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G VR.

You might already be aware of the fact that AF-P lenses don’t play nice with older cameras like the D7100. I had the choice of mixing and matching between D7100, D3300 bodies and AF-P 70-300 VR or AF-S 55-300 VR. Having tried out all four combinations, I settled for D7100 and AF-P 70-300 VR. Wondering why? Here’s why:

D7100 vs D3300

First off, let’s talk about why I chose the “incompatible” D7100 body instead of the fully compatible D3300. It’s not about IQ. Both have comparable 24MP sensors and I shot 12-bit on D7100 (more on that later). It’s actually about AF.

D3300 has a 9 point AF system whereas D7100 has 51 points. More than the number of AF points, though, it’s the possibility of AF-C with d9 (set point + 8 surrounding points) tracking AF that puts a big gap between the two bodies. I don’t have a 39 pt body like recent D5xxx or a D7000, but both of them offer d9 tracking mode, so I expect them to perform similarly. With a really long lens and high speed action, d9 mode helps in holding focus more reliably.

I did not use d21 or d51 because one, the direction of motion of aircraft is highly predictable, thereby making it less difficult to keep them positioned at the active AF point. The other factor is that the D7xxx line has a really low resolution matrix meter (2016 pixels), which makes it difficult for the camera to know what the subject is. See slides 6 through 8 of this dpreview slideshow to know more.

The other thing missing in D3300 is the ability to enable back-button AF. I normally use the shutter button to trigger AF, but when I’m shooting with telephotos, there’s nothing better than the agility afforded by BBAF. I have saved a custom setting (U1/U2) on the D7100 for BIF (Bird In Flight) shooting that switches to BBAF, among other setting changes.

55-300 VR vs AF-P 70-300 VR

Despite it’s super slow AF speed, I have shot quite a few BIFs with the 55-300 VR.

Eyes on You
Black Kite. D7100 with 55-300mm VR at 300mm

That VR bit is rather useless, though, since at the shutter speeds I use for BIFs, (1/1000s – 1/2000s) it’s more of a hindrance to smooth panning and tracking than a benefit. The inability to disengage VR on the AF-P 70-300 VR with the D7100 was a significant downside making me strongly consider going ahead with 55-300 VR.

What did switch me to AF-P 70-300 VR, though, was its responsiveness in tracking. And it’s quite sharp at the long end compared to 55-300 VR. A couple of days before the airshow, I tested the new zoom’s tracking ability. It yielded some convincing shots, even with the D3300. But that was with VR turned off.

D3300 & AF-P 70-300
Black Kite. D3300 with AF-P DX 70-300 VR at 300mm

The Air Show

I was quite certain of using the D7100 for the air show, but I still had doubts over the lenses, so I carried both. When I reached the venue, I tried a few settings with both the lenses, finally settling for the newer model.

One of the problems that plagued me was that I had to be really conservative with bursts, owing to the limited buffer of the D7100 despite using U1 95MB/s cards. That slowed me down quite a bit but not enough to actually eat up all 24 GB (16+8 GB) of memory I had available, in less than 45 minutes! I switched to a regular Class 10 card to continue capturing the SAAB Gripen that was roaring through the skies. Bursting? No way. Any good shots? Sure, like this one:

SAAB Gripen
SAAB Gripen. D7100 + AF-P 70-300 VR at 285mm

In the few minutes I got between Gripen’s landing and the next show by Suryakirans coming up, I switched from 14-bit raws to 12-bit, formatted both my fast cards and decided to start from scratch as I had another 3 hours of the air show left, with repeat performances from some of the aircraft that I missed.

Once I got settled with the settings and got into a shooting rhythm, it was smooth sailing from there on. I did wish for a few things to be better with the lens, though.

Loss of Focus on Zooming

Possibly the biggest frustration with this lens in the field was loss of focus on zooming. The lens was reasonably fast to acquire focus while the aircraft was at a distance or taking off. It also held focus admiringly well while the aircraft was on approach, even at high speeds like the F-16 Falcon that put out the fastest show with the widest stage of all. However, as the aircraft got close enough to start clipping the frame at 300mm, I tried to zoom out but lost focus in the process.

Rafale | Get a Good Look
Dassault Rafale. D7100 with AF-P 70-300 VR clipping the frame at 300mm

This happened every time I tried. Though it re-acquired focus in a second or two, it seemed like eternity and it was pointless anyway, since I was trying to time the shot precisely as the aircraft was right in front. As a result, I had to shoot at a shorter focal length and crop later.

F-16 Falcon | Approach
F-16 Falcon. D7100 with AF-P 70-300 VR at 250mm, cropped to 500mm FX equiv.

VR Interference

The other problem I faced with the lens was with VR staying on all throughout. While panning in a straight path was less of a hindrance, though it surely was, the bigger issue was with smaller aircraft performing quick direction changes. The VR caused my adjustments to lag, leading to a jarring experience. I could also not get panning shots at slow shutter speeds to get some motion blur in aircraft propellers.

Scandinavian Airshow | Viking
airshow.se Viking. D7100 with 70-300 VR at 300mm. Frozen propellers.

Vignetting & CA

The lens exhibits CA and also vignettes very badly at 300mm, even at f/8 – f/11 apertures that I was using. This is a big problem while shooting against a uniform background such as clear sky. As of this writing there’s no lens correction profile for this lens in DxO Optics Pro (my raw editor of choice) so I had to use manual vignette and CA correction, which too were not satisfactory enough.

Long End Sharpness

I was highly interested in shooting the aircraft at the moment of switching direction while they were the farthest away from the show area. Many such shots were encumbered with heat haze, but of the ones that weren’t I found that there was quite some loss of sharpness at 300mm, compared to the shots at approx. 250mm.

Rafale | Twist
Dassault Rafale. D7100 with AF-P 70-300 VR at 277mm, cropped to 800mm FX equiv.

User Errors

Along with the lens shortcomings, I should also mention that I spoiled some shots out of my own mistakes. The most stupid of these was jerking on the shutter button! Despite many years of shooting experience, I still found myself spoiling some long shots that needed precise timing, due to the nerves. If I had the ability to burst at will, I could have mitigated some of it. Times like these are when one would also wish for a heavier lens, which the AF-P 70-300 VR is not by a long shot.


When out shooting fast action like an airshow, the D7100’s slow buffer and the AF-P DX 70-300mm VR’s niggles leave one wanting for better. However, for anything that allows a bit more breathing space between shots, the 70-300mm VR is a very satisfying lens and should make a very compelling sports combination with a compatible D5xxx body, given the price.

As for me, despite some gear anxiety and in-field fumbling with multiple issues, it was an experience that I enjoyed a lot. For the next time, though, I have committed to an upgrade to 128GB of SD cards, a D7200 and a 70-200mm f/4 VR.

To see more of the interesting aerobatics, please have a look through my Flickr Album.

Aero India 2017

AF-S Nikkor 20mm ƒ/1.8G on DX

Early this year, I acquired a used 20mm ƒ/1.8G Nikkor lens. I only have DX bodies and the 20mm works more like a wide-normal prime than an ultra-wide, as on FX.

Inauris Aurea | D7100 + AF-S Nikkor 20mm f/1.8G ED
20mm ƒ/1.8G Nikkor on a D7100. It’s big.

Why use 20mm ƒ/1.8G? on DX?

I had long wanted to have a small, fast 24mm prime for my DX bodies. While the 35mm ƒ/1.8 DX is compact enough, I don’t like it that much. The FoV (51mm FX equivalent) is too narrow for general photography and too wide for portraits. I do most of my portrait work with a 50mm ƒ/1.8G, so I need something to cover the wider end.

The 20mm is not a bad option. Its 30mm FX equivalent FoV actually matches that of some very popular smartphones, which is what I intended this lens for – having a smartphone camera equivalent with much superior image quality.

Continue reading “AF-S Nikkor 20mm ƒ/1.8G on DX”

Nikon D750 + 20mm f/1.8G Nikkor

A few days ago I got the opportunity to try out a Nikon D750, along with the new 20mm f/1.8G Nikkor lens. It wasn’t the best of times for trying out new toys for me, because of which I couldn’t get any presentable shots. I still got some shooting to do with it and I would go ahead to include those non-presentable shots anyway.

Nikon D750 with 20mm f/1.8G Nikkor
Nikon D750 with 20mm f/1.8G Nikkor

Continue reading “Nikon D750 + 20mm f/1.8G Nikkor”

Carrying Cameras

The Problem

One of the big issues I face while photographing outdoors is that of having to carry a big 1.5 kg camera, and usually additional lenses and accessories weighing another 1-2 kg, all the time while out shooting for the day. The default carrying solution – neck strap – has a couple of disadvantages:

  1. It’s extremely tiring for the neck muscles
  2. It’s very fiddly, and gets in the way too much

Most of you might already have faced problem #1. Problem #2 is something you might not realise, until you start shooting without the camera strap. I let my cameras go without the strap a couple of years ago, and now I can’t even think of having to shoot with the strap on the body.

For quite some time, I used to carry the camera in an unzipped LowePro AW Rezo 140 (discontinued) camera bag. It solved the problem of fidgety handling, but my neck still complained. Continue reading “Carrying Cameras”

Farewell, Photography

Update: I couldn’t stay away for long. That, and I conquered the sharpness gremlins plaguing my experience with the heavily used AF-S DX 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G VR.

Farewell, Photography

We had a good thing going for eight years or so, but it’s time now to bring it to a halt.

Back when I started, I had no dearth of time to give to myself and I had no one but myself to spend money on. It was meant to be all for fun, nothing serious.

Somewhere along the way, things became different. I still find some time but can’t give it to myself without some sense of guilt being felt or implied. I still have money but spending it on something that no one other than me values doesn’t seem to be sensible any more. The fun is still there but seriously, there’s too much disappointment to make it worthwhile.

Back when I started, digital cameras used to be rubbish. It took the right kind of knowledge and tools to make a picture look good. But if you had the right equipment and knowledge and tools, your photo could stand head and shoulders above the average in terms of IQ (Image Quality). That alone used to bring about a sense of achievement. Now though, you can’t achieve anything noticeable with just a good camera and a computer because digital cameras have matured. They all make stellar pictures compared to what the average camera captured in the previous decade.

Now that’s a really good thing for photography in general. It’s become more accessible to everyone and the general quality of photographs is increasing every year. Having access to a camera on the phones is also giving a lot of people a lot of practice. But herein lies a problem. Being a photography/camera buff today is like being an audiophile in the 80s – back then, good sets of

speakers used to be rare and very expensive. Now the average consumer-grade speakers can reproduce a pin drop to a thunderous explosion with equal clarity and there are credentials – THX, Dolby, what-have-you – to help recognise their capability. You don’t need to be an audiophile to find a good sounding set of speakers. Just get a middle-of-the-price-range set with some fancy stamps and 495 of 500 of your friends will approve of it.

Now you might be thinking, hang on a minute, that analogy is bunkum. An audiophile doesn’t create music, he just consumes it. A photographer on the other hand creates something. True, that, but only to an extent. There are two types of photographer. One who shoots what he sees, and the other who makes something worth seeing. I would be monumentally dishonest if I, for a moment, claim that I am a photographer of the latter type.

So, all said and done, my photographs are only as good as my equipment and what I shoot.

And that’s a big problem.

If I need my pictures to improve I’d either need to improve my equipment or I’d need to find something better to shoot. Now, I have two class-leading cameras (Sony RX100, Nikon D7100) so I am quite far down the curve of diminishing returns. Yes, my pictures would look better with a Nikon D800 and 16-35mm f/4 Nikkor or a Sony A7r with 24-70mm f/4 ZA or some such combination of full frame body with an exotic lens. But how many of my 500 friends be able to tell the difference? 5, I reckon.

So, let’s look at the other bit – what I shoot. Unfortunately for me, I don’t find anything that I shot in the last 6 years worth hanging on my walls. I’m just guessing here, but I think it’s because I’ve only shot common tourist locations in India. India is great, it’s beautiful and colourful and… for me, it’s all the usual stuff. People like photographs of stuff that’s different from the usual. I still find pictures that I clicked 7 years ago in California or 6 years ago in London to be better than anything else that came after that.

All in all, we’ve come to a point where I am thoroughly unimpressed with my photographs and I have no more willingness to throw the requisite time or money at it.

Not at this time.

And that’s not OK, because I can’t bear with myself doing a half-assed job of it, on and on and on.

So I must stop.

Sensor Format Blind Test


Rank the four shots below from best to worst. Mention the position as top-right, bottom-left, etc. Submit your ranking as a comment.

Sensor Format Blind Test
Rank the above images from best to worst. Mention positions as top-right, bottom-left, etc.

The Fuss

These are interesting times for camera enthusiasts. Digital cameras have advanced to a level where most cameras are capable of  publication quality snaps and you don’t even need to carry a camera to take good pictures, thanks to smartphones.

One big debate this has fuelled is regarding the importance of sensor size now. Some people believe, as they always have, that bigger is better and a full-frame sensor will always win.

Some people believe that beyond a certain threshold (1/1.7″? 1″? 4/3?) sensor size becomes irrelevant because the rules of equivalence (same DoF, same shutter speed, same FoV) dictate that all sensors will be operating in a similar fashion since they’re seeing the exact same amount of light, for the exact same amount of time.

Furthermore, it is argued that most pictures are never going to be printed and hung on walls. Instead, they will be viewed on phone, computer or TV screens at a nominal resolution of, currently, 2MP (HDTV resolution) or in future, 8MP (4k TV resolution). At such resolutions, minor differences in image quality become immaterial.

To find out how deep the shade of grey is between the black and white of FF supremacy vs. FF irrelevance, I’ve devised a simple test. The image you see above/below is a PNG screenshot of DPReview’s Studio Comparison Tool, loaded with camera test shots from cameras with different sensor sizes. I have chosen the web resolution from the tool to match the “common use” scenario, i.e., sharing pictures on the web.

Now, can you rank these shots from best to worst? Mention the position as top-right, bottom-left, etc. Submit your ranking as a comment below.

Sensor Format Blind Test
Rank the above images from best to worst. Mention positions as top-right, bottom-left, etc.

Once I have obtained enough responses, I’ll publish a summary and also reveal the link that will load this very comparison in DPReview’s Studio Comparison Tool, thereby revealing the cameras chosen.

Thanks in advance for participating!

Update: The poll is closed and the results are out!

Six Months with Nikon D7100

It’s been more than six months since I have had a Nikon D7100 for my own and I have been thinking of writing down my thoughts about the camera. However, these six months with the camera have been a bit of an up-and-down journey and it’s only now that I feel like I know the camera enough to write about it.

Continue reading “Six Months with Nikon D7100”

The Lost Flickr of Hope

I woke up this Tuesday morning to a shock.

This bar is wrong in a lot of ways. The way it stands out in all its ugliness from the rest of the Flickr visual design speaks volumes about how it was executed (thoughtlessly, in a draconian way), how little the Flickr development team have a say in how things work (I can’t imagine a product owner who would allow such visual desecration of their product without a protest) and how little Yahoo! as a company cares about its vocal community (no attempt made by Flickr staff to respond to the outpour of grief in their help forum).

The newly redesigned Flickr reminded me that I’ve been on Flickr for a very, very long time – close to 9 years. My joining of Flickr pre-dates its acquisition by Yahoo!. I have been with Flickr through the several major design changes to its layout and functionality and through the waves of people from Flickr community leaving for other competitors. More importantly, I was generally quite vocal in my defence of Flickr and the changes it brought about. The only time I previously considered looking for alternatives was when the site had not received any significant updates in ages.


I think I was naïve. I think the people who left earlier had better foresight.

I revoked my Pro account yesterday. Barring a few days of discontinuity between manual renewals, this is the first time in 8 years or so that I’ve dropped to a free account on Flickr.

I don’t intend to continue with any more public photo uploads to Flickr. I haven’t decided which service to use next, partly because it’s a difficult choice. Flickr is a great website. Despite years of neglect in community building, it still has strong community participation. There are other photo hosting websites, other photo sharing websites and other online communities. But there’s none that brings all these aspects together the way Flickr does.

Looks like I will have to find not one but two alternatives – a showcase and a community to replace my daily Flickr fix with.

PS: Some people recommend deleting photos from Flickr or making them private to disallow Yahoo! from making advertising money from our pictures. However, I don’t think I’m going to do that. I don’t want to break the trust of scores of third party pages that have legitimately embedded my photos instead of just flicking them without credit.