I went to America the other day, but I'm already back in Japan.
Actually, it was my shortest trip to America, having been there for less than an hour. In fact, I was back in Osaka eating lunch 15 minutes later.
As part of the paperwork for selling my house, a few of the thick stack of associated documents needed to be notarized, so I had to visit the US consulate in Osaka (officially, the Consulate General of the United States of America, Osaka Japan).
I knew that I was getting close to the building when I saw the police assault bus and a dozen bored-looking policemen loitering around.
As I arrived at what I thought was the front of the building, there was a big sign yelling “NO ENTRY” in Japanese, and something like “No Entrance Except For Official Business” in English. I did a double take at the door, which really looked like the front door, and decided that having some random documents notarized was probably official enough. An unofficial-looking person was exiting the door, so I went in.
I have moved a bank vault door before. This door was glass, but heaver. I think it was concrete lined glass, or something. It looked fairly normal from the outside, but could stop a tank. I'm sure it was designed just for that purpose.
Inside (now on American soil, God bless the King), it turns out that it was the correct entrance. “Welcome to America,” I had to think to myself because nothing else about the short experience so far made me feel the slightest bit welcome.
I'd brought my camera (because I was planning on taking advantage of being in Osaka to stop by a big camera shop before heading back to Kyoto), so I had to surrender that and my cell phone. I didn't have any liquids with me, so didn't have to surrender those.
A somewhat elderly Japanese policeman with the a most pleasant way about him took my stuff and processed me through the metal detector, and a light body search with a wand like at an airport. I then exchanged an ID for a visitor pass, and was allowed through another 15 ton door to the elevators.
Other than a pictures of The President, VP, and Sec. State on the wall, you'd never know that this was a US Government office. No marines. No English. Well, the 5" thick glass doors might be one clue.
The 4th floor is th American Citizen Services floor. The elevator opens up to a waiting room large enough for about three small card tables and two benches. More pictures on the wall.
I paid the $70 it costs to have three items notarized, and waited for my turn for about 20 minutes.
One will find bureaucracy, pettiness, corruption, and other bad things in any government. On my trip to the consulate, I ran into pettiness in the form of one Sara Revell, who is a/the notary there.
Laws differ from state to state, but except for in Louisiana, a notary is a trivial job. It doesn't require much in the way of intelligence, and it's about as difficult and expensive to get a notary licence as it is to get a driver's licence. A notary witnessing a signature merely attests to the fact that the person singing a document is the person they claim to be. In performing this function, the content of the document is not relevant. They don't have to know nor care what the document says.
One of my documents made a passing reference to a separate document I hadn't brought. I didn't bring it because it wasn't needed here, but she wanted to see it. This was ridiculous; not only did she not need to see it, but she had no right even asking — it's not her friggin' business! Her business here was to ascertain to her satisfaction that my name was what I claimed it to be (which my passport apparently did), and that the signature on the document was mine. Oh, and to accept my money — that's her business too.
So, here was the situation:
- She already had my $70.
- She knew that I needed the service, or else I wouldn't be there.
- There was no one hundreds of miles, except her, who could do what I needed.
- She was behind a 3-inch-thick glass window.
- It was almost lunch time.
She had 100% of the power and we both knew it. Sara Revell treated me with all the compassion that one expects from low-level civil-servant twits in positions of power that exceed their intelligence. It just makes my blood boil — I can not being to tell you what I felt about this person (because my parents read my blog and I don't want them to know what filthy, angry words I know).
After returning to Japan in a decidedly foul mood, I had lunch at a restaurant in Umeda that was delicious. And the camera store was fun, too, so it wasn't an entirely wasted day.
I've another tech-related photo writeup, this time on NEF (Nikon raw image format) compression.
In it, I look at detail lost during compression in a way I've never seen anyone do it, so if you have a high-end Nikon that can write compressed NEFs, you may find it interesting.
(See my Photo Tech page for more technical writeups related to photography.)
My Tech-Related Photography Posts
- My Lightroom-to-iPad Workflow
- Lightroom Goodies (lots of plugins)
- Digital Image Color Spaces
- Online Exif (Image Data) Viewer
- Jeffrey's Autofocus Test Chart
- Photoshop Calendar-Template-Building Script
- How to Prepare Photos for an iPad
- A Qualitative Analysis of NEF Compression
- Tripod Stability Tests
more...
The only lens I own for my Nikon D200 is a Nikon “AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor ED 18-200m F3.5-5.6G(IF),” also known as “the 18-200mm.”
I really love it as a fantastic all-around lens, but at f/3.5-5.6, I find that it is sometimes a bit slow (that is, it doesn't let in enough light for me to use a fast-enough shutter speed). So, I've been thinking of getting a faster (allows in more light) lens for use in lower-light situations.
Because of its “18-200mm f/3.5-5.6” name, I know that my lens is f/3.5 at 18mm, and f/5.6 at 200mm, but what is it in between? Without knowing, it's hard to compare how much faster a different lens might be. For example, how much faster is Nikon's f/1.4 50mm lens than the 18-200mm at 50mm?
So, I set the camera to wide open and turned on the high-speed continuous drive, and held down the shutter while sweeping the lens through its full range of focal lengths. I then plucked the data from the MakerNotes in each image and plotted it.
I see that the 18-200mm is f/4.6 at 50mm, which is just about 1/3rd stop slower than f/4.0 (which is 3 stops slower than f/1.4 — if you need them, here are two primers on f-stops).
So, compared to the 50mm f/1.4, my lens is 31/3 stops slower, which is a lot. That's the difference between a shot at 1/15th of a second, in which even mild subject movement is blurry, and one at a much more snappy 1/160th of a second.
I'm thinking of something like Nikon's 17-55mm F2.8, but can't see shelling out $2,000 for only a 2/3rd gain at 18mm and a 11/3rd gain at 55mm.
Isn't there at least an f/2 (or better) in this range?
UPDATE: I ended up getting the 17-55 f/2.8 and love it.
Technical Notes
The main graph above is logarithmic on its Y (f-stop) axis, and linear on its X (focal-length) axis. Perhaps not surprising, the plot appears as a straight line when the X axis is also logarithmic.
The graph on the right shows the same data in a log/log plot.
Despite the 18-200mm's smooth zoom throughout its range, the Exif data and the MakerNotes data have only a limited number of points along that range that they'll report, and oddly, the two sets of data are slightly different. I've shown the MakerNotes' data in the graphs.
The full data from both are shown in the tables below.
From the MakerNotes Data
| 18.3mm | f/3.6 | 27.5mm | f/4.0 | 38.9mm | f/4.4 | 56.6mm | f/4.8 | 95.1mm | f/5.3 |
| 20.0mm | f/3.6 | 28.3mm | f/4.0 | 40.0mm | f/4.4 | 59.9mm | f/4.9 | 106.8mm | f/5.5 |
| 20.6mm | f/3.7 | 29.1mm | f/4.0 | 42.4mm | f/4.5 | 63.5mm | f/4.9 | 113.1mm | f/5.5 |
| 21.8mm | f/3.7 | 30.8mm | f/4.1 | 43.6mm | f/4.5 | 65.4mm | f/5.0 | 119.9mm | f/5.5 |
| 22.4mm | f/3.8 | 31.7mm | f/4.1 | 46.2mm | f/4.6 | 71.3mm | f/5.0 | 130.7mm | f/5.5 |
| 23.8mm | f/3.8 | 32.7mm | f/4.1 | 47.6mm | f/4.6 | 75.5mm | f/5.0 | 138.5mm | f/5.7 |
| 24.5mm | f/3.9 | 33.6mm | f/4.2 | 50.4mm | f/4.6 | 80.0mm | f/5.2 | 151.0mm | f/5.7 |
| 25.9mm | f/3.9 | 35.6mm | f/4.2 | 51.9mm | f/4.8 | 82.3mm | f/5.2 | 169.5mm | f/5.7 |
| 26.7mm | f/3.9 | 36.7mm | f/4.4 | 55.0mm | f/4.8 | 89.8mm | f/5.2 | 201.6mm | f/5.8 |
From the EXIF Data
| 18mm | f/3.5 | 31mm | f/4.0 | 44mm | f/4.5 | 62mm | f/4.8 | 105mm | f/5.3 |
| 20mm | f/3.5 | 32mm | f/4.0 | 46mm | f/4.5 | 65mm | f/4.8 | 112mm | f/5.3 |
| 22mm | f/3.8 | 34mm | f/4.2 | 48mm | f/4.5 | 70mm | f/4.8 | 120mm | f/5.3 |
| 24mm | f/3.8 | 35mm | f/4.2 | 50mm | f/4.8 | 75mm | f/5.0 | 130mm | f/5.3 |
| 26mm | f/3.8 | 36mm | f/4.2 | 52mm | f/4.8 | 80mm | f/5.0 | 135mm | f/5.6 |
| 27mm | f/3.8 | 38mm | f/4.2 | 55mm | f/4.8 | 82mm | f/5.0 | 150mm | f/5.6 |
| 28mm | f/4.0 | 40mm | f/4.2 | 56mm | f/4.8 | 90mm | f/5.0 | 170mm | f/5.6 |
| 29mm | f/4.0 | 42mm | f/4.5 | 60mm | f/4.8 | 95mm | f/5.3 | 200mm | f/5.6 |
I awoke the other day to find Anthony playing with a street sweeper he'd built. Perhaps every three-year-old does this, but I was really impressed with both the imagination and the ingenuity of the design.
As far as I know, he's hasn't seen a street sweeper like this, so the design is all from his imagination. He did see a street sweeper during the summer, but it had the vacuum/sweeper hidden within the center of the vehicle, and more or less looked like a brick with wheels. I have no idea where he got the idea for this design, but it's spot on!
His play with it was quite detailed, such as about how the vacuum pivoted as the vehicle turned).....
I'm not sure what the Lego in the back are — counter weights? This morning he'd built the sweeper again, but without the blocks in the back, so I guess they're not critical to the design.



