The new Air, and why I'd love one...

Ok, for the two of you out there who are not Apple users - that's a joke, but seriously, if you're not an Apple user, and especially if you're in any type of visually-driven industry, give them a hard look - this is the new MacBook Air. So, let's start with the obvious. Reason No. 1 why I, and you, want one - look at it. That is reason enough for approximately 40% of future owners of this device. For the remaining 60%, lets take a closer look.

Reason No. 2: Instant on. Because the OS is embedded in the Flash based hard drive (see below) the system boots quickly. Closing the lid sends the computer into hibernate mode, as usual, and opening the unit powers it back up instantly. Much like the iPod/iPad. When not in use it goes dark and then when you need it, it's ready. There is no drive to heat up, and therefore, less moving parts and theoretically fewer drive failures and less lost data. Standby time is rated at 30 days in hibernate mode. Which is excellent considering my current Air is only good for a few days if it's not used at all. On the 11" this promotes 5ish hours of battery life and up to 7 hours on the 13" - both are excellent.

Reason No. 3: Flash based storage. This provides extremely fast and silent operation. Think of it as a built in thumb drive, but considerably faster since it's not communicating through a USB 2.0 interface. As of now, storage options are smaller than traditional laptops, but those looking at this device are likely not going to suffer from storage space as this will probably be a secondary unit or something for college or work in which case most information is saved to an external hard drive - or should be. The lower end 11.6" model sports a somewhat scant 64GB hard drive. Hilarious, given that my $4,000 Gateway (yes, after my Mac LC II, I went to the dark side, but have since repented and returned to the light) desktop that I purchased back in the late 90's had a whopping 10GB arena of storage, and now my iPhone has more than triple that. The only reason that 64GB would become problematic is if you do lots of high resolution digital picture taking and have an iTunes vault rivals that of the Library of Congress. So, if you are a media savvy college student, an engineer packing countless Auto CAD designs, an art director who likes to carry the entire portfolio, or filmmaker with the RAW footage of your next Sundance award-wining masterpiece, consider the MacBook Pro line - or at least the 13" with the larger storage options. For the user looking for the pint-sized 11.6" model, I doubt the 64GB flash storage will be a major deterrent, especially considering that you can double it for $200.

Reason No. 4: Screens and Sizes and everything else. For the first time ever, Apple is offering the Air in both a 13.3" and 11.6" model. This is a superb, and might I say, belated idea. So many users, even Apple lovers, have been looking for something that has Apple reliability, usability, functionality and performance in something along the netbook lines. With netbooks offering screens from 7-10" and units running around 2 lbs, it's easy to see why people on the move would be interested in such a device. Where the netbook line has been crippled, in my opinion, is in the following key areas: screen resolution and size, battery life, durability and feature set. The screens on some, but certainly not all of the models, are simply too small for practical use. Sure, a 7" screen is nice to carry around, but try typing a term paper on it or reading text on the web for long periods of time or even trying to organize and, dare I say, manipulate your digital images. It becomes rather obvious that this screen size sounds good, but for people that actually intend on using their laptop for productivity, it sucks! Then there is the resolution issue. Well, I'll keep it short. With the tolerable exception of a few Lenovos or some HPs and Dells, the resolution on most units leaves much to be desired, color is often poor and the lighting is dim. Next we have battery life. Some units have managed to pull off five hours or so, but usually that's with an extended life battery that is an add-on option. Some of these extended life batteries, especially offerings from Acer and Lenovo are also extended space and add as much as 2 inches to the back of the unit to gain that extra juice. Durability is usually terrible in the PC world overall. The good thing is that the plastic is so tightly restricted due to size that they seem to have better build quality at first glance than their bigger brothers. Companies started trying to disguise the fact that their gear is made out of loosely screwed-together plastic by decorating that plastic with pretty colors and various designs. The offerings from several netbook manufactures look like a Sherwin Williams exploded during the coloring process. This marketing tactic was really spearheaded by Dell. They offer more shell options than hardware configurations which is interesting for a company that is known for it's hardware mix-and-match availability. This is cool in one degree because it offers some variety in an overly crowded and boring market. On the other hand there's still a good chance that you'll run in to someone that has the same "personalized" laptop running the same outdated software. And that brings us to feature set. Lets sort out the first group of plagued netbooks right off the bat - the half-witted Linux-based OS as in the Acer Aspire One. This is a cool, easy to use interface. The problem is, it doesn't do anything. Nothing that you're used to doing on a computer can really be done on such a device. So, enter the Windows based models. Say what you want about Microsoft, I certainly will, but they are a lightyear ahead of the Linux units. They at least feel like a computer and you can install other normal software on them as long as your hardware supports it. So, you just need to figure out if you want Windows XP, XP Home, XP Business, 7 or one of the other 641 variations of the same inadequate OS and let 'er rip! Once you've spent $600-100o on your micro machine, then all you have to do is buy a competent photo manager/editor; a video production kit, if that's your thing; download iTunes because you know you have an iPod (Zune, really?) and then pick up Office - the most practical and, dare I say, quality product in the Microsoft lineup. Or you could go with an Air that has the highest resolution, instant-on super bright LED display on the planet. It also happens to be in the same weight category; is made of super durable aluminum; has a full, single-option OS that is so easy to use you'll be confused as to why you don't get a headache searching for your applications; has all of the best digital productivity software on the market INCLUDED (iPhoto, iTunes, iMovie, Garageband, iWeb and iDVD); has excellent battery life and is backed by the best customer service in the industry. The only serious thing missing is an Office software suite. I love iWork. It's faster and more practical than Microsoft Office and is about half the price. It includes Pages (Word), Numbers (Excel) and Keynote (Powerpoint) and pretty soon it looks like these will be available independently through Apple's upcoming Mac App store which is sure to revolutionize the way we all get and use our desktop applications.

Reason No. 5: New Additions. I have the older generation of the Air and I love it, but these new improvements really push the device over the top and make it a worthy upgrade. Some other new features that the newer generation(s) sport are the addition of a second USB port, which is a huge plus, and in the 13.3" you get an SD card slot which makes importing photos from most consumer cameras a snap and it provides an alternate storage option if you don't want to use the optional Super Drive, an external USB hard drive or a thumb drive. They've also moved all of the connections to the sides of the device instead of in the bay door on the old model which was kinda cool until you had to use them while trying to work with the laptop on a flat surface. The keyboard remains full size and is, in my opinion, the best portable typing surface on the market. When OSX Lion hits, everything is going to get even better.



I love the new Airs. Bang for buck, they still aren't quite same deal as the impressive entry level MacBook Pro 13", but if you're looking for thin, light and very capable, it's the best thing going. Personally, I'd love to upgrade to the new 13.3" with the 128GB drive and bump it to 4GB of RAM for $100. It's got excellent battery life for something with a 13" screen that is so thin, it's whisper quiet, has decent expansion for a thin-and-light, has the SD slot, instant-on and a superb display. It will run $1,400 for that configuration, but I can run all of my most important applications on it with ease and it's an excellent travel companion. It wont fit on an in-flight tray table quite like the 11.6", but I have and iPhone for that. Or better yet, use an iPad! The funny thing is, I don't really see the two devices (Air and iPad) competing. They both really do different things. At the end of the day, I'd side with any of the Airs because of their versatility over the iPad, but I wouldn't hate owning both.

As a professional photographer and journalist of sorts who is on the go quite often, this is the ideal partner - for me. I have screen real estate and power in my office. When I'm covering events, traveling and writing articles on the move I want light, fast and versatile. I can shoot, upload, sort, select, drop, export and deliver the images along with my articles from one spot without any issues. If I'm doing a longer trip, I'll throw an external drive in my bag for storage. I almost never do hardcore editing in the field and always transfer the files to my main system anyway. The Air running iWork and Lightroom is, in my book, the perfect travel device for shooters on the go because it really gives you everything you need and doesn't lack much of what we want. If it had a Firewire 800 port for faster CF card file uploading, then that would be cool, but I'm a practical guy. I also have the Super Drive which is convenient for loading software and burning discs when necessary. You can certainly get more power for your money in a portable package, but if you want something sexy or are just looking to go as fully capable and as light as possible the Air is simply the only option in my book.

Again, all of this is opinion. Take it as such and enjoy.

- R

BTS Look at the 2010 Faulkner Football Poster Shoot

Here is a behind the scenes look at the development of the 2010 Faulkner University football poster. The end result is shown below and the video beneath that shows the photographic process and the compiling of the final product. I hope to have a video showing my work for the 2010 football media guide cover soon, so stay tuned.

Here is the youtube video showing the behind the scenes work...



Enjoy

- R

Nikon introduces a new flash and a host of lenses

Nikon has had two lens releases since my last gear review post and that's both a good and bad thing. It's bad because that means I'm behind on my posts. But it's good considering that usually such releases are only twice a year at best. So, without further delay, here is a quick look at the new flash and lens releases from Nikon.



Nikon SB-700: Think of this puppy as the SB-900's mini-me. It brings in the focusing power, the improved LED display, better build, better head rotation, over-heating tracking, FX/DX auto tracking, filter identification and more are all incorporated in this new body. The unit is not as powerful, of course, as it's big brother, but that's to be expected. The BIG thing that I feel Nikon really overlooked or just deliberately left out is the PC-sync terminal. For $325-350 it really should feature the PC-sync input. This allows for the addition of wireless receivers to trigger the flashes remotely. You can add such receivers via hot shoe adapters, but that is an extra piece of equipment to have to keep up with. Pocketwizard has released new Mini and Flex units that can be placed on the camera and flash to bring that communication in, but at $200-220 each, that's a step you have to really consider taking.

One new feature that the SB-700 inherits from the SB-900 that the SB-600 does not have is the SU-4 mode. This setting allows the flash to use an optical slave to trigger when it sees another flash fire. This is very handy considering the lake of the sync slot, but it might not be suitable for all shooting circumstances and environments.

Bottom line, if you are in need of a flash unit and can get by without the PC-sync terminal, then this is the most well-rounded unit currently in the Nikon lineup. The SB-600 is not quite as feature laden, but it comes in at more than $100 less. The big brother, the SB-900, has more power and features, but will run you $100 more. Flashes have never been, nor will they ever be, inexpensive and at $330 online, it's a good compromise overall.



Updated AF-S 200mm f/2 VR II N: This a beautiful lens that every wedding, event and sports photographer wants in his/her bag. This is one of the best optics on the planet. It provides superb bokeh, rapid AF, excellent VR control and razor sharp results. This is an update to the previous version. This rendition gets the nano crystal coating (N) and the new VR II system (versus VR). At $6,000 though, you might want to rethink things. The current, and equally excellent copy, retails online for $4,800 for the USA copy and $4,000 for the gray market version. The newer one likely has somewhat noticeably better results, but depending you your line of work, they might not be a few thousands dollars better.



NEW Nikon AF-S 85mm f/1.4  N: Finally after years of waiting Nikon decided to bring AF-S to one of the best lenses in its lineup. The current AF 85mm f/1.4 is superb, but it focuses slow even on the best bodies and does so with a bit of a grunt. The new nano crystal coating should help with overall image quality and the AF-S feature will allow it to be used in even more environments - like sports. The current AF version runs about $1,250 online and the new N coating and AF-S will bump the price $450 to $1,700. If you don't have this optic and you shoot portraits, weddings, etc. you should definitely consider it. It is my favorite Nikon lens of all time. For me, the ability to use it in the athletic world as well as the portrait world does at the moment justify the extra funds. But this is my take on things. I'm considering selling my AF for the AF-S, but we'll see.



New Nikon AF-S 35mm f/1.4 N: Another huge finally.Why? Because there are a handful of 35mm options from Nikon, but none that quite hit the sweet spot. The current 35mm f/1.4 was non-af, making it virtually useless by today's standards. The AF 35mm f/2 was slow and load and despite a lot of great reviews was one of the worst lenses I ever used. I wound up sending mine back to B&H. The newer 35mm is the AF-S f/1.8, but it came in the DX flavor, rendering it pointless for FX sensors. For the money the 1.8 is an excellent optic and should be on every DX Nikon out there, but full frame shooters were stuck with no AF or slow AF with crapy results. Now we have something to consider. But consider it we must. At $1,800 it's the same as the 14-24mm f/2.8 N, a hefty amount more than the 50mm f/1.4 N (of course it's noticeably wider) which rings it at around $475 and is more expensive than the 24-70mm f/2.8 N. These optics are not all in the same category, but depending on what you need, you can see the overall cost. The Canon equivalent is only $1350, but it's a bit older. I'd love to have this lens, but only the 24mm f/1.4 at $2,200 scares me more for versatility for the price.



NEW Nikon AF-S 24-120mm f/4 N VR: Another lens that finally brings competition to the Canon equivalent. This lens offers a relatively wide to moderate telephoto option with a respectable constant aperture of f/4. The VR feature will help control vibration and the fact that it can be used on an FX camera is a big plus and the N coating will improve image results. However, if you can handle an f/3.5-5.6 variation the current version is a lot less expensive at $570 online. The new one rings in at $1,300, but should provide far better results. The reviews that I read on the current version were not so hot, but for $1,300, the older one at sub $600 might be a better option. This one might be more of a shelf-sitter than other new releases.



NEW Nikon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6 VR: This, to me, is a far more exciting introduction than the 24-120. Why? It's faster on the wide end - and is practically as wide - 100mm longer on the long end - and only a stop slower - has VR, is FX ready and is nearly $300 less than the 24-120! This is considered the 18-200mm lens for FX users. Nikon's popular 18-200mm has been an awesome "do all" lens for DX users, but FX bodies have had no such friend...until now. The 28-300 is a very good general "do all" focal range and the variable aperture is more than sufficient for most situations. It has a zoom lock switch so it does not creep open when held downward and is an all round nice little package. At $1,050 it's not for everyone, but considering that it could quite possibly be the only lens necessary for travel and adventure photographers, it's a steal in my book.

If I were going to be doing an international trip, entering a variety of shooting situations, packing an FX body and a few flashes, I would have to strongly consider weather I needed all the extra gear I would normally haul along. My current widest lens is 24mm and my longest without telephoto converter is 200mm. This trumps that and it's ONE lens. If I decided that I really would not need, or could, without penalty, forego apertures of 2.8 or faster, I would take ONLY this lens. If I had to pack something else, it would be my ultra light, inexpensive and fast 50 f/1.8. And I would ONLY use it for depth of field work and extreme low light shooting. My perfect - low weight, low cost travel/mission work/adventure/gone for the day/do it all setup for FX would be: D700 body, SB-800/900, 50 1.8, 28-300, a small transmitter and receiver - DONE. I love my MB-D10 grip and battery, but if I pretty much know I'm not going to be shooting a ton of action, I'd leave it (for pack space and weight) at home. If I had extra room, I'd toss in a clamp and another flash. When you own heavy, fast, expensive glass, you get used to the versatility and results, but many times, that much gear is simply not practical. When I went to Ukraine a few years ago to work with orphans, I decided that my point and shoot option from my previous visit was far too limiting considering that photography is my job and hobby. So, I took my backup body - then a D40 - a 55-200 VR lens, three Nikon flashes, two small light stands, a few collapsible umbrellas and a transmitter and my receivers. I was able to shoot a variety of things and only had the one lens! I set up some small "portrait" shoots outside with the lighting gear and the results were pretty good considering all of my limitations.

Today, I might consider the new Coolpix P7000 for it's quality, size and weight, but for double that price, I could get this excellent lens to pair with my D700.

I'm considering adding this to my kit for future travel use. I think it's a great solution.



NEW Nikon 55-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR DX: This will apply to cropped DX sensors only and is a new "kit type" alternative to the popular 55-200mm VR. When most people pick up a kit purchase it usually features the 18-55mm and if it has a second lens, it's the 55-200mm VR. They are both great lenses for general shooting and the new 55-300mm offering simply sweetens the deal further. The new 55-300 offers the same aperture values as the 55-200, but with 100mm more focal length potential. The lens is also a nice alternative to the excellent 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR. At $80 less than the 70-300 it's wider on the back end and definitely worth a look. At $170ish more than the 55-200 it's a bit of a leap, but it offers more focal length in a very similar package size. The 70-300 still has the advantage of working on FX bodies. Overall I think it's a great new choice for the D300s model and down.

Again, all of these points are my own personal ones and in no way reflect what each unique shooter/buyer will think, want or get. I simply post my ideas to help in your decision to expand or replace your gear.

- R

Nikon releases the D7000

It's been a while since my last post on gear even though Nikon has coughed up a ton of new stuff, predominantly new lens, which is a good thing. They have introduced new entry level items as well as glass that the avid pro has been pining for for some time. If you don't believe me, look at my previous posts and you'll see that a lot of things I, and pros across the board, have been wanting and, in fact, genuinely needing for years. This post will focus on the new D7000 and I will follow up with a look at the new flash and lenses. Again, any recommendations, likes or dislikes are simply that - my opinions given my understanding of the equipment, cost and usability. So, here we go.



Enter the D7000:

So, what is it? Well, it's been dubbed the successor to the D90, which in all fairness, it sort of is. Expect the D90 to dwindle out by the first of the year or a little after.  It might hang around longer, but when you compare the list pros and cons and create your bang-for-buck scenario, I think the vast majority of shooters that are looking at this price point will side with the D7000. Now, the D90 might get a new life if the price continues to drop, but I'm not sure Nikon will continue to output that model once this one is readily available.

Now for the real kicker that many are probably NOT considering. Is the D7000 a D300s killer? We'll take a look at the features and see. Now, I'm obviously not going to talk about all of them, but there are certainly some things to hit on. After each topic I will keep a running "point" total as I see it.

1. Build: It's got a new magnesium alloy frame. This puts it on par with the D300s and a big step up from the D90. This improves body integrity and can contribute to better weather sealing. D7000: 1     D90: 0     D300s 1

2. Sensor: The D7000 gets a bump up to 16MP from 12MP. This is not, of course, the end all, be all of image quality, but it does help. The user should see sharper images with more detail overall with everything being equal between the bodies. This could effect low light shooting results, but only tests will confirm this. I highly doubt that this sensor will suffer more than the current generations when it comes to low light work. Nikon is leading the industry in this area as far as I'm concerned. You still get the cropped DX sensor, but what did you expect? D7000: 2     D90: 0     D300s 1

3. ISO: Another point for the D7000. The D90 and D300s are base 200-3200 with expansion up to 6400. The D7000 knocks that out of the park with a base of  100-6400 with expansion to a ridiculous 25,600. Not as high as the D3s, but more than enough for even non-practical purposes. D7000: 3     D90: 0     D300s 1

4. Movie Mode: This might not even appeal to a lot of shooters, but it's definitely something that would-be indie film makers will love and, honestly, it does expand the creative arena for the photographer. So many photographers are moving into film because of the lower cost of gear - because they already own it! The D90 revolutionized the DSLR world when it became the first body that produced HD video. Then everyone followed. Now the D7000 breaks into a new realm - autofocus in video mode. This is a HUGE step forward because it allows you to use follow focus if you want, but does not make it necessary. It also shoots full resolution 1080 HD at 24 fps. So, even though the D90 does have video, the D7000 blows it away and the point will only go to the new body. D7000: 4     D90: 0     D300s 1

5. AF Sensor: Luckily all three of these cameras will focus even non-AFS lenses. It remains to be seen if the D7000 will be a significant leap in AF speed, but the sensor is a bump from the D90 where it gets 39 points with 9 cross type areas versus the 11 and 1 of the D90. It still isn't on par with the fabulous 51 area/15 cross type of the D300s (and D3 bodies), but it's excellent at this level of camera. But, because we are doing a side by side look, the D300s will get the point. D7000: 4     D90: 0     D300s 2

6. Metering Sensor: The D7000 will win here too as it features a new 2016 pixel sensor versus the 1005 of the D300s and the 403 from the D90. What does this mean? Theoretically it makes the camera more efficient at ganging light levels for proper exposure, white balance, focus tracking and iTTL output. D7000: 5    D90: 0     D300s 2

7. Viewfinder: The D7000, like the D300s gives you 100% coverage at .94x magnification. The D90 gave you 96%. It's a tie with the D300s. D7000: 6    D90: 0     D300s 3

8. Shooting Speed: This might be where the pack gets separated in a major feature for some. The D90 could only output 4.5 fps on a good day. This is not bad for family shooting, but when you compare the D7000 to the D300s and higher, this number will become a factor. The D7000 outputs a maximum 6 fps which is very respectable, but no match for the excellent 8 fps max that the D300s is capable of - although it does require the MB-D10 grip and more battery power. So, if you're a sports shooter looking for either a new rig or a backup, you should consider the lack of frame rate in your purchase. Again, for non-sports shooters, this might not be an issue. D7000: 5    D90: 0     D300s 3

9. Storage: The D7000 keeps the SD slot for its storage type, but does provide a second slot to either provide roll over storage or separated storage or say RAW and JPEG when shot simultaneously. I prefer the Compact Flash option on the D300s, but I think for this class of camera, the SD is a more common storage format and since it accommodates the SDXC cards and there is double the internal capacity, the D7000 gets the point. D7000: 6    D90: 0     D300s 3

10. $: This is tougher to do side by side, because you have to take value into consideration here. For a hands down winner, the D90 finally gets a point coming in at $780 for the body only (as of this post). I expect that price to drop even more as it exits the stage, so if you are a new shooter in the DSLR field or just want a superb backup, grab the D90 or wait for it to drop a little. I see it absolutely bottoming out at $699 new, but I'm not a marketing expert. The D300s has been around for quite a while and is in need of an update, but not more so than the excellent D700. The D300s will cost you about $1,480 new body only. It's at the top of the list and considering that it's only real advantages over the new D7000 are AF points, 2 more fps and a possible preference for the CF card, it seems unlikely that most shoppers will throw out the extra $300. The D7000 also offers some newer metering sensors, the new processing engine and the excellent movie mode. I think the deal breaker here would really just be the shooting speed. The D7000 comes it at a respectable $1,200 and in my opinion is the bang for buck champ of the group. The point for dollar amount goes to the D9o, but the value point goes to the D7000. D7000: 6    D90: 1     D300s 3

11. Value: See point 10. for info. D7000: 7    D90: 1     D300s 3

At the end of the day, camera dimensions and weight are totally subjective, so are not included in the review. I actually prefer a meatier camera so I like the D3s/x bodies, but I shoot with a heavier (when fully loaded) D700. There are also other features that can be talked about, but I think they impact the shooter/buyer less than those points listed above.

If you're a full-frame shooter, just keep waiting for the D700 update or other major D3 advancement. If you're an entry level shooter consider the D3100 or D5000. If you are looking at the middle of the pack consider the D90 for it's excellent price if the features of the D7000 are not necessary for you. If you need speed, still go with the D300s if the D3s is out of your price point. If you want the most for the best value, I'd strongly consider the D7000. Wait for some image and performance reviews from other great sites, but at the end of the day it offers a TON of features that are sure to justify the $1,200 price tag.

- R

Volleyball Poster Shoot '09

Here is another shoot from last year. This is a behind the scenes look at the shoot I did for the volleyball poster last year. More to come...

Volleyball Media Guide Cover Shoot '09

This is going back in time a bit, but I came across some semi behind the scenes footage and thought I'd post it. I will be adding some other videos soon...

Thoughts on next generation iPad

With the iPhone 4 ushering in so many new features, it seems safe to say that the iPad II will inherit many of it's little brother's features.

Here is what I'm betting on:

Retina Display - it's far too sharp with text to NOT put it in the second gen iPad

Front Facing Camera - this will likely be in there because supposedly there is room for it and all iPads are WiFi compatible - the avenue used by FaceTime.

More RAM - I believe  the iPad has 256 MB of RAM while the iPhone 4 has 512 MB.

Faster Chip - duh, newer units are always faster, but maybe not by a lot.

SD Card Slot - this might be pushing it, but it'd be cool to see an SD slot on an iPad. It would make for faster image uploading and you could use it for extra storage.

Possible Redesign - we MIGHT see a redesign based on the iPhone 4. Maybe not a glass back, but I wouldn't put it passed them. If not, it may look similar, but with an aluminum back.

No Camera or HD video - it is really nonsensical to add this feature to such a big product. Forward facing camera is likely as mentioned. If there IS one on the back it will be fore FaceTime purposes and likely lower resolution.

I think we could see this as soon as January, but it could be further out and late in 2011. Apple seems to want to make it's products uniform. Just look at the Macbook Pro line. 13-17" are identical except for size. Same with iMacs and even the new Mac Mini has taken on the design characteristics of the iMac. The only odd ball in the group is the regular MacBook. I wont be surprised if this one goes away eventually to make room for a pad between the iPad and the Macbook pro? Why? Because for like $200 more than the Macbook, the lowest end Macbook Pro is way more than $200 worth the hardware in my opinion.

We'll see. It's always fun to see that they're gonna do.

- R

No worm for the early birds

An interesting twist is occurring in the iPhone 4 launch debacle. It seems that early players in the pre-order game are actually being penalized for their efforts. Many of the pre-order customers who's orders were postponed or processed late in the day are actually getting their precious packages ahead of schedule, while many of the early birds, as it were, are not expecting delivery until at least launch day.

The fact that the orders - for the most part - seem to be scheduled for on-time delivery is a good thing. However, many of those who had conducted the pre-order at the beginning of the day are actually getting their units after the late bloomers.

There has been some variation in delivery times between those who waited at Apple direct stores and those who ventured to AT&T retailers, but other issues are occurring between orders sent form the same location.

For example, I was one of the first four people in the door at the local AT&T store here in Montgomery. No, I'm not a crazed fan - well, yes I am, but I was not rushing to the store to beat every other iPhone patron nor was even there to pre-order, but rather to determine when the online server failure would be resolved. I then discovered that they would be taking pre-orders in-store. Lucky me.

There were four of us there when the doors opened and all of us were greeted by AT&T reps - no lines, at that point. Within 3o minutes the system errors became clear. Within an hour and a half they were unable to process orders and within two hours they were turning people away. The whole thing went from bad to worse in less time that it takes to play a World Cup match, and considering that this is the FOURTH time the phone has been upgraded, you'd think that this wouldn't have happened - but I digress.

Anyway, a few people that I know got their phone pre-orders in well after mine and as it turns out, their devices are getting in sooner. My pre-order was completed at 9:45 a.m. One friend's was completed at 2 p.m. and the other at 6 p.m. How are they arriving? The 6 p.m. order arrived today - a day early - just after lunch. The 2 p.m. order was delivered at 3 p.m. today - again a day early. And mine? The early bird pre-order? It should be here tomorrow. Launch day, yes, but really? The first in line get their's later? My shipping information was "not found" in the FedEx database - like thousands of others. It only updated this morning around 8 a.m. Ironically, it was the first in the system. I guess the guys at Apple started boxing and labeling devices and created a big pile, then, started shipping from the top of that pile. Makes sense...to someone, somewhere, I guess.

At the end of the day, does it matter? No. It just sucks that those who did get their early wound up not getting the priority. I know if I were the first to a restaurant I'd expect to get seated before those who came after me with the same party number. In the end we'll all get to eat, but it's just common courtesy I suppose. I'm a little irked at the situation to say the least, but as I like to say, "I'll live."

- R

AT&T not "changing everything". Again.

If spotty cell coverage and the inability to tether haven't been reason enough for Apple to consider expanding its wireless carrier relations, today's problematic start to the most anticipated wireless device launch in history surely should be.

In an effort to circumvent customers' problems with getting iPhones in the past - I suppose - Apple decided to offer pre-ordering for the first time ever - that I recall. The iPhone launched in much the same way as the iPod. It was new, and cool and everyone probably wanted one, but not everyone jumped on board - at first. Now the iPod is so popular that it, in fact, is the default name for the entire MP3 player line. Even if you are sporting a Roxio or, dare I say, Zune, everyone asks, "Hey, what are you listening to on your iPod?"

The iPhone went through similar paces with the second generation, the 3G, bringing in a larger crowd and with the 3Gs the iPhone became one of the most popular mobile devices on the planet. The unit, in conjunction with the iTunes, the iTunes Store and the hundreds of thousands of Apps has created a family of usability unmatched by any other manufacturer - period. Sorry Droid. But all of this is separate from the carrier end. Yes, Cingular jumped on board with the Rocker - which was actually terrible aside from the fact that it did iTunes - and visual voicemail and they do provide good data speed compared to some other vendors, but they monopoly on iPhone rights has taken a toll on customers. Something that Apple has had to start answering for more recently.

It becomes harder and harder for Apple to separate itself from AT&T when it comes to coverage problems because even though the two are really mutually exclusive with regard to what they handle in the unit, Apple has been getting some flack for not allowing other carriers, like Verizon for example, have a shot at it. Yes, Verizon's data is not strong, but with a nod from Apple, that would likely be fixed and quickly. But, until the multi-carrier day arrives, AT&T has exclusive rights to do what they want and lately it seems like they want to screw it up.

When the 3Gs launched it was a big enough deal that it spawned record lines of people waiting to either upgrade or obtain the device for the first time. Even here in podunk Montgomery, Alabama, one store saw more than an hundred people in line on launch day. The store only had about 40 phones, but wouldn't tell anyone in the back of the line not to waste their time. What did those toward the rear get after hours of waiting? "Sorry, we're out and there's no rain-checks."

Another problem that's slightly more understandable, but still super frustrating was the early days of activation. I remember being without cell service for more than 10 hours cause the network was clogged. Now, it's a new problem - and it's not even activation time.

As of this post I am - as far as I'm aware - one of only about five or so individuals in Montgomery that actually as a receipt confirming a reserved iPhone 4. Why? Because the AT&T servers can't handle the load. Everything goes smoothly online (or did) until you actually want to pick your phone and then the system crashes and tells you to call an 800 number to upgrade to anything BUT the iPhone 4. The AT&T servers have also screwed up the Apple pre-order deal as well because they are having to tap in to the AT&T system to verify that the customer is either qualified via credit approval or eligible for a product upgrade.

So, I did what any rational person would do. I went to a an AT&T retail store. I went to the source. After 45 minutes in line, I got my receipt. Apparently the main glitch is coming from the address verification component for product delivery. No matter what gets entered, it cannot verify the address and won't complete the order. I wanted mine sent to my office so someone would be there to sign for it. When that wouldn't take the AT&T rep tried the retail store. It too failed. Then she entered my home address. Fail. She just kept trying until finally it accepted the order and printed a receipt. So, as of now, I am a verified pre-owner of the iPhone 4. I have no idea where the phone is going to ship to, but I'll know like two days before it's supposed to arrive when I get an email. Nifty.

Another cool thing that would be awesome for the clerks to know is if someone has to be home to sign for the package and which carrier will bring it. Everything I've ordered from Apple in the past has come FedEx, but we'll see. Since FedEx can deliver from like 7 to 7, it can come any time. If someone has to be at home to sign for it and if everyone is at work trying to make money to pay for it and FedEx wont leave it on the door step, then there is another major problem with the system. FedEx might have thousands of people in line waiting to get their undeliverable iPhones! All because the AT&T reps - at least here - have no idea who is bringing them or how, and they can't get an address in the system anyway.

A work associate of mine was in line right behind me and he called me an hour after I left and said they were turning people away because they couldn't push any orders through. He was told that the manager would personally call him once it was sorted out and as of five hours later - still no word. Since the location I was at opened an hour before the other lone AT&T retailer in the city and since he was right behind me in line, it might be safe to assume that only the first of us who got to a rep first got into the system.

So, Apple offers a pre-order process nine or so days before the actual launch to help streamline the process and ensure supply demands are better met, but AT&T wasn't ready. I'm not sure how this could be the case. Did the IT department take a vacation? Did they fail to see the product reveal? Apple has sold an iPad every THREE SECONDS since it launched and it DIDN'T have a three-year history of loyal owners and 90% of the new owners STILL aren't sure exactly what it's for and AT&T didn't prepare for the iPhone 4?! It makes no sense. This is where AT&T is extremely lucky to be the ONLY provider with the most popular device in the world. Because there are really no repercussions. Big deal if people have to keep coming back and get pissed off - they can't shop elsewhere.

I have an idea. If I am the CEO of the exclusive US carrier of the most popular handset in history and I know that the most significant upgrade to the device is coming since the second generation (really) and they are offering customers advanced purchasing - I'm going to dedicate a server farm to the task and my IT team is going to be getting lots of overtime quadruple checking that the address field works! Yes, I realize that there is an extreme demand on the system, but this is 2010 and we're talking about one of the largest telecommunications companies on the globe. This is stupid.

Luckily, they have nine days to sort it out and hopefully people wont get left out in the rain because they got bumped down a list and there weren't enough phones to go around. Then after nine days of waiting, maybe we'll all be in for a treat when the millions of people got preordered units all try to activate them within a few hours of each other. If the servers and system can't handle an address field, what happens when all those people got to turn on their phones?

The 3Gs activation was seamless - at least here - so there is hope. But it was first come first served and the system was more controlled. You didn't have millions of people all WITH units trying to activate at the same time. This should be fun. For FedEx's sake they can get them all delivered on time...

We'll just have to wait and see...

The hot and cold in Nikon's latest lenses

My first response? I'm psyched! Finally, Nikon 1.) introduces a world's first and 2.) revisits the professional days of yore. My second response is, well, we'll get to that in a moment.

First up to the plate is the AF-S 16-35mm f/4 G VR; the world's first ultra wide professional zoom with Vibration Reduction. Like all new Nikon lenses this one also receives the N emblem for Nano Crystal coating and inherits Nikon's newest lens styling with a magnesium body and undoubtedly solid, tight construction. The constant aperture of f/4 gives you moderate speed - especially for a lens in this price range. And since we've hit that topic, the lens will be available this month with a $1,260 price tag. Ouch.

The main issue I have with this lens is it's price. It is approximately $600 cheaper than the excellent 14-24mm f/2.8 which, at first glance, looks to be a chunk change - around 33% savings. But when you break down the specs, you really have to ask some tough questions. What are you getting for the extra $600 with the 14-24mm? First, you're getting a wider wide. Second, you're getting an even flow to the next major lens in the Nikon lineup - the 24-70mm f/2.8. There is no overflow from 24-35mm. Not that that's a big deal, but you're technically purchasing more on the long end, which you don't need, if you own the medium tele. You're also gaining a stop of light with the higher end lens.

Now, what does the new baby brother offer that its older sibling does not besides price? First, it offers VR. Many may consider this overkill for a wide angle, but it's a nice feature for sure. Another nice feature is that it will take a filter - even if just for protection purposes - and it's a standard 77mm pro size to boot. The 14-24's bulging front element prevents it from accepting a filter, let alone a normal snap-in lens cap.

Now let's look quickly at how it stacks up against it's closest rival, the Canon 17-40mm f/4L. The Nikon offers a little more on the wide end, but the Canon makes up for it on the long end. Both lenses have quick and quiet AF thanks to Nikon's AF-S and Canon's USM technology. Both lenses offer a constant aperture of f/4 and build wise, both are in the pro end of the lineup. The VR does give the Nikon the technology advantage, but the Canon is much lighter on the pocketbook at under $800. At the end of the day the Nikon might be more technologically advanced and perhaps even sharper, but for nearly $500 more, it is really might not be such a great comparison.

This lens is going to appeal to the prosumer and professional Nikon shooter who simply doesn't need the speed of the 14-24mm. This will likely be a many photojournalists and travel photographers and landscape lovers. For sports shooters, wedding and event photographers and those who work in other low light areas, the 14-24mm will be in tow.

To sum up this lens, I think it will be insanely popular - for those who can afford it -because of what it is: a well-built, wide, pro caliber lens with VR. However, for many shooters in the market for a wide, pro caliber lens fitting this description, the 14-24mm may still win when it comes down to it. Personally, I'd rather cough up the extra coin for the speed of the 14-24mm. There are simply too many times where f/4 wont cut it for me and in the $1200+ range, I want all I can get. I'll sacrifice the filter and VR. But that's just one shooter's opinion. My advice would be, if you don't see yourself in one of the lesser expensive lenses and you're not switching to Canon, think long and hard about your investment to ensure you're getting the most for your money.

Now onto something that's less revolutionary and more evolutionary; the new AF-S 24mm f/1.4G. This is a lens that a lot of Nikon shooters have been waiting for since the 28mm f/1.4 vanished a while back. A super fast, wide angle lens that is quiet and sharp is just what many a pro has been awaiting in the Nikon lineup.

When this baby showed up on the announcement sites last night around 10 p.m. CST you could almost hear the applause of Nikon shooters worldwide.

Up until yesterday, Nikon's fast and wide AF lens selection was rather sparse. Ok, let's face it, aside from the 35mm f/1.8 - which is limited to the DX camera line - it was really non-existant. The new 50mm f/1.4G doesn't qualify as a wide angle and everything else is older than virtually every camera that anyone is really shooting today. None of them were AF-S and all of them were limited to f/2.8 with the exception of the 35mm f/2D. I tried that lens and must have had a bad sample because it's really the worst Nikkor lens I've ever used. It focused dreadfully slow compared to my other lenses and was terribly softness.

Enter the state-of-the-art 24mm f/1.4. It's reportedly razor sharp, quick, quiet and obviously fast. So, what's not to love? The price tag. At $2200 it's a financial beast. It's only $300 less than Nikon's superb new 70-200mm f/2.8 VR II. Bottom line, you've got to know you need it before you put it on the credit card. The shooters who are going to get this know exactly who they are, and perhaps surprisingly to many, that might not be a small crowd. I've read other reports of people suggesting that this lens would pair nicely with the likes of a D40-60. But, just because it will focus on such a camera by no means entitles it to be there. If someone is rocking a $2200 lens on a $400 camera I'll be more than surprised.

The Canon version comes in at around $1800, so prices are again elevated in the Nikon camp, but it is a newer lens and the gap is a little less significant. Nikon has nothing else like it.

So, if you want and need it and have the cash, don't hesitate, get it. It'll be that good. If you're like me, love it all you want, but don't start making room in your camera bag just yet. I'm going to have to weight the cost against the images it will provide me and when all is said and done, I'm probably better off going for the more versatile 14-24mm and saving $300.

Both are great releases and appeal to specific markets. I'm (and the rest of the Nikon world) waiting for the AF-S 85mm f/1.4 VR and I wouldn't mind seeing an AF-S 135mm f/2 VR either. Rumors also suggest an AF-S 35mm f/1.4 as well. The first is a pro staple and the second is a lovely option that many of us would love to see hit the shelves. If they do decide to offer a pro grade high speed 35mm, that too will be news for Nikon. They have promised a surprising release year for 2010, so we'll see.

Until next time, be safe and happy shooting.

- R

Thoughts on the new Apple iPad

I'm psyched about the new Apple iPad and the upcoming iBook Store. The reason I'm not completely bent out of shape about the new device centers on the fact that it does what it is supposed to do and that's it.

"It doesn't multitask!" So what? About the only thing I would likely really want to multitask would be iTunes and maybe something like Pages or Keynote. The big thing is a lot of Apps, especially the games, now allow you to pull your audio over and run it in the App. Problem solved. Seriously, if I wanted to do major multitasking on the fly I'd pack a laptop.

Remember, this thing is not going to run major third party Apps like Photoshop or Office. So having several things open at once is not a major concern for most users. At work I often have Final Cut Pro, LiveType, iTunes, Safari, Photoshop and Indesign all running in different Spaces simultaneously. But that's on an 8-core system with 16GB of Ram and a heck of a graphics engine. When I want to do major manipulation to photos, video or even extensive work with something like Keynote, it's going to happen on the desktop.

The main things that I would see myself using it for are as follows: Sharing my portfolio. Apple pushes the idea of sharing your vacation and family albums from iPhoto with friends and family on the run. It also works nicely as a digital photo frame when charging on the optional dock. But what Apple failed to hit on is the possibilities this device offers working graphics, photography and video professionals. It just might be the best portable device for sharing your work with potential clients.

It's a sleek and sophisticated device and perfect for the mobile professional. I'd use it to display wedding portfolio images, slideshows, marketing graphics and even film to clients and potential partners. I often meet clients in a relaxed atmosphere like a coffee shop. Pulling this small, light and highly capable device out of a portable sleeve would make the presentation both beautiful and unique. Tons of multimedia professionals are going to pocket (almost literally) these things as tools of their trade.

It is obviously going to be an excellent iTunes video playback device for road trips. For someone who travels often to cover sporting events throughout the southeast and internationally to work with orphans and communities in need, this could prove an ideal travel companion.Checking email, surfing the web, sharing photos and using Apps can all be done with supposedly excellent battery life in a light weight and small profile tablet. The optional photographic accessors which include an SD card reader and USB connection hub should prove valuable to photographers of every style. Ideally either Apple or a third party should create a Compact Flash device since all professional cameras use these media cards. I don't see pros using it as a proofing system for immediate image feedback, but it would be a useful tool on the go as long as it is used within the limits of the devices storage capabilities. For travel and vacation work it should be an exceptionally good tool. If Apple ever rebuilds a full or scaled down version of iPhoto for the device like they did for the iWork suite that would just up the ante for such purposes.

Using the apparently incredible calendar, contacts and notes applications. Without personal experience with these apps it's tough to say exactly how good they can be, but everything points to a far better experience than even the iPhone can deliver. For someone who has to keep up with the schedules of ten athletics teams, my personal work assignments, social activities and my freelance photography and videography work, the calendar application would prove invaluable. I'm also a fan of the Notes app on the iPhone and using it on a larger display could also prove helpful.

The Pages, Numbers and Keynote applications will appeal to a lot of people. For me, Pages would be a definite yes with Keynote coming in a close second. I don't do a lot with Keynote in my line of work, but for $10, you never know. I do use it for teaching photography class and I use it as a large preview/remote device for those presentations. Pages would prove a great productivity application for writing articles on the fly, logging field notes and keeping a travel journal.

And finally, iBooks. This could be cool. Personally, I'm not a huge fan of reading on the Kindle or the Sony Reader. I really like the technology, especially in bright light, but they did such a good job of making the displays look like pages, that, well, it's just like a page. Maybe I'm an odd duck, but I really like reading articles on my iPhone even though the screen is small. It's backlit and easy to read in the dark. And, oddly enough, it's easier on my eyes than the previously mentioned devices. So, regardless of your screen type preference, the interface on the iPad is exceptional. Not only can you change the font size and the font, the interactivity of the book and pages is just play cool and natural. With books being able to embed not only photos, but videos, it brings new life to a once stagnant medium. Now, how could they make this better. Well, if I were smart enough to design my own App that could add usability to the iBooks application, I would add highlighting and the ability to embed notes. The major reason why I have not left the paper book world for the digital counterpart ,even though I love the Green appeal, is because I highlight text and write notes in the margins. If Apple or someone were to add these two features to iBooks then I'd be far more likely to buy the titles of interest in the iBook Store. The features seem rather easy to implement. Just have an opaque color option in the menu bar that you can apply with the touch of a finger. You could simply use the same feature that Apple uses to Copy on the iPhone. Simply tap and hold and then drag the bars where you want them to start and stop and then fill it with the desired color. Adding a note could be simple too. Adding a toggle or pin that when tapped would expand into a note window for making notations about the text, responses or ideas would further enhance the usability of iBooks. It would also likely help promote the addition of college and professional text books to the iBook Store. The last thing, and perhaps the main thing that users are most potential buyers are likely curious about is what titles will be available. When the iTunes store first launched it was difficult to get older tracks and many new releases. That has been improved greatly over the years. With the popularity of iTunes it is likely that publishers will catch on and fast. We will see in the coming months just how many titles - other than major best sellers which will undoubtedly be available - will make their way into the iBook Store.

My final thoughts? I will probably get one. I will, for a time, use it in place of a laptop since I have plenty of power on my desk. Personal use always reveals the strengths and weaknesses that we either didn't know existed or under or overestimated in our preliminary thoughts about the item. Only time will tell, but I'm looking forward to getting one and putting it through the paces. If I had to predict now, it will likely be one of my favorite devices for both productivity and entertainment. The only question now is to 3G or not to 3G. For complete versatility and resale value (just in case) the 3G build is the way to go. But the extra $130 plus the monthly data plan does leave room to question this. But, hey, we have 60-90 days to ponder it. Until we all get our hands on one, we can only wait and hope that it's as well executed as we've been led to believe.