Nikon D4 thoughts

The Nikon D4 is here. Because everyone and their brother has an opinion on it and because people far more capable than me have already had a chance to play with it, I'm simply going to make some comments and observations based on what I've seen and know about this camera.

Strategy. Unlike Canon, which seems to have blended their high end line into a single body, Nikon has remained true to form with the D4. It's an upgrade from the D3/s body and nothing more. It adds loads of features for sure, but does nothing to disrupt the hierarchy of bodies which Nikon loyalists have come to understand. No, Nikon will wait and do that with the upcoming D800. More on this later...

When Canon set out with the 1Dx they were looking to try and make something that suited almost everyone. They kept, and in fact, improved on the high speed shooting abilities of the 1D Mark IV, but did so for the first time with a full frame sensor as opposed to the 1.3x APS-H size sensor which was standard on their photojournalist/sports bodies for years.

They met on middle ground with the resolution for this sensor. They bumped it up from the Mark IV's 16 but dropped it down from the 1Ds Mark III's 21, and the result is 18MP. This sentence alone is proof of why so many users might just be happy with the merger - too many Marks to keep up with!

Canon also loaded the camera with twin processors and loads of new video features, etc., which you can read more about in my other post or check out the discussions online. The concept I wanted to briefly discuss was this: That Canon married the 1D and 1Ds lines to produce a hybrid of sorts that would best suite the widest spectrum of needs. It seems that for straight studio work Canon users will stick with the 5D Mark II or the upcoming Mark III upgrade.

Back to Nikon. So, Nikon's approach to the D4 was more streamlined. In fact, it was really just an upgrade to the already excellent D3 line. This is not to say that they didn't add features, but they really didn't change what the line is known for. It's more of a refining than a rebirth.

So, what's under the hood? More resolution. Those who felt they were behind the megapixel curve with a  scant 12MP now have 16 at their disposal. So, this is a larger increase in resolution than owners of the 1D Mark IV will see in the new 1Dx, but remember, the Mark IV was already at 16MP. The D3 series has had a full frame sensor, so there's no change there. Nikon's D3x will remain the megapixel leader until the D800 shows up. Again, more on this later.

The Nikon also gets a better buffer, faster frame rates, a new silent shutter mode (limited to 2MP), better AF performance especially in low light and a slightly larger screen (3.2 inches vs. 3 inches) that keeps the same resolution. The 1Dx has3.2" screen as well, but with higher resolution. There are also a few button layout tweaks that, from my perspective, seem to be improvements. Every camera get's these little tweaks. So, what, besides the almighty resolution, does the D4 get? Let's take a look.

Perhaps my favorite new feature on this camera is the illuminated buttons. I shoot in dark environments quite a bit so I can appreciate this upgrade beyond its obviously being cool. Wedding, event, sports and nature photographers are going to love this new feature. It keeps you from having to feel your way around in the dark and from memorizing everything in order to navigate your controls and menu settings. Below is a screen shot from Nikon's promotional video. Click on the image to view the YouTube clip.

PS - if you don't want a D4 yet, the video will make you want one. It shows all of the cool features while playing an Oscar-worthy score of triumph. I think they got Hans Zimmer to do it, but I digress...

Another new feature which has caught the eye of a lot of people is the new XQD memory card slot. The D4 is the world's first camera to feature this new card technology. It is smaller and more durable than current cards and the Compact Flash group says it will be the new standard. It's supposedly outstanding for video and photos because of it's read and write speeds. The camera also features a standard CF slot, so you're not forced into any new tech right out of the gate. Bummer: the double CF card slots were awesome. New owners will not have the luxury of using two of the same storage type like before. It would have been cool if they could have crammed twin CF slots and a new QXD in there, but oh well. You'll lose the ability to double up on your current "film stock" but you'll get the luxury of newer, faster tech if you opt for the new cards which are, thankfully, not significantly more expensive than their current CF counterparts.

The next feature, better ISO performance? I end that statement with a question mark because until we have the ability to compare the results with other models, we have to trust what Nikon says about its sensor. The D3s became a legend because of it's lowlight abilities. Early estimates by Nikon are that the D4 is approximately a stop better in the noise category than the D3s, which, if true, is a significant feat. Why? Well, consider it. Sure, having images at ISO 12,800 out of the D4 that are as clean at shots at ISO 6,400 from the D3s is stellar. But couple that with the bump in resolution and the stop better lowlight AF specs and you've got a real weapon on your hands. We should be seeing some test results within a few weeks, but wait until the Olympics to get a real look at how this stuff excels - or doesn't. The Olympics is an extraordinary testing ground for new state-of-the-art optics and bodies and this year's gathering could prove crucial for both the D4 and 1Dx.

Finally, we have video. The D3s had it, but many hardcore videographers would argue about the genuineness of that statement. It was 720p with full-time manual focus and that's about it. The D4 could be a cinematographer's dream. It's got full HD support with the option for direct output of uncompressed HD footage which is both impressive and problematic. The number of hard drives you'd need to store the footage could require a bigger financial sacrifice than the camera itself, but hey, the feature's there if you need it. Combine the stellar lowlight performance with Nikon's legendary optics and you'll get some astounding video quality. They've also integrated a headphone jack and options for microphone inputs which makes it perhaps the most video ready DSLR out there. However, Canon's new cinema line of bodies shows its dedication to the video industry. I don't see Nikon sharing this path, but the new D4 will easily be the go-to body for production companies who want to best video features Nikon has to offer.

Many users consider video rather out of place in the DSLR, but I disagree. Visual artists - i.e. 98 percent or more of the D4 buyers, etc. - usually welcome this feature. Not because they plan on making feature films or documentaries, but because they can. No one who is in the market for a home video camera is really going to buy the D4. Why? because it's $6000 and you still need storage cards and lenses! It will, however, appeal to documentary groups, wildlife production teams as well as wedding and sports crews. Sure, far less expensive cameras can rock HD video, but with this level of quality, lowlight performance and feature set - it's really in a league of its own. This camera is clearly aimed at the hardcore professional photographer and videographer or the combination of the two. It's also aimed at people who want the latest and greatest and have deep pockets. Nikon will sell this to anyone with a valid credit card.

Worst new feature: battery. The battery life is rated significantly lower than the battery life on the D3s, by more than 1,000 shots! Real world testing is pending, but the estimates are crappy. You'll wanna carry more batteries and, oh yah, they're more expensive. You didn't expect it to be perfect did you? Ha. I suppose it has something to do with environmental standards or something, but I'm for more landfills if I can shoot a few hours longer. I'm kidding - mostly.

So, is it cool? You bet. Do I want one? Of course. Will I get one? Not on my own dime. If the university where I work puts a new budget into play, then I will get this camera. It will be the absolute best solution for what my job requires. I do quite a bit of video production in addition to lowlight sports action, event coverage and studio work. It has excellent resolution for the promotional stuff and just might be the world's best all-in-one system. The 1Dx will certainly be a contender as well.

So, personally, I love the idea of this camera and will be anxious to see how it works in the real world. If I get my hands on one I will do a post about it without question. If I hit the lottery I don't play or inherit a load of cash from my middle income family members, then I might splurge. However, for my personal work the D3s and trusty D700 are still excellent weapons. Though the D4 is theoretically the best solution, it will not change my work in a significant enough way - at least at the moment - for me to go hog wild with the credit cards. I'll update some lenses instead and call it a year. Maybe I'll grab a used one in a few years or get the new D5 in 2017.

Now, about that "Nikon will screw up the hierarchy/functionality comment"... Well, though Nikon left the D3 series alone, it just might have stirred the pot with the next tier down - the D700. The D700 is a brilliant camera. It shares a sensor with the D3 which is a good thing. The D700 was Nikon's first full frame body for enthusiasts and was setup, it would seem to offset the Canon 5D series. However, Nikon through a wrench in that thinking and ultimately produced a unique body that really didn't have any major competition. The D700 offered a respectable 12MP full frame sensor, had excellent lowlight performance for it's class, good build quality and with the optional grip and higher end battery could kick out 8fps! It was sort of like a poor man's D3. Canon's 5D trumped the D700 in the resolution category, but couldn't hold a candle to it with regard to build quality, shooting speed or lowlight ability - at least in the Mark I. And Nikon users ate it up. 

So, how did Nikon screw this great thing up? Well, if the rumors hold true, they've essentially killed this category of camera to focus more on a head to head with the Canon 5D. It seems that this class of camera is now all about resolution and video than lowlight and high speed. Early estimates are that the D800 will be around 36MP - which is insane - but will slouch in the frames per second arena and undoubtedly in the lowlight area. There's really too many photo sites that are just too small to make super lowlight all that great, but I could be wrong. I figure clean to maybe 3,200, but not by D3s or D4 standards. No one will wanna shoot it it over that is my prediction. Think studio not sports.

So, my guess is Nikon will convert the D700 to a 5D alternate in the D800. Then, maybe, they'll pick the slack back up with the D400. IF the D400 can be what we all wanted the D800 to be, a budget-friendly high-speed, lowlight performer, then that would be just swell. But it needs to gain the FX sensor to do that. If the D400 is just a D300s upgrade, then we will lose that magical D700 window and it will simply be a 7D combatant.  The D700 legend will fade into oblivion. 

But maybe the D4, D800 and D400 will make us forget all about it. Maybe the D800 will do what the 5D series is looking to do at Canon and that is whip the ridiculously priced D3x line out of business. Canon quit selling 1Ds bodies when the 5D Mark II came out. People realized they got the same performance for half the price. Maybe the "X" is done at Nikon and now popular at Canon. I don't know. But $8,000 for the D3x is stupid and has been from the onset. If the D800 manages somehow to replace the X series then perhaps it will become a legend in its own way.

We'll see what Nikon does with the D800. I'm guessing it'll be announced in February. I'd love to see the D400 along with it just to clean up the aging lines - but they'll make us wait.

Until next time, be safe and happy shooting.

Camera Test: Is the iPhone 4s a good option for an every day camera?

Since so many people are obviously interested in the iPhone 4s and because Apple is touting the new optics as the "you-can't-believe-it's-on-a-phone camera," I figured why not give it a real world walk around test against an ordinary pocket camera.

Top: Canon PowerShot SX230 HS, below: the iPhone 4s

As much as people like to push comparisons to the max, I find no need whatsoever to compare the iPhone's camera to anything higher up the ladder than a decent consumer level camera. If you want to see still and video samples comparing it to DSLRs which are dedicated image-making machines with sensors a hundred times larger backed by hardcore processors behind state-of-the-art lenses that total thousands of dollars - look elsewhere.

The iPhone is a phone first and foremost, hence the name. It features a camera. Just keep this in mind. The sensor in the iPhone's camera is tiny. This comparison with a point-and-shoot camera isn't even really all that fair because the sensor in the Canon is larger and again, a part of a dedicated product designed to do nothing but make images.

Keeping this in mind as we dive into this comparison will help make things "fair." In addition, this isn't a comparison to prove that one is better or worse than the other. This isn't a test to see  if the iPhone can "beat" a "real" camera, but rather to see how well the 4s can hold up as a day-to-day photo device. Basically, I wanted to know, is it worth packing the extra camera for normal shooting or can the 4s serve this purpose.

If I'm doing serious shooting, I'm suing my DSLR. For fun, random, Facebook, Twitter pics, a point and shoot is far easier to work with and less cumbersome to carry. If I can get this same, or very similar, functionality in my phone, that's even better. Taking usable images and video on a device that is constantly connected with social networking and virtually every other communication avenue on earth eliminates the middle man - the computer.

So, how does it stack up?

The devices:

The iPhone 4s has an 8 megapixel sensor, a fixed aperture of f/2.4 and fixed focal length lens and no access to manual controls. The shutter is touch screen or volume button controlled and it has an LED flash. This makes it very much an Auto-only device. It also sports full 1080p video with stabilization and has geotagging built in it's files.

The Canon PowerShot SX230 HS is, by comparison, much more feature-laden. It sports a 14x optical zoom lens, larger size 12 megapixel sensor and provides various levels of manual control including white balance, ISO, aperture and shutter speed settings. The lens has a variable aperture of f/3.1-5.9 and a built in stabilizer. The camera is also one of the newer consumer cameras that does have built in GPS, so geotagging is built in here as well. It has a standard pop-up flash and offers mini HDMI output and shoots 1080p video as well.

So, out of the gate, the Canon is heavily favored has more to offer. Remember, this isn't a battle, rather a comparison.

All images on the Canon were shot in auto mode at a comparable focal length to make things as neutral as possible. This made ISO, aperture and white balance camera selected. All images are unaltered right out of the camera. I just cropped them to the same ratio. No flash was used so that both cameras would have full access to rendering the image with the built-in features of the sensor.

PHOTOGRAPHS         

                                                                      

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 1/250th, f/4, ISO 250

iPhone 4s chose: 1/320th, f/2.4, ISO 64

In the above leaf images there are some noticeable differences. The Canon image is brighter and offers slightly more detail, but the iPhone's white balance is more accurate and the exposure is closer to reality. As you'll see, the iPhone offers more color saturation, which is nice for the most part, but can get it into some trouble.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 1/800th, f/4, ISO 100

iPhone 4s chose: 1/1500th, f/2.4, ISO 64

It's hard to tell in the smaller images, but the Canon does have a very slight edge in sharpness, but it's pretty close. The blue of the sky is more accurate on the Canon, something I'll mention more about on the iPhone as we go. The iPhone was more accurate again on white balance - with the exception of the blue - and exhibited less purple fringing than the Canon. This was most noticeable int he tree to the left of the frame. These two images are among the closest in the pool.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 1/2000th, f/4, ISO 100

iPhone 4s chose: 1/3200th, f/2.4, ISO 64

Again, the white balance on the iPhone is much more accurate overall. The cream stucco of the building and orange cast of the bricks are spot on in this light. The saturation of the 4s is also very good, but it is a tad strong in the blue of the sky. This saturation does bring some color pixelation/artifacts into play in a lot of sky images, where as the Canon, and most cameras, render it as a smoother tone. Even Apple's sample images on their site reveil this trate to a small degree.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS close crop of the above image

iPhone 4s close crop of the above image

Here is a close crop of the gymnasium picture from above. I chose an outdoor photo so that ISOs were at their lowest and shutter speeds at their highest to try to maximize image quality. As you can see, the Canon as slightly more resolving power, but it's close. No one would ever go this nuts on crop, but this gives some indication of the quality of image that the iPhone is capable of producing compared to a standard camera.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 11250th, f/4, ISO 320

iPhone 4s chose: 1/1151th, f/2.4, ISO 64

No, that's not a typo. The 4s' metadata indicated a bizar 1/1151th of a second shutter speed. That oddity aside these images speak volumes about how each camera rendered this image. In contrast to the building exterior above, these two images are perhaps the most unique interpretations of the same subject. The iPhone, again, was more accurate with white balance and that combined with the color saturation makes for a very good image here in my opinion. I actually had to double check and make sure I didn't label the images backward. This is a great example of how little megapixels can matter. Here, the 8MP at a better white balance and saturation produced a more pleasing image to me than the 12MP sensor.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 1/1600th, f/4, ISO 125

iPhone 4s chose: 1/3000th, f/2.4, ISO 64

Just when you thought the iPhone was going to win was seemingly without many flaws, you get this. This is an example of where a flat lens front and wide aperture can cause problems. Either way you dice it, the 4s is highly prone to lens flare in bright sunlight. This was taken around 1 p.m., so the sun was definitely high, but the Canon had little trouble. Also, without the ability to compose with optical zoom help, this could be an issue in many shooting scenarios. The lens flared in the upper right near the light source and in the lower left at the opposite corner. Without question the Canon did a much better job here, though the white balance on the 4s is still slightly more accurate.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 1/30th, f/3.1, ISO 800

iPhone 4s chose: 1/20th, f/2.4, ISO 250

In this lower light indoor situation, I find the Canon's white balance was more accurate, but I prefer the iPhone's warmer tones. The field is deeper on the 4s, despite the shallower aperture used - I suppose because of sensor size in relation to the aperture. Either way, both did a good job, especially considering the slower shutter speeds. Note that the ISO of 250 here was the highest selected by the iPhone in any test image I had. The same 250 was selected in the paddle image below. I'm not sure what the max is, but this might be close.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 1/30th, f/3.1, ISO 800

iPhone 4s chose: 1/20th, f/2.4, ISO 250 

Once again, the iPhone has more accurate and pleasing white balance. The color is more saturated and arguably more pleasing, at least to me. The Canon's higher ISO selection results in a slightly noisier image, but it does render more detail in the shadow areas - note the area between the paddle and the balls.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 1/30th, f/3.1, ISO 160

iPhone 4s chose: 1/25th, f/2.4, ISO 64

Here is an indoor, low light, backlit scenario. Both cameras actually did a really good job considering the circumstances. The iPhone's warm white balance tendencies got sort of strong in the background near the window an did throw a gold cast on the jar. So, the warmth isn't always a plus. The Canon's cooler tendency renders a more accurate image here. The Canon shot is also slightly sharper.

Canon PowerShot SX230 HS chose: 1/160th, f/4, ISO 200

iPhone 4s chose: 1/552th, f2./4, ISO 64

Again, this is another example of an uncommon shutter speed. The iPhone popped at 1/552th, which is an odd number (well, it's even, but you get my point). This was an interesting shot. I focused on the upper left window pane so that it would throw most of the tones in the dark. The iPhone really surprised me here. The metering did a very good job of rendering for the selected area. There is more detail in the stained glass and the light levels there are very good. As a result the other elements went darker, but that's to be expected. The Canon did a good job as well, but there is less detail in the window pane. Because the camera didn't meter it quite the same, the foreground is rendered much brighter.

HD VIDEO CLIPS

10 second clip from Canon SX230 HS - view on YouTube for full 1080p

10 second clip from iPhone 4s - view on YouTube for full 1080p

The iPhone got a little bit of light creeping in the left side, so it washed the tones out a bit, but overall, I like the way the 4s rendered the scene better. The result is much sharper actually and the color is very accurate. Note that the framing is slightly closer on the iPhone due to the default crop on the camera. Both were shot from a tripod with AF engaged before recording began. Both clips were imported into iMovie and trimmed to 10 seconds. No other alterations were made.

10 second clip from Canon SX230 HS - view on YouTube for full 1080p

10 second clip from iPhone 4s - view on YouTube for full 1080p

Here is a second clip from both cameras. Again, shot from a tripod with similar framing, imported into iMovie and cut to 10 seconds with no other alterations made. Note, I did have to use some optical zoom on the Canon to try and match the framing of the iPhone. Here, the Canon has the edge with resolution and there are less artifacts in the blue of the sky than on the iphone. Both cameras were focused on the flag. The iPhone wasn't quite as sharp at the flag, but rendered more detail in the trees. Both clips here are very similar.

CONCLUSIONS:

In short, the iPhone 4s is a more than worthy go everywhere option and proves that it can hold its own under all but the most extreme conditions. Lens flare is a problem in strong sunlight and the lack of optical zoom can limit composition and, of course, your ability close to your subject if walking forward is prohibited - think sporting events, museums, etc.

The camera in the 4s also seems limited by a somewhat moderate ISO max (my samples capped at 250) and there are no options for manual control. Autofocusing is rather quick and accurate, especially for a phone, and face detection - though not directly tested here - is a nice feature.

White balance is remarkably accurate and significantly better than on the iPhone 4 and even trumps the SX230 HS under most conditions. Colors have a pleasing warm tone and are nicely saturated, though blue skys can come out mildly dark and with some artifacts. Sharpness and and detail are both very good and on par with most point-and-shoot cameras. Noise is even well controlled and aided by the ISO ceiling.

Video is exceptionally good for a phone and produces sharp, color accurate and well exposed clips. Audio is on par with consumer cameras as well.

In a nutshell, the 4s is a noticeable upgrade from the 4 in terms of the camera feature. In fact, the only area where users might notice a negative trait is in the battery life. Though not tested directly, the battery does seem to drain a little faster, but the better results make up for this easily in my view.

Will it replace your current point-and-shoot? Well, that depends. If you take tons of images and battery life for talking, texting, emailing and Facebooking (ya, apparently it's a verb) might become a casualty, then consider carrying an extra imaging device. Also, if you need optical zoom, manual controls, a plethora of gimmicky settings (like night mode, landscape or underwater), HDMI ports, and the like, then you'll also want to look to make your images elsewhere. 

If, however, you are wanting a simple, convenient, capable imaging device that you're guaranteed to always have with you, then the iPhone is a talented option. It's capable of producing very good images under most normal conditions and it's ability to post or share images and clips directly from the same device is significantly handy for the social network addicted crowd.

When you consider that the iPhone 4s runs $200-400 (with 2-year contract) and that it is first and foremost a phone and mini computer that features a camera, it's actually an affordable option. The Canon SX230 HS retails for around $330 and is a camera only. In my opinion, the manual controls and versatility of the Canon are strong options that more knowledgable shooters will enjoy, but the speed, convenience, simplicity and all around excellent quality of the 4s camera might appeal to more audiences for every day use. Keep in mind that the Canon doesn't have a monthly fee either.

I've tested both cameras under what I consider real world conditions in how the majority of shooters are going to use these devices. The results speak for themselves. The iPhone can certainly hold it's own as an every day companion and the Canon just might make it's way to eBay just to eliminate one extra gadget.

I hope this review of the iPhone 4s camera was helpful.

Until next time, be safe and happy shooting.

- R

Fuji X-100 impressions

The photography world got a pleasant surprise when they announced that the X100 would be arriving this spring. Amidst all of the other big releases, it was this little, simplistic, retro unit that really caught the attention of so many people. Why? Well, even though the needs and likes of each photographer are different, there has to be something about it that's indeed a universal draw and I think that the simplistic functionality coupled with the retro styling and just the right amount of technology has really boosted this camera into the limelight.

The retro styling is the first thing that jumps out about this camera. It's unlike anything else on the market, with perhaps its closest competition being the Olympus PEN series, which doesn't go this far down the retro styling track.

There is a manual knob on the top for shutter speed and another for exposure compensation. There is a retro style shutter button that takes the syringe-style screw in remote shutter release cable and there is a hot shoe - that's it!

The aperture dial is where it used to be - on the lens. The newest lenses out there have the aperture controlled electronically. This has the aperture dial right where it should be at the base of the lens next to the body and it's marked with full stop increments starting at f/2. It appears that ISO is still dialed in via the menu system.

The lens is fast, but fixed. That means you have 35mm equivalent all the time. Because of this, the camera will probably appeal to hobbyists as well as travel and street photographers more so than traditional shooters or those looking for more focal range. The lens has a four leaf shutter that is very quiet and fires at up to 1/4000 of a second.

Behind the lens is a 12 megapixel APS-C size sensor. That puts it on par with sensor sizes in most DSLRs and up in size from the four thirds offerings from Olympus and Panasonic. The only other major small body APS-C player is the Sony NEX series. It offers interchangeable lenses and a lower price point, but it lacks a viewfinder - even an option for an add-on - and a hot shoe. There are other pros and cons that come into play, but the bottom line here is that Fuji will have a love it or hate it following as there isn't much out there that can compete with the feature set directly.

The flagship feature of this model is the hybrid viewfinder. The camera features a genuine optical viewfinder with digital overlay indicating the exposure information, EV levels, a histogram, color temperature, digital level and more. With the flip of the switch on the front of the camera, the optical window closes and a super high resolution electronic viewfinder takes over. It's the first of it's kind and it has certainly generated a great deal of discussion and from the hands-on reviews I've looked at so far, it's very good. Or, if you must, you can use the LCD screen to compose your images. (PS, if your doing this, you might want to look at some less expensive cameras as you're eliminating one of the camera's strongest features).

For a complete look at the features, visit the product site here.

The body is well built, simple and will certainly be fun for the lucky owners.

The bad? Other than the arguably limited fixed focal length, it's expensive at $1,200. You can get a very well equipped DSLR with various lenses for the same price or less and offers you more versatility. But you wont get the looks, build, and hybrid finder. And not to mention a small, easy to use, compact take-anywhere shooter.

Others will compare it to maybe something like an Olympus E-PL series. Well, you get a body and more versatile 28-84mm equiv. lens, but it's slower and there's no EVF built in. If you want to make a similar package you'd need the $350 Panasonic 20mm (40mm equiv.) f/1.7 lens and the $250 EVF adapter and pairing that with a $600 E-PL2 body puts you in a similar price point. Remember, the E-PL2's shoe will be occupied by the EVF, so you LOSE your hot shoe potential. 

Again, this is not a review as I have not had any hands-on experience with it nor will I be purchasing one. This is a look at the potential pros and cons and my opinion on where this little guy will fall in the end.

PROS:

Sexy, sleek, retro design

Build quality

Fast lens

Great simplicity - it gets to the shooting and away from living in menus

Extraordinary viewfinder

APS-C size sensor really puts it in a league of it's own

Quiet leaf shutter

Cool built in modes including panorama stitch similar to that found on Sony cameras

Seemingly great high ISO performance - see DPREVIEWs sample images here.

Everyone will be jealous of you

CONS:

Expensive

Fixed focal length

Smaller body may not be for everyone

Bottom line: Get in line, because even at $1,200 these babies are going to fly off the shelves. 

Velbon Ultra VOXi L Tripod Review

One of the fundamental components of the photographer's gear bag is the beloved tripod. Some "authoritative" figures out there on the web like to lobby for the "with improved high ISO performance and stabilized lenses, one doesn't need a tripod nowadays" theory. In my humble opinion, and of course the opinion of anyone who shoots in a variety of settings with a variety of settings, this mentality is simply problematic. There are situations where there is absolutely no substitute for a good tripod and this review will look specifically at the compact traveler companion rather than the industrial studio rail or the heavy-deuty landscape trekker's sole mate.

Criteria: I want to state up front that your tripod needs depend on many things. The two most important things to consider when purchasing any tripod are 1.) the size and weight of your camera equipment and 2.) your intended use. For example, if you are using an 8x10 large format camera a $28 tripod from WalMart isn't going to cut it no matter how hard you try. The opposite is not necessarily true. There's no such thing as "too much support," but you probably wont want to carry a 20 lbs. set of legs out into Yellowstone to mount your pocket point and shoot camera. Therefore, consider your needs carefully before purchasing your legs and you will often find, depending on how versatile your shooting and the conditions in which you shoot, that you need more than one set of legs.

I already own a conventional tripod that I love, but wanted something light weight, compact, versatile and as close to normal shooting height when fully extended as possible (50"+ in my case) for travel and street photography with my Olympus E-PL2 camera. I was willing to compromise on some features if necessary, but was really wanting to get as many of these features in a tripod as possible...oh, and I needed it to be as inexpensive - within reason - as possible. My budget for legs and a ball head was about $200, but I was willing to be flexible - a BIT - if something significant came down the pipe.

Therefore, this review will compare my ultimate choice, the Velbon Ultra VOXi L, with some competition and will ultimately look at the key features of this excellent little stabilizer.

Alternate Tripods: Whether you've been a player in the tripod game for a while or are new to the arena, several brand names are very likely already familiar to you. Gitzo, Manfrotto and even Benro have been around for quite some time and have an almost cult following among shooters today. Personally, I've worked with Manfrotto of and on through the year and love their gear. But when it comes to something as specific as the traveler companion I was after, huge brand names were shifted to the back burner as far as being mandatory. If I could find an affordable winner among the popular brands then that would just be a bonus. Quality was definitely an important component in my search, but was willing to go with an "unknown" if the product could meet my needs.

The Players: Although there are several other tripods out there that could fall into the traveler category, I was specifically looking at the sub 3 lbs units which ultimately evicted some would-be companions right out of the gate. Ultimately, my search generated the following legs: Gitzo Traveler 1541T and 1550T, Manfrotto 190CX3 and 732 M-Y, Feisol CT3441S and SB, Benro A0680 Travel Angel, Horusbennu M-2530TT, Tamrac ZipShot and the Velbon Ultra VOXi L. The Feisol and Horusbennu are most commonly acquired through eBay.

To keep the body of this already lengthy post somewhat condensed, I've attached the chart of the specs and sort of my mindset when narrowing down my choice. Several of the units scored higher than the Velbon in certain areas, but as a whole they didn't quite level out due mainly to a severely week point in the criteria or an absurd price. The later really took a toll on the Gitzo and Feisol offerings even though the units themselves had very strong marks in some of the necessary areas.

To sum it up, the Velbon had the most bang-for-the-buck out of the models I compared by my standards. This review is to help you in your decision making or introduce some players you might have overlooked and NOT to tell you which tripod to get. You can look at the chart and see how I rated each element on the list and how I came to my conclusion. I tried to be both flexible, but fair. For example I didn't even score the Velbon in the weight category as a Top 3 pick even though it missed the cut by just 0.2 lbs! I tried not to lean in any particular direction. I did however, give some leniency in my ratings. For example, in weight, I marked 1.98-2.2 lbs all as second place units because the weight was virtually the same.

At the end of the day the Velbon had the best height-to-folded length-to-weight balance of any of the devices that were under $300. And with a max recommended load of just shy of 8 lbs, I was home free. 

As you can see in my ratings the Manfrotto 732 M-Y and the Benro Travel Angel came in second and the relatively unknown Horusbennu ranked third. In fact, had the Hoursbennu not had a ridiculously unusable max height of just over 46" then I would have definitely given it a shot. But, I really wanted a normal height option and the 60" offered by the Velbon as well as it's versatility in setup ultimately won the day.

THE REVIEW

Now that I've described how I made my decision, I'll take you through a guided tour and wrap up with a quick list of pros and cos as I find them.

The above images show the VOXi alongside a Velbon El Carmagne 630 - a more standard 22.5" tripod for size comparisons. The VOXi stands at just a peep over 14" long when folded. The top image shows both tripods standing closed and the second shows them at their base unfolded length. As you can see the VOXi is significantly small both in length and width at its base settings.

However...

...when fully extended you can see how comparable the two become. The Carmagne does have more height, but for a compact unit, the VOXi is capable of running as a standalone device if needed. This was a HUGE plus for me when I was considering my options and it s major factor in going with the VOXi. It reaches to just over 5' tall with column extended!

Although not the most "ideal" option for a full size DSLR, it can handle the load if you want it to. Here I've mounted my D700 with grip and extended battery, RRS "L" plate and a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens. I put the ball head - a Velbon 41Q - at an off center alignment to illustrate the holding power of the LEGS. They are not going to tip over on you. I would recommend a stronger head for cameras north of perhaps a Rebel or D3100 or so, but honestly the legs are fine. You will get less vibration and more overall stability and peace of mind if you opt for standard legs, but in a pinch or on travel, the VOXi is a great alternative to a standard pod. It's rated at 7.7 lbs, but could easily hold more with the right head - though as usual, you are running a risk whenever you exceed the manufactures specifications for anything.

Above are the various leg angle settings on the VOXi. I removed the base portion of the center column (it unscrews) for these illustrations. These positions allow you to get lower to the ground without having to inver the column. If the lowest leg spread is not low enough you have the option to inver the center column and either rotate a telephoto tripod collar to an upside down position or, simply mound your camera upside down and rotate the image in post. The image below is an example, again with the D700 and telephoto mounted from the lens' tripod collar.

Remember, I'm going to be using the VOXi with a micro 4/3 camera, but used the D700 to illustrate the abilities of the tripod. Smaller cameras are even easier to manipulate on the unit for obvious reasons.

The platform is well designed, but only has a small thread for a head. So your RRS BH-55 ain't gonna work here. But then again, the 55 weights more than this thing! It's designed to work with smaller, more modest heads and the pairing is not an issue for the weights it's rated for anyway.

The leg angle adjustment switch has been moved over on the front leg for illustrative purposes. Doing so allows the leg to be fully extended out for the lowest shooting angle. As you bend the leg back toward the center column the switch 'clicks' and locks into each subsequent setting with needing to reactivate the switch. The joint has been very strong, quite and fluid thus far.

The two photos above are to illustrate relative size. I have short, though fat fingers and as you can see the, though small, the legs do have some admirable girth to them - unlike say, the Tamrac ZipShot. The rubber leg locks are a decent size too and the bottom lock doubles as the leg foot. NOTE: One of the upper rubber grips did come loose while shooting at the beach over the weekend. Some super glue will fix this issue. I think there is an urge to really tighten the legs when a modest amount of torque will do the job fine. I am uncertain if the issue was a result of tension on my part, lack of the necessary glue in production or the very damp conditions I was shooting in. Either way, it's not a deal breaker for me.

The unit is rated at just over 2.4 lbs, but our postage meter clocked it in at just over 2.6 lbs. Either way, it's tiny and light by virtually any standard.

Above you can see the thickness of the leg sections. The top sections has the gray rim all the way to the left. The second section connects to the first lock, then three more sections extend to the foot. The following video is a brief look at how the legs work:

The unit measures just over 14". I tried to shoot it from a low angle because of glare.

It's a bit harder to illustrate how the center column lock works with photos, so I've added a short video for that as well.

I plan on doing a quick video review of the VOXi soon (I hope - extremely busy right now) for YouTube. If and when I do, I'll embed the video in this post.

CONCLUSION:

In short, it's a wonderful tripod. If you own a PAS, micro 4/3, super zoom compact, 4/3 or even an entry level DSLR this could serve as your only tripod if you pair it with the right head. For the PAS through to the average sized 4/3 owner, you're home free with an inexpensive ball head like the Velbon 41Q - which I used for the Olympus Pen series. If you are using longer lenses however, like say, the Panasonic 100-300mm for micro 4/3 or any major telephoto, you should really consider a larger, sturdier head as the 41Q might display a bit of shake at longer focal lengths and it certainly isn't wonderful for manually focusing lenses in video mode when every bump or shake is recorded in all it's glory! But for smaller cameras and shooting that doesn't require tons of subtle adjusting or incorporate significant weight, the 41Q is plenty of support.

For the avid pro, this is a great auxiliary pod for travel or for your fun camera (as is the case here).

These legs are really brilliant. Though perhaps not as well built as the Gitzo Traveler series, it's also not $600+ dollars. It's certainly got stability to spare given the criteria I mentioned earlier. You can pick it up easily with a single finger when fully extended, but at the same time, not worry about it blowing over in a normal wind. It's fun and easy to use, packs easily and is indispensable for low light, macro shooting and long exposures. 

You get upwards of 8 lbs of support (rated - though it will hold more with the right head), 60.5" of max height, ground level shooting with an inverted column, 14" of compact length at just over 2.6 lbs. for less than $200 and that is a real bargain.

If you're in the market for a compact traveler and the specs meet your criteria, I highly recommend the Velbon Ultra VOXi L!

PROS:

Very light weight

Small folded size

Sturdy for size

Well built

Several shooting heights and orientations including a reversible center column for very low shooting

Good max load rating considering packed size

Well-designed center column lock

Excellent max height

Great for point-and-shoot, mirco and standard 4/3 cameras as well as many DSLRs

Comes with a decent bag

CONS:

Somewhat expensive for a 'travel' device if that's what you're going to use it for

Legs can be tricky

Rubber on twist locks can become loose with turning or extreme weather (super glue will fix that)

No foam grip/protection on legs to guard against dings and help in extreme temperatures

No "bag hook" on column to secure a small camera bag for better center of gravity and convenience

No head included in the price

I hope to add a review of the Olympus E-PL2 soon. I am waiting on an additional lens and a bit more shooting experiments with it first. If you are interested in that camera, check back soon.

Until next time, be safe and happy shooting!

- R

Apple launches App Store, mostly exciting...

Today Apple launched the much-anticipated App Store that offers users an iTunes-like venue in which to purchase some current and upcoming application titles. The idea is simple and brilliant - put software in a familiar, intuitive  and downloadable arena and users will flock to the water hole. That seems to be happening, so far.


If you use iTunes, then the App Store layout will be more than familiar with Top Paid and Top Free apps running down the right and side and top new titles in a slideshow-like window at the top. There also New and Noteworthy titles, Staff Favorites, etc.

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