Wacom Intuos4 review

I have been using a Wacom Intuos3 medium size graphics tablet for several years now. I have long been a fan of the benefits that the tablet provides, namely the pen/paper ergonomics for a more natural editing approach that a mouse, or worse, a track pad simply cannot duplicate.

The new Intuos4 offers more sensitivity, an elegant charcoal gray finish, illuminated task button indicators, a navigation wheel and convenient ambidextrous layout, an improved pen holder with multiple tips housed within and a thinner overall footprint.

The most notable improvement is the button layout and indicator lights. Previously, you had to remember which button did what and there were only four really. There where eight total, but only four could be used by the free hand on the appropriate side of the tablet while the other hand did the pen work. The new model offers eight buttons all on the same side of the device and the blue lit LEDs to the right of each button tell you what that button is designated for - a very helpful feature. The illumination can be adjusted to four different levels of brightness ranging from off to fully bright - also a great feature.

Images are from Wacom. Click on any image to go to the Wacom website.

The other thing missing from the previous generation is the touch sensitive slide groove that zoomed in and out of images and up and down pages and the like. It has been replaced by a rotary dial with a center select wheel. This not only zooms in and out of images, but also acts as a jog dial when accessing extended options with some of the other button sets. For example, in Photoshop CS4, when you select the first of the four jog indicator lights (there are four), the scroll wheel zooms in and out of the image. When you select the last jog dial indicator light, the scroll wheel rotates the image. The wheel is touch sensitive and does not actually move. The wheel also scrolls up and down on web pages. Each of the settings is fully customizable as is the touch sensitivity and speed.

I use the default settings, but the buttons are customizable to a wide variety of settings. The default are a question mark which gives you a heads up display on the computer monitor of the button configurations. The second button down brings up a virtual navigation menu on the monitor that features options for "command," "www", "media" and "e-mail". These will give you quick access to some of the most used sources on your computer. The latter three are pretty straight forward, but the Command feature might not be. It basically gives you quick access to features like save, cut, paste, undo, etc. Personally I don't use this button. I prefer keyboard shortcuts, well, on the keyboard.

The next button down is "Precision Mode" followed by "Display Toggle". The former, when activated, makes for more precise and less figity movements on-screen. This can help tremendously when drawing or outlining in a graphics program as it slows down the pointer for more control. This function only works while holding down the button and is not designed for prolonged use - it would tremendously slow down your work flow.

The later is a toggle that can be used when using multiple displays. This is hugely beneficial. If you have ever worked with multiple displays you know that the Wacom mapping stretches both screens by default. So, if you are working on a large display for example and want to move over to a palate on another screen, you could drag all the way back and forth. This can cause problems because you effectively change the range of motion when you spread the mapping over two monitors. The Toggle button can jump your mapping between screens and eliminates this problem. working on one display and want to access tools on another, just hit the button and the mapping jumps over to the other monitor. Press it again to jump back. The previous version might have offered something a little similar, but I never used it and it certainly was not this simple.

Below the wheel is another set of four function buttons that default to your most used options: shift, option, command (Apple) and move (hand). I leave my tablet to the default setting (but increased the brightness of the LEDs all the way up) and I have no problems with the standard setup. If you are used to the previous version the button layout will take a little getting used to, but will be better - I think you'll find - in the long run.

Other differences are in the actual sensitivity area. The surface is more of a matte finish and less smooth and glossy than the previous version - which I really liked. It might take some getting used to and I'd recommend trying all of the different pen tips to figure out which is best for you. I found that the standard black tip works best for me. You get on in the pen itself and five replacements. It also comes with three gray tips, one spring-loaded white tip and a slightly rubberized tip. They fit conveniently in the base of the pen holder so they wont get lost and the tip removal tool is there as well.

The pen is excellent and is over an inch shorter than the previous pen. The grip is not as slick as the version 3 pen and provides a more secure fit. The pen is fully customizable as well when it comes to the buttons and the grip cover. The Intuos4 also comes with a variety of ring colors that can be added to the tip area of the pen. This not only gives a color splash, but if you purchase additional pens and keep each supplied with a different tip, then you could color code which pen is which. Just a thought.

The unit also includes a mouse, but I never use it. It functions much like a normal mouse on the Wacom surface. I prefer just using the pen for everything or using my Apple Magic Mouse. I put mine back in the box.

Moving back to the tablet, there are a few other features that many users will really like. For one, the USB cord is REMOVABLE! On the Intuos three, you could not do this and had to wrap the cord around the tablet when you wanted to transport it. The new version is completely separate and you plug it in when you need it. Another great feature is the ability to choose your USB connection port. The tablet has two separate USB outlets that are selected by sliding a trap door up or down to reveal the appropriate port. This is excellent since right and left-handed users can now have the SAME tablet set up. For example, right-handed users will place the buttons and scroll wheel to the left and select the upper right USB port and choose the right-handed option in the system preferences menu. For left-handed users it's the opposite. The buttons are to the right and switching the trap door now allows the USB cord to be at the top on the left side of the unit. Selecting left-handed use from the preferences menu will tell the tablet to flip the LED icons properly.

Overall this is an exceptional tablet and superior in every way to the Intuos3. Does that make the previous version obsolete? Absolutely not. But it does make jumping to the newer version more worth the investment. At $350-400 for the medium size unit, the Wacom tablets are by no means cheap, but if you've never used one and do any type of photographic retouching or graphics work, you'll quickly wonder how you every worked without one. If you have an aging Intuos3 and are considering the upgrade, it is, in my opinion very much worth the cost. If you have no issues with your current unit and don't need the increase sensitivity or the increase button layout, then stick with what you have.

Conclusion: This is a wonderful accessory that is simply a must-have for professional photographers and graphic designers. It's feature set is the most complete of any tablet I've ever worked with and there are no drawbacks to mention save the slight difference in surface texture - which you get used to. The medium version is the perfect size for most users and the unit quickly pays for itself through precise selections and time saved. I wholeheartedly recommend the Wacom Intuos4 series graphics tablet.

Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G VR II first impressions

Nikon announced the successor to the excellent AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR lens a few months ago and now the updated VR II version is slowly shipping to those who have been patiently awaiting its arrival.

The newer version promises improved VR (vibration reduction) performance, sharper images with more contrast and better color as well as the elimination (or vast reduction) of vignettes caused by the previous addition on FX (full frame) sensors.

Though I've only had my copy for a few days, I've done some very brief testing and have reported my findings here. I hope to a update this post when I have had more  time with this optic in the field.

For starters, the lens is about the same size and weight as the first generation. The new rendition is wider on the back end and carries this trait uniformly throughout it's length. The previous version was wide near the front element and tapered at the manual focusing ring to provide a narrower profile for the bulk of the body.

Click on any images to see them larger

The above image shows the previous edition (left) and the newer version (right). The newer lens is slightly shorter than the first generation and wider throughout. Overall, they feel about the same in terms of weight, but the newer version may be slightly better balanced in my opinion. I actually like the tapered ergonomics of the original lens, but it's not a deal-breaker for the new one.



The lens hood for the new model (show to the right) is significantly shorter and lighter than that which adorned the pervious lens (left). This results in a slightly less intrusive presentation and can make a notable difference when packing the lenses. The image below shows both versions of the lens with the hood mounted in the inverted position.



Because the lens is slightly narrower as a package when the hood is mounted, the newer version does make for slightly better packing. The overall length being shorter also helps in this arena. Though this can be negligible depending on your bag and how you pack your gear, it is noticeable in my Kata MC-61 where I pack the lens sideways.

Another place to note a difference in the lens hood is in the curvature of the long "petal" elements of the hoods. As seen below, the first version is flatter in nature than the newer one. The original version is also thicker and more sturdy overall. This has no impact on the hood's ability to reduce light falling in the lens, but will surprise some photographers who are prone to standing the lens on it's hood. Standing the lens up vertically, especially with a camera mounted, is not exactly good practice, but we sometimes do it. Especially if we are in an environment where lenses need to be changed quite a bit - like in the studio. One may line up the non-mounted lenses for quick access when changing optics. With round metal hoods like those on, say, the 85mm f/1.4 lens, this isn't a big deal (I keep mine on it while is packed), but for less stable flower petal style hoods this can be risky; especially in windy environments or where there is heavy traffic. This new hood really prevents you from being able to do that because the curvature of the longer petals is just significant enough to topple the lens if you try to rest it on it's hood. A word to the wise - don't do it.



One of the things I heard some of the pros discuss - when they got their hands on early releases of the lens - was an improvement in contrast, color and clarity (sharpness). They also claimed that the VR was noticeably better. I have not had enough time with the lens to comment on it's AF performance or low light VR abilities yet, but in my quick test shots, the lens does appear to deliver on the three "C"s as well as in the vignette department.

With the first generation, there was some distortion at the edges of the frame and some vignetting (dark halos at the image edge) on images taken with an FX sensor, particularly at wider apertures. Adjusting the camera's vignette correction control did help with this, but didn't completely eliminate it.

The newer version, just in my quick test fire images, did very well in edge distortion and vignetting. I don't shoot in a lab and analyze everything under a microscope like some reviewers. This is simply my feedback on real-world use. As a sports, wedding and portrait photographer I need fast, reliable glass that delivers the best image quality possible, and to me the new VR II makes strides in this area.

Below are two images shot using the pervious generation (left) and the updated version (right). My framing is slightly off, but the comparison should still show some notable results. The image of Jama (student assistant) on the right has more contrast and no vignetting. The image on the left shows slight vignetting at the far corners. Both images were shot at 200mm at ISO 400 at f/4 and 1/500th. Both images were shot handheld from a stable position with VR ON and in NORMAL mode. It was on an overcast day and there was no change in light as the images were shot just seconds apart. Even though framing is slightly off, the camera was set to center weighted metering and the images can be considered virtually identical.

The images below show a crop of the above images. The crops are exactly the same size and from the same location in the photographs. These crops were made to reveal sharpness and the slightly closer crop with the older lens (left) should give that version a very slight advantage over the image to the right, but the results show that the new VR II lens does seem to produce sharper images right out of the camera. I took a series of images at various focal lengths and settings and tried to pick the two that were most similar in every way to be fair.

The image on the right is noticeable sharper than the image to the left. This was consistent with various images taken at the same time.

Is this exhaustive proof that the newer VR II is hands down the better optic by far? No. But from my brief experience it does seem to be an improvement and produces images that are equal to the previous version at worst and significantly better at best. Is it worth $500 more than the original version? That remains to be seen from a full blown handling and results perspective, but from the preliminary results, on an FX sensor, I'd have to say, for me, yes. I shoot sports, weddings, portraits, album artwork and more, and if there is a lens available that arguably produces better contrast and more sharpness and may work better in low light, then it's worth the extra coin. I want the best images I can get right out of the camera and, so far, the VR II is proving itself.

I will likely not do a follow-up side by side comparison, rather simply remark on the handling and overall performance differences after I have a few thousand images under my belt. I'll be using it to do some portraits, action shots and a wedding in the next several weeks and hope to get another article up toward the beginning of the year.

As a side note, if you use the Really Right Stuff system, their website indicates that the replacement foot they designed for the original lens will also work with the VR II. It does slide on and lock down easily, but the new lens has a slight taper on the slide plate and this results in a slightly downward angling of the lens. This is not decremental, simply adjust the head backward, but it should be noted just in case.

As always, I'm simply one voice in a million. I don't have a degree in physics and am not an imaging expert. I am, however, a professional who takes his artwork seriously and my reviews are my opinions based on products I have personally used and/or own. I am not compensated in any way for my opinions. I place them here for the benefit of others and to offer a perspective that can be added to the comments and tests of others to provide potential buyers with a broader scope with which to arm themselves when considering new or used equipment.

Until next time, happy shooting.

- R

Pretty please Nikon...

Call me a back and forth kind of photographer, but I like shooting with the gear that best matches my shooting situations. I started off with a Canon camera when I shot 35mm film; a camera that I got for Christmas from my mother when I was in my mid teens. After my wife and I got married, we decided to take a weekend trip to Sedona, Arizona, to shoot the red rocks and nearby rivers and streams. Upon leaving town I realized the iris in my 35mm lens was hung so we went to the mall to get a new one. When we returned to our trip I had a new Nikon film camera with a few third party lenses.

When the D70 became available I quickly switched to digital for the work flow convenience and speed. Later I bumped up to the D2X and never had any issues. Then the price of the Canon EOS 5D began to drop and the "affordable" full frame was enough to draw me back to Canon. I wanted the high resolution and full frame for my graphics and wedding work and acquired a used 1D Mark II for my sports shooting.

The 5D eventually ran into a problem with the batter terminal and I had to send it off for repair which Canon did for free, minus shipping. Then the shutter went out on the 1D Mark II at about 120,000 actuations (less than half the rated value) and I had to send it to Atlanta to get fixed - $350. Then my 50mm f/1.8 quit focusing and started grinding. I sent it off to Canon and again the fixed it for free minus shipping.

When Nikon released the D300 I moved back over to Nikon. It was the first affordable camera that would shoot 8 fps (with the grip) and the noise control was way better than the D2X. Then came the announcement of the D3 followed by the D700. I sold my D300 and went for the D700.

For my type of shooting the D700 is about 95% perfect. It's about the size and cost of the 5D, has the full frame FX sensor, knock your socks off noise control, better build (in my opinion) and will rack off 8 fps with the grip just like the D300. Because I shoot sports, portraits, weddings and large promotional graphic materials, I need all of these features. If anything, I wish the sensor had a tad more resolution to offer than the 12 MP, but for most stuff it's more than fine. An 18MP would be about perfect if it could hold the noise levels that the D700 currently does at 1600-6400.

So, what is it that Nikon doesn't currently offer that I (ok, EVERY Nikon shooter) want to see? Faster primes with newer technology! We were dying for a revamped 70-200mm for better performance on FX and we finally got it (well, in Nov.). We also recently got an AF-S version of the 50mm which is a tad slow on the AF, but quiet and accurate. Now, we need updates to the 35mm, 85mm and 135mm. I'd love to see an AF-S 35mm Nikkor f/1.4G , an AF-S 85mm f/1.4G VRII N and an AF-S 135mm f/2 VR II N. While we're at it, give us a AF-S 24mm f/1.4G too.

This is one area that Nikon has trailed the pack, especially  Canon. They now offer more camera bodies than anyone else, but their lens upgrades are really coming slowly. The old AF D versions are fantastic (if available), but all of these state of the art bodies - especially the D700, D3 and D3X - could use the newer glass.

Nikon, stop worrying about putting HD video in every camera model and calling it "New". If we get a D3s that just adds video I'm going to throw up. Bump the resolution, keep the same noise control, and video then we'll bite - maybe, but adding video and an "s" isn't going to change the minds of that many users.

Canon is far and away the optics leader with regard to speed, IS (VR equivalent) and USM (AF-S equivalent). We need some faster glass with AF-S and the N features. Throw VR into the 85 and 135 and you take a huge lead even if your 85 isn't a 1.2.

I considered moving back to Canon because of the faster glass, but I'm sticking with my Nikon. I love it more than any Canon I've fired and they've always been more reliable, but I'm begging you Nikon, PLEASE give us some newer optics!

Other things I'd love to see:

D700x for $3,200 or less (I'll just keep dreaming. Even if the camera does show up in late 2010, that price is a fantasy)

AF-S 80-400mm f/4-5.6VR II N

AF-S 100-500mm f/4-5.6 VR II N

Video tour and review of Kata's MC-61 bag

Hands-on reviews and product tours coming soon

If you're at all like me you try to find out as much about new products as possible before dropping a lump of cash down. However, many of these new products, especially the less mechanical releases, have few, if any, reviews or real-life tours. Don't get me wrong, most manufacturers do a solid job of posting photos and, on occasion, video tours. But most companies have such a broad spectrum of products that it's nearly impossible to do an extensive job in all areas.

So, in order to better help our fellow photographers out there, I've decided to try and put together some short videos that give you either a first look at a product from a true perspective or a personal review of its easy of use and practicality. I don't plan on doing a lot of camera and lens evaluations because there are much more qualified professionals out there that run tests that, honestly, I don't even always understand. Besides, we all know that sooner or later a host of these sites will likely have a review of almost everything that hits the street from the major manufactures.

Look for our videos to focus more on the equipment that is so often seemingly left out of the loop. Items such as light stands, brackets, reflectors, carrying cases, light modifiers and accessories. Remember, these wont necessarily be exclusive looks at these products, but rather and opportunity for you to see them outside of the manufacture's propaganda, which is really only aimed at the pros of the item, as well as some of our likes and dislikes and potentially alternate uses. The following is a list of items I hope to take a look at soon. Note, the hyperlink will take you to the product page on the B&H website:

*The Kata MC-61 DSLR/ProHD camera bag (it's tough to even find photos of this bag outside of the Kata site and video tours/reviews are practically nonexistent. Even  B&H has only 3 reviews of the item. I usually try to add my two cents there too.)

*Manfrotto 1051BAC mini stackable light stand (this will focus on the design and functionality of this new stand and compare it with the previous version, the 305B mini stacker)

*Manfrotto 1005BAC Alu Ranker Light Stand (this will focus on the design and functionality as well, with a comparison between it and the 307B Stacker)

*Lastolite TriGrip Bracket (let's face it, Lastolite is one of the manufacturers that does an outstanding job of producing product demos for potential clients. This video will focus more on the construction and limitations of the device as well as it's ease of use and practicality for photographers)

*Lastolite TriGrip Diffuser 48" and TriGrip Sunlite/Soft Silver 30" (these will likely be reviewed both independently and with the above mentioned TriGrip bracket)

*Photoflex LiteDome Q39 XL Softbox (this video will give you a real world look at the size and functionality of Photoflex's largest rectangular softbox for strobes)

*Photoflex LiteDome Q39 Large and Medium Softboxes (this video will also give you a real world look at the two most common softbox sizes. Because they are exactly the same only different sizes, they will be combined into a single video. We will also take a look at the softbox grid as well)

*Photoflex LiteDome Q39 XS along with the Basic Speed Ring Adapter and Adjustable Shoe Mount Connector (the XS LiteDome can be used with both a studio strobe and a shoe-mount speedlight with the help of the mentioned adaptors. We will take a look at the softbox and how it works with both of theses lighting systems)

Hopefully some of these reviews will help both budding and professional photographers get a look at some new, and or different, equipment before they spend loads of money on stuff that may or may not work for them. In all of this, it really my hope that at least one person finds the information useful.

I'm slammed right now at work preparing all of the athletic graphics for the first four fall sports at the university and I'm trying to wrap up some wedding work, but I assure you, I will try to begin work on some of these videos soon.

Take care and happy shooting.

-R