Category: Canon

The Smart Phone Versus the SLR?

JasonLeave a comment

Lately the internet has been teeming with people fixating on the latest iPhone release, and questions are coming through the woodwork asking the same question over and over. Everyone thinks they are coming up with an original question, just because they changed one word here or there, but essentially all these questions come down to smart phone cameras versus traditional cameras. I’ve answered the question so much via email, in forums, on Reddit, and in Quora that I finally said “enough is enough”. For all who want to ask the question, I am going to direct you to this post!

Smart Phone Cameras in a nutshell

Let’s break down this phrase a bit – smart phone cameras What does this mean? It means the phone vendors like Apple, Samsung, LG, Huawei and the rest are adding cameras as software applications to sit on top of these cell phones. I’ll say that one more time for clarity. At their core, these devices are cell phones. So, on that basis alone, why would anyone want to draw a comparison between an add-on feature to a device designed with photography in mind?

The answer lies in dollar bills. That’s it – money! Vendors want to sell more devices, and if the phones can’t really be improved (let’s face it, cell phones are merely a function of the network they are on), then sales plummet! Think about it – iPhones, Androids, and the rest all must be on a cellular network for their original designed purpose of making phone calls, right? So, off the top of your head, how many cellular providers can you name? Not regional ones. I mean Tier 1 providers! I came up with 4/5:

Verizon

AT&T

T-Mobile

Sprint

US Cellular (don’t really wanna count these guys, but ok…)

I think the phone makers agree:

iPhone Carriers offered

From the Apple iPhone 11 Splash page

Samsung carriers offered

The others, like metroPCS, Cricket, Go Phone, etc. are really just smaller ones that piggyback on the major providers networks (and many are actually owned by them!)

So, don’t fall for the hype. iPhones, Samsungs, and every device out there as far as their phone service goes, is only as good as the network it lives on. They can’t sell products that way, because the experience will be different for everyone, based on the network and where the customer lives relative to the towers. So, cell phone vendors try to stand apart by their add-ons. That is the only reason why every vendor tries to hype their accessory apps like cameras, computer speeds, and media storage aspects of these ridiculous tiny devices (of course tongue in cheek when you consider that these devices have more processing capacity than what we had when sending a rocket to the moon!).

But, everyone likes cameras, and photographs are a part of our lives. We are a visual society, so everyone wants a camera they can always have with them. Naturally, since we always have our cell phones with us, it’s sheer brilliance to make the camera feature the selling point.

But the cameras are crap.

There, I said it. Cell phone cameras are crap compared to dedicated cameras. Don’t believe me? Check this out:

Here is a photographic representation of various camera sensor sizes ranging from a medium format camera, all the way down to the sensor sizes of point-and-shoot cameras, with their actual dimensions (courtesy of Wikipedia):

I don’t even see a cell phone camera listed, so off to Google I went in search of the actual dimensions of a cell phone CCD sensor for capturing images. Here’s what I found…

From https://improvephotography.com/55460/what-is-the-focal-length-of-an-iphone-camera-and-why-should-i-care/ )

So, the sensor in a smart phone is about 7mm x 6mm in physical size. The author claims that’s “about the same as a 1/2.5″ sensor”. I actually think it’s closer to the 1/1.7″ range, but that’s miniscule…

A meaningless measurement from the outside looking in, but it looks to me based on the lens that the sensor is about 1/3 of an inch. Interesting that this sort of information is not readily available from Apple, Samsung, or other phone vendors. I wonder why?

The answer is because at the end of the day, the sensor on these cameras are teensy tiny miniscule little things that are crammed into the innards of a phone, trying to get you to buy into the fact that the CCD sensor of the phone (thus making it a “smart” phone) is better than the sensor of an SLR, or even a point and shoot.

I’ll go to my grave saying that it’s not better, and never will be. Simple physics prevents it.

Lenses

If you ask any photographer the question of what camera to buy (excluding talk of the smart phone cameras), invariably, they will tell you that it’s not the camera you buy into – it’s the camera system. More specifically, it’s the glass that matters. The reason for this is because the camera is just a box that houses the sensor, and it’s the lens that defines the clarity of the shot, your aperture range, and even the sharpness of the glass comes into play. I know photographers that refuse to by Tamron or Sigma glass because they claim it’s “not as sharp as Canon” lenses. I’ll leave that argument aside for now, because the point here is to highlight that even if we were to exclude the sensor as not being as much of a factor based on this concept, we need to now look at the lenses in these phone cameras.

So, let’s do that for the iPhone 11:

That’s actually better than I would have thought, because most predecessor phone cameras had fixed or nearly fixed aperture sizes on their lenses. But a range from 1.8 – 2.4 aperture opening is impressive, as it’s nearly a full stop (read more about apertures and F-stops here) so I’ll grant that. Now let’s compare that to the absolute cheapest lens for a Canon lens at B&H Photo (I looked at the EF and EF-S lens mounts). I also could have picked Nikon, Pentax, or another maker, but I am CanonBlogger for a reason: 🙂

So, for $125, I can get a lens that goes from an f1.8 all the way up to f22? (That’s about a 6 full F-stop range by the way, for those of you keeping score..) A smart phone camera will never compete with that. Now, for the average Joe (or Josephina) consumer, what does that matter or mean? It means from a smart phone, you’ll always get images that look like this:

And never get images that look like this:

Now, with my rant over on the differences between the camera apps and sensors in phones versus the dedicated SLR and even point and shoot cameras, I need to clarify something.

Software

The way that phone cameras are able to get some apparently stunning imagery is not because of the camera – it’s because of the software. So, if you really want to compare apples to apples, the comparison should be between phone camera software and standalone software. And I will grant you that the software the developers at Apple and Samsung have done some amazing work as to what’s baked into the computational algorithms. The problem lies in the fact that it’s baked into the phone. We have no control over it.

Now, devil’s advocates will say “There’s an app for that” and sure, there are tons, but that’s not a fair comparison, now is it? Comparing a software app from a phone camera to a dumb SLR that has the sole purpose of capturing images makes no sense. So, if you want to get into a discussion of software comparisons, we can do that, but we need to make it an apples to apples comparison. Which one would you like to start with? We could start with a comparison to Lightroom, Photoshop, and others…

But if anyone tries to tell me that the hard baked software for photo editing in a phone can compare with Photoshop, Lightroom, or any of the above, I’ll… well, just don’t! 🙂

Printing

Does anyone print images anymore? I am not sure about that to be honest. With social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, and LinkedIn (and probably a whole host of others that I am not hip to), we often are looking at images through this medium rather than by prints. So, my argument here could be meaningless, but…

Take a photo with a smart phone camera. Take the same photo with a point and shoot camera. Try to print them at your local print store. My guess is you’ll be able to print up to perhaps an 8×10 photograph from the cell phone. From the SLR camera – you can go billboard and poster sized effortlessly. Why? Because of the sensor and the pixels.

You see, cramming pixels more tightly together in a small teensy sensor is going to produce something called artifacting, which ultimately translates to bad pictures when you try to print to a larger medium. So, there’s that too…but again, perhaps I am long in the tooth because I don’t know anyone who prints photographs anymore. 🙁

Conclusion

So, there you have it – the full explanation as to why a smart phone camera will never truly compare with a dedicated camera. The SLR will always win. In any category.

What say ye all, interweb citizens of the world? Agree with my assessment? Hate it? Sound off as to why you like what I have to say, or where I am just flat out wrong in my preconceived notions. Otherwise, I’m ready – what’s the next question…?

What Is Zoom?

JasonLeave a comment

A great question came up in my Twitter feed a while back, and felt it was worthy of putting together a short post to help explain the whole concept of zoom on cameras.  The original tweet asked:

“What’s the best focal length on a lens to reach 400 yards so I can see a 1 inch square at that distance?”

We started talking about different long length lenses, such as the 400mm, 800mm, and 1200mm lens options from Canon.  All were (are) very pricey and beyond the budget for my friend.  he then started asking why a 35x zoom point and shoot wouldn’t be an option.  So, the discussion turned to a teachable moment!  How exciting for a teacher!  The recap is two simple points:

Point #1  When manufacturers refer to the zoom of a lens, whether it’s a P&S camera, binoculars, or digiscopes, they are referring to how much of a magnification one can get over “normal viewing conditions”.  Notice how I put the last part in quotes.  What are normal conditions anyway?  What kind of vision is normal?  20/20 vision?  And what are we looking at?  Something 10 yards away or 400 yards away.  The point here is that there are so many subjective factors, the “zoom” isn’t really has hard and fast a number as one would think.  We can approximate sure, but it’s not set in stone, and certainly a measurable distance is nothing more than a rough guess.

Point #2  The zoom of an SLR lens isn’t at all on par with the zoom of other equipment – it actually is a hard and fast number.  Simply put, the zoom of a lens is the ratio of it’s longest reach to it’s shortest reach.  A 70-200mm lens starts with a focal length of 70mm and ends with a focal length of 200mm.  This is the distance from the focusing point to the sensor.  So, a 70-200 lens has a “zoom” of 200/70 or almost 3x.  A 100-400 lens would have a zoom factor of 4.  it’s simple math for SLR lenses.

This is a classic example of where the same term can mean different things to different people.

So, my answer to him?  Well, to see something at 400 yards large enough to take a decent picture you would likely need an 800mm lens or 1200mm lens.  You also probably need a 1x or 2x TC to really get far enough.  The problem with taking a picture at this distance is that heat, atmospheric conditions, and just the physical limitations of optics would not make for appropriate conditions to capture decent images.  Most wildlife photographers I know of like to get closer than 400 yards from a subject to take their picture, and for good reason.  The distance to subject is of prime importance in capturing wildlife photos.  Zoom or no zoom (prime lenses), there’s no substitute for proximity!  Photography all too often comes down to something along the lines of real estate mentalities…location, location, location!

My best example?  A hummingbird I shot from a mere 15 feet away!

Hummingbird in Flight
Hummingbird in Flight

A Pro Level Point and Shoot?

JasonLeave a comment

I need some help!  Recently I had the idea of creating a Pro level Point and Shoot camera review corner as an interesting addition to the blog.  To that end, I am compiling a short list of P&S cameras that would be useful material here for the reading audience to have.  However, since most of my experience thus far has been with SLR gear, I could use some help in ensuring my final selections are both useful and of interest to the audience here.  So – I need your help!

You see, it’s a given that there are limitations to the “point and shoot” grade of cameras.  You simply don’t have the same degree of flexibility – no changing out lenses, a smaller sensor, more inherent noise, etc., etc. etc.  Yet, when you take an SLR, there’s a lot more gear involved, even if you “go light”.  At a minimum, you’re likely to have a camera body, a lens, a flash, and a tripod.  So, which do you do?  Thankfully, with the advancement of the “P&S” grade cameras, the differences between SLR’s and the “P&S” category has narrowed substantially.

Pro Level Point and Shoot
Pro Level Point and Shoot

So, the question becomes:  which P&S is a good alternative for the SLR when you just want to take something and go, yet still have the malleability to capture the kind of images you want?  Now, if you ask ten different photographers this same question, you will likely get ten different sets of cameras in varying degrees of priorities.  That being said, a short list of high-end P&S cameras is always helpful to consider.  Here’s the short list I picked:

Canon:  Powershot S95, Powershot G12
Nikon:  Coolpix P7000
Sigma: DP1x

There were some others I considered including a few from Panasonic, Sony, and Olympus, but in looking at the specs of those, all had an interchangeable lens feature, which makes them more SLR-like than most P&S counterparts, so I removed them from consideration.  Here’s the criteria I am using to consider cameras for inclusion in a P&S review section:

1.  True point and shoot design (no interchangeable lenses)

2.  Cost should be less than the entry level SLR for that vendor

3.  Raw or sRaw capacity is probably going to be a requirement…most high end P&S cameras I’ve seen have this feature.

These are of course, just subjective takes on which P&S cameras stand head and shoulders above the rest, and the criteria to classify ones for inclusion as “true P&S cameras”.  As they come through the doors, I’ll share thoughts and feedback with you, but for the time being, I’d also like to hear what others think of these selections.

Can a P&S really stand toe to toe with an SLR?  Is it even worth looking at?  What about the cameras themselves?  Are there others that you wish were included?  Do you own any of these?  What have your own thoughts and experiences been?  Sound off in the comments, and I’ll see what I can to do add others to this roster for upcoming review!  In the meantime, happy shooting, and we’ll be back tomorrow!

What? You’re Not Going to PSW?

JasonLeave a comment

Photoshop World – aka PSW – has become a week-long hug-fest, and is a bi-annual tradition,especially among the NAPP faithful.  As an active and sometimes promotional arm of NAPP, I can promise you that if ever given an opportunity to attend PSW, I will jump at said opportunity.  Having said that, I’ve been a member fr nearly four years now and still have not found the financial wherewithal to pony up the necessary funds needed to:

Photoshop World

1.  Pay for the cost of entry

2.  Pay for the cost of travel

3.  Pay for hotel accommodations

4.  Pay for the cost of food

It’s an expensive proposition, which I conservatively estimate at nearly $1000.  This does not mean it isn’t worth the money, because it most likely is, even if for networking purposes only (and I am sure there are educational opportunities galore)!  Let’s face it – if you want to be a “player” in the photography world, there is usually justification to attend PSw either in Orlando (Spring) or Las Vegas (Fall).

My problem is that I am something of a one-man-show.  And photography is very much a secondary stream of income, when it even does present opportunities.  My primary job has always been in IT.  I suspect it always will be.  So, to find the time off for a traditional working stiff is tough – I am often needed, and earn precious little vacation time every year.  So, unless a company that values both my IT and photography skills hires me (Adobe, are you listening? ), I will likely not be in a position to attend this event.

As is often the case, I know I am not alone.  So, here’s your chance to let your non-PSW light shine!  What are you doing this week?  For me, I am taking a little time off between jobs actually.  After accepting an offer at a new company (I am not holding my breath for Adobe), I have a week or so to spare from my calendar (but not my budget) to travel a little, and am visiting family in both AZ and NY.  Let’s face it, family should always come first, and here is no exception.  This last weekend I spent in AZ, and coming up later this week is a trip to NY.  Maybe I’ll get in a little fall foliage out east, but not sure as the fall seems to be late arriving all over this year.

So, there’s my plans, and why I won’t be there!  What’s your excuse?  Why are you not at PSW?  Sound off in the comments!  See ya back here tomorrow, and keep on shootin’!  I’ll be back again with the August contest winner and a new contest for September that will knock your socks off!

Buying Used?

Jason2 Comments

I’ve not been in the gear market for a while, but while discussing some technical stuff with colleagues over in the NAPP forums, had some time to check pricing in various outlets for used gear, and there are some deals going on these days!  In my previous experience, used gear would go for roughly 10-15% less than the new retail equivalents.  That percentage is apparently a bit low now as some gear is selling for up to 25% off new pricing!  So, if you’re in the market for gear, check out the used market for some serious savings!  Here’s a few items I saw in just a mere matter of minutes:

  • Nikon D7000:  New = $1200, Used = $1000 (16%)
  • Sony A580 kit: New=$899, Used = $699 (23%)
  • Sigma 50mm f1.4: New=499, Used = $420 (15%)
  • Canon 500mm f4: New=$7000, Used=$5600 (18%)
  • Canon 5D Mark II: New=$2500, Used=$2135 (15%)

There’s more out there, but that’s just a sampling of what you can expect to see.  The nice thing is many of these items include useful accessories like bags, straps, cases, and media cards as incentive pieces…savings add up even more (about a 20% average in my estimation).  For what it’s worth, I used the forums from Fred Miranda to look up used gear pricing and B&H for retail equivalents.  Your mileage may vary.

Fred Miranda Photography Forum
Buy Sell Listings

What sort of discount would you expect to pay for used gear over it’s  new counterparts?  Is 15% the new minimum?  20%?  30%  What’s considered a “good deal” anymore?  Since I’ve not been in the market to buy anything lately, am totally not sure where things are except what I’ve seen above.  Those sound good to me but I have not scoured all of the internet to be sure…so, let me know if you’ve had similar or different experiences.  Likewise, if you’ve got any of your own deals you’ve noticed recently?  Sound off in the comments!

That Face!

Jason2 Comments

Last week I wrapped things up with three tips for posing your subjects better, and boy did that launch a flurry of questions…so many that I think the next podcast will be dedicated to tips on posing your subjects.  There’s so much to take into account, it really shouldn’t be that much of a surprise.

However, until then a few nuggets here and there will have to do.  (I am trying to coordinate with friend-of-the-blog Kevin Mullins to have a go at a podcast and this would be a great subject for him as he’s an accomplished wedding, event, and photographer from across the pond.  Kevin, I promise we’ll find a date here soon!)

So, the nuggets for this week are facial features – because at the heart of the portrait photographer is bringing out the beauty in your subjects’ face!  Here’s a great set of tips for bringing out the best in your subjects!  When shooting subjects it helps to keep in mind the three basic facial positions:  full front, 3/4 pose, and profile positions:

Three-Fourths view

Three Fourths View

 

Profile View

 

For subjects with round or wide faces, it helps to raise the camera angle slightly so as to look down to them just a little bit.  This elongates things a little more and minimizes the width perception.  It also helps to approach them with a pose that has a 3/4 look rather than a full frontal look.

For subjects with a thin face, just the opposite holds true – have their full face looking toward you with the camera and try to keep the camera at eye level with your subject.  Going up or down below their eye level will only serve to elongate a thin face even more.

For subjects with a large nose, it can often help to have them also face the camera directly.  By doing this, their nose will point straight into the camera to help minimize its size, and lets viewers see the rest of their pretty face!

For subjects with a smaller nose, it’s time to shift back to the 3/4 look…this will bring more depth to their face and “enhance” things a little…

Other tips I’ve picked up that are not specifically related to facial positioning include things like:

  • People Deep-Set Eyes – Point light into their eyes. Light coming too far from the sides will accentuate the depth.
  • Glasses – Bounce the light off the ceiling where possible. If not, position the subject so that glasses are pointed away from the lights.
  • Dark Hair – Make sure that the background provides enough contrast so hair doesn’t just blend into it. Hair lights or a light on the backdrop are extremely helpful. Also make sure the background doesn’t show through hair.
  • Double Chin – A slightly higher camera angle will be more flattering than straight on. It also helps to have the subject leaning forward.
  • Large ears – Use a ¾ face pose or a profile.

There you have it!  Great ways to capture portraiture, specifically when working with facial angles.  Special thanks go out to my good friend Evan Ashenhurst for sharing some of his portfolio for this article.  You can see more of his work on his website at:  Ashenhurst Photography

A final footnote – since I will undoubtedly get a few questions about which lenses are best to shoot portraiture with, my favorite is the nifty fifty actually.  Amazingly sharp and the 1.8 depth of field is to be envied among all glass.  If you’re in the market for a portrait lens, you’ll definitely want to check this bad boy out.  Here’s the Canon-mount, a steal for less than $150 retail!

Canon Mount 50mm 1.4

Did You Know…

Jason1 Comment

This last week has been kind of rough – after teaching in Minnesota on Sat., my whole time schedule was thrown off and I never really have been able to get my body clock back in sync.  (I don’t know how traveling types do that…)  That, combined with a little out-patient surgical procedure on Friday made for a lot of distractions.  So, apologies in advance for being a little hit and miss with the blog posting.

Today though, I thought I’d share a little-known (or at least not-often-discussed) tip about the Canon EOS camera line.  Did you know that there is a silent shooting mode?  To enable this mode of shooting, simply switch your camera to the live shooting mode (where you compose your image using the LCD instead of the viewfinder), and when pressing the shutter, it’s much quieter than when normally pressed!  I knew about this, but honestly had not used it in quite a while.  It’s one of those “Oh yeah…..!” moments and when reviewing some material, I came across this from the owner’s manual.  Here’s the page directly from the 40D guide:

Silent

This is a very handy feature to have if you don’t want to interrupt an emotional moment during an event (say a bride and groom kissing, a baby sleeping, or some other such occasion).Got your own unknown or not-often-mentioned feature to share about your own gear?  Sound off in the comments!  Have a great weekend all and we’ll see you back here next week!

Subscribe to CanonBlogger by Email

It’s high time…

Jason11 Comments

Over the holidays, the SLR was in great demand for the family portrait work, and I pulled it out periodically for some “street-style” photography.  I found myself instead getting out my 4 year old P&S camera, which is very long in the tooth to say the least.  So, I’ve decided that it’s time to retire the one and venture into new territory.  I am currently waffling between three cameras:

Decisions, Decisions, Decisions
Decisions, Decisions, Decisions

The G12 is a compelling camera.  The features I am liking are the LCD resolution, the f2.8 on the lens, and the manual controls over the exposure triangle (shutter, aperture and ISO).  It helps that I can also shoot in RAW which would fit my existing work flow.  The biggest cons for me are the proprietary battery, the MP count (I’d rather have 8 than 10 for this size sensor – makes for better noise handling in my opinion), and the price tag.  (Really?  $500 for a P&S Canon?  I can get an entry level SLR for that price…take it down $100 and you’d have a lot more buyers!)

The Powershot SX130 IS  is equally compelling.  With the larger 3″  LCD, acceptance of regular AA batteries, and manual controls, it’s tempting to go with this option.  The problem is that the Megapixel count is so high.  I wasn’t thrilled with the 10MP count above, so 12 here makes me very nervous.  After all, let’s face it that Canon’s handling of noise is not at the standard of the Nikonian crowd.  Here it’s also not the budget-buster that the G12 is either – a very enticing element to consider.

The Powershot SX 120 IS is no slouch either.  Saving a little more coin is always a good thing (it retails $20 cheaper), and is back down to 10MP for the sensor.  The problem here?  Saving $20 also compromises the ability to control things manually.  Frame rate is also noticeably slower too.  That’s a lot to lose to save a few pennies.  I likely will not go this route as it’s just too much being sacrificed for a minimal short term savings.

So, it’s really between the G12 and the PowerShot SX130 IS.  I think I am leaning toward the latter simply because I am not going to sacrifice as much in functionality.  Still have to check out some reviews and DXOMark ratings though.  A final answer should be forthcoming soon, but that is the upshot of where the Christmas Cash is gonna ching!  Of course, new gear is always coming out and Spring time is no exception.  That will lower the cost of entry on these current generations considerably, so I might hold off for a month – see what happens in the market to these three!

Some, of course, will ask why I didn’t consider the new SX30 or the A12000.  Truth be told, in Canon’s line-up, the A series is a notch below the SX series for a reason…it’s just as beefy!  As for the SX30, I read several reviews on it and the noise level at even ISO 400 seems high to what people were expecting.  I’m just not willing to throw money at a P&S for no reason other than “because it’s new”.

Let’s turn the perspective outward…anyone out there get any Yuletide Yen they’ll be using for new gear items?  What are you getting and why?

 

It's not the body, it's the glass! (New Canon gear…)

Jason5 Comments

Okay, while everyone is salivating (or slamming) on the new 60D Canon just announced, let’s not forget that it’s not really about the body upgrades – it’s the glass we want to invest in.  And, true to form, there are also a significant number of additions and upgrades to the Canon lens line-up that bear some discussion, so here we go:

Canon EF 8-15mm f/4L Fisheye USM lens – Touted as the worlds widest fisheye zoom, it’s an impressive feat, but not many shooters really need such a lens.  At $1400 price point, the price point will likely be too high for many to justify.  Cool factor – high, Use factor –  low.

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM lens – I believe this is the first L lens in this zoom range, and for that reason, the optical quality will likely see a market improvement.  At a price point of $1500, the reach will appeal to many, but the price compared to the 70-200L f2.8 IS will deter more.  You may lose a little reach, but you gain a stop of light.  Not a lot of reach loss for IS gain!

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM lens – The 6th in the continuing series indicates that this is the go-to lens for the serious shooters…i.e. the pros of the sports circuit. The appeal? Drop in overall weight will reduce arm fatigue. The burden? $7 large! (Call your boss to see if accounting will approve it and best of luck!)

Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM lensThe best of the best – a fixed focal length prime and the bees knees of the profession, SI shooters, NFL, MBL, NHL, etc – if you are looking here for advice on whether to drop the $11,000 on this lens, I want to know why! Buyers of this grade of optics are the companies with budgets larger than my annual salary my many multipliers!

Canon Extender EF 1.4x III & Canon Extender EF 2x III At $500 a piece it’s really just improved optics. For each it also represents light loss – one stop versus two. if optics are important and light isn’t, the 2X is your choice. Add reach and minimize light loss – the 1.4X. A more cost effective approach – neither at this price!

*****

One last thing before you go though, I know you want to subscribe to the newsletter, so hit the sidebar and let me know you want a monthly dosage of free premium content including early bird announcements, discounts on workshops, webinars, and ebooks, with user featured photos and much more!  (It’s only available via subscription to sign up today before the Sept one goes out!)