How you hold your camera is so important, yet so many of us take our camera grip for granted, assuming that we will naturally hold it in the most stable way available. For some, it does come naturally, but for most of us, bad habits can take root before we even know it. To that end, there’s a couple pointers I’ve put together on How To Hold Your SLR and How To Hold Your P&S. To wrap things up, today I’d like to share a couple tips on How To Hold Your Phone Camera.
Video seems to work for demonstration purposes, so again, YouTube to the rescue:
The takeaways from the video? Three simple ones:
1. Finger Curl – curl your middle fingers around the front lower side of your camera phone – this will add stability and will help subconsciously you to keep your armed tucked in
How to Hold your Smart Phone
2. Arm Tuck – Since I just mentioned it, avoid sticking your arms out – either to the side or in front of you. Extended your arms reduces stability and tends more toward camera shake. Keep your arms tucked in, elbows into your tummy by your waist.
3. Double L – Make an L with both hands and cradle your camera phone into the corner of each hand. Position the phone so that your camera lens is on the topside. That way, your thumb (either left or right depending on phone model) will be at the ready for the trigger on the edge of your phone (don’t use the on-screen one).
As always, there is no hard and fast set of rules to follow – using these techniques will not guarantee a stable shot. If you watch the video – notice even as I demonstrated, the camera shifted slightly even in my grip. The best way to hold any camera is not with your hands but with a tripod!
There are options out there for phone cameras now too – I like this one:
Got your own tips, ideas, or suggestions for hand holding a camera phone? What works for you? Do you use a tripod or a monopod? What gear would you recommend?
A while back I teased about a forthcoming lens review (nearly 3 months ago actually, in the Teaser Alert), and after several project shoots, the holidays, and scheduling delays, I am finally getting my act together to bring you the latest gear review…that of the Sigma 50-500mm. As a word of caution, you should be forewarned that the Sigma line-up of lenses that I have reviewed has become quite extensive. Right away this should tell you two things:
Sigma has been quite generous with me in terms of making a variety of lenses available. They likely are doing this for a number of reasons, but primarily because they know that I will give a fair, honest, and 9 times of out 10, a positive review of their equipment.
I like Sigma lenses! It should be no secret by now that I do like their lenses. They are optically on par with what one would expect from lens manufacturers by todays standards. Heck, sometimes I think the optical quality even exceeds that of the main brands out there (of course here I mean Canon and Nikon). The price is almost always right on – sometimes the price tag is a little high for my taste, but the advantage that Sigma has is that they are what is considered a “third party lens”, and because of that designation, their pricing is a notch below comparable lenses made by either Canon or Nikon for equivalent glass.
So, when Sigma came calling (actually I called Sigma), with the 50-500, the game face was put on. Right off the bat, here Sigma has been more than generous because I have now had this lens in my possession for nearly 3 months! I’ve posted a few photos from this lens over the past three months, so you may see some repeated images here, but they serve the purpose of demonstrating the various settings that I have used to shoot and test this glass. Having set the stage, let’s get started with the review. In the past, I’ve talked about things in terms of Pros and Cons, listing first the things I like, then the things I was not as much a fan of. While it has worked to a degree, I am trying to make things more uniform in the review section, so will start adhering to some more concise points and then indicating whether it is a pro or a con. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the
Sigma 50-500mm f4.5-6.3 Review
1. Focal Range: The focal range is how lenses are most commonly identified, and this is the measure of how much “zoom” there is in the lens. Here, the description says it all. This lens ranges from a widest point of 50mm to an impressive “zoom” of 500mm. On a crop sensor camera, that means you are looking at a range of 80 to 800mm! By any standard, this is a pretty wide range, encompassing a difference of nearly 700mm in focal adjustments. I am going to call this one a Pro.
2. F-Stop Range: The f-stop range is the measure of the minimum (or maximum depending on your way of thinking) aperture the lens can handle at various lengths. When dealing with a zoom lens, as you move further out, the elements have to compensate for the change in the length by increasing the size of the opening of the aperture, so you will see adjustments as the lens “zoom” increases. The Sigma 50-500mm is dialed in to a minimum aperture opening of f4.5 to f6.3. So, at the widest zoom of 50mm, the lowest aperture setting you can get is f4.5. Likewise, if you zoom this all the way out to 500, the minimum aperture is f6.3. So, don’t be misled by the numbers, shooting this lens at 500mm will not afford you the f4.5 that is capable at the widest setting any more than the f2.8 is available on a 70-200 at the longest zoom. When you have zoom lenses, there is a compromise in aperture capabilities that must be met when zooming out, and such is the case here. I did some experimenting at various focal lengths, and here are some apparent limits at different zooms:
Focal Length
Minimum Aperture
50mm
f 4.5
70mm
f 5.0
100mm
f 5.0
135mm
f 5.6
200mm
f 5.6
250mm
f 6.3
300mm
f 6.3
400mm
f 6.3
500mm
f 6.3
Given the technology of aperture limitations in zooms, I would say that the Sigma is on par with what the expectations would be for this range. To build this lens for any lower aperture settings would make the lens both heavier and longer. I don’t even want to think about what it would do to the price either! It’s not the greatest in aperture abilities, but it’s no slouch either. I’m going to have to thrown an “Even” flag on this.
3. Noise: I brought in the noise consideration based on my first Sigma lens I ever purchased, the 70mm Macro (f2.8) which did not have HSM. The inclusion of HSM in almost every lens since has been a Godsend. This holds true for the 50-500mm as well. It’s super quiet and has convinced me that I will never stray off the Hyper Sonic Motor (or USM on Canon glass, ever gain! ‘Nuff said. Pro
4. Size/Weight: My last big lens I reviewed here was the 18-250. It was a respectable weight, but this is by far the heaviest lens I’ve ever tested. Weighing in at a shade upder 4.5 lbs (that’s 1970 grams for you Metric folks), it can cause some serious arm strain after extensive shooting. I would recommend using either a monopod or a tripod for this lens whenever possible. It also bears mentioning here that due to the weight of the lens, you want to support it in the provided collar. Supporting the rig by the camera can result in some serious shear force, which can rip the lens right off the camera. Other size considerations involve the length of the lens both fully closed and fully extended. This will draw some eyes at either end…whether it be the short side (8.5″) or the long side (12″)! Here’s a comparison shot with it next to several other lenses so you can get an idea of its relative size:
Another consideration to take into account about this size is the filter required. For those interested in using the ND filters to protect front elements, you will need a 95mm filter to cover this – not a cheap thing to purchase by any means. Ultimately the size/weight considerations really will depend on your personal ability to handle it effectively. For me, most of the time it was not a factor, so I’ll acquiesce and call it a Pro.
5. Build Quality: In line with expectations, the Sigma quality showed here. Their now easily recognizable textured exterior exudes professionalism, and just feels good in your hands. Given the weight of the lens, you don’t want to hold this gingerly, but at the same time, if the body took a slight bump from another lens in your bag, the “other lens” would likely bear the brunt of it. No questions here. It’s a Pro.
6. OS/IS/VR: Due to the limited aperture range, and the weight, the presence of OS is invaluable. Using the OS allows you to keep your aperture value low, allowing for bother faster manipulation and shorter shutter speeds, as well as some nice bokeh in the background when your distances are good. What was extra nice about this is the ability to toggle between the vertical and horizontal planes to control vibration in different circumstances. When I was on a monopod, I switched to OS 2 to help control vertical (or up and down) vibration. When shooting handheld, I was on OS 1 most of the time, under the premise that my own face, body and camera holding helped to minimize the vertical and thus needed more help with horizontal. When I was on a tripod, I turned it off per normal procedures for when using OS/IS/VR. In my book, having versus not having OS/IS/VR is definitely a Pro.
7. Cost: The average retail market for this lens is approximately $1500. Given the focal range, the aperture range, and other considerations thus far, it seems to be pretty competitive. The Canon lens with the longest zoom range is their 100-400 and that factors in at $1800. Nikonians can salivate over their 80-400 for $1850. Both price in over the Sigma lens, and it still gives an extra 110-150mm of variable range. For my own personal budget, that’s a tougher call because while I would love to own this lens – I would have to sell something else to do so, and am not sure I want to dispose of anything else in my camera bag at the moment…the jury is out on this for me personally, but for those interested in purchasing any time soon: Pro
8. Image Quality: Image quality is always subjective to the viewer/shooter, so here I will just let everyone defer to their own tastes by sharing a few sample images taken over the last few months:
Kissing Squirrels
Chopper Series
Miscellany:
Other features that bear mentioning here include the locking mechanism and the focusing rings. I thought about including the latter in the build quality, but decided to bring it in here for discussion. First, the locking mechanism is a handy feature to have for keeping the lens locked in place to prevent lens creep. The idea is a good one, but for this particular lens, it would not lock in the “zoomed” position, where I would have thought lens creep would be more of an impact, than in the “closed” position. Having said that, from the lunar shots I did (as shown above), the fully extended lens did not experience much, if any, creep. This could be because the lens was recently brought back from a service stop where knobs and buttons and toggles were all tightened and such.
This brings me to the focusing rings. The rear focusing ring is the one used for fine tuning and the front ring is for zoom. This was an adjustment for me as my other zoom lenses have these rings reversed (where the zoom is on the back ring and the focus is on the front ring). it forced me to change my style of shooting a little, but since I was working off a lens-mounted setup most of the time rather than a camera-mounted setup, my shooting habits were already being adjusted anyway. The last part is that the zoom ring did seem a bit tight to move. Whether this is by design or because of the recent factory adjustments, I am not sure, but it was just a tad stiff to adjust.
Summary:
All in all, the Sigma 50-500mm is a great lens. It stood up for the challenges of both wildlife and aerial photography, as well as lunar and even a portrait shot of the canine companion. The compression it exhibits at the far end (which is characteristic of these long zooms) is to be expected, but I would probably not be using this for landscapes unless I was in a pinch and had no other lens with me. Still, it could be done, depending on what kind of landscape you are trying to capture. The zoom really had no noticable effect on image quality without going into some serious pixel peeping, and thus, meets or exceeds all criteria that I can think of. I would definitely make a positive recommendation on this lens for either a wildlife or sports shooter where distance from subjects is often greater than 10-15 feet. (The minimum focusing distance at 500mm is something like 6 feet!)
That does it for today – I hope you enjoyed the review and photo gallery from the Sigma 50-500. Here’s the final results/scores I give the lens:
Category
Score
Focal Range
8
F-Stop Range
7.0
Lens Motor Noise
8.5
Size/Weight
7
Build Quality
9.5
Optical Stabilization
8.0
Cost
7.0
Image Quality
8
Have you shot with this lens? Share your own thoughts in the comments or with me via email. Likewise, if you have a lens you would be interested in having me review, feel free to drop me a line or share your requests through the comment area as well. Special thanks to Sigma for giving me such an extended testing period to review the lens, and we’ll see you here again soon! Happy shooting!
The subject of today’s post: The Sigma 18-250mm lens review! You read that right – Sigma has a lens that covers the range of 18-250. This allows you to go from relatively wide angle shots at the 18mm end to zooming pretty far in at 250mm on the opposite end. But, is the quality really there?
I took the lens through its paces over the weekend and here’s what I found out about the Sigma 18-250! In the interests of full disclosure, I should also note that this was actually requested by myself for review, and that I am not being compensated in any manner by the good folks at Sigma. So, this is, in fact, a loaner and I am required to send it back no later than June 26th. Since I will be busy next weekend, decided I should get the review shots done with this weekend so the lenses can be shipped back on schedule.
Pros:
Weight – this has a nice solid feel to it. With I think a total of 13 elements in here, it’s no surprise that it doesn’t feel the slightest bit flimsy. The weight adds a certain durability, but I still took things carefully as this is only on loan from Sigma for the purposes of this review. Compared to the 70-200, it certainly felt heavier, but I am not sure what the comparative weights are. All in all though, I think the weight is a good thing.
Noise – Excellent! My prior experience with Sigma is my own 70mm Macro, which does not have the HSM (hypersonic motor). That thing is NOY-ZEE! This, on the other hand, rivals the USM operation of Canon lenses. Compared to the 70-200L glass I own, the two are pretty close to each other in terms of silence in operation. The test I did for this was switch focus to manual, then take the lens all the way out to the opposite end of its last focus point. I then switched it back on to AF and listened for the motor operation. Sure, I could hear it when listening, but man was it quiet!
Range – This is without a doubt, my most favorite element (bad pun) of this lens. The fact that I could go from wide angle work to close up work with such ease makes this an ideal lens for things like photo walks (which are becoming more and more popular), or for just a go-to lens on a regular basis without having to switch out.
OS – Optical Stabilization – the equivalent of IS on Canon lenses. While I don’t own a Canon IS lens for direct comparison, I will say that it went a full stop faster than my 70-200mm CanonL f4.0 did at the same focal length/light. In a day and age where fast glass is becoming pretty much the standard, I would say this meets the mark.
Size – This lens is remarkable compact – standing at almost half the height of my 70-200 comparison lens. Think about that – a wider range of zoom and half the length. I can store this vertically in my bag, saving precious cargo space for other accessories and accouterments. Alongside would be the 70mm Macro, the 10-22mm, lensbaby, flash and other such items. Very tempting for that reason alone.
Feel – The signature brushed metal feel of Sigma lenses is present here and it just exudes “cool” and “professional”. No bells or whistles, no fancy L rings or anything, just brushed smoothness. Gotta love it!
Image Quality – The bugaboo, the real deal, the end result – the pictures! So how does it stack up? Pretty well actually, but rather than wax on, I’ll just share some images I took for you to judge the IQ – just remember to distinguish IQ from compositional quality! 🙂 Here’s the results…
Cons:
Weight – Yes, I am listing weight as both a pro and a con – the weight did get to me after a while of shooting on the 40D. While it’s durability is not in question at all, the heaviness can get on your wrist and forearm. I should put this qualifier out that I am still recouperating a tender arm from our move last July, which I am for the most part over, but it still flares up with extended use. So, things like shooting for a day can wear on me. Lighter is always better, but if I had to choose between durability and lightness, the former would win every time. Take what you wish from this con then…’nuff said.
Cost – It retails at B&H for $529, which is always a big price tag to swallow no matter what you are buying. Then again, when you look at a comparable lens from Canon that has the OS/IS built-in, the Canon counterpart goes for almost twice that at $1025 (and you still don’t get the same range of focus). While it may be a lot to pay on first glance, you really are getting quite a bit of bang for your buck.
Truth be told, I couldn’t find much else to nit on. I also liked the fact that they made this lens so you can put the lens hood on while also leaving the cap able to attach. Don’t ask me why, but I like that… Believe it or not, the lens also performed fairly well with portrait work too. I did a few test shots with yours truly as the subject and even got one I liked! So, would I recommend this lens? Absolutely! To see a complete gallery of photos I took this weekend, including the portrait ones, and even a few of the moon last night with a TC attached), follow this link:
Well, that should be enough content for the day (I know, my reviews are long-winded), so get out and shoot (with a Sigma if you like! 🙂 ), and we’ll see you back here tomorrow. Happy Shooting! Don’t forget – would love to hear reader thoughts and ideas for product reviews – let me know in the comments or via email!
As with most things, your camera needs maintenance too – and I’ve waxed here periodically about establishing a maintenance schedule, cleaning schedules, and the whole schmear – but I’ve never addressed the specifics of cleaning that most important piece of equipment – the sensor in your camera. As I dive in here, it bears mentioning that I am not advocating any one of these over another – just sort of laying the foundation on the various ways that are available:
1. Having someone else do it – Most camera stores offer this service for around $50, so if the idea of getting anything near your sensor just gives you the heebie-jeebies, by all means, this option is a good one for the nervous Nelly.
2. Air Blowers – These are rapidly becoming one of the more popular options as they are relatively cheap, easy, and don’t require messing around with chemicals. You simply put your camera into the cleaning mode, insert tip of the air blower near the sensor and puff it a few times remove and you are done. Some claim fantastic results with these while others say stubborn dust won’t come off from this method. The advantage of this approach is that you never have to touch your sensor (technically the filter in front of the sensor) with anything! The downside is that results may not get everything off.
3. Sensor swipes – Certain swipes are made just for camera sensors that use hydrostatic charges to remove dust from your sensor. It’s got an advantage in that it’s a dry cleaning approach so requires no chemicals. I have heard of some who are reluctant to use this as foreign fibers and materials can get in the swipe which could scratch your sensor.
4. Chemical cleaning – Pec Pads, Eclipse alcohol and sensor swipes all combine in this method to give the most thorough cleaning, virtually guaranteed to remove even the most stubborn dirt from your sensor. The risk – doing it wrong can permanently damage your sensor and the cost of buy-in is a lot higher than other methods. Once you buy-in though, the long term cost drops rapidly!
Since I only mentioned it briefly at the beginning, I should also clarify that the idea behind cleaning your sensor is actually a misnomer – all of these solutions are cleaning the filter in front of the sensor – the sensor technically never gets cleaned unless you use option 1 – sending it in for a cleaning. All the camera vendors (Canon, Nikon, Pentax, etc.) offer this service, but the downside there is multi-faceted in that it’s usually more expensive, you have to go without your camera for a period of time, and there’s shipping involved!
What methods do you use? I know some people that combine multiple approaches, while others simply just shake it out once and a while (heck, I read a story once of a guy that used his t-shirt! – not sure how valid it is, but you get the gist). Sound off in the comments with your own cleaning products and approaches!
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.
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!
As mentioned previously in the monthly contest series post, this month the featured vendor is none other than Hoodman. Their patented and widely recognized CF cards and loupes are proudly made in the U.S.A. (the only ones I know of that can make this claim), and are virtually indestructible. They have generously donated one of their Loupes for the contest winner, and allowed me a chance to review it as well. So, without further ado – here is the latest in the hardware review category for the blog:
Hoodman Loupe
The whole purpose of the Hoodman Loupe is to block stray light from hitting your LCD. In sunlight or hazy scenarios, it can often be challenging to view your screen, and even change settings if you own a newer camera. Given it’s simple function, the review aspect of this really is a simple matter to determine, does it do the job it claims to do or not.
Not only did it completely block all ambient light with ease, the Hoodman Loupe also seemed to make the on-screen photo much more brilliant and crisp than I had remembered before using it. That surprise was further mitigated by seeing how compact the Hoodman Loupe actually is – at roughly 2 inches long and an inch deep. Not only did it perform adequately, but at this compact size, the Hoodman Loupe is an easy addition to your camera bag with the minimal footprint it takes up in space.
Most rubber or manufactured products attempt to make things slick of shiny and in so doing, the product becomes quite slippery and difficult to hold. Not so with the Hoodman Loupe, as the rugged rubberized exterior was nicely made, and I was pleased to get an easy grip on it. Although easy to hold when in use, I was not as thrilled with the ease of porting. The short trap that they provide to carry it around your neck is much too short for me. Now granted, I am 6’1”, but certainly no giant, and the size was just awkward for me. While the quick release snap does attenuate it to a certain degree, the idea of keeping it tethered somehow is a little more reassuring (I have a penchant for losing small items when taken away from my body…LOL) The accompanying carrying case was a nice addition, but did serve to really make it easier to carry…this seems to only serve as a storage container for when not in use so you can differentiate it from other gear in your bag.
I did recall after using this that a DIY solution was suggested by Larry Becker, of NAPP notoriety (he does the weekly NAPP News segments and writes his own blog at Larry’s Cheap Shots), and think his belt clip idea is both innovative and and highly functional. If the folks at Hoodman made this accessory and slapped their brand on it, I’d be half inclined to purchase the entire kit from them directly.
It’s a fairly simple idea in total, and not much else to say other than – it works! The sturdy construction, and compact nature of it is perfect for any photographer who wants to utilize their LCD. For those of us with older cameras where shutter, aperture, ISO, and all other settings done via dials and the top viewer, it may not be as relevant, but for shooters using more recent gear like the Canon 50D, 60D, and 7D, the back screen is used much more to make these adjustments, so a device like the Hoodman Loupe could be a huge aid in making sure you’ve got your settings where you want them. For $80, you almost can’t go wrong! This is definitely the accessory you never thought you needed, but you really did!
Remember, this very Loupe is being given away at the end of the month, so for your chance to win this cool accessory, don’t forget to submit your BLOCK themed photo in the Flickr thread here. Good luck to those who enter, and thanks again to the folks at Hoodman for their sponsorship and contribution!
When the folks over at www.backlitbox.com approached me about reviewing the product and participating in the initial research and design of their new product, I was happy to oblige as new products that come into the marketplace are always engaging to participate in during development. So, I submitted one print for work-up, considering the line of products (images back-lit by laser lights). I chose a shot of the moon hanging beautifully over the harbor of South Carolina. When I got the product, I was skeptical at first because there was hardly any color to the image. However, when I plugged it in, the color became quite brilliant, and lit things amazingly well – better than I would have anticipated.
I did have some notes to go back to Faxon (the owner): the back of the box had no hanging wire mechanism, which put me in an awkward position of having to nail a picture hanger into the box myself, and without knowing how it was wired up for electrical, made for a potentially damaging situation. The other thing I noticed is that a thin line of light was evident around the perimeter of the box on all four sides. As we discussed at length later, this was an unfortunate side effect of the production line, with no real professional way to mask this light spill (we both agreed that gaffers tape or electrical tape would just look rather amateurish).
Not long after that, I had an idea when noticing a piece of trim molding in my office was peeling…what if there was a thin piece of trim molding that surrounded the print…this could effectively black out the border thereby avoiding the light spillage. I relayed the thoughts to Faxon, and shortly before I left for my trip, he informed me that the 2nd generation product was ready to ship and to send another photo in for production.
After sending in another image (a sunset over Folly Beach), I got the updated product literally 24 hours before my departure on vacation, and the end of the April contest series…so the review had to wait until now.
First off, let me say that I was (and am) very impressed with the professionalism that Faxon exhibited during the entire research and development process. Not only did he take constructive criticism well, but he also was quick to implement changes where improvements were desired, including not only a photo hanger on the back now, but also the trim molding to effectively eliminate the the white line of light around the border. Take a look:
The image looks amazing and I was surprised even that it was one from my own portfolio! Give the image quality, back-lit intensity, and visual appeal from this product, I must heartily give it a two-thumbs up rating, even though it is likely still in development. While most products usually are, this one even more so as he continues to improve upon the original design to deliver a better quality product to his client base. For the cost of printing, it almost is a no-brainer to consider these as part of your portfolio of products to offer clients. I’ve seen two different landscapes, and Faxon has shown me displays of portrait work and architecture work as well that have really rocked my socks off!
It’s a great product that will only improve with time, and is something every photographer should have both in their own portfolio, and as a product offering to their clients. For more information, and to upload/order your own images for production, please visit www.backlitbox.com
For those interested in having product reviews done on your own product line, please feel free to email me, as always. I do also appreciate the many requests for reviews of various products from the readership here, and all it takes is a request to me for a review to begin the process of communication with respective vendors for review copies, so keep chiming in with these ideas – it’s your suggestions that keep the product reviews coming, so sound off in the comments with what you’d like me to review next! Until then, happy shooting!
So, after years and years of advice and instruction on maintaining hard drive redundancy, and the benefits of upgrading from time to time, I finally am following my own advice and upgrading my venerable Macbook Pro. After a screamingly good deal came out for laptop disk drives locally, I went out and snagged a 750GB 7200 RPM hard drive from MicroCenter and brought it home. I also picked up a copy of Mac OS X.6 since my previous upgrade came through a friends DVD who was no longer living in the area. All told, I am in for a little over $100 – not too shabby! However, as they say, the Devil’s in the Details!
I’ve changed out lots of hard drives in my time…after all, it’s no secret that I am a working IT professional – that’s my day job. I’ve been doing that for about 10 years now, so hardware upgrades are pretty routine for me by this point – and I’ve got lots of tools to do it with too…everything from magnets, to phillips heads, to flat heads, to Torx bits for unique screws, and even a pair of nylon pliers. But all of this based on a Windows background. I’d never done much with Macs. The mentality I’ve always had though is that hardware is hardware, right? I did check out a few tutorial videos on YouTube and all the tools sounded like ones I own, so I jumped right in and off I went – until I got inside the Mac and was presented with two teeny tiny screws that required a Torx bit T6. I went to my trusty toolbelt and saw my Torx bits went from T30 all the way down to T4 – awesome! Until I noticed that one slot was missing – and sure enough, it was the dreaded T6!
A trip to Wal-Mart yielded no dice (it was getting late), so this morning off to Lowe’s I went. I did find the T6 bit – but it was in a package of other bits and a nut driver – for $20:
Suffice to say, I was a bit (if you’ll pardon the expression), a bit torqued to be missing what was likely a 50 cent bit and having to spend nearly $20 to reassemble the Mac. However, the eternal optimist, I put the positive spin on it – this is a nice kit I bought and the rest will probably go to Good Will since they are showing their age a bit. Finally, of course, the educational moment for me: I finally got my Torx in Order!
So, with the Mac now flying on a 7200rpm drive with plenty of storage, my weekend will likely be spent performing a fresh install of all my favorite apps. Which ones do you think will go on there first? I’ll give you a hint – the company name starts with A and ends with dobe! The takeaway from all this – make sure you have your Torx in order – it is definitely a good motto to add to your motto book! Have a great weekend everyone – just because I wont be shooting doesn’t mean you can’t so be safe, be smart, and…(wait for it)…
With all the talk and hooplah over things like dynamic range, HDR, Megapixels, and the latest and greatest bells and whistles in photography, some of the staples in composition are often over-looked. Focus stacking is one such area. Most folks kind of look at me quizzically when I bring this topic up, primarily because it is rather niche and unique, but it does rely on principles of composition that have been around for a while.
First off, focus stacking is used mostly in genres like macro photography, where intricate detail is needed across a range wider than what the aperture will allow for during composition. The principle is much like the layered approach to HDR imagery – where you stack layers of images with different compositions on top of each other and blend the right portions through the entire image.
Where focus stacking differs from HDR is the types of images that you are layering. In HDR images, you are compositing images with different exposure values over one another. In focus stacking, you are not changing the exposure values, rather just the point of focus. As depth of field drops off both in front of and behind your focusing point, the subject will blur. While this may be an appreciated blurring technique in some cases, in other cases, getting different depths of field from different focusing points can make for a tack sharp macro throughout the range of the subject.
As is most often the case, explaining a photography concept is best done with images, so let’s take a look at an example. For easy demonstration, I took a white cordless phone and placed it on a black background. This way color issues are kept to a minimum…
Notice on the first focusing point, the sharpest point is right near the front? It also quickly drops off into the background as I was shooting at f2.8 The low aperture number means I will have a very shallow depth of field, which is what is causing the blurred background. To bring the rest of it into focus, I need to “stack” more shots that have a different point of focus. So, let’s add another few to the composite:
The end result from stacking all these together can be accomplished by any one of a number of methods ranging from the most time-consuming of doing it manually inside Lightroom or Photoshop, and the most efficient one of using 3rd party software. While several options do exist, the one that has become pretty much the industry standard is that of Helicon Focus! Their quality of processing is, bar none, among the best I’ve seen. More on that likely later this week.
In the meantime, here’s the result of an image that has been focus-stacked:
It’s a quick edit, and done with only having focus-stacked 5 images. If I wanted a really detailed depth of field on something more important than a cordless phone from circa 1990’s, I’d likely have taken at least 10-15 images and massaged them through Helicon Focus more carefully. More details on this entire process are coming up later this week, including reviews of the Tether Table (which will be given away this weekend as the March contest comes to an end), Helicon Focus, and the light triggers from Blackbelt Lighting.
For a behind-the-scenes footage video, stop over to the Facebook page! (Be sure to “like” it and share a comment while you are there…)
A friend of mine is going on an extended backpacking trip, and space is already tight, so he approached me to see if I had any ideas on how he should go about running his SLR for an extended period of time without being able to charge or re-charge. A couple ideas came to mind:
1. First, just buy a battery for each day – not the cheapest route, but the easiest way to ensure power is had all along.
2. Second, what about renting these accessories? If he has two of his own, then renting 5 would run half the cost…
3. Another option was to get a battery grip. Here he could use his own for as long as possible, then switch to disposable AA batteries…
4. Last but not least, solar power…I’ve considered these and even saw them in REI – they were a tad expensive and I am not even sure how one would go about connecting these to an AC charger. You’d need the solar panel, then a male USB/AC converter, then the charger. And the other factor would be how much of a charge you could get off that…in addition to weather concerns. What if it’s not all that sunny?
Given the options, my final recommendation was to go with option 3. It’d be a sound investment, would actually make the gear easier to hold on to, and often more stable than going w/out. He agreed and will likely buy based on my recommendation. It’s always a good feeling to be helpful to others, but before he does, I asked him to hold off for a day or two if possible, because I wanted to throw the question out to the readership…what ideas does the audience have for my friend?
Some of the rental outfits I’ve pointed him to include:
I’ve not had the benefit of experience with any of these vendors as we have a local camera rental shop that gives pretty good rates, so I always rent local from them. Anyone have any experience with the national rental outfits? Would really be helpful to get some external input here as he is leaving soon on his trip and could use some direction. Sound off with your ideas!
