Canon 5D mark III - initial impressions

Sorry for the technical hitch - I posted this a couple of weeks ago before disappearing on a shoot and no words showed up! Here's trying again....

The Canon 5D mark II is one of the most highly anticipated cameras of the last few years. Mine arrived on Wednesday. While I haven't had much chance to piut it though it's paces yet I thought I would post my initial impressions here.

First of all, a quick reminder of the headline features:

- 22MP full frame sensor

- 6FPS

- ISO 25600

- Improved AF

- 100% viewfinder coverage

- 1040k dot 3.2" LCD

- Dual memory cards

To be honest, when I read the spec sheet they had me at 'improved AF'. While an excellent camera in so many ways, the achilles heel of the 5D mark II has been its autofocus. My EOS 3 film cameras from 1999 had far superior AF than a 2008 mark II, and my cameras were permanently set to use only the central AF point as it was the only one that could reliably lock on to anything.

So I ordered a 5D mark III body the moment I read it included the same AF system as the new flagship 1DX. There are 61 auto focus points spread across a large section of the viewfinder, and they are customisable to your heart's content. You can choose different modes depending on what you are shooting, configure the camera to cycle only through 15 or 9 points for greater speed, choose AF or shutter priority etc.. In this way it is similar to the 7D.

Fortunately there are other things that have been improved too:

Overall build quality feels extremely solid, and Canon claim the weather sealing improved over the mark II. In fact the build quality and control layout are very reminiscent of the 7D. It inherits the same ON/OFF switch located beside the lockable mode dial, the larger buttons and a dedicated movie/live view button to the right of the viewfinder. A new 3.2" screen produces contrasty images. The shutter sound is decidedly tinny however, and makes you feel like you are using a toy camera. I understand this is the price we pay for 6FPS and reduced shutter lag and vibration, so I can live with it but it does sound very cheap!

Two new buttons are the Q "quick menu" button, that brings up all the cameras settings on the rear screen and adjustable using the rear joystick, and a new 'Rate' button that allows you to rate images during playback from 1 to 5 stars. This one seemed pretty useless to me, who rates their images in camera? But my friend Toby who I share a studio with claimed he would use this all the time on his documentary shoots, so YMMV. In any case, many of the buttons are programmable and can be set to other functions if you choose - this is a great move on Canon's part.

Another nice feature is the viewfinder which now has 100% coverage and, like the 7D, incorporates electronic overlays such as grid lines and active AF points. Along the base there is now a +/- 3 stop exposure scale rather than the previous 2. All useful stuff.

The body can now take dual memory cards. You can set the camera to switch automatically when the first one is full, record RAW files to one and JPEGs to the other, or write every picture to both cards simultaneously. But unlike the 1DX which takes 2 CF cards, the 5d mark III takes a CF card and an SD card, which is somewhat less useful unless you have a collection of high capacity SD cards lying around, which I don't. It will take an Eye-Fi SD card however which may replace the need for the WFT wireless transmitter in some cases.

And finally we come to image quality. Like in the 1DX, Canon have resisted the siren call of higher megapixel counts and the 5d Mark III receives a very modest increase to 22MP. In my initial very basic tests high ISO quality is greatly improved, with ISO 6400 shots looking cleaner than ISO 1600 shots from the Mark II. I haven't yet had a chance to test colour rendition and dynamic range, but initial results are very promising. If general improvements are in line with the 1DX I was shooting with last month then I will be very happy indeed.

The new DIGIC 5 processor adds the ability to process RAW files in camera, as well as blend multiple exposures and create HDR images. I would normally choose do do these kind of things on the computer where I have much more control, but can understand that it might be useful to be able to do this in the field occasionally. I haven't yet had a chance to test these functions yet so stay tuned.

Overall the 5D is feels rather like a 7D with a 1DX sensor inside, and that's no bad thing. With improved frame rate, ISO and AF the Canon 5D mark III has truly become a 'do everything' camera. All of the weaknesses of the mark II have been addressed. Unless you need the blazingly fast frame rates of the 1DX then this is all the camera you will ever need.

Retailing at £3000 including VAT the mark III is not cheap - a mark II can now be bought new for half that amount. So is it worth it? If you need good AF, shoot at high ISOs or need higher frame rates then the new camera is a big step forwards. If you are a landscape shooter typically shooting on a tripod at ISO 100 and manually focusing then maybe not. As for me, I've replaced one of my mark IIs and I'm sure I'll replace the other before the end of the year.

Fuji X100 review

Two weeks ago I finally cracked and bought a Fuji X100.


As someone who has used SLRs for the last 20 years, why was I interested in a £1000 compact? Quite simply there are times when I'm just shooting casually and don't want to carry an SLR, but I find traditional compacts, with their slow lenses, poor ergonomics and low image quality too limiting.


For the last 18 months I've been using a Panasonic GF1 with a 20mm f/1.7 for casual shooting. While it is much better than a compact, it still handles like one and so can be frustrating to use. The Fuji X100 was appealing because:
- it has mechanical controls for aperture, shutter speed an exposure compensation
- it has a proper optical viewfinder


Initial reviews were very critical of the firmware, but since Fuji made a major update a month ago that appeared to solve many of the issues, I decided to take the plunge. 2 weeks in and what do I think?


More after the jump:




The good

First impressions are excellent. It is pretty to look at and very well made, with a fine metal body and beautifully damped manual controls. The shutter speed dial and aperture ring click reassuringly through their stops, and the optical viewfinder is clear and bright with a cleverly superimposed frameline and exposure information around the edges.


Ergonomically the shooting controls of the X100 are very good. The aperture ring around the lens is easily controlled by your left forefinger and thumb, while the shutter speed dial can be set by feel with the camera to your eye. If you are using shutter or aperture priority there is a handily placed exposure lock button under your right thumb, and the exposure compensation dial clicks positively, It too can easily be set with the camera to your eye and and presents information on how it is set in the viewfinder.


There is a programmable button that sits under your right index finger that can be set to ISO, so you can quickly change your ISO setting. There is also an excellent Auto ISO setting where you can select the maximum ISO and minimum shutter speed you are comfortable with.


The X100 is primarily an autofocus camera, and a pair of overlapping rectangles in the viewfinder show the selected focus point, which flashes green when focus is locked. This pair of rectangles can be set in the menu system and are required to account for the parallax error between the viewfinder and the lens at close distances. It works very well. The focus point can be changed by holding down the AF button with your right thumb and using the 4 way scroll wheel with your right thumb. After a bit of practice it is quite easy to do while looking through the viewfinder. There are focus points across most of the frame.


And when you download the images to your computer, prepare to be astounded. This thing is SHARP - even at f/2 and especially so at f/2.8 and higher. And noise is extremely well controlled at high ISOs. 1600 is excellent and 3200 is perfectly usable if the exposure is bang on. This is as good as a high end SLR. Sure it might be 12MP rather than the 21MP of my Canon 5D mark IIs, but in every other way it is at least as good.


So far so good - this is all exactly what I was hoping for. However, it's not all plain sailing.


The not so good

Autofocus speed is not great and it sometimes locks onto the background rather than what I intended. I don't expect it to be super snappy, but something as fast as my GF1 would have been much better. Instead autofocus can feel a bit slow and deliberate. It also doesn't focus particularly close -  around 50cm - and there are often times I wish I could fill the frame a bit more with my subject. It will focus much closer using the electronic finder, but I didn't buy this camera to use an electronic finder.

And in very low light when any autofocus system will struggle, manual focus is very slow and frustrating to use. For whatever reason Fuji chose not to have a traditional manual focus ring on the lens, instead opting for an electronic focus ring. This in itself is not a great problem, my GF1 works the same way. But the focus ring on the GF1 takes an enormous number of turns to shift the focus even slightly, making it all but pointless in normal use.

Then there is a slightly fiddly wheel on the back for scrolling through images and menu settings, as well as selecting flash mode, white balance, macro and drive modes. Most of these things I don't use very often, but it does make it all feel a bit like using a digital compact and is in direct conflict with the lovely controls and ergonomics on the rest of the camera.

Next up, some of the digital controls are less than ideal and sometimes seem unnecessarily complex. For example there is a button for cycling through using the optical finder, the rear screen or both. A sensor will then switch between the two depending on whether you have it to your eye or not. Then there is a second button to cycle through what information is shown in the viewfinder and on the rear screen. The various combinations between these two buttons interact with each other and take a bit of getting used to.

Another example is that if you set the camera to automatically review images after they are taken, it will display them in the viewfinder when you are in viewfinder mode - which is totally pointless, and interrupts your shooting. So I have this set to off, and just review images on the rear screen when I press the Play button.


Finally, when you fit the the accessory lens hood (£80 extra, although there are knock offs available on ebay already) the lens cap and leather case no longer fit, which is just daft.


Conclusion

So after all that what's it actually like to use? In a nutshell - the good far outweighs the bad.


The actual shooting controls of the X100, the ones you use all the time, are a pleasure to use. Shutter and aperture controls fall nicely to hand, and the viewfinder is a joy to use. Autofocus is a bit pedestrian and I do sometimes miss shots from it, but most of the time it does a decent enough job. And finally, the images that come out of it are just lovely.


Many reviews have commented on how the X100 harks back to the golden age of rangefinders in the 1960s. However I don't think think that is quite correct and explains why some users are more frustrated with it than others. The X100 has been designed from the outset to be an autofocus camera, and should be used that way. Manual focus is an afterthought at best, and in that regard is more similar to a Contax G2. With a 35mm f/2 mounted the G2 even looks almost identical.


The acid test? I take the camera with me almost everywhere and shoot with it all the time. It's simply great fun to use, which is what a camera should be. So from that perspective it's a great success. Sure, I hope Fuji will go on to produce an X200 in a year or two and correct all of the flaws in the X100. However I also hope the success of the camera (a few months after release and supply is still limited) will encourage other camera manufacturers to develop high quality cameras with manual shooting controls for the enthusiast market. After all I'm still waiting for Nikon to build me an FM3D...

Pros:

- excellent manual aperture, shutter speed and exposure compensation controls

- bright and clear optical viewfinder

- sharp f/2 lens

- superb image quality, even at high ISOs

- beautiful styling and excellent build quality

- great fun to use

Cons:

- auto focus is a bit slow and doesn't always focus on what you expect

- doesn't focus very close when using the optical viewfinder

- manual focus is almost impossible

- rather fiddly digital controls

- using the lens hood means the lens cap and leather case don't fit

Overall - better than anything else available in the 'large sensor compact' market

Compared to the Panasonic GF1

For the last 18 months or so I've been using a Panasonic GF1 with a 20mm f/1.7 lens. It's a similar size, has a similar lens, and also has a large sensor in a small body. So how does it measure up to the Fuji which costs twice the price?

When it was released at the end of 2009 the GF1, along with the similar Olympus Pen EP1, filled a gap in the market. They provided a large-ish sensor in a compact body with fast prime lenses. This was exactly the kind of camera I wanted for casual use, so I picked one up. However I soon realised how much I missed having an optical viewfinder, and the slipperiness of the body made it tiring to hold in my hand for long periods.


To overcome these issues I pimped up my GF1 to include the optical viewfinder from the Olympus Pen - the field of view is about right for the 20mm lens, and I used some fine sandpaper to take off the silver finish leaving it black to match the camera. I also fitted it with Panasonic's half leather case which gave it a much better feel in the hand and made it easier to grip.


However, the optical finder accessory is far from ideal:
- it has a very soft plastic shoe, so it easily gets knocked out of alignment while in your bag causing me to misframe shots.
- it obviously does not show any exposure information so the rear screen is still necessary to check your aperture and shutter speed, recommended exposure and focus point
- it makes the camera taller and bulkier


And when you do make changes to your aperture or shutter speed, you have to use a single tiny wheel under your right thumb that you have to click to switch between one and the other, and look at the rear screen to see what you have selected.


So the ergonomics of the GF1 are seriously compromised compared to the Fuji X100. It handles like a high-end compact as opposed to a fully featured camera.


But what about image quality? While image quality from the GF1 is certainly a lot better than a compact camera, it is simply not in the same league as the X100. The 20mm lens is very sharp when stopped down just a little, and at low ISOs noise is well controlled. But by ISO 800 noise is very apparent, and ISO 1600 is very noisy indeed. At this speed the images lose much of their fine detail and and colours become muddy. Given the situations I tend to use these cameras, high ISO shooting is important to me.


The GF1 does have some advantages - AF speed is superior and it takes interchangeable lenses. The first is indeed a genuine benefit, but the second is not that important to me for this kind of camera.


So despite it's quirks, the X100 is a better camera for what I use it for.

Canon 200-400mm f/4 IS with built in 1.4x extender

Ever since I started using Canon cameras over a decade ago, one of the key attractions of the system was the huge variety of lenses available. Need a fast, wide prime? Pick a 24/1.4 or 35/1.4, or if budget doesn't allow get their cheaper f/2 or f/2.8 brethren. Need a telephoto zoom? Take your pick from the 70-200/2.8 IS, 70-200/4 IS, 70-300/5.6 DO and the cheap and cheerful 70-300/5.6 IS. If you need them there are also the speciality lenses such as the 24, 45 and 90mm TSE, the super-fast 50/1.2 and 85/1.2 and the full range of super telephotos all the way up to the monster 800/5.6.


Nikon have only recently updated their line to include a 24/1.4 and a full set of TSE lenses, and they still don't offer anything as fast as Canon's brace of f/1.2 primes. But if there is one lens that has caused some envy over last few years it is Nikon's well regarded 200-400 f/4 VR. It covers a very useful zoom range for sports and wildlife photographers with a reasonably fast aperture, and is pin sharp to boot. In fact Nikon released an updated version last year with better coatings and improved VR.

Canon have at last announced their own version of this lens - a 200-400 f/4 IS USM - but have upped the ante with a dedicated 1.4X teleconverter built in. The extender will allow the lens to act as a 280-560 f/5.6 when required. Many photographers are wary of using teleconverters as you do typically lose some sharpness - this is certainly the case with my 2X extender when used with my 70-200/4 IS. The advantage of having the extender built in is it can be optimised for that specific lens and so minimise the loss in sharpness.


We'll have to wait and see how successful Canon have been in achieving this, but if they pull it off I can see this being an extremely popular lens among sports and wildlife pros. I rarely need to shoot anything longer than 200mm, so I'll probably just stick to my 70-200 f/4 IS and pull out the teleconverter occasionally. But for people who a regularly working at these focal lengths I'm sure it will be a hit.

Canon's new 70-300 L zoom

Back in august Canon announced a slew of new lenses, including updates to their super telephoto range and the remarkable 8-15mm fisheye zoom. But the lens that held the most interest for me as a travel and outdoor photographer was the 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L IS.


I currently use the 70-200 f/4L IS, and I used to use the non-IS version before that. It is pin sharp even wide open, and with today's cameras producing clean shots at ISO 800 or even 1600, I'm more than happy to trade a stop of aperture for a lens that is half the size and weight of it's enormous f/2.8 cousin. All in all, I'm a fan.


The new 70-300 L is therefore pretty interesting. You get 100mm more reach at the long end, at the cost of up to a stop of aperture and 300g extra weight. It's also a bit shorter, which helps.


I played with the lens at Photokina at the end of September, but for me it's a bit too heavy and bulky and doesn't offer enough of a benefit over the 70-200 for me to replace it. So the 70-200 f/4 will still hold it's place in my camera bag as the ideal telephoto zoom for travel and location work.


Anyway, for those who want to know more about it Canadian snowsports photographer Dan Carr recently posted a detailed review on his blog. You can read it here.

A 'traditional' digital camera at last - the Fuji X100

The run up to Photokina, the world's largest photography trade show, is always proceeded by product announcements from all the major camera manufacturers. But this is the first one this year to get me excited - the Fuji X100.

It's a traditionally-styled rangefinder camera with a 12MP APS-C sensor and a fixed 35mm f/2 lens. It has a manual shutter speed dial, aperture ring and exposure compensation dial, is small and compact, and is almost the antithesis of every other digital camera on the market - with the exception of the ridiculously priced Leica M9 and X1.

It also has a cleverly designed viewfinder - a hybrid rangefinder and high-res electronic live view finder with the ability to switch between the two. You can have the optical finder with a histogram superimposed, or use the 1.4MP electronic finder for through-the-lens viewing. If it works as well as described it should be perfect.

I spent many years shooting with manual Nikons in my early days, first the FE2 and later the FM3A. I sold them when I went over to Canon digital cameras, but I've been on the verge of buying another one over the last month or two to be my 'fun' camera, as I just miss the beautiful feel and operation of a manual camera. I have kept on hoping that Nikon might release a digital version - an "FM3D" - sometime, but so far have been disappointed.

Although it won't hit the shelves until 'early 2011', Fuji are to be applauded for breaking the mould and producing a really distinctive camera. Being a premium niche product I'm sure it's not going to be cheap, but if the ease of operation and image quality are up to the mark then I will almost certainly be buying one.

And, if the X100 sells well, then maybe Nikon will develop that FM3D I've been hankering after.

New Profoto ActuteB 600 AirS

Having just finished writing up my experiences of using Elinchrom's Ranger Quadra light weight 400ws battery flash, Profoto have struck back by announcing an upgrade to the 600ws AcuteB 600 - the new Profoto AcuteB 600 AirS.

The new model has a Lithium Iron (LiFe) battery that reduces the weight by over a kilo and increases the capacity from 160 to 200 flashes. Contrary to the fears raised in my Quadra review, the lithium batteries have been certified safe or air travel. The new pack also integrates Profoto's new Air system to allow for wireless triggering and power control. These improvements now make it a formidable competitor to the Quadras I reviewed earlier.

In a nice bit of design, the new LiFe batteries will work in the old AcuteB generators and the  the old lead-acid batteries will work in the new AirS generators - so people with the older model can mix and match as they like. You can also use them while they are recharging (note - the Quadras may also do this, I'm not sure).

So to update my previous comparison between the Quadra and the AcuteB:

Profoto AcuteB Pros:
- Half a stop more power (600ws versus 400ws for the Quadra)
- More flashes (160 at full power versus 100) - now 200 flashes versus 100
- Faster recycling (1 sec versus 2 secs at 400ws)
- Takes all existing profoto modifiers without an adapter


Profoto Acute B Cons:
- Bulkier and heavier (nearly 8kg for a pack/cable/head versus 5kg) - now only 6.5kg
- No ability to adjust output wirelessly - now has ProAir integration
- More expensive


So while it is still heavier and bulkier, the gap has reduced considerably, and you get the advantages of 50% more power and twice the battery life. If you throw in a spare battery for the Quadra to make it able to equal the AcuteB's 200 flashes, then the weight and bulk of the two systems are essentially equal while you still get to enjoy the extra power of the Profoto.


I typically rent my gear, but if I was in the market for a battery flash system right now then I'm pretty sure these would be at the top of my shopping list. Read an FAQ about them here.


If you need more power
In a related note, Profoto has also upgraded the B2, the AcuteB's bigger brother, with a new 1200ws unit called the Profoto B3 1200 AirS. Featuring the same new LiFe battery technology and ProAir integration, this is certainly going to be a welcome upgrade from the old 7b and B2 for those who need the extra power. The Elinchrom Ranger Speed AS, the 1100ws top-of-the-range big brother to the Quadra, is looking a bit  stale compared to this.

Thoughts on the Elinchrom Ranger Quadra

**Just updated with a few more details and some corrections**


On my recent shoot in Switzerland I used 2 of the relatively new Elinchrom Ranger Quadra battery powered flash units. As there is not that much information around on them I thought I would share my impressions here. 

First of all, a bit of background. All my shoots are done on location, and I usually work with just one assistant. Taken together these two facts means my kit has to be lightweight and as portable as possible. Traditional battery pack flashes are large and heavy - a single Profoto 7b or Elinchrom Ranger (big brother to the Quadra) setup will weigh in at 12-15kg. In comparison, the Quadra is only 5kg all up - pack, cable and head. Because of the light weight, it is also possible to use a light weight stands, which save you another kilo or so.

So what are the Quadras like to use? 

Firstly, they are small, and the heads are in fact tiny. 2 packs, 2 heads and 2 spare batteries will easily fit in a Lowepro Photo Trekker backpack with room to spare for a camera body and a couple of lenses. Build quality of the packs is quite good, if not as bullet proof as a Ranger or Profoto 7b. The heads are rather flimsy however, with the reflectors built of quite thin metal that bends easily.


Secondly, the heads are not supplied with any covers for the flash tubes, which makes travelling with them a bit nerve wracking. Luckily we didn't break any but I wouldn't be surprised if they would break occasionally in regular use unless you treat them with kid gloves. UPDATE - I've just been told that they are now shipping with a cover for the flash tube so it looks like this has now been addressed (thanks Dave T.)

So just how powerful are they?

The Elinchrom Ranger Quadra is rated at 400ws. That's about a stop and a half less than its 1100ws big brother, the full size Ranger, and the 1200ws Profoto 7b or Profoto B2. How much more powerful is it than a speedlite? Well, one of the problems in comparing battery flashes with hotshoe flashes is their power is rated differently. Battery flashes are measured in watt seconds, while hotshoe flashes use a guide number. The easiest way to know for sure is to test them, which is what I did.

I ran a quick test of the Quadra versus a Canon 580 EX II and a Nikon SB28. I set them up at a distance of exactly 3m from an evenly textured wall and varied my aperture until they provided the same level of illumination, as judged by the histogram on the back of the camera. All were on freshly charged batteries and at full power. I got the following results at 24mm on a full frame 5D mark II at ISO 100:

- Elinchrom Quadra with standard reflector: f/13 with even illumination across the frame
- Canon 580 EXII zoomed to 24mm: f/8 with even illumination across the frame
- Nikon SB28 zoomed to 24mm: f/6.3 with significant light falloff on the edges of the frame

So the Quadra is about 1.3 stops more powerful than a 580 EXII, and about 2 stops more powerful, and with much more even coverage, than an SB28. But in all cases the Quadra recycles much faster - a speedlight on full power takes over 5 seconds to recharge, where the Quadra takes just 2.


Modifiers


One of the big advantages of battery flashes over speedlites is the range of light modifiers available. The Quadra heads have a built-in mount for a shoot through umbrella, and Elinchrom also make a 40cm soft box for them. Using a relatively lightweight adapter you can also attach any of Elinchrom's other modifiers for their larger heads, including the highly rated octaboxes.


I only had the chance to use them with shoot through umbrellas, but the mounting system is quick and easy, you just slide them in. Be advised all Elinchrom brackets use the non-standard 7mm shaft, so you need brollies especially designed for Elinchrom.

OK, fine. But how do they perform in the real world? 

Unlike a speedlite, the Quadras do have enough power to work as key or fill light on a reasonably sunny day, even when shot though an umbrella. Here's an example shot in cloudy bright light. With the pack on half power (200ws) the flash head was being held on a boom and being shot through an umbrella about 2m above and in front of the subjects. Recycle time is less than 1 sec.

The highlight on the right side of the models' faces is from the sun. The illumination on the rest of their faces is all fill light from the flash/umbrella combo. By way of comparison, here is a similar shot taken without the flash as I fired before it had recharged:

To do this with a speedlight would have required full power and about 5 seconds recharge between shots - way too slow for me. And if the sunlight had been any stronger I would not have been able to balance it unless I shot without an umbrella, giving harsh, unnatural looking light.

Shooting lifestyle images like these requires a lot of shots. Once you set up the initial parameters, the models have to interact with one another while you shoot away to try can catch a natural moment. With a fresh battery the recycle time starts off at around 1 second, but it rapidly increases as the battery loses charge. In fact after about 80 shots the recharge was so slow (4 secs plus) that we needed to change batteries. So plan on carrying spares for a day of shooting.


Wireless control


Another thing to mention is the Quadras have Elinchrom's wireless Skyport system built in, so you can adjust the power of the flash from on camera, using a small device that sits in the hotshoe. It is much smaller than a Pocket Wizard Plus II (which is what I normally use), and allows wireless power adjustment of multiple groups, not just triggering, which is pretty neat. When working with an assistant it's not quite as important, but when working alone this would be a really handy feature.


The competition
So what other choices are there out there? As far as I am aware, the only other lightweight battery pack from a major manufacturer is the Profoto AcuteB 600. I've used these packs a few times, and here are their main pros and cons versus the Quadra:

Profoto AcuteB Pros:
- Half a stop more power (600ws versus 400ws for the Quadra)
- More flashes (160 at full power versus 100)
- Faster recycling (1 sec versus 2 secs at 400ws)
- Takes all existing profoto modifiers without an adapter

Profoto Acute B Cons:
- Bulkier and heavier (8kg for a pack/cable/head versus 5kg)
- No ability to adjust output wirelessly (no ProAir integration, while the Quadra has Skyport)
- More expensive

So it's a bit of a mix up which is better - it depends on what you are looking for. Overall though I was very happy with the Elinchrom Ranger Quadras. What I would like to see is a longer lasting battery - Lithium Ion anyone? (or maybe not - see the comments from Dan Carr below), more sturdy reflector and a cover for the flash tube when travelling (looks like they've fixed this now).


Otherwise I think Elinchrom are on to a winner.

Here are a few other people's thoughts on the Quadras:
- Drew Gardener
- Simon Keitch
- Neil Turner, part 1 and part 2

- Zack Arias - comparison with other options (thanks Dave!)

What goes in the bag? Packing for a commercial shoot.

I'm leaving this morning for Switzerland, where I will be on a 5-day brochure shoot for a luxury holiday company. As I'm spending today testing and packing all the gear, I thought I would share with you how I prepare and pack for a shoot like this.


First up is to create a pack list. I have a template that I use for this that basically covers all the kit I own, and then I simply strike off items that I know I won't need and add any gear I will be renting, until I have a customised pack list for the shoot.


As I pack the gear I tick off the list. This way it makes it (almost!) impossible to forget something. There's nothing worse than arriving on location and finding you forgot to bring a battery charger or some other vital bit of kit.


For my commercial shoots I often rent additional lighting gear. For this shoot I've rented two Elinchrom Ranger Quadra kits - I've mentioned them here before but they are essentially very lightweight battery flash units. Given that we will have to be skiing with the gear to get to several of the locations, small and light weight are very important.


The packs and heads are so small that a couple of them will easily for within a mid-size photo backpack, and at 400ws they punch out a lot more light that hotshoe flashes. This is the first time I've used them on a real shoot, so I'll be writing a review of them when I get back.


I'll then be taking my usual gear - 2 Canon 5D mark II bodies, a set of L-series zooms,  some backup Speedlites and Pocket Wizard radio triggers, a tripod and some light weight light stands. For most of the shots we'll be shooting to a laptop using the WFT-E4 wireless transmitter, so I'll also be packing the MacBook Pro, a couple of Lacie Rugged external hard drives, and a Sandisk Firewire 800 card reader.


Add on the usual bits and pieces such as sensor cleaning kit, various power cables and adapters etc, and even for a relatively straight forward shoot such as this you end up with quite a lot of kit.


So how will we be packing it? I'm a big fan of rolling bags, and often use the Lowepro Roller. But given that we will be skiing with our gear, it has to fit in backpacks. In this case we'll be taking a Lowepro Photo Trekker and a Dakine Sequence. The Photo Trekker will take all the lighting gear and will be carried by my assistant, while the Sequence will take all the camera gear and will be carried by me. Additional kit such as light stands will go in a separate bag. 


So here it all is, ready to go:

Apple strikes back: Aperture 3 is here

Apple have just launched Aperture 3, the latest version of their image management and editing suite. Back when it came out in 2006, Aperture was the first all-in-one photo management suite, including an image library, a RAW converter and web and print output options.

It seems hard to remember back then, but prior to the release of Aperture, digital photographers were having to use a whole suite of apps to manage, develop and edit their photos, such as iView (now Microsoft Expression Media) for cataloguing and keywording, Adobe Camera Raw for RAW conversions, and Photoshop for printing.

Although version 1 was flawed in some respects, it clearly showed the way for photographer centric applications, and by Version 1.5 released 6 months later, it was a well rounded application which I began using.

Clearly caught on the back foot, Adobe quickly made their beta version of Lightroom publicly available, and released it onto the market a few months after Aperture 1.5. At the time there was little to chose between them, but since then Aperture has seemed to be a bit of a hobby for Apple, while Adobe has gone on to aggressively develop Lightroom including killer features such as localised image adjustments and improved web and print output facilities. These features, along with the sluggish performance of Aperture 1.5, were enough to make me switch over to using Lightroom.

However one key area Adobe has not addressed is video. With most DSLRs now capable of shooting HD video, many photographers, myself included, are starting to shoot it more often. As far as Lightroom is concerned, it behaves as if your video files do not exist. While I do not expect to be able to edit video in Lightroom, the fact that it will not even simply copy video files off my memory card when I am importing photos is rather annoying, forcing me to go back to the Finder and drag them over myself.

Now Aperture 3 has been released, and not only does it include localised adjustment brushes similar to LR, it also handles video, including import, scrubbing, and combining with stills. For me this is a big deal, and will simplify my workflow enormously.

Just as localised adjustment brushes in Adobe Lightroom 2 greatly reduced the number of times I needed to take images into Photoshop, the video features in Aperture 3 should mean my copy of Final Cut Express gets very little use from now on. I was invited to pitch for a job at the end of last year that required stills and video to be combined, and this would have been just the trick.

So let's see. I've just downloaded the Aperture 3 trial. I'll report back on my findings here once I've had a good look around over the next few weeks.

Canon 550D announced

Canon have announced a new entry-level camera, the 550D, sporting a 18MP 1.6 crop sensor very similar to the mid-range 7D but in a smaller, less robust package.

Key features include:

- 18 Megapixel APS-C CMOS sensor

- DIGIC 4 processor with ISO 100-6400 (Expansion to 12800)

- Continuous shooting at 3.7fps

- Full HD movie recording with manual control and selectable frame rates

- 7.7cm (3.0”) 3:2 Clear View LCD with 1,040k dots

- iFCL metering System with 63-zone Dual-layer Metering Sensor

- Quick Control screen to change shooting settings

- Exposure compensation +/-5 stops.

- Select maximum value for Auto ISO

- External Microphone socket

- Movie crop function

Key differences from the 7D appear to be:

- Entry level plastic body - no rear control dial and not weather sealed

- Frame rate of 3.7 fps instead of 7 fps

- Built-in pop up flash cannot act as a master controller for off-camera speedlites

- 9-point autofocus system borrowed from the 30D, rather than the new system from the 7D.

However, for those looking to get into DSLR movie making on a budget, this would look like an excellent choice, featuring the same full 1080 video in 30/25/24 FPS as the much more expensive 7D. More info at Canon with opinion over at Rob Galbraith and DP Review. For the video perspective see Phillip Bloom.

Canon's latest compared

Canadian ski photographer Dan Carr has a useful post comparing the three most recent high end Canon cameras, especially in how well they are suited for sports photography and video. Head over here to read his insights on the 5D mark II versus the 7D versus the brand new 1D mark IV.

Lightweight battery flash review

One of the challenges of shooting outdoor sports such as skiing and hiking is that you have to carry all of your gear with you on location. So if you don't want to have back ache at the end of the day it is important to travel with lightweight kit. And if you want lighting, that means speedlights.

The problem is that speedlights are not that powerful. On a sunny day, it's often necessary to shoot at f/11 or greater in order to keep the shutter speed below the camera's max flash sync speed. At f/11 the range of a speedlight is pretty limited, and drops dramatically once you put it through a softbox.

The answer of course it to carry more powerful flashes. But unless you have several assistants, carrying a couple of Profoto 7Bs or Elinchrom Rangers is out of the question. Each pack, head and modifier combo comes in at 15kg+.

Elinchrom has tried to fill the gap between speedlights and the more powerful battery flashes with the new Quadra series. At 400 w/s they are only 1/3rd of the power of the 7B or Ranger, but still approx 5X more powerful than a speedlight. They are also about 1/3 of the weight of their larger cousins, meaning they are a realistic option to stick in a backpack and carry out into the field.

I've been toying with the idea of renting some to test them out for a few months now. UK-based photographer Simon Keitch has a review of the Quadras on his blog here.

Weather Sealing is your friend

For the kind of photography I do, I need my cameras to be reasonably robust. I‘m often shooting in the snow, in the desert, or even in the water, all of which do not play nicely with precision electronic equipment.

And it’s at times like those that you want to have complete faith in your equipment. If you’re worrying about looking after your gear then you’re not focused on making the best photograph.

Because of this, I was slightly concerned that my switch from 1-series bodies to the new 5D mark II might come back to haunt me. While Canon suggest in the manual that the 5DII is as well sealed as the EOS 1n top-of-the-line film camera from the 1990s, reports on the interweb have suggested that the weather sealing on the 5DII is not very good at all. In particular, during Michael Riechmann’s photo tour of Antarctica, fully one quarter of the 5DIIs on the trip died after being exposed to “light rain”.

So after the first couple of months of putting the 5DIIs through their paces, I’m happy to report that mine seem to stand up reasonably well to abuse.

Firstly while shooting in the falling snow in London in February, the cameras got very wet with melting snow, but coped very well.

And more recently while shooting in Jamaica I spent a couple of hours was standing in the sea shooting models on the beach and riding horses through the surf.

On both occasions the waves were higher than I was expecting and when I got soaked, so did the camera - including the WFT wireless transmitter – on 3 separate occasions.

Although I feared for the worst, I’m delighted to report they both came through with flying colours, not missing a single shot.

So it would seem that once again, I have a set of cameras that, within reason, will withstand adverse conditions without any special treatment, which is a great relief.

Unfortunately my iPhone was not quite as tough, and failed to recover from a brief submergence!

The ridiculous story of the Canon 5DII Battery

As anyone else who has bought a Canon 5DII will no doubt have found, the availability of extra batteries is non-existant. I have had 3 spares on order from Warehouse Express, a large online supplier, since December and they still haven’t had any stock.

By February I was getting desperate, and collared a Canon rep at the Focus on Imaging trade show at the NEC. He promised to prioritise an order for me but they still haven’t had any stock to ship.

Around the same time I bought the Wireless File Transmitter (WFT), which takes the same battery. However, Canon, in their wisdom, decided not to ship it with one. So I had to cannibalise the battery from my second body to power the WFT, essentially turning my backup 5DII into a £2000 paper weight.

About to depart on a major shoot (see future posts) I was desperate to get my hands on more batteries. Eventually I resorted to bribing a friend with a slap up lunch in order to persuade him to lend me the battery for his 5DII (thank you Dominic!)

How Canon can release a major camera such as this, which will likely be used by as many pros as amateurs, and not be able to supply extra batteries for 4 months after the camera’s launch is simply ridiculous. It almost makes the camera unusable as a professional tool...

Yes, there are aftermarket batteries beginning to appear on eBay and the like, but they lack the electronics of the Canon batteries, cannnot use the same charger, and cause the camera to give out warning messages. Not an ideal solution.

Here’s hoping they ramp up production soon.

How to go wireless - setting up FTP with the WFT-E4

UPDATE: This post has proven to be very popular, so I've just updated it with one or two corrections and extra details to make it even easier to set up your WFT E4

UPDATE 23/06/2010: A few extra details added


After I picked up my Canon WFT-E4 I found it very hard to get set up. The manual is a textbook example of how to confuse people, and even with all the advice on blogs and forums, after clicking through the setup wizard on the camera at least 10 times with no success, I was ready to give up.

Eventually I ignored all the tips and set up the device using the WFT Utility that you can download onto your computer. This allows you to set the configuration on your laptop using a much easier interface, and upload them to the camera over a USB cable. Everything was up and running very quickly and easily.

I know I'm not the only one who's had problems getting it set up, so here's how I did it:


1. Setup an FTP server on the laptop

Go to System Preferences (found under the Apple menu at top left). Chose Sharing.

On the sharing screen, check the File Sharing box:

The click on Options, and check the Share files and folders using FTP box and the "Account Name" box next to the account you log in as:


Click Done.


2. Set up an ad hoc network on the laptop

Click on the wireless icon in the top right corner and select Create Network...


Set the Name as your network name, the Channel to automatic and uncheck the Require Password box.



Click OK. The wireless icon at the top of the screen will change to a greyed out image of a computer


3. Set the IP Address of the laptop

Go to System Preferences (found under the Apple menu at top left). Chose Network.



Click on the Advanced button at the bottom right.

Select Use DHCP with manual address from the drop down and enter 192.168.1.20



Click OK, then Apply


4. Configure WFT Utility and upload settings to the camera

OK, now start EOS Utility, click on Accessories then click on WFT Utility

If you don't have WFT Utility installed you can download it here for Mac OSX and here for Windows




Under TCP/IP set the following:
- Check “Use the following IP Address”
- IP address: 192.168.1.2 (This is the default IP address of the WFT-E4)
- Subnet mask: 255.255.255.0
- Do not use DNS Server
- Make sure “Use IP Security” is unchecked



Under FTP Settings, set the following:
- Server: 192.168.1.20 (this is the default IP address the WFT-E4 looks for)
- Port: 21
- Enter your computer’s login name and password (you must do this before the next step!)
- Select the destination folder on your computer you would like your images transferred to
- Uncheck “Use proxy”




Under Wireless LAN Settings, set the following:
- SSID: enter the name you chose for your ad hoc network that you set in Step 1
- Conn. Method: “Ad hoc 11g” and select “WFT-E4” and “Channel 11” from the drop downs
- Encryption: None


Give the settings a name in the top text box: e.g. “Adhoc_FTP” and save them.




5. Upload the settings to the Camera


Attach the WFT to the camera, turn it on and navigate to the WFT Settings menu. Under Connection select Disabled


Next, connect the camera to the computer via USB. Upload the settings to the camera by clicking on the Upload Settings to Camera icon at the top of the WFT Utility.


Save them on the camera as Set 1, turn the camera off and disconnect the USB cable.


6. Setup the camera

Connect the WFT-E4 to the camera and turn it on

Press Menu and navigate to the WFT Settings menu

From the WFT Menu select Set up

Select Load Settings and select Set 1 – the settings you just uploaded

From the WFT Menu select Communication Mode and chose FTP

Congratulations! You should now be ready to shoot. You should see a flashing green LED on the WFT, and the LCD screen on the WFT will show the signal strenth of the connection to the computer. Transfer speed should be good up to about 20m distance.


OK, now you have the connection set up, you need to decide how you want the images to be transferred:


7. Customising the WFT-E4

Once you have the wireless transmitter up and running you can customise how you would like the camera to behave with the options in the Setup section of the WFT menu.


Transfer only JPEGs

Transferring RAW files is quite slow, as they are 25MB each. You can set the camera to shoot RAW and JPEG you can transmit just the JPEGs, which is much faster. The RAW files will be saved to the memory card in the camera. This is detailed on page 33 of the manual:

- Set the camera to shoot RAW + small JPEG.
- Under the WFT menu on the camera select Setup then select Transfer type/size
- Under RAW + JPEG Transfer select JPEG only


Transfer only the images you want

You can chose to have the WFT transmit every image as you shoot it, or configure it to only send the images you want while you review them on the rear screen when you hit the SET button.

To transmit all images immediately as you shoot them (page 32 of the manual):
- Under the WFT menu on the camera select Setup
- Under Automatic Transfer, select Enable

To transmit only the images you chose (page 34 of the manual):
- Under the WFT menu on the camera select Setup
- Under Automatic Transfer, select Disable
- Go back to the Setup menu and under Transfer with SET, select Enable

This is great if you don’t want your client to see all your setup shots, or if you are shooting fast moving sequences, you can send just the good images.


8. That's it, you're done!
I hope this helps anyone who is having trouble getting FTP mode to work on their WFT-E4. Once you get it up and runnning the device is great.