In The Picture

Super Laptop Deal – Lenovo 14” E420 i5 for $599

i5 2400ghz processor, turbo boost, 4gb RAM, 320gb HD

2NDS WORLD has this on offer and I had a look which confirmed that this was an outstanding deal. It’s the right size and weight (about 2kgs), has a good, sharp screen and the best keyboard I’ve ever struck on a laptop. Lenovo throws in a DVD drive, WiFi-n, Bluetooth, webcam, a 6-cell battery and Windows 7 Home Premium.

the touchpad on mine is closer to the middle

The E420 is made of plastic, but it’s good quality matt plastic. The machine looks well-built enough. And it works: the i5 gets a Passmark score around 3500 and a Windows Performance score of 4.8 due mainly to the moderate graphics capabilities.
This may not be a great gaming machine but I’m no gamer so it doesn’t matter. The other scores on the Win index sit between 5 and 7 = pretty bloody good. It's a pretty fast machine in real use, which includes processing large RAW image files in my case. More specs here:

www.techbuy.com.au/p/179811/Lenovo/E420%281141C3M%29.asp

It’s fast, it’s comfortable, battery life is a realistic 4-5 hours, and the price is right.

http://www.2ndsworld.com.au/product/lenovo-14-intel-i5-thinkpad-edge-e420-notebook-black-edgee420

If you miss out at this source, Lenovo has a laptop sale on as well -

http://shopap.lenovo.com/au/en/deals-and-coupons/quickship-deals/

Good luck

Kim

 

Webroot Secure Anywhere – the mouse that roars

Breakthrough internet security: 100% protection, 0% system load

Most internet security suites behave like bullies, riding roughshod over you, strangling your system while they go through endless signature updates, running scans whenever they feel like it, taking up hundreds of megabytes. It’s painful on older PCs, laptops and mobile devices. You know the story.

Webroot installs a tiny piece of code, less than 1mb in size, and leaves the bulk of its considerable intelligence in the cloud. And the code on your machine is written in C, a very efficient language. It’s not a breakthrough, strictly speaking: the best-kept secret in internet security in recent years was a program called PREVX-3, which worked much the same way. The company did no marketing, and the lazy IT journos who should shout about these great products from the rooftops were too busy going to junkets arranged by Norton and McAfee.

Anyhow, we’ve been running PREVX-3 in our business for years, and have been utterly delighted with the product. Last year, the guys who run Webroot saw how smart this software was and bought the company. Then they did a courageous thing: they threw out their own software and worked on a new version of the PREVX-3 code, plus some additions. That’s how Webroot Secure Anywhere (WSA) came about.

Easy As
It takes literally seconds to install, and it’s off running a scan. A deep scan that is, which is finished minutes later. It takes a few minutes longer on a system that's infested with nasties. WSA is also good at removing these bad critters. After that, the system runs silently in the background as you enjoy the improved performance of your computing device. This is the new way, the smart way to keep your stuff secure. FREE AT LAST!

You can play with the settings if you want to, or just leave the whole business to Wevbroot. It comes with real-time shields and a firewall, and optional cloud storage. It has extensive heuristic capabilities. There's no spam filter or parental controls.

When it comes to PC security, Neil Rubenking at PCMagazine has been the top dog for many years. And Neil is mighty impressed: ‘Webroot SecureAnywhere Antivirus is tiny beyond belief,’ Neil says, ‘yet it achieved perfect scores across the board in my malware-blocking tests. It also did a very good job cleaning up malware-infested systems. This impressive product shares our Editor's Choice honor with Norton AntiVirus 2012.’

Neil tested the first version of WSA last year; some enhancements have been added since then. Here’s AV Test Org’s score from earlier this year: http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/test-reports/test-reports/?tx_avtestreports_pi1[report_no]=120525 . More reviews and awards here: http://www.webroot.com/En_US/about-press-room-reviews-and-awards.html

Here’s a comparison chart for the 3 different versions, and a 50% off deal that reduces the price for WSA Complete for 3 PCs to $40 a year: http://www.webroot.com/En_US/sites/land-3product-25-40-50-percent-offer/  The offer is open until the end of May 2012. More information about Webroot here at the main site http://www.webroot.com/En_US/ .

As I said already, it doesn't get any better than this.

Kim

2012 Mirrorless / EVIL camera update

 Trying to keep up with this fashion parade ain’t easy

Lytro Light Field Camera

I’m starting with the most revolutionary because I mentioned it on release a few months ago. DPReview has now put the Lytro through its paces, and found it unconvincing ‘in terms of final resolution and the limited range of scenes its can bring something interesting to.’ The reviewer says ‘the final resolution of 1080 x 1080 is simply too low to make it useful for much more than Facebook. The lack of control over any shooting functions, including white balance can also spoil the results.’

I suspect the camera will appeal to the Facebook set, and they won’t care about the other stuff. Still, the technology will evolve and improve over time. The fact that the guys behind Lytro got this off the ground at all in such a short time is testament to their ability.

Nokia 808 PureView

I wrote about the exotic 41mp camera in the new Nokia 808 PureView smartphone not long ago. Here’s a video demonstrating it’s features:

http://www.whatdigitalcamera.com/videos/reviews/532169/nokia-808-pureview-hands-on-preview.html

Ricoh’s GXR system

The oldest EVIL system technically, given a whole new lease of life with the M-mount adaptor, which opens up a whole new world of lenses for this clever body. The only problem is that all these lenses are designed for 35mm film cameras. More detail here: http://briard.typepad.com/get_the_picture/2012/02/its-just-as-well-leica-has-lots-of-cachet.html

Samsung NX 200

This camera features a 20mp sensor, and Samsung pushes that detail for all it’s worth. DPReview found some issues with the camera’s image quality, but liked the 1080p HD movie mode with full manual control, fast playback and slow motion options. Samsung also throws in 7fps continuous shooting, a 30fps burst mode (at 5MP), a panorama mode and a selection of image filters and frames. Solid body, well-built.

Olympus E-M5

Retro cameras are in as Fuji has proved, and this is a digital copy of the once widely admired Olympus OM range of 35mm SLRs. The E-M5 will be sold alongside the PEN series and is obviously uses Micro Four Thirds lenses. The camera is actually slightly smaller than the tiny OM-4Ti it copies. The good news is that the E-M5 is built around a new 16MP Four Thirds sensor, most likely the one from Panasonic's DMC-G3.

 This addresses a long-standing issue of Olympus focusing on cosmetics rather than working on improving the sensor. Olympus claims improved dynamic range, which is its Achilles Heal. We shall see.

Fujifilm X-Pro 1

This new system is out of our league pricewise (close to 2 grand for the basics) but needs a mention as it is an EVIL style system and a serious glove thrown into the arrogant face of Leica. The Germans will be worried, I’m sure. Serious shooters will rejoice.

Luminous Landscape concluded its review this way: ‘A week with the X-Pro1 was not enough.  While it drove me mad on numerous occasions, it also thrilled me with its image quality and the possibility of a viable autofocus rangefinder-style camera. At roughly one-third of the price of an equivalent Leica system, the X-Pro1 is  amazing value, but still a significant investment. The verdict for now: the X-Pro1 is a quirky gem.’

Here are a few links for more detail:

http://www.f8photography.com.hk/blog/2012/03/streetxpro1/ 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/fuji_x_pro1_review.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/.shtml

Pentax K-01

This is a strange one. It looks like a clumsy toy camera but it isn’t. The body is really lumpy instead of slim, yet Pentax has designed ‘the world's thinnest interchangeable lens’ to go on the front. What a waste! Steve Huff has written a full review of the K-01 and comes away unconvinced http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2012/03/16/the-pentax-k-01-camera-review-design-masterpiece-or-design-fail/ 

  Canon G1X

This new camera almost went unnoticed in the post-Christmas rush, and it’s not an interchangeable lens camera either. It does have an APS-C size sensor, in what looks like a bulked-up G12 body. Canon says the G1X is the top of that line, and charges another $300. Too pricey, I suspect. It’s also top of the line in heft, coming in at a fairly lumpy 534g, and measuring 117 x 81 x 65mm. Not exactly pocket-size, and a lot bigger than it’s natural competitor the Fuji X10 with its fixed short zoom lens. Of course, the Canon is dearer, has a bigger sensor and better IQ.

Imaging Resource has found an internal light leakage problem with the G1X, check here

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2012/03/21/canon-g1-x-exhibits-light-leak-or-internal-reflection-in-certain-conditions

Interesting review here, comparing Canon to Toyota

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon_g1x_field_report.shtml

Panasonic GX1

Thom Hogan calls the GX1 ‘the missing GF3.’ Then he explains that ‘the rangefinder-style Panasonic cameras (GF1, GF2, GF3, and now GX1) did a strange little twist. They started with a very competent and enthusiast-targeted GF1, but then quickly downscaled into more entry-level models with each iteration. The GF3 is a nearly button-less camera clearly targeted at an entry user, while the GF1 has quite a few buttons and controls that appeal to a higher-level shooter. The GF2 fell exactly in the middle of those two.

The GX1 restores us to where the GF1 was, but with the 16mp sensor that's in the G3 DSLR-style camera. Indeed, comparing the GX1 and G3 is a good starting point, as they have a great deal of commonality to them.’

Are you confused yet? Clearly Panasonic is. DPReview praises the new 16mp sensor, which it claims narrows the gap between M43 and APS-C sensor cameras in low to mid ISO ranges. Add improved JPEG processing and the GX1 goes to the head of the M43 class. There are still issues with the GX1's 14-42mm power zoom kit lens option, so choose lenses carefully. http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/GX1/GX1A.HTM

Sony Alpha A57

Strictly speaking the A57 doesn’t belong here. I should be talking about the Sony NEX-5N and NEX-7, but they’ve had plenty of exposure. We know all about them, right? The A57 is more interesting, because it’s not a DSLR. The pellicle mirror doesn’t have to move out of the way, which makes much faster continuous shooting possible – 10 – 12 frames per second (fps). The EVF is said to be an improvement over the traditional DSLR VF since it is WYSIWYG. Through it you can see the exact image with the settings you selected before you shoot. The live view is direct and covers 100% of the frame.

The A57 replaces the A55 and offers the Sony 16mp CMOS sensor with the latest BIONZ engine. The body is bigger and fits more comfortably into normal hands. The EVF is almost on par with that in the A77. The guys at Image Resource summed up the A57 this way: ‘Overall, we're pretty impressed with the Sony A57. It seems like an ideal camera for any kind of photography. I don't generally get jazzed about unusual modes like HDR, and I seldom go for resolution-enhancement technology, as is found in the Clear Image Zoom function, but I'll still give it a try. What's most impressive is having access to 12 or even 10 frames per second in a sub-$800 camera. Add full-time autofocus while you shoot movies or stills, and the Sony A57 has what it takes to run the other guys over. And while it seemed gimmicky a few years ago, I really enjoy sweeping out a panoramic image without much thought or effort, something the Sony A57 makes easy. We'll reserve final judgment for a production unit, but so far, this is Sony's most competent consumer camera offering ever, one that should give the big two camera makers chills.’

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/sony-a57/sony-a57A.HTM

It’s about time CANIKON had some serious competition. If you feel like checking out Sony’s new wares, have a look at the SLT a65 as well. It’s not much dearer than the A57, and packs most of the goodies the A77 introduced into a non-rugged body. More here: http://briard.typepad.com/get_the_picture/2011/09/sonys-new-slt-giant-killer.html

Kim

NOKIA’s 808 PURE VIEW PACKS 41 MEGAPIXEL CAMERA

Hold on, there’s more to this smart phone camera than meets the eye

Serious Sensor

Yes, the sensor in Nokia’s new 808 smartphone has an active area of 7728 x 5368 pixels, totaling over 41MPs depending on the aspect ratio you choose. The good news is that Nokia isn’t trying to gazump all its competitors with one mighty blow. No, the folks at Nokia have developed some nifty new technology they claim will raise the bar for image quality in smartphone cameras to new heights.

For one, the sensor in the 808 isn't a standard 1/3.2" mobile phone sensor, it's a five times larger 1/1.2". This is almost three times the size of the sensors you find in most compact cameras, so the photosites are about the same size as those in typical 8.2MP cameraphones.

courtesy of dpreview.com

Serious about IQ

Nokia hasn’t created this sensor so that you can print images the size of small buildings, but so you can produce decent 5 or 8mp images with your mobile phone. The firmware that goes with this new sensor oversamples the images and then pixel-bins them down to a normal size. In the process, IQ is drastically improved says Nokia.

In digital signal processing, oversampling is the process of sampling a signal with a sampling frequency significantly higher than twice the bandwidth or highest frequency of the signal being sampled. Oversampling helps avoid aliasing, improves resolution and reduces noise.

We consumers first came across this idea in CD players and, in simple terms, oversampling reduces bad signals and optimises good ones for clearer audio or video reproduction. In image processing, getting rid of bad signals is called ‘pixel-binning' and means that noise is averaged-out across multiple pixels (around 7-to-1 in the 5MP mode). Nokia puts it this way: ‘Pixel oversampling combines many pixels to create a single (super) pixel. When this happens, you keep virtually all the detail, but filter away visual noise from the image.’

Serious digital zoom

Smartphones don’t have room for zoom lenses, and typically use digital zoom - cropping the image - which has the same effect but further reduces IQ. The high pixel count of the 808’s sensor lets you crop into the center of the image and still have enough pixels left: 5mp after a roughly 2.8x 'zoom’. fixed lens. So you get a 28-78mm (35mm) equivalent zoom with a fixed (prime) lens which Nokia claims is of very high quality. The level of oversampling is highest when not using zoom, gradually decreasing to zero at maximum zoom (where there is no oversampling).

Some other benefits Nokia claims:

• Oversampling eliminates Bayer pattern problems. For example, conventional 8MPix sensors include only 4Mpix green, 2Mpix red and 2Mpix blue pixels, which are interpolated to 8Mpix R, G, B image
• With pixel oversampling, all pixels become true R, G, and B pixels
• Image definition is pin sharp, way superior to conventional zoom designs
• Faster lens, faster shutter speed at given ISO ratings
• The lens has a constant 15cm minimum focusing distance (macro in effect)
• 1080p video recording at 30fps, with 4X lossless zoom thanks to the big sensor
• Image processing which handles over 1 billion pixels per second.
• Optional - 6X at 720p and up to 12X lossless zoom in nHD (640 x 360) recordings
• Recording without distortion at audio levels beyond the capability of human hearing, for ‘stereo CD-like audio quality.’

More info

http://conversations.nokia.com/2012/02/27/nokia-808-pureview-%E2%80%93-revolutionary-camera-technology-great-smartphone/

http://europe.nokia.com/PRODUCT_METADATA_0/Products/Phones/8000-series/808/Nokia808PureView_Whitepaper.pdf

Outrageous megapixels and the resolving power of lenses

When the 36 megapixel Nikon d800 was announced, a few of the experts said that the huge hike in megapixels would show up the limitations of your favourite lenses.

That seemed a logical consequence to me, I have to admit, but Ctein, the pixel-level guru at The Online Photographer (TOP) has a different point of view. He shares it here:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/02/d800-megapixels.html

In that post, he addresses a handful of myths, and here’s what he says about

Myth #4

‘It's pointless to add more pixels [to sensors] because lenses aren't good enough

Reality: I have no idea where this one came from, because it's contradicted by decades of lens and camera test data. I'm going to cut through the morass of minutia-based arguments about pixel dimensions, filter geometries, and Airy disks and lay it out in very simple terms. A 16-megapixel 35mm-sized Bayer array sensor is going to resolve around 50 line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm). A 36-megapixel sensor will resolve around 75 lp/mm. Even mediocre 35mm lenses will hit 75 lp/mm at some aperture over some portion of their field of view. This is true of both fixed focal length and zoom lenses.

Decent (not at all exceptional) 35mm-format lenses can hit 75 lp/mm at just about all apertures and will do so over most of the field of view for at least one aperture. They'll show peak resolutions more like twice that. Really good lenses (not necessarily expensive ones) will be able to exceed 75 line pair per millimeter without even trying hard over most/all of the field of view and will have peak resolutions three or more times that.

Furthermore, until the lens resolution drops to only half that of the sensor, improving sensor resolution will produce an observable improvement in image resolution.

See the previously cited diffraction column and "Why 80 Megapixels Just Won't Be Enough..."

The only thing holding back camera makers from 50mp, 60mp or more on FX is the data-processing involved. A 72mp FX sensor would only be able to do about 1 frame per second, which most people would think is too slow. And, the high-ISO wouldn't be so hot. But hey, maybe they'll do a D800L for the landscape guys. We have to wait for the data processing to catch up. I think Nikon's best glass -- the recent f/1.4 primes -- are fully capable of delivering with a 72mp sensor, at least in the center of the frame.’

There you go!

Kim

Fujifilm x10 Image Quality – facing up to DxOMark

DxOMark has built up a huge database of camera and lens tests, and you can make your own comparisons on the DxO website by choosing from the tested hardware on the database. Here’s a comparison I put together today:

I use my 5-year old DX40 as a benchmark, and it serves that purpose very well. I bought that camera in as-new condition a year ago for <$300. With an 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 kit lens, which tend to sell for $200 for a good copy on eBay, it’s a $500 camera. With the addition of the $200 (new) 55-200mm f/3.5-5.6 tele zoom, you’ve got everything covered for $700.

So it’s a valid comparison, except for the lack of video in the D40x. I don’t use cameras like these for video so it’s not an issue. The obvious question to Nikon is: why bother making a camera that costs the same as the D40x did when it was new, and can’t compete with its 5-year-old sibling on Image Quality?

Of course, both Nikon and Fuji are chasing a different market here: enthusiasts looking for interesting compact cameras, all-in-one without interchangeable lenses. Below is an obvious comparison in that ballpark, and here is the DxO assessment in full of the new Fujifilm x10

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/News/DxOMark-news/Fujifilm-X10-an-old-fashioned-compact-camera-with-some-surprises

Neat cameras they may be, funky even or cool as we say these days, but they don't produce images of the same quality asthe old gear. I suspect IQ wasn't the most important criterion.

Have lots of fun

Kim

 

 

FUJIFILM x10 – a cute camera that works hard

The camera I played with belongs to a friend, and my hands-on time was limited so these are really first impressions. There are cameras that are tactile in a way that makes you want to keep them in your hands. The x10 is one of those. The build quality of fit is first rate, and the metal case makes the x10 feel like a serious toy. It’s a nice size as well, about the same as a Panny GX1 with a small lens on. It won’t fit in most pockets, though.

 Main specs include:

• 12MP EXR CMOS sensor
• 28-112mm F2.0-2.8 lens
• Optical viewfinder and flash inbuilt
• 2.8", 460,000 dot LCD
• Raw shooting option with in-camera Raw conversion
• Single-sweep panorama stitching
• Continuous shooting up to 7fps at full resolution, 10fps at 6MP
• Video shooting at up to 1920 x 1080 Full HD, 30fps, with stereo sound
• Various Fuji film modes and colour-filtered mono modes

The x10 comes with a new 2/3-inch (8.8 x 6.6 mm) backlit CMOS sensor with a resolution of 12 megapixels. Photosites are rotated through 45 degrees to collect more light and improve horizontal and vertical resolution. Fujifilm's EXR technology does the rest, i.e. it  controls the image processing functions. Here's how it compares:

The 28-112 zoom lens is fast at f/2.0-2.8 (that’s very fast for the long end), and it zooms via a twist ring on the lens barrel like a real camera (and the ring doubles as the camera's On/Off switch). It’s a very welcome change from the stepped electric zoom function of most cameras in the quality compact class. A bonus is smooth, short gearing that moves the lens from 28mm to 112mm in about 45 degrees of turn. 

image courtesy of dpreview.com

A tiny pop-up flash is built-in, and offers plenty of settings. There’s even an optical viewfinder with dioptre adjustment, but its tunnel vision is a bit claustrophobic and covers about 85% the sensor's field-of-view. No information is shown in the OVF, not even AF confirmation. That’s a real letdown. On the plus side, the Autofocus is pretty fast but a bit hit-and-miss in poor light, and manual focusing is too fiddly to be useful.

The X10's back panel offers a fixed 2.8-inch LCD monitor with 460,000 pixels, and this may be a better option most of the time. The controls are laid-out much like they are on a real camera, and the x10 seems to avoid most of the navigational obstacles its big brother the x100 serves up.

The x10’s image quality in difficult light situations was a surprise. Perhaps the EXR trickery is responsible for this but ISO 3200 is not out of the question. I had more problems with outside shots where the camera tends to over-expose in order to capture more shadow detail. I got a bunch of shots with blown-out highlights – one reason is that the shutter speed is locked at 1/1000 second if you try to shoot with f/2 in bright conditions. That’s another letdown.

Dynamic range is still a challenge

ISO 1250 - really impressive

would you believe ISO 3200?

bokeh is possible but may not please your eye

colours are good

detail is acceptable but not that sharp in ordinary light

All in all, the x10 is an odd blend of retro and hi-tech. It looks and feels like rangefinder film cameras of old, while Fuji’s EXR mode provides a bag of tricks that help improve image clarity, reduce noise or enhance dynamic range. EXR Auto provides scene recognition and automatic adjustment of settings. It’s a baffling option on an enthusiast’s camera like the x10.

Build quality and handling are strong points of the x10, along with image quality in most situations. The main problem is where it fits in the marketplace. At around $700, it’s $200 to 300 more than the Olympus XZ-1 or Canon S100 or Nikon P7100. And it’s bigger than the first two here.

The x10 is in many ways more comparable with entry-level EVIL cameras (Electronic Viewfinder Interchangeable Lens). The trouble is that you can get a Sony NEX-5 Twin Kit with 16mm and 18-55mm Lens for about the same money http://www.dwidigitalcameras.com.au/store/product.asp?idProduct=3004

Yes, the X10 has a brighter lens than typical kit zooms, and you get an OVF and Flash built in which beats having to buy costly add-ons. On the other hand, a Sony or Panny or Oly EVIL camera can provide a heap more flexibility in terms of lenses and accessories – for example fast and compact prime pancake lenses - and of course better IQ from a bigger sensor. Also, some EVIL cameras now offer high resolution electronic viewfinders that show you exactly what the camera sees, along with articulated LCDs and touch screens.

If you can’t be bothered mixing and matching the bits and pieces, and prefer to have one compact camera with a fast, sharp, flexible lens, then the x10 is a serious option as long as the money isn’t an issue. If it is, you may prefer the Oly XZ-1 or the Canon S100 or the old Panny LX5. Then again, you may just fall in love with the Fuji. It may just turn out to be one of those gadgets you really want to own regardless.

Additional resources -

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/fuji_x10_first_impressions.shtml

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/11/08/the-fuji-x10-digital-camera-review-a-look-at-the-baby-brother-of-the-x100/

http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/fujifilm_finepix_x10_review/conclusion/

Best

Kim

Breakthrough cameras of 2011 - PART 2

Nikon 1

In its promo material for the J1 and V1, Nikon claims ‘outstanding system performance, high-speed dual image processors, state-of-the-art focal-plane phase detection auto focus and the fastest data transfer rates.’ It continues with ‘superior image quality, tone reproduction, advanced noise reduction, amazing 10 fps speed in autofocus and 60 fps in manual mode ... even fast moving action is rendered with amazing clarity—thanks to an incredible 73 point AF array continuously working to ensure everything is sharp and clear.’

Nikon also claims the world’s fastest hybrid AF system for the 1, faster than its flagship D3S. This comes from combining phase detection and contrast detection AF on the new sensor, and the new EXPEED 3 image processing firmware. The 1 handles data throughput at the blazing speed of 600 mp/sec, which Nikon claims is another record. The phase-detection AF system can also track moving subjects during video shooting. Another aspect of the new sensor that the electronic shutter is completely silent while shooting on the J1 -the V1 has a mechanical shutter.

The Nikon 1 blends stills and video nicely. For example, you can take a still photo during slow motion video recording by simply pressing the shutter, and both will be in focus. A feature called Motion snapshot (MSS) lets you take a second of slow motion video and a photo at the same time. Nikon calls this the ‘Living picture’. 1 offers 1080p full HD video capture at 30 or 60 fps, and adds double slow motion modes of 400fps and 1200fps.

That’s a lot of firsts in one small package. Thom Hogan sees the 1 system as a test bed for new Nikon technology such as sensors that might get rid of the old mirror in future DSLRs. If phase detect AF on the sensor is so fast, you don’t need pellicle mirrors.

Great technology, poor marketing

Thom may well be right because the Nikon 1 system makes much less sense from a marketing point of view. It’s a complete system, with a bunch of lenses, a multi-accessory port for accessories like a speed-light, a microphone and a GPS unit. So what’s wrong with it? On one hand it panders to the consumer market, on the other to pro shooters looking for a compact camera. The two models underscore the 1’s split persona, but there are more serious flaws under the skin.

The V1 is more expensive than a D5100, which makes no sense. You can't just just throw a new product out there without giving thought to where it fits with your existing line-up. There’s more: no articulated screen,  no inbuilt flash, no conventional control dials, PASM modes that are buried in the main shooting menu, and a jog switch on the back to change the exposure. Manual focus is set via the rear contril dial -what were they drinking? After 4 years in development, these are pretty rough edges.

A more obvious problem is that the 1’s sensor is too small and the C mount lenses too big. Nikon does have a knack for getting better results out of a given sensor than anyone else, as it has proved vis-vis Sony for some time. And so it proves again with V1 testers reporting better than expected image quality, and the DxOMark results backing them up.

To be fair, the current M43 sensor employed by Olympus and Panasonic counts poor dynamic range and colour depth among its flaws. Still, that the Nikon V1 sensor at half the size of the M43 is competitive in overall terms is a surprise.

A smaller sensor makes smaller lenses possible, which is the whole point of the M43 design. We’ve seen what happens when you stick an APS-C sensor into a tiny body – viz Sony NEX – and the large lenses look like Dolly Parton’s oversize boobs on her tiny frame.

The 1 system lenses are hardly smaller than the M43 lenses, and the body is bigger than the Olympus PENs, so where’s the advantage of choosing a smaller sensor? Why did Nikon not go with the M43 sensor, and the M43 lens mount? The M43 coalition offers a huge range of lenses courtesy of Olympus, Panasonic, Voigtlander and Leica http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/lense.html .

Needless to say, the Nikon 1 system is compatible with Nikon lenses, if nothing else, via the usual huge adaptor. That oddball sensor size throws a big spanner into the works. Just trying to convert DX lenses to the new FOV is giving me a headache. Here is the new body with adaptor and the 24-120 FX lens I think, which would end up giving an FOV of 120 – 320mm in 35mm terms. Would you actually want to do that?

 

In the PC world, we’ve had Open Systems for decades. It means lots of choice with anything from motherboards to disk drives and screens. It’s a whole lot easier for camera makers. The M43 coalition is open in a modest kind of way: the lenses are interchangeable between Panasonic and Olympus bodies. Nikon could’ve opened up the M43 market, offering Nikon lenses to Panny and Oly users, and offering its own customers more choice.

What was Nikon afraid of? Its customers buying M.Zuiko lenses? Competition is good for progress – the more competition, the better for us consumers. We love open systems, we don’t want more closed proprietary systems. I bet when Canon flashes its compact camera system early next year, it will have a unique sensor and unique lens mount again. Nikon could’ve left Canon out there on its own. A big chance missed. I’ll get off my soapbox now.

Small sensors make shallow Depth Of Field impossible, as the lenses need to be wider to compensate. It’s hard enough with M43 cameras and fast lenses, but Nikon hasn’t produced any fast lenses for its 1 system, and no fast primes. So forget shooting portraits with smooth as butter bokeh. And that blazing internal transfer speed doesn't translate to fast shooting either - shot to shot takes 2 seconds, and so does waking from stand-by mode.

Steve Huff talks about some of these things at some length here: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/11/14/the-nikon-v1-camera-review-the-camera-i-expected-to-hate/ .

Kirk Tuck is also testing the V1 and comparing it to the Oly E-PL3 and Fuji x10 http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011_10_29_archive.html (part 1)

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011_10_30_archive.html (part 2)

So the Nikon 1 system is a flawed gem, mixing serious advances with surprising rough edges - especially for a late-comer to this market. It looks like the Nikon team worked in complete isolation these last four years, instead of learning from the mistakes made by Panny and Oly and Sony et al.   

Pentax Q

Yes, it's a breaktrough camera because its design concept is unique so far - the smallest camera with interchangeable lenses ever made. The Q made no sense on first sight, and it still doesn’t. What’s the point of having interchangeable lenses on a digicam body with a typical, tiny digicam sensor? Yes, the Q-mount lenses are small but you’re not going to get great image quality out of a system like this, are you? So why not just buy a Canon IXUS 1100 HS/ Elph 510 HS with a 12x zoom lens?

Yet there’s something appealing about this idea of a miniature EVIL camera – much like a miniature train set. If you’re looking for novelty or fun gadgets, the Pentax Q makes a lot more sense. Mike Johnston from The Online Photographer talked about playfulness. ‘Almost as if we are all starting to get just a bit tired of serious, utilitarian, cookie-cutter black-blob DSLRs and the everlasting pursuit of clinical perfection, and just want to have a little fun.’

This new toy set is about as playful as it gets. As Mike points out, some of the lenses are even labelled ‘Toy’. ‘The "Toy Lens Wide" (35mm-e) and "Toy Lens Telephoto" (100mm-e) are both designed with aberrations deliberately left in, like a toy camera, or a Lensbaby, or a Lomo. Each is only going to cost $79.95 (!!). They're just for fun, in other words.’ There’s even a shoe-mounted toy optical viewfinder, but it only includes guide marks for the 47mm kit lens, and comes with a not so playful $250 price tag.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/06/qsystem.html

Thom Hogan, not known for his ready sense of humour, called the Pentax Q ‘over-the-top bizarre. Bizarre enough that Pentax will sell a few to people who are more interested in being able to pull a mini-mini-SLR out of their pocket to impress others ("Name's Bond. Thom Bond"). Meanwhile, the rest of us will be taking better pictures with an Olympus XZ-1 for half the price.’

Most of us had similar reactions, especially when we saw the projected price of $800 for a basic kit with a prime lens. Yes, the Q has an alloy body and it’s well-built but even the folks who like this new system think that’s 300 dollars too many. Still, we’re all missing the point: A new market has emerged, a market that is young and smart and well-heeled, a market that will devour gadgets that are super cool and stylish and avant-garde.

Price is not the big issue here – novelty is. We saw this with the Micro 43 cameras from Olympus and Panasonic: instead of improving the sensor and firmware, they focused on making the bodies smaller or cuter. Sony and Samsung did the same, shrinking their bodies to an anorexic extent. Why? They figured out that this market wants ‘small’ stuff, and Pentax decided to be the smallest game in town.

Kirk Tuck made an interesting point in his review of the Nikon V1. He’s a pro shooter and he says that Oly E-PL2 and Nikon V1 and similar cameras are all good enough for the kind of photography people (including Kirk) buy these things for. Good enough for casual shooting. So is the Canon SX220 I always carry with me. Not perfect but good enough.

Maybe the camera business has gone the way the watch business did many years ago: at a certain point, all new watches kept perfect time so the emphasis shifted to how they looked, how much they cost, how cute they were, how well they matched your outfits. The Pentax Q is pretty Qute alright.

Kim

Part 1 - http://briard.typepad.com/get_the_picture/2011/11/breaktrough-cameras-of-2011.html

The Lytro camera – game changer

A quantum leap in digital photography

The technology

Lytro is the first camera maker to put the ‘plenoptic’ or ‘light field’ principle into a consumer device. The first Lytro model has just been announced and sells for $400 to $500 (two flavours). The camera uses a micro-array of lenses rather than a single lens, and this allows it to captures far more light data, from many angles, than conventional cameras can.

The Lytro captures far more digital image information than conventional cameras, so much of it that you don’t have to worry about focus. That’s right, you can focus after the event, much as you can change white balance after shooting RAW. Lytro’s software lets you choose the point of focus from any point in the depth of field.

What’s more, the people you send Lytro images to can do the same (as long as they have the software as well). The PR says that this allows images to be shared and explored in news ways, that still photos become 'interactive, living pictures.'

The camera

It’s the size of a pocket torch, lens on one end, LCD screen on the other. It weighs less than eight ounces, and is made of brushed aluminium. There’s a power button, and a zoom ring of sorts (more of a collar). Battery and flash memory are built-in.

Power on is immediate, and there’s no shutter lag. ‘No auto-focus, no unnecessary modes, dials, or settings,’ says Lytro’s website. ‘And no flash, because Lytro can handle many low light settings.’

The camera has an 8x optical zoom, with the aperture constant at f/2. A DSLR lens with these specs wouldn’t be a cheap item, nor a small one. Resolution is quoted as 11 mega-rays, that is the sensor captures 11 million rays of light per image. The resolution in pixel terms is not stated.

The bottom line

The Lytro camera comes with its own image-management software loaded onto the device. Once you plug the camera in to a MAC, the software auto-installs and shows a gallery of images you can work with. At this time, the software only works with the Mac (OS 10.6 or later), but a Windows version is in the pipeline.

The only obvious downside is the 1.46-inch-diagonal touch-screen display, really too small for previewing photos on the device, but here you don’t need to worry about focus and exposure. Post processing is everything here.

If the Lytro does what it says on the tin, it'll turn the digicam market on its ear, scare the EVIL makers half to death and nibble at the heels of the DSLR makers. Check the CNET video at the link below, and see for yourself.

The essential links

Hands-on video

http://cnettv.cnet.com/lytro-camera/9742-1_53-50113476.html

Back story

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/22/technology/22camera.html?_r=1

The technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plenoptic_camera

Interview with Lytro founder Ren Ng

http://www.engadget.com/2011/06/22/light-field-camera-captures-unprecedented-images-lets-you-cho/

Lytro website

https://www.lytro.com/camera

Specs

https://www.lytro.com/camera#tab-specs

AF-S MICRO Nikkor 60mm f/2.8 G ED - Nikon's best lens?

And a bargain at that?

 My pro shooter friend Kit Laughlin said this was the best lens made by Nikon today – super sharp, great colour depth, lovely bokeh. And it only cost a little more than $500. Hard to believe.

 

These are my main uses for this kind of lens. Macro (Micro in Nikon speak) is for getting right up close to things, and portrait is about sharp focus on the subject and creamy bokeh in the background. Plus capturing natural skin tones, and doing so in all kinds of availabe light.

Choosing a macro lens

The portrait part is reasonably straightforward, although most pros say 75 to 135mm is the optimum range. Macro is a bit more tricky: if you want to shoot insects, you really need 150 – 200mm in focal length. Anything less will have a very short working distance at 1:1 magnification, which will scare the tiny critters away before you catch them.

Even when shooting still objects like coins, it pays to keep your distance and pay attention to the camera angle - see how the coin is sharp at the top but not at the bottom? That's why a tripod is really useful for this kind of work - you can line everything up and get real close without shaking.

It makes you wonder why Nikon released a 40mm micro lens recently. In general, the lower the focal length of the lens, the lower the cost, so a 40mm macro is cheaper than a 60mm macro which is cheaper than the 105mm lens (the Nikon 105 is close to $1,000 in price). For obvious reasons, the shorter focal length lenses are also smaller and lighter.

Should you opt for VR or OS or IS? For normal shooting, you don’t really need VR this side of 150mm if your technique is solid. For portraits and close-up work like product shots, you’ll probably use a tripod so again there's no need for VR. In short, it's not really an issue, and it tends to add bulk and cost to any lens. The added complexity can also detract from sharpness.

Too many options to choose from

This is a truly crowded field: here are most of the current options:

AF Micro-NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8D

AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED

AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/3.5G ED VR

AF-S NIKKOR 85mm f/1.4 G

AF-S VR Micro-NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED

AF-DC Nikkor 135mm f/2D (one of the oldest Nikkors still in production)

AF-S VR-Nikkor 70-200mm F2.8G ED-IF

Tamron 60mm f/2.0

Tamron 90mm f/2.8

Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Macro Di LD [IF]

Tamron 70-200 SP AF f/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro

Sigma 70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro

Sigma 85mm F1.4 EX DG HSM

Sigma 105mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro $1400

Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM APO $1600

Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG APO Macro HSM II

Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro(Motorized)

Getting to a Shortlist

Next to quality, my most important selection criterion is price since I don’t use this kind of lens a lot and don’t want to spend much more than $500. That sure narrows the field. 

AF-S Micro NIKKOR 60mm f/2.8G ED                                             $550

AF-S DX Micro NIKKOR 85mm f/3.5G ED VR                                    $500

Tamron 60mm f/2.0                                                                   $400

Tamron 90mm f/2.8                                                                 <$400

Sigma 70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro                                                   $500

Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro(Motorized)                         $210 

The Nikon 85mm and the Tamron 60mm are DX lenses, the others FX. The Nikon 85mm is longer and slower at f/3.5 but it has VR going for it. It looks like the standout bargain here but the reviews aren’t exactly gushing – good value but not the best glass in the class. That kind of thing.

The Tamron 60mm gets terrific reviews for IQ and is faster at f/2.0, and the price is lower at $400. The only problem is the clunky AF motor Tamron has stuck inton this lens, a frequent problem with older Tamron lenses - the new 70-300mm with the USD drive is a very different proposition. If you don't rely on the AF too much, it's probably the standout bargain here.

I owned a copy of Tamron’s 90mm f/2.8 a while back. It produced lovely images but was too short to get really close to tiny critters, better for portraits. It’s not an IF lens and has a long plastic extension tube, which can be awkward. Again, the AF is a clunky affair, and hunts a lot. Great value if those things don’t matter much.

The Sigma 70mm gets terrific reviews for IQ and sharpness but it has no HSM (inbuilt motor) so it won’t AF on the D5100. If you have a D7000 or D90 or D80, this is a lens worth checking out as well since it will look like a 105 on those bodies – possibly a bargain 105.

I also owned a Sigma 70-300 once and sold it because it has no VR (there is a newer, dearer version that does). On the long tele end (150-300mm), VR is really useful. You can switch it to macro in the 200-300 range but 1:2 magnification is the limit here. Still, with that long reach you can get plenty close to tiny things.

The Sigma is surprisingly sharp and produces very true colours, but again the extension tube is long and plasticky, and the AF slow and noisy. Still, if you’re on a tight budget, you’ll get 2 lenses in one for a bit over $200. Nothing wrong with that.

The Nikon 60mm f/2.8 gets a perfect score

I ended up buying this lens, because the reviews are a lensmaker’s dream (see links at the end of this post).

• Fred Miranda – 10 out of 10
• Adorama user reviews – 5 out of 5
• Amazon user reviews – 5 out of 5
• Photozone only gives it 4 out 5 but I’ve never seen a lens score better than 4 on that site.

The lens has a lot going for it on paper:

• The price is close to the budget
• The lens is compact and an IF design, so it stays compact and filters are no problem
• It employs Nano Crystal coating for reducing flare and optimising contrast
• It’s equipped with a fast Silent Wave AF motor
• Manual override is immediate.

Photozone points out that the lens hood might get in the way of essential light in close-up work, where the subject distance to the front lens is as little as 5 cm maximum magnification. The hood is 4cm in length, and that doesn’t leave much room.

Image Quality

The lens delivers very sharp images with excellent detail. As always, just click on the images to see larger files.

Colours are uniformly excellent too

Bokeh can be creamy

but also a little coarse

Close-ups are wonderful but with this depth of field, it's best to usal manual focus to ensure that you're focusing on the right thing. 

Sharpness is very even across the range of apertures I tend to use, from f/2.8 to f/8. There is no visible distortion of any kind and I rarely saw chromatic abberation (colour fringing). Vignetting (light fall-off in the corners) is not an issue on a DX body (the tests say it it's noticable on FX bodies - this is an FX lens).

Handling, construction and build

It's a solid lens of modest proportions - it weighs 425g and is 7.3 x 9cm in size. The lens has 9 diaphragm blades, 2 aspherical elements, one ED glass element, nano crystal coating and super integrated coating. It has a distance scale and even a Depth Of Field Scale. It's plastic but it looks and feels like a quality lens.

The focus ring is almost an inch wide, is well weighted and low-geared, so manual focus is easy. There's the usual switch for AF and MF, but you can overide AF at any time. There are no handling isues, with the autofocus fast and reliable even close-up. There's no focus lock to limit hunting, and the lens doesn't need one. The lens balances well on the smallish but solid body of the D5100. 

Summing up

This is a quality lens at an attractive price, no doubt about it. Whether it's worth grabbing depends on your needs. I've been cheating and getting great images of flowers and people using Nikon's 55-300mm kit zoom. Creamy bokeh is no problem zoomed out but you're shooting at f/5 or f/5.6, and you're standing a lot further back. Speed is no longer as critical as it once was with cameras like the D5100, but f/2.8 is nice to have on tap.

The next two images were taken with a Nikon D5000 and the 55-300mm f/3.5-5.6 G. The first one is as sharp as a tack, and the second one shows the colours and the kind of bokeh we treasure.

It's hard to imagine creamier, dreamier bokeh from any lens, or better colour rendition. The 55-300 is a bargain as I've said more than once.

Regarding the 60mm f/2.8 Micro, I'm in two minds about it. I haven't had a chance to do serious portraits work as yet, and I don't tend to do a lot of that. Nor do I do a lot of macro work, apart from product shots for articles like these. The shot below doesn't really qualify as a portrait, but it shows the lens struggling for once (with the background).

A few reviews that might help you decide:

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-60mm-2-8G-Micro-Nikkor-Cameras/product-reviews/B0013A1XDY

http://www.adorama.com/NK6028AFGU.html#ProductReviews

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=377

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/60mm-afd-vs-afs.htm

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/394-nikkor_60_28

Kim