X100 Urban Guerrilla Photography

 A run down back alley provided a great backdrop with nice soft overhead lighting

Yup that's Guerrilla, not G-oh-rilla, as in Che not Kong. If you remember back to my last outing with the X100 I had originally planned to do this sort of shoot then. Due to a sudden cold snap the last time though outdoor shooting was scrapped and we headed to the local university. Well spring seems to be here now and I'd been meaning to work with this cool little camera slinging hipster I'd met on the plane to Halifax a few years ago. Clare agreed to step in front of the lens for me as we set out downtown to scout around and just shoot at any and all interesting locations we found. I had done something similar to this once before but we stuck to outdoor locations, with the X100 being so inconspicuous I could also sneak into cool buildings without my big dSLR setting off alarms that there is a pro photographer in the building.

Nobody batted an eye while we hung out in front of these elevators shooting away

The X100 proved to be great for doing this, not only did we not get hassled even once about taking photos we were given cookies :) That's right, while shooting in a stairwell of one of the cities higher end hotels a staff member carrying a tray was approaching us, "that's it" I thought here's where we're going to get kicked out but no instead he lowers the tray which turned out to be covered in cookies and offered us one.

Taken just minutes before free cookies

I must admit I'm still getting used to the X100, I'm constantly second guessing my focus, especially when shooting at f2. Most times my paranoia proves to be unjustified I just miss that reassuring feeling of the lens shifting and locking into focus that a bigger lens on an SLR body gives you. The other thing is how the camera doesn't automatically cross over into macro when the subject gets closer than a certain distance. I don't even need auto, I'd settle for a button that I can press without having to move the camera from my eye. When doing portraits I seem to be riding this line between macro range and normal range and I missed a few poses as my model relaxed and shifted as I had to enable or disable macro mode, with the moment lost I couldn't re-pose her to get the same look. The next shoot I do I'm going to try to put it in manual focus mode and just do the AF lock trick that Zack Arias mentions in his initial review of the X100. A few other pet peeves I realized were these: Why is there no option to enable Auto ISO from within the ISO menu? I've set my custom function button to bring up ISO yet in order to enable/disable auto ISO I have to scroll through menus. The other isn't so much a peeve as perhaps a design flaw, apparently if you have your camera in macro mode with manual focus enabled then turn the camera off you should not turn the camera back on with the lens cap in place because during the initialization the lens extends, hits the cap, then your camera gives an error telling you to turn the camera off then back on. This had me depositing bricks in my joe-boxers the other night when it happened. Luckily a power cycle cleared this but still its not something I want to repeat. Fuji should do two things, a) forget macro setting when camera is powered off b) return the lens to a known starting point when powered down c) sense via incoming light if a lens cap is on before performing the lens initialization d) not design a lens that extends past the outside of the bezel in the first place. I can live with these issues however and am still stoked on my X100, in a few years maybe I'll upgrade to the X300 or 400 and by then fingers crossed maybe full frame sensors will be more affordable and will be popping up in these.

I broke a few of my own rules during this shoot too, since this shoot was about experimenting as much as it was about finding new locations. Normally I tell everyone that they're crazy to shoot using an in-camera black and white mode, my argument is that you're just limiting what you can do afterwards so you should shoot in colour and convert in post. Going into this shoot I knew I'd be converting to black and white after anyway so I thought I'd try the black and white mode. Since I was doing portraits I chose the bw+g which is black and white with a green filter, this is supposed to give pleasing skin tones for portrait work. One thing I noticed about shooting this way is that it changes the way you compose the images, since you're seeing real time what it looks like in black and white. You're not shifting your angle to block out that nasty yellow building in the background or that puke green car because now they're just pleasing shades of grey. Its the same argument I made about Lensbabies, sure the effect can be done in post but when you're seeing the effect in real time it impacts how you're taking the shots and that matters just as much if not more sometimes.

The other rule I broke was shooting in jpg instead of RAW. I've read lots of X100 reviews where people couldn't say enough good things about the in camera jpg processing and how when shooting RAW and processing in Lightroom they couldn't seem to get as good results as straight from the camera jpgs. On this front I'm not so sure, there were a few times during post where I wished I had the latitude afforded to me that a RAW file would have provided. I was shooting in some dim locations and did wind up underexposing a few times (gotta be checking that histogram!).So a tip for X100 users, if you're shooting jpg make sure you're nailing the exposure (or even just slightly over exposing).

All in all the shoot was really fun and I found a few new locations that I can draw on if needed. There is still many alleys and even more buildings left unexplored so I think there may be quite a few more urban guerrilla shoots in store for this summer, stay tuned!

You just can't beat window light

Poor man's macro really delivers

Closeup of a new Canadian $100 - Razor thin DOF at f5.6
Click the above photo to see all of my macro shots

The other day I spied a Kijiji ad (like Craigslist) for a Canon EOS3000 film SLR with an EF 35-80mm lens & polarizing filter all for $20! It also just so happened that the seller lived across the street from my parent's house, how random is that? I figured I'd snap it up just for the lens if nothing else so I googled the 35-80 to see if it was any good or not. One thread I found said the lens was a mediocre kit lens, even the newer 18-55mm kit lenses were better, however the person went on to say that with a little hacking the lens could be made into a pretty decent macro lens. After seeing some of the photos other people were taking with the modified 35-80 I was totally sold. When I went to pick up the camera and lens the guy said he thought $20 was too much and gave me $5 back! I told him $20 was fine but he insisted so my already sweet deal got even sweeter.

Here is the original forum thread I found on the topic but if you just google "35-80mm lens hack" there are plenty of results and tutorials. There are 3 versions of the EF35-80mm, it sounds like version 1 is the easiest but I found modifying my version 3 model was pretty easy too. Now there are three ways you can go about doing this, the first and simplest way is to just remove the front lens grouping which are all housed together and use the lens that way. The second way is to punch out the 3 lenses that make up the front element so that you can put the plastic back on, this allows you to use a filter to keep dust out of the lens. The 3rd way is to remove only the first and third lenses from the front element, this reduces magnification by a little but allows you the ability to focus using the focusing ring. The 3rd way is the most difficult, especially on the version 3 lens that I have, however for some this might be the best opotion since it increases focal distance a few inches. At this point I'm thinking if I can find another 35-80mm for $15-20 I'll just have one with the front middle element and one without. Having the middle element with the lower magnification will be better for shooting flowers etc.

Once I got home from work yesterday I spent 2 hours shooting anything I could find in my house that I thought might look cool at this magnification :) While I took a break from the shoot and had a smoke out front of my house I even gathered up some small pine branches, pine cones, and a few dead leaves to shoot. I just used a sheet of white paper as a backdrop, my 580EXII with a noname Stoffen on it (triggered wirelessly) provided my lighting. For most shots I was able to keep the power down at 1/128 but it all depended, for a few shots I was up at half power and was bouncing the light off of my ceiling.

A dead leaf proved a worthy subject when dramatic top lighting was applied.



Same leaf but backlit with an LED flashlight

Pine needle tips just poking into focus


The inner portion of an orange slice looks like a flavour explosion at this magnification.

For some reason at times I'd wind up with a light spot in the center of the frame, it seemed to happen most if I was shooting a brighter scene. At first I thought maybe I'd gotten some dust on one of the elements since I was shooting with the front piece off. Cleaning didn't seem to help so I'm starting to think that this is due to the lack of "flocking" due to the missing front piece, the flocking prevents unwanted reflections. The only other explanation is that one of the elements has a small scratch or something on it that I simply wasn't seeing with my naked eye. In the photo below you can sort of see what I'm talking about, I had shots that were way worse but I didn't post them anywhere so this is the best I can do to show you.

In some photos I'd get a lighter spot in the center of the frame, not completely sure of the cause. The subject btw is a weaved cowboy hat my roommate recently bought while in Cuba :)

This proved to be probably the best $15 I've ever spent. Since its winter and there aren't a lot of flowers around to shoot I might actually hit up the flower shop and buy something to shoot, if I do they'll windup in my macro set on flickr so feel free to check back.

Power of Primes

Late this summer I decided to take some of my photography earnings and invest in some new lenses. Since getting my 5D MK II I've become acutely aware of the need for good quality lenses, however, my pockets aren't deep enough to always seek out that illustrious "L" and the red ring that accompanies it. There is a way to cheat this a little though and that is through the power of primes. If you read the reviews on most prime lenses and see their output is often compared to L glass. Rather than being a jack of all trades but a master of none the prime lenses focus their efforts (accidental pun) on being great at just one focal length all while remaining decently affordable.

Knowing my main intent with these lenses would be portraiture I opted for the Canon EF 35mm f/2.0, the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4, and finally the Canon EF 85mm f1.8. The 85mm was initially what got me cruising the B&H site, I'd heard good things about this lens and knew the wide aperture would be great for melting the backgrounds away. I already owned the practically disposable "nifty fifty" but I wanted to upgrade more for build quality than the extra 0.4 of a stop that the 1.4 offered. The 35mm was more of an afterthought, I had emailed a friend needing some help to justify my purchase and while giving me the push I needed also suggested the 35mm.

My first order of business with the new primes was to test them out by doing some maternity portraits of a friend of mine. I decided to revisit a location I'd relied on heavily when I first started out doing portraiture, Kinsmen Park in Saskatoon. I grew up in a nearby neighbourhood and this park has a lot of interesting angles. Already being familiar with it let me focus on shooting rather than scouting for places to setup etc.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 - Shot at 1/640 @ f1.4

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - Shot at 1/200 @ f2.2

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - Shot at 1/500 @ f1.8

I tried shots with all 3 lenses but quickly found that the 35mm was not my favourite choice. Whether it was just my shooting style or the fact that being outside allowed for use of wider lenses I wound up just putting it back in my bag. I'm thinking that where the 35mm will really shine is in my basement studio where space is limited and I'll be shooting in close quarters.

A few weeks later I found myself back at this park with another friend's family to further put the lenses through their paces. This time the 50mm got more use than the 85 just because I was shooting 3 people instead of just 1. By this time the golden hues of autumn had taken hold and with apertures down around 1.8 the backgrounds became a sea of orange and yellows.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 - Shot at 1/200 @ f1.4

Various exposures

By the time I got around to doing one of my last summer shoots, again of friends, I was pretty comfortable with these lenses and was feeling confident that they were indeed a great investment. For this shoot I was pointing the lens at another photographer so I knew I had to be at the top of my game :) His wife was a week away from her due date and at times I was worried we might have to stop the shoot and just head to the nearest hospital. Luckily I was shooting at the University of Saskatchewan which has a hospital right on the grounds, though fortunately we made it through the shoot without anyone's water breaking.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - Shot at 1/200 @ f1.8

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 - Shot at 1/250 @ f1.8

I did wind up using the 35mm for a few shots during this shoot, the shot below wouldn't have been possible with the 50 or 85mm unless I had a lift of some kind.

Canon EF 35mm f/2.0 - Shot at 1/160 @ f2.0

Now I should point out a few things to anyone reading this, especially those newer to digital SLR cameras that might be shooting with cropped sensors. [I explain crop sensors in another post here] All of the entry and mid level cameras have sensors that are not equivalent to a full 35mm frame, most are 1.5 or 1.6 times smaller or "cropped" as they call them. If you use an EF lens on a cropped frame sensor two things will happen: 1) The effective "zoom" of the lens will increase by the crop factor and 2) the dept of field will increase a little. This means that a 35mm lens will behave more like a 50mm and a 50mm will behave more like an 80mm. Shooting at 1.8 on a crop sensor will result in a slightly less blurry background (aka less Bokeh) than if shot on a full frame sensor. Don't let this deter you however, the loss of Bokeh is fairly minimal and if you plan ahead the amount of zoom you get won't matter at all. There is the added bonus that if you ever upgrade to a full frame camera you'll be able to use these lenses whereas your EFs lenses will be useless.

I also want to mention that I bought my lenses online through B&H Photo at a significant savings compared to my local camera stores. I'm not affiliated with B&H at all and I'd actually rather have put money into my local economy but in the end even with shipping I saved a few hundred dollars by ordering through B&H. One aspect I was quite happy with was the shipping, being in Canada online shopping can be a real pain because people forget about brokerage and duty fess which can be ridiculous. Most of the time these insane fees can even be avoided if the US merchant would take the time to fill out an extra form when shipping. B&H apparently does take the time and uses Purolator to get you your stuff within a few days. On a $1200+ order I worked out the duty I paid and it wound up being exactly equivalent to the GST which is what its supposed to be, and the best part is there was no brokerage! I just wanted to point this out because gear is expensive and you shouldn't get gouged on shipping if you don't have to. Also hopefully some of the local stores in Saskatoon will see this and realize how insane it is that I can order stuff from New York and have it shipped while still saving 20% on their inflated prices.

My camera takes crappy pictures, what should I buy?

I've been asked this question numerous times, normally I refer people to this earlier post but I figured I'd rehash the issue and provide some more info.

Essentially it boils down to
a) what exactly are they unhappy with in their current camera
b) what is their budget and
c) is camera size a crucial aspect?

Most of the time when people say they aren't happy with their current camera it due to one of 4 things:
1) Poor lowlight capabilities
2) Poor zoom
3) Pictures aren't sharp enough
4) Too much lag when the shutter is pressed

I'll cover each of these issues and explain why they happen and which type of cameras are affected the most and least.

Common complaints:

Poor lowlight:
All cameras whether film or digital suffer in this environment, photography needs a lot of light because after all we're capturing photons here hence photography ;) In the digital realm it really all boils down to sensor size, the larger the sensor the bigger the "footprint" available for the light to hit. Its like running outside in the rain to collect water, the person with the biggest container is going to get the most water. Point and shoot cameras are immediately at a disadvantage because of their size, smaller body = smaller sensor. If you're dead set on owning a point and shoot you're only real option is to use that nasty on-camera flash to create more light. Digital SLR cameras, having larger sensors, tend to work better than their diminutive point and shoot cousins in this environment. They are still not perfect but they offer a very noticable improvement. At the time of writing this one of the best low-light dSLR's in the entry level range is the Canon Rebel T2i ($979 with 18-55mm kit lens at Don's photo) which yields very acceptable images up to ISO 800. There are more expensive dSLR's with larger sensors (full frame sensors) but these are really out of the price range of most people ($3000+ for just the camera without lenses).

Image sensor sizes, the smallest shown are point and shoot sensors

Poor Zoom:
Once again the point and shoot camera is being dealt a poor hand right of the flop, their small size physically limits the amount of zoom that can be available. Ignore any claims about digital zoom, this is not real zoom at all, it’s the same as blowing it up on your computer and you'll result in a blurry image. Optical zoom is the important number here, 3-5x optical zoom is fairly standtard within the realm of point and shoot cameras (P&S's from hereout) with a few touting 7x optical zoom. When you start going above this range, up to say 14x zoom, you leave the P&S realm and get into the mid-sized "bridge" or "prosumer" cameras. They call them bridge cameras because they bridge the gap between P&S camera and full fledged dSLR's. I tend to tell people to avoid these cameras, the reason is that about 4 out of 5 people that buy them are upgrading because of an interest in photography and end up buying a dSLR soon after anyway. I say skip that expensive step and just go for a dSLR, the size isn't that much bigger than a bridge camera and prices in some instances can be roughly the same. For those scared off by dSLR's because of all of the extra features don't worry, there is still "auto" mode and as you feel more confident you can explore the manual features to improve your photos even more. Lastly with a dSLR you can change lenses so if the kit lens that it comes with isn't enough you can buy a telephoto zoom that suits your needs.

Example of a "bridge" camera, for the most part I say skip these and look into dSLR's which will start at close to the same price.

Pictures aren't sharp:
Most often this complaint is less the camera's fault and more operator error when it comes to image quality. Even though digital cameras are common place now its surprising how many people don't realize you should always press the shutter halfway first, let the camera focus and determine exposure, then press fully. If this isn't done photos are often blurry because you're rushing the camera, often the autofocus doesn't have time to detect a face instead of the background (though this is improviing). Sometimes poor images are due to low light situations like we covered above. Point and shoots are mainly meant to yield nice 4x6 shots, that’s not to say if shot properly they couldn't provide bigger enlargements, but in the end they are made for capturing friends and family more than they are for fine art prints you'd blow up and frame in your livingroom. A station wagon is a station wagon and a sports car is a sports car, they are two different classes and are meant to do two different things, don't set your expectations too high. With the digital era people started viewing their photos on computers, immediately they began viewing them at 100% size and used this to judge image quality, while this is a valid method in some instances really what you should be doing is viewing it at the desired print size. For example a 12MP camera will snap a picture at roughly 4272 x 2848 pixels, this equates to a 14" x 9.5" print at 300dpi (just divide the pixels by 300), most point and shoot cameras when printed or viewed at 100% or maximum size won't yield the nicest quality. If you take the same image and view it at 1200 x 1800 pixels or 4x6 size they image will probably look much better. The truth is that most of the cameras out there are perfectly fine when it comes to image quality when judged by the print sized they'll most likely be used for. The problem is that manufacturers kept making them with higher and higher MP ratings when the sensor itself shouldn't really have that many and didn't need it if you look at what they're going to be used for. In truth anything above a 7MP camera for a point and shoot is really a waste, 7MP will let you make 8x10's at photo quality and can be pushed up to 11x14 in many instances, most people never even make enlargements at these sizes anyway.

Laggy shutter times:
Buy a dSLR. Period. Sad but true even with the most expensive P&S and bridge cameras you're always going to run into shutter lag. Even dSLR's when used in automatic mode will have some amount of lag as it autofocuses and adjusts the exposure however the time it takes to do it will most likely a lot less. Some cameras are worse than others and they way that you use your camera will affect this as well. As mentioned earlier pressing the shutter half way to "prep" the focus and exposure will significantly reduce any lag. Use of a flash can have a huge impact on this as well since it takes time for the flash to charge.

So what should I do?
It depends on a few things. After reading this do you still think you need a new camera? If the answer is yes then you'll need to see if what you want out of a camera is possible given your budget.

Buy another point and shoot?
The only time I'd recommend this is if you have a camera that wasn't made by a reputable name (ie Canon, Nikon, etc), if you're looking for new features like HD video, or if your camera was just really old (2MP for example). There are a few brands out there that have really crappy point and shoot cameras and you wouldn't expect it from the name, Polaroid for example makes terrible digital cameras, Olympus also has left a lot to be desired upon entering the digital arena. As far as MP's go I always tell people not to get to carried away with it but realistically if you're still shooting a 2-4MP camera an upgrade may be desireable. Another acceptable reason would be if your current point and shoot has very limited zoom or no optical zoom at all, in this case you may want to look at a better point and shoot or upgrade to a bridge or dSLR.

Should I look into these bridge/prosumer cameras?
Maybe. This is a really tricky area because they are really not that much cheaper than an entry level dSLR and only slightly smaller. If you think you may be considering a dSLR in the future you should definitely skip this range and hold out for a dSLR. If you're strictly looking for a bit more zoom and some added controls then perhaps a prosumer or bridge camera is precisely what you're looking for, my only advice is give it some serious thought before taking the plunge.

Should I just go all in and get a dSLR?
If you're wanting better photos, don't mind a bit larger camera, and can afford it then unequivocally YES. There are just so many advantages to a dSLR and due to their increasing popularity you can buy amazing cameras for very low prices. Ten years ago consumer level dSLR's didn't even exist, in late 2003 Canon came out with the first one for a resonable price ($1500) and it was 6.3MP. Today you can get an 18MP dSLR capable of full 1080P HD video for under $1000 and a resectible 10MP for $549 with a lens. Plus you can still keep your old P&S for snapshots ;)

Some example cameras from each class
Prices accurate as of Aug 30 2010

Point & Shoot
Canon Powershot SD1400IS ($249)
Pros: Very small and portable, Surprisingly crisp HD video (720p)
Cons: Only 4x optical zoom, can't use optical zoom when recording video

Canon Powershot SD780IS (Low prices if you can still find it in stock, its last years model but virtually identical to the SD1400IS)

Pros: Very small and portable, Surprisingly crisp HD video (720p)
Cons: Only 4x optical zoom, can't use optical zoom when recording video

Canon SX120IS ($229)
Pros: 10x optical zoom (very high for a P&S)
Cons: No HD Video (still has SD video though), Large for a point and shoot

Sony Cybershot DSC-H55 ($269)
Pros: 10x optical zoom (very high for a P&S), HD Video (720p)
Cons: Uses expensive proprietary Sony Memory sticks for the storage medium

Nikon Coolpix S8000 ($279)
Pros: One of the smallest cameras sporting 10x optical zoom, HD Video (720p)
Cons: No optical zoom while recording video

Bridge / Prosumer cameras
Canon Powershot G11 ($549)
Pros: All the controls of a dSLR, solid build, almost the industry standard camera for journalists
Cons: No HD video, only 5x optical zoom

Canon Powershot SX20IS ($449)
Pros: 20x optical zoom, HD Video (720p)
Cons: Lack of RAW support, slow lens at telephoto range (ie aperture is smaller letting in less light)

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ100 ($549.99)
Pros: 24x optical zoom, Full 1080p HD video, Leica lens
Cons: Electronic viewfinder could stand to be higher resolution

Fuji Finepix HS10 ($499)
Pros: 30x optical zoom, Full 1080p HD video
Cons: Slow processing of RAW format images

Digital SLR cameras
*Unlike the rest of the cameras I've listed above I'll include the MP rating for the ones below since the larger sensors actually make it a legitimate spec. Keep in mind that even 7MP will yield a crisp 8x10 print so unless you're planning on making posters you should still avoid getting too caught up in this rating. One caveat is that higher MP will allow you to crop a photo more and still retain detail.

Canon Rebel XS 10MP ($549 with an 18-55mm kit lens)
Pros: Solid entry level camera for a low price
Cons: No video capabilities, 10MP (which is still not bad)

Canon Rebel T2i 18MP ($979 with an 18-55mm kit lens)
Pros: High value for money, Full 1080P HD video, High MP for the price
Cons: Price may be above an entry level budget

Nikon D3000 10MP ($499 with an 18-55mm kit lens)
Pros: Solid entry level camera for a low price
Cons: No video capabilities, 10MP (which is still not bad)

Nikon D90 12.3MP ($999 with an 18-55mm kit lens)
Pros: Wildly popular, first dSLR to allow HD video shooting
Cons: Video is only 720p, price may be above an entry level budget

Sony Alpha A230 10.2MP ($399 with an 18-55mm kit lens)
Pros: One of the most inexpensive dSLR's, allows shooting to SD card as well as memory stick
Cons: No video recording, hotshoe is non-standard and may require adaptors for use with non-sony/minolta flashes

Pentax k-x 12.4MP ($629)
Pros: Compatible with almost all Pentax lenses, burst rate of 4.7 frames per second
Cons: Video is only 720p, no HDMI port

But wait!
Before you go running out the door to drop your hard earned cash on a new camera I recommend doing the following. Leave your cash/cards at home and go window shopping first, if at all possible try the camera out in the store and see how it feels. Write down a list of cameras you're interested in, when you get home scour the internet for reviews on them and see if there is any hidden flaws you didn't notice. Dropping a few hundred bucks or a grand is a big deal and you should be sure of what you want before you drop that kind of cash. I'd also recommend holding off on buying all sorts of accessories for the first week or so while you try out the camera at home, this way you can still return it without getting stuck with a bunch of accessories.

Good luck ;)

Break from digital : A vacation to film land

I don't think I've really mentioned it much (if at all) here on my photo blog but I collect old and unique cameras. Every once it awhile I'll put down my digital cameras and pick up one of these to head out for a little film fun.

The majority of the older cameras I have are medium format TLR's and the odd box camera, there are a few 35mm exceptions like my elegant Werra 3 and the low fi Smena 8M.

It is when I have these cameras in hand that I remember how exciting taking photos was when I was a kid. Each frame was precious because you only had a finite number, no erasing unwanted photos or memory cards that allow for thousands of photos. There was always that feeling of anticipation as you waited to get the photos back from the lab wondering "did they turn out?" Or in some cases "I have know idea what's even on this roll" lol. The kids growing up in the digital age missed out on this (I feel old saying that and I'm only 29), don't get me wrong I love what digital sensors have given us in photography but it's also taken something away.

Today reminded me of that era and gave me a glimpse of that old excitement when I saw this camera while surfing the web:

(Photo from www.japantrendshop.com)

It's the Superheadz Blackbird Fly, a new 35mm TLR that hails from Japan. Other than Seagull I don't think any other company is producing new TLR cameras, sure there was that digital Rollieflex a few years back but at 2MP it was more of a joke than a real camera. These little Blackbird Fly's (aka BBF) are a little pricey at a touch over $100 but are cheaper than the medium format Seagull TLR. I like the fact that they shoot the readily available 35mm film, it's a little easier on the pocketbook compared to spending over $1 per photo with 120 film not counting the film itself. If you're shooting MF because of the higher detail negatives you're most likely shooting on a MF SLR or a higher end TLR anyway so 35mm makes sense for those of us just looking for some fun.

If you are however interested in the medium format route you can get into it on a fairly low budget. The Holga 120N is a cult classic in the field of lomography and can be had for under $50 if you look hard, Diana's (the inspiration for the Holga) are also still available and fit a shoestring budget. Some vintage cameras can be found on ebay or in your local antique shops, the Lubitel II and 166B made from bakelite instead of metal can generally can be had quite cheaply. Lastly, and not to be overlooked, the archaic yet still fully functional Kodak box cameras often sell in antique shops for around $10. The only piece of advice I'd offer when looking for vintage medium format cameras, assuming you want to shoot with them, is to make sure they shoot 120 film and not 620. It is possible to respool 620 onto the fatter 120 spools but its not the easiest process.


Another interesting little camera that is made by the same company is the Superheadz Golden Half which is quite unique itself. This is a throwback to yet another popular genre from yesteryear, a 35mm camera that only uses half a frame per photo netting you twice the pictures! A few years back I was trying to find something similar on Ebay and the vintage versions were fetching prices that were outside of my range. At just over $50 these are still a tad on the pricey side all considering however they are unique and since they're new you don't have to worry about buying one and finding the lens is covered in fungus ;)

(Image from http://kualalumpurcity.olx.com.my)

I ended up ordering an orange Blackbird Fly and a "black mountain" Golden Half, once I get them and put a roll through each I'll make another post reviewing my findings. At one point I'll dig all of my vintage cameras out, take their portraits, and write up a post about all of them too but that'll be down the road.

Ok I bought a dSLR now what?

OK

I bought a digital SLR camera. . .

now what?

A few people have approached me lately with essentially the same question, some were asking about what kind of lenses they should buy others about what kind of software they should use. Thinking that these were probably fairly common questions I decided to write up a little guide outlining a few things you should consider. They are arranged roughly in the order you should consider them too ;)

What attachments/accessories/lenses should I buy?

This all depends on what you plan to do and your budget but here are a few suggestions:

UV Filter

Chances are good that if you bought your camera at any respectable shop they would have tried to sell you one of these right away. No it's not a con by the sales associates (mostly) the idea is that it if something is going to get scratched it'll be a $30 filter instead of a costly lens. If you're just starting out in photography you probably won't need a top of the line brand filter so don't let the sales person get carried away trying to upsell you there.

*Tip: One interesting quirk to watch out for is what you see in the image above. It happens if you're using filters when taking long exposures at night of northern lights. I won't get into the physics of it but it has to do with a certain wavelength of light and the two parallel faces of your lens and the filter.

Lenspen

I think that all photographers should have one of these in their bag. At around $10 you'd be crazy not to have one anyway. One one end is a retractable brush that is good for knocking loose dust and debris and on the other side protected by a cap is a slightly concave felt pad for getting more stubborn materials off your glass. Over time (and depending on usage) they should probably be replaced so you have a new felt tip, that being said I've had mine for years and see no need to change it yet.

• Tip: They also make lenspens for point and shoot cameras, they have a smaller triangular felt pad for cleaning the smaller lenses.

Carrying bag/Camera Backpack

You just dropped a lot of money on your new camera so you should spend a little cash in order to protect it. There is a plethora of options in this department, unfortunately once you're getting into dSLR size bags the price goes up because there is less demand for them.

Above are some choices from LowePro, a company that's been around for decades and is well respected among photographers. There are a variety of choices ranging from simple hip pouches to sling bags and full backpacks which even accommodate laptops.

*Tip: One word of advice is buy a slightly bigger one than you need so that if you pick up a few lenses later on you can still carry them.

Tripod/Monopod

Investing in a decent tripod would probably be next on the list for most people.

Why do I need a tripod? There are a number of reasons but mostly it allows you the luxury of shooting at slower shutter speeds without producing blurry pictures. If you read my guide on understanding lighting you'll already know that you always want to keep your ISO as low as possible (sensitivity to light) in order to get the sharpest photos, however if your available light is already quite low the only options are to increase your aperture and/or lower your shutter speed.

If you're wanting to do any of the following photography you'll need a tripod:
Landscapes, wildlife, macro, sports, lowlight/night photography (lightning, northern lights) and anytime you're using a telephoto zoom lens

The rule of thumb is that 1/60^th of a second is the slowest shutter speed you can safely shoot handheld (though this is changing as image stabilization technology improves) but with a tripod you can have exposures lasting as long as minutes or even hours. As I mentioned above any time you're using a zoom lens you should be using a tripod, the reason is when you're zoomed in that far any small movement gets multiplied by your magnification X.

Good brands for tripods are Manfrotto, Slik, Gitzo, Velbon to name a few. Avoid tripod's designed for video cameras, they tend to be sloppier. When you're looking for a tripod you want one that is sturdy and won't allow your camera to move when all the adjustments are tightened up.

Tip: A monopod may be what you're after as well, they are good for sports photography because they don't take up much space . Keep in mind though that you can always use your tripod as a monopod simply by not splaying the legs out. I'd recommend starting with a good tripod and if you think you need a monopod later then go for it.

Extra lenses:

In short the best two lenses you can add to your kit are a zoom that compliments your kit lens and a nice fixed prime lens.

Zoom lenses:

Most dSLR's come with a general purpose standard lens, typically around 18-55mm. For most situations this is the best lens to use however sometimes you need a little extra zoom and that is where the telephoto lenses come into play. A good companion to say an 18-55mm kit lens would be something like a 70-200mm or a 70-300mm, this way you're not missing much range between the upper end of your 18-55mm and the lower end of your telephoto. If you find a good deal on a lens that will leave you with a gap don't rule it out though, it just means you'll have to keep this in mind when shooting and you may have to move back a little to get the same composition in your shot.

Depending on your camera manufacturer you might be able to find older lens used for a fraction of the cost of a new lens. For example Canon's EF lenses will work on their dSLRs but due to the fact most dSLR's have a smaller sensor the magnification factor will be larger and I'll explain this below in a bit. When in doubt call your local camera shop (Don's or Phase II for example) before purchasing a used lens to make sure it will work with your camera and if possible try it out on your camera first to make sure it fits and the auto-focus is compatible.

A note on cropped sensors:

If you have a dSLR camera and paid less than $3000 for it chances are good that your camera's sensor is what's referred to as a “cropped sensor” or “crop sensor”. This goes back to the days of 35mm film cameras, the film was the part that “sensed” the light and was 35mm diagonally across. The sensors in consumer grade dSLR's are smaller than that of the 35mm frame hence the term “cropped sensor”. What this means is that if you find an older used lens that was made for a film camera the zoom rating will not be accurate anymore. For example if you put a Canon 100-300mm EF lens on a Canon Digital Rebel dSLR which uses a 1.6x crop sensor your effective zoom will actually be 160mm-480mm.

1.3x – Canon EOS 1D/1D MkII
1.5x – Nikon D40/D50/D70/D70s/D80/D200/D2XD2Hs Minolta 7D/Fuji S3 Pro Pentax *istDS/K100D/K110D/K10D
1.6x – Canon EOS 300D/400D/20D/30D

Here's a nice little reference table of standard zoom sizes and their effective zoom's on a crop sensor.

Full Frame 1.3 Crop 1.5 Crop 1.6 Crop

Don't let any of this dissuade you from saving some cash by picking up an older telephoto though as there is another advantage besides the extra zoom. All lenses suffer from some inaccuracies due to how the lenses are ground and what materials they are made from etc, this results in the center of the lens being sharper than the outer edges of it. When you put one of these older lenses on a crop sensor camera you dramatically improve the quality of the image because the sensor only uses the central portion of the lens thus discarding most of the area that is degraded.

As mentioned previously if you plan on shooting with a zoom lens you should really consider using a tripod, at higher zoom ranges any vibration or shakiness is multiplied dramatically and will result in blurry images.

One last thing to note is that when buying any lenses you typically pay a lot more if you want a larger aperture (aka a faster lens). Where a 70-300mm F5.6 lens may cost $250 the same lens capable of f2.0 may run in the thousands.

Prime Lenses

Before the days of variable zoom lenses they were all fixed zoom aka prime lenses. Why would anyone even consider a lens so limiting? Below are 3 very good reasons:

1. Image quality
Variable zoom lenses are made up of many more elements than a fixed prime lens, this means any errors in how each of these elements are ground will add up and therefore decrease the total optical quality of the lens. Due to this fixed lenses tend to be sharper across the entire image, not just the center. Other optical issues like barrel distortion, pincushion distortion, and chromatic aberration are reduced in prime lenses.

2. Speed
This term may be new to you but when someone refers to a lens as being “fast” they mean it takes in a lot of light allowing you to use a faster shutter speed. Due to how they are made they often are available with very wide apertures (1.2, 1.4, 1.8 etc) compared to the variable lenses. Why is this important? Photographers always run into the same problem: not having enough light. Say you're shooting indoors and want to avoid the use of a flash (at a wedding for example) and your camera tells you in order to get a proper exposure you need to shoot at 1/4^h of a second at ISO 100 at f5.6. 1/4^th of a second is going to result in a blurry shot even if you're using a tripod because the people will probably be moving a little. If you have an F1.4 prime lens available that would give you 4 more stops of light to play with letting you shoot at 1/60^th of a second instead which is shoot-able handheld. In short it gives you options.

3. Shallow depth of field thanks to wider apertures

By using a very wide aperture (F1.4 or 1.8 etc) a very dreamy effect can be accomplished as backgrounds softly blur away allowing the viewer's eyes to be drawn to what matters.

So which focal length should you buy?

If you're going to pick up a prime lens I suggest going for a 50mm. The reason is that this is a very popular focal length for portraiture and therefore manufacturers make higher volumes resulting in lower prices. For both Canon and Nikon a 50mm prime can be found for under $150 and most likely other manufactures have similar prices to stay competitive.

Keep in mind though you may have to apply that multiplication factor to the focal length that we covered earlier in this article so your 50mm may end up working more like an 80mm if you're shooting a Canon. Don't get hung up on that though as generally “portrait” lenses are regarded as anything between 50-100mm.

Software Options

Here are a few options when it comes to image editing/library management. I highly recommend trying all of the free ones first as well as any trial downloads you can find before spending any cash at all.

Photoshop (CS4 is $1000, Elements Ver 8 is $129.99)

Now for image editing software Adobe Photoshop is the gold standard in the industry (CS4 is the current version), it’s the program that everyone uses. It is also ridiculously expensive which leads to a lot of pirating, there are tons of torrents available if that is the path you choose (I'm not condoning it). Another, more affordable option, is Adobe Photoshop Elements which is a "lite" version that sells for $129.99 as I write this at London Drugs. Check Adobe's website for downloadable trial versions before dropping any cash.

• Pros: It is the industry standard bar none.

• Cons: Pricey, A bit of a steep learning curve, I've used it for 8 years and am still learning new things every day.

GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program) FREE!

GIMP has been around for years now and has come a long way, it is by far one of the most full featured photography programs second only to Photoshop and maybe a few others. The best part is that since it started out in Linux the software is FREE. I recommend downloading simply because it is free and trying it out, chances are it will do everything you need it to do. Realistically the stuff that Photoshop has that GIMP lacks is more for advanced users anyway. There are parts of GIMP that aren't very user friendly or just outright backwards if you're used to Photoshop but the price kinda makes up for that ;)

• Pros: Its FREE, full featured, and has an abundance of free tutorials and books online

• Cons: Steep learning curve, not user friendly in some instances, awkward if you're used to Photoshop

Picasa a FREE program made by Google

I'm a huge fan of FREE and often recommend this program. It's no Photoshop when it comes to features but it is very user friendly and covers all the basics like cropping, resizing, exposure correction, and some nifty filters for spiffing up your photos. Picasa also acts as a photo manager for organizing your pics and has other handy features like "email" that will re-size your photo and automatically place them in a new email for you to send (supports outlook, gmail, and a few others). Personally I don't like the photomanager portion of it but that's just me.

• Pros: It's FREE, covers most if not all of the “basics”, allows for fun projects like collages and slideshows

• Cons: Due to its easy to use nature more serious photographers may not like the lack of complete control.

Adobe Lightroom ($369.95)

It takes its name from the film days where photographer's would view their negatives on a light table etc. Essentially it is a workflow tool for organizing your photos and is also a feature rich "digital darkroom". It gives you a plethora of controls for developing your photos and most "pros" use this to import & tweak their images before editing them in Photoshop. This isn't really a tool for beginners but if you're shooting in RAW already you might want to look into it.

• Pros: Its fast becoming the industry standard for workflow and photo management, offers finer development control and Photoshop, great for processing RAW files

• Cons: Price, Semi-steep learning curve, really meant for serious photographers

Everyone photographer should have a pocket camera...

Altoids, the curiously strong (and cheap) camera case!!!

It doesn't matter if you have a billion-pixel-best camera in the world-uber-DSLR hopped up on steroids it won't amount to jack squat if you don't have it with you when you need to take a shot. A few times now I've had my shots or videos used in the news simply because I was the only one present with a camera, the shots were not always the best quality but they were often the only ones available. In one instance there was a large accident near where I work, photos I took were used by the local newspaper in an online story and the video was used by a few local stations. One day at work we had some stray moose wander into our parking lot and once again I had some of my footage make it onto the news. Last winter during a -40º C cold snap a spur of the moment experiment let to a video that ended up being used province wide of water freezing before it hit the ground. They played it throughout the winter whenever there was a cold snap ;)

Point and shoot cameras are sometimes looked down upon by us "serious" photographers but there is still a place for them for multiple reasons, the main one being size and portability. Another key advantage is that they don't attract a lot of attention, something very handy for street photography or events where "professional cameras" aren't allowed. A few years back when I visited China I accidentally left my point and shoot back here in Canada. I was so envious of my fellow travellers as they popped candid street photos while I had everyone shying away from the business end of my monstrous 40D. When I first purchased my G10 I read an article of a man who had to cover a university's championship baseball team's trip to the white house, his G10 slipped under the radar because it wasn't an SLR. [On a side note that last link is an interesting read since he accidently snapped his SD card in half whilst trying to dump the shots]

My current camera "family" is like the 3 little bears story, my SD780IS is the baby, my G10 is the middle one, and my 5DMKII is the big one. In this story however the "middle" one isn't necessarily the right one. Each have their place and for this post I'm going to focus on the SD780IS and the G10.

I'll admit I'm a bit biased towards Canon personally but even if you're a die hard fan of brand X it doesn't really matter when it comes to point and shoot cameras. Its not like the SLR world where you have hundreds or thousands of dollars invested in glass that's keeping you loyal to a specific manufacturer. Some of the Nikon cameras coming out are becoming tempting, likewise Pentax has some cool water and weatherproof point and shoots and Panasonic's Lumix series is quite good as well.

Getting the most out of your tiny camera.
CHKD is one of the biggest reasons I'm still going back to Canon for my tiny camera "fix". If you haven't heard of it I recommend clicking the link. Basically its what is referred to as a "firmware extension" that unlocks tons of control in your point and shoot giving you SLR-like features. Shutter speed, aperture, ISO, custom bracketing and even RAW! Using the shutter overrides some people have claimed insanely fast shutter speeds above 1/20000th of a second. But the fun doesn't stop there, you can even run scripts on your camera like a motion detection script that some have used to capture lightning, or an intervalometer script to take cool time-lapse shots. These clever MIT students used a cheap Canon A470 running CHDK to take pictures in SPACE!

Perhaps you're a photographer who is just starting out, say you want to get into using some off camera flash ala strobist well if you're running CHDK you can set your on-camera flash to manual to avoid that nasty pre-flash that is preventing you from using those cheap optical slaves. This summer I'm planning on doing a fashion shoot using only my SD780IS just to prove it can be done. If/when that happens I'll post the results here.

Know your limits, then bend or break them
The image quality of a point and shoot may not rival a full frame SLR but if you wield it correctly and know your limitations amazing things can still be done with these cameras.

Generally the really tiny cameras (like the Canon Elph series) all suffer from the same thing, a small sensor and small optics. The very thing that makes them so nice and portable is their biggest downfall. Small sensors don't work well with low light situations or tolerate high ISO's very well. The small lenses they come with often suffer from barrel distortion and pincushion distortion when they are either zoomed all the way in or all the way out. While the lowlight issues can't always be avoided the optical distortion caused by small lenses can be easily corrected using software like Adobe Photoshop or Lightroom.

One of the frequently overlooked issues with point and shoot cameras that is getting worse with every generation is the mega-pixel race, every year they're cramming more and more photosites into the same size sensor. In more than a few instances its been proven that older version of the same cameras that are lower MP actually produce better images.

For the most part the image quality of most point and shoots aren't going to win any awards but what I told you this doesn't have to be the case? Well one way is to take a bunch of pictures then stitch them into one huge picture. Essentially you fake a large sensor. Confused? Let me explain. Say your point and shoot at full resolution and highest quality takes a really sharp 5x7 but once you start to blow it up to 8x10 or 11x14 it starts to look poor. Now take that same subject but zoom way in (optical zoom only) and take 20 pictures to cover the same area. Now since each of your photos have enough resolution to make great 5x7's when you stitch them together with some software like this you'll have a very large shot that looks sharp. The shot below is an example of trying this technique out, it was taken using a piddly 3.2MP Canon SD200. It was made up of about 50 individual photos and I later printed it sharply at 16x20!

What about the middle road?
Ok some of you may say those little cameras are too tiny, I want something a little beefier. No problem, the Canon G series, the Nikon P600, or the Panasonic Lumix LX3 among others might be right up your alley. All 3 bring SLR-like control to the table, are still pocketable (mostly) and have. Once again I'm biased towards the G10 but this time it is attachment based in that I can use my 580EXII on it. That being said the other two have some nice perks of their own, the P600 for example has built in GPS for automatic geotagging and the Panasonic will do HD video. All 3 still suffer a little from the smaller sensors with respect to ISO noise (try to keep it below 200) but the G10 at least in good light could give some dSLR's a run for their money.

I'm not sure about the Nikon or the Panasonic but the G10 has one huge ace up its sleeve, amazingly high speed sync. Using a wired connection the G10 can sync a flash up to 1/4000th of a second thanks to its electronic shutter. This feat can let you do some pretty amazing things like overpowering the midday sun. There are two ways to do this, either use a very high power strobes full blast like an AB1600 or White Lightning 1800 and crank your aperture up to f16 or higher, or use a few speedlights at low power at a very fast shutter speed.

In conclusion
Don't dismiss these diminutive cameras, keep one in your shirt pocket and keep these tips in mind:

• When possible avoid low light situations
• Try to keep the ISO below 200
• Use the low key nature to your advantage (street photography, concerts etc)
  
• Get large sharp images by taking a bunch of smaller ones and stitch them together
• Use the features unique to smaller cameras like the electronic shutter to you advantage
• Take advantage of the video feature, most point and shoots are near camcorder quality and newer models are
  

Softbox Umbrellas from Steve Kaeser

Two 40" softbox umbrellas from www.skaeser.com

I picked these up a little while ago and have been meaning to write a review for a while but haven't had a chance.

I'll start by saying that I love softboxes, especially ones that I can use my speedlights in. Last summer (or was it the summer before?) I took the plunge and picked up the 28" Westcott Apollo softbox for speedlights after watching the Onelight Workshop DVD. Since then I've almost totally abandoned my umbrellas ;)

Obviously I was quite stoked to come across these softbox umbrellas while surfing the web, at the time of purchase you could get 2 for a measly $29.95 on sale. Unfortunately their site only listed UPS for shipping and living in Canada I've been gouged all too often by UPS's exorbitant brokerage fees. I decided to email the company and see if they'd ship USPS instead, to my delight they said they would and they sent me an invoice. They wanted$25 for USPS shipping ($5 less than UPS) and while I thought that was a little steep for a $30 item I realized the box was probably oversized so there wasn't much I could do. Fast forward a few weeks and UPS knocks on my door, no that was not a typo they still shipped UPS! I ended up getting charged another $20 for brokerage even though I went out of my way to get a USPS quote! So now I've paid $45 for shipping on a $30 item. Not pleased with this I emailed the company and have yet to get a response (about a month ago at time of writing). Thats the end of my rant, I'll get on with my review and sample images now. I just couldn't in good conscience write a review of this product without explaining some of the extenuating circumstances.

On with the review!

Shot with a 580EXII in Steve Kaeser Softbox Umbrella

The umbrellas came with nice carrying bags for the umbrellas, an extra that I wasn't really expecting for such a low priced item. My next surprise was the build quality which was in fact quite good! I've bought some cheap umbrellas in the past and regretted it when they nearly fell apart in my hands, these however I see sticking around for quite some time.

I couldn't wait to test them out so I arranged a quick test shoot with a girl I had actually just done a shoot with the week prior. Like the previous shoot we just did it in her apartment using a nice large section of blank white wall as a backdrop. Since the area we were shooting in was relatively small I opted to just use a single softbox umbrella.

Initial impressions:
Right off the bat I noticed that there was a lot more spill with these than with my Westcott Apollo, I'm not sure if it was due to the larger surface area or the fact that the Steve Kaeser boxes don't have a recessed panel like the Apollo. If you put a gun to my head I'd say it was probably the lack of recessed panel. This does limit you a little if you're working in a small environment but its definitely not a dealbreaker.

One thing I had read on some forums was that light distribution was not equal across the whole umbrella. I really didn't find this to be that much of an issue, if there was a hotspot at the center I didn't notice it very much at all. I found the quality of light to be on par with my Westcott. As you can see from the shots my 580EXII didn't seem to have any problems filling the softbox.

I've yet to try them out with my studio strobes but would imagine they would work pretty well. I would imagine the region blocked by the head might be a little darker but I'd have to see whether it is negligible or not. The nice thing is that you don't have to go out and buy a specific speedring to use them with your equipment.


The breakdown:

Pros:

• Cheap (provided you don't have the shipping hassles I did)
• Well built
• Fairly even light (some sticklers might disaggree)
• Versatile in that either speedlights or monoblocks can be used

Cons:

• Diffusion panel is not recessed and results in spill
  
• Diffusion panel is not removable for cleaning etc

Conclusion:
For the price you'd be crazy not to have at least one f these in your bag. They're as small and portable as a regular umbrella yet give you the effects of a softbox. I still like my Westcott better but when you think you could get 8 of these for the same price I'd say start with a set of these instead.

Improvements:
If there were ever a rev 2.0 made I'd suggest making this unit convertible so it could be used as a shoot through as well, if they also made the diffusion panel removable it could then also be used as a reflective umbrella making it one of the most versatile pieces of gear ever!

A few parting shots ;)