Mark II Artist’s Viewfinder Announced

September 20, 2013 by

The worst thing in developing cutting edge software is that you can’t share your excitement the moment you achieved something great. And by the time you can publicly talk about it the excitement is long gone. So this is a special moment for me: talking about an app that’s still in the works, although the major pillars are already in place. And this app is the successor of our Viewfinder family, the Mark II Artist’s Viewfinder.

vf2header2

There isn’t a single piece of code that we haven’t touched during the making of the Mark II. Everything is modernized, made simpler, faster, and better – and have its design updated.

The flat, simple design iOS 7 brought resonates with me deeply. So my goal was to create something that looks every bit as great as it works. I can go on for hours telling stories, and probably will during the coming weeks (just keep in mind that finishing the app is my top priority right now).

For now I’d like to present you a list of what’s new (from the announcement press release):

  • By utilizing the Retina display, frame lines are now 1/3 of their former width. This, along with their increased opacity and contrast, results in drastically improved visibility and reduced interference with the composed shot.
  • The main screen now handles like a camera, complete with auto-exposure lock, auto-focus lock, AF confirmation beep and single shot/continuous AF support. A new Quick Control Screen for accessing frequently needed functions and a customizable Fn Key make the new app more productive.
  • The Mark II can save clean full-resolution photos with location and simulation metadata, so it can be also used as a regular camera.
  • The number of simulated equipment setups (now named “virtual cameras”) was increased from 4 to 20. The number of custom cameras and backs was increased from 5 to 20 each. The number of custom focal lengths per virtual camera was increased from 3 to 20.
  • A new menu system is provided for configuring non-simulation parameters of the app.
  • Track logs can be managed from within the app, with no need to connect to a computer via iTunes File Sharing.
  • Quick Lens Change for quickly modifying the lens list of the active virtual camera.
  • Automatic, configurable length image review (can be also turned off).
  • All features and cameras of the former Pro and Cine editions are now available in a single app, no additional in-app purchases needed

And were are already working on cool things that aren’t even on the list ;)

So make sure to visit and keep an eye on the app’s new microsite, available at: https://www.direstudio.com/viewfinder.

Filed Under: My Apps, Photo Software Tagged With: , , ,

Bataflae 32L – Is It The Ultimate Photo Backpack?

August 24, 2013 by

Like most photographers, I had many photo bags over the years. But only a few of those were truly great. In this post I’ll tell you about my reasons to get, and my initial experiences with what I consider the ultimate photo backpack for my needs: the Gura Gear Bataflae 32L.

My Bag Story

My first camera carrying solution was a Canon gadget bag. With a huge red “steal me” kind of logo on the side. It was awful, but was able to carry the D60 and a single lens.

Later on as my lens collection grew I needed a larger bag, and made my first mistake: bought a Lowepro DryZone 200 backpack. It was heavy and it was painful to get access to the main compartment – not to mention that I rarely shoot in an environment where I need a totally waterproof bag. It was an overkill for me. So I sold it just to fund my second mistake: a Lowepro Stealth Reporter 650W. Although it was good when shooting from the car, I realized that this was a mistake while hiking to the Delicate Arch. My conclusion was that I would definitely prefer a backpack to shoulder bags.

The next bag, which is one of those I consider to be a great one, was the Lowepro Mini Trekker (which had been discontinued since then). It was able to hold all my gear those days, as you can see on the picture below.

My Lowepro Mini Trekker in 2004

Lowepro Mini Trekker in 2004

It was a lightweight backpack, with only one downside: wasn’t able to carry a notebook computer. So an upgrade to its bigger brother, the (also discontinued) CompuTrekker AW was a logical step. The brother was also a bit more spacious, so 1-seriers bodies put less stress on the zipper.

Over the years I hauled the CompuTrekker around the globe from Antarctica to Iceland and it served rather well. In it I was routinely carrying: 1D Mark II and 5D (Mark II) cameras; 17-40 f/4L, 24-70 f/2.8L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS and 400 f/5.6L lenses; 1.4x and 2x teleconverters plus both extension tubes in the main compartment. A flash with its external power pack and cables, batteries, and a GPS in the outer pocket. An up to 14″ notebook in its dedicated compartment. I was truly happy with this backpack. Really. So much that I thought I found the ultimate carrying solution.

More Lenses Need More Space

The bag problem resurfaced with the arrival of the 500 f/4L IS. It was huge, just used it for birding, and a separate pack seemed a good solution – mostly because I didn’t want to part with the CompuTrekker. I ended up using a Kinesis L311 long lens case to store and carry it for seven years. Yes, this way I had to carry two bags, but was happy with them – and still have fond memories of this combo.

Until – guess what – my next lens purchase, which was the TS-E 24/3.5L II. I thought that I would carry the TS-E along with the zooms, so I would need a bigger pack again. At that time (late 2011) the best solution seemed to be the Lowepro Pro Trekker 400AW. I got one, and my DryZone memories came back… It is an expedition quality pack, that would definitely withstand lots of abuse – an overkill for my needs. And that toughness comes with a price – it weighs 3.3kg empty. Despite the weight used this pack for two years.

To be honest, I regret buying it: I don’t hike that much with photo gear, so its hiking-oriented features seen no use during those two years. What made my situation even worse is that I replaced my zooms with primes, and the Pro Trekker was half-empty. Even the old Mini Trekker would be too big for those. Putting the 500 f/4L IS into the bag wasn’t an option, as its divider structure didn’t allow that. All this resulted in thinking about replacing the Pro Trekker with a backpack more suitable for my current needs.

Enter the Bataflae

Recently I came across Gura Gear’s new Bataflae product line. One of my friends has a Gura Gear Kiboko, so I knew their quality and design. I didn’t like the butterfly-only opening design of the Kiboko, but the Bataflae promised full opening (which is a must if you want to carry a notebook). My last concern was the configurability of the strap system. The Pro Trekker being excellent in this regard, I had fears that I will not able to configure the Bataflae for my body size, resulting in some rather painful experiences.

After two weekends of measurements, thinking and hesitation I decided to get the biggest Bataflae, the 32L, in black. Although I think the gray one looks better, “black makes your bag look thinner”, which is a huge plus during air travel.

Man, this bag is a pleasant surprise. The experience is kind of getting your first Mac(Book) Pro or Gitzo Systematic tripod: it is so well though out and solves your problems so genuinely, that there’s no going back.  Now I can believe those raving reviews.

It’s Bigger Inside

The empty bag is a tad smaller on the outside than the Pro Trekker, but swallows way more gear. This is because of the divider structure (two huge compartments in the Bataflae vs. three smaller in the Pro Trekker), the slightly taller side walls and the thinner dividers.

And the Bataflae today

Gura Gear Bataflae 32L today

On the right is a picture of my fully packed Bataflae. The left side compartment holds the 5D Mark III and the 650D; 24 f/2.8 IS, TS-E 24 f/3.5L II, 40 f/2.8, 50 f/1.4, 100 f/2, 135 f/2L  lenses with their hoods; 1.4x II and 2x III teleconverters and extension tubes; 600EX flash under the hoods; and a few filters tucked under the 24/2.8.

In the right side compartment is the 500 f/4L IS (after the weight reduction treatment it went through last winter); extension cord and battery pack (under the 500) for the flash; and to my biggest surprise I was able to find a place for the Mongoose M3.6 head – which clearly show how deep is the bag.

As you can see I still have plenty of free space.

Pockets on the flap are large and easily accessible (as they were on the CompuTrekker – much better than the Pro Trekker). These and the outer pockets hold all those small gadgets such as batteries, remote switches, shoulder straps, cleaning supplies, and so on.

My fully loaded bag weighs just shy of 16kg. Honestly, I’m not really calibrated to carry more on my back.

Carrying Comfort

All my worries vanished the instant I put the bag on my back. Despite the less padded strap, it feels more comfortable than the Pro Trekker – even fully loaded. There’s only one difference between the strap systems of the two bags: you can’t adjust the Bataflae to your torso’s length (here the PackJack tool of the Pro Trekker is a plus). Fortunately the 32L Bataflae fits me just perfectly, so there’s no height adjustment necessary (this was one of the reasons I went with the largest one).

A rather nice addition to the strap system are the strap keepers: small velcro strips with which you can get rid of those dangling straps.

Quite a few reviews of the Bataflae tout how easy it is to strap a tripod to the bag (you can do it two ways – to the side and to the back). Well… This is bullshit in my opinion. Yes, you can strap a toothpick-legged tripod to it, but I’m completely sure that if you buy this kind of bag then your gear demands heavyweight support. I have a Gitzo 3532LS with an Arca Swiss Z1sp head, and would never-ever strap it to this bag. Even if the elastic pouches on the sides could withstand the tripod’s weight (which I doubt), it would protrude too much above the bag (and my head). So I still carry my tripod separately.

Working from the Bag

99 percent of time I work from my bag in the following situations:

  • The bag is on the back seat of a car. Usually I’m sharing the car with another photographer, who also puts his/her bag on the back seat. I found opening larger backpacks (like the Pro Trekker) to be problematic in these cases, while the smaller CompuTrekker was just fine – there’s a top flap collision when both of us try to open the bags. The butterfly opening here is a big help.
  • On a smallish boat, sometimes shared with others. The butterfly opening here helps to keep a small equipment footprint, leaving room for other supplies (food/water) and also for my legs. It is also great to have the bag half-closed but accessible all the time, as accidents can happen (from birds dumping their load on the boat and the bag, to larger fishes jumping into the boat – both happened to me).
  • Out in the field, where I must put down the bag on whatever ground happens to be there. I don’t know about you, but I really hate to put a wet or muddy pack on my back, so previously I carried a piece or nylon or closed cell foam sheet to lay under the bag. The Bataflae has a detached rain cover, which can be used as a ground cloth for this exact purpose – and can also be lost because it’s detached. Anyway, I will still bring a cheap piece of nylon sheet as a ground cloth, not risking to lose or damage the expensive cover/sheet of the Bataflae. In this case the butterfly opening is a plus too, as reduces the equipment footprint and hides the bag’s content from passersby.

To summarize: I find the butterfly opening a truly usable feature that makes my life much easier. Actually I use full opening in just one situation: when I carry a notebook.

Where to Put a Notebook?

There’s no dedicated notebook compartment, so what to do? Of course you can carry a dedicated notebook bag (as a personal item while traveling by air, for example). But there’s a more compact method, one that I started to use back in the Pro Trekker days.

Observation: there’s no ideal place for a notebook compartment on a photo backpack. If one places the compartment to the back, then the whole weight of the bag’s content will push on the laptop’s lid when the pack is laid on its back. I had some display panel damage from this in the past. Or one can place the compartment on the outside of the front flap, just like the Pro Trekker does. This also has drawbacks: the notebook can hit the ground if you quickly open the flap, and the laptop’s weight will act on a longer level arm, so you will feel it heavier.

To counteract these I started to put the notebook inside the main compartment (within its sleeve, of course). It is even easier to do this with the Bataflae, because the higher walls leave enough clearance for my sleeved MacBook Pro.

Conclusion

As you might have noticed: I really like the Bataflae. On the level I liked the CompuTrekker. But what will I do when I get more gear? Well, as I can’t carry more than 20kg (backpack, tripod, notebook combined), something will have to leave the bag.

All in all: I highly recommend the Bataflae 32L.

Filed Under: Photo Equipment Tagged With: , , , ,

The Tiny General

August 13, 2013 by

Earlier this month I spent a few days on photographing whiskered terns. On Lake Tisza they pretty much ignore the “tourists” and with care and patience you can stay invisible in the colony without disturbing their daily lives.

And they do lots of interesting things: feeding, fighting, you name it, they do it. My favorite time there is when the chicks are still young and brown. But don’t get fooled by the tiny plumeballs – their behavior is fully tern-ish from day one.

The chick on the image below was asking for some delicious fish or frog (I guess, because stopped yelling after getting the bottom half of a frog) during the evening feeding session.

The Tiny General

The Tiny General

Filed Under: My Photos Tagged With: ,

Making It Easier to Put Your Cap On

July 23, 2013 by

Manufacturers usually go for “good enough” solutions, even if they can make something significantly more usable with just a bit of more expense. Case in point: Canon rear lens and body caps (I’m citing Canon here, because I’m a Canon shooter, but it also applies to most other manufacturers).

If you ever shoot in marginal light (if you are a landscape or nature photographer, I bet you do it most of the time), then probably run into the hassle of putting your caps on. To comply with Murphy’s law, you’ll always try to attach it in the wrong position at the worst possible moment (I even have a cap at the bottom of Bryce Canyon because of this).

We have a red alignment dot on the lens mount and on lenses, but the stock caps only contain a small, shallow hole marking the attachment position – which is pretty hard to see. And the solution is pretty simple: fill that hole with white (or your color of choice) paint! It can be done in a few minutes for your entire lens collection (after you mastered the technique – I’m using a thin wire to put just a drop of paint there).

My lens cap mod

My lens cap mod

I’m using this trick for almost a decade and haven’t had any issues with putting on the caps since then.

Filed Under: Photo Equipment Tagged With: , , ,

Canon EF 24mm f/2.8 IS USM First Impressions

July 19, 2013 by

My sister bought my beloved 24mm f/2.8 lens a couple of months ago (and is making some pretty impressive images with it, this one being my favorite). My good old 400mm f/5.6L USM also have a new owner, so I was thinking about what new equipment should all this money fund.

The first idea was to buy a Fuji X100S, but after trying it I decided that it would require me to accept far more compromises than I’m willing to, so turned back to get some good Canon glass. The 24/2.8’s successor to be exact.

The lens arrived yesterday and just put it through the initial tests and autofocus microadjustment calibration with FoCal. Here are my initial observations.

Image quality

It’s pretty damn good – as was the old 24. A little more resolution (+), a little more distortion (-), but very similar looking images. The center is crazy sharp (much better than my TS-E 24mm). Corners aren’t that sharp, but are still very good. No surprises here. Autofocus consistency is a bit down from 99.1% to 98.6% – they are practically the same in field conditions.

What surprised me pleasantly is the aperture sharpness profile of the new lens (after the AFMA calibration I usually do a focus consistency test as well as an aperture sharpness test).

as-24-old

Aperture sharpness of the old 24/2.8

Above is the old lens’ profile. Numbers from the vertical scale were removed intentionally, as they can’t be used outside of a single measurement (to compare lenses).

And here is the new lens’ profile.

as-24-new

Aperture sharpness of the new lens

Much better at f/2.8, and the sharpness is more consistent through the entire aperture range I routinely use (up to f/11).

Build quality

There’s a night and day difference between the 25 years old design and the contemporary one. The 24 IS’ build quality is on par with my 135/2L. Both utilize engineering plastic as the outer shell, and are tough, but still lightweight. The focusing ring is smooth and well dampened. The lens hood is, well…

Canon does not ship a lens hood with it by default. So it’s a separate purchase. With a lens in the L territory in many aspects (image quality, build quality and and also price), it would be nice to include the hood in the box. Heck, they can even put a red ring on this lens!

The hood itself is the best design I’ve seen from Canon yet. The only drawback is that you can’t remove the lens cap when it’s attached. You have to remove the hood to access the cap. Again, for this price I would expect to get the new center-pinch lens cap. So I might finally pull the trigger and buy a bunch of center-pinch Mark II lens caps.

Image stabilization

The lens belongs to my “travel trio“, so it will be used mostly handheld, sometimes in marginal light. I routinely do landscapes in those conditions and need larger depth of field, so a larger (f/1.4 for example) aperture isn’t a solution for me. But image stabilization is!

Did a couple of low light tests last evening: with a bit of patience I was able to handhold the lens up to half a second! 1/4 second exposures were a piece of cake (the test was done with a 650D, but I expect similar results on my 5D3).

I should also mention that the IS is so silent that I have to put my ears close to the lens to hear it. Also there’s no jump in the viewfinder image when IS is engaged. Light years ahead of the IS systems in my older lenses.

Conclusion

This lens is a winner. If you are into landscapes and want a lightweight and great lens, do yourself a favor and try one. I bet you’ll be immediately hooked.

Recently Canon refreshed their short non-L prime range (24/28/35) with great lenses. I can hardly wait for a similar refresh in the normal/short telephoto range (50/85/100). And may I ask for an image stabilized 135/2L?

Filed Under: Photo Equipment Tagged With: , , , , , ,

DoF Conversion Factor – The Exercise

July 14, 2013 by

In my previous post I described how easy it is to calculate apertures to get equivalent depth of field on different formats. I presented there all the equations needed for DoF calculation, but left the actual “paperwork” to you.

In this post I’ll do these calculations for those of you who did not do the homework ;)

Our goal is to get the same amount of depth of field for two setups. Object distance is also the same, so we can simply work with hyperfocal distances.

H≈fF2NFcF≈fC2NCcC

Where the index F denotes full frame and the C index denotes crop sensor cameras.

We also know how the required full frame and crop factor focal lengths relate (X denotes the crop factor), so:

X2fC2NFcF≈fC2NCcC

Now let’s see how the circle of confusion changes with the format. Having the exact same print dimensions, magnification will be higher for smaller formats.

mC=XmF

Viewing distance and your eye’s resolution are also the same, so:

cC=tan⁡(π180Re)DvXmF

XcC=tan⁡(π180Re)DvmF=cF

To summarize what we have:

X2fC2NFXcC≈fC2NCcC

Which after simplification leads to:

XNF≈1NC

That is, we arrive to the result:

XNC≈NF.

Filed Under: Photo Technique Tagged With: , ,
« Previous Page
Next Page »