Camera Bits (Photo Mechanic) President describes why the iPad is a non-starter for photographers as an editing platform

There are a lot of photographers that saw the iPad and immediately thought it would make an excellent mobile platform for downloading pictures from a camera, quick editing, and uploading to the Web. Well, there are a lot of reasons why this isn't so. The two main reasons are power and openness: 1) Power: Photo editing requires a lot of computing horsepower. 20 Megapixel, 16 bit images are BIG, and giving you instant feedback when you move those brightness sliders around takes a ton of computing which the poor little iPad/iPod/iPhone just doesn't have. Also, since the hardware is so hobbled with respect to I/O, you have trouble just getting your photos onto the device.

2) Openness: Assuming hardware power wasn't a problem you would still be up against Apple's stance about app development in the iPad ecosystem. As Dennis Walker pointed out in his letter below, "the iPad is meant for the consumption of media, not the production of media content." Apple won't let you read from flash cards and they won't let you access the filesystem. Combined with the threat of having your app pulled if it becomes too full-featured (a full-featured app might be pulled for duplicating Apple functionality), and there's really no way to expect a serious photo application on the platform.

These have always been my thoughts and now Dennis Walker, the President of software company Camera Bits has written a blog entry saying just as much. You can read his blog entry here.

He goes into more detail than I could but his essay mirrors my thoughts exactly. I'm amazed how excited people are getting about tablet computing. I'm a firm believer in the laptop and I really wish Apple would make a netbook. But an iPad isn't the right tool.

Canon 10-22mm wide-angle zoom lens is for sale

Since upgrading to the Canon 5-D mkII last year, I've been planning to phase out my reduced frame (EF-S mount) lenses. I just picked up the 17-40 mm wide angle zoom which means the 10-22 EF-S lens is ready for a new home. I've found I really enjoy the wide angle view and this is one of my favorite focal ranges. This is always the second lens I'll take when I go somewhere, after a more medium length "walk around" lens. Different photographers are drawn to different things and I find I'm drawn to wide angles. This is also a good lens to make panoramas out of, by taking a single wide shot and then cropping it down to a 2 by 1 aspect ratio, or even a 3 x 1.

Keep in mind that 10-22 on a reduced frame (APS-C, or 1.6x crop) sensor is equivalent to 16-35mm on a "full frame" sensor. So the 17-40 is almost the same lens but not quite as wide. The angle of view is almost 90 degrees in the horizontal direction which means you can stand in the corner of a room and take a picture of the whole thing - sometimes including all four walls.

This lens has been well cared for, but not babied. It was purchased two days before a trip to Burning Man, where it was taped up and sealed pretty well. I've carried it a lot of places and it shows some light scuffing, but that's because it's actually been used. (It also went to Jamaica and Vietnam.) It's always had a filter attached on the front for protection and it works 100% as far as I know and has never gotten wet.

The current price at B & H is $720 after rebate and I'm asking $550. That's about 25% off.

Email me at bjohns@brian-johns.com if you're interested.

New Camera RAW algorithms for 2010 (in Lightroom 3 and Photoshop CS5)

One of the new features of the upcoming Lightroom 3 and the just-released Photoshop CS5 is the new Camera RAW 6.0 module I've recently started playing with it and the results are Amazing.

Some background:

RAW processing software is the software that does development from RAW files to something you can edit and share. (TIFFs or JPGs) The algorithms that go into RAW conversion software are complex and somewhat secret, since the quality of RAW conversion is a selling point for different software manufacturers. Camera makers like Canon and Nikon make software to process their own RAW files and software makers like Apple and Adobe make software that reads the RAW files of multiple manufacturers' cameras.

I've never used Nikon's RAW software but Canon's software (free with any camera that shoots RAW) makes excellent images but is horrible to use. Most photographers use a tool from a third party that does organization and sorting, as well as the basic image processing. Adobe's Lightroom and Apple's Aperture are the two most popular choices.

Potential downside: When you convert your whole photographic life to one of these tools you pretty much have to buy into their RAW processing algorithms. Part of the appeal of tool is the smooth workflow that comes from "development" features being built in to the tool you use for sorting, ranking, and organizing. Both tools allow for external processing engines but it's a really clunky, inelegant solution, so very few people do it.

What this really means is that the chosen tool and processing chain (Adobe vs. Apple vs. Capture One, etc.) really affects the look of your images, as much as the choice of camera, choice of monitor, and choice of paper for printing. By using Lightroom I'm really locking myself in to Adobe's view of my RAW files, which means I hope they do a good job for me. My whole imaging workflow depends on it!

Adobe Camera RAW 6.0:

With the release of Lightroom 3 (now in extended Beta) and Photoshop CS5 (released a couple weeks ago), Adobe has made a huge jump in the quality of RAW conversion, especially for shots taken at high ISO in lower light. The difference is so striking that I've been going back to older photos I took a few years ago and looking at them with Lightroom 3 and marveling at how much better they look. (One of the advantages to shooting RAW is you can easily go back and "redevelop" photos with newer technology.)

I don't think I'm exaggerating here when I say there's at least a 1.5 stop improvement with my high-ISO darker files. In other words, I can now develop a low-light shot taken at ISO 6400 and it will look BETTER than a shot taken at ISO 2000 used to look. I can't understate how huge this is for people that take photos in low-light, like at parties or concerts. It's not outrageous for people to spend a lot of money on newer cameras and faster glass to get better low-light photos - it was one of the reasons I upgraded to the 5-D mkII. Upgrading to newer processing algorithms is like getting a newr, better camera for way less money. Plus, it works retroactively on my older shots! How cool is that?

Adobe points out that their older algorithms are based on their RAW work in 2003 and a lot has changed in 2010. One of the byproducts of the new algorithms is they take more time as they apply mathematical techniques that were either not developed 7 years ago or were deemed too slow. That's fine by me - computers are always getting faster. When you find an image you like you're willing to wait a couple seconds for it to come out.

I remember back when I first got into photography with my Digital Rebel. It had an option to shoot RAW files but the workflow was so slow that I didn't usually do it. It was too painful to deal with sorting all these files (before thumbnails on RAW files worked in MacOS) and do these one-by-one conversions in Canon's Digital Photo Professional, especially on the 800 MHz G4 laptop I had at the time. The process was so inconvenient that I just stopped doing it and shot most of my stuff in JPG. There are a few shots I really like from that time period but all I have now is an edited jpg that I made for an online gallery. No original to reprocess!

So anyway,

So anyway, that's the skinny for now. If you're shooting a camera that can make RAW files but you've been disappointed by how well the low-light, high ISO shots turn out, give them another try with the new version of Lightroom and Photoshop - both of which have a free 30 day trial. You might be blown away by the different is quality visible in your existing shots.

My first experience with the PocketWizard Flex

I recently picked up a pair of the new PocketWizard units that do E-TTL with a Canon speedlight. Essentially, you put one of these on your camera's hotshoe and one on the the flash and then the flash and the camera act as if they were directly attached. You can move the flash wherever you want and the auto-metering "just works" and the exposure is supposedly all taken care of. You can even dial the flash compensation up and down on the camera and the flash does the right thing. That's the idea, at least.

So, I went back to Florida for another party and experimented with putting a gelled softbox (about 10 inches wide) over the flash and holding it a few feet away to try to add a little color to the scene. If you had seen any photos from the last photoshoot you would remember that the venue is pretty plain looking. Adding a little color to each shot from the side really adds a some punch, and what says "party" more than colored lights? Who cares if there are colored lights in the cafeteria line?

The way E-TTL works is there's a pre-flash that fires right before the shutter trips and the camera uses this pre-flash to figure out how much power to use for real when the picture is actually being taken.It turns out the the exposure meter is not equally sensitive to all colors of light, so with some colors the flash would be way too string and other colors the flash would be too weak. For really mild colors it was pretty much dead on though.

The system clearly works although there are some quirks. First of all is the range. It's well known by the company that some flashes emit huge amounts of RF interference which really cuts the range. I found that I could get 20 feet pretty reliably but that was about it. There are PocketWizard-supplied RF shields you can put around your flash to block out the badness, but that seems really awkward. (I've got one on order, so I'll let you know how it turns out.)

In conclusion, it was a great experiment. I look forward to using the system for more conventional, non-party uses in the future. If there were some sort of technology that allowed me to share pictures with you on this blog, I'd show you just how exciting the party looked, but alas, that technology hasn't been invented yet.

Until next time...

Canon 20-D for sale [sold]

I'm selling my Canon 20-D. It's an 8 megapixel camera from 4 years ago and I'm the original owner. I can't say it's been babied - I've taken it a lot of places and taken a lot of great photos with it. It has a very small ding in the side, near the Compact Flash door but other than that it's just scuffs here and there. It just came back from a clean-and-check at Canon's service center so it's good to go. It includes two batteries, the charger, the box, everything that came in the box, etc. No lens, no Compact Flash card. Well, I guess I could throw in a 2 GB compact flash card...

I'm looking to get $300 for it, based on completed eBay auction prices. I could settle for a little less for a friend.

This thing takes some pretty good pictures. In fact, there's no real reason to sell it, other than I don't need 3 cameras very often. It was my upgrade from the original Rebel and I was blown away by the responsiveness and speed of it.

Let me know if you're interested.

UPDATE: I sold it.

Quick trip to Florida with the ThinkTank Airport Takeoff bag

This weekend was my first cross-country trip for a photoshoot and it went very well.  I've done long trips with photography before but this was the first trip where the whole point was to fly cross-country just to shoot an event and then turn around and come back home.   It was also my first event with a Canon 5-D mkII, and my second event with the Think Tank Airport Takeoff combination roller/backpack.   I want to pass on my thoughts on the trip as well as review the Think Tank roller/backpack. They say to never do a job with new equipment but in this case it was unavoidable.   Due to the last minute booking of my services for the event, the new camera was shipped to Florida to meet me there.  I unboxed the camera for the first time when I checked into my hotel room at 2:00 am Friday night.  (For a Saturday night event.)

Everything with the camera went flawlessly.  It works almost identically to the 40-D so there was zero learning curve.   While editing the shoot at the airport, I could tell that everything looked pretty good.   The depth of field on the full-frame camera is a lot narrower than I'm used to and it's a whole new creative element that I look forward to exploring.

There's a big travel component this trip since Orlando, Florida is a long way away from Santa Clara and there aren't any direct flights out of SJC.  That means a plane change in Denver or LA and it all adds up to a day spent in each direction.  My return flight gets in at midnight so tomorrow might be a bit rough.  I was starting to adjust to Florida time which makes Sunday's arrival feel more like 3:00 am. Monday morning.

The upside to the travel is how well my new Think Tank Airport Takeoff bag is working out.   The size is pretty much perfect - it's international carry-on size which really means that it's a good size for domestic carry-on.  Any larger than this and the flight attendants are liable to make you gate-check the bag through to your final destination and that's not something I want to do with this much valuable equipment.

There are only three downsides I've found to this bag: First, the four-section telescoping handle you use when you roll the bag seems loose and a little flimsy.   This is the only "delicate" thing about the bag.  As soon as you extend the handles you realize there's a lot of play in the sections and a lot of flex.  It seems a little sloppy compared to the precision and durability in every other aspect of the Think Tank products I have.   After loading the bag to capacity and then putting the straps of my other carry-on over the handle (the way the smart travelers make their roller do double-duty by carrying their small duffel) the strain started to worry me.   Time will tell if it can handle to strain or not.

Secondly, the straps are really padded and comfortable which means they kill almost an inch of depth that could otherwise be dedicated to gear.   I don't plan to use the straps very often so they're more of an emergency-use thing for me.  (There was that hotel room in Vietnam that was 7 stories up with no elevator…)  I actually wish the straps were thinner so they would take less space.

Finally, I couldn't figure out for the life of me how to use the rain cover for the bag.  All Think Tank products come with a great custom-fit rain cover and I've had to use them in the past.  This bag comes with a cover but I can't quite tell how it's supposed to go on.   I'm not sure if it's supposed to cover it while it's lying down or standing up but either way it seems to be cut a little too short.

Regardless of those downsides, this bag is carrying a lot.  Two camera bodies, five lenses, a flash, two lens hoods, a laptop, 4 chargers (laptop, new camera, old camera, AA), a card reader, USB cables, ethernet cable, Garmin GPS, and other assorted supplies.   It's a mobile office that let me touch down, arrive on scene, and set up a small office, offloading and processing images throughout the evening.  It even had a space between the dividers that seemed custom-made for a PB&J sandwich The Wife made for me before heading out.

Even with all of that there are a few things that were left behind on this trip so I could get by without checking any bags.   I would have preferred to bring my Think Tank belt system to carry more on my person, and if I had been here any more than two nights I would need to bring more clothes.   The goal of this trip was to be light and quick though, and it worked out OK.

The home computer is cranking away on hundreds of huge files from this weekend and doing a backup run, and I've gotta run myself.  The trip was a huge success and I'll be doing a small review of the 5-D mkII at some point in the future.