- Resource

Review: The Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art Lens

Jaron SchneiderMarch 12, 2015

Sigma has made quite the turnaround over the past couple years with a series of lenses that regularly shock the photo and video world with their incredible perf...

Affinity Photo Review by High-End Retoucher Pratik Naik

Jaron SchneiderMarch 3, 2015

Pratik Naik isn't just one of the best retouchers on the planet, he's also an incredible teacher with a vast knowledge of how the programs we use in this indust...

Lowepro Echelon Series Review: Don’t Just Get Somewhere, Arrive.

Jaron SchneiderMarch 2, 2015

We spend thousands of dollars on cameras, optics, microphones, memory cards, rigs, computers, hard drives and tripods. We look at the latest from Canon, Nikon, ...

The Profoto B2 Review: Portability Maximized

Jaron SchneiderMarch 2, 2015

The Profoto B1 might have been the best selling light for the company in their entire history, most certainly the best selling strobe in recent memory. But thou...

Review: The Feather Camera Crane from Lite Pro Gear

Mike WilkinsonFebruary 18, 2015

The name here almost says it all. The Feather Camera Crane weighs less than 4lbs while extending the camera out 7 feet from the base. What the name doesn’t tell...

Review: The Nikon D750 Shines

Jaron SchneiderFebruary 2, 2015

The title is sort of a pun, as the "shine" many of you might think of involves that internal reflection that the D750 has been battling in the publicity market ...

Adobe Photoshop Touch Workspace: Worth Buying a Surface Pro 3?

Jaron SchneiderJanuary 19, 2015

Recently I gave my full review of the hardware and software of the Surface Pro 3, but in a way that was kind of a preamble to this review. Last Adobe MAX, Adobe...

I Used a Surface Pro 3 Exclusively for a Week and Lived to Tell the Tale

Jaron SchneiderJanuary 12, 2015

Look guys, the Surface is not as bad as people would have you believe. In fact, it was a good (not bad or great) experience all around. You see, Surface is a wo...

Review: Optically The Sigma 150-600mm Sports Lens Really Delivers

Trevor DayleyDecember 10, 2014

Sigma rolled out a beast of a lens earlier this year and I was finally able to take it for a spin at home to see how it would perform outside a conference room ...

Review: The Canon 7D Mark II

Jaron SchneiderDecember 9, 2014

Canon’s 7D Mark II seems like it’s been years in the making. The original 7D was a workhorse of a camera, but over the past two years has really shown its age. ...

Review: Think Tank Limited Edition Airport International Roller

Jaron SchneiderDecember 7, 2014

Think Tank has grown to be the photographer’s go-to bag solution in recent years, and for good reason. The bags are extremely well designed, priced well and rar...

Review: The Panasonic DMC-GH4

Jaron SchneiderDecember 7, 2014

Micro four-thirds cameras have dramatically improved in quality and reliability since their introduction several years ago. What was once a scoffed-at system is...

Array ( [0] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 49466 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2015-03-12 11:37:32 [post_date_gmt] => 2015-03-12 15:37:32 [post_content] => Sigma has made quite the turnaround over the past couple years with a series of lenses that regularly shock the photo and video world with their incredible performance. The 24mm f/1.4 Art is a landscape and astrophotographer's dream lens, and Sigma's take on the focal length is a solid effort, but isn't quite as flawless as the other Art series prime lenses that came before it.Starting with build quality and handling, the Sigma 24mm feels just like the other lenses in the Art line. Its robust, metal body mimics most closely to the 50mm or 35mm lenses released before it, though it is stouter than either of those two lenses. It is actually a bit surprising how small the 24mm is, given experiences with the rest of the Art series. It is easily the lightest lens in the line. Aside from the Auto/Manual focus switch on the side of the lens, it is devoid of really any other features, which has become a characteristic of Sigma's new Global Vision: simplicity.

The autofocus on the 24mm is a departure from what I've come to expect from Sigma's art line, as I found the speed and accuracy of the lens to fall short of expectations. Though when tasked with capturing wide, scenic shots, the autofocus was very accurate, pitting it against closer scenes with people in the frame was a different story. I think the accuracy issue actually stems from the biggest problem in the autofocusing mechanism: its very low speed. The 24mm has the slowest autofocus of any other lens in the Art line, and it is likely that speed that leads to what I perceived to be inaccuracy, as I am used to being able to fire the shutter much sooner than the 24mm would allow. I also found the lens to struggle with bright and dark spots, common in sunset and sunrise shooting. In several cases, it hunted for a few seconds until I moved the focus area to another place in the frame that it was better able to discern. For shooting stationary subjects like landscapes or stars, this won't really be that big of a deal. Just don't expect the lens to compete at the level the 50mm or the 35mm do, as those autofocus engines are quite pristine, especially in comparison to the 24mm.As expected, the Sigma 24mm f/1.4 is incredibly sharp, and it maintains an unprecedented level of sharpness from edge to edge through the entire aperture range. I don't believe I've ever seen a lens this wide maintain sharpness as well as this lens does. Usually there is some glaring issue around f/1.4 or f/13 through fully closed down, but here there is nothing. To me, the focal plane at any given aperture looks just as sharp as any other point. This has to be the best feature of the lens.

[caption id="attachment_49473" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Photo taken at f/1.4.[/caption] [caption id="attachment_49474" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Photo taken at f/16.[/caption] When we look at photos taken with the 24mm f/1.4 closely, a few things become clear. Aside from the aforementioned sharpness, when we look at the contrast points, that same consistency is apparent, just not in a positive way. Unfortunately, some chromatic aberration is visible through the aperture range. It's nothing incredibly serious, but it is apparent, and it is the first Art lens that has this problem consistently. Most of you will probably take no issue with this amount of aberration, and I personally don't see it as a large enough amount to say the lens is not doing a good job. However, we have to note that it is indeed still happening, regardless of to what degree. [caption id="attachment_49469" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Chromatic aberration is visible in the tree branches, f/1.4. Note the green and purple fringing.[/caption][caption id="attachment_49481" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Chroma visible around the edges of the peak of this building, f/6.3.[/caption][caption id="attachment_49470" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Chromatic aberration continues to be visible closed down to f/16.[/caption] I also want to go back and look at two of those images from before just to highlight something: the vignetting on this lens when it is wide open is rather severe. Though that vignette disappears by about f/3.5, wide open this lens has the most vignette I've seen in quite some time, and easily the most out of any Sigma art lens so far. Just look at the difference between f/1.4:

And f/16:

At times, it can feel like you're looking down a tunnel at your subject. I do believe that many of you will find this to be a positive thing, as vignette is rather popular. Some of you also might see this as a negative, since if you want vignette it's easy to add in post. I'm going to go ahead and say that it can fall both ways, as a positive and a negative. Just note that it happens.Finally, when we look at distortion, the 24mm does do a good job at minimizing it, but some barrel distortion is visible when we look at the far edges of the frame. Lets start where I have lined up two pillars in a structure down the middle, where they appear to be quite straight:

This is pretty good. There is some slight "bubbling" effect in the center that is well illustrated in the video review, but it's minor. Centered objects will retain their basic shape. When we pan the field of view to either side though, we do see some barrel distortion present.

The distortion control is what I would call "good." I have seen mindblowingly fantastic distortion control before, and this ranks below it as we still get that barrel distortion, but it's nothing truly terrible. I wouldn't recommend the lens for perfectionist types like architectural photographers, but it will do just fine in landscapes and for astrophotography work. Also, tilt movements in video don't seem to be too affected by weird distortion, which is good if you plan to use this lens for cinema work. Panning is really the only case where distortion becomes noticeable.That distortion is really only localized around the final eighth of the sides of the image. If we kept this structure slightly in from the far side, lines stay pretty straight. Not perfect, but tolerable and well controlled given the focal length.

Pros:

Great build quality, and lighter weight than expected
Incredible edge-to-edge sharpness across the aperture range
Good distortion control through most of the frame
Pleasant vignette when wide open (if you're into that)
Very well priced: $850

Cons:

Iffy autofocus that's the slowest in the Art line
Barrel distortion present at the edges of the frame
Small amounts of chromatic aberration present across aperture range
Huge amounts of vignetting wide open (if you're not into that)

The Sigma 24mm f/1.4 might be the first lens in the Art line that didn't actually "wow" me. It's a really good lens that lives in the company of masterful lenses, which is perhaps why it's hard for me to say it's a "great" lens. It does a lot right, and continues the incredible sharpness that I've come to expect out of Sigma lenses as well as maintaining a beautiful build quality. Unfortunately, it wasn't able to fully contain wide-angle lens problems like chromatic aberration, though it does do a pretty good job of keeping them from becoming too wildly noticeable. That problem, coupled with particularly slow and inaccurate autofocus gives me pause on the 24mm f/1.4. It's still quite good, and competes well with other lenses of this focal length from Canon and Nikon, it's just not the jaw-dropper I've come to expect out of Sigma in recent years.It might be better than the competition, but it's not a hands-down run-away winner that crushed all opposition. It's a weird feeling not being able to say the Sigma was a far-and-away victor. But, using a sports reference, even the best basketball teams have close games.We give the Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art lens 4 out of 5 stars for a lightweight and incredibly consistent sharp lens with good distortion control that is held back only slightly by slow autofocus and chromatic aberration. [post_title] => Review: The Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art Lens [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => review-the-sigma-24mm-f1-4-art-lens [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2015-03-12 13:25:30 [post_modified_gmt] => 2015-03-12 17:25:30 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=49466 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 11 [filter] => raw )[1] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 48983 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2015-03-03 11:30:27 [post_date_gmt] => 2015-03-03 16:30:27 [post_content] => Pratik Naik isn't just one of the best retouchers on the planet, he's also an incredible teacher with a vast knowledge of how the programs we use in this industry actually work (like, at an algorithmic level). In short, he understands the what, and the why. This makes him uniquely suited to evaluate new platforms like Affinity Photo, the Photoshop competitor product that is currently free to download in its beta state.Let me summarize a bit of what Pratik covers in the video above.Affinity takes a lot from Photoshop. The layout and keyboard shortcuts, for example, are all very similar to the popular program (the keyboard shortcuts are actually identical). They are so similar that Pratik is questioning how they were able to get away with it without infringing on Photoshop's copyrights. However, being so similar makes the program very easy to adopt. It only took him ten minutes to feel comfortable in the system.Affinity does a lot right, especially for a beta. Here are some of Pratik's notes on the platform.It has a pleasantly simple interface, with the only confusing part being the raw processor window. It doesn't bring up a new window like you might see in Photoshop, instead it plays in the same space as the rest of the platform. This can be a bit confusing at first.Affinity doesn't adjust color temperature by Kelvin. Instead, it does so by percentage, which feels less precise and doesn't allow a user to directly specify what color temperature to use.The program has absolutely excellent tools, such as healing brush and clone stamp. They actually work exactly like expected: They don't feel underpowered at all.The raw processor, though rudimentary, is still impressive. For a beta, it's great. However, as a final platform it will need to be advanced further. For example, the way it calculates shadows, highlights and midtones together isn't perfect. If you push a shadow or a highlight too far (but still normally what is ok in Photoshop or Capture One), it can start to look pretty bad.Speaking of the raw processor, it doesn't yet support medium format files.The Clarity slider can produce that unpleasant "halo-ing" effect if used too strongly.But Affinity Photo is very, very far along. The platform needs a bit of tweaking, and hopefully as they continue they're able to add new raw support quickly. That's the main concern of Pratik: how fast can they adapt? Pros:

Great platform
Easy interface
Excellent tools
Feels professionally powered, like a legitimate Photoshop contender

Cons:

Shadows/Highlights feature in raw editor not perfect
Clarity slider algorithm needs a bit more work
Color temperature only available by percent, not exact Kelvin

Especially for a beta, Affinity Photo gets a lot right. It's a well thought through program that doesn't feel rushed, and has the potential to actually compete with Photoshop and Capture One.We give Affinity Photo for Mac a solid 4 out of 5 stars for an excellent interface, great tools and a well thought-through platform in general.This review was part of the ReWrap podcast, a weekly show focusing on trends in the photo and video industry.

Subscribe to our Podcast RSS

Download ReWrap Podcast on iTunes

[post_title] => Affinity Photo Review by High-End Retoucher Pratik Naik [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => affinity-photo-review-by-high-end-retoucher-pratik-naik [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2015-03-03 11:30:27 [post_modified_gmt] => 2015-03-03 16:30:27 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=48983 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw )[2] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 48881 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2015-03-02 13:00:21 [post_date_gmt] => 2015-03-02 18:00:21 [post_content] => We spend thousands of dollars on cameras, optics, microphones, memory cards, rigs, computers, hard drives and tripods. We look at the latest from Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Phase One, Hasselblad and Panasonic and can’t wait to spend our dollars on the equipment and yet, increasingly, we carry around these thousands of dollars in frightening ways. I’ve seen cardboard boxes, tote bags and in extreme cases, plastic grocery bags. Sure, we get rollers and backpacks but we turn our noses up at the price when it goes above $100 or $200. “Why would I spend $150 on a bag?” I hear regularly. Why? Because it’s the only thing that stands between us and our livelihood of technological wonders. The world is harsh, unforgiving and it’s what we face daily. A good bag is important. And it’s about time there was a bag series out there that acted like it.Lowepro’s Echelon series doesn’t just act the part, it walks the walk. It is that bag set that you not only want, but deserve for all the hours of toil you put into your craft. It’s time to treat yourself and your equipment, dammit.It’s time to not only just get to your destination, it’s time to fucking arrive.

The Echelon series is the first camera bag line that actually steps into the batter’s box, stares down the line and knocks it out of the park. This isn’t a bag you necessarily need, but you sure as hell deserve it. Built with the highest-end materials Lowepro could muster, the leather, metal and beautifully sewn nylon is a tip of the hat to photographers who have experienced success and who want to show it.Echelon is made up of three bags: the Brief, the Attaché and the Roller.The Brief is, as you probably guessed by the name, briefcase-sized and briefcase by design. It’s not a hard briefcase like you will see on Wall Street, but a sewn nylon soft case. The handles are soft black leather as is the lip of the front zippered pouch. The included sling is made of a tough yet soft seatbelt-like material that just feels much nicer than what you find on most slings for bags in this industry. The zipper is incredibly heavy duty, made of metal and a rubberized plastic.

Inside the brief are three large pockets that sit at either end of laptop pouch that fits up to a 15 inch machine. There is a secondary pouch that is designed for tablets. This whole six pocket, laptop holding setup is removeable, if you would rather pack something else in the bag. There is also a small insert at the front for holding pens, papers and business cards. It is also removable. The Brief will retail for $340.

The Attaché is the equivalent to what we normally see in a medium sized sling bag or backpack, but the design is relatively unique to this industry. There are two “wings” on each end of the zipper that snap into the sides of the bag, and pop out when you need to reach the interior. It’s a design I’ve seen on higher-end luggage, which is the kind of thing Lowepro was going for in these designs. The handle is a mix of soft black leather and that same seatbelt material we saw on the Brief, as is the removable sling which is basically the same as what we saw on the Brief as well.

The interior of the Attaché has a Velcro insert that holds a body and several lenses as well as two side pockets on either end of the bag for miscellaneous items. Because of the form factor of this bag, I found it a bit odd for carrying camera gear. However, what it is perfectly suited for is being an overnight bag. I tend to have short trips up and down California that put me in hotels for a night or two, and the Attaché is the perfect size a few changes of clothes and toiletries. It also has a laptop sleeve that will hold up to a 17 inch laptop. The Attaché will retail for $420.

My favorite bag in this series, hands down, is the roller, a product that is not only beautiful to look at, but is likely the strongest, most durable roller on the market. What makes it worthy of that moniker? Firstly we need to look a the other rollers Lowepro makes. Unlike some other bags on the market, Lowepro’s rollers all have an interior tub system made up of interlocking thick plastic pieces that fit in between the walls of the bag and the inserts on the interior. I like this, because the idea of not having a hard protective casing around my equipment while I travel bothers me. The Echelon Roller takes that protection to another level. That tub system is normally made up of, as mentioned, interlocking pieces. This is because it is expensive to do a single formed tub, but that expense was disregarded in Echelon. Echelon is one single formed tub. That single piece interior is incredibly tough, tougher than anything I’ve ever encountered in my years in this industry. This bag will protect your gear. End of story.

The extending handle on the Roller is also a marvel: beautifully shined metal leading up to a leather wrapped handle and metal push. Again, Lowepro sets a new high point, as this is the best handle for a roller I’ve ever seen, both in the camera industry and across luggage brands.Anyone seeing the inside of this bag will likely utter a single word: “Wow.” The lips of the main, larger inserts are lined with black leather and the included pouches for accessories also have leather accents. Lowepro’s trademark inserts also take the pain out of Velcro, folding in to make moving them around inside the bag easy instead of having them stick to anything they touch. They are also sturdier, with a stiff core that prevents bending and keeps gear snugly in place. Lowepro also designed a specific insert that will cradle your favorite camera and lens combo gently in a cup of luxury. Your gear does a lot for you. It deserves this.

The rear of both the Brief and the Attaché has a zipper at the bottom that, when opened, allows them to be slung over the handle of the roller and held together. At the top of this little open pocket is a small, powerful magnet that keeps the fabrics held together in aesthetically pleasing way. And that’s the only point of the magnet. It’s not necessary, but appreciated.It’s beautiful little things like that magnet that you will find all over these bags. A hint of leather here, metal there, conscious efforts at beauty and function in every possible place, reminders that the bag is more than just a bag. It’s a rare thing in this industry to find something like this. We usually depend on Leica or Hasselblad for luxurious offerings, and they are normally far outside our reach. Though the Lowepro Echelon series is expensive, the roller is only $800, a price that many find to be a going rate in the broader luggage industry, and downright cheap in the luxury luggage world. In the camera industry, it’s not actually that expensive, especially considering how much we spend on the rest of our equipment. And, quite honestly, it’s worth it.The biggest test that the Echelon series passed, in my opinion, was that in the past few weeks they have been in my possession, across multiple shoots and miles traveled, not a single bag is showing signs of wear. Not a single thread has frayed. Not a single piece of any of the bags has shown age. They look exactly as they did when I pulled them out of the box. This is yet another first, as I will usually experience my first frayed thread by day two of any bag. Again, impressive. Pros:

The best build quality in any bags I have seen, let alone ever reviewed
Completely customizable to whatever you need each bag to do
The bags compliment each other and work together aesthetically and practically

Cons:

Due to the materials used, the bags are heavier when empty than we expected

There was a period of time about two years ago where I thought Lowepro had forgotten who they were, who we as photographers were, and as a result was headed to the big bag shop in the sky. Today, with the recent bags they have released, what I have seen coming down the pipe, and especially with the Echelon series, my faith in the storied camera bag manufacturer has been restored. They take the prize for simply the absolute best bags you can get for your camera, with the closest competition light years away. For now, Lowepro stands alone on this precipice of excellence.

We give the Lowepro Echelon Series a perfect 5 out of 5 stars, a first-time for this reviewer, for absolutely impeccable design in both form and function. [post_title] => Lowepro Echelon Series Review: Don’t Just Get Somewhere, Arrive. [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => lowepro-echelon-series-review-dont-just-get-somewhere-arrive [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2015-03-02 12:00:41 [post_modified_gmt] => 2015-03-02 17:00:41 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=48881 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw )[3] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 48747 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2015-03-02 03:00:11 [post_date_gmt] => 2015-03-02 08:00:11 [post_content] => The Profoto B1 might have been the best selling light for the company in their entire history, most certainly the best selling strobe in recent memory. But though the B1 freed photographers from the cord, it didn’t give them the true mobility that many were seeking. To answer that call, Profoto announced the 250 watt/second B2 battery off camera flash strobe, a light with at least four times more power than the top-of-the-line speedlight that still manages to maintain an incredibly small profile. It is the event and wedding photographer’s dream light, offering high speed sync, TTL and a studio-like feel with access to all the light modifiers that are currently available for the D1 and B1 systems… plus a few newcomers.

I’m not exaggerating when I say that the B2 is small: the head is smaller than most speedlights. The ballast/battery pack isn’t big either, coming in at about the same size as you might expect to find for any other battery pack on the market. That said, there are no current products on the market that mix a small battery pack with a small head like you find on the B2, perhaps with the exception of the Elinchrom Quadra Ranger (and the Ranger’s battery pack is obscenely heavy and the power levels are not as minutely controllable as you will find on the B2 system).

The build quality of the B2 and battery are what we have come to expect out of the B1 and D1: high-quality plastic with some glass and metal parts. The battery pack itself is housed in a neat and tough little pouch that comes with a shoulder strap and also has a belt loop. The power cable that runs from the battery to the heads is not removable from the heads themselves and is of a pleasantly tough rubbery material on the outside. I was not ever afraid of breaking the cable through normal wear and tear.As stated, the build is plastic, which lends to good and bad perspectives. The positive: the B2 can remain very light weight. As light as a speedlight, meaning it can be held easily and maneuvered quickly. The negative: it’s not going to be able to withstand a lot of punishment. Maybe a drop or two, but don’t expect it to survive a long fall onto concrete.Each battery is capable of pushing 250 watt/seconds total to one or two lights. If you plug a second light into the pack, those 250 watt/seconds are split in half. What is helpful in this regard is that if you have both heads plugged into one battery, the amount of power that you can dial up on the packs automatically limits itself. The pack is aware of how much power it is capable of pushing and it doesn’t say power level 10 to mean max per light, but max for the entire pack.

I would also like to mention that the pack and battery aren’t the molded together. The pack/ballast is on the top, and the bottom part of the pack is removable and is the battery. That means you can have one or two spare batteries on you when you are on location, in case the first battery dies.One complaint about the battery: the meter that shows the charge level seems like it will only show full if the battery is truly full. After one pop, it’s not technically full anymore and the battery does show a bar missing. However, through our whole time testing the units we never saw the battery power dip below losing just one bar. It just takes some getting used to, as I don’t feel as though we as photographers are used to a wholly literal battery meter. When we shoot with our cameras, if it is on for more than a minute, the battery isn’t technically fully charged, but it will display as such for some time. It’s just a different philosophy on how power shows, I guess.The same Nikon and Canon TTL Air Remotes (and the older non-TTL remotes) that work on the B1 and D1 are compatible with the B2. That means you get TTL and high speed sync, which is a huge plus for those photographers looking to ditch the speedlights and transition quickly to the more powerful B2 system. The remotes are very reliable, more so than I have found something like PocketWizard to be. I have no complaints about the wireless triggering system except that the remotes themselves do not actually display the real-time power level of any strobe you are commanding. That means you need to remember the starting power level for each strobe as you adjust them, because all you will see is +1.0 or -2.5 (for example) on the Air remote LCD. This is annoying, but not deal breaking and nothing unexpected for current B1 owners.Each head’s power can be individually controlled from both the pack and the Air Remote.As a side note, I found that though you can’t get TTL, the Air Remotes for Nikon/Canon can work with other systems such as the Pentax 645z. The Nikon remote specifically is the one that works with Pentax.The recycle/refresh rate of these strobes is outstanding. The wait time is virtually nonexistent, even at maximum power with one or two heads. This means you can just shoot without having to worry about recycling. It just works.

Another cool bonus with these lights is their modeling lamps: they are very bright LEDs. So bright, in fact, you could very easily light paint with them. Their throw is impressive, and using any number of B1 or D1 modifiers on the heads means you have a lot of options available to you. Unfortunately, the balance of the lights is tungsten instead of daylight. Maybe this isn’t unfortunate to you, as it really is a preference. Profoto went with tungsten so that they matched the modeling lights of both the B1 and D1 units. Another unfortunate aspect of the LEDs is that they are not variable with the power level of the light. It only has two settings: on and off.For an example of what it was like shooting with these lights in both portraiture and architecture, please reference the above video. In summary? They were excellent. When we heard that the lights were only 250 watt/seconds, the first thought into our heads was “would they be powerful enough?” The thing is, yes. They are. For the situations that people would want to use these lights (such as events or weddings), generally speaking shooters like to be wide open for both the shallow depth of field and pleasing bokeh. If you are shooting an event and either complimenting the sun or shooting in the dark, the B2s are plenty powerful (depending on the situation, perhaps too powerful).The B2s aren’t a studio light, and they aren’t meant to be. They’re a location variant that brings studio options into the open world. When you get a B2, you get it to compliment the B1 or D1 systems you might already have. With the B2, you’re sacrificing a bit of power for a whole lot more mobility.We really couldn’t find a lot to not like when it came to the B2… except for the price. Here is a list of what to expect:

B2 250 AirTTL to-go kit	$2195
B2 250 AirTTL location kit (2 lights)	$2995
B2 250 AirTTL w/o battery	$1495
B2 Head	$695
Li-lon Battery for B2	$229

And the new modifiers available today with the B2 (they also work on the B1):

OCF Grid kit	$99
OCF Snoot	$59
OCF Barndoor	$99
OCF Speedring	$99
OCF Softbox 2' Octa	$149
OCF Softgrid 2' Octa	$99
OCF Softbox 1,3x1,3'	$99
OCF Softgrid 1,3x1,3'	$69
OCF Softbox 2x3'	$199
OCF Softgrid 2x3'	$119
OCF Softbox 1x3'	$179
OCF Softgrid 1x3'	$109

Looking at those prices, the B2 with one battery and one head is more expensive than a B1. Though we understand the complexities of the build here as well as the advantages of the B2 over a B1, we still find that pricing to be peculiar. We’re certain the B2 will sell well, as the primary complaint with the B1 was also price, but we still have to say it: the price seems high.Here are some photos that we took using the B2 in San Francisco Bay Area. Portraits by Karaminder Ghuman, architecture images by Mike Kelley, with special thanks to BluHomes. To see our process, make sure to watch the video review.

Pros:

Incredibly light weight and compact
Easy to use
Integrates seamlessly with B1 and D1 systems (including modifiers)
Very fast recycle time (nearly instant, even at max power with two heads attached)
Reliable high speed sync and TTL
LED modeling light
Much more powerful and usable than speedlights, the B2’s primary competition
Battery lasts a long time, despite rarely showing a full charge

Cons:

For those used to studio lights, they can feel underpowered
Very pricey; Even more expensive than the B1

The B2 is part of what Profoto is calling the Off Camera Flash system along with the B1. Though they can work with each other seamlessly, users will probably find themselves using the two lights pretty distinctly and separately because of how mobile the B2 is. The B2 makes the B1 feel heavy and weighed down, kind of how we felt about the D1 once we saw the B1… and that’s a good thing!So what is the final verdict? The B2 is a great event and wedding photographer's lighting tool: excelling at exactly what it was built to accommodate. Though it's probably the least powerful strobe Profoto has ever produced, it's not particularly fair to judge that aspect of the product too harshly. 250 watt/seconds is considerably better than any speedlight on the market, the go-to products of the wedding and event industry. The B2 isn't a studio strobe, and it's not meant to be. In the situations where the B2 is best suited, it's hard to find a better option in terms of power, reliability, size and weight. Where we think the B2 falters slightly is in its price point: it's more expensive than it's big brother the B1 at $2195 for one battery and one head.The only thing keeping the B2 from a perfect score is that high price, which we would have been more forgiving on if they were even a cent lower than the B1. Seeing them having less power and yet a higher price, despite the fact power isn’t their primary benefit, still feels odd to us, and therefore barely keeps them from a perfect score.We give the Profoto B2 Off Camera Flash System a high 4 out of 5 stars (think of it like a 4.8) for incredible performance packed inside of a tiny, lightweight package. [post_title] => The Profoto B2 Review: Portability Maximized [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => the-profoto-b2-review-portability-maximized [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2015-03-02 11:13:08 [post_modified_gmt] => 2015-03-02 16:13:08 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=48747 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 19 [filter] => raw )[4] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 48365 [post_author] => 46732 [post_date] => 2015-02-18 11:09:04 [post_date_gmt] => 2015-02-18 16:09:04 [post_content] => The name here almost says it all. The Feather Camera Crane weighs less than 4lbs while extending the camera out 7 feet from the base. What the name doesn’t tell you though, is that it packs down into a kit that is only 28 inches long. In this video and written review, I’ll share with you why this thing rocks for outdoor adventure filmmakers.I was spending two weeks working on the Michigan Ice Film with Clear & Cold Cinema, so I had the crane shipped to the cold north of Michigan's Upper Peninsula.When I pulled it out of the box, it was shocked that there was supposed to be a 7-foot long crane in there, it was just so small. I set it up the night before our shoot, just to check everything out and make sure I knew how and didn't fumble around in the snow. I would be using it in single-digit temperatures and on icy ledges, so I wanted to troubleshoot issues sooner rather than later. An easy to read manual helped me the one time I couldn't figure out a setup detail, but in general the setup was intuitive.

The kit included a black, neoprene-like bag for the boom arm and camera plate, and a smaller, rollup style bag that holds the counterweight bar, tripod attachment, and spare parts. This bag can also be used to fill with objects for a counterweight. Personally, I preferred to use other gear bags for this but that was a personal choice, as I wanted to keep the rollup bag clean. I was able to load the FCC kit into a Manfrotto bag that also held the tripod I would be using to mount it– amazingly it all fit inside the bag, right next to the large tripod!

In the field, the Feather Camera Crane set up fast, and it gave me exactly the shots I was looking for. I mounted a GH4 onto it, but this rig can handle larger cameras like an FS700, or even a Red (The weight limit is 10lbs.)The FCC uses lever-lock boom arm sections that can free-spin, so at first I was worried about accidentally pulling them out or making the head section difficult to level. Neither was the case as the arm sections don't pull out (you can see a blue section when you’ve made it near the end of an arm for easy reference.) With a single boom-arm style, leveling was extremely easy.

The first shoot I did with it was of ice bouldering. I found that the crane's rollout kit bag made a great place for sitting the camera head side of the crane down onto. This kept the snow off the camera, and allowed me to tweak the counterweights.

Speaking of counterweights, this took a few shoots for me to dial in. With only my gear bags and what I had on hand, I used a carabiner to clip a camera bag onto the handle. As I boomed the crane around, the bag would shift, causing a shake in my shot. The more I worked with it though, the more I figured out the best ways to affix a bag for counterweighting, and keep it from either hanging too low (preventing a high boom) or shifting during boom moves.

On another shoot I found myself in a precarious position, on a (relatively flat) surface of ice, directly above an immediate 60 foot drop off where an ice climb had formed. I made sure to secure myself as well as the tripod that would be holding the crane. Setup of the crane again was easy, but adjusting the camera and counterweight ends was very tricky because of the limited amount of area I could move about. I placed the camera on a small ballhead and pointed it straight down for the angle I wanted, and wrapped the shoulder strap around the crane arm for another level of safety.

This worked great and was one of the best shots I was able to capture.I used it a few more times for this project, and with each use I got quicker and more efficient in my setup. I discovered that I could easily keep my ballhead screwed onto the camera plate, and it would still fit into the boom arm bag. Also, since I was using a Manfrotto tripod bag to carry everything around in, I left the quick release plate attached to the bracket that holds the crane. Doing all of these things just made setup time that much faster, and tool-less.

One thing I had to watch out for is the amount I tilted the tripod up or down– it will tilt the camera on the plate, but if I went too far, the cord loosened and the camera fell forward/backward. It doesn’t hurt anything, but it will ruin your shot. The first time it happened to me I was scared for the camera, but upon closer inspection it was easy to see that the camera was still completely secure. My takeaway from this is that I can only tilt up/down so far– a ballhead is needed for extreme up/down angles, rather than tilting the tripod head. After just a few uses, I could easily feel how far I could push the tilt without having this happen.

Overall, I’ve been very impressed with the quality of footage, the low weight and small footprint of the unit, and how easy it is to assemble. Within a few shoots I feel that I’ve come close to mastering the use of it, and minimized my setup time as much as possible. The FCC cannot tilt all the way up or down (you need to use a ballhead for those angles) but that’s the price you pay for having a lightweight cord instead of a second boom arm… which is not bad considering the weight and space you save.Pros: Lightweight Packs down small Easy SetupCons: Cable takes a minute to reset for different boom lengthsWe give the Lite Pro Gear Feather Camera Crane 5 stars out of 5. If you're serious about getting great shots on your outdoor adventures, the cost is well justified.Right now the Feather Camera Crane sells for $979, and is currently available for order from Lite Pro Gear. If you value space and weight while creating video in hard to reach places, definitely give the Feather Camera Crane a look- you can get a major bump in production value without a major bump in weight or bulk. Thanks to Aaron Peterson and Dan Englund for providing footage from last year's shoot, and clips of me running the crane for the work done this season! Check out the Michigan Ice Film here. [post_title] => Review: The Feather Camera Crane from Lite Pro Gear [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => review-the-feather-camera-crane-from-lite-pro-gear [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2016-09-30 10:41:29 [post_modified_gmt] => 2016-09-30 14:41:29 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=48365 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 1 [filter] => raw )[5] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 46946 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2015-02-02 11:37:42 [post_date_gmt] => 2015-02-02 16:37:42 [post_content] => The title is sort of a pun, as the "shine" many of you might think of involves that internal reflection that the D750 has been battling in the publicity market lately. However, those issues shouldn't distract you from what this camera does right. In my testing, I never encountered any problems with the flaring, so I was rather surprised when the news broke about it, and even more surprised to see how it escalated. If you can set aside that internal reflection situation and look at the camera objectively, you might find that it is possibly one of the best DSLRs on the market today, with incredible image quality, color rendition, video capabilities and, my favorite, the best grip on any DSLR I've ever held.Yeah, I'm serious about that last part. It's really hard to explain why a grip matters so much until you hold the D750. The grip itself is very deep, letting you almost get a full fist going while holding the camera. This makes it one of the most comfortable cameras I've ever held, perhaps the most comfortable camera. Big hands or small, this tweak in body design is, outside of image quality, the best part about this camera.

Unfortunately, that deep grip does come at a cost. If you compare the D750 top LCD to, say, the Nikon D610, you'll notice the D750's screen is considerably smaller. Because they sacrificed so much room on the right side of the camera to allow for that deep grip, there just wasn't enough real estate left on the camera to fit the traditionally-sized LCD. That means you're going to lose immediate visibility for things like white balance, but it's not too big of a deal. You can always hit the "i" button on the bottom left corner of the back of the body to get all the info on what your camera is set to.

The other major change on the D750 over other Nikon full frame DSLRs is the tilt screen, which lets you use live view while taking stills or video from any angle above or below the camera. Unfortunately this isn't as good as a flip out screen like we see on cameras such as the Panasonic GH4, but it is better than nothing. When I asked Nikon why they chose the tilt screen over the flip-out, they told me that the flip out was less "rugged" and "tough" which to them meant it might break when taking the D750 in extreme environments. This is a claim I'm not entirely sure I believe. I've had two cameras with flip out screens that I have beat to near death, and at no point does that flip out screen ever hint at breaking. What I really think is happening here is that, for some reason, Nikon and Canon both think that if they put a flip out screen on a camera, it will be somehow viewed as less professional.Stop it. Professionals desire the flip out screen. Give it to us.As far as button layout and operation, the D750 doesn't deviate too far from other Nikon DSLRs like the D600/610 or the D800/810. Some buttons got shifted around, but they're easy to adapt to and the operation of the menus and the activity of shooting with the D750 will feel familiar to anyone who has used a Nikon in the past. As a note, the camera does come out-of-the box with the focus assist AF beam activated, which the camera absolutely doesn't need and only annoys anyone on the other end of the lens. Not entirely sure why it's on the camera to begin with as the AF with and without the assist beam was no noticeably different.

Speaking of autofocus, the D750 is snappy, quick and pleasant to shoot with. It isn't what I would call a sports shooters' camera, but it's fast enough to react to most situations and is accurate every time I've shot with it. In dark places the autofocus did hunt around a bit, but I'm more inclined to believe that a shortcoming of the lens, not the body.Let's take a look at how the camera performs in terms of image quality. When you are shooting below about 12,800 ISO, you can expect some pretty great things out of the camera:

I think what the D750 does best is render color. The blues and greens in natural settings really pop on this sensor, giving images a strong sense of life. I was out shooting with my friend John Schell when testing the camera, and we shot the exact same scene from nearly the exact same position, he on a Canon 5D Mark III and myself on the D750. Our settings were also nearly identical, just different focal lengths. Here is what my camera saw straight out of camera:

And here is what the Canon captured with the same scene:

If you have ever shot a landmark like this at night, you probably realize that most of the time you will only see different hues of orange and red thanks to tungsten lighting, much like what the Canon captured. The fact that the sky has so much blue detail in the D750 is pretty impressive. The jpeg preview on the back of the camera looked a lot more vibrant, which we can get with the raw with just a few minor adjustments:

And the Canon:

It wasn't just with this night shot where I was seeing some great color rendition. I took the camera out to Muir Woods to see how it would handle some early-morning shooting. I was not disappointed. Below is an image straight out of camera:

And with some minor adjustments that gave it a bit of a "film" look:

Here are some more from that same day:

I don't think anyone saw the D750 and expected any less. Right now, Nikon cameras are extremely popular because of how beautiful images look on their sensors (which are Sony in origin). What I didn't expect was how much I actually enjoyed shooting with the D750. The camera itself was extremely easy to use and the grip, as previously stated, makes holding and using the camera an absolute dream.But what about video?The D750, when first announced, looked like it was going to be Nikon's first "serious" video DSLR. With the tilt screen, 60p video capture and all the desired camera hoookups (like HDMI out, headphone jack, etc), it appeared to be a camera that would excel in video.And it does.Though it is unfortunately restricted to only 1080p60 output, what it does capture in HD far outperforms what I had become used to seeing out of competitor cameras, even the 5D Mark III and especially the 7D Mark II. It is capable of producing moderate slow motion thanks to the 60 frames per second, which should be a standard feature in all cameras these days, but it's nice to have nonetheless. Nikon seems to have learned their lesson with bad video functionality in some of their other cameras (I'm looking at you D600), and the D750 is not only easy to shoot with, but it's actually enjoyable. Shooting on the D750 was a vastly superior experience than I've had in recent months on any comparable camera from any other competitor. The only downside is that camera itself is rather heavy, so shooting video with it can be tiring after a few hours.Below are some screen grabs from video clips captured on the D750:

The footage is strikingly clean and without digital artifacting of any kind. The quality of the footage that the D750 produces puts a new standard on how DSLR video should look. It's not as good as what I've come to expect out of my Panasonic GH4, but those looking to pick up a D750 probably aren't the same market as those with a GH4.I wish it had focus peaking, however. It's difficult to see things in focus, despite being able to digitally zoom to catch focus. That's much, much slower than just having focus peaking, though presently no DSLR seems to have this feature, so I can't really hold it against Nikon. There are also limited file and codec options. This is still a photo/video hybrid camera, and as such it doesn't have some of the features pure video shooters would really desire.Pros:

Excellent color renditions, especially with blues and greens
Deep grip makes this camera insanely comfortable to hold
Tilt screen opens options for live view and video shooters
Body is incredibly sturdy and well-built
Full frame
Middle-of-the-road pricing
Clean, beautiful full HD video

Cons:

Heavy
For a video camera, it has limited pro-video-centric features
Tilt screen, not flip out, limits field of views possible

The D750 has been marred by bad publicity caused by manufacturing errors on some of the bodies, but that doesn't mean you should forget about this camera. If yours is without the internal reflection issue, this camera is nearly, nearly flawless. Because this camera is billed as somewhat of a video camera as much as it is a still camera, I had to judge it on those video capabilities. Though it swings for the fences on giving top-quality 1080p footage, it doesn't include focus peaking and has a short list of video file recording options and not many frame rate options. This is likely not a huge deal to many of you looking at the D750, and if you plan to be a photographer first and a video shooter second, than the D750 is just about perfect. For the small group of us looking for everything in this package, it falls just barely short of meeting that mark.We give the Nikon D750 a high four out of five stars for incredible image quality, great video quality, a well-built body and many options and features photographers of all types will love, keeping the perfect score just barely out of reach for a very small number of issues. [post_title] => Review: The Nikon D750 Shines [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => review-the-nikon-d750-shines [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2015-02-02 11:37:42 [post_modified_gmt] => 2015-02-02 16:37:42 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=46946 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw )[6] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 46797 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2015-01-19 13:45:35 [post_date_gmt] => 2015-01-19 18:45:35 [post_content] => Recently I gave my full review of the hardware and software of the Surface Pro 3, but in a way that was kind of a preamble to this review. Last Adobe MAX, Adobe let out kind of a bomb: they were partnering closely with Microsoft to product products that tickle our tactile fancy. What they were able to do nearly immediately was introduce Photoshop (and though it's not included in this review because I'm not much of a digital artist, Illustrator too) to the wonders of creativity with a Surface-specific workspace. I'll first admit I've been strapped to my Mac for years now. I've edited thousands of photos on my iMac in a very specific fashion. But I'm willing to open myself up to new experiences.So before I dig into it, I do want to point out that the Surface has its biggest competition in this arena with Wacom products, namely the Cintiq. In case you are unfamiliar, Wacom makes tablets and displays that work specifically with pens, and every single retoucher I know swears by them. Though the more portable versions of the Cintiq do require a computer in addition to themselves in order to function, it's a matter of what can be done with them that makes them a seller.So firstly, if you're already a Surface Pro 3 user and you have tried to use Photoshop, you might have noticed that it's not quite the perfect experience for touch you might have imagined. The pixel density of the screen makes the buttons on the screen much too small to effectively work with. You can enable the touch workspace by going to Edit > Preferences > Experimental Features > Scale UI Up 200%.

You'll then have to restart Photoshop, but afterwards all the buttons and options have been pleasantly upscaled, making them much easier to tap with a finger and, more importantly, the Surface pen. Since it's located in Experimental Features, I would consider the workspace in beta somewhat, so if you experience anything wonky don't be too surprised. However in my testing, nothing weird ever arose.There was some lagging that happened when I opened a particularly large raw file, or attempted to move or zoom that file once it was opened. I chock this up more to the i5 processor and 8 GB ram that the Surface has more than anything. It's why I recommend the beefier version of the Surface in my original review.

I have to say, working in Photoshop on the Surface was a really cool experience. The Pen is gratefully touch sensitive, and very sensitive at that. Brushing was a wonderful experience, akin to what I have become used to working with Wacom products. Switching tools was like a painter going for a different color, dabbing the panel on the left.One of the best features of the Surface was its ability to completely ignore my hand. Let me explain... when I write, or in this case brush, my hand lays on whatever I'm writing/brushing. Normally that's a piece of paper, but here it was the screen of the Surface. Most screens I've used pretty much suck at being able to differentiate between the touch of my hand and the pen, causing the cursor to fly all over the screen until I lift my hand off the surface of the monitor. This results in my uncomfortably holding my hand above a tablet or monitor in a way that I would never do with a pen and paper.

The Surface didn't care that I rested my hand on the screen, and that made for a truly pleasant, carefree and thought-free retouching experience. I'm not sure how Microsoft did it, but while wiping the side of my hand across the screen, never once did the operating system deviate from what the pen itself was doing. What this means is that the gap in experiences between analog and digital has really closed on the Surface. If you want to sketch on the Surface, you can sketch how you would on paper. For me, this is a gigantic leap in the right direction.My personal favorite way to retouch on the Surface was to keep the kickstand folded flat, remove the keyboard and use the Surface like I would a piece of paper: flat on the table. This feels like this is how I should have been retouching my whole life. You can rotate the image quickly using two fingers, you can zoom by pinching, and you can move around the image using three fingers. The three finger move is the only touch command that is going to take a little getting used to, but all in all the experience from a software perspective was really quite nice.

There are a few hiccups with the Surface though, unfortunately preventing it from being a perfect companion for Photoshop in a touch environment.If you recall, one of my complaints against the Surface in my hardware review was that the pen buttons can't be changed to specific options per software that is open, or even be changed to anything useful at all. When using clone stamp or healing brush, Photoshop requires that you give those tools a location to pull from by using Option or Alt, depending on Mac or PC. Because of where the keyboard is located, keeping a finger down there during retouching is cumbersome and unnatural. If you somehow find holding a pen against the screen in the orientation of a traditional laptop comfortable, then you're a better man/woman than me. It is heinously difficult to retouch like that for me, but unfortunately that is the only way the keyboard's orientation works. If I could just assign keys to the buttons on the side of the pen, this problem would be resolved as I could do everything from my right hand, but unfortunately Microsoft hasn't given that functionality out of the box like Wacom does with all their products. [caption id="attachment_46816" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

This is an incredibly unnatural way to use a pen, but luckily Photoshop doesn't actually require the keyboard be attached.[/caption]I most often found myself removing the keyboard entirely, and using the digital keyboard when I need the Alt or Control keys. In order to get those keys to appear on your screen, since out of the box the Surface only shows you basic keys on the digital keyboard, follow these steps:

Click Settings
Click PC settings
Click PC and Devices
Click Typing
Reference the Touch Keyboard section
Select “add the standard keyboard layout as a touch keyboard option”
Open Photoshop
Click on the Touch Keyboard icon in the taskbar
Click on the new keyboard option

This would be great, if the digital keyboard did not suck up half my screen.Using the digital keyboard is also slower than using a traditional one, or using assigned keys with a Wacom product. The Surface has to think a bit when you're using the digital keyboard to select areas. It's not immediate like I've become used to on any other experience. It's limiting, but not crippling. Annoying, but not crushing. What Photoshop Touch needs most is a way to assign buttons on the screen to these keyboard tasks instead of having to bring up an entire keyboard. Better yet, as mentioned, give me the ability to assign keys to the buttons on the pen (I know I am coming dangerously close to beating a dead horse here, so my apologies). What I am grateful for is the ability to just ditch the keyboard altogether and not really miss it. That's an experience where using a screen like the Surface really shines.

I think Adobe is aware of my problems involving the keyboard and I would be surprised if it wasn't on the top of things to address when working with Microsoft going forward. Though that doesn't do a lot for my problems in the here and now, it is something to consider in the realm of the product's future.Another unfortunate problem that arises from the hardware is the lack of an SD card port. Yes, it has microSD, but none of my cameras, DSLR or otherwise, shoot to a microSD. That means I have to put the photos onto another computer to either transfer them to Adobe Creative Cloud storage or migrate them to a microSD just to get them on the Surface. Though I could buy an SD card reader for the USB, it would have been a lot simpler to just have the slot built in to minimize the number of things I have to carry with me when I use the Surface. I'm already afraid of losing the pen.Pros:

Being able to rest my hand on the screen itself while using the pen on another area of the screen is a Godsend
The Adobe-built touch interface for Photoshop works beautifully
Commands are quick and easy, and getting lost in the edit was frequent (that's a good thing)
Screen is bright and vibrant, colors pop and working on the Surface monitor was a pleasant experience
Having the full power of Photoshop in a customized environment on a very lightweight package is pretty amazing

Cons:

Lack of control over what the pen buttons do makes them basically useless in the Photoshop Touch Workspace and amount to simply wasted buttons
Needing access to certain keys on the keyboard was troublesome, Neither the digital keyboard or the physical one was anywhere near a perfect experience
Lack of an SD card port means either toting around an SD USB reader, or transferring data through another computer en route to using the Surface

Back at MAX, we were treated to this really great video of what could be possible with an Adobe/Microsoft partnership, and after working in Photoshop on the Surface, I have to believe that these artistic dreams will become a reality:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlLR9ANGsOoMy problems with the whole interface, aside from the pen buttom complaints (ok I'm seriously done talking about those now, I promise), amount to basically small quips and minor inconveniences. For an experimental workspace that is just the first step of many towards a tactile digital experience, this was a wondrous success. It's not better than a Wacom in all areas, but it's cheaper than buying a laptop and a Cintiq, with some advantages like a compact size and the ability to rest your hand on the monitor while still using the pen tool. Any downsides to using Photoshop Touch on the Surface was due to the underperforming or incomplete hardware, not the software. So if you're really into this kind of touch interface, then it's absolutely worth it. Just make sure to get the more powerful Surface.We give Photoshop Touch Workspace on the Surface Pro 3 a solid four stars out of five, for using the limitations of the Surface hardware to their utmost and delivering a mobile retouching experience that rivals industry standards from the likes of Wacom. [post_title] => Adobe Photoshop Touch Workspace: Worth Buying a Surface Pro 3? [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => adobe-photoshop-touch-workspace-worth-buying-a-surface-pro-3 [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2015-01-19 13:45:35 [post_modified_gmt] => 2015-01-19 18:45:35 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=46797 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 13 [filter] => raw )[7] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 46410 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2015-01-12 13:54:41 [post_date_gmt] => 2015-01-12 18:54:41 [post_content] => Look guys, the Surface is not as bad as people would have you believe. In fact, it was a good (not bad or great) experience all around. You see, Surface is a wondrous idea that has been struggling with itself for the better part of two years now, and although it has most of the kinks worked out, the current operating system seems like a pieced-together malcontented compromise, the trackpad is probably the worst I've ever used, and the pen seems wildly under utilized. But it's not what I would call a terrible experience. Overall, my life wasn't really impeded on much when I swapped my MacBook Pro for the Surface Pro 3. For those who go on and on about how terrible it is, I think you're being melodramatic. There really is no reason why these shouldn't be more successful in the consumer market. But wait, didn't I just say it was terrible at a few things? Let me explain.The Surface Pro 3 is a frustrating product, but to me only frustrating because it dangles an excellent experience in front of your face but just barely comes short time and time again. It's so good at so many things, yet misses the mark in some rather bizarre places.For a guy who has used only Apple computers since ditching his Toshiba Satellite notebook in 2005, moving back to a Windows operating system for a week was a striking non-event. As far as tablet features go, the Surface Pro 3 is an excellent tablet. Sure, it's a little big, but the controls and things you can do with it far surpass what I ever expected to get out of a tablet. The iPad is fun for play, but Windows wasn't kidding when their advertisements stated that most professionals want more than that. They want to be able to actually work. The Surface delivers on this desire, as I found myself actually editing photos and writing blogs from the Surface. The real estate of the screen wasn't quite large enough to allow for actual video editing, but in testing the Surface actually had no problem opening Adobe Premiere and running it. It kept up, and that put a smile on my face.I will be going into the functionality of Photoshop in another review, but suffice it to say that it actually works extremely well. There are a few quips here and there, but as far as actually editing photos and getting immersed in the experience, the Surface shines here.

I really enjoy the experience of what was originally billed "Metro" when it was first announced... that is to say, the "tiles" system that Windows adopted. What is effectively your home screen, the tiles actually make a lot of sense. They're intuitive to use, easy to customize and adapt to the changing world around you. One of my favorite apps is the Bing news app. It's so well designed that I found myself reading the news for extended periods of time. Think "Flipboad" and "Pulse" (before LinkedIn bought it) combined. It's addictive. What I didn't enjoy is how the old "desktop" view feels shoehorned in. However, as successful as that news app is, the OneNote app and it's integration with the pen seems like a waste. Note taking is a fine thing, but what you can do with OneNote doesn't seem particularly "huge" enough to warrant placing an entire button on the included pen whose single purpose is to bring up the app. More on the pen in a moment.

If you recall, the original Windows 8 had no "Start" menu or desktop to speak of. It was a huge step for Windows to abandon these mainstays, and the general public hated it. Hated it. So they brought it back mostly, and now I hate it. You see, the entire Windows 8 experience feels like a touch-centric ecosystem that would be perfect for a finger or a pen, but the desktop completely breaks that. It's old, not optimized for something as big as a finger, and difficult to maneuver after the entire setup process was gracefully molded around an experience with my finger.[caption id="attachment_46442" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Look how large the tip of my finger is in comparison to these digital buttons. Add to that the keyboard is uncomfortably close to the bottom of the screen, it can be nearly impossible to actually tap on those icons.[/caption] It's lazy, breaks with the experience entirely and feels like a last minute add-on... which it was. It might work for pure desktop computing with a standard mouse, but on the Surface it feels weak and not thought through.

The included pen is extremely sensitive, both in how it works as a "mouse" of sorts and the how it registers pressure. It's a handy tool, but I wish there was a place on the Surface itself where I could store the pen. It's only a matter of time until I lose it at this point. If you've ever used a Wacom tablet and pen, the experience is pretty similar to that, if we only talk about the experience of holding and using it. The pressure sensitivity is awesome when it comes to editing photos, but the inability to assign specific commands to the pen per program you have open is unfortunate. The software support for the pen is where the comparisons between Wacom and the Surface diverge. Though there is an app you can download that lets you change the functionality of that button, currently the only two options are OneNote and OneNote mobile for the button on the back of the pen. Not really what I was looking for when it comes to options. I can't even tell it to be an eraser when Photoshop is open. Kind of a drag. You also can't give any commands to the two buttons on the side of the pen. At all. They aren't options in Hub, even for developers who want to give the pen more power. This is a big misstep in my opinion, especially when they are trying to get folks who are used to editing with a pen such as a Wacom. When you have all these options available to you in a Wacom and suddenly they're taken away when you move to a Surface, it doesn't really make you want to use the product.The keyboard included with the Surface Pro 3 is far and away their best iteration of the concept yet. The original keyboard was so frustrating to use that it basically sank the product before it left the shore. Gratefully, Microsoft abandoned the "touch only" keyboard and has adopted a very slim keyboard with actual keys. Typing with the keyboard is fast and easy, but I don't really like having it propped up against the bottom of the Surface, which is how Microsoft recommends it, for two reasons:1) When the keyboard is propped up and at an angle, it clicks and clacks incredibly loudly and vibrates with every punch of a key. If it's not annoying to anyone around you, it might be pretty irritating to you. Typing anything for a long period of time feels insecure and flimsy. If you lay the board flat, however, typing becomes a much more pleasant experience.

2) When the keyboard is propped, the bottom portion of the screen is flush with the physical keyboard, making touching anything in the lower inch of the screen extremely difficult. But Jaron, what do you need to touch that's so low? The WiFi, that's what. Even with the pen it can be difficult to tap so far down. But wait, doesn't the keyboard have a touchpad mouse? So glad you asked...The touchpad mouse on the keyboard is probably the only hardware portion of the Surface that I genuinely hate. It's incredibly insensitive and difficult to use. Clicking is a pain, right clicking is worse and trying to navigate anywhere on Windows 8 with a touch pad feels archaic. This might be because the Surface is best used as a tactile experience, and I wouldn't have cared if the touchpad was so low quality if touching all four corners of the Surface screen was easy when the keyboard was attached. Unfortunately this isn't the case, and sometimes I'm nearly forced to use that horrible touch pad.Microsoft touts the kickstand as something to be loved, and admittedly they are right: it rocks. Using the Surface as a monitor to watch streaming video on an airplane was a great experience. Also a surprise was how high quality the speakers on the Surface sound. Though they aren't what we as computer users have grown to expect from the built-in laptop speakers, they aren't nearly as tinny sounding or quiet as I was expecting. Having heard the speakers on an iPad and iPhone, the Surface excels here. You can even make out a pleasant bass.[caption id="attachment_46440" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Seriously, I don't think it's possible to put the microSD card slot in a more hidden, unmarked place.[/caption]The Surface manages to include both a USB and a microSD card slot (which was possibly the most difficult slot to find on any piece of hardware I've ever experienced, by the way). This is awesome, and makes the Surface more akin to a laptop than a tablet. Unfortunately, for a pro computing device, leaving out an SD card reader is a bit of a drag. No one shoots to microSD unless they have a GoPro, so having to move my data around using another computer kind of defeats the purpose of the Surface as a "work" device. During my one week of only using the Surface, I had to shoot to microSD via an SD adapter in my camera and thus sacrifice speed. Annoying, but do-able.One last thing about the Surface that I loved: the battery. This sucker lasts a very, very long time. I charged it intermittently, and of course after about five hours of use it needed charging, but in standby/sleep mode, the battery lasts weeks without draining. I can't say the same for my MacBook Pro in sleep mode. That thing will die after a couple days. Whatever Microsoft is doing here, they need to keep doing it. Big thumbs up.Unfortunately, the Surface is really expensive. There are cheaper options at $800, but getting one that's capable of actual work will require investing $1600. It's a lot to ask for what looks like a tablet, and tablet competitors are a lot cheaper. It's more than a tablet, but less than a laptop in many people's eyes, and they wouldn't be entirely wrong in that belief.Pros: Large, beautiful screen, which is a plus when it comes to tablets Multitasking on one screen (splitscreen) Great speakers Kickstand is great Having a pen is fantastic Pretty light weight, considering how much is packed into the device Powerful processor, can handle intense computing MicroSD slot USB 3 port Incredible battery lifeCons: Lack of pen customization options Touch pad on keyboard is probably worst I've encountered in 8 years No SD card slot The ancient "Desktop" and "Start" menu feel out of place on the system Oddly, connecting to WiFi networks was hit or miss Expensive: $1600 if you want one worth purchasing.After a week of using nothing but the Surface for computing, I have to say it wasn't the horrific, terrible experience I had been warned of by industry peers. Quite the opposite actually. It was pleasant, and though actually using the Surface on my lap wasn't as comfortable as a traditional laptop, it got the job done. I was able to edit photos, write blogs, surf the internet, watch videos and basically do everything I had become accustomed to doing on my Apple products. It's a fine machine with a few missteps that prevent it from being a great one. In the end, I placed it and my Mac next to each other in my living room to see which I gravitated towards after my full week of Surface-only computing to see how I, my significant other and my friends reacted. Which would get the most touches?

Admittedly, as good as my experience with the Surface was, it is still sitting where I left it. Unused since that first week. It does a lot right, but not enough to make me give up that which has proven so reliable for so many years.We give the Surface Pro 3 a three out of five for delivering on most of its promises, while falling short in other areas. It's not a bad product by any means, but it's not good enough to make me give up my laptop yet either. [post_title] => I Used a Surface Pro 3 Exclusively for a Week and Lived to Tell the Tale [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => closed [post_password] => [post_name] => i-used-a-surface-pro-3-exclusively-for-a-week-and-lived-to-tell-the-tale [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2015-01-13 20:27:10 [post_modified_gmt] => 2015-01-14 01:27:10 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=46410 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 9 [filter] => raw )[8] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 45023 [post_author] => 47038 [post_date] => 2014-12-10 11:34:19 [post_date_gmt] => 2014-12-10 16:34:19 [post_content] => Sigma rolled out a beast of a lens earlier this year and I was finally able to take it for a spin at home to see how it would perform outside a conference room floor. The new Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports lens did not let me down. The build, focus speed, sharpness, versatility and even the price were all determining factors that this lens would be a perfect addition to any photographer looking for the advantage in sports or wildlife photography.Let me preface this review by saying while I enjoy reading lens reviews full of test information and cool graphs showing me the sharpness at different f/stops, this will not be one of those. Instead of shooting with the lens in a controlled environment I thought I would test it out how it would be used in the field. I was especially looking forward to taking it down to the sideline of an NFL game but unfortunately my hometown Arizona Cardinals were out of town both weekends that I had the lens in my possession. I decided to hit up the next best thing; two-hand touch Turkey Bowl pickup football game of the town locals on Thanksgiving morning.[caption id="attachment_45024" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

600mm, f/8.0, 1/2000, ISO 800[/caption]As I mentioned in the introduction, this lens is built like a beast. It is full metal outside construction including the lens hood and tripod collar. It is dust proof and weather tough to protect the 24 lens elements in 16 groups inside the casing. (Here's a great video I found on the lens that illustrates the dust and splash proof feature that I thought was entertaining. Due to privacy settings on the video we couldn't embed it here.) Sigma also coated the front and rear glass with a protective coating to help repel water and fingerprints. It weighs in at a little over 6 lbs and while manageable without a monopod or tripod after an hour of shooting with it outdoors, I was wishing I had brought mine.Two things that are of utmost importance to me while shooting sports is the speed of focus and the optical performance. At a price of just $1,999 I wondered if the Sigma had compromised on either of those.They didn’t.In fact, this lens produced incredibly sharp images through the entire zoom range from center to corner and did so while locking focus using their autofocus technology. Not only was the focus quick and razor sharp but it was also quiet. The lens includes two optical stabilization modes, one for general photography and the second for panning either vertically or horizontally. I can see that second mode would be especially ideal for motorsports though I didn’t get a chance to experiment with it. Optically the only complaint I might have is a slight vignetting in the corners. Fortunately Lightroom has already updated their lens profiles to include the Sigma 150-600mm and so by checking a box that is fixed instantly. Ultimately I would rather take a little bit of vignetting rather than have them sacrifice sharpness in the corners of my photos.[caption id="attachment_45025" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Both images shot at 600mm, f/8.0, 1/3200, ISO 800[/caption]The lens is about 12 inches long and when the barrel is extended to reach the full 600mm, it adds an additional 4 inches of length. (Did I already mention it’s a beast?) Fortunately it does include a built-in tripod collar, so you won’t leave home without it (and wouldn't want to). One nice feature of the collar is that it can be rotated easily 90 degrees so you can change from shooting horizontal to vertical in just a few seconds. The zoom on the lens can be either adjusted by turning the zoom ring or using the push/pull function. When pointing the lens up or down there is zoom creep as one would expect but Sigma added a cool feature to combat it. They included a lock switch on the zoom so that you can lock the focal distance at any of distances listed in white on the lens. I kept mine at 600mm most of the time while using it. When locked I experienced no creeping with the lens pointed up or down.The lens is highly customizable using the Sigma USB Dock and Sigma Optimization Pro Software. In addition to updating lens firmware and adjust focus parameters you can also customize AF speed, focus limiter and OS function. This is a neat function that Sigma has been including in all their newer lenses and I appreciate knowing that throughout the entire range of the lens I can calibrate the focus to be razor sharp.[caption id="attachment_45029" align="aligncenter" width="838"]

Photo of my sister-in-law reading a book at the park. Notice how at 600mm the text on the book is razor sharp and easy to read. f/6.3, 1/6400, ISO 1600[/caption]It is worth seeing the photo of my sister-in-law reading the book shot at 600mm to see how sharp the lens is so I have uploaded it in full resolution here. You can read the every word she is reading.I believe it’s worth noting that there were two different Sigma 150-600 lenses released on the same date. The one I got my hands on was the Sport lens which is known to perform optically better, be a heavier more sturdy build and weather sealed. The Sport lens runs just $1,999. The other model labeled their Contemporary is their even less expensive sibling. I have not had a chance to handle or shoot with the Contemporary version of this lens so I can’t tell you much about it but I wanted to mention it so you don’t run out there and pick up a Sigma 150-600 at a deep discount from the $1,999 price and find out later you didn’t get the Sports model I have been talking about. The lens is available in Canon, Nikon and Sigma mounts.For those who love the MTF charts... I included them below.

The Sigma 150-600mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM Sports lens exceeded my expectations. The build was solid and heavy but still manageable even hand-held. The imaging performance and focus was impressive. The lens was brimming with all of Sigma’s latest technologies and customizations including the useful zoom lock and advanced image stabilization. If I could ask for perfection, the only two things I would change about the lens would be the slight image vignetting that was noticeable in the images and an internal zooming lens. That said, I can understand that an internal zoom lens would have made this lens substantially larger so there would be a drawback to that of course. As a photographer that has shot on the sidelines of NFL games, I can see this super telephoto lens as being a game-changer and something that would give me significant advantage to get images at 600mm or even close at 150mm if the action comes to me along the sideline. In four words, this lens really delivers.Pros:

Build Quality
Fast & Quiet Focus Motor
Great Sharpness Throughout
Ability for Customizations
Price Point

Cons:

Weight (6.3 lbs)
Vignetting
External Barrel Zooming / Length

We give the Sigma 150-600mm f/5.6-6.3 Sport Lens a very high 4 out of 5 stars thanks to it's solid beefy build and high performance focus motor. The glass is of superb quality and it reflects in the sharpness of your photos. Lastly the price for what you are getting is competitive. The only negative was the weight and the size of it. Well that and the fact that all the parents were staring me down at the park when I was shooting photos of my kids. Pretty certain I was labeled in the minds of a few as the new neighborhood creeper. [post_title] => Review: Optically The Sigma 150-600mm Sports Lens Really Delivers [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => review-optically-the-sigma-150-600mm-sports-lens-really-delivers [to_ping] => [pinged] => http://vimeo.com/106290197 [post_modified] => 2014-12-10 11:34:19 [post_modified_gmt] => 2014-12-10 16:34:19 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=45023 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 4 [filter] => raw )[9] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 44896 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2014-12-09 11:21:44 [post_date_gmt] => 2014-12-09 16:21:44 [post_content] => Canon’s 7D Mark II seems like it’s been years in the making. The original 7D was a workhorse of a camera, but over the past two years has really shown its age. The quality of its images, its capacity to keep up with other modern DSLRs and its video capabilities were all questionable compared to other alternatives. So when the 7D Mark II was announced, Canon fans were ready for a giant leap forward, perhaps a leap equal in distance to what the original 7D did for photography. So, was that expectation met?When you hold the 7D Mark II, you will immediately notice its weight: this is a heavy camera due in part to the incredible magnesium alloy frame. To say the 7D Mark II is durable would be an understatement: it’s incredibly tough. Not only is it weather sealed, but I truly believe you would have a difficult time breaking this camera, even if you tried.The layout of buttons should be very familiar to any current Canon user, and is reminiscent of the original 7D. This is one place I think Canon has a leg up on the competition: the way they have arranged the physical location of buttons is extremely easy to pick up. Even if you have never shot with a Canon before, it is a matter of minutes before you have a solid grasp on how to operate the 7D.From a photo perspective, this is where I believe the 7D really stands out. The camera’s autofocus is incredible, probably the fastest and most accurate I’ve ever encountered on a still camera. The 10 frames per second is not the fastest on the market, but it’s really quite capable of capturing motion be it from a moving vehicle, sports shot, event shot or wildlife. During testing, I aimed to capture birds in a variety of lighting situations and never once did the autofocus lose track of the subject. Nearly each frame in a burst is beautifully tack sharp. The sensor’s ability to continually keep focus on moving subjects is thanks in large part to the dual pixel sensor, which I will cover in more detail in a few paragraphs.

To show you how the subject is still very much in focus, this is a 100% crop of the same image above:

In terms of dynamic range, the 7D is pretty impressive if we look at its performance in the ideal ISO ranges. At ISO 160, we can get nearly all details out of a photo with only a slight effect on usability of an image. If your exposure is slightly off, it’s easily correctible with no side effects, as long as you shoot in raw.

In this particular example, the only location where the sensor was unable to pick up detail was in the shadows of the one girl’s pant leg. Otherwise, the shadow detail was well preserved.If we look at highlights, relatively similar performance is evident as compared to we saw in the shadow detail preservation is evident in highlights. What was a blown reflections on the water is now clearly ripples on the sea.

Unfortunately, this level of detail is not preserved when we look at higher ISOs, at least not in the shadows. If we bump the shadows identically as we did in the ideal ISO 160 to this shot at 16,000, we will see some horrific results:

This is not completely surprising. APS-C sensors have gotten better at high ISO performance, but they are still a long way off from what we can expect from their full frame brethren. I am happy to say that at the other end, the highlights, the 7D does do better at higher ISOs, retaining color and some detail.

Full HD 1080p video recording is supported in multiple frame rates, up to 60 fps, in both the MOV and MP4 file formats. Additionally, uncompressed video can be recorded to an optional external recorded via the HDMI output. In-camera video is recorded using the high quality H.264/MPEG-4 AVC codec and manual exposure control is supported for greater refinement over the look and feel of recordings. Video clips are automatically partitioned after the file size has reached 4GB and both IPB and all i-frame compressions are available for use depending on editing and output preferences.Unfortunately, that video recording in-camera is where I noticed a staggering disappointment. The quality of the video is mediocre at best across the ISO range, especially when viewed at 100%. If the camera was capable of shooting beyond 1080, I would likely be more lenient on the quality. However, because I can’t go to 2.5 or 4K, I’m stuck with exactly what the camera is capable of producing, and that is video that’s not better than what Canon has on the 6D and 5D Mark III. From testing, the 7D II appears to not even match what those two cameras have benchmarked. Though the rolling shutter and moiré is decently controlled and it is a relief that we are able to shoot to 60p for moderate slow motion effects, the 7D lags embarrassingly behind competitor video products such as the Panasonic GH4 or any Blackmagic camera currently available.As mentioned, the 7D II also has Canon’s dual pixel autofocus sensor that is intended for use in video, at least that was the case when it was first introduced on the 70D. It’s not as good as the one in the 70D, but it is decent. The system integrates two separate photodiodes within each pixel to provide a broad and dense network of phase-detection gathering elements across nearly 80% of the frame to help reduce focus hunting for faster, more direct control of focus placement. Dual Pixel CMOS AF is utilized during live view applications, for either still or video shooting. In testing with video, the system worked decently well on non STM lenses, and great on STM lenses, though it wasn’t great enough for me to consider dropping manual control of focus in my videos. I haven’t come across a system that makes me comfortable with giving up manual control, and the 7D II hasn’t changed that opinion.The Dual Pixel sensor was made more effective on the 70D due to the intuitive touch interface on the incredibly useful flip out screen, which allowed for on-the-fly adjustments to subjects. The 7D confusingly does not include a touch screen, which dramatically decreases the effectiveness and speed at which a video shooter can tell the camera what to focus attention on, even with the speed and accuracy of the Dual Pixel Sensor. That, and the refusal to add a flip out or tilt screen to the camera, is baffling. Though Canon touted the 7D’s new video features, the actual experience of shooting video on the platform is inhibited by Canon’s refusal to include necessary pieces in the preverbal puzzle.Pros:

Incredibly damage-resistant body with sturdy magnesium alloy frame
Outstanding autofocus performance during high speed shooting
Highly detailed, sharp and crisp images
Good dynamic range when shooting at ideal ISOs
Video shoots at 60 frames per second in multiple file types

Cons:

Disappointing video quality, with little to separate it from competitor product
Average overall ISO performance, which limits dynamic range at higher ISOs
Average overall image quality
No touch screen, and no tilt or flip out screen
Though it has made it a stronger body, the camera is very heavy

The 7D II is a good camera, excellent if you want to look at it strictly from an action shooter or wildlife photographer standpoint. It does that one task well, firing accurately and quickly when subjects are in motion. The end results are beautifully sharp and colors are crisp.But that’s it. It’s a camera that is seemingly designed for one purpose, with little of the “Swiss army knife” personality that made the original 7D a desirable camera. If you don’t shoot sports, events or wildlife, this camera offers little else to entice you. The video performance is mediocre at best and ISO performance hits about average in the spectrum of competitor cameras. Yes, the video does shoot in 60p now, but there are other cameras that will do the same but with higher quality. It seems overly specific and tailored to one style of photography and offers few frills for anyone else.In a time when the competition is building cameras that are excellent at a wide range of tasks, the 7D Mark II seems outmatched across the board, despite excellent performance in its target category. It’s as though this was the camera the original 7D should have been, therefore making it late to the game in most of its major features.We give the Canon 7D Mark II a solid three stars out of five thanks to its great high speed autofocus performance and excellent image quality, but it is held back by doing little else of consequence. [post_title] => Review: The Canon 7D Mark II [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => review-the-canon-7d-mark-ii [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2014-12-09 14:36:22 [post_modified_gmt] => 2014-12-09 19:36:22 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=44896 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 2 [filter] => raw )[10] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 44762 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2014-12-07 17:43:35 [post_date_gmt] => 2014-12-07 22:43:35 [post_content] => Think Tank has grown to be the photographer’s go-to bag solution in recent years, and for good reason. The bags are extremely well designed, priced well and rarely (if ever) fall apart. They’re incredibly well made and the brand resonates with this industry: made by and for professional photographers. The Airport International Limited Edition roller bag is Think Tank’s celebratory bag for 10 years in the industry and a slight upgrade from the standard Airport roller, a popular bag for the traveling shooter. Think Tank upgraded their standard Airport roller with leather accents that only marginally increased the total cost of the unit (only $40 more than the original non-leather model). The upgrade is somewhat minor, but packed onto what is already a great bag, it’s nice to have a roller that has an element of class to it.

As with all Think Tank bags, the build quality of this roller is exceptional. I’m going to start with the exterior and work my way in to describe each portion of the bag.Starting with the exterior, the woven nylon that surrounds the entire bag is extremely heavy duty and can withstand quite a bit of punishment. If you have the original Airport Roller, the LE version is identical here. Where they differ is on the front of the bag, where the LE has introduced leather onto the topmost zipped pocket and the pull-tabs on the zippers themselves. It’s a small amount of leather that adds a nice touch to the front of the bag, but it’s nothing exorbitant or especially luxurious. The amount of leather is rather small, so it’s not something you notice unless you’re really looking for it. It does, however, make me personally want to take better care of the bag. I find myself babying it a bit, which is an unusual feeling for a piece of gear I normally toss around without much thought.

The other leather addition is to both exterior handles located on the left side and top of the roller, but only to the top, visible area of the handles. Again, it’s a nice touch but you only notice it if you’re looking for it. It also doesn’t really change the “feel” of the grip very much, as most of your hand will be under the handle and not touching the leather when in use.

The placement of the leather mimics the materials on the original Airport, so I can understand why they did it they way they did. For manufacturing purposes, it is easier to substitute a material in places where material differs on the original bag. It limits the amount of work the designers and actual assembly line has to do. But it also doesn’t make the bag feel particularly unique, even though it is a special edition bag.The wheels and wheel housing on this bag are outstanding. The roller-skate-style wheels are incredibly smooth, making the bag a breeze to pull behind you. They are removable and serviceable, so if you run into any problems in the future you can repair them easily.The retractable handle lives inside another zippered pocket (with a leather pull tab on the zipper) and is my favorite design of any retractable handle on any bag I own. It smoothly and easily pulls in and out in three sections. My only gripe is that when you first pull it out, the handle is so deep inside the top pocket that it can be a bit tricky to get your fingers around the handle to pull it out. It is an exceedingly minor complaint, however.

What I love about the handle is how it feels when I’m pulling the bag. The grip on the handle is rubberized yet smooth to the touch. It has to be experienced to really adequately describe it. I really enjoyed pulling this bag behind me.For those who plan to travel with the roller, which you probably will considering it’s carry-on approved, there is a TSA lock on the side to secure the zippers. This really is only a benefit if you plan to check the bag, which if mine is full of camera equipment I never will. It is a nice thing to have though.Gratefully, this bag is surprisingly light when empty. After filling it with two cameras, six lenses, accessories and a laptop, I could very much notice a difference between it and my other non-Think Tank bags. However, that low weight did come at a cost.Unlike another roller I am quite fond of, the Think Tank has no inner support “tub” that adds stability and safety to the interior of the bag. This limits the security of the contents from outside forces. What I found most interesting is that the interior dividers are very sturdy, which means that when I put lenses or cameras in the bag and they needed to force themselves somewhere as they fit snugly into position, rather than force inwards, the items actually forced outwards, warping the form factor of the entire bag and making zipping the roller closed somewhat difficult. I do like how well cushioned and secure the interior of this bag is, but I’m bothered by how easy it is to warp the exterior of the bag. It makes me question how well the contents would be secured against a fall, airport baggage claim collisions, and any other sort of forces that come with being a photographer.I want to come back and talk a little bit more about the reason Think Tank created the bag, and how the addition of premium materials has affected it. The LE is designed to be an ode, a celebratory bag, a “we did it thanks to you” experience, but the amount of leather on the bag itself hardly seems all that joyous. Don’t get me wrong, I love the leather accents, but I was left wanting more. I would gladly pay a far more premium price for a bag that screamed luxury. A bag like that would help paint an impressive picture when speaking to high-end clients, but this bag only makes known its benefits to me. Any onlooker would not notice the leather, and the bag just looks like any other Think Tank bag at first glance. This isn’t necessarily bad if you don’t have any plans of needing to impress clients or have your bag stand out, but for a premium price I would think it would at least be something you would be considering. People don’t buy high end, nice clothes from top fashion brands to satisfy themselves; they do it to send a message to others. This bag doesn’t sufficiently send that kind of message, in my opinion.Pros:

Lightweight, well designed and tough
Excellent wheel design
Extremely durable interior
Good size fits a lot of gear, but isn’t obtrusively big
TSA Lock built in
Carry-on size
Great handle design
Leather accents are a nice touch

Cons:

Wish the premium materials had bigger focus
No interior tub, making exterior of bag flexible

The Airport International Roller is an excellent bag, and the LE brings pleasant, though somewhat limited, leather accents to the table in what is the first attempt by any major camera bag company to give us something with a luxurious take on what we normally consider a “workhorse” product. It may not blow me away in that luxury category, but the bag itself is still a winner. It is well-designed and light weight with its only flaw being the lack of interior support through the exterior padding of the case.We give the Limited Edition Airport International Roller a solid four out of five stars for an excellent overall design, but leaving us wanting a bit more in the luxury department.[jetpack-related-posts] [post_title] => Review: Think Tank Limited Edition Airport International Roller [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => review-think-tank-limited-edition-airport-international-roller [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2014-12-09 14:37:15 [post_modified_gmt] => 2014-12-09 19:37:15 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=44762 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw )[11] => WP_Post Object ( [ID] => 44750 [post_author] => 30241 [post_date] => 2014-12-07 17:17:21 [post_date_gmt] => 2014-12-07 22:17:21 [post_content] => Micro four-thirds cameras have dramatically improved in quality and reliability since their introduction several years ago. What was once a scoffed-at system is now being adopted by some of the top professionals and biggest names in the industry. The Panasonic GH2 and GH3 were sleeper hits, in use by many for years and lauded for their incredible video capabilities. With the launch of the DMC-GH4, Panasonic was able to get my attention and give me something I wasn’t expecting: the best compact video camera on the market.Though the GH4 is both a still camera and a video camera, this review will focus on the video capabilities of the camera. Though it takes fine photos, they aren’t really what I believe at what the camera excels or even is mainly aimed towards. This is a video camera first, and a still shooter camera a distant second.The Panasonic GH4 is small, but it is by no means too small or toy-like, a problem some mirrorless cameras struggle with (I’m looking at you Canon EOS M). The grip on the camera feels robust and solid, comparable to many full size DSLRs on the market. Though some complain that there are not enough buttons on the GH4 and that most of the functionality is controlled via digital menus, I disagree. There are dedicated buttons for ISO, white balance, recording, adjusting manual or auto focus, display and five function buttons that can be customized to whatever you want. Yes, there are some features that are locked behind the menu, such as adjusting frame rate and video file size, but they aren’t options a shooter would typically be grabbing for regularly. The important options are available at all times, right near a fingertip or thumb.

Gratefully, the GH4 designers recognized that a true flip-out screen is vastly superior to the tilt screen popularized by Sony and presently found on their Alpha series cameras and the new Nikon D750. The tilt screen is marginally more useful than not having a moving rear monitor at all, as it only allows you to vertically adjust the field of view. The GH4’s flip-out screen allos for vertical and horizontal field of view change, meaning you can be standing to the side or in front of the camera and still have access to view what the camera is seeing.If you have ever photographed architecture or attempted to shoot video in a confined space, there are few things more gratifying than being able to stand to the side of your camera and manage the controls instead of having to attempt to cram your head behind the camera at an uncomfortable angle.Manufacturers, I beg of you, take a page from Panasonic’s design: stop building tilt screens when the flip out screen is monumentally more useful in practical applications.From a sheer “firepower” perspective, there are no cameras on the market at the sub $10,000 price point that can match what the GH4 is capable of. Let me list for you what this camera does for less than $2000:

Slow motion, 96 frames per second at 1080p
4K video at 24p direct to SD card
Headphone jack, HDMI out, and AV out
Touchscreen with adaptive autofocus
WiFi enabled
Built in intervelometer with the option for a remote

The main things I want to focus on here are the slow motion and the 4K video. Though many cameras are capable of 4K capture, nearly all of them are exorbitantly priced or require clean HDMI out in order to get that footage... or both. The GH4 is the only camera that can write 4K directly to an SD card that is below $2000 in price, besides the GoPro Hero 4. It is also the only camera that is capable of producing 4K video and also 96 frames per second at 1080 at its price point.Let’s focus on those 96 frames per second for a moment. Recently, industry leaders Nikon and Canon have released cameras that finally shoot to 60p, something that video shooters like myself have been clamoring for years to have. Now that they finally have offered it, perhaps it is too late. The GH4 is an older camera than both the new Nikon D750 and the 7D Mark II, but it has more advanced capabilities. Being able to shoot proper slow motion is one of the few features that have been out of the reach of independent filmmakers for years. There simply has been no option at an affordable price point, the closest being the Sony FS700 which can capture up to 240 frames per second. The GH4 fits in by giving us one step better than 60p, but realizes that very few instances require something as robust as 240 frames per second.Basically, the camera’s design gave us just as much as we needed without compromising nearly anything.When you look at the actual quality of the footage produced by the GH4, it’s awe-inspiring. Comparing it to what used to be flagship indie filmmaking cameras like the 5D Mark III is night and day. Lines are crisper, images are sharper, colors are better defined and overall, the video just looks spectacular. What we see out of the GH4 is akin to what we see on television or in theaters. The quality is simply unprecedented, and we get it straight to SD card, allowing shooters to maintain preposterously small shooting rigs. Smaller is most certainly better for filmmakers who are no doubt used to lugging hundreds of pounds of gear with them wherever they go. The GH4’s compactness is an absolute godsend.The GH4 is nearly perfect, but falters in a few important places.Firstly, though it does have a built in intervelometer, the timelapsing abilities of the camera are sub par. In low light situations, the camera allows a slight green/magenta color shift every few frames, causing the footage to look jumpy and inconsistent. Not having identical color and exposure through a timelapse are two ways to immediately make the final footage basically unwatchable. It is for this reason that I choose to use a different camera if I want to timelapse.From a still shooter perspective, the GH4 is good, but it’s not a competitor to something like the Sony A7R, the Nikon D800E or the Canon 5D Mark III. If you buy the GH4 expecting a still-shooter experience that will rival those cameras, you will be disappointed. While the EVF is amazing and looks like real life (something I never thought would happen) and the burst frames per second is outstanding, the actual quality of the final still is only good, not great.

The dynamic range of the sensor is limited to about three stops in either direction, with little detail being preserved in the shadows and highlights. Bumped beyond 3 stops, you will either end up with a lot of noise in the shadows and no detail, or a lot of nothing in the highlights except more blown highlights. Three stops is good, but not great, especially when we are used to incredibly usable 5 or even 10 stops of dynamic range out of other full DSLRs.The ISO performance in the GH4 in both stills and in video is also a letdown. Though it cranks from 200 to 6400, it’s not really what I would define as “usable” past 800 ISO. This can likely be attributed to the very small sensor. A weak point of non-full-frame sensors is their poor ISO performance, and the GH4 is no exception. I’m willing to forgive subpar still performance if the rest of the experience was flawless, but when you combine that with what equates to rather pitiful ISO, especially when compared to even the lower end DSLRs, it’s hard to forgive.Pros:

Truly gorgeous video quality
4K recording straight to SD Card
96 Frames Per Second in 1080 video
Intuitive interface with few hiccups
Well-designed flip-out screen with touch interface
High-performing autofocus in video and still shooting
Large library of lens options, plus more when combined with a Metabones Speedbooster
Great battery life

Cons:

Mediocre still image quality
Unimpressive dynamic range
Inconsistent color matching in timelapse
Pitiful ISO performance
Small final image sizes/not enough megapixels

The Panasonic GH4 is so, so close to being an absolute object of perfection. Even with a few snags (ISO performance and its still image quality), the GH4 is priced unbelievably well for what it can bring to the video shooter. When you look at what Panasonic has crammed into the tiny body for under $2000, you begin to wonder how the competition can sleep at night charging more than three times the cost for one third the features in their DSLRs and camcorders. If you look at the GH4 as strictly a video camera, it is unrivaled in its usability, quality and price point. The camera could easily have cost three times as much and would still compete at that level, which says a lot about where Panasonic has it strategically placed.We give the Panasonic GH4 a high 4 out of 5, with only a few compromises to be taken in exchange for a laundry list of excellent features.Images courtesy of Michael Wilkinson, Video footage provided in part by Panasonic USA and Schneider Productions[jetpack-related-posts] [post_title] => Review: The Panasonic DMC-GH4 [post_excerpt] => [post_status] => publish [comment_status] => open [ping_status] => open [post_password] => [post_name] => review-panasonic-dmc-gh4 [to_ping] => [pinged] => [post_modified] => 2014-12-08 14:55:41 [post_modified_gmt] => 2014-12-08 19:55:41 [post_content_filtered] => [post_parent] => 0 [guid] => http://resourcemagonline.com/?p=44750 [menu_order] => 0 [post_type] => post [post_mime_type] => [comment_count] => 0 [filter] => raw ))

PHOTO

Inside the EQ Rental Startup Disrupting the Market For Photography Gear

Photo Series Captures the Elusive World of Polyamory

VIDEO

This Secretly Recorded Rap Video Was Shot On Only Commercial Sets

5 Best YouTube Channels for Film and TV Lovers

Filmmaker Ali Vingiano on Life After BuzzFeed and Authentic Storytelling

LIFESTYLE

SOCIAL MEDIA

REVIEWS

Review: The Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art Lens

Affinity Photo Review by High-End Retoucher Pratik Naik

Lowepro Echelon Series Review: Don’t Just Get Somewhere, Arrive.

The Profoto B2 Review: Portability Maximized

Review: The Feather Camera Crane from Lite Pro Gear

Review: The Nikon D750 Shines

Adobe Photoshop Touch Workspace: Worth Buying a Surface Pro 3?

I Used a Surface Pro 3 Exclusively for a Week and Lived to Tell the Tale

Review: Optically The Sigma 150-600mm Sports Lens Really Delivers

Review: The Canon 7D Mark II

Review: Think Tank Limited Edition Airport International Roller

Review: The Panasonic DMC-GH4