Sony PCM-M10 portable audio recorder

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Doing as I say, as well as as I do.

The Long Version: I've been using a Sony PCM-D50 audio recorder for ages, so whenever someone asks me for buying advice, I've suggested its newer sibling, the PCM-M10. It's 80% of the D50 for half the price, and even exceeds the abilities of the bigger unit in some ways. My arguments in its favour were so compelling, in fact, that after a few years of recounting them I eventually succumbed and bought one myself.

The Sony M10 is a hand-size audio recorder with excellent electronics and supernatural battery life. Yes, you can use it with $500 monitor headphones if you want to, as long as they have a 3.5mm jack, but that's not really the point. Its pair of omnidirectional microphones are very tolerant of suboptimal use, at the expense of some soundstage crispness, so it's perfect for people who just want to record good audio without fussing over the minutia.

I'm primarily interested in field recording ambience and environments in the city, so I have different requirements than musicians or videographers. A low noise floor is always good, but an effective limiter that can handle loud transients is much more important. Stereo imaging matters, but so do forgiving microphones and quick startup times. And there's simply no way that I'm going to walk the streets with a blimp on a boom. For me getting the sound is more important than being able to record the highest possible fidelity, and that's where the Sony M10 comes in.

The PCM-M10 is, at its heart, consumer electronics. It doesn't have the metal heft of its higher-end siblings, and cuts some corners in its controls. The worst of this is the LCD backlight being set through the menu, rather than being toggled by a dedicated button, as it's hard to see the meter display when the light turns off. It's also brutally difficult to see the numerals on the levels dial, which are only stamped on its side without any contrasting markings – although I must note that some allegedly “serious” handy recorders lack a levels dial at all. The switches on the back of the unit are easy to move accidentally, which I've resolved with some gaffer tape. And the small size of the recorder makes it particularly ill-suited to having a wind screen, with nothing much to hold one in place and no way to avoid it obscuring the LCD display or LED metering guides. The M10 is not nearly as nice or as easy to use as my bigger Sony PCM-D50.

The PCM-M10 is, on its surface, consumer electronics. It's available in black, burgundy, or white plastic; all have a wide contrasting silver band around them. My burgundy model even has little metallic flecks in the plastic, although the Black is described as matte. The microphones are hidden within the body of the unit, with small grills to cover them and no protrusions. Only the track mark button is silver, with the tape-deck transport controls being body-colour, and a black row of secondary buttons is tucked into the black surround of the LCD bezel. No casual observer is going to mistake the M10 for A Serious Piece Of Gear, which most recorders come across as, or for a stun gun, which is a real danger with the Zooms. Instead it's just another hand-sized electronic gadget of no clear purpose, and even if it is recognized as a recorder, it looks like something a student might use to hold their place while they sleep through a lecture. The M10 is not nearly as noticeable or remarkable as my bigger Sony PCM-D50.

In my life "nondescript" and "inoffensive" are goals to be aspired to. The M10 fits in perfectly.

The best feature of the Sony recorders are their built-in limiters. These clever devices record a secondary track at a lower gain, -12dB for the M10 and -20dB for the D50 and D100, which they normalize and cut in seamlessly to avoid clipping. The M10's levels will just read "OVER" instead of giving a positive reading like the D50 would, giving less indication of if and how the levels should be adjusted, but the magic still works well enough.

The M10 also has the Sony five-second preroll buffer, and even comes with the wired remote that lets it start recording without any handling noise. That's great when lying in wait for sound, but enabling the buffer has another enormous practical advantage. Like many recorders, hitting record doesn't actually start the recorder recording. This is a solid opportunity to set the levels, but it's really easy to not notice that the pause button is still flashing and think that sound is being captured when it isn't. With the buffer turned off the display looks about the same whether it's paused or rolling, but with the preroll enabled the zeroed time counter is replaced by bold blocks that look vastly different. And that's why I keep the preroll enabled: it's an obvious indicator of the recording state right under the meters that I'm devoting my attention to.

Another Sony quirk is that there's no way to change the file name format in the recorder. It's always YYMMDD_XX, so my being in a multi-Sony environment means that using both recorders on the same day creates identical file names. (Although the M10 starts incrementing the _XX portion from _01, while the D50 starts at _00.) To get around this I've set the M10's date two decades into the future, which it accepts somewhat gullibly, even though that annoys my computer's 'list files by most recent' function. This may not be much of an issue for anyone else, anywhere, ever.

One of the strengths of the PCM-M10 is that its omnidirectional microphones are relatively immune to wind. Well, gentle breezes. Maybe immune to slight drafts is a better term. Outdoors it does need a screen on all but the calmest days, but when wind does hit the M10, the effect is relatively mild. And unlike the Sony D50, which loses its mind if someone walks past its unshielded microphones too quickly, the M10 can go naked indoors with near-impunity. This is another huge advantage in the effort to be nondescript and inoffensive.

When the M10 does need a hat I'll use the Røde Dead Kitten, which is originally designed for their Stereo Videomic, but also fits the D50 and similarly-sized recorders. This is pretty heavy-duty protection, and attenuates the high frequencies somewhat, but I haven't felt the need to add a lightweight screen. Sony's own M10-specific design costs almost as much as the recorder.

As an aside, I'm also a big fan of Joby's tripods. I can highly recommend their low-profile Micro 250, which permanently lives on the bottom of my M10, and the recorder still happily fits in a pocket or small camera case. This makes it easy to position it away from the surface of a table; for the brave it can even be used as a stand to prop up the recorder vertically, as it has for some of these photos. And it doesn't block the battery door, so I don't need to remove it when I swap the M10's two AA cells – which I do out of habit, not necessity, since I've never had the patience to actually run a set down.

The M10 has about the same footprint as a small phone – that's an iPhone 5 in the photo above – and weighs about as much as a large unpeeled banana. There's just no reason to not have it nearby. Its absurd battery life means that I keep it locked on 'hold' instead of turning it off, so it only needs a quick flip of the power switch to be instantly ready. I've lost count of the number of good sounds that I've caught with the M10 that I would otherwise have missed.

I bought the Sony M10 because I thought I would use it more than the on-paper-superior D50, and I was absolutely right. It's true that I will choose to carry and use my bigger D50, with its better stereo imaging and somewhat lower noise floor, when I know that I'll be dedicating significant time to audio recording and have the comfort level to use it. This is exactly the same as choosing when to carry and use a big DSLR instead of a smaller camera. And like having multiple cameras, there have been times when I've used the little M10 even though the D50 was also in my gear bag. I'm wincing just a little to say this, but if I could only keep one audio recorder – a horrible thought – I'd be better served by the versatile and inoffensive M10. Not that I'm known for making rational choices, but hopefully it never comes to that.

last updated 12 oct 2014

Sigma 19mm and 30mm F2.8 EX DN E-Mount Lenses, Part 2

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: My how time flies.

The Long Version: Back in mid-February I wrote part 1 of this review with every intention of following up with part 2 in a reasonable amount of time. Sometimes life intrudes into plans, such that your idea of reasonable evolves into not what you originally intended. It's good that I'm just now getting around to writing part 2, because it's allowed me more time to work with these lenses and the NEX 5N. The singular flaw with all camera reviews is that everyone is so eager to get their review out in front of the public before anyone else that the reviews wind up reading pretty much the same and pretty thin on meaty real-world use. I don't have that excuse this time for writing a thin, meatless review.

Behind the Counter, Key West Florida, Sigma 30mm, f/2.8, ISO 2000, 1/60s

Unless a camera manufacturer is grossly incompetent (and Sigma has skirted that particular edge more than once), gear performance, and especially a lens' optical performance, is pretty much the same across contemporary lenses; that is to say, of good to excellent optical performance, even in the face of 100% pixel peeping. Personally what I want to know about a lens is more mundane, such as how well will it work in the real world under varying conditions and how well it holds up under use. I have toted the Sigmas all over a good portion of Florida since purchasing them, and under my ham-handed amateur use they have worked flawlessly and held up quite splendidly.

Conch Train, Key West Florida, Sigma 19mm, f/2.8, ISO 100, 1/800s

In part 1 of the review I talked about how, in spite of the fact the Sigma lenses lacked in-lens image stabilization, I purchased them anyway primarily because I'm so cheap and I refused to make any major (read: expensive) lens purchases for the NEX 5N. Fortunate was I to have chosen to purchases these specific lenses, simply because I didn't need in-lens image stabilization for how I use these lenses.

Under practical use the Sigma lenses shoot far above their discount cost to me. As an avowed amateur photographer I have neither a burning need nor an infinite amount of cash to purchase every top drawer lens that is offered in E-mount (such as the Zeiss Touit lenses). At $99/lens (and even double that price), the Sigma 19mm and 30mm are some of the best lenses you can purchase for your Sony NEX cameras. For photographers on a budget, a good deal of enjoyment comes from reducing the economic pressure by not tying up large sums of cash in eye-wateringly expensive camera equipment. Based on that metric the Sigma lenses are thus very, very enjoyable.

Ringer, Key West Florida, 30mm, f/3.2, ISO 100, 1/160s

An irrelevant issue that has cropped up on the various forums is the mechanical noises the lenses produce. The first noise comes from shaking the lenses, either accidentally or deliberately. Both lenses use an internal focusing element. When the NEX 5N is powered up, so is the lens, and the internal focusing elements are locked into place. Powered off the internal elements are allowed to float. I've given both a fair deliberate shake, and you can hear a soft 'thunk' as the elements hit the extremes of their travel. That noise means nothing. If all you can do is shake your camera in public to hear the lens make a noise, then perhaps you need to find another hobby.

Big Boat, Key West Florida, 30mm, f/5.6, ISO 100, 1/60s

The second irrelevant issue is the noise produced by the aperture. During focusing the aperture blades will snap open to the aperture's widest opening, the lens will focus, then the aperture blades will snap back down for proper exposure. This has been described in various fora as "lens chatter." The Sigma's aren't the only lenses to exhibit this; for example you can spend over $500 for the µ4:3rds Panasonic Leica 25mm f/1.4 and experience the exact same behavior. From a practical standpoint it means nothing to the overall operation of the lens. The noise is low enough that you have to be very close to the lens to hear it, let alone care about it.

Other than the two nit-noids just listed both lenses focus silently and very quickly, which is 99.9% of the time they're in use.

Better Than Sex, Key West Florida, 19mm, f/2.8, ISO 100, 1/3200s

The strengths of the Sigma 19mm and 30mm far out weight their perceived weaknesses. Combined with the Sony NEX 5N they create a modest but quite enjoyable compact system, especially for travel. I spent a fair amount of time just carrying and using the 5N and the two Sigma lenses. If you can find the older versions of these lenses at the discount prices then by all means pick them up. Even the more current 'Artist' versions are reasonable, given that more metal is used in their construction, even at twice the price ($199) of the first generation. The Sigma lenses really strike a nice series of compromises between image quality (very good), use of materials, construction, and overall operation. For the budget photographer who's more interested in making photographs than making a status statement, you really can't go wrong purchasing the Sigma 19mm and 30mm for your NEX camera.

Picket Fence, Key West Florida, 30mm, f/2.8, ISO 100, 1/80s

Bike Stop, Key West Florida, 30mm, f/5.6, ISO 250, 1/60s

Sunrise, Key West Florida, 30mm, f/5.6, ISO 100, 1/800

Rent Me, Key West Florida, 19mm, f/2.8, ISO 100, 1/80s

Rail Bridge, Bahia Honda, Florida, 30mm, f/6.3, ISO 100, 1/640s

Technical

All photographs taken hand-held with the Sony NEX 5N and post processed in LR 4.4 and the Nik Collection.

Sigma 19mm and 30mm F2.8 EX DN E-Mount Lenses, Part 1

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Never look a pair of gift lenses in the aperture.

The Long Version: I've been carrying two unique mirrorless camera systems for a while now. The first is µ4:3rds consisting of my µ4:3rds cameras (E-P2, E-PL1, E-PL2, and the OM-D E-M5) as well as a fair number of µ4:3rds lenses, some of which I've reviewed on this site. The other mirrorless camera system I've been carrying since late last year has been the Sony NEX, specifically the NEX-5N, which I picked up when it dropped precipitously in price right before the NEX-5R was announced (it has risen a bit in price since then).

So why did I buy the NEX-5N with all those other Olympus Pens lying about? Curiosity mainly. When I saw the low, low price of the 5N plus kit zoom, I figured the price was low enough to give the NEX a tryout. If it turned out bad I'd resell it and go on about my business. But the 5N turned out to be pretty good actually and so I kept it around. With regards to video it's turned out something close to phenomenal (but that's a review for another time).

Unlike the µ4:3rds system, I held back purchasing any other equipment for the camera beyond the 18-55mm kit lens the 5N was sold with. I wanted to investigate what the 5N was capable of on its own merits before making any kind of equipment expansion. While I was somewhat interested in the Sigma lenses when they were released for their still photography potential on the 5N, I was growing more interested in the 5N for its video capabilities and found the kit zoom to be more than adequate for my very modest video needs.

After their announcement the Sigma lenses began an inexorable slide in price, first down to $200/lens, then $150. Sometime around late January Sigma bundled both of them together for $199 ($99.50 each), which made the lenses irresistibly attractive to a cheapskate like me, so I bought them.

The bundle price was for both the µ4:3rds as well as E-mount versions. As luck would have it, the µ4:3rds sold out fairly quickly (that's where a good majority of the mirrorless camera enthusiasts seem to be) leaving plenty of E-mount lenses for the NEX system. I wouldn't have purchased the µ4:3rds versions because I already have those focal lengths pretty well covered with other lenses I own. From my perspective the 19mm and 30mm lenses make a lot more sense on the NEX body with its APS-C sensor; the 19mm gives an equivalent focal length of 28.5mm and the 30mm an equivalent focal length of 45mm. In other words, decent wide angle and normal primes.

The Problem With These Lenses

Before you go run off and buy copies of your own, you need to know the following:

1. These particular lenses have been discontinued, which is why they've been chopped down in price so much. Sigma has officially stated that they will be replaced with "Art" versions of these lenses in the future. And if it's an Art lens, it will cost more.
2. These lenses do not have built-in image stabilization. That means you'll need to work on your "camera technique", another way of saying you'll have to learn how to hold your camera steady in low light when aperture and ISO won't buy you a high enough shutter speed to be indifferently held. Tripods come to mind.

And Why You'll Buy Them Anyway

None of this will bother the true budget photographer. You'll purchase your copies, appreciate their value where others might not, and learn to use them regardless. While it could be argued their introductory MSRP might have been a tad too high, they're certainly worth what they're selling for now, which is one important reason I rate them as highly as I do.

The 19mm and 30mm have features which their more costly cohorts from other manufacturers lack at this price point, such as metal bayonets and lens hoods (at least a lens hood for the 19mm).

Both lenses use plastics quite heavily in their makeup, and both are blessed with quality metal bayonets. When I say they use plastics quite heavily, I mean that they spare nothing in the construction of the lens, especially the lens barrel itself. Both lenses are well-built and exude a level of fit and finish above their station.

And they are wonderfully black. I am so tired of seeing and/or buying silver and silvered lenses from Olympus and Sony. I hail from the Jurassic film period of 35mm photography, where every manly lens was metal and black anodized, with etched lettering everywhere. In these modern times the black anodized and etched metal has given way to industrial plastics with silk-screened lettering. I may grouse about the use of such, but I will at least grant that Sigma's use of silk-screened plastics is better than most (I'm looking at you Olympus and Sony).

Fitting one of these primes on the 5N produces a compact and enjoyable little camera system. The matte black finish of the Sigma lenses blends beautifully with the semi-gloss black finish of the 5N. The physical handling of the combination is superb. The operational handling (focusing and picture taking) is as good as the kit zoom. And this is why I like to have one or the other prime on the 5N instead of the zoom for still photography; at f/2.8, either lens' maximum aperture is 2/3rds to two stops wider than the kit lens at equivalent focal lengths. That's great for low-light photography.

Because the Sigma primes are black and smaller than the kit zoom, the overall combination is easier to carry and more inconspicuous in use. Even if you carry both primes with you (which I do), the total space occupied with the two primes plus the 5N is no more than the 5N with the kit zoom mounted. In practice I carry one prime in one pocket and the 5N with the other prime mounted slung over my shoulder or stuck in another jacket pocket.

That's it for now. In part two I will speak a bit more of their operation as well as display soul-searing (or is it eye-searing?) images made with the pair and the NEX-5N. In the mean time I leave you with this haunting image I made of poor Ruby, my yellow Lab, using the Sigma 30mm and the NEX-5N.

Oh, hell, not another test photo of me?
One day you're going to stick a camera in my face and
I'm going to grab it from you and bury it in the back yard
where you can't find it.

Technical

The hero photo at the top and the middle lens mount detail photo were taken with the Olympus E-M5 and the Zuiko Digital 50mm macro with the Olympus MMF-1 adapter. I used a pair of Fotodiox LED 312AS panels for lighting (thank you Kirk Tuck). Being lazy, I used the E-M5 instead of the E-1. And I mean lazy in that I didn't want to sit the camera on its tripod, use base ISO, and a very slow non-hand-holdable shutter speed. I hand-held the E-M5 and let it choose very high ISOs for both images (2500 for the top and 640 for the bottom). I have now put the E-1 away, and have no idea if I'll ever go back to it again.

last updated 16 feb 2013

Sony RX100

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Everything's relative.

Counter Opinion: It's funny the difference that packaging makes. Nikon made a mirrorless interchangeable-lens format with a 1" sensor and the internet decided that it's too small; Canon makes a compact camera with a sensor slightly larger than 4/3" and the camera is too large and too limited by its lens to really spark a lot of enduring interest. But with the RX100, Sony has combined the best of both ideas and come up with an excellent combination.

The Sony RX100 and Canon S100 share more than a passing resemblance, and while the Sony is larger, it's not larger enough to make any practical difference. While the Canon's lens is both longer and wider, it's not longer enough to be dramatically more useful, and the wider end just invites perspective and geometric distortion. If that's the sacrifice for the larger sensor of the RX100, it's a good one.

As good as the image quality from the S100 is, the RX100 promises to be significantly better. The twenty megapixel jpegs look excellent, and while I haven't yet been able to play with the raw files or use the camera under adverse conditions, I'm impressed. The camera is quick and easy to use – the absurdity of Sony's two different auto modes being no less ridiculous on this advanced a camera – and while it's not cheap, it should last for years.

I already own what is now the second-best pocketable point-and-shoot on the market, so I'm not in a hurry to upgrade. But the D800 has convinced me of the value of a larger pixel-dense sensor. I would love to have an RX100 as a companion to the big SLR, because it looks like this little thing is going to be capable of some serious work. Maybe when the next generation is out, and my S100 is a couple years old, it will be time for me to make the jump.

Counter Opinions are quick "sales counter" product reviews.
As always, viewer discretion is advised.
Last updated 28 july 2012

Sony RMPCM1 Wired Remote for the PCM-D50 Audio Recorder

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: It could be better - but how?

The Long Version: The Sony PCM-D50 is a great audio recorder, tough with good sound quality. One of its nifty features is a five-second preroll buffer, meaning that it can capture sounds that happen when the recorder is running but paused. All you need to do is hit the 'pause' button without spoiling the recording with handling noise, and that's where having a remote comes in.

The RM-PCM1 is a simple little device, being a thin remote on an equally thin 6-foot long cord. It has buttons for pause, record, stop, and divide, and a light to show when the recorder is rolling. Simple, straightforward, and does everything needed to control the recorder during capture. It even has a right-angle connector, which I love.

But despite its seeming usefulness, the RMPCM1 remote isn't an easy recommendation. For one thing, it doesn't really feel like a Sony product, certainly not in the same league as the D50 and D1 recorders that it mates with. The cable is thin and slightly insubstantial, leaving an expensive accessory feeling almost cheap. The other issue is that it's something of a nuisance to use. The six-foot long cord is too long to use while close enough to monitor the levels, and if you want to monitor the audio from the end of the remotes' reach, you'll need an extension for your headphones. Using a reliable radio-frequency wireless system would be a huge improvement, even if it adds to the already nontrivial cost.

So get the PCM1 remote if you'll need to be able to control the PCM-D50 or D1 from a moderate distance, or if the preroll buffer is an important part of how you'll use the recorder. Otherwise, give it a pass - it really doesn't add anything for normal use.

Sony Memory Stick

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: Is any memory card something to be enthusiastic about?

The Long Version: Two words always seem to come up when someone mentions Sony's Memory Stick format in a camera review, so I'll get them out of the way now: Expensive and Proprietary. Frankly, it gets a little monotonous. (Here, here, here, here, here, here...) No, they aren't sold at the local dollar store - on the shelf next to the toothpaste from South Afrlca - but their cost is in line with similar-speed SDHC cards from Sandisk and other reputable manufacturers. And if something being proprietary is such a problem for people buying P&S cameras, then why do cameras that take AA batteries, like my Canon SX20, hit so much resistance? Certainly, if someone already has a stack of SD cards, then a Sony device needs some pretty compelling features. Someone who has had a bad experience with a Sony camera, and wants to switch brands, won't have her day improved by telling her that she needs a new memory card as well. But these are relatively uncommon scenarios, and even cameras that take SD memory usually need a new card to go with them. We're past the point where buying enough memory to last through a week-long trip is a significant expense - as long as it's not an xD card, anyway.

I do have to confess that I find the many different names and formats of Sony's memory card(s) confusing, and even the wikipedia entry doesn't help much. I bought this card, a Memory Stick PRO-HG Duo, because the plain old Memory Stick PRO Duo Mark 2 that lives in Penny's Cybershot S800 isn't certified to work with my PCM-D50 recorder. There's also an elusive "High Speed" model that isn't listed in the Wiki article, which has the same colour scheme as the PRO-HG card, but I have no idea what the differences (if any) might be. I suspect that Sony has hit the same wall that Sandisk recently climbed when it had to redo its names for the "Extreme" cards. There's only so many superlatives you can throw at a product; once you get to the Extreme Ultra Super-Duper PRO Special Edition to mark yet another format change or meaningless speed bump, your nomenclature is pretty much pooched and customer confusion is inevitable. The "Class X" system that SDHC cards use is vastly superior and does make it easier to understand some of the difference between cards. I want to say that Sony should adopt something similar, but that means either renaming existing products, or adding even more information to the already too-complicated names. Neither option is a good one, and there's already far too much nearly-meaningless marketing twaddle out there to make remembering all of it feasible.

But really, does anyone know what actual difference a Class 4 or Class 6 SDHC card will make in any of the hundreds of consumer cameras currently on the market?

So aside from a befuddling naming system that has lasted at least a half-decade too long, these cards are pretty much unremarkable. What I really wish for is an easy way to get a fingernail on these slippery little beasts - the scuff marks on mine are from needing my Swiss Army Knife's tweezers to get the card out of the PCM-D50's wimpy little pop-out slot. It makes me miss my Canon SX20's ability to fire its memory cards across the room, but since that's my biggest complaint about the PCMD50/Memory Stick combination, I'll live with it. What other option is there?

Sony CKL-PCMD50 Case for the Sony PCM-D50

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: It's perfect for someone, but maybe not for me.

The Long Version: Sony makes a couple of cases for the PCM-D50 digital field recorder: there's the widely available LC-PCMD50G, which is a clam-shell style, and the CKL-PCMD50 model that was originally only available in Japan. It's since become more widely distributed, and it's the one that I bought with my recorder.

The CKL case is the audio equivalent of the ever-ready camera cases that used to be popular. Like a never-ready camera case, it attaches to the tripod mount and flips around when the recorder is being used, but doesn't get taken off of the device. It also comes with the wrist-strap that you see in these photos, which is nylon with leather, and a soft grey fabric bag that's big enough to add extra scuff protection to the whole assembly.

The case is designed to double as a stand, which it does reasonably well. The photo above is its 'high' configuration, and it's held in position by some magnets that are built into it. As you can see, the leather case is quite stiff, and provides ample protection for the recorder. For carrying around to interviews, recording sessions, and for ENG I can see it working quite well - any situation where the recorder can be put down somewhere clean and conveniently near the sound source. For 'stealth' recording, put the Sony D50's mics in the wide stereo position, and the case doesn't even need to be open. Naturally, you can't reach the front-panel controls, so start it going and then toggle the 'hold' switch on the side (to prevent the 'stop' button from getting pressed - I learned that the hard way) before closing the case.

The tour of the CKL flip-case ends at the back, where you can see (from right to left) the snap-button clasp, the coin-activated attachment screw, and the belt loop. That's really the first thing that seems like it isn't very well thought out; the belt loop has a simple snap to attach it, and doesn't seem particularly secure. I would hesitate to use it to actually carry the recorder, but it does come in handy for holding the wires on my earphones. For carrying the recorder hands-free when it's being used for field recording/ENG with an external microphone, it might be perfect - but people who plan on using a decent external mic probably aren't using the PCM-D50. I could be wrong, and probably am, but adding an overlapping snap for security certainly wouldn't hurt.

Personally, I haven't quite settled on how I use the PCM-D50, so I also haven't decided whether or not I like this case. It's great for carrying it and setting it down on tables, but I don't often do that. I'm much more likely to be hand-holding the recorder for environmental sound gathering, and for that I need to be really careful because the self-noise that the leather case generates is far worse than the handling noise from the bare recorder. And for serious sound recording, I need to remove the case completely so that I can use the D50 on a tripod - and then I need to make certain that the heavy leather wrist strap doesn't hit the stand. It's not cheap, so think about how you use the recorder before you go out and buy one - but if it's right for you, then it really is a great case.

Comparison: Sony ADPCM1 and Røde 'Dead Kitten' Windscreens on the Sony PCM-D50

Sony: 2 out of 5
Rode: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Imagine if they were actually designed for the PCM-D50.


The Long Version: As part of my never-ending quest for expensive hobbies, I've decided to take up audio recording. After months researching portable field recorders, mostly spent on other people's review blogs, I chose the Sony PCM-D50. You will never, ever find a review of this excellent field recorder here - it's been done and there's nothing that I can add. I can only direct people to a few of the sites that helped me: Brad Linder, Transom, O'Reilly, Wingfield, Future Music, and F7 Sound. What I can do is fill in a little bit of information about the accessories.

The Sony D50 is equipped with a pair of condenser microphones, so it's very sensitive to wind noise. Some sort of windjammer is mandatory, but Sony doesn't include one in the box. Their recommended screen is the ADPCM1, and as its name suggests, it's also/originally for the $2000 PCM-D1. It has mid-length fur that's neatly trimmed, and the D50 still squeezes inside the fancy Sony flip case with it in place. My biggest complaint about the screen is that, despite being hard to put on, it has a very loose fit. I have no doubt that one day it will run away from home. I've already dropped it on the sidewalk a couple of times, and even the addition of some ponytail-elastics hasn't really helped.

Since I'm sure that I'll lose the Sony windscreen eventually, it seemed prudent to preemptively order its replacement. I had read on a forum that the Rode 'Dead Kitten' would fit the PCM-D50, so that was the one that I picked. (RØDE, for what it's worth, is Australian.) It has a taller and boxy design that's intended to go over the NT4 and Stereo VideoMic, but it has a very strong and narrow elastic cuff that holds snugly around the D50's roll cage. Its fur is also much longer and floofier than the Sony windscreen, making it look like the D50 is having a lot more fun.

The elastic on the Kitten is so strong that when it's off of the recorder it rolls into a little ball, and it can be hard to find the opening. It also has sides, with one flap that's longer than the others. With that put at the back, the -12 and 0dB LEDs on the D50 are somewhat visible, but mine will still get a slight haircut to help that out. And yes, I did include this photo just in case anyone thought I was being funny with the 'Dead Kitten' name. Did I mention that Rode is Australian?


Testing:


I wanted a simple way to compare the performance of the different windshields, so lacking any better ideas, I set up an oscillating fan. I've read somewhere that a fan doesn't provide a realistic test, since its steady output doesn't match the force or variability of real wind, but it was the best I could do for repeatable and consistent conditions. I set the recorder up about one foot from the fan and one foot from the ground, and positioned it so that it was catching the fan on one end of its travels. Even if it's not scientific in its rigour, the results do seem indicative of real-world performance.

These are Audacity's audio waveforms from the original 48KHz/24-bit .wav files for the Dead Kitten, Sony windscreen, and the bare nekkid PCM-D50. The mics were set to XY stereo, the gain was set to 7, and the low-cut filter was off. I set the levels so that the Sony windscreen was barely clipping, hitting +03dB, which the D50's fancy limiter handles with ease. The Rode peaked at about -3dB at the same position and settings; for the screenless recorder that was enough to cause serious hard clipping, which is the first time I've ever actually heard it with the D50. (A gain setting of '2' stopped the wind noise from clipping, and completely removed the sound of the pesky fan.) With the screens, the sound of the gears is audible underneath the hum of the blades, and with the Dead Kitten it can be heard even when the full force of the fan is hitting it.


You can click on these links to listen to the mp3 versions of the files. They're each 25 seconds long, start two seconds before the first pass of the fan, and end five seconds after the second pass. You'll want to turn the volume down for the last one.

Rode Dead Kitten:


Sony Windscreen:


Bare PCM-D50:



I have a habit of being very conciliatory in my comparison conclusions, and this isn't going to be an exception. The Dead Kitten is clearly the more effective windscreen, but at the expense of a slight overall reduction in sound levels. That's not a big deal, since the PCM-D50 has plenty of gain to spare, but the larger hairdo makes it very difficult to fit into its fancy case (sold separately). So I'm striking a compromise: dedicated recording sessions will use a tripod and the Rode screen, and the Sony windscreen is the one to use when I'm just carrying the D50 around in its case.

...at least until I lose it.

JJC/Gadget Infinity JR-Series Infrared Remote DSLR Controller

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: Works better than the low price might suggest

The Long Version:One of my main areas of interest as a photographer is long exposures, mainly at night but also during the daytime to capture the essence of movement.
A tripod is mandatory, but I have long known that some sort of remote shutter release is also recommended.
Using the camera's timer is a free solution, but isn't always the best solution.
So I have kept an eye out for a wireless shutter release that won't abuse my wallet.
Sony's RM-L1AM Alpha Remote Commander is a simple button in a box on a cable that has an MSRP of $69.99!
I could build one for $10, but it would take time and look a little unprofessional despite my fabrication abilities.

Recently I noticed a wireless IR remote for Sony Alpha DSLRs at Gadget Infinity, my favorite source for strange far-east camera products.
I bought my Cactus remote flash triggers from GI, and trust them more than I do the similar eBay stores. 3 orders and never a problem so far--fast and reasonably priced shipping, and the products are always what I ordered and work as advertised.
One important note--this isn't name-brand stuff (and is priced accordingly) so you get what you pay for but might need some tools and skills to make it "perfect".
(More on this later).

As shown in the top photo (click to enlarge all pics) the JR set includes a receiver module with a standard iso hotshoe mount made of plastic, a transmitter, the specific cable required by different camera brands, and in my case a little plastic hotshoe adapter because Sony/Minolta uses an odd proprietary mount.
Also in the box were two CR-2032 button batteries to power each device, of the Star-Bully brand. As with most similar items from across the ocean these are described in the instruction manual as being "for testing purposes only" meaning they are crap and will die within days of being installed (using the tiny Philips screwdriver supplied).
The instructions are typical bad translations, but have many pictures and are relatively understandable.


Here is the JR system mounted on my Alpha300:

I wrap the excess cable around my lens because I like things to be neat.
The Sony-type hotshoe adapter didn't accept the shoe mount of the receiver, but a few quick passes with a small Dremel file (folded sandpaper would work) cleaned-up the excess molding flash that caused the problem.
This is a Sony-specific detail, and since most serious Alpha owners probably have an
FS-1100 hotshoe adapter already it's of minimal concern.
When also using off-camera flash the hotshoe might be occupied by a radio transmitter, so finding a new place to mount the IR receiver will become a problem--I have yet to solve this for myself.

Note that between the first and second photo we have seen both ends of the receiver, and there is a red-tinted IR window on each side. You can trigger the shutter from behind or in front of the camera.
Very nice!

Not so nice is that when set-up this way, my Alpha's controls were completely locked. Changing iso or shutter speed or aperture or white balance, etc, was impossible without pulling the little 2.5mm plug out of the receiver!
Not cool, but at least I didn't have to remove the other end of the cable from the camera as this is a less-convenient connection to deal with.
Also, the advertised half-press AF (auto-focus) feature didn't work, nor did AF activate with a full shutter press. Totally blurred photos.
After switching the camera to "Continuous AF" mode this became a non-issue except for slightly increased battery drain, but I was surprised that something so important to proper function didn't work.
This may be a Sony-specific compatibility issue, but then again it might not.
You've been warned, and supplied with the fixes, so don't complain to me.
My main reason for wanting a wireless remote is to do group shots of my band, and since I can set those up from behind the camera all settings and focus will be finalized long before I step in front of the camera to pose.
Depending on your needs it may or may not be a deal-breaker.
I'm okay with it, especially at the incredible price.

An interesting feature is an optional 2-second delay, which is perfect for self-portraits as it allows you time to hide the remote before your shutter trips.
(Timer does not work with Panasonic & Leica cameras, according to the instructions).


Having said all that...
If a simple wired remote is all that you need, it takes mere seconds to unplug the cable from the receiver and plug it into the transmitter.

And this restores the camera functions that were previously locked during IR wireless mode!
My Alpha300 works normally in wired mode--all buttons and menus do what they are supposed to do again.
Even half-press AF using the transmitter's button works just fine.
All for much less than the price of Sony's wired version.

Since I'm mainly going to use this remote system at night to reduce camera-shake during the start of long exposures, I already feel like I got my money's worth.
(Actually my brother's money--it was a birthday gift).

As long as you understand the odd limitations of this remote system and keep my recommended work-arounds in mind you shouldn't have any problems getting it to perform in your favor.

Here is the first page of GI's listings for wireless camera remotes so you can search for your specific model.


Please note that the instructions for 'Bulb' mode seem complicated and I haven't had time to try it yet, but then I never use bulb anyway.
I will update this entry should anything important come up in future testing.

Zeiss Pre-Moistened Lens Cloths

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: Your mileage may vary, but I love them

The Long Version:
I have been using this product on all of my lenses for 3+ years, and have had nothing but positive results.

Lens cleaning is something that I feel very strongly about, be it sporting optics, camera lenses or just my eyeglasses.
Spotless is the only way to go.

In my opinion, the standard microfiber lens cloths are a fine tool but they can get contaminated with lint, skin oils and other gunk that isn't lens-friendly after a few weeks.
These Zeiss lens cloths are in individual packages that are VERY convenient to carry around, and you can trust that they aren't compromised in any way.

The "Pre-Moistened" agent is high grade alcohol, so use them quickly as the drying time is short. The alcohol makes short work of filthy glass bought second-hand, and has the added benefit of displacing water when you're in rainy, foggy, or temperature-related condensation nightmare mode.
Instead of just smearing the moisture around, you can actually remove it in a few seconds.

I also make use of their disinfectant properties.
Sometimes you have no choice but to let the sketchy guy at the range put his disgusting eye to your riflescope, or allow a barskank to touch your camera.
It's alcohol on a paper towel, so I'll even use one to clean my fingers between eating fried food and taking pictures so as not to insult my camera.

When you're talking about lenses, Zeiss is a company that has a proven track record, to say the least.
Possibly the finest.
Does it bother me that I can only find this product in WalMart's optical department?
No. They work perfectly, with extreme cleaning action and fast-drying lint-free results.
A box of 50 retails for around $3US so that's just 6 pennies each.

The packaging also mentions that they are safe for all lens coatings.
No reason to doubt it from my testing so far.


The usual cautions apply: If you think there may be anything like sand, metal shavings, or chicken bones on your lens, use a blower and/or brush to dislodge them before employing any kind of cloth.
You don't want to rub something solid across your fine glass.

Sony DPF-D70 Digital Picture Frame

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: Its 15:9 aspect ratio matches nothing.

The Long Version: One of the shortfalls of digital photography is that the photos never go anywhere. It was easier to flip through a box of prints from the Olden Days than it is to sort, index, and find digital images - especially when the computer's off. Since I've taken most of the family photos over the past few years, that meant that they were buried in the tens of thousands of photos on my hard drives, and Penny would never see them. The addition of this digital frame has completely fixed that problem, and makes the whole Digital Photography thing much more fun and sociable.

The Sony D70 frame cost more than the other 7" frames on the shelf, but its display was noticeably better than the others at the big-box store. It was also the only frame that supports the Compact Flash memory format - thank you, Minolta, may you rest in peace - which let me re-use some older cards instead of buying a new one. The D70 does have some decent built-in memory, but I find that it's easier to move a card to the frame than the frame to the computer. (I've been using Sneakernet longer than the Internet.) Since the actual size of the photo can be quite small, hundreds of them will fit on a memory card that's far too wee for my cameras to feed, or in the internal memory. All told the small amount of extra money was very well spent.

Being a Sony product, the digital picture frame also has a calendar and clock built in, which look great and work well. There are different slideshow modes, and plenty of options for sequencing and dwell time. The looks of the frame itself will work equally well in an executive office or a modern living room, and it's even possible to shut off the bright-white Sony logo that's lit in the bottom of the frame. Some people might like the tech-bling, but I wouldn't have bought it without the brand-neutered option.

My only real complaint about the DPF is the funky 15:9 aspect ratio. Me being me, I had to re-crop over 400 photos to get them to fill the display. All of the nine digital cameras in the house have 4:3 sensors, and if I crop them I usually recut them to the squarer 8:10 or 11:14 to match my print sizes. I suppose I could go on a rant about Sony's obsession with having a 16:9 ratio crop built into its Cybershot and Alpha cameras, and the hoax of a "Full HD" logo that they put on the camera boxes, but the reality is that pretty much all of the 7" digital frames on the market have the same ratio. It's probably just the best way to get a decently sized LCD panel at a price-point that people will buy. And once I had adjusted my photos, I've actually come to like the abnormally wide ratio.

I like photos, and get pretty serious about them. I had never taken the idea of digital frames seriously, but this Sony has converted me. I bought it for Penny so that she'd have a way to see the personal photos that were somehow never 'worth printing', but would love to have a second one just for my 'artwork'. After all, there's plenty of it that's never worth printing, too.

KALT Brand Filter Adapters

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: Does the Job while saving you money

The Long Version: Buying a new camera left me in a bad place: What do I do about filters?
Both of my lenses have 55mm threads, while my old camera and extensive filter collection were 58mm. It's bad enough that I have a few hundred dollars worth of memory cards that are now worthless--taking a big financial hit on filters too was out of the question.

Looking around online, the usual places such as Adorama and B&H stocked the adapter I needed, probably made from steel, for $20 (+ free shipping).
That sounded like a bargain, and I was all ready to place an order.

But a trip to the only good camera store in town gave me a chance to do a little comparison shopping. With $20 being my target price, I asked the nice man behind the counter to show me what they stocked, and to my surprise he pulled out the above pictured KALT brand step-up ring.
I have never heard of KALT.
The adapter is well made, probably from aluminum.
It works.

And it was only $6.95.
Sold!

I also remembered to get a 58mm lens cap for around $4 to complete the package.

I was lucky that my filters are larger than my new lenses, but fairly close. Smaller filters can cause vignetting at wide angle settings, and filters that are much larger than the lens look goofy and might tend to snag on things in and out of a camera bag.


(Please note that the above pictures are clickable thumbnails)