Streamlight Survivor Flashlight

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Flared base for safety.

The Long Version: I've said this before, but it bears repeating. If you're looking for a 'tactical' flashlight because you think that someday you might be in a position where your best course of action is to hit someone with it, then you've made fundamentally poor life choices. In fact, if you're looking for punching-people things in general, this isn't the sporadically-updated reviews blog for you. Go away.

The Streamlight Survivor is a particular type of flashlight that's designed for firefighters. The right-angle light is designed to be worn, not carried, and throws an uncommonly tight beam that's designed to cut through smoke. Yes, the yellow one looks like a cross between a sex toy and a Minion, but sometimes greatness comes at a cost.

I am not a fire fighter, making this a slightly odd flashlight for me to own. But I like ugly utility lights, and it answers a particular need. I'm a photographer, and have been working with night photography in a remote wilderness location, and the Survivor lets me light up trees that are over a hundred metres away from my camera. It's an excellent tool for light painting, especially with the warming amber 'smoke-cutter' installed. While it shows as a ring in these photos, the little CTO disk does average out into the beam at a fairly short distance, making it a nice temperature for mixing with ambient light.

And yes, Streamlight calls those in-beam light modifiers "plugs". Maybe they do have a sense of humour.

The Survivor has both a heavy-duty plastic clip, which is spring-loaded and rugged, along with a metal loop for hooking. The metal loop is attached to the top of the clip, so when it's upright it gives a little extra leverage for attaching or removing the clip from clothing. The upright clip also makes it harder to turn the light on with a one-handed hold, but that's life.

One design shortfall of the Survivor is that nothing on it glows in the dark. Pelican lights are the masters at this, but even a few other companies have figured this out, so it can't be patented. I've addressed this shortfall by applying some photoluminescent tape to the back of the light, which helps, but a glow bezel would be better.

And there's a funny story about me applying that tape. I wanted to clean the body to ensure that the tape would stick properly, so I wiped it down with a paper towel that had been touched with rubbing alcohol. It worked – the tape sticks nicely – but the alcohol also took off all of the black paint that usually highlights the name on the front of the light. I really expected a tool that's designed to be used in hazardous environments to be a bit more resilient than that, even if it is only cosmetic. My Pelicans are all tougher than this.

There are a couple of powering options for the Survivor. I chose the basic 4xAA setup since I'm putting it through fairly light use, and the bespoke rechargeable options are quite expensive. But regardless of which option you choose the light itself is the same, with the pass-though charging contacts on the base, so if I ever find myself running a fleet of these things I can upgrade it to a rechargeable battery pack instead of needing to buy a new light. On the other hand that does mean that the 4xAA cells are housed in a bulky carrier that needs a little pry to open when it's time to change them.

The Survivor is a bulky light, much larger than the 4xAA battery power would suggest. This isn't strictly a negative, since it's designed to be handled by people wearing gloves, but it's worth keeping in mind for civilian use. While the 4xAA light does lose its safety certifications when running with anything but disposable batteries, it works just fine with my usual choice of low-discharge rechargeable batteries – ready whenever I need it, no matter how long it has been sitting idle.

Just like a sex toy.

last updated 20 october 2017

Ricoh GR: Final Word

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 5 out of 5
Yeah, but: The GR abides.

The Long Version: It’s been over a year since I reviewed any aspect of the Ricoh GR, so it seems like a good time to do a long-term report. But not much has changed from my experience in the first few months: it’s still my favourite camera, and now it's my hardest-used and most-travelled camera, too.

The grip has smoothed down a bit, and if I only press on the right side of the shutter button occasionally it sticks in the half-down position. This happens more often when I’m just playing with the camera rather than when I’m actually taking photos, so it isn’t really much of an issue, and may be a result of the times I photographed Los Angeles’ “sunken city” with its abundance of incredibly fine silt-like dust. That’s probably also how I gained two little specks on the sensor that are only visible when I shoot at the smallest of apertures.

Thousands of photos and thousands of miles have revealed no problematic idiosyncrasies, hidden flaws, or secret weaknesses. Ricoh may update the GR, but like the GRDIV it will remain a classic and endure far beyond what’s reasonable for a compact digital camera these days.

last updated 30 dec 2014

Sigma DP3 Merrill

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: Okay, but seriously…

The Long Version: The Sigma DP3 Merrill is a camera that puts the decimal point in the wrong place. My comfortable high-iso limit is iso640, it takes about 50 photos per battery, writing a burst of one raw file to a fast memory card takes 13 seconds. Even its memory cards hold just a fraction of the images its pixel count should suggest, and it needs clunky raw-processing software that predates the invention of 'workflow'. The DP3M could be from the dawn of consumer digital cameras.

The Merrill lacks basic abilities that are included in any half-decent point and shoot these days. No image stabilization, no flash, poor LCD quality, and no concessions to shapes that the human hand can hold. Forget about modern conveniences like viewfinders, tilting LCD screens, or remote shutter releases. Every nitpicking review and every negative word ever written about this camera has at least some truth to it, and often quite a lot.

And yet it doesn't matter. The Sigma DP3 Merrill is a magic camera.

Some equipment creates uncommonly compelling images in a way that has nothing to do with the users' skills. Of course this undefinable ability won't perform for every owner, or even consistently for the fortunate ones, but when it's right it's unmistakable. The DP3M has this magic.

The DP3 Merrill creates my favourite photos. It's neither my favourite nor my best camera, but I can lose track of time looking at images that should have been nothing but snapshots. I want to use it out of all proportion to its operational merits, and despite all of its shortcomings. It's capricious, but give it its due and it can be benevolent and gracious; treat it carelessly and suffer its anger and wrath.

Would you choose a flawed and frustrating camera if the results have the potential to be exceptional? That question can only have a personal answer. Most people, quite sensibly, will say no outright. There are plenty of really excellent cameras out there that don't carry the Sigma-Foveon baggage. A few will say “yes, sometimes” – this is the group that I find myself in. Some people, I suppose, will give an unqualified yes. There are certainly more difficult ways to make art, and creating art is the only purpose for a machine like this.

last updated 14 sept 2014

Sigma DP3 Merrill

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: They say to think of it as a film camera…

The Long Version: There's something really incredible about the Sigma DP3 Merrill. It's small, it's light, and it produces great photos. Normally we need to trade off quality in exchange for smaller size or more convenience, and accept smaller formats with lower resolving power and coarser tonalities. The Merrill upends all of our expectations.

The DP3 Merrill looks strikingly different from traditional compact cameras. From the front it's a slab-sided box dominated by a large off-centre lens, and most strikingly it doesn't have a viewfinder. This hints at the camera's true nature, because where the film door should be instead we find a large electronic viewing screen. Yes, this is a digital camera – but don't be intimidated, because the Merrill still fits in with film cameras and the new hybrid 'digital darkroom' perfectly.

Instead of taking film – whether in sheets, rolls, or cassettes – the Sigma DP3 Merrill takes batteries. While film rarely holds more than a few dozen photos, and typically only a third of that, the Merrill can manage as many as fifty exposures per battery. And changing batteries is far simpler than film – no more catching sprockets or switching rollers! It's even faster than swapping cassettes in Advanced Photo System cameras, because there's no time needed to rewind or advance the film. And best of all, each battery can be replenished and reused over and over again.

The Sigma DP3 Merrill fits perfectly into the new 'digital darkroom' that is increasingly popular with amateur and medium-format photographers alike. Typically we feed our developed film into scanners to digitize our captured photographs for electronic editing, but the Sigma DP Merrill has this ability built-in. This saves hours of work and the ongoing expense of chemicals or a professional lab. It's an amazing ability and one that will likely be incorporated into all cameras in the future.

Sigma provides the dedicated software that is needed to see the images as they are loaded into the computer. This is called "Sigma Photo Processor" and works very similarly to other scanning programs. Images are visible in an on-screen array that looks like a contact sheet, and then each selected image can be individually developed for best quality. You can even choose whether you want colour or black and white photographs after they're taken – or you can do both. Remarkable.

From a quality standpoint the Sigma DP3 Merrill easily matches a good 645 negative, and can rival larger film formats as well. The only major drawback is that the DP3 Merrill has the 3:2 aspect ratio of the 35mm format, not the paper-friendly 4:3 or 5:4 of larger professional cameras, so take that into consideration when planning your crops for printing.

The lens of the DP3 Merrill is a bright short telephoto with exceptional quality despite its small size. There's pleasant falloff and slight edge softness at f/2.8, giving the photographs a rich, painterly feel. Stopped down to f/4 the lens becomes much more incisive instrument with uniform sharpness and excellent descriptive power. Aperture can be set in thirds-stops, giving plenty of flexibility, and its leaf shutter is capable of astounding top shutter speeds of 1/1250-2000 depending on the aperture selected.

The Merrill is also exceedingly good throughout the standard sensitivity range, with minimal grain as high as ASA400. If you're printing black and white the camera can be pushed up to ASA1600 with reasonable tones and substantial, but not objectionable, grain. A tripod is always recommended, as benefits any high-quality camera, but if you're seduced into hand-holding the DP3 its lack of a reflex mirror and quiet leaf shutter will keep shutter shock to a minimum.

The Sigma Merrill DP3 is a rare and cutting-edge camera. Despite its occasionally awkward implementation of electronic capture technology the entire thing comes together very well. Don't abandon the habits that you have tuned through years of large and medium-format photography, and don't be tricked by its small size into thinking that it will work like some fixed-focus pocket camera. Remember to treat it exactly like your better film cameras, and you'll be rewarded with excellent images and surprising ease-of-use.

last updated 12 sept 2014

Fujifilm XQ1

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: Small, quick, and good.

The Long Version: The Fujifilm XQ1 is an interesting camera.

Well, actually, that's not entirely true. It's a raw-shooting compact camera that's trying to make its way in a world of ubiquitous smart phones. There are similarly-sized but more expensive cameras that have much bigger sensors, and cheaper cameras that have similar features and more refined designs. My XQ1 was given to me as a gift, and so I've been trying to decide if, knowing what I know now, I would have bought one for myself.

The big deal about the XQ1 – its Unique Selling Feature – is that it's the cheapest and smallest camera with an X-Trans sensor. This is the same 2/3 size as the X20/X30 series, not the bigger 1.5x unit that goes in the X100 and X- cameras, but it's still a bit bigger than the ones that Canon or Panasonic use in their point and shoots. While I'm not convinced that size actually matters at this scale, the XQ1 does produce good images with lots of detail.

The main competition for any compact camera is the smart phone. This is an easy image quality comparison to make: the XQ1 beats my iPhone 5S quite handily. The XQ1 has wifi connectivity, so I've been using it for many of my social media endeavours. There's a distinct quality advantage even after the reduced-size 3MP images have been edited and fed through the spaghetti-shredder of online recompression and transmission. And that's even before things that used to be a photographic staple, like zoom lenses and low-light ability, come into consideration.

I suppose others might choose it for art-making, but I use the XQ1 almost exclusively for impromptu and record-keeping photos. Snapshots, twitter-fodder, chance encounters with mayoral candidates, and so on. It's nice to have a small and good camera for this, especially since it has a decent zoom lens. That lens, and the wifi connection, is why the XQ1 is the camera that I usually carry each day.

A little-known fact is that "WiFi" is actually short for "well, iffy". Linking the camera to a phone or tablet means going into playback mode, turning on wifi on the camera, selecting the camera wifi network on the phone, launching the Fuji app on the phone and hitting 'connect'. With luck the camera hasn't timed out, or had a button hit that would turn off its wifi broadcast and needed the whole routine to restart.

Once the iffy connection is made then the rest goes fairly easily. I prefer to just use the Fujifim "PhotoReceiver" app that has the camera choose which images to send, since the camera's LCD provides a bigger preview of the images to transfer. It means a bit more juggling devices than using the app that allows the phone/tablet to browse the images that are on the camera, but it's easier overall.

But of course using the XQ1 isn't as fast or easy as just using a phone to take a photo – and yes, I'm of an age where that still seems like an odd thing to say. My phone is always closer to hand, and I can have its camera up and running before the XQ1 powers on. So there's always a decision to make, to decide if it's worth using the bigger camera, but that's always the way.

I don't really have much to complain about with the XQ1, which is a little odd for me. I wish that it had a dual-axis level instead of single, and that the mode dial was firmer, since it tends to move all on its own when the camera isn't being observed. But the bigger control issue is the ring around the lens. There's a slight lag and no detents, so it's necessary to pay attention to the little numbers on the screen to use it. This means that the camera always needs to be supervised and can't be used intuitively. Often that's a critical flaw, but for a simple little compact camera maybe it's not that important.

The XQ1 also doesn't have any sort of 'safety' override on its exposure controls, and it's actually fairly easy to run out of shutter speed when leaving the lens wide open in bright light. This is a camera to set in Program mode and forget about any control beyond exposure compensation.

There are some other features that are fun to have. The sweep panorama mode works well, and I like the film-effects bracketing that can mimic different black and white contrast filters. Since I only use the XQ1 in jpeg mode – my generation of Lightroom can't handle its raw files – this has turned out to be quite handy. Once I accepted the XQ1 as a happysnaps point-and-shoot this camera has turned out to be a lot of fun.

The question remains: if I wasn't given this camera, would I buy one? I'm still not sure. The XQ1 takes better photos than the Canon S100 I owned a couple of years ago, even though the Canon had the advantage of being a more mature design. So when the time comes to replace my XQ1, I'll certainly look at what Fujifilm is offering – along with whichever Canon camera happens to be current that month – because the company is certainly showing real promise. And hopefully by then they'll include a bigger battery and a stand-alone charger, because this USB-only thing is the pits.

last updated 7 sept 2014

Generic 52mm Telephoto Screw-In Hood

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: So, about that thing I said earlier…

The Long Version: Sometimes, as I'm writing a review, I'll think of something that completely undermines it. I did it again, this time with my Sigma LH3-01 lens hood.

The problem of almost any hood is that it conflicts with filters that need to rotate, such as a polarizer. So in my Sigma Hood review I idly mused that I could just solve that problem by spending $4 on a screw-in hood via ebay. The idea just kept making sense, so I did. And it does.

For less than one-tenth the price of the original plastic hood the generic metal one only gives up the ability to be reversed for storage. It also weighs a bit more, and has an obnoxious painted-on generic name. I keep that covered with black tape, and have added two more strips of tape so that I can feel how much I've rotated the attached polarizing filter.

I was really impressed with the Sigma LH3-01's ability to accept a 62mm filter on its end. I had never seen a hood do that – but it turns out that the open end of this generic 52mm hood is threaded for 58mm filters. So much for innovation. With metal there's none of the worries of stripping the threads, and with the screw-in I don't worry about over-stressing the bayonet mount. Putting a filter on the end of the hood still pretty much defeats the benefit of having the hood in the first place, but having the option at no extra cost is better than not having it.

This is my second metal screw-in hood from eBay – this one was bought from 'jiakgong' – and I'm completely happy with it with the single exception of its painted-on sizing name. That wasn't shown in the photos. The amazing thing is that this one was bought and shipped half-way around the world for half of what it would cost me to mail it within my own city. Say what you will about generic manufacturing, how does the shipping make any economic sense at all?

Perhaps in the future I may not automatically buy the original hood, and try waiting a month or so for shipping instead. Not that I plan on buying any lenses that don't come with hoods, but still.

last updated 15 aug 2014

Nikon D810

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: Behold with cautious optimism.

Counter Opinion: I know what I'm risking by saying this, but I'll say it anyway – Nikon has gotten the D810 right. Sadly it's a truism that Nikon has the ability to screw up the most surprising and basic things, even on simple model refreshes, so that sound you hear may indeed be the other shoe dropping. But, for now, I'm going to call this a win.

When I first saw the D810 details, my initial thought was that Nikon had improved the D800, but that not being good enough was never that camera's problem. Now I'm thinking that Nikon has taken the D800 and done what Canon did to the 5D2: there are no huge headline-grabbing changes – except to the price – but everything has been made better. The price is high, yes, but to some people it will be worth it. There's nothing better for even close to the same amount of money.

Some noise has been made about the D810 being made in Thailand instead of Japan. I can't say that there's any deficiency in its build quality when compared to the D800 that I've been using for years. The grip is a big improvement over the D800, being at least as nice as the D700, with a deeper finger groove and a real thumb ridge. Even the button that's used to change AF mode has had some extra texture added to make it easier to find and press.

The control interface has been tweaked and loses nothing in the process. The bracketing button, which was removed from the cloverleaf, has found a new home near the flash controls. The OVF information display is a friendlier pale blue instead of LED Green. The LCD is better, and manually focusing in Live View is easier. The left-side port covers have been improved and the port placement has been rethought. The shutter sound is strikingly quieter and much more subdued. Everything is better.

There are lots of features that I can't evaluate but are still very promising. Nikon's metering has always been good, so the highlight-priority weighting could be very useful. Being able to magnify two different parts of the scene to check for focus and composition would have made my most recent series almost too easy to photograph – most of my best work is done with a tilt-shift lens. The electronic first-curtain shutter for Live View and Mirror Up mode is also a very positive change for extracting maximum quality from a camera that's designed for it.

The D700 was a great and much-loved camera, but the D810 replaces it for everything except the very fastest frame rates that it could hit with the EN-EL4a or AA batteries in its grip. Hard drives are cheap. The D810 is simply the best camera out there right now south of the Pentax 645Z – we know this because the D800 was the best sub-10K camera last week, and the D810 is better than that.

The D810 is still only a mid-cycle update, so I wouldn't consider it as a replacement for working D800/E cameras, despite my being slightly jealous of how nice the new machine is. If I photographed events I might be tempted to spend the extra money just for the quieter shutter, though – it really is a big difference. But even without being a D810 buyer I'm incredibly pleased that Nikon seems to have this one figured out. After watching them fumble through the V-series and Coolpix A I had my doubts about their abilities to design and make cameras, and I may want to replace my D800 with another Nikon some day.

But then again, that other shoe still hasn't been heard from yet.

Counter Opinions are quick "sales counter" product reviews.
As always, viewer discretion is advised.
Last updated 18 july 2014

Sigma LH3-01 Lens Hood

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: Lens hoods are cool.

The Long Version: The Sigma LH3-01 for the DP3 Merrill might be the most obscure camera accessory I've ever reviewed, given that it's a sold-separately $48 add-on for a cult camera that's at the end of its sales career. Lens hoods are not the most exciting accessory, it's true, but this is one of the more interesting ones that I've seen.

Cosmetically the hood is an appropriate match for the camera; it's smooth plastic instead of metal, but the lines match. It attaches with a bayonet mount, and when reversed extends almost all the way to the camera body. It really couldn't offer any better coverage without being dramatically harder to stow. That's great, but not particularly remarkable.

So here's the clever bit: the front of the lens hood is threaded for filters. The lens is a 52mm thread, and the hood has a 62mm thread on its front. It's a nice touch. The funny thing is, though, that putting a filter on the front of the hood actually negates a lot of the ant-glare benefits of having the hood in the first place. So who not just take the hood off? Why not, indeed.

Any filter that needs to be rotated – polarizer, variable or graduated neutral density – will benefit from the improved access of being on the front of the hood, and that slight increase in shading might still be worth the effort. Might. But any filters that don't need interaction, like the two- or three-stop ND filter that the DP3 should have had built-in, should still go on the lens.

There are some more exotic uses for the lens hood threads. A rubber lens hood pressed up against a window avoids most reflections, and attaching it to the end of the LH3 would be less restrictive than putting a really tiny one on the end of the lens itself. If the Sigma DP3M wasn't terrible in low light that might be useful for the local aquarium.

I suppose there's nothing stopping me from getting a 62-77 step-up ring so that I can use my big filters, and then buying a cheap screw-in hood to protect the filter from glare. That way the hood that's on the filter would still be able to rotate the filter that's on the hood, giving the best of both worlds. Or I could just buy a 52mm screw-on hood for $4.16 with free shipping – that would work, too.

I do appreciate that Sigma thought to add an extra feature to something mundane. But at some point, no matter how clever the idea is, there comes a point where workarounds and contraptionizing become more effort than they're worth. And if that isn't the motto for the entire Sigma DP series, well, maybe it should be.

Updated Forty Days Later: The idea of spending just a small amount of money on a screw-in lens hood that would let me rotate a polarizer just kept making sense, so I did it. It turns out that the metal screw-in hood that I bought from ebay extends farther from the lens and has a narrower opening, both of which give better coverage than the original. The photo above shows it screwed onto my polarizing filter inside of the sigma hood – and yes, I did risk never being able to disassemble that contraption for the sake of this review. Live and learn, right?

last updated 15 august 2014

Kinotehnik LCDVF

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Smaller and simpler.

The Long Version: LCD viewfinders are designed to work around usability problems that shouldn't really exist in the first place, so I suppose it was inevitable that one would find a home on my Sigma DP3 Merrill. While I'm happy enough with a bulky and complex tripod-mount one on my big SLR, a compact camera needs something smaller and simpler. After considering a number of options, including some very expensive ones, I picked up the Kinotehnik LCDVF.

The LCDVF – please don't make me type the company name again – is about as simple as it gets. The shell is one piece, without any hinges or diopter adjustment doohickery, with a two-element lens and a rubber eyecup that can be removed and repositioned for left-eyed people.

The viewfinder attaches with magnets to a metal frame that adheres to the camera. It's secure enough that I can pick up and carry the 1-pound camera from the viewfinder; this isn't wise, but it's possible. The package includes two of these metal frames, which gives the option to use the one viewfinder on two cameras, or provides insurance against adhesive mishaps.

The metal frame and magnets makes for a streamlined and lightweight attachment method that's perfect for a little camera, and weighs far less than attaching via a tripod-ready plate. It almost verges on elegant, but mine has just a little bit of side-to-side wobble that I've fixed by shimming the hood with a single thickness of gaffer tape.

The LCDVF has a 2x magnification ratio, and to be honest I can't really see the difference between it and a 3x view. The resulting image is large and clear; the 28mm-e lens that I used to take the above photo doesn't do it justice. The inside of the hood really is that shiny, though. I've never noticed it as a problem when I'm actually taking photos, but it is really shiny.

Of course not every camera needs the assistance of this kind of viewfinder; I'd never consider attaching it to my Ricoh GR, for example. But having the LCDVF on the DP3M really does improve my stability with this long-lensed camera; I'd rate its as being just a bit less of an improvement than a lightweight monopod. While I was mostly hoping that the LCDVF would help me see the DP3M's screen, now that I know what it can do I wouldn't hesitate to put one on any LCD-based camera that usually uses a long lens.

I bought the LCDVF because the Kamerar QV1 (right) added too much bulk, weight, and complexity to a little camera like the Sigma DP3M. While Kamerar does have smaller viewfinders, the slickness and simplicity of the LCDVF is hard to beat.

But simplicity may be only skin-deep with the LCDVF. It has a double-element lens that's noticeably thicker than the one in my Kamerar or Hoodman loupes, and Kinotehnik says that it won't risk concentrating sunlight and burning the LCD the way other designs can. I haven't felt the need to test this myself.

In a fairly short time period I went from owning just the Hoodman Hoodloupe – and never using it – to having two different magnifying loupes to suit two different cameras. That's probably excessive, but it suits each individual machine and I don't see a lot of overlap. If I had to choose only one, it would be the LCDVF, and I'd just have to put up with having the magnetic frame tapeglued to the back of the D800 during the 95% of the time that I don't use an LCD hood on that camera.

The LCDVF and Sigma DP3M is such a natural combination that I prefer to use it whenever the little Foveon camera isn't on a tripod – which is the opposite of how I use my SLR with its bigger LCD loupe. Life can be funny like that.

last updated 13 june 2014

Kamerar QV-1 LCD Viewfinder

Concept: 3 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: I'm not a video person.

The Long Version: I was just starting a project that had me manually-focusing my D800 outdoors when I had the chance to try out the Kamerar QV-1 head-to-head with my classic Hoodman Hoodloupe. I bought the QV-1 on the spot.

The Kamerar QV-1 is a magnifying viewfinder loupe that's designed for recording video with the ergonomic nightmares that are HD-SLRs. As such it's specifically designed for hitting focus with an LCD screen in unfavourable light, which suits me perfectly even though I don't shoot footage. The viewfinder has a 2.5x magnification, which is enough to see pixels, and a big eyecup that's reversible for us left-eyed people.

The viewfinder attaches to a dedicated tripod plate via a magnetic tab, which holds the viewfinder quite securely despite latching at only one point. The viewfinder position is adjusted on the camera with hex bolts – wrench included – which makes it time-consuming to switch between camera models; the whole plate can side front-to-back to snug the finder up to the LCD. The plate is compatible with the Manfrotto 501PL, so it will fit on some of their video heads with no further difficulty. If a different plate is needed then there are screw points for both 1/4" and 3/8" attachments.

The viewfinder attaches securely, but doesn't seal hermetically – there can be a slight gap at the top and sides of the LCD that lets a little stray light in. I don't see any way to do a better seal without sticking a mounting frame onto the camera, though, which is a level of commitment that I'm not willing to make.

The QV-1 has a hinge and a latch that lets it fold upwards without needing to be removed from the camera. This is essential if the camera has a touch-screen, and I'd sometimes use it when I needed to change settings, although it isn't that difficult to find all the buttons while looking through the eyepiece. Yes, after two years with my D800 I still get confused between the + and - viewing buttons, but trial and error is part of the learning process.

Naturally it's not possible to use the cameras' own eye-level viewfinder with the LCD hood attached. That's a good reminder to close the OVF shutter, which is recommended when shooting on a tripod or with live view anyway.

This viewfinder, like most of them, is pretty big. Budget some extra space in the camera bag – it isn't heavy, but it's as bulky as a lens. It includes attachment points for a lanyard, so that it can be worn hoodman-style, but I'd never do it. There is a cautionary note that sunlight can be focused through the viewfinder and burn the camera's LCD, so that is a reason to take it off when it's not actively being used, but that's still no excuse for treating it like a fashion accessory. I put it in my jacket pocket or camera bag instead, and so far the rubber eyecup hasn't shown any tendency to collect lint.

I've never used the viewfinder brand that costs four times as much as the Kamerar and sounds like a hobby knife, but I've been pretty happy with the QV1. It's certainly good enough, it's a nice match for my SLR, and it costs about what I'm willing to spend given my low-key and rather undemanding usage. It's not one of those things that makes my heart sing with joy, but it's good enough that I wouldn't replace it, and it has proven useful enough as a concept that I bought a different LCD viewfinder for another cameras as well. More on that here.

last updated 8 june 2014

Hoodman Hoodloupe 3.0

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 1 out of 5
Yeah, but: It's a classic.

The Long Version: The Hoodman Hoodloupe, patent US 7,386,229 B2 and 7,034,877, was the first thing I thought about when I needed to use my D800's live view for manually focusing a lens when outdoors. And why not? It's been around forever – I remember seeing ads for it back in the days of actual print magazines, so it must be good to still be on the market.

The Hoodman Hoodloupe is very slightly misnamed: it is a hood, but loupes typically offer magnification, which the Hoodman doesn't. Instead it has a diopter correction eyepiece and sturdy sides that block out stray light, making the camera's LCD easier to see by cutting out glare and distractions. It is used like a loupe, however, being hand-held and moved into place each time it's needed.

The Hoodloupe is clearly an idea that predates the era of SLR cameras that capture video, and the mirrorless revolution that followed it. The need to see the camera LCD clearly in any light was once the exclusive difficulty of photographers using tripods and seeking critical sharpness as they leisurely take photos of churches and mountains. If that's all that it's asked to do then the Hoodloupe performs well, but there's a new generation of video-inspired LCD magnifiers out there that have surpassed it for all-around use.

The Hoodman does still have some advantages over most of the newer products on the market: it's well-built, simple, small, and comparatively inexpensive. Even today it would be a good choice for anyone making a pilgrimage to the great tripod-holes of the American midwest or west coast. If this is something that's on your bucket list then consider picking one up – mine's available for $40, tax and shipping included.

last updated 6 june 2014

Sigma DP3 Merrill First Impressions

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: Pixel = Picture Element. Sensel = Sensor Element.

The Long Version: This is not a review of the Sigma DP3 Merrill. It has already been scrutinized by some of the best and there's really not much to add; these cameras are not creatures of nuance and subtlety. The DP series, and the 75mm-e DP3 in particular, is so unambiguous that anyone who has looked into it should have no doubts about whether or not it's a suitable camera for them. Anyone who hasn't looked into them already should probably stop reading now, because nothing good will come of it.

As I said, there are already some great reviews out there. But I'd like to single out their essence, which comes from Lensrentals: "if you want some amazing images, but not a lot of them and never very close together, this camera is a blast."

But there is a question I can address: Why not hold out for the recently-announced Quattro?

There is value, both financial and personal, in being a late adopter. This is something that I learned from Bill, although naturally it has taken me time to appreciate his wisdom.

Sigma's Merrill generation is a known known – none of its many flaws or strengths should surprise any purchaser with an internet connection. (Any purchaser without an internet connection is in for a nasty shock when they learn that the necessary raw-processing software is download-only.) But despite being superseded by the Quattro the DP3M can still have its age measured in months. So why hurry to pay the highest price for an early production unit of an unproven design? Cameras are invariably rushed to market with insufficient testing, and problems can strike anyone. Canon, Fuji, and Sony have all had light leaks, Nikon had the D800 autofocus misalignment, Sigma had the SD1 Merrill pricing, and so on.

Yes, I'm sure the Quattro will be a better device with less mid-iso noise and slowness, but it doesn't add what I miss most with the Merrill. There's still no EVF or tilting LCD screen, and there's still no cable release or even WiFi triggering option. And some of the dpQ's improvements don't help me: the bigger batteries will let it record more rolls of film per charge to its memory card, but the Merrill takes the battery that I already use in my pair of Ricoh GRs. Synergy matters.

Besides, the dpQ doesn't have that old Foveon three-sensels-per-colour nostalgia – I've wanted a Foveon camera since I first tried an SD9 a decade ago, so the Quattro sensor design feels like a very very small betrayal. And in another generation or two the technology pioneered in the dpQ will be even better, making the upgrade more significant when a cable release or EVF finally make an appearance.

For what it's worth, the DP3M reviews are absolutely right, but it still takes some experience with the camera to really appreciate them. The battery life is dreadful; I exhausted one by taking six photos and going through the initial setup process. Autofocus is at least as slow as any compact camera made in the past few years. Shadow noise at iso500 in indoor lighting requires countermeasures. And yet when it all works the files really are amazing.

The Sigma DP3 Merrill is a best-case camera. What's wrong with that? When I have worst-case needs I'll pick up my D800 and its suite of excellent prime lenses. If I want a more normal pocket camera I have the ultra-sharp wide-angle GR. And when I need versatility over image quality I have my Nikon V1, which is perfectly capable of producing mediocre results across an expansive range of focal lengths. The DP3M is a city-friendly camera that can produce exceptional results when used appropriately, and it just so happens that its comfort zone and mine are almost identical.

I just need to buy more batteries.

last updated 2 may 2014

Nikon D800: Two Years

Concept: 5 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: "It has 53 teeth still in place."

The Long Version: After two years the Nikon D800/e remains the best camera on the market. It's tough, it's fast, its image quality in good light is unequalled by any camera costing less than three times as much, and it's still among the very best in low light as well. Its viewfinder is superb, the controls are well considered, and as a bonus it works with some excellent lenses and speedlights.

Other cameras solve different problems, or emphasize different priorities. Smaller, lighter, faster, tougher, cheaper: all of them are possible, and sometimes a few of them occur in combination. But anyone who thinks that newer cameras have caught up to its image quality – yes, Sony A7r, I mean you – simply isn't paying attention.

Today is my D800's second birthday. After this much time with my D700 I had its faults precisely identified: obscure bracketing and custom white balance controls, 98% viewfinder, and too low resolution. The D800 fixes all but the awkwardness of setting a custom white balance, but I actually prefer to just shoot a white reference card and then sync everything in post, which is what I do with every other camera I own as well.

Compared to the D700, Nikon has only introduced one new shortcoming with the D800: the hand grip is not as comfortable. Those who have used both will know what I mean, and for everyone else it doesn't really matter. Some day I may try building up the hand grip a bit, but I'll probably never bother. It's really a matter of hand position, and not trying to grip the camera in a fist, which is easy enough when shooting but a bit harder when the camera is held at rest. The MB-D12 helps.

The past two years of marching technology is really only apparent in the D800's LCD and Live View implementation. A contemporary cutting-edge screen would be nice, but mostly I'd like a better magnified view and manual focusing assistance modes. I'll use a Hoodman loupe to shield the LCD when I need to focus precisely outdoors, but even then it isn't always easy to see where critical focus falls. If this could be tweaked within the existing camera I'd take it, but I certainly wouldn't upgrade the camera over it, should the inevitable day come when there's one out there that thinks it can succeed the D800.

There are a lot of really good cameras out there. Nikon has several and Canon makes a few, as do Fuji and Olympus; Panasonic and the former Pentax have one each as well. The market for mirrorless cameras has changed radically since the D800 came out – the X-Pro1 is also two years old – while the SLR world hasn't really changed at all.

Maybe SLRs are dinosaurs, being undercut by the smaller and nimbler 16 megapixel squirrel-like mammals with cropped tails. But it's worth noting that mammals didn't end the dinosaur's reign – it took an asteroid. There's no telling what the future will bring, but in the mean time the D800 will continue to be one of the cameras that rules the earth.

last updated 4 dec 2010

Nikon 1 V3 Press Releases

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 2 out of 5
Yeah, but: I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

The Long Version: First of all, there's no way to separate my reaction to the Nikon 1 V3 press release without also responding to the camera that inspired it. I haven't handled the N1V3, and have no special knowledge about it, but I do know the Nikon 1 V1. It's impossible to be impartial.

The product images, as with my Canon G1X2 Press Release review, are adapted from the official images which anyone can download from Nikon's press site. Interestingly, the press releases on Nikon's Canadian and American sites are very different, so I'm going to be picking bits from each.

To begin, let's look at the headlines.

USA: The world's fastest*1 continuous shooting rate with AF tracking, performance with tracking of moving subjects that exceeds that of digital SLR cameras, and capable of full-scale operation.

Canada: Create with Uncompromising Speed and Image Quality: Nikon 1 V3 Provides a Compact, Versatile Feature Set for Capturing Stunning Images and HD Videos. …the Nikon 1 V3 is the ideal companion camera for the DSLR shooter looking to pack light and move fast.

Is it true that Canadians are friendlier and more polite than Americans?*1 The USA release hits the obligatory "World's Fastest" claim right off the bat, and stakes its position that the 1V3 is superior to an SLR, while the Canadians are simply looking for some companionship. I can't puzzle out exactly what 'capable of full-scale operation' means, but it seems to be trying to counterbalance the USAian Bigger is Better perception against the Compact, Versatile marketing message that sells these cameras elsewhere in the world. The Canadian press release calls the V3 compact four times, while the American uses it only once.

USA: …the latest addition to the V series of Nikon 1 advanced cameras with interchangeable lenses that propose new forms of imaging expression.

Canada: …a compact yet powerful addition to the Nikon 1 Advanced Camera with Interchangeable Lens System.

Again we see the Canadians throttling down the exceptionalism, as we tend to do. If you're an American buyer, the 1V3 stands to fundamentally change both art and technology, while in Canada it's just yet another camera. A good camera, to be sure, but the understated Canadians are not even going to claim that it's the latest model in the line, which clearly – if, invariably, temporarily – it is. But the one thing that both cultures can agree on is that Nikon uses a terribly awkward way to refer to what actual real people call "mirrorless cameras". Nikon being Nikon, the word "mirror" never appears in either press release.

Canada: a blazing fast Hybrid AF system and the world’s fastest continuous shooting frame rate1 at 20 frames-per-second (fps) with full autofocus (AF) – a speed that outpaces even professional DSLR cameras.

Okay, that's pretty impressive, and now we know where the Canadians put their better-than-SLR claim. Of course the N1V1 was also on par with – or faster than – the top SLRs of the time, but was crippled by a mandatory last-shot image review that locked out the shutter. The lesson here is to never underestimate Nikon's ability to screw things up, including fundamental things that they've gotten right in dozens of cameras before now.

Nikon is very quiet about the shot buffer depth of the 1V3. The Canadian release never mentions it, but the Americans say 40 shots over two seconds, without specifying file format, or 50 shots using the mechanical shutter at its limit of 6fps. For comparison, the old Nikon D4 can do about 100 raw images (or 200 jpegs) at 10fps with tracking AF, while a stock F5 from 1996 could do 7.4fps for 36 shots.

USA: 105 densely packed focus points positioned over a broad range of the frame ensure precise acquisition of moving subjects.

Densely packed over a broad range? Seriously? How is that even possible? Either somebody ate some bad jumbo shrimp for lunch or this is Nikon's way of conceding that the CX sensor format is really small. But I will give the PR teams a lot of credit for not adding up the 171 CDAF points with the 105 PDAF points to claim 276 total AF locations. It seems that, even with them being densely packed over a broad area, there's a lot of overlap in the actual point positions.

USA: …the world's fastest*1 high-speed continuous shooting rate with AF tracking … as well as the world's shortest*3 shooting time lag ensures fast and precise focusing…

This is interesting*2 for what it doesn't say: the claim for World's Fastest Autofocus is nearly mandatory for a press release these days, but this one skirts the subject with a couple of claims that are related but not quite the same thing. That seems too carefully done to be irrelevant, but I can't decide what it might actually mean. Nevertheless, I keep looking askance at this phrase, and am waiting for the other shoe to drop.

Canada: “…” said Gregory Flasch, National Advertising and Communications Manager at Nikon Canada. “With an incredible feature set, a newly-crafted ergonomic design, and the elite high-speed performance…”

It's thoughtful of the people in Nikon Canada's marketing department to include a quotation from their boss about the new camera, because otherwise we might not know from the outset what tone the upcoming advertisements would take. Spoiler alert: they like it.

The N1V3 seems to have picked up some styling cues from the Canon EOS M. I admit that I like the look of the new Nikon, both when it's stripped down or when it has the optional/bundled EVF and grip attached. The N1V1 won no prizes for its appearance, while N1V2 was cripplingly unphotogenic, so any improvement here is a good thing. As for the actual quality of the new ergonomics and elite performance, I can only say that I'm looking forward to trying it out – before putting it back down and walking away from it forever.

USA: What's more, the Nikon 1 V3 offers an operational system that users of digital SLRs will find familiar.

Just remember this bit for a few moments, and consider that at its launch price the 1V3 costs as much as a really good SLR, meaning that it will mostly appeal to people who already have excellent SLRs.

USA: The Nikon 1 V3 is equipped with a main command dial on the back of the camera and a sub-command dial on the front…

On the front of the camera is the Nikon Df Memorial Vertical Dial, while the back has a more conventional horizontal dial. There's also a third, uncounted consumer-standard dial around the four-way controller, which has an Exposure Compensation button on it. Seeing that button was when I first heard my own photographic death knell tolling for this camera.

USA: …allows users of digital SLR cameras to apply and adjust settings such as shutter speed in a familiar manner.

Such as shutter speed, but not such as exposure compensation. That's the opposite of awesome. In fact, that's the same bad design that ensures that the Ricoh GR stomps all over the usability of the Coolpix A, which was another camera that Nikon intended to be familiar to its SLR users. Once again Nikon gets the fundamentals wrong. As far as SLR-like operation, or even general usability goes, this is a massive screw-up on it.

I simply will not consider buying a camera that doesn't give direct and immediate access to two variables at once, which I typically set to aperture value and exposure compensation. And while this should be a simple thing to rectify with a firmware update, Nikon is as willing to fix problems with its existing cameras as Sony is likely to release a complete lens collection before losing interest and moving on. The N1V1 remains a usability disaster two generations later, and D600 users might have some experiences to add here, as well.

If this camera was made by Ricoh or Fujifilm then I'd have complete faith that an error like this would be fixed. But Nikon is a camera company, not a photographic company, and I'm sure they've already wiped the N1V3 from the corporate resources and moved on to the next model in their relentless parade of V1.0 products that passes for innovation.

Canada: An additional function button is added with the optional GR-N1010 grip, a lightweight option that provides steadier handling, as well as an additional shutter button and sub-command dial that will be familiar to DSLR shooters.

Love that product name. GR-N1010. Like poetry.

It remains to be seen if the secondary sub-command dial that will be familiar to DSLR shooters will add to or over-ride the Df Memorial Vertical Dial that's also on the front of the camera; it also remains to be seen if the Df Dial can even be reached with the grip in place. But the grip does offer the intriguing possibility of having two shutter buttons on top of the camera, which seems like something of a first.

USA: the first Nikon 1 camera to be equipped with a virtual horizon function … and is capable of detecting not only roll (camera tilt to the left or right), but also pitch (camera tilt forward or back), a capability previously limited to high-end digital SLR cameras.

Nikon, frankly, assumes that its audience has its collective head up its collective ass. The Olympus E-PL2, Sony NEX6, Panasonic GX1, Canon G15, Ricoh GRDIV, and others all had this feature long before Nikon broke it out of their high-end SLR bracket. But in truth Nikon has a long history of only caring about what Canon is doing*3 in the same product tier, where a dual-axis level remains limited to the 7D and above, so I shouldn't be surprised.

Canada: Another innovative addition to the Nikon 1 Series is the V3’s new tilting, touch-panel 3-inch LCD monitor that allows photographers to compose brilliant images and HD videos from various new angles.

Don't worry, I'll refrain from listing other cameras that have a 3" tilting touch screen. Life simply isn't long enough. But there is some novelty in putting a row of hard buttons on the tilting LCD panel, which is interesting and may border on being innovative. Whether this is a good idea or not remains to be seen, but it may provide some benefit when the camera is on a tripod. Not that this camera is really meant to be used on a tripod, since that blocks access to the little battery and Micro-SD card slot.

Did I forget to mention that the blazing-fast N1V3 is the first Nikon interchangeable-lens camera to use Micro SD cards? That must be because the press releases skip that little innovation, too.

I'm also wondering how long it will be before specifying that a camera records 'HD Video' becomes the camera-equivalent of a motel specifying that they have 'Color TV'. It might have been impressive once, but it already sounds dated, and will soon be a superseded expectation.

Canada: The Nikon 1 V3 also empowers users to unleash their creativity, with fun and unique shooting options for all levels of photographer.

Every camera these days comes with built-in creativity as a standard feature. The American press release doesn't make this specific claim, but it's probably because they're all still busy creating new forms of imaging expression.

USA: The 0.48-inch, approximately 2359k-dot color TFT LCD viewfinder with frame coverage of approximately 100% supports diopter control and brightness adjustment. It ensures a broad field of view equal to that of digital SLR cameras…

They don't specify which DSLR the viewfinder is equivalent to, so I'm hoping that it isn't the D3000. The dots and size of the GR-N1010 are essentially the same as the EVF on the Fujifilm X-E2, which is no slouch. While Canon's EVF-DC1 for the G1X2 doesn't specify its screen size, the dot count is about the same and it even sells for almost the same premium as the N1V3 kit with the lens, viewfinder, and grip. Something tells me that the G1X2 and N1V3 is going to be an interesting competition to watch; a battle of the slow-selling and overpriced Titans.

USA: …adoption of the same rounded eyepiece used with the cameras such as the D4, Df, and D800, the DF-N1000 supports full-scale shooting capabilities.

That's an amazing bit of name-dropping, and highlights that the round eyepiece has always been reserved for the cameras that Nikon considers "Professional", such as the D300. No doubt the forums will find that significant, but what intrigues me is that they mention the D4 here, not the D4s, which was announced on February 24 and is already shipping. That suggests that the N1V3 release was written before then, and despite the nearly three-week wait until the V3 announcement, nobody went back and updated it.

They probably assumed, almost entirely correctly, that nobody was likely to notice or care.

And I still have no idea what 'full-scale shooting capabilities' actually means.

*1 When compared to Americans who reside in the same time zone as the Canadians that they are being compared to, possibly; compared to just about anyone else in the world, not so much.

*2 "Interesting" being a relative term and compared only among press releases for similar products as of March 14, 2014.

*3 With the recent exception of Nikon becoming dimly aware of Fujifilm, resulting in the Df, from which Nikon will almost certainly take the wrong lesson. 

last updated 15 mar 2014