Outdoor Research Radar Pocket Cap

Concept: 4 out of 5
Execution: 3 out of 5
Yeah, but: Yes, I own three of them.

The Long Version: I like hats, which is a little odd because until recently I haven't usually worn them. But this summer I decided that I would make a more concentrated effort to protect myself from the sun, so now I keep a hat on hand, so to speak. Or try to, anyway: even ballcaps are bulky and tough to keep track of, especially when I'm constantly switching between different bags.

I found the Radar Pocket Cap when I was browsing the friendly shelves of my local Mountain Co-op. I had left my ballcap at home yet again that day, so I was looking for something that would be able to protect me from the sun, be easy to carry and pack, and still not be too expensive. I have to say that Outdoor Research's "Radar Pocket Cap" is just about perfect.

Outdoor Research generally makes really good gear, and the Pocket Radar escapes the ugly "OR" logo that afflicts much of their line. (I see it and want to ask: "Or What?") Instead it has their full name stitched into the band, jauntily off-centre, with a small logo tag on the back as well. I can live with that. I'm not sure why they thought that also embroidering "UPF 30" onto the back was a good idea, but overall the Radar made it past the marketing department without being fatally wounded.

The really big deal with the Radar, and what earns it the Pocket Cap appellation, is that the brim folds in half. It has a single piece of dark grey fabric across the bottom, for a seamless look, and the fabric stitched to reinforce the hinge on the top can easily be mistaken for a styling accent. Once it's folded then it's easy to wrap the hat around itself and tuck it into a back pocket.

I'm a big fan of things that fold up without looking like they should, and pocketability is a huge factor for me. While I realize that the North American Etiquette Society has ruled that men are now allowed to wear hats indoors without automatically being considered complete assbags, I still prefer to remove mine as promptly as possible. This means that I may be putting my hat away a half-dozen times in a day, and the Radar has held up perfectly.

Sewn into the back of the cap is a little cord loop that makes it easy to hang up or clip to things. I already have biner clips on most of my bags specifically for the purpose, so this was a clear sign that the Radar is the cap for me. I have a thing against one-size-fits-all hats, but the design of the D-gap at the back does make them easy to clip to things. Finding a properly fitted hat that's still easy to put away is huge.

(The problem is that I'm a photographer. Even though the Radar has a very short brim I still need to wear it backwards from time to time. I worry that wearing hats with those adjustable bands across my forehead makes me look like a complete idiot – or even worse, like Ken Rockwell. Thank you, Outdoor Research, for understanding my pain.)

The cap itself is lightweight nylon, which is somewhat rain-repellant and not at all breathable; the black one especially is hot in the sun. There is also a Transit Radar that has mesh panels built into the side – I'm not sure who thinks these names are clever – but the use of mesh in clothing has too many bad associations for me to try that one out.

While the fabric isn't immune to wrinkles, it bounces back fairly well. Being nylon, the cap doesn't attract much dirt and dries quickly after it has been washed. Hand-washing it is easy, but I've also thrown it in my front-load machine with good results.

After spending a month with my black check Radar pocket cap the only sensible thing to do was buy another one. So naturally I ended up with two more: never believe a store when they say that a seasonal item is "backordered three to five weeks". Since I'm in a good position to compare, it's worth pointing out that they fit slightly differently despite all being nominally the same size. It never hurts to check in an actual store if their sizing guide seems ambiguous.

But despite already owning three of these caps, I'm still looking forward to seeing what colours Outdoor Research comes up with next year. I'm easily tempted when it comes to things that I like.

last updated 31 July 2012

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

Sigma 70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro (Nikon Mount)

Concept: 2 out of 5
Execution: 4 out of 5
Yeah, but: Solid but unsexy.

Counter Opinion: I'm looking for a sharp short telephoto, and the Sigma 70mm f/2.8 Macro is one that I've heard good things about. While I'm predisposed to the Nikon 60/2.8G – despite, not because of, having previously owned both the 150mm and 180mm Sigma macros – I decided to try the 70mm out in order to know more about my options.

Physically the 70/2.8 is substantial and well-built, justifying why Sigma EX lenses come with a decade-long warranty in Canada. The lens is all metal with the dark grey crinkle finish that looks great on its own, but always seems a little out of place when it's on a smooth black camera. The screw-on hood is metal, and works as the worlds' longest step-up ring by being threaded for 77mm filters on the front. Very clever.

The design of the 70/2.8EX Macro is something of a throwback; it feels older than the 2006 vintage that it is. It lacks Sigma's HSM motor, which means that the narrow focusing ring rotates during AF operation, and the Nikon model depends on the camera's screw-drive. I prefer this to the motor that Sigma puts in the Canon version, but it's a real problem for the little Nikon cameras, which are limited to manual focus. But what a manual focus it is – the ring has about a 270 degree throw, which is a vastly different experience from the measly 90 degrees of most quick-action AF lenses.

While focusing still isn't speedy, the powerful motors in top-end Nikons don't leave much to apologize for. Subjectively, I'd say that it's a bit faster on my D800 than my 50/1.4G in the normal range – not much to boast about – and about the same as my 105/2.8VR for macro focus. The Sigma also has an excellent limiter that keeps the lens in whichever half of the range it's already in when it's enabled. This is much easier to use that the fiddly three-position switch on the 105VR, and infinitely better than the 60/2.8G's complete absence of one.

Like three of the eight Micro lenses in Nikon's current catalog, the Sigma 70mm macro doesn't use internal focusing. The inner barrel extends quite substantially toward the minimum focusing distance, and there's a reproduction scale marked on its top. The second lens I ever owned also did that – the Olympus 35mm Macro, which is a 70mm equivalent – but it still takes a mental adjustment and feels like a negative. The upside is that there's no bellows effect: the 70/2.8EX keeps its f/2.8 aperture all the way down to its maximum 1:1 reproduction ratio.

But despite having so many other classic attributes – being polite – the Siggy 70/2.8 lacks an aperture ring. This lens could have been perfect for mirrorless cameras, and with a Nikkor "G"-compatible adapter it can still work, but naturally my Voigtlander F-to-M4/3 mount doesn't have an aperture control. Ah, well.

But the best part of the 70/2.8EX is the optics: it's subtly but distinctly sharper than the Nikon 60mm f/2.8G lens that I've put it up against, which is frequently called one of the sharpest lenses that Nikon makes. With proper technique and processing, the Nikon 60/2.8G is sharp enough to make my quickly-handled 50/1.4G look broken; when a Sigma lens can beat that, I have to sit up and take notice. While I'm not completely convinced that it will find a place on my D800, don't be surprised if I write a long-form review of it in the future.

Counter Opinions are quick "sales counter" product reviews.

As always, viewer discretion is advised.

Last updated 24 july 2012