It’s fall, Photokina 2010 is coming up, and just a week ago Nikon announced their fall new products. Today, it’s Canon’s turn.

EOS 60D: High Low-End, not Low High-End

First up is the impressive as a consumer class camera, but maybe not so much as a replacement for the EOS 50D. What’s gone is the Aluminum/Magnesium body, the 6.3 FPS frame rate, AF micro adjustments, and  compact flash cards.

The new EOS 60D, yep it still looks like a Canon SLR.

Out with the old in with the new. New to the EOS 60D, among other things, is:

• A 63-zone color sensitive meter
• +/- 3 Stops of exposure compensation
• A combination multi-controller and rear dial ripped right from the PowerShot G11
• An articulating high resolution screen and wireless flash control
• In camera image resizing
• Creative image filters (soft focus, grainy B&W, Toy Camera effect, and a tilt-shift effect)

Clearly canon is putting more and more focus on video in their new SLRs, though the lack of video information on the Canon USA product page is a bit of an odd oversight. The EOS 60D has full manual video control, including manual gain control of the audio. It also has in camera editing functionality, which I guess is handy given what appears to be the target market for the EOS 60D.

So while the spec list is fairly impressive, I’m not sure the camera is. Not to me at least. There is one new feature that I really like. The integrated multi-controller and secondary control dial does make for a much better UI design when it comes to using the multi-controller ot select AF points, especially when you have a vertical grip attached to the camera. In fact this has been one of my major peeves with SLR UI design for a long time.

Using the multi-controller to selection AF points is unbeatable fast, however, when you’re using a vertical grip it’s virtually impossible since the multi-controller is now way out of finger’s reach. Nikon got around this on their D300(s) and D700 bodies by adding a second controller to the MB-D10 grip. The combination controller on the EOS 60D appears to solve the issue for Canon, at least on the lower end cameras–the professional bodies are still woefully lacking when it comes to having a properly designed user interface.

The new front top LCD and control buttons on the EOS 60D.

There’s another UI change that isn’t so impressive, however. On the 50D and it’s predecessor, 6 of the most important functions–ISO, drive mode, AF mode, metering mode, white balance, and flash exposure compensation–were controlled by 3 buttons in front of the top LCD. I actually think this is one of the best UI features of any Camera I’ve handled. Need to bump the ISO, push the first button turn the main dial, no need to even take your eye away from the view finder.

The dual mode buttons in conjunction with the two control dials were simple, compact, and intuitive. Never mind at this point well established. The EOS 60D apparently eschews that for a more Rebel–or dare I say it EOS 1 series–style single mode button. The new camera replaces the elegant 3 button solution with 4 (not including the LED button), AF mode, drive mode, ISO, and metering mode. White balance and flash exposure compensation are nowhere to be found. I assume you have to go though a menu for them now.

The EOS 60D is expected to retail (body only) for $1100, and should be available towards the end of September.

New Glass: Go Pro or Go Home

New glass is always a much anticipated event. The months proceeding any of Canon’s major announcement times send the rumor sites into a virtual frenzy theorizing and speculating over every possible lens. One can dream, right?

EF 8-15 f/4L Fisheye USM

This is something akin to a replacement for the old EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye, even though the EF 15mm f/2.8 Fisheye hasn’t been discontinued. On a full frame sensor the lens has a circular 180° field of view at 8mm. At 15mm, it’s like the current fisheye, a 180° diagonal field of view. On a crop camera, at 8mm you get a full 180° diagonal field of view. Not a bad deal if you use a fisheye.

Estimated list price is $1400, and the lens is expected to be available in January of 2011.

EF 70-300 f/4-5.6L IS USM

Lets start with what it is. It appears to be an L class replacement for the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. It’s a slow, variable aperture lens, so it’s not exactly in the same class as the EF 70-200mm f/4Ls (either with or without IS), nor is it as long as the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM. It is, however, weather sealed.

What this lens really is, at least to me, is an enigma. Canon had a perfectly good, if not slightly soft EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM. It was the reasonably priced and it’s been removed from Canon’s website (at least the USA site) which tends to mean that it’s been discontinued. The replacement is apparently this lens. Boy does that leave a gaping hole in Canon’s lineup. There’s the two non-stabilized, mediocre–kit lens–quality 75-300′s at the $200 price point and the non-stabilized EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM at the $500 price point (where the old 70-300 IS lived). If you want a stabilized 70-300mm lens, you jump then to $1400 for the EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM, and then to the new $1500 EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM.

There are two questions for me. First, why another L telephoto zoom? Canon has 13 telephoto zooms listed on their site now; 1 is an EF-S lens, 3 are the a fore mentioned low end 75-300s/100-300, the final non L lens is the 70-300 DO. Eight, yes, eight of the 13 telephoto zooms are L. Doesn’t that diminish the L branding as a premium when almost all the lenses are L branded?

Second is a matter of the lens’s described focus system.

Lens extension via inner focusing and focus cam plus floating mechanism.

Is it me, or does that sound suspiciously like the front element extends when the lens focuses. Extending front elements tend to be a feature of inexpensive lenses, not premium pro level ones. If that’s the case, this will be one of the first L lenses I can think of that isn’t an internal or rear focusing design.

The EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM is expected to retail for about $1500 and be available in October of this year.

EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM

I so want one of these. The current one is fast both to focus and in gathering light, tack sharp, not terribly heavy, and reasonably sharp when paired with a 1.4 or 2x teleconverter making it pretty flexible. The new one improves the IS system (it’s now good for 4 stops), has 2 fluorite elements to reduce chromatic aberrations, adds the latest in Canon’s coatings to reduce ghosting and flare, and is lighter to boot. Wow! Wow! Wow!

The downside? The price has jumped from about $5000 to $7000.

The lens is expected to be available in December with an est retail price of $7000.

EF 400mm f/2.8 L IS II USM

If the EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II USM was impressive, the bigger badder 400mm brother is simply jaw dropping. Take the same fancy coatings, optics, and stabilizer, make the lens 400mm longer while keeping the f/2.8 aperture and you have the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM. Of course, anybody who owns the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM knows right away you don’t get a 400mm f/2.8 lens with out your back (or your monopod) paying for it. The first generation 400 f/2.8L IS USM weighed in at a back breaking 11.8 pounds. The mark 2, a feather weight 8.5 pounds. WOW! That’s almost 2 pounds lighter than Nikon’s 400mm f/2.8 VR II.

The only real downside to the EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM appears to be the price.

The EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II USM is expected to retail for $11,000 and should be available in December.

Extender EF 1.4x III & Extender EF 2x III

This year had seen Nikon introduce a 3rd generation 2x tele-extender, the big deal, an aspherical element to improve image quality by reducing spherical aberrations. It’s now also seen a 3rd generation of extenders from Canon. While the press release and product pages don’t say anything about aspherical elements, they do say this.

These new extenders have been designed to provide faster autofocusing and improved autofocus precision with compatible EF lenses. Each extender includes an anomalous dispersion lens element for reduced chromatic aberration and enhanced optical image quality. Each extender also features a newly developed microcomputer that increases AF precision when the extenders are used with a IS Series II EF super-telephoto lens. Both extenders are equipped with rubber gaskets and seals to enhance weather resistance. A new fluorine anti-smear coating is applied to the front and rear elements of both extenders.

I use my Extender EF 1.4x II enough that if these are as good as they sound, I can certainly see a new 1.4x extender in my future.

The extenders are expected to be available in December of this year, and will cost approximately $500 a piece.

According to Canon this fall is all about the pros, and their product line up really shows it. The EF 8-15mm fisheye provides a useable fisheye for any Canon user, regardless of the camera’s crop factor, that’s a big deal if you ask me. Canon’s previous 300mm f/2.8 and 400mm f/2.8 were arguably as close to optical perfection as you could get for a lens of that class, and I expect the new ones are going to be even better. The new tele-extenders also show promise to stretch those big lenses just that much further while keeping the IQ needed to drive today’s high density digital cameras. Finally, there’s the EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM, it seems like a bit of an odd duck in the line up, apparently pushing the lower priced entry level lens out of the catalog. That said, it is an L lens, and L lenses generally deliver optical quality commensurate of their price tags.

That just leaves, EOS 60D, certainly it shows promise as a solid upgrade for those Rebel users that are looking for a bit better control and better ergonomics.

* Direct links to the product pages and press released can be found in the Links box in the right-hand column.

Canon announced today that they’ve developed a 120MP (that’s a 13,280 x 9,184 pixel image) APS-H format sensor that has a laundry list of features. The sensor can be completely read out in about 10ms, resulting in a 9.5 FPS frame rate, it can do full HD video from the whole sensor (I assume) or one of several 1/16th area sections. Fortunately, or unfortunately as it may be, this is just a prototype and not something Canon has any immediate plans for.

The full press release can be read on Canon’s website. What follows are my thoughts on this sensor and what it could mean for photography down the road.

Small Pixels, Big Picture

From the scant details in the press release, we can make a few estimates about the sensor. For starters, the sensor packs 120 million pixels, resulting in a 13,380 x 9,184 image, in a 29.2mm x 20.2mm area. Simple math tells us, that the pixels are approximately 2-microns across.

2um pixels alone aren’t something new, many of the better performing current generation point and shoots have pixels that size, including Canon’s PowerShot G11 and S90. What is unprecedented, however, is the move to make a sensor with that pixel pitch that big.

Since this is an engineering prototype, it’s clear that part of this is Canon demonstrating they have the technology to manufacture a part this big and the capabilities to drive or use it. Lots of pixels, after all, means lots of data that needs to be moved and processed, doing that at almost 10 FPS isn’t anything to laugh at. The real question, or at least a good hypothetical one, is what that means for photographers in a few years.

Why aim for small pixels, aren’t bigger pixels better?

The balance between pixel size and noise is determined by a couple of factors including area, well capacity and quantum efficiency. However, the only factor in resolution is pixel size.

In general, when there is very little signal (light), larger pixels do “better” since they collect more signal and as a result should have less noise. However, when there is a lot of signal, smaller pixels will resolve more detail. This split can be seen in how Canon and Nikon orient their studio and “low light” cameras, studio cameras has more pixels and a limited ISO top end, low light cameras have fewer pixels and a much higher ISO top end.

What this thinking doesn’t consider is that you can make a smaller pixel appear bigger if you combine it with its neighbors. In short, you can make a small pixel camera behave more like a big pixel camera, but you can’t do things the other way around. This parity can be seen if one compares results of the 5D mark 2 and the Nikon D700. The D700’s bigger pixels perform better in low light, but when you reduce the 5D mark 2’s image to the same size, the results are virtually identical.

Currently, designers try to balance the resolution advantages of small pixels with the noise advantages of big pixels. However, if the sensor can pack enough pixels to break the current 1 imaging pixel equals 1 image pixel condition things could change in interesting ways.

With a whole heck of a lot of pixels, designers could choose to bin pixels all the time. That is, treat each RGBG quad as a single image pixel. It reduces the image resolution at least by a factor of 4, however, noise goes down, and image quality goes up. Moreover, the anti-aliasing (blur) filter can be disposed of without worrying about moiré so the camera should be able to resolve more fine details.

The other alternative is to progressively bin as the signal to noise ratio or ISO increases. This has the advantage of producing the highest possible resolution image in situations where there is enough signal to support that, and producing increasingly less noisy, though lower resolution, images as pixel noise increases. Binning based on ISO isn’t something that’s unheard of either, Phase One’s P+ medium format backs do this to achieve their highest ISOs, so do many P&S cameras.

Bits, FPS, and Bandwidth

The real problem, and what makes this sensor largely infeasible as a commercial product for the foreseeable future, is the amount of bandwidth that this sensor can consume. Assuming it keeps a 14-bit output reading out 120MP sensor 9.5 times a second requires almost 2 GB/s in bandwidth. At that rate, a 32GB flash card would be filled in less than 2 seconds and with only 16 or 17 pictures.

2GB/s isn’t an insurmountable problem; most modern PCs are capable of moving much more than that between their system memory and CPU. Even the DDR memory used in Canon’s current top end camera’s in theory, at least with a wide enough bus, could handle the data. The problem in a camera, however, is twofold. First, is power; simply put moving lots of data requires a lot more power than moving a lot less data, and this sensor would be moving more than 7 times as much data as the fastest production camera Canon currently makes.

Simultaneously, there the problem with storage, at 9.5 FPS, this sensor could fill a 32GB flash card in less than 2 seconds, with only 16 images. Well, at least it could if the buffer was big enough. The fastest flash cards currently available can’t write any faster than about 100MB/s. At that speed, it would take almost 30 seconds to write a single 120MP 14-bit image (assuming no compression).

It’s a Tech Demo, Don’t get Excited Yet

Of course, ultimately this announcement wasn’t intended to demonstrate what Canon expects to put in a camera in a couple of years. This is a demonstration of their capabilities in designing and building bleeding edge imaging sensors, and while it’s not ultimately useful on its own, it is very much necessary to spend the time and money on R&D that results in this kind of thing even if you only use part of what you learned.

There are a few things, however, that concern me about this announcement. For starters, there’s the frame rate. 9.5 FPS is quite fast, and while Canon doesn’t go into detail about how parallel the readouts are, it’s clear that in addition to reading in parallel the sensor is being read out quite quickly as well. The problem is, speed and noise, at least when it comes to analog to digital conversion, don’t play together very well. Conversions can be done quickly, but doing so increases the amount of noise in the conversion.

This problem is most obviously seen in the EOS 1D mark 4. Independent tests have shown the sensor could be capable of >15 stops of dynamic range if the conversion circuitry wasn’t driven to meet the 161MP/s requirements of 10FPS shooting. Now this might not be an issue for this prototype sensor, it may not have even been a goal of this prototype, and of course, Canon may have found a way to build an ADC that performs better at the required speeds.

While this prototype sensor is certainly impressive, photographically speaking FPS and pixels mean less to me than noise, dynamic range, and color accuracy. What would really get me excited is to see Canon announce is a sensor with good by current standards resolution (say ~20MP full frame) and 20 stops of dynamic range. Even better, would be for them to say they’re going to ship it in a camera in the next year.

This may not exactly be news, I just got a notice about it while re-profiling my displays, but Datacolor has released (as of July 30, 2010) a new version of their Spyder 3 calibration software, version 4.0.2 for Windows and Mac OS. The new version has a slightly reworked UI that slightly improves the programs usability and provides some automated brightness controls for users with displays that lack them.

Version 4.0.2 can be downloaded form Datacolor’s download site.

It’s been long in the waiting, for me at lest, LPA Design’s AC-3 Zone Controller has finally started making it into retail channels. The AC-3 Zone Controller, is the little add-on that slots into the top hotshoe of LPA Design’s Mini TT1 or Flex TT5 transmitters so you can control flash powers in multiple zones without having to have a flash on the camera.

Supposedly they were released to distributors some time ago, however, they appear to be just making it into retail channels.

B&H Photo finally has them listed, though they apparently aren’t stocking them.

Midwest Photo Exchange also has them listed, though with even less detail.

The AC-3 is listed at $69.99 from both sources.

For about as long as I’ve been using Wacom tablets, I’ve encountered a rather rare phenomena where my tablet (which I also use as my mouse) will crash and burn causing my mouse to freeze. Other than this occurring in both Lightroom (2 and now 3) and Photoshop, and with both the pen and mouse, there’s no rhyme or reason to it. The following describes the source of the problem (as far as I can tell) and the solution I’ve come up with for use in Windows XP, Vista and 7.

Disclaimer: This isn’t supposed to be a programming/computer/info-tech site, yet I keep posting bizarre programming/computer fixes. Like the last one of these, I’m not about to go into every possible level of detail in walking though the resolutions I’m about to describe. However, these instructions should be enough for someone reasonably versed in using computers to implement. If you’re not comfortable with the detail provided, I strongly suggest finding someone who is to implement it for you.

In Windows XP, the fix is as simple as restarting the Tablet service though the Services control panel. In fact it was easy enough, and the OS insecure enough, that a simple CMD script could do it as well.

net stop tabletservicewacom
net start tabletservicewacom

It was tedious enough that I use to have that in a cmd script file, but I could call from the hot-key application I used. However, it could also be called from a simple shortcut or though one of the media/shortcut keys on most modern keyboards.

Windows Vista and Windows 7 change that. The new privilege system means that you can’t simply restart a service without some form of privilege escalation, even for admin users. In addition, the separation of privileges has apparently prompted Wacom to introduce a “Wacom_TabletUser” process that appears to interface that user’s settings with the system-level tablet driver.

Unfortunately when the system’s “Wacom_Tablet.exe” (the process behind the TabletServiceWacom service) crashes the user process doesn’t. At this point, simply restarting the tablet service leaves the orphaned user process blocking communicate and the tablet frozen.

The solution is to stop the TabletServiceWacom service, kill the the Wacom_TabletUser.exe process, and restart the tablet service.

The trick is scripting that so it can be done without having to navigate the OS with a keyboard. UAC is what makes this complicated.

Option 1: Use the Elevate Power Toy and a CMD script.

The elevate command isn’t built into Windows. You’ll need to download it from here. Installation is straightforward enough, extract the EXE that’s provided, and install the “ElevateCommand.inf”.

The commands needed are show below. Copy and paste the following into a text file and change the extension to “.cmd” and you’re good to go.

elevate net stop "TabletServicWacom"
taskkill /F /IM "Wacom_tabletuser.exe"
elevate net start "TabletServiceWacom"


Running this will cause a UAC prompt to appear, and then reset the tablet driver.

Option 2: Use AutoHotkey to do this on a hot-key shortcut.

Actually there’s two options here, one is to run the cmd script from option 1 via a hot-key, though that’s not nearly as elegant if you ask me.

The second alternative is to download this compiled AutoHotkey script and execute it as a hot-key action. The script is compiled to require administrator privileges and will generate a UAC prompt.

Of course there’s one more option, you could always reboot when the tablet driver craps out. This was what I was doing until just recently, and it’s horribly annoying if you ask me so I don’t really count it as much of an option.

Adobe, has released a release candidate for the first update to Lightroom 3, and the second update to CameraRAW 6.

Lightroom 3.2, Adobe has elected align the minor version numbers between Lightroom and Camera RAW (i.e. Lightroom 3.2 and CameraRAW 6.2 have feature parity), has an extensive list of bug fixes and brings new camera and lens profiles. Unfortunately, for me at lest, Lightroom 3.2 still opens RAW files in Photoshop CS4 with Camera RAW 5.7 even though ACR 5.7 isn’t fully feature complete.

• Camera RAW 6.3 (Adobe Labs)
• Lightroom 3.2 (Adobe Labs)

The EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is a mid-range general purpose zoom lens designed for Canon’s full frame cameras, but is equally at home on Canon’s crop bodies. The EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM trades speed, some image quality, and a fixed aperture for a greater zoom range than it’s L or lower end kit counterparts, but compensates for that to some degree with an in lens image stabilization system.

Build and Construction

Fit and finish is quite good for a mid-tier lens. The EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens is mostly plastic, but doesn’t feel cheap or plastic-y. In fact, the lens has quite a bit of heft, even with the  plastic body, enough to warrant a metal lens mount. Unfortunately, that mount, like the rest of the lens, isn’t weather sealed.

The finish is a smooth un-textured matte black, not the “powered coated” textured finish found on many Canon lenses. That said, the finish doesn’t mar or scratch easily.

In fact, in my experience the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is quite robust for its size and price. It’s most fragile component is the image stabilizer system, and even that can take quite a bit of punishment.

Like most low- and mid-range lenses, the zoom-ring is given “priority”; it’s wider and located at the front of the lens with the focus ring behind it. This is typically reversed on high-end lenses, where the zoom and focus rings are typically equal in size and focus ring tends to be the front most.

The EF 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS USM fully extended at 135mm. (click to enlarge)

The zoom-ring on the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is wide (the rubber grip is 7/8^th inch, the whole part that turns is 1-3/8^th inch) and textured rubber. The zoom-ring turns smoothly, though there is slightly more resistance starting from the shortest focal length. The complete zoom range is covered by turning the ring 90°. There is no zoom lock and the zoom can, and usually does, creep. Creep however, seems dependent on the specific lens; some lenses have a very pronounced creep others won’t creep at all.

Like most lenses in the wide to telephoto (walk around) range, the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM extends when zooming. Likewise, it follows the standard zoom design where the lens increases in length as the focal length increases and the hood is mounted on the end of the inner most lens barrel. As a result, the lens hood is most effective at the shortest focal length setting and increasingly less effective as the focal length is increased.

The extending lens barrel is composed of 2 parts. Because of this, there is a slight “wobble” or give in the front element that’s not there in single barrel lenses. However, the wobble seems to tighten up longer focal lengths. Moreover, I’ve never seen image quality issues due to this.

Autofocus on the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is powered by a ring-USM motor. As a result, autofocus is fast and silent and full time manual focus is available. Additionally, the lens is of an internal focus design, so the front element doesn’t rotate or extend when focusing.

Manual focusing is done with a ½-inch wide hard plastic ring located near the middle of the lens. The complete focus range from close-focus to infinity is covered in 135°, which isn’t bad for an autofocus lens. While the ring is hard and plastic-y, it turns smoothly and feels good for a focus ring on a lens in this price range.

The only switches on the lens are for the autofocus and image stabilization system. (click to enlarge)

A distance scale is provided, though like most modern distance scales, its utility is limited. The internal focus design means that the infinity focus point can vary over a range with temperature and focal length. Because of that, it’s possible to focus past infinity. Finally, the distance scale lacks the hyperfocal/depth of field marks typically found on manual focus lenses. On the up side, the distance scale does have IR focus marks for all listed focal lengths.

The lens’s controls are rounded out with the autofocus/manual focus switch and image stabilizer switch. Both are located on the left side of the lens just behind the focus ring and use Canon’s older non-flat switch design.

The front of the lens features 72mm filter threads for protective and creative effect filters. 72mm has become something of a rarity in Canon’s line up these days, with the vast majority of lenses being either 77mm or 58mm.

Rounding out the features, the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM has a bayonet mount for a lens hood. Canon’s recommended lens hood is the EW-78BII, and this provider proper shading on a 5D, 1Ds or film EOS body. Unfortunately, the petals on the EW-78BII aren’t cut flat at the ends, so the lens won’t stand upright when set on the lens hood.

Performance

Optically the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM consists of 16 elements in 12 groups. It also has an aspheric element to help combat field curvature and spherical aberrations.

Let’s be honest here, though, this isn’t an L lens and it doesn’t have L lens image quality. Quantitatively, objective tests show this lens has less resolution, more distortion, and higher CA than its L cousins do, though sometimes not by a whole lot. That said I’ve never had much of a complaint with this lens optically.

Auto focus is quite and fast, thanks to the USM motor and internal focusing design. Focusing from infinity to a closer subject takes about 1s. Most focus moves, especially in good light, are considerably faster.

While the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is not as fast as the 24-70 f/2.8L, the image stabilizer gives some breathing room as long as your subject isn’t moving. However, this lens uses one of Canon’s earliest image stabilizers so performance doesn’t stack up that well against lenses that are more modern. My testing and experience puts the IS system at about a stop and a half, give or take. On a full frame body that would mean handheld shutter speeds in the 1/15^ths (w) to 1/80^ths (t) range. On a crop body, speeds are about a stop faster 1/50^ths (w) to 1/160^ths (t).

The image stabilizer on the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM has a bit of an odd behavior. When shooting in portrait/vertical orientation, the stabilizer makes a noticeable diagonal shift when it engages or disengages. I’ve seen this on every copy of this lens I’ve handed, which leads me to believe this is normal behavior.

In the Box

Like all of Canon’s non-L lenses, the box contains very little beyond the lens. In the case of the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM the box contains the lens, as Lens Dust Cap E (rear cap), a 72mm snap on lens cap, instruction sheet, and warranty card. No hood ($30 extra) or pouch is included.

Alternatives

Canon produces 2 other full frame lenses in this range the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM and the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, though either of these lenses cost about twice as much as the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM.

Compared to either of the L lenses, the 28-135 IS trades aperture, image quality, and wide angle for more reach. Whether that makes a difference is far more subjective. Compared to the EF 24-70 f/2.8L USM the 28-135 IS has almost twice as much reach. Though compared to the EF 24-105 f/4L IS USM, it’s not that much. Below is a comparison of 70mm, 105mm and 135mm with the same subject distance.

On a crop body, the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM has roughly the same field of view as a 50 to 200mm lens would have on a full frame camera. This put’s in a rather interesting, if a bit anachronistic, position. If you don’t shoot wide angle a lot, it’s a rather nice normal to telephoto zoom, with the widest setting being equal to the normal field of view produced by a 50mm lens on a film camera.

There’s not a lot of reason to go for the 28-135 IS USM on a crop body at this point. The EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS covers the same range but goes wide enough to be a wide angle lens on a crop camera. It’s also lighter, though it doesn’t have the Ring-USM motor.

Verdict

Unfortunately the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is a bit of an anachronism now. On a full frame, body the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM provides a constant aperture, better image quality, and weather sealing though at the cost of some of the telephoto reach and twice the cost.

On a crop body, the 28-135 is a normal to telephoto zoom, with an effective field of view equal to a 50-200mm lens. Here too the 28-135 has become an anachronism as well. The EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS provides more reach and better pairing with the 18-55mm kit lens or EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. Alternatively, the EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 USM covers all of the range of the 28-135 and adds wide-angle capabilities.

About the only setup that that makes sense is pairing the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM with the EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM. This pairing provides the equivalent coverage from 16 to 200mm (in full frame terms) with a gap from 35 to 50mm in 2 lenses. Though neither is super-fast, they don’t take up a lot of bag space and provide a lot of flexibility.

One other thing that hurts the EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is that it’s a very popular starter/kit lens and that popularity coupled with its mid-tier build and optical quality, ultimately reduce the lens’s resale value. Used 28-135’s fetch maybe half of their new price.

One other thing to consider, if you’re using this lens on a crop body, the recommended hood doesn’t provide optimal shading (since it’s designed for a full frame sensor’s angle of view). Since the hood isn’t included by default, this means you can opt to buy an alternative if you wish. The alternative is the Canon EW-78C. This is the hood from the EF 35mm f/1.4L USM, and while it doesn’t provide ideal shading either, but it does provide better shading and is slightly better built as well.

In short: There are better choices out there now, but this is still a good lens if it fits your budget and needs.

LPA Design has released the final versions of the 5.1 firmware for their Control TL PocketWizards (i.e. the Mini TT1 and Flex TT5) for Canon cameras. The new firmware adds or fixes several issues including:

• Adds support for the AC-3 Zone Controller
• Adds support for the Canon Rebel T2i (550D)
• Addresses an issue with the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM on the EOS 7D
• Expands compatibility with the EOS 1D Mark 4 and High Speed Sycn
• Fixes trigger issue with remove cameras and shutter speeds higher than 1/400th
• Reduces rear curtain sync clipping
• Radio timing optimized for reliability improvements

A complete list of fixes can be found in the Manual Addendum 5.1. The updates can be downloaded an installed though the PocketWizard utility available from here.

Visualizing an image is as fundamental to photography as the cameras, lenses, and film. Even modern technology is unable to diminish the need for your eye as it has for so many other aspects of photography.

Seeing an image, however, is not a simple task. It can be aided, in some ways, the old standard of learning with a 50mm prime, for example. However, that only takes you so far.

However, there’s more to images than just what fits in the frame. In particularly relevance in this case is the way light is reflected from surfaces.

That brings me to, of all things, sunglasses.

I wear sunglasses almost religiously. Fortunately, or unfortunately as it may be, the sunglasses I wear are polarized. As a result, the way I normally perceive the world is fundamentally different from how my camera does.

Mouse over the image to see the effect of removing the polarizer.

That difference was driven home, again, while I was photographing a scene at the Magic Kingdom. What to me was readily visible and obvious wasn’t to my camera (at least initially), and it took a quick review of the images to realize my folly—chimping isn’t always a bad thing. Worse, I find that this is becoming a more frequent experience for me.

While I was attaching my polarizer, I found myself wondering if photographers should make it a point not to wear polarized sunglasses.

I don’t know, maybe that’s a good path to follow. Using only neutral density sunglasses certainly would keep your normal perception in line with that of your camera. However, polarized sunglasses can be useful tools themselves. The drive to putting polarizing foils in sunglasses is the same as using a polarizing filter on a camera lens, cut glare, intensify color, and increase contrast.

I find it’s virtually impossible to visualize how a scene will look though a polarizer without looking though one. Some things are easy; skies, for example, darken the most at 90° to the sun. Other things aren’t so obvious. The boards and shadows image posted recently to my Flickr stream was largely a product of seeing the effect of polarization on the boards before even having a camera in my hands.

Perhaps the question in a broader sense is to what end should we sacrifice things for a more accurate eye?

To which I don’t have an answer at all. It’s certainly true that sacrificing health and personal safety (the former is a line I’m loathe to cross, the latter not so much) can definitely net better images.

Where you draw the line and what it ends up costing you, are certainly personal choices.

I’m going to keep wearing my polarized sunglasses and redouble my effort to remember that I normally see the world differently than my camera does.

One final thought: The effect of using a polarizer can’t be mimicked with digital processing. Being able to see when using one, and using it, is certainly valuable.

The distance scale has long been a useful tool for photographers since it provides a good deal of information about depth of field and focusing quickly and easily. Though it could be argued that autofocus has diminished the need for a distance scale it continues to grace most mid- and higher-end lenses, though in its current form I have no idea why.

The manual focus distance scale is a thing of beauty. It conveys a ton of information about the state of focus and depth of field on the lens.

Distance scale form an 50mm FD manual focus lens.

For example, from the distance scale shown one can immediately see that this lens is focused at approximately 12 feet. One can quickly estimate the depth of field at any full stop aperture. Finally, if one were to shoot at f/22, this lens would be focused at the hyperfocal distance maximizing depth of field. Oh yes, and the red dot near the center mark, that’s the IR focus point.

That’s quite a lot of info that can be gleaned from some simple markings on a lens.

Distance scale from a modern zoom lens.

Now look at the modern distance scale. Gone is the ability to estimate depth of field, gone is the ability to easily focus at the hyperfocal point. All you can readily tell is that the lens is focused at about 10 feet.

The distance scales on autofocus lenses have clearly been gimped. Why?

Decreased need is certainly a major factor, though I’d argue that in its current state the autofocus distance scale is virtually useless. In fact I’d go so far as to suggest that the lens makers should save the few dollars it costs to put the currently useless distance scales on lenses and remove them completely.

The real tragedy is that both hyperfocal focusing and estimating depth of field aren’t useless even with autofocus cameras. Yet the ability to easily do those things easily has been removed and no functionality has replaced them. Considering the advanced nature of current cameras, it should be easy to focus the camera at the hyperfocal point at the push of a button, or display on one of the many LCDs (my vote goes for the shutter/aperture /ISO spot in the viewfinder when pressing the DoF preview button) the depth of field in some user configurable units. It’s just software, yet it’s not been done.

Needless, to say I don’t find modern distance scales very useful. If you use the distance scales on modern autofocus lenses regularly, leave a comment, I’d love to know.