Which brings me to gloves.

Just about every photographer I know has their preferences. One uses ski glove liners, another has rather nice tactical gloves (though, they do hold up better than softer fabric gloves when it comes to moving stuff). For the longest time used a crappy pair of knit things that didn’t work for crap. However after last years unusually cold winter, I thought it was time to do something about keeping my poor fingers warm.

When looking for gloves I had a few objectives in mind. First, they had to be reasonably warm, but not super hot. Like I said, it doesn’t get that cold down here and the last thing I want is to have to keep taking them off and putting them on.

Second, is that they need to have some grip. My 1D’s portrait grip is mostly covered by a Really Right Stuff L plate, which means most of the grip is smooth anodized aluminum not grippy rubber.

Finally, I really wanted something that didn’t require removing the whole glove to use my iPhone or iPad in the field. This means either “removable mitten” covers, or removable finger tips.

Which brings us to Target, and the Champion C9 gloves they carry. The gloves come in a number of styles, including both removable finger tip versions and finger-tip-less mitten cover versions. Some have grippy rubber coatings, others don’t and this is something I’ll be coming back to.

Style 1: Grippy is Good

I’ll call this style 1 for this purpose, the SKU on the label inside is 044000084 if that helps, I can’t currently find them on Target’s website, but that’s where I got them.

These are your basic light weight gloves. Other than the rubberized palms, they don’t have any fancy features or frills. That said, the rubberized grip holds quite well. Moreover, compared to the second style of gloves, they are slightly warmer.

In fact, the only real problem I have with these gloves is that to use my phone (any touch screen phone or tablet actually) I have to take them off.

Though they’re considerably better than the plain knit gloves I use to use; however, they’re not perfect. That said, if I didn’t have a touch screen phone, I don’t think complain at all.

Style 2: Removable Finger Tips

The second style I found is Target product #061-07-0830. These are listed online (see the link) and have a couple of features I kind of like over the first style.

First, they have removable finger tips on the thumb and index finger. You can work a touch screen phone or tablet without removing the glove, you just have to pop the finger tip off and have at it.

The second selling point for me was the long wrists. They’re long enough that they tuck under a jacket well which is ever so slightly warmer for when I’m pushing the edges of what I consider comfortable temperatures.

The only real problem with these is the complete lack of grip on the palms. However, this is a problem that can be readily solved.

Fixing the Grip Issue

The one problem with these gloves is that they lack any grip, fortunately it’s relatively easy to add grip to fabric. There are a number of guides that suggest buying a product called Plasti Dip, made by Performix, and using a syringe and a toothpick add dots in a regular pattern over the surface you wish to add grip to. This certainly works. However, maybe I’m just way to lazy to bother to grid out by hand 2 palms worth of grip dots on 1/4″ centers, and hope it didn’t look horrible.

The solution I came across is another product made by Performix called Super Grip. It’s a clear spray on rubber coating that’s designed to be used on fabric, moreover it’s flexible and washing machine safe. Their stated application is making rugs and bath mats non-slip, on smooth floors.

Prep for the application was simple enough, make sure the gloves were clean, mask off the area not to be covered with blue painters tape, insert a cardboard “hand” cutout in the glove to hold it’s shape, and spray.

With the Super Grip applied, the style 2 gloves aren’t quite as grippy as the first pair, but they’re more than grippy enough to hold my 1D and a 24-70/2.8 by the portrait grip (with the a fore mentioned L-plate) without worrying about it slipping out of my hand. Plus with the finger tips removable I can actually work my cell phone while I’m in the field, which is a huge plus for me.

Conclusions on the Gloves

I’ve ditched my old gloves for the the second style with the a fore mentioned fix of spraying the palms with Super Grip. That said, I don’t think either pair are the end all be all of light weight gloves for photography, especially since they have to be modified to work well.

Are they the end all be all solution to lightweight gloves? Not really. They’re considerably better IMO than basic knit ski gloves/ski glove liners, but they aren’t really top shelf material either. Moreover, I have no idea how durable they’ll ultimately end up being.

Unfortunately, they seem to be a Target specific product so sourcing them may be difficult if you don’t have a Target stores in your area.

The mark of progress brings us again to the start of the public beta for the next version of Adobe’s Photoshop Lightroom. Now before you run off and download it and think, “Oooh new tool time!”, keep in mind this is a beta program. What that means for you non-computery photographers is that it’s not feature complete, functionally complete, may damage or destroy your files, wont perform as well as the final version, and most important may not be stable or even usable at all.

Moreover, like they did with the Lightroom 3 public beta, Adobe has elected to not include catalog conversion functionality, so you can’t import a copy of your existing Lightroom catalog and start playing. In fact, Adobe recommends that you work on copies of your images as well. Nor, does Adobe guarantee that any catalog created by the beta version of Lightroom 4 will be useable in the final version.

In short, this is a preview of the cool tech we can expect to see in Lightroom 4 when it’s actually released, probably sometime later this year.

What’s New?

Well it wouldn’t be a new version if it didn’t have new features. The high level list is something like this.

• Robust Video Support
• Manage images by location with the Map Module
• Simplified Basic Adjustments
• Powerful new Shadow & Highlight controls
• Additional local adjustments including Noise Reduction and White Balance
• Soft Proofing Reinvented
• Elegant Photo Book creation
• Email from directly within Lightroom
• Publish videos directly to Facebook or Flickr
• Enhanced DNG workflows
• Adobe Revel export workflow

The nice thing is some of those categories expand into a pretty significant pile of new functionality. Take “Robust Video Support” which actually includes limited editing functionality, as well as basic color and exposure corrections.

Jumping Right In

If there’s one thing I can say straight up, the public beta for Lightroom 4 is very much beta software. I’m not talking Google’s perpetual beta-until-the-word-beta-doesn’t-mean-anything. I’ve had tremendous stability issues running this on my machine (Windows 7 Pro 64-bit). Looking at it wrong will crash the beta for me, which makes it rather hard to actually spend time working with it.

On top of that, even though the functionality exists, one sure fire way I’ve been able to crash LR4 Beta has been to try an export images. Obviously this is something I really want to be able to do, as even in the “limited” state LR4 is in, many of the new development tools work really well. Moreover, they really do streamline the development process and make getting to a final image really smooth.

Develop 4.0

Of all the functionality that Lightroom brings to the table, I spend the most of my time in the Develop module working on my images.

The revised basic pallet.

Adobe has simplified the “Basic” panel options removing the confusing brightness slider, and breaking the histogram into 6 distinct “bands”. From brightest to darkest, whites, highlights, exposure, shadows, and blacks.

The new controls make it much cleaner and easier to adjust the various ranges. In fact, it’s so much faster and cleaner that, I find that after a mere 15 minutes using the beta, I miss the controls when I go back to Lightroom 3.

The only thing that’s partially confusing to me is the layout of the sliders when using them. In the histogram they are organized as blacks, shadows, exposure, highlights, then whites when moving from left to right. The sliders themselves are organized in a much less “intelligible way”. I can understand moving exposure out of the more fine grained controls, but I think Highlights, shadows, whites and blacks, should be stacked from brightest to darkest. In other words, I think they should be listed as whites, highlights, shadows, blacks, from top to bottom. Of course, this is still beta software and the final version may not reflect the current ordering.

The second most notable change is that the sliders are now organized as “- 0 +” with 0 centered, as opposed to the previous 0-100. And this is the bit that threw me for a minute.

If you take, for example, blacks; in the Lightroom 3, it was normally set to something like 5, with a lot of room to shift the black point darker (i.e. increasing the number to 100). In Lightroom 4 beta, it can be shifted either way. Dragging the black towards the left (-), makes the blacks blacker (raises the black point), dragging the blacks to the right (+) makes the blacks lighter (lowers the black point).

It works real intuitively once you first grab it an use it but is kind odd at first. Moreover, it gives an unprecedented—in Lightroom at least—level of control in how you’ll be able to manipulate things in LR4 over how you have to now.

Soft Proofing

Soft proofing gamut warnings enabled, areas in blue are out of gamut on the current display, areas in red are out of gamut in the target color space, and magenta areas are out of gamut in both color spaces.

We’ve only been asking for this for well as long as Lightroom has been available, and Adobe has finally added it, and so far as I can tell done a very good job with it.

Soft proofing is handled in the develop module, and can be as little as gamut warnings or be taken as far as full corrections using specially tagged virtual copies.

Clicking the soft proofing button (or using the ctrl+s/command+s(?) shortcut) gives access to two different gamut warnings. The first is a gamut warning for the display you’re using. In other words, Lightroom will highlight (in blue) where the image’s colors are out of gamut on your display (i.e. you can’t see these colors).

The second, is the destination proof which is highlighted in red. This can be configured to sRGB for the web, Adobe RGB, or any of your printer profiles.

Since soft proofing has been added to the develop module, Adobe has also added a mechanism for tagging virtual copies with the color space they’re rendered for. That is you will now be able to create a color space specific virtual copy, make your alterations needed for the target device, then print or export that. Fortunately, creating the virtual copy can be done automatically when you enter the soft proof mode.

I should note, some things can get a bit wonky. I’m not sure yet whether the ICC profile is invalid, or the wrong version, or if it’s something else, but I have found something can get a bit wonky. For example, using the profile provided by Canon for the Pixma Pro 9000 II and Canon’s Photo Paper Platinum, Lightroom thinks the paper color is yellow as shown in the picture below (the background color sounding the image by default should be the same color as the paper you’re using).

Bad ICC profile, or something in the beta reading the ICC profile wrong? Either way, the background shouldn't be yellow.

RGB Adjustment Curves

Also long on the feature request list, RGB adjustment curves. Granted these haven’t been high on my wish list, but it’s nice to have. The only real problem is that the size of curves adjustment are continues to remain considerably smaller than it is in Photoshop.

However, there is a in photo adjust tool which makes it somewhat easier to tweak using the image as the point selection.

Chromatic Aberration Removal

Perhaps not a top billed selling point, but lens corrections and CA removal is one of those tiny touches that goes towards a far more professional looking result. Lightroom 3 introduced profile based lens corrections including profile based CA removal. Adobe has determined that they can do a better job removing CA from images algorithmically instead of though a profile, and thus there’s now a new setting in the Lens correction pallet to use the new CA removal algorithms.

Maps 1.0

Geo locating images has become an increasingly important, never mind useful tool for photographers, both professional and amateur. The problem in the current iteration of Lightroom is that to include or use geolocation information, a 3rd party utlity or plugin needs to be consulted.

The trick has always been adding location data to your images. Until recently, GPS support was largely relegated to professional level cameras and even then with expensive addons. Nikon has been quite progressive, with the relatively inexpensive GP1 (supported by all of their current cameras from the D3100 up). Canon is slowly starting to follow suit, at least producing a reasonably compact GPS module for their new 1DX, but for the most part lacks any form of built in support.

One way to work around the limited support from the camera companies is to carry a stand alone GPS receiver that exports GPS track files (.gpx). With that, and some special software, and now Lightroom 4, you can add the GPS data in after the fact by syncing file capture times with the track file position times.

I haven’t been able to play with this yet, but it’s on my short list if I get some time.

Custom locations can be used to group images based on a their proximity to a given point.

The Maps module also adds support for custom locations that can be used to group images based on their proximity to a given point. For example, in the above image I’m creating a custom location for Walt Disney World. Once that’s created, any image that is geotagged with coordinates inside the circle (partially cut off) will be accessible though that saved location similar to how categories can span multiple capture dates.

Moreover the saved locations can be used to generate private locations which will force Lightroom to remove the geotagging information on all images that are exported that are in that location. This way you can put say a mile radius circle around your home, or something like that and not have to worry about that information making it’s way to Flickr.

Additionally to satisfy the people who don’t want any location data revealed in their exports, there’s an option to remove all location data from all photos in the export menu. So even if you’re not interested in telling everyone else where you took your images, you can still keep track of them internally.

Rounding out the Location module is the ability to add location data to images in a point and click way, as well as import and apply GPX track files to images. I’m hoping to revisit this when I get a chance to do some GPS tracking.

All told, I’m pretty confident that the GPS module is going to be something that pushes me towards properly generating GPS data for my images. Being able to quickly look at images based on where they were shot, and keeping track of that appeals to my need for OCD metadata.

Video 2.0

Lightroom 3 introduced the ability to catalog video in addition to photographs. Lightroom 4 expands on this ever so slightly, providing the ability to control white balance and exposure in the video, as well as being able to trim starting and ending time from the video.

Unfortunately video is still something that I haven’t had the opportunity to get into in any serious way, so the functionality of Lightroom 4 is largely untestable to me at the moment. I did, however, import a clip I had and the manipulations can, in the beta, be made to though the quick develop panel in the loupe view.

Unfortunately, that’s about the end of my ability to test the video capabilities, which means I have no idea how well LR4 will integrate into something like Adobe Premier or whether you’ll have to maintain two different import workflows for dealing with SLR video.

Books 1.0

Photo books are for sure a very nice way to present your material, either to clients or as a keepsake/gift for friends and family. Adobe has recognized that and included a streamlined book creation module in LR 4.

The beta current integrates with Blurb or can produce a press ready PDF. The software includes page layouts for image only as well as text pages, though at least in it’s current beta form it does lack any form of spell checking; meaning you’ll still want to compose your text in a proper word processor and past it into LR for the book.

Conclusions, for Now

Adobe’s public beta of Lightroom for gives us a glimpse of some very cool things coming down the pipeline. However, in it’s current form it’s not meant to be used in production work. It’s also very slow, buggy, and unstable. These are characteristics of all pre-release/beta software, and should not be considered against the Lightroom 4 when it’s finally released.

I’ve tried very hard to experiment with the functionality that’s currently available Lightroom 4 Beta, but due to the nature of the beast, some things are necessaraly under discussed by virtue of the difficult I’ve had getting them to work. For example, exporting an image from the beta is a sure fire way to get it to crash on my machine, however, I’ve spoken to other people trialing the beta and they’ve had no problems at all doing the same thing. Again, this is the nature of the beast.

Suffice to say, from what I have been able to play with in Lightroom 4′s first public beta, I’m very excited to see where Adobe is taking Lightroom.

As for when we’ll see the final release version of Lightroom 4, that’s anybody’s guess at the moment. On one hand Adobe doesn’t comment on their intended release date. On the other, depending on the feedback they get during the pre-release testing process, the date may need to be moved. Suffice to say, if my memory serves me, Lightroom 3 Beta 1 was released in October of 2009 with the first real release version following in June of 2001. Given that, I think we should be expect to see Lightroom 4 come out sometime in fall of this year.

Want to play with Lightroom 4′s first public beta yourself? Download it from Adobe Labs here.

Some people would argue that in the brave world of digital, filters are obsolete nonsense that should be left in the garbage along with film. Though it’s true that some filters certainly can be dumped, there are many that are still useful, most notably among these are neutral- and graduated-neutral density filters, and to do that right, you need some kind of filter holder.

Rectangular Filtes

Why use rectangular filters instead of screw in ones?

Rather simply this allows the graduation in graduated ND filters to be positioned where the composition requires it instead of forcing the composition to a fixed position. Since the only filters that are really needed anymore, aside from circular polarizers, are graduated ND filters, the ability to position them based on where the scene demands it is fundamental.

To me there’s no question as to whether you should use rectangular filters or not; the only question is what size do you need?

Rectangular filters come in a verity of sizes, Cokin brands these as A, P, Z and X, in order from smallest to largest.

The A series filters are largely aimed at compact and point and shoot cameras. They will work acceptably with small lenses that aren’t especially wide angle on something like the 4/3rds platform or most P&S that can take filters.

The P series are by far the most commonly used for SLR class cameras. Though popular, the P series filters, have limitations on how wide the lens can be before they start causing problems. For example, I find that anything wider than about 24mm (15mm on a crop camera) will see significant vignetting from the filter holder in the images.

The X-Pro series are aimed at especially large format and extremely wide-angle situations (8×10 film, broadcast cameras).

Z-Pro Series (4 in. Filters)

Slotting in between the P series and X-Pro series is what Cokin calls Z-Pro. The filters are 4” wide, which is actually a more standard photographic and cinematographic size than the more widely known P filters.

4 inch filters can be had from a number of companies (Cokin, Hitech/Formatt, Lee, and Signh-Ray to name a few). For the most part the filters are interchangeable between 4” systems, the only real exceptions are for polarizers. This was no small part to my decision to go to the slightly more expensive 4” Z-Pro system.

The other benefit of the larger 4 in. Z-Pro filters is that they vignette less on ultra-wide angle lenses. This was actually the primary motivation for not going with a cheaper P sized system. When using my Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM, P sized filters had to be held in front of the lens at most focal lengths simply to avoid vignetting from the filter holder. With the Z-Pro system, the problem is reduced dramatically, though not completely eliminated.

The Z-Pro Filter Holder

Cokin’s Z-Pro filter holder is an amazing simply concept. It’s made from a combination of 3 different basic pieces held together by brass screws to form a very flexible solution. Show below is a completely disassembled Z-Pro Holder.

Components of the Cokin Z-Pro holder.

In the normal configuration, there are 3 filter slots on the front, 2 for normal thickness filters, and one for Cokin’s thicker circular polarizer. The springy plastic bits that hold the filter in place provide enough pressure that the wider first slot doesn’t have to have the spacer removed for normal filters either.

The back side, is a single slot. In “normal” use the single slot on the back is fitted over the adapter ring that you screw into your lens’s filter threads.

However, for very wide angle lenses, the whole situation can be reversed in the field. Making the 1-slot side the “front” and the 3-slot side the “back”. So long as 1 filter is all you need, there’s no need to tear down the filter holder in the field to use it on an ultra-wide angle lens.

Moreover, a little creativity can get you 2 filter slots for an wide-angle lens. Simply put the adapter ring in the rear most slot of the 3-slot side, and screw the whole assembly onto your lens.

In contrast, many of the other 4” filter holders, have less flexibility in the way the holder can be mounted, and as a result have to be taken apart to adapt to ultra-wide lenses where vignetting from the holder is a problem.

However, in the end, this flexibility ultimately ended up being the biggest problem I have with the holder.

When using high-power ND filters, like a 10 stop (ND3), it’s critically important to have a good light seal between the ND filter and the lens. In short, this means the filter has to be in the rear most position and this is where the problem comes.

The Cokin Z-Pro holder with a 10 stop ND filter in the rear most slot. You can see how the core has to be reversed to stop the bottom two pins (covered by the filter) from interfearing with the filter.

The Z-Pro holder center’s itself on the lens by way of 3 plastic pins; 2 in the bottom and 1 in the top. The arrangement of the pins means that to completely cover the lens ring, the core part of the filter holder has to be used backwards, not that this poses a significant problem in and of itself. However, the required arrangement to get that seal also means you can’t do the whole reverse the holder on a wider lens and still use the filters.

The Z-Pro holder (note the core part is reversed) mounted to a camera via the threaded ring. All of the mounting pins are fully depressed to the rear.

It seems clear to me, that Cokin was hoping to make the holder work in a way that was quickly reversible without having to completely disassemble it, the arrangement causes some issues. Moreover, I think a few mm of thickness could have been shaved off with a single-single direction core piece that required disassemble to shorten.

The second complaint is that if the plastic “springy” tabs are kept compressed for any length of time, they deform. In fact, the pair of “springy tabs” that are on the mount side of my holder has become less “stiff” simply because I kept a filter ring in them for a couple of days. Now consider, that while that may sound like a bad idea, the slots are 2.75mm thick, the adapter ring is 2mm thick, as are most filters.

Pros & Cons

Pros

• Cheaper than the Lee Holders
• Reconfigurable for various lenses
• Holds up to 3 filters out of the box

Cons

• Mounting system makes using high powered ND filters harder than it needs to be
• The “springs” that hold the filters can deform and become less secure with age

Conclusions

Even now in the digital age, some filters are still useful tools and the rectangular filters and their requisite holders are still the most flexible way to deal with neutral density filters.

To me the only real question is what size holder you should get. Though it would be easy to simply jump on the more inexpensive “Cokin P” sized filters, the 4” (i.e. Cokin Z-Pro) filters are considerably more flexible and are produced by a number of companies.

As for Cokin’s Z-Pro holder? It works, and there’s not much else that needs to be said. It may not be as easily flexible as it seems like it should be, but at least it’s not any worse than anyone else’s is.

I’ve been using this lens for a little less than a year now, which is just long enough that I’m comfortable writing about it.

Like my other lens reviews, I intend to focus more on the ergonomics of day-to-day use than on optical performance. This is a conceit I must make for lack of money or equipment—optical benches are just so stupidly expensive. I’m also uncomfortable just making it up, or at least pretending that what I say has any objective meaning. What’s tack sharp to someone else may be a mushy mess to me, and vice versa. If you want hard numbers, I suggest you do what I do and head over to DXO Mark’s page for this lens.

The 70-200mm focal range has been the “pro” grade mid- to short-telephoto lens space for as long as I can remember camera companies making pro-grade zoom lenses. These lenses sacrifice 100mm on the long telephoto end that their consumer grade 70-300mm cousins have to insure the image quality is pro level. In fact, it’s only been recently that advancements in optical design have allowed for comparative quality 70-300 lenses; even then, there are still compromises.

Which 70-200 is right for me?

Canon’s 70-200mm range is a venerable smorgasbord of choice. Canon has elected to produce 4 variations on the theme, varying in max aperture (either f/2.8 or f/4) and inclusion of image stabilization. Quite honestly, I think this was a brilliant move, as it’s placed high quality lenses from $700 to $2600 and leaving the photographer to choose the features they want based on their needs and budget.

The advantage here is that you can avoid paying premiums for features that may be unnecessary. Don’t need to shoot in low light? The f/4 models will save considerable weight and money. Is all your work in a studio with strobes? The f/2.8 version without IS will save big money over the IS version and still get you the fast aperture for smooth buttery backgrounds.

The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM

Size, Build, and Handling

This brings us to the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, unlike its f/2.8 brethren the f/4L IS tips the scales at only 1.7lbs. (760g) and is a mere 3 inches in diameter and 6.8 inches long. By comparison, the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM weighs 3.2 lbs. (1490g) and is 3.5 inches in diameter and 7.8 inches long.

Standing next to Canon's EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM, very similar in size to their 70-200mm f/2.8Ls.

The smaller size and weight means two things. First, the lens can bTe hand held longer and easier than the larger f/2.8s. Second, and more importantly, the lens will fit in the secondary lens compartments of more bags than the f/2.8 versions will.

When I was writing about Think Tank’s StreetWalker Pro backpack, I noted that 7 inches is about the ideal depth for a bag, as most primes under 200mm and small zooms will fit in that space. In my StreetWalker Pro, I can carry this lens in one of the side lens slots instead of having to give up the main compartment. As a result, I can pack 2 bodies and a 70-200/2.8 or 100-400 in the main compartment and this lens in the side compartment with room to spare.

Loaded up in a StreetWalker Pro, it's may not look like it, but the bag closes just fine and the 70-200 isn't crushed in the slightest.

The control’s follows Canon’s pro style design traits; the focus ring is at the front and the zoom ring to the rear. The both the zoom and focus rings are wide and rotate smoothly. Like most Canon lenses, focus can be set past infinity, which is something to watch out for when focusing manually. Additionally, like other full-time manual capable USM lenses, the focus ring will rotate indefinitely, without a little more resistance indicating that the lens elements have reached the ends of their movement.

The EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM is an internal focus and internal zoom lens; its length never changes regardless of focus or zoom position. Moreover, because of that the filter-rings are essentially part of the outer lens barrel and don’t rotate, which is good for creative filters like polarizers and split ND filters.

Unfortunately, there is one negative to the front filter rings. At 67mm, they are 10mm smaller than the filter rings on Canon’s other pro lenses. If you’re like me, that means a 67mm to 77mm step-up ring is in order. I’d also consider ordering a rubber lens hood, like this one, since you won’t be able to use the Canon one while using a CPL either.

A side effect of this is that it’s easy for Canon to weather seal the lens, and in fact this is a dust and weather sealed lens. It’s not waterproof, only water resistant. Submersion is flat out, but rain isn’t a problem. Also, like most Canon lenses, a front filter is needed to complete the weather sealing.

There is a groove for an optional tripod mount. The most appropriate part is the Canon Tripod Mount A II (W); the W indicates that it’s white, as there’s a black version as well. Strictly speaking, the lens is small and light enough that it’s not necessary to use a tripod ring with it. Unfortunately, clearance between the tripod ring and a gripped body is minimal.

With the tripod ring attached in the normal position, there's not a lot of room for fingers on a vertical grip.

Like other L lenses, it comes with a Canon ET 74 lens hood in the box. The ET 74 hood is a simple circular hood not a petal hood like the f/2.8 versions use. The hood attaches via a plastic bayonet system. Though tight out of the box, my experience with other Canon lenses leads me to it to loosen up as the “nibs” wear down through use.

Additional external controls include an AF/MF, focus limiter, and stabilizer activation and mode switches. They are located between the focus and zoom rings for easy access. The switches are Canon’s flat design and are relatively stiff, so they shouldn’t change accidentally.

Canon claims the image stabilizer is good for 4-stops. In my experience, it does a very good job of reaching the advertised rating. Like Canon’s other non-super-telephoto stabilized lenses, the IS system isn’t smart enough to detect whether it’s on a tripod or not. For maximum image quality when shooting from a tripod, the IS system should be turned off manually. Finally the IS system has 2 modes, mode 1 and 2, which must be manually selected depending on need.

Mode 1 is best for static subjects, it compensates for shake in all directions. Mode 2 is the “panning mode”, where the system only compensates for movement in the axis perpendicular to the direction of the pan. Like all optical stabilization systems, there are hard limits to what it can actually deal with. For example, it won’t make tack sharp images from a moving vehicle on a bumpy road.

Optical Performance

The lens consists of 20 elements in 15 groups, including 1 Fluorite element and 2 Ultra-low dispersion elements. The combination of UD and Fluorite elements mean that CA is well controlled; I don’t see any worth talking about in my images. DXO Mark has measured the lens’s CA at 6 microns; you won’t see it if you’re not using a very high-density crop sensor (7D, 60D, T3i) even then it will be minimal.

The exotic elements also help keep distortion under control. I use the built in profiled distortion correction in Lightroom 3 and with some lenses you can really see a difference turning it on and off, not so much here. DXO Labs backs that experience up, measuring the distortion on average at less than 0.5%.

Resolution is superb too, the lens easily out resolves my workhorse 1D mark 3, as well as my 40D backup. This is easily one of the sharpest lenses I’ve owned or used. Though like any other subjective qualification of lens performance, you should take this with a grain of salt.

Mobile resolution chart, also test AF tracking performance, sometimes. (click for 1:1 crop)

The low distortion and chromatic aberration coupled with the lens’s resolving power, allows this lens to be effectively paired with Canon’s teleconverters. With a 1.4x teleconverter the lens becomes a 98-280mm f/5.6, with the 2x it becomes a 140-400mm f/8 lens.

Normally I’d avoid using a teleconverter with a zoom lens. They magnify the optical flaws in any given lens, and image quality decreases rapidly. A better teleconverter helps, but only to a point; on some lenses, especially zooms, the loss of image quality always outweighs any gain in reach. This lens is one of the exceptions. In my experience, it’s virtually impossible to tell that there was a teleconverter involved by looking at the images alone.

Though a 1.4x teleconverter reduces the aperture by a stop, to f/5.6, the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM will continue to focus on all Canon bodies. Moreover, AF performance doesn’t appear to be appreciably slower when paired with a TC. Even in low contrast environments, like the one show below, I was able to snap the bird into focus more than fast enough to get the shot.

Even with a Canon 1.4x II teleconverter, there's no noticeable degradation in image quality. (click or 1:1 crop)

Speaking of autofocus, the lens has a 2-position focus limiter. The options are the full range of 1.2m to infinity and the reduced range of 3.8m to infinity. Using the 3.8m setting cuts focus travel, and this acquisition time, dramatically. Additionally, in the 3.8m mode, most cameras shouldn’t need to hunt due to defocus anyway.

The minimum focus distance is 3.94 feet (1.2M) resulting in a maximum magnification of 0.21x. With the 1.4x TC magnification is increased to .31x; with the 2x TC, 0.5x. The table below shows the magnifications and working distances with various extension tubes.

This isn’t a macro lens by any stretch of the imagination, though it is possible to get close to 0.5x magnification a number of ways making it at least usable in that fashion in a pinch.

TL;DR Conclusions

In short, what I’m saying is this is a very good lens. It’s as sharp or sharper than the EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM, and on par with the superb EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM (the new one), all the while being considerably lighter and smaller than any other f/2.8 70-200. Compared to the consumer 70-300s, it’s far better lens optically, and it has the advantage of being weather sealed.

The only real alternative worth considering from Canon is their new 70-300mm f/4-5.6L. Image quality is near enough between the two that you’re not taking a major hit, though the 70-200 is a constant f/4 lens and doesn’t extend when zoomed.

Arca-Swiss is perhaps best known for the for the dovetail quick release system they developed, which has since become the de facto standard for high-end photographic quick release systems throughout the industry. However, they’re no newcomer to the industry, having been a large format view camera manufacturer since the 1950s, and more importantly manufacturing ball-heads for those cameras since the introduction since 1964. The Monoball Z1 is the latest descendent of that line of tripod heads.

Without a good tripod head, there’s little point to using a tripod at all, especially the more expensive carbon fiber ones. Pair a wobbly low-end head with an expensive carbon fiber tripod, and you may as well have saved your money on the tripod; your camera will vibrate just as much as if you had a weak tripod.

The natural question then is, “what makes a good tripod head?”

Capacity

I would argue that stability or rigidity is the paramount requirement. All the fancy control schemes in the world don’t amount for a hill of beans if the head can’t keep your camera pointed where you pointed it and do so without undue vibration.

So how do you measure the strength of a tripod head? Well short of buying them and testing them until they break, you’re at the mercy of the manufacturers and their “load capacity” ratings. Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, there’s no standard for what it measures exactly, how it’s measured, or what it represents. Suffice to say, for what we have, it’s not very good. I tend to take load capacity with a grain of salt and aim for something with a liberal amount of overkill just to be sure.

That said, while I have no idea how conservative Arca-Swiss is in their load capacity rating, they have the overkill in droves. The Z1 is rated for 132-lbs (60Kg). That said, the Z1 is derived from ball-head’s intended for large format view cameras so there’s probably some truth to it. The table below compares the Z1’s rated weight capacity with those of other similar ball-heads.

In practice, a better way of looking at it might be the amount of torque the head can resist. This is considerably harder information to find published, in fact, only Markins publishes a torque rating. That said, due to a change in manufacturing around the time I bought my Z1, Wimberley was testing and selling Z1s to insure they wouldn’t fail when used with their Sidekick head. According to their testing, my Z1 was tested in excess of 200 inch-pounds (~4.9Nm) of torque. That matches Markin’s ratings for their Q20, which is in the same “load” class as well.

Build and Weight

For as much as the Z1 can hold, it doesn’t weigh a lot. Tipping the scales at 1.5 lbs (680g) with a QR clamp, it shaves almost 100 grams off its B1 predecessor. Fit and finish is very good as well, majority of the ballhead is matte finished metal, excepting the pan lock lever, tension scale, and the rubber grip on the Multifunction Knob.

All told, the build quality is every bit of what you’d demand from a $400 piece of equipment. More importantly, it’s sturdy enough that the head can take some pounding without breaking, even if Arca-Swiss says you should treat it like your cameras.

Range of Motion

The Z1 has independent control over the pan base and the ball’s orientation and the base can freely rotate though 360°. Additionally the ball can yaw though 360°. Pitch and roll motions are limited to ±45° from center, except when the neck aligns with the “portrait notch” where the ball can be rolled/pitched over 90° and rotated around it’s now horizontal axis.

In Use

Ball-heads pose a unique issue in their use and every manufacturer deals with it differently. What I’m talking about is the increase in torque applied to the ball as the load is moved off center, such as when tilting or rolling the camera. The increase in torque as a result of an off-centered load increases the amount of tension necessary to hold the ball in position, which can mean you have to continually adjust the tension setting when you’re using the head.

Arca-Swiss has attempted to get around this by using an aspherical ball. Instead of a perfectly round ball, the ball in the Z1 is more egg shaped (though it’s not visibly obvious). This has the effect of increasing the amount of tension in the clamping mechanism inside the ball-head as the ball leans over. As a result, the tension can be set once and the ball-head will hold the camera in position regardless of the orientation used. The aspherical ball does its job well enough too.

This may sound like a purely theoretical issue,  however, the ideal way to work with a ball-head is to adjust the tension once, so that the camera stays still when you let go, but can be moved around without having to release and reset the tension.

Controls

The Z1 has three controls, the Multifunction Knob, pan lock, and Friction Thumbscrew. Under normal use only two of these controls are ever used, the pan lock and Multifunction Knob. All of the controls are located on the left side of the tripod head, if you have the portrait notch facing towards you.

The Multifunction Knob is approximately 1” in diameter, and controls the “tension” on the ball head. Turning the knob clockwise (when facing the knob) increases the tension on the ball; turning it counter-clockwise reduces the tension. Adjustments are smooth and a whole turn gives quite a lot of control over the tension the ball is set to. Additionally, a user adjustable 13-position (0-12) scale can be set to your specific minimum tension range not that it’s useful in my experience but it’s a nice touch.

On the side of the Multifunction Knob is the Fiction Thumbscrew. The thumbscrew controls the minimum tension the Multifunction Knob can set. The friction thumbscrew, effectively sets the 0-tension point.

Arca-Swiss describes setting the friction thumbscrew as follows:

With the head tightened, mount the lightest combination of camera and lens you will regularly use.  Turn the small thumbscrew (located on the multifunction knob) by rotating it counter clockwise till it stops. Now turn the multifunction knob counter clockwise until you reach the desired minimum degree of friction. This can range from completely free or  to as little or as much drag as you desire.

The Friction Thumbscrew does contribute to one of the major problems some people experience with the Z1 and its predecessors, ball lockup. The ball isn’t actually frozen, though it appears that way. What’s actually happened is that the friction thumbscrew has tightened itself to the point that the Multifunction Knob can’t be turned and the tension decreased. The solution is simple enough, tighten the Multifunction Knob slightly, and then back the friction thumbscrew out. In an attempt to avoid this happening, I keep a piece of gaffer tape over the friction thumbscrew so it can’t be accidentally tightened or loosened.

The final control is the pan-lock. The current generation of the Z1 uses a small lever instead of a small knob. The pan-lock controls the fully independent panning motion of the head, and it doesn’t take much to set (pointed up) or release it (about a quarter turn). In fact I find this setup works very well on a tripod with a large base-plate, like the Gitzo’s Systematic series, where it would have been difficult to turn a knob and the plate is large enough that the lever can’t turn more than ~120°.

Though not an active control per-say, the base of the tripod has a rotation gauge built into it, along with 3 alignment points (white dots 120° apart on the non-rotating base). The major marks are in 15° increments, and minor marks are in 5° increments.

Camera Attachment

When it comes to attaching a camera there are a number of variations available with the Z1. There is a version with no quick release clamp, just a 1/4-20 threaded stud. That also happens to be the lightest version available at 635g.

Arca-Swiss offers both lever action and screw type clamps using their double-dovetail quick release system. This is the same QR system that Really Right Stuff, Wimberley, Markins, Kirk, etc. used as a base for their quick release clamps, and they are all generally speaking compatible with the Arca-Swiss clamps; both lever action and scew.

Arca-Swiss has gotten around the dimensional variations with a width adjustment mechanism in their lever-action clamp, and that will need to be adjusted for your brand of quick release plates prior to use.

Additionally, Arca-Swiss offers a double pan model that places a second pan block on top of the ball. This is especially useful for stitching panoramas where, the tripod can’t be leveled, or you don’t have a leveling base to level the head itself. Instead, the ball is used to level the top panning plate. The double pan versions can also be had in both lever-action and screw-type quick release clamps.

Additionally, the quick release clamps are secured with an M6 screw, and can be replaced with clamps like those made by Wimberley (as mine was), Really Right Stuff, or any other QR clamp that allows a screw to be driven down though it into the stem.

TL;DR: Verdict

The Arca-Swiss Z1 may not be the pinnacle of bullheads, but I think it’s darn close. In terms of strength versus weight, it’s hard to find something that exceeds it, with only the Markins Q20 coming close—at least based on published specs. Moreover, I’ve found the Z1 to be very low maintenance and highly reliable; it doesn’t require lubrication and only minimal cleaning, wipe down with a damp cloth.

All told, the Z1 is strong, precise, and smooth in its actions and movements. It’s a quality ball-head that will last for a lifetime.

Let’s be honest, it’s now 2011, this fall the EOS 1D mark 4 will have been out for 2 years, and the EOS 1D mark 3 will have moved well into “ancient history” status, at least as digital cameras go.

So why write a review now?

I know I won’t be shedding any new light on the imaging prowess of what is now a dated camera. In fact, even if I could, the time for that would have been Q1 of 2007, not now.

The truth is I’ve always had an interest in usability, especially in how it applies to camera designs. I was planning to write a series of articles discussing UI design as it applies to cameras and how their UIs could have been made better. In a sense, this is it, at least for the 1D mark 3.

On top of that, I find that usability and user experience are the mostly over looked when it comes to camera design, and more importantly reviews. Instead, they focus on the best image quality, frame rate, AF accuracy, or some other whiz-bang feature. Yet, nobody seems to ever talk about what was done right or wrong when it comes to talking about how the photographer interacts with the camera. That’s what I hope to contribute.

About the EOS-1D Mark 3

From 2007 until the end of 2009, the EOS-1D Mark 3 was Canon’s premier body for sports and low light photography. Equipped with a 10.1 megapixel sensor and capable of shooting 10 frames per second, it was the fastest firing still camera on the market.

Canon hoped the 1D-3 would continue its market leading position in sports and low light work for the foreseeable future; and for all practical intents and purposes, it was, though the foreseeable future was a scant 6 months. Of course, the D3 came out in fall of ’07 and changed everything, no longer was there a megapixel race it was now the ISO race and the rest, as they say, is history.

The EOS-1D Mark 3 marks the start of the 3^rd generation of Canon’s pro camera line. There are actually two 3^rd gen sibling cameras, the 10.1 megapixel EOS-1D and the 21.1 megapixel EOS-1Ds. Aside from the sensor; they are effectively the same camera in all other respects. In fact, other than the specifics about frame rate and sensor design and frame rate, everything else said here applies to the EOS-1Ds Mark 3 as well.

Canon’s EOS-1D cameras are built to meet the needs of professional photographers, and the 1D Mark 3 is specifically aimed at sports, action, and low light venues. This means that aside from rugged weather resistant construction, it had to be able to support high frame rates, fast accurate auto focus, and low noise levels at high ISOs.

Build

The camera is a “1 piece” design, meaning the vertical shooting grip is part of the body not separate. This eliminates any potential flex or debris intrusion between the body and the grip that can result in malfunctions. It also provides more internal volume for a larger more powerful battery.

Further, the chassis, mirror box, and exterior covers are all magnesium alloy. Unfortunately, magnesium alloys are heavier than plastic and there’s very little plastic on the EOS-1D body. All told, the Mark 3 is a beast; without the battery, the camera weighs 2.5 pounds, and pairing it with any of Canon’s f/2.8 L lenses, makes quite a decent sized anchor, metaphorically speaking. This is one camera where a good padded strap, or even better, ThinkTank Photo’s camera support straps is necessary for all day carrying.

All of the controls, body joints, and compartment doors are sealed with gaskets resulting in a fully weather sealed camera. However, don’t confuse that with being waterproof; the EOS-1D can take rain, snow, and spray, not a swim in a river.

The Mark 3 also uses a new 2300mAh lithium ion battery. The new battery is smaller, lighter, and more powerful than the NiMH battery used in the Mark 2. However, it’s also incompatible with the Mark 2 and earlier bodies. Fortunately, Canon has kept the same battery in the Mark 4.

Sensor, Processing, and Image Quality

The EOS-1D Mark 3 saw a 23% increase in resolution over its Mark 2 predecessor. Advances in sensor fabrication however, allowed Canon to maintain a similar sized photo-site even though the overall pixel size was reduced.

Improvements in sensor tech give the camera a base ISO range from ISO 100 to ISO 3200; 1 stop larger than the Mark 2’s ISO 100-1600, and does so without compromising the image quality. Expanded ISOs of ISO 50 and ISO 6400 are also available.

All ISOs, expect the expanded ones, are generated with analog amplification instead of digital manipulation. Further, the Mark 3 uses a dual layer analog amplification system (the same as Canon’s other high-end bodies) where intermediate ISOs are reached using a secondary amplification step. As a result, ISOs below ISO 800 show an unusual stair step pattern where +1/3 and +2/3 stop intermediates have more noise than the next full stop.

Read noise is an important consideration as it is the dominant noise in the shadow areas. Lower read noises produce cleaner shadows, and better images in inherently dark environments (such as dim indoor areas). The noise characteristics of the 1D-3 strongly suggest that for maximum image quality use only the full stop ISOs below ISO 800 and the lowest possible ISO past ISO 800.

The expanded modes are in camera numerical multiplications of the next closest ISO, not analog amplification. As a result, they lose 1-stop of dynamic range relative to their closest real ISO and gain no advantage in noise levels.

Some photographers recommend against using the expanded ISOs; they arguing that they are no better than underexposing[i] at the closest real ISO and adjusting in post. While it’s functionally the same, I disagree with the suggestion. The expanded ISOs have a real usability advantages by allowing you to keep the full range of the meter. Additionally the underexpose-and-adjust approach produces erroneous TTL flash powers. For example, using ISO3200 with -1EV exposure compensation will result in a 1-stop lower flash contribution.

For high ISO users the Mark 3 is, well, long in the tooth, as one would expect from a camera that’s almost 5 years old. However, like most cameras of the Mark 3’s generation, the camera is still very capable of producing solid quality images. Dynamic range is better than Canon’s 1.6x crop bodies, and on par with the 1Ds Mark 3, 1D Mark 4, and 5D Mark 2. At the $2000-2500 used price point, it’s easily worth looking at a used 1D mark 3 if you’re looking at a 7D.

The sensor is backed up by a pair of Canon’s DIGIC 3 processors. Combined the two processors are capable of handling roughly least 180 megabytes per second (MB/s) worth of data[ii], a nearly 100% increase over the Mark 2 system’s data rate. To put this in perspective, a high performance SATA disk drive, from a desktop computer, tops out at about 110MB/s.

The DIGIC processers are backed by high speed DDR SDRAM for buffer space and the 1D-3 can shoot approximately 30 RAW frames at 10 FPS before running out of buffer. To be honest, given the price of RAM these days, I’d really like to see larger buffers in professional cameras. It shouldn’t add much if anything to the cost, and in a high FPS body like the 1D would give much more flexibility to bursting. In fact, as it stands at 10 FPS you run out of buffer after a mere 3 seconds of shooting.

Finally, the sensor, sensor assembly, processing, and firmware in the Mark 3 provide a number of ancillary benefits to photographers. Perhaps most importantly, the 1D-3 provides two mechanisms for dealing with sensor dust; first, it’s the first Canon pro camera to have a self-cleaning sensor. In practice, the self-cleaning sensor alone goes a long way towards minimizing sensor cleanings. Secondly the 1D3 stores “dust delete data” that maps dust spots and allows Canon’s RAW converter to remove or at least reduce them when it processes the RAW files.

The Mark 3 also brought live view, to the professional SLR world. While, not always the most useful function it does aid in focusing with macro subjects or when the viewfinder is inaccessible.

Storage

Both Compact Flash (CF) and Secure Digital (SD) (including high capacity SDHC cards) flash cards are supported. However, write speeds aren’t what I’d call blazing fast. Even with the best cards currently available, the camera can barely push 15MB/s (or about 1-1.5 RAW frame per second) to a flash card.

The dual cards can be utilized in a number of ways, including; writing to both simultaneously, for in camera redundancy; writing RAW files to one and JEPGs to the other; or automatic failover when one is full.

What the camera can’t do, and a function I’ve yet to see any manufacturer implement, is a file level stripe across both cards. In other words, odd numbered files would be written to the first card and even numbered files to the second. This would allow the camera to write out twice as fast; increasing burst lengths, all be it only slightly, and cut buffer clear times in half.

The choice of supporting SD and CF formats strikes me as a bit bizarre as well. On one hand it’s gives photographers a choice on media, including the ability to use cheap readily available SD cards should they find themselves needing more media in the field.

However, I personally, I don’t care for SD cards in a professional setting. While their small physical size makes them ideal for compact cameras, small JPEG files make it easy to avoid changing cards. That small physical size works against them when changing cards, and changing cards is an inescapable fact of life when shooting RAW. Additionally, using two media types requires photographers to invest in two types of flash cards if they wish to have media available to remain fully redundant in the field.

Auto Focus

The Mark 3 also overhauled the autofocus and metering system to be sensitive enough to operate at 10 FPS as well. In fact, the EOS-1D Mark 3 was the first, and it and its Mark 4 successor still are the only, digital SLR without a fixed mirror that can shoot at 10 FPS without sacrificing functionality[iii].

In addition to increasing sensitivity, the new AF sensor added to and redistributed the cross-type AF points. Where the Mark 2 had 7 cross type AF points sensitive with lenses f/2.8 and faster located in a group in the middle of the grid; the Mark 3 increased the number to 19 cross type points and distributes them over the entire AF grid. Like the Mark 2, the central point retains cross type sensitivity with f/4 lenses, and is horizontal line sensitive with f/8 lenses.

Selectable AF points are highlighted in red.

One of the biggest changes from the Mark 2 is the reduction in selectable AF points. Only the 19 cross sensitive points are selectable, instead of all 45. The remaining 26 points are classified as “assist points” and are only available to the camera’s AF system when AF point expansion or auto point selection is enabled. What’s not clear though is whether this was a deliberate design “simplification” or one necessitated by the increased timing requirements needed to shoot at 10 FPS.

The new AF system and the increased sensitivity requirements did result in some teething problems, worse early cameras were hampered by a faulty sub mirror assembly that caused AF to become especially sloppy in bright environments and when using fast lenses. While the sub mirror assembly was quickly redesigned and the AF algorithms tweaked and updated, many photographers still don’t feel the EOS-1D Mark 3’s AF performance is up to par.

In my experience, AF accuracy is something of a mixed bag. While I’ve had my share of AF issues with the Mark 3, I have a very hard time narrowing them to the camera specifically and not user error. Moreover, some I can reproduce on other non-1D Canon bodies that have no known AF issues. The truth is, no matter how you cut it, trying to keep focus on a subject is while tracking it at 10 FPS is difficult. Further, some subjects can produce focus errors that can’t be controlled by the camera.

What is clear is that expecting every frame to be in focus all the time when shooting at 10 FPS is not realistic on this camera.

EOS-1D Mark 3’s auto focus system also introduced of the concept of autofocus micro adjustments. This gives users the ability to field-tune their camera to deal with minor errors in auto focus placement. The AF micro-adjust system provides ±20 steps, or approximately 2-1/2 depth of fields of adjustment. These adjustments can be stored on a per lens basis for up to 20 lenses, or as one setting for the camera alone. Lenses unfortunately are tracked by model not serial number, so while you may have multiple identical lenses with different adjustments, the camera will treat them all the same.

User Interface (UI) and User Experience (UX)

I find that one of the most important and often under discussed things in photography is the camera’s user interface design and subsequently the user experience. In fact, I’d say it’s the single biggest thing neglected in most camera reviews.

I came to the EOS-1D from what I consider to be the best designed camera UI, at least as far as shooting goes, on the market; the EOS 40D. In many ways, I find the user experience of the 1D to be a step backwards. It’s almost like the designers said, “Hey these guys are pros, they don’t need things to be simple or easy.”

A note on Bias

Bias is important to consider, while there are certain generally applicable guidelines in UI design, there are many things that are simply dependent on how each person is “wired.” Moreover, familiarity with a given system strongly influences the ability to be objective about it.

Simply put, I shoot with Canon cameras on a daily basis; and while I have some experience with Nikon, I have none with Pentax, Sony, or Olympus bodies. On top of that, quite honestly I like the way Canon cameras work. I’m one of those people that are wired to think just close enough to how Canon cameras work that they make sense to me. Further, what and how I shoot strongly dictates what functionality I think should be important. That’s my bias.

Control Layout versus Frequency of Use

When looking at UIs I consider two things; the accessibility of the physical controls on the body and how often that function is needed. The combination of accessible control placement and proper function mapping makes or breaks the user experience.

For example, consider the shutter release and the function of taking a picture. The act of taking a picture is the whole point of a camera; additionally, the ephemeral nature of the subject material, demands easy access to the physical control. In other words, not only is the function used a lot, but also needs to be very quick to access.

The physical implementation is a button directly under the index finger at the top of the grip. This places the index finger very near, if not on, the shutter release at all times. This, combined with the index finger’s inherent dexterity satisfies the demands the logical function of taking a picture places on the physical interface. As a result, the physical implementation of the shutter release matches the functional needs, resulting in a configuration that has a high level of usability.

That said the shutter release is an easy example. The hard part in designing the UI is placing lesser-used functions, as there is a point where what’s not used by some is heavily used by others and vice versa, but in either case, it’s not clear objectively which should be most important. Ultimately, the goal should be to balance those functions in such a way that everybody is “happy,” or at least as inconvenienced as little as possible.

I can’t afford to make this an exhaustive look at the 1D-3 user experience that would make a monstrously huge paper that would neither be fun to write or read. Instead, I’m going to try to highlight some general points and a few more detailed areas in the UX that I’ve found to particularly good or bad.

The General Control Layout on the 1D Mark 3

The EOS 1D Mark 3 uses Canon’s 2-dial control layout, though similar to the 5D or 40D the locations of some controls is different enough to have the potential to cause issues switching between bodies if one isn’t frequently used.

Changes to exposure settings are done though the main- and quick-command dials. These dials are also the primary means for navigating the menus and changing settings.

Like all Canon bodies, the main dial is vertically oriented and placed behind the shutter release. The orientation and location affect the ergonomics of the hand while holding the camera by rotating the top of the hand back or the bottom of the hand forward away from the body to some degree. Ultimately, the most comfortable/proper grip tends to keep the wrist straighter while allowing the arm to be pulled tight against the body.

The quick-command (secondary) dial is large and centrally located on the rear of the body such that it’s easily accessible by the thumb regardless of which grip is used. From an engineering perspective, Canon’s dual dial scheme has certain elegance to it. The large rear dial is equally accessible from both the normal and vertical grips, as a result, Canon can avoid the part costs and weather sealing for a 4^th control dial for the vertical grip without sacrificing usability.

The remaining physical controls are distributed on the left and right shoulders of the body and below the LCD on the back.

Exposure Controls

I’m going to define the exposure controls as the aperture, shutter speed, exposure compensation, shutter release, and ISO controls. Ideally, these are all located directly under finger, providing the fastest easiest access to them when shooting.

There are two general trains of thought on the mapping/use of dials in the camera industry. One takes its lead from mechanical cameras where the dials couldn’t be reprogrammed, i.e. the shutter speed control was mechanically linked to the shutter mechanism. The other is to set the dials’ function based on the shooting mode.

The former strategy has the advantage of building muscle memory linking the control to an effect, i.e. the front dial always controls the aperture. The latter, places whatever the main operation is (i.e. changing the shutter speed in shutter priority), on the main dial.

Ultimately, which strategy works best for any given person is largely dependent on the person. In fact, for some it’s a major reason prefer one platform to the other.

Canon’s cameras follow the second strategy, where the controls are mapped to dials based on the mode as shown in the table below.

The Mark 3 does provide two options for fine-tuning the behavior of the main and quick dials.

First, the function of the dials when in manual mode can be reversed using Custom Function IV-5. Personally, I think this should be an option on all of Canon’s bodies, and it’s sorely missed when I step back to my 40D. For me, in the cases where I’m working in manual the aperture is still the most important control, and my shutter speed is only being used to balance flash/ambient, which I feel is more akin to exposure compensation. Ultimately, though this is one of those “how you’re wired” kind of things that should be customizable just because it’s a few lines of code in the firmware and makes it possible to tailor the camera to your way thinking instead of the other way around.

The second option is Custom Function IV-6, which reverses the change made when turning the dials; i.e. when turning the main dial to the right, the shutter speed will decrease instead of increase. Again, this is about making the camera work how you think, not forcing you to think how the camera manufacturer does. However, regardless of what C.Fn IV-6 is set to, the dial controlling exposure compensation is not reversed (I’ll be coming back to this later).

ISO Selection

Digital photography changed how one treats the film/sensor’s sensitivity. Gone is films fixed ASA and the inability to change it until the end of the roll. Digital make it possible to make every exposure at a different ISO, giving photographers an unprecedented level of control. Unfortunately, many manufacturers have been slow to adapt and in some cases still haven’t figured it out.

Fortunately, Canon while slow hasn’t been standing still and the EOS-1D Mark 3 finally brought Canon’s pro digital UI in alignment with the new reality. The ISO control on the Mark 3 is a dedicated button placed between the main command dial and the top LCD. It’s easily accessible from the normal grip while shooting, allowing very quick ISO changes even during fast action.

Here is one of a number of situations where the vertical grip is disadvantaged compared to the regular one. The ISO control isn’t duplicated on the vertical grip, nor is there a way to program the FE-L, *, or AF-start buttons to control the ISO. Canon does provide a mechanism (custom function IV-3) to remap the rear dial to control the ISO instead of the aperture/exposure compensation, though I don’t think that’s ideal either.

Personally, I think the most useable solution would be to make the FE-L button user programmable. Canon made some strides in this direction with the EOS 7D, and EOS-1D Mark 4. However, in neither case does the camera allow the ISO to be assigned to the FE-L/M-Fn buttons. Again, I don’t follow these narrow limitations when it amounts to a few lines of code, and a lookup table that already has to be there.

Exposure Compensation

By default, exposure compensation is handled by the rear dial. However, the Mark 3 includes an “exposure compensation” button to the left of the ISO button the top panel. If it’s not already starting to become painfully apparent, this button too can’t be reprogrammed. As a result, if you don’t alter the function of the rear dial, or use the rear-dial lockout position on the power switch, it’s yet another button that’s in a prime spot that’s completely useless.

Shooting Functions on the Left Shoulder

There are 3 shooting function buttons on the left shoulder that have control over 5 functions: shoot mode, AF mode, Drive mode, meter mode, flash exposure compensation, and bracketing step size.

Coming from the EOS 40D, the decision not to locate at least some of these in front of the top LCD is a bit odd to me. However, there’s also a consideration for making the buttons in front of the top LCD glove friendly; something the close spacing on the 40D is decidedly not.

Fortunately, most of these functions aren’t things that need to be changed very often or quick. Well except for one, the flash exposure compensation.

Metering Modes / Flash Exposure Compensation

While not related at all Canon chose to combine them into a single dual function button; one of the only 2 shooting related dual function buttons.

The problem for me is flash exposure compensation. On the 40D, FEC is the “secondary” function for the ISO button. To me this makes a whole lot of sense, or at least it makes a whole lot of sense to have flash exposure compensation very accessible.

Why?

Because normal exposure compensation doesn’t affect the TTL flash exposure, flash exposure compensation does. Anybody doing TTL flash, as either primary light or balanced fill, has to consider the flash exposure in a way similar to how they would consider a normal exposure. That is, white subjects that cause the regular meter to under expose will also causes the flash metering to under expose.

On the 40D, it’s a simple matter to adjust the flash exposure when shooting by pushing the ISO button and adjusting the rear dial. Not so on the 1D.

There are workarounds, like using the dial on the rear of a 580Ex, but none are as elegant or fast as what you can do on the 40D.

Again, I’m not sure whether it’s a lack of imagination, or whether there’s a real case to be made against, having the ISO button pull double duty like it does on the 40D.

The Vertical Grip

The vertical grip provides portrait orientation users with a way to maintain the most stable and comfortable stance while shooting. Ideally, both the normal and vertical grips should provide equal usability for the exposure and at least some secondary controls. In practice, I’ve only seen this work in practice on some of Canon’s Rebels, and then largely, I think, only out of chance.

The vertical grip on the 1D-3 mirrors the shutter release, AF-Point select, Exposure Lock, AF start and main dial from the normal grip. Additionally it has a dedicated FE-L button, like the normal grip, though it’s been repositioned behind the main dial instead of next to the shutter release, so it’s not quite as accessible.

Though Canon has made some effort to insure that there is some level of functional equality between the normal and vertical grips, the vertical grip is clearly at a disadvantage in a few key ways. As I already mentioned, the ISO control isn’t duplicated, and there’s no way to remap one of the available controls even if it’s otherwise not used to control the ISO. The second major usability issue is AF point selection.

AF point Selection

The general mechanics of AF point selection on the 1D is similar to Canon’s other cameras. The AF point select button is the rightmost of the 3 buttons on the rear of the grip, and easily accessed by the thumb when shooting. Pressing the AF point selection button puts the camera in AF point selection mode, where either the dials or the multi-controller can be used to change the selected AF point.

Strike 1, Canon has elected to use an odd navigation scheme on the Mark 3. Instead of continuing what the Mark 2 did, which was subsequently brought back for the Mark 4, where the main and quick dials controlled motion in orthogonal directions; the Mark 3 has adopted something that’s a hybrid between that and the 9-point spiral system used on other Canon cameras.

I’ve shown the scheme the diagram below. When in a 9-point mode, the rear dials works similar to how either dial would work on a 9-point body and the main dial moves the point horizontally across the frame. When in 19-point mode, the main dial behaves the same as in the 9-point mode, however, for the rear dial, there are now 3 separate groups, left, middle, and right, and you must use the multi-controller or the other dial to move between them.

Suffice to say, while this isn’t hard to grasp, it is somewhat unintuitive.

The alternative is to use the multi-controller, and there are two ways to do so. One is to enter AF point selection mode (by pressing the AF point select button) then navigate with the dial. This is the default configuration for the camera.

The second is to set Custom Function III-9 to option 3, 4, or 5. In this mode, the multi-controller can be used to select an AF point any time the camera is in meter/shoot mode. If you have experience with Canon’s lower tier bodies, this might sound similar to Multi Controller Direct AF point selection. It is, but with one big caveat, pushing the AF point select button doesn’t set the camera to Auto AF Point select, rather it enters AF point selection mode.

Unfortunately, this is strike 2 with the AF system UX; the multi-controller incredibly good way to select AF points. However, because you can’t reach it from the vertical grip, nor is it duplicated for the vertical grip, vertical grip users are left without the fastest easiest way to select AF points.

One tangential thought on AF point selection; orientation linked AF points[iv]. No, they don’t exist on the Mark 3, but they should have. Actually, I don’t know why it’s taken this long for that to be implemented. Quick AF point selection when rotating form landscape to portrait is actually compounded on the 1D, since you can’t scroll from say the bottom middle of the left grid to the top of the middle grid with a single wheel, nor is it as simple as pushing the thumb stick to the side. It seems like this is yet another case of simple software features being ignored or not thought of because what existed was “good enough.”

Viewfinder

Coming from just about any other Canon digital body the viewfinder on the Mark 3 is simply heaven. It’s big, bright, beautiful, has 100% coverage and good magnification .76X. Additionally the viewfinder reduces distracting visual clutter by only showing the active AF point (in manual point selection mode), or no points at all (in automatic point selection mode).

Better yet, unlike Canon’s lower tier bodies, the viewfinder has a built in 5/8-inch of nose relief. As a result, you’re never mushing your nose into LCD as you would on a 5D or 40D. Moreover, while, you can get an eyepiece extender[v] for most of the lower tier bodies (7D excluded) using the extender makes their already small viewfinders 30% smaller.

That said the viewfinder falls down in a couple of ways. First, the exposure meter; as with most pro bodies, the exposure, and flash meter bars are rotated vertically. This gives them the room for a larger exposure meter (±3 stops instead of ±2) as well as making the exposure meter larger and easier to read.

Though something of a minor nitpick, it is one of the issues that I’ve had with the viewfinder and exposure compensation on the 1D. In my mind at least, I want to right side of the quick-command dial to move in the same direction the exposure compensation does. It doesn’t, in fact it’s reversed.

Is the reversal of the meter an issue? That’s the question, isn’t it? I have to admit, normally it doesn’t bother me, I can plug along just fine, as long as I don’t think about it. When I do think about it, ya it’s an issue. I ran into the same issue with a Nikon D2X at one time. I had reversed the controls so the aperture and dials worked similarly to my Canon; only that reverse the direction of the exposure compensation went versus the meter, boy did that mess me up. The same applies here, when I’m on autopilot, it’s all good, when I think about what I’m doing I just get hung up mentally.

TL;DR: Verdict

From a purely hardware perspective the 1D Mark 3 is outdated, and certainly not what you want to buy new, and definitely not at the Canon list price of $4000. However, Canon factory refurbished bodies can be had (if you can find them) for about $3000 and used bodies run for between $2000 and $2500. Buying older generation used gear can certainly get appreciably higher end gear for pennies on the dollar; and this is one case, where I don’t have any qualms recommending a used 1D Mark 3.

That said; while the user experience on the EOS 1D mark 3 is the best on a pro Canon body to date, it could be better. Unfortunately, the 1D mark 4 doesn’t change too much that I’ve noted, other than returning the dial-biased AF point selection to orthogonal axis and not the weird groups.

I may be begging for the question as to whether there’s something better out there.

Unfortunately, my experience is not really. While the user interface on the 5D mark 2 and 7D, or even the 40D or 50D, edges out the Mark 3 slightly in some ways; they’re missing features, especially in the AF system and when it comes to customizing the camera,. That’s not to say that the 5D Mark 2 or 7D are bad cameras, or that it’s even relevant for any other photographer. To me however, there’s no reason that many of the things that can be customized in the 1D mark 3 can’t be in the 7D or 5D mark 2.

Nikon’s, whose cameras I have the most experience with after Canon, has finally dealt with their technological deficiencies, and even exceeded Canon in image quality with recent releases. However, their UI is still largely the same as what was best for a film body 15 years ago, and that puts them at a big disadvantage form a UX perspective. Things that should be simple, like changing the ISO, are comparably more difficult.

When it comes to making sharp images with medium- to long- shutter speeds, there are 4 fundamental things that are necessary; a sturdy tripod, a good tripod head, a camera with mirror lockup, and a cable release. The RS-80N3 is Canon’s cable release for their mid- and high-end cameras including the X0D, 7D, 5D, and 1D lines.

What is a cable release? Fundamentally, a cable release is a button on the end of a cord that connects to the camera’s shutter release so that vibrations aren’t transited to the camera when pressing the shutter release. In the early days, with manual camera’s this was accomplished with a Bowden cable that connected an external push button directly to the the camera’s shutter release. Modern camera’s with electronic release systems use an electrical cable release instead.

The Canon RS-80N3 is an electronic cable release that provides the same functionality as the electronic shutter built into the camera. That is, half pressing the shutter button on the cable release is equivalent to half pressing the shutter release on the camera—both the autofocus and image stabilization systems will be engaged if enabled. Fully depressing the shutter release on the cable releases the shutter mechanism.

Additionally the RS-80N3 provides a mechanical lock to hold the shutter release fully depressed. This can be used in conjunction with a camera’s bulb exposure setting to produce extremely long exposures or keep the camera firing when set in continuous drive without being operated directly.

The RS-80N3’s release functionality is completely passive and requires no battery power to operate.

The cable on the RS-80N3 is flexible, though doesn’t feel easy to break or wear out. Additionally, the proprietary N3 connector provides a positive lock when attached so the release won’t accidentally fall out that’s released when the housing is pulled on to remove the connector. Fortunately, the N3’s locking mechanism isn’t nearly as cumbersome as Nikon’s 10-pin screw in connector is.

Canon makes and sells two versions of their cable releases using their proprietary N3 connector, the RS-80N3 is just a basic cable release with no advanced features, and its bigger brother the TS-80N3, which provides intervalometer functionality in addition to being a basic cable release. The decision between the RS-80N3 and the TC-80N3 ultimately comes down to whether there’s a foreseeable need to have intervalometer functionality. Personally, I have and use both depending on the situation, though if I’m only going to carry one, I take the TC-80N3 just in case.

What is the TC-80N3? Simply put it’s part cable release and part intervalometer. Ultimately it’s Canon’s solution for long- and repeated- exposure needs.

The TC-80N3 is compatible with most of Canon’s mid and top end EOS bodies that support a remote release socket. The exception is the entry level (Rebel) line, which uses a 2.5mm TRS connector instead of the proprietary N3 connector—though they do have a cable release of their own.

The 33-inch long (0.85m) cable on the TC-80N3 is easily flexible though not so much that it feels weak or fragile. Moreover, the proprietary N3 connector provides a positive lock when connected to prevent accidental disconnection. Intentionally disconnecting the cable is easily accomplished by pulling on the gray sheath on the connector. All told, the N3 connector is both secure when attached and easy to remove when needed. Finally, the N3 connector used is a right-angle connector that directs the wire for the release forward; this has the added benefit of reducing the profile of the connection.

Cable Release

When it comes to making sharp exposures at shutter speeds of 1/30^th and slower, the list of required tools is short, a sturdy tripod, a good tripod head, mirror lock-up, and a cable release.

Why use a cable release instead of the built in timer mode? Control.

While the timer release mode can be used to reduce mirror slap induced vibration, it has nowhere near the level of control. What to start the frame exactly when the wave crashes ashore, click the mirror up and wait for the wave, then click the shutter open.

Canon’s cable releases—both the TC-80N3 and the RC-60N3—provide the same shutter release functionality as the on-camera shutter release. Half pressing the button on the cable release activates the image stabilization and autofocus systems, and a full press of the cable release trips the shutter.

Additionally the cable release has a manual lock that will hold the shutter release in the fully depressed for long exposures. This lock can be used with the bulb exposure mode to keep the shutter open for very long exposures or combined with the continuous release drive mode and faster shutter speeds to fire a burst without having to interact with the camera—though buffer limits still apply.

While the intervalometer functionality requires a battery to function, the cable release functionality is completely passive and works all the time.

Intervalometer

The second function of the TC-80N3 is the intervalometer. The intervalometer enables the remote to programmatically trigger the camera in a rather large number of ways. The intervalometer functions of the TC-80N3 requires a CR2032 battery and one is provided in the box. That said, the power requirements for the TC-80N3 is vanishingly small, even without a way to turn it off, it will run for years on a single battery, even with regular use.

The display on the TC-80N3 is a segmented LCD panel similar to what you’d find on a digital watch, it even has a watch like blue-green backlight for programming or checking the settings in the dark.

The intervalometer offers 4 programmable settings, self, int, long and frames. All the timing modes (self, int and long) can be set up to 99 hours 59 minutes and 59 seconds, the frame setting can be set between 0 and 99 exposures.

Self-Timer (self): The self-timer setting controls the amount of time the intervalometer waits before taking the first frame.

Interval Timer (int): The interval setting controls how long the intervalometer waits between successive frames.

Long Exposure (long):  The long exposure setting controls how long the TC-80N3 will hold the shutter release closed.

Exposure Count (Frames): The frames setting controls the number of exposures that will be made before the intervalometer automatically stops running.

Programming the TC-80N3 is done by stepping though the 4 modes by pressing the mode button and using the click/scroll jog wheel on the side to step though and set the various timers. Each timer is broken into 3 steps, seconds, minutes, and hours, to facilitate easier programming.

The real tricky part of dealing with the TC-80N3 starts when you start combining multiple settings to get more control and varied results. One of the best resources I’ve found for the TC-80N3 is Canon’s own Digital Learning Center download on it.

Two additional things worth pointing out, first, the TC-80N3′s intervalometer will “half press” the shutter release several seconds before the image is captured. There’s more than enough time for an IS system to settle, focus to be achieved, and metering to be done. Secondly, the only time the manual release on the TC-80N3 doesn’t work is when the intervalometer is holding the shutter closed (i.e. during a long exposure), at any other time when the intervalometer is running, the shutter release on it (or the camera) can be pressed to expose a frame, though doing so doesn’t reset the timer.

Sample Settings

Below are the two most used setups I use with my intervalometer.

Time-lapse (int)

Time-lapse photography is probably the easiest to setup, only the INT setting needs to be specified. The minimum interval is 1s, for many things I find 5-10 seconds works very nicely. Though obviously the more frames you have the smoother the composited video will be.

Remote Event Capture (self + long)

I’ve used this on occasion to free my hands to run another camera; moreover, I’ve known other photographers to use this setup to shoot events that will occur at a known specific time in the future. This is done by pairing the self-timer and long-exposure timer with a camera set to continuous release. The self-timer is set so the camera starts shooting shortly before it’s necessary and the long exposure time insures the camera will continue firing for however long it’s set to.

Conclusions

The Canon TC-80N3 is not the most used item in my bag, but when it’s needed, there’s really nothing else that can take its place. If you’re sure you won’t need the intervalometer functionality, the Canon RS-80N3 remote switch is a cheaper alternative for just having a cable release, the RS-80N3 is also slightly smaller.

I first found these while reading the 2011 Really Right Stuff catalog, and immediately they struck me as something that really made sense. The parts reviewed here, the FA-QR-B base and FA-QR1 adapter, are part of Really Right Stuff’s larger flash mounting system. The system includes

Two Parts: The Plate and Clamp

The 3 parts included in teh FA-QR set, base, plate and camera cord attachment screw (not shown allen key for tightening the screw).

The FA-QR package consists of two parts, the FA-QR-B base and FA-QR1 plate. Both of these can be had separately, the plates run $15 the bases $39, or together for $49 in the FA-QR set.

One of the advantages of the Flash QR system is that Really Right Stuff has endeavored to make the clamps and plates small enough to not get in the way, but still secure enough to hold a flash and keep everything in alignment.

Together the FA-QR1 and FA-QR-B measure only 1.3” x 0.8” x 1” over the locking tab. The FA-QR-B clamp on its own measures 1.3” x 0.56” x 1” over the thumb tab, and the FA-QR1 plate measures 1.3” x 0.41” x 0.75”.

The FA-QR set with ruler to give a sense of scale.

The system uses a triangularly tapered dovetailed to securely align and lock the plate to the clamp. As a result, the plates and clamps can only be attached one way making them directional.

The thumb release is tapper in such a way that plates can be slid into the clap without holding the lock down. Releasing the plate is a matter of holding down the release lever and sliding the plate back out of the clamp.

A word of caution though, make sure the plate is fully clamped before letting go. While the system is well designed, sometimes the locking lever can snag on the bolt in the plate, making it feel like the plate is clamped when it’s not.

There is a small amount of play in the clamp but it’s not enough visibly change the alignment of the pieces, let alone affect your flash alignment or the security of the mount itself.

Like almost everything from Really Right Stuff, everything is made from black anodized machined aluminum, including the thumb tab for the locking mechanism. Moreover, the locking mechanism is hinged and spring, so it doesn’t rely on something bending which can easily wear out and loosen. The overall build quality, even the quality of the lettering is, is top notch.

Mounting

A Canon OC-E3 off camera shoe cord mounted on the Really Right Stuff FA-QR quick release adapter. Note the silver washer required when mounted on the Manfrotto 3/8-16 to 1/4-20 reducer to allow the lock to release.

The system is designed to have an off camera shoe cord mounted to the plate, and the plate is “notched” or profiled to support securely holding that in place. The off camera cord is secured with a hex-head 1/4-20 screw that recesses into the plate to keep the profile as small as possible. The mounting screw is 0.5” overall, with 0.2” exposed to thread into the base of the off camera cord.

Test mounting a Canon OC-E3 off camera cord, to the plate was very solid and well aligned. The plastic foot on the cord fits snugly in the notch in the plate. Further the mounting screw aligns everything and none of the off camera cord’s shoe protrudes over the edges.

The base has a 1/4-20 threaded mount as well, though this time there’s a caveat. The mounting hole is drilled clear though the bottom of the clamp directly below the locking mechanism. As a result, if the mounting bolt is too long it will stop the lock from being able to completely open. I’ve found this to be the case when mounting to the stud that comes with a Manfrotto umbrella bracket, but not the studs from the cheaper plastic ones. Using a washer as a spacer will fix the problem.

In Use

I can’t really speak to how well the QR system works when paired with Really Right Stuff’s flash brackets, since I don’t use them. My interest in the QR system is for simplifying mounting Flex TT5 PocketWizards and strobes on light stands quickly and securely. I’ve already dropped one of my flashes and PocketWizards a couple of times trying to quickly get it secured to the stand without removing the stud. The RRS QR system seemed like the perfect solution, and it almost is.

In my intended use is to have the clamps always mounted to my umbrella brackets, and the plates to the bottom of my Flex TT5s.

As of April 2011, I’ve been using the FA-QR adapters on my FlexTT5 Pocket Wizards and light stands regularly for some months now. Setup and tear down are so much easier and continent that I really couldn’t imagine not using the QR adapters. Moreover, I’m much more comfortable when I’m tearing down a setup that I won’t drop a flash or Pocket Wizard, for me that alone is a pretty big win. It’s also reliatvely simple to mount or remove the PocketWizard/flash package to a stand one handed.

Complaints

Ultimately, I have two complaints with the FA-QR system as a whole. Though they really only arise as an artifact of my intended use and not so much as a defect of the system.

First, there is no dedicated “PocketWizard Flex TT5” plate, or a basic flat plate for that matter. The FA-QR1’s grooves make it impossible to fit it flush with the bottom of the pocket wizard and the bolt is almost too short to use that way anyway. The same can be said about the FA-QR29—the plate intended to be paired with the Nikon SC-29 cord.

My solution, was to break out the angle grinder and cut away the material that was in the way.

Secondly the plat intrudes into the hotshoe area on the Flex TT5. The intent, or at least hope, was that I could keep the FA-QR1 plate on the PocketWizard even if I had to mount it on a camera. That proved to me a mixed proposition. On the first plate I cut down, I removed a little more than 1mm from the side that faced the hotshoe, it served well enough to clear the hotshoe on an OC-E3 cord, and even worked when mounted to a Canon 40D. However, the actual dove-tail part that locks into the base, hit the viewfinder housing on a 1D Mark 3 preventing the TT5 from being attached to the camera.

While making it easier to setup and tear down PocketWizard installations likely isn’t the first thought that ran though Really Right Stuff’s mind; it was the first thing that ran though mine. Personally, I’d really like to see RRS come out with a plate fitted to the PocketWizard FlexTT5 specifically that insured alignment and didn’t interfere with allowed the FlexTT5 being mounted to a camera’s hot shoe. Even better would be if it moved the mounting position in front of the bottom hot shoe, so the flash was centered over the stand.

The second thing that would be nice, would be a base clamp that had a 5/8″ stud machined in place instead of having to mount it to one. That would allow a more solid mount on a flash bracket than having to worry about the base loosening n the stud.

Conclusions

Even though, I’m only starting to use the FA-QR system, I’m already finding the system gives me a small but noticeable amount of comfort and speed in setting up or tearing my off camera flash setups. The biggest advantage for me is that the plates can stay on my PocketWizards even when I’m storing them, something that I can’t do when using the 5/8ths studs.

Though not flawless, at least for me, the system does make life a bit easier for setup and tear down of off camera flash setups.

That said, if you’re looking to use the FA-QR parts with PocketWizard FlexTT5 components and flash brackets, I’d strongly urge you to express that to Really Right Stuff. The system is nice and with a lot of promise outside of just Really Right Stuff’s flash brackets, but having to cut down parts to make them fit properly on FlexTT5s is less than desirable.

Pros:

• Quick secure mounting of flashes (or really anything with a 1/4-20 threaded mount) to light stands or umbrella brackets (or anything that has a 1/4-20 screw)
• Positively maintains device alignment (as long as the base doesn’t loosen)
• Compatible with all of Really Right Stuff’s Flash brackets
• Custom plates for various flashes and off camera cables

Cons:

• Some what expensive for what it appears to be
• No good solution for FlexTT5 PocketWizards that doesn’t involve cutting or grinding yet
• Sometimes a bit tricky to get to lock together without looking
• Your thumb can get in the way of the plate when holding down the release lever

To be honest, I think LPA Design’s Control TL Pocket Wizard system is the best thing since sliced bread, or maybe even better than that, I’m not sure.

When I first started doing off camera flash work I went through a number of wireless triggers from the cheap radio triggers sold on eBay, to Canon’s own optical system, and finally to LPA Design’s PocketWizard Plus IIs. Each of those systems had their pros and cons. I had no end to reliability problems with the cheap radio triggers, the Canon system required an extra expensive and heavy flash for full functionality, and the Plus IIs were manual only. Of all those cons, having to do things manually was the least annoying of the lot.

That was until early 2009 when LPA Design announced they were going to enter the radio TTL flash control market with a new set of PocketWizards. Until then the only options for wireless TTL control was either Canon or Nikon’s optical system, or using Radio Popper’s which basically piggy-backed on  Canon or Nikon’s optical system. While the Radio Poppers were a step up in range and reliability over the native optical systems, they still had the same drawbacks, namely requiring an expensive flash or dedicated control module to be able to do anything.

What LPA Design showed when they announced their Control TL PocketWizards, was a product that would do away with needing a flash on camera all the time—and with the now released AC-3 Zone Controller, a flash on camera at all.

It’s not hard to see the advantages for this, especially for a Canon user. To fully utilize all of Canon’s wireless control you need to mount a 580Ex on camera, and have 1 or more 430Ex or better flashes off camera. An extra 580Ex adds just over a pound to your bag and camera and costs around $450. Alternatively, you could save $100 and 12 oz. by using a ST-E2 Speedlite Transmitter. However doing this removes control over the third channel and the ability to use stroboscopic modes from the 580.

As of early December 2010, LPA Design has expanded the base Control TL PocketWizard system to support Nikon camera’s and flashes. While I won’t be reviewing the Nikon system specifically in the foreseeable future, the design and function is largely the same as the Canon units.

System Overview

The neatest thing about the Control TL PocketWizards are that they’re a system not just a set of radio triggers. The PocketWizard Control TL system is built on pair of radio modules, the Mini-TT1 and Flex-TT5, and a series of expansion modules that allow the Control TL ‘Wizards to interface with a verity of other gear.

The Mini-TT1 is a transmitter only, though it makes up for its lack of receiver/trigger capabilities by it’s diminutive size. Measuring in at 1-7/8” by 2-5/8” by 1-1/4”, it’s the smallest PocketWizard transmitter available to date.

The Flex-TT5 is the transceiver counterpart to the Mini-TT1. The Flex-TT5 trades the Mini-TT1’s size for receiver functionality.

LPA Design offers a verity of expansions that add onto the Control TL system, specifically the AC-3 Zone Controller, AC-9 AlienBees Adapter, and PowerST4 for Elinchrome studio strobes.

In addition, the Mini-TT1 and Flex-TT5 still transmit on the standard PocketWizard channels, so you can trigger Plus II, MultiMax, and PocketWizard compatible receivers (like the ones built into Profoto strobes) from your Mini-TT1 or Flex-TT5 transmitters, though obviously without TTL or power control.

The Mini-TT1

The Mini-TT1 is arguably the core transmitter for the Control TL PocketWizards system. Its diminutive size makes it an unobtrusive while sitting in the hot shoe.

The Mini-TT1 has a limited number of external controls. In fact, there are two, the combination setting/power switch, and a test button. The limited controls, however, belie the complete range of functionality.

The power/setting select switch picks from 2 setups. Each setup is capable of configuring the radio to use one of the 20 Control TL and 32 basic channels. As well as the settings for each of the new

The Mini-TT1 can transmit on all 20 of the new Control TL channels as well as all 32 basic channels that the MultiMax uses. However, it cannot transmit on MultiMAX custom ID frequencies. In addition, all of the advanced Control TL settings can be customized on a per-mode basis.

The Mini-TT1 is powered by a CR2450 battery, which LPA Design claims will last for 100s of hours or 1000s of triggers, and that seems to be on par with my experience. I’ve just replaced my first Mini-TT1 battery after almost a year of use.

The Flex-TT5

The Flex-TT5 trades the diminutive size of the Mini-TT1 for receiver capabilities, a bigger antenna, as well as a more flexible way to interface with strobes or cameras. In terms of controls, in addition to the configuration/power switch and test button, the Flex-TT5 has an additional zone selector switch.

When it comes to outputs, the Flex-TT5 has 3. First there’s the TTL compatible hot shoe, second there’s a 1/8” stereo/TRS mini-phone camera/P1 port, and a 1/8” mono mini-phone flash/P2 port.

Unlike the Plus II, the P1 and P2 ports are not interchangeable. The P1/Camera port is designed for use with PocketWizards’ 2-stage camera trigger cables and is not intended for triggering strobes. The P2/flash port with its 200V 250-milliamp continuous rating, however, should be capable of being used with almost any kind of strobe. In addition to handling TTL flashes, the hot shoe can safely trigger any shoe-mount flash with a sync voltage less than 50V and with less than 250 milliamps of current, which should cover all modern and most pre-digital shoe mount flashes.

Power for the FlexTT5 is delivered in the from of 2 AA batteries. LPA Design recommends using alkaline batteries. However my experience is that NiMH rechargeable work just as well and given the short, roughly 60 hour, run time you’ll save a lot going the rechargeable route.

Features

The thing that really impressed me about the Control TL PocketWizards are the number of features and improvements they offer over either Canon or Nikon’s flash system or any of the other radio systems that simply piggyback on the manufacturer systems.

HyperSync and High Speed Sync

HyperSync is one of those features that make the Control TL system unique. HyperSync uses a calculated pretrigger offset to allow faster than X-sync speed shooting but without having to use FP/High Speed sync mode. Since the flash is only being fired once—as it normally would—instead of being pulsed—like it does in high speed sync/FP mode—the flash can deliver more power to the scene.

Additionally the Control TL system will automatically transition remote Speedlites to either HSS/FP mode when the shutter speed reaches 1/640^th or the manually defined HSS point. The Nikon versions appear to have a hard limit of 1/400^th or 1/500^th instead of the higher 1/640^th.

Additionally HyperSync triggering works with the MultiMax and Plus II, so it can be used to trigger manual flashes attached to those triggers.

On my EOS 1D Mark 3, HyperSync works very effectively producing no dark shutter curtain bars, using auto camera detection and the default timing settings.

High Speed Sync Efficiency Gain

Since the Control TL system intercepts control signals directly from the camera and communicates with the flashes as if it was a cameras, it has far better control over the firing the flashes than an piggybacked radio system would have. Moreover, LPA Design has spent considerable effort optimizing the control timings not just to insure that things are correct but also to improve the efficiency.

One of the side effects of HyperSync and those timing tweaks is a major boost in useable flash power. For some cameras, that gain can be 1.6 stops or more at shutter speeds all the way up to 1/8000^th of a second. Of course, the flip side of more power, is that at lower powers that power is used more efficiently, which means shorter recycle times and more flashes per battery charge.

Unfortunately due apparently to the way Nikon’s TTL protocol works, Nikon users will only see a decrease in recycle times, and not an increase in flash power.

In fact, the efficiency gain is a big enough deal that I actually use a pair of PocketWizards instead of an off camera cable when using a telephoto flash bracket.

Auto Rear Curtain Sync

Rear curtain sync is handy when there’s potential for motion blur in an image that’s balancing ambient and flash sources with a long shutter speed where there’s the capability of producing a motion blur. With rear curtain sync, instead of the blur seeming to originate from the subject, it appears to end with the subject, which is generally more pleasing.

Canon’s native system doesn’t even allow for rear curtain sync when using the optical wireless system. Adding the Control TL PocketWizards’ to the mix, however, not only adds rear curtain sync functionality, but the system can switch from front to rear curtain sync automatically at a user set shutter speed.

The only real downside to the rear curtain mode is that the PocketWizards will only hold the rear curtain flash for 8 seconds.

Low Power Test Mode

When used on or off camera, the standard test mode, as you’d receive if you pushed the glowing red pilot light, results in a comparatively high-powered flash. Depending on the settings, it can be anything from 1/32 of the rated flash power, to the actual flash power (in manual mode). The result of all of this is that testing to see if your flashes are firing, especially in a dimly lit room, can be quite attention getting.

However, when pressing the Control TL PocketWizard test button (when seated in a Control TL PocketWizard, the pilot light/test button is disabled), the remote flashes produce a much fainter burst. In fact, it’s faint enough, that unless you’re looking directly at the light, the odds are you’re not going to notice it.

Pre-flash Boost

Pre-flash boost is another feature that exists outside of either the OEM optical solutions or the piggybacking radio solutions. In some situations, when the flash head is pointed away from the scene it’s lighting, a situation you’d commonly experience when doing bounce fill, the TTL pre-flash can be too under powered for the camera to accurately determine the proper exposure. Pre-flash boost mode is a potential remedy for these occasions. When pre-flash boost is enabled, the Control TL ‘Wizards will boost the flash power for the pre-flash and automatically compensate for the boosted, and this metered, difference when firing the actual flash.

Cross Brand Compatibility

With the late 2010 launch of the Nikon compatible PocketWizards, LPA Design has introduced corss system compatibility. As it stands the initial release will have only support manual power and triggering up to the x-sync speed. However, LPA Design hopes to expand this functionality in 2011.

When cross brand compatibility is fully functional with TTL support, this will be a very nice feature for ControlTL PocketWizard users in a number of ways. One, Canon users will be able to sidestep interference issues with Canon’s noisy flashes, by using less RF noisy Nikon flashes. Second, it makes it possible for small groups of shooters, or camera clubs, that want to pool resources while still having full functionality in the field. So long as everyone has the lastest firmware and is using ControlTL Pocket Wizards, it won’t matter whether the model is lit with SB-900s or 580ExIIs they’ll just work.

Setting up to Shoot

Setting up the Control TL Wizards couldn’t be simpler, but there is a required order for things to work right. In the default configuration, the transmitter detects what kind of camera it’s mounted on, in order to use the correct HyperSync settings, for this to work the transmitter has to be on before the camera is turned on. Proper camera setup is to attach the Mini-TT1 or Flex-TT5 to the camera while both are off, then turn the Mini or Flex on followed by the camera.

For flashes, both should be powered off when they are being connected. Power the flash and receiver up and if everything is working right, the flash will display will ETTL on the LCD.

Software

The TTL PocketWizards make one other major departure from the previous PocketWizard products; all of the configuration is now done via PocketWizard Utility from either a PC or Mac computer. In addition to configuration, the utility also manages firmware upgrades, and a PocketWizard inventory.

There are two things that I’d like to see improved with the software, first is the documentation. While LPA Design does a reasonable job keeping the documentation up to date when firmware updates add features, there still places where the help file doesn’t cover anything about the software. One example is the Modeling tab, which is conspicuously absent from the help file in the utility, though the tab appears there. It’s only in the notes in Addendum 5.0 for the manual that it mentions the following.

Now considering that LPA Design can show a different picture based on the device connected (and even whether there’s an add-on attached to it) it doesn’t seem unreasonable expect them to hide things that don’t apply to the device connected. Moreover, it’s not documented in the help files, so if you missed it in the manual addendum, you’re left wondering what is going on, or at least I was.

The second feature that’s missing is the ability to save configurations to your computer. Now it’s not as if changing PocketWizard configurations is something you do an awful lot, but there are times when it would help. One of those times is when updating the device firmware, as the update process requires performing a factory reset on the device. LPA Design’s solutions is to remind you before you reset your device to write down the settings so you can change them back manually and reprogram the device.

To me, this isn’t a solution at all. Moreover, it’s resulted in me using the default settings (including the channels). I’m willing to bet there are an awful lot of these new PocketWizards running on channels 1 and 2 for their two configurations simply because there’s no real good way to persist changes between firmwares and devices.

That said, as of version 1.18.9 LPA Design has added a replicate settings function, that syncs the configuration between all devices of the same type—so all FlexTT5s they own—however, you still have to input the settings manually.

A Canon 580Ex II on a FlexTT5

There’s one other downside to having to change all the configuration settings in software, and that’s that it requires you to have a computer to do it. Now, I’m not entirely versed in the capabilities smart phones, like the ever-popular iPhone, but it would be nice to see a mobile phone version of the PocketWizard Utility, assuming it could communicate to the devices via the phones USB port.

Range

The Control TL PocketWizards weren’t without their sticking points and growing pains. For example, Canon flashes tend to leak a lot of radio noise in the same area of the spectrum as that LPA Design uses for their the system. Because of this interference is that at longer ranges the Control TL PocketWizards may not trigger your strobes.

Fortunately, the triggering range without taking steps to isolate the strobes isn’t horrible either. In my testing, using one of Canon’s noisiest flashes—the 580Ex II—I could reliably trigger the flash out to about 100 feet without doing anything. In a studio environment, the odds are you’ll never need to go more than 20 or 30 feet.

Fortunately, LPA Design has produced a number of solutions to the noise issue with Canon flashes. The first is to use the included AC-5 soft shield (reviewed here), that comes with all new Flex-TT5 transceivers. The AC-5 uses a flexible metallic fabric and filtering hot shoe to block RF noise from the flash. Using an AC-5, my tests show the range increasing 3-fold; Rob Galbraith gets an even better 5-fold improvement in range in his tests.

A second solution is the AC-7 hard shield. The AC-7 blocks RF even better than the AC-5, according to Rob Galbraith’s testing, adding an unmodified 580Ex II in an AC-7 will stretch your range out to almost 550 feet. Moreover, the AC-7 tips the flash on axis placing it in the ideal position when used with an umbrella.

MiniTT1 on Camera

The third solution is to have your flash modified by one of 3 companies that PocketWizard certifies to properly shield your flash. I’m not sure what the extent of the modification is, but it likely involves the installation of filtering electronics in between the hot shoe and the flash’s electronics. The modification promises to be the cleanest solution, though it only appears to extend the range on the same level as the AC-5.

When it comes to range, the biggest question is does it pose a problem. In my experience the answer is no. Working in a studio or inside a normal sized building, and the 100-foot range is more than adequate for most needs. If you need to get the flash farther away from the camera, then the AC-5 that comes with the Flex-TT5 should be good enough to get you some 300-500 feet. However, after about 100 feet, it’s likely you’ll start running into other problems, like the ETTL II metering not being able to meter the flash properly.

It’s also important to note, that these range issues are only when triggering some remote flashes, most notably Canon’s 580Ex, 580Ex II, and 430Ex. The Mini-TT1 and Flex-TT5 should get their rated 800-1200 foot range when triggering other flashes and cameras.

Conclusions

When I started looking for a TTL wireless flash control system to replace doing everything manually with PocketWizard Plus IIs, I started with the only available option at the time, the Radio Popper system. It didn’t take long after LPA Designed announced they were going to build a TTL PocketWizard system to put my Radio Popper plans on hold, since the Radio Poppers never really offered anything but longer range over Canon’s optical system.

When 6 months after their release, LPA Design announced the AC-3 Zone Controller to go with the TTL PocketWizards, I was completely sold on the system. In fact, when I was considering switching from Canon to Nikon, the lack of Nikon compatible Control TL ‘Wizards was a contributing factor to the “do not” list.

FlexTT5 on Camera

Right now, the only other competitor in the wireless TTL market is Radio Popper. From everything I’ve seen, their PX products are solid but they do piggyback on the manufacture optical systems so you have to have a wireless capable trigger on camera (either using the built in flash, a commander capable hot shoe flash, or a dedicated wireless commander unit). As a result, there’s no gain in efficiency or power, or features over what the platform natively provides. Additionally at $250 a piece with dedicated transmitters and receivers, they aren’t any more cost effective either.

At the time of this writing, a basic 3 light setup with Radio Popper PX system will run $1000 before adding flashes. If you need an on-camera controller—most Canon users and all pro camera users—you can add between $300 and $500 for either an ST-E2/SU-800 or 580ExII/SB-900. The same 3 light setup using Control TL Wizards’ consisting of a Mini-TT1 and 3 Flex-TT5s will run around $900. Adding complete 3-chanel control to the system requires a $70 AC-3 zone controller.

If you’re serious about your photography and are looking for reliable TTL radio triggers, or want a level of control over your flashes that’s unprecedented for Canon users, I don’t see any choice other than the Control TL PocketWizards.

As I sit here finishing off this this review, I realized, I’ve written more than 3000 words on the TTL PocketWizards, and I still don’t think I’ve done the system justice or conveyed how awesome I think they are.

Updates, Errata, and Further Comments

Since I wrote this review, it’s become clear to me that even though I tend to cover PocketWizard related news else ware some issues warrant being added and discussed in the review itself. For the time being, instead of adding new content in the middle of the review, I’m going to add it here at the bottom with the date it was posted.

November 30, 2010: Nikon Wizards are Shipping

LPA Design has started shipping the MiniTT1 and FlexTT5 PocketWizards for Nikon cameras in Europe with US availability following shortly. While this review is was done using the Canon version of these triggers, the Nikon versions are similar in function and I’ve added notes where applicable. I won’t, however, for the foreseeable future, be testing the Nikon system specifically.

February 17, 2011: Potential for Problems with Canon’s 580Ex II

There has been a growing number of discussions on the internet—I’ve received a few emails regarding that discussion and as noted there’s a comment at the bottom of this article regarding it—regarding the Control TL PocketWizards damaging Canon (and potentially other brand) flashes. LPA Design, has released (at least Canon Rumors has posted) the results of their investigation into this issue. The document is a 19-page long highly technical article, however, I’ve tried to distill the key points in my own post on the matter.

In short, it appears that the design of the Canon 580Ex II flash, allows a spark to jump between the flash tube and the metal reflector behind it, which in turn eventually causes a part on the flash’s control board to be fried. The problem appears to become more of an issue the more the flash is triggered, with high-speed sync’s multiple rapid triggers in a single exposure being a major accelerator. Reliable, and more powerful, high speed sync being one of the major selling points of using Control TL PocketWizards. As a result, a problem that may have rarely reared it’s head under normal use, became more apparent.

What’s clear is that there is a small chance for flashes to die. What’s not clear is whether using the Control TL PocketWizards makes this appreciably more likely.

If it’s any reassurance, I’m still using my Mini and Flex TTL PocketWizard’s and Canon’s 580Ex II flashes and I still recommend the system. As far as I can tell, the issues only affect a small number of users. Though those that are affected, however, have my sympathy as I wouldn’t want to kill my expensive flashes either.

More importantly, this issues does not appear to affect Nikon users at all or for that matter Canon’s 430Ex II flashes.