Upgrade 2006 / 2007 Mac Pro

I bought the original Intel based Mac Pro back in January of 2007.  It had two dual-core Xeon 2.66 Ghz processors (four processors total).  I think it came with 3GB of memory and I added an additional 4GBs for a total of 7GB.  About a year ago I added the ATI Radeon HD 4870 graphics card to my system. The Geekbench scores for this system were around 5000, respectable, but many of the iMac and MacBook Pros that are being sold have Geekbench scores over 10,000.

I am a photographer so most of my heavy lifting is done with tools like Adobe Lightroom, Apple Aperture, and Photoshop CS5.  I use CS5 plugins like Nik Color Efex Pro and Portrait Professional.  Most of these tools take advantage of the GPU so the ATI Radeon HD 4870 gave me a good boost.  But there were times with Aperture, exporting from Lightroom, and running some of the CS5 plugins that my system got a little sluggish.

So last summer I had to decide to buy a new Mac or upgrade my 2006 Mac Pro.  The future for Macs is definitely going towards buying high powered laptops with an SSD (solid state drive) and using Thunderbolt devices for access to your high speed drives and monitor.  The problem in the summer of 2011 was that there were few Thunderbolt peripherals available, and you knew that the current, heavy MacBook Pros were going to go the way of the MacBook Airs.  I really use the internal drives of my Mac Pro and didn't want to give them up, and someday Thunderbolt drives will be my answer.  So I looked into the current Mac Pros, they are fast, but they currently don't support Thunderbolt.

Given that we are in a period of transition with Apple Mac products, I decided to extend the life of my current 2006 vintage Mac Pro.

I replaced my original 256GB main hard drive with an 256GB SSD (Crucial Technology $372).  I added 4GB ($108) to my memory taking me up to 11GB.  And I swapped my two dual-core Xeon processors  for two quad-core Xeon processors ($200 on ebay), giving me an eight core machine.

My Geekbench score  went from 5000 to over 10,000.   I spent $680 and I got a machine that was current in terms of performance vs. spending what would have been over $3,000 to get a new Mac with an SSD card and 11GB of memory.  The new machines have faster cores, so applications that only run on a single core aren't as fast on my machine as they would be on a new Sandy Bridge Intel CPU.  But for most things my performance is much better.

After I did this upgrade and things were working well, I got greedy.  I decided to add a USB 3.0 card to my Mac Pro last November.  The only card I could find that claimed to work on a Mac Pro the was CalDigit SuperSpeed PCI Express Card.  My system has crashed more times in the last two months than in the prior five years.  I suspected the CalDigit card, so I removed it two weeks ago.  Guess what ... no crashes since.  You have to install a USB 3.0 driver from CalDigit to make this card work because the operating system, Mac OS X Lion, doesn't support USB 3.0.  It seems to be that this driver doesn't play well and causes the system to crash.

CONCLUSION:  For $680 I have extended the life of my Mac Pro for probably at least two years ... well worth the money.

PocketWizrd FlexTT5 for Nikon Review

I have had four Pocket Wizard FlexTT5s for Nikon for about six months.  I have been waiting two years for this technology ever since Pocket Wizard announced their offerings for Canon. Photographers who use Canon's E-TTL remote flash system or Nikon's i-TTL CLS flash system know the limitations of having to have your flashes in line of sight and within close proximity. Even when I would be inside within close proximity, I would have to make sure that the sensor on the remote flash was pointed back at my camera.  With my style of shooting I quite often move the lights all around my subject and having to re-align my flash to be sure it was pointing towards the camera was a real pain.

I tried the Radio Poppers but they were just too fragile for my purposes.  The RadioPopper PX transmitter box that was attached to the camera flash was held on by Velcro with a flimsy antenna sticking up in the air.   I move around a lot and quite often carry two cameras.  The Radio Popper transmitter kept getting bumped and would move or fall off the flash.  They also were very unreliable unless the batteries were very fresh.  I could barely get one photo shoot out of a set of batteries.



I bought four Pocket Wizard TT5s vs getting a one Pocket Wizard TT1 and three TT5s because I didn't see much advantage other than size and $20 of getting the TT1.  The TT5 takes AA batteries vs a CR2450 for the TT1.  I don't know about you, but I have a lot of AA batteries laying around but not any CR2450s.  And, of course, the TT5 can act as a receiver and transmitter where the TT1 is just a transmitter.

They seem well built and I REALLY like the standard 1/4"-20 thread. I didn't even know that it had it until I received them.  I like to simplify my setups as much as I can.  The fewer parts that I have to put together when I get to a photo shoot the better.  I can mount the FlexTT5 right onto my light stand with the Manfrotto Swivel Umbrella Adapter.  I was using three TT5s with a Lastolite TriFlash Shoe Mount Bracket and the swivel point loosened on me and the flashes flipped down and broke two of the plastic hot shoes on the TT5s.  I called PocketWizard parts department and they sent me two replacement parts for $20 each.  When you put the weight of an SB900 on one of the units the plastic hot shoe isn't strong enough to support the weight in any kind of stressful situation.      

One of the features of the FlexTT5 is the ability to tweak the flash sync speed beyond the 1/250 second  (they call it HyperSync). I have a Nikon D3S, D3, and a D700.  I was able to sync all three cameras up to 1/320 using a Nikon SB800 as the remote flash before I went into Nikon's High Speed Sync.  They also claim that the FlexTT5s allow your Nikon flashes to use less battery in high speed sync. mode because all of the communication between flashes is being taken care of by the TT5s and not the flashes.  From my experience this is definitely true.  I was using three TT5s on a photo shoot outside the other day using shutter speeds upwards of 1/8000.  My flashes were ready to go within a second with no battery pack.

I can sync up to 1/4000 of a second with my Alien Bee AB1600 but the light is so inconsistent over the sensor that you would never use it.  I couldn't get a clean, consistent flash with my AB1600 any faster than 1/320, 1/400 was usable but there was some shading going on.

I tried the PocketWizards with my Alien Bee AB1600  using 1/8000 shutter speed F2.8 at ISO 200 on a Nikon D3S.  As you can see from the photo there is a dark band on the bottom then the light is bright and then gets a little darker as you go up the frame.  I backed it down to 1/2000 and the band went away but the light is so inconsistent (some parts of the frame are more lit than others) that it really isn't usable.


I had a problem on a shoot the other day with my Pocket Wizard FlexTT5 on my Nikon D3S with a Nikon 70-200MM F2.8 with VR II.  Even though I saw a flash of light come out of my flash, the photo was almost completely dark.  I called the engineering support staff at Pocket Wizard and he said that they have a problem syncing the TT5 when VR is on.  The problem also occurred with my Nikon 105MM F2.8 VR lens.  When I switched to a non-VR lens the problem went away.

THE FIX - while in manual mode, switch your shutter speed to 1/200 and take a photo and then you can change the shutter speed to whatever you want.  For some reason they can get in sync at 1/200 and once they do that they are good to go.


You have to remember to take a few test shots to allow the TT5s to sync up, but once they do that they seemed to work fine.  I used the TT5 on the camera with and without a flash (SB900) attached.  Without the flash I put my camera in Manual mode and used the camera's exposure compensation to adjust the output of the flash.  With the SB900 attached, I was able to control the remote flashes from the SB900 controls just as I normally would without the TT5.  The remote flashes stay in TTL mode (not remote mode) and the switch on the Pocket Wizard TT5 allows you to designate which flash is in Group A, B, or C.

I got tired of lugging around an SB900 on top of my TT5 so I bought the PocketWizard AC3 ZoneController for Nikon.  It works as advertised and is a lot lighter then the SB900.

I have had a couple of situations where the units are working fine on a shoot, and then all of a sudden they stop working.  So you have to shut down the camera, TT5, and the flash and then turn them back on and hope everything is back in sync.

In general the native i-TTL control of the Nikon Speedlights delivers a more accurate flash then the TT5s.  With the TT5s I have to monitor and modify the flash exposure compensation more.

CONCLUSION - Do I prefer the simplicity and reliability of using the integrated i-TTL of the Nikon SB900 and SB800 Speedlights and accepting the line of sight limitations, or do I prefer to have the flexibility of placing Speedlights wherever I want and not have to worry about line of sight but inheriting more complexity in terms of more devices to setup and manage, and the unfortunate misfire of the TT5s that force an occasional reset of the system?

I shoot native i-TTL when I am shooting inside within close proximity of my flash units ... it is simple and reliable in this environment.  If I am shooting outside, using high speed sync, or putting flashes in places where I don't have line of sight, I go with the TT5s.  I would say I am using my TT5s on 80% of my shoots.

Nikon vs. Canon DSLR Review

Here we go.  There is nothing that can stir emotions among photographers like the debate as to which professional digital SLR is better - Canon or Nikon.

I started using Canon DSLRs back in 2002.  I plunked down $5000 for a 4 megapixel Canon 1D.  It was worth every penny.  It was fast, rugged, great autofocus and the picture quality was outstanding (relatively speaking for 2002).  The Canon lenses were all top notch.  I bought the 16-35mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm, 200mm F1.8 (what a great piece of glass), 85mm F1.2, 100mm F2.0, 50mm F1.4, and the 24mm F1.4.  All great lenses and combined with the 1D bodies they really created some great photos with the help of the photographer.

I bought the Canon 1DS, the Canon 1D Mark II, the Canon 1DS Mark II, and the Canon 1D Mark III.  These were all great cameras for their time and Canon was the clear leader over Nikon for low noise, high ISO images and they were the only company with a full frame 35mm camera with the 1DS models.

Nikon had the 1.5 cropped sensor, and their high ISO performance was always a step behind Canon.

In 2007 everything changed.  Nikon introduced the 12 megapixel, full frame, high ISO (low noise up to 6400 ISO), rugged, great autofocus  .... the Nikon D3 DSLR camera. 

During this time Canon introduced the Canon 1DS Mark III which took the pixel count over 21mp and only slightly improved the high ISO capabilities of the Canon 1DS Mark II. The Canon 1D Mark III was a great camera ... 10mp, 1.3 cropped senor with respectable high ISO up to 3200.  Many users reported autofocus problems with the Canon 1D Mark III, but I never really experienced that.  Many Canon users started using the Canon 5D ... a full frame 13mp camera in a pro-sumer body.  The problem with the 5D was its autofocus system.  It was basically the same system as found in the consumer level Canon 40D model.  The focus points were tightly bunched in the middle of the finder and they weren't as sensitive or accurate as their Canon 1D big brother, leading to a lot of out of focus shots.  In good light this camera produced great images, but if you were photographing moving subjects in poor light you were in trouble.  Canon then came out with the 5D Mark II which took the pixel count over 21mp and improved the high ISO performance, but the autofocus system was still pro-sumer and the 21mp was overkill for what I needed.

As a photojournalist and wedding photographer 12mp is the sweet spot for resolution.  The images are big enough to allow you to enlarge photographs up to 24 x 36, yet small enough as not to fill up CF cards and hard drives quickly and take longer to process on my Mac.

I bought the Nikon D3 for $5000 in 2007 to replace my Canon 1DS Mark II.  The Canon 1DS Mark III was $8000 and 21mp (overkill for me) and the ISO performance was two stops worse than the D3.  Then I bought the Nikon 14-24 and the Nikon 24-70 lenses.  Both lenses were newly introduced and were amazingly sharp.

I used the Nikon D3 along side the Canon 1D Mark III for about 6 months.  When Nikon introduced the Nikon D700 in the summer of 2008 I made the switch to Nikon 100%.  I bought the  70-200mm F2.8, 50mm F1.4, 85mm F1.4, and the 16mm fisheye to go along with my other 14-24mm and my 24-70mm lenses. The D700 was about $2,700 and had the same exact full frame image senor and autofocus system as in the D3 in a slightly smaller and lighter body. 

I also bought a few Nikon SB800 flashes and later the SB900 flash.  I have no hard core testing on this, but the Nikon flashes seem to be more accurate and the iTTL system seems to work much better and easier than the Canon wireless flash system.

After I switched to the Nikon system the number of keepers for a wedding went up by 25%.  My in-focus and properly exposed shots were much higher with the Nikon.  Maybe I became a much better photographer, but it seems like quite a coincidence. I added the Nikon D3S in the summer of 2010 to my portfolio of cameras.  The D3S is basically the identical camera but with an additional stop of high ISO capability and they added video capability as well. 

Come forward to 2012 ... Canon has introduced its 18MP, full frame sensor Canon 1D X DSLR with better high ISO and better autofocus.  It won't be available until March 2012 so time will tell.  They are merging their 1D March IV and the 1DS Mark III cameras into one great camera.  If I had $7,000 and I were a Canon shooter still, this would be the answer to my prayers.  

Nikon just introduced their new Nikon D4 to replace the Nikon D3S.  See my other post on this camera.  It won't be out until the end of February.  It is upping the MP count to 16 (from 12MP on the D3S) and greatly improves the the video capabilities.  It will run you about $6,000.  Of course, Nikon also has the Nikon D3X which is a full frame, 24MP camera which was introduced in Q1 of 2009.  So if you need the high resolution and can accept a little lower high ISO capability, this camera is for you at $8,000.  The D3X is probably due for refresh as well.  The D4X ?  Will have to wait and see.

In terms of lenses, both Nikon and Canon have a great lineup ... you can't go wrong with either Canon or Nikon glass. 

Assuming the Nikon D4 and the Canon 1D Mark X live up to their hype, we have basically reached parity between Nikon and Canon.  

Pocket Wizard FlexTT5 for Nikon Problem with VR Lenses

I had a problem on a shoot the other day with my Pocket Wizard FlexTT5 on my Nikon D3S with a Nikon 70-200MM F2.8 with VR II.  Even though I saw a flash of light come out of my flash, the photo was almost completely dark.  I called the engineering support staff at Pocket Wizard and he said that they have a problem syncing the TT5 when VR is on.  The problem also occurred with my Nikon 105MM F2.8 VR lens.  When I switched to a non-VR lens the problem went away.

THE FIX - while in manual mode, switch your shutter speed to 1/200 and take a photo and then you can change the shutter speed to whatever you want.  For some reason they can get in sync at 1/200 and once they do that they are good to go.

FUJI X100 Review

I have had the Fuji X100 for about a six months.  After reading about the image quality of this nostalgic looking camera, I had to see for myself if it was as good as advertised.  

The image quality is excellent, comparable to my Nikon D3S.  For doing street photography landscape photography of static subjects the camera works great and is sufficiently responsive.  The X100 can sync a flash at 1/2000 of a second.  This is great when doing flash photography outside in bright sunlight.

Unfortunately, I have found a lot about this camera that makes it difficult to use in many situations.  Here is my list of gripes:

• I like to pick my focus point on my Nikon DSLR bodies.  I don't like to focus and recompose with the center focus point because that slight amount of movement can make a sharp eyelash a bit soft.  Selecting a new focus point on the X100 is very cumbersome, especially if you are using the optical viewfinder because the button you have to push to turn on the focus point selection is right next to your eye and hard to reach when looking through the viewfinder.
• Autofocus is pretty slow (slower than my Canon S100 point and shoot) and you just miss a lot of photo opportunities while waiting.
• Manual focusing is useless.  It takes so many turns of the lens ring to move the focus that it becomes very tiresome.
• The X100 has a macro capability but you have to push a button on the back of the camera and then toggle to macro mode to focus on subjects within two feet or so.  
• There is a Command Button on the upper right side of the back of the camera.  The button is totally underutilized.  Why not push that button to go right into playback mode?
• I shoot in RAW mode and it takes quite a long time to write to the SD card.  
• The camera has a fixed 23mm lens (35mm equivalent).  There are times I wish the lens was a bit wider and a bit longer.  You can't complain about the lens quality, but when you just want to take one camera, having a fixed length lens can be limiting. 
• All of the above problems make it very difficult to use this camera if you are trying to capture the moment. 
• Video focusing is hit or miss.  The focus just seemed to wander everywhere.

Conclusion ... I sold my FUJI X100 - The camera is simply too slow to focus and can't focus within 2.6 feet without going into macro mode.  The picture quality is great, but if you miss the photo because your camera is too slow, it doesn't matter.  I took some wonderful photographs with this camera, but I missed a lot as well.

  

The image quality of a camera of this size is the best on the market and is the main reason why one would keep the FUJI X100.  If you are shooting landscapes and static subjects this camera is great. But if you are trying to capture the moment this camera is too slow.

Too Many Workshops / Books / Video Lessons?

Is it me, or does it seem that every other photographer and their mother is producing more and more workshops, books, ebooks, video lessons, blogs?  Some of these photographers do so many workshops and books while trying to maintain a presence on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, and their blog, I wonder if they ever have time to do a photo shoot for a paying client?

I hear all the time how professional photographers are seeing less and less revenue from the conventional business of working as a paid photographer for clients, so they are going after the pocket books of enthusiast amateur photographers and the aspiring professional photographers.

There is nothing wrong with this strategy, but how much of the information that is being produced is actually breaking new ground?  It seems like so many photographers are simply rehashing the same information over and over.

Photography isn't really that complicated and the basics of lighting and composition haven't changed that much since the days of Vincent van Gogh.  From 2000 to about 2010 there were a lot of changes in the technology arena with both cameras and tools like Lightroom and Photoshop, but even the rate of change in this area is starting to slow a bit.

More to come .....

Lightroom 4 Beta - What is missing?

The Lightroom 4 Beta is definitely a step in the right direction.  Improved shadow and highlight recovery and the Soft Proofing stand out as the main new features that make LR 4 a better product.

The Book feature is okay but it is tied to Blurb.

The big thing that is MISSING is the ability to integrate videos and stills into a slideshow/movie like Aperture 3 can.  LR 4 can edit videos but that is it ... now what do you do with them?  Adobe always leaves a few little goodies for the final release.  Let's hope that this feature is one of them.

Nikon D4 - To Buy or Not to Buy?

Nikon just introduced the Nikon D4 ... their flagship professional DSLR.  I currently own the Nikon D3, D3S, and the Nikon D700 cameras.  These cameras have been superb tools .... excellent picture quality, low noise at high ISOs, reliable, great autofocus, etc..


The Nikon D4 provides MUCH better video capabilities and increases the image resolution from 12.3 MP to 16.2 MP than my current camera lineup.  I don't care about video (today) and going from 12.3 to 16.2 is only a 16% increase in resolution and I haven't had a single client asking for higher resolution photographs, and if they do it is easy enough to rent a Nikon D3X (24 MP).

Rob Galbraith did an interview with one of the Nikon D4 Engineers.  In that interview the engineer stated that "Overall, D4 high ISO noise levels are very similar to the D3S."  This is the first time that I can remember that Nikon (or Canon) has introduced a major upgrade to their flagship camera with no additional high ISO capability.  He later goes on to state "the D4 photos looked sharper and more detailed. The D4's crispness advantage in Nikon's comparisons was significant, suggesting that we were seeing the effect of more than just the new camera's higher pixel count."  

Nikon D4 PROS (from my perspective):

• Two new multi-position buttons on the back that can be used to change the active AF point.  Believe or not this may be the one feature that could get me to buy this camera.  I switched from Canon in 2008 and I loved the wheel on the back of the Canon cameras that allowed you to QUICKLY change AF points.  I use single auto focus point for focusing and I constantly changing my AF point .... for me the faster the better.   
• Ability to go down to ISO 50 (vs. 100 on the D3S) for situations when I am shooting outdoors with flashes where I need to over power the sun.
• Slightly better picture quality is always better.

Nikon D4 CONS (from my perspective):

•  Different battery than the D3 and D3S.  I always have a backup camera and now I have to carry two different backup batteries and different chargers (I have no plans on buying two D4s to solve this problem).
• Second storage card is a new card from Sony (not a standard CF card).
• For most of my shoots I don't need the added resolution and it just eats up more storage space.
• Are mirror-less cameras such as the Canon G1X, Fuji XPro 1, and the Sony NEX-7 a sign of the future for professional digital cameras for photographers?  Having a mirror flopping away when you shoot was a necessary evil for film cameras, but do they make sense when you have digital sensors?  These cameras can be much smaller and offer the same kind of picture quality and responsiveness of a DSLR.
• Or maybe one goes the other route and go for a medium format camera like David Hobby just did as outlined in his recent article. 

I will hold off on my final decision after other professional photographers have taken the camera through its paces and some reviews have been published.

Lightroom 3 Beta 2 Review vs. Aperture 3

What has changed since Lightroom 3 Beta 1?

• IMAGE QUALITY with the new noise reduction is much better.  You have to play around with the Luminance, Detail, and Contrast sliders in conjunction with the Sharpening amounts to get a look that you like.  I was trying some different settings with the Luminance slider and you can get some very strange looking texture in your images if you tune these things wrong.  The sample on the left is from LR 2 and the one on the right is from LR 3 Beta 2.  LR 3 is definitely cleaner, but you loose a little detail.  The settings were the same for both photographs.

• TETHER SUPPORT - this worked with my Nikon D700 for a few frames and then I couldn't get it to work again.  I am sure they will work the bugs out of this before it is released.  The implemenation is clean and simple and will be a great new addition.  Aperture 3 Tether left a copy of the images on my CF card as well as downloading them to my laptop, Lightroom 3 does not.  
• VIDEO SUPPORT - this is definitely a reaction to Aperture 3 video support and it shows.  All Adobe did was allow you to import the video file into your Lightroom catalogue ... that is it.  What a joke.  You can't edit it, you can't include it in a slideshow. If you click on the thumbnail it will play in your default video player.  I hope a lot more is coming in the final release.
• IMPORT - Adobe broke the import function in Lightroom 3 Beta 1 by adding to much functionality and slowing it down from Lightroom 2.  Lightroom 2 import was clean,  simple and fast.  LR3B2 import seemed quicker, but I still like the LR 2 interface better.
• PERFORMANCE - Beta 3 does seem to be a little quicker overall than Beta 1 or even Lightroom 2.  This is where Lightroom just punishes Aperture 3. When you make a change in this new release, the image is changed immediatley. 

Compeition is good.  Adobe is definitely reacting to Apple's Aperture video and tether support.  They have a long way to go to catch up to the Aperture 3 video support.   Aperture also has book designing, faces recognition, location (GPS) support, and a slideshow feature with video support that puts Lightroom to shame. 

Aperture 3 Review Update

I have been using Aperture 3 for the past couple of weeks trying to become more comfortable with the interface. I updated to 3.0.1. It seems a bit more stable and a bit faster, but still not fast enough.

I did a test with five images from a wedding that I photographed last year. I edited the images with Lightroom and then did the same adjustments in Aperture. It took 12 minutes in Lightroom and 15 minutes in Aperture ... 25% more time. Some of that has to do with me being more comfortable with Lightroom, though I did practice in Aperture quite a bit to minimize that. I made videos of the two tests, you can click here to see them:

DVD Joe Buissink: A Workshop

If you haven't seen Joe's work or how he approaches weddings, this might be a good DVD to get. But if you know Joe and have his prior DVDs, this may not be worth the $100. I got it for $75 (with shipping) ... he was running a special.

This video was filmed at a two day workshop he did in Canada. The DVD is broken down into 30 chapters/topics. You get a few minutes from each section of his two day workshop. The good news is that I wanted more ... the bad news is that I didn't get it. When the credits rolled at the end I was a bit shocked because I was sure more information was going to follow. The DVD lasted around an hour, he could have easily fillled up the DVD and given us two hours. Maybe he wants you to want more so you sign up for his two day workshop.

The workshop is more about inspiration than technical information ... which is great. Joe talks about his passion for wedding photography and how he is shooting for himself as much as he is for the client. He goes through his selling process and how he gets potential clients involved emotionally by his images. He does a few minutes of actual shooting with a model at the ranch where the workshop is being held ... but this is minimal.

Aperture 3 vs. Lightroom Review

SUMMARY

I have used Lightroom for a few years since its first release. I tried Aperture 1 and Aperture 2 and never found them compelling enough to switch from Lightroom. Unless Lightroom 3 has video support (like Aperture 3) when it is released, I will be buying a copy of Aperture 3.

My biggest headache before I used Lightroom was getting through the editing process for weddings. I was using Photo Mechanic for file management, Capture One for RAW processing, and Photoshop to do any special effects or cleanup. It would take me days to edit the 400 to 500 images from each wedding. Lightroom cut that time in half. The RAW processing wasn't as good as Capture One but the productivity gains far out weighed the image quality difference. In my opinion, for smaller jobs where you have less than a couple dozen photos that you edit, the editing workflow / products you use isn't going to make that much difference in your productivity. For bigger jobs, products like Lightroom can save your marriage.