Category Archives: Photography

The Sirui K-40X ball head

A cheap knock-off, well made.

My recent night-time efforts with the Nikon D3x, the 35mm Sigma and the old Linhof tripod in Carmel produced one or two nice snaps but far more in the way of garage language. You see, my old Manfrotto QR plate and jolly, colored Novoflex ball head just could not reliably handle the weight of the camera and lens, the poor ball head protesting that this really was not its role in life.

So I did a spot of research and had pretty much settled on the Arca Swiss Z ball head and related QR plate, a non-trivial $450 with spare plate, when DP Review published a thoughtful review of a bunch of big ball heads, accompanied with excellent test measurements. The Arca was among those tested, and comparison with the $214 Sirui (with spare QR plate) disclosed that the latter was pretty much a Chinese knock-off at less than half the price. Having discounted the American Acratech, whose funky design I concluded was trying too hard to be different for no obvious benefit, I went ahead and joined the lottery, ordering a Sirui from B&H, hoping I would luck out with a good one. The Sirui improves on the Arca Swiss (made in Beijing, for all I know) with more bubble levels – all useless – and a properly calibrated pan base, compared with the dots passing as calibrations on the Arca Swiss. Has anyone at Arca actually tried to use these? With a spare QR plate the Sirui was a bargain and if I got a good one the six-year warranty would make me feel good though it’s likely as useless as those spirit levels. Spare plates are a total rip-off, by the way. Sirui gets $48 for theirs, others charge even more, for a simple machined piece of metal.

Anyway, it seems I lucked out. I had none of the issues noted by DPReview with their sample which had crooked spirit levels and poor rubber sheathing on the locking knob. The QC tag in the box is dated 8/24/2013, so it’s a fairly recent one. The head is beautifully made, no machining marks anywhere, heavy-duty if not too heavy at 18 ozs., and comes with excellent English instruction, probably a first for any Chinese marketed product in the US. I mean, they are written in real, idiomatic, grammatically correct English. By ‘heavy duty’ I mean you do not have to tighten the locking knob at all hard to really lock down a heavy piece of gear safely. The friction adjuster’s use is well explained and while it does allow the presetting of friction so the camera does not flop about on the head when the release knob is loosened, this tends to vary quite a bit with ambient temperature, so use with care. There’s a neat QR button for the QR head which means you only need loosen the QR plate retaining knob a tad, press the button and slide the camera off. Alternatively, you can unscrew the retaining knob completely – four turns, when it locks – and simply lift the camera out vertically as the retaining dovetail grooves are fully separated at that point. This is poor design as the thread pitch of the knob is far too fine, defeating the QR concept. Two turns would have been a nice compromise between safety and speed.


Ball head with the D3x and Sigma 35mm f/1.4
on my ancient Linhof tripod.

The design of the ‘industry standard’ Arca plate is sub-optimal. So much for standards. Engagement, whether sliding the camera in – retaining screw released half a turn – or dropping it in – retaining screw released four turns – is far too fussy as regards placement. The earlier Manfrotto is superior in every way here. Still, I suppose I’ll get used to it, fiddling with the bloody camera until I can get the grooves on the plate and head to align just so. A disappointment. No QR device should need anything other than feel – certainly not sight – to operate and this design fails the test of ease of use. At night on a poorly lit street I’m not about to crouch down and try to see that I am properly mating two black matte pieces of metal ….

The ball head itself uses the meatier 3/8″ female screw thread for tripod attachment, which is a good thing. The Arca plate provided with the head has three slots and comes with two 1/4″ retaining screws. One has a fold out arc to allow finger tightening, but mine immediately fell off as the retaining pin had not been installed correctly. No matter, as there is both an Allen socket in the screw and a transverse slot which will fit a flat-bladed screwdriver or small coin. An Allen wrench is provided but this is simply an awful idea, for you can bet the one time you will need it on the road you will have left it at home. It is also an invitation to the ham-handed to over-torque the retaining screw. The straight slot works with a US cent or dime just fine, and it’s not likely you will be without either. The screw with the fold-out arc has too large a diameter base, meaning it will only fit in the center one of the three slots in the plate. Had Surui bothered to make it a couple of millimeters smaller all would be fine. To their credit (?) they mention this in the instructions and advocate use of the smaller allen screw if either of the two other channels is to be used. This smaller head screw also comes with a screwdriver/coin slot. OK, a good save, but the wrong answer.

By contrast, the spare plate I ordered is of a different design. It comes with one slot only and with the fold out arc screw only, as well as with an Allen wrench. Interestingly it has two small fold up red plastic tabs which can act as a limit device for some cameras where the baseplate will abut the raised tabs. Think of these as anti-twist devices. Not so good for my big Nikons with their rounded-edge baseplates, but a nice idea. This plate resides full-time on my D3x as the fold out arc on the retaining screw has yet to break off and I like the idea of tool-free installation and removal; the stock plate resides full-time on my 500mm Reflex Nikkor. If it helps, the stock 3-slot plate is designated TY-70X, while the single slot spare with the red tabs is TY-70-2.

Here’s the TY-70-2 spare plate on the D3x – I prefer transverse attachment rather than having the plate protrude front and back of the camera’s baseplate. You can see the fold out tabs, the allen head and the screwdriver slot below. The red tabs in longitudinal orientation can be folded up to protrude from the top of the plate allowing certain cameras to abut them.

Sirui has a large selection of QR plates which you can see here. There are many camera specific ones, shaped to fit the baseplate, with versions for the D700, D800, and a host of Canon bodies, if nothing for the D2/3/4 Nikons.

Finally, the panning base is a welcome feature, well indexed in degrees of rotation. The grease used here is heavy and makes for just the right degree of resistance with a heavy camera body and lens. Friction is not adjustable for this function. I have had no issues using the camera vertically via the drop slot in the ball head. Make sure the slot is aligned with a tripod leg and there’s no risk of the rig tipping over.


The vertical slot in use. No clearance issues.

A very nice neoprene pouch comes with the head and, as you will never use it, it makes for a fine lens pouch with proper drawstrings with movement lockers. Handy.

I am the worst possible source to look to for comments on longevity, as tripod use is largely anathema to this street snapper. If I use a tripod a dozen times annually that’s a lot. Thus I will not be able to comment on meaningful, hard use in harsh environments, as I will be doing neither. However, if you are looking for what appears to be a bargain, are prepared to maybe have to exchange the first one or two (this is beginning to sound like a Sigma lens review) and use heavy gear needing a solid head, the Sirui deserves consideration. For me the sweetest part is that I sold my old Novoflex head for what the Sirui cost me!

Some test data:

The D3x is most susceptible to camera shake on a tripod at 1/15th second exposure time. The reason is that the vibrations caused by the slap from the rising mirror are present for a significant percentage of the exposure time. Shorter shutter speeds obviate the issue while longer ones make the percentage smaller with the same positive result. So using 1/15th with the D3x is an iffy proposition if maximum resolution is aimed at. One way to avoid this is by using Mirror Lock Up and a wireless remote to trigger the shutter, with the first press raising the mirror and the second releasing the shutter.

Thus I set up the camera on the tripod taking snaps of the mesh window screen at 1/250 and 1/15th – depth of field obviously varies, but the mesh screen is a very critical indicator of camera shake. Here are the results using MLU, with a 5 second pause after mirror up before wireless release. These enlargements would yield 48″ prints:

Magnified on my display there is no difference, suggesting the Sirui + Linhof + wireless remote are doing their job.

For results from a successful field trip, click here.

Update May 24, 2015:

A reader who has lost his manual wrote that it’s nowhere to be found on the web, so I append images below:

Mac Pro 2009 Part XXI

A 4K capable graphics card.

For an index of all my Mac Pro articles, click here.

I first wrote of the Zotac nVidia GTX660 graphics card used in my Mac Pro back in my Hackintosh days. That Zotac card has proved to be outstanding, cool running, silent and capable of simultaneously running four displays (2 x DVI, 1 x DP, 1 x HDMI). When I migrated to the 2009 Mac Pro the Zotac joined that migration and except for the lack of the cog wheel/splash screen on a cold start of the Mac, the card was compatible in every way.

My displays are rather dated Dell 2209WA IPS panels, 21″ in size, and I use three. Eventually these will give way to two larger 4K panels once the technology settles down but with a far higher pixel density (3840 x 2160 vs. 1680 x 1050 computes to 4.7 times the number of pixels for a like sized screen) I will go from 21″ to 30″ or so, and the factor increases to 9.6 times. That’s a big increase.


The EVGA has only one fan, yet the card is much larger overall.

Thus I decided to get the best ‘Made for Mac’ card out there, the choices being the ATI Radeon 7950 or the EVGA nVidia GTX680 both ‘Made for Mac’ variants selling for some $600 new. I like the external connector choices on the EVGA more and found a used, mint GTX680 on eBay for $450. I doubt you will go wrong with either. There are yet faster cards but not in ‘Made for Mac’ editions and power consumption becomes an issue, many of these really requiring auxiliary power supplies if they are to be driven hard and if damage to your computer is to be avoided.

The power consumption issue:

The EVGA GTX 680 requires the use of two auxiliary 6-pin power cables connected to the backplane board, in addition to the power provided by the double-width PCIe slot. Each of these runs at 12 volts and can deliver up to 75 watts of power (6.25 amps of current – more than that and you risk frying things).


The two 6-pin connectors attached to the backplane board. I use 1/2″
flex tubing to neatly dress the cables. The PCIe fan is on the right.

The EVGA card I bought came with two six pin cables while the card itself has one six-pin and one eight-pin socket. The instructions clearly state that the 8-pin will accept a six-pin in one orientation only and this proved to be true.


One of the 6-pin connectors goes in an 8-pin socket at the card end.


GTX680 installed. The Apricorn PCIe card with the boot
SSD is below and the powered Orico USB3 card below that.

Installation in the double-width Slot 1 is a breeze, and no tools are required. It took me some 10 minutes, most of that spent unplugging and replugging cables to the Mac Pro. As with the GTX660, the claw at the rear base of the GTX680 is retained by the sliding bar activated by the push button on the PCIe fan’s casing, the latter being moved back for removal and installation, then pushed back into place, making for a secure fit for this large and heavy card.

Why Slot 1? Because inserted in any other slot your card will block a free slot. Not good, considering there are only four PCIe slots available in any Mac Pro.

Static current draw in PCIe slot 1 is 2.95 amps (35 watts) compared with 2.46 amps (30 watts) with the GTX660. An immaterial increase and the new card seems every bit as silent as the old one which was outstanding in this regard.


About This Mac.

The full splash screen appears on cold start, allowing choice of boot drive if the Option key is held down during start. This was a black screen in the GTX660 so boot drive selection had to be made in System Preferences->Startup Drive before restarting. It’s nice to have the splash screen back, but hardly a reason to upgrade, especially as I never turn off the Mac Pro, preferrring to let it sleep. Adventurous hackers can buy a stock PC GTX680 and, using Windows, flash its ROM for the splash screen functionality. As I do not use Windows, and as there is no circumstance under which I can see that changing, I opted for the ‘Made for Mac’ flashed card – though the appearance of the casing on mine suggests it’s actually a flashed PC version. There’s no difference in use. It’s not the first, nor the last, time that a vendor on eBay has lied. For new cards there is negligible price difference between Mac and PC versions and the Mac version will work fine on PCs.

The PCIe fan spools up to some 1500rpm on cold start then quickly settles to the stock 800rpm idle in under 30 seconds:

Noise at ear level (3′ from the front grille) measures at 43dB, the same as with the GTX660, whether idling or under stress.

Benchmark tests:

The most stressful tests for graphics cards include Unigine Heaven (now in 4.0 guise) and the recently released Unigine Valley (v. 1.0), and I show comparisons with the GTX660 below. All run using OS X Mavericks 10.9.1. The GTX680 is 73% faster on Heaven and 10% faster on Valley:


Heaven – GTX680 vs. GTX660


Valley – GTX680 vs. GTX660

With two X5650 12-core CPUs performance is much the same as with two X5590 8-cores:


Heaven – 12-core performance.


Valley – 12-core performance.

This is as expected. These are GPU tests, not CPU tests.

How about power consumption under stress? Using Unigine Heaven as the most stressful test, the current draw from the three sources (PCIe plus the two 6-pin connections) measured thus (worst cases shown):


PCIe current draw.


First six pin connector current draw.


Second six pin connector current draw.

That total power use of 52/63/42 watts, respectively, meaning 157 of a total permitted of 225 watts – is 70% of overall capacity. But individual percentage of capacity is equally important here – you can be under in aggregate but over on one source, a danger point. With each limited to 75 watts, the highest use noted was the 63 watts on 6-pin slot 1, or 84% of capacity. Given the very stressful nature of this test and the short-term peak power use, I remain satisfied that the health of my Mac Pro is not threatened.

With Unigine Valley, the maxima noted were 51/37/41 watts, for a more modest total of 129 watts, and a worst case use of 68% at the PCIe slot.

Monitoring the 1,000 watt Mac Pro power supply, I never saw power use exceed 500 watts during the Unigine Heaven test, a mere 50% of capacity.

GPU temperatures:

I cannot report on these as the GPU sensor is not ‘seen’ by the system. However, the power draw readings, above, are a fine proxy for determining GPU stress, and the permitted maximum power draw is not exceeded here.

Real world subjective use with Lightroom 5.1 and Photoshop CS5:

I’m not one much for subjective data. “It feels faster” is usually the placebo effect at work. But here are my subjective observations with LR and PS, applications I use all the time.

Lightroom is a key app for me and I actually noted a perceptible improvement. The occasional “Loading …” flag when flipping fast through 1:1 previews (I would get it 30% of the time) and the associated 2 second delay has now fallen to 2-3% of the time and a consistent 1/2 second delay.

When exporting a file from LR to PS, the longest part of the process is rendering of the PSD file from the RAW original in LR, before it can be opened in PS. With the GTX660 this took 6 seconds. With the GTX680 it’s down to 2.5 seconds – much faster and a noticeable enhancement to workflow smoothness and speed.

Are these improvements enough reason to upgrade? That’s a function of your patience threshold and the state of your pocket book. You will not go wrong with the slower GTX660 but once you have used the GTX680 it’s tough to go back. If your budget is $200, the GTX660 is unreservedly recommended. A new GTX680 is three times as much.

Comparison with the new Mac Pro:

Will the GTX680 match the D300/500/700 dual GPUs in the new Mac Pro? Once test data are available we will know and I will update the metrics above. If it lags, I would guess it will not be by much. Either way, you will have a great deal of money left in your pocket by sticking with the 2009 Mac Pro.

Now it’s time to start thinking about 4K displays. For a full list of nVidia GPUs which support 4K, click here.

Update May 27, 2014 – new OS X drivers: nVidia has just released a new driver which claims to fix all existing 4K issues. Click here.

Update June 6, 2014 – new Mac Pro:

Here’s Unigine Heaven running on the new Mac Pro (cylinder) with the 6-core CPU and dual top-of-the-line D700 GPUs. In a word – underwhelming, epecially given the very high cost of the D700s:

The premium for the D700 GPUs over the base D300 ones is $1,000, whereas a GTX680 ‘Made for Mac GPU’ for the old Mac Pro can be had new for $640, used for half that amount.

Update June, 2015:

The newest top-of-the-like Nvidia GTX980 card doubles the speed of the excellent GTX680 but also doubles the price – $600 new compared with $300 used for a flashed GTX680. Add a further $180 if you need the ROM in the GTX980 flashed to show the boot and option-start screens.

You can get it in many socket configurations from the usual vendors – Nvidia, EVGA, PNY, Gigabyte, Zotac, MSI, etc. – so choose based on your peripherals. I opted for a dual-DVI/DP/HDMI configuration, but if DP or MDP is your thing any number of multi-socket options is available.

For still photographers the GTX980 is overkill but for heavy video rendering using CUDA-capable apps it’s a must and the premium will be quickly recovered from enhanced productivity. You can read all about the GTX980 here and I recommend it without reservation. Performance is some 20% better than the costliest dual D700 option for the new (‘dustbin’) Mac Pro.

Meanwhile, a used, flashed GTX680 at $300 or less is an excellent choice for many users.

Olympus 45mm F/1.8 MFT Zuiko – Part II

Some snaps.

In Part I I took a look at the ergonomics of this MFT lens and also linked to my RAW lens correction profile for use with Panasonic bodies.

Here are a few snaps from a first spin with the lens on my Panasonic GX7 body. Most were taken in Carmel, CA. All were processed with my lens correction profile applied and with LR5’s Sharpness slider at ’60’:

Apertures varied from f/1.8 through f/5.6. The last image had the sun in the frame partly behind a branch. There are no flare spots. For a lens so compact the performance is excellent. Not quite as natively sharp as the 17mm Olympus MFT f/1.8 but perfect for a traveling, very light outfit.

Blurb revisited

Much better second time around.

Ask me what the best ways to show your photographs are and I will reply big prints, well printed hard copy books, a PDF on a tablet and last a computer display. I suppose TV screens work, but it just does not feel right to me.

I wrote over five years ago about publishing your own photography books with Blurb and came away disappointed. The price was overwhelming and everything else – paper quality, print quality, the divot in the cover – were underwhelming.

But times and technologies change so I decided to give Blurb another shot. Lightroom 5 added a Book module which integrates with Blurb but I simply exported my files to JPGs (2,000 pixels on the long side) then imported them into BookSmart, an app which can be downloaded from Blurb at no charge. The app comes in Mac and PC versions.

The app is really well engineered and while my 60 or so snaps imported oversized, requiring each be reduced to fit the page, the process was easy and fast. Note that if you want a spine title the book must be at least 80 pages. I decided on softcovers and paid a little more for the premium lustre paper. The weight and texture of the paper are serious art book quality and the printing is excellent. Printed images are just a tad more contrasty and darker than originals on a computer display, but nothing to complain about. The crop marks shown within the app are dead accurate. Even monochrome images show good if not great blacks and you can make out the lustre of the paper in this image:

I make these books for friends as Christmas gifts and, like my annual calendars, they show work solely taken during the year. This discipline prevents raiding the catalog for oldies and inspires me to come up with new things. I recommend it.


A scan of the book’s cover. Actual quality is far better.

With shipping, 60 page books, printed on both sides, with images on the front and rear covers, cost me $45 each after using a 20% discount coupon. As the paper is finally satisfyingly thick I see absolutely no sign of bleed through from opposing images. A contrast with my original experience. I messed about some with the Lightroom module but find the BookSmart app far easier to use and it’s not like exporting images to JPGs for import to BookSmart takes any appreciable time.

Recommended.

Olympus 45mm F/1.8 MFT Zuiko – Part I

An outstanding short telephoto lens.

So enamored was I of the Olympus 17mm f/1.8 lens that I decided to add the 45mm f/1.8 optic. I paid $350.


The 45mm on the GX7, next to the 17mm.

This makes for a superb, light and compact outfit with the two classical film era focal lengths of 35mm and 90mm, FFE. For a street snapper, that little outfit is good for 99% of daily needs.

Rather than build an exposed bayonet for the lens hood (extra), Olympus decided to hide the bayonet under a weakly attached plastic, chromed ring:


Bayonet exposed.

This is so weakly held in place and the lens so ugly were it lost, that I immediately attached a piece of chrome flue tape to make sure it does not fall off, This is especially recommended if, like me, you do not use a lens hood. If the lens hood fits as poorly it will soon be lost. It seems Oly simply cannot resist adding some asinine feature to most of its products – take the collapsible barrel on the 9-18mm MFT zoom and the retractable focus collar on the 17mm/1.8. But the optics of all three are so good that these eccentricities are but minor annoyances.


Flue tape in place.

How light is the lens? At 4.1oz it’s a featherweight, almost identical in weight to the 4.2oz of the 17mm. The 45mm appears to use more plastic in its construction, but who cares when the optics are so good? Length is 2.3″ against 2.2″ for the 17mm – it’s tiny.

Focus is almost as fast as the instant focus in the 17mm. It’s as near silent as it gets. There is a slight ‘bounce’ around the sharpest focus point, missing from the 17mm and much more pronounced in the 9-18mm, but nothing that gets in the way of rapid execution.

Much as it makes sense to compare the 17mm with the Leica 35mm Asph Summicron, the 45mm is the equivalent of the 90mm f/2 Apo Summicron, one of the finest lenses I have owned. (I bought mine years ago for $900 and sold it for some $2,000 when the Leica Ms moved on. Today it remains available, now for $4,000, which is plain daft. All 18 ounces of it. I owned mine for some 5 years, which computes to a compound annual return of 17.3% for those into such things, confirming Leicas are for China cabinets, not for real world use.) What both Leica lenses lack is AF, of course, and both will leave a mighty hole in your savings, one dug deeper still once you add an M body to use these with. Definition-wise it’s tough to comment as my catalog only contains film snaps from the Leica optic, a medium far inferior for capturing detail than modern digital sensors. However, purely subjectively, the 90mm Apo Summicron is the better lens wide open, though add a touch of sharpening at f/1.8 for the Oly in Lightroom and there’s nothing in it. Well, OK, there is something in it – the $3,650 burning a hole in your pocket if you are an Oly man.

The Olympus lens shows very minor vignetting which disappears by f/4, and mild pincushion distortion at all apertures. Accordingly, I created a lens correction profile for use on Panasonic bodies with RAW files and you can download it here. Install the profile as I explain and its application becomes automatic when images are loaded into Lightroom (3, 4 or 5), so it’s a ‘set and forget’ thing. Definition at f/1.8 and f/2 benefits from a little sharpening in LR (I use ’80’) otherwise the default setting of ’40’ for the GX7 body is fine, until you get to f/22, at which point diffraction takes the edge off sharpness. Setting sharpness to ’80’ at f/22 once again does the trick.

In practical terms there’s absolutely no need to stop the lens down unless you need depth of field, and one of the signal appeals of the wide apertures this optic offers is the very absence of depth of field, with backgrounds rendered pleasantly out of focus.

I constantly read about how MFT camera X or compact camera Y is not pocketable. This, I confess, leaves me confused. What, pray, is the utility value of a camera when it is in your pocket? What is important in a light traveling kit is that a spare lens is pocketable. One on the body, one in your pocket. The two Olympus f/1.8 lenses, the 17mm and the 45mm, are so small that they will fit even in the pocket of a jeans wearer, unless he is a hipster opting for skin tight fit. That is pocketability.

In Part II I will publish some snaps taken with this lens using the Panasonic GX7.