Lensbaby Gets Fisheye and Soft Core Optics

lensbabies

Did you know that your Lensbaby Composer has a removable optic inside? Using the right tool you can extract this glassy core and swap in one of Lensbaby’s new Fisheye or Soft Focus optics.

The Lensbaby Composer itself is a twist’n’shoot lens which bends to place the point of focus anywhere in the frame. It’s great fun to use, and can give some odd and unexpected effects to your photos. These new optics slot into that same case and distort the images even more.

The fisheye gives a fully round view, with the bending of straight lines you expect from a fisheye. With a full-frame camera, you actually see the circle. Crop frame sensors will get a little vignetting at the edges and Micro 4/3 bodies will not see the circle at all, but do get the bendy lines.

The soft focus unit slots in and gives even blur across the image. From the example pictures, it looks like the picture is still in focus but jut, well, softer. Imagine the old Hollywood vaseline-on-the-lens trick and you’ll be close.

Both optics have interchangeable aperture disks, and both can still be used with the tilting mechanism of the Lensbaby, although in the case of the fisheye you end up just blacking out a lot of the frame. The softy is $90, and the rather satisfyingly hefty fisheye is $150. Both turned up here at Gadget Lab España yesterday, and will be thoroughly tested over the next week (including shooting video on a Micro 4/3 body).

Fisheye [Lensbaby]

Soft Focus [Lensbaby]


Nikon’s New Shoulder-Busting, Shake-Free 300mm Telephoto

2186_afs-300-ed-vr-ii_front

You want short depth of field? Can’t be bothered to walk closer to your subject? Need to work on those weedy biceps? Hands shaking from a little too much of the good stuff last night? Nikon has you covered, with its new 6.4-pound, 300mm ƒ2.8 monster, a lens which packs in just about every new technology that Nikon has cooked up in the past few years.

Despite the weight, the lens is not that huge, and amazingly has just a 52mm filter thread. Inside you have a Silent Wave motor so the camera doesn’t have to shift the elements into focus and a VRII shake-reducer which adds up to four stops worth of wobble control (and has an auto-detecting tripod mode which optimizes the anti-shake for non-handheld shooting).

There is also a rather odd but possibly very useful feature: AF Memory Recall, which despite its name is not for remembering to take sharp pictures of Arnold Schwarzenegger on Mars. Instead, it lets you flip instantly back to a pre-determined point of focus. We’d like to see this on some shorter lenses, too — it would be dead handy for popping to the hyper-focal distance of a lens for fast street-shooting, for example.

Otherwise, there is a range of coatings on the elements, from ED to Nano Crystal to SIC. These all help the light get through to the sensor quickly and cleanly.

The price? This is a pro level lens, and has a pro-level price of $5,900. Nikon also has a 2x teleconverter out today, with an aspherical element which is a world first in converters. That will be going for an equally painful $500.

AF-S NIKKOR 300mm ƒ2.8G ED VR II [Nikon USA]

AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E III [Nikon USA]


Giz Explains: What Everyone Should Know About Cameras

Talking to a camera nerd—or even reading about new cameras—can feel like translating from a different language. But it doesn’t need to! Here, in this here post, is everything you need to know about cameras, without the noise.

When you buy a camera, you’ll be pelted with specs from a salesperson, many of which are confusing, and even misleading. You will cower, and may cover your head for protection. He will keep pelting. And really, he has to—spec sheets and jargon are integral to camera marketing, at least for now. Here’s what it all means, in one handy cheat sheet.

Types of Cameras

Before you set out to buy a new camera, or even just to get to know yours a little better, you’ve got to know the difference between the different types or cameras. Here are the ones you’re likely to come across.

Point-and-Shoots: Also known as compact cameras. If you don’t know what kind of camera you’re looking for, or what kind your have, it’s probably one of these. They’re the smallest style of camera, typically—at least in the last few years—trending toward a boxy, mostly featureless shape. The lens is non-removable. The flash unit is built in. They have LCD screens on the back, not just for reviewing photos, but to use as a viewfinder as well. When you press the shutter button on a point-and-shoot, there is a slight delay before the photo is actually recorded. Many new point and shoot cameras will take video, and some even manage to record in HD.

Bridge/Superzoom Cameras: These cameras often look like DSLRs, but don’t be fooled: They’re just juiced-up point-and-shoots. They will typically come with longer lenses and slightly more impressive specs than your average P&S, and will give you a bit more photographic flexibility to play with. Sadly, they suffer from the same picture-taking delay, or “shutter lag,” as point and shoots. The problem with bridge cameras, especially now, is that in order to get a decent one you have to spend at least a few hundreds dollars, at which point you may as well get a…

DSLRs: This unwieldy acronym stands for Digital Single Lens Reflex. Narrowly, this means that the camera has a mirror mechanism which allows photographers to see through the camera’s lens while setting up a shot, and which flips up, exposing the image sensor (the equivalent to film in a digital camera). Widely, this means that the camera will have interchangeable lenses, a larger sensor than a point and shoot, and to an extent, more image controls. When you press the shutter button on a DSLR, it takes the photo instantly—no lag, like in a point-and-shoot. Many new DSLRs at mid-to-high price points shoot HD video; some manage 720p, some manage 1080p, but all turn out impressive results, if simply because of the cameras’ lenses. That said, they’re not really ready to replace proper video cameras yet, because amongother things, no DSLR to date has got the autofocus during video thing right.

These are the cameras that photographers, or people who call themselves photographers, use. They’re also the ones that are capable of taking the best photos.

As a rule, DSLRs are more expensive than point and shoots. But they’re getting cheaper. Much, much cheaper. Olympus, Nikon, Pentax and Sony all have DSLRs that can be had for under $500—and these are real cameras—rendering the entire category of bridge cameras kind of pointless.

Micro Four Thirds/Digital Rangefinder: Micro Four Thirds cameras are interchangeable-lens cameras, minus the straight-through-the lens viewfinder that defines a DSLR. In other words, they have larger sensors like DSLRs, have swappable glass like DSLRs, but use an LCD screen as viewfinderlike a point-and-shoot. This saves space inside the camera, meaning that—at least this is the theory—it can be more portable than an equivalent DSLR, while maintaining the same versatility and image quality. Most of them record video, too, and they’re pretty good at it: They don’t have the complex viewfinder/mirror system of a DSLR, so it’s technically simpler to record video. Some of these cameras are styled like DSLRs, like the Panasonic Lumix DMC-G1, while some are styled more like portable cameras, like the Olympus EP-1.

This is a small category for now, and accordingly, prices are still high, starting at about $750. Panasonic and Olympus are basically the only game in town.

Sensors

The sensor is the part of the camera that actually records the image. In other words, it is your camera.

Megapixels, and image resolution: Megapixels have been central to digital camera marketing since the beginning (it just sounds like a 90s term, doesn’t it?). A megapixel, quite simply, is one million pixels. If a one-megapixel image (or sensor) was perfectly square, it would be 1000×1000 pixels. They’re usually rectangular, at 4:3 or 3:2 ratios, which means their resolutions look more like this: 2048×1536 pixels for a 3-megapixel camera; 3264×2448 pixels for an 8-megapixel camera, and so on.

As digital cameras mature, this number means less and less—it’s easy to cram megapixels in a camera, but without good optics and light sensitivity, it doesn’t mean that it’s going to turn out an honest, clean, high-quality images at such a high resolution. My cellphone shoots at five megapixels, but the images look like screenshots from some kind of ghosthunting show. My DSLR shoots at 10.1 megpixels, but turns out images more than twice as clean and clear as my phone. My point-and-shoot is rated at 12.1 megapixels, but on close examination, its images are effectively blurrier than those from the DSLR.

If you’re planning on making huge prints, or need to crop your images a lot, a high megapixel count is necessary, but beyond a certain point, the returns are minimal. You’ll read a lot of guidance from camera manufacturers about how many megapixels you need to print different sized photos, which you can ignore, because they seem to change with every generation of cameras. Unless you’re printing billboards or in magazine or something, don’t sweat it too much.

Aside from indicating how many dots a camera is capable of capturing, megapixels can be a helpful indicator of how old a camera’s guts may be. Megapixel count has been increasing fairly steadily over the years, so within a given manufacturer’s camera line, increased megapixels could correlate to newer sensors, which could, along with high resolution, take richer, less noisy pictures.

ISO: This indicates how fast your camera’s sensor collects light—the higher your ISO, the more sensitive your camera is to light, the less light you need to take a picture. And while high-ISO capability is most useful in low light, it also comes in handy when you’re shooting extremely fast exposures in the daytime, like at a sports game. With higher ISOs, though, comes more noise—some point-and-shoot cameras advertise extremely high ISOs, on the order of 6400. Shots at this sensitivity will invariably look like ass. DSLRs, which have larger sensors that are better at gathering light, can sometimes shoot at 6400 ISO and higher without too much noise.

It might help to think of it like this: ISO ratings are actually a callback to the days of film. You used to have to anticipate how you’d be shooting, and buy film based on how sensitive it was, as expressed in an ISO or ASA rating. The ratings got carried over to digital cameras, despite film getting replaced with sensors.

Anyway, don’t buy a camera for its ISO rating alone, because there’s a good chance its top two to three settings will be useless.

CCD and CMOS: From our previous Giz Explains on the subject:

There are two major types of image sensors for digital cameras and camcorders: CCD (charged-couple device) and CMOS (complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor, sometimes also known as active pixel sensor). We’re not going to get into the really geeky differences, because you don’t really need to know or care. What you should know is that higher-end digital SLRs (the big cameras with a removable lens) use CMOS because it’s easier to make bigger CMOS sensors; and mobile phones do because CMOS uses less power. That said, most point-and-shoot cameras and most camcorders use the more common CCD sensor.

Things are a little different now, and CCDs are common in DSLRs nowadays. The difference for consumers is minimal—don’t be alarmed to see either on your camera’s spec sheet. UPDATE: As some commenters have pointed out, this isn’t quite right: DSLRs are still trending more towards CMOS sensors, including most of the latest/greatest cameras. Anyway: still more of a curiosity than a purchasing point, for most people.

White Balance: Have you ever seen a set of indoor pictures that’s totally, inexplicably orange? That’s a white balance problem. Your camera can adjust to compensate for different light temperatures—tungsten lights have that orange hue, and sunlight will turn your photos kind of blue—and correct your image’s color accordingly. Virtually all cameras let you adjust white balance with presets, though it’s best if you can adjust it manually, too.

Sensor size, and crop factor: Some cameras have sensors that are roughly the same size as 35mm film, at 36x24mm. These are called full frame cameras. They tend to be more expensive—like Canon’s 5D and 1D series, or Nikon’s D3s—and their bodies tend to be a bit bigger. Semi-pro to pro equipment, basically.

APS-C sensors, on the other hand, are what almost all consumer DSLRs ship with. These sensors are about 22x15mm, which is significantly smaller than a full frame’s sensor. Why does this matter? Larger sensors provide more room for each pixel, which makes them better at picking up light. (A bucket analogy is useful here.) More importantly for APS-C users, though, is crop factor. A smaller sensor will pick up a smaller section of what’s coming through a lens, so: A 200mm lens on a full frame DSLR becomes a 300m lens on an APS-C camera, a 50mm becomes a 75mm, etc. Of course, camera manufacturers make APS-C -specific lenses which are designed for the smaller sensors, but the listed focal lengths aren’t adjusted—they’re still 35mm-equivalent numbers. Just be aware the any given lens will shoot differently from one type of camera to another.

Optics

The optics are the the parts through which your camera sees. They’re the eyeballs, basically.

Swappable lenses: There are two kinds of swappable lenses, generally speaking. Ones that zoom in and out, which are called “zoom” lenses, and ones that don’t move. These are called “primes.” They’re all classified by focal length. Strictly speaking, focal length refers to the distance required for a lens system to focus light. In real terms, focal length roughly correlates to physical lens length, and helps indicate how much a lens magnifies an image. 18mm focal length on a DSLR is considered wide, 200mm or more would be considered a telephoto lens.

Point-and-Shoot Lenses, and the X Factor: The second most prominently featured number on your point-and-shoot’s obnoxious feature sticker is the zoom rating. It’ll be expressed as a number, with an x: 5x, 10x, etc. You’ll also see a printed range, something like 5.0-25mm, which describes the focal length of the lens. Here’s a trick: Divide the larger focal length measurement by the smaller one. The result should match your “x” zoom rating, because, well, that’s all it is: the quotient of the maximum lens length and the minimum lens length.

This is misleading labeling. Mounted on the same camera, a lens that zooms from 50mm to 100mm would be called a 2X lens, while a lens that zooms from 18mm to 42mm would be called a 3X lens, even though at the longest, it doesn’t zoom in as far as the 50-100mm lens does at its shortest. Take this equation into account when comparing point-and-shoots, but most of all, try them. You’ll see the difference.

Shutter, shutter speed, and shutter lag: You shutter is the little door that opens up between your lens and your sensor, allowing for photographic exposure. Shutter speed ranges are advertised with the intention of implying that the camera will be useful at both ends: from the 10-second long exposure to the 1/4000th-second high-speed shot. Keep in mind, for both numbers, that shutter speed alone doesn’t guarantee anything. If your camera can shoot at 1/4000th of a second, but it’s got a small aperture and low ISO rating, your shots will probably be too dark.

Shutter lag is something else entirely. You know how on a point and shoot, there’s a frustrating gap between when you press the button and when your shot actually takes? That’s it. The lower the shutter lag, the better, though many camera manufacturers don’t even bother to advertise this.

Aperture: This is the hole through which light passes after its been through part of your lens, and before it hits your sensor. The bigger the hole, the more light gets in. The smaller the hole, the less light gets in. Larger apertures allow you to take pictures in lower light situations, but only allow you to focus on a thin plane—either your background or your foreground will be out of focus. Smaller apertures let you keep more of a scene in focus but they let less light through, and require longer exposure times. Apertures are described by f-numbers—these are the ration between the width of an aperture and the focal length of a lens. The smaller the number, the larger the aperture.

Optical vs Digital Zoom: Another scourge of the camera buyer is digital zoom. Optical is magnification by your lens—in other words, it’s true zoom. Digital zoom is just your camera taking the optically zoomed image and blowing it up, like you’d do in Photoshop. It’s only useful for framing shots and sometimes helping your camera focus properly. Otherwise, it’s a gimmick: Ignore it, shoot wide and crop your shots later.

IS, or Antishake: Image stabilization is fast becoming a standard feature on even the cheapest cameras, though you’ll find some sub-$150 point-and-shoots without it. The point of image stabilization is to correct for camera movements during an exposure, which cause blurry shots.

There are two types: Digital IS, which you’ll find mostly in point-and-shoots, corrects the image with software, and can be somewhat effective, though the results are often passable, not perfect. Optical image stabilization physically moves some part of the camera to counteract shaking. In some cameras, like Nikons and Canons, the moving parts are in the lens. In most other other manufacturers’ DSLRs, it’s the sensor that actually moves to stabilize the image. Optical IS almost always works better, but it’s not magic—you won’t be able to shoot a freehand four-second exposure just because it’s on, but you might be able to keep things together for a half-second or more.

Software


“Modes,” Face Detection, Smile Detection: Your camera’s modes are assistive tools,, not hard features. They’re generally just collected presets for settings that you can adjust yourself, like equalizer presets on your iPod. They can be useful, though you’ll be a better photographer if you manage settings yourself.

Face and smile detection, again, are like crutches. Face detection guesses when there’s a human in the photo so the camera can adjust exposure, white balance and focus to make sure that said human doesn’t end up blurry. Smile detection is a crude algorithm that measures facial features, and won’t take a photo until the subjects are judged to be SUFFICIENTLY CONTENTED, by which I mean they have vaguely crescent-shaped mouth holes. It’s a good way to ensure that nobody is ruining a photo with a grimace. Also, to ensure that none of your photos are ever interesting.

Image formats: You digital camera doesn’t have film, but your photos have to go somewhere. In today’s cameras, the digitally stored photos are either JPEGs or RAW files. JPEG files are compressed, which means that they are encoded in such a way that they don’t take up much space, but lose a small amount of quality. This is how point-and-shoot cameras almost always store images, and how DSLRs store images by default, generally.

If JPEGs are like photo prints (they’re not, really, but bear with me) then RAW files are like the digital negatives. (In fact, one popular RAW format, .DNG, crudely stands for “digital negative”). Raw files contain almost exactly what your sensor has recorded, which means you can change values like exposure, white balance and coloration after taking the photo, to a surprisingly high degree. It feels like cheating! There is a downside: larger image files. And, depending on the type of RAW file—different camera manufacturers have different ones—you may need special software to view and edit your photos. Shoot in RAW if you can, and buy a camera that’ll let you. This is a huge feature.

As a bonus, most cameras that shoot RAW will also let you shoot RAW and JPEG files simultaneously, so you have a lightweight, ready-to-print-or-upload file right away, as well as the RAW source, for later editing. It takes up a ton of space, but hey, space is cheap nowadays. Spend a few bucks on a bigger memory card, and live your life.

Video: Most new cameras, including some DSLRs, shoot video. But just because your camera shoots stills at 10 megapixels doesn’t mean that it’ll shoot anywhere near that kind of resolution in motion. The standard resolution for most point-and-shoot cameras is VGA—that’s just 640×480 pixels of video, which is good enough for YouTube—while DSLRs, and some nicer point-and-shoots, record in either 720p or 1080p, which are HD resolutions, which translate to 1280×720 pixels and 1920×1080 pixels, respectively.

Storage


Point and shoot cameras usually come with a small amount of onboard storage. This, I’m about 100% sure, is there so that the camera technically works when you buy it, making your inevitable extra storage purchase seem more like a choice, and less like a mandatory camera tax. Anyway, with any camera, you’re going to need to buy some memory, or storage.

There are a few peripheral memory card formats still kicking around (Sony, can you please just put Memory Stick Pro out of its misery? Thanks!) but there are only two that matter.

SD: Also seen as SDHC, or SDXC, these little guys are the card of choice for point-and-shoot and bridge cameras, and some newer DSLRs. They’re small, they works fine, and they’re available in just about any capacity you could ever want. Almost: Most cameras are only SDHC-compatible, a standard which maxes out at 32GB. SDXC, the next evolution of the SD standard, maxes out at a theoretical 2TB, though almost no cameras support it yet.

Compact Flash: These cards are chunkier, can be faster, and are more durable, and anecdotally less prone to temperature and weather damage. These are what you’ll find in DSLRs.

Speed ratings: Memory cards come in different speeds. These are advertised in a variety of different ways, for no good reason. You’ll see a couple of numbers on most cards, in the “133x” syntax. Ignore them—they are inflated, unregulated and therefore, basically meaningless. What you’re looking for on SD cards is a Class rating, from 1-6. The official SD Association chart:
For Compact Flash cards, your best bet is to look for an actual transfer speed on the card, expressed in MB/s.

Further Reading


Reviews: One gadget blog, try as we may, can’t cover the hundreds of cameras that come out every year. We’ll leave that to the obsessives. See:

DPReview

The Photography Bay

Photography Review

Photo.net

You really shouldn’t buy a camera without consulting these guys first. They have a habit of lapsing into jargon at times, but hey, if you’ve read this far, you’ll be able to get by.

Taking Photos: So now you’ve got your new piece of neck candy, and you feel awfully cool. You know what would make you cooler? Learning how to shoot, for god’s sake. A few of out recent guides:

The Basics: Your new camera has been removed from the box. It has been fiddled with. You cat has been photographed multiple times. Now what?

When Not to Use Flash: The answer: Pretty much always.

How To Shoot HDR: Taking hyperreal photos by combining multiple exposures, without, as we call it, the “clown vomit.”

• For general advice, Photo.net‘s comically extensive set of photography guides provides instructions for virtually any scenario. Need to shoot some, say, nudes? In, say, Namibia’s uniquely harsh sunlight? They’ve got you covered.

And although broad guides are useful, I’ve learned more about photography and cameras from Flickr than any other resource. Join the Flickr group for your camera, and spend some time on the message boards. You’ll learn clever tricks for getting the most out of your hardware, but in doing so, with the help of a gracious community, you’ll learn just as much about photography as a whole.

Still something you wanna know? Send questions about DSLRs, P&Ses, B&Bs or BBQs here, with “Giz Explains” in the subject line.

Phone-O-Scope brings SLR lenses to the iPhone the hard way

We’ve seen a few iPhone camera mods and even the odd off-the-shelf case with interchangeable lenses — but why buy new lenses when you already have some perfectly good ones for your SLR camera? That’s the thinking behind this so-called Phone-O-Scope built by camera modder Bhautik Joshi, at least, which makes use of an always handy laser pickup from a CD player, some PVC pipe couplers and, of course, duct tape to let you attach any regular SLR lens to your iPhone. As you might expect, however, the end result isn’t exactly flawless, but the Bhautik does seem to be happy with the “fuzzy, Holga-like images” he’s able to get with the rig. Judge for yourself after the break, and find the details for building your own at the link below.

Continue reading Phone-O-Scope brings SLR lenses to the iPhone the hard way

Phone-O-Scope brings SLR lenses to the iPhone the hard way originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:29:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink SlashGear  |  sourceCaptain Nod  | Email this | Comments

iPhone camera mod for magnification: because you can

We’ve thought before how nice it might be to have some powers of magnification on the iPhone’s cam… but are we going to go out and mod our unit? Probably not, but that doesn’t mean we can’t admire someone else’s work. Taking various lenses and attaching them to the lid of a jar, the modder quite carefully built a contraption that looks a little “hobo Steampunk” to us, but we’re still fairly impressed with this little gadget. Hit the read link for full, detailed instructions and more photos if you’d like to make one of your own.

iPhone camera mod for magnification: because you can originally appeared on Engadget on Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:37:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink Wired  |  sourceInstructables  | Email this | Comments

Video: doctors implant tooth into eye, restore sight, creep everyone out

Osteo-odonto-keratoprosthesis. It’s a real procedure that really does revive people’s ability to see, yet we get the feeling that people will be more, um, excited about how it’s done than why it’s done. The seemingly Mary Shelley-inspired doctors extract a tooth from a blind person and drill a hole through it, where a prosthetic lens is placed, and the resulting macabre construction is implanted into the blind person’s eye. The tooth is necessary as the body would reject an artificial base. It’s not at all pretty, and it cannot repair every type of blindness, but it’s still a major step forward. To hear from Sharron Thornton, the first American to have undergone the procedure, check the video after the break, but only if you can handle mildly graphic content — you’ve been warned.

[Via Daily Tech]

Continue reading Video: doctors implant tooth into eye, restore sight, creep everyone out

Filed under:

Video: doctors implant tooth into eye, restore sight, creep everyone out originally appeared on Engadget on Tue, 22 Sep 2009 06:25:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Purported Canon EOS 7D poster, lenses turn up online

Well, it’s nearly become an annual event at this point, but it looks like those patiently waiting for a Canon EOS 7D now have a bit more fodder to consider, with a purported new poster and some new lenses for the camera recently turning up online. As you can see above, however, that poster reveals only a few details and an even less complete look at the camera itself, which was most recently spotted in pieces. The rumored new lenses, on the other hand, are making themselves seen considerably more clearly and, if the pics (after the break) are to believed, include an EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens and a longer EF-S 18-135m f/3.5-5.6 IS. Still looking for a bit more? There’s charts and graphs at the read link below.

[Thanks, Bruno]

Continue reading Purported Canon EOS 7D poster, lenses turn up online

Filed under:

Purported Canon EOS 7D poster, lenses turn up online originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 28 Aug 2009 16:37:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Review: Lensbaby Composer Lets You Art Up Images Sans Photoshop

pr_lens_baby_f

There are many options for adding effects to a photograph, but one way or another, they usually involve some sort of Photoshop-y sleight of hand. Not when you have a Lensbaby. These specially made DSLR lenses let you create pics with accouterments  like selective focus or the rawness normally achieved with plastic Lomo cams. But first, take in some background courtesy of writer/ photographer Jackson Lynch:

Back in 2003, full-time photographer, DSLR devotee and part-time tinkerer Craig Strong felt his images were just too crisp, clean and well, boring. Yearning for the dramatic effects of a view camera’s tilt-and-shift selective focus and the organic randomness of plastic cameras like the Holga, Strong holed himself up in his Portland, Oregon tool shed for some serious hackin’ and hewin’. He emerged in early ‘04 with a Rube Goldbergesque marriage of flexible Shop-Vac hosing, a hand-machined mount and an uncoated lens element that fit onto an SLR body and focused by moving the lens plane with your fingers. It looked pretty rough hewn and funky, but he gave it to a few incredulous friends to try.

Strong’s friends didn’t just like it. They lurved it. And it turned out other photographers would too. Nearly six years later he’s sold thousands of lensbabies to over 40 different countries. We took the most recent model, the Composer for a spin. Again from Jackson:

The Lensbaby experience is a creative one and requires a lot of manual tweaking. Apertures on the double glass, single glass and plastic units range from f2 to f22 and you set them by inserting black metal discs into the front of the lens, not by turning a dial. Selective focus is of course, manual as well. Thankfully, the aperture priority setting on most modern cameras works with the Composer. It’s available for the for Canon, Nikon, Sony Alpha A/Minolta Maxxum, Pentax K, Samsung GX, Olympus E1, and Panasonic Lumix DMC in case you’re wondering.

There’s more to this story. To read the full account of Jackson and the Lensbaby Composer check out the full review right here.


The 3 DSLR Lenses You Need (and 2 More You’ll Crave)

This goes out to people who bought or want an entry-level DSLR, and wonder what’s the deal with interchangeable lenses. You really gonna buy that extra glass? It’s a beginner’s guide to growing as a photographer, preferably without going broke.

It doesn’t matter what brand of camera you bought—if it’s an entry-level DSLR, it was offered to you with an 18-55mm kit lens. I hope you took them up on that offer because no matter what you bought, that kit lens comes cheap, and is well worth it. Yes, of the five lenses covered here, that kit lens is numero uno.

KIT LENS
Like most bundle pricing, it’s cheaper than buying the camera body and lens separately, and most experts agree that an 18-55mm is actually the perfect lens for most immediate photographic needs, with both a decent wide angle plus the ability to zoom in on far away objects. In fact, if you take a look at the four shots below—all taken by me with kit lenses on basic DSLRs—you can see a foreshadowing of the four other lenses in this briefing—telephoto, wide-angle, portrait and macro:

But if you read Gizmodo enough, you know that we’ve made the case that lenses, and not the cameras themselves, account most for great pictures. Photography is an optics game first and foremost, and there’s a point at which that kit lens can’t achieve shots that your heart and soul tell you are achievable. There’s nothing wrong with your camera—seriously, there’s nothing wrong with it. You just need to get some more lenses.

In order to run this story I called some experts at Canon, Nikon and Sigma, which makes discounted lenses for most DSLRs. I could have called experts at [insert your favorite non-Canon or Nikon camera brand here] but early on, the advice was consistent and clear: Anyone who is really taking an interest in their camera should invest in a telephoto zoom next, followed by a fast “normal” lens, which you might call a portrait lens.

LENS LABELING
In the interest of speed, I can’t talk about lens anatomy, but there are some key attributes you need to know to read all lens retail listings: focal length and aperture.

In most cases, the lens categories here differ by the focal length, that is, how close a subject appears, indicated in millimeters. The human-eye equivalent is between 30mm and 50mm. A telephoto lens, which gets up close to things that are far away, can be as long as 500mm. A wide-angle lens, which makes close-up objects appear farther away, can be 10mm—still less if you want the bulbous fisheye look. A “zoom” lens simply means that it has a variable focal length—for instance, your kit lens, which can hit any length from 18mm to 55mm.

Because entry-level cameras have smaller (APS-C) sensors than professional APS) full-frame 35mm cameras, everybody makes two sets of lenses. Typically all lenses work on beginner cameras, but beginner lenses don’t work on pro cameras. If you stick with beginner lenses (denoted Nikon DX, Canon EF-S, Sony DT, Pentax DA, Sigma DC and Tamron Di II), you won’t have to stress, but if you want to buy a pro lens, or have some lying around, bear in mind that you need to multiply the focal length by 1.5 or so to get the equivalent focal length for your camera. A 50mm pro lens is really a 75mm lens on your beginner’s model. Why am I telling you this? Because there are new and used pro-level lenses out there for really good prices.

In one case below, what sets the lens apart is its large aperture. The aperture is the hole that lets in the light, and it’s measured by the f-stop. A wider aperture means more light comes in, and you have a better chance of getting nice shots indoors, in dimmer settings. A narrower aperture lets in less light. The trade-off is that a wide aperture can’t focus on as many things that are at different distances—it is said to have a “shallow depth of field.” Your main subject is clear, but the background is blurry—artistic in many cases, annoying in some. When you narrow the aperture, you can crisply resolve more elements, but only if there’s enough light. The wide aperture of a “fast” lens can always be narrowed, but there’s no way for a “slow” lens with a narrower aperture to bring in more light.

As if that wasn’t tricky, check this out: The f-stop is a fraction, and the number you refer to is on the bottom, so if it’s low (f/1.4), the aperture is wide, and if it’s high (f/6.0), the aperture is narrow. Got it? Zoom lenses at beginner prices tend to have variable f-stops, apertures that get narrower, and in need of more light, as you zoom in.

TELEPHOTO ZOOM
Lenses in many ways are about reach, about bringing faraway subjects closer to your camera’s sensor. “The low-end customer, who may take out their DSLR only occasionally, says, ‘I want to shoot a picture of the moon, or animals at the zoo, or kids playing soccer,'” says Dave Metz, a lens specialist at Sigma. Even when that kit lens is cranked to the max, it’s only giving you a 55mm focal length, which is why most DSLR makers have a very well-priced 55-200mm lens waiting at the ready. Prices range from $120 to $250, and it’s usually the easiest purchase to make.


Credits: Lindsay Silverman – Nikon; me with Nikon; Robert O’Toole – Sigma; Stephen Lang – Sigma

Another telephoto zoom lens you’ll see is the 18-200mm, which can cost anywhere from $350 to $600. That’s a hefty premium to pay just so you don’t have to schlep around two lenses, and generally speaking, the broader the focal length range, the more corners are being cut in performance. That lens is a pass.

If you are feeling particularly far out, both Metz and Nikon’s camera marketing guru Steve Heiner suggest a 70-300mm lens. Sigma’s model sells for under $200, Nikon’s most recent model, with built-in image stabilizing, is just over $500, and there are 70-300mm lenses for everyone else ranging from $130 to $850, all with variable f-stops of either f/4.0-5.6 or f/4.5-5.6. Better yet, these lenses are spec’d for pro-grade full-frame cameras, so they’re exceptionally zoomy on your beginner’s camera, more like 105-450mm. Hey, don’t think about it too much, just enjoy it.

NORMAL (AKA PORTRAIT)
As much traction as you’ll get from a zoom lens, it doesn’t really teach you much, except maybe how to compose without cropping. I personally learned a hell of a lot more about photography when I started playing with f/1.8 50mm lenses. This is called a “normal” lens because, says Heiner, “It was all you could get on a camera in the ’50s and ’60s.” In fact, he jokes that even though younger people are snapping up this relatively cheap lens ($100 to $150), he and his ilk “couldn’t wait to get away from it” when zoom lenses started hitting the market.

What does it do? As a “fast” lens, it can shoot really well in low light. Keep the aperture wide, get up in your subject’s grill, and start clicking. You’ll see parts of their face sharply resolved while other parts are softly blurred. Tighten the aperture a tad, and your subject’s whole head is clear while the backdrop is soft and peaceful, even if it’s a Manhattan street corner at rush hour. What doesn’t it do? It doesn’t zoom, and because it’s usually rated for pro cameras, it’s about the equivalent of 75mm on an entry-level DSLR—which is roughly the preferred focal length for portrait shooting—so you often have to step back to get a decent shot.


Credits: Me with Canon; Joe DiMaggio – Sigma; Joe DiMaggio – Sigma; Lindsay Silverman – Nikon

Alternatives to the cheap f/1.8 lens are an even faster one, f/1.4 ($300 to $500), or a 30mm or 35mm that gives entry-level cameras more of a “normal”—what your eye can see—perspective.

At this point, in addition to the original cost of your camera, you’ve spent less than $500, and you’ve added immeasurable functionality and artistic wiggle room. You can stop here, and you won’t be judged. But, if you like, I can tell you about two more lenses that might rock your casbah.

ULTRA-WIDE ANGLE ZOOM
That kit lens brings you down to 18mm, which is enough for you to stand in a corner of a room and shoot pretty much anything going on in that room. But what if you’re not in the corner? The same twist of fate that makes pro-level telephoto lenses even more zoomy on your entry-level DSLR makes wide angles trickier—or at least more expensive—to attain.

Why is this? Film is flat, so light can come in at any angle, and the film will mostly record it. But camera sensor pixels are concave, and don’t do well with light coming in from the side. Think of the pixels as little water glasses, says Sigma’s Dave Metz. “You can fill them up with water by pouring it in from above, but try shooting it in from the side with a garden hose, and it’s going to go all over the place.” A telephoto by definition is pulling in light from directly in front of it, whereas a wide angle by definition is bringing in light from the sides, too. Hence the trouble, and the added expense.

But if you have the means, it’s the consensus of my experts that you should pick yourself up an ultra-wide-angle zoom lens (10-24mm, 10-22mm or 10-20mm). Just be very careful that it’s one built specifically for entry-level DSLRs, with the arcane designations I mentioned in the “Lens Labeling” section. Discounted on Amazon, Nikon’s is selling for $809 while Canon’s is around $730. Tamron and Sigma make them for Canon and Nikon for just under $500.


Credits: Stephen Lang – Sigma; David FitzSimmons – Sigma; Carol Polich – Sigma; Joe DiMaggio – Sigma

And the aesthetic pay off? As Metz tells it, “I am sure you’ve seen a beautiful mountain scene; in the foreground there’s beautiful little flowers. Because they’re so close, they appear out of perspective. You effectively enlarge the flowers.” It’s also, as he points out, the best way to make sure that all the uncles and aunts are included in the family portrait you take at the Christmas dinner table.

MACRO
The final stop on our survey of lens-topia is the macro—or big hairy bug—lens. “When I try to show people about macro photography, they say ‘What is that?'” says Lisette Ranga, a Canon camera marketing specialist, “but when they look through the viewfinder, and see how close you can get, they get it.” While I don’t understand why people like taking pictures of bugs and flowers so much, I am a victim of the chronic urge to do so. Though some are 50mm or thereabouts, many macros are telephoto lenses. The ideal, it seems, is to shoot stuff up close that you wouldn’t even want to get near—he who snaps the most snakes and scorpions wins.


Credits: Canon 60mm Macro sample; Canon 60mm Macro sample; David FitzSimmons – Sigma; Lindsay Silverman – Nikon

So what do you look for? Typically, macro lenses have a fixed aperture of f/2.8 (sometimes f/2.5). Sigma has five lenses, ranging from 50mm ($300) to 180mm ($900), all fixed, plus a few zooms such as the one I personally want to try out, the 24-70mm ($570, compared to well over $1,000 for the equivalent Canon or Nikon). What’s cool is that when you’re not photographing scorpions (or stamps or coins or documents), you can use these for portraits and other “normal” shooting, but with such sharp resolve that some even recommend a bit of digital softening.

So you see, adding those final two lenses more than doubles your investment, and for a diminished payoff. That’s what you would buy next, but for most of you, it’s not what you should be buying.

IMAGE STABILIZATION, LENS MOUNTS AND YOUR DADDY’S LENS COLLECTION
Though some readers probably gave up on this story a long time ago, I have made every attempt to keep it clear and moving. In doing so, I skipped over lots of hot topics, including image stabilization and lens compatibility.

Canon and Nikon currently promote the hell out of image stabilizing lenses, in large part because their cameras do not have in-camera image stabilization like Sony, Pentax and Olympus. While image stabilization does tend to matter, its location doesn’t seem to matter as much. The consensus on the internet is that it’s a drag to have to buy IS in lenses over and over, and from what I’ve seen, there is a clear added cost when buying lenses a la carte. Nevertheless, there’s a premium for buying Nikon and Canon because they are consistently the best reviewed and the biggest sellers, so there’s no right or wrong. It’s just something to look for when buying lenses, and to discuss with your favorite camera nerds.

The main reason Canon and Nikon don’t have IS in their cameras is that the camera technologies pre-date the digital revolution, and it was harder to do with film. The flipside is this: Older film-based lenses from Canon and Nikon work on newer Canon and Nikon digital cameras. For Canon, it’s the EF standard, which dates back to 1987. If the lens says EF on it, it will work. If it says EF-S, it was specifically made for entry-level DSLRs, and won’t work on pricier pro models. If you put an EF lens on a camera that typically takes EF-S lenses, remember to multiply by 1.6 to figure out the real focal length.

For Nikon, it’s a tad weirder: Any F-mount lens dating back to 1959 will fit on the thing, but only the lenses labeled AF-S will definitely work with D40/D60/D90/D3000/D5000 class of entry-level DSLRs. If the lens doesn’t say “DX” on it, multiply the focal length by 1.5 to see what it really is. If your dad hands you a bag of Nikon lenses, accept them graciously, and try them all out, but be ready for weird results, or at the very least, a sudden lack of autofocus and auto metering.

LENS QUALITY
I want to leave you with one final bone of contention—the quality of the lenses. I recognize that I have made many suggestions that seem like go-out-and-buy-’em recommendations. I do think that shopping for new lenses on a tight budget is a good way to expand as a photographer, but this is not a “buyer’s guide.”

Many photography enthusiasts believe buying a cheap lens to attach to your camera would be like buying a used prophylactic to… well, I’ll spare you the imagery. But the point is, there is surely a reason why third-party ultra-wide-angle zoom lenses cost half as much as big name versions, just as there is surely a reason why Canon’s 50mm f/1.4 costs nearly four times as much as its 50mm f/1.8. There are real differences in lenses, and I’m happy to invite you to discuss them below.

Canon’s New Anti-Blur Lenses Will Be Available This Year

canonhybrid-001

Blur is a bane and a boon to the photographer, depending on just what type of blur it is, and where it is found. Canon’s newly announced Hybrid Image Stabilizer aims to do a better job of removing the bad kind from your photos.

There are two kinds of blur: A shot can be out of focus, or moving too fast for the shutter to freeze. These can both be good. An out-of-focus background makes the subject pop out, and motion-blur, say by panning with a moving car, gives the impression of speed by blurring the background.

But the bad kind is the kind that makes your friends look all fuzzy when you can’t hold the camera steady. IS, or image stabilization, has been around for a while, and it uses a computer to analyze the scene and compensate for your wobbly hands by shifting either lens or sensor (or both). Up until now, this has worked with linear blur, movements left-to-right or up-and-down. Canon’s new IS also works with rotational blur.

The new tech gets information from an angular velocity sensor, kind of similar to the iPhone’s accelerometer. The extra dimension of shake-correction means that the system can be optimized for both normal and macro (close-up) photography, as different types of shake become more apparent at different distances. Tilting the lens when very close to a flower, for example, can have a large relative effect.

The oddest part of the announcement, though, is that “The technology will be incorporated in an interchangeable single lens reflex (SLR) camera lens planned for commercial release before the end of 2009”. It’s unusual to pre-announce something like that. On the other hand, we’re half way through the year already. We’re looking forward to seeing what this will do for low-light shooting. Right now is an amazing time to be a photographer — camera tech has caught up to film already, and now the boffins are bent on inventing all sorts of fancy new toys.

Press release [DP Review]