Well I did it. I cancelled my Adobe Photographer’s package subscription at the point of renewal. As I mentioned in a previous post, I am not happy to work from the cloud because it simply isn’t practical in the Highlands of Scotland where we struggle to get a mobile signal let alone wifi.
I have not been a fan of the subscription model, and being tied into a monthly contract for 12 months, ever since it was launched. Whilst I do appreciate it spreads the cost, you are then tied to it. I also resented being tied to Photoshop when I only need Lightroom, which was always the much cheaper free standing package.
So, what will I be using? Affinity Photo.
I have this on my iPad Pro and it’s superb. It almost makes me want a bigger iPad, as in one with more storage, so that I can use the pencil features. The desktop version I will have to get used to, and after over 25 years with Adobe it will be a big shift.
I might regret it, or it might be liberating. If I regret it then I can always take a new subscription with Adobe in due course, but at least I would do so knowing that I had given it a go without.
I have to say that after a couple of days processing two shoots (from Raw) with Affinity it is a good replacement for Photoshop but it doesn’t replace Lightroom. It is very difficult to accurately assess images without opening each one individually as it has no catalogue feature. I have downloaded Adobe Bridge, which is free, but it feels like too much of a compromise and increase in workflow.
I also find Affinity is very power hungry on the computing front and this means I have to wait for transitions to take place more than I did with Lightroom.
It has slowed my workflow down, and sometimes I am not noticing things until well into the edit which I would have seen immediately and corrected (like minor lens distortions). It probably doesn’t help that I have just moved to the D800 and am dealing with bigger files with more definition.
I have now downloaded a trial of On1 Photo Raw 2018 for 30 days to see if this is better suited. I still like Affinity on the iPad Pro, and I can see uses for it, but more for Photoshop than Lightroom type edits. I, as an ‘right in-camera’ type shooter that doesn’t use special effects, don’t really use Photoshop that much, it was Lightroom that I used most so I feel there is more work to be done.
3 Legged Thing are a British company that designs tripods with a very different attitude. They design a tripod as a modular concept so that it does more than just holds your camera. For information on that I would definitely recommend visiting their website because they will explain it far better than I can, and I don’t expect to use all the possible features or configurations.
They also design them to be a bit sexy…
Anyway, this is my initial few thoughts on the Punks Billy – currently the only Carbon Fibre tripod in the Punks range. I would like to say that I purchased the Billy with my own money from Jack the Hat, and that neither 3 Legged Thing or Jack the Hat have paid me to write this and all opinions contained within are my own.
The reason I purchased from Jack the Hat and not directly from 3 Legged Thing was the delivery service. Jack the Hat delivers to the Highlands and Islands postcodes of Scotland without any fuss and even next day using Royal Mail Special Delivery by 1pm. Sadly, 3 Legged Thing does not, and I wasn’t in a position to wait for a courier to sit on my delivery for an extra day just because they don’t like my postcode (even though I’m about a minute from the main Inverness-Aberdeen road which they drive along more frequently).
In this review I am not going to write about the specifications for the tripod because you can get them direct from 3 Legged Thing’s website here. What I am going to write about is how the tripod shapes up in actual use.
When it first arrived it was in a very funky box, and struck me as being very well engineered, with excellent accessories, but sadly not including spikes as standard. It is possible to buy more feet, and three different ones for different terrain are offered, but this does then increase the overall cost. Given that two of their main competitors; Benro and MeFoto, both send their tripods out with a set of spikes included it is a bit disappointing. It should be said that you do generally pay quite a bit more for many of the similarly specified Benro tripods so it could be argued that you’re paying for them anyway.
When I put Billy up to his full height, I thought he was less stiff that I had expected. To be honest, I was a bit disappointed at the time, and somehow I needed up with a very odd angled image of it in the kitchen.
Billy (and Travis) are two of the taller tripods and as an added bonus for me, being only 5ft 3″ that means that without the centre column the camera is still at veryclose to beingeye level. I like removing centre columns as it allows a tripod to go much lower, reduces carry weight, and so I feel it gives me more flexibility. The image above shows it with the centre column but I then took this out (very simple to do) for the shot below, and used it without the column for my first outing.
As it was blowing a hoolie as we say up here in Scotland. I took it to the beach on the north sea coast to see how it would cope. Putting the camera on it actually made it much more stable, and even having the legs at almost their full extensions and splayed to the middle of the three leg positions, I was not more impressed.
The leg with the orange band at the top unscrews to become a monopod which is part of the modular design of the tripod, although I am not a great user of monopods it might prove handy.
Carrying it on my rucksack was a doddle and I didn’t notice it was there as its weight is very minimal for the support offered. It does fold like a travel tripod; the legs go fully up the other way to that show in the image, so the head sits between them, but when on my tripod this configuration works better for me.
I really liked the big chunky grips on it as the air temperature was barely above freezing and the windchill was making it considerably below. I was using fairly thick gloves for every moment except the final shooting, and it operated fearlessly with my gloves on. In Scotland this is very important. Big grips and larger knobs are very useful.
Carbon Fibre comes into it’s own in the cold. It is way nicer to handle that Aluminium and I was actually glad the Travis (Billy’s non-carbon twin brother) was out of stock. Billy is basically the same as Travis but being carbon is around 220g lighter whilst, evidently, being stronger for it too. It would have been nicer still if one leg had a leg warmer, but rubber please not foam as the foam ones soak up water. A couple of strips of the same rubber as is on the leg adjusters would be nice. It would give you more grip in the wet too.
Using the centre column enables you to use the ‘Toolz’ carabiner to attach a weight, such as a water bottle, to the bottom of the centre column via its hook. This also can aid stability although I didn’t find it necessary even in the gale force winds I experienced.
Having removed the centre column you loose that attachment point but you still have the three eyelets on the head attachment plate which you can now use for the same purpose amongst others. This would place the weight very slightly off centre in its attachment but if it’s handing this should still be ok.
I have constructed a three way sling using three accessory carabiners and a piece of cord which I can rest bottle or even rocks in. One carabiner into each hole on the plate and the cord suspends between them. I didn’t use it on this outing, and it may just live in my bag unused. I wouldn’t be out in conditions much more difficult that I encountered today so this was a fairly good forward looking test.
I started off on the beach getting shots of the crashing waves and I was very pleased with the results (see above). The tripod held my Nikon D600 with Nikkor 14-24/f2.8 lens (which is not light) very securely, much more so than my MeFoto Roadtrip does. Already Billy was proving he was worth the money.
I moved on from the beach at Kingston (sadly not Jamaica) to the sea wall at Portgordon, and the variable leg angles proved very useful. My MeFoto Roadtrip annoyed me a lot by having less positions, but the Billy has three very useful angles and so I could actually have each leg at a different angle to take into account the terrain. Billy had one leg set short and at the most extreme angle sticking onto on the sea wall (which I was hiding behind), one leg in the middle position on the rocks to my left side, and one leg in the most upright position and on the debris and pebbles to my right (seaward) side.
The wind was seriously strong and I was struggling to stand up in the gusts, which shows what Billy is capable of standing in.
Using this configuration meant that I personally was being bent over a bit more than I would have liked and I actually wished that I had brought the centre column with me. I would also have like a bit more height from an aesthetic point of view, to get higher up onto the waves and to capture the swirling seas coming into the harbour. You live and learn, and I have already put his column back in for the next trip. Removing it is simple and it can always live in my rucksack if needed. It really doesn’t weigh enough to make a substantial difference.
After not being initially confident in the stability, and having a concern about the tripod being so light it wouldn’t stand up to wind, I was really pleased with the performance so far. Admittedly I did find as much shelter as I could in my shooting positions but that was more to do with my staying warmer, and reducing spray, as it was giving Billy the best the chance.
As the hail started to fall I had moved along the coast again to Strathlene near Buckie, and took temporary residence inside a beach shelter.
I could work with Billy at full height (minus the column), using my heaviest lens, without any issues at all. I was out of much of the wind, although the hail was finding every conceivable gap.
As the quick release plate is compatible with Peak Design products, so I was able to use my hand strap and the tripod at the same time. This was great security for when I released the camera from the tripod, and convenient. There is no safety mechanism on the release of the camera quick release from the head; you absolutely must have a good hold of the camera before you loosen it. I know some reviewers have moaned about this, but it’s just a case of forming a working practice (or habit) to get around it. I don’t see it as a problem because, to be honest, you should have a good hold of the camera at this point in proceedings anyway.
The hail continued but I still managed to get some decent shots:
Having frozen my arse off for a couple of hours I decided to make a break for a cafe to warm up, and the public car park proved to be both my undoing and Billy’s.
The public toilets were closed but they didn’t let you know that until you’d gone up the chequer plated slope to the door, which meant you then had to come down again. I hadn’t realised that the chequer plate slope would be colder than the surrounding ground, and with the previous rain combined with spray coming off the sea, it was covered in a thin layer of invisible ice. The car park itself had some puddle but these weren’t properly frozen so I hadn’t worried.
Completely unprepared, I slipped on the ice and was airborne from the top of the slop, for a few milliseconds, before crashing onto the tarmac of the carpark at the end of the slope.
Poor Billy got a few war wounds in the process, but at least it will give him some genuine Punk character I guess. I was bloody annoyed at the time. First outing too.
My left knee and my left hand didn’t come off too well either…
…I guess I won’t be playing Twister for a few days.
My camera equipment, cosy within the Lowepro heavy duty padding and armoury of my Whistler 350AW was absolutely fine. Thankfully.
Although one trip, two if you count falling over, really isn’t enough to make a full review or judgement on Billy, I have to say that over all I am, so far, I am impressed. I would have liked slightly thicker legs, but that’s probably more for my confidence than because I feel they’re actually needed. I come from the old heavy tripod is good school, although I detest carrying them.
I am delighted by the three position legs, and the removable centre column. I love the weight and ease of carrying. I love the chunky grips and the smooth running head, although I would have really liked the head from the more expensive range with its built in panoramic bit.
Had I the requisite £400 then I might have gone for the Albert to gain some extra height but that’s because I spent a lot of time on the side of lochs and I do like to put the legs in the water, and so its feet are often a foot or more below my feet, but given the price difference and the colour way (which is way more me), I am very happy so far.
Because I like to put the legs in water, I also like tripods which you can easily take apart and clean or dry out. 3 Legged Thing make lots of the tripod user serviceable and there are great how-to videos and exactly what you need to do available on their website and YouTube channel.
I would like an L plate thing because I’m a landscape photographer and lazy, but then would it interfere with my use of the Peak Design hand strap?
I would like a set of free spikes included, and as it stands that adds to my cost, and so does adding the panoramic bit for the head which is also available as an extra. The Punks range is the cheaper range of the two 3 Legged Thing offer, but don’t let that fool you, these are not cut price or cheap tripods. For the money, I have to say it is one of the best I’ve every seen and knocks spots of other similarly, and many more expensively priced, tripods.
No, it’s not a Gitzo. But then neither is Gitzo anymore (it’s a rebranded Manfrotto by the look of it and not the same quality as the original).
The Billy and the Travis are the most conventional designs from 3 Legged Thing, and I like them all the more for it. I’m not big on centre columns as you can tell, and I remain unconvinced about telescopic ones.
I anticipate that Billy and I will have a long relationship, although possibly not leading to marriage, and I will update again in due course with some longer term observations. Until then, enjoy my site and please take time to comment, like, and share as it does my Google rating no end of good. You never know, one day I might even make some money at this, and if you want to buy me a cup of tea in the meantime, there is a link on the menu to Paypal Me. Thanks for reading.
There is an old saying that something is only worth what someone else is willing to pay for it. Sadly, in the age of digital photography that means nobody is willing to pay what you think it’s worth. Rarely now will they even pay you what it cost you to take the photo.
Let me give you an example:
I have some images from a recent trip on Shutterstock. They have sold quite well so far and I have amassed the grand sum of $2.25 for them. Yes, you read that correctly, I have sold my images and received $2.25. Now, how much of a loss am I at here? Well, petrol is the equivalent of $6.67 a gallon for starters.
Let’s say the trip consisted of 300miles at 54mpg (the average I get from my VW Polo), then I used 5.56 gallons at a total cost of $37.08. Without accommodation, food, or any other expenses (camera costs, insurance, or my time of course) then I am already facing the prospect of at least another 16months of consistent sales to break even on fuel alone.
Shutterstock, and they are just one drop in the competing ocean, pay just $0.25 per image sale on subscribers downloads until you get reasonably well known.
For many people this is a non-starter: Sure, over the years you might see a return on your money, and if you have several thousand images on several sites you might see a profit, in time. But, what you live off in the meantime and how you fund trips and creating new images is another matter.
What about selling your images as fine art prints? Well, you have the initial outlay of the print, framing, and then finding someone to sell it for you in a shop or gallery. You then you have to hope it sells and you get your money back plus a little profit, and after you’ve paid the commission to the gallery. You also need somewhere as storage to put them, between displays, if they don’t all sell. Which they won’t.
For many people this is a non-starter: Again there is the investment need, you have to spend to accumulate is the old saying, but where do you accumulate in order to spend?
So, what can you do to sell your images or make money from your photography in the 21th Century when everyone has a camera? I honestly don’t have the answer, but I do know that the number of people making a sustainable living is ever decreasing. Look in any magazine and you will see the same faces, and very frequently the same rehashed articles – if you want an example take a look at the excellent photos from Fukushima.
This is now the third magazine I’ve seen them in. They’re good, but I am not buying yet another magazine with them in so I missed buying this edition. You can’t blame the photographer for spreading them thinly to get a return on their investment, and you can’t blame an editor for wanting to use good images.
Getting in with magazines requires you to be able to write now as well as take excellent photographs, with the odd exception of art or photography magazines which will take your images only. But even then, often now you get a ‘gift’ instead of money – a camera rucksack for publishing your portfolio anyone? Not me, got one, and I can’t bank another rucksack. I could sell it on eBay I suppose but that won’t bring me a return anything like what it costs me to get those images.
What about getting your work noticed in the first place? Exposure, that fateful word…the one that to 99% of outlets means they ain’t going to pay you a dime. Have you tried to get a plumber to work for ‘exposure’? Have you tried to buy your lunch with ‘exposure’? Art industries are the only industries where ‘we’ (and not me actually) accept exposure as an excuse or licence for not paying a fair price, or even any price.
What does that say about how we value our own work? Aren’t we making a rod for our own backs? If I, we, are going to accept $0.25 an image what are we telling people we are worth? If some of us are happy to see our name in lights (or rather print) and have a swanky new camera bag in return for our hard won images what are we saying about the value we place on our images and our industry?
But, and here is the but, what choices do we have? The answer is very little because if we don’t then we don’t get a look in anymore. Unless you are already well known and established then I fear that the days of the full time photographer are sadly numbered, and even the most well known and respected professionals are diversifying and now make as much money (if not more) from teaching other photographers, either one-to-one or on group workshops and holidays as they do from selling the actual images they shoot. The best of the best – National Geographic – has shed staff and freelancers since the buy out by the horrible Murdoch lead group. Most newspapers now buy in images from freelancers and don’t employ their own photographers anymore.
We are bombarded with visual content, and for every images you have to pay for your can find a dozen that are almost as good for free, or for very little. Photography is now becoming a race to the bottom, and an industry that many dream of entering either as students or dream of turning hobbies into their living. Want my advice? Don’t do it.
There was an interview on my local news station the other day with a retired press photographer and he was asked what advice he would give budding photojournalists today. He said; ‘buy a guitar, there’s not money in photography anymore’.
Is there a future for photographers? I guess we wait and see. We continue to try to elevate our work to the highest standard, we continue to push new markets and new directions, we try to get our work noticed by those who still value the craft and the art of photography and we do so with thousands snapping at our heels who are happy with $0.25 an image or working for ‘exposure’ that they hope will lead to bigger things but usually just leads you to more payment free job opportunities or being passed over for the next hopeful.
Adobe has recently issued new updates for subscribers to its Lightroom and Photoshop products. We now have Lightroom Classic; which is an update to the traditional program for those of us working and storying images offline, plus Lightroom CC and Photoshop CC: Creative Cloud programs which now operate from the Cloud.
Whilst I get this move they have completely failed to take into consideration the global audience which does not have reliable and quick access to the internet. They have also failed completely to understand the issues of large image files, which is kind of weird for a company who have made their millions from tens of thousands of photographers and designers. It is also ignoring the market demands and technology advances that are currently bringing out cameras with larger and larger file sizes. We have just seen the new Sony and the Nikon D850 – both producing mega sized files.
As well as having your monthly subscription to use the applications, already something that had many photographers up in arms (whilst allowing those of us will more limited cashflow the advantage of PAYG), now, if we go the cloud route, we will have to hire our Cloud space. This may not sound too bad, unless your image archive runs into the tens of thousands, and you have an internet connection that is slow.
In practical terms for me, as a landscape photographer who travels regularly to remote locations where I am very lucky even to have a non-G phone signal at best, it is completely unworkable. I cannot guarantee that I will have any internet access at all from any location I am working in, and in fact I can more often guarantee the exact opposite – you won’t be able to get hold of me at all!
Without wifi, without a mobile signal, one of the pleasures of the wilds of Scotland or any other country with any wilderness is that we are cut off away from these modern (in)conveniences. It is often one of the reasons that many of us enjoy our profession as difficult as it can make the ‘business’ element of what we do.
I can only talk about the difficulty that this places on those of us in parts of Scotland – an affluent first world nation, but those difficulties are limited just to us of course. How will this work for correspondents in remoter locations and those areas of the world that frequently go without electricity let alone phone lines, mobile signals, and wifi. Wifi is not ubiquitous, not even in the USA where Adobe calls home.
At the moment we still have the non-cloud version, but by separating this out it becomes fairly obvious that we will either be charged differently (and probably more expensively) or at some point in the future our service will no longer be supported. Adobe assures us, at least for the foreseeable future, that we will get served but what is a foreseeable future? I can’t tell you exactly what I am going to be doing next week, so realistically can, or will, they?
My currently subscription takes me to the 15th December 2017. At this point I expect them to push me, from a purely cost based incentive point of view, to move to the cloud. However, for me, working often without the internet, it isn’t a feasible option. Do I renew my subscription and hope they keep Classic going and updated or perhaps it is time to find another solution.
As someone who has worked with Photoshop since it started, in 1998 (yes, I am that old) I am very sorry to leave. I do not really want to have to learn a whole new program and say goodbye to what is 30 years of experience and the ability to process my images without ever using the help menu. I don’t actually do a lot of work with my images, and in fact, I rarely work outside of Lightroom now. But, I do shoot Raw for a good reason, and I do process my Raw files, like everyone does. I also actually like Lightroom’s indexing and keywording, and the ability to find things and conduct a search. If you have an extensive archive this is very important. I will miss it if I have to go, but I have always titled my folders so that I can find things without this and I reckon that I am going to pretty glad that I did. It will be slower and more troublesome, but I will have to manage. We did before, and will after in PPS (post-Photoshop) time.
Personally, the move away from Adobe has to be viewed as pretty inevitable. Cost has played a huge factor over the years, and to me the subscription was actually a benefit because it spread that cost, but I know that many photographers have boycotted and moved away from Adobe because of this. I know a good few who are already using some very old stand alone versions and then using other software, such as their camera manufacturers free programs to do an initial convert to their Raw files, but this adds to the workflow in a way I don’t, personally, want.
So, what now? Well, I am experimenting with Affinity. I have had this program on my iPad Pro for a couple of months, and find it pretty good. I only use it away from home and for processing files so that in the off moments I have a suitable signal I can update my online media. Such is the way of modern marketing, if it ain’t fresh it ain’t getting looked at, but, I can process without the wifi or mobile signal, so although I am using it for the web I am not using the Cloud. The Cloud is not an option for me.
And I haven’t even gone into the security issues of having my images stored singularly and remotely!
Time to experiment with Affinity for the desktop – I have a month to make my decision…
I really wanted to move to mirrorless cameras. I was keen to explore a lighter, smaller, more compact and cartable photographic experience. But, I needed to retain the same quality, or improve on what I had. It didn’t quite work out as well as I had hoped and so I’m now back with Nikon, well over a grand down in the pocket for the experience, and a whole lot wiser.
What I am going to say will be controversial to some readers, and that’s ok. Please remember that it is my very personal experience that I am relating, and not a statement of fact condemning any manufacture, cameras, or whatever. Please don’t see it as an invite to send me nasty messages or comments. They might even get published so you will only embarrass yourself. Oh, and all the images are Copyright of me so keep your mitts off.
For me, it started with Fujifilm – the X-Pro 1 came out with two free lenses, the 18mm (not really wide enough), and the 27mm (hmmm, ok as a standard). I loved it, and I took some great photos. But I wanted convenience of a zoom, because I spend a lot of time in wet conditions and I have a tendency to drop things…
I also wanted consistent f2.8.
I had a little trouble holding the very flat body when I was used to a more hand friendly shaped grip. My back and shoulders loved the experience and the photos were top quality, but I would have liked a wider wide angle and I would have liked better focussing, oh and longer battery life. And a zoom with f2.8…
A zoom, any zoom, didn’t feel good on the rangefinder body, at least to me. It made the whole camera holding experience even worse. The X-Pro series is designed for fast primes, it is what they really excel at. But, I am not a street photographer, I’m usually found in fields, up to my arse in mud, frequently in the rain; I live in Scotland. The X-Pro 1, I don’t think, is weather sealed. I didn’t tempt it.
The lens range simply wasn’t there for me, not at that time. I do object to being forced to buy lenses just from Fujifilm. Ok, I have had Nikon bodies with Nikon lenses, but I have also really enjoyed some Tokina lenses and one (and only one) Sigma lens before.
So, anyway, it went away and was replaced by a Nikon D7100, which was all I could afford at the time. But I hadn’t quite got away from really wanting something smaller and lighter, especially at the end of 15mile hike. So that went away to be replaced by the Fujifilm XT-1, which was so much better suited to the zooms than the rangefinder bodies. I still struggled to find a zoom that met my needs, until in the end I got the 16-55mm/f2.8. It is an amazing lens, except that it is actually about the same weight and size as many DSLR lenses, which makes it very front heavy and somewhat unbalanced on the XT-1. I bought a grip, it was better, but now my camera weighed what a DSLR did and took up more space in my bag than my Nikon D7100 did!
It felt like it always wanted to fall forward, even on a tripod, and I had to really make sure it was secure. The lens weighed more than the body and it was huge by comparison. I wasn’t saving much weight, it was awkward to hold, but the results were great and I persevered. I love Fujifilm’s film simulations, nobody does it better, but…
Then the Fujifilm XT-2 came out, and it offered (allegedly) a number of improvements over the XT-1. These, to me, included a flip out screen that went in two directions so you can use it in portrait as well as in landscape, and a jog-stick thing for moving the focus point. Believe me, it was a bit of a pain moving it on the XT-1. Unbeknown to me, my (bought used) XT-1 developed a row of dead pixels, and so I was delighted to part with whilst still under its used warranty (by three days, phew) and so I got a decent deal. It wasn’t very old, and it hadn’t take that many shots so this worried me, and it sat like the elephant in the room over my decision to stay with Fujifilm. I have used Nikon camera’s for years and never experience a dead pixel issue. Jammed shutters on Canon cameras have blighted all three I have owned but never had an issue with Nikon…(and hopefully that hasn’t just tempted fate).
I got my XT-2 brand new. It was like “hens teeth” to get one new, and it would be months or even years before any appeared on the used market. I was concerned by the amount of money I had now invested, and that dead pixel issue reared its head again when I found the XT-2 came with an option for pixel re-mapping in the menu. I wonder why they put that in….? Perhaps there had been complaints.
(Incidentally the OM PEN-F has that option too)
Anyway, more great pictures followed. Although to me, they weren’t actually as great as the ones from the XT-1. The new camera gave me 24MP but to me, there was something I can’t define that was missing from these images that is there with the lower 16MP images from the XT-1. Maybe it’s colour, dynamic range, I don’t know. Sometimes you just find something you like in a camera and moan when they change it. I had the same thing with the D200, the last of the CCD sensors. I still to this day like the look of a D200 image over a D700 image, and I shot both at the same time.
But back to my story – I now wanted more lenses, and the ones I wanted were all large, heavy, and to be frank they are darned expensive. You still have to stick with Fujifilm or go fully manual with a very excellent Samyang. The other odd thing that kept striking me when I picked it up and used the dials was that the XT-2 didn’t seem quite as well made as the XT-1 and I had concerns bit were going to drop off it. They didn’t but I was worried…
I know there are reports online of dials breaking so maybe my concern wasn’t totally unfounded. I didn’t see these until after I’d parted company with it, so they didn’t influence my decision.
If I had the money, and the desire, to go out an buy a mirrorless camera today then I think I would choose the XT-1 over the XT-2. It really does feel better and I actually preferred the results.
I personally think that 16MP is the peak of perfection for a 1.5x crop sensor and that 24MP pushes it too far. But that is me, and every time I post a negative comment or review I get hate mail, but there you go. That’s the internet for you!
To me, with the big lens and with or without a grip, it still felt unbalanced,. You put a heavy, big, lump of fast glass at the front of a body which ways less and has a small hand grip then it is going to.
I really began questioning my missing of the DSLR lens to body balance. I certainly wasn’t saving that much in weight, or size.
To be honest, I have never thought that size is much of an issue. It is more to do with the weight of what you are carrying that determines how pleasant that 10mile hike is going to be. My camera bag remains the same and so I just move padding around to accommodate the size of the items within. I think there is where actually mirrorless manufacturers are going wrong. Having a decent size gives you a secure and comfortable grip in use, and this doesn’t change because hands are, basically, still hands. It isn’t space that’s an issue for me, it is weight.
Also, I am used to carrying my DSLR one handed, it’s just the way that I work. My Fuji’s both really required me to get neck straps because they weren’t comfortable in the hand for very long, and I have real neck issues. My neck issues were one of the reasons I wanted to lighten the load, so I definitely didn’t want my camera back around there again. Without having something to tuck your fingers around it isn’t comfy to single hand hold and wander about with. So it the camera goes around your neck, or in your bag. If it’s in your bag you take less pictures.
I figured that if I was going to go light, then I wanted to be balanced and really light. I wasn’t convinced by the argument that a bigger sensor is better, I think it’s down to the number of pixel balanced with the size of the sensor. A bigger sensor can take more pixels of the same size as a small sensor, if that makes sense. I think, from my personal experience that there is a optimum point. With a compact it’s 10MP, with a 4/3rd it’s probably around 12MP, with 1.5x crops it’s around 16MP, and with full frame 35mm then its around 24MP. That’s my best guess. Yes, if you are printing big enough to notice the difference it will be important, but most of us aren’t.
I also don’t buy the whole thing of needing lots of pixels even when you do print large. I’ve printed to 6ft x 4ft fine art print from a 10MP Nikon D200 native file, converted to jpeg from the raw, and I have printed A3 dps* brochures from a 3MP Nikon/Kodak camera (back in the 1990s) that was a lot worse than 90% of current mobile phones! But, the quality and ability to render colours and tonality is vitally important, more so than how many you have.
I firmly believe that dynamic range is very important, because if you increase that then you already reduce the noise in the shadows and reduce the chance of burned out highlights. You reduce the compromises, and you reduce the need for external filtration. I want cameras to see the range we see, and we are still a long way from that. The human eye is very adaptable, not so much as some birds and animals but way better than a camera.
So, anyway, I thought I’d switch to Olympus (and if you’ve read my other posts then you know how that turned out…)
I guess in the end part of it was that I really missed the familiarity that comes with years of using Nikon. The menus are familiar, the buttons are (largely) in the same place. I favour Nikon over Canon for two reasons (and here I start another fight) – firstly, in over 25 years, I have only ever had three cameras pack up mid-shoot and they were all Canon’s and all with terminally jammed shutters. Secondly, they move the controls and buttons about and I can’t be doing with relearning a new camera as you’ll also know from my things-i-dont-like-about-the-olympus-pen-f post
Ten minutes with any Nikon and I can use it, in the dark, or at least without looking. I take more photos because I’m not messing about in menus, trying to find things. It feels good in my hand. It feels like an extension of me, and that allows me to get on with the creative art of image making.
I keep more images, because I take more images, and because I am not messing about in menus and not getting the results I think I’m going to get. Or missing the shot because I haven’t found the settings I want.
So, I am going back to big and heavy.
Back to a weighty DSLR. Back to big heavy lenses (not that I went very far away with that bit).
I went to my local used dealer and played around with a Nikon D600. Yes, they have a reputation for dust but to be honest if you pick one up now then they’ve either not had an issue, been back to Nikon for free to have it sorted, or the original owner would have got it replaced by a D610 by Nikon F.O.C. So it’s probably now a bit undeserved, unless you get one from a really lazy owner. It does however make them daft cheap, for what you’re getting.
I played with it for ten minutes and it felt like coming home. It sounds silly but I didn’t need to look at the controls more than once or twice, and, within minutes I had the settings the way I wanted them and saved to custom memory. It was just comfortable…
And, I now I also have full frame! And with my ideal of 24MP.
I also now have balance! I can use the camera with one hand again, even with the bulbous wotsit (Nikon AF-S 14-24/2.8). The lenses, even the big ones, balance on the camera. I’ve gone a generation back to get the body, and spent the real money on the glass (always the best plan because you’ll change your bodies every few years but good glass lasts, well almost, forever).
My osteopath won’t like it….
But I do.
And hey, my DSLR with a little 50mm/f1.8 prime even weighs less than my XT-2 with the zoom.
*double page spread, ie. an A3 centrefold in an A4 product
It always amazes me what people just jump over fences and where they think nobody is looking. It saddens me also.
All of these appliances were dumped in what appears to be a building of potentially historical significance, and right next door to a family holiday park. They were clearly visible to anyone walking to and from the site to the beach via the side pathway, which also gives very popular views of the lighthouse.
The Billingham F-Stop range is one of those quiet little back burners that hasn’t really been appreciated as it sits in the shadow of the renowned Hadley range. But it shouldn’t, because it’s actually, I think from my initial impressions, a better bag.
Let me explain…
To the left there you will see my Billingham Hadley Pro that I had a love/hate relationship with. I loved the waterproofing, the style, the robustness, the look, but it was always, in my view, dimensionally ‘wrong’.
It was so deep that you lost your mirrorless in it and ended up with things stacked on top one another, but it was so shallow front to back that you couldn’t use it very easily for a DSLR, and certainly not one with a grip. It was trying to fit everything and ended up fitting nothing as well as it might.
I bought the Hadley Pro to replace the Hadley Small, which was actually a better overall size (not so tall, not so wide), but it has the same depth issue.
These bags are Billingham’s biggest sellers, so people do love them, and I can see why. The removable interior to create a great waterproof messenger bag is simply brilliant, although I never removed mine.
The Hadley Pro is W350mm x D120mm x H280mm, but that D is tapered so you only get 120mm/4.75″ in the centre. It weighs in at 1.01kg or 2.23lbs, has two front dump pockets and one zipped rear pocket.
I was very surprised when the Digital turned up having put on a little tubbiness around it’s middle. I was also delighted.
The Hadley Digital, which I reviewed yesterday, is W210mm x D130mm x H210mm and the internal depth measurements are most telling D100mm for the Digital compared with 80mm for the Hadley Pro. As I said, the smaller bag actually has more depth and because it’s across the whole width of the bag, that makes it far more useful. Especially for anything bigger than a very small DSLR, or bigger than an Olympus OM-D/PEN-F sized mirrorless camera system.
My almost favourite bag, possibly of all time, was really the Hadley Small, which comes in at W290mm x D120mm x H220mm, 0.70kg/1.54lbs. Although it is quite a bit less in the width, the fact it also isn’t as tall made it, for me, much better with a mirrorless kit as I wasn’t stacking so much up. The Hadley Small and the Hadley Pro are exactly the same depth at their biggest (in the middle). The difference in weight is partly down to the size and partly down to the inclusion of the reinforced top handle on the Pro, which is missing from the Small.
Now, lots of people don’t mind their bag bowing out in the middle to accommodate their camera bodies, I know this because, as I said, the Hadley range is Billinghams’ biggest seller and the Pro is the daddy of them all and Billingham’s best seller of all.
The thing was, I could never get comfortable with it. Which is what lead me to look for something that was essentially a Hadley Small, but with more front to back depth. I also wanted the ability to take an iPad with me again (Digital isn’t big enough and doesn’t have a pocket for it), plus personal items such as my phone and purse, and have all round all season protection for my gear. I carry my camera with me, everywhere, everyday. You never know when you’ll get that once in a lifetime shot.
So, meet the much ignored F-Stop. This example is the f2.8 (the f4 was evidently smaller but, quickly, discontinued, and the f1.4, which is still available, is a bit bigger).
The f2.8 dimensions are W300 x D150 x H240 (all in millimetres and external measurements). The internals are W270 x D120 x H190.
Compare that to the Hadley Small – external W290 x D120 x H220, internal W260 x D80 x H190. Internally, the f2.8 has 10mm extra width, which is neither hear nor there, but 30mm extra depth, which makes a huge difference to what bodies I can put inside and in what positions, and internally the height is exactly the same.
Compare it to the Hadley Pro – external W350 x D120 x H280, internal W340 x D80 x H230. I have less width, but I have again 30cm more depth, and I lose a bit on height, which I don’t actually need, unless I have a 70-200/2.8 to worry about. If I did want to carry the 70-200/2.8 plus more lenses I would need a bigger bag than either range anyway.
The f1.4 is even closer to the Hadley Pro – external W360 x D150 x H240, internal W310 x D120 x H190. I’d be losing a little height but I’d be gaining a whole 40mm of internal depth front to back and it goes right the way across. It’s boxy, but it’s good.
Both the Hadley Pro and the F-Stops have a rear zip compartment (not shown).
I still get quality brass fittings, although the straps can only be replaced by Billingham at their factor as they are not detachable by the user, unlike the Hadley range. I also get slightly less positions by not having the buckles, although to be honest I never changed mine.
The holes in the leather fittings are to attach 5/8″ tripod straps, which is another useful feature associated with the larger 7-series bags, which also share the same non-user replaceable straps. The Hadley range shares its fittings with the 5-series.
It comes with three inserts, the thick padded base and two dividers. One which folds over and one which isn’t quite full height and doesn’t fold.
These both velcro into place.
Personally, I didn’t get on with the dividers, and although they do the job I have whipped these out to replace them, for now, with ones borrowed from my Lowepro Whistler 350AW backpack.
I love Lowepro’s idea of making dividers also pockets. It gives you extra padded safe storage for those little things, likes cards and batteries, which move about and get damaged if left loose in the pockets.
I can move them back into the Whistler whenever I need to but they not only give me another storage space within the bag, but as they are much softer allow the Billingham to be less boxy. I can now press the Billingham more with my hip which make it nicer to carrier and more conforming to body shapes.
I don’t see why we can’t bastardise our bags with the best of each system, and they almost all come with velcro so it’s actually very easy. Ok, it might not look as cool but who is looking inside your bag as a style comment? Only you should be in it, and only your ease of use really matters.
At the moment, this is not really a review but an initial impression, as it only arrived yesterday and I have as yet only tried loading the bag with a number of configurations. The true test will come after several months of use and I will update this post with that review in due course (probably around the end of November/early December time).
Will this bag become the new favourite of all time Billingham and depose the Hadley Small? Watch this space…
I have owned a number of Billingham bags over the years, from the 225 and 335 that I used with medium format film cameras to the 307 which was just too large when I converted to mirrorless, via the Hadley small which became my everyday bag with the Fujifilm X series, the Hadley Pro as my lens collection grow only for me to fall out with it for being too narrow when I went back to Nikon (the first time).
When I went to Fujifilm for the second time, with the XT1 and then XT2, I got the Hadley Digital you see here and it became my everyday go to bag. In spite of that everyday go to use, it still looks almost new. That’s the thing with Billingham, they really very rarely die before your needs change and the second hand market remains strong so you never really loose hugely on resale values.
The Hadley Digital is the smallest of the Hadley range, and strangely it has more front to back depth (making it far more useful) than the Hadley Small or Hadley Pro bags. Underneath the rain flap you equipment is cosseted in beautiful padding with two dividers that can be moved or removed. There is also a front dump pocket which can easily accommodate memory cards, battery, phone and wallet or purse.
It proved perfect with all my mirrorless cameras, but I struggled to fit the Nikon D600 in it and still use the front pocket, or accommodate a second lens or flash, so I will be parting with it to fund (actually refund) part of the replacement – the much underrated and ignored F-Stop range f2.8.
It’s small and discrete and I will miss it terribly. It’s waterproofing and ease of use really has been second to none, but it’s just a little bit too small now.
The Moray Coast Trail, or Moray Coastal Trail (not even the council can decide what it’s called) stretches from Cullen in the east to Findhorn towards the west, along the coast of the Moray Firth.
Officially, it’s 50 miles but there are some arguments about that…
…anyway, over the past few months we, as in Patches and I, have been tackling it in nice bite sized sections at the weekends. Patches is a mature gentlemen, with a touch of arthritis, and so those bite sized chunks range from five to around nine miles. This is a bit of a misnomer though, as we walk each section as a there-and-back, so we might only cover 2.5miles of the trail, but we do it twice, in both directions seeing it from both views.
Some sections are easier to walk than others, as it shares the route with sections of cycle trails and on disused railways, so sometimes a nice wide flat path is provided and sometimes you are on the “walkers path” and therefore going around the cliffs (and up and down thin tracks being scratched by scratchy shrub).
I had been looking forward to yesterdays section very much, because the map has the words ‘caves’ printed on it all the way. It did not disappoint, although the scratches from the scratchy bushes on the very enclosed sections might take a few days to heal.
All along the route there are coves and bays, some sand and some pebble. Some are easy to get to, and some are definitely not.
The whole route gives excellent views across the firth to the coast on the other side, depending on the weather of course, and you can often see dolphins, seals, and a large variety of birdlife.
Not marked on the map is the old Coastguard lookout station, which you get to see from quite some distance when walking west to east, but then it pops up over the gorse and undulating cliff top at you if on the route east to west.
It is a shame that you can’t go in it, or that it hasn’t been co-opted into a bothy like the one on Skye. I image the view from the balcony at the top would be quite something.
The route does indeed take you past a number of sandstone caves and rock formations, as promised on the map. These ones (above) are not far from the active quarry and are reasonably accessible, although two of the three paths down are much steeper than the west most one and great care is needed.
Popular with photographers, mainly due to the natural arch you can just see at the bottom of the photo (above), and the array of weather worn large round rocks which form a stunning collection of geological complexity (below), it is unlikely you’ll be alone here for very long.
At weekends, it is possible to park near to the quarry entrance and just visit these caves, although this is certainly not recommended on weekdays when the lorries are going in and out, and care should be taken not to block access at ANY time.
The quarry produces some very large pieces of sandstone, and whilst it may be a bit of a blight on the landscape, it does facilitate the degree of weekend parking which is helpful, as well as offering much needed employment.
Towards the Covesea end of the walk, which can be extended easily to Lossiemouth if desired, there is the Sculptors Cave. This feature is clearly marked on the OS maps in the serif type usually reserved for ancient monuments so there is a deeply historical context, obviously. It isn’t actually possible to see Sculptors Cave from the walk, as you’re actually walking over it, but nearby natural arches and caves that you can see give you a teaser of what it could be like.
‘Finds from the Sculptor’s Cave dating from the Bronze Age to the 4th century AD, and including Iron Age pottery, are in the Elgin Museum.’
‘The most striking feature of the cave is the (formerly) substantial assemblage of human remains that was revealed in both programmes of excavation’
‘The possibility may be considered that there were two periods of deposition….the deposition of the remains of children, with some emphasis on the placing of heads at the entrance, and….the remains of several decapitated individuals. Concern with the removal, curation and display of human heads is a persistent trait across prehistoric Europe…’
(edited, removing technical references for ease of reading, by the photographer)
This exciting site certainly warrants a further expedition to photography the carvings at a later date.
The caves and natural arches extend along the seaward side of the cliff and also under where the photographer is standing.
The coast of the Moray Firth is still able to enchant and interest, even after more than 13 years of living beside it. The geology itself is varied and interesting, and the human history of the coast is just as fascinating.
The eastern side of Scotland is often overlooked by the rush to the west coast and the isles, and whilst this keeps it from being unpleasantly crowded, it is a disservice to what is a very worthwhile destination. The weather of Moray is far more stable, and frequently warmer and drier than the west, although the residents will still bemoan the lack of a “decent summer”. It also suffers considerably less from the issue of the Highland midge than it’s opposing neighbours.
Although the walk was only around 5-6 miles in length, ignoring some exploratory detours, Patches certainly enjoyed the outing as much as I did.
Update Sunday 8th October: attempted today to get down to the Sculptures Cave from the cliff above. It was difficult is distinguish the right path and I tried finding a way down and back to it from different points. In the end I found what seems the most logical path but I was only brave enough to tackle the first section and was slipping in the mud from the last few days of rain. As I peered over the precipice and contemplated the leap across the missing rock section onto the second path I am afraid that I bottled it. The caves remain unexplored until I can tackle them from the bottom having walked there from the beach at the far Lossiemouth end. For this, I would want to be there as the tide was going out rather than after it had turned and was heading back in, as being cut off is a very serious proposition. Another time…
The sky on Skye is wonderful this morning, which is typical when it’s time to go home. Of course, there is no need to go straight home, or even via a remotely direct route, as part of the fun of any adventure is the travelling.
So, this morning, after more kippers, I am off to Dunvegan Castle, or I would be, if it wasn’t shut for winter. Scotland, which is very reliant on tourism, is still stuck in the age when winter was winter and nobody came. In the Skye Brewing Company, yesterday, they were commenting they hadn’t ever seen a February so busy, and they are not alone. Closed castles, closed hostels, closed pubs, closed hotels, and lots of tourists. The things that are open are reaping the rewards! Welcome to the 21st Century Scotland!
For me, I have spent two days wishing for a dramatic light, and today I am getting it. Of course, I am heading in the wrong direction and constantly shooting into the sun, but then that is the nature of having to stick to moving in certain ways, on certain days.
I love the new ACROS setting that is available with the Fujifilm XT-2, the X-Pro 2, and the soon to be available XT-20. It is a shame it cannot be retrospectively applied to XT-1 shots though.
Moving further down the road, I wanted to get a sort of Canadian feel to a shot and include some trees, something that is actually quite scarce on Skye.
The light was coming in shafts that appeared to set the landscape on fire, and the building bulk of the clouds was creating thick shafts of light with definite edges. The effect was stunning and as brutally hard to capture as it was threatening. Clouds building ominously over the top of the mountains were also making me happy not to be up there. People who think we have small mountains in Scotland which are easily tamed should remember this is still the training ground for the Royal Marines, saw the birth of the Commando units of WWII, and still breaks many international mountaineers even to this day.
The Caiplach Forest shot required a lot of in-camera, or on-camera, filtration using ND grads and a polariser. The sun was just to the left of the shot meaning flare was a huge issue, and I must have been quite entertaining to watch as I wafted my map book between camera and sun to prevent lens flare. Without the filters I could have used the lens hood, but then I would have lost the drama of the sky and mountains. The shafts of light were really ‘thick’ and whilst I wanted to loose some of the general haze, I was desperate to keep the shafts visible to add to the drama. The light on the grasses and heather was so stunning that even just stood watching it around my feet made me feel like any moment my boots would catch fire.
It was really difficult to capture what I wanted in the second-by-second changing light, to stand in the wind, keep everything steady, and to time it just so that the big cloud sat in the right place over the Cuillin.
With all this drama surrounding me, I was tempted to stay for another night on Skye, perhaps moving to the Broadford, or Sleat, areas. Sadly, budget constraints, balanced with the forecaster promise of just waking up to wet, dull, and more wet and dull, wasn’t appealing.
As the weather closed in, it was time to go. I was to head not directly for home, or as directly as I can going via Inverness, but to go down and then across via Spean Bridge, then into the Cairngorms, to Aviemore, and then finally to home on the Moray coast.
So, although this blog series is called 3 Days of Skye, there is quite a bit of not Skye today too (but it’s all related).
Passing by three sets of locked toilets, and wondering if the second dose of kippers wasn’t agreeing with me, I finally found myself at the Kyle of Lochalsh and happy to pay my 20p to pee.
As I sat and drank some water, in the warm sunshine, without need of a jacket, I could watch the weather on Skye take a rapid turn for the worse. I sat at the pier-side and looked back to the changes on Skye then took a brief walk in the warm sun.
I had left the hotel by 9am, but it was still lunchtime before I was off of Skye. I knew I had a good 2/3rd of the journey home still to do, and with stops I anticipated getting home well into the evening. Time to get going.
Of course, if you are heading from the Kyle either to Inverness or to Fort William, you have to pass the monster of Eilean Donan Castle. It is probably the most photographed castle in Scotland, and quite possibly also one of the most photographed castles in the world. It owes it’s modern day fame to the 1986 film Highlander, and possibly a little bit to an earlier James Bond.
Ancestral home of the MacRae’s, not the MacLeods (see yesterdays entry), the Chief of the MacRae’s still resides (at least for some of the time) within its walls. It also provides wonderful tours, and has an excellent gift shop, like most respectable castles in Scotland, well, at least those with intact walls of roofs of course.
Normally, I seem to time this very badly and get to the castle when the tide is almost right out, and the infestation of midges at it’s very worse. The castle stands on Loch Duich, and this is a tidal sea loch. Luckily for me, today at last I had timed it well, and although the reflection could have been better if the wind had dropped, it was nice not to dance about being bitten to death. I swear the highland midge is the originator of the highland fling and it hasn’t anything to do with music…
As I reflected on the number of times I have stood in this, and similar, spots and the events in my life surrounding the times I have passed this castle, and the people I have been there with, the light burst through the clouds to catch the stonework which improved this image and created a warmth to the granite.
Travelling on, initially signed for Inverness and Fort William, I was to take the A87 turn to Invergarry, and then on to Spean Bridge where between there and Fort William, I would then take the turn signed towards the Cairngorms National Park.
The last photo of the day was taken in strange place not far from a lay-by on the A87. The OS map shows the word Cairn, indicating a burial or memorial cairn, but it seems that this little spot, and it’s spectacular view, has become something more significant than that. Whilst carefully picking my way from 10″ cairn to 10″ cairn, edging towards the point I took my shot, I counted over 20 memorials. I stopped to read the plaques where they existed. I am stood carefully by one to a chap called Mike at the time of taking the photo.
There were the little cairns with no markers, some with little slate plaques, two with iron crosses (made of iron, not in the unfortunate Germanic sense), and one clearly Jewish memorial. It was quite moving. Obviously, these people must be either lovers of the mountains and thus their loved ones have held this spot dear, their friends and families have found something here that speaks to them.
I hope it continues, in the same, carefully un-arranged, not becoming a clinical, official, or uniform manner. I hope their souls gather to admire the view and trade tales, and so, at the end of their tales, it is also the end of mine.
I hope you have enjoyed my wee trip through the Highlands to Skye. I have made many trips like this over the years, and it will always remain one of my favourite places, in spite of the tourist take-over, and the weather, and the midges.
If you enjoyed this, please share it, and if you didn’t, then how the hell did you get through three other sections to part four?
Enjoy the mountains, leave nothing by footprint, and take only photos away with you.
I shot this with a Fujifilm XT-2, Fuji 16-55/2.8 XF lens, using a Gitzo Mountaineer Series 3 tripod with Manfrotto Magnesium head, SRB and Cokin P series filters (which are too small and soon to replaced), and I carried my gear in a Lowepro Whistler BP350AW.
I was powered by Lucozade and Chocolate Mini-Rolls, mostly plus copious amounts of tea. All photography and copy is the exclusive right of Blythe Storm, Copyright 2017, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, contact me for details. I AM NOT SPONSORED, although I am open to offers, bought all my own gear, and paid for all my accommodation and refreshments.
Map of Skye reproduced with permission, and much thanks, to isleofskye.com – a great source of information about the island.
If you have joined us at the end of the trip you can find the links to the previous entries below: