Yep, you read that right. A highly organised, and probably professional, raid was carried out on my favourite camera shop last weekend.
Over £160,000 worth of gear was stolen, all of it Leica, and includes multiple copies of the same models was taken from Ffordes Photographic
If you are offered any Leica equipment it would be well worth checking it against the published serial numbers to see if its ‘hot’ property. Even if you’re tempted by a great price, and your underlying lust for equipment you normally can’t afford, just remember this:
Leica won’t service it for you, they know it’s stolen so they probably won’t even return it to you,
you won’t be able to sell it on, because everyone in the business knows about the raid
you won’t get it insured, because they all know too,
and you could even find yourself in court for receiving stolen goods.
AND on top of that you will know that you’re a part of the loop that has hurt an exceptional independent retailer. Yes independent, not some big chain. One shop, an amazing toy shop, in rural Scotland, that does wonders for photography and photographers in the area and beyond.
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.
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
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.
If you’ve been reading my blog you’ll see that I reviewed the Olympus Pen-F a little while ago. Since then I have used this camera on a trip to the Isle of Skye, which I have also documented, and which sadly resulted in my having some serious second thoughts about my relationship with this beautiful little camera.
I love it’s size, I love it’s weight. It makes really excellent 8×10 prints (I haven’t printed bigger yet). But, for me, personally, as a landscape photographer, there are some real issues that have come to light.
Firstly, the Olympus menu system; I shoot raw and jpeg because I like to have the option of reverting to the raw file later if needed, but I also like the convenience of having a jpeg which meets my requirements as a finished image. My problem with this on the Olympus is controlling the jpeg in camera. I got spoiled with the Fujifilm system where you selected a film replication and knew exactly what you were getting. You didn’t need to tweak the colours, it was simple and effective. Now, I know this is down to me not having got the settings right as yet, but trying to delve into menus and options in the middle of a field in gale force winds is just not happening. Trying to see a tiny little adjustment colour wheel on a highly reflective screen, with even smaller nodes and really sensitive operation of the knobs and dials, whilst standing on top of cliff, in sunlight, is nigh on impossible. Trying to make valid adjustments with gloves on, totally impossible.
I know this is me, and that there is nothing wrong with the camera. But, I don’t want to take a degree in computer nerd to operate my camera.
In the end I decided I had had enough of messing about with the jpegs and set the whole camera to shoot raw only and fully manual. I’d deal with the processing after. The trouble is, that isn’t what I bought the PEN-F for, and it’s a waste of its extensive talents.
They say familiarity breeds contempt but with equipment that isn’t true. I have used Nikon cameras for over 30 years, right from film and through the first digital cameras which were Kodak/Nikon hybrids. Nikon, unlike a lot of manufacturers, keep pretty much everything in the same places from one body to the next. The menus have the same titles, and the same order. Sure they add new things but it’s logical. Sure, sometimes buttons moved or can be programmed, but its logical and it takes only a few minutes to find where the stuff has gone to or what’s new. I can operate a Nikon in the dark, like an extension of my own being. It is familiar to the point that I can pick up any body and lens combination and make it work without thinking about it.
This means that I am concentrating on my composition, on actually taking the photo, and not operating the camera.
Anyway, as I said, I switched the camera to raw and manual which kind of turned it into a Fuji…which leads me to the second thing:
I like to use filters to get shots right in-camera, first time. This includes graduated neutral density filters. Now, I’m not a complete numpty and I did leave the 100mm filter system at home (and there is no way to get rings to attach it to the tiny filter sizes of the Olympus lenses anyway). I took a Cokin P sized system with me, with three hard grads, two soft grads, a polariser that didn’t fit the holder (which is another story…), and stepping rings to take the 52mm filter size from the 9-18mm lens down to the 3something-mm of the standard lens. The soft grads were unusable as the graduation change covered more than the actual diameter of the biggest lens, so you couldn’t get the effect at all, just a graduation across the whole scene or a very weak transition of grad over around half of it. This was pretty useless, really. It was also a right bastard to line anything up because the viewfinder is small and the screen is hard to see in bright light. Why can’t they make screen matt?
So, I, and I do mean me, can’t get to grips very quickly with the jpeg options in the field, because I find that they’re too fiddly and too annoying. And, I can’t use filters. And, I’m shooting mainly landscapes.
When I get home, in spite of the issues and how much the Olympus annoyed me in use, I did enjoy the result and was impressed, to a point.
Point three – 4:3 ratio images are odd, to me. They are not quite square and not quite rectangular enough. I ended up turning most of my images into squares. I found that cropping the image to create a more landscape shaped landscape meant a very small file size ensued or, because I had composed the shot with the full size of the sensor in view, I was cropping out bits I actually wanted. Printing onto normal paper sizes also meant cropping off part of the images, which changed the image composition in ways I didn’t appreciate. It was sort of like shooting 6×6 film knowing you’re going to crop to a rectangle so you leave a portion of the frame as unimportant to the composition as you know you’ll loose it. The thing is, with a small sensor like the micro 4/3rds, you don’t have a lot of room for aggressive cropping.
Fourth and final point – the lenses are have are impressively sharp, and they are tiny, which has advantages when hiking, no denying that. Chromatic aberration is well controlled although distortion with the 9-18mm isn’t in raw and there is now automatic adjustments available with a Lightroom profile. This means manually fixing each image, which is fine. It’s not a big job and you do expect that with any ultra wide, especially if its a zoom.
I know the Pro lenses are better, but they don’t suit the PEN-F build. Putting a standard zoom on the front of it makes it front heavy. This doesn’t bother some people, but it does bother me. I had the same issue with the Fujifilm system; the pro fast lenses are the same size pretty much as DSLR lenses but the body is half the size. I found the XT2 with the 16-55/2.8 uncomfortable in use, and weirdly balanced on a tripod, requiring a heftier tripod that I would have liked. This was why I moved to Olympus. To get a balance between the lenses and the body. Perhaps I should have gone for a more traditional SLR shaped body rather than the PEN-F? Who knows.
So, what is the conclusion, my conclusion to this exercise?
Well, I still have the PEN-F kit at the moment because I do appreciate the light weight flexibility. I also think that for travel, where weight or bulk is an issue they can’t be beaten. I also think that for street photography or walking around in areas where you might need to move quickly or surreptitiously they’re wonderful. I never shot street photography until I got the PEN-F because I felt too self conscious. I have depression, and anxiety issues around groups of people, as readers will know.
But….I did just go and buy a used Nikon full frame (FX) D600 body, and two used lenses. It took me around five minutes to set up the whole camera from a factory reset to the way I like my camera setup. I did it whilst having my sandwich, one handed. I then went out and shot roughly 30 images on the way home, in bad light. I loved the reassuring noises it made, even if they were damned loud to start with compared to the Mirrorless cameras I am used to now.
I was reticent about the weight although, the XT2 with its 16-55/2.8 only weighed around a mars bar less, ok two mars bars. I would carry that weight back in extra batteries because the Mirrorless XT2 would get 350shots a charge compared to 900+ with the Nikon DSLR.
I shot in low light, bright light, with and without a tripod, with and without filters, and I rarely looked at the controls. I shot everything in raw, in 14-bit, and then I sat at my computer and admired the detail in the trees and leaves that I simply don’t see in the Olympus images. Yes, I was pixel peeping, because I wanted to do a detailed examination of the files. Then I printed one image out and it fitted to the paper without loosing more than a few millimetres. The whole image, 3:2 ratio.
It has more tonality, it has more detail. Even just printing on an A4 sheet.
Where does this leave the PEN-F? To be honest the jury is out. If someone makes me a good offer then it will go because I need the money back. I will take the Nikon out for a few days and see how I feel about carrying the weight and bulk again. If I decide that actually, with a few manual primes the set up will be just as light and efficient, or near enough, then there is a very good chance I will switch back to a DSLR system completely. I don’t know yet. I’d like to keep both, but that’s not really an option.
As you’ll know if you follow my blog, I recently switched from the Fujifilm X series to the Olympus 3/rd system, moving from the XT-2 to the PEN-F.
The Fujifilm system is renowned for the quality of its in camera Jpegs, and I have written on the subject in relation to social media client use, and to using the ACROS setting in my blog. So, logically, I wanted to see if the jpeg output from the Olympus PEN-F would be as good. In order to do this, I shot a whole day on the Mono 1 setting for my Superfine Jpegs (its a hidden menu option, more on that here), but also saving the raw files. I then processed the Raw images in Adobe Lightroom (LR) as this is the most common development program.
My Mono 1 settings are for +1 contrast and +1 sharpness, with added fine grain because I like the film effects, as you’ll know from my ACROS usage on the XT-2. Raw files were processed to add +30 up to +50 sharpness, and to change the profile to Camera Mono so that they would end up, in theory, as similar to the Superfine jpeg in tone etc. I wanted to see how much is lost with the in-camera process to jpeg compared with the, probably superior, LR process of the raw file. The results are quite interesting:
This is the most telling shot of all and the one I looked at first on my Mac. It was this pictures that made me decided to process the raws to monochrome and to provide this series of comparison images. As you can see, I was able to recover the blown highlights on the back of the white pony from the RAW, but the jpeg continues to look slightly ‘sharper’. This may be raised mid-tones, increased sharpening, I am not sure at this stage, but the result is definitely interesting and supports the use of Raw in many situations.
With this shot, I could again pull back the highlights of the image generally, which would suggest that I considered shooting with some negative exposure compensation or reduced the set construct amount from my +1 setting back to 0. In Raw processing I was also able to add a false graduated filter to the sky to increase significantly the cloud detail in the sky to create a more balanced image. This would suggest that I should have used a ND Graduated filter at the time of shooting, if I wanted to use the Jpeg. Adding a false filter in LR afterwards wasn’t an option as it increased the noise in the image and made the grain more noticeable in the sky than the rest of the image in an unpleasant way.
Again, the Raw image wins for post production abilities as we would expect. But importantly it also shows us what could have been achieved in-camera with a little more thought perhaps at the time, and using the correct filtration.
With this image, taken from the same spot, there is very little to notice between them at all. I have corrected the verticals in the Processed image but not in the jpeg and I did this so I could easily tell them apart once posted into this blog and I could no longer see the filenames. That is a reflection on how close they are. If anything, I prefer the in-camera jpeg on this occasion, and would correct the verticals for use. I think it appears slightly sharper and there is more detail in the sky. It is strange, because although they were taken just minutes apart and from the same place, the sky recovery from the previous shot was better in the raw image processing and the in-camer jpeg would not have been my choice.
With these too I am really struggling to tell them apart. I think the jpeg looks somewhat ‘cleaner’ which makes it look a little sharper. As a side point, I have put the file sizes in brackets as part of the captions. Bare in mind that the original raw, unprocessed, would be colour so we would expect it to be higher due to holding the additional colour information. The superfine jpeg is still a decently sized file, and all of these files from the shoot ranged from 13.6MB – 15.5MB straight from camera. The raw files ranged from 17.7MB – 20.2MB in size. Both are more than adequate to produce some very high quality printed images.
With these two final images I am again struggling with which is which and if there is a difference, albeit minuscule, I would say I have a preference for the jpeg because, again, it strikes me as a ‘cleaner’ image. The camera is definitely doing something to increase the clarity, in my opinion. To test this, I tried raising the contrast slider by +30 in LR, and this appears to confirm my theory and I then really can’t tell the difference. I would assume this comes from my having added a ‘red’ filter to the creative control on the mono setting at this point in the shoot. I had forgotten about that until I checked the camera!
It would appear to get the very best out the jpegs, don’t use the plus or minus contrast setting as this is too clumsy, but use the colour defined filtration options in the customisation of the art settings. This was one of the attractions of the Olympus system, the ability to add ‘filters’ in-camera. If the raw file is saved alongside the jpeg you can always then change the whole image or effect later.
For the creative black and white shooter, the Olympus system offers a real opportunity to create substantially large and good quality jpegs in the camera at the time of shooting. This reduces the amount of time that anyone would need to spend on their computer and so give them more time to create new images out in the real world – ie. time with their camera being a photographer rather than in the office or studio glued to a monitor.
Shooting raw at the same does enable you to have a back-up, either for when you were trying to work quickly in the field and didn’t quite get it right (such as not using ND grads etc), and it gives you the options of changing your mind and not having the art settings at all and producing a completely different image. The choice is really up to the photographer and what they want their images to say, coupled with how they like to work. Memory is cheap – shoot both.
Generally with the exception of the image of the ponies where the highlights were blown out, I preferred the result of the in-camera jpeg and will therefore remember to use my grad’ filters more often. But, shooting both means if I’m rushed, it doesn’t really matter.
The forecast was for sunny spells, not sunny spells and showers. Arriving at Cummingston (marked Car Park on the map above) it was properly raining, but ten minutes sat in the car watching it bouncing off the bonnet and it had stopped. Twenty minutes into the walk towards Burghead and the sun was trying to come out.
This was to be a funny walk in some ways, because instead of going out and back, we were going from the middle to one end, then back to the middle, then off to the other end. The reason for this? Well, this was where I knew the car parking, toilets, and access to the old disused railway line actually was. So, that was where we started. The accidental benefit if this is that we also knew there was a toilet there which would provide another opportunity thus mid-way, and the walk could also then be cut short if the weather deteriorated. Thankfully, it didn’t.
I had been to this spot before, for a quick recce of the route, but the weather wasn’t conducive to the shots I wanted at the time, so I planned to return and combine a bird walk, with a dog walk, with a photo walk. I would be experimenting with the Nikon P900 as a documentary camera at the same time. As much as I would like a proper long lens for my Fuji XT-2, I simply don’t want to pay £1,500 for a lens that I also don’t really want to have to carry. I think I am getting to point where I have realised that I take far more photos, and far better photos, if I am not bogged down with loads of stuff. The Nikon P900 takes you from the 35mm equivalent of 24mm to whopping 2000mm, in one camera. It also features GPS to record your shots (hence the map up above, and also enables you to capture birds and wildlife, as well as landscapes and scenes, all in one camera. Or so it promises on the advertising…
I had bought it for birding, but I wanted to see if it could do more than that and if I would still be happy with the result.
As this was also a bird walk, I had taken my binoculars with me and within moments of getting onto the main path, with a view of the shore, I had spotted the first ID confusion bird of the day.
A long way out it would have been impossible to get a clear photograph of it without the P900, and so I was happy with this somewhat uninteresting shot as a means of later identifying the eclipse male eider duck. I couldn’t see as much detail with my excellent Minox 8x binoculars as I could later see, at home, on my screen with the images from the camera. The bird would have remained unidentified without this shot, and so already I had found a reason to be pleased I took the P900.
I had started to envision using this camera for documentary photography for my Detritus project, so I wanted to see how well it would cope at the wider end. I was very happy with the camera for bird photography, but would it, with its tiny sensor, still give me the details I require for a more ambitious project? I have had images from it accepted to stock agencies, but there is little room for additional cropping, which means you have to really concentrate on getting the composition right in-camera, because you can’t really change it and still maintain a large enough file, with sufficient data, later on.
The Fuji XT-2 gives me files in the 15MP+ range to the 6MP+ range of the P900, as a rough guideline. Agencies need a minimum of 5MP, so there isn’t a lot to play with from the Nikon. This means making firm decisions at the time of shooting, like we did with film to an extent, and I actually like having to work like this. It makes you really take care and consideration when shooting if the room for error is so very small.
My Detritus project, so far shot exclusively on the Fuji XT-2, is about the impact of man’s waste on the natural environment of Scotland and the detrimental effect it has on the scenery and as a threat to the tourism industry. I will be travelling around some of the most scenic and best loved locations and showing them, warts and all, rather than polishing them up to the ideal images we know and love of Scotland. This project will require a lot of travel and a lot of walking to remote locations, and thus if I can find a way to reduce what I need to carry to a bare minimum whilst ensuring that I won’t then regret it or be limited on arrival at a location by this, there will be a lot of incentives and benefits to carrying just the Nikon.
Another part of this walk today was to capture some images of the birds found around the Moray Coast, and for that the Nikon P900 would be perfect. It enables you to get very close shots of the birds without disturbing them, and impacting on their behaviour. I am very interested in birds responses to their environment rather than just portraits, and being able to observe without impacting on that is very important for accurate documentary photography. Birds are easily disturbed and this effects their behaviour, so being able to photograph them without this is very important to the birds but also to me.
The coastline around Moray is spectacular in many places, allowing you to enjoy the geology, geography, and still often feel like you are alone, even on a busy summer weekend. The weather was still clearing and the view across the whole of the Firth to the far north coast breathtaking. But it wasn’t long before we came across some more detritus of us humans and our working of the north sea.
I was very pleased to be able to document this at the same time as being able to get the wildlife shots, whilst still carrying only one light weight camera. In practice and operating it was living up to my hopes, although I do hate that the buttons and dials move far too easily, especially compared to the Fuji, which are stiffer and lockable. This is only a problem if you don’t double check before you fire off the shutter – and sometimes, when birds and wildlife are involved you don’t have time to check and so it can be annoying.
We had set off from the car park in the direction of Burghead and just as we got to St. Aethan’s (or Aidan’s) Well, I was delighted to spot two Stonechat. This one was obliging for a couple of shots only.
It is claimed that the water from the well has healing powers, but whatever it has or hasn’t got going for it, Patches wasn’t touching it.
Having declined a drink from the bowl provided at the well, he was more than happy to have some good old tap water from the Sigg bottle along with me instead.
As we approached Burghead I was very happy to find this Linnet on the rocks. It would appear they have developed a way of opening the small limpets that cling to the rocks, or otherwise they are getting something in the rocks that makes it worth the effort.
I like to photograph bird behaviour, even if I don’t fully understand at the time what the bird might be doing. Although I much prefer to shoot stills than moving images, I do like my subjects to have motion and to be engaged in doing something.
As we came into Burghead the rocks change and the famous carbuncle homes into view…
It provides a lot of work, of course, but it isn’t half ugly to look at. Coming at it from any angle you can’t fail to spot it, but from this angle it dominated the whole of the village. Reaching the edge of the village it was time to turn around and walk back past Cummingston and head for Hopeman.
I was pleased again to see another three Linnets as these were first I had seen this year and in my first in this area.
I was delighted to be able to photograph the small gatherings of wading birds on the shore from the path, again without disturbing them, and delighted to find Redshanks, Turnstones, and even a Knot amongst the larger Oystercatchers.
Having successfully documented the detritus, and the wider scene, it felt natural to also be able to capture images of the wildlife and the birds in particular. The sun was shining through the clouds now and picking out the plumage of the birds made for some lovely images, especially with the surf breaking in the background thus confirming the location whilst enabling a relative close-up of the birds.
We went down into Hopeman and found our way through the houses to the harbour, where a small but interesting gallery has the added advantage of serving tea, coffee, ice creams, biscuits, and cans of cold pop. Hopeman also has easily accessible and very nice toilets, at the harbour, which enabled us to refuel and refresh before heading back to Cummingston again, and the picking up the car.
The path follows the old railway and so it’s easy and accessible for all abilities, although some sections are small short gravelled rather than tarmac, and getting up and down to the car parks can be a bit interesting at some points. The route is part of the Moray Coastal Trail which runs all the way to Inverness, and is a designated cycle route as well as a path for walking and recreation. There are facilities at various points along its length and it also goes past or through some campsite for those wishing to tackle its full length. More details can be found here.
The side of the path host a number of interesting plants and an abundance of insects. The bees were making light work of these flowers, which is good to see given how much trouble bees are in, nationally and globally.
As we reached Cummingston of the third and final time, I took a route off from the main path to examine the caves and sea stacks, which attract climbers as much as they do the wildlife.
Again, it wasn’t hard to find more detritus from man’s long love affair with the sea. I do not wish to think about the trouble that this rope could cause to our wildlife, and tails of entangled whales, seals, and even dolphins are sadly becoming more and more common around the globe.
The walk was extremely pleasant an undertaking, and whilst it is not long in distance there is plenty to see all the way along the route. With birdwatching, dog walking, photography, and just general exercise and interest all combined, and the tea stop of course, we were out for much of the day. I would certainly take the route again, and with Patches snoring gently in my office, I am also now delighted with the results form the Nikon and look forward to using it again for more than just birding.
Today I was out at Spey Bay, one of my local haunts, and the opportunity to shoot these marvellous delicate flowers presented itself. I hadn’t gone out with the idea of shooting these flowers, or anything with sky in it as we shall see.
Although I had shot all my images in Fine+Raw, the excellent rendition of the in-camera JPEG set on Velvia meant that when I returned to the office I didn’t have to do a thing with the image aside from cropping.
All the images were shot at ISO200, and thankfully, although it was overcast it was also very bright which meant I could get a decent depth of field to work in close-up, whilst retaining a fast enough shutter speed to get over the constant subject movement.
I am a fan of cropping square for two reasons; Instagram, and that when the image is then printed and framed it can go on any wall space. Landscape pictures really require a landscape wall, and portrait photos either need hanging in pair, or a portrait wall (or they look too small) – square goes anywhere. Which is why I loved my ‘blad and its 6×6 film format I guess.
Shooting blue or lilac blue flowers (such as Lupins and Bluebells) is notoriously difficult, and I have had considerable trouble with getting this colour correct when I was shooting with Nikon cameras and lenses, and even more so shooting with Sigma lenses. For some reason that a tech’head might be able to explain, this is hardest colour for digital cameras to render correctly, or so my experience tells me. With Fujifilm’s Velvia setting there wasn’t any issue at all.
I specifically wanted to get the pebble beach into shot as the colours worked so well together, but I did expect to have to work on the raw tile and perhaps tweak this a little. The colours straight from camera, using the Velvia setting, in-camera Jpegs were fine for for every shot shown here, and I doubt I could do much better with the raw files.
I was equally impressed with the contextual shots, although I would probably go to the raw file for this one if I was printing it for the shot directly below. The sky has lost the colour accuracy slightly, and this wasn’t helped by me as I didn’t take the ND graduated filters with me. I wasn’t intending on shooting anything with sky in, but to be shooting details in black and white for my backgrounds and frames series of stock images.
With the raw file, which I have, I would be able to balance the sky more, but I wanted to show you the in-camera jpeg version to see the one time I did feel it either needed to post process. It was down to me not using a grad and not the camera though.
As you can see, the image from the raw file is better in terms of the sky, although I think the Lupins loose a little of their oomph. This is a quick edit, and I am sure I can get them to look exactly as the great colours of the in-camera jpeg file.
The only time I have issues with the in-camera jpeg files from the XT-2 is when presented with situations just like this. Here below you can again compare the in-camera jpeg, which I wouldn’t manipulate as it would degrade the image, and the processed raw file which I am happy to work with as it won’t degrade.
Although I prefer the balance now, I do feel that the heavier sky detracts from the Lupins which are the main subject. Even thought this is a contextual photograph i want the intent of the image and the main subject to still be the Lupins so although I have restored more of the sky, for balance, I would now probably crop more sky out to then restore the intent of the image.
This of course changes the composition and the shape of the final image:
The images show that Fujifilm XT-2 does a fabulous job of the colours and the lens does an even more impressive job of helping to retain the colours accurately with its coatings, and being so absolutely pin sharp all the way through that every aspect of every image is presented as I envisaged.
Given that the 16-55mm is not a macro lens I was very impressed with how the flowers came out in the close-up photos, and the amount of detail this lens captures blows me away every time. I have had a lot of cameras and really good expensive lenses over the years, but this lens is way up there with the very, very, best of them. It isn’t cheap, but it is worth every penny and is my main lens.