The price of SSDs is still out of this world and it didn’t make sense to me to spend that kind of cash in an upgrade of what is now an ‘old’ Powerbook, so decided on two Western Digital 750Mb Scorpio Black. These are fast drives and my faithful 3.5″ desktop Scorpio Black hasn’t failed me yet [check a comprehensive review at TechReport ].

The problem was to find the stuff on this side of the pond, for about the same price. After googling around for a bit I bumped into a website that pointed me to these guys: Macupgrade. A quick email to check their reaction time and stock, placed the order on-line and got the package 3 days later with everything well packed and in original condition. It was faster and costed less than ordering directly from OWC and these guys have a lot of OWC’s stuff right here, so very convenient indeed.

Back to the Data Doubler, what can I say…it’s a good product, the holes for the screws fit perfectly, no hard edges, the manual is very good with detailed step-by-step instructions for each model and it comes all the tools you need to install the bracket. Since the disk is secured to the bracket by 2 screws, it’s not vibration damped as the main hard disk bay which uses rubber grommets. Of course this is not really a problem for SSD’s but for normal HD’s it might be, especially when there is a lot of vibration around and both disks are in a Raid 0 configuration [also known as sky-diving without a parachute, backup often...]! But so far, so good…

A couple of things that might be useful and that are not mentioned in the installation manual:

a) Disconnecting the camera cable from the logic board is really a delicate step. There is a small plastic tab glued to the logic board that you should remove first so that it’s easier to disconnect and reconnect the cable later [don't worry, it is not hard glued and can be placed back afterwards]. It’s located here:

MBP13 with OWC Data Doubler installed

b) The bottom case of the MPB 13″ mid-2009 only has long screws [13.5mm] and 3mm screws but the MBP 13″ mid-2010 has [apparently!] also shoulder screws [also 3mm] which are slight different from the other 3mm screws. Their positions are shown below along with the correct tightening sequence to avoid wobbling.

I cloned my existing hard disk [a Seagate Momentus 7200.4, already slightly better than the 5400rpm stock HD it came with] using the excellent Carbon Copy Cloner shareware, booted from an external USB disk, formatted and partitioned each of  HDs alike and using Apple’s Disk Utility created Raid 0 volumes [with 128k block size] from the respective partitions [hint: if Disk Utility says that the 1st raid volume is busy when trying to create the second, unmount the first!]. This is software raid so there is a processing overhead involved, still the overall performance is a lot better. The downside of having 2 HDs is higher power consumption and reduced battery autonomy, worth it in my case.

Xbench performance results:

Disk:    Seagate Momentus 7200.4 500Gb			Disk: 	WD Scorpio Black 7200 750Gb Striped Raid
Disk Test	44.84					Disk Test	136.74
Sequential	94.15					Sequential	156.40
Uncached Write	110.85	68.06 MB/sec [4K blocks]	Uncached Write	346.80	212.93 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write	156.67	88.65 MB/sec [256K blocks]	Uncached Write	316.81	179.25 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read	60.80	17.79 MB/sec [4K blocks]	Uncached Read	58.30	17.06 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read	94.04	47.26 MB/sec [256K blocks]	Uncached Read	419.58	210.88 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Random	29.43						Random	121.48
Uncached Write	9.07	0.96 MB/sec [4K blocks]		Uncached Write	52.28	5.53 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Write	154.00	49.30 MB/sec [256K blocks]	Uncached Write	520.42	166.61 MB/sec [256K blocks]
Uncached Read	81.27	0.58 MB/sec [4K blocks]		Uncached Read	144.32	1.02 MB/sec [4K blocks]
Uncached Read	146.77	27.23 MB/sec [256K blocks]	Uncached Read	201.96	37.47 MB/sec [256K blocks]

Power (W) from Manufacturer				Power (W) from Manufacturer
	Seek,Typical:	1.554					Read/Write:	1.75x2
	Idle, Typical:	0.67					Idle:		0.8x2

These days I tend to carry my iPhone around when taking pictures, it’s a very useful thing really. There are a number of interesting apps, many of them free and quite useful for long exposure photography, sooo…instead of fumbling through pockets each time I need it I looked around for some sort of plate/support that could hold it within easy reach of the camera. I did not find anything commercially available that meets my requirements [one came close though] so I decided to make one from bits and pieces of stuff lying around.

Voilà, jorgesantosphotography proudly presents the ‘iPhone Support with Quick Release Plate’…tattaaaa…

DIY iPhone support with quick release plate

The half-plate comes from a camera plate I don’t use anymore. I cut it in half to reduce weight. The small ballhead comes from a Manfrotto 709B table top tripod and the iPhone case is from Griffin. Of course, you case use a cheaper ballhead and iPhone case. I just had this stuff lying around so…here is how it looks when attached to the camera, as I intended it to be:

Attached to the camera L-plate

Yes, you need a sliding clamp such as the RRS B2-Duo or a Novoflex Q=Mount [better choices then the expensive and bulky FAS Clamp shown]. The small Manfrotto ballhead allows you to position the iPhone as you want [portrait/landscape, whatever] and has enough clamping power to hold it in place even if you are running around with the camera with the iPhone attached. I have been using it for some time and I still have a working iPhone…You can take it apart for packing too, here:

Taken apart

A couple of things, don’t use an iPhone plastic case that has a rubber coating! since the round camera base is glued to the back of the iPhone case with Epoxy it will separate from the case quite easily because it is actually glued to the rubber coating. Also, use some coarse sandpaper on both surfaces [case and round camera base that comes with the ballhead] before applying a thin layer of strong Epoxy. Optionally, you can also put a screw through the cut-off Arca Swiss plate preventing the base of the ballhead from rotating in relation to the plate [red circle]. Put a drop of thread locker glue [Loctite blue for e.g.] in all the threads just in case [like the back of the case to the ballhead if you want, it packs quite nicely even when not taken apart].

Hope you find this DIY project useful in some way, I did at times.

I never contemplated stacking teleconverters because of the loss in picture quality associated but since I just got the new TC-20EIII…why not do some quick comparison shots? The stacked combo of the TC-20EIII plus the TC-17EII gives you a 3.4x factor meaning that a 70-200 mm f2.8 becomes a 238-680 mm f9.5 on a FX body and a 357-1020 mm f9.5 on a DX Body. On a 200-400 f4 lens the stack gives you a 680-1360 mm f13 on a FX and a 1020-2040 mm f13 on a DX body. Truly impressive focals no? It will cost you a 3.5 stops light loss and AF capability at least.

Due to the optical design of the teleconverters the TC-20EIII can be used on top of the TC-17EII [but not the other way around!!] without the optical elements touching but to do this one has to remove an annoying tab in the female bayonet of the TC-17EII first. It is quite a simple procedure though, locate the 4 screws on the female bayonet of the TC-17EII [the side where your lens attaches to the tele], remove the screws and remove the bayonet with care. If you do it properly you won’t even disturb the position of the spring that is under the bayonet [note the position of the spring, just in case!]. There is only 1 correct position for the bayonet because of the lens release pin, it is really that straightforward.

Needless to say that you do it at our own risk!! It will likely void the manufacturer’s warranty and if not done properly can damage the teleconverter. If you feel uncomfortable trying this on your own go to an authorised Nikon repair center and ask them to do it for you. Many UK repair centers will remove the small tab for a small fee.

Bayonet screws on lens attachment side of the TC-17EII

Locate the small tab that is almost aligned with one of the screws [see pict A below]. Take a smooth flat or half-round needle file and carefully remove material from the tab until it is almost flush with the inner part of the bayonet [see pict B]. To avoid making scratches and cuts on the bayonet surface while using the file, cover the areas next to the tab with electric insulation tape. Remove the tape when finished, place the bayonet back in the teleconverter and tighten the screws [be careful to align the threads properly! don't force the screw in! if it offers resistance then it either the threads are not properly aligned or the spring under the bayonet is not in the right position!].

A - The annoying tab that needs to be removed on the lens attachment side of the TC-17EII and B - how it looks after removal if done properly

That’s it! The TC-20EIII can now the stacked on top of the TC-17EII.

Stacked TC-20EIII with TC-17EII

Quick Stacking Comparison Tests

D700, manual exposure 1/80 sec, f/11, ISO 800 with a 70-200 f2.8 VR I at 200mm with VR Off. Shots without any tele, with the 17EII, with the 20EIII and with stacked 20EIII and 17EII combo. Shots taken on a sturdy tripod with remote release and mirror-up. Blow ups of the frames taken without teleconverter, with the 17EII and 20EII were resampled in Photoshop using Bicubic interpolation to match the magnification of the stacked shot. Default Adobe Raw conversion settings [no sharpening applied], no further processing. Click on the thumbnail to download a higher resolution version.

Quick Comparison Shots

Conclusions?

Although the tests were not extensive they nevertheless show the superior quality of the TC-20EIII. The blow-up of image with the TC-20EIII is actually sharper and more contrasted than the one taken with the TC-17EII alone. Between the images taken with the TC-20EIII and with the Stacked teleconverters, I actually prefer the one with the stacked teles [despite the lower contrast] but Photoshop Bicubic interpolation is not the best interpolation around. If I would resize the TC-20EIII image in ImageMagick with the right filter settings I’m sure that the differences would be minimal or non-existent and I wouldn’t need to lose an extra 1.5 stops and give up AF altogether during shooting. You to decide…

]]> http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/05/27/to-stack-or-not-to-stack-nikon-teleconverters/feed/ 2 Jorge Santos Bayonet screws on lens attachment side of the TC-17EII The annoying tab that needs to be removed on the lens attachment side of the TC-17EII Stacked TC-20EIII with TC-17EII Quick Comparison Shots http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/twin-camera-setups-really-right-stuff-lego/ http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/twin-camera-setups-really-right-stuff-lego/#comments Wed, 26 May 2010 12:59:46 +0000 Jorge Santos http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/?p=138 ]]>

Just been playing around with the possibility of using a twin camera setup for shooting movies and stills simultaneously for both handheld and tripod shots. Using RRS stuff I came up with a couple of interesting configurations for use with wide/medium zoom lenses.

Twin camera setup for handheld. Independent Pict or Yaw depending on position.

This is an somewhat interesting set-up for handheld. Due to the L plates on each body each camera can be set for landscape or portrait and the yaw [in vertical position] or pitch [in horizontal position] can be adjusted independently. Put a camera strap on the top body and you can carry both around your neck.

The next 2 are meant to be used on a tripod. You can adjust the position on the ballhead to balance the all thing better. Again the L plates allow each body to be set for landscape or portrait in addition to the tripod’s head movements.

Twin camera setup for tripod use. Independent pitch.

Twin camera setup for tripod use. Yaw Cam1, Pitch Cam2

The problem is that for tripod shooting both configurations [1 more than the other] will amplify any vibration issues so…still I though it was interesting in case you want to shoot movies and stills at the same time with some degree of compositional freedom.

Fellow photographer documenting the on-going activity within Halema'uma'u Crater

Again in contrast to Iceland, areas where activity is taking place have limited public access or no access at all. One should bear in mind that Hawai is part of the US after all, where everything comes packaged with a warning and a disclaimer and perpetrators will be shot first and prosecuted afterwards. Only when you embrace this mindset will you be able to understand why the local guides and tour operators would rather take you to an inactive crater and show you pictures of how it looked like 20/30 years ago when it active rather than take you to an active crater, which needless to say will be closed to the public. The only free place is still the sea, there are basically no restrictions for approaching lava flows into the sea from the sea, provided that the flows are there i.e.

Last Tree Standing, Rim of the Halema'uma'u Crater in the Kilauea Caldera

I’m happy to say Aloha to unremarkable Hawai tomorrow and Aloohhhaaaa to Yasur…Yes!

]]> http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/03/31/world-volcano-tour-part-1-hawai/feed/ 0 Jorge Santos The Edge Last Tree Standing http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/d700-pop-up-flash-diy-repair/ http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/d700-pop-up-flash-diy-repair/#comments Tue, 16 Mar 2010 18:51:28 +0000 Jorge Santos http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/?p=104 ]]> The pop-up flash of my D700 stopped working, not that I use it that much.

Still, it has some use for Commanding other Nikon speedlights or as an emergency flash. So, I called Nikon Repair for a repair quote. They gave me a hefty 290Euro [±397 USD] estimate for the repair, which I find out of proportion.

Ok, there are a number of possible causes for the non-firing of the pop-up flash [faulty flash tube, wiring, electronic component(s) for e.g] but one of the most common is the lack of electric contact in the switch at the end-of-travel position of the pop-up flash.

So, I decided to take a closer look. If your camera is outside the warranty and you have some basic DIY skills then you might want to try the step-by-step instructions below before you handout the cash, especially if your hot-shoe is working fine.

It worked for me, saving some cash and inconvenience in the process so…here is:       D700_PopUpFlash_DIY_Repair

]]> http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/03/16/d700-pop-up-flash-diy-repair/feed/ 1 Jorge Santos http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/the-best-lowepro-bag-for-carry-on/ http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/03/14/the-best-lowepro-bag-for-carry-on/#comments Sun, 14 Mar 2010 19:32:43 +0000 Jorge Santos http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/?p=100 ]]> I love Lowepro bags and I own several of them, but in Jan this year I had to return my Computrekker AW Plus for a small repair to one of the zip pockets inside. Sadly 2 months after! I was told by the distributor that the bag was discontinued and they didn’t have a replacement bag in stock neither the new bag [Pro Runner 450 AW] that is supposed to replace the Computrekker AW Plus. So I started looking at the new range trying to find out a suitable replacement for a carry-on bag.

Below is a comparison between the old and the new bags that are a close match to the maximum carry-on dimensions that most airlines use.

The increase in height [from 23.1. to 29 cm] in the Pro Runner 450AW means that it is above most airlines limits, although in linear cm/in it does meet the maximum linear dimensions [see below]. The height issue also applies to the new Pro Trekkers 300 and 400 AW and this is why they were not included.

Both the Vertex 200 and 300 AW are good matches [height slightly above the limits, but I am sure they can be squeezed in]. The Vertex 300 AW also meets the maximum linear dimensions.

The now discontinued Computrekker AW Plus is nevertheless lighter than any of the Vertex bags and it is slightly wider which allows you to pack a Nikkor 200-400mm f/4 on the middle of the bag and still have space on both sides to pack the bodies and lenses, it is a tight fit but I have done it. The same packing will not be possible with the Vertex bags since they are 3cm/1.2in smaller in width, although the extra length of the Vertex 300 will compensate to some extent.

What the manufacturer does not tell you is that most mountaineering backpacks out there offer much better load distribution and comfort than any of these camera backpacks on medium/long treks. If this your case buy a backpack that provides easy access to the middle of the pack [like some rescue mountaineering backpacks] and fit a smaller camera bag inside the backpack if you want.

Of course there is still the question of the weight with the bag loaded [which will for sure exceed the maximum allowed in most airlines]. The following tips will also help for a trouble-free check-in:

• Wear the backpack casually on one shoulder. It gives the impression that is light and you are less likely to be asked to put it on the scale [this is also why I do not travel with roller bags for carry-on];
• Wear a photo vest under your jacket. If they ask you to weight your backpack you can always transfer a considerable part of the heavier stuff into your  jacket and photo vest pockets, hopefully meeting the limit;
• If you still don’t meet the limit, kindly argue that you are carrying valuable, delicate equipment and point out that the European Directive [in Europe, obviously] foresees such exceptions;
• If the ignominious bastard still insists that you check the backpack, ask him if it is possible to hand it in at the gate [of course, get rid of any bag tag he might have put in between];
• If the above doesn’t do the trick and you are still being asked to check it in, as a last resort ask him to call the airline person responsible, get the names of both bastards [no, you can not kill them! It's against the law, although it shouldn't be] , take as much as possible of the valuable gear with you, file a written complain to the airline and take them to court if any of your checked gear gets damaged or disappears.

Note: The table above only applies for international flights from Europe.

In Conclusion:

• The Computrekker AW Plus [if you can still find one] as well as the Vertex bags are, as far as I am concerned, the best Lowepro options for carry-on if you are planning to take a reasonable amount of gear.
• Whenever possible opt for a friendly airline [like BA, United, KLM and others like them], one that is less likely to hassle you at check-in with carry-on and excess luggage charges.

PS: In the end I decided that my Computrekker AW Plus was still the best option for me, succeed in tracking a shop with one in stock, informed the Lowepro distributor and got it as a replacement.

Since we are on the subject, I have calculated the focal length at INF using the known position of stars , the [averaged] results are:

Exif (mm)         Calculated (mm)

@70                            72.5

@86                            85.7

@105                        106.8

@200                        198.6

Of course, lens distortions do affect the results but overall pretty much on the spot.

]]> http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/01/24/nikons-service-notice-on-the-70-200-vrii-issue/feed/ 2 Jorge Santos http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/nikons-70-200vrii-issue-blunder/ http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/nikons-70-200vrii-issue-blunder/#comments Tue, 19 Jan 2010 18:26:00 +0000 Jorge Santos http://jorgesantosphoto.wordpress.com/?p=70 ]]> So far, the little feedback people got came from Nikon’s service centers, each one chipping-in their own ad-hoc version of the causes and effects. Such uncoordinated response is not, per say, reassuring and reassurance is what affected customers want and expect from Nikon. The all thing is now getting completely out of control with people returning their lenses by the bucket and dealers wanting to get rid of the stock they have asap. This will have a negative impact in present and future product sales not to mention the damage already done to Nikon’s brand image. After this, who is not going to think that a thorough check of the lens or camera is the sensible thing to do before handing over their credit card details? And what about pre-ordering the new stuff? The message from Nikon’s customers is clear: We care about performance but we also expect products that aren’t cheap not to look cheap!

I was a production engineer in a major manufacturer of brown goods a long time ago and what I believe happened is that Nikon knew there was a quality issue with this specific part but they decided to ship anyway to meet the forecasted demand for the Xmas shopping season. These kind of ‘mistakes’ just don’t happen, not in the numbers we are seeing and not without the management being fully briefed and their go-ahead.

In the end this tainted affair is Nikon’s own fault and I believe they deserve every bit of the heat they are getting. Also, the absence [so far] of an official position clearly shows that Nikon still has a lot to learn in the customer relations Dept.