The Team With the Best Equipment... Doesn't Always Win

There are few things that get photographers' hearts racing like a "new" lens. Especially, one that's as unusual as a mirror lens; otherwise know by the awkward name of catadioptric! Some months ago, in my Mirror, Mirror post, I talked about picking up a Tokina 500mm f/8.0 "Cat" lens off of eBay for a pretty darned good price. Then, I found that it had some fungus growth on the inside of the front element and the seller refunded me half the price of it, so this lens ended up being south of $30. 

So, yesterday after the Thanksgiving meal and rocket-launch-a-paloosa, I headed out with this lens mounted on the D300, MB-D10 attached, and the whole rig attached to my mono-pod. I don't mind if I do say so myself: I looked good! AP or National Geographic should start sending me checks! 

This was about as good as it got! Not terribly impressive, is it? Oh, but it gets better!

If you go ahead and pull this up at full-size, you'll see that some of the grass in the lower right-hand corner is darned sharp! 

Apparently, it was the camera's (lens', computer's, fence's) fault...... Uhhhh, no; it's just photography. Photography isn't just equipment, it isn't just talent, it's mostly skill which is acquired through hard work. 

It's unfortunate, but you can't just grab up some nice equipment, go out into the woods with a "how to" book and get it done. I shot images for the better part of an hour till the wife came out and wanted to know what I was doing at which point, I basically ran out of light. An f/8 (f/11 effective) mirror lens needs lots of good light even to shoot bad images. If there's a lens out there that takes more work for a photographer to get good at using, I don't know what it is. Thinking back, to the days where I carried a camera literally everywhere, there was a reason I was astounded by our photography instructor who regularly used a 500mm Nikkor mirror hand-held. No, it's not the lens. Yes, the beast of a Nikkor is a better mirror than the little Tokina, but as you can see, it's not the mirror bugaboo, contrast, that's the issue here. 

1. I didn't hold it very steady even for shooting at 1/1000th of a second or higher....
2. I clearly didn't do the best job focusing either, and if you didn't already know, the depth of field for a 500mm (750mm effective on APS-C sensor'd camera) f/8 is pretty darned unforgiving. 
3. I probably should have used a tripod instead of a mono-pod, but then; what would be the point of using a compact mirror anyway!

So yeah, I'm going to need lots of work with this lens if I'm going to get any good with it. 

However, it wasn't an all-bad afternoon....photographically speaking. I did shoot some pictures with my regular "go-to" lens, the 18-200mm VR Nikkor and I got another reminder of how much better the use of "fill-flash" is when shooting in bright contrasty conditions! Here's is a picture of Josh "the Rocketeer" with his helper, Katie "Space Disaster" getting ready for a launch.

That turned out pretty well; photographically, as well as aeronautically.
 



 

My Life In Cameras

My days of camera love began here. Strange isn't it? Of course, being a child of the 60's and 70's, it should be no surprise given the dominance of Kodak in those days. I don't remember where it came from or what the circumstances were surrounding this 126 cartridge loading Instamatic. I just remember it being around the house when I was young. It was heavy. Everything had a weight to it back in those days when most anything even remotely substantial was made of metal. Anyway, I also remember that I never could get it to work right so I took most of my pictures on this.....

I know, I know... these were barely cameras. But hey, it was cheap (mowing lawns didn't pay a lot), and the film was cheap to buy and have processed. Plus it was very small and portable. I mostly went everywhere on my Sears "Free Spirit" 10-Speed, so something that fit in my overly-tight bluejeans pocket was perfect. Only super geeks wore backpacks and no self-respecting teenage boy had a luggage rack, much less a basket on his bike! On a regular basis, I road down to the train depot, took pictures of the passing freight engines and chatted with the station master. Little did I know that it was the last of those days as well. Both station and master are long gone now from little towns in the Texas panhandle like Abernathy. On the way back, I'd swing by the library and pick up some "Rick Brant Electronic Adventures" or "Hardy Boys Mysteries" that I'd already read several times.You know; I still read to books for relaxation.

Real photography came in this form. My dad's Voigtlander Bessamatic Deluxe. I can't imagine a better camera on which to learn photography. It had one lens, a 50mm f/2.8 Color-Skopar. It had a coupled "match-needle" selenium meter visible in the viewfinder. This "deluxe" version had a reflecting mirror system which gave the ability to see the aperture and shutter speed in the finder. The Synchro-Compur leaf shutter allowed flash synchronization at all shutter speeds. For a late 60's and early 70's kid, I was photographically spoiled. I got to use this camera under the supervision of my father on our seemingly annual summer trips into mountains of northern New Mexico and Colorado. For those of you who have been up there in the summer time, you won't be surprised that experience helped me learn to handle rapidly changing lighting conditions. I sometimes tell people that I "cut my photographic teeth" on that camera. Although I had loan of it any time I wanted; of course this wasn't my camera. That would come later.

In a dusty little West Texas town like ours, there were very few kids who grew up handling a SLR (single lens reflex), so I supposed it shouldn't surprise anyone that I landed the post of "Annual Staff Photographer" my Freshman year of high school. The school owned a Mamiya/Sekor 1000DTL, along with the requisite 50mm f/1.8 and 135mm f/2.8 lens, as well as a Yashica Mat 124G twin lens reflex. My 14 year-old self though, turned up his nose at them, and continued to use my dad's Voigtlander instead. If I knew then what I know now, I'd have jumped all over that 1000DTL with it's built-in spot metering. The whole time though, I was pining away for the latest and the greatest from the "land of the rising sun". This was the later part of the 70's and the electronic revolution was sweeping the photographic industry. It had begun almost a decade before with cameras like the Pentax ES, and Nikkormat EL, but after the middle part of the decade when Olympus turned every other company on it's ear with the M-1 (OM-1, Olympus Model 1) with it's compact size and every feature under the sun, the handwriting was on the wall. Everyone needed to get smaller, lighter and more electronic! In April of 1976, Canon took things to the "next level" with the AE-1. Relatively small, light, and electronically advanced, with the ability to take most of the professional grade Canon system. However it's real secret was really the construction technology which jumped to a different level entirely with polycarbonate body components! Canon didn't invent these things. They're just the ones that combined it all together. This completely shifted the SLR market from typically doctors, engineers, scientist and such to include the everyday common man/woman. They invented today's DSLR-toting soccer moms. Although, I was able to talk the school into this camera the following fall, it wasn't my camera either. What I wanted came along in the Spring of '78. The great Canon A-1. Although, it shot film; this camera can be considered the progenitor of today's DSLRs. All electronic, with the now familiar PASM shooting modes, controlled by a control wheel for every function. Yes; you are correct, that the Minolta XD-11 of 1977 came first, but it's functional layout for controls was traditional and it never dominated the top end of what would later become know as the "pro-sumer" market like the Canon. The A-1 was the camera I had to have. After a lot of scraping and scrounging from working part-time jobs and the participation of my brother who was also fascinated by the camera, I bought it during the summer of 1978. I actually shot with it for less than 2 years, it had a major impact on my Psyche. 

Although, the A-1 was the camera that I remember so completely it seems that it was around longer than it really was; it was this camera that changed me as a photographer. The Canon 7s, introduced in 1961! If the A-1 was the "bombshell cheerleader" dream-date that makes everybody stare and drool everywhere you go (make no mistake: when I went anywhere shooting yearbook photos with it, every other yearbook photographer wanted to talk about it!), then this was the girl next door. One the eye-catching (with the blond Farrah Fawcett hair-do), the other the slender brunette with her hair pulled back in a pony-tail and no make-up. It was a little angular, with very few controls, but everything operated smoothly and quietly (almost silently). The summer after I graduated before heading off to college, I worked in the booming metropolis of Lubbock, at a photo studio long since gone called Reeves Photography, as the "black and white" technician. When I wasn't standing in the darkroom over a Dektol tray or prowling the basement full of old equipment, I haunted the camera shops all over town....both of them. One day, as I was hanging around in Plains Camera on 34th St., I spotted it; the Canon 7s in a glass case. It was mounted with the 50mm f/1.2 lens. I think I went back every day for a week to look at that camera. In the end, I cut a deal with my brother, where he help me buy it, and we'd split the cameras up when I went to college in the fall. I kept the 7s and he got the A-1. Shooting with this camera was at once, both work and joy. You had to know the light in your head and set the controls accordingly. When you knew what you were doing, this camera became a part of you. When you didn't, the results weren't very good. Unlike the A-1 with all the automation, there was no safety net. At this point, I might have been the best photographer that I ever was or will be. No, really; I'm just being honest. I've always had a "good eye", but at that point, I hadn't yet over developed my left-brain with the abundance of Masters Degree analytics followed by decades of classroom and administrative work.

Speaking of classroom. I eventually got out of college.... twice. By the late 80's, ensconced in a paying position as a teacher and coach, I was finally in a position take my old hobby back up. In case you haven't heard, photography can be a little expensive! Although I wanted to take up where I left off, it's not as easy as that. A decade before, in the last years of high school, I was as close as I ever would be to professional photography. I was in the darkroom every day, and shot lots of photos, especially model portfolio regularly. After a decade hiatus; it doesn't just all come back. On top of that, I was a teacher, a coach, and a student again, pursuing his Master's Degree..... all at the same time. One of things I learned at that time is that a rangefinder camera, is not something you just kind of pick up randomly and get good results. You have to kind of become "one" with the camera. Besides which, I wasn't shooting much (if any) portraiture and that bit of "softness" from the Canon was unneeded and unwanted for what I was doing. What I needed and wanted was a relatively "up-to-date" system SLR that was quick to use and had some basic metering capability. So I made the decision to sell the Canon 7s, which made me sad (then and now). Around this time, I had found a little camera shop on the outskirts of town that dealt exclusively in used equipment. There was a lot of that in those "Mind of Minolta", and "EOS Rebel" (remember those Agassi commercials?) days. People were dumping older non-auto-focusing/non-automatic exposure cameras right and left! I knew I didn't have the money for the Nikon FM/FM2 that I wanted. Well, actually, I did have the money for the camera and a lens, but not for any other Nikon lenses. After all; what's the point of owning a Nikon if you don't put Nikon glass on it! Small, light camera with a good system and had excellent glass: not surprisingly, it came down to Olympus (OM-1n, OM-2n), or Pentax (MX, ME-Super). I bought an MX in nice condition with a SMC-M 50mm f/1.4 for $140. Later I traded it for an almost identical black-bodied version, then came the ME-Super and eventually about 12 lenses, ranging from 24mm to 200mm, plus various zooms. This went on happily for almost 2 decades.

Then came digital. In an early post, I had talked about my progression beginning with a Kodak DC4800. I'll at least hit the high points here. I was working at the University of Illinois at the time as the Area Coordinator for IT. Under my purview was all items digital, including the cameras. No one was an expert photographer in our department so we used the fairly nice performing Kodak DC cameras of that time to shoot photos of events that we could use in our literature and website. Of course, since I was in charge of them, I had access. I soon found that the only photos I ever did anything with were the ones that were digital. So, I started doing research. I learned the the 3Mp was the break point where you just generally couldn't tell the difference between film and digital. The DSLR market at that time was still over the $2000 per, so that was out. Almost all the other cameras were completely automated and really not suited for a photographer (vs. a snap-shooter). So, I got a DC4800 and shot digital increasingly as my film use decreased over the next several years. My detour into the compact "super-zoom" cameras in the form of the Nikon CoolPix 8800 has been previously covered enough so I won't get into that again other than to say that I did manage to catch my mistake quickly enough to land on my feet and purchase the Nikon D70. Although, I've moved on from that model, it sure fired-off my continued affection for 6 megapixel DSLRs though!

The first 5 or 10 post of this blog details how I went from the 8800 to the D70, then on to this camera, the D200. I probably consider this my first real Nikon. Not that the D70 was deficient in any way. It was just that this magnesium bodied "pro-sumer" camera embodied the sense of what I always felt using a Nikon was all about. That came through in every Nikon I've touched ranging from my friend Eric's mom's "F", to the "FM" that I owned for a while a few years ago. I'll probably always consider this model to be my first "big boy" Nikon. 

Today, I have these to use. The D300 (successor to the D200) and the newly acquired "walk-around" camera, the D40. It's been a long road to get here over these last 45 years or so. It's been an enjoyable hobby, as much for the equipment as the photography. This last Saturday, I met a father who had come with his daughter to buy the "plastic fantastic" D50. I had a good time just sitting with them and watching her hold and try that camera out then nodding to her dad when she had decided that it "was the one". I pegged her at somewhere between 18 and 20. She was excited and her dad was happy that she was happy. I'm just glad that the camera went to somebody that had to scrape and work to get it, just like all those cameras have been a part of my life these last 45 years.

My 200th Post

If anyone would have asked me years ago when I started writing this blog, whether I thought that I'd go 5 years writing this thing, or better yet, have 200 post; I'm not certain that I'd have answered, "yes". Yet here we are. Last week, when I wrote posts, #198, and #199 on the various considerations associated with B.Y.O.D., I briefly thought about what topic I would focus on for this landmark post. I didn't come up with anything. Then as I sat down this morning, I figured that a "day in the life of" would be good. It's a cloudy dreary Sunday morning. The donuts have been eaten. The children are happily playing on an "obsolete" gaming system (GameCube) in my son's room. My wife is reading, while listening to her favorite radio station on the big A/V system in the living room. Here I sit in front of my desktop computer with my cup of coffee, doing what I've really come to enjoy. 

Our technology is pretty much ubiquitous, but it's also largely seamless. That's as it should be. Even ducks on the pond sometimes get to just sit, and float. Yesterday turned out to be one of those days that just worked. I started out driving into Dallas to meet a buyer for the Nikon D50 (Plastic Fantastic). We met at the big "buying club" sized Half-Price Books. The sale went without a hitch...once we found each other inside that place! On to my other "to dos". Up to Plano to the Chinese grocery to pick up the necessities for cooking dinner for the family. Down to Garland Camera, not surprisingly in Garland to pick up the, 55mm f/2.8 Micro-Nikkor with the super stiff focusing my brother sent me. They did an excellent job returning the lens with a firm focus, but nice and smooth making it perfect for macro work. 

While waiting for the guy behind the counter to find my rear-cap, I spotted this in the used case. Yup, that's a Nikon D40 (Plastic Fantastic 2.0). Yup, I bought it. Here's what happened: I asked to look at it, and fitted my "chipped" 50mm, f/1.4 Nikkor to it to get a sense on how it felt. Should never have done that with the $175 from the sale of the D50 in my pocket! They had it sticker'd for $200 with the kit 18-55mm "kit" lens (VR version). At this point, my brain goes into high gear! "What can I get them down to; for cash." "Will they sell it without that lens (that I don't need)". "What would that price be?" "Should I buy it with lens and then sell that to help defray the cost?" Yes: I ran through all that in head in the 30 seconds it took while rummaging through my bag for the lens and putting it on the camera.

After holding it and admiring it's very compact size compared to my D300, I knew I was hooked. Well, look at it! In the end, I got the guy to come down to $175 "out the door" (meaning he swallows the tax), with lens included....for cash. Of course, that's exactly what I just sold the D50 for an hour before. I think I must have walked into there with a "has $175 in cash" written on my forehead. If I decide to sell off that lens, it should go for about $75-100, which would make the body itself cost roughly $100, maybe less. I'd have been pretty darned happy to get that price on eBay, much less, in town, "in-the-flesh" that I could hold and see the condition for myself! As you can see, if you know that you are looking for, and know the market price, you can often get a good deal pretty much anywhere! 

Here's another image I shot this morning of it mounted with the relatively large 18-70mm lens. Good gosh; compare it with the D300 with the 18-200mm. The difference in mass is astounding! And that's with no MB-D10 battery grip or flash mounted, which is how the D300 is often equipped when I'm out shooting with it. I know, the D40 only has a 6Mp sensor compared to the 12Mp of the D300, and that it's a 18-70mm vs. an 18-200mm "super-zoom" lens, but this is how each camera is most likely to be configured "in use". Furthermore, look at the previous two images and see what that camera could very likely be configured with the even smaller lens! On top of that, I'm now going to be in full "bird-dog" mode looking for the "E Series" 28mm lens to fit this body which is significantly smaller than the 50mm in those pictures! In actuality, now that I have it in hand to compare, the D40 isn't much larger than the Panasonic GF-1. 

So, to finish my story, I completed my swing through the Dallas burbs, by going to Costco in Rockwall to gas up, and top the tires with nitrogen (we've had a major temperature drop the last day or so here in North Texas). Then it was off to the bank and the dreaded Walmart on the way home. I know all that doesn't have a lot to do with the D40 or technology, but can I just say that how much more enjoyable the morning was after my little find in Garland!

Before I close out today, let me just put this little picture out there. Yes, that's most of my stable of Nikon equipment. Even though, the SB-600 flash is out on loan, the 55mm Micro-Nikkor hadn't come back from repairs and my wife's Coolpix 8100 is at school; it's most of it. Also, I wanted a "family picture" before I sold the D50. NO: I am not a crazed Nikon "fanboy" since much of what I have came by accident or gift. At some point in the future, I'll get into what-all this stuff is and what role it plays in our world. Until then; have a great Thanksgiving break!

What Should I Buy My Kid?

At the risk of adding to the confusion that's already out there for you B.Y.O.Disoriented parents. Let me literally take you to the next level. In the previous post, I tackled tablets and hopefully clarified that issue a little bit. And for the buyer who has a child of elementary school age, that was all fine and good, but what if you have kids who are a little bit older? Maybe 5th/6th grade, middle school, or what about those angst ridden high schoolers? What does their B.Y.O.Dear experience mean to you? Well, actually, it's a bit more complex.

I can virtually (pun intended) hear the silent scream through the web now. NOOOooooooo!!!! I'm not buying them 3 devices! Actually, you've already bought them one. I don't know many students of the age we're talking about who don't have one of these. So the first step is simple. If your kid doesn't have a smartphone already, get them on one. Now comes the hard part. Sit with them and work through all the apps that they NEED . Not the 36 versions of Angry Buzzards, and Minecraft, but stuff like, Dictionary.com, finding a useful multifunction calculator, how to access their teachers web content through Google Apps. All the various things that Google Apps does, such as taking the place of M$ Office. Then work out a scheme of how you are going to maintain some semblance of control over their appropriate use, AND last, but not least, make sure they fully understand how to switch to your home's, their school's, the doctor's office, Starbuck's, Lowe's, everybody's free WiFi so that they aren't ringing up a crazy number of minutes on their (yours) data plan! 

I teach high school. They pay me to be with teens. Before that, I taught middle school. They paid me to be with younger teens. I know teens. Before they'll use ANYTHING else, they'll grab their phones, for both useful things as well as things less useful. If you don't work with them on this, you're going to regret it. To them; B.Y.O.D. means using their phones!

Now that we've addressed why older students need something other than tablets..... oh, I think maybe I skipped that part. Anyway, here's the scoop, simplified. As kids progress up the school grades, instead of being "consumers" of academic content (such as using practice apps on a tablet), they tend to move more and more toward "interpretation", and then "creators" of content themselves. As such, they increasingly need to use full-blown software applications, which are often too heavy-duty for tablets, although the gap is closing. One thing that is an absolute struggle for tablets is extended typing. Even the addition of a docking keyboard via a connector or Bluetooth rarely helps, especially as students move to typing full essays and research papers. What now?

This now rapidly moves towards the province of the "clamshell". How's that, you say? That's what they call the form-factor of standard "laptop/notebook" computer. There are two main things here that makes this the dominant form of computing today. Basically, this takes not only pretty much a full computer, but a real keyboard and relatively large screen that doesn't require a ton a scrolling to get all your content. These things come in a variety of sizes and weights. The main categories are as follows:

• "Desktop Replacement"- Full-sized laptops that tends to run about 7 pounds or so, a screen ranging from 16" to 17", a full-sized keyboard generally with a separate number pad. The prices ranging from $450 to 5 times that if you let your kid talk you into something like an Alienware "gaming" laptop! These are not for B.Y.O.D. These are for you to set on that desk in the den to replace the old desktop computer.....hence "desktop replacement".
• "Think & Light"- Actually, not all that thin OR all that light. They tend to be in the 5 pound range, which is a lot in today's world. Think desktop replacement with a smaller keyboard and screen. These are the compromise notebooks that corporations buy their workers by the thousands. They can run anywhere from the $350 Acer at Walmart all the way up to the $2500-3000 ones that Fortune 500 companies buy for their workers jetting around all over the world. However, they do tend to show up on the used market by the pallet-load, so they are great (read cheap) deals if you know where and how to look for/at them. Look at some of my previous posts about why and how to buy them.
• "Sub-notebooks/Ultra-portable"- These are smaller (and consequently lighter) notebooks that are less than 5 pound (often around 3lbs) with screens in the 12" range. This combination of small size and light weight make them almost perfect for the older student. One important caveat though: these are NOT netbooks! These are full computer with full computing capabilities in a smaller size. The new price for them range from $500/600 all the way up to the well over $1000 "Ultrabooks". Like the thin & lights, corporations tend to buy them by the thousands, so they can also be had easily on the used market which I cover briefly later.
• Microsoft Surface Tablet- These are actually kinda cool. They are actually real computers despite what they look like. Basically you have a form that's a bit of a thicker tablet, but they come with kind of a full keyboard. Despite their ridiculous commercials that don't tell you anything useful, they are essentially a full computer. They start at less than $500 for the cheaper version, so they aren't out of the ballpark. Go and touch it and play with it and see if your student is OK with it's idiosyncracies.

OK, now that we have that settled, let's talk about getting them into a laptop that they can carry, vs. carry for a few days and totally not carry again. Kinda like my rather petite student who started the year carrying a full-sized desktop replacement HP with a 16" screen. She completely didn't understand why I was laughing at her, until she stopped carrying it! So, don't be that parent...please. But how do you get into an appropriate sized laptop without, killing the budget? This is where we hear the siren call of the tablet. You see the ads: $300-350 they say.....$249 on "Black Friday"! Don't do it; step away from that Sunday ad! Then what should I do, you say?

Go boring. Many schools like mine will give you the option of "checking out" a perfectly adequate machine. Ours high school has the ThinkPad X200/201. These are not "cool". They are not "sexy". They are NOT MacBook Airs. They do not cost $1000-1200! If your kid breaks this, you might be out $200.

But what if my school doesn't have a program like this? Here are the options:

• Go to Walmart, Costco, Best Buy, Micro Center, Fry's, wherever and buy the least expensive computer under $500 made by a company you've heard of. Here's the thing: If you can make this thing last 3 years, you will have only spent about $150 a year. Just don't be tempted to buy the cooler one that cost more. Regardless how cool it was in the store, it will completely not be cool in 6 months.
• If you are brave and know a little bit about computers, go onto eBay or Craigs List and find Dells that are branded Latitude (not Inspiron), Lenovo ThinkPad, HPs that are branded EliteBook (not Pavilion), that are around 3 years old (when they are surplused or come off-lease). Great deals can be had at about half the price of new in a machine that's built for the corporate world. Prices vary a lot.
• Find a small, "Mom & Pop" computer shop that take the "off-lease" laptops and refurbish them. This means that they'll reload the operating system and make sure the machine is working well. You have to look hard, but they can be found around any good-sized city. Dallas has quite a few around Garland, Carrollton/Farmers-Branch, and Arlington. You'll pay a little more, but the hard part is done for you.

Anything else? Yup: don't buy Anti-Virus when you buy the machine. There are a bunch of good ones that are free, ranging from the Avast (that we use), to AVG (which we've used before), to Microsoft Security Essentials (which we used to use). What about an "office" application? If you don't want to spend the $100 on M$ Office for Students & Teachers, use Google Apps, or download Open Office. With everything from Adobe Acrobat Reader and Flash to Browsers, etc. available free these days, there's precious few things you should have to buy.

Here at Frugal Propellerhead headquarters, we just don't believe in spending a lot of money on technology. In today's world, it's essential, and I even love it, but I try to be as cheap about it as possible. I know, I've thrown a lot of unknowns at you if you aren't a computer geek like me. Please feel free to comment or email me and I'll try and answer your specific questions to the best of my ability.

World War "F": The Day of the Tablet

It's almost upon us....the most dreaded day of the year......Black Friday!!! This year is going to be extra dreadful. Black Friday combined with.....B.Y.O.D. That's bring your own device for the uninitiated. I'm not sure how it is in other parts of the country (but I suspect that it's about the same), schools have decided to get out of the technology hardware game and have largely embraced the B.Y.O.D. concept in some form. It's simply moving too fast for the institutions to keep up with it, plus it's so pervasive that most students either have it already or are acquiring it eminently. So even schools like mine which had been on the cutting edge by providing laptop computers are bowing to this irresistible force of technology. 

What has also become apparent is that many parents played the "wait and see" game to determine how much their children were going to need to use technology and how the schools were going to implement it before running out and buying something. Well, I'm going to bet that they've seen enough to now "make the call". So, either they, the grandparents, Santa, or whoever is going to make a major run on these things during this year's holiday buying season. 

Although, B.Y.O.D. doesn't necessarily define it's technology to mean tablets, and sometimes, that's not even the best device for the child; I'm going to bet that they will be the majority of what's purchased this year. There's a number of reasons, but this post isn't about deciding between them, although I might feel the need to write one on that later. This post is about the parameters that make up the decision making process of choosing a tablet. Of course, I'll have to put the caveat out there that the information is for what's currently out now (Nov. 2013), and of course to some degree will be effected by my philosophies and biases. That's out of the way; let's get down to it!

No; that's not me. That is of course, the great Steve. And for many who have just paid attention to their awesome ad campaigns and drank the Apple "Juice" (Kool-Aid to some), you'd think that all anyone needed to do is to run out and buy one of their Uber-Cool devices and have done with it.

Of course, I'm a technological heretic and am here to tell you, it's not that simple. In today's tablet world, there are 3 main forces in play. Apple "IOS" (iPhone, iPad, iBlender, iDryer, yada-yada-yada, ad nauseum), Android (Pretty much any non-Apple Smartphone and Tablet) and new to the game; Windows (Actually Windows 8, phones and tablets). All three, have their strengths and weaknesses and I'll go through them one by one.

There's that man again! Well; that's because he/they invented the modern category of the tablet as we know it, with the original iPad of April, 2010. First, let's eliminate that from your buying consideration, no matter how great of a deal that "Uncle Ross/Aunt Judy" is offering you for their "almost-new" one....don't buy it! This first version of this product simply won't run many of the modern apps on it's IOS 5 which can't ever be updated to a newer version...end of story. Trust me; we have one. However, the iPad 2 (oddly still in production) will run the up-to-date versions of IOS, but just slower then the newest wiz-bang iPad "Air" which has the super-duper-secret-alien technology screen. In all seriousness though, any and all iPads are technologically cutting edge, and function virtually flawlessly and get great battery life. The down side is that they are generally more expensive than others with the current models starting at $399 and going up from there. Best bet in Apples (vs. Oranges ...padump) is the iPad 2 which sells down around $350. Your kids won't be able to tell the difference in the speed of the hardware between it and the more expensive versions. Are there downsides to iPads? Yup; IOS isn't as "open" as Andriod and therefore, some APPs don't have an IOS version. So if you are getting it specifically with the intention of your kid using it in school, I'd absolutely check to make sure whether there's an IOS version of the APP that their teacher(s) are looking to use! Plus, for all it's cutting edge technologies, Apple products are not often friends with otherwise "common" ports like USB, card readers, etc. You'll have to buy a separate device to say.....connect your digital camera or flash drive. Believe me, I've felt this pain. Oh yeah, almost forgot; if you are looking for a smaller version, the iPad "Mini" starts at $280. Also almost forgot; there's a dark secret about IOS devices that they don't like to talk about. They won't run anything with Adobe Flash. What's that you ask? Well kiddies....it's those fun little videos and other automated gizmos that are on everybody's websites these days ranging from just plain news sites to (unfortunately) many educational sites as well! Not trying to Apple-bash, just lettin' you know one of the issues Apple-philes have to deal with.

The other "heavy-hitter" in the tablet market are the various Android tablets. It doesn't matter whether you are looking at a Nabi, the Kindle, or the ubiquitous Samsung Galaxy Tab 2 or 3, they are all based on Google's little adaptation of the Linux OS we all know as the Android. Let's start with the basics before it gets complicated. Don't buy the little cheap ones that you see advertised at places like Big Lots for something in the order of $50-70. Just don't do it. They often run an old, designed for smartphones, version of the OS that runs on a single core processor. An older OS, means that besides it not having the newer improvements and features, but that it also won't run some APPs. A single core processor means that it can't be upgraded to a new OS either. In general, if you are looking for a "budget" tablet in the sub-$200 range, look for an older major brand, like Samsung, Asus, or Acer with at least a "Dual-Core" processor. You won't get the nicer HD screen, or much memory, but it'll be enough to run what you want to. 

What about the next group "up"? $250 or so? In that case, you really want to start with "Quad-Core" processor and a HD screen. What does that mean? It means that you'll be able to make this tablet last a little longer, because not only will it run what's out there now very nicely, but probably the next-gen OS and APPs that haven't been released yet. And if you haven't gone to a store and held an HD screen'd tablet side-by-side with a non-HD screen'd one; go do it and see what I'm talking about. 

What about the other one? Oh yeah; Microsoft Surface, running Windows 8 or 8 RT depending on whether you paid for the expensive version. I'll say this: if you have a high school or maybe a middle school kid who wants something light and physically smaller, then consider this. It's largely because these are better for content creation (read writing papers) than any tablet, even the big ones. However, I'll also say that I'd sooner buy a used ultra-portable laptop than shell out about $500 for one of these. $200 vs. $500, real keyboard vs. membrane kinda keyboard.....you decide. 

Still confused and would like me to be more specific? Want me to make some recommendations? OK, I'll do that....along with some things to think about as well.

• Apple families; you know who you are. You've gone through several generations of iphones. Mom and/or Dad have an iPad, maybe a MacBook? I'd look long and hard a the Mini for your kid unless there are reasons which can't be overcome. Here's the deal. It may be your kid's tablet, but when they can't find something or want to change a setting, you're going to want to know where that is. When you are traveling somewhere, you'll want everyone to be able to use the same chargers...trust me on this.
• Budget driven folks; for whatever reason, you need a functional tablet, but simply can't or won't go over a price-point. The lowest price-point, I can recommend if you really can't do $225, is $175. At this price, you can buy a decent machine branded by a decent company that will be probably be there for the duration of the warranty and won't have turned into "makers" of vacuum cleaners. The older model of the Samsungs, the Galaxy Tab 2, is available at lots of places around $179. HP has a tablet about around $150 that has good specs, but it's build quality is not very good. I'd look for one of the old Asus ME tablets. You might get lucky and get one with a nicer screen. Make sure that the Android OS is 4.xx "Ice Cream Sandwich" or newer. Try to get one with a MicroSD card slot so you can put a memory card in there to augment the low amount of memory that comes with tablets in this price range (typically 8Gb).
• Bang For The Buck Buyers; look to spend $225-275. The Nexus 7 HD, whether you buy the Google version (made by Asus) or the Asus version (made by Asus) are really great deals right now. They typically sell at $229. The hardware is very nice, the screen is excellent and it's well-made. Personally, if I wasn't as price-sensitive, I'd look for one of the Asus models that has the MicroSD card readers although it's not as big of an issue here since most of these tablets will come with 16Gb of memory on board. But hey, it's always nice to be prepared, especially if you travel a lot and want to put a bunch of movies on there for your kid. 
• Beyond this price point, you are mostly paying for extras that are very user specific. These are things such as a docking keyboard, extra-super-duper fancy camera, bigger screen, other things that kids don't need. Also, buy a 7" tablet. You'll/They'll appreciate the way more convenient smaller size. You'll appreciate the smaller price as well.

But what about Nabis and Kindles!?! Here's the deal on those. I wouldn't generally recommend either of them for the same philosophical reason and different real-world reasons. I don't like products that are specifically "limited". Since Android is basically an "open" standard, manufacturers can basically do with it what they want. Some, based on what market segment they are trying to sell to, will create a "walled garden" so only certain APPs are available for their product. This is all fine and good you have a young child, but create issues if you have a school-aged kid who will have different needs as they grow. In the Nabi's case (literally), they've essentially added a silicone case to the case. That might be a good thing if you have a younger kid or a particularly accident-prone one, but I'd suspect that it would be a bit of an issue to put in the typically over-stuffed book-bag though. Both the Kindle Fire, and Blackberry playbook are really nice devices, however, they both limit their users to specific subsets of Android Apps available or worse yet, their own Apps. Just ask HP how that one worked out! Nook? See above. But in the end, what the issue ends up being is that, if their specific adaptations aren't exactly what you need, then not only do they not offer any more for your money, but end up limiting what you can do with it in the long run.

A few last notes and items to address before closing out this post. What about a phone? Your kid may campaign for one, but the simple fact is that they really don't have big enough screens to do any sort of real work on. They are also often too small to allow the user to make accurate button presses on some of the curriculum specific practice apps. Plus, since they are often tied to the data side of your cellphone plan, do you really want to trust that your kid is going to go through the extra step to make sure that they've logged on to the schools WiFi network vs. being still tied to the cell tower sucking down your data minutes? Really? You do actually know your 8, 9 or 10 year old, right? Yeah, that's what I thought.

"So, which size do I buy?" I'll make it easy. Unless you have specific needs, buy the 7" or as close to that size as possible. It's small enough to make it easy to throw in a bag, but it's big enough to read for an extended time and see things without squinting. If you can afford it, get one with Gorilla Glass, much less likely to break when your child throws it. Again, if it fits in your budget, I'd try to get one with a MicroSD card reader (memory cards are cheap). For your sanity, get them decent headphones, and a car-USB adapter (make sure that it'll support the electrical draw of a tablet though; about 2amps). Get a decent case that has a hard cover over the screen. You've seen the inside of your child's book bag, right? .....and have seen how they throw that around?

Where to buy? OK, let me start by saying that I'm not supported by any company in any way shape or form. I share with you what I do based on hard-won experience and my partially tough-in-cheek eccentricities. If there's a Micro Center in your area; print out this post and go there. They have a lot of stuff so you need to give yourself some time. Go on a weeknight or the middle of a weekday. Do not go on Saturday any time around and after noon. Same for Sunday. I like them because unlike other places, their staff seems to know what they are talking about. I like that. They also tend to hire people that actually speak good English. I also like that. But they are physically much smaller than a Fry's so they'll often get crowded. I go to Fry's sometimes, when I feel like being alone. Unless you are like me; don't go. Or expect that no one will help you. You (or they) won't be able to find what you want (the thing in the ad) since they sold both of them within minutes of the Friday ad coming out. I prefer not to go to Walmart or Best Buy for obvious reasons. Although Best Buy usually has lots of stuff out, and is a good place to just go and look at the models. Expect no useful help, unless it's a full-moon and on an alternate Thursday during a Leap-year. I'd sooner go to Walmart, although you won't think that they have what you are looking for since it won't be on display and you won't be able to see it locked behind the expanded steel-mesh cage at ankle level. The one kid who knows stuff won't be working on the day you go there. Amazon is a better bet.

 

"Back In The Day"....We Built Systems

In my childhood and teenage years, while I waited with anticipation, each month's photography magazines (as much for the ads of gear that I could only dream about), I planned and plotted as to which lenses I would own.....when I grew up. Funny thing is; I still do that, but instead of dreaming, it's more methodical planning. In the intervening 30-35 years, life and inflation happened. According to the various online money calculators, that painfully saved $100 of cash is the equivalent of almost $650 these days. So those, $150-200 Pentaxes, Mirandas, Canons, and Minoltas of 1970 would cost roughly $1000-1300 today. The next step up, "baby Nikons", high-end Canons, or relatively inexpensive German cameras would be in the $1500-2000, range with the "F", Leicas and such running into the $3000 area. 

No wonder people shelled out the money to buy expensive aluminum cases such as Zero Halliburtons to protect their prized gear. Although the prices in actual dollars don't seem to have changed all that much in that time, our perceptions of them have. In those days, when an engineer or accountant shelled out that much to buy a camera, he expected it to last a life-time and perhaps pass it on to his son. Yes; I said "he" and "son" since photography in those days was almost universally the province of men. In today's Walmart'd society, we're thrilled to have something last more than 3 years physically and usually, by that time, it will have been discarded, sitting forlornly in a closet or garage sale. Therefore, people don't go to great lengths to create a "system" and protect it.They might shoot a Nikon DSLR this year, but switch to Canon the next, because they have a new model with some neat video features that they might use, then in a couple of years have moved on to Sony or Samsung because those new mirrorless APS-C cameras are so cool and compact!

I'm a dinosaur, if not in equipment, in perspective and philosophy. I thought long and hard when I decided to switch from Pentax film cameras a few years back. I weighed the pluses and minuses of Canon and Nikon while reading a ridiculous number of commentaries and reviews both on the web and in magazines. Ultimately, I decided to go with Nikon because they had the lens I wanted (18-200mm VR) and their company philosophies fit mine and my idiosyncrasies. 

This is one of them. Nikon never changed their SLR mounts. To this day, they still use the "F" mount. Which means, barring any of the nebulous coupling lugs and what-not, any F-mount lens will fit any F-mount body. Now, you have to watch for things like; intrusive rear elements that might break a mirror that hasn't been locked up, or pre-Ai/non-converted lenses that might break the coupling lugs on your newer camera. But the mount itself.....that'll fit. I LOVE that! Make of it what you will. I don't really care. Am I going to run out and buy a drawer full of old glass? I probably would if I was a retired millionaire, but no, it's not in my plan. 

However, there are a few pieces that fit my "system", and the fact that they are old, or manual focus, whatever....is not relevant to me or doesn't effect my intended use of them. We'll start with some I already have. The first is this an older, non-Ai (auto-indexing), 50mm f/1.4. It has been converted to Ai so functions fine on modern Nikon bodies. It also has been "chipped" meaning that it has the CPU and contacts which send and receive information from the digital Nikons. The 50mm focal length roughly translates to about 75mm on my DX (APS-C), D300 body making it a nice portraiture lens. Not only is manual focusing a non-issue on this VERY bright (1.4!) lens, but it take all the other automated adjustments from the camera just due to the CPU. Oh yeah; it was free. My brother sent it to me as the result of one of his many projects......Bonus. If you don't have an unusual and generous brother, this lens will run $100-150. Yeah, that's about $15 of 1970 money!

You might ask yourself, why I would have/want another lens in the same focal length range? Yes, this is a 55mm, Micro-Nikkor f/2.8 making it a comparatively slow 82mm lens. Well; it too was free. Yeah, you guessed it.....another of my brother's projects. This one was half-finished in-so-much as he bought it at a great price because it can hardly be focused due to the weirdness of a lubricant that seizes up after a 20-25 years of use. Imagine that! Anyway, I dropped it off at a local repair place and they are replacing the lube at a cost of about $65. Probably worth that, given that it's a true macro lens versus a lens that focuses closer than some others and thus has "macro" put in the name. No, it's not chipped, but since it's Ai already and will meter couple with my D300 as long as I put it into the camera's bank of manual lenses, I'm good. Given that's it's job is to shoot things such as flowers, and bugs, I'm not going to be overly concerned that it has no electronic coupling with my D300. I know, this is a bonus that just showed up in the mail, otherwise, I wouldn't have pursued it. But if I was a macro photographer, the common price of around $100 makes it worth looking into, particularly if you don't have to shell out to have it re-lubed.

Then we have this; a 500mm f/8.0 catadioptric mirror lens. Of course, mine isn't this Nikkor that's depicted, but the concept is the same, and if I get a few things out of the way and have the time, $$$ and inclination, I'd like to swap my Tokina for the Nikkor since it's much sharper and has significantly more contrast. Of course, those differences might have something to do with the $1000 or so difference in original prices! All in all, I'm going to say that I really like the Tokina. It's well made since it was purpose built with a fixed mount, vs. the many cheap-o, T-mount mirrors out there. It's main purpose is to sit here and look good while awaiting it's occasional excursion out to shoot wildlife or zoo trip. Apart from that; I'll have to admit that I only have it because it's cool and it costs about $35 after the seller refunded me half the price due to fungus on the glass.

If I was really a serious user, I'd have bought the Tamron SP/SPII, the Perkin-Elmer made Vivitar Series 1 600mm (or 800mm), or the aforementioned Nikkor. These 3 have advantages ranging from collectability and/or top-notch performance.....for a mirror lens that is. You can see from the upper image how compact the 600mm Vivitar Series 1 is sitting next to the a 55mm f/3.5 Nikkor. If you want to see the size of the Tokina on the D300, please refer to my "Mirror, Mirror" post: 

http://frugalpropellerhead.blogspot.com/2013/04/mirro-mirro.html

It really balances very nicely on that camera, especially when it has the battery grip attached. 

So, on to the lenses that I don't have and are planning/plotting to acquire. The latest to grab my interest is this; the 300mm, f/4.5 Nikkor. There are a number of different versions of this lens, however, as typical for me, I've focused (pun partially intended) on one, the 2nd version. The early "P" (Penta) version referring to it's 5 elements, aren't very sharp, besides being non-Ai which would require conversion, so it's eliminated. The 3rd version which is "IF" for internal focusing not only had that feature, but is considered to be among the smallest of the focal-length and speed, thus are more sought after and consequently making them more expensive. Which leaves the middle-child 2nd version, one of which I watched sell for $66 yesterday on eBay!

What's my purpose for this lens other than that it's a bargain and very sharp? I have a gap between 200mm (300mm, eq.) and the 500mm (750mm, eq.). That's a pretty big hole, besides which the 500mm is a mirror and thus a bit of a specialty lens, plus at f/8 is quite slow. So, a 300mm with a 35mm eq. of 450mm that's pretty bright at a constant f/4.5. Then you consider that it's an actual "normal" lens with controllable f-stops and it's relatively compact size that doesn't over-power the D300 (as you can see): these things are a bargain at the sub-$100 that they can be found at. But it's a manual focus lens, you say! OK. First of all, I'm not a professional shooting sports for my livelihood or I'd be looking for a 300mm, f2.8 AF lens....which costs a lot more money. And secondly, I'm an old photographer, meaning that I've spent most of my life focusing lenses, not some 20-something who hasn't focused much of anything ever in their life. Plus, really; less than $100 for classic Nikon glass!?! Do I need to go further?

Then there's this. A 28mm. The image above is an Ais, Nikkor version, that tends to range anywhere from $85-90 to over $150. They are really sharp lenses, there were lots of them made so they aren't terribly expensive. That 28mm converts to something like 42mm on the DX cameras I use, so just a little wider than what would be considered normal. Why would anyone with a typical kit lens like the 18-55mm or a super-zoom like my 18-200mm want something like this? Well; look at it. Even this larger Ais is quite compact, and that the (unremarkable for it's day) f-stop of 2.8 is fast compared to the 3.5 to 4.5 that the kit zoom is, at that focal length. Do I really want to spend the $100 or so for this lens? I don't really see myself using it on the D300. That 42mm focal length is an informal, "walk-around" lens. Do I really want to walk around (meaning with no specific purpose in mind) with a D300?

Probably not. What would I use as a walk-around camera then, that I could attach a good walk-around focal length lens? Well, I've spent the last week or so rationalizing my switch from my current Nikon D50/Panasonic GF-1 combo to the D40. So there you have it. This then takes me to the next line of reasoning. On a DX camera, there's going to be precious little difference between the Nikkor Ais lens, versus the significantly smaller, and cheaper Nikon Series E lens. These sell in the range of between $50 and $75. Adding a $30 Dandelion CPU chip to it gives you something that electronically couples to a D40 making it an almost perfect walk-around combo.

Even professional who make a living using their cameras don't have anywhere near this gear. Maybe some well-heeled collector who buys up all the stuff in "pristine" condition, then puts it away in a case does. But that's not what real people do. What we do, if it's something that we actually use and have real jobs with real families with real expense, is to use logic applied to costs, projected use and availability to create a system that we can use.