A while back, you may recall seeing that I wrote about my disappointment with the Tokina 15-60mm, which I returned just a couple of days after receiving it.  It was meant to be the replacement to my 17-40L, which at f/4 was just a little too slow for my indoor work.

Well, the new replacement has been here for a while now, and it’s here to stay.  On the advice of a friend I found a mint used Canon 17-35mm L f/2.8, which has earned a permanent place in my bag.

Photo Credit: DPChallenge.com

The 17-35L is two generations old, since replaced by Canon’s 16-35L Mk II.  What this means is that there’s some of these phenominal lenses popping up for sale used, at half the price of a new 16-35L.  Which is excellent news for those of us with budget constraints.

While it may be older, it’s hardly antiquated.  The 17-35L is an amazing lens, or at least my copy is.  It focused nearly perfect out of the box, and a few points of micro-adjustment has it tuned perfectly now.  The images display excellent color and contrast, and wide open it has a pleasant bokeh.

Most importantly, it’s sharp.  Very sharp.  Even wide open, which is somewhat rare, even among the L-series lenses.  How sharp?  Let me put it this way – anytime I share a photo, be it a print-sized file going to a client/friend, or the web-sized images I post on here, one of the final steps in my workflow before saving is a low-level pass with Unsharp Mask.  With images shot with the 17-35L, I skip that step altogether – any application of USM ends up over-sharpening the photo!

I can safely say that using this lens is the most fun I’ve had with any glass in a long time.  It’s just fun to work with!  (My first evening out with it, I was literally charging around the park, chasing the light, and grinning like an idiot – it’s no wonder I was getting strange looks…)  I find  the focal range to be very useful, both for landscapes and, to a more limited extent, portraiture.

Physically it’s got the build you’d expect from an L-series lens, and while it has a bit of a reputation as a dust-sucker, I’ve yet to see any evidence of that myself.  It’s nearly the same size as the 17-40L it replaced in my bag, which happens to be a size that fits well in my hand and balances well on the camera.

I find that I really can’t say enough good things about this one – it really is that amazing.  It’s also the first step on my path to acquiring a full set of professional lenses, instead of working with the mid-level consumer alternatives.  And now that it’s in my hands, I really am glad that I opted for it instead of the EF-S 17-55 IS; while the IS would have been handy, it’s better to have the L build and durability of the 17-35.

(The only downside to this purchase is Canon’s refusal to service this lens anymore.  Goodness forbid something ever happen to mine, I’ll have to find an independent shop to fix it, or I’ll be stuck buying a replacement.  Is this likely to be an issue?  I certainly hope not!  But it is something that you should be aware of if you’re buying a discontinued lens.)

Even the rumor boards are fairly quiet – it seems that nobody really knowns.  (Which is, of course, just how Canon likes it.)  The only thing I’ve heard whisper of is a new 24-70L IS.  This is certainly a lens that would capture some attention; the addition of IS would probably cause a feeding frenzy as photogs tried to get one.  But on the other hand, this rumor has been floating around for years now, so there’s probably not much stock to it now.

So in the absence of cold, hard data, I’m going to sit here and theorize – daydream, some might call it – about what Canon might be releasing soon.  Bear in mind, there’s nothing to back any of this up; this is just me looking at the current lens lineup and thinking out loud.

For starters, how about a replacement for the 24-105L IS?  This is an old lens that’s been relegated to the status of “high-end kit lens.”  It could definitely use a re-design, perhaps go a bit longer, perhaps to 135mm, with the new 4-stop IS system.  If Canon really wanted to make a winner, they’d also convert it to f/2.8, which would collectively negate most people’s gripes with it.

How about a new fisheye?  The 15mm fish is getting old and, on a crop sensor, it really isn’t impressively wide.  A new 10mm fisheye might be a niche-market lens, but it could be a good one – especially if it were make an L.

Sigma just came out with the 120-400 OS & 150-500 OS, plus the new Bigma 50-500 OS, all three of which are getting attention – and providing cheaper alternatives to the Canon 100-400L IS, a lens that already has an inconsistent reputation.  Time for Canon to step it up a notch here!

I don’t pretend to know much about much about the L primes, having yet to put my feet in that pool.  But the 100L IS Macro was a big hit, and I have to think that adding IS to some of the longer, popular primes could only be well received.  The 135L, the 200L?

I certainly don’t know what the future holds, but I do know that when I look at Canon’s L-series lenses, I see a lot of aging glass.  Glass that, while it might have a great reputation and performance, is at risk of becoming antiquated if it doesn’t get an update soon.  Am I alone with this thought?  Maybe, but somehow I doubt it.

Heard a rumor of your own?  Got a fantasy lens that you want to share?  Or just want to tell me that I’m off base on this one – feel free to hit up the comments!

Now that Daylight Savings Time has kicked back in and there are signs that spring is here, hopefully I can get back outside in the next few weeks and really start shooting again, and posting about photos instead of equipment.  But before that happens, I want to take gear once more, and give a shout-out to a camera that continues to impress me:

The Canon 400D.

Photo Credit: Canon USA

I can see the raised eyebrows, the scornful looks.  The 400D?  A camera that’s 4 generations old?  From the Rebel line?

Yes.  To all of the above.  I picked up my 400D refurbished several years back.  At the time I needed a backup body to my 30D, and the price was right.  It is a move I have never, ever regretted.

The 400D (also known as the XTi) is fairly old, fairly small in my hands, and doesn’t have the heft or build of any of the x0D series or higher cameras.  In terms of technology it’s almost antiquated, featureless alongside it’s new cousin, the T2i.  And frankly I couldn’t care less, because this camera performs phenomenally.

It never hesitates or stutters.  It plays well with any lens I’ve ever put on it.  The photo quality is always excellent.  And whereas I’m hesitant to push any other camera – even my 7D – to it’s highest ISO setting, I have no qualms about pushing the 400D to ISO 1600 and shooting away.  So long as I there’s ample light, I am completely confident in the little camera’s ability to render good photos.

I made this photo of a university karate class with the 400D a couple of years back.  I had three SB-25s in a triangle around the class, bouncing them off the high gym ceiling, shooting ISO 800 and f/2.8 to get the shots.  They came out great.

A few weeks back I shot this photo at a sweet sixteen party, in a dark fire hall, lit my a mix of window and candle light.  ISO 1600, f/4.  Sure, there’s some noise visible, but it’s not ugly or distracting.  Another perfectly good shot taken in tough conditions.

Whatever Canon did when they designed this camera, they got it right.  This is the one camera I have no desire to upgrade, the one that, when the shutter finally goes, I’ll get it repaired despite the cost.  It may be my backup camera, but it’s also the one I reach for for certain types of shooting – when I’m heading out with a single prime lens, or when I want to travel smaller and lighter.  It’s always dependable.

Canon simply got it right.

(From what I hear, they may have likewise gotten it right with the XTi’s successor, the XSi, although I’ve never shot with one to confirm.)

It was my first time buying from KEH and I’m pleased to say that the experience was a good one, and I’ll likely use them again in the future.  KEH appears to be an excellent source for used lenses, although their user reviews are a little spotty – the jist of it seems to be that internet orders take second place to phone orders, so sometimes net orders lose out and folks get annoyed.  (Frankly, if you know that going into the deal, I’m not sure what right you have to get annoyed.)

Anyway, I wasn’t really looking to buy this lens – I was poking around KEH just to see what they had, actually looking more at prime lenses when I stumbled across this one.  I’d never even heard of a 70-210mm f/4, so I had to Google it, and what I found was promising.  I’ve had my eye on the new 70-200 f/4 IS lens for a while now, but I just can’t get past the $1200 price tag.  The fact that the old 70-210mm was only $200 sealed the deal – for $1k in savings, I can live without IS.

Unfortunately my order processed just in time to ship out during one of this year’s snowstorms, and it spent 48 additional hours sitting in a UPS facility in GA because of snowstorms.  So I wasn’t able to test it out at this past weekend’s event, but I do have it in time for an upcoming portrait workshop, which will be its real trial by fire.  But given some informal, around the house testing, here’s what I’ve concluded:

First off, unlike its new cousins, the 70-210mm is a small lens.  Even fully zoomed, its overall length is less than that of the new models, and since it has neither internal focusing or zooming, the overall weight is much less.  The front element takes a 58mm filter, which seems radically small.  For me, this is a big deal – I owned a 70-200mm f/2.8 a while back and although it was a good lens, it was simply too big and too heavy for me to use much; the small size of the old 70-210mm, coupled with the constant f/4, means that I’m much more likely to stick it in my bag when I head out.

The lens is a push/pull style zoom, which isn’t a feature I’m thrilled about, but then beggars can’t be choosers.  And unlike other push/pull zooms, which often have a reputation for being dust vacuums, this one seems to work very well, with nearly no detectable sucking or blowing of air when in use.

I am somewhat saddened to report that it is not super-sharp when wide open.  The whole point of having an f/4 is to use it wide open, but I think that some stopping down will be required, or at the very least, some sharpening in post.  This is a little disappointing, but then I remember what I paid, and I feel better about it.  The good news is that at f/5.6, things are sharp, and by f/8 they are quite sharp.

It’s also noticeably soft past about 200mm.  At full zoom and f/4, the result is disappointing – for portraits you can almost call it “beauty soft” and make it work, but for anything else you’ll need to stop down or hit the Unsharp Mask in post.  I’m fully confident in the lens’ ability to take great photos, but the trick is learning its quirks first.

200mm @ f/4 appears somewhat soft, but works for portraits

Despite the lack of USM focus, the AF is still quite snappy.  It didn’t seem to hunt in low light and overall was quite responsive.  This was a pleasant surprise, since many of the reviews I read for this lens criticized it for having slow focus.  (But also based on those reviews, I have to conclude that many of the reviewers were themselves L-lens snobs who simply don’t like any lens without a red ring on it.)

I’ve got to give props to KEH for their rating: the lens was listed in EX+ condition, and while I forget the exact description that equates to on their scale, the jist of it is that the lens would be about 90% of new.  I looked it over carefully before using it – there isn’t a mark on it.  It actually amazes me how a 21 year old lens can be in like new condition.

The only thing that really annoyed me was the fact that KEH shipped the lens without any caps; I had to dish an extra $20 to get a set of caps from B&H.  After a great deal of Google searching, I managed to find out which lens  hood went with the lens, and I’m going to try and find one on eBay.

As always, the 70-200 range is very useful, and I’m one again equipped for it at very low cost.  Will I keep this lens forever?  It’d hard to say.  I win the lottery, I’ll probably get a new IS version.  But in the meantime, I think this will work out very well.

After further reflection: I was a bit quick to state that I was “fully confident” in this lens’ ability to perform.  Having used it several more times, I became disappointed with it.  At 200mm, it is simply too soft wide-open to be of much use.  Stopped down, it’s not bad – but if you’re shooting in low light, you can forget about getting usable images.  The combination of decreased aperture, low shutter speed, and focal length results in muddy, blurred images, and a great deal of frustration.  Especially when compared to the current f/4 IS model, which has a reputation for being startlingly sharp.

If you can find one of these cheap (around $150) and plan to use it only when the light is good, then it’s still a good way to get into the 70-200 range cheaply.  But if you have any aspirations for it, you’ll quickly outgrow it.  Mine is headed for eBay, and I’ll be picking up the new IS model soon.

The 7D was the first Canon DLSR to include a Speedlite commander mode in its built-in flash, a feature that captured my attention very quickly.  For years now, Nikon users have has commander capabilities built into their DSLRs, SB-800 Speedlights, and dedicated commander units.  Canon shooters, on the other hand, have had…well, very little.

Very little, that is, if you’re looking for TTL control.  If you’re shooting Strobist-style, with manual flash settings, then any “dumb” radio triggers will work (although all units except the Canon 580EX lack PC ports, so you’re left at the mercy of hotshoe adapters).  So long as you don’t mind running from flash to flash to change the output, this works okay.

But for TTL flash, there were exactly two options: the antiquated ST-E2 Speedlite Transmitter, or a 550EX/580EX flash hotshoe-mounted in master mode.  The ST-E2 only shoots forward along the lens axis and only triggers groups A & B; if you want to use group C, you’re out of luck.  That leaves a 550/580EX, and personally I’ve always found the idea of using a $500+ 580EX on-camera as a master unit incredibly annoying; it’s large and somewhat unwieldy, and it seems like a very poor utilization of an expensive flash.

Canon ST-E2 Speedlite Transmitter

The 7D stood to correct this with a built-in master capability; suddenly your Canon Speedlites can be controlled from the camera’s menu system.  Set your groups, ratios, manual output – no more running between flashes, it’s a whole new level of control in the camera, where it should be.

Problem is, it doesn’t work very well.  Consider the physics: the 7D’s flash measures 1″x.25″ in size.  That’s a hugely unimpressive .25 square inches total.  And because of the pop-up mechanism, the flash head will only face forward; there’s no bounce or swivel.  It’s underpowered, tiny, and restricted – puny is the word that comes to mind.

After having used it in a range of situations, I’ve become disenchanted – while it was a good idea, and a noble try at matching the Nikon system, I have to say that it is ultimately of little use.  If your Speedlites are in front of the camera, with no obstruction between them and the built-in flash, then it’ll work pretty darn well.  But start adding in any variables – the sort of variables and setups that you’ll actually find in the real world – and the whole thing falls apart.

Half way through my last studio shoot, with half the Speedlites failing to fire simply because of their physical placement, I broke down and threw the 580EX on the hotshoe and flipped it to master mode.

Whoa.

Instant change.  Immediate improvement.  Suddenly I’m blasting commands out of a flash with a 2.75″x1.5″ emitter (that’s 4.125 square inches).  An emitter that can be tilted and swiveled around a complete hemisphere, with enough power to bounce it off a ceiling.  Where before I was working in a corner with only partial success, I was able to blanket an entire room with command signals.

Overlay of Canon 7D built-in flash vs. 580EX Speedlite flash.

Sadly, there’s just no way around it.  For dependable communication coverage and command capabilities, you need a master-capable Speedlight on-camera.  The built-in mode is more gimmick than useful tool, and frankly I believe that it should be relegated to the Rebel series, as it’s more likely to fit the needs of a hobbyist/advanced amateur with a single off-camera Speedlite than it is a professional with a full setup.

What Canon needs is a whole new unit.  There are faint rumors of a new Canon Speedlite coming soon.  My guess is that it will be a unit designed to challenge Nikon’s SB-900 (which is a very impressive Speedlight).  It will certainly retain a master mode, and will likely interface its menus with the newest EOS cameras.  But in my opinion, this is still a stopgap measure.

I return to what I said before – using a $500 Speedlite solely as a commander, adding little or no actual light to a scene, is like buying a BMW and using it only to run for groceries.  A flash with the power of a 580EX is meant to be used to light a scene!

Canon needs to go back to the drawing board and design a brand new commander unit, one that will bury the pathetic ST-E2 and give professional photographers a real option when it comes to commanding their Speedlites, which they’d then be free to use off-camera as lights.  This new unit would need tilt/swivel capability, and whether it uses visible or IR light pulses would depend on the engineers, but it should be designed to throw an aimable, powerful command pulse, with no option whatsoever for actually adding light to the exposure.

Let us use our commanders to command and our Speedlites to light!

I’m finally at a point where I’m happy with my photography gear.  The 7D is enough camera that I should get at least a couple of years out of it before needing to upgrade.  My 400D still serves well as a backup camera.  There are still a few lenses I want, but by and large they’re not huge or expensive.  Another Speedlite or two and I’ll be satisfied.

And yet the addiction doesn’t stop.  I looked at the Powershot product page last night and immediately thought that what I really wanted was an SX20, or even an SX1 -  both of which are essentially small, fixed-lens SLRs, dumbed down to P&S level.  I went so far as to read reviews and check the specs.  They’ve got hotshoes, IS, 28-560mm zoom lenses!

See?  This stuff is like crack! 

The problem is, I just got rid of a $400 P&S because I couldn’t justify having it.  It was too big and too expensive when all I really needed was a little camera I could stick in my pocket.  Something lightweight and simple that I could travel & play tourist with.

What in the hell would I need an SX20 for?  Nothing, that’s what!

Yet it is still so tempting…

What’s worse is, according to the rumor mill, Canon will be making announcements in February, releasing a number of new products – new DSLRs, lenses, and Powershot cameras are all expected.  Which will probably throw my satisfaction with my lens collection into disarray and send me lusting after something new and prohibitively expensive.

Same thing with the P&S, never mind that it’s supposed to be cheap and simple.  No, like any unhealthy addiction, this one will only be salved by throwing unseemly sums of money at it.  Gotta get a fix to feel better.

On the other hand, Mandy has hinted at wanting a nicer, more feature-filled camera than her current A-series P&S.  Maybe if I buy a camera for her, it would fulfill the addiction without being too outlandish.  Oh the justifications, they just keep rolling in…

But if you’re like me, then most of the time you’re 0 for 1 in the model department.  Your significant other is busy, your friends flee at the mention of it, your kids and pets hide when you get the camera out, so you’re left with a bunch of gear and no one to practice with.

The solution, as it turns out, is much simpler than expected.  Model for yourself.

The hot seat

The first argument I’m sure I’ll hear is, “We’re photogs, not models – we hate being in front of the camera!”  To which I respond: we’re doing lighting practice here.  Nobody said you had to share the photos with the world, or with anyone – it’s for your own benefit, not to hang on the wall.

The second argument is, “How am I supposed to be in front of the camera and behind it at the same time?”  That’s the classic problem with self-modeling; it’s a real pain in the butt to setup the scene, focus on the spot you think you’re going to be in, then jump in front of the camera, take the photo, and run back around to review it.  Pain in the butt, and a recipe for tripping over gear and breaking something.

Unless you’re smart about it.  Unless you, say, install Canon’s EOS Utility software on your laptop.  EOS Utility comes free with all EOS cameras on the included CD – and can be downloaded free from the Canon website.  Now personally, I’m not much impressed with most of Canon’s software, and I leave those CDs at the bottom of the box in a closet somewhere.  But having a moment of clear thought, I installed EOS Utility last night and gave it a try.  And I like it – a lot.

Canon EOS Utility command screen

This is what you get.  Near-total control over your camera from the comfort of your laptop computer.  You can change settings, adjust exposure, pop up the flash, focus, shoot, review, and transfer photos with ease.  Gods help me, I even turned on the LiveView on my 7D, used Face Detection focusing to make sure my charming lack of a smile was going to be sharp, and then fired off a few shots – and I did it all from the laptop.

This is how you do it:  install the software, and then connect your DSLR to the computer with the included USB cord.  If you have a USB extension cord, that’s even better, as it will give you more working distance.  Turn on the camera & launch EOS Utility on your laptop – it will connect to the camera and give you control.

If you have LiveView, it’s just easier to use it; turn it on with a button on the control panel, and a window will pop up with the feed from the camera.  You can position yourself in the scene then and either shoot via LiveView, or go back to the regular shooting mode.

After each shot, the photo will appear in the review window.  Depending on how you configured the options, a copy will be saved to the camera and/or computer.

For lighting, the trick is obviously to put the camera on a tripod, hook it to the computer, and then setup your lights.  If you’re using a hotshoe-mounted 580EX as a commander, it looks like the EOS Utility may let you control the flash settings remotely.  (It does not, however, recognize the 7D’s commander ability, so all my wireless flash adjustments had to be made from the camera itself.)

I turned my lights on in sequence, starting with a sofbox on a boom to get the base exposure, then adding an umbrella’d strobe behind the camera to boost the main light, followed by a strip light to my right, and finally a BG light.

Softbox (base exposure)

Softox + Umbrella

Softox + Umbrella + side light

Softox + Umbrella + side light + BG light

I’m not really as miserable as I look in those – I’m just concentrating.  I shot the first sequence with the flashes in manual mode, the power levels dialed in my hand; there were several other photos that I left out of the sequence above, where I was fine-tuning the power.  Unfortunately, to make those adjustments I had to go back behind the camera to access the control menus.

Here’s the result when I switched to ETTL mode, set the lighting ratios, and let the camera do the work:

The result?  I’m happy with the lighting (which is a simpler variant of this Strobist setup), although if I had additional Speedlites I could have better reproduced the setup I was working from.  Using the EOS Utility while self-modeling made the whole procedure much easier.  I did still have to get up to adjust the flash settings, but I was able to do all my positioning, focusing, and shooting from in front of the camera, with instant feedback.   Now I know that if I walk into a studio space with a model/client, I can use this setup with minimal fuss and get the shot.  That’s what it all comes down to – knowing that you can get the shot when it counts.  And all it cost me was an hour in front of my own lens.

The one issue I did encounter was with the shooting modes.  At first I used my IR remote to trigger the camera, but the EOS Utility doesn’t like that much.  You have to set that particular shooting mode on the camera itself, and while the computer will still display each photo as it’s shot, some of the control features are disabled.  You’ll also need to pre-focus the camera and switch the lens to manual.

Unfortunately the alternative is to use the shutter button on the computer control panel, which you have to mouse-click for each shot.  When you’re seated, it’s not much trouble to put the computer on your lap and fire away.  For for any kind of standing shot, it could be difficult.

Still, it’s better than doing the old dash-and-run-to-see routine!

**Canon EOS 7D + 17-40mm L + Canon Speedlites (wireless) – all photos unedited, except for resizing to web.

So the G10 is on its way out the door and any plans for a G11 have been discarded. Enter the SX120. A year or so back I had gotten my hands on a refurbished SX100 and during the short time I used it, I was quite impressed. The SX120 is now two generations ahead, featuring Canon’s Digic 4 processor, improved IS, and a 12MP sensor.

What do I like about it?

Size: the SX120 is truly a pocket-sized P&S. It doesn’t need a special bag; it will even fit in my pants pocket if need be (although a jacket pocket is more comfortable).

Zoom: most P&S fall into two categories; 3-5x pocket cams and 20x big boys. The SX120 falls right in the middle, with 10x zoom in a body size that isn’t approaching a DSLR.

Batteries: no Li-ion pack here, the SX series runs on good old “AA” batteries. I use rechargeable NiMHs, but in a pinch plain old Duracells will work, and they’re available at any gas station. (Battery life on the SX120 is somewhat better than on previous models)

Flash: the SX flash folds down into the top of the body, much like the flash on a DLSR. When you want it, you pull it up into position. Call me vain, but it looks cool – and isn’t crammed over in the top left corner, right where most people accidentally cover it with fingers.

LCD: the 3” LCD on the SX120 is huge and beautiful. I’m not crazy about LCD shooting, but if you have to do it, do it big!

Manual Modes: it may be a P&S, but if it doesn’t have M and Av modes, I’m not using it! Come on, Auto modes are for sissies. You don’t want to be a sissy.

What don’t I like about it?

JPEG: since switching to RAW files years ago, I’ve never looked back. I like the options RAW gives me, and I always feel limited shooting JPEG. (But you know what, it’s a P&S. If I wanted RAW, I should have brought a DSLR.)

Megapixels: adding MPs is a marketing ploy; in general (and especially on small P&S sensors) more MPs = more noise. 10MP isn’t bad, but Canon really should have left it at 8MP and instead boosted the noise performance.

Focal range: the SX120 has a 38-300mm 35mm-equivalent range. 300mm is great on the long end, but 38mm isn’t very wide. Definitely won’t be shooting expansive landscapes here (without photo-stitching several shots into a panorama).

Menu system: the menu options are really dumbed down, with the camera doing most of the thinking for you. While I’m not a fan of that, it is what it is.

In terms of performance, the Canon SX120 isn’t going to turn a lot of heads, but it isn’t a slacker, either. It starts up within a couple of seconds and focusing in general conditions is about average for a P&S. Shutter lag is noticeable, but doesn’t leave you tapping your foot. As with most P&S cameras, the burst rate is laughable; the SX120 manages about 1.3 frames/second. You probably won’t be shooting NASCAR races with it.

The Image Stabilization system works well, even zoomed to 300mm, which we’ve all come to expect from Canon. Shooting in lower light levels is possible with this camera, but best done with the lens at its full wide angle to take advantage of the f/2.8 aperture there. When you need more light, pull the flash into position and you’ll find that it’s ample most of the time, although the recharge time between flashes is painfully long.

ISO performance is also about what you’d expect, and falls in line with the rest of the Powershot range. ISO 80 and 100 look nice; ISO 200 is still good; ISO 400 starts to show enough noise to make you hesitant, and anything beyond ISO 400 is better left unused. You can pretty much forget about ISO 1600, although if you encounter Bigfoot by the lake one evening, and just have to get the photo, I’d go for a higher ISO before the flash. Noise reduction software in post will help out, but the molasses-in-January flash recycle rate will make you miss shots.

As I mentioned in the bullet points above, the menus have been dumbed down. There isn’t a lot of fine tuning ability with this camera; it’s more a case of setting the general terms and going with it. For instance, FlexZone focusing is absent; instead you get the center point or Face Detection. Want to format the memory card? Do it from the shooting menu; the playback menu only offers a Delete All option. Oh, and there’s no more Superfine JPEG option; now you get Fine or Standard, although one would assume that’s because the difference between Fine and Superfine was negligible (or so we hope).

Physically, the SX 120 is a pleasing camera to use. There’s just enough of a grip on the front to grab onto. The wrist feels sufficient without getting the way (unlike the neckstrap on the G10, which was reassuring to use, but always managed to get in the way). The dimensions aren’t too big or too small, although the lens housing protrudes a bit from the front, making the camera just too bulky to fit comfortable into your jeans pocket. A jacket pocket, on the other hand, is perfect. And shooting with one hand is no problem.

All your common shooting modes are there, including the three “Creative Zone” manual modes and a full range of auto scene modes, plus a video mode. If you read the online reviews, you’ll see many people complain about the lack of HD video recording. Personally I couldn’t care less if it had a video mode at all, much less HD, but if you’re someone who puts value on this feature, then it might be something to consider.

Canon appears to be cutting costs & waste when it comes to packaging the Powershot SX120. The box isn’t much bigger than the camera, and the reams of paperwork and manuals that used to come with a camera are conspicuously absent – that’s right, no English manual, although they do still include the Spanish version, strangely enough. The English manual is available online from the Powershot website, and Canon is obviously gambling on the fact that anyone who uses this camera is computer-savvy enough to go online and get it. (Which still begs the question of why the Spanish manual comes in the box – it seems they’d either make them both digital, or include them both.) So while I genuinely applaud their efforts “Go Green,” I have to question its effectiveness.

Overall, the Canon Powershot SX120 is a very capable little camera. It falls in the lower (cheaper) end of the “High-End, Advanced Digital Camera” line, so it’s not going to have all the features of, say, a S90, SX20, or G11. But in exchange you get a more compact camera that is travel-friendly and low-maintenance. It is definitely a large step up from the ELPH series, although not such a far cry from the A-series cameras.

You can make no mistake, however, about this being a point & shoot camera. If you expect DSLR performance or quality, you will be gravely disappointed. (That being said, you know it’s a P&S when you buy it.) In my case, that’s why I bought it, because it was a true P&S that I could carry with my, in my pocket, wherever I went. It doesn’t call attention to itself, it’s not a $500 camera I have to worry about, and it’s not going to be used in lieu of a DSLR. It’s my grab-and-go camera.

On a final note, here’s a few quirks that I’ve already discovered:

IS mode: you might be tempted to switch the IS mode to “Shoot only” to save battery life. However, performance tests show that the IS works better when left in “Continuous” mode, netting more blur-free captures.

AF Lock: press the shutter halfway to focus, keep it half pressed, and press the left arrow (MF) button. The focus locks and you can recompose and shoot.

AE Lock: there’s no * button, but the feature is still there; aim the camera at your subject and press the shutter halfway and, while holding it halfway, press the +/- button. The * will show up and the exposure is locked. Keep holding the shutter halfway, recompose, and shoot. (If you let go of the shutter and press another button, the lock is broken.)

Continuous AF: in the shooting menu, this is set to either On or Off. When on, the camera continuously focuses at whatever it’s aimed at until you press the shutter. This is supposed to help prevent missed shots. When turned off, the camera only focuses when you press the shutter halfway, saving battery power. (I keep mine set to Off unless I think I’ll need that feature specifically.)

After further reflection: I’ve used the SX-120 for over 6 months now, and I still reach for it when an event isn’t important enough to carry around the DSLR, but I still want photos.  As P&S cameras go, I stand by my earlier evaluation – it ain’t the best, but it ain’t the worst.  In retrospect, however, I fell victim to the super-zoom feature.  The fact is, optical performance at full zoom isn’t good enough to make it really worth while.  I’d have been just as well off with a standard-range zoom (ie: 28-135mm).

I’ve also found that stopping down beyond f/5.6 is useless – the depth of field doesn’t improve by any real margin, and image quality degrades rapidly.  Surprisingly, it performs quite well wide open at f/2.8, and I find myself doing much of my shooting there (treating my super-zoom camera like a prime lens!).  And because of the physical properties of the lens & sensor, DOF at f/2.8 isn’t very shallow at all, so there’s no real trouble keeping things within the focus range.

For starters, the Canon 50mm is a prime lens.  The battle has long raged over prime vs. zoom lenses, photogs going all out to prove that one is superior to the other.  I’m not interested in that – to me it isn’t a matter of superiority, but rather a matter of one lens being better suited to a particular situation than the other.

The pros of a prime lens are simple: they tend to have wide, fast apertures (usually f/2.8 or better) with a very narrow depth of field (DOF), which is perfect for isolating the subject against a lovely out-of-focus background.   And because of their physical construction, image quality is generally excellent.

50mm @ f/1.8

50mm @ f/2.8

As for cons, well…  I’ve heard several photogs say that zoom lenses “make photographers lazy.”  With a prime you have to physically move your location to alter the composition and perspective.  That can be a challenge, but it’s not usually a con.

So after a hiatus of several years I’m returning prime lenses to my bag for a couple of reasons.  In large part I’ve been inspired by the photographs I’m seeing on Style Me Pretty.  The ultra-shallow DOF and blurred backgrounds appear to be one of the current trends in wedding photography, but more than that, they make for absolutely beautiful images.  Combined that with their isolating power and low-light performance and I wonder why I didn’t do it sooner.

The other major difference in my Canon 50mm is its age.  This lens is from the late 1980s – nearly as old as I am.  Most of the time it’s the newest lenses that garner all the attention, so you may be wondering why I specifically bought a 20 year-old lens.  Simple – because it really is that good.

Sometime in the 1990s, Canon came out with a new 50mm f/1.8 Mk 2 version of the this lens.  This is the version you can still order up new from B&H for under $100.  Why so cheap?  Because it is, well, cheap.  The Mk 2 version is built entirely of plastic, from the lens mount to the focus ring.  And you get what you pay for - a good little lens that will fall apart after receiving the first good shock.  (The net is full of stories about people who knocked their 50mm Mk 2 against a door or wall by accident, only to have it literally go to pieces in their hands – and we’re talking the kind of light knocks that other lenses shrug off without a second thought.)

The difference in quality, combined with a better focus ring, metal lens mount, and supposed higher performance have made the old Mk 1 version a sort of cult classic.  Good luck finding one on eBay for less than $175 (which, granted, is still cheap for a lens).

In actual use I’m blown away by this lens.  The images are good and sharp at f/1.8, but stop down to f/2.8 or f/4 and they get even sharper.  The minimum focus distance is decently close, and the 50mm range (approx. 85mm on an APS-C sensor) is just right for portraits in smaller spaces.  My only real complaint is the auto-focus, which is a bit noisy and tends to hunt a bit in low light.  But given the lens’ age and performance, I’m more than happy to overlook that.

So here’s the final scoop: if you want to experiment with a prime, get a feel for working with shallow DOF, spring for the nearly-disposable Mk 2 version of this lens.  But if you’ve used primes before and know you want a good one, hunt down a Mk 1 version online, and don’t be afraid to pay a little more just to get it.  It’s worth it.

After further reflection: I keep eying the 50mm f/1.4 lens, but I never pull the trigger on it.  There are too many reports of issues with it, and in all honestly, my old Mk I is still going strong.  For as cheap as it is, it’s an incredible little lens.  Is the f/1.4 version worth 4x as much?  Is the L version worth 14x as much?  Some folks seem to think so…but I really can’t see myself ever getting rid of this oldie goldie.  If you can find a Mk I version in good shape, it’s worth buying it.

An older model lens, Canon’s 28-135mm IS lens sits in the lower middle of the lineup, with a price tag of $400 and a feature list that includes some popular points, while skipping others. In terms of quality however, this lens is a sure bet. I’ve owned two, the first purchased used and the second which came with my 7D. In both cases, the lenses were excellent; good color, few aberrations, and great sharpness. The focal length makes it a perfect everyday walk-around lens, although it is perhaps not quite wide enough for some. I’ve successfully used it for everything from portraiture to astrophotography.

No one will ever mistake the 28-135mm for an L-series lens. It is a plastic build with a metal mount and, while the lens does feel like it’s made of a good solid plastic, there’s some play in the barrel, especially when zoomed all the way out. If you drop it from the couch to a carpeted floor, it will probably be fine; a fall to concrete, however, and it’s probably a goner.

Likewise its apertures don’t stack up to the professional series lenses. At 28mm the maximum aperture is f/3.5, decreasing to f/5.6 as you continue towards 135mm. In short, it is not a fast lens – even less so since you are more likely to be using it between 50-135mm at f/5.6 than at 28mm. However, Canon compensates for that with the inclusion of the Image Stabilization system. Canon claims somewhere around 3-stops of stabilization, although the fine print reminds you that your mileage will vary. Either way, the IS does help offset the slower apertures to some degree, and the increased ISO performance of the newest cameras also helps.

The 28-135mm IS is a USM lens, with a catch; to keep the price down, Canon did away with full-time manual focusing. So while the lens sports the gold USM logo and a quick, quiet focus motor, you’ll have to flip the switch to manual before twisting the focus ring. For some folks this might be a black eye, but personally I don’t find it to be a problem at all.

Overall, the 28-135mm IS is an excellent lens for everyone up to the professional level (although I’m sure some “pros” would dispute that). If you’re looking for a walk-around lens with a great range, definitely consider it. Nature, portraits, events? Still worth looking at. Unless you’re going to trek the outback or take up photojournalism, there’s really few applications where this lens wouldn’t be at least competent. I can say that I’m definitely a fan. Several times I’ve considered the 24-105mm L lens, but I keep deciding against it – the constant f/4 and better build quality just isn’t worth the loss in focal length or the huge expense. Not to me, at least, right now.

Before buying the 28-135mm IS, I used a Canon 18-55mm kit lens and a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8. If I could do it all again, I’d have just bought the 28-135mm IS to start with.

After further reflection: if you’re looking for something better than the current 18-55mm kit lens, or just a good walk-around, but aren’t ready to jump into the L-glass pool, then this is still the best bang for your buck.  The 28-135 IS is a very versatile lens, with solid performance.  I loved both of the copies I had.

It’s only fair, however, to admit that I finally jumped ship and am now using a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 instead.  Why?  Only one reason: the shallow depth of field at f/2.8  It finally reached the point where that was more important to me than the longer range or IS.

But if I were ever to step back and want a single, all-purpose walk-around lens, I’d go right back to the 28-135 IS.