Showing posts with label third-party. Show all posts
Showing posts with label third-party. Show all posts

Thursday, January 12, 2012

What is the trade-off with Energizer-brand compatible battery packs?

Question

The difference in price between the Canon LP-E4 battery back and the equivalent model from Energizer is significant. What, if any, are the main disadvantages to purchasing the cheaper model as opposed to the Canon brand version?

Answer

It looks like the Energizer compatible offers less longevity: 800-970mAh (depends on the exact subtype of the Energizer one) vs. the official 1080mAh of the Canon brand. I could not find any information about the Energizer providing any of the data feedback, such as power level and the like. I did find several sellers that made a key point out about how to go about the first charge, and some caveats with the first charge.

When it comes to Canon batteries, your paying for two things. Obviously, your paying for the Canon name, to a degree. Additionally, you get the Canon guarantee of quality and longevity, full data feedback, and no quirks or restrictions on charging. Having used a few off-brand compatible battery replacements for my XSi myself, I can say one thing with certainty:

Canon batteries last FAR longer than most compatible replacements. On a single fresh charge, my Canon battery would usually last at least two times (2x) longer than any one of my off-brand replacements. When used in extremely cold conditions, the Canon also outperformed the off-brands, although to a lesser degree.

Friday, December 23, 2011

What constitutes the quality difference in lenses with exactly the same specifications but different brand names?

Question

Example: I wish to purchase a lens with the fixed maximum aperture of f/2, and some other features.

If I get the exactly same specifications in Tamron and Nikon, on what basis should I decide which one to go for (assuming there is a price difference)?

Answer

For lenses:

  • overall build quality and durability (how long the lens will last)
  • smoothness of zoom and focus, zoom creep
  • materials - metal or plastic barrel and mount, glass or plastic lens elements
  • optics
    • number and design of elements (two similar lenses may have a different number and configuration of elements and this may affect the performance of the lens)
    • lens coatings to eliminate flare
    • distortion, chromatic aberration, vignetting (darkening of the corners)
    • contrast and sharpness throughout the range of apertures, both centre and in corners
    • bokeh (subjective quality of blurred areas of the image)
  • autofocus speed and accuracy
  • compatibility with current and future camera bodies (3rd party lenses are to some degree reverse-engineered, so no guarantee any and all communication between the lens and body will be equivalent with a 3rd party lens
  • image stabilisation (VR/OS/IS)
  • internal focusing (IF)
  • ability to take filters and filter size (larger diameter = larger, more expensive filters)

There are some very good 3rd party lenses (Tokina 17-50mm, Tamron 90mm macro). Overall 3rd party lenses tend to be less expensive but with lower build quality. I don't think you can generalise - there are some very good Sigma lenses, and some poor ones. You'd need to read reviews and try out these lenses yourself to know which ones are good value.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

What constitues the quality difference in the lens with exactly same specifications but different brand names?

Question

Example: I wish to purchase a lens with the fixed maximum aperture 2, and some other features.

If I get the exactly same specifications in Tamron and Nikon, on what basis should I decide which one to go for (assuming there is a price difference)?

Answer

For lenses:

  • overall build quality and durability (how long the lens will last)
  • smoothness of zoom and focus, zoom creep
  • materials - metal or plastic barrel and mount, glass or plastic lens elements
  • optics
    • number and design of elements (two similar lenses may have a different number and configuration of elements and this may affect the performance of the lens)
    • lens coatings to eliminate flare
    • distortion, chromatic aberration, vignetting (darkening of the corners)
    • contrast and sharpness throughout the range of apertures, both centre and in corners
    • bokeh (subjective quality of blurred areas of the image)
  • autofocus speed and accuracy
  • compatibility with current and future camera bodies (3rd party lenses are to some degree reverse-engineered, so no guarantee any and all communication between the lens and body will be equivalent with a 3rd party lens
  • image stabilisation (VR/OS/IS)
  • internal focusing (IF)
  • ability to take filters and filter size (larger diameter = larger, more expensive filters)

There are some very good 3rd party lenses (Tokina 17-50mm, Tamron 90mm macro). Overall 3rd party lenses tend to be less expensive but with lower build quality. I don't think you can generalise - there are some very good Sigma lenses, and some poor ones. You'd need to read reviews and try out these lenses yourself to know which ones are good value.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Is Pentax AF360 same as Jessops 360AFD?

Question

I've got a Jessops 360AFD flash and I'm looking for a diffuser for it (the original one is broken). I have been led to believe it is the same as a Pentax AF360.

Is this the case? Or have I had misinformation?

Answer

No. It is almost certainly a relabeled version of the Tumax DPT386AFZ. This flash is made by Icorp Development Ltd., a Hong Kong company which makes low-cost reverse-engineered dedicated system flashes sold under the Tumax brand and also as what they call "private label" products.

Other versions of this flash, or other models from Tumax, are sold under brands like Digital Concepts, Vivitar (a brand unrelated to the old-school Vivitar company), Bell and Howell, Bower, and so on. Various versions of this flash often claim slightly different guide numbers, but 36m is on the low side. Presumably a company can order them that way to cut costs — or it's possible that it's just older version than currently offered.

Reviews are mixed; some people are happy with the results for the lower price than the camera-system brands or from bigger third-party flash companies, while others have bad experiences with quality and support. Support is a big deal: in the US, the companies selling these models are basically cheap-chinese-electronics-importers, not camera companies, and customer support is not in their business model. I don't know if that's the case with Jessops. Have you contacted them about the broken diffuser?

Thursday, October 13, 2011

Does EzPrints.com Terms of Use try to grab my copyrights?

Question

I generally don't like legal questions, however in this case my choice is either to accept an agreement or move on to a different print service, and I'll gladly do the latter if necessary. I was reading the EzPrints.com Terms of Use, and I'm a little confused about part of their terms. I hope I'm just being dumb, and its just a matter of understanding. The part I am confused about is Point B:

PHOTOGRAPHS AND PRODUCTS

A.

You can purchase the photographs featured on our Web site from ezprints in the form of photographic prints, or other photographic products such as picture frames or photo- albums (collectively, the "Products"). You acknowledge that all Products are custom made to your order and have no market beyond your purchase thereof. As such, all Products are non-returnable and payment for all Products is required to be made in full in advance. All items purchased through ezprints and shipped to you are subject to a shipment contract under which the risk of loss and title for such items pass to you upon our delivery to our shipping carrier.

B.

You may not reproduce, display, transmit, distribute or otherwise exploit the Products, or any portion thereof, in any manner, including, without limitation, print or electronic reproduction, publication or any display of photographs, without the prior written consent of ezprints. While you can add captions and descriptions to the photographs in your account in accordance with the terms hereof, you agree not to otherwise modify, alter or otherwise manipulate any Product, including without limitation, adding other material to a Product, without ezprints's prior written consent.

C.

...

To me, Point B sounds like EzPrint is telling me I can't modify, reproduce, transmit, distribute, or otherwise exploit my own works if they are printed through them. That sounds rather ludicrous, as there is no way in hell I am giving up my right to rework, print, distribute, and sell my own property simply because I printed it through EZPrints. I am also not going to limit what I do or who I sell to with any print I farm out, however given the wording of this agreement, it sounds like EZPrint is trying to say just that.

What am I misunderstanding here?

Answer

I think that there is not a problem here and it is not a copyright grab. Why? Two reasons:

First, see the first sentence in Part 2a:

You can purchase the photographs featured on our Web site from ezprints in the form of photographic prints, or other photographic products such as picture frames or photo- albums (collectively, the "Products"). [emphasis added]

My reading is that "Products" refers only to value-added stuff created by EzPrints: silly photo frames, mugs, calendars, etc., not your photographs themselves.

Second, reading Part 2b as a copyright grab is highly inconsistent with Part 3 ("Your Copyrights").

Thus, I agree with Alan. IMO, image theft is not a concern here and you should evaluate EzPrints on other criteria.

Other random thoughts (converted from question comments):

My recollection is that EzPrints has a good reputation, though I could of course be wrong. I'm surprised that they would be attempting a copyright grab or even want to be appearing to do so. I would suggest contacting them directly with your concerns.

Given this good reputation, IMO it is fair to give EzPrints an opportunity to weigh in before condemning them. While one explanation for terms that are an apparent copyright grab (and I emphasize that on a second, more careful reading I don't believe it is that, but I can see how it could be interpreted that way) is malice and/or greed, another is simple error. Maybe they have a new lawyer, or whoever was in charge of vetting the terms was having a bad day, or they just had some calendar designs stolen, or something like that.

Thursday, September 8, 2011

What third-party speedlite/flashes are available for Nikon?

Question

I'm looking for a flash with a budget of < $200. I have a Nikon D3100, and I'm a beginner with photography, who is taking some classes and wants some flexibility with a decent bounce flash.

I was surprised to find that the only Nikon flash < $200 is the $119 SB-400, which I'm concerned might be a little too limited. But the next jump up is around $279+ to the SB-600, and up from there with the SB-700.

I'm looking for some strong recommendations for alternative brands that will provide comparable functionality of an SB-600 at a more affordable price.

If there are no options, then we'll consider the higher priced Nikons, or postpone the purchase 'til we have a bit more cash, so if you feel really strongly that we have to go with one of the more expensive Nikons, let that be known.

Answer

There's one that I've looked at several times as a possibility for my next flash - although I have no personal experience with it - the Vivitar DF383.

Features:

  • TTL
  • Swivel and Tilt
  • GN45
  • AF focus assist

Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Are third-party alternatives to the Canon 70-200 f/2.8 worth the price savings?

Question

Has anyone used the 3rd party 70-200 lenses?

Are you happy with the quality, or do you wish you had saved up for longer and got the Canon?

Answer

Personally I have a 70-200 2.8 IS. Yes it cost a lot, and yes it is heavy, but the results from it speak for themselves.

But having said that, you need to pick a lens that is going to meet your needs (i.e. what sort of photos you plan on taking with it). I have a friend who uses a 70-200 F4 (non-IS) and is very happy with the results. Likewise I know someone who has a Sigma Bigma (50-500) who produces good results.

One resource you may find useful is Fred Miranda Reviews which agregates the results from people submitting reviews about the lenses they own.

Can a cheap DX battery damage my camera?

Question

I would like to purchase a spare battery for my new Canon EOS 550D\Rebel T2i for a trip abroad.

I've found this battery on DealExtreme. It costs 6.90$ (with shippment), a small fraction from the street price.

What are the chances this battery will damage my camera?

enter image description here

Answer

The chances are high. Nikon started putting holograms on their batteries so they would be recognized as originals because some fakes burst into flames after some use.

Most importantly, is why are you even considering this? You paid good money for a nice camera and you want to risk it by saving some money on a cheap battery? If the one you have is not enough, even one more will give you at least another 400-shots per charge unless you use the flash more than you should.

Friday, August 12, 2011

Are aftermarket battery grips made for the Canon T2i compatibile with the T3i?

Question

I know that the T2i (550d) and T3i (600d) both use the same OEM BG-E8 grip. There are some aftermarket grips (that are significantly less expensive than the OEM one) that are specifically marketed toward the T2i. Am I correct in assuming they will also work with the T3i?

Answer

You shouldn't have any problems with a grip designed for the T2i working on a T3i. They have the same body shape on the bottom, and both use the same battery. As you said, the Canon grip is identical - the BG-E8, so there is no reason why other brands wouldn't work the same. The only reason one of them wouldn't work for some reason is if it had extra hardware that somehow interferes with the flip out screen(new feature to the T3i.), but I can't imagine that ever occurring. I did find at least one example of an off brand unit that claims to work on both units - B&H - Vello BG-C5.

Monday, July 11, 2011

What aftermarket batteries for Fujifilm FinePix X100?

Question

I want to get a spare battery for my Fujifilm FinePix X100. It takes the Fuji NP-95 rechargeable battery. These are very hard to find; aftermarket brands are much more common. I'm hesitant to put an off-brand battery in a $1000 camera, though.

Does anyone (a) have a recommendation for a brand that they have personally tested with an X100, (b) know of a brand/store that guarantees no damage to the camera, or (c) know of a source of genuine Fuji batteries?

Answer

I've written an article about this very thing, http://www.x100enthusiasts.com/discussion/80/batteries-chargers-power-management-finepix-x100-user-guide

I've been using a MaxPower brand generic for 5 weeks now without issue. Other users have reported similar experiences in the comments.