And then I turned the thing on, and everything went downhill.

I’m writing about the ASUS UX21. I really wanted to like this fantastic looking “Ultrabook”, and it’s a really convincing rendition of a Windows-based MacBook Air-compete. However, a few critical components crippled the user experience of this unit in particular. Here are the specs of the version I picked up at the Microsoft Store.

• ASUS Zenbook UX21E-DH52
• Intel Core i5-2467m, dual core HyperThreading (1.6GHz – Turbo 2.3GHz)
• 4GB DDR3
• 128GB ADATA XM11 SSD
• 11.6″ 1366×768 (TN)
• Intel HD 3000 integrated video
• Atheros AR9485 802.11b/g/n
• 1 USB 2.0, 1 USB 3.0, mini-VGA, micro-HDMI, 3.5mm headset
• Trackpad – Sentilic
• 35WHr battery

As I alluded to at the beginning of the post, the design of the UX21 is gorgeous. Although the dimensions and components used in this machine are almost exact replicas of the 11.6″ MacBook Air, the build quality is as good, if not better, and the execution of the design makes this a striking laptop. The radiating circular brush design on the lid works well, and even the two tones of aluminium for the lid and chassis complement each other, very well. The keyboard deck is firm, is nicely coloured to match the rest of the visual style, and even the display bezel seems to be aluminum. Closing the laptop produces a confident “thunk”. Once closed, the entire laptop feels like a solid chunk of metal, with little-to-no flex anywhere. Overall, the PC is stunning to look at and hold.

The first hints of trouble are seen when setting the machine up, for the first time. The trackpad isn’t sensitive all the way to the bottom edge – I think this is so you can rest your thumb/other finger on the “click-area”, without impacting cursor movement. But that’s a lazy way of getting around the real issue; other than in a MacBook, we still haven’t seen a good driver implementation of a clickpad, which can parse the difference between contact for moving the cursor and contact intended for clicking. While the trackpad looks awfully large and feels like one contiguous surface, you can’t tell at what point the trackpad will no longer be sensitive to your finger, as you move around. In that sense, ASUS would have been better off with separate buttons. ASUS says an updated trackpad driver should solve most issues, but I have the latest version they recommend (9.1.7.7), and there are still problems.

Fortunately, performance, even with a low-voltage Core i5 is very snappy, and the solid state drive (which uses an SF-2281 controller) is extremely quick. Boot up times are astronomically low. From a cold boot, the Windows 7 start up orbs don’t even have time to group together before we’re off to the Windows desktop. Resume from sleep is essentially instantaneous. It’s a superb experience. Given ASUS’ claim that this will last 1 week+ on standby, we’re getting pretty close to consumer-electronics experience.

After setting up Windows in the first boot, I connected to my home wireless network and opened up Internet Explorer and waited for the homepage to load. And waited. And waited.

Sure, MSN is not exactly the lightest-weight page in the world, but on a 20mbps downlink internet connection, it really shouldn’t take upwards of 20 seconds. I flipped over to Engadget, only to find that it loaded just as slowly. I thought it might be a temporary slowdown in my internet connection, but everything was still very speedy on my desktop. Speedtest.net showed I had download speeds below 2mbps. Fortunately, with a USB wireless N adapter lying around, I had an easy way to isolate the issue. I plugged that in and tried browsing again. Everything was near instantaneous and Speedtest.net showed ~16mbps down.

I searched the web for issues with Wifi on the Zenbooks and quickly found numerous users having the same problem with the built-in Atheros solution. For some, installing an older version of the Wifi driver helped. For me, it didn’t. Transferring files from my Windows Home Server became absurdly slow, to the point of unusable. This is a deal-breaker.

And the rest is mostly history. The laptop is, for the most part, pretty quiet. The fan rarely spins up (although my UX21 came with the 206 BIOS – some folks have said the update to 207 runs the fan more often: bad). The display is mediocre, but gets the job done; viewing angles aren’t great, but neither is the likelihood that I’ll be sharing an 11.6″ display with several other people or needing to fit it in some crazy angle on an economy seat tray table. Battery life is right around ASUS’ advertised mark. I get in the range of 4-5 hours of browsing, before the computer wants to hibernate.

The keyboard, which some have complained about, is okay – it’s a bit stiffer and has shallower travel than most keyboards, but you quickly get used to that. The keys seem smaller than a full-size though, particularly in the length dimension, so sometimes I overshoot. I’m typing this review on the UX21, and I’m already pretty used to the layout and firmness.

This laptop is going back, and with the combination of wifi (deal-breaker), touchpad (nearly deal-breaker) and a number of smaller issues, it’s not something I’ll try another unit of. The external design and construction of the UX series is phenomenal. Now they just need to choose the right key components for a good user-experience. The UX21 is a almost a great PC, but a few mistakes were made on critical components, which completely undermined the potential of the system.

Microsoft provided me a generous budget for my work laptop, which I used on an HP EliteBook 2540p. Specs:

• Intel Core i7 640LM (2.13GHz – turbo 2.93GHz)
• 4GB DDR3
• Intel 160GB SSD
• 12.1″ WXGA LED
• Intel integrated graphics
• 6 cell battery (62Whr)

I also had the option of larger, 14″ and 15″ laptops, but I knew I’d also have a desktop with plenty of grunt for running VMs. My laptop would to take to meetings, work on the road, at home, etc. I wanted something small and light, with good battery life. It really came down to the 2540p and the Lenovo X201. However, only the 2540p could be had with an SSD within budget, and knowing the difference one makes with my personal laptop and desktop, I had to have one for my work machine as well. One note: if you want an optical drive in this laptop, you’re stuck with 1.8″ form factor drives. Fortunately, Intel makes a 1.8″ SSD – otherwise, I would have been saddled with some slow as molasses 1.8″ spindle drive. That’s just no fun. Then again, I now have an optical drive I haven’t used yet.

Build and Design

Business machines haven’t exactly prioritized aesthetic design, but the EliteBook doesn’t do a horrid job here. It has a nice brushed metal texture on the lid and a two-tone color scheme when open. Brushed metal also adorns the palm rest. The combination of a standard 16:10 display, thick top and bottom bezels and thin side bezels could make one mistake it for a standard 4:3 laptop, but who makes those nowadays, right? Even the 6-cell battery protrudes out the back about 2/3rds of an inch, but ends being a fair hand-hold when the laptop open or closed. (I end up walking with my laptop open, reading email more than I’d like.) Overall, it’s a little more sprightly looking than a ThinkPad, but there’s certainly also something classic about the ThinkPad look. We’ll see if the EliteBook design wears well over time.

In terms of build quality, the thing is tank-like. The lid feels very good, the heavy-duty metal display hinges are tight as day one, there’s no flex anywhere you’d touch. The lid is held in place by a strong clasp, which is disengaged by a large metal button on the front. Unfortunately, it’s a bit easy to push it and open the lid. ThinkPad’s sliding lid mechanism is much more fool-proof. The chassis is supported by a magnesium alloy shell underneath metal (or plastic around the keyboard). The laptop also meets some military standards for environmental conditions, tested for a wide range of temperature, vibrations and shocks, and moisture. Long story short, this thing is designed to survive in the elements, so surviving a typical office workday probably isn’t asking much of it. After 6 months, the only sign of use is a slight bit of a mark on one of the left mouse buttons. There’s absolutely no marks anywhere else, and I certainly haven’t babied it in the least. Not bad.

On the downside, the laptop is nearly 3/4lb heavier than an equivalent (6-cell) Lenovo X201. I’m okay with the near 4lb weight overall.

Input/Output

The keyboard is one of those hybrid-chiclet types, with flat keys. It feels pretty good to type on, although not as good as the ThinkPad keyboards or the Logitech Illuminated Keyboard I used with my desktop (quite possibly the best keyboard I’ve ever laid hands on). There’s a slight bit of rattle when typing quickly, but no flex is evident. I think the travel distance could be a bit longer. Above they keyboard are touch-sensitive buttons for volume, wireless and some quick-boot options. Personally, I’d be just as happy with tactile buttons. Touch-sensitive buttons are always a bit fidgety, not 100% responsive.

The touchpad is small, but acceptable for a 12″ laptop. Nice rubbery-textured touchpad and pointer buttons have good travel. The pointer comes with an indented cap that I’ve become very accustomed to. In fact, I simply never use the touchpad anymore. When I’m home with my MacBook, my hand defaults to where the track pointer should be, only to realize there isn’t one.

The display is of the 16:10 variety, matte, with typical viewing angles for a TN panel (e.g. decent horizontal, terrible vertical). It can be turned up pretty darned bright and colors seem fine. Then again, I use it for web, email, Word, and the occasional training video. The display doesn’t have the most stressful job to perform in my day to day.

There’s a smattering of ports – 3 USB 2.0, DisplayPort, VGA, SD card reader, FireWire, single headset 3.5mm, gigabit ethernet and (importantly!) a smartcard reader built in. That last input is fantastic for working remotely, as I don’t need to carry around an external card reader.

In Use

I’m not going to run the laptop through a gauntlet of performance benchmarks, since no, I don’t spend my days running PCMark or calculating the x millionth digit of Pi. However, I do launch Outlook quite often and that’s essentially instantaneous now. The combination of four threads of Intel Core i7 power and the Intel SSD does wonders for system responsiveness and performance. There are no hesitations between action and response, except for the human ones. It’s generally a pleasure to use.

Here’s what happens during a normal day. I get into the office, pull the laptop out of my backpack, plunk it into the dock and snap in the dock connector. My Logitech MX Anywhere’s mini-receiver is perpetually plugged into the left-hand side USB port of the laptop, so once the 2540p resumes from sleep (about 2 seconds) I’m ready to go. The dock is connected via DisplayPort and VGA to two 20″ 4:3 Samsung displays, one in portrait and one in landscape mode. I have Logitech Z-5 speakers connected to the dock and a Microsoft Natural 4000 keyboard. Outlook fires up and I’m ready to start with my morning email browsing.

A couple hours later (or perhaps immediately, depending on the day), it’s meeting time, and I simply pop the dock connector button and my laptop’s good to go. I sit down at the meeting, open up my laptop, and a few seconds of the laptop figuring out that it’s no longer connected to two desktop monitors ensues. Then I’m back at my desktop, except with a 1280×800 resolution desktop. Doing the regular tasks at work, writing, emailing, browsing SharePoint, gives me 5 hours or so of battery life on the 6 cell. That’s plenty to get me through the day, since I rarely sit through any string of meetings longer than that (in which I’m actively using my laptop, especially).

I come back to my office, plug the 2540p back into the dock and my monitors pick up the picture again, without any input required on my part. It’s all really pretty seamless. My mouse and keyboard haven’t left their original positions and I’m ready to work again.

And really, that’s how a business laptop should be, in my opinion. Portable, good battery life, easily able to survive being bumped around and virtually invisible (from a reconfiguration point of view) to the user. I don’t want to think about reconfiguring my multi-monitor setup every time I get back to my desk or need to explicitly ask to undock my laptop before I do so (which, from what I understand, you need to do with the ThinkPad docking solutions).

Conclusion

As you can probably tell by now I’m pretty happy with my choice of the EliteBook 2540p. It’s built well, performs great, has good battery life, and fits seamlessly into my day-to-day use cases. It’s a bit heavier than the equivalent from Lenovo (X201), looks a bit nicer as well (in my opinion), and has a fantastic docking solution. It should easily last me our typical hardware upgrade cycle.

Pros

• Built like a tank (essentially no signs of use after 6 months)
• Blazing fast with the SSD
• Portable and good battery life
• Full-size keyboard
• Looks pretty nice for a business machine
• Great, seamless docking experience

Cons

• Keyboard is only good
• Heavier than the competition (X201)
• Display is middle of the road in terms of quality (but bright)
• If you don’t get an SSD and want an optical drive, you’ll be stuck with a slow 1.8″ hard drive

The drive is very speedy, especially on reads, achieving 25MB/s and 20MB/s in reads and writes, respectively, with large files. That’s very impressive for a drive at these prices. Plus, it feels very sturdy, with a durable, metal shell, and an interesting sliding mechanism. You push and pull the entire top part (black portion) of the key to extend the USB connector.

All in all, a very good buy! Should be on until June 20 at your neighborhood Costco (Canada).

Even at a time when I was looking for maximum performance out of every computer I purchased, ultraportables always caught my eye, for one reason or another. Perhaps it was their cuteness, or perhaps it was the jet-setting lifestyle that they were associated with. Whatever the reason, they’ve held a soft spot in my heart, but prices have always been a hard knock for my wallet.

Intel became a victim of their own success in the Atom processor. Although margins on the product are pretty high, they cannibalized sales of more expensive processors, especially during the economic downturn of late. Sure, they’re still making money from Atom, but less revenues equals (=) bad for most companies.

Intel launched the Consumer Ultra-Low-Voltage (CULV) lineup of processors to help combat falling ASPs, starting with single core SU2700 and SU3500 processors. Since then, they’ve broadened the lineup to include dual core Celeron SU2300, Pentium SU4100, Core 2 Duo SU7300, and more. I always thought it would be AMD that forced ultraportables into my price range; it’s ironic that Intel’s own upselling strategy put the ultraportable within my budget.

ASUS launched their CULV notebook products in early September 2009, and a couple months later, the UL20A began shipping in North America. The smallest of the bunch, the 12.1″ UL20A brings decent dual core performance down to something not much bigger than the larger netbooks, which range all the way up to 11.6″. In fact, one of the “netbooks” I’ll compare the UL20A to, the Atom + ION powered HP Mini 311, is less than 0.1lbs lighter and 0.4″ narrower and shorter.

Purchased configuration

Intel Core 2 Duo SU7300 (1.3GHz)
1x2GB DDR2-800 RAM (1 open slot)
250GB 5400RPM HDD (Hitachi 5K500.B)
12.1″ LED-backlit display (1366×768)
Intel GMA X4500MHD
10/100Mbps Ethernet
0.3MP webcam
Intel WiFi Link 1000 802.11bgn
6-cell battery – 4400mAh (47.5Whr)
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Dimensions:  11.8″ (W) x 8.4″ (L) x 1.0″ (H)
Weight: 3.3lbs (6-cell battery)

Price: $599 CAD

Reason for purchase

My choice of laptop would paint a pretty accurate picture of my interests and hobbies over the last five years. When I entered university, I went for a desktop replacement for power and gaming, an ASUS Z71V. Two years later, I downsized to a Dell XPS M1330, albeit with the discrete NVIDIA graphics, as I realized absolute performance was no longer the most useful asset of a laptop, with portability starting to trump. And now, as I wrap up my university career, I’m moving further down the size and performance food-chain with the ASUS UL20A. Without space limitations, a powerful desktop takes care of all my high-end photographic work.

Despite some drama around the time of the Dell-NVIDIA GPU issues, the M1330 has served me quite well for 2.5 years. That’s about as long as I’ve held onto any one piece of technology. The combination of portability and performance is not lost on me, and it served its purpose quite well. However, 2.5 years is a long time for the lithium-ion batteries, and both the 6 cell and the 9 cell started to wear out. To maintain portability away from power outlets, I needed to look for something new.

With a desktop holding down the performance fort, I went on the lookout for a small laptop, with good battery life. Cheap was also a bonus, as my place of employment would provide me with a laptop for business use. Really, this would be a toss-around for trips and lounging at home. Think netbook, but marginally more powerful.

I wanted something smaller than the M1330, so I juggled the Acer 1410T, 1810T, the ASUS UL20A, and the Dell Inspiron 11z.

• The Dell was struck from the list, after I found out even with the tumorous 6-cell battery, it only gets slightly over 5 hours of battery life.
• I’m still a sucker for aesthetics and design, and well, the Acer isn’t exactly a pretty face.
• The Acers all come with bilingual keyboards in Canada, which I haven’t had much luck adapting to in the past.
• The 1410T (SU4100) was $50 less than the UL20A, with similar battery life
• The 1810T (SU7300) was $50 more than the UL20A, with better battery life.

In the end, I compromised with the prettier option, an English keyboard, and decent battery life in the UL20A. The laptop was purchased from NCIX.com for $599.95.

For now, I’ll set up some quick samples – the full set of ISO 80 – 1600 will have to wait to when I have a bit more time to process everything. I only used the RAWs from the two cameras for this example, with the D90 images processed in Capture NX2 and the S90 images processed in Canon DPP. The default noise reduction settings were used (none in NX2 and 2 Luminance and 4 Chrominance for DPP). No sharpening was applied to either set of photos.

So, without further ado, the canonical Seattle skyline shot.

Canon S90 – ISO 80. Click on the thumbnail for a 1600px wide version, or click here for the original size. Use sparingly, and be kind on my bandwidth!

Canon S90 – ISO 200. Click on the thumbnail for a 1600px wide version, or click here for the original size. Use sparingly, and be kind on my bandwidth!

Nikon D90 – ISO 200. Click on the thumbnail for a 1600px wide version, or click here for the original size. Use sparingly, and be kind on my bandwidth!

And for a closeup (100% crop) -

Canon S90 – ISO 200

Nikon D90 – ISO 200

Clearly, the Nikon D90 is pulling out much better image quality here. That’s to be expected. You can also see the difference in dynamic range between a compact camera sensor and the larger APS-C of the Nikon D90. At what ISO does the D90 have comparable quality to the S90 at ISO 200? I found it to be somewhere above ISO 800. The following is a 100% crop of the Nikon D90 at ISO 800.

Nikon D90 – ISO 800

Compared to the Canon S90, there’s more detail here (probably due to the fact that some noise reduction was applied to the Canon S90′s RAW images in DPP), but noise levels are about the same. The D90′s ISO 1600 shot is significantly noisier than the S90′s ISO 200.

What can we take from this brief look at the differences in image quality from a large hulking DSLR kit compared to the Canon S90? There’s around a 2.5 stop (or slightly more) advantage for the Nikon D90 in this situation (I’m adding half a stop for the fact that some NR was applied to the S90 RAWs), but that’s also factoring in the 60mm AF-S lens used, which is a decently sharp macro. What I think is pretty interesting is this comment from a reader of my S90 review:

Your comparison with the D40 SLR is an interesting one because I’ve been using one for a [D40] couple years now, and I just ordered a S90 today (replacing my ancient SD200). Of course I don’t expect the S90 to take better photos than the D40, but I think it will do better in low-light high-ISO situations than the D40 w/kit lens based on sample shots, and also:

- Lens has a 1.8 stop advantage over kit at wide end
- Being 3 years newer probably gains it ~1 stop (for example, compare D90 to D40) w/ better tech and software
- 1/6 area sensor size probably means ~2.5 stop worse

- Andrew S

The D90 is probably close to a stop better than the D40 in low-light, which means the D40 is probably around 2 stops better in low light than the S90. That’s fairly decent performance out of a compact camera, that weighs less than the 200g+ kit lens that comes with the D40. With the fast f/2.0 lens at the wide-end, as Andrew S remarks, the S90 could get pretty close to a D40 kit’s performance. I’d argue that although there’s still a good half stop or more difference there, it shows that in certain circumstances, you can get pretty close. Of course, this is with some pretty wonky math and some assumptions of performance on my part (I’ve long since parted with my D40, so I can’t do any scientific testing), but I think it’s within a pretty small margin of error. I’d be very interested in seeing what the image quality difference is between the S90 and an older DSLR.

Again, as I mentioned in the review, I imagine the majority of users of the S90 will end up posting their photos on the internet, with a much smaller subset doing any printing. At any reasonable web size, say 1600px wide, as I’ve done for the linked images at the beginning of the post, noise really doesn’t play a part at ISO 200. From my brief look at ISO 400, it should be absolutely no problem either at 1600px. In fact, with DPP’s default 3 Luminance and 6 Chrominance NR, there is not much visible noise in this same scene at ISO 400 at 1600px wide. Very impressive.

And remember, everything I showed here is a baseline. I pretty much used every default; there’s more image quality to be squeezed out of the S90. I did my tests in this manner to keep both the S90 and D90 on a level playing field, from a post-processing point of view.

When I first read about the Canon S90, back in August of this year, I held out hope that it was the pocketable camera I was looking for to complement my Nikon D90. The only thing pocketable I had was a Canon SD200 (yeah, ancient). By the time the S90 was announced, I had tried and rejected a Canon SD870IS, a Nikon P6000, a Canon G10, and a Fuji F200EXR; okay, that last one’s a bit of a lie. It’s been my point-and-shoot up until now.  The SD870IS didn’t have the IQ or controls I was looking for, the Nikon P6000′s IQ was disappointing, as was its shot-to-shot performance (over 3 seconds between JPEGs, around 10 seconds between RAW), and the Canon G10 had good IQ and fantastic controls and performance, but was too large to fit in a pocket. That meant carrying a bag, in which case, I felt I might as well bring my DSLR. The Fuji F200EXR ended up being a compromise to myself. The low-light IQ was quite good, size was pocketable, but I sacrificed most of the manual controls I wanted.

So you might have gathered by now what my ideal P&S camera would be: small enough to fit in a pocket, have good image quality, especially in low-light situations, and give me manual control over exposure. The S90 hits all these points. I bought one on the first day it was officially available from Best Buy, October 11, so I’ve had some time to get a sense of what’s good and what’s not so great.

Design

After a couple iterations of my search with the G10 and P6000, I realized that there was one criteria I simply could not sacrifice: size. I didn’t have a camera that could slip into a pants pocket and not freak people out when pointed at them, as a DSLR too often does. The G10, and to a lesser degree, the P6000, are serious-looking pieces of photographic gear, and can’t easily fit into a pocket.

The S90 measures 10cm x 5.8cm x 3.1cm. By comparison, the SD870IS, which I also tried, measures 9.2cm x 5.9cm x 2.6cm. The body of the S90 isn’t much larger than that of the SD870IS – the lens housing protrudes somewhat, making the dimensions a bit larger front-to-back than the SD870IS.

The S90 has a slightly smaller footprint than my Nokia E71, but is around 3 times the thickness.

From a size-performance standpoint, the main competitor of the S90 seems to be the Panasonic Lx3. Although 1.5 years old, the LX3 is still the reference point for the small, compact, high-performance camera. Its price, at least in North America, is a bit higher than the S90′s. The LX3 is advertised by Panasonic to be 10.9cm x 6.0cm x 2.7cm. However, this doesn’t seem to take into consideration the large lens protrusion, which brings the camera’s thickness to around 4cm. From a size standpoint, the S90 wins out by a fair margin, especially in the important thickness dimension. The S90 fits in a 28-105mm f/2.0-4.9 lens, which is slower, but covers a wider range than Panasonic’s 24-60mm f/2.0-2.8 lens.

As you can see, there’s a pretty significant difference in the size of these two cameras. The key thing here is that the S90 can pass itself off as just another point-and-shoot. I don’t feel like the group photographer or any sort of awkwardness when I carry the camera to a social event. That’s very important. It means a whole new range of photographs can be taken, with decent image quality.

The S90 has a metallic-feeling outer casing, and is generally well put together. There’s no flexing of the chassis and carries some heft (175g, without battery or SD card) to give the impression of quality as well. When the flash unit is enabled, it rises up from the body using a motor, and retracts (motorized as well) when flash is disabled. It feels very confident and there’s no wobble or weird sounds from the motor system.

The lens housing dominates the otherwise plain camera face. An autofocus assist light is just above and to the left of the lens. Otherwise, a couple logos adorn the front. Overall, it makes for a relatively quiet subject-facing design. There’s really nothing indicating serious camera equipment, hiding in the back.

Unlike the Panasonic LX3, there is no hotshoe. I presume Canon decided it simply isn’t what the targeted demographic is interested in. I don’t blame them. When I had the Nikon P6000, I tried mounting my SB-600 flash on it. It was comical. The flash head was about 2.5 times the volume of the camera and weighed 50% more. It was unwieldy to hold and use. It mostly defeats the purpose of a camera as small as the S90, if its size is doubled by just about anything you could mount on a hotshoe.

On the left side of the camera are mini USB and HDMI ports. At the bottom of the camera is a sturdy feeling flap for the battery and SD card compartments. The S90 takes NB-6L batteries. Also on the bottom, at just about the centerline of the lens is a metal tripod mount.

During the NCIX Boxing Day sale, I picked up a Patriot Warp 32GB SSD for $50 after MIR. While I had read all about the stuttering issues associated with the JMicron controller-equipped MLC SSDs, I reasoned that for $50, the potential benefits outweighed the risk of a crappy user experience.

Boy, am I ever glad I went ahead with that purchase.

It’s been about 3 months with the SSD installed in my Dell XPS M1330, and for over two of those, I’ve been running Windows 7 Beta. I’ll save the Windows 7 discussion for a later time, but I’ll say for now, if this is the direction of the computing experience for the next couple years, I welcome it with open arms.

Many new solid state drives tout extremely high transfer rates, sequential reads over 200MB/s and writes well over 100MB/s. While these speeds are a couple times faster than a good 7200RPM drive, it’s the random access times that really put the SSD on top. With sub 0.5ms seek times, it’s easily an order of magnitude less than hard drives. In typical productivity work, linear transfers of large files back and forth isn’t the focus. Instead most of the interactions with applications and files involve many small transactions, which at first glance, seemed perfectly aligned with the benefits of solid state drives.

JMicron – Performance Killer

Unfortunately, it wasn’t that simple. The JMicron controller used by the vast majority of MLC solid state drives was utterly poor at random reads and writes. Furthermore, the built-in request cache is quite miserly, somewhere around 16KB, compared to 256KB for the Intel controller, used in the much more expensive Intel MLC drives. With poor random read/write performance practically no buffer to mitigate the issue, most of the ‘budget’ MLC drives became an order of magnitude worse than spinning hard drives when it came to some of the things that are most prevalent in standard computing use: web browsing, instant messaging, email. When the request buffer became full, nothing could happen and performance would drop off a cliff. Windows would freeze for seconds at a time.

So, with all the issues I just mentioned, you’re probably wondering why I went and bought one of these performance crippling drives, right?

Because everyone was in agreement on one point, when they work, they work hellishly well.

Solid State Drive Tweaking

I wasn’t on the bleeding edge of SSD adoption, so there were plenty of resources aimed at mitigating the detrimental effects of these drives. The OCZ forums were an especially active area of experimentation. Their first MLC drive, the Core was received with anticipation due to its very low cost, relative to SLC drives. However, the poor performance resulted in a significant outcry by the community. As a result of the commotion, there are posts like Vista 32/64 SSD Windows Registry tweaks. The main objective of these tweaks was to reduce the number and frequency of random reads and writes and deeply queued requests that caused the stuttering.

The work flows I use my laptop for aren’t highly multitasked. While I may have many applications open at once, I rarely perform multiple strenuous things at once. For example, I don’t compile code while extracting gigabytes of archives and encoding videos. Most of the time, my actions are focused. Consequently, the causes of stuttering wasn’t very prevalent in my use case. Still, I didn’t bother trying the system out without the tweaks. My first order of business after installing the OS was to disable indexing, SuperFetch, and apply the registry tweaks mentioned. I could have gone further, such as working with Windows SteadyState, but didn’t want the tweaks to get in the way of how I used my computer.

Performance

We’re finally at the section that really means the most of all, overall performance. With the tweaks applied, it’s good, it’s very good. The Dell XPS M1330 the Patriot Warp currently resides in used to have a 120GB Hitachi 5400RPM drive. Here’s an ATTO bench of a 2+ month old system with the SSD.

Compared to the Hitachi 5K160 drive it replaced, it’s slightly slower at block sizes below 8KB; however, whereas the Hitachi topped out at around 35MB/s for sequential reads and writes, the Patriot continues on through to 130MB/s read and around 80MB/s writes. What does this mean in terms of real world usage?

In terms of launching applications, my laptop (1.8GHz Core 2 Duo, 3GB RAM) is now significantly faster than my desktop (2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, WD 640GB 7200RPM), with both running Windows 7. Here are some example application load times, timed from the launch until the application reaches a usable state.

Adobe Photoshop CS3
Desktop – 6s
Laptop w/ SSD – 3.5s

Microsoft Office PowerPoint
Desktop – 2.6s
Laptop w/ SSD – 2s

Microsoft Office Outlook
Desktop – 4.5s
Laptop w/ SSD – 2.5s

Internet Explorer
Desktop – 2.5s
Laptop w/ SSD – 1.5s

The difference can be significant. Furthermore, typical usage is more fluid, and applications are a bit more responsive. A friend, upon using my laptop for a few minutes got the feeling that the applications he was opening for the first time were already open somehow. It was as though he were simply switching applications and not launching them at all. There’s a sense of instantaneity.

While I applied many tweaks to improve performance right after installing the operating system and didn’t have a baseline to compare to, I was still able to witness first-hand the impact they had on the system. A couple weeks ago, I noticed extremely frequent stuttering in Firefox. At first, I couldn’t understand it. I thought it might have been caused by the performance degradation claims made about solid state drives. However as it turns out, SuperFetch and drive indexing had both been re-enabled. After disabling the two features, performance was back to normal again and stutters became so infrequent they no longer affect everyday usage.

Moral of the Story

What should you take away from this user experience? Solid state drives, even budget MLC ones, have the potential to vastly improve system performance. With the tweaks applied, stuttering is no longer an issue on my laptop. If there’s one thing I regret slightly is the anemic size of the SSD I purchased, 32GB, but for the price, $50 after MIR, I can’t complain about that much. The experiment was a huge success and I’m looking forward to upgrading my laptop to a larger SSD and my desktop to one.

A series of events led me to the Nikon D40 as my first DSLR. Well, that’s not quite accurate. I purchased a Sony Alpha A200 first, but after discovering the ‘new’ camera I bought from Future Shop actually had over 4000 photos taken on it already, it was promptly returned. During my brief time with the camera, I noted disappointing image quality from the kit lens. Chromatic aberration was moderate at best and sharpness was seriously lacking. I’m not alone in that assessment; DPReview noted much the same. Additionally, one aspect of image quality which could not be explained by the kit lens, the amount of noise and noise reduction, were also disappointing. Noise was already very apparent at ISO400 and the noise reduction algorithm resulted in a blotchy, fuzzy mess at higher ISOs. I had originally been wooed by fancy features like in-body stabilization system (Super Steady Shot) and the low price, but I knew I wouldn’t be terribly happy with it and the false sale by Future Shop gave me all the more reason to return it.

While the Sony A200 purchase was due in large part to pricing, I had wanted to stick with the tried-and-true Canon-Nikon choice. With a second chance, I started diving deeper into the entry and upper-amateur level cameras. After reading countless reviews, I decided on the system – Nikon. I preferred Nikon’s approach to noise handling by default and was certainly influenced by both a cousin who uses a Nikon D70 as well as the attractiveness of the entry level D40/60. The first model I considered was a used D200, but wasn’t sure the $800 price for a used body alone (not to mention the size) was justified at this point. The next choice was between the D80 and the D40. The D80 has a built-in screw drive motor, allowing it to autofocus with a much wider range of lenses, but is also about twice as expensive. I ruled out the D60 as I figured if I were to spend $700, I might as well put up the extra couple hundred and get a whole lot more camera with the D80.

However, when BestBuy put the D40 with kit lens on sale for $450 plus another 10% off, my decision was essentially made for me. Out to Future Shop I went for a price match and $450 later (after taxes) I held in my hands a new D40 and 18-55mm lens. The next several days were bliss.

The Experiment

Ever since playing with my dad’s old Minolta film SLR, I’ve had an interest in photography. I especially enjoyed photographing marvels of construction (airplanes, architecture) and nature (landscapes mostly). It was with a Sony F717 that I learned the basics of photography, from aperture to shutter speed to exposure to depth of field. That camera gave me a lot of manual options that I learned the interactions of. I felt the next step was to go for a DSLR.

Finding myself in the midst of a two week break from university and co-op, I spent the wonderful hot weather at the Niagara Botanical Gardens and hiking in the Bruce Trail. Armed with my new camera, I was ready to try my hand at recreating some of those gorgeous photographs I’ve seen on the web.

The saying, ‘the tool doesn’t make the photographer’ couldn’t be any truer. I certainly took a bunch of real garbage shots, but there were also a few that I was very proud of. For example, the much faster shooting rate and shorter shutter lag allowed me to catch one of a Niagara Rapids boat just as it emerged from a plume of water.

I also experimented with some depth of field effects and paid more attention to composition than ever before. Now the kit 18-55mm lens is far from a ‘bokeh’ master, but it did allow me to try out effects from varying the aperture. I read articles about photo composition, such as the rule of thirds (based on the Golden Mean) and lighting. More than ever, I tried to infuse some sense of meaning into my photographs by thinking about what I was trying to capture or represent from the photos I was taking. One photo I took, a close-up of a few hedge growths looking up into to the sky, represented to me that crispness of new life, even though it was towards the end of the summer months.

There are some drawbacks to the D40, which all things considered, are pretty reasonable for the price range it’s targeting. Auto-focus can be limiting with only 3 focus points, which results in more tricky focus-recompose situations than I’d like. The lack of exposure bracketing also means that you’re more likely to not quite get a shot at the exact correct exposure, and also limits your HDR choices. I’ve also found the matrix metering to be somewhat inaccurate, typically overexposing. Finally, perhaps the most serious drawback is that with the relative lack of physical controls, many options end up having to be done through the menu system, such as ISO changes, which can be slow and tedious.

Operation

Nikon DSLRs have been widely praised for their ergonomics and handling characteristics and the D40 feels great in the hand. It’s a small camera, but the grip is well designed and there’s never any doubt of a secure hold. The middle finger groove fits my hand very nicely. I usually don’t have issues with getting my fingers pinched between the grip and the lens barrel, although people with larger hands and/or significantly wider lenses may run into some issues here.

The controls are intuitive and well laid out. Navigation is performed mainly by the large 4-way controller. Along the left side of the LCD are 4 buttons that bring up the single shot preview, grid preview, menu, and shot settings.

Controls are somewhat simplified from more advanced cameras like the D80. There is a single control wheel, which means in full manual mode, aperture is controlled by holding the exposure compensation button while turning the wheel. Upgrading to a D80 and above affords the user two control dials, which makes some operations possible without using what are essentially function key combos.

Held up to the eye, things sort of fall into place. The right index finger sits comfortably on or near the shutter release and the thumb rests on the control wheel. The index finger can quickly and easily access the exposure compensation button located near the shutter release. I did find that my left hand had some issues locating the flash and custom function buttons blind. I often had to turn the camera a bit to see where they were.

I leave the camera in continuous shooting mode. Pressing and quickly releasing the shutter button fires off a single shot, which is normally the case, but it’s also just as easy to hold the shutter to take a few frames in a row quickly. I have no issues with taking only a single photo in continuous mode (the 2.5fps continuous shooting means you have plenty of time to release the shutter before the next frame rolls around) and the ability to seamlessly switch to continuous when needed is invaluable.

Speaking of shooting performance, the D40 is worlds faster than what my F717 can do in single shot mode. The F717 has a good second or so of lag between shots, which means taking several shots of an object can be a frustrating process, especially after using the D40 (or just about any DSLR for that matter).

Are 6 Megapixels Enough?

Yes. Now let me qualify that.

They are for me. I rarely, if ever, do prints and the vast majority of the photos I take will be to share with others, either through this website or posted to photo sharing sites like Flickr. The largest photos I’ve posted to this site are (I believe) 1024×768 or so. I’m always considerate of people who don’t have high resolution monitors like the one I do the majority of my work on. The 6MP sensor of the D40 produces 3008×2000 photos. That leaves me some room to crop or downsize for crispness.

That’s not to say a higher megapixel sensor won’t capture somewhat more detail. It will. But also remember that it’s a trade-off for fixed-size sensor cameras. Although the resolution increases, the sensor doesn’t grow any larger, so those extra pixels are being crammed into the same area, reducing sensitivity. The D40 has excellent low-light performance, in part due to the larger photo-sites afforded by the humble megapixel count. On the other hand, cameras like the D90 or D300 are able to produce meaningfully better low-light photos, even with twice the pixel count simply due to technological improvements (the CMOS versus CCD sensor helps).

Nikon D40 – Tamron 17-50mm – f/4, 2/5 sec, ISO400 – handheld, braced against railing

In the end, despite what the salesperson at your local big-box electronics retailer might have you believe, megapixels do not correlate directly to photo quality. In terms of image quality, I’d take my D40 over any compact point-and-shoot, regardless of their sensor resolution. Just take a look at the physical sensor sizes – the sizes shown aren’t correct in absolute terms, but they are proportionally correct.

The vast majority of point-and-shoot cameras use the 1/2.5″ sensor. Compared to the APS-C that Nikon uses, it has about 7% of the sensor area. Now, cram 10 or 12MP into that sensor and you can see why almost no amount of processing magic can make it come close to even an APS-C image. High-end prosumer cameras may use the 1/1.7″ sensor (Canon Powershot G9/G10 come to mind), but for the most part, it’s like putting a band-aid on a severed limb. It’s better, but sort of pointless.

Next Steps

I originally planned on getting a Nikkor 18-200mm as a walk-around lens, but as with all reasonably priced super-zooms, it’s a tradeoff between flexibility and quality. Since most of my photographic subjects seem to fit within the approximate range of the 18-55mm kit lens, I’m planning on getting a better lens for that focal range. After a lot of research, I’ve settled on the new Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 with built-in motor. The fixed maximum aperture across the focal range will be vastly superior to the f/3.5-5.6 for the kit lens. That’s not even mentioning that the Tamron is simply a superior piece of glass. Then again, for $500+, I’d expect it to be superior to the bundled kit lens. I looked at the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 as well, but the advantages over the Tamron simply can’t make up for nearly triple the price tag. The choice of the f/2.8 lens may actually have the unintended effect of replacing the 50mm f/1.8D I recently purchased. I usually stop the prime down somewhat to gain some clarity, so we’ll see if the Tamron at f/2.8 can match it. If it even comes close, I doubt the 50mm prime will get much use – it’s simply a hassle to switch lenses for little gain.

To complement the Tamron 17-50mm, I’m looking at the Nikkor 55-200mm VR lens for some reach. I don’t plan on getting this lens in the short term as it’s not a range that I do much photography in. As many photographers would rather do, ‘Get closer’.

On the other end of the scale, I’m considering a Sigma 10-20mm wide-angle lens. It’s about as wide as things get on a DX format camera without going for a fisheye lens, which I’m not too keen on. Much of the photography I’m interested in, landscape and architecture would benefit from a wider angle lens than I currently have.

Final Words

Don’t get me wrong, these will hardly be the last words I write about the Nikon D40 and certainly not about photography in general. That said, let’s wrap up some thoughts on my first serious stab at the art.

I’ve hit upon many hobbies in passing through the years, but photography has been one that’s stuck around through it all. The Nikon D40 was my choice (albeit not my first choice when I started looking at DSLRs) as a starter/education tool in the field of photography and as such, I have very, very little regret. You can easily get the D40 kit in Canada for ~$400 before taxes. At that price, I’d strongly consider it over higher-end point-and-shoots, if you can deal with the size. Don’t be fooled by the numbers – at 6MPs, you’ll get vastly superior quality than anything with a tiny compact camera sensor.

More than anything, the D40 has made me focus on composition and the study of light. I’m beginning to understand the intricacies of metering and judging scenes to avoid over or under exposures. I read photography blogs and tips. I use the rule of thirds. A photograph can be shocking effective by simply shifting the point of interest off center. It may sound counter-intuitive, but it sure works.

Work this semester has unfortunately sapped a whole lot of my time, so I’m looking forward to the Christmas break, when I’m planning on doing some hiking and photography with my D40 in the fresh snowfalls that are bound to come.