A Little Something Different

I have been requested to write an album review. Something I don't normally do, but I was honoured by the band, so here it is:
__

Musical Supergroups.

It's a common enough phrase, but the imagery it brings to mind is a varied as the people you ask. To some, it's a recipe for disaster; massive ego fighting for creative control. For others, it's a one album wonder, maybe done for love, perhaps done for money. Whatever the reason for existence, a supergroup is bound to make people sit up and take notice.

Spark some controversy, make some waves.

The latest incarnation of said phrase is here for your listening pleasure, to make you sit up, to take notice, and maybe in the process, stick in your brain. It's Dunsmuir.

The name doesn't exactly roll off the tongue like Cream, or Blue Murder does. In point of fact, I'm not even certain, without resorting to Google, who, or what, a Dunsmuir is. A quick online search says it's a city in California. Not exactly a name I associate with musical heavyweights, but that is perhaps about to change, for Dunsmuir packs some heavy firepower. Feast your eyes on these legends:

Neil Fallon of Clutch Fame

Brad Davis of Fu Manchu

Vinny Appice of, well just about every legendary metal band that ever was (Dio, Black Sabbath, Heaven and Hell, the list goes on)

Dave Bone from The Company Band.

Dave is the only member of the band that didn't immediately jump into my mind as being a heavyweight, but after listening to their eponymous debut, he certainly belongs up there with the rest.

The album is a concept piece (another common theme in musical supergroups) about the survivors of a 19th century shipwreck and the various fates that befall each one.

The album starts with "Hung On the Rocks" with clear catchy (not flashy, more meat and potatoes Ramones style) guitar work, backed up smartly by rumbling bass and crisp drumming. Before the vocals kick in, I’m thinking "Love Gun" by Kiss, but then Neil roars into play, just as forceful as he ever was. Clever lyrics abound, a solid sign of intelligence and hints of what's to come.

"And the Devil is content to dance,

The sea begins to boil, Charybdis awaits

Tie myself to the mast"

"Our Only Master" starts off with a snappy drum solo and the speed of the tune reminds you these four guys have their roots in metal. The middle of the song slows it down to Black Sabbath velocity with some haunting chants from Neil before picking up the pace for the end, which arrives in a short 3 minutes 20 odd seconds.

The short frame of the song reminds me this isn't a Clutch album, the longest song barely breaking the 5 minute mark, with most clocking in under 4 minutes. Unusual for a concept album. Judas Priest's Nostradamus broke the 100 minute mark, Queensryche's flawless Operation Mindcrime (really, the concept album which all others will be forever judged) hits the 1 hour mark. The ten songs from Dunsmuir barely surpass the half hour meter.

The rest of the songs move along at a brisk pace. The album will never be confused with speed metal, but only one track, "Church of the Tooth" (coincidentally the longest track here, at 5.47) slows down into sludge rock territory, but Neil's powerful pipes keep things alive and active. The band never gives the feeling of dissolving into a jam session or self-indulgent wankery. The drums move with purpose, with bass keeping the tempo and when the guitar isn't driving the song, it hits solo exploration, safe in the knowledge the rhythm section will carry it through.

The final song "Crawling Chaos" tackles H.P. Lovecraft's themes with aplomb and the lyrical touches only Neil can provide. Sounding like a deranged street preacher (I was going to say manic, but, you know…) he weaves the final tale of the last of the survivors as they descend into madness.

Will Dunsmuir be around for another album? Hard to say, each member has a firmly established career and finding time to write and record another album is always tricky, but where there is a will, there is a way.

As with most things Neil does, the lyrics, vocals and music linger far after the needle his the last groove and I found myself wanting more. So listen up dear readers, find the time, make the change, get in gear and find this album before the crawling chaos consumes us all.

Cheap n' Cheerful Part Two

For my next lens test, I am reviewing something of a mystery. It's a lens by JC Penney. For those not in the US, JC Penney was a mid-tier department store that used to sell more than just clothes. They were successful enough in the 70s to sell re-branded camera gear, ranging from the Big Three (Pentax, Nikon and Canon) to numerous smaller ones (Mamiya 35mm SLRs.) Their pull in the photographic world is long gone, but examples of their presence still remain.

This 135mm f/2.8 lens for example:

I picked this lens up on eBay some years ago, in unused condition, for less than 5$US. I've used it here and there, always pleased with the results, but never really delving into its capabilities until now.

For starters, it's a solid chunk of metal and glass. The front rim claims "coated optics" (Yeah, but coated with what?) and comes with a built in retractable hood which slides into place with a pleasing sound. A slight twist of the hood locks it into place, a neat touch on a budget lens.

JC Penney didn't make this lens, but tracking down who did is a mystery worthy of Sherlock Holmes.

I've read dozens of articles claiming it was originally made by Nikon/Albinar/Tokina/Sigma/etc. but no authoritative links backing anything up. After hours of reading I'd come no closer to finding out the real manufacturer. It's virtually identical to the Albinar, but Albinar itself was merely a reseller of other lenses, it never made their own, so that's no help.

Regardless of who made the lens, it's a cracking good one. For reasons I'm unclear on, 135mm f/2.8 lenses were easy to make back then with good contrast and sharpness. Here are examples from this lens both full shots, and 100 percent crops. Same rules applied to this shoot as did the Tamron one.

While the Tamron lens is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful lenses I've ever seen, the JC Penney one is better built and has a nicer feel to the focusing.

Post Tamron Len Review

These are just some thoughts on the lens I reviewed below. I'd been meaning to post them earlier, but life gets in the way of a hobby sometimes.

The focus is easy to turn, too easy, there is a sense that the lens will fall out of focus when the camera shifts, but it hasn't happened, at least not yet. The advantage of the free turning focus is you can track a subject with just one finger, and support the lens with the rest of that hand, although I do not shoot video (and probably never will, such things require a completely different skill set) I suspect this lens would be ideal for such a task.

I will be posting more lens reviews in the coming month, starting with another 135mm lens.

Stay tuned.

Cheap 'n Cheerful Lens Review

Since I have been able to acquire my favourite Black and White film, I've wanted to use more manual focus lenses on the Nikon F3HP. Trouble is (or was) that I had only a few manual focus lenses. So off to eBay to find some cheap n' cheerful (under 20$ US) lenses to test and shoot with.

Over the 40 some-odd years the Nikon F mount has been around, hundreds of no-name makers have put out lenses in that mount. I thought it would be fun to find some of those no-name brands, long forgotten, and put them through their paces.

I've not been successful in that regards.

What I have fouond, however, are some very nice well-known brand lenses. Starting with Tamron.

I've actually had this one for some time now, but I didn't have a proper mount for it. Way back when, Tamron had a brilliant strategy, rather than make lenses for each mount (Canon FD, Nikon F, Pentax K, Minolta MD, etc) and increase production costs, make one lens with a universal mount, then sell special mounts for each camera. Thus, Tamron's Adaptall mount was born.

This 135mm f/2.8 lens was bought for pennies (well under 5$ US) because it was advertised with a Canon FD mount. FD mounts are obsolete these days (Canon switched to EF and to a lesser extent, EF-S) and converting them to modern digital Canons is somewhat problematic, so FD lenses languish in the dustbin of history and as such are dirt cheap on eBay. But since it was an Adaptall mount, off the FD mount went, on went the F mount and the lens could have a new life. For starters, look at this lens, it's a work of art:

The lettering and distance lines are of a beautiful font rendered in a delicate shade of blue. The feet markings are in orange, easily distinguishable from the meters, the silver of the lens stands out and brings something special to the look. The knurled focus ring has the perfect amount of grip and the built in lens hood snaps in place with satisfaction. In short, this lens is a work of art. I wish modern lenses looked half as good as this one does.

But a stunning lens is nothing without the sharpness and clarity to back it up. Thus, a test was born.

In order to test the lens against the other ones I have, the test needed to be fair, and repeatable. All elements had to be identical, from lighting down to subject matter. For all my Cheap 'n Cheerful lens tests, the following parameters were in effect:

Nikon D2x

ISO 100

F/11

1/5 sec shutter speed

Two 150 watt hot lights on full burn

Xevoz Quick Slinger toy.

No PhotoShop or other alternations have been done to the subject. What you see, in terms of clarity and sharpness and all other factors, is what you get.

First image here, the full shot:

And here is a 100% crop of the above image:

Tamron produced this lens from 1976 through 1979. When it was introduced, the initial price (in Japan) was 24,000 yen, this (roughly) translates to 500$ US today. So the depreciation value is pretty much total. Given this was long before any kind of special coatings or optical tricks, or even computer aided design, the lens holds its own for sharpness and colour rendition. Now this is a "laboratory" experiment, under controlled conditions, and eventually this will only be used on film cameras, where the grain of the film will come into play, as well as the weather and so forth. BUt I am pleased with the lens, very pleased, and am actively seeking out other Tamron Adaptall lenses.

Cheers!