tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-75653951856269335752024-03-12T19:30:59.501-07:00Freddies ClipRantsDamp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.comBlogger70125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-60681125750320977802017-08-29T15:07:00.001-07:002017-08-30T12:53:39.515-07:00CaNikon and The Future The Middle Offer<p dir="ltr">The trouble for the big brands is that they won't be able to sell volume for long. Low range conpacts are missing from them now and even the Nikon 1 system bit the dust this month. Why ? Mobile phones and action cam's are taking over, and creeping up the ranks of camera quality.</p>
<p dir="ltr">When our second kid was at kindergarten, nearly all the mommies or pappas appeared with a DSLR slung round their neck at parties or sports day. Mostly an entry level Canon or D3000 with a kit do it all wide to mid zoom. That was 2009-2011. Then suddenly in 2012 they had left them at home and it was qaulity mobiles taking the snaps. The change was yes mobile phone cameras became somewhat better, but that the value of a photo changed from being a private memory on a chip, hard drive or printed album, to being one shared to friends, family and often all-an-sundry on social media. Suddenly the value of a really sharp peripheral field and high ISO were whiped away. The mobile became the take everywhere, and the action-mini-cam' the absokute go and do anything, anywhere. For an average DSLR diving house perspex body you can get two or three top end GoPro kits.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Quality hss also crept up. For FB, Insta' and Snap' mobile quality is going to be just fine and has been for a long time. High contrast, highly sharpened images out of mobiles are then compressed on the web sources to very few megapixels on screen indeed. The impact comes from a punchy shot, colour or very often timelyness. First to publish. First to share. It happened right now. Here is our special moment, streamed live. Also mobile phônés are a little less intimidating thanan up to eye camera. Frankly taking peoplé shots has changed for ever. Both candid and posed.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b><i>Can Mobiles Ever Take Overr From 'Quality' Cameras? </i></b></p>
<p dir="ltr">You cannae defy the laws of optics captain....mobiles have a limitation in three areas - high iso performance, nice blurry backgrounds and of course zooming without becoming a scene from Minecraft. Back up here on all these points. Firstly many mobiles have an 'old money' focal legnth of 35mm - a nice street shot, close portrait and landscape lens size. In fact just the type of lens which adorns and adores a typical mFT camera as part of a set of primes for keener photographers, and often it becomes the most used lens. Secondly you can take amazingly DEEP depth of field images from close up with out having a really tiny aperture. You are turning a guffawing and patronising deswceitopn of a fundamental shortcoming into a fundamental advantage. Thirdly just like stock galleries, social media likes bright images, not subtle shades of shadowy brown from a noiseless full frame, every pixel peeped upon. </p>
<p dir="ltr">You maybe cannot defy the laws of physics with a tiny glass lens set up, but you can make up for the shorcomings in post, or now first pass, in-camera-processing. Many top end phone cam's have twin cams now, with one being used to either create a simultanious out-of-focus background or more fancy detection of depth and range by parallax interpolations. Thus blurry backgrounds, once a crappy 'post' effect with a vignette, are now getting good and soon you will need to be an expert to tell the difference between an ( on line) image from a quality f1.8 dslr /milc and a mobile for the same field of view ie usually 35 mm. The time is nearing when 'bpkeh' images will be only discernably different by experts, and the old formats of album, litho plate art book and enlargements on the walls are evapourating in the digital age. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Zoom too could be getting better- there are bound to be more attempts at those cam-phones with an optical zoom, but in the meantime we will see interpolation playing a bigger role in processing. You've seen CSI, can you enhance that security cam frame ? . We also have the floating sensor 'pixel shift' tehcnology coming to small cameras. Here we literally make a more detailed picture by moving the chip around to take many pictures very quickly. Combined the last two could make for a 28 - 100 mm walk around camera in a phone, and add a telescopic zoom with independently moving lens elements, and who knows ? 20 - 400mm with a quality fine for facebook, or even the cover of vogue?</p>
<p dir="ltr">All those years when D3 and D700 owners never knew they should not be making money publishing images in fashion magazines or for giant billboards because they had less than 12 mpx ! Well now 4k video with frame grab is all the rage, and those frame grabs have been used for high qaulity litho covers for famous glossy magazines.....in their glorious 8 mpx! Suddenly a native 8mpx sensor with a 35 mm lens becomes a useful tool in the right hands for film, at a nice focal lenght,  and frame grab. No cropping no interpolation from a factor of eight. OOC.</p>
<p dir="ltr">A but low light performance - small sensors are rubbish noisy and absolutely awful when you allow the ISO to rise above base. Well if we use 4K as a selling point and move back to 8 mpx sensors as above, then you can get much better iso due to the noise to signal being reduced. Dynamic range, ie where highlights become blocky or shadows pure black in mobiles has been an issue, and the same approachb of a move to 4K branding could help wing us back from 41 mpx on a sensor smaller than your little finger nail.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b><i>A Declining Differential</i></b></p>
<p dir="ltr">The demise of the Nikon 1 system shows that the differential for quality cameras people will buy for size and convenience, or generally their photographic and social media mores, needs to be bigger over mobile phone cams. Top end mobiles are now more expensive than entry level dslrs and compete with them for wallet space or credit repayments on a more frequent basis. However when you get below f3.5 in general use lenses ( below 200 mm eq) to faster glass, the costs of milc and dslr systems rockets.</p>
<p dir="ltr">This is the last mexican stand off then between essentially CaNikon and the consumer market. Do the manufacturers stick to their now age old sell with a kit lens, make much more margin later on the faster lens upgrades ? This could see them shot down and left with only the Pro and serious hobbiest markets. Do the consumets gravitate to mobiles with better cams and strap on telephoto lenses, and pay over a grand a pop ? Or do the main marques admit defeat in the bottom end dslr market, and small sensor compact markets and regroup to offer the consumer faster lenses with their initial purchase? Here you put the cart behind the horse again because you need good, fast glass, but can upgrade body later. </p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>The Necessary Gap in the Market</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">With Samsung pulled out, Fujifilm and Leica are the only ones offering faster f stop packaged lenses as standard on decent sized sensor milcs and fixed lens cameras,  with Panasonic offering the wonderful LX100 as a spanner in the works for both Nikon with their inferior one system cam at that focal range, and the 'G' enthusiast compacts from Canon. In my opinion faster glass on larger than one inch sensors up to full frame as packaged is the way to go if you want to keep the quality differential and get consumers buying into your branded systems, or higher end compacts with fixed lenses. Otherwise mobile phones and action cams are going to eat away not only at that entry to brand level, but in the lucrative upgrade. Why 'invest' in a series of f1.8 primes or a fabulous f2.8 pro zoom for two or three grand, when you 'need' the latest mobile which you buy every 2 years now? </p>
<p dir="ltr">By the mid eighties all the manufacturers offered their 35mm SLRs with a sub f2.8 'nifty fifty' 50mm packaged lens, and sub f2.2 35mm and portrait lenses of 90 or 120mm were emminently affordable. Zooms were hideous and heavy. Birders and sports pros bought big whites with manual focus back then too. Now decent mFT prime lenses cost more than the bodies, and the zooms are pro pocket prices. Outside gaurantee, or with any dents voiding said gaurantee, modern AF zooms can be a liability to repair too. It's become an expensive business for the punter, with sales declining for a decade, just picking up now, but being driven by Asian sales. </p>
<p dir="ltr">We see a spate of 'craft brewed' manual focus prime and speciality bokeh lenses popping up, and three non major manufacturers entering mFT, one using ironically, the Kodak brand. That brand passed in  a protracted death, at one point making great CCD sensors for the time and some half decent P&S conpacts before mobiles came in. Once a huge multinational, they shrivelled and died by not being ablento keep up with technology and the qaulity demands laid out by their OEM customers and the consumer. Woolworth's too. Big brands falling hard. Some say Pentax is next, but some may need to oook at their own camera bag to see a dinosaur.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Essentially the big brands stand at their own Kodak moment, with a last rise in sales from baby boomers retiring or passing their last ever mortgage payment and treating themselves. Asia is the new growth market and they have no relation to CaNikons western economy based mirrored offerings. The newly afluent were happy to buy the now myriad of retro looking MILCs when they could offer a differential and a 'cognicenti' image. But even like those DSLRs hanging round the mums' decks they could evapourate as mobiles get better and command a higher price for their top models with the latest and best cameras. </p>
<p dir="ltr">You could say that you can't get a Ferrari for the price of an escort. However today's focus offers a very refined driving experience for actually a more affordable price than an 80s escort. Fast glass is only really difficult to get right in zoom lenses, which dominate the levered income models for most of the main DSLR margues if not all. You can of course lessen the stretch of a zoom and then also make it fully motorised so all elements can move independently as the focal length changes. Then you can pack in a better f stop. But good primes need not cost the earth. And landscape or architectural photograpers, and even some portaitists would find manual focus is no big issue for them. Let the price come down so the quality of image creation increases per buck and makes system cameras with or without flippy up mirrors more relevant for the younger generations who will shape the future market.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br></p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-17793383625477736762017-04-25T07:03:00.000-07:002017-04-25T07:03:12.147-07:00The LX200 .....Loading....Loading....It really shouldn't be a surprise that the LX100, which came as a thunder bolt to the rather nichey enthusiasts compact market. A true wonder of shoe horning and mischievous use of an mFT sensor, something which I and many others forsaw years ago.<br />
<br />
Where this camera should have placed is in the professional compact market, which is basically anything a pro will take as a back up camera and use for more candid or photo journalist work, or when taking a big camera would be impractical or attract the wrong sort of attention. That includes these days some serious work being done on top end Android and iPhones, so really<b><i> image value</i></b> counts more than absolute<i><b> technical image quality</b></i>.<br />
<br />
Surely then the LX100 takes better shots than say an Olympus PEN of 1965 vintage, used by some of the true greats of the genre of candid, political leader imagery? What is pro-quality ? It can be argued that even medium format 120 Ektachrome shots are less than the equivalent 20mpx, and mid end lenses can't actually resolve below 12 on APSC!<br />
<br />
Anyway, there are some features pros 'need' like a large buffer and outstanding autofocus apparently, funny how any of them made a living with thumb winder levers and 36 frames per reel in days of film. Pros though have always made their true living in the after work it has to be said, in terms of everything from choosing the coolest frame on a set of contact prints to burning in the salient areas for high contrast impact. So yes pros these days want high image quality OOC so that any lossy or other wise subtractive after effects don't influence the final output, which is likely to be printed at only 330 dpi anyway if you are lucky, or shown as a fragment on a 1080 resolution screen.<br />
<br />
The LX100 seems to have attracted controversy and 'haters' from the word go. Some of them had pretty thin profiles on the chat rooms at DP review and elsewhere it has to be said, and perhaps there was some outright comercial trolling going on from areas which would rather no have such a plumb camera with such a fast lens at such a good price point. There are though enough 'flamers' out there looking to comfort their older purchases or appear like geek gods that this is unlikely., but I was surprised how much negative buzz the camera attracted and how several of the negative threads include no images from the OP nor on their profile!!<br />
<br />
For a travel camera you are generally looking for something which does the wide to mid end admirably and you are able to live with some compromises. In the good old days, and for many ILC compact users today, that means planting a 35mm lens on and enjoying a jacket pocket sized camera which could be hidden from Genoa's worst street thieves, known to grapple SLR owners to the ground by their camera straps! Shoving a zoom with a bit of reach ( and a crop zoom) plus image stab' meant that cameras like this and some of the Canon G's are much more than an ILC with a 35 despite being smaller!<br />
<br />
<br />
<h3>
<br />Expectations and Wish Lists for the LX200</h3>
<br />
There is some debate as to whether Panasonic will launch the 200 or not - given they came with the LX15 - but just as the LX100 came as a pleasant surprise I reckon that they will be launching one this autumn or latest at consumer electronics shows in the spring 2018.<br />
<br />
They can afford to take their time. The camera was a little GH3 in some of its workings but with the wow factor of 4K video, which technically is not all that difficult. So our first expectation can be that there will be some exciting elements in the 200, while also it will pull from established Panny technology.<br />
<br />
Here I think we will see a crop factor to the mFT 20 mpx chips, because is it not the case that it is a cropped 16 now? Or a 14mpx mFT sensor? Now this doesn't really help 4k much, because it is a compression to 8mpx per frame so the more in, the more processing and resulting heat in those hard coded compression circuits.<br />
<br />
20 Mpx though means that the alternative crop aspect ratios will perform better for stills though, and that any application of digital zoom will be far superior in this new outing for the 'hundred' series LX<br />
<br />
Upgrading to a newer sensor may also bring better high ISO performance, which has been criticised with 1600 quoted as the top 'workable'. There may also be some better colour rendering and better microcontrast, but the main issue with all this technical chip IQ improvements will be the resolving power of the lens, and the buffering and write to SD ability of the wee black box itself.<br />
<br />
A lens upgrade is 'demanded' by the sceptics and pixel peepers who see the soft edges wide opened and also point to the lens's 'front focus' problem. These are to my mind non issues in the 200 - the latter was/is an annoying foible in landscape fotography which can be worked round in several ways, the former is well, what do you expect? A lens as good as the 'pro' level mFT wide end zooms? It is a compromise not worth adding extra size to the camera snout over imho.<br />
<br />
The next upgrades which are 'anticipated', or rather would be on the project punch list if this was a crowd funded camera, are to do with the wee screen at the back. To me the ethos of this camera is that you have far more control over how you actually capture and you will most likely not just be sitting in a P modus, you will be flicking around. The screen being a 2010 vintage type is not an issue , it is a place to do menus and check an image quickly for sharpness, composition and so on. But there are whole armies of photographers out there who just must have a tilting screen so they can get those catwalk shots from above the madding crowd, or capture that bee on that flower on the ground because no bee has ever pollinated a daisy before nor will ever again. Once in a life time that you have to be able to tilt, and live with an extra chunk of plastic box and a very big, vulnerable mechanical system to go wrong or get damaged. No, the screen for me can just have touch ability for menus and focus point as an upgrade.<br />
<br />
One thing I do expect is an upgrade in the price though. The camera sold more initially than anticipated, going onto back order in some outlets, but there are rumours that it is just a steady seller and that Canon has stolen its' muster. I expect that they will use a price hike to sell some units of the LX100 out in the supply chain and make way for the new on as the display model and soon, only one available.<br />
<br />
Now here I come to my own point, that Panasonic should sod the casual photographer who thinks they could maybe go pro, or the enthusiast who wants great value for money, and get this camera to really work at pro level. This would mean a sharper lens and something cool like weather resistance. In fact why not just make as near to the 12-35 as possible and shoe horn it down as a collapsing lens ? Then you have a camera which could retail for maybe three times the current list prices for the LX100 on the internet shops. It is a margin- volume trade off though, but that is where their once rich adoptive child, Leica, still play of course when they are left to their own devices.<br />
<br />
I expect rather that the price point will be up around 15% over the launch price in 2014, and that the camera will have a touch screen, 16 mpx effective sensor, touch screen, better EVF and some form of connectivity to microphones and headphones since the 4K is so darned good. Also I think we will see what all enthusiasts 'hate' but which always helps sell more units to 'dumb people' who want to take fireworks. In this I think we will see more on the in camera pre-effects, such as with focusing and digital bokeh - waf-fer thin deh-oah- eff monsieur Creosote? Soft focus, high key photos?<br />
<br />
To bore you all then I hope that the camera is more about internal evolution rather than external, bulky revolution. There will be changes and they will be for the better and there will be of course an LX200 You read it here, April 25 , 2017!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-38324655135946212872016-08-29T23:28:00.001-07:002016-08-29T23:28:42.217-07:00Acer Iconia A1 - Fixes for Start Up Freeze<p dir="ltr">Acer managed to pull off a fantastic little product, especially if you managed to get a 16GB 810 on offer for less than half the price of an iPad mini.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However despite the quad core processor and all that on SSD board memory, they are a little vulnerable to 'stack height' and virtual memory issues.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The best way to avoid these and thus crashes and freezing on start up, is to keep at least 1.2 GB free. When cleaning out then, aim to free up 2.2 gig to give some cushion time to your next check. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Clear out includes gong throiugh apps and deleting memory used for each, but also you can find otjer, large yet hidden folders through the memory menu on settings. Here i found 330 mb for Viber which did not show on the app' settings. deleted withoit any trauma. Noticed of course that images was the big baddie, over 9 gig. Many chat apps store images and videos, so worth chosing out that option if possible or cleaning often.</p>
<p dir="ltr">My tablet had become so full that there was not enough stack and virtual to start up properly. It hung on the first Acer logo screen. This can mean worse news- a corrupted boot sector, which then entails a reboot of the ROM base,  factory settings, delete everything to reboot. </p>
<p dir="ltr">However øuckily in my case I could " Unix" start with the volume control up held in, then choose 'fastboot' which allowed the machine to start but at a lower memory use, thus I bought time to check it was otherwise workijng såand discover jsut how muhc memory i was wasting !<br>
w to enter Acer Iconia Tab 8 A1-840 Recovery Mode, Hard reset (Wipe) and Pattern Unlock.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Recovery Mode Acer Iconia Tab 8 A1-840</p>
<p dir="ltr">Turn off the devicePress and hold Volume UP keyKeep pressing Volume Up key then Press and hold Power key about 5 seconds then release itKeep press volume up key until the screen turns on then you will see Recovery modeUse Volume keys to select MenuUse Power key to Confirm.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Try Fastboot first, rewstarting on the top power button only. Firs boot may be a little slow, or it maybe worth both carghjng the device and letting it stand off for 20 mins.s<br>
See if you casn gwet it to work before then going through clear all files and then back to use reboot to affect a factory reset, where the original ROM is loaded and should fix all the boot aectoe issues. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Having cleaned out memory, try restarting with a couple of minutes pause while off. The first full restart ,may takr longer than usual beforee you think that it is atill frozen.<br></p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-66047564213371920042016-08-14T14:30:00.000-07:002016-08-14T14:30:11.483-07:00Custom Settings and TIps for the E-450 revisitedI did a <a href="https://olympe450rants.blogspot.no/2010/11/top-custom-settings-for-olympus-e450.html#comment-form" target="_blank">blog a while ago on custom settings for the E-450</a> which got a 'whole bunch of hits' over time and really I needed to add a couple of comments or updates to it.<br />
<br />
One repeating issue is unsharp images, with users blaming the kit lenses - Olympus kit lenses may be plasticy, but they are far higher quality than Canikons for their period. Yes there are bad, late friday shipped examples, but these are few and far between. Read on to seehow to solve soft, unsharp image output.<br />
<br />
<b>1) The Vrontiak Files. The Raw and the Cooked.</b><br />
<br />
His (or hers) settings are basically up +1 on the Sharp , Contrast and Gradation, but the latter can be left on Auto quite happily.<br /><br />
In addenum to this though I would say do not pump up the saturation, leave it zero, or even drop it in scenes with a lot of grass, foliage or greens. Oly does them nasty in their colourspace, which favours wonderful blues and flattering skin tones in stead (R B with nasty G)<br />
<br />
Olympus has a great JPEG engine in this particular camera to which these vrontiak settings help make OOC images instantly publishable, but remember if you shoot RAW ORF files, then Olympus Viewer will actually impose these settings on the preview you see and 'developed' jpegs,. I think there is a work around for this in fact, or you can use a non native editor or RAW developer which accepts ORFs.<br />
<br />
<b>2) Shoot Cooked and Keep it Cold - Jpeg is fine, natural , Base ISO</b><br />
<br />
Just as a follow up to 1, really a sub point but you should just really reserve RAW for finer landscapes, or portraits in low light or high contrast- in my honest opinion you will just waste card space and your own time processing general shots from RAW instead of allowing Olympus to make its rather fine JPEGs as you go. All of the work I have published to print media, and that includes litho colour separation, has been in jpegs and some of them are reduced pixel size to help the guys on the other end with an old mac or a heavy Heidelberg laser cut queu.<br />
<br />
Keeping it cold though means not going above ISO 200 for anything which is going to be of artistic value or in quality print. Also as mentioned above, turn off or down saturation, and shoot always in NATURAL mode or even MUTED when you have a lot of light and any greens or reds.<br />
<br />
RAW is by no means a total waste of time by any means- there is a lot more detail in the shadows and three quarter (darkish) tones, a bit better tonal depth through the range and a little more general detail and microcontrast to be had from a USM in a good editor. Hightlighs seem to blow when the sensor decides anyway, but yes there is some sublteties to be had for landscapes and finer portraits.<br />
<br />
However as soon as you talk about batch processing then you are back to sending your film off to a cheap lab who ran a single, first frame test shot before printing from the negatives and made your whole roll look mediocre. You are not big and clever batch processing a hundred, random and varied images dropped off your card. If you are not at a very controlled shoot, in very constant light then each and every image needs its own RAW developing., If you use oly viewer to develop RAWs to nice, easy to work on JPEGs then you are also fooling yourself a bit because it is very similar to their incamera, first pass hard programmed jpg engine.<br />
<br />
<b>3) Shoot Fast and Delay in Low Light- Use Shutter Priority and Mirror Lock Up Delay</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
For some reason the real bug bear of this camera even for family snap shots is camera shake, and this is in part down to it not being super ergonomic, but also that it has one hell of an agricultural mirror mechanism.<br />
<br />
Also to make matters worse, the P mode selects a slower shutter than is really optimal, You can work round this by using the wheel in P mode, but really it is a pain. <b>In good light I shoot now minimum 320th using only S mode </b>and have found that the number of sharp images where I can quibble about composition or what is in focus<b> has gone up to 90% from around 60%. </b>I really did think my kit lenses were nearing their pensionable age, and this was just not true, it is my own shakey hand and the little ladies slappy tongue to blame<br />
<br />
I find for anything with significant movement needs a 500th btw. Remember at base 200 ISO there is still a lot of detail in the shadows of a FINE; LARGE jpg and more to hank out if you insist on RAW. Underexposed shots which are sharp are usually better than soft right exposed or of course, lots of blownm blocky highlights.<br />
<br />
Amazingly for an entry level camera, it has variable mirror lock up, delayed by 2 or 5 secs if i remember right, I have it on 2 secs. Toggle to the Drive mode and you will find a black diamond appear to the right of the usual single frame shot rectangel. This helps dampen things down in low light or slow shutter speed otherwise. On a light tripod you may also want to use timer with this function, which will allow vibrations from your touching the camera to die down too. A remote is a nicer option but sometimes you just want to look and press the god dammed button!<br />
<br />
<b>4) Turn on centre Spot Focus only, and Centre Weighted Metering</b><br />
<b><br /></b>
For photos of a subject or a main light area central to a landscape, select centre weighted metering, which is very good in Oly. You can always bracket exposures manually on the +/- button and wheel or automatically, and use a bit of liveview with historgram to check for blow highlights, or heavy shadows.<br />
<br />
Centre PD AF spot focus is just a lot more reliable, and intuitive. Okay it is 1995 era technology, but it works. Remember focus, re-compose before 51 point tracking? Well that is my every day camera I am sorry to say and also, a tad nostalgic for.<br />
<b><i><br /></i></b>
<b><i>PITA Warning!!! </i></b> You need to set the metering and focus point for the oridnary modes SPAAutoM one by one, and sometimes it seems to 'forget' them.<br />
<br />
You can also use the AE button on the back to lock focus, which is useful in various situations like 'simulated macro' using a telefoto or cropping, and if you are waiting for a shot of a sports competitor are a particular spot and have to get it right, prefocusing and leaving it locked with at least f5.6 will solve your challenge of yeah, slightly leisurely focus capture and the risk of back focusing in the heat of the moment. See last blog.<br />
<br />
<b>5) Upgrading to Better Glass?</b><br />
<br />
You are kidding me right? I mean Olympus E system die hards are just that, they think their fast glass, two zooms and a macro are worth their weight in gold still, and hope to sell them at about 70% new price to new OMD users.<br />
<br />
Joking aside, now I do see that some of the SWD glass is coming down in price as people themselves have upgraded to OMD, and find the lenses are not that fast to focus and are a little clumsy with the adapter an' all, on the new and petite bodies. I see 12-60s now advertised in VGC occiasionally for under 300€ which is an acceptable price for an old lens of indescrimate useage, from a dead system.<br />
<br />
Bodies for E system cameras, bar the E 5, are literally being given away and the going street price for a 450 or 420 is only about €80 with one kit lens.<br />
<br />
However, there are bound to be some folk getting rid of the 14-54 Mrk II which is a nice, CAF optimised lens for a good price, and no doubt folk will be dumping their SWD glass soon for deposits on what ever takes their fancy and works above ISO 400. Olympus E system tends to have an older user base in the west, who like me, had OMs, and they have hung onto their system longer than whipper snappers who now dump nice little MILCs with kit lenses for fifty bucks after a year or two. Soon all but E5 body owners will most likely jump ship, so I predict a steady decline in used prices of the better glass.<br />
<br />
An e450 with the better glass is just a really nice, neat system to have for brighter, photo friendly days, but you have to weigh up say paying €600 euros for two to three pro level, used and aged lenses versus a down payment on a now semi pro level, full frame like the sony's, the Pentax K1 or the Nikon hundred FX cameras.<br />
<br />
<br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-25405994561895344382016-08-12T04:51:00.003-07:002016-08-12T04:51:43.543-07:00The Joys and Challenges of Yachting Photography<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-J1dT0R9TM4M/V6nrAJmdm7I/AAAAAAAAIRQ/wpZrjRK9rkUQaynDxihKrVJHAI_2sAC5gCLcB/s1600/P8055309_2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="298" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-J1dT0R9TM4M/V6nrAJmdm7I/AAAAAAAAIRQ/wpZrjRK9rkUQaynDxihKrVJHAI_2sAC5gCLcB/s400/P8055309_2.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
Photographing boats and races is another kind of obvious side hobby, and indeed you can read more on my sailing exploits and ponderings themselves at Lost Sea Soul. I have enjoyed taking shots of regattas but often yearned rather to be out sailing in those very regattas. Last weekend I had the opportunity to have my cake and eat it, being out in a RIB one day down the Norwegian "Riviera" and then crewing on a 12mR the other.<br />
<br />
It reminded me of the challenges of both disciplines - team work, stregnth and wisdom on the one while a sense for a composition and wisdom on the camera side.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HefeCc9B8ww/V6ntitM5xLI/AAAAAAAAIRY/vN_FjD8Ou_ECc5DBHB0eqQ-5JA4DmX5vwCLcB/s1600/P8055561_3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="197" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-HefeCc9B8ww/V6ntitM5xLI/AAAAAAAAIRY/vN_FjD8Ou_ECc5DBHB0eqQ-5JA4DmX5vwCLcB/s320/P8055561_3.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
The biggest challenge in sailing photography to me is not having a water resistant camera. For others it is likely to be getting close enough to the action or being able to predict when the most exciting and interesting shots can be captured. The first is fixable with either a different camera system, Pentax and Olympus offering mid end weather sealed systems, while on the other, asking some spectators or race organisers what is going to happen can solve problems of where to stand on the shore, or where to go on the water in a motor boat to catch those shots.<br />
<br />
My other challenge is not really my own- it is the percieved need for new fangled stuff all the time and how much more "obsolete" camera bodies are considered these days after they are but a few years old. When i started SLR 35mm photography, you would see a lot of older folk with good Nikons and Canons from the early 70s slung around their necks, seperate light meter round their wrists. There was also the OM revolution and the followers at Pentax and Ricoh. All before we went all "electronic operating system" and then much worse, APS film cameras were pushed onto the market to the detriment of photography in general. These days many hobby photographers think it laughable that I persist with a body launched 7 or 8 years ago, but as I stated before, it is way in excess of what was available to me in the 1980s.<br />
<br />
Main system equipment aside, what do you need for a good day's yattin' phottin'?<br />
<br />
Firstly you don't necessarily need a boat or loan of a boat. You do then need to be within reasonable distance of sailing, and that means either knowing that the racing is at least in part, going to come near land, or positioning yourself at a natural narrows where boats have to sail regardless. Also another alternative is as I found out, to use local route ferries or tourist boats when racing or other 'muster regattas' are on, such as over to the Isle of Wight, Kilcreggan on the Clyde, Syndey Harbour or San Francisco bay area. How I cursed not having a good camera on the way past Alcatraz when a rather infamous I 14 sailor, "The Captain" Came shooting past the "Rock" in his high performance dinghy, bright spinnaker resonant in the mute californian colours.<br />
<br />
Lens choice, given that you have them. Firstly for dock side photting a 28mm eq zoom or prime is quite sufficient and unlike the wider end, does not distort perspective so much on yachts that you become very aware of the wide treatment. For example - 28mm eq<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rLiuNxnTEOg/V62gfaiilCI/AAAAAAAAIRo/ORjAvML_OGI1cl_RG2amhIh3ikKHjUeqgCLcB/s1600/P8055403_2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-rLiuNxnTEOg/V62gfaiilCI/AAAAAAAAIRo/ORjAvML_OGI1cl_RG2amhIh3ikKHjUeqgCLcB/s320/P8055403_2.jpg" width="240" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
A typical kit zoom in the range 28-85mm eq ff, will provide for on shore images not only dockside, and passing boats close by on the wide end, but what I really personally like and that is "in context" shots of boats in their often beautiful or interesting seaside land- or town -scapes. At the long end you will get kind of cut off shots though of boats racing at distances of a few hundred yards, which are neither between having enough background to give context nor enough detail to be a photo of a boat. The same will be true of primes in the eq nifty fifty 50mm to portrait semi telefoto, but the added speed of a fast prime at 120mm to say 150mm can make up for lack of composition freedom in capturing detail shots when boats are near enough.<br />
<br />
When I say detail shots, this is often in the sailing magazines close enough to recognise crew members, which helps sell copy or gives an otherwise anonymous top competition boat, a relevant human face, such as the instantly recognisable handsome profile of Sir Ben Ainsley. Alternatively, they can be technical shots, which show either nice detail on a wooden boat, the motion of the boat in the sea, or particular action or mishap sequences. In harbour the "wide to mid" zoom will suffice, but for shots at greater distances you need to go up to higher telefoto ranges for both detail shots, and whole boat shots when they are further away up the racing course.<br />
<br />
At the telephoto end, I have looked at my own EXIF focal mm, and some other folks on and off the water. From the land, I use quite a lot of 300mm for boats sailing on their race courses, but once out in a boat I find that the shots are split three ways in fact:<br />
<br />
<b>Whole boat circa 85mm</b><br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JUWrL49qxYE/V62jgvrODiI/AAAAAAAAIR0/3ElTwmqEWtEjmeWTULv3QP62QL1rKQNmgCLcB/s1600/P8055548_3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-JUWrL49qxYE/V62jgvrODiI/AAAAAAAAIR0/3ElTwmqEWtEjmeWTULv3QP62QL1rKQNmgCLcB/s320/P8055548_3.jpg" width="239" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
cropped action in context 100-120<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-l7_2aCwc1SM/V62jqyx3miI/AAAAAAAAIR4/Tpn623ULm6sQuV2ibVlmMH6ljEslsbd4ACLcB/s1600/P8055552_24.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-l7_2aCwc1SM/V62jqyx3miI/AAAAAAAAIR4/Tpn623ULm6sQuV2ibVlmMH6ljEslsbd4ACLcB/s320/P8055552_24.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
Close up of action and crew 200- 220<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-in5tVp1vwV8/V62j1wk9_ZI/AAAAAAAAIR8/WksgtV0w3uAbETZ3a63XwehRgFCYnc0sQCLcB/s1600/P8055591_3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="317" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-in5tVp1vwV8/V62j1wk9_ZI/AAAAAAAAIR8/WksgtV0w3uAbETZ3a63XwehRgFCYnc0sQCLcB/s320/P8055591_3.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
The last shot is a bit misleading probably taken at about 80 actually, because we could drive close to them since they had finished racing and were enjoying the spinnaker run to the harbour. But usually this type of close up would be on the race course, keeping a respectful distance at 200mm approx. More on positioning and courtesay later.<br />
<br />
I find the longer end off shore is pretty unworkable above 220mm because you usually are bobbing about in a RIB or small boat, so framing shots becomes difficult as can even getting focus on the boat rather than fore or back ground points. With f stops on my kit being lower, the shutter speed drops too low on programme, or the images get too dark on S, or worse, if you have forgotten auto ISO then it bumps up high. <br />
<br />
I recommend using shutter prioirty at base ISO, there is usually more light than you think at first and shadows and quarter tones can be lifted in post. Shutter speed wise, I find that I cannot get sharp images by in large at under 1/320th and prefer at least 1/500th. Remember if you have a fast lens that this will be pushing the aperture more open and reducing your depth of field, which can be an issue for example here :<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i7NSN8SgOxU/V62loDK8DUI/AAAAAAAAISM/UNSMra0jqakVi1Aedk9gDFhw6gxqPELXACLcB/s1600/P8055415_3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i7NSN8SgOxU/V62loDK8DUI/AAAAAAAAISM/UNSMra0jqakVi1Aedk9gDFhw6gxqPELXACLcB/s320/P8055415_3.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<i>If you look closely, you can see that the depth of field is quite shallow and the nice, shiny chrome winches are out of focus, while the hatch is sharp. Be aware to too thin a DOF with boats.</i><br />
<i><br /></i>
On exposure and light conditions, the vast majority of boats white or light coloured sails and also a large number have white hulls these days, and even ye olde varnished hulls reflect a lot of light. Also as mentioned there is a lot more light around at sea because so much reflects up from the water. I prefer to use a polarising filter which reduces reflections and total, scattered light from the sea and therefore that kind of odd brighter blue in images from the sea. This helps with texture of the sea, while also helping tone down the white of hulls and sails allowing more detail to come out. White, blocky hulls and sails detract from photos IMHO and a polarising filter is a good means to vastly reduce this glare, while maintaining a balanced exposure.<br />
<br />
Of course a digital optimised polarising filter reduces the scene by up to -2EV. Alternatively a ND (neutral density) -0.5 or -1.0 EV filter can be used to achieve some of the effect, and also open the aperture up just a little more to get thinner DOF on very bright days, when you want to throw the background.<br />
<br />
Once on the water, in a small boat, it is pretty desirable not to change lens because no matter how waterproof the camera is, when the body cavity is exposed, it is highly vulnerable to water, and salt water is so much more dangerous. Filters can also be fiddely to mount while bobbing about, which is another advantage of a polarising filter because you can vary the darkness or density by rotating it. Also given my tips based on years of photting myself and recent EXIF checks on some 'pro' flickr images, it is best to have a zoom lens with a range of around 80 to 250mm, and not change lenses. "Big Whites" or those "Bigma" long telefotos with sub f5.6 apertures, are the reserve of either land based photting or being on quite a substantial vessel where roll and spray are minimal for the same weather conditions.<br />
<br />
Camera techniques out of the way, as with any sports photography, or landscape photography if you like context as I do, knowing your subject and what is about to happen next makes the difference between " i took some shots at a sunny regatta" to the "wow, see what we captured!" Direction of light and time of day are important, with the shadow cast by the sails to one side of boat something to either avoid or take advantage of. For the non sailor reading this, generally speaking boats under sail go through three interesting 'states' and do a couple of interesting manoevres in terms of action beyond "boat heeled over on water"<br />
<br />
1. Beating - this means the boats have their white sails closely hauled in, with often elegant curves on their trailing edges. They are sailing up towards the wind, so you can work out where they are going to be next, as they zig zag in that direction.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BroHeIw2dcQ/V62q5M40FMI/AAAAAAAAISc/x1Clq1XKH6cL8XvIBtNDgTCT5JJ1bMtFgCLcB/s1600/Vesilia_cropAdj.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BroHeIw2dcQ/V62q5M40FMI/AAAAAAAAISc/x1Clq1XKH6cL8XvIBtNDgTCT5JJ1bMtFgCLcB/s320/Vesilia_cropAdj.JPG" width="272" /></a><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-E76otrZhw5s/V62qSzPwMaI/AAAAAAAAISY/LNCTTeMXTLQ0yMdyX0VsfnAxPvdNThNtgCLcB/s1600/P8055555_3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-E76otrZhw5s/V62qSzPwMaI/AAAAAAAAISY/LNCTTeMXTLQ0yMdyX0VsfnAxPvdNThNtgCLcB/s320/P8055555_3.jpg" width="308" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
From the front of the boat, approaching you is the best angle usually, with the bow wave and crew being points of interest, and worth taking multiple shots at high shutter speeds to select the most interesting wave or crew shots.<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PU6f2bh0ff0/V62rVKJAWRI/AAAAAAAAISk/JMp054ua7jMttnydUP--ktbd2ObAoKnjgCLcB/s1600/P8064435%2B%25282%2529.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-PU6f2bh0ff0/V62rVKJAWRI/AAAAAAAAISk/JMp054ua7jMttnydUP--ktbd2ObAoKnjgCLcB/s320/P8064435%2B%25282%2529.jpg" width="240" /></a></div>
<br />
2. Reaching - This is when boats cross the wind at about right angles, and for many boat types this is their fastest point-of-sail. Often racing boats will have spinnaker up, and out to one side. Sometimes this angle can put a lot of pressure on the sails, and the helmsman is on a knife-edge of being overpowered and spun round into the wind in what is known as a "broach", in spectacular fashion sometimes. One note is that the boats will be sailing fast away from where ever you are stationed.<br />
<br />
3. Running - Here the wind is behind the boat, and the white sails are either pressed out, often like "goose wings" on either side of the boat, or on many racing boats, the bright spinnaker will be most prominent, out to one side of the boat. Given a good light direction, then this can make for spectacularly colourful shots, and also with a degree of shadow with back light, interesting semi silouhette shots can be had. Here the light was failing, and I had a polariser on a non WR lens, so this is how it turned out, a little dark and flat:<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JUWrL49qxYE/V62jgvrODiI/AAAAAAAAISA/7xCrwd-WGC0aNxfIQCkSUOCvzEX1A_W8ACEw/s1600/P8055548_3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-JUWrL49qxYE/V62jgvrODiI/AAAAAAAAISA/7xCrwd-WGC0aNxfIQCkSUOCvzEX1A_W8ACEw/s320/P8055548_3.jpg" width="239" /></a></div>
<br />
The manoervres of interest racing boats do are<br />
<br />
1) Tacking their bows through the wind in order to zig zag up to the direction the wind is blowing from<br />
<br />
2) Gybing - the opposite, swinging their sterns through the wind with it behind them, and changing sides with the sails, often in interesting fashion with the spinnaker up.<br />
<br />
3) Starting - Most boat races have a common mass start, so the boats line up and start all at once. In competitive fleets this means a neat line of boats which is amenable to a 28-35mm from the water. It can be very difficult to spot a given boat btw. It is the sprint, the most stressed point in sailing and crashes do happen.<br />
<br />
4) Taking up and down sails (hoist and drop/douse). Usually racing photographers get shots of the spinnaker work as it is a coloured, interesting sail and involves a lot of team work on deck to handle up and down- see image above of a boat 'fishing' with its spinnaker, while the crew do their best to haul it onboard again after it was droped. But other sails can be just as interesting.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OA09rZJLHZM/V62twtbkdjI/AAAAAAAAIS0/IGN5FyQk-Iomqg18aVxKCwQNUIkOJdleQCLcB/s1600/P8064483.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-OA09rZJLHZM/V62twtbkdjI/AAAAAAAAIS0/IGN5FyQk-Iomqg18aVxKCwQNUIkOJdleQCLcB/s320/P8064483.JPG" width="240" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b>Other Equipment </b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I am going to invest in a second weather resistant camera, most likely the Pentax K series with a single, WR lens the 18-135 (just the ticket as it covers all my usual focal lengths, and with the latest 16 and 20 / 24 mpx sensors without AA filter, cropping can compensate for lack of 300-400mm reach) , but for those of you maybe either with a water proof DSLR or not, a second waterproof 'tough' camera like the Olympus TG4 or a good water resistant mobile can be a good option, despite the fixed or short focal ranges- here a boat is handy to 'leg zoom' near to the action, while often tough compacts and mobiles have a nice do it all 35mm FF eq focal legnth. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Weather jackets for cameras are a good idea for any DSLR camera on the salty sea, because salt is not worth the risk of getting into your camera- a single tiny grain will destroy a sensor or lens mechanism. No amount of being careful will stop a sudden wave splash reaching you on a small, open boat. A full waterproof diving box may be a bit excessive, but if you have many thousands of spondoolics in equipment, worth perhaps the bother. Water proof 'kayaking' bags are a good idea too, just taking a single camera 'snout pouch' bag as I say on a RIB (rigid hull inflatable boat ) or the like,m you dont want to change lenses really at sea.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Tripods are ok for cruise liners, but on a small boat or busy public ferry alike, you are better with a monopod to add maybe that one to two stop benefit in steadyness, while also synchronising with the hull's movement on the water, so at least cancelling out your own body's weather leg movements and getting you used to when you will have the subject in frame as you bob up and down. IBIS/ILIS andbest shot selection, will generally speaking be enough to compensate in light conditions at mid shutter speeds for the combined effects of your boats' movement, your body's movement and the subjects movement. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b>"Eplilogue" in a non Police Squad sense </b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
I hope this has been of some use and inspiration to sailors in particular, to get out and take shots of their sport from a motor boat or even land. Use your knowledge of how races operate to position yourself for the best images, and decide what type of shot you are setting up for. Remember to get out of the shadow side of the yacht or course unless you are looking for silhouette effects that is. Take bursts of photos in manoervres, when boats cross each other or if you are trying for a close up 'people shot' -. Otherwise for 'in context' shots or general shots, position yourself and wait until the boat is at the sweet spot, and perhaps use an exposure bracket series if light conditions have either high contrast or very flat light. Remember to just check that the camera is focused on the points of interest or tracking the boat well, the dof is not too shallow on the subject, you are using shutter priority at say 1/500th or faster, that you are not overexposing white sails and hulls or getting that unatural 'denim' blue from the sea.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
For the non sailor, get to know the basics of sailing and racing and look up some youtube clips to understand what boats are up to and when is interesting to get shots. Being on land may severly restrict you if there are no racing bouys near by, but 'narrow' sounds, harbour entrances or peninsulas can get you close to the action. As can using a ferry or tour boat if you cannot persuade someone to take you out in a boat and spectate actively.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Remember that a RIb infront of a boat racing can be both a destraction, a potential collision hazard and casue a wave as you gvet out of the way which can slow a racing boat down,so keep the engine running keep clear by several of their boat legnths , don't make large waves near competitors or which will roll through the whole fleet as you blast off to thge next spot or home with your 'catch'.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The safest and best places for photographing a race on the water are usually just outside the triangular or in effect diamond shaped racing course layed out with three bouys, sometimes it is just two. The 'diamond' shaped racing area in a typical race round marks, is usually about 20 times wider than the start line, and often the start line is half way up or at the 'foot' of the course in relation to the wind blowing down the middle. Best, safe spots outside this 'diamond' are usually to the left of the start line by 30 meters or so, being just slightly ofrward of the bows when they gather and start; being at the windward mark, longest up towards the wind direction where the boats turn and often hoist spinnakers, and being at the converse 'leeward' mark where the boats sail with the wind behind them and usually spinnakers up, and then take them down and go back up to hauling their sails in and sailing in the typical zig zag fashion up wind. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Other races work in longer distances following the coast sometimes or heading offshore. Typically these have an inshore start and finish line near land, the latter could ential much waiting if it is a long race with variable wind during the day. Also often an inshore 'harbour' or club house start or coastal course will necessitate the boats passing a harbour wall, or an estuary mouth, and coastal courses often have to pass headlands or peninuslas and want to use minimum ditance to do so, so that is where they come closest to land.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
A weather sealed camera system is really what to get if you are going to be on the water often or in rough water, and that is what I am investing in, before I explore the joys of on water yacht photting more!</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<br />Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-55930469207392673032016-08-03T13:59:00.001-07:002016-08-10T10:10:18.950-07:00Will We Ever Get Full Frame Camera Performance in Small Compact Cameras, Even Mobile Phone Form?<p dir="ltr">Will we ever be able to slip some gizmo out of our shirt pocket and take images akin to those on a Canon 1D or a Nikon 5D ?</p>
<p dir="ltr">The answer is a resounding yes yet an indifatigable no. </p>
<p dir="ltr">No of course not, you cannae defy the laws of optics jim-there are two or so big arguements as to why. In terms of 'real' shallow depth of field, optically this just cannot be delivered by current lens technology on very much smaller cameras and sensors. Secondly the low density of pixel elements allowed for on full frame sensor means a far higher signal to noise ratio per pixel - area increase is on the square so the difference over APS-C, mFT and 1" is bigger than first meets the eye so to speak. This means better dynamic range, better low light performance and vis a vis better high ISO image quality.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However this is all given, precaveated, disclaimer with simple, single lens, esatblished sensor technologies. What can we expect then from technologies in smaller packages?</p>
<p dir="ltr">We also have to accept on the one side how important the "waf-ferr thin" DOF and ultra high ISO performance are to image representation and dessemination today. ISOs of 6400 negate the need for flash photography per se. Beyond that, the mega tens of thousands of ISO points are getting to freezing a frantic blackncat having a fit in a dark room. Outside some special applications and cameras with super fast shutter speeds, these features are my one is bigger and better than yours. They are academic, the returns on investment are at the thinner end of the diminishing. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I would say that what we actually 'need' for taking dslr quality photography from full frame are roughly using some bench marks-</p>
<p dir="ltr">* f2.8 or even f3.5  type of speed and depth of field<br>
*D7000 dynamic range <br>
*  ISO 6400 with little notable noise and only mild smoothing<br>
* 12 - 20 mpx depending on the above vs size of sensor<br>
* tonal depth and colour capture like the D3 and 5dII</p>
<p dir="ltr">Is any of this achievable in a compact camera or even a mobile ? We are really in the realms of not doing the same things but in miniature for the large part but rather emulating the final results with technologies.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Of course mobiles are stealing a march on compact cameras. For years they have been eroding the necessity for shirt pocket compacts and have hit trad' camera brand-sales, which often carried a nonsense premium price mark, out of the ball park. Now they are poised to go up a gear and not only challenge 'enthusiast compacts' but rival mirrorless and even DSLR territory. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Mobile phone technology has also driven some of the innovation we see in user interface and file handling but more than that, the always on immediacey of social media has changed how we view and  "consume" images, with some pro photo journalists and artists shunning their full frames to take people and street scenes where a dslr or even qaulity compact would create a barrier to the subject and perhaps invite a mugging. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The recency and availability is often the wow factor in social media, and often the professional photographer is out of the picture if you pardon my pun. The famous and daring now whip out a mobile and take a selfie a-top Everest, or traipsing up the red carpet to the Oscars. The image then has a different and perhaps higher value in the subject owning the moment, and most often sharing their emotions in a way which as third person behind another lens may make look contrived as they ask them to turn, or wait for theh flash to charge.</p>
<p dir="ltr">We consume images most often at 72dpi and a maximum size of 1080 wide pixels now. I dare say most images now viewed are no bigger than indeed the screen on the iPhone 6s. Gone are the days of the art litho printed coffee table photo extravaganza books. Image technical quality is reduced to the average smart phone's output, with image impact being far more important in the new, nano attention span on line world of image and sound.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Many say that the best camera you can get, is the one you can take with you and have therefore, all the time when you place yourself in a landscspe, street or event. Using live view screens instead of viewfinders has a kind of immersion in the scene and a causualness brought on by the mobile smart phone revolution.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Not only this of course, but smart phones offer not just picture capture but significant post processing ability. They are image systems and they are integrated to this new God, digital social media. An image has not just recency, but immediacey is a large part of its value. Being able to take multiple shots, inspect and select the best, crop and enhance them at the scene and instantly disseminate them to millions is a kind of modern tearing down of the old Rome - the antiqauted print media controlled by the political demigogues. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The way we take and view images then has changed much of the relevancy of full frame and even mid sized sensor photography to the mass market, in which more images have been made and shared in the last five years than in all of preceeding history. There are though some few superior tehcnical features which pro's and IQ snobs alike desire whcih are only to be fulfilled in their eyes, in FF. </p>
<p dir="ltr">There are two or perhaps three major hurdles for small cameras in equalling the final image output of Full Frame. Firstly optics, and shallow depth of field. Secondly there are two sensor pixel density related features - dynamic range/tonal depth and signal to noise ratio. Optics or rather emulating their shallow dof and telefoto images, are something we will return to and are natural physical barriers to miniaturisation actually working.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However in terms of sensor technology, I believe we will see major improvements in the smaller sensors in terms of dynamic range, colour tonal rendition and noise. HTC have already recognised that masses of dense megapixels is not the way to go, and reduced their mpx chip,  for a camera which produces more realistic images with better DR and better low light performance by lower noise levels. </p>
<p dir="ltr">We have a distance to go too with lens and hardware but that in terms od the single lens is limited unless light-field -lenticular capture becomes practical in pocket-thin devices. Small, flat lenses van be very bright, even sub f1.0 , but are limited to short hyperfocal legnths and very short possibilities for zooming within the form factor of consumer mobiles. Yes we have seen 'Phameras" or "Phonecams" and android on compacts which then offer zoom. However digital crop zooming is also now a better prospwct with the advent of shift-sensor multiple capture quadrupling image size. We also have powerful interpolation which 'repixelates" zoomed areas to recreate a higher mpx count, thus enabling crop zooms via purely software. The stregnth in actually acheiving more flexibility in 'apparent' focal legnth is likely IMHO to be from a combination of these three technologies - small zoom lenses, sensor shift and interpolation. These could offer social media ready results in the range of 22mm to say 300mm with small screen acceptable IQ. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Shallow depth of field is something which can also be achieved with software, as any Photoshop fan au fais with mask-and-blur will tell you. Currently 'fake blur' is still in its automated infancy, with equipment or off camera software selecting foreground or faces based on contrast and preprogrommed recognition. One physical answer is to take two images, one with usual focus and the other with a very short hyperfocal distamce near the lens, thus giving a naturalistic blurred background and the software a base point to work from. A more innovative and potentially successful way is the twin camera approach seen in the HTC One M8 and current Huwaei P9. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Dual lens cameras are almost as old as film photography with both stereo and parallax views being used in 3D imaging and range-finder focusing for more than a century. They have a particular appeal in mobiles when one camera captures something different, such as when they are BW and capture more light information, allowing for both better DR and tonal range in the final, interpolated image output from the colour sourced camera, and also delivering more depth queus to the bokeh software. So far the real world results from the HTC M8 and the Huw'P9 are mixed though. Perhaps the real value will be in a second lenticular camera which captures light field information which can then be used create very much more accurate and aesthetic shallow and long DOF images. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Mobile phones by in large are given user interfaces which are to a low common denomintor, yet i the M9 i owned before and the desire Z i hold onto for the keyboard, there are quite a few settings to play with. They are hidden way in menus and awkward to get to or use multiple times. User interface will be another area which will need to improve if mobiles are to ever rival big old cameras, because the photographer needs control over input and output at their fingertips to get the best captures at least.</p>
<p dir="ltr">When we start talking about combinations of technologies we then also hit another barrier which is a function of the mass market naturw of the mobile smart phone- price. It may be great to appeal to enthusiasts, pros and those wanting a great camera in a shirt pocket, but doing some of the combo's i describe above, costs. Top end mobiles are around €~$ 750. That is around the same as enthusiast compacts, mid range "super zooms" and more than entry level DSLRs and MILCs - which are very good indeed these days. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Software though need not be part of that price barrier equation due to firstly the App' phenomenon and secondly, cloud computing. Image processing does not need to happen in camera, nor at time of capture. This opens the field to very advanced computing which is held propriety and 'micro licensed' for each image proceassed in the cloud or App download. Simple computing tasks which require pure power and memory are ideal for cloud computing,  such as face outline matching which would then lead to near perfect blurred bokeh i  portraits within milli seconds.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I have kind of made my conclusions under way, but to summarise we perhaps won't see physical camera features which add to the cost of top end phones, although the follower manufacturers, LG, Huwaei, HTC and most likely Nokia now, may well explore this as a way of capturing more top-end consumers from Apple and Samsung. Software is a different matter economically speaking, either as installed in camera system, as an App' or in the cloud. The cost is inversely proportionate - 'disponential' in that the initial high cost has miniscule unit costs as volume sales increase.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The converse of my proposition is also going to be true of course, that mobile digital telephony becomes more integrated to full frame digital SLRs.</p>
<p dir="ltr">, </p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-63652846913461212502016-07-16T17:21:00.001-07:002016-07-17T03:30:08.936-07:00Please End Retro Cameras<p dir="ltr">I don't know if it was olympus, leica or fuji who first came up with the vintage look  digital camera. However now it has just gone too far, with Olympus prefering to 'quote' mid century Leica film cameras rather than their own original PEN F in their new reworking of this brand name.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Canon first dared to make a better ergonomic camera and a leap if not a quantum one, in the EOS range of 35mm film DSLRs in the 80s. They were almost shockingly modern and insultingly plastic. Now we fly plastic planes from both Airbus and Boeing around the world and have internet tablets like something from a 70s sci fi. Yet we also have a plethora of rather crappy looking, polished alloy and fake leather , random diameter knob studdes mirrorless system and mid to high end single lens compacts.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Olympus were saved by beauty......or rather they knew they were almost two years behind the competition on sensors, yet they dared to come up with the modern day PEN series, which quote the style ques and overall user æsthetic of their original crop framed 35mm film cameras. PENs then and now, are the poor man's Leica. Today's PENs though have always featured some enthusiast level functions, like flash radio remote, all the different shutter-aperture modes, raw orf output and 'a whole bunch' of other stuff. Also in contrast to their 4-3rds partner come rival Panasonic, olympus has a better Jpeg engine for both the photojournalist on a deadline, and the uninitiated would be hipster who bought on style over content and 'caus grandad had an Oly. Back to the hipster, they got a hangover from the E system, art filters which in 2010 were more instagram freindly than those questionable warts on Oly enthusiast heaven E series DSLRs. Olympus must know that some buyers will only use programme mode orherwise and giving them a helping hand to create an OOC image in a trendy or kind of 'gee whizz' style.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Also PEN struck the death knell of the wee, and often noisy, flippy up Mirror as integral on most all single lens reflex cameras. Enthusiasts felt as betrayed as when OM 135 range was dropped, only this time Olympus moved into new waters, leading the way in electronic viewfinder cameras with the OM-D range. They probably picked up more previous OM 135 users than they ever did with the E series, and had a new retro camera for the style conscious, with a slighly shrink fit 70s or 80s OM look. And now we are back to the 135 Canon EOS which eat olympus for breakfast ferom 1989 onward. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The EOS had far better ergonomics than the staid, boxy competition which was basically making cameras with 1967 structure and limited electronics. Canon struck gold in moulded plastic with AF,  and in terms of value sales lead the market in 35mm dslrs. Indeed even the E series Oly are really influenced by this sea change in camera design and accompanying manufacturing methodology. With AF and more advanced electronic control, you could take better images with the EOS. Twisting to focus was made a thing of the past most likely by this one produxt range. Peole ewvwn used them strapless, the modern youtube review poseurs prefered 'acapella' carry style, gesticulating and wafting the cameras like Churchill did his cigars.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Retro look ia on the one hand possibly a marketing stylists reaction to what has been a fairly fugly road in the digital sensor camera age. Olympus and their E1 ugly duckling, not to mention some abortionate zoom compacts. Freed from the 35mm or APS sized film plane and reeling space, deaigners often didnt quite know what to do around a flat pike of  lens, sensor and viewfinder componentry. Perhaps it was Leica's tenacity to hold onto it's heritage and allow theier glass owners to cross over seamlessly to senor bodies,mor perhaps it was a kind of hipster radar blip in Oly markerting, but PEN looked retro as Catherine Hepburn on a sunday afternoon TCM - and it caught the imagination of the affluent, style conscious yuppie of 2010. Olympus had the worst sub APS-C size sensor quality, and with only 12mpx, so they needed to deliver other buying queus to this segment.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Perhaps the basic oblong box format of the PEN and OMD is actually cheaper and easier to build than a curvy, ergonomic camera which meets the hand like a womans buttock and invites tender, secure caressing and indulgent tactility. Perhaps Oly are locked in the style by not only their marketing department and percieved current brand equity, or their mechatronics are all optimised for the shoe box layout  out, I don't know.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Not as mentioned, that Oly can't do ergonomics - the e520 was ok, the 600 better and the E5 really did have a kind of Pentax K thing on the go......and maybe that is where they exactly did NOT want to follow, into a quirky also ran niche where weather proofing and a two lens-does-all offering competes with mid range "Canikons".  They needed style queus and brand heritage to anchor a psychological, if not quite emotional bond to prospective owners. Also Sony saved their bacon , twice, firstly with a cropped down sensor from their APS-C state of the art 20-24 mpx sensora, and then by buying stock to keep the post scandal company afloat. Finally they could compete with mid range DSLRs and rival higher end and FF products in terms of size to image quality and user definable functionality. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Now the market is flooded with retro cameras and compacts which have the same shoe box form. They are by in large not very ergonomic and at worst some quite serious offerings are blighted by in particular, obrtusive dials and buttons which are too easy to activate or alter accidentally during ordinary handling. Also we have some great cameras falling short of their actual potential and most likely, actual price point they could command. Take the LX100 from panny. Ok, you have to get past the dire out of camera JPEGs and get used to batch filing- which makes some people feel big and clever - but really to have to correct Panasonic's output when you take the only camera you'll need on vacation or want to deliver a breaking news item to the photo editor's inbox. Beyond that though there is a fantastic lens for the type of photography people will do with this camera, and traditional hard controls any seasoned photographer with some grey hair will feel fully satisfied with. But its still a shoe box, slightly retro, with poor ergonomics. Also it isn't weather and dust proofed which are features which could have raised the camera to a must-have for proffessional photo journalists.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Pentax dared to keep up some concept of tough ergonomics in their K range but now the cameras seem to be a little boxy and even undersized for their weigth in the KS2 and the k50/70. Many have criticised the GH range from Panny as being a little small for the typical western, male hands. The fact is that cameras in the mid to high marrket don't have to look a particular way, they have to take amazing photos which lure enough of consumers away from their Mobile phone camera to make niches in the market have a market in the niche. Six hundred dollars is now again, a lot for a camera to the uninitiated when you also buy a 500 dollar mobile phone which does the job of snaps and holiday 'scapes, with direct share to social media witthin seconds.</p>
<p dir="ltr">There is then a need to trade up enthusiasts and appeal to seasoned pro's and 'copyright John Smith-Jones Images' two weddings under their belt pro-ams. For people who really want to shoot and not be conspicuos consumers with retro jewelry round their necks, then ergonomics and weather seailing are two uptrades which cost fairly little compared to the price premium they help secure. OK pentax/ricoh kind of have to have something to offer in the DSLR market at mid priced APSC cameras. But in compacts and mirrorless really it is wide open for a 'proffessional' opening, while in DSLR there is room for a video optimised offering which has some degree of camcorder ergonomics and live knob and dial fiddeling on the fly.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The latter is probably not Oly's bag - they are likely to remain a stills system on 4-3rds with IBIS and live off glass and peripheral sales the next couple of years as the format reaches its limits in stills photography and dminishing returns in performance become uneconomic. There is rumoured Full Frame, but Elvis coming back from the moon is more likely unless Sony decide to own them and relaunch the alpha full frames in a parallel world with olympus doing the user interface and jpeg engines, plus maybe a return to two ZR Zuiko pro lenses which cover all as with the E system's 12-200 (24 - 120 : 100 - 400 f2.8's) </p>
<p dir="ltr">The way to go is smaller and easier to handle, and better video imho in any mirrorless system or single lens pro level. Now that pro level IQ and speed of glass at least, is a lot cheaper than it was a few years ago, and the must have in camera adjustability and pre-settings pro's want from the D3 days are well documented, while the nice to haves and never actually used settings can be kept out. Essentially this has been Leica territory and top end enthusiast compacts in the 600/900 dollar region. The LX100 has shoe horned itself into being an amateur camera with some appeal for pro's and price-quality snobs, where in fact it should have dared to be a pro level photojournalist camera with weather sealing and a touch screen at more like Leica pricing - say a grand. </p>
<p dir="ltr">As I predicted before, mobile phone cameras are going to eat more and more into the compact market, moving up a notch with fake f 1.2 layered image bokeh, 4k video and passable quality zoom, shift sensor mpx maxing and digital crop zoom with re-interpolated pixelation. This eats into the percieved need for blurry back grounds and a 'pro' look which then eats into how much a mid range camera can demand in price and how many people see the benefit increment as being large enough to buy a second camera to that (or those ) in their mobile. Olympus should follow the LX100s lead and come up with something fast, sharp, ergonomic and wonderful.<br>
</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-88682932365373429692016-07-04T06:49:00.000-07:002016-07-04T06:49:05.476-07:00New Camera (s)?The E450 has served me very well for six years, probably because I came from a 35mm background where Fujichrome 200 was my standard 'shoot' colour slide film.<br />
<br />
Now though I find that as a travel camera system it is bulky and even the super zoom (<i>once much beligned as a kind of joke camera class amongst 'serious' photographers</i>) cameras of the last year or so, out do the E series cameras for dynamic range and quite probably overall image quality, especially the Panny FZ1000 and the Mrk II and III Sony RX10s.<br />
<br />
To think through a critical path analysis of what I need and what I will be empowered to do then I have to look a bit at the past and the future. A "travel" compact is on the cards, as well as a new system....or should I get a used 12-60, 50-200 combi and stick with Oly as the 'hobby' and get a compact ?<br />
<br />
Lets write that one off now: The 12-200 Combi do it all? Well that is down to price, and Olympus owners are not like others, they are generally more experienced photters and think their kit is wonderful, so despite outdated sensors and a clumsy combination with the OM or PENs, they think their fast Glass is still worth a fortune. Cheapest is about 50% new last I looked. I am looking at using mayeb, maybe 300€ on the two. Mission impossible, best use the cash on a new system<br />
<br />
There is very, very little middle ground now in compacts. THe RX10 II and III are expensive, a bit slow to zoom in and out, have way too long a reach for real use, but now have a one inch sensor and really. Weather proofing, the fast lens and this reach means<br />
<br />
<br />
To move forward and even make some cash, sailing photting is a runner, so weather proofing is a must for my system., That now restricts me to in fact the Pentax K series for a system, with a two or three lens set up, and / or the RX10. THe LX200 "due" in september this year, may have weather sealing. But it is far too short a reach for sailing photting where I need about 400 mm reach.<br />
<br />
I think a used pentax system and a used LX100 or D LUX 109 is the way to go really, or maybe a bib end 109 with Light Room included in the deal.<br />
<br />
There may be a round of new cameras seeking new niches or to open things up like the LX100 and RX100 before it did. One thing for sure is that I have zero point zero budget this year!!!Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-34574626860858742052014-11-08T02:42:00.001-08:002014-11-08T02:42:22.090-08:00Light Field Cameras - Gimmick or Gold Dust<p dir="ltr">I sat down last night to get my head around how the light-field-camera system works, because it looked conceptually difficult ...I couldn't work it out at first run through, I was bewildered.</p>
<p dir="ltr">It took a few different approaches and looking at a Lytro video of their first series of interesting cameras, for the penny to drop. You can think of the technique as on the one side being like the compound eye of a fly, fusing together many individual shots in the 'brain' to make a map of the immediate world ahead of you. Or you can think of it as grabbing more information from the light rays which enter the camera, which in traditional photography are simply trained onto a flat 2D image with much of what the lens can capture being simply reduced to a simple, easy to interpret image.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Think then this. Today we are very used to 3D CAD images, while I work often with 2 D output for actual practical engineering and manufacturing purposes. Plan view, side view and so on.... It is easy on the computer to flick between these two , the three dee for conceiving how it will look, operate and fit during installation and then the 2D for the nitty gritty of measurements, angles, threads, welds and so on, where 3 D would just be a mess of info overload. Usually the 3 D is made from the 2 D traditional drafting, and then the CPU brain makes the 3 D view.</p>
<p dir="ltr">This is a similar principle for light field cameras, where a traditional lens is followed up by an array of micro lenses, the fly's eye , which then allow for more information to be captured in terms of all the focal planes available ie many slices of depth of field, and then also the multiple stero/optic capture where a slight 3 D image can be recomposed. Each micro lens splits the detail up a little more from all the rays coming such that the rays of light render more information or more traces if you like onto the sensor. It has been done in film too, but is not practical for viewing before the advent of serious computing power. </p>
<p dir="ltr">We got used to the stunning quick time style composite images which were created by multiple camera capture, allowing for unbelievable 3 D images with about a 40 degree walk around. The rolling stones video was the first I can remember, and I wondered, how did they do that!??? Basically on a single sensor you can achieve a slight 3 d stereoscopic effect due to the distance across the chip being able to capture very slightly different angles of view </p>
<p dir="ltr">Depth of field contol is then achieved in post processing with Lytro's software suite for example and that is the biggest benefit for general photographers. For macro photographers, the 3D view also helps them but really it seems to be a bit gimmicky for general photography, it is only a few degrees.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The compromise of this composite single capture image is the eventual resolution though. The first lytro camera has a resolution as any one still jpeg image, or just 1.2mpx . This is fine for a VGA monitor but makes for a limited image size on anything bigger, or a poor quality large image. Whereas in fact the information processing is far, far higher than that of a normal 2 D camera due to all the extra computations, which links a camera with a reasonable ouuytput of 8mpx into needing serious on board processing in order to capture even one image per second and represnent it as a flat jpeg on its read monitor screen.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Howwever, Lytro have of course found out that it is not consumers who really gain from this small 3D effect in still images, it is the space imaging and military gun sight government research that this system can find most value and thus earn Lytro the most cash. For me I can see two other major areas if it can be made to work with microscopes and endoscopes, for bio/medical imaging and for inspection work in engineering.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I dont think we will all be using Lytro cameras any time soon, but perhaps we will see a mobile manufacturer licensing in the lens array because then VGA quality in maybe a 2mpx image is worth the bother for the small screen size to overcome the normal DOF limitation and offer a quirky three dee image.</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-51204708644475196202014-11-08T02:10:00.001-08:002014-11-08T02:10:22.767-08:00Micro Four Thirds is Dead....Long Live mFT<p dir="ltr">mFtf is basically dead for me, and as dead as it had been when i went in to a shop to buy an EPL1, walked out unimpressed and bought an E450 with three lenses on-line.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I am of course impressed  by the OMD range, but I need a weather sealed system and two lenses and that in OMD mFt is a huge investment with all the time the slightly poor trade off between depth of field and size being there. Also there is the fashion-over-ergonomics which is kind of fair  enough if it helps sell bodies, but at the top model really style is not important. How ugly are the D3 and the 5DIII after all?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Olympus have slowed up on selling the compact bodies and rightly so, they can get a far bigger price for the OMD range and people can suffice with their old PEN bodies as 2nd back up or pocket walk around, or buy them pretty cheaply indeed used or old stock. Not that they are much good with that 12mpx chip, but not that they are that bad when compared to the nealy all sub 1000 eurospondoolicdollars compacts.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Until now that is, with two cameras in fact from Panasonic and the related competition from Fuji in particular.<br>
The FZ1000 finally places a reasonable size sensor into a "super zoom" or bridge camera, while the LX100 steals the show for a street camera based on the mFT sensor and a very fast lens.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The lx100 and its sibling the Leica branded Dlux type 109 change the game, big big time for all compact non EVF mFt compacts which are basically dead in the water IMHO for enthusiast buyers. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Interesting with both the LX100 and the FZ1000, Panasonic are stealing a march on not just compacts but also entry and mid level APS-C DSLRs and system cameras. The lenses are faster and better in range than the kit-shit of Canikon land, or most MILCs. The ISO performance is good enough for real photography in disappointing lighting. <br>
The nirvana of shallow depth of field and good bokeh are checked off as if they have reached a mountain top and can take a pause for breath, while the competition look on from their foothills.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The lenses bring into question what the blazes these companies are doing in following the strategy of DSLR and making highly expensive lenses which in DOF / Speed terms are just mid level for APS-C. They have been able to pull off the less-is-more for many years and have ended up painting themselves into a corner, all be that a very nice couple of corners- Panasonic's genius hand played in video and range of cameras, Olympus with their enthusiast and pro appeal with OMD and the retro  style PENs. Nice corners to live in for the here and now, while perhaps the enthusiast market will desert them.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I see that there will be a range of LX hundred series and even a bridge mFT camera in the FZ range. So far it looks like the LX100 is a big seller on Amazon and this is for the same reason I want to buy one - it is a fast lens which can deliver creative depth of field and it is a jacket pocket camera with a view finder. It trumps having to buy a boxy mFT compact and two or three lenses in the mid range. </p>
<p dir="ltr">mFT MILC will still take slightly better technical image quality but the fast lens for under a grand just beat entering the system, and in fact I can see a lot of olympus first and second generation PEN owners dumping their gear to get an LX100, and I can see that people looking for a good long zoom for nerdy-birding could ignore the pixel peepers and plunge into an FZ1000.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Panasonic would be wise to look at doing an mFT version of the lens , to replace the 12/35 video optimised lens and indeed consider creating a range of fast zooms which are compact but sub f3, perhaps with a little less reach such as doing yep a 12/35 but say a 30/100 f2 for portrait and best dof seekers. The genie is out of the bottle, they have achieved a very good lens with only slight compromise which has no relevance to the buyers and intended use of the LX100. The fast lenses from Oly in particular are not all that small, and relative to many APS/C f3.5s they are actually slower due to equivalence.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Why have a kit lens and an mFt for less money and have to spend lots and then change lenses all the time or end up wasting time trying to set up a shot to isolate the subject, when on the LX100 we simply click open the aperture ring and shoot.</p>
<p dir="ltr">For me then, mFT is dead but has a long future in non interchangeable enthusiast compacts.</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-75645850160736880002014-11-05T12:17:00.001-08:002014-11-05T12:17:19.220-08:00Painful Decision to Wait on The LX100 - DLux 109<p dir="ltr">All the reasons are there to buy this new LX100. I need a jacket pocket, glove-compartment take with me camera more than any new lenses for my dslr or say a do it all am-cam like the new FZ1000. It is better than the canon and the sony, and much better than its incongruent predecessor in the lx range, the seven. It has also great DR and mid ISO and OIs and better video than my current jvc camcorder. </p>
<p dir="ltr">However it is a relatively expensive camera which is showing not only its strong sides, but also some weaknesses.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The big point of this camera is a combination of the big chip and the fast lens. That trumps the XZ2, which i had my eye on, and btw can be had new for less than half then original rrp now on line. </p>
<p dir="ltr">It also trumps just about that is, any mft camera with any kit lens, apart from maybe the 12-50 oly at the two extremes of focal length. Why? The fast lens.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Why then not just dash out and buy one, cash down and the rest on credit? </p>
<p dir="ltr">The real reason on the back of my mind is that i am hoping olympus will make a competitor. </p>
<p dir="ltr">What would be so good from oly? Firstly amd most of all, far better out of camera jpegs, which is important in a compact camera which will document the minutiae of oir family lives as much as it will take any images of artistic, photojournalistic or heirloom framed images. My general dslr shoots are in a way warm ups for owning a pro-am FF dslr, in another way they are fun and only when i see the beautiful shot dono turn to raw. I cannot batch process by in large for all sorts of reasons, so frame by frame raw optimalisation is just too time consuiming for me.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Secondly the lens would be sharper, maybe not as fast, but sharper. Also in combination with that it would be a Sony chip with less noise, better resolving ability and better colour.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Panasonic have fallen short , not by much, but just a little short. </p>
<p dir="ltr">	1) Soft when open wide below f4<br>
2) noisy and colour abberrant on the edges<br>
3) annoying NR softness, i.e. default high smoothing<br>
4) little bit short on the long end at eq 75mm<br>
5) other foibles,: auto iso , sensor warm outs on 4k, filters button stupid place, some others yet to be found.<br>
6) out of camera jpegs needing post! </p>
<p dir="ltr">Any one of these points as the single isloated issue on the lx100, would not stop me getting one. But together and with that biggie in 6, they hold up my wallet peel.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I am stalling, i want to handle one but i can see it is going to be nice ftrom the videos. I am not convinced by the on line jpeg galleries, even though the test shots in the so called laboratory conditions say it is class leading. </p>
<p dir="ltr">If only olympus would do this as well!</p>
<p dir="ltr">It is currently a little unclear if there will even be an XZ-3. I guess they are either waiting for something cool from sony's sensor department for the current sensor size, or are reworking to either sony's one inch or hopefully the mFT format.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Panasonic have been able to use Leica to design ground breaking lenses, while having the R&D biudget in sensors and body equipment to now stand head and shoulders above the compact competition with their FZ1000 and LX100. The other manufacturers are who knows, maybe over a year behind in being able to put these size of sensors with so fast glass, enthusiast control elements, and not fogetting the video capability, all into sub 1000$€ packages. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Canon seem to be pretty happy with themselves but their G cameras which take good enough images but are quite bulky and no where near as good as the new GM or existing Epm with their kit lenses. Nikon just cannot do compacts or the milc one syste,, maybe they are too worried about the differential to their dslrs. Users are veryr happy, but they are brand-blinded. Panny are lucky to have had the deep pockets to align with Leica to get the edge and keep it.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Olympus are struggeling outside OMD - they have probably saturated the style seeking market and enthusiasts have fallen off PEN upgrades for omd, and have good enougj back up EP bodies. Omd is a fine fine place to be. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Stylus is not. They need an absolutelty top pair of sensors in order to carry on with the same hardware, otherwise the nice handeling and enthusiast features melt away for those consumers prone to buying the next generation phones with real zoom cameras, and cutting out the middle man on the way to facebook. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I suspect olympus are either consolidating on the up market cash cow omd, or are beavering away on something to really scare the competition in compact land. Hopefully the latter is the case!<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br></p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-85181842227770486112014-10-23T12:18:00.001-07:002014-10-25T16:34:40.601-07:00LX100 on the Way, Why Buy??<p dir="ltr">WIth the LX100 starting to ship to retailer's warehouses, it is a pretty hot time to consider if this is a great compact camera or just a 'whole bunch' of trendy buzzy things actually achieved with an old mFt camera and some clever compromises.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Reasons Not to Buy?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Well the resolving power of the lens is still very much in question , and so far it does  not look as good as even the first generation PENs or of course FT cameras, even with kit lenses. The RAW files show better sharpness though, so maybe the jpeg engine is either undertuned on sharpening or is just a bit "loss-y". Default saturation is a bit high, as is maybe contrast but that would need to be seen. </p>
<p dir="ltr"><i>On</i><i> </i><i>my</i><i> </i><i>e450</i><i> </i><i>i</i><i> </i><i>like</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>use</i><i> </i>out-of-camera images, <i>just</i><i> </i><i>really</i><i> </i><i>because</i><i> </i><i>raw</i><i> </i><i>developing</i><i> </i><i>is</i><i> </i><i>time</i><i> </i><i>consuming</i><i> </i><i>and</i><i> </i><i>my</i><i> </i><i>images</i><i> </i><i>are</i><i> </i><i>mostly</i><i> </i><i>going</i><i> </i><i>up</i><i> </i><i>on</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>web</i><i>, </i><i>hdmi</i><i> </i><i>lines</i><i> </i><i>max</i><i> </i><i>required</i><i> </i><i>ie</i><i> </i><i>less</i><i> </i><i>than</i><i> </i><i>half</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>original</i><i> </i><i>file</i><i> </i><i>size</i><i>. </i><i>So</i><i> </i><i>i</i><i> </i><i>have</i><i> </i><i>set</i><i> </i><i>sharpness</i><i> +2, </i><i>contrast</i><i> +1, </i><i>and</i><i> </i><i>gradation</i><i> </i><i>-1</i><i>. </i><i>I</i><i> </i><i>do</i><i> </i><i>regret</i><i> </i><i>forgetting</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>set</i><i> </i><i>RAW</i><i> </i><i>for</i><i> </i><i>some</i><i> </i><i>landscapes</i><i> </i><i>or</i><i> </i><i>high</i><i> </i><i>dynamic</i><i> </i><i>range</i><i> </i><i>shots</i><i>, </i><i>but</i><i> </i>because i like to underexpose often then <i>attempting</i><i> </i><i>batch</i><i> </i><i>is</i><i> </i><i>hopeless</i><i> </i><i>for</i><i> </i><i>raw</i><i>. </i><i>Better</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>adjust</i><i> </i><i>jpegs</i><i>. </i><i>Even</i><i> </i><i>litho</i><i> </i><i>printers</i><i> </i><i>ask</i><i> </i><i>me</i><i> </i><i>for</i><i> </i><i>jpegs</i><i>, </i><i>less</i><i> </i><i>than</i><i> 4 </i><i>megs</i><i> </i><i>due</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>their</i><i> </i><i>workload</i><i> </i><i>and</i><i> </i><i>knowing</i><i> </i><i>that</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>shots</i><i> </i><i>will</i><i> </i><i>work</i><i> </i><i>at</i><i> 330dpi ...ie that is </i><i>from</i><i> </i><i>about</i><i> 75% </i><i>sized</i><i> e450 </i><i>shots</i><i> </i></p>
<p dir="ltr"><i>The reach onnthe lx100 - 75mm - </i><i>is a little short for many, maybe for me ideally, </i>but more on that below.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Now what is considered 'mid ' ISO is 3200 and here it picks up more noise than say the D7100. No big deal for me, the black cat leaping in a darkened room crowd may disagree. 1600 iso jpegs show smoothing but are very acceptable and noise is low. RAW low <i>light</i><i> </i><i>shots</i><i> </i><i>are</i><i> </i><i>embargoed</i><i> </i><i>by</i><i> </i><i>panny</i><i> </i><i>marketing</i><i> </i><i>for</i><i> </i><i>now</i><i>.</i></p>
<p dir="ltr">You need a big, expensive SD 1 card. Yep to do 4k justice then you will need to spend two hundred euros-dollars on a fast 64  or 128 gigger primary SD card.  Wifi suddenly seems very cool, but how much space do you have on your tablet, and how long to dropbox it on less than a 3G line ?. Also you really need to move out of PC land and into iMac and unix land for editing video within reason of productivity.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><i>Size, ergonomics, non touch screen....something has to give at this price and size point in the market, so it has for some given. </i><i>Basically</i><i> </i><i>this</i><i> </i><i>camera</i><i> </i><i>plays</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>te</i><i> </i><i>old</i><i> </i><i>joes</i><i> </i><i>like</i><i> </i><i>me</i><i> </i><i>in</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>gallery</i><i>, </i><i>but</i><i> </i><i>also</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>POS-mobile</i><i> </i><i>upgraders</i><i> </i><i>who</i><i> </i><i>are</i><i> </i><i>really</i><i> </i><i>wanting</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>get</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>grips</i><i> </i><i>with</i><i> </i><i>A</i><i> </i><i>and</i><i> </i><i>S</i><i> </i><i>modes</i><i>.</i></p>
<p dir="ltr"><i>Diallling in controls. the classic controls appeal to me, but many would rather have a more familiar set up with a multi wheel and a touch screen because they are spoiled techno toy brats!</i></p>
<p dir="ltr"><i>Reasons to BUY ?</i></p>
<p dir="ltr">The lens! Yep it is so fast and has a really nice range without making the camera too big. Ok not that long, but it is so fast and onto a bigger sensor so your thin depth of field happens way soon and is way smoother than either DSLR kit lenses or competing smaller sensored enthusiasts compacts</p>
<p dir="ltr">Size- got to be a plus, a true jacket pocket, light camera. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Tactility- good use of the lens A ring and focus - zoom ring, and the dial in hard controls for A, S and not forgetting manual mode plus a little fine adjust on the exposure comp wheel. This is very well thought out actually. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The Wide End .......24mm is a lovely angle to work with for land- amd city -scapes because it does not distort so very much as to make the cameras presence obvious, while it does add to that 'vista experience' and zero to infinity DOF.</p>
<p dir="ltr">11fps  / in full size, this is impressive.  Coupled to 8mpx frame grab from 4k video</p>
<p dir="ltr">4k video? bit gimmicky ? maybe for some, but future proof and you avoid total mess ups in 'lossy' processing. Also it secures 1>1 from the sensor chip which means better fidelity in camera capture to card.</p>
<p dir="ltr">wifi check , high iso check and so on.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Bye bye pasm. I find pasm really annoying these days as many of the shots i choose to spend time on i want to do my own manual bracketing for exposure, depth of field and trying to avoid camera shake. This is largely solved by going back to<i> basics </i><i>and</i><i> </i><i>i</i><i> </i><i>like</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>idea</i><i> </i><i>of</i><i> </i><i>then</i><i> </i><i>overlaying</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>exposure</i><i> </i><i>wheel</i><i> </i><i>which</i><i> </i><i>will</i><i> </i><i>give</i><i> </i><i>you</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>opposing</i><i> </i><i>shift</i><i> </i><i>when</i><i> </i><i>in</i><i> </i><i>S</i><i> </i><i>or</i><i> </i><i>A</i><i>. </i><i>This</i><i> </i><i>is</i><i> </i><i>a</i><i> </i><i>real</i><i> </i><i>plus</i><i> </i><i>for</i><i> </i><i>me</i><i> </i><i>these</i><i> </i><i>days</i><i>, </i><i>i</i><i> </i><i>end</i><i> </i><i>up</i><i> </i><i>not</i><i> knowing </i><i>where</i><i> </i><i>i</i><i> </i><i>am</i><i> </i><i>in</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>series</i><i> </i><i>of</i><i> </i><i>possible</i><i> </i><i>shot</i><i> </i><i>set</i><i> </i><i>ups</i><i>, </i><i>or</i><i> </i><i>suddenly</i><i> </i><i>wanting</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>take</i><i> </i><i>a</i><i> </i><i>fast</i><i> </i><i>shot</i><i> </i><i>and</i><i> </i><i>finding</i><i> </i><i>S</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>be</i><i> </i><i>left</i><i> </i><i>on</i><i> </i><i>a</i><i> </i><i>half</i><i> </i><i>second</i><i> </i><i>or</i><i> </i><i>P</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> be </i><i>a</i><i>perture </i><i>biased</i><i> </i><i>on</i><i> </i><i>my</i><i> </i><i>camera</i><i> </i><i>unfortunetly</i><i>. </i><i>I</i><i> </i><i>would</i><i> </i><i>hope</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>lx100</i><i> </i><i>has</i><i> </i><i>a</i><i> </i><i>max</i><i> </i><i>auto</i><i> </i><i>ISO</i><i> </i><i>setting</i><i> </i><i>to</i><i> </i><i>then</i><i> </i><i>not</i><i> </i><i>worry</i><i> </i><i>about</i><i> </i><i>going</i><i> </i><i>over</i><i> </i><i>into</i><i> </i><i>noisey</i><i> </i><i>squishy</i><i> 6400 </i><i>land</i><i>. 1600 </i><i>will</i><i> </i><i>be</i><i> </i><i>enough</i><i> </i><i>for</i><i> </i><i>me</i><i> </i><i>with</i><i> </i><i>the</i><i> </i><i>OIS</i><i> </i><i>on</i><i> </i><i>or</i><i> </i><i>using</i><i> </i><i>a</i><i> </i><i>tripod</i><i>.</i></p>
<p dir="ltr">Last but not least you are getting a very, very good electronic view finder, which for enthusiasts is a real plus.</p>
<p dir="ltr">You are essentially buying a very good lilttle package which will for the non pixel peeper take better shots than anny kit lensed crop frane dslr or mFT or nikon 1 .</p>
<p dir="ltr">Pricey ? Think of the pckage over the immediate competition-possible price differentials for the goodies you get...</p>
<p dir="ltr">200$ for the evf <br>
100$ for sub  f2 to 2.8 in this focal zoom range.<br>
$200 for 4k vid - think also resale even if you do no videography, this camera is three years video future proof at least.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Ok by 2016, the new rival models will have caught up but what will these cameras cost then ? Panasonic recognisw that now is the time for a quantum jump in features and yes, a price hike, to maken this level of camera truly head and shoulders over mobile phone cameras in $500 devices you must remember. With one inch mobiles, fovean and repixelising digizoom , intelligent blur etc in camera, for the above average facebook -instagram glamour snapper then having a separate compact as well as your mobile is going to be a harder ask, as the next level of compacts up to one inch sensor sizes are eaten into by mobile devices. The only place left to go is larger sensors over an inch and faster lenses, longer too and here panny are blazing the trail with this neat  lx100 and the FZ1000 for people who must take birdy - mammal shots from a far. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I have sat on the fence with mFT because i do not like the ergonomics and really the fast glass shows that the systems are overpriced. It is only with the last two levels of GH-G series and the OMD that sensor IQ is really impressive and iso 3200 useable. I am glad i waited because 900€ on an lx100 gives me a better option than a GX7 or epl7 duen to size and price for those f2 numbers. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The only reasonb not to buy is probably the LX110 !!! </p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-79528181508563696632014-10-22T13:48:00.001-07:002014-10-23T02:26:30.311-07:00Which Camera Suits You. Me. and the Woman in The Street ???<p dir="ltr"> I have just taken a tour into the never-never land of Leica on a well known internet forum and came away with a decidedly underwhelmed feeling. Worse when I went onto the NIkon 1 MILC forum, where the standard of photography on average did not warrant more than a mobile phone, while a particularly well captured composition of dancers had awful soft, out of focus or  camera shake from what looked like a pause in proceedings.</p>
<p dir="ltr">All these people have one thing in common, they have spent far more than they needed to in buying a camera for what they actually 'need'.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I think that people really miss the point if they have not grown up with the principles of photographic techniques and basically an eye for sealing a moment in eternity from somthing which they feel they can grasp. In other words, some people have a natural talent for both seeing the moment as it arises, the photo-opportunity,  and then having the skills to capture it. Or seeing the composition as it presents itself , such as a sunrise or shadows cast across a railway terminals marble concurs. <b>Any camera will take you there if you don't know where you are going....</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Now what type of photos are you likely to take, which do you like most, why do you want to take photos in the first place?  Over time in the west most people who have been interested in taking better quality photographs have been talked into buying the cheaper entry level digital single lens reflex cameras, and until just a few years ago these indeed were the route to better images than the small pocket sized point-and-shoot cameras. </p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Why DSLRs and  Multi Lens System Cameras are a Waste of Money For Most People</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">DSLRs of the entry level type are also bought by the consumer masses at inflation adjusted prices two to three times the price of mid nineteen eighties 35mm Film SLRs , when a then funky PASM body would set you back between 200 and 300 pounds for a 35mm camera....<i>oh did I say that most all people buying a DSLR by numbers, buy a smaller than that of course in the APS/C . It is ironic that this originally film format was heralded as the next big thing when in fact it took so much away from photographic quality, while now in fact it is both the bread and butter of over spend on a students or a  family's camera and also a serious contender for proffessional quality output. </i></p>
<p dir="ltr">The thing is that DSLRs are obtrusive by their size, their shutter noise and actually the message they give out...this is a serious image that is being taken. People can be guarded in their response to candid shots. Your face is hidden from interaction by in large, you may well be better served by ducking your head under the black cloth of a large plate format camera of old because at least then you are hiden as a person. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Also they are cumbersome, and feel a little vulnerable with their snouty lenses. You would probably not take a DSLR down the rough side of town alone, you maybe avoid taking it hiking or boating due to its weight and value, and you most of all would not get allowed into a rock concert with one slung over your shoulder without a press pass.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Compact Cameras A Great Choice, And A Great Future</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">This is why compacts took off with proffessional photographers. They found them far less obtrusive. The cameras were a lot less threatening, almost as if JFK or Che Guevera thought they were having family snaps taken and not iconic images which will last through history. The tool of choice was the Leica M, or some photographers used the film Olympus PEN cameras. It took the invention and implementation of the pentaprism view finder in 35mm, to change the game and in fact all these SLR cameras owe as much to the 35mm compacts of the 1940s-60s as they do to the twin less reflex cameras they largely came to replace.</p>
<p dir="ltr">If you watch many pro's at work in the studio or working sub telefoto, they often spend a lot of time away from the view finder. The back screen on digi cameras helps them. Some do not have this approach, tending to be glued to the view finder, but most you will find I think are there looking at the scene or model and waiting for either the right second or the right inspiration to then execute the shot technically.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Things have come full circle with Leica going digital, but remaining out of reach for most pockets, while Olympus played the price payoff game with mFT along with the new kid on the block Panasonic, who swalled Leica behind the scenes in order to get a head in the consumer photography market. Both have ended up creating real rival cameras to the great Nikon and Canon 35mm digital SLRs and also Panasonic rival proffessional video cameras in their GH range. Yes there are some draw backs, but in essence you get images which can be to a jobbing media professional, indistinguisable from full frame. It takes a technician to tell the difference between these mFT cameras and their 'professional benchmark' cameras such as the D3 when the best lenses are engaged.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Why The Through The Lens Optical System is Obsolete</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">In essence the pentaprism, or mirror box as it is on many cheaper SLR cameras, is an uneccesary feature on any digital camera, and adds bulk and also requires the mirror geometry which takes up space in the distance from the film to the lens mount flange. Pentax have basically just chopped it off  in their mirrorless APS-C cameras.  The optical view finder  in all cameras has been made further obsolete by firstly LED based back screens and by the latest generation of electronic viewfinders. The arguments about the virtues of the OVF, the optical real deal have all but evaporated from the chat forums of the photographic web community. </p>
<p dir="ltr">There are benefits in low light, with light intensifying, in giving extra overlayed information and in reducing the size of cameras when going for the EVF, whille many consumers have grown up taking images on their mobile phones, and have no relationship to the viefinder. They have actually broken a couple of the barriers I talk about above. Firstly your camera becomes part of the scene, obvious but a social device in taking shots. There is nothing special about having it with you, and nothign special about group selfies. WHYSIWHYG - what you see is what you get, the frame of the camera is just a part of the scene, or the scene is looking at the frame and seeing themselves before it is taken. There is a continuum with only a narrow picture frame between the screen image and the wider reality around it when you hold the camera out to take a photo. You are taking your head out of the camera, usually letting the programmers who made the camera take care of the technical exposure and focus, and just picking your moment..... most of all as I say just above, it is the camera you have with you MOST.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Limitations of Your Mobile Device Camera</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Unfortunetly there are many draw backs with mobile camera images, but do not let that influence you if you decide that you are maybe going to get  a shirt pocket camera versus a better mobile. Go for the mobile with the best in built camera from the range, and then of course you save yourself maybe half the buying price by not having spent your cash on a compact which will do little more at the sub 200 euro end of the market. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I dare say that there are paid ie professional photographers now who have only taken images on mobile phones, and probably work either for the mobile manufacturers or the networks in producing inspiring images which then of course eat up mobile network megabyte allowances! </p>
<p dir="ltr">The draw backs of mobile phone in built cameras are:</p>
<p dir="ltr">1) No good quality telefoto /zoom photography<br>
2) No real control over blur ie always a deep depth of field<br>
3) Often poor low light images with motion blur, speckled image noise and incorrect colours <br>
4) Often poor controllability over shutter speed <br>
5) Highlights and shadows are 'clipped' ie lack nuances<br>
6) Sharpness for print quality is lacking<br>
7) Usually dependent on the cameras own way of compressing images into jpegs and that can create banding and aliasing ie blocky images.</p>
<p dir="ltr">All of these are being addressed as I write. Panasonic have launched a "large sensor mobile phone- this promises to have less low light noise and better control over DOF,.There are intelligent blur filters and after effects which are getting very very good in faking it. The best mobiles now feature Shutter Priority ie shutter speed selectability and exposure control with live view. You can take black and white images or alter them instantly in any android or apple phone now. </p>
<p dir="ltr">However it has to be said that the drawbacks are only being clawed in partially and basically you cannot get a ferrari v12 in the body of a Mini. I would say as a photographer myself, that if you are upgrading mobile phone right now then look for the one with the best camera and most controllability now for your price and choose a mobile operatiing system around that. If though you are really keen to learn photography then do not waste your money on the best mobile camera, look for a compact camera which suits your ambitions and pocket.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Getting Your Head out of the Camera</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">What using a mobile though. as I say you get a very immediate interface to the world around  you and less of a barrier to people or the crop of the scene you are going to take. You can train your eye to take shots of what you see as being good, ie there is a subject or wholistic impression to be captured, and you frame that in a way which is clean and pleasing. You execute it without camera shake, and you adjust exposure or effects to make something which looks pleasing immediately. In fact you experiment with art filters on images and post processing with effects on the fly, taking maybe dozens of shots for fun. Not worrying about focus and shutter is actually a bonus.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The vast majority of DSLR owners have an entry level Canon or Nikon, and they set it to P, programme mode because that  is easy and they remember forgetting to turn it off F16 or a half second exposure when they did venture round the PASM wheel. So as a mobile phone photo artist you are in good company.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Often quoted is of course the percieved need of expandability, but in fact the vast majority of first time DSLR buyers stay with the kit zoom lens they bought the camera with until the whole camera becomes dated and loses its resale value by more than half, by which time they buy a new. Expandability means essentially buying more lenses and eventually upgrading a new body which is still  compatible with the system. The problem is that really the cost of the system is prohibitive for most buyers, they just have better things to spend their money on because buying an f1.8 lens for twice the price of their original camera kit just does not seem like good value.  If the cost of bodies have perhaps doubled in 20 years, the cost of system lenses, filters, flash units, tripods and so on have gone up more than three times. In my opinion, you get actually very much more for your money but wages have just not kept up for the majority of people in the last 20 years. A middle road APS-C system with four lenses, a good flash, filters and carry bag is probably around about three thousand pounds. That is more than twice a comparable system such as the OM or early AF EOS systems costed 27 years ago.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>How Many Millimeters Do you Need?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Lenses though are a very good place to start in defining your needs in a camera.  The most obvious feature is the focal length which provides both the magnification and the field of view, and always referred to in "mm" and for historical reasons that is  then when talked about, converted to old momney ie 35mm camera equivalents. mFT has tghe kindest equivalency being half the lengths for which ever format of sensor chip you buy,  you willl find a 35mm equivalent either referred to in the instructions or you can search for it on the internet.</p>
<p dir="ltr">. In 'old money then the ranges are></p>
<p dir="ltr">11mm and below: Fish Eye type images and highly distorted images.<br>
22-24mm  Considered a strong wide angle, gives interesting perspectives and deep DOF, useful for landscapes and street photography or many creative approaches. These lenses function much better in digital photography than film, because the natural distortions of this very wide are corrected by in camera computing such that the edges do not appear unduly curved.<br>
30-40 mm The 35mm lens is the classic compact lens of old, as it is compact while being wide enough for street photography and landscapes, while having natural depth of field which can lend itself to closer portraits or journalistic photos of people than telefoto lenses<br>
50-55mm The classic nifty-fifty , this lens range has fallen out of favour, see my note below, but were often the very good standard, basic lenses fitted to cameras for first purchase. Slightly less magnification than eyesight, they cover a field of view quite similar to the human central field of attention, and that is perhaps why they were so popular, making it easy to frame images and capture desired detail.<br>
.<br>
75, 90, 120mm These are the classic lengths of portrait telefoto lenses, and my prefered working magnification for working with people and certain sports like sailing. They were affordable and had wide apertures which meant they could take very short depth of field shots, making for nice soft backgrounds and even a side of the face out of focus. The modern fast 'prime' lenses ie fixed length, for all the smaller formats are correspondingly much smaller than the full frame 135/35mm film which is a benefit. The usual kit zoom lenses usually cover this range from the wide, or from about 50mm eq, but lack the very fine depth of field in the full sized versions. <br>
.<br>
They create a noticeable magnification over eyesight and make it easier to work further away from the subject.  As mentioned they used to be very good value for money, being about 100 to 250 pounds for a film SLR. Now they arre partly obsolete due to zooms and have become expensive items often at professional prices. One way of getting a cheap upgrade to a current APS-C or in particular an mFT lens is to buy a convertor ring and buy a cheap second hand 50mm nifty fifty lens from an old film SLR. The drawback here is you will need to manually focus.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Zoom lenses which cover this range while also offering the very wide apertures of f2.8 and lower, are for most people prohibitively expensive being very often more than twice the price of the initial camera and lens. However you can work around this a little by using the longer end of an equivalent of 150mm to 250 mm and then backing off from the subject a few meters. You can then achieve a nice blurred background, but be aware that camera shake becomes worse the longer the focal length chosen. My zoom lens on FT which covers 80mm to 300mm does not need to be backed off very much, just a meter at 100mm eq to make for a nice subtle blur, while also it has to be said, keeping the whole of the face in focus.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Telefoto Lenses</p>
<p dir="ltr">150 - 600mm and beyond.  A typical useable length for nature photography is considered 400mm, and there is a trade off here between having to use a very stable tripod for the longer lengths and maybe being able to take some careful handheld shots at higher shutter speeds. </p>
<p dir="ltr">In the days of135/ 35mm film and at the longer ranges today, zooms were bulky and had quite restricted aperture values of f5.6 upwards as a start point,   so it made it hard to get a fast shutter speed to stop the amplified camera shake movement.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Working Out Your MM Needs</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">A very useful feature of modern jpeg images is that they usually contain embedded information, date and time of course, but also shutter speed and focal length. So if you have a cheap compact or your mobile you can get an idea of what lenght you use, and then you can start to look at some of your favourite photos or some photos you found frustrating.  Too far away, not close enough, not enough of the scenery and so on.</p>
<p dir="ltr">A very commonly sold modern camera type is the Superzoom which are chunky cameras with a telescopic zoom lens, offering at least as high as a 400mm equivalent often from 28mm wide. So you can take images from wide landscapes to wildlife. Unfortunetly the compromise is that they use small sensors to make the system less cumbersome and to keep the price down. If however you are happy with mobile phone image qaulity, and depth of field control is not important to you while being able to take birds-in-trees shots is, then the latest cameras are not bad, although you may find the picture qaulity is not even as good as the iPhone 6 or Galaxy s4, all be those with much more limited magnification.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Be honest with yourself. A long focal length is just a nice to have, it probably does not reflect the vast majority of pictures you take, while the bulk and limitations such as camera shake and need for a tripod, mean that lenses for an interchangeable camera are rarely used, while a super zoom aka bridge camera is used seldom on the long end, and you carry the bulk and reduction in image quality for no real reason.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However at the other end of the scale  a nice wide angle of 24 or 28mm you will get lovely landscapes, city scapes and so on without having to take panoramas and force people to click or scroll to get the impression.  </p>
<p dir="ltr">Good family portraits begin at around 45mm, head and shoulder shots, and as I say 80-120mm for heads and faces only. This is very well catered for in many smaller compact cameras. On MILC cameras and DSLRs often the kit lenses are just a little short, being around 85 mm max zoom and then you need to swap just to do head shot close ups. However you get a better control of shallow depth of field and background blur, and for APS-C and mFT you get good enough quality to be able to then crop in on shots and make really nice face portraits for example.</p>
<p dir="ltr">There are now though a very few compact cameras which offer this useful range of 24mm to 80/100mm in a zoom and have both a wide aperture of below f2.8 and a larger sensor. They are actually dearer than entry level DSLRs with their single kit lens, but in fact take as good photos while also being able to fit in a jacket pocket. Sony, Panasonic, Olympus and Canon all have enthusiast cameras some of which have the 1" sensor or larger like the mFT sensor and 1.5" sensor.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Lenses for</b> <b>Nice Blurry Backgrounds ?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Depth of field means how much of the image is in focus. For a wide angled landscape of the Scottish Highlands with a lake shore and an obligatory stunted tree, you want a deep sharpness ie extensive depth of field. For a blurred background in a portrait, you want to have a shallow sharpeness, a limited depth of field. The first deep type is actually very well achieved by the latest mobile phone cameras, and you can take very good scanning panoramas the camera stitches together. These are okay for use on facebook, and great if that happened to be an opportunity you didnt have another camera with you. </p>
<p dir="ltr">As I mention above you can cheat with longer focal lengths in achieving the same thing but it is far better to have control over depth of field by essentially having a wide aperture in the main range of your defined needs, which I suggest are those of the enthusiast compacts I mention, or an interchangeable lens system camera with a more expensive zoom lens in the 24-90mm range. A very interesting alternative is to buy a kit camera and then a high quality 35mm semi wide which can be used for everything from close up portraits, body length shots, group shots, street architecture and landscapes. You then queu your gadget legs to achieve zoom ie framing what you want. This also renders the camera very compact. <br>
As you get better at photography you will decide that 'fast' lenses ie those with apertures of f2.8 and lower, are highly desirable because you not only get better control of shallow depth of field, but you can use faster shutter speeds to freeze action and avoid camera shake.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Lenses are really the key to photography and literally the window on the world for all cameras and image capture.<br></p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Reflecting on Your Needs Now</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Now start adding layers of what you want to achieve. Action shots? Long smooth exposures in low light? Silky blurred out backgrounds? Telefoto nature photography? Super wide landscapes? Professional looking portaits and posibly setting up your own stuidio?  Flash free night time street shots ? Video with fidelity for your HDMI tv at home...</p>
<p dir="ltr">Now look at images you have taken and would like to have taken better. Then find images you love. Now go to a shop with some enthusiasts as staff, or if you dare, venture onto a photo chat room on the internet and start discussing those images and what you want to do before you start discussing camera models.</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-72635998611494115832014-10-17T04:50:00.001-07:002014-10-17T04:50:53.761-07:00Decided for the 2nd Time , Micro Four Thirds is Not for Me !<p dir="ltr">The first time I decided mFT was not for me was when I walked into a shop and picked up a PEN EP-1. I was a little captivated by the 1960s retro design, the 12mpx and the good quality lenses. However straight away it just did not feel right in the hand. I also looked at a G1 that day or another day, and decided nope, I wanted somethign a little bigger in my hand and with an OVF, like the old days. I went for a well priced new FT Olympus E450.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Apart from the G/GH cameras, which I find a little small actually, mF T cameras are either retro or basic in ergonomics until you start adding grips or of course tout out for the OMD EM1 or GH4. The time for retro style selling is surely passed, there are only so many hipsters and does the asian market care if it looks like a 1972 Ricoh view finder 35mm cam'? I just wanted something with substance, familiarity, critical mass in the hand.</p>
<p dir="ltr">After this as you know if you follow me, I built up the budget system many other entry level Oly users do, the 14/42 and 40.150 with the faster pretty much pro level 25mm pancake. I was going to go to the OM adapter ring and buy a couple of OM (my old OM stuff was stolen and the rest dissapated ) lenses but really the wide end is okay, no blur but the 14/150 saves the game and takes nearly all my family portrait keepers and nearly all I have published in print. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The problem is that it is all a bit combersome and a bit slow, added to no IBIS on the entry level Oly and piss poor mid ISO performance , with 400 not really being acceptable. It also has a really heavy mirror and shutter release movement which needs correcting for sub 125th sec with lock up delay for the mirror. ( try finding that, remote flash iradio trigger in camera, selectable curtain shutter, bracketing and WB preview and so on in other entry level cameras of 2010 or today for that matter!) So now after almost five years of a lot of fun, much developing my photographic skills and artistic ability, and some notable frustration I am ready for a move.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However it will not be to mFT.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Why not? Well for a pocket sized camera I currently use my mobile phone like most all of us, so the body size is not so criticalI have big hands and like a feeling of weight and proportionality, substance as I say above, in my hand. mFt also has another huge negative and that is the gap between entry level glass and the fast glass. Due to the crop format, you are almost two stops down from APS-C, and this is a physical barrier. The big new pro zoom lenses show that in fact there is compromise and a high price to pay. They lack the range of the old queen and king of FT, the 12-60/50-200 Oly ED SWD glass and in fact are not all that much smaller, they have to have the same diameter and apart from the flange adapter, they need to go to their focal lengths too.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The alternative for me would be of course the wonderful 12-60/50-200 pair with an adapter ring and a....wait for it, only one Camera really works with these lenses and it is a big investment. It hardly can be compared to the D7100 for image output and the video is weaker than its panasonic cousins. (Video suddenly becomes a new hobby from this summer onwards!!!) Now this week actually there are two offers of well under 1000 euros for these lenses plus a 520 or a 630. Seems like a bargain? But wait I have to then still put up with low ISO on all but the E5 if that falls in price and no video, which is annoying because I am not interested in lugging my camcorder and having piles of SD cards to go through after a holiday. </p>
<p dir="ltr">If olympus were to bring out an E50 or E700 type SLR mirrored with the new sony 16mpx and 4K vid and so on, then I would get this glass. Or an FT mirrorless, or a bigger mFT body in a mid range price. They are not going to do any of that, they are more interested in petite asian hands fondeling their wares in the shops than caucasian quarter backs fumbling with the small dials and touch screen.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The thing about mFT for me as an amateur is that the glass for the blur per dollar is just not worth it. In the wide to mid range where I want to throw the back ground then I have no way apart from post. Which is Doable. Okay there is a lot of second hand kit, but basically only the GH3 , 4 and OMD EM1 interest me and they are all pretty expensive compared to the D7100, and the pentax k50. I want weather proofing so that limits me again, and then I cannot use the SWD lenses on the GH cameras. Bummer</p>
<p dir="ltr">Back up here then, I have a nice little system for my daughter to use and to take on holiday. If I did buy the glass and say an E520 or E630 then I would have a nicer system, and with the E5 I would have a pro system then for sailing and maritime photography (in clement weather that is!) I couuld do it all NEW with the K50 and get better DOF control. better high ISO, more MPX of course and then decent enough video, in a system arguably tougher than the e5 with the pro WR glass combi. Bigger yes. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Back up there also on affordable mFF and my need for a "glove compartment camera" Panasonic have indeed pulled it off with the excellent little gem, the LX100 which takes near mFT quality image technically, but with that lovely fast glass , latest generation DR, good mid to high iso performance and with great video. All for well under a grand, 699 pooonds in blighty. Short on the loing end? Well it opens up other things for me than my wonderful 40/150 plastic megatastic Oly lens. It will be with me much more often too which is the best camera to have, and it can take DSLR quality images for screen use at least, if not maybe being absolute pico peeking sharp when opened up lower than f8.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I would expect with wishful thinking that there would be some lenses like this in mFT which are then kit quality but with sub f 3 performance, but I am wishing again. It is more likely that there will be more mFT fixed lens cameras, especially in the bridge area which can then compete ...but with what? In effect they are competing with mFT in terms of the price point, but deliver better image value due to more DOF control. These will though be from the main two or three manufacturers already in mFT of course and will compete with the next generation of larger sensor compacts, of which maybe two will use the FT sized sony 16mpx chip anyway. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I see that as the future, would like to see more mid range prices in mFT, there is though a good used market for the primes, but also I would like to see a new FT camera or mFT mid range camera optimised in ergonomics for the FT lenses and new big lenses from Oly in mFT (300mm inc next year) </p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-91892032645948791922014-10-15T04:07:00.001-07:002014-10-15T04:07:59.558-07:00Panasonic Lumix DMC LX 100 Shows Its Value<p dir="ltr"> <br>
Finally the jury is in final discussion in the back rooms, while all over the papers it is clear the LX100 has won its case.  Purely and simply it is far better value for money than a mid level mFT camera with either the 12/35 or the oly 12/40 fast zooms.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Technically though it can be argued that the camera needs some tweaks to its jpeg software. The <a href=" http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_g7x&attr13_1=sony_dscrx100m3&attr13_2=sony_a5100&attr13_3=panasonic_dmclx100&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=125&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=100&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0&y=0">evidence finally from digital photography review, </a>is right there now which both appeases the prosecution for the pixel people, while also basically making panasonic go do some tweaks on the fast pass jpeg processing, more on that below.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The new mFT sensor camera has gone back in my mind to some of the soul of compact camera photography. It is a small tool for taking impressive, high visual impact pictures, doing this a little incognito even candid, and basically is something you take with you when you dont take a DSLR. It has a tactile, eyes off camera way of just going between A and S or P, just a click without needing to line the screen or EVF up to line of sight. You are going to be working with the settings for this little, inconspicuous beauty while your eyes are firmly on the subject. Head up out of camera I call it. Being a photographer and not a camera technician. Capturing high image value while of course not perfecting pixcel peeping image quality, it is a compact not a mid format studio camera!!<br></p>
<p dir="ltr"><b><i>Not convinced ? Firstly look at the RAW and compare to the LX7 and G7X and then the GM1. It seems that Panny will have to address a couple of in camera processing issues because the raw processing (at this early stage of convertor software) catches back details and adds some subtlety to the colours</i></b> <b><i>for the LX100.</i></b><br><br></p>
<p dir="ltr"> It is interesting that the LX 7 raw and jpeg files show little difference at all, meaning that Panalieca have fully optimised the jpeg engine there, while there needs to be some optimising on the LX100 before it ships out. I suggest they take the sharpness up, and link that to f stop, take the contrast up again linked to low f stops in particular, alter the gradation slightly and then drop the saturation of colours slightly while allowing for a bit more brightness, possibly achieved anyway in the higher contrast. </p>
<p dir="ltr"><b><i>Then have a look at the depth of field control, which for the money is best in class. That is the rub for mFT, you need to go up in focal length and back off before you get it. Irritating in a portable camera, curable only with expensive top end lenses. </i></b></p>
<p dir="ltr"><i>This is the big problem for me with mFT, you have to spend a huge amount of money for the fast lenses really, okay they are good and comparable to the better Canikon APS-C quality, but so far there is a lack of budget lenses which maybe compromise a little on something but make up for it with killer speed and depth of field control. I would hate to suggest that the mFT federal bureau are holding up mFT software for new APS=C lens conversions from the OEM folk at Sigma and Tamron. I expect though maybe a mid range fast zoom which trumps the lens shift on the two Brand wide to mid fasties and is much faster wide open, say an f1.8/f 4 25-75 from tamron, and also a killer portrait lens at around f 2 / f 2.8 with a macro switch from sigma. Possibly collapsing, we cannot turn our eyes away from these systems being compact. From the main marques, Panny will probably do a couple more motor zoom video lenses, while Oly, well a long end zoom and of course the previewed 300mm f2.8 is out soon, around maybe 2000 USD all be it. Kodak have a whacky races long telephoto which although it may need manual focus, with focus peaking it may be a bit of a fun lens to own. </i></p>
<p dir="ltr"><i><b>Also the fast mFT glass is not that much smaller than say the wonder duo from Olympus for FT DSLRs , the 12/60 and 50/200mm covering 24mm to 400mm at f2.8. This is because it is pretty much impossible to make them any small</b></i><i>er . All that has become smaller is the camera bodies, mainly by reducing this flange distance and removing the pentaprism over the older mirror touting FT DSLRs. Ye cannae defy the laws of physics, f stop is an absolute length to diameter relationship. Given also the need for software correction for the super short flange to film plane distance (which makes mFT possible) it seems that optically both Panny and Oly have reached the limits of the speed to range trade off in zooms, and are not willing to go any further. </i><i><b>The LX100 trumps this by exceeding the speed on f stop wide open, and then compacting down more than the 12/35 and only beingg a tweet short of the 12/40. </b></i></p>
<p dir="ltr">On telefoto, let us talk tele-conversion, I think that in fact panny may have a 1.4 teleconvertor front end in mind for the LX100 ( what other up selling opportunities do they have????? an LX110 ??) which I could see myself using if it was okay in the centre, used maybe a further aspect crop and then was actually under 200 USD.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Need more convincing that this camera could just maybe take much better artistic shots than your five year old DSLR or your point and shoot ??? More links then > cut and paste them at will to see what the camera has to offer in depth of field (blurry backgrounds) and </p>
<p dir="ltr">https://www.flickr.com/photos/cameralabs/sets/72157648747458481</p>
<p dir="ltr">http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/10/13/panasonic-lx100-initial-gallery-posted</p>
<p dir="ltr">http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_lx100_review/image_quality/</p>
<p dir="ltr">http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_lx100_review/sample_images/<br></p>
<p dir="ltr"><b><i>As with mFT though, it could end up replacing your DSLR because of the creative quality of images you can capture, and because you miss fewer photo opportunities.</i></b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Now in effect this camera is a 12 mpx mFT camera and as you may expect for the size and not least price, it will not take as good a technical image quality as any mFT camera with the fast zooms mentioned above. However it will achieve the same over all artistic impression, the same pop and bang for youse in the USA, for a far better price.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Essentially you are though getting only those 12mpx, all be it in a nice multi aspect choice which appeals to me. BNut the D4s is just launched with 16  mpx so what are we moaning about ? many an only D3 on 12 too. Ah, wandering onto compact camera forums is bad for the psyche. You are not really getting then the Sony 16 mpx mFT chip performance, nor their 1" in terms of ISO. You are getting better colours though.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Also you are only getting just above eye sight magnification at 75 mm, which is short of the sweet range for portraits being around 90 - 120mm in old money, the Full Frame SLR days. Hang on though a minute, this is a really small camera and very unobtrusive. It focuses super fast apparently in low light too, and focuses down to good minimum distances (with a macro setting too btw, which is a real plus for many of us) so you can do go-go-zoom-gadget-legs or arms and get closer in. Also the centre of the images are pretty sharp and detailed whatever the fringes are, so you have maybe an acceptable digital crop post zooming of upto 1.5, down to around 8 mpx for printed output, but acceptable down to I would say 4 mpx for putting up on Flickr and of course, then 2 mpx for anything else on the web were it will be shown in no more than 1 mpx resolution on screen. </p>
<p dir="ltr">In video you are getting 4 K which means 8 megapixels per frame, yes you need a pair of big SD cards which will cost you maybe 300 dollars. There is an HDMI out which presumably can give a live feed for that quality for recording perhaps onto something external, I am not getting my hopes up. On a 64 gig chip you maybe get 20 minutes of 4K and an hour of HDMI. What you do get is GH3 quality sharpness and dynamic range, plus panasonics rather nice muted you could say natural, beigey colour pallette. Also there are art filters, mostly complete junk, but a couple I saw would really be nice to use to give a feel for the shot. Videography here I come any ways, I have a couple of hours to cut to 40 minutes from a Blue Grass Music Festival from a camcorder. So this does actually excite me,  but so far no external mike is a bad, it is like selling a luxury car without sun visors.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b><i>Is mine on pre order? Well no, I do not want to buy this camera before I handle it and feel that the 75mm long end is acceptable, and that focus works well on moving objects and low light. </i></b><br></p>
<p dir="ltr">Panasonic LX100 Hands-On Field Test (With HC-X100…: <a href="http://youtu.be/4K7v3IyuMnE">http://youtu.be/4K7v3IyuMnE</a></p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-20478966518545137922014-10-13T13:33:00.001-07:002014-10-13T13:33:13.420-07:00A Quandry of Choice.....Choosing a Compact and A New System<p dir="ltr">Ok let us get into this, I am at a quandry ...what to buy, and when....</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b><i>Firstly Compact, specifically ...Am I Madly in Love with the Panasonic LX100?</i></b></p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>LX100 Lumix DMC Range from Panasonic</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">It is a real shame that this camera has been lumped in the LX range because it really is an mFT camera, just with a single fixed zoom lens. So the LX5 to LX7 owners are all over the camera with claims from early jpegs that it is not as good a camera even or not worth the extra money. They should have called it a G WHZ..The gee whizz.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Here are the questions I should ask myself</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>What is this camera replacing? My DSLR?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">No, but yes, it is replacing my DSLR only in so much as my mobile phone camera does. It is really a replacement to the HTC desire camera and also an old Konica periscope lens camera, which was not bad, still works actually.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Like my Pentax K1000, the E450 is going to stay, it is not worth selling and I love it.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I<b>s the LX 100 worth the Money?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Well that is a big ask., Yes when on top of the LX7, no when compared to other cameras a hundred dollars either side of it perhaps. </p>
<p dir="ltr">It has EVF, 11 fps, 4k vid, in camera raw developer, f1.7 and acceptable iso 3200 perf. All that has got to be 300 dollars at least more than the lx7.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Is it then, better value than going into mFT?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Micro Four Thirds is a bit of rip off IMHO until now that is, and then you have to think that they have a pro range which are not that much cheaper than good entry level full frame cameras. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The main reason the Lumic LX100 is better value than mFT is the fast lens. You have to pay 1200 USD for the 12mm (= 24mm ff) wide end fast f 2 ish zooms. </p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>How Else Does it Beat mFT?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">It beats it by size of course too. mFT plus the fast wide glass is not all that small, you have to go to the collapsing /retracting lenses and they are a lot slower. Basically this camera for artistic effect if not absolute sharpness, equals the 1000 usd 12-35mm panny and then you have no body.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Is this the Right Time to Buy a First of Type Camera?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Absolutely not! I would be crazy to buy it, not knowing when it will be "obsolete" , outcompeted and therefore likely to crash in new price.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However I buy a camera as an investment and an excitement! I have had the E450 four and a half years, it is completely technically obsolete, yet on a sunny day or with a tripod it can take as good images as any 35mm film photographer could in the 1980s. </p>
<p dir="ltr">I would however, have been disappointed to be owning an XZ 2 now from Oly, with the new prices being half what they were, maybe in anticipation a 3 will be out soon, but that camera is quite obsolete. Once again though, if you thihnk of two years of shooting with a jacket pocket camera with that level of control and the great OOC colours then it would not be thrown away money, and now you have a camera to keep in the glove compartment.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Down Sides of the LX100?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Well the jury is still considering technical evidence. It can be that the lens is soft ish or that the jpeg engine settings need to be adjusted. </p>
<p dir="ltr">It is rather short on the long end, queue shanks pony zoom, but that lovely 24mm eq is what I am in for. </p>
<p dir="ltr">EXIF myself, well of course all my "peachy keepers" and shots I have sold or won competitions with have been done on the Olympus poor man's secret weapon, the FT 40-150 which has stellar glass encased in a plastic coat. It really is liz hurly naked under a black plastic mac'. </p>
<p dir="ltr">But given that before I used the fast primes on 35mm and also my mobile, or the nifty fifty 25mm now gets slung on the e450 on duller days, or light camera need days, then I am using zoom zoom gadget legs!</p>
<p dir="ltr">I think the long end is too short for really good portraits and especially candid shots. But that is where the crop zoom of quality images comes in, and also new ways of taking shots, with a smaller less obtrusive camera. </p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Upisides</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Well as BH point out and the Camera Store, they have taken out a level of twisting and turning. You basically go onto the dials and one twist and you have not only selected function, but also value for shutter or f stop. Combine both, then you are instantly in full manual without having to peer through the view finder, or on the camera sccreen and start finding where you were from your last settings.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Videography</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">Well until this year I was a bit anti video on DSLRs and so on, and generally saw video for us as kids poop for first time, gaa gaa, first day school....you know, flarey poor DR and just a fun record. In fact I just delegated it all back to the wife with the camcorder responsibility, which meant both less shots and also poorer attention to detail .</p>
<p dir="ltr">Then I went with the camera to a blue grass music festival out in the woods, and it was so cool to have video and sound. I have yet to cut a little film together, but I am hooked. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Ok sound has to be synced in, the in camera mike is probably useless, but EDR 4K video!???? I have gone from the stone age and am driving a porsche!</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-70414892430384855212014-10-10T04:22:00.000-07:002014-10-10T04:22:05.843-07:00Panasonic Triumph With Their LX100 !Finally we get some photographers willing to take just a little time to think about what this camera can do and how the <a href="http://www.photographyblog.com/reviews/panasonic_lumix_dmc_lx100_review/conclusion/" target="_blank">Panasonic LX100 should be shown off.</a><br />
<br />
Sharpness is technically not any better perhaps than the smaller sensor competition, but it is perfectly acceptable to me and when I get publishers asking for SMALLER files so their inboxes don't explode and they can work super quick setting up for Litho, then I feel this is pixel peeping and the detractors are missing the point of the camera.<br />
<br />
Panasonic have in fact probably found out that high end DSLR owners from the main brands are not interested in mFT as a second or that all important, "travel" camera because to get anywhere near decent bokeh you either have to pay big, big money for the zoom glass, carry even more dollars in your back in three fast primes, or get used to backing up from the subject with the longer kit lenses. (which works just fine actually even on the kit 40-150 type lenses btw, nice bokeh over eq 100mm, you just need to back up for some shots)<br />
<br />
So how to lever more people into the brand, and how to sell more sensor chips so your in-costs on those are cheaper by volume?<br />
<br />
As pointed out this camera trumps their GX and latest GM cameras by size, 4K video and the lens it comes with. Although 75mm is a little short, at f2.8 (eq maybe ok f4.5 on FF) it will take portraits with a thrown background, and in post you will get an easier magic select to then further modify the blur-bokeh.<br />
<br />
It does a few things in camera too with RAW and the histogram which may seem a little trite for a compact, but just add value for the clued up DSLR photographer who wants to also avoid time in post when they are out snapping with a compact.<br />
<br />
It is too short for my sweet spot use from my EXIF I see, but that is then only because I need to change where the hell I stand and how I compose or crop in post. Like when I go out with a prime lens on my DSLR, a pancake or the like and just take shots with the camera in a small case or no case at all.<br />
<br />
People are nit picking away from the G7 and the RX100 III but these cameras are not really in the same sector, and hell what is their resale value going to be next year when sony do a NEX to compete with the LX100 and canon bring out their new mid sized (ie large for compact single lens) G 8 or what ever it will be.<br />
<br />
Also Leica may do something weird using the whole 16mpx of the mFT chip you never know, and sony may break in with a short zoom, single lens "street" camera based on their new FF mirrorless. I would say Sony are ripe for that, thus the LX110 would be the lower end of a new segment once only a Leica niche.<br />
<br />
I have photographed with SLRs since 1982, so I like dials and the A-ring and the kind of certainty they bring. Thumb Wheels with PASM are irritating for me with my formative years in fully manual cameras.<br />
<br />
I need a lift right now for many reasons, and I just cant justify upgrading from Olympus FT, it is money thrown down the drain to try and bridge between E series and the EM1 with the two "fast" zooms. They are over priced on the used market still and dont work all that well on the new on chip PDAF OMD model which in itself is a little over priced if you dont get a 12-40 deal.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-56239321826357847182014-10-09T14:49:00.001-07:002014-10-09T14:49:22.131-07:00What Next for DF , a Df ? what system next<p dir="ltr">You know I very nearly jumped ship from Olympus as soon as the Nikon D90 was on the market, and only the recession continuing to bite kept me away from that camera and a three lens set up.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However despite being bitter at Oly' for never making an E6 or as it may be an E8 and E700 now with the sony 16mpx chip, I do not regret holding onto my E450 and three lens line up. It has forced me to live within limitations of the camera while exploring my own new territories. For an entry level camera it has SO many features you do not get with CanNikon, and it is really neat in size. It gets mistaken for an OMD these days.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Although I dare say I could spend more time on late curtain flash and some other little used stuff on the E450 it is now high time I moved on. I no longer see the challenges of getting some shots, rather the frustrations of ISO image noise, no IBIS and fairly slow glass even at f2.8.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I still love my E450 and have no intention of selling it, but what next?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Freds Needs</p>
<p dir="ltr">1) I need something like the LX100 or if there is a 1" sony chipped XZ3 . THis is not a replacement to a DSLR, it is a supplement to my general enjyment of image capture, and would be pulled out when my mobile currently is. </p>
<p dir="ltr">2) I need then another slightly more serious camera system</p>
<p dir="ltr">3) I want weather proofing for sailing and skiing</p>
<p dir="ltr">4) I want good ISO 3200 </p>
<p dir="ltr">5) I want affordable glass which does the following</p>
<p dir="ltr"> a) FF eq 24mm -400mm in two lenses, ie the same as buying the Zuiko 12-60/50-200</p>
<p dir="ltr">b) a compact prime either at eq 32/35mm somewhere or at 80 - 120 mm</p>
<p dir="ltr">c) A very compact pancake</p>
<p dir="ltr">d) some retro lens conversion</p>
<p dir="ltr">e) a market for second hand glass, with some people dumping it off!! LOL</p>
<p dir="ltr">6) IBIS then over the need for all lenses to be OIS</p>
<p dir="ltr">7) Video is becoming a must after this years blue grass festival and a sailing event. Why carry a camcorder and a DSLR like i did at the festival? Why not have the kids playing ball in HDMI? 8 mpx frame selection for stills would be cool in camera too, but can be done in post anyway. </p>
<p dir="ltr">8) Wifi is nice to have now c'mon it is a must these days</p>
<p dir="ltr">9) the consumerist in me wants to explore something new! Sad but true.</p>
<p dir="ltr">10) doesnt need wafer thin DOF, and does not correspondingly need to break the bank<br></p>
<p dir="ltr">Not far down the list and in combination with not spending the earth, then the WR points one way and that is the not exactly foible free, Pentax</p>
<p dir="ltr">But wait, the K50 is a stunner of a camera, ok not the latest video but Nikon APSc standard AF and ISO performance, and "kit" lenses which are WR and pretty much pro lenses of years gone by from Canon without a metal flange. The rubbery look is actually starting to look retro, like some kind of 1992 EOS competitor that never was.</p>
<p dir="ltr">You could say though that I could do all I want with a WR version of the FZ1000, or I could go find some other MLILC system to suit, but you know, I often feel my oly is small in my hands !</p>
<p dir="ltr">Pentax has its limitations but really the "kit" glass is pretty specialist, sharp and the thing is it is NOT slower than the supposedly royal performance of the FT olympus lenses in f2 and f2.8. That equates to f 4 in APS-C, so hold up! Bokeh is fine, and then you have higher ISO to go beyond the exposure. I dont subscribe to the concept punted of " total light", it is a linear relationship.</p>
<p dir="ltr">It is a big jump in size though, so I will need to go get touchy feely. The other big deal is that Pentax cameras depreciate like hell when a new model comes out, as the stores sell off the k30 right now for example. They are a bit quirky, like olympus in FT days, so some just fall away because their CaNikon flocking mates take better shots than they can, or just slag them off. Others get pretentions for full frame of course. and then you dump the whole system on the market to raise the deposit and first three payments on an FF with two lenses. </p>
<p dir="ltr">First purchase is not a DSLR no matter what, enthusiast compact zoom cameras have come so far that now you really have choice at 300 euros to 1000 Euros. The most exciting is the LX100 but the best value is the XZ2, presumably an XZ3 is on the way. Then you have CaniSony erm, yeah those two, and Leica for some more cash and then the p9000 from NikoNikon ahem, yeah. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Sad as I am I still get excited about the E450, but also fall back into stopping myself and thinking, will there be camera shake? will there be any Bokeh or enough so POST can auto select the subject for laying on blur? Basically the E450 will not blow-away enthusiast compacts any more, used mediocrily a canon G series could eat it three years ago. Still it makes great images and will be in the family for years to come what ever I get next.<br>
</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-90474376716500267052014-10-09T13:54:00.001-07:002014-10-09T14:15:48.414-07:00Olympus Leave A Generation Behind....no DSLR, No Play<p dir="ltr">My little foray into the LX100 and wish list for mFt are kind of side shows to what is creeping up on me. </p>
<p dir="ltr">It is not for me that my DSLR is out of date, a 2010 model. If we had no digital and it had not been stolen and divested then my two body OM system would have been serviced and used today, I did not like AF when it came out and get frustrated by it now.</p>
<p dir="ltr">My problem is that I am finally outgrowing my Olympus E450, I have gone to many of the edges of its performance envelope and come back happy, but increasingly frustrated.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I was set to upgrade through first the swd 12/60 and then a new body and the 50-200 but the E5 was a bit of a too little too late from the company who obviously had their eyes set on bigger gross margin in the PEN series. Okay you could do a really good travel pro set up for under 4000 euros or dollars but then you just were not really getting a pro level camera.. Then the D90 blew it away, all be it without weather sealing.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Olympus have tried with the OMD EM1 to put on chip PDAF as we predicted so that it would function with the expensive glass. But wait, I dont have the glass and it does not work ALL that well anyway. Also the OMD has less than great ergonomics for me. Yeah, small light and weather proofed. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Given the f stop equivalent of APS-c for the fast lenses is about f3.5 then you start to see that DOF control is still lacking in the mFT system for the price of those rather extortionate fast lenses, especially the new zooms. There is no legacy glass to call on which will work acceptably.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Surely Olympus should look at the figures and just see if it is worth putting the tooling out to Thailand OEM and getting the 16mpx sony chip into the E5 body and making a cheaper non articulating lens version also with WR to compete with the only other sub 1000 usd with lens system, the pentax K50? Alas no. OMD sells in torrents, PENS in deluges so sating the tiny appetite of keen E series users is.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Actually I dare say you could do a whole load of tests and conclude the K50 with its two base zoom lenses f3.5 are actually better than the E5 and the 12-60/50-200mm at well under half the price. So olympus would be making a new system which is likely to be twice as expensive as its main rival in quality, with the only advantages being size/weight and glass investment assets from before.</p>
<p dir="ltr">The really irritating thing for me wanting to upgrade is the fact that so many Olympus users ARE enthusiasts. There are not the droves of CaNikoSon where there is a good second hand market and people often just want rid of stuff they got as presents, or see as no longer trendy or just not used. So Oly have held their value of the dearer glass. 400 euros for the two serious first lenses each, the 50mm macro and the 14/54 Mrk II both of which will be five years old or more, and both of which will have been well used by said enthusiasts.</p>
<p dir="ltr">As with Olympus OM glass and all the Tamron - sigma OM mounted guff from the 80s, even a good enough lens fantastic for its day will loose any value. In fact holding on to them just too long means that suddenly, suddenly everyone wakes up to see that the world has moved so far on from your original system that it is obsolete. Worthless. The value of putting SWD as a new or used purchase onto EM1 is negligible , you are getting an oversized, over priced, bad deal.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I have seen one 14-54 and one 12-60 bundled in with a Exxx hundred series camera and the kit lenses, for around five hundred euros, but you know what, a five year old lens which has the E5 as the latest usable body is not worth that. I would pay 700 euros for the two SWD zooms, not a penny more and they would have to work. </p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-25540313187359380472014-10-06T05:32:00.001-07:002014-10-06T05:32:48.512-07:00Panasonic Lumix LX100 Cat Among the Pigeons...Pros and Cons?<p dir="ltr">Sample shots and so on are now running from the usual sources as a trickle, which will soon become a torrent for the LX100 wee beastie from Panasonic.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Several of us in the forums predicted a single lens compact version of the mFT system, mostly we thought it would be either Olympus or perhaps the Leica brand who would swing in. However it was the R&D power house at Pana/Leica which got it out, first and maybe uniquely for a while at least.</p>
<p dir="ltr">"Large" sensor compacts are of course the whole raison d'etre for mFT and its immitators, and the life line which has kept Leica going as a brand apart, based on its core values and probably a well leveraged customer base. However single lens zoom compact cameras were still generally poking around in the smaller 1" (square inch) sensor, all be that with some very pleasing results, they were based on pushing the chips and most of all the in camera hard wired processing, especially the jpeg engine, to make flattering images, which after all is what the compact segment has been doing since the early days. High contrast, over sharpened, saturated images and now with a degree of smoothing to reduce noise. This area has been of course influenced by the pixel power ignorance that more pixels is better, and that digital crop zooms on these tiny chips is of some value. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Now there are several cameras at the high end of this from Fuji in particular in their X range with in built lenses, but it seems that Panasonic will indeed trompe le monde with their offering.  Why is that so and what may be the draw backs of this camera?</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Pro's of the Lumix DMC LX100</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">1) Large sensor, proven mFT quality, dynamic range and ISO performance<br>
2) Fast Lens, which is truly good for depth of field <br>
3) Wide 24mm end - this is a deal maker!!!<br>
4) Small size. It is inside jacket pocket size!<br>
5) GH/GM/GH Features <br>
6) 4K video<br>
7) Clean design, no tilting screen and other stuff to break<br>
8) Useable EVF<br>
9) Price !! compared to mFT of the same f stop as a system</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Cons</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">1) Panasonic's bad colour pallette in camera - skin tones and some odd magentas in particular<br>
2) The long end is only 75mm, just useful for portraits <br>
3) Potential softness in images with sub f4.0 aperture<br>
4) Maybe also Softness and colour abberations at medium to high ISOs.<br>
5) Quite complex menus, lack of multi button allocation to customise ?<br>
6) First of type issues perhaps ?<br>
7) No flash and other things like utility connector (mic in etc) and tilting screen, no touch control on the screen. LCD and not AMOLED screen, quite small these days too.<br>
8) You cannot upgrade lenses to bigger telephoto than 75mm</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Comments on the Design</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">I think it is kind of a bit me too in design" Hey look a retro camera , looks like a 1980 Ricoh range finder camera" , although it is very clean and does have simple rubber ergonomic pads which make it really look like a one hand operated street journalist camera. This is where they want to play, it competes with the Fuji xs and of course the PENS and Leicas, and is smarter than the Canon and Sony competitors.</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Lost in Menus</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">It seems this camera will be like some other Pannys, big on menus when you want to do quite ordinary set ups like auto bracket, or use some of the funky features like video to still panorama. </p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Buttons and Dials</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">There is part of me which really likes the idea, like the Ricoh classic 35mm compact of the late 70s, that you have a good old aperture ring on the lens, and a shutter ring, with an exposure adjust wheel. Then I think, heck that is not really how I use a modern camera. Yes a clicking function ring on the lens, but rather a conventional DSLR thumb wheel for spinning though ASP settings, or useable with other features like exp' compensation. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The Canadian Eh? Camera Store did a pretty honest reveiw, got real excited and then backed off on the dials and wee buttons which did not seem customisable but did seem to get hit when feeling the way to the shutter release button</p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Bang for Buck / the IQ to Wonga Equation.</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">This camera will retail in europe for around 900 euros, plus of course you will want a big, fast expensive SDHC card for it, pushing it up over the 1000 euro mark. But then that is it! No more costly lenses, no more temptation to try a prime, or save up for the latest wide to mid range zoom. Essentially you have just bought yourself a 12mpx mFT camera with a 12/35 f2.8 lens for the price of JUST that lens plus a kit lens in your first purchase of the package. Add a comparable body and you are up at at least half the price again.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Okay, back off there, you would buy mFT for all the expandability ?  Well the fast primes and the new fast zooms are just WAY over priced. You are talking pro prices onto the format which inherently is not as good at DOF and a few other parameters than Full Frame. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Buying on a budget with kit lenses, you could go for a double kit with the two zooms, where the longer zoom makes an adequate portrait lens, but the lenses are quite slow and you run into short depth of field and hyperfocal distance. Okay olympus now boasts great high ISO performance, 16mpx croppability and improved IBIS on their top cameras but to get the same IQ as the new LX100 you are talking twice the money for body -glass combo.  </p>
<p dir="ltr">Thank fully though, Oly have sold a tonne of OMD cameras and Panny has sold wads of Lumix mFT so there is a second hand market out there, with quick sellers offering bargains if you are up early in the morning. So you could be looking at a 14/16 mpx body with the ISO performance, a long kit zoom with IS ( alternatively oly IBIS), a new fast zoom and either one of the wonderful primes such as the 17 or the 45 for around 900 euros on a very 'must sell today to buy a D4 " basis. Because more basic consumers have dabbled with advanced photography with mFT, but find their iPhone or S4 takes most of their actual shots, there is a get shot of it mentality out there which sets the cat amongst the pigeons of the old enthusiast sellers market, who would rather not sell than get less than 2/3rds the new price out of their kit. </p>
<p dir="ltr">A good thing about Panny is there penetration to the new high street /shopping centre chain stores so I will be able to pop out and have a play very, very soon with this camera and what I will be looking for is</p>
<p dir="ltr">1) Portrature - will this camera take those once a year iconographic family shots which I know I can get on my DSLR  ?  Is 75mm and f2.8 enough for me ? </p>
<p dir="ltr">2) Depth of field for portraits of couse, but also other things</p>
<p dir="ltr">3) Focusing - will there be foibles and mis hits?</p>
<p dir="ltr">4) Mode controllability , will the menus frustrate me?</p>
<p dir="ltr">5) Soft IQ when wide open ?</p>
<p dir="ltr">6) Peripheral abberations to IQ especially in 16>9 mode ? </p>
<p dir="ltr"><b>Why I May Buy ASAP?</b></p>
<p dir="ltr">As you can tell dear reader, I am really champing at the bit on this camera. It takes my need to experiment with 24mm, semi macro and not least high DR, high res' video and exceeds this by having a f1.7 at the wide end and 4K video. </p>
<p dir="ltr">Also I have a burning need to get away from DSLR because I am ahem, using my mobile in far, far to many photo opportunities because the DSLR with three lenses, despite being Oly FT, is a whole camera bag. I also see that in mFT I would be carrying around three lenses and irritated in wet or dusty conditions about changes of lens.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Furthermore I now need high ISO. Have mono pod will travel, but need high ISO </p>
<p dir="ltr">In terms of resale too, I reckon a quick trial followed by purchase is low risk with this camera, it is likely not to be upgraded by panny for at least 18 months, giving a big resale window. They are good at stemming leaks in panny so that bodes also well. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The only reasons not to get this would be if an OMD system came on the market with a fast zoom and 45mm, and one wider prime for 1100 Euros, but that is unlikely. In any case my biggest hole is for a carry anywhere, point and shoot wonderful shots without worrying.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Alternatively the other reason would be that olympus come out with an XZ based on the mFT 16mpx chip and double trump the new king of compacts!! </p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-60144265519231263322014-10-03T08:52:00.001-07:002014-10-04T03:23:22.815-07:00Panasonic Trompe Le Monde With the DMC-LX100<p dir="ltr">I have been wish listing for a long time now a compact camera which uses the mFT four thirds aspect 'large' sensor in a compact with non interchangeable lenses. I reckoned Olympus would be first out, or perhaps a new player or even Leica, but it turned out to be their parent and current kings of compact enthusiast cameras <a href="http://m.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc -lx100">Panasonic with their new Lumix-DMC-LX100 wonder machine.</a></p>
<p dir="ltr"><a href="http://m.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100/5">http://m.dpreview.com/previews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-lx100/5</a></p>
<p dir="ltr"> <a href="http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4K7v3IyuMnE">Canadians ----camera review 12   Minutes of the LX100 in the field!</a><br><br></p>
<p dir="ltr">Several of my predictions have come absolutely true, but anyone with a reasonable understanding of how cameras work, the current line up of models available in mFT system cameras and a bit of imagination could come up with namely:</p>
<p dir="ltr">1) Fast Lens, compact retracting lens<br>
2) Lens elements individually adjusting<br>
3) Wide end 24mm eq<br>
4) Some compromise on long end to keep size down and f stop light<br>
6) EVF<br>
7) Not being able to use the whole mFT chip<br><br><br><br><br></p>
<p dir="ltr">The latter is a kind of quirk of the line of thinking that something has to give it you start trying to build something which physically must be almost as broad as it is long ie the f stop is a physically defined factor, you cannot escape the need for wide glass and in mFT, software correction. This prediction was also made in light of the fact that there is no point in trying to make an optimalised mid sized chip to be enveloped in the light circle of the lens when you have standard production of mFT and have optimised so much software for this, in parrticular JPEG engine and autofocus. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The camera is kept really quite small, not tiny for the asian market, and for my large hands I do not see anthing but advantage. </p>
<p dir="ltr">To cut to the quick I will include links to other people's run through the look and feel and controls below.</p>
<p dir="ltr">Here though are some key questions and some observations></p>
<p dir="ltr">1) Quite short top end focal length  of 74mm.  </p>
<p dir="ltr">This means that the camera is actually competing for my EXIF with my kit lens, my oly 25mm f2.8 super lens, and of course my mobile phone and shelved older shirt pocket Konica (which took some great, great creative shots which stand up to 24" prints btw, more on the megapixel issue below)</p>
<p dir="ltr">2) Outcompetes older Olympus FT and mFT for price, size, MPX, and ISO</p>
<p dir="ltr">Where this outcompetes my current Olympus set up is that it does the range 24/70mm in glorious sub f 3 and with better ISO performance, onto a higher megapixel base plus I quite like alternative aspect shots, 1:1 and 16:9 are acvctually favourites in post proc!</p>
<p dir="ltr">Of course then it also becomes a jacket pocket camera to replace my mobile, which I do take some stunning shots with but always regret the IQ and not having my Oly system with me.The best camera is the one you have with you!!!</p>
<p dir="ltr">So in terms of thinking about getting into the mFT system with a fast 'street lens' then you are talking about quite an investment pre GH1 and EM5 or OMD body wise, with the 12/35 and 12/40 being still grossly expensive lenses which are a bit over specced in terms of the amateurs who will mostly be buying them. </p>
<p dir="ltr">3) How wil lit perform at the longer end with bokeh and the OIS system?</p>
<p dir="ltr">Two questions from the one thing/ how does it perform at the loing end? It is a focal length just into useable portaiture, so it must have decent bokeh, and for hand held the OIS has to work at the long end otherwise it is just a little icon label not worth the ink it is printed on.  In my FT experience and from lining up to buy the f2.8 SWS lenses, it is enough but not that much, it needs IS and it needs high ISO to work, and bokeh is short of APS-C for the same focal length and aperture.</p>
<p dir="ltr">4) This Camera has KILLER video.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I was not much into video before, and relegated the CD card camcorder to being used by other family members while I took stills. But I have really changed my mind, especially with the XZ2 on the market which was impressive.</p>
<p dir="ltr">I now see video as a whole new art, integrating to my other hobbies and of course family chronicles. </p>
<p dir="ltr">With 4K video and mFT chip qaulity, this is just a boon. </p>
<p dir="ltr">The only fly in the ointment seems to be the lack of a microphone jack, although that may be just overlooked with an option for a hot shoe adapter?</p>
<p dir="ltr">5) Flash. Not inbuilt, no big issue especially if they have included remote radio triggering in camera, so you can get any flash unit and pop it in your extra inside pocket.</p>
<p dir="ltr">6) Should I just Wait for Something Even Better?</p>
<p dir="ltr">It seems panasonic have gathered everything they could and pressed GO ....but maybe it is too good to be true?  </p>
<p dir="ltr">I am not waiting long on the fence, the only comments are it is not weather sealed and it is quite short at the long end.</p>
<p dir="ltr">However it is going to be about 200 / 600 Euros cheaper than getting into the equivalent mFT with fast lenses and an EVF, plus they will be a bit bigger and the ergonimics poorer.</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-53943640654787956122014-08-11T08:17:00.001-07:002014-08-11T16:01:26.247-07:00Quick WIsh List - mFT<p>Here is an impromptu wish list for something all Olympus</p>
<p>EM1 ergonomics and features<br>
zoom f2.8 over range 12-40 and 25-150 - save me doing so many lens swaps in the mid range 30-60<br>
an f2 or better portrait short zoom 30-80mm<br>
a macro convertor ring which maybe crops the frame for best results<br>
Depth of Field / Focus auto bracketing for macro<br>
Focus Lock / Focus range lock combined with focus peaking<br>
Blue tooth speaking settings<br>
Auto file back up and "keeper" double back up. Auto delete all non keepers from earlier shoots when docked. USB memory stick dump possible.</p>
<p>In reality though today, what is there as a system for me? </p>
<p>Firstly there really is no fall back short of the 16mpx sony chip ,and then with viewfinder built in. Hence OMD. </p>
<p>I see very little point now in the em1 because the swd lenses are expensive second hand, so expensive in europe that hand baggage imports of new lenses from the states or far east are cheaper. People think they can hold their value and now there is a new body to take them- if not excell with them screwed on- the prices for the two swd zooms which do it all are way too high. The 12-60 used on ebay and amazon and our local finn.no are around 800 euros, which is more than the new mFT 12-40. When a new oly fast zoom comes out in the range say 40 to even 120, then the golden ed pro zooms of old will be foot notes in the book of Olympus's digital adventure. </p>
<p>A better bet is now loosing value and being sold on some nice E3s and E30s, the venerable 14-54 mrk II. The mark one is also being punted on E1's and hundred series cameras. These packages are around 400 to 600 euros, and you could pretty much dump the body in the bin as far as i am concerned. If you are getting the mark II plus some other lenses of note such as the wide zoom or 75-300, then that is a bargain. People are a bit prone to want to sell their whole system if it is pre E5 E620. For latter day cameras with quality lenses the lenses are usually quoted seperately after a bait price on the body with the kit lenses. </p>
<p>Even the mark I seems to work on some mft bodies, but it is thed mark II 14-54 which was contrast detect optimised and has a second to none manual focus. This works across all the ep compacts from 3 vintage, and the omd range of course. It is a more compact lens than the 12-60 and is actually faster in the mid to longer range on f stops. </p>
<p>But then it lacks that nice eq 24mm for lakeland shores with mountain panoramas, city scapes and weird candids. Well on mft there are good wide primes and you now get amazing iso performance compared to four thirds E series cameras so you dont need a soft wide open 22-28mm range. Also people are far more consumerist about the fashion of system compacts, and dump kit cheap to make the down payment on their next bling thing. Often that means an earlier PEN body with one kit lens or two, but with one quality wide prime or the 45mm prime in the package or highly negotiable. </p>
<p>That is the good thing about PEN, panny g series and now OMD: lots of consumer fashion idiots buy them, learn they need a good prime, and then realise they are using their iPhone /Galaxy for actually taking piccies, thus selling off as above.</p>
<p>Kodak by name only, have amazingly enough gone 16mpx mft and have their own interesting zoom lens which is not super fast but nor is it a slow dog kit lens. Also they are using IBIS , so the lens can be cheaper than a panny and you can retro on anything. The "kit" zoom has a good range and if i remember it was f three and a half to the arbitary five point six, not that shabby if ISO is up to the job and ibis works as well as oly. Also they launch with an at first comical Hubble competiting 400mm (=800 in old money!) Which could be to mft was the "Bigma" was to FT. If under 300€ it could have the last laugh not just for those awful twitching "birders" who clutter many a photoforum with this week's brown bird sitting in a tree , or eagle half hidden by pine tops, or vulture silohoute against blue sky. Bravo "kodak". Eastman may guffaw from above. </p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-27262841459813392182014-08-11T08:03:00.003-07:002014-08-11T08:03:58.209-07:00Samsung- Dark Horse ? Olympus still ShineSamsung maybe just doesn't sound authentic enough for 'real photographers' in their NX mount range of compact and 'bridge' EVF cameras. True, they have no legacy. Disappointingly you don't get them as a bargain either.<br />
<br />
And there is the rub for me: pre sony 16mpx mFT sensor I could see that the NX with the APS-C sensor was a way of getting an ergonomic camera with better colour and light dynamics than the best mFT at the time. Now however, I just don't see the point in NX unless you are already an owner, or you are Korean.<br />
<br />
Samsung could have done a flyer in the market by having a best value for money body and a small range of fast zooms, and also some degree of convertability to legacy MF lenses. Instead they have a hotch-potch range og lenses in terms of aperture and focal length.<br />
<br />
My ideal street and general use camera needs only two lenses: a fast 24-90 / mm carry and portrait lens and a longer lens without the need for very fast , just 4.0 to 5.6 up to 300/400 mm eq from FF. A macro would be nice, but a macro convertor onto the former of the two may suffice for my rare excursions into food and flowers. Here a legacy lens may do the job with focus peaking and bracketed shots.<br />
<br />
Now I could do this handsomely in fact with an E520 with just two lenses : the 12-60 and the 50-200 , which would be a second hand purchase likely to also have the excellent macro 50mm f2. However the 520 is quite dated in terms of the poor dynamic range on the chip and also availability of them. Price for this set up is about the same often on Ebay as for the cheaper OMD's with the 12-40 plus say the 45mm prime, so that is an alternative or the 60mm macro ontop of the kit 14-42/40-150 combo. Olympus really have got a sorted out lens range!<br />
<br />
EM1 back compatibility is not shining and people want their cash out of the 12-60 or are willing to persevere so far onto the new body with an adapter as very few are available used. I suspect the 12-40 would remain resolutely stuck on any of the OMD houses that I chose.<br />
<br />
All in all it is a bit of an investment, best done where VAT is lowest in the world and I guess I am in for $1400 - $2200 dollars so I had better find someone looking to buy some photos!Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-15741407903457853742014-08-06T13:38:00.001-07:002014-08-06T13:38:47.279-07:00Olympus Blues ....Are the Greens and the Shakes<p>After a bit of a break from taking photography seriously - a bit unfocused if not diffuse - I have been using the E450 for more or less snapshots and I have been with the family all the time this summer so the "better " more thought out shots have been actually compromised into being ever so slighty better but often lacking.</p>
<p>So this summer for the first in four years of E450 joy, I produced no signature portaits of the kids and no perfect landscapes.  In fact: Quite a lot of mediocre results due to various factors, mainy of course concentration, but also some limitations of the camera: My main bug bears are then:</p>
<p>1) camera shake / movement blur<br>
2) using too wide an angle<br>
3) composition needing cropped which could have been in camera zoom or "shanks pony" zoom/ shifting my backside<br>
20m <br>
3)b) titled images needing rotating and cropping out good composition<br>
4) Olympus Greens</p>
<p>On the latter, the green,  green grass of home is ever so slightly too green. I guess this is because olympus have chosen to optimise their system into producing stunning sky and sea blues and flattering skin tones (in contrast to panasonics crappy jpeg engine). I shoot only jpeg Large Fine now because without a full photoshop investment and a lot of time on my hands, olympus have hard coded the best jpeg conversion chip in the business and i cannot do better.......except for those garish lawns and hillsides.</p>
<p>I was a bit taken a-back by olympus having a vivid setting as factory default but more disappointed that "natural" still produced garish greens and rather flattering skin tones are more apparent. Reds and blues become more realistic thought.</p>
<p>The fix for images with a lot of green, such as lawns or grassy summer mountains is to set the camera to "muted" which suddenly makes the greens very natural and even adds depth and texture to grass details. </p>
<p>Just remember muted will give rather dowdy blues, yellows and reds while also losing some flattery in skin tone. </p>
<p>On the green issue i coud advise someone who is clued up and who has lightroom, corel 64bit or photoshop to then shoot raw and adjust per "keeper" shot first, then running a batch conversion on the series from the shoot. I would rather be behind the camera on location than in Post personally.</p>
<p>On being behind the camera, this brings me to point 3.</p>
<p>The main draw back with the earlier olympuw E series cameras through to the latter day last of the 10mpx my dear old 450 , pre E3 /30 ,was the small view finder. The OVF gives less than full view of the actual chip frame size and is small and difficult to use with glasses. I often find I am trying to catch my kids in full flight and at the right moment, head out of camera ,and i more or less end up shooting with a "blind" eye to the actual composition TTL. </p>
<p>This leads to most often shots which are too wide, shots which are tilted badly off plumb or zoom shots which are cropping off limbs.</p>
<p>For kids-in-action shots there is just going to have to be more praqctice in setting up and knowing what focal length will work best. CAF focusing in ljive view is too slow, but can be useful for candid shots of people at ease. Also a better eyecup is probably available for spectacle wearing clots like me. This then covers two. </p>
<p>I think i need to go back to looking at some posed, stock library family shots etc and get a feel for composition and then fire off lots of frames when i feel the golden moment is in there.</p>
<p>So no quick fix there, only a back to the basics, experiment and experience. At least i stand inspired as i have hardly lifted my olympus to eye this year!</p>
<p>Finallly the real bug bear for E450/420 and I suspect many other non image-stabilised E series cameras: low shutter speed .</p>
<p>Programme/ Auto mode in Olympus favouritises aperture wide for faster shutter for the same exposure. This is okay if you own the faster, over price f2.8 glass wear, but for the vast majority of we "hundred" series owners we dont own, and we cannot just go over to standard shutter priority and dial in because we have poor non base ISO. We shoot ISO200. Or can we?</p>
<p>Well we have had the sun here and i have bet on 1/320th on S mode as often as i remember to set the camera up. I then shoot even -0.3 a lot of the time to get nice saturation and further more I have been using a polarising filter all summer, whipping it twixt the two kit zooms it fits. The thing with the E series is that you can pull detail and colour out of the three quarter tones into the shadows, but the quarter tones are often poor and the highlights clip in. </p>
<p>So here I have dozens of S images and a good few high light range images which can be lifted, but you know what? ? I like underexposed landscapes and people shots and town or boat shots because it kills off blocky highlights and adds depth with heavy shadows which have good gradation into them.</p>
<p>My investment then for the end of the summer with no work contract for August yet, was a half price monopod which is a full 1669 mm extended ,almost eye height, which i will experiment with to see how much this improves my camera shake issue to free me up for A priority and low light shots.</p>
<p>I am inspired to do a blog based on the very theme post shooting. Watch this space.</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7565395185626933575.post-76959617899379023802013-11-26T14:07:00.001-08:002013-11-26T14:07:49.244-08:00Bemoaning low house prices? Eikas cheif economist in lala land<p>http://mobil.aftenposten.no/meninger/debatt/Taler_-eller-tall-om-boligmarkedene-7384960.html</p>
<p>Roughly translated; house prices in Oslo are too low and on a national basis it is not economic with any new building.</p>
<p>Ja vel, as they say here . He is gryning really about the biggest correction to the markets for consumer finance and mortgages in the north western hemisphere since who knows when...it almost has no comparison as a half decade of insiduous decline to what i mean is infact a greater reality now ahead of us:; rather several major changes: </p>
<p>1) we are facing a shift of wealth creation, distribution and retention away from the western middle class engine to asia and to the super rich.<br>
2) we in the west are going to have to get used to paying a much higher proportion of income on food and energy<br>
3) we are in a new epoch where nervousness is a powerful brake on the previous lunacy of loose flowing credit- uncertainty in the finance system based around intervention regulation versus abject failure if the mistakes were repeated and a western world liquidity crisis rose again.</p>
<p>Although maybe not inevitable, it is a forseeable scenario that house prices to income ratios outside the major western metropolises will continue to be a gearing with a declining profile towards three times average household income per 	average city or regional house price. </p>
<p>Norway is not exempt from the demands on banks to have higher equity to debt ratios. This has had the immediate effect at the highest percieved risk end where now first time buyers have no access to one hundred percent mortgages. They are faced with 5 - 10 years of saving for the minimum deposit; that may even need to rise if house prices show stagnation or a falling trend for the flats they would be buying.</p>
<p>This is the base of the whole pyramid of consumer property, but it is in fact just a drip of petrol which used to get the nitrous effect when boy meets girl, and two starter flats are sold at a major joint capital gain. That is what had been stoking the fires of the Norwegian house market prices, and many regional markets. </p>
<p>With the 1970 and 80s babies themselves dragging their feet terribly in starting families, this meant that the single white female had made a very tidy profit on her appartment because she had been in that rabbit hutch for 5 to 10 years. She and himbo had probably not paid a bean in capital repayments either but came out with maybe a million krone as the downpayment on their big step up the ladder.</p>
<p>Now they cant sell or make less or find they are even in negative equity and losses on selling costs. So the bottom rung on the ladder has actually affected profoundly the town house appartment, semi in the commuter belt or out of town villa two steps up the ladder or more.</p>
<p>Eventually you reach a level where ordinary employees are not the fuel in the market. Here the rich in Norway have been really stung due to a hang over of super high glamerous prices which the glitteratii thought nothing of paying to secure a bit of coastal paradise or luxurious cabin at altitude. </p>
<p>Lower down from the impulse purchases of the well heeled, capital investing in property means getting ROI, in turn that necessitates selling at some point. That also relates to green field and brown field redevelopment plots.</p>
<p>It is therefore pretty obvious that two main scenarios pan out: house prices fall, land prices follow , developers and builders decide to get a little less rich or lower margin operators come into the market. The next scenario is that a bubble is suddenly created with masses of first time buyers getting access suddenly to the market: this would happen because the blue-blue government get their puppet strings pulled and create a system for 100% mortgages or subsidise first time buyers, , , which was called sub prime in the USA and was probably the the grain of sand in the evil oyster which precipitated the whole crisis......</p>
Damp Freddiehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01335140908458450601noreply@blogger.com0