Aperture Storyteller

Hello FUJIFILM...Photography is not a Competition!

2019-04-09T20:00:00.000-07:00

Okay, so here it is... it took a little longer than I thought to publish my thoughts, but here begins the new chapter in my life.

Introducing the FUJIFILM Family!

Starting with the change to this blog that started back last year in June. Changing the name of this blog, changing jobs and the biggest change—my entire camera system!

Returning to this blog has taken some time to get here, mostly because so much has changed in my life. I stopped writing here about four years ago, and much of that was burnout and becoming disenchanted with the system I was with and reviewing in general.

I return to share my stories, not to try and compete with other writers or reviewers. This brings me to the big step I took, which was to rid myself of all my various camera systems to consolidate it into one!

I also contacted Michael Zhang at PetaPixel about a chart I put together, motivated by my own personal analysis and was part of an exercise to see how the value of a system panned out across all competing brands.

The featured article, of course, garnered some conversation over it, but ultimately it merely was an exercise to compare perceived value. If you're interested in the article, follow this link.

Boxing up the Trade

When I stopped writing on this blog, I was struggling with the value proposition of my Sony dominant system at the time. I've written a few articles about the Sony system over the years (both positive and some negatives), but at that point was deciding to get out of it and return to Canon (mostly to be in align with my work situation). I was up to 6 Sony bodies at that point, had racked up a couple hundred thousand plus photos and video on them but to quote someone else who was in a similar situation as I, Sony felt like it had no soul (more on that later). But let us just say that I regretted even dabbling in Sony for numerous reason beyond that.

...Sony felt like it had no soul...

Disenchanted already, sold off most of my Sony equipment to return to Canon, and the biggest pain I faced was the amount of depreciation the system took in such a short time! My previous Nikon, Canon, Hasselblad, Leica or even Minolta systems in my experience, didn't depreciate as quickly as Sony. I buy and sell a lot of gear in the past 20 years, but I was shocked to see how much value was lost in my Sony equipment, sometimes more than half in less than a couple of years. It certainly made coming back to Canon, that much more difficult to do.

The 'Bin of Regret'. Much of it E-mount adapters

After I had moved much of my Sony gear off my hands, I spent a few years back with Canon. I loved it for the most part and just had way more soul to it than the Sony did. Loved working with the files and it just always worked right with the past three years over a course of a million photos. It took much longer to rebuild my kit over that time and added a mirrorless EOS M system to the mix. But I ultimately thought about why I had so many cameras, so many competing systems, so many adapters and so many unnecessary redundancies (I call that bucket my 'Bin of Regret'). I practically duplicated what I had in full frame to have it in mirrorless as well which didn't really make a whole lot of sense. I also still had quite a bit of Sony left over as well and it just felt right to grab as much as I can out of my 4 or 5 bins of camera gear and simplify my life.

But more than just having multiple systems, I also questioned the ever-rotating gear that fuelled what many call within themselves Gear Aquisition Syndrome (GAS). I certainly will not say that I did not suffer from this, but I asked myself, why did I participate in it?

A question I asked myself over and over again, and although I love collecting nice things, as an artist, I could not come up with a valued reason of why I was doing this. It seemed to me the only adage that defined this is, 'he who dies with the most toys wins'. A commentary that isn't meant to be taken literally but to criticize the notion that one mustn't collect material things to be fulfilled. The same goes for the marketing of how each system is better over the other. As an artist, photography is not a competition, it is a tool to express and capture a moment that I had seen, felt emotion, and now want to share it with others.

FUJIFILM approaches photography from an

entirely heuristic and tactile way

This brings me back to the notion of 'soul'. I don't mean that a system has a sentient consciousness. Sure some cameras now integrate artificial intelligence into their technology, but to me, that removes the human element even further. Moving into FUJIFILM is less about having access to controls which it touts as its benefits. Honestly, I feel having more external controls confuses new users to the system. However what I love about the added external controls, is being able to access it like a refined tool, rather than it be a decision taken away from me and decided by the camera.

FUJIFILM X-T3 XF 10-24 F/4

One could easily conclude that most expert level cameras have manual modes which are no different from the others. I don't deny that one bit, but what I feel is different is FUJIFILM approaches photography from an entirely heuristic and tactile way. I've been calling it a little bit like a paradigm shift in how I take photos but more importantly, it's like having a really fine set of quality brushes, versus inexpensive ones that do a great job, but you can feel the difference when you create and get that feedback on how it all works. FUJIFILM, in my opinion, gives me that and more.

Now I'm not saying that you can't get that in Sony, Canon or Nikon. It ultimately is up to you to find that experience in the tools that you use. I personally feel that FUJIFILM has really made a system that appeals to the artist in me and less about the technical side in me. Although I feel that the system is a technological marvel, it's less about that, and more about the tactile and heuristic experience I get from it. It makes everything feel like an extension of my creativity, and less about trying to create images to compete with other photographers or cameras.

The return to FUJIFILM

To be clear, this isn't my first FUJIFILM camera. If you've followed me since the beginning of this blog, you'll know I created some interest in how I processed and exploited the most out of the FUJIFILM X-Trans sensors when I was shooting with an X-Pro1. It really is nice to come back to the format, both for the quality of the files, but also to be able to get somewhat geeky and do some unorthodox processing with it.

Alternative processing, yielding higher resolutions at 103 MP, more details and higher tonal range.

Once again, I'm exploring high-resolution processing while utilizing the unique character of X-Trans files to exploit and benefit from additional information hidden in the files. My recent experiments showed really favourable results and I'm seeing images that easily and certainly rival 50MP cameras up to the limits of 103MP (at this point, I'm seeing more limitation on the ability of the lens to render any finer than that). However, it is a testiment to the product and the ability to give me more than what is straight out of the camera which is already superb.

Now it is way too early to write up any conclusions on my big move, but ultimately, I'm very happy with the shift. I traded in my random equipment to unify it into one consistent system. I made it so I had a back-up system, but also allowing for my eleven-year-old son to also enjoy his photographic journey with me (I bought a FUJIFILM X-T1 as a back-up camera and for his own to use). The trade was done through my local camera store Kerrisdale Cameras, and with advice and support from FUJIFILM Canada which I've worked with in the past, I was able to create an amazing system that should serve me for many years to come. I really give hats off to both for making a very equitable transition back into this family.

My past regrets are somewhat relieved as I got a great kit in the end, and although I look in my 'Bin of Regret' to remind me of how much time I wasted chasing things, it all brings me some comfort that I can move beyond it and focus on just enjoying the art, the creative process, and the tools to get me there. I can't promise that I'll be reviewing more stuff (or more frequency) or talking about technical things like I have in the past. As the rename of my blog is suggesting, I hope to tell more stories related to photography and talk about the journey of getting there while putting less focus on the technical merits of one system over another. I'm happy to come back to writing, so hello to everyone again and look forward to interacting with my readers.

-T

FUJI X-T3 XF 10-24 F/4 Black Card Technique.

UPDATE and exciting changes coming!

2018-06-23T12:28:00.002-07:00

Greetings everyone...

It's been awhile since I've updated my blog. Almost two and a half years!

So while I'm posting a quick update, there will be many changes coming, and those that have stuck it out this long to wait for a new update, thank you for your support (so you might see some things break as I adjust this site).

The site will likely change names as well and with that, the content, for the most part, is going to be more focused on the things that I do, stories I have to tell, and the work that I am involved with.

The original intention of this blog has run its course long ago, both being a tool for instruction in my classroom, and the evolution of my thoughts from my Livejournal blog.

I hope you'll like the new look, direction, and content I hope to share in future.

In the meantime, if you haven't followed me on Instagram where I'm most active these days, you can follow me here www.instagram.com/kinematicdigit/

A little teaser from a recent food shoot for Summit Restaurant at the Villa Eyrie Resort.

Big Changes.... and an Alfa Romeo

2016-02-17T22:14:00.001-08:00

So what does an image of an Alfa Romeo have to do with me and this overdue update to my site?

Those that have been following this blog since the start know that this site was conceived with the idea to teach my students about social media, but it grew and became much more than that.

Over the course of six and a half years, it has been my place to share my experiences, my advice, instructions, opinions and reviews. I loved being a teacher and the time that I spent at the college both as the head administrator and instructor was both enlightening and refreshing.

Teaching reminds us why we do the things we do. For me at least, it recharges me and also presents to me, that I've always been happier creating vs teaching. So about 12 weeks ago, an opportunity came to me that I just couldn't refuse. I accepted a job marketing high end import cars for an amazing company that is rapidly growing and making waves. Not only do they sell cars, but are very active in marketing the lifestyle that goes with it. It's not just a typical car dealership.

To top things off, they are building a world class Tilke-designed race track, a hotel resort, and I'm actively marketing that for them. It's what I do well, telling the story to the public. Whether it is through photography, design or words. I'm at a new home, with a new metaphorical ride.

It's has been a while since I've updated the blog, and I'm not sure what the direction will be in the coming months for it. Obviously the new job will take me away from much of the free time I had to spend on things like this, but I'm also working on settling into my new job and role.

I appreciate the monthly tens of thousands of readers that come to this site on a regular basis and get the information they are looking for. I make no promises of being more frequent, but I do want to revive my efforts in here, bring some new insights to you the readers, and share some of the exciting work that I'm doing.

Thank you for visiting and supporting my site over the years.

Sincerely
Terrance Lam

Sony A7s mark II vs the A7s

2015-09-13T16:35:00.003-07:00

This past week at IBC 2015, Sony announced the FS5 and a bit of a surprise with the mark II body update to the A7s. Fitting for this event being the A7s is really intended for the video market while the A7II and A7RII for still photographers. This comparison will focus on the things that will matter the most to videographers.

Key Features
• 12.2MP Full-Frame Exmor CMOS Sensor
• Full Pixel Read-Out Internal 4K movie recording
• Full HD 120fps recording and 4x/5x slow motion recording
• S-Log3 Gamma and Gamma Assist Display function
• In-camera 5-axis optical image stabilization (IBIS)
• .78x Magnification 0.5″ 2.36m-Dot XGA OLED Tru-Finder EVF
• ISO 100-102400, Expandable to ISO 409600
• Wide dynamic range across entire ISO range
• Fast Intelligent AF

Sony Video - Takigi-noh

The biggest update to the A7s is certainly the markII body design and the host of features that were brought over with that update. Most of those features updates what was found on both the A7II and A7RII over to the A7sII.

Ergonomically there is little to distinguish the three with the exception of name plates. Read my past ergonomics review (http://www.frontallobbings.com/2015/01/sony-a7-mark-ii-design-and-ergonomic.html) to get my impressions of the mark II body design.

Although the original series is still available, my opinion of that line is still pretty good and I encourage anyone that is interested in the Sony full-frame mirrorless line to consider them. They are all a great value at this point and technologically advanced to most of it's competitors out there.

What the second generation of the line upgraded are much needed features that both enthusiasts and pros were asking for. Interface tweaks, and functionality update were some of the biggest things and have all been pretty much finalized in the A7RII and now included in the A7sII.

Check out my updated chart that compares all the A7 cameras against each other.

A7 Series Comparison Chart
Click on the chart to view it

So how does the A7s and the A7sII compare against each other? Are they compelling features that someone that currently owns an A7s might upgrade to? Are new users going to appreciate the $500 difference between the two model offerings?

Ergonomics
Obviously this is the first and most important thing to consider. If you're a user that is only interested in the camera and not any additional hardware like a rigging cage or other accessories, than the ergonomics is certainly a major update from the Mark I. Keep in mind though that these updates are not necessarily better for video. The mirrorless or ILC camera form factor isn't a great format for video regardless. The movie record button is also still located in the same annoying shoulder position that really isn't much better. However one of the new things updated in the A7sII is the introduction of assignable functions to the movie record button. This means you can customize the movie button to a number of other keys. Sadly, you cannot reassign the actual movie button (like a display on/off button perhaps). This should be a firmware update feature in my opinion.

The A7sII does update the EVF to a class leading .78x magnification from the A7s' .71x. That's significant and certainly makes the EVF a much better device to use while shooting all types of work including video. Larger magnification means less eyestrain.

New location of the tripod mount point for mark II bodies.

Because of the change of the design of the case, this also affects the location of the tripod mount. Using just small arca swiss mounting plates it fouls even the LA-EA4. This will significantly impact a lot of generic cage designs out there for videographers that prefer to use accessories with this. The LA-EA4 isn't the only one that may have issues with this tripod mount location, so be mindful if you're a videographer that uses adapters, that this may be an issue when you're trying to mount other glass to the set up in a cage that has preset locations or using a quick release plate of some sort.

The new version of the included cable lock/protector

Many cages also utilize a clamping system that is integrated into the cage. The new design now puts all the ports near the top of the body. This means the clamping style of most current cage designs will not work and need to be redesigned. Although the Sony does include a protector clamp with the A7sII, how this works in future cage designs will be something that one will need to be aware of or not use.

My current cage doesn't use the included version 1 cable lock, which has some flaws regardless. It pushes the screen away from the camera (which might be a good function as it allows for better cooling) when properly installed and doesn't always fit all kinds of HDMI cables. The new cable lock design is much more accommodating for different cable brands and designs.

Sony - 5-Axis Image Stabilization Example

IBIS or in body stabilization is also another major update that promises to videographers a more stable platform to shoot video. This by no means replaces a proper 3 or 5 axis motorized gimbal but as stated before, it does give a pretty good stabilized all in one package without adding more expensive hardware.

It is also important to note that the A7sII is 100gm more than it's predecessor. If you are using one of the popular hand held powered gimbals, you're getting closer and closer to their maximum 1kg limits. Add batteries, and lens, the A7sII is too heavy for my own Nebula 3000 Lite gimbal.

Video Upgrades
The biggest upgraded functions is the ability to record UHD 4K video internally. This reduces the need to purchase a separate recorder like the Atomos Shogun and the Sony A7s. This certainly will reduce your entire equipment footprint by not having extra hardware and the added convenience of writing to the smaller SD card. However from a cost per GB perspective, internal SD cards are significantly higher than cheaper SSD media. SD cards average around 75 cents per GB while SSD cards are around 33 cents per GB. SD cards are however faster to read from which means transferring over data is pretty quick.

Sony SLOG3 Example

The addition of SLOG3 is also a noteworthy upgrade. The SLOG3 curve gives a much flatter profile that is also found on their professional series cameras. It offers more flexibility in grading and is more accurate in colours. However what isn't changed how the A7sII records 8bit video (while the professional units ar 10bit). How Sony engineered the same sensor to present more information when the information is already compressed to 8bits from RAW footage is a little bit of a mystery. It is very likely the very nature of SLOG3 profile is going to significantly affect midtones in an 8bit compressed format while giving better highlights and shadows. Only experience will tell if this will be something that is a benefit or a problem.

Two new picture profiles, SLOG3 and SLOG3 Cine (PP8 and PP9) have been added. Also to assist in the use of these flat log profiles, Sony has now added a 'Gamma Display Assist' mode. This mode allows you to shoot in the flat log mode, but display a higher contrast calibrated display of your footage that would better represent post graded footage. This is a significant update that makes it much easier for people to shoot in flat contrast log profiles. Being able to see a close representation of what it will look like after it's graded will make any beginner in LOG profile shooting much more comfortable in this set-up.

One of the downsides to the Gamma Display Assist is that it it isn't supported on the HDMI output, taking away the bigger advantage of larger display or director's monitor to preview the footage as it's being shot.

Do these new features reduce the need for a separate monitor/recorder like the Atomos Shogun? Probably not, but it will reduce the dependency for some, but the more serious users will continue to utilize an independent unit. It is great for the operator to see what to expect, but productions these days include more people than just the camera operator.

Fast Intelligent AF Example

Fast Intelligent AF for movies is an update to the autofocus speed. All previous A7 cameras have a very slow AF system when in movie mode. Now the intelligent AF offers a much quick AF system to respond in movie modes. However it begs the question how useful this will be other than the run and gun shooter. Those that will be on tripods will likely manually focus or use a focus puller. It's a welcome update, but hardly a feature update worth noting. The Gamma Display Assist is far more significant than the AF upgrades in my opinion.

What is missing?
8 bit video despite SLOG3 is very limiting. It is disappoint to say the least that there isn't a 10bit option. However adding 10bit is a massive amount of data to deal with, and with that in mind there were compromises made. To be clear, there are lots of professionals using the A7s, but it's a consumer camera, not a professional grade camera. For that, the new camera that was also announced at IBC, the FS5 is probably more appropriate for professional requirement (however at at twice the price).

4:2:2 Chroma is also missing on internal HD and 4K recording. Again, likely a data size issue, 4:2:0 is a big loss in information if you're serious about colour. It is at least available through the HDMI output, but at that point you're no better off over the A7s mark I. Especially if you're shooting green screen work, your options are pretty limited. You cannot shoot in SLOG modes for green screen work, and with 4:2:0, you must spend more time lighting your scene properly than being able to deal with it in post. Keep in mind no ILC camera including the 5Dmk3 offers internal 4:2:2 chroma.

No BSI sensor. News is still fresh on this camera and currently the information on the mark II is that it is a tweaked A7s sensor and not a new backside illuminated sensor found on the A7R mark II. I am not certain why this is the case, but I would have anticipated even higher ISO performance if they made a low MP BSI sensor. I imagine 1 million, or even 2 million ISO might have been possible.

No global shutter. This probably couldn't realistically made it into the A7sII at this point. They are far expensive to produce and operate very hot. It would have meant a major redesign to the whole body to accommodate a proper cooling system to work well. I for one welcome a big change in the form factor, but one could argue that this is what the FS5 is for. 4K has made the rolling shutter problems even more obvious. When I shot HD video on the 5Dmk3, I noticed it far less than I do when I'm shooting 4K on the A7s. This needs to be a priority for all camera manufacturers and hopefully we'll see it in future cameras.

Industry standard ProRes. Well this being Sony, means they love embracing their Beta SP roots. Proprietary formats aside, ProRes is 4:1 compression while Sony's XAVC-s is 7:1. That said, a format that provides strong image quality for consumers in the form of the new and ridiculously small H.265 is also unsupported in this camera. Technically there are likely issues with anything but Sony's own proprietary codecs, but not having ProRes certainly increases transcoding time for most professional editors.

No Waveform Monitor. RGB Histograms are great for still images, but industry standard waveform monitors is far better and more accurate.

No increase in MP like a 14-16MP sensor. Cine Super 35mm format in full pixel readout 4K isn't available internally on the A7sII. Had they gone to a BSI 16MP sensor, it would have been possible to have a full pixel 4K readout. It's rather disappointing they didn't at least make a slight bump in the resolution to accommodate that popular format.

No Touch Screen. Seriously, is this 2004 still? Touch screens offer a slew of options to videographers for focus and focus pulling effects. Touch focus is such a simple and useful function to most videographers.

Lack of focus speed controls. This is available on the A7RII, but current online information seems to show that this feature does not exist. Although the Fast Intelligent AF is a welcome update, having control on the speed would have been more desired.

The SLOG3 and Gamma Display Assist are great features in this new camera, but more importantly, how do you grade your footage. Sony is making an assumption about their end users. In my experience, even though SLOG options have been made available, it has been very frustrating for many users to take advantage of it. There is no profile made offered by Sony that assists in this, and there is no included software to help with that grading of the video. They gave us the keys to better dynamic range, but they never left a manual on how to exploit it.

Summing things up... for now.
I will not sugar coat the fact that I was disappointed over this announcement/update. It was already a bit surprised that they announced something this quick and I would have been more than content for Sony to have done more R&D time with it to ensure this mark II version was perfect.

If Sony follows any of the A7s groups of users out there, they would see some of the discontent with the older system and users that hoped to see what the new mark II would offer. Sadly, I don't believe this update did that (at least not like the A7II and A7RII did for the A7 and the A7R).

The price increase over the old is also significantly enough for a new customer to consider the Mark I with an external recorder rather than get the modest upgrades of the Mark II. However that said, I think it's important to note that operators looking for an all in one solution in a single package, need not go further in considering this model over the previous. There is likely just enough differences in this version that will appeal to new shooters.

Will there be an onslaught of owners upgrading to this version. I anticipate a very luke warm one if there is, I could be wrong.

Do I think the A7sII is a terrible camera. Far from it. It offers many of the great features found on the A7RII, which is considered by many as the best cameras out there from any manufacturer. It is videocentric as a low MP camera. Of course high ISO, low light is where this camera excels. There are reports that it has a 14 EV dynamic range, which is about 3/4 a stop improved over the A7s. The Gamma Assist display makes SLOG video much more friendlier, and the internal 4K recordings are all things that one might consider.

I expect the A7sII to do well for Sony, but significant upgrade from the A7s, it is not.

I Leica Q (A hands-on review of the Leica Q (Type 116)

2015-06-28T21:24:00.000-07:00

My Hands On Review of the Leica Q - Type 116

I'm going to just start out by saying, this is one of the best Leica digital cameras I've ever handled. It's got so much going for it even though it still has some oddball quirks to it that still links it to the classic camera company trying to fit into today's modern technology world. I was given an opportunity to spend a few hours with the Leica Q, and this is my summary of my experience with it.

Let's start off with some key highlights on this camera.

Highlights

24.2 MP Full-Frame CMOS Sensor
Leica Maestro II Image Processor
Leica Summilux 28mm f/1.7 ASPH Lens
3.68 MP LCOS Electronic Viewfinder
3.0" 1,040k-Dot Touchscreen LCD Monitor
Contrast-Detect AF System
Full HD 1080p Video at up to 60 fps
ISO 50,000 & 10 fps Continuous Shooting
Aluminum & Magnesium Alloy Body Design
Built-In Wi-Fi Connectivity with NFC

The Lens

The Leica Summilux 28mm f/1.7 ASPH Lens has 11 elements in 9 groups, 3 aspherical elements. It has 9 aperture blades, and a leaf shutter built into the lens. As far as construction goes, metal construction, which has very positive rings that just feel very well built. Although I don't believe it's a traditional brass helicoid, it does feel like a quality Leica lens. Even though this is a fixed lens, don't confuse this as being just another Panasonic/Leica camera collaboration.

Leica Summilux 28mm f/1.7 ASPH Lens

The 28mm focal length seems rather wide for a street photographer’s camera. Some will question why they didn't make this a 35mm or even Henri-Cartier Bresson favourite focal length of 50mm. Many would likely love at the idea of a fixed 50mm F/2 Summicron. But I think it was wise of Leica not to make this product any more niche than it needs to be. The 28mm focal length takes some getting used to if you've never shot with this length, but it's a great size to get everything you'll ever need and for some, means getting a little more personal with your subjects if you want to crop closer.

This is an ideal length for point and shoot/pocketable cameras. Although sized much larger than one would put into a pocket, this camera is small enough to fit in most small gear bags or purses. The saying goes that the best camera on you is the one in your hand and this is the right focal length and size to be that camera that is always in your bag.

The sharpness of the lens is very good and of course being paired with a high resolution 24MP non anti-aliased sensor is going to yield exceptional images.

Incredible clarity!

The bokeh on this lens is really quite nice. Out of focus and shallow depth of field with this lens is really easy to achieve with images that pop with a 3D quality that is signature of Leica lenses.

Beautiful smooth bokeh, even with a busy background.

Although the 9 blades are not rounded the bokeh is smooth and does not exhibit any erratic distracting backgrounds that one might find from a fast aperture lens.

Autofocus position

The controls on this lens are very logical and is a nice balance of traditional with modern features of Auto Focus, Auto Aperture, and macro mode.

The Autofocus is engaged simply by having the focus ring parked in the AF marker on the distance ring. Once it is in this mode, the camera uses contrast detect for AF.

It's very fast and responsive, and compared to most of the mirrorless camera models I've owned the past 5-6 years, this camera is very responsive by comparison..

Traditional focus thumb lever with an AF lock/release button

Like many Leica M lenses, the focus has the traditional thumb lever. However what is unique is a slight button on one edge of the lever that allows you to push it past the infinity position to put the lens into auto focus.

I have to admit I like this approach. It's a great way to introduce a discrete switch onto the camera needing another barrel button or putting more buttons on the body. It's a great ergonomic design that feels natural.

Auto aperture position just past the widest aperture setting

I found myself actually loving how well the contrast detect AF works with this camera, but it is so easy to just flip into manual focus when you want to with accurate and nicely visible focus peaking on the display.

Auto Aperture is also equally easy to access, and also on the lens. Just turning this below the widest setting, puts the camera into shutter priority with auto aperture. I actually rarely tried this, but is a nice feature when you really want to dumb down the camera for quick situations that don't require a lot of thought.

The macro mode is an interesting feature that basically acts like a built in extension tube. A ring on the lens, close to the camera body provides a positive turn from standard to macro mode. What's really clever in this design is the distance ring changes to provide the proper ranges for macro shooting.

Standard Position

Macro Position - Note the distance scale changes.

Macro also changes the aperture to a minimum of F/2.8 which is to be expected, but what might seem rather limiting with this focal length now provides a pretty versatile and decent macro lens at the turn of a dial.

Instant macro lens at the turn of a dial.

Body and Ergonomics

The form factor and construction of the Leica Q is superb. It feels like a classic M without feeling clunky and large. In fact I'd almost argue that this feels more like my Leica M2 than the Leica M9 or Type 240. It is slightly smaller due to the lack of range finder, but rather than making this camera smaller, they actually kept the height the same as all current M bodies at 80mm tall.

The Leica Q actually feels like a classic M in my hands.

Very similar dimensions. 3mm taller, and 8mm narrower.

The fit and finish is very Leica for sure. The leatherette finishes are tactile and looks nice, although I can't help but think it will pick up some debris in no time. All the dials, buttons and rings are all very positive feeling. There's nothing on this camera that feels cheap on it.

Exposure Comp dial inset to the body

The satin finish is very soft to the touch and not too different from the Leica M and buttons are all very responsive. The shutter dial is low profile but not difficult to use. The exposure compensation wheel is actually very well designed. First it's set right into the body so it's not in the way to push the shutter button, but like all exposure compensation dials, still can be accidentally turned. But despite this, some engineer felt that it was logically that when you first turn the dial, it only brings up the screen for your compensation and doesn't actually change it. After the menu comes up, you have to then select your Ev compensation amount to make it set. It's both good and might be annoying for some. I like it a lot as many other companies have the dial in this place that often gets accidentally bumped and changed.

The shutter dial also has a position to put it into aperture priority mode and auto shutter. The dial only goes up to 1/2000 for the leaf shutter but when you need more, the shutter can give you up to 1/16,000 of a second in electronic shutter mode. The only caveat of shooting with electronic shutter is the potential of rolling shutter. The leaf shutter is also very quiet. I argue that it's only slightly louder than the X-Pro1 which is almost silent. I actually prefer this to a completely electronic silent shutter. Some feedback is nice even if it is barely louder than tapping your nail lightly on a camera case.

The shutter also offer 1/500s flash sync. This will be great for any action studio shooters, but one odd thing is the lack of a bulb mode. I found the omission of this standard feature a bit odd. I hope that this is an oversight and maybe it will come in the form of a firmware update or in the WiFi app that I didn't have access to. There is a time lapse function in this camera that I didn't explore, but that has some interesting creative possibilities.

A movie record button is also located right beside the shutter button. As a video shooter this is very welcome. Unfortunately it doesn't appear that it can be customized. I hope that this oversight from Leica will be fixed, but like a few other buttons on this camera, customization is rather limited.

There's an additional function button that if found on the back right by the shutter dial which has the most customizability, but it's limited to a small list of common functions. By default this is set to frame selector (or crop modes).

Doors and access ports are well made with one on the side of camera that reveals access to micro- HDMI and mini-USB ports. The battery and media card access is at the bottom and the tripod socket is located in line with the centre axis of the lens. The battery has approximately around 300 shots per charge and around 45 minutes of video. About what I'd expect from a battery of this size. The battery (BP-DC-12) is also the same battery found in the V-Lux and also other Panasonic cameras (Panasonic DMW-BLC12). The Leica battery is almost $200 USD, so it might be wiser to get extra Panasonic batteries which as far as I know are exactly the same. Batteries are always bone of contention with me. I find that my Sony equipment all seem to need lots of extra batteries. But compared to the RX1 series, it's closest competitor, this camera is significantly better on battery.

There is no official documentation on whether or not there are dust and moisture seals on this camera. I will not make any assumptions on that, but to be on the safe side, let's just say it doesn't have any.

A thumb indent is located just above the control D-pad and it's very comfortable in my hand. All things considered though. I would suggest getting a wrist strap or the integrated hand grip with finger loops. Although I like grips on my cameras, the accessory adds more height to the camera which I don't necessarily feel is needed. The camera is comfortable in the hand and I didn't find that it was uncomfortable, but having a decent grip is essential with the satin finish of Leica cameras.

A series of common buttons is also found on the left side of the LCD display. The buttons are nicely integrated into the design with just enough protrusion to easily press the buttons in. The typical buttons are found there with a FN button that has a limited set of customs functions you can assign to it. These buttons are also found much closer to the edge of the camera unlike the Leica M. This is certainly going to make it much easier to access those buttons with your left hand.

The display is a healthy 3" capacitive touchscreen display. I didn't get a lot of time with it, but it also has gesture controls on it that makes it very iPhone like.

The eyefinder is a large display that includes a diopter adjustment and a 3.7MP LCOS display. I didn't find any lag to this display and while shooting in the day with it, did not find it too dark. LCOS stands for Liquid Crystal On Silicon display. It has some advantages for near eye viewing, but due to it's polarization design, it can introduce some odd distracting colour behaviours when blinking or viewing on an odd angle. However the resolution is sharp and bright. I found that it didn't take long to get use to this display. There's also an integrated eye sensor on it so it will automatically flip from the LCD to the finder.

Image Quality

I'm uncertain if this is a CMOSIS sensor like the ones found in the Leica M (Type 240) or not, but judging from the images I've taken with this camera, similar sensor or not, I found them to be quite spectacular. This unit is a pre-production unit so there is a possibility of some improvements in firmware (1.02). According to Leica, this camera has a 13 stop dynamic range which should be identical to the Leica M. This is very good still but isn't over the top great in comparison to many 14+ dynamic range digital cameras, but from my own tests in Adobe Lightroom (which is included with the purchase of the Leica Q), I found that it was more than plenty of information for 99% of my edits.

Inspecting the dynamic range of the images.

In most cases of shadow and highlight recovery, I would argue that this range is plenty. Without having two exact files from the Leica M240 and the Leica Q to compare, I can only make a speculative observation that noise seems to be better controlled in the Q over the M240. I also think there's a better baseline gamma on this camera which helps avoid highlight clipping over previous Leica cameras. All things considered the results are pretty spectacular and working with them in Adobe Lightroom is both easy and rewarding.

My own custom black and white workflow (http://www.frontallobbings.com/2013/08/black-and-white-images-that-pop.html) also loves the Leica Q files. Despite only having 13 stops of dynamic range, I did not find that this was at all limiting. Because the signal to noise ratio is so good on this camera, I was very comfortable editing the images as if they were 16+ stop black and white film.

Film like black and white is easily achieved with this camera.

One of the things I'm critical towards Sony A7 series cameras is their colour and gamma. As soon as I loaded up the images into Adobe Lightroom 6/CC, the results were pretty clear to me. Unlike Sony files, the Leica files responded like most other digital camera files. Colour adjustments were easy and intuitive, and I did not find certain colours going fluorescent like they do in Sony file. Also the fact that the Leica Q writes their 14bit colour data to a DNG format is also another plus, however DNG files are not the smallest of files. I will also admit that the JPG files off this camera may look great on the display, but to be honest, they do not hold up well when I bring it up on my display for review. I don't recommend critical images shot with the in camera JPG engine, shoot in DNG and set up a good workflow for your edits.

Reviewing image in the camera are also very slow. It's almost like Leica's engineers forgot to embed a thumbnail preview into the DNG files. It was painfully slow and requires rendering each image to view it. Not a huge deal breaker for me but lets hope that this is just a pre-production glitch.

Very pleasing blues from this sensor, unlike Sony sensors that tend to fluoresce with editing.

Obviously the lack of an AA filter has some immediate impacts on the image. But there is no doubt that both the combination of lens, the sensor and the lack of AA filter creates ridiculous details when pixel peeping the images.

I can only compare this to the Sigma DP Quattro for this kind of clarity and detail. Although I didn't photograph too many textures where moire might rear it's ugly head, I am truly impressed with the bayer mosaic sensor image quality that comes off of the Leica Q.

I also would make some comparisons to the X-trans sensors found on Fuji cameras. Aside from strong image quality, it has a similar user experience I get from the Fuji X-Pro1 rangefinder-esque cameras.

When these images are converted to black and white, you really get to appreciate how amazing this interpolated sensor really is. Both the Sigma and The Fuji X-trans, which are very nice for black and white work, are really outdone now with this camera.

100% crop, click to view full size.

One interesting feature in this camera is the ability to select the crop mode and bring up a very bright rangefinder like frame line to compose as if it was 35mm or 50mm. Basically it's a digital zoom that crops down the images from the 24MP down to 10MP for 50mm and 15MP for 35mm crop. This does not affect the full 24MP DNG files if you change your mind. It's handy to use when composing and should you change your mind, Adobe Lightroom allows you to go back to the crop mode and resize the crop appropriately. Most will find this feature novel but it did kind of made this camera feel like I'm using a tri-elmar lens which does increase the versatility of this limited focal length. 10MP is also higher resolution than most 35mm films. Optimal professional scanning will only yield anywhere from 6-10MP for most traditional films.

10MP crop in 50mm simulation mode. Plenty of detail the still rivals traditional film resolutions.

The one thing I didn't really get an opportunity to test was the high ISO. Leica cameras are not known for great low light performance. This camera is rated to go to 50,000 ISO, which I'm certain isn't all that great, but at least available for those intimate moments where little ambient light is available. Although I did look at the comparison files at DPReview http://www.dpreview.com/previews/leica-q-typ116/5 and compared it to the Sony RX1R and both cameras seem to match each other well with the Sony files slightly better in noise performance, but the Leica outdoing it with resolution.

The Price

No doubt this question will come up for many. Is the Leica Q expensive? Relative to the Leica brand it isn't. This camera comes in at around $4,300 USD. Approximately $1,000 more expensive than the release price of it's nearest competitor, the Sony RX1 (Sony RX1R is currently around $2,800 USD). The RX1 also doesn't come with an integrated finder, which is an additional accessory at $500-$600 USD. Batteries are an issue with the RX1 series and you'll need at least two batteries to Leica Q's one. All in all even at today's prices, an RX1R with finder and extra battery is around $3,500 USD, a difference of around $800.

The lens alone is most of the value of the Leica Q. Compared to a Leica Summilux-M 28mm f/1.4 ASPH. lens at around $6,000 USD, or the budget Leica Summicron-M 28mm f/2.0 Lens at around $3,800 USD, the Leica Q gives you the performance of the $7,000 Leica M with probably similar quality of the $6000 M-mount lens equivalent. Lets not forget a few other things that this can do over a Leica M which is being rangefinder like when you want it to be, to being a modern digital camera with auto aperture, auto focus, auto shutter and image stabilization. This means the Leica Q is basically a $13,000 camera for $4,300 – a savings of around $8,700 (enough for at least two great trips to use the Leica Q on).

The Leica Q, for some, will certainly be great value!

Closing statement

My time with the Leica Q was short. Although I got to shoot with it for the day, it was very hard for me to give it back to Kerrisdale Camera's who was generous enough give me so much time with it. Most importantly I can say from the images that I've taken with it and the overall experience I had with it, that Leica has a clear winner on this combination. I suspect they will sell lots of these when they start to become readily available. I would love to spend more time with this camera if I can, and if I get the opportunity for more time with it, I'll post more updates.

Check out the rest of the Leica Q shots below in my flickr feed:

A Newsletter of sorts....updates and other news....

2015-02-22T22:21:00.001-08:00

Lots going on in my life these days, but wanted to make a brief update post to talk about some exciting upcoming things.

Lindsay Wagner's Advanced Acting Retreat 2015

My studio http://www.styluxstudio.com has been working on this for quite some time to make this happen.

I am very excited to share the news that Lindsay Wagner is coming to Victoria to work one-on-one with up to 14 Actors! We are also very fortunate to have Michelle Allen, an award-winning Casting Director, join us at the retreat. This runs for a week long in summer.

We have already sold a few seats and I suspect it's going to go fast. If you know of an actor that is interested in this, please point them to our website or visit Lindsay Wagner's Website: http://www.lindsaywagnerinternational.com/vancouver_acting_retreat

Sony A7s - The Nikon D700 reborn as a mirrorless camera...

I will be publishing a review on the Sony A7s and how it performs. I swapped one of my A7 classic bodies for it, and been using it to shoot video. But what I want to talk about is how it performs as a still camera. There's lots of great reports on it as a video camera, but it's also amazing as a still camera.

Sigma 50mm F/1.4 DG in Sony Alpha mount - The ultimate standard!

Also upcoming and paired with the Sony A7s is the Sigma 50 ART lens with the long awaited Alpha mount. Using it with the LA-EA4, I'll share my thoughts on that match up.

More YouTube Tutorials

Busy as I am, I am still trying to get more tutorials up on my YouTube channel. A little teaser of the next episode, "The pen, is mightier than the sword."

Infographics

That time of year again where my students are busy preparing for their next installment of social media experimentation and showcasing their Infographic work. I'll post the information on their site and great work.

That's it for now, but stay tuned for updates and more info.

The Grass Can Be Greener...

2015-02-15T21:15:00.001-08:00

Up to episode 8!

These tutorial videos, I'll admit, are hard work. But they are pretty fun to put together as well.

More are coming and a whole learner series is in the planning stages.

This episode demonstrates how to use the adjustment brush in Adobe Lightroom 5.7.1 to make quick and simple corrections for dead or yellow grass.

Revisiting the question of RAW vs JPG - Sony A7 mark II

2015-02-10T23:12:00.000-08:00

Figure 1: Original Images

I get this question often in classrooms, emails, and workshops. I usually respond with a simple analogy from the days of film, comparing RAW to a film negative, and JPG to a Polaroid print. It's something I've said for a the past 6 years, but it might need some revisiting.

Now there is no real comparing a 14-16 bit RAW file to an 8 bit JPG file in terms of information. There is no question that the gamut of colour between those two file types will always be quite different. But much of that is academic to the untrained eye, which begs the question of whether or not the two files warrant much debate.

Digital files have certainly come a long way in the past 6 or 7 years. The shadow noise performance of modern digital cameras pretty much now yield near smooth and noiseless images. The Sony A7 series of cameras have been the talk of the photographic community for the past year and it produces some amazing images from compressing the shadow and highlight information. I'll say after performing this test, I am very amazed by what the camera puts out, but also what it does for JPG images. The need for HDR software is certainly put into question, when it appears that the tonal range from 100% black to 100% white produces such favourable results from this camera.

Figure 2: Highlight Compression

Regardless of the tonal range, the shadow noise, and the gamut difference, how much does it matter to the layman. In figure 2, I've compressed both the ARW and the JPG images highlight ranges, with a snap shot to show the histogram. Both histograms look pretty close to each other but there are slight difference that I know from experience that shows the difference in gamut. This image was taken with the Sony A7 Mark II with both RAW and JPG files written simultaneously. The DRO has been turned off and any noise reduction settings (specifically for the purposes of this test. I recommend keeping DRO on and to turn on your noise reduction settings if you use JPG. The camera does a much better job to control those situations, but in this experiment, I wanted to have as much of an untouched/unprocessed file). To preserve highlights during the shot, I carefully monitored the histogram, and adjusted the exposure to ensure there is no highlight clipping (I recommend using the EV dial to underexpose high contrast images if you don't trust your meter). The resulting image in figure 1 appears underexposed, but shadow recovery can compensate for that.

Figure 3a: Shadow Compression

Figure 3a shows shadow compression only, and once again we look at the histogram to see any major changes. The JPG does show some minor fall off at the extremes, however looking at the images between the JPG and the ARW, the differences appear pretty minor.

Figure 3b: Shadow Compression Detailed View

In the detailed view (figure 3b) there is very little shadow noise to be concerned about considering that the shadow was compressed by +2 EV. There is some detail loss that you can see in the form of JPG artifacts, but it is both a result of compression and in camera processing. Turning up the sharpness in the in camera profile certainly should compensate for that (something you'd normally have to do in post with RAW files).

Figure 4: Tone Mapped (Note the slight colour shift that has to be corrected afterwards)

In the Figure 4 example, I've combined both shadow and highlight compression. Both histograms show subtle differences, but both the shadow and highlights are now compressed to simultaneously show both extremes. Again, much of the image differences are subjective, and in some ways the micro contrast of the JPG might be even slightly better but all things treated fairly, looking at the histogram at this point I'm observing the differences between 8 bit files and 16 bit files. But at the end of the day does it really matter much? One thing that needed to be adjusted was White Balance, and because JPG files cook the colours in, this was much harder to adjust between the two files (however as in the figure 4, the RAW file went magenta but was easily corrected). RAW was easier to match to the JPG file because there is more colour information. This means while using JPG, you need to make sure your white balance is set properly ahead of time.

So upon revisiting this popular question about RAW vs JPG, what conclusions should I make? One could argue that with media being as cheap as it is, you should always shoot the highest quality setting and convert or downsample later. On the other hand, why put yourself through unnecessary processing if you're confident in your shooting, and your images are always properly exposed? Let the camera do the processing, and just enjoy a beautifully processed JPG image (and thousands compared to hundreds on a media card)

Even with the 8 bit JPG files, I was able to push it at least 4 stops, which in the past was lucky to get 1.5 stops. I also did some more tests where I pushed it 6 additional stops overall, giving a very healthy margin of 12-14 stops as reported by other sites.

Although the low overall gamut of the JPG image may present some banding issues with certain images and certain colours, it doesn't mean that it should be totally disregarded as the ugly step child in your camera. Based on this simple test, it isn't as clear as it was 6-7 years ago about the differences between the two formats. I might have to change my analogy to something a little better suited to today's generation and a little more accurate. RAW is like the graphics of the Sony Playstation 3 compared to JPG images as if it were on the Sony Playstation 2.

The real question for many is should they shoot in RAW or should they shoot in JPG. My answer to that is yes!

For the most part it is pretty inconsequential. I use both when the occasion calls for it, and when I do need to shoot thousands of images (most of the running events I shoot are all in JPG and usually I shoot 4000-5000 images per event). I find that if the situations is controlled and I have time to set things ahead of time, I shoot JPG. But if I'm uncertain of changing light or going to be changing settings a lot, I still trust in RAW files. This test proves to me that I can trust in both formats regardless of my personal preference, and probably should be less about RAW vs JPG in the future, and more about how to shoot both to maximize the most potential from it.

Post Script: One comment I received are other important factors of why to shoot raw which in terms of problematic files that are harder to correct in JPG images are colour balance, post sharpening, and noise control (especially in higher ISO images). RAW files offer much more flexibility in terms of this. But this article isn't to suggest that RAW is a crutch, but there is no doubt more information is always better. I would never do shadow and highlight recovery to a JPG image like I have done here, but this article merely demonstrates what flexibility is still within the JPG file without resorting to a RAW file. JPG does require accurate and proper settings to maximize the file, which means that if something does go wrong, you can always rely on RAW files. Like many other cameras, having the ability to shoot both RAW+JPG is actually a good compromise to the question. If you choose to save yourself a bunch of work, you can just use the JPG files.

RAW or JPG? It doesn't really matter because they both look the same.

Fotodiox Signature Tough E-Mount LT - Review

2015-01-28T10:05:00.000-08:00

Installed on the Sony A6000

The new Fotodiox Signature Tough-E Mount LT is an exciting update to the original Tough-E Mount, adding a new light tight design that prevents any light leakages from the previous mount designs.

The new tough mount design benefits the most with adapted lenses and long lenses

The mount is easy to install and built of brass alloy, making it attractive and quality feeling. The mount itself is snug fitting and I tested on many ranges of adapters (from Fotodiox, Metabones, Techart, Viltrox, and others). One of my tests was with the Sony LA-EA4 which improves it, by removing any slop that was present before.

The Sony LA-EA4 Alpha to E mount adapter.

Long lenses benefit the most from this adapter. It installs both on the original A7 and on the A6000 and both made the Sony FE 70-200 F4 lens more secure feeling, but more importantly, no axial wobble.

Native lenses with the new Tough-E mount LT adapter feel far more secure.

It certainly is a great solution over the two piece design of the E-mounts on both cameras, making the lenses feel more integrated into the smaller bodies plus this new benefit of preventing any leakage of light that often comes through the lens release area.

Balanced unsafely in my hands, but feels very secure.

One observation is the amount of flex that is stressed on the mount when using a long lens. I don't encourage you to test this, but if you put any pressure on a lens while holding the camera stationary, you can see a separation that happens at the mount. Clearly this is a weakness in the design, but is resolved by using the tough mount that securely adds a positive bridge to the screw posts. The plastic mount portion is likely the cause of the flex and unfortunately can cause this gap at that mount. In normal operation and practice it shouldn't be an issue, however it does set my mind at ease with the tougher mount. I also felt especially on the Sony A6000 that heavier lenses now feel very secure on this body.

Light leaks in the past sometimes made it very difficult to image deep space astro images
like this one of the Orion Nebula taken with the FE 70-200.

Couple of things to be aware with the tough-mount. Some adapters have been known to fit very tight or not at all with them. This is compounded by the fact that the tough mount has extremely tight tolerances. Native sony lenses do not have issues mounting on tough mounts, but some adapters might. Another thing to be aware of is Sony's official stance is that this will void your warranty. My A7 is past the warranty period, and I thought it was worth voiding my warranty on the Sony A6000. Regardless of that stance, there is no countermeasures by Sony for them to identify the exchange of the mount. Only the A7 has a little bit of adhesive between the plastic inner ring to the body which is easily peeled off, and the torque on the screws is not an accurate counter measure of exchanging the mount. So I'm not suggesting that you won't be caught exchanging mounts, but in my experience and what I've seen taking apart many electronic items in the past is that usually there are obvious countermeasures to void warranty. I believe Sony is just taking the high stance of not allowing this kind of modification to take place to admit that the A7 (r) and earlier E-Mounts were flawed.

I also recommend using a JIS driver, not a phillips driver. You can find most of them at local electronics stores. If you must use a phillips driver, use some emery paper and sand off the tip on your driver to make it a JIS driver. These screws can strip, so don't force it. The JIS standard is slightly different from a phillips driver so keep that in mind.

But aside from these warnings, I really give this a huge thumbs up. Many people have already past the warranty period of their cameras, and this is worth the purchase and installation.

Price is $49.95 USD for the chrome version, or $59.95 USD for the all brass version. You can order it from this link: https://www.fotodioxpro.com/catalogsearch/result/?q=tough+e-mount

Special thanks to Bohus and Fotodiox for allowing me to test this and to share my images on their youtube channel. Check out the video below for details.

Black and White Tutorial for Lightroom 5.7.1 - E0002

2015-01-21T12:18:00.001-08:00

Episode 2: Black and White editing in Adobe Lightroom 5.7.1 is now up.

This video tutorial, demonstrates how I do my black and white processing in Adobe Lightroom. This tutorial isn't exclusive to the Sony A7, but I did use that file to do the processing.

Black and White Tutorial for Capture One 8.1

2015-01-11T11:10:00.003-08:00

This video tutorial, demonstrates how I do my black and white processing with Sony files in Capture One 8.1. This tutorial is not exclusive to Sony A7, but can be used with any files that are imported into Capture one.

After all these years of teaching classes, workshops, guest speaking, and numerous requests from various people, I finally got behind the mic, and recorded my first tutorial.

More to come so stay tune...

Sony A7 Mark II Design and Ergonomic Review

2015-01-03T14:19:00.000-08:00

A7 vs A7 mark II

When the first leaked pictures came out for the new A7 mark II, I was excited. As a designer, having spent a better part of my life designing to make things easier for people to interact, I wanted to focus this review on design - after all the devil is in the details. Mirrorless cameras are still relatively young and going up against the decades of design refinements in SLR cameras is something where this segment is playing catch up with.

Mirrorless cameras are not just free of the bulky mirror box, but overall smaller. With the smaller sizes, it contends with the balance of being too small vs the functions that makes SLR cameras great. Most modern cameras have all the features that are expected by consumers, and for the most part are on par with each other for quality and function. But one of the more important factors of making a tool work well is how easy it is to hold, handle and utilize the features.

Weight and Dimensions:

	Sony A7	Sony A7 mark II
Weight	474 grams	599 Grams
Width	127 mm	127 mm
Height	94 mm	96 mm
Depth	48 mm	60 mm

The new Sony A7 mark II is not only heavier but also slightly taller and much thicker. All of these are to incorporate the new 5 axis In Body Stabilization System (IBIS). The extra heft is noticeable and for some who are looking for a balance between size and weight, this may be more than they expected. I personally find it more solid feeling in the hand and comparing it to my brass constructed Leica M2 (580g) is pretty equal. But I do know wearing a thin profile neck strap with this kind of weight isn't all that comfortable after a couple of hours. Invest in a much thicker and comfortable strap if you intend on wearing it around the neck.

Most of the upgrades are pretty subtle at first, but the more you delve into it, the more you realize the importance of each update.

Redesigned Grip
The headline ergonomic update was the grip design. The grip now reflects a more traditional SLR like design approach (Nikon-esq to be specific). The big move was relocating the shutter button to the more logical place on top of the bevel of the grip from the top plate location. Some people have had some concerns of the depth and comfort of the grip, but much of this is subjective and hard to make it well suited for each and every user out there.

New Grip Design

The deeper grip certainly changes how it's handled and the location of the fingers change. It's a bit subjective for some how this works. The deeper and thinner grip means your fingers are more bent to hold it. For some this might be more troublesome and cause some cramping. The older grip feels more like a ball in the hand. But the differences change once you start to handle it with a larger lenses attached to it. I tend to dangle lens downwards and this style of grip works much better.

The middle finger notch on the A7 is better suited for larger hands (I wear large gloves, but have medium sized hands). The introduction of the front wheel to the grip for some forces the fingers to go lower and clustered together. In fact for some it means the pinky finger either sits under the grip, or against the edge. It can be uncomfortable, but easily remedied with a form fitting L bracket or the future battery grip.

A7 Grip

A7 II Grip

This could have also been easily remedied by not having such a large bump out below the front dial, but obviously there were some compromises made to ensure it was secure. In fact the front dial is slightly recessed or protected by a little bit of a shoulder. This in theory should protect it from being rubbed out of position.

A7 II Grip and new Front Dial (A7 on the Left)

Relocated Front Dial
The dial itself is made from a polycarbonate plastic and when turned has a soft indent feel to it. Compared to the metal dial of the A7 and A7r, it does feel cheap. I personally prefer the softer feeling dial which is both welcome for video shooters and for smoother interface. The knurling is more tactile, and offers a more positive feel against the finger as you turn it with your index finger. I do prefer the wheel behind the shutter button like it is on Canon cameras. It is something I need to adjust to, but for former Nikon users should find this layout very familiar

Some people have mentioned that this dial changes too easily. I suspect that this is caused by using a tripod sling strap system like the Rapid straps that hang the camera's upside down, and the dial against your clothing or leg. The slight bump out and recessed dial is probably not enough to protect it from changing. Nikon cameras also have this problem, but with the softer indent dial on the A7II, it is easier to turn it.

I recently stopped hanging my cameras that way because of a fundamental flaw in design in all cameras (more on that later).

Strap Lug Locations
With the relocation of the shutter button, the strap lugs are positioned between the index and thumb. This is a far better position for neck strap wearers and to some degree hand straps. Wrist straps or lanyards can have the strap sit either over the hand, or under the hand. This might be uncomfortable for some.

A7 lug location

A7 II lug location

Shutter Trigger Location
The old shutter trigger button location was very rangefinder like in the A7 location. For those that came from that world, they may have found it comfortable, however those cameras didn't usually have an exposure compensation dial that was necessarily in the way as you rested your index finger against it. The shutter button makes far more sense and is located in the right place now on top of the redesigned grip.

Shutter Button location on A7

New Shutter Button Location on A7 II (Note the knuckles and lens location)

The trigger button itself is slightly larger and has less play in the two positions vs the original. This might be both good and bad to some users who, but in my books, much more responsive. Some might call this a more 'spongier' kind of button. I find that some camera manufacturers make their shutter buttons too loose and it feels unresponsive. This slight adjustment in button design is welcome. Personal preferences will dictate what you prefer.

The deeper grip also puts the fingers and knuckles closer to the barrel bevel of larger lenses. Larger fingers might find this a bit close and crowded. This is a fundamental design flaw of the E-mount and larger lenses. The A6000 is actually slightly closer, but because the face of the grip is shorter, the fingers come back ever so slightly. This is more noticeable when you're wearing gloves. The only solution for users with bigger hands is to hold the grip with their fingertips rather than their knuckles (in this case pinky under the grip, and back corner in the middle of the palm).

New Dual C1 and C2 Buttons
With the relocation of the shutter button this gave room for two of the custom buttons, C1 and C2. Both of these buttons are substantially higher than the original C1 and located in a logical and comfortable position. The default actions on the buttons are magnifier and WB, but can be programmed for each user's requirements (also expanded in this update). There is also a ridge located between the two buttons which helps avoid mispressing the other button. The custom buttons have a more positive feeling over the previous version which means no soft buttons are needed. But this brings to mind the annoying movie button and also the rear AF/MF button are still too recessed for my taste of usability (these can be improved with a third party soft button).

New C1 and C2 Buttons

Redesigned rear shoulder
One of the more nagging design flaws from the A7 and A7r is the rear shoulder/shelf. Both the MENU and a C2 button were located on it, but were rather difficult to press because of that shelf (I don't have a big thumb but it was still difficult to hit the buttons with the shelf in the way). Thankfully, the A7 mark II has been redesigned with a bevelled shoulder where a more easily accessible MENU and C3 now sit.

Redesigned bevel/shoulder

The bevelled shoulder also makes it much easier to access the rear dial. However the deeper grip also makes it slightly thicker to reach both dials at the same time. Manual mode shooters with small hands might find this set-up a little tricky.

SD Memory door

Battery door

Another redesign to the camera is a much smaller SD memory door. The card also slides in a more logically and new direction. This is partially due to the fact that the new in body stabilization needed more room, but the new door and SD logo facing towards you for loading is a welcome improvement. I do wish it was dual slot instead, but obviously that would certainly introduce all sorts of issues with component locations.

The redesigned slot also has some better designed channels that prevents moisture. I also find that it's much easier to access it with gloved hands.

Construction, Finish and paint.
Another nagging issue with the original A7 and A7r design is the poor paint and finish.

A7 Finish

A7 II Finish

The corners are far more rounded on the A7 mark II design and unfortunately I can not confirm the durability at this point, I know for a fact that all the sharp edges on the older design wore and chipped very easily (about 2 weeks before it started to wear through). The new hammerite finish has a more durable feel to it, so I'm optimistic about it. Also improved is the plastic front face of the A7 has now been replaced with metal not that it made much of a difference before. It's a minor detail but adds to the overall feel of the camera. What we can't see is a supposed improvement on the environmental sealings but there's been some evidence in redesigns elsewhere.

Steel Mount Update
One of the major improvements is the mount. I'm not going to take it apart for my curiosity, but what's different on the A7II is that it's an all metal construction rather than the two piece plastic and metal one on the A7 and A7r. This makes a huge difference on how the lenses feel on the camera.

There's no rotational wobble which is very irritating if you have a stiff focus ring and trying to shoot video with it. There is still the usual play that is expected for temperature shifts, but everything I've put onto this mount has been solid and tight.

The two piece mount design of the A7 and A7r also introduced a failure point found near the lens release button. Because there is no gasket between the two different materials, it was possible for light leaks to enter into that area (much of this was in specific long exposure and lighting situations). The one piece design corrects for that. I also believe I see a little rubber gasket sitting in what I can only suspect is now a metal sheath just between the orange beauty ring and the mount ring. I believe the A7s has this new design as well, but I don't have a sample to compare.

This certainly should provide a lot more environmental sealing, not just from dust and moisture, but any light contamination.

Mystery baffle/mask redesign?
While I'm on the mount, inside the mount, there is a baffle mask found just behind the lens contacts. For some reason, the A7II has been redesigned with a slight cutout? I have no real theories at the moment for it but maybe the exception of some sort of flare/internal reflection issue? I don't know why it is that way, but if it does provide some design improvements, I welcome it.

A7 baffle mask

A7 II baffle mask with slight cut-out

Battery Doors

The battery doors have also been redesigned. I'm not completely sure I like the redesign here. At first try I thought it was clever, then I tried to put it into practice which was an absolute pain. On the new design, it now has a lock switch that locks the hinge pins into a retracted position. That seems pretty logical. You can either release it by swinging the switch back, or a tiny little button above it is spring loaded. It all seems rather clever until you try to put it in operation. I found it clumsy and hard to align properly. Although the older design is similar to many other battery doors I've used in the past, I found it far less finicky than the new design. Sometimes if something isn't broken, they shouldn't redesign it. This in my opinion was a poor redesign choice.

A7II battery door on the left A7 on the right

I should point out that an additional foam seal has been put into the hinge area of the battery door.

This brings to mind a warning to everyone the flaws of slings straps. If you think you have a weather sealed camera and using a tripod socket sling system, be aware (from personal experience shooting hours in the rain) that water will likely get into the battery door especially if you hang it from that socket. Cameras were never designed for the bottoms to be exposed to rain coming down on it. However seeing a better seal on the battery door is another good improvement but I'd still caution hanging it upside down in the rain.

Rear LCD Screen
The rear LCD screen has had a few small improvements. First it's thinner and more embedded into the chassis. I did however find that it was actually harder to flip the screen out because of that. The screen also extends further out than the previous design. This improvement clears the eye finder better so that when you're looking from above, that you can see the entire screen. This redesign also clears any oversized tripod plates that you mount to the bottom. The A7 And A7r screen often fouled with a tripod plate, making it difficult to swing the LCD plate if it overlapped onto the screen.

Lower profile and inset LCD screen

I also believe that there's other industrial design improvements made here. This is also the heat sink area for the sensor. With the more robust XAVC S video, that sensor is going to heat up more. The hinge and greater gaps in around the screen give better airflow. It may be a minor detail, but it might make all the difference of being able to shoot video longer with less heat issues.

Tripod Mount Position

Another likely change made due to the IBIS added in body, meant the tripod mount is now further forward in position. This unfortunately may be a poor design decision as it fouls the ability to put on adapters if you put on certain adapter plates directly on it before adapter installation. Depending on the adapter plate you may be able to turn it 90 degrees and have enough clearance or add an additional L-Plate with integrated dovetail for popular arca-swiss mounts.

New tripod mount location fouling the LA-EA4 adapter when plate is installed.

One good thing about this mount reposition is that the weight is better distributed for larger native lenses. For sling strap users this will also put the centre of gravity forward and hang with the lens more forward position than down.

Media Ports

Another change because of the IBIS addition, the media ports are now more compact and located on upper portion of the camera near the strap lug. There is also new lanyard plastic doors to cover these ports.

They are much cheaper and more plastic than the original doors but I prefer them over the swinging media doors from the A7. They do open near the strap lugs which some people will find annoying. I've never found any media port design that isn't flawed in one way. I like that the doors fold down and away, but personally, I'd rather just have lanyard rubber plugs with well design ports rather than doors.

Hotshoe

Another obvious wear point is right near the hot shoe. The new design has the hot shoe set with a little more room around it which seems to be less flimsy feeling.

A7 II Hotshoe

A7 Hotshoe

The hotshoe rail is now powder coated black like the A6000 but I do notice that there is still over spray on the inner rails of the ISO shoe (I do like the look of it though). In my trigger tests it didn't interfere with operation, but if it does, a little emery paper might be necessary.

Sony's Dark Secret
So there's a little dirty secret that Sony hasn't publicly come clean about. No one knows for certain if the A7 II sensor is a new design or not, but most public information seem to say that it is the same. One thing is certain, there is a completely different coating on the protective glass.

New Coatings on Sensor

The A7 compared against the A7II shows that the A7 sensor in my sample image reflects more off my white ceiling in the sample photo. The new anti-reflective coating on the A7II prevents some incidental flare (and sensor blooming) issues that happen mostly with some third party lenses and most times with point lights (in my cases I see them sometimes in architectural photography work I do).

It could be argued that it isn't the responsibility of Sony to put out a release about this design flaw with third party lenses but unfortunately it happens with FE lenses as well. But clearly, they changed the coatings in the new camera to correct for some reflection issues. Further testing is required but regardless of why it's different, to me it is a welcome upgrade.

Conclusion
Sony has done a fantastic job of updating the ergonomics on this camera mostly due to the fact they had to make room for a moving sensor. There are still some issues that may never be resolved, or will require a slightly wider design or even a complete form factor change.

Overall the ergonomic changes are very welcome to me. The camera is heavier but it just feels right in my hands. It has a more solid feeling over the A7 and A7r. In some ways it feels like I'm handling my Leica in my hand and doesn't feel like a shell over empty bits of space in it. The new grip is a massive improvement and feels far more secure.

The fit and finish overall is better, and the new buttons are welcome improvements.

The IBIS is of course a welcome addition and redesign that I hadn't talked much about. It makes all my vintage lenses image stabilized which means lower speeds and better low light performance. That's an important thing to appreciate, but unfortunately it did make it rather difficult to make an ergonomically designed camera. Also apparently auto focus is improved by 30% according to Sony. This is significant, but not part of this review. I've actually not found it difficult to make the AF work on the A7, but I'm sure I'll learn to appreciate the improvement much like I did with the Canon 5Dmark3 over the Canon 5Dmk2 AF.

Some improvements will be awkward with really small hands or really large hands, but I believe for most average sized hands, it should be fine.

I do believe the improvements do one of the most important things to this update which is making it a working tool, like SLR designs before it, it works very well in the hand of a user. Is the update worth it for A7 users to upgrade? In my opinion, on just these ergonomic updates it can be worth it. But I caution users that have really large hands to handle one before you buy it. It will be those users that will likely find this camera too small for their hands.

Welcome to the redesigned site

2014-12-24T14:14:00.003-08:00

You might have noticed the site has been a little wonky the past couple of hours as I redesign it a touch and streamlined it. I've now removed all ads on my blog, and cleaned up the sidebar.

The simplified design should be less distracting and gives me a little more room for the articles.

Please be patient as I resolve all the bugs, but as of this posting, I believe everything has been cleaned up.

Simple Product Shoot with 1 studio light and Adobe Photoshop

2014-11-28T11:36:00.001-08:00

The set-up

You don't have to bust the bank to make your product shots look like you used thousands of dollars of lighting. You can simplify things by using one light, a scrim or bedsheet and some post processing.

This simple process is more about using Photoshop to control your lighting rather than trying to adjust your lighting in the studio. It's not uncommon for me to adjust all the lighting for hours in the studio to get the perfect shot. But much of my time is spent controlling reflections and other issues. By simplifying the process and breaking it down to layers, you don't even need to be an expert at Photoshop to get great results. In fact, there is no editing of the photos in tutorial other than merging the layers and being selective of the intensity.

Before you start though, you need to have some understanding of what you're looking for in your image and break it down.

With a wine bottle for example, generally I want to have a nice looking reflection along the sides and lighting the label. There's several ways to do this in the studio, but what I might do is set up two 6 foot lighting panels on either sides of the bottle, an on axis light in the middle with a grid aimed at the label. Mostly simple set-up, but does require additional equipment and modifiers and no guarantee of it looking quite right.

Breaking down the image to three simple shots.

Label shot on axis

So the process of using one light is much simpler by setting up my camera on a tripod with remote switch, I basically took three shots of my bottle from the sides with a single light panel/scrim (or a bedsheet) relocated to opposite sides, then I relit the front of the bottle with the strobe in front. I'm not overly worried about reflections with the front shot.

Next I bring all the images into photoshop in one file as layers. The order should be the darkest images below with the brightest on top. In my case I put the two side lit images below the label lit image.

Under the layer's palette choose the layer and select lighten. This will allow the layers to blend with each other and appear that you lit the whole scene with multiple light sources. However if you have lighted everything with the same power of light, it may look a little unnatural. You'll need to balance that with some creative choices and make adjustments in the opacity slider to give it an asymmetrical lighting appearance.

In my case I reduced the middle layer (or the right hand lit image) to around 40%.

The next step for me is to make the label look like it was spotlit to draw the eye into the image and bring some central attention to the important label. The image I initially took was very bright, but very even. This was easily solved by introducing a masking channel.

The masking channel allows me to selectively choose how I want the label to appear. In my case I wanted to have a spotlight like fall off, so I first made the mask black, then selected the white radial gradient tool (with background translucent selected), and painted my label in. You can certainly use a mouse and paint it in, but this tutorial is all about simplicity and speed.

I also wanted to have a little bit of light show up at the top of the bottle. I liked the little bit of light in the middle, so I also used the gradient tool to paint that back in.

Lastly but not least, as in all products that are reflective, you'll have some undesired reflection. Using the masking channel and a small brush, I painted out the reflections I didn't want in my image.

Final Result

I could have added a third effect such as a nice radial lighting effect from the background. This would be laid down as the bottom most layer, but ultimately it is up to you how you want to adjust your lighting effects. This can also be used to replace the need for gels as well. You can adjust each of the lighting layers colour settings and you can create different lighting effects within Photoshop for your product shots.

I should point out that my studio is very bright because of an overhead skylight if you saw in the set-up shot. So I did use an ND filter on my lens to kill ambient lighting and all the lighting was controlled by the single strobe. In my situation, I was using my Quadra Ranger, but any studio light or flash can be used for this set-up.

New Canon 7D Mark II - APS-C and dSLR still relavent? Opinion Review

2014-09-15T09:28:00.001-07:00

Canon has finally announced it, and although it doesn't seem all that compelling of an upgrade I am compelled by it and the reasons might not be what you think.
First the new spec list:

20MP Dual-Pixel AF CMOS Sensor (similar to the 70D sensor)
10 fps continuous shooting with autofocus (Up from 8)
65 all cross-type autofocus sensor (Up from 19)
150,000 RGB pixel metering sensor (Up from 64)
Dual Digic 6 processors (up from the single Digic 5 processor)
Enhanced environmental sealing (apparently 4 times more sealing)
Dual slots Compact Flash (UDMA) and SD (UHS-I)
Built-in GPS (wi-fi optional - kind of what the hell on this one)
Larger-capacity LP-E6N battery (But possibly takes the older LP-E6)
Shutter speeds up to 1/8000th seconds (as all cameras should)
Shutter rated to 200,000 cycles (up from 150,000 on 7D)

For the past year I've been running two full frame cameras, the Canon 5DmkIII and the Sony A7. Both are similar in specs to each other, and despite much of rhetoric out there, they are also equal in image quality. As the internet explodes with trolls and Canon haters over this newly announced camera, I add my opinions and thoughts on this latest offering that seems to be incremental in features, and why someone like me who has made some moves to get away from the dSLR format to much more compact mirrorless cameras.

I'll also point out that Nikon also made their new announcement of the D750 which has it's pluses and minuses. Neither which should be of concern to Canon or Sony as it is targeted to a different segment.

My cameras are tools, and as such, each camera has it's specific pluses and minuses. In terms of what I'm running right now is a bit redundant in the image quality area. Having two full frames is a bit odd but why I have both comes down to functionality and ergonomics.

As much as I love the Sony A7, it just doesn't suit my professional needs in terms of speed, accuracy, long term use, durability, longevity and user experience. These are all things that my 5DmkIII provides and something that makes kind of sense for me to ditch the 5DmkIII for the 7DmkII.
Before you all say I should take my crazy pills in the morning before writing, I'll focus on the reasons why my 5DmkIII suits my professional needs over any mirrorless cameras (including Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji ones).

Speed
The latest feature of the new Canon 7D is 10 fps, 65 AF all cross points and iFCL metering assist are basically what puts all other speed systems to shame. Despite all the claims that are out there on the mirrorless side of things, even with the Fuji X-T1, there is no doubt in my mind that this combination will trump any speed requirements for a shooter. This includes wildlife, sports, action and event photographers. Although the -3 ev centre point does not sound all that impressive, the important thing will ultimately be tracking among the 65 AF points and the iFCL linked metering assist (a feature found only in the flagship 1Dx). iFCL tracking is very similar to a feature that is found on pretty much all Nikon cameras called 3D tracking. It's an important feature that uses colour metering information to link to the auto focus points.

Despite all the claims of fastest AF on mirrorless cameras, it still lags behind. My experience with all the various options have been pleasant but ultimately still has issues with accuracy.

The 10 fps is also impressive, but there are mirrorless cameras out there that provide faster. Yes they do provide faster fps, but they generally don't include AF accuracy to go along with that. Press the shutter, and the frames do not track the AF of a subject. Shooting subjects approaching you will not track the AF on those systems, while the new 7DmkII will certainly do that with no issues.

Accuracy
Mirrorless cameras these days claim speed and accuracy with their new AF systems. Canon certainly will say that their new offering is far superior to those claims. Bottom line ultimately will be when it has been field tested, but drawing from experience of using most of the systems out there, I'm pretty certain from the new specifications that the 7DmkII will trump them all. But regardless of that, what is accuracy to a shooter? Ultimately having things drop out of frame and easily return into frame is common with event shooters. I've seen enough online review examples of videos where people that tout the strength of one system's tracking by keeping everything in frame. Reality or at least from experience, people drop out of frame all the time and you need to get them back in the same frame and in focus. This is not a strength of even on sensor phase detect focus. Impressive as some systems like the Sony a6000 is (a camera I'd love to own), it will still hunt when things drop out of frame. Trying tracking an object on a neutral background and once something drops out of frame, the camera will lock or seek on the background.

An example of one of my associates who shoots an X-T1. He loves to shoot rodeos with it, however in the 600 shots that he might take on average with it, he'll get maybe about 25% of them that are in focus and accurate. He's not afraid to admit that this camera is not well suited for that kind of work and so he often will fall back onto his Nikon D7100 for that kind of shooting where he gets about 80% of the images in focus.

Accuracy also comes down to metering. Canon is playing a little catch up here by also including AF linked spot metering in the 7DmkII (a first in models not the top of the line flagship cameras). Ah hah, you'll say, Nikon and mirrorless cameras have been doing this for some time now. Yes, and no. AF linked spot metering is varied in sizes on the Nikon, however it is there and it works accurately enough. Good work on Nikon, but they really need to make sure it doesn't vary in sizes across the various models. On mirrorless, the metering is a liveview, histogram based interpretation. Both Nikon and Canon have intelligent/smart metering processors that compares databases to the images you're trying to capture. It makes decisions that ensure perfect metering. Currently at least, none of the mirrorless models out there have intelligent metering. Most of them base their metering on histogram information alone, which tends to have consequences when you go to AF linked spot metering on those cameras. Even in AF Linked Spot metering, there is a 'weighting' that is considered, and with the new RGB iFCL sensor in the 7DmkII, the meter, the database, and the AF linked Spot metering, should provide the best balance of that feature without having issues with bad exposures.

Long Term Use/Longevity
Simply put, dSLR's ergonomics reign supreme here. Hand sizes vary and so should cameras, but reduce that camera too far down, you compromise the ergonomics which means shooters that might shoot 6-8 hours with a camera will really feel it.

Shooting running events, I know that a camera needs to be comfortable enough that I don't start to cramp up. Small cameras are appealing for weight, but try holding that up for an hour and it won't matter how light the camera is when your fingers start to cramp up. Even if you shoot on a tripod or monopod all day, the small compact mirrorless cameras will show its limitations in short order.
The other part of longevity is battery use. It's easy to just say, stick on a battery grip and be done with it. That adds bulk and weight, but does provide function for portrait orientation shooters. However I can easily shoot 6-8 hours on two batteries in a grip (usually end up using only half my batteries for around 6000 images), the same cannot be said with a mirrorless equivalent. Batteries are small because the cameras are small, and their capacity is pretty limited still. The 7DmkII has a new battery that ups the capacity of the already impressive LP-E6 battery. Although I can't imagine doing an 8 hour shoot without a battery grip, I can be certain that I'll likely never need more than two batteries in the field with a higher capacity 7DmkII battery.

Durability and User Experience
Some of this is subjective. User experience comes down to interface design both inside and outside the camera. The dSLR format is an old and tested format that works. Take for example attempts like Sigma's DP Quattro on their attempts to breaking that form factor. Like I mentioned before in long term use, the ergonomic design is so very important in the successful function of the camera. Mirrorless cameras are small, miniaturized and simplified. They are great when you're out hiking and not hauling 20lbs of camera gear, but reaching for tiny buttons and looking for shutter buttons that require a Captain Hook finger to press the shutter are not my ideas of perfect ergonomics. I love the Fuji cameras for their physical ergonomics, but their software interface is kludgy and unless you're a waiter/waitress who's used to everything on one screen POS interface, it isn't all that pleasant for the generic user. Olympus has made wonderful miniaturized versions of dSLRs but everything is way too small and access with larger hands.

As a UX designer myself, I'm always watching and observing how people interact with devices. Watching large people use mirrorless compacts is painful from a design point of view, and yet those that still use them, swear by them. I know for a fact that after several hours of use, that it would get weary for me, but then again, I also know that user experiences do vary and are very subjective (and are also subject to how they plan to use the camera). For example, I never thought oversized smart phones or phablets would be so popular, but they are.

Durability is another issue to be concerned about. The new 7DmkII claims to have 4 times better environmental sealing and of course is made on a strong and trusted magnesium chassis. For professionals or event shooters, this is something they can trust will hold up to their demanding requirements. Many of the compact mirrorless cameras claim some level of environmental durability, but in reality they are still delicate electronics that I wouldn't dare bump or drop. My mirrorless cameras have always been babied around my neck and close to me, while my dSLR comfortably dangle from my hip without too much worry.

Final Words
I don't know if I will be adding the 7DmkII to my collection or not, but I wanted to share my thoughts on the whole point of dSLR relevancy. With the growing popularity of mirrorless (CSC) cameras despite reports that it has flat lined in popularity, the question will come down for many users why they would still consider the dSLR.

The 7DmkII is not something that is marketed to keep people from going to the mirrorless system. It's targeted specifically for one segment and one segment alone: Professional and semi-professional action shooters that need comfort, durability and accuracy. The closest mirrorless system to that is probably the X-T1.

The APS-C sized sensor can live on in the dSLR format and not be exclusively on the mirrorless format. Zach Arias posted an interesting video a little while back about why you don't need full frame, and I mostly agree with his points. But I also believe that dSLR still has it's important position in the market, and will continue to do so until still photography is either completely displaced by video, or mirrorless finds some magic way to address my specific concerns. Until then, I believe the 7DmkII is going to continue to challenge supremacy in it's specific segment regardless of all the haters and trolls that feel that this camera did not meet their expectations. To me, at least on paper, it sounds like a fabulous upgrade, and for all the right reasons for the market it is targeted for.

Posted with Blogsy

What Photography Can Learn from the Near Death of the Graphic Design Industry.

2014-04-28T10:15:00.003-07:00

Hello, I'm going to destroy an industry.

I'm going to take you on a journey into the past.

It begins with a recent field trip to a TV station I took my students on, in an industry not completely unrelated to photography.

We visited one of my former places of employment where our guide was a coworker who has worked there for over 25 year. He made a very interesting and complimentary statement where I was credited for bring computers into the studio for graphic design work.

I find it interesting to look back to the past and remember what it was like to be a pioneer in the field of design, but also what set the wheels in motion that almost destroyed the industry.

When computers entered the graphic design industry, it was a revolution that stakeholders like Adobe and Apple were hot to monopolize. Meanwhile, other competitors were also hot on the heels to enter into the computerization of commercial art.

“When computers entered the graphic design industry, it was a revolution that stakeholders like Adobe and Apple were hot to dominate”

Being a trained graphic designer before the advent of computers meant specialty work that was a well paid for skill (skills in details not unlike those of a watchmaker). But graphical user interface computers changed this which almost destroyed the industry in less than half a decade.

Example of a compact phototypesetter. Some of the
older models took up an entire room. These device's
exclusive purpose was to create typography
that would be imaged and then cut and paste
onto original artwork. It was limited by how many
fonts you could produce, and costly
to operate.

Computers in the late 80s and early 90s, for the most part, were out of reach of most people and were a novelty at first. It eventually became a production tool to replace labour intensive commercial art reproduction. Production designers was a specialized field within advertising and design who took the concepts of art directors and graphic designers, turning them into "Camera Ready" artwork. Many production designers relied on phototypesetters for the creation of typography for camera ready artwork. Even in the early days of computers, it was difficult enough for a studio to afford these massive phototypesetter. Some of these units were in the hundred thousand dollar ranges.

The Macintoshes from Apple started out at the $3,000 range and quickly went up to $6,500. In those early days of computers, they topped out at around $10,000 for the Macintosh IIfx. However this was appealing to many studios as they could easily outfit their production departments with a computer and a 300 DPI laser printer for under $20,000. The laser printer was another revolution by Apple. At introduction, the $7,000 Laserwritter II was the first mass market printer that produced stunning edge sharp graphics at 300 DPI. This printer not only made it possible to replace the limited and expensive phototypesetter, but also allowed for a typographic revolution in design.

I started out with photo mechanical transfers cameras (PMT) and photo typesetters, and spent many hours in the dark room working with all sorts of camera ready artwork and orthographic films. I hunched over light tables, cutting and pasting (stripping) typography and building artwork directly onto orthographic film. One thing I never forgot, was how much space all of this equipment took.

“This was very appealing to many studios as they could easily outfit their production departments with a computer and a 300 DPI laser printer for under $20,000”

I put hundreds of hours on a PMT camera like
this one.

Computers were still a ways off from replacing all of these industrial sized tools even in the early 90s, but it was certainly setting a new trend for those interested in opening up a new cost effective studio.

There was certainly a bit of denial from the industry over the emerging computer technology. We still couldn't do colour work on it, or create colour separations, an essential for colour magazine reproduction. The threat of computers wasn't much of a thought because of the quality of output. But it still set in motion the ideas of home grown studios or independent freelancers capable of delivering materials that 80% of the world could afford. Much like in photography just 10 years ago, digital cameras were just as limited by it's quality for 'professional' work.

Botticelli's 'Birth of Venus' was one of the
symbols for the Renaissance,
and adopted appropriately for
Adobe Illustrator 88 and still to this day

Desktop publishing in the 90s became a dirty word among professional graphic designers who felt little threat by them. Many small studios popped up overnight with a small investment in computer equipment. They could operate out of a home and fill the needs of small businesses with 'just good enough' quality flyers and materials. As computers improved, the prices of them also dropped, and in less than 5 years, the $20,000 average, dropped down to a $5,000-$6,000 investment.

The software evolved, and even though Macintosh computers were already revolutionary for ease of use, the philosophy also transferred over to the software developed for it. Adobe Illustrator 88 was one of the early design packages I used. The software was simple, and although it did come with a pretty hefty manual, it didn't take long for a motivated person to learn it and start making sellable commercial artwork. Something that my associates, spent countless hours at the drafting table creating with specialized cut papers, drafting tools, special cutting blades, french curves, professional gouaches, ruling pens, technical pens, etc... It really took very little mechanical skills when using Adobe Illustrator. The only saving grace was the quality of the printouts, but that would be short lived.

“...home grown studios, could now produce artwork that was no longer 'just good enough', but could now produce artwork that was National Geographic worthy.”

The introduction of the imagesetter (a giant version of the laser printer) would replace several devices in the typical design studio such as the photo typesetter, the PMT camera, and a UV Contact Printer. This device brought back production to a production studio, and continues to hold its ground to this day. The costs of these beasts are still quite high, but how it revolutionized graphic design, was how easily it interfaced with computers. The home grown studios, now could produce artwork that was no longer 'just good enough', but could now produce artwork that was National Geographic worthy. The access to this kind of technology was probably the final nail that first set the Desktop Publishing industry as the replacement to the old and dusty design industry. Designers panicked as it took off like a runaway train.

Modern imagesetters haven't changed much from their
earlier designs. Still large and bulky machines. Modern day imagesetters
not only print on paper and orthographic film like the early models, but
now can print directly onto metal or plastic plates that go directly to the
offset printing press.

I recall participating in a graphic design equivalent Big Blue vs Human challenge. I was challenged to see if I could set and prepare a plate ready newspaper page with photos faster than the computer counterpart with a desktop publisher and imagesetter. I won pretty convincingly (I completed the task in under an hour while the computer counterpart took 6 hours). However, I certainly didn't deny the fact that technology was eventually going to replace what I could do by hand.

By the mid 90s, the industry had hit bottom. Anyone who had an interest in something graphic design related, could choose to take a 3 month desktop publishing course, or put that money towards a computer system and figure it out on their own. Printers were improving rapidly, and access to imagesetters were getting more and more affordable. Graphic design studios and ad agencies were all scrambling to deal with the rapidly changing environment. Many failed to keep up and were forced to shut down. It was just impossible to compete with home grown studios and maintain the high markups they used to ask for assignments.

“The Internet introduced the concept of electronic publishing on mass. Desktop publishers who basically dominated the small publishing industry, saw a new opportunity in Web design.”

But another major innovation was about to happen during the mid 90s that would take about a decade to mature and become one of the more important technologies to save the graphic design industry.

Remember when this logo was
on every computer desktop?

The Internet introduced the concept of electronic publishing on mass. Desktop publishers who basically dominated the small publishing industry, saw a new opportunity in Web design. But this also became an opportunity for graphic designers to also compete for the same kind of work. Over the course of 5 or so years, both disciplines competed against each other. With desktop publishers abandoning the traditional medias, it allowed graphic designers to return to small publishing, once again showcasing their skills and value.

Over the course of several years, it became apparent that a machine or software did not replace the training behind the skills of a designer. Although the 90s had educated a lot of poor or low quality desktop publishers, it also eventually seeded a return to well thought out designs that helped set businesses apart from their competitors. The value added service of a fully trained graphic designer returned to focus, and although I would be hesitant to say that it has done that completely, the corporate consumer certainly appreciates them over inexperienced self-taught computer operators.

The desktop publishers from the 90s evolved with the web. They got more training, and many with experience became graphic designers in their own rights. With the evolution of desktop publishing it eventually got reabsorbed back into the design industry. Instead of competing against graphic design agencies, it was welcomed back as a necessary skill set in for any graphic designer. In more sophisticated agencies, the traditional production designer merged with desktop publishers. The reunification of design skills was complete.

“Professional photographers today, compete against hundreds of amateurs who picked up a $600 set-up and do it on the side”

Although there is still a strong self taught industry out there, the most important thing that came from the past 20 years, is the public perception that anyone can just press a button to create. It takes training, experience, and knowledge to succeed.

Today, photographers are faced with a grim reality that their industry is no longer an occupation that is sustainable. With cameras coming on everything from your phones to your TVs to high resolution video cameras at street corners, it seems at least for this moment, that it doesn't take any skill to be a photographer.

On May 31st, 2013, the Chicago Tribune let go of
all 28 of their staff photographers. A growing
and troubling trend in publishing these days.

Newspapers (and magazines) all around the world are letting go of their photojournalists, and are crowd sourcing submissions from the over sharing public, rather than have staff photographers rush out to get the images for their stories. It should come as no surprise that with the web, media is disappearing quicker each year, and they need to find ways to keep costs down.

Professional photographers today, compete against hundreds of amateurs who picked up a $600 set-up and do it on the side. How does a professional photographer pit their $3,000 photo packages against a $500 price point?

Businesses are no longer hiring photographers to photograph their products or locations because they just ask someone internally to do it for them. They feel they are giving budding amateurs an opportunity to build their portfolios, while the businesses get those images for free.

Even fine art photographers are not completely immune to this. The over sharing public utilizes photo sharing websites, that gives access to cheap affordable fine art worthy prints without needing to pay high prices for a specific fine arts photographer. For example, it is much harder for fine arts photographer that used to make $700 from a $1000 print to compete against photography websites that offer photographers $25 to $50 on a $350 print that is delivered directly to a customer.

“Too often I hear the question asked by instructors about who wants to become a professional photographer, with the answer being negative and mostly demotivating”

It all seems very bleak for photographers these days. But I remind myself of what happened to the graphic design industry 20 years ago and expect a similar and necessary revolution for photography.

What can we learn from the past in the graphic design industry that will help a troubling photography industry?

So many places to share your life online.

Too often I hear the question asked by instructors about who wants to become a professional photographer, with the answer being negative and mostly demotivating. Although it's hard to disagree with that sentiment, it certainly comes off a bit defeatist.

Although many graphic designers did not survive the changes that computers brought into our industry, those that weathered the storm has come out into a time where they can now benefit from it. Photographers need embrace the same revolution and evolution of their industry.

Graphic Designers made the mistake by not reinventing themselves when computers first came out. They set it aside and only embraced it as a specific tool in the corner of their studios. It was a slow transition that required another new revolution in design (the web) for them to finally embrace and evolve from. Photographers need to embrace and accept that this is the way things need to be done.

“Graphic Designers made the mistake by not reinventing themselves when computers first came out.”

Don't get confused that a $3,000 per wedding photographer needs to drop their prices to $500. They need to embrace new techniques, and current trends to bring value to what they do. They can no longer hang on to the traditional ways and they need to understand that consumer needs are changing. I know many experienced wedding photographers who are taking lessons to be graphic designers. Why? Because they can design a custom photo album that no website could ever produce from an overly used template. These wedding photographers ask $5,000 or more just for designing the albums.

Would Andy Warhol use
Instagram? I think he would have loved
the Valencia Filter.

Just for fun here's a youtube video of
Mr. Warhol doing digital painting
http://youtu.be/3oqUd8utr14

If over sharing is what the public is doing and desires, then the pro photographer needs to be a part of that. They need to be plugged in to social media not just as a consumer, but as a participant. Want to show off how good of a photographer you are, then show off the skills by hash tagging, and tweeting about a wedding shot you just took a few minutes before you uploaded it. It is very similar to setting up a photobooth at a wedding, but now, it's live and open to the Internet to see it as it happens.

Instagram is a look that makes photographers cringe. Regardless of the trendy hipster effect it creates, it's a popular look that the audience loves to see. Pros needs to embrace it and make it part of their tool kit. Can they share a much better Instagram filtered version from their pro equipment? With wi-fi cards and wireless tether support in the latest cameras, they can and should. But the point is not to allow it to be just a trend, but a way to show how the photographer is skilled by taking that medium to the next level.

Like the web design, this is an opportunity for professionals to show off their technical skills. The web saved graphic designers because it allowed designers to show the value of good design over poorly executed web designs. Photographers need to understand that the Internet is equally their tool and not just rely on their cameras.

Building a career in photography is not easy. It never was or ever should be. Like graphic design, it has evolved and gotten more complicated. What I teach in my college program is several times harder than what I learned almost 30 years ago. Today's professional photography like graphic design was, is equally harder than what it was 30 years ago.

“Building a career in photography is not easy. It never was or ever should be.”

Certainly the dark room and all the technical jargon that went along with understanding how a light meter worked, how to use studio lights or all the chemistry know how is part of the pro photographer's past. I'm not saying that this was easier than today's tool kit, but it has been replaced with a different paradigm in how we use the technology and equipment. Even though it seems that anyone can press a button and take a 'good' picture, the skill of making it a success still relies very much in the work put in by the photographer to market their skills.

What about the relationship between graphic designers and photographers? Even that has changed a lot in 20 years. I art directed many photographers over the years, but eventually took photographic control over that and these days also train my students to be hybrid designers that are skilled in commercial photography. The ignorance by past photographers of changes in their industry has fuelled an unnecessary hatred towards art directors.

The progressive photographers that evolved, learned to speak the language of designers, maybe even taken a course in it and priced their work more efficiently, all benefited and continue to work well with designers and art directors. Much like the blending of graphic designers and desktop publishers, photographers also need to communicate that their skills are still relevant and important in that industry. The successful photographers are able to communicate to agencies that they are required, and rather than have the agencies use their internal staff to do the photography, pay a decent fee to a photographer who isn't hung up on ownership or licenses but showcasing that they truly understand the needs of the agency through their skills and professionalism.

I do foresee, a public perception change where the cameras doesn't just take good pictures but the pro photographer is the one that takes good pictures. Meanwhile, photographers can't panic. They must learn to evolve and embrace the change in the industry.

Is that photographer winking at me or is he taking my picture?

I certainly don't imagine myself wearing heads up display camera like google glass, running around looking like an idiot at a wedding winking at all the guests. But even so, if that's where the technology takes us, I will certainly reconsider and should be embracing it. What is the most important point in the survival of the photography industry will always be about showcasing the photographers abilities, no matter what tools is in use.

-T

Back to Basics - a New Journey, New(ish) Camera, and New Outlook...

2014-04-11T07:43:00.002-07:00

Drifting on 500px

Enchanted Morning on 500px

In the past couple of months I've returned to the photography I love. Nature photography.

Part of this has been fuelled by my transition over the Sony A7 which I picked up late last year. I haven't really been reviewing a lot of products in a while because of my busy schedule and frankly when I did have free time, I wanted to just go out to either shoot, or to review what I've done.

Overall I love the Sony A7, and although this isn't really a review, I do mention it because it has really kind of started to change things up in my photography.

Part of it is certainly the size of it, which has making carrying it and a bunch of lenses a real nice change from the heavy bag full of my larger dSLR gear.

Those of you who have been following me for years knows my journey of multiple mirrorless cameras and know that this is the most obvious benefit.

I also did this in part to pair up a digital companion to my Leica equipment. Again fuelled by the idea of staying compact, the Leica came into my possession fuelled by being more compact and discrete. I spent a good portion of last year with alternative processing in digital photography, then entered into a period of alternative film processing.

A7 in the Studio

But ultimately was a return to nature photography. For me the Sony A7 has been a greater part of that return which isn't saying it's that much better than my other equipment, but it has given me some different options in the way I shoot and interact with both the camera and my environment. There are still some small annoyances with the Sony A7, but generally I've accepted that no matter what system I use, there are always compromises.

A7 for Nature Photography

I've also still continued to explore alternative digital processing in various forms. Some, a continuation from last years work, and I intend to publish how I do that.

I've been really enjoying the return to shooting for myself more and it's something I remind myself is why I do photography. However one gets to this point in their lives, it's a nice reminder to go back to the things one used to do, explore it again, and try something new with it.

Cotton Candy on Flickr

Fotodiox Vizelex ND Throttle - The Variable ND in a Lens Adapter! Quick Review

2014-04-03T00:38:00.002-07:00

LATEST UPDATE:
The amazing team at Fotodiox and I walked through the issues I was having and we have identified it as being a defective copy that I have. They sampled the same lenses and did not find the issues I was having. It is possible that the chrome on one of the parts was too thick or maybe a machining error. Regardless. Fotodiox is sending out a new copy and I will hopefully put up a new review in short order.

Thanks the wicked team at Fotodiox, and Bohus who personally called to discuss this.

I'm super stoked to put this through the paces and talk more about it.

BREAKING UPDATE:
I've identified an issue with the adapter that for at least one of my lenses does not focus to infinity. It also affects all other lenses in where the focus distance is completely incorrect (where 10 feet is normal but with adapter it shows it at 4 feet). I suspect that this problem is probably a minor issue where the adapter thickness is too thick by .5 mm. I've contacted Fotodiox and hope to hear back from them about this issue. For now this review will be redacted until further notice.

I apologize to my readers about jumping onto this without a thorough test (just very excited by this). I hope it's a simple issue that should be resolved with a thinner profile adapter.

Mounted onto the Sony A7 with the Samyang 14mm
One of the problem lenses at the moment with no ability
to focus to infinity.

My Student's work: Infographic Love - Showcase of Data Visuals: Ed's Infographic

2014-02-25T16:03:00.001-08:00

Hello readers. I just wanted to plug my student's latest design assignment and have everyone check out the talented work by them on their infographic assignments. They will be updating a blog every couple of days with each of their own designs.

Have a look at this first entry by the talented and also fantastic photographer Eddie Morris:

Infographic Love - Showcase of Data Visuals: Ed's Infographic: Please click here for full-size Hello everyone, My name is Eddie Morris and this infographic was made in my Marketing class. ...

Tip of the Day: Snapshots - Lightroom

2014-01-22T00:41:00.000-08:00

Today’s tip is a little known or under-utilized feature in Adobe Lightroom. This feature is extremely powerful, and in terms of version management, allows a users to do multiple edits and inspect the process at different stages.

Snapshots allows you to save a state of your workflow at any point during your workflow. You can start with an original and create as many ‘snapshots’ as you like.

Simply click on the + symbol on the panel located in the default left side of your develop module, then name your Snapshop, and hit create.

You can also add snapshots at any point of your workflow. By going through your History palette which is located underneath the Snapshots, select the point of editing that you were last happy with, and then proceed to click the + beside the Snapshots heading to lock in a state.

You can also at any point update a snapshot with any new adjustments if you don’t want to create too many snapshots. Right click over the Snapshot and select the ‘Update with Current Settings’ pull down. Because this does not take any real memory on your hard drive, I don’t necessarily find this a benefit, but it’s there if you like to keep the amount of states down to a minimum.

Tip of the Day: Adjusting Camera Adapters

2014-01-07T22:04:00.002-08:00

Today's post is another attempt to put simple short content into my blog. Ironically, I teach social media and one of the cardinal rules I often break here is the length of my entries (it also makes it very time consuming to write lots of content for it). I of course appreciate those readers that spend the time to read through my detailed and lengthy posts, but I also know for every 100 people that come to this blog, that maybe only few spend the time to read the latest entry.

This hopefully will start off some simple little tips and tricks of the day. No promises of how often they will be posted, but for now, here's the first on adapters.

Sony E mount to Leica Adapter

One thing that is popular these days are lens adapters. Many of them vary in quality and price which often relates back to the fit of these products.

If you're lucky, some of these products are made from quality products, but regardless, I've often heard of people complain about how loose an adapter might fit or not at all. The later you can't correct easily, but the loose adapters are easy to adjust.

Other than the very best and most expensive adapters will not have that little slot as shown in the above image. Most people are unaware of it's function, but they are on every bayonet protrusion and designed for one specific task.

Apply light pressure and in the middle of the slot to bend the metal slightly for a tighter fit.

Simply wedge a jewellers or eye glass screwdriver into the slot. As you push it in, the thinner lower part of the metal will deform. This creates a tighter fit with your lens.

Start small, and evenly on all the slots. Checking with your lenses to see how they fit. Once you've done that, there should be no wobbling lenses. You shouldn't need to do this often, but metals all shrink and bend from use and temperature. Simply repeat this on your adapters when you find a wobble.

It should be stressed that it is important to ensure the lenses are tight. If they are not, there's always a slight chance that your images are slightly out of focus on one edge of your frame.

Plustek OpticFilm 8200i Review (with SilverFast 8)

2013-12-26T14:32:00.000-08:00

plustek OpticFilm 8200

It's only been 24 hours since I've gotten this scanner for Christmas from my wife (and her parents as well) that I'm already ready to give a rave review about this (I haven't even done a full A7 review).

This is almost like a spiritual experience on how good it is. I don't need to be told that there is no comparison of a flatbed scanner to a dedicated film scanner. I came from a time where I used drum scanners and doing lots of pre-press work, so I'm no stranger to the limitations of technology.

A while back I had expressed my return to 35mm film after 25 years hiatus from it as something that has been both eye opening and also a great pleasure.

To preface most of this mini review I will state this: if you're shooting 35mm film, get yourself a dedicated film scanner!

Three key factors I will outline to support the statement.

1. Flatbed scanners suck! Especially with 135 format 35mm film, it's awful. No surprises there, but if you do put money into something, don't put it into a flatbed scanner that also doubles for film (of course with exception to larger format films, then that's a different story)

2. The resolution and grain is beautifully resolved. Nikon Coolscans are also great at this, but they are dated and slow. I can get slightly better results from doing slide copy method, but the slide copy method does require a digital camera, a decent macro, a light-source and a set-up to do so. Also you're limited by the resolution of the camera and in terms of negatives, especially with colour, is very difficult to convert (and to be honest, only really useful for super fine resolution films like the technical-Pan like and microfilms). I've spent many frustrating hours trying to convert colour negs with no real success to my standards. Even black and white can be a pain, but regardless, this dedicated film scanner resolves grain and details perfectly.

3. Speed and convenience. Much has been stated in the 2nd point in terms of comparing this to digital slide copy methods. But compared to flatbed scanning, it's considerably faster. But it only has one carrier, and you do have to advance it manually, where as a flatbed scanner you can put up to (12) 35mm frames on the bed, preview it and scan it. So for quick indexing, the flat bed is still faster, however I can't help but think that this will create disappointment with the experience of shooting 35mm film. The biggest speed improvement over a flatbed scanner though is the high resolution scans. 7200 DPI scans are quick, and you can almost set this as a default if you're not in a massive rush to digitize a roll of film. Results of course at that resolution with high resolution films is stellar.

I'm not trying to advocate that film is better than digital. Digital is 100% more convenient than film. Film is an experience that is both culture and a preference. I love both but for me, perhaps it's more about sharing with my readers how to make that 35mm experience a treat.

Regardless of the Digital Vs Film debates, refining the workflow to me helps blur the line a little more between the two.

There's no doubt that frustrating things about film such as dust and scratches and the time spent developing it can discourage some, but also slowing down, and coming away with something that you can push and pull in development, and then in post processing, is something that pure digital cannot always offer you.

But more important in this workflow is making sure that any barriers of acquisition are removed. The plustek 8200i does take away all of that from my perspective.

It is a mini scanning lab for your desktop, and with just 15 minutes of set-up, the only limitation to your photos will be your own skills of photography.

I tried both Vuescan and the included SilverFast 8 SE Plus software. Both have their pluses and minuses. However straight out of the box I will say that with a small learning curve with SilverFast, that you'll be scanning awesome negs in no time.

The unit itself isn't all that large, and takes up a third of the space that a flat bed scanner takes. Interfacing to the computer is simple, and includes the USB cable to your computer (take note Canon and Epson!).

What was odd in this package was a rip-stock nylon carrying case? I'm still trying to figure how often I would need to carry around a film scanner from location to location. It's a nice extra, but 99% unnecessary.

The mostly pointless carry bag.

The package also comes with two film carriers. One for 35mm film that can accept 6 cut frame strips, or a slide carrier (which I think is a bit of a waste as very few people get slides in frames done anymore). The quality of the frames is what I'm really impressed by. First off, it's all rounded and there's no sharp plastic edges that can scratch your film. It is nice and substantial. Thick enough to not flex easily and just overall feels as a film holder should feel. Nothing cheap feeling about them.

The one criticism I would say about this system is that it doesn't automatically advance the frame in the carrier. In order to to scan each frame. You start by loading it with emulsion side down into the carrier, line it up on the frame lines (which also flatten the film for those PET films that curl like a SOB), then you load it into one side of the machine and push it through until you feel the click of the indent of the carrier of the first frame. This indent position is solid enough and registration is very good when you click the prescan. After you've scanned, you push the carrier through to the next indent and so forth. It would have been nice to have a mechanism where it just advanced it to the next frame, however I can only suspect that this would have put the cost up substantially. Let us consider that this unit is 1/3 the cost of a competing Nikon Coolscan.

Personally I wish they included a simple uncut film carrier system. However thinking this through, I would gather that there is a lot of risk of scratching your film with any system out there (I scratch my film all the time - although I'm a little careless in terms of film care). However I've hacked the system to deal with that, but I might just start to get into the habit of cutting my film and storing it properly.

A minor hack to use the plustek to scan uncut film.

The included software is pretty advanced. I wanted this model because I wasn't so sure I cared about SilverFast and their more expensive options so I chose the basic model. I've used SilverFast in the past but didn't really care much about it (mostly I was trying to improve the image quality of crap scans off of a flatbed, so perhaps some of the disappointment was due to the fact that you get crap quality out of crap scans, and good software can't improve what was already crappy).

Plustek and Lasersoft actually partnered in ensuring that these two devices got the most of each other. I'm rather impressed by the software with this scanner which certainly has me reconsidering it in my workflow. It gives a lot of control over all aspects of imaging, however it's not nearly as intuitive as Nikon's scanning software which is still my personal favourite in terms of film scanning.

Aside from that, once you've learned how to use the software, you can really get some amazing scans as a result of it. It includes an assortment of functions like dust detection from the IR scans, Automatic contrast compensation functions, Multi-Exposure scanning that improves your highlights and reduces scanner noise.

One of the things that is both annoying and a plus about SilverFast is that some functions require a rescan of the film as you make adjustments. I can appreciate the reasons for it, but sometimes it just slows things up. You definitely need to come up with a workflow that works best for you, which is why I still have some issues with SilverFast in that respect.

The second annoying point is that you can't save in a RAW formats. Although TIFF is still a good standard, I don't like locking in my settings into the file. Frankly I wish there was just a RAW DNG setting in SilverFast so I can just do all my adjustment in the far more intuitive Lightroom environment. But to each there own. The $90 Vuescan software that I already have, supports this scanner and gives me that option, so even though Vuescan has a terrible interface, at least I can retain as much of the bit depth of the file as I can.

However for the more basic user, I'd still suggest spending the time with SilverFast over Vuescan and in terms of colour negs, SilverFast deals with the orange mask far better than any other software scanning combination out there. The NegaFix option gives you a plethora of film options, and it seems to work relatively well. Vuescan is just not good enough in terms of this, so I would flip flop between the two software packages for different reasons.

Edit: Something I hadn't explored in the past is something called Workflow Pilot. Early indications while exploring this option has certainly assured me if you're a novice at scanning that this option makes it super easy to use and highly recommended. It make me rethink some of my criticisms towards SilverFast. Even for intermediate users, the Workfow Pilots certain streamlines things, so if you do get this set-up, do dedicate some time to learning that feature to see if it suits your needs.

For the value of the plustek, I say this is the best bang for your buck by a long shot. There might be some debate on whether this is better than a much more expensive Nikon CoolScan, however the Coolscan does come with more automatic features to make scanning more convenient. However the money you save and the image quality you get from the scans are comparable or maybe better. The advertised resolution is 7200 DPI with the plustek, while the advertised resolution for the Coolscans are 4000 DPI.

Whether or not this will make a difference or not, most consumer films will not likely benefit from anything higher than 2400 DPI. But I will debate that point as you start to use quality films and quality lenses, that imaging with the best resolution scanners do make a difference. I've been chasing grain the past couple of years as this was my mark for best imaging practices. Flatbed scanners fail to do that well or at all, and seems to fall in the premise of imaging just good enough for the limitation of small format film. I disagree with that ideology that 2400 DPI is enough, because once you start using good films, good lenses and a decent scan, it is a world of difference and at high scanning resolutions..

The plustek is a mini scanning lab on your desktop at a value that makes film shooting something that is fun and worth keeping around for at least this generation. Whether it gets fully displaced by digital one day or another is an irrelevant exercise that is best left to the haters of digital to debate in their forums.

For me, it was the last equation for my belief that I don't need to go larger format to love film. This scanner really does make 35 mm a charming format to shoot in, with image quality that matches digital in some respects, and avoids the need to go to medium or larger formats.

For more information on the Plustek OpticFilm 8200i visit their website at http://plustek.com/ and for the SilverFast 8 scanning software visit http://www.silverfast.com/

We were too young when we first met...

2013-11-25T13:13:00.000-08:00

To answer a question that some followers and readers, associates and others have asked me...

Why shoot 135 (35mm) film?

Fuji Film Acros 100 Developed in Ilford Perceptol

My objective has not been settling the argument of film vs digital. In my mind there is still no doubt that digital is superior in many respects, especially in the colour spectrum of things.

This hasn't been about dynamic range either. Frankly, I've seen good dynamic range and bad dynamic range. Both from combinations of good films and bad developers. Ultimately though, I've seen a realistic range of 10-14 stops which doesn't make it any better than digital, other than the fact it's 10-14 stops of grayscale, while digital is 10-14 stops of colour.

Kodak T-Max 400 with Ilford Perceptol

This has not been about resolution (sorta). Again, not to compete against digital at least. Some films are very impressive, and will out-resolve any modern digital camera. This comes with a massive but. You have to have the right film, the right developer, the right lens and more importantly the right scanning method. These days I'm scanning between 9000 DPI to 38,000 DPI (or 120 MP and up).

Modern optics are pretty amazing I should add. My Carl Zeiss Biogon 35mm on my Leica is one of the sharpest lenses I own. My 24-70 F/2.8 on my Elan is also even sharper. Here's where I will say why I'm shooting 35mm film. To bring the size of the equipment I'm using to a more manageable size, but give me quality that rivals larger formats.

This is all about matching what I can do on medium format. For over 25 years, I've not been a fan of the 135 format. Partially due to the fact that 20 years ago I was digitizing all sizes and formats but adored 4x5 and 120. Fast forward 14 years later. About the time I really returned to photography in a serious way, not just editing other photographer's work. For a short period of time I looked at 135 format, shot it, scanned it and reviewed it. No surprise, I was very disappointed by it. Ditched it, went fully digital and only cared about medium format film.

ADOX CMS 20 in ADOTECH

In the past couple of years, I have been chasing 'quality' resolution, which brings me back to the 'sorta' point about resolution. I often hear the statement, "Why don't you just get a D800?" all the time, but the overall answer to that is I'm going for much different resolutions than that, and there are issues with the D800 sensor that I won't go into details about. But ultimately, I was researching best practices to get to 100MP+ The result of that ultimately increased my understanding of diffraction, resolution, reproduction, etc... Even though I've been involved with imaging for over 25 years, it's always good to research new approaches and ideas.

Throughout this time, I came to a conclusion that my dissatisfaction with 35mm format film might actually be a result of the limits of certain technologies. I've come to terms with the fact that past attempts were a result of using poor scanning techniques. My current workflow increased the quality of digitizing my 35mm film, to a level that I can satisfactorily say is what I was capturing and appreciating from digitizing 120 and large format.

For me, I believe in 35, not again, but maybe for the first time. It's not a replacement for digital, but will companion my efforts in my art. The fact that I have now reduced my film kit to a pocketable 120 and 135 format rangefinder is making it much more fun to shoot film.

AGFA APX25 in Ilford Perceptol - Colourized in Post.

Although I have my large format camera, I have no interest in lugging it around. Sure there's some real nice things I could do with it that I can't with 135 format cameras, but at this stage, I am very satisfied with the results I'm getting.

This first image as an example, shot with fine grain, high resolution black and white film, and reproducible at 6 feet at 300 DPI, or for most normal viewable distances can be easily reproduced at 12 feet at 115 DPI. Definitely competes against medium format well.

I continue to explore and exploit the 135 format these days, but I haven't made any definitive conclusions from it, or maybe even willing to.

I like to challenge my tools, the medium and my techniques, but ultimately, what I am most certainly enjoying in this journey is being able to revisit something that I thought was so awful, actually turn out to be quite a nice format to work with.

Who needs a full frame 135 format camera anyhow? A quick look at the new Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 DC HSM...

2013-10-17T21:50:00.000-07:00

Sigma 18-35 F/1.8 DC HSM

Sigma is certainly stirring a lot of excitement in the camera world these days. Not only have they shed the stigma of being fringy and sometimes inconsistent in quality, but now kind of the king of cool lenses these days.

The current direction in that company has certainly brought out exciting products that many photographers are excited about, but they are also challenging old notions about what is possible on smaller format cameras.

APS-C whether or not is truly in danger of being left behind, is still one of the most popular dSLR formats out there. Millions of users have bought into the 135 crop size without concern over the fact that part of the dreamy parts of an image have been cropped out.

However as new photographers mature in their abilities and those that follow the trends of what is hot in photography, some can't help but fall into the rhetoric around 'full frame' format.

Perhaps you haven't been sucked into all of that but this lens just proves that you don't need to have a full format 135 camera to get the same effect that all those users of that format rave about.

Considering also the price of this lens at $899, compared to the full frame equivalent of $2,200 is something that is hard to ignore.

Of course 18-35 is a pretty limited range, but does cover the 'normal' lens range that is very popular with many photographer.

This first look was just a quick trial in the store with their first copy to arrive, and I was very impressed with the image quality and the bokeh or background blur.

The build of the lens is impressive. It's got a solid build, and has a very smooth (but a little stiff) zoom ring. I like the new texture of the outer shell which is a nice soft surface (which I do worry will pick up some scratches easily).

All the shots I took with this camera were wide open at F/1.8 on my EOS SL1 and it was accurate and quick.

I was actually a little surprised that I didn't see the wide aperture effect in the viewfinder, but once I snapped the photo, I certainly was wowed by the results. There were no aberrations that I would expect first on shooting wide open, but more so the fact that this is an F/1.8 zoom lens which should certainly show even more issues at the out of focus areas. I'm very impressed by the performance for sure.

As I write this entry, I can't help but think about the cost of being invested with my full frame 5DmkIII. The matching camera for argument sake would be with a 24-70 F/2.8L II vs a 70D with the Sigma. The 5D with the 24-70 comes in at a whopping $5,638 vs the 70D with the Sigma at $2198 a difference of $3440! Both cameras I'm certain would not make a single lick of difference with my style of shooting (and I'm very critical of image quality).

Sure there are some features that the 5DmkIII has over the 70D and some image quality difference in high ISOs, but is it that much of a difference that it warrants that price? I'm not that certain.

Regardless, this new Sigma is sure to make it even more appealing to APS-C owners giving them additional speed vs an F/2.8 lens for focusing in lower light which becomes a benefit that's hard to turn down. Of course the benefits of image stabilizing adds even more handhold-able possibilities in slower shutter speeds, so this combined with the new Canon EOS 70D might be one of the nicest combinations out there. I mistakenly thought there was image stabilizing when in reality it doesn't. Not a big deal to me, but the F1/.8 on the 70D will make this a real nice low light combination.

More time is necessary to really fully appreciate this set-up but for now, consider me impressed by this lens.

Regard

Stepping Back in Time

2013-10-06T00:21:00.001-07:00

Starting off, this was real hard for me to do.

For many years, I've owned Leica lenses and never a body. That decision has been because I'm an admirer of the lenses, but always felt the bodies, and maybe even the culture behind owning a Leica more status than practical.

It was also difficult for me to come to terms that my own personal feelings of Digital vs Film wasn't so much about dispelling any misconceptions of one over the other, but more about what this system meant to me.

I've been involved with imaging for over 25 years and I'm no stranger to film. I'm also no stranger to pulling the very best out of both film and digital files.

The notion that there is a 'look' is such a subjective point of view. Over the years, I've created film and digital manipulations that could come from either, but this isn't a debate about those merits. I say this to establish that my journey in photography has always been a balance between the two.

Now this isn't going to be another blog entry where a photographer is self-professing a return to film, or to say that a light has been seen to move to a Leica system.

Part of this is about practicality for me. I had recently picked up a rangefinder Weltur Welta that shoots 120 film and 75+ years old. The experience in using this system was something very liberating.

To be clear though, this was not an experience that had no issues. The Weltur requires hand winding with a view port on the back. Cocking shutters, taking meter readings, adjusting aperture and shutter speeds, and then using the rangefinder to verify focus.

If anything, it would be frustrating.

But I did say practicality earlier, and what this gives me was a couple of things. The 120 format in a small compact foldable system, with a bloody fast triplet lens with very nice background blur, and something that I could fit into a pocket. The image quality rivals my Hasselblad film cameras, and this is no where near the same weight. The rangefinder is also something of a treat for my aging vision, and last but not least, a 6x6 square format that I adore.

This got me thinking about other cameras again.

But this still didn't drive me to the Leica.

What happened next was a bit of an oddity, maybe even something of a realization. One of the reasons why I love Leica lenses is partially to do with how it is designed to focus easily without even looking through a viewfinder. Two things on Leica lenses that make this easy for many users. First the focus helicoid can generally be turned with a half turn and cover the entire range from near to far. The second is that this is done with an armature to make it easier.

I had recently salvaged a lens and created a focusable helicoid system which I mounted to my EOS-M digital camera. The ironic realization was that this creation I had made emulated the focusing experience of a Leica lens. It gave me fantastic results that I couldn't help but be reminded of a full Leica experience.

But again, this wasn't the final straw that sent me to the Leica.

I recently came into a small collection of antique abandoned cameras. One of them was an old Ikon Contaflex SLR camera. The camera has a classic fresnel focusing system and a mirror that needs to be cocked between shots.

What was real cool about this camera was the old selenium based meter that gave me the necessary readings while I used it. Focusing was a little awkward, and frankly, I felt the ergonomics of the beast was a little frustrating at times. However I really liked being patient with it. Taking the occasional reading, but even just framing, and waiting for a decisive moment was a joy. Even when I wanted to take a discrete or quick shot, I found it was real easy to do. Something I certainly know that Leica cameras are very well known for, and was reminded when using this camera in that way.

But that was still not what drove me to getting a Leica body.

Many of my associates have often said that I have an obsession with detail. This would certainly be true. But another thing that relates to this is what I've done all my life. Found more detail behind the details. My entire career I've been obsessed with all levels of details. Details in quality, details in information, details to master on my own, or details in construction. But before you say you have the AHA moment that you think I chose Leica because of the details of it's construction and quality, that's not the reason why.

Previously, I never really researched the history of Leica. It was after spending hours on some Leica fan site, reading about why people love Leica, and why the company is so great, that I found my 180 degree moment.

I don't know how many fans of Leica actually appreciate it, or value the company, but the number one thing that made me really admire this system was the company's level of tolerance.

In my research, I hadn't realized just how much this company was built on that principal. It doesn't say that Leica users are tolerant, but after reading the history of the company and the timeline that went along with it, I found a kind of tolerance that made me realize what a fabulous company this was.

I decided it was not only time to try using a Leica system full time, but maybe it was time to look at all my own prejudices with film, Leica, and to a lesser degree, the community behind analog photography.

I still have my opinions, but more importantly to me, I'm proud to carry this system not to show my values around my neck, and frankly many people would not ever see it that way, but that this is to me a personal choice that I would use something practical, patient, and without prejudice.

For whatever other reasons why people pickup this overpriced box that hold film, will be a sentiment that I will still likely believe in. I have no intention at this time to pick up a digital version of it, but in the meantime, when I go out to shoot something for fun, It will likely be the first camera I grab. Regardless of what this may mean, I still believe the best camera for you, should be an extension of your values.

For me my values are of tolerance, and this camera not only displays it for me, but helps me capture it.