I live in the far south of England, a few miles from the seaside town of Worthing. West Sussex is a beautiful part of the country, very green with plenty of picturesque villages and market towns (and a lovely coastline). Woodland in my immediate locality tends to be mixed deciduous - of the distinctly cluttered and messy kind. I’m often envious of photographers who have access to locations like the Peak District, the Lake District, or the Scottish Lochs. In those places the scenery is breathtaking and shows nature at its most unspoiled. Though I’ve been to those places over the years, I’m hoping that one day I’ll get to photograph those parts. But for now it’s my local woodland which is about a five minute walk from my front door. The local Arboretum about 45 minutes away is another appealing location.

These images were taken in 2020 – I can’t believe how long it’s taken me to look at them! I knew there would be a heavy early morning mist and I wasn’t going to miss a rare chance to get some shots. Mist adds so much depth and atmosphere to woodland photography. Suddenly backgrounds aren’t quite so cluttered and we’re able to isolate subjects far more easily than if the air were clear.

One of the exercises I do with my students is to remind them to be purposeful. Always have an aim in mind when you go out on a personal photography excursion. If I have a student with me the aim is for each of us to capture about half a dozen images which would look good printed and framed. Perhaps because of my age I live in the world of print. A photograph comes alive when expertly printed to the right paper type and framed with the right frame.

Our frame choices can completely change the look of an image, as you’ll see from the mockups below. These are low resolution so you won’t be able to see as much detail as you normally would, but you’ll get a good idea of what I’m talking about. Incidentally these gorgeous frames are the ones I use in my portrait and pet photography business. They include limed woods, hand painted swept and tray frames, simple gallery frames and classic metallic finishes.

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

The mist was so thick that I lost my way a couple of times. This was a strange feeling given that I’d walked around this woodland hundreds of times over the years. In the end I just followed the perimeter until I found a way out, but even that threw me. It was a strangely disconnecting experience, but in a good way. If you want to truly escape from the stresses of life, go out on a misty morning – you’ll become invisible!

I do miss the winters we had decades ago, when the frost turns our woodland into a winter wonderland. I can remember fabulous crystal formations hanging from every tree, which would build day on day. We rarely have frosts now in the deep South and they tend to be short lived. The bright golden winter days of old are a rarity. Nowadays it’s mostly dark, drab, rather depressing weather sometimes with no usable light for weeks on end. I find that I end up postponing shoots quite often in wintertime now, often more than once. The extent to which I’ve seen the seasons change in such a short space of time is frightening. I can’t imagine what our landscape will be like in as little as a decade. The great thing about photography is that we can document all of these changes and cycles and create an invaluable and true record for future generations. That’s something AI will never be able to achieve.

On recreational outings it’s important not to feel burdened or weighed down by your equipment. Thankfully these days we have so many small but capable choices. My favourite cameras for personal outings include my Sony A7C, my Panasonic G100, and my Sony ZV-1.

SADCASE hosts some lovely events throughout the year at scenic venues in West Sussex from village greens, seafronts, farms - and arguably one of the best open-air museums in the country. Each month throughout the summer SADCASE holds an evening gathering at Amberley Heritage Museum. If you haven’t been to the museum then you really must go - it’s like taking a step back into our industrial and engineering history. The setting itself is beautiful - the museum is nestled in the rolling hills of the South Downs. There’s also a cafe and plenty of seating.

Basking in the warm glow of a summer evening, surrounded by history and a large gathering of cars, is nothing short of marvellous in my book. You’ll see cars you may never have seen before, and you’ll meet their friendly and knowledgeable owners. Car clubs can sometimes be daunting and some are even a little snobby, but you won’t find that at SADCASE.

The August Amberley meeting gave me my first opportunity to write a blog post for what seems like an age. Life has thrown us some challenges and the last couple of years have been tough. It comes to most of us in late middle age - elderly parents can need high levels of care and our own health can start to tax us. Getting some much-needed escapism is very much on the cards. I met friends old and new and I saw some thoroughly unique cars. Taking my own car was a great excuse to give it a pleasant run from Storrington across the rolling Sussex countryside.

In terms of photos, you don’t need fancy equipment at a car event like this. Your subjects are static, the light is good enough and any sort of camera will do. What is important though is your focal length and composition.

The cars are spread all around the grounds and I soon discovered that I needed a wider focal length than expected. I started taking pictures with my little micro 4/3 camera (Panasonic G100) and a 34 mm equivalent lens (Olympus 17mm f1.8). This is a favourite focal length for general walkabout, street, and travel photography. But it was a bit too tight a lot of the time on this particular evening. For that reason I switched to my phone where the main lens is equivalent to 28 mm - this was perfect and most of the pictures below are taken with the phone. I’ve also included a small handful of images taken at September’s event at the same location.

I always shoot RAW as this gives me the ability to precisely correct the light balance if I need to as well as pulling as much detail as possible out of shadow and highlight areas. The latter is particularly important if the light is sunny. Sunshine creates quite a lot of contrast within the scene and shooting JPEG would push you into making a determination between preserving shadow detail or (most likely) highlight detail. My phone is capable of true RAW capture, so it’s a great tool for this kind of photography. Low late summer sun results in warm saturated colours which add depth to an image, so use that to your advantage.

I’ve shared some car photography tips in other blog posts, but in general do try to avoid taking mugshots of the cars! Instead try to inject some character into your photos. Experiment with wide and tight shots and see how you can use the environment to add interest or storytelling to your pictures. What can you include in the scene to add narrative, or visual interest? Foreground interest will help to elevate an otherwise ordinary shot, so experiment with ‘layering’ – foliage is good for this, as are people. Don’t forget to photograph any details you might spot, such as interesting badges, lights, or wheel caps.

Amberley Museum is a perfect setting for these cars because the backdrops are so historic and relevant to many of them. Having people in the pictures really adds life to the images, you can see the enjoyment and fascination these cars are evoking.

When we’re tired or at a low ebb it can be hard to make ourselves go out and mix with people. But I’m so glad I got Bambi out of the garage and went to this meeting - I came away with a smile on my face. Sometimes we have to force ourselves out of the door and it can feel hard (if not draining) at first. But once we’ve got back into the habit of being amongst people and life again, we start to reap the benefits.

If you’re in reach of West Sussex do have a look on the SADCASE website. As winter draws in there are daytime events as well as evening gatherings. You’ll meet plenty of like-minded people who have a wealth of car-related knowledge to share. It doesn’t matter if your vehicle is a much loved old runabout or a fancy Ferrari – all are equally welcome.

If you’d like to see some photographs of Amberley museum there’s a dedicated post here: Photographs of Amberley Heritage Museum

Today we left the house early, but probably not early enough. We sat in a fairly long tailback as we gradually made our way onto the large parking field opposite Goodwood Motor Racing Circuit. Ten or fifteen years ago we would all park in the circuit itself (assuming we were arriving in a relevant car). The numbers then were easily contained on site and there was plenty of room for everyone. It was fantastically social and I would always bump into at least a dozen friends and their cars. It would be busy, but not crowded - a true enthusiast’s event.

A Goodwood breakfast club meeting like Supercar Sunday is now one of the busiest events in the local calendar, attracting thousands of people from across the south of England and beyond. Gone is the intimate feel and camaraderie, but the event is as perfectly managed and run as always. And the location is gorgeous. I see it as something of a tourist attraction now, a great morning out for a family. The entrance criteria for displaying your car has changed over the years and I can’t help feeling this is reflected in the lack of overall variety I saw today.

To say this meeting was crowded was an understatement and within minutes I felt the beginnings of boredom. Rows of similar Porsches and Ferraris can become a little repetitive after a while, and I miss the days when the lineup would be rare, eclectic, and fascinating. There are also far fewer breakfast club meetings now. I understand why things have changed, the events need to be profitable given that entrance is free. A large captive audience means a roaring trade for the high quality catering stalls serving delicious snacks made from organic produce raised on the Goodwood estate.

Given how jampacked Supercar Sunday was, photographing the cars on display can be a challenge if not impossible at times. I decided to treat the outing as more of an exercise in street photography. With that mindset developed, it became easier to enjoy some casual picture taking. As always, I travel armed with a compact camera and today I had my little Canon G1X III and Sony ZV-1. Capturing interesting moments relies on speed - these cameras have blazingly fast autofocus and I had no problems capturing the visitors enjoying the fabulous cars on display.

Timing is everything, so it’s worth pausing with your camera framed up and ready, then reel off your shots when an opportunity arises. With so many people around it’s completely impossible to exclude them - and we shouldn’t exclude ourselves, we’re fantastic compositional elements in our own right. People add dynamism to a photograph, people can be used to control the visual weight of an image, or to add colour, movement, emotion and interest.

One interesting feature of visiting the same location periodically is the extent to which the light will be different each time. Today’s light was flat but glaring, featureless, devoid of sun yet harsh. There were no clouds, just a flat blank whiteout in the sky. These are the least appealing conditions I can think of, but we have to work with what we find. By contrast the light in August at Classic Car Sunday 2019 was very much nicer!

Another challenge is to create images which are different to the last set of images taken at the same kind of event. We always need to look for ways to shoot the scene differently, or at least with a different vibe. The way in which we process our RAW file can be integral to this. We might choose to ‘print down’ photographs into something slightly moody when we have dull and inspiring light. At the very least we should try to make each outing look a little different otherwise there really is no point in taking any pictures at all. The idea is to be creative each time we go out - how else can we keep improving?

If you’re just getting into car photography, there are some tips in this post: Car Photography Hints and Tips

Here are some of today’s images and the amazing cars I saw:

I never get tired of discussing compact cameras, despite having a bag full of Sony’s finest professional offerings. Compact cameras represent fun and recreation. And for me, they’ve been instrumental in helping me gather images for competitions and distinctions. Despite the vast choices we have, finding the right compact camera for our needs can be an ongoing quest. Invariably some compromises will need to be made.

The best compact camera for one person may not be particularly suitable for the next person. Evaluating and prioritizing our needs is always the first step. For example I want my compact camera to be small enough to fit in a jacket pocket or small handbag, without visibly weighing me down. I also want excellent autofocus which copes well in low light and which will track a moving target with reasonable accuracy. I also want a zoom lens with good edge-to-edge sharpness. A hot shoe is vital to me since I’ll probably be mounting a wireless mic or even a small flashgun. A leaf shutter is something I benefit from, given my strobist tendencies. If possible I’d like a viewfinder and a built-in flash. 4K video and the ability to shoot slow motion is also nice to have.

That’s my wish list, but your wish list may look very different. Note that I don’t make a big deal out of sensor size. There’s little point having a fabulous sensor if the camera doesn’t have the features and performance you need or want.

In this post I talked about my favourite compact cameras and how these have evolved over the last decade. One camera I didn’t discuss in that article is the Canon G1X III. Given my requirements, this would be an obvious contender. The reason it hasn’t made its way into my pocket until now is largely down to its price. It’s one expensive little camera. That changed recently when I had the opportunity to get my hands on a preowned unit at a hard to miss price.

The Canon G1X III is quite something. It features a large APS-C sensor yet manages to be quite tiny. That’s a heck of a feat, especially when combined with a zoom lens covering the standard 24 to 70 focal range.

Where does that leave my current pocket camera, the Sony ZV-1? I love this little thing, and it isn’t going anywhere. Which just goes to show that sometimes there will never be one camera which ticks every box. Sometimes you’ll need more than one, depending on the usage case.

The ZV-1 features a 1 inch sensor and a fast f1.8 to f2.8 24 to 70 mm equivalent zoom lens. The Canon G1X III has an f2.8 to f5.6 24 to 70 equivalent zoom lens. The ZV-1 has a crop factor of x2.7 and the little Canon x1.6. If you multiply the crop factor with the aperture value you’ll arrive at the ‘equivalent’ aperture in full frame (35mm) terms. In other words the ZV-1’s lens is equivalent to an f4.86 to f7.56 lens on a full frame camera, and the G1X III’s lens is equivalent to f4.48 to f8.96. You can immediately see that the depth of field (and ISO) advantage of the GIX’s larger sensor is broadly negated by the ZV-1’s bright lens. This means that at any given aperture value, your depth of field and image noise will be very similar on both cameras.

In that case, why am I even bothering to talk about the Canon G1X III? Why don’t I just save my money and stick with the ZV-1? Because there is more to having the right camera than simple equivalence.

If we stick with image quality for a moment, one really important advantage of a larger sensor is greater dynamic range. This means that in very bright scenes and high contrast scenes, the images from the larger sensor will retain more detail. This also means there’ll be more latitude during postproduction. Skin tones will also be more pleasing. If we zoom in to images taken across a range of sensor sizes, the differences are quite apparent. As a rule, a larger sensor will simply produce a smoother and richer result with all else being equal.

It’s important to say however that your sensor is only as good as the lens in front of it. A terrific sensor can be let down by a lens with poor resolving power - or a lens which is soft in the corners and edges (that was a major bugbear of mine on the otherwise excellent Panasonic LX100ii). It’s also true to say that the smaller the lens the lower the resolving power will be. This means that the larger lens of the G1X III should outperform the lens on the Sony ZV-1.

It's quite common to see a measure of copy variance on cameras with fixed zoom lenses. I saw this across the various RX100 cameras I’ve owned and three samples of the ZV-1. For me, fairly good corner and edge sharpness is critical because an opportunity to gain an interesting photograph may yield a competition image. A great image with soft edges and corners is unlikely to make the grade.

Let’s compare the two compact cameras under discussion (RAW findings). Incidentally both cameras have a leaf shutter, articulating LCD screens, hot shoes, and a built-in neutral density filter. The G1X III doesn’t have a mic jack. I’ve also included some comparisons with one of my favourite Micro 4/3 cameras - the Panasonic GX8. Its sensor lies between APS-C and 1 inch, with a crop factor of x2. This gives us a view of the three most popular sensor sizes for travel photography (APS-C and Micro 4/3 is a popular choice for professionals as well).

Canon G1X III vs Sony ZV-1 Lens

The lenses cover the same focal range and whether there’s an aperture advantage or disadvantage depends on which part of the focal range we’re using. The ZV-1 has an aperture of f1.8 at 24mm, which closes down to f2.8 at approximately 33mm. The G1X III has an aperture of f2.8 at 24mm and therefore has a small depth of field and ISO advantage at the wide end of the focal range. The G1X III lens is at f4 at 33mm, which offers a more significant advantage over the ZV-1.

However at the long extremity of the lens the G1X III is slightly disadvantaged since the lens’s fastest value is f5.6 from 57mm onwards (equating to almost f9 in 35mm terms).

Sony ZV-1 Advantages

The ZV-1 shoots 4K video (unlike the G1X III, which shoots only 1080p). The ZV-1 can shoot high speed video clips for extreme slow motion effects (the G1X III video tops out at 60fps). The benefit of filming in 4K is versatility if you have to crop or pan.

The ZV-1’s onboard microphone is so good it all but eliminates the need for an external mic, at least when vlogging. Another advantage of the ZV-1 is the ability to focus very close to an object (around 5cm) - this is one of the inherent advantages of small sensors. The G1X III on the other hand won’t focus any nearer than 10cm at the widest end of zoom range.

The ZV-1 has Sony’s all singing autofocus system and is also slightly smaller and slightly lighter than the G1X III.

Canon G1X III Advantages

The G1X III has some features which may just tip the balance for you. The key difference is the viewfinder (and it’s a nice one at that). There’s a built-in flash which is great for adding fill to backlit scenes. If you go hiking and enjoy landscape photography then the weather sealing and rugged build quality of the G1X III will be great to have, plus the fact you can attach filters to its lens.

Then there is dynamic range - if you enjoy printing at a decent size there’s no getting away from the fact that in good light the images from the G1X III will trounce even the best 1 inch sensor camera. The autofocus is no slouch either, having Canon’s dual pixel focus system which is very reliable. Plus the lens is noticeably sharper than that on the ZV-1 at all but the widest focal length.

Pricewise things are rather different though, with the G1X III costing almost twice as much as the little ZV-1! In the last five years, the price doesn’t appear to have come down much.

But what about image quality? For those of you who are primarily stills photographers, this may be the most important consideration. In my experience discussions about image quality are closely tied to ISO performance. However it’s vitally important to remember that ISO capability is but one element of image quality (and in some cases it’s the least important).

ISO and Depth of Field

If we consider only noise levels for a moment, I was surprised by my findings. We already know that in low light conditions there is no ISO advantage to the larger APS-C sensor because the G1X III’s lens is between one and two stops slower (depending on where you are in the zoom range). Therefore that alone cancels out the lowlight advantages of the G1X III.

But what if we compared the two cameras at identical ISO values - we would naturally assume that the larger APS-C sensor would visibly outperform the much smaller 1 inch sensor.

Well, I was surprised to see barely any difference in noise between the Sony 1 inch sensor and the APS-C sensor in the Canon G1X III at the same ISO setting! This means a G1X III image at ISO 800 is markedly noisier than a ZV-1 image at ISO 400 – when we’d expect them to be about the same. I can’t really explain this. Is Sony applying some noise reduction to the RAW files on the ZV-1? Or is the sensor on my G1X III unusually poor in the noise department?

Out of curiosity I did the same ISO tests with my Panasonic GX8. This is a Micro 4/3 camera and it’s a few years old, but has always been known for its excellent image quality. The GX8 images came out the cleanest of them all.

When I compared my ZV-1 with another Canon APS-C camera (my SL2/200D) the result was along the lines of what we would expect of the larger sensor – about ¾ of a stop of improvement in noise. I can’t explain why the 200D is visibly cleaner than the G1X III output, when both cameras apparently share the same sensor (which I believe is the sensor from the 80D) and Digic VII processor. Chances are there are some tweaks in the G1X III sensor setup which explains the difference. The images below are 100% crops of a series of images from the test cameras.

The virtually identical ISO result between the ZV-1 and the G1X III could leave you a little worse off at the long end of the G1X III lens in low light, although you may be able to offset that somewhat if your subject is static. This is because the stabilisation on the G1X III makes handholding at slow shutter speeds more successful when compared to the ZV-1 in my experience.

With respect to depth of field, at the widest point in the zoom range there is around a stop and a third of aperture difference between the two cameras. At 33 mm there is one stop of aperture difference. At the longest extremity of the zoom range the G1X III’s lens is two stops slower. In other words the ZV-1’s bright lens balances up the difference in depth of field - and even edges ahead a little at the long end of the zoom range.

Before you discount the G1X III on ‘ISO and DOF equivalence’ alone, remember that the benefit from a larger sensor is all about pulling maximum detail from bright or contrasty scenes where the additional dynamic range will be significant. The G1X III also has an additional 4mp of resolution, so you can crop a little more. Then there is lens performance. These are areas where the G1X III pulls ahead of its smaller sensor rivals.

G1X III vs ZV-1 Dynamic Range and Detail

The lens on the G1X III is very sharp indeed at all focal lengths and remains acceptably sharp edge to edge. The edges and corners show higher levels of purple fringing than the lens on the ZV-1, but that’s easy to sort out in postproduction. The ZV-1 lens is good, but it’s softer by comparison and the edges aren’t as good either. It’s best at the wide end of the zoom range and at short range.

I found the autofocus on the G1X III to be perfectly accurate in my tests (but I’m yet to test its tracking capability). The ZV-1 on the other hand wasn’t quite as reliable (which surprised me a little) and I fell into the habit of taking two pictures of each scene in order to choose the sharpest.

Despite the largely imperceptible image noise difference, the pictures from the G1X III are superior to those from the Sony 1 inch sensor. The overall sharpness, detail and dynamic range is better than any smaller sensor will offer. This can be seen as smoother tones throughout the image and higher levels of detail in the brightest and darkest parts of the scene. Small sensors tend to have a slightly ‘gritty’ look to them for this reason. But – if all you’ll ever do is post your images online, then these differences won’t be apparent to your audience.

Lens characteristics are hugely important on any fixed lens camera. The lenses on the 1 inch cameras I’ve owned are less sharp than their larger counterparts and also tend to show a slight fuzziness in high contrast scenes or when focusing close-up at wide aperture values. There’s also more purple fringing throughout the frame. Overall, smaller lenses tend to resolve less detail.

I noticed that the G1X III meters a little differently to the ZV-1 if the scene is high in contrast. The G1X III’s RAW engine appears to protect highlights more than the ZV-1 (which tends to return brighter more punchy RAW files). By default I leave a little bit of exposure compensation set on the Canon.

G1X III vs ZV-1 Video

If your usage case involves a lot of video, then the ZV-1 comes into its own. 4K video and high frame rate video for those gorgeous cinematic slow motion clips - it really is a little gem if you enjoy filmmaking. If that’s your thing, then I would recommend the ZV-1 without reservation. The video on the G1X III is OK (and the stabilisation is excellent) but it doesn’t have the features of the smaller camera.

WHICH CAMERA SHOULD I CHOOSE?

Herein lie the frustrations when it comes to choosing a compact camera. One hand gives generously while another hand taketh away. All we can do is list our priorities and accept some compromises. I would struggle to give up either of these excellent cameras.

G1X III Advantages

• Larger sensor, better dynamic range

• Weather sealing

• On-board flash

• Sharp lens

• Viewfinder

• Good stabilization

• Good backup for pro photojournalism/landscape

ZV-1 Advantages

• Faster lens, slightly shallower depth of field

• 4k video good enough for pro b-roll

• Good on-board microphone

• Noise levels on par with G1X III

• Slow motion video options

• Close focus ability

• Mic jack

I didn’t expect to see virtually identical levels of noise between the two compact cameras at the same ISO value. I’m still trying to get my head around that. I recall my Sony RX100 days (Mk II and III) and I was always wary of going above ISO 800. Not so with the ZV-1, it’s great at high ISO values. Nor did I expect my old GX8 to edge out the G1X III in that department.

Overall though, for sheer quality no other compact camera (with a zoom lens) is a match for the Canon G1X III with its large sensor, excellent lens, and weatherproofed body. But you’ll pay for the privilege of owning it. On the other hand the Sony ZV-1 is the ultimate all-rounder – it offers better value for money, top flight video features, sophisticated autofocus functions, great onboard sound, very good image quality and it’s more pocketable.

If I had to choose between the two cameras it would be a very difficult choice indeed. If I was photographing very bright environments such as seascapes then the G1X III would be the best choice. If I needed ultimate detail and sharpness then the same would apply. But for everything else the smaller size and lighter weight of the eminently likeable ZV-1 makes it a great choice.

A few months ago I finally upgraded my 11-year-old Samsung smartphone to a phone I hoped I would actually use. And use it I have, which was quite a surprise given that I’ve always been phone phobic. My new Sony Xperia Pro I was a carefully considered decision. Firstly, it would need to be useful rather than reluctantly pulled out once or twice a year due to necessity. Call me a loner all you like, but I can’t imagine anything worse than being constantly accessible. All too often calls and text messages seem unduly trivial and rarely have any point to them.

For me, my new smartphone needs to be more of a productivity device reducing the need for me to carry a separate camera and occasionally a tablet or small laptop. Nowadays most smartphone buyers will probably agree with that.

A Smartphone designed for Professionals and Photography Enthusiasts

The Xperia Pro-I isn’t aimed at mainstream smartphone consumers. In fact it’s squarely marketed towards imaging professionals, particularly those already invested in the Sony imaging ecosystem. I use Sony cameras for most of my professional work so the interface will be familiar. What makes the Pro-I so ‘pro’? There is a distinct lack of computational processing meaning the images are very natural, as they would be from a dedicated camera. There’s also a full range of manual controls and features similar to those found in the Sony Alpha lineup. Then there is the superb Sony autofocus system and dedicated videography apps. It really is like using a camera rather than a phone.

There are of course other smartphones with large sensors. But from what I’ve seen the images tend to be highly processed and the RAW files aren’t always ‘RAW’ enough. The imaging apps may not be aimed at a professional user who seeks ultimate control over their output. My Pro-I also came with a fairly unadulterated operating system. I never could stand the bloatware and unnecessary apps which many manufacturers bundle by default - and you can’t always get rid of them.

Much is made of the 1 inch sensor in the Xperia Pro-I, but that isn’t without a caveat. In order to maintain a reasonably sleek profile, the image circle only covers approximately 60% of the sensor. This means the effective sensor area is similar to some of its competitors. The depth of field is likely to be similar as well. However in my experience overall image quality is superior in the Pro-I. The pixels are large and the Zeiss lens (with its glass elements on the main camera) is fabulous edge to edge. The Pro-I also offers the option to close the aperture to f4, which can be useful when filming in bright light or photographing landscapes. There’s also the stunning 4K display, 4k 120p filming, excellent sound quality and a headphone jack.

View fullsize

View fullsize

There’s also a hefty amount of storage built in and the ability to add another terabyte via the SD slot. What’s not to like, you might ask. Well …… the price. But if this device gives you what you want or need then the price starts to feel easier to justify. I have to confess that having studied everything else on the market I have no regrets whatsoever. I bought my phone preowned, as I try to do with all of my gear.

Whilst noise levels and depth of field from the Pro-I’s cropped 1” sensor aren’t going to match that from a 1 inch sensor camera like the Sony RX100 line, the image quality will surpass the competition in my opinion. That’s assuming you’re a photographer rather than a layperson (who might prefer colourful punchy pictures which can virtually turn night into day).

I do have the odd gripe though. On a hot summer day I did experience overheating – snapping away in full sun was a short lived exercise. That isn’t unique to Sony of course - the more powerful the device the more likely it is to get hot. Another thing I’d like to see are picture profiles for JPEG shooters.

View fullsize

View fullsize

Sony Xperia Pro I for Landscape and Travel Photography

As with anything, the proof is in the pudding. I thought I’d use this post to show some of the images I would typically take when I’m out and about. These are images anybody can confidently take with their smartphone.

I’ve specifically chosen one of my favourite recreational photography locations - my local beach at Worthing on England’s south coast. Over the years I’ve spent more hours than I can count enjoying this locality whenever I need to destress, test a new camera or lens, or recover from something. As things stand I have more stress than I would like, so a rare hour on and around Worthing pier turned into a field review for my Sony Xperia Pro-I.

It was a bitterly cold day and at times the light was dull, flat and overcast. I used a small amount of exposure compensation (a third of a stop) rather than my usual choice of 2/3 to one stop when using a large sensor camera. I switched between the main camera (which has the 1 inch sensor) and the telephoto camera. The latter has a smaller sensor and smaller lens, so the image quality isn’t quite as good.

I shoot RAW so I can avoid the strong sharpening even the Pro-I applies to its JPEGs (although less so than its competitors). When shooting with a small sensor device I find that the RAW files almost always need more sharpening and contrast - and often a bit more vibrance and saturation.

View fullsize

View fullsize

The Importance of Dynamic Range

It’s really important to understand the differences between small sensors and large sensors. Most of you will already know that the larger the sensor the shallower the depth of field at any given aperture value. You’ll also know that the larger the sensor the lower the noise will usually be at a given ISO value. Often discussions about sensor size will end there, but there’s a bit more to it.

There’s also sensor resolution. The Xperia Pro-I produces 12 megapixel files. The smaller the sensor the more cautious any camera manufacturer will need to be with respect to megapixels. The more pixels you cram onto a sensor, the smaller those pixels will be, and higher levels of image noise are usually the result. It’s easy to forget that smaller pixels will also mean lower dynamic range.

View fullsize

View fullsize

The smaller the sensor (particularly with a high pixel count) the less dynamic range you’ll have. Dynamic range is expressed as a numeric value and in simple terms it’s the ratio between the brightest and darkest parts of the scene. Dynamic range is commonly expressed as ‘stops’. Dynamic range is directly linked to a sensor’s noise floor. In turn, the amount of dynamic range your camera’s sensor can capture will depend on the ISO value. As ISO increases, dynamic range drops.

What does dynamic range mean in the real world? This will depend on the kind of scene you’re photographing. Some scenes contain a wide range of tones from very bright areas through to the deepest shadows. How will your chosen camera capture all of those tonal values without highlights clipping and dark areas losing detail? Once highlights are blown and shadows are blocked, detail can no longer be recovered from them. In other words small sensors won’t always capture the tonal information we might want them to. The result can be photographs which appear ‘gritty’ and less smooth in tonality than their large sensor counterparts.

View fullsize

View fullsize

We can help to mitigate the lower dynamic range of small sensors by exposing carefully. When taking pictures with my phone or a 1 inch sensor camera, I’ll expose for the highlights. This usually allows me to lift enough detail from the shadows later on when I process the RAW files. Note I say RAW files. Lifting shadows won’t work particularly well if you’re a JPEG shooter.

Conventional wisdom will often advise you to expose to the right (slightly overexposing your photograph) but that depends on the kind of scene before you and the camera you’re using. It isn’t something I would advise for smartphone photography.

View fullsize

View fullsize

I will say that the RAW files from the Sony Xperia Pro-I are very nice to work with, and I had no problems recovering highlight areas.

I’ve used more cameras than I can count on my beach photography excursions over the years. Everything from cameras with 1 inch sensors through to full frame cameras. This can dictate what I then do with the photographs - for example how large I feel I can print them for an optimal result. The 12 megapixel files from my Xperia Pro-I print beautifully and I wouldn’t hesitate to fill a photo album with them. In optimal conditions a 24 inch print will look great as well. But there’s no doubt however that the RAW files from my Sony ZV-1 are more versatile. The full size of the 20 megapixel sensor is being used, the lens is top notch, and there’s more detail in the images. But as smartphones go, I think the Xperia Pro-I is very impressive indeed.

View fullsize

View fullsize

Is this phone a substitute for a compact camera? In many situations it is, and in many situations you would never know the difference between images taken with this phone and a good quality compact camera. Those differences would start to become more evident with pixel peeping and printing at large sizes – but probably only to a trained eye. My phone is a great everyday imaging device, as these photographs can testify. But if I’m embarking on a dedicated photo walk I prefer my ZV-1 or A7C.

View fullsize

View fullsize

If you want to see some comparisons there are some side-by-side shots on this blog post – Sony Xperia Pro-I vs Compact Camera and Xperia Pro-I Real World Image Comparisons

An everyday personal use camera doesn’t have to be anything fancy, it just needs to suit your purposes. Over the years I’ve worked my way through a number of handbag cameras and as time has gone on new technology has gradually met more of my requirements, with fewer compromises. I now have three compact travel cameras which are used interchangeably, each with their own features and benefits.

Finding the Best Compact Travel Camera for my Needs

I truly discovered travel and street photography when I purchased a Fuji X10 in 2011 - a camera which kindled my love of recreational photography. In fact I have never enjoyed off-duty photography as much as I did back then. I still own this camera, there’s something special about it. Or at least there was given the era when it was released. It was the beginning of a new breed of compact cameras, but with a super stylish retro design, a fast zoom lens and a 2/3” sensor.

Now imagine a system with a decent sized sensor and features not dissimilar to a well specified DSLR, but in a small and lightweight body. When Olympus released the pro-oriented 16MP OMD E-M5 in 2012 this replaced my DSLR inventory and became my professional system (whilst being small and light enough to use as a recreational camera). It was incredible not to have to haul a DSLR and lens around with me on personal outings. I could also avoid the horribly suspicious looks which were part and parcel of most photo walks. There were some compromises of course – the u4/3 kit lenses which offer the lightweight and compact size inherent to a travel system have variable apertures and combined with the 4/3 sensor this meant shallow depth of field (and low ISO values) was compromised. Still, that was a small price to pay for the size and weight reduction, and overall image quality.

Over time I started hankering for something even smaller and lighter, which could be slipped into a pocket. I went on to own two iterations of the Sony RX100 line, but lasted only a short time with each. I’ve never warmed to the RX100 cameras, which feel like a bar of soap in my hands as well as having controls which I find cramped, fiddly, and frustrating to use. On both of the units I owned the lens wasn’t particularly sharp either, especially at the edges. I then moved on to a Canon G5X which I preferred, before giving way to the Olympus EM-10 (the lightest u4/3 camera at the time).

At this point in travel camera evolution, we were limited to 4/3 sensors or smaller (at least if we wanted zoom lens capability – there were a couple of APS-C contenders, but with a fixed prime lens and a limited feature set). We’d be tied to variable aperture zoom lenses in order to keep the overall package as small and light as possible. This is usually where the gripes and complaints would always lie - the lack of creative control and the need to use higher than desired ISO values to compensate for those smaller aperture values.

The release of the Panasonic LX100 in 2014 was exciting - a proper compact camera with a 4/3 sensor and a fast zoom lens – finally! I was very fond of this camera and it was a joy to use, but I would have liked a little more than 12 megapixels. That requirement was answered by the LX100ii in 2018, albeit with a lens which didn’t match the edge-to-edge sharpness of its predecessor. Having tried two or three copies of this camera I found that I was having to crop the images more than I would have liked in order to remove the soft corners and edges. Given that my compact camera must have a purpose (providing images good enough for high-level professional competitions) I thought I was compromising more than I wanted to. And so the search continued for something small enough and light enough to improve my shooting envelope.

My next travel camera was the Fuji XT200 which I bought in 2020 - with its beautiful APS-C Bayer sensor and nice quality compact kit lens. This is a great little camera and very lightweight. But it wasn’t a particularly sensible purchase given I’m not otherwise a Fuji user. I couldn’t justify buying additional lenses for a system which was still lacking in some areas. I reluctantly parted with my XT200 not long after I added the stunning full frame Sony A7C to my professional kit bag in 2021. I shoot with Sony professionally so the A7C was a much better prospect as a double duty second camera and recreational camera. The kit lens which accompanies the A7C is exceptional – it’s very compact, ultra sharp and makes for a dream travel solution.

You would think I would have left things there, but I was browsing YouTube one day and saw a number of rave reviews about the little Sony ZV-1. Deep down, I still wanted something which was small and pocketable for those days when I want to travel extra light. The ZV-1 is marketed as a vlogging camera, I presume to avoid taking too much market share from Sony’s RX100 line. In reality the ZV-1 is also an impressive stills camera with Sony’s all singing autofocus system, their latest 1 inch sensor and a top-notch f1.8-f2.8 zoom lens. It also has a number of features which the latest RX100 doesn’t - such as a built-in neutral density filter, a hot shoe, and some video features which will be genuinely useful to anyone looking for a sophisticated yet highly portable vlogging camera. I succumbed to a good deal at my local Argos store, which included the Bluetooth shooting grip.

Last but by no means least, this year I finally updated my largely unused 10-year-old mobile phone. I’ve been staving this off for a very long time and felt the purchase wouldn’t be worthwhile unless I found something I actively wanted to use for more than just talking. Enter the Sony Xperia Pro-I - a phone that is also a professionally specified camera, or perhaps better described as a camera which is also a phone.

Sony A7C vs ZV-1 vs Xperia Pro-I as Travel Cameras

It’s interesting to make a comparison between the full frame Sony A7C with its kit lens, and the little ZV-1 in the context of recreational photography.

The wide aperture of the ZV-1 lens means I can shoot at low ISO values, thereby negating the ISO advantage of the A7C’s much larger sensor when paired with its 28-60 f4-f5.6 kit lens. The same applies to depth of field - the wide maximum aperture on the ZV-1 can approximate quite well to the widest aperture value of the A7C’s kit lens. Because of that, it can be incredibly difficult to tell between images made with either camera. Obviously the A7C has the glaring advantage of being able to accept a spectrum of lenses to cover a multitude of photographic scenarios. However that will come with a size and weight penalty so I’m limiting this discussion to kit lenses.

There are of course a number of glaring differences between the 1” sensor ZV-1 and the fabulous full frame sensor on the A7C. One is dynamic range, although the ZV-1 does surprisingly well in that regard - just don’t expect to recover quite the same level of highlight detail. Then there is the tendency for small sensors to show more image noise than larger sensors (usually because there are an awful lot of pixels crammed onto a fairly small surface area). The noise issue can be largely mitigated by a fast aperture lens. Small sensors can also make it very difficult to create shallow depth of field effects (more on that in a minute). Lastly there are the limitations of a small built-in lens - these will rarely if ever match their larger non-fixed counterparts. This tends to show in edge sharpness and chromatic aberration.

One thing I’ve noticed is that the focusing of the ZV-1’s lens isn’t always as accurate as I would have liked beyond distances of around 15 feet. This is by no means an issue, but I do come home with the odd missed shot. With that in mind I tend to take two or three shots if the scene is likely to be important to me. On the flipside the ZV-1’s close-up capability is fantastic, really useful and highly accurate. In fact I’m struggling to find anything bad to say about the ZV-1 - I genuinely love using it. There’s no viewfinder, but we’ve been given a hot shoe which for me is more important. The ZV-1 ticks far more boxes for me than the RX100 models. It benefits from a flippy screen, a very good on-board mic, a mic jack, a recording lamp, a built-in neutral density filter and a fast standard zoom lens akin to older RX100 iterations. The most recent RX100 has an impressive zoom range of 24 to 200 mm, but with a slow maximum aperture (not something I would entertain on a camera with a 1 inch sensor). The ZV-1 doesn’t have as good build quality as the RX100, but that’s reflected in the more modest price point.

I won’t go into the detailed specifications of the cameras I mention here, because that’s easy enough for you to look up. It’s more interesting to show some pictures with comparisons. But before I do, there’s another device I really need to mention - my latest smart phone. I invested an eye watering sum in the Sony Xperia Pro-I and it’s no exaggeration to say that this is an all-round communication and image making powerhouse. I will happily grab my phone for personal outings if the images aren’t intended for any critical usage such as very large prints. I say that because the phone limits me to a resolution of 12 megapixels and the tiny lenses inherent to smartphones cannot compete with those of a good quality compact camera. The great thing about the Pro-I is the fact the files are far less processed and computational than those from its competitors. The RAW files are what you would expect from a RAW file and the video capabilities are exceptionally good as well.

It’s also worth mentioning ‘the compact camera that got away’. I missed out on a great deal for a used Canon G1X III. This is a terrific (albeit very expensive) APS-C compact (about the same size as the Panasonic LX100ii) with a fixed zoom lens like the kind you’d see with an entry level DSLR. It has a viewfinder, leaf shutter, built in ND filter, weather sealing, and excellent autofocus. It lacks 4k video, which is a great shame. It’s still on my list if I can find a used bargain.

Sensor Size and Shallow Depth of Field

One of the more common complaints about small sensor compact cameras is the lack of shallow depth of field, even at the widest available aperture. If you intend to use your compact camera for portraits or creative photography then any failings on this front may push you towards a larger sensor camera with the additional size and weight which normally goes with it.

There are a number of determiners when it comes to separating your subject from the background. These include focal length, aperture size, camera to subject distance, subject to background distance, and sensor size. As you can see, there are several things we can try to juggle in order to get the effect we want, but without some flexibility on focal length and aperture we may find that cameras with smaller sensors can limit any prospect of shallow depth of field effects.

A camera’s crop factor (vs full frame FX format) will help us to work out our depth of field at a given aperture value. For example most APS-C cameras have a crop factor of x1.5. This means that if we placed a 50 mm lens on that camera, the field of view would be similar to that of a 75 mm lens on a full frame camera. Similarly an aperture value of F4 would look like f6 on a camera which has a full frame sensor. In other words there is just over a stop of difference in depth of field. A 4/3 sensor has a crop factor of x2, and a 1 inch sensor as a crop factor of approximately x2.7. A 2/3” compact camera has a crop factor of around x3.9.

As you can see, if our chosen compact camera has a small sensor (and hence a high crop factor) then having a wide maximum aperture is quite important. And not just from a depth of field point of view, but also to maximise the amount of light the sensor can gather and therefore reduce the effects of image noise which will become more noticeable as sensor size decreases.

My Sony ZV-1 has a 1 inch sensor and a fast f1.8 to f2.8 24-70mm (equivalent) zoom lens. My full frame Sony A7C has an f4 to f5.6 28-60mm kit zoom lens. If we apply the aforementioned crop factor to the ZV-1 we can see that depth of field and noise levels will be very close to what we would see if using the A7C.

My Xperia Pro-I smartphone has a 1 inch sensor but only around 60% of that is used, so the crop factor of my phone is actually in the region of x3.9. Having some additional depth of field isn’t always a bad thing - it’s useful for landscapes, street scenes, and close-up photography. But given my phone has a maximum aperture of F2 we’re not going to get as much subject separation as we would with a larger sensor camera (we’ll also get higher noise levels) or a telephoto lens. You can see the relative similarities and differences from the photographs below.

Many smart phones do of course have a ‘portrait’ mode which uses a processing algorithm to separate what the camera perceives to be the main subject, whilst adding a blur effect to the background. The amount of blur can be controlled on many smartphones via a slider in the photo app. Some smartphones are better at this than others, but overall I find the effect nothing more than a bit of fun and not something I would want to utilize.

Shooting with the Pro-I’s 50 mm equivalent lens will give you some background compression but since the sensor is smaller on the tele camera than the main camera I try to stay within ISO 400 and below. The images aren’t quite as sharp and detailed either. I tend to stick with the 24mm main camera.

Given the overall high quality of the images coming from the Pro-I’s main camera, there’s little to complain about. Particularly when we consider how portable and convenient a smartphone is, albeit a fairly large one like this. I suspect that depth of field control will be something many of us will miss when photographing with our phones, but given how flat and portable a phone needs to be there will always be some trade-offs. The Xperia Pro-I also has Sony’s excellent autofocus features which make it a truly useful image making device.

Sony A7C vs ZV-1 vs Xperia Pro-I Image Comparisons

Below are some shots taken around my garden on a late summer evening. The photographs will give you a good idea of the comparative depth of field differences of each device when shot at its maximum aperture. Maintaining the maximum aperture means shooting at the widest available focal length (on the Xperia Pro-I I’m using the main camera which has a 24mm equivalent focal length and an f2.0 maximum aperture). The widest apertures and the extremes of a zoom range are likely to show a lens’s weaknesses. It’s not uncommon for even an expensive lens to be slightly soft at very wide aperture values - the ZV-1 does well in that regard (and is even sharper if stopped down slightly).

From left to right: Sony A7C, Sony ZV-1, Sony Xperia Pro-I:

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

I think the conclusion is that each device has turned out very pleasing results indeed, with respect to depth of field and detail. The A7C with its kit lens and the little ZV-1 come out broadly even (at least with respect to casual leisure images like this) making the latter camera the one I reach for consistently for recreational shooting. In most cases it’s very difficult to tell the images apart. The A7C’s lens is sharper as you would expect and the full frame sensor returns more detail. But overall, it’s surprisingly close in most everyday situations. The focus accuracy of the A7C is extraordinarily good and even though the ZV-1 has a highly sophisticated focusing system, it isn’t quite as reliable.

The Pro-I is extremely impressive on the autofocus front and it’s hard to find anything to criticise - and that’s before you look at the video features of the Pro-I (which I’ll save for another day). As far as phones go, it doesn’t get any better than the Pro-I given the level of professional control it offers the user.

Although a typical travel lens is a compact zoom, there are plenty of photographers who prefer a fixed focal length and hence the opportunity to use a wide aperture value. A lightweight prime lens which I rate very highly is the Sony FE 28mm f2 - it’s small and balances beautifully on my A7C. This is where the full frame sensor will shine if you don’t need a zoom lens for your walkabout picture taking.

If you’re a casual snapper using your smart phone simply to record the odd interesting moment or family outing then chances are you won’t be too forensic about the photographic capabilities of your device. But what if you want to enjoy a measure of dedicated photography or videography with your phone? In which case smartphone photography may leave you disappointed by the result, highlighting the fact that we do need to set our expectations at an appropriate level.

In my working life I shoot almost entirely with Sony full frame cameras including the Sony A7Riii and A7C. My backups are my personal use cameras which include the Panasonic GX8 (four thirds sensor) and the Fujifilm XT200 (APS-C). The Fuji XT200 is a stellar lightweight walkabout “handbag” camera, and it’s the one I would choose to have with me as often as I can. Paired with its impressive and lightweight kit lens the combined weight is a mere 440g. In that regard, the Fuji XT200 really is a go anywhere camera, turning out images which rival those from my bigger and more expensive Sony full frame cameras. Light weight aside, it’s still a little too large to fit in an evening bag. As someone who has always been preoccupied with the weight I carry, I have to add the weight of a camera to the weight of a phone (which might average 190g). That’s a combined weight of 630g. Hmm.

If I could find a phone which is also a useful image making device then I could reduce that load to approximately 200g. That’s quite a saving when walking around town for a few hours, or travelling in general. Is there a phone out there which will satisfy me enough to do just that? In this article I’ll set out to answer that question as objectively as I can.

A New Mobile Phone for Somebody who Dislikes Mobile Phones

I must be the only person on earth who has managed to evade using a mobile until about a week ago. Yes, you heard that correctly. I bought my first mobile 12 years ago – a Samsung Galaxy SII, swayed by peer pressure and the security benefits of carrying a communications device. Through no fault of its own, I didn’t exactly warm to it.

Sadly my Galaxy SII was relegated to an occasionally remembered device and only when I was travelling. Emergency use, or those rare occasions when I might need to phone for a taxi (or to tell someone I was running late). In a decade I managed to make barely 30 calls (not including the brief calls from my desk to my landline to keep the SIM active).

Why did I have such an aversion to mobile phones? I’ve always found them resoundingly antisocial. I grew tired of having to compete for someone’s attention when their focus would often be on taking usually trivial calls partway through a meeting or social gathering. I can recall a similar level of annoyance during a relationship I had a couple of decades ago. A nice enough guy, who always had the latest and greatest cell phone. This object became more and more irritating to me as our friendship continued. It was always sitting on a restaurant table midway between us, a small but potent barrier to any conversations lasting more than half an hour. Or else it was in the top pocket of his shirt - like a middle finger gesture every time I expected some focus on a discussion. Politely asking him to switch it off (unless of course he was expecting a call from a VIP – aka his mother) usually fell on deaf ears. I did belatedly realise that the exercise was rather deliberate on his part - he wanted me to know that I was a lower priority than anyone else who might want his attention that evening. And indeed I was, but we were able to deal with it fairly amicably and we’re still friends to this day.

The years rolled on and my (very expensive at the time) Galaxy received no love whatsoever. I can also say that I have never taken a picture with it.

So why the change of heart in the last month? With enhanced security measures being applied to most of what we do now, an up to date mobile phone became something I couldn’t really avoid any longer. I could of course just continue to use my old but pristine Galaxy SII. But it’s slower than its newer counterparts and it’s basic by comparison. More importantly, I’m curious about the photography side of mobile technology. Is it possible that a new, all singing mobile phone might tempt me to be little more accepting of these devices? The time had come to put it to the test.

Choosing my New Mobile Phone – A Photographer’s Smartphone

Until last month I knew virtually nothing about today’s smartphone technology. I also had no idea what they cost - I almost spent the night in our local hospital after looking up the price of the phones I’d shortlisted for consideration.

As with many things in life, I started out with what I thought was a healthy budget only for that to be increased almost fourfold (had I been buying new). My priority was best in class camera performance, at least if I wanted to leave my handbag cameras at home.

I narrowed things down to the Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra, the iPhone 13 Pro, the Sony Xperia 1iv and the Xperia Pro-I. All have screamingly expensive price tags, and I knew I’d be looking at the preowned market.

Setting Expectations – Can a Smartphone Replace a Camera

Mobile phones have tiny imaging sensors. Today’s compact cameras on the other hand generally have sensors which range from the small end (1/1.7”) right up to APS-C. Even full frame cameras have shrunk. Given the cameras I usually carry in my handbag, I was going to have to accept that the images coming out of a phone would be a step down in many situations.

Small sensors will also mean that shallow depth of field can be hard to achieve. Small sensors also mean visible image noise at higher ISO values.

Mobile phone cameras tend to rely on a main camera and additional cameras covering ultrawide and telephoto focal lengths. Zooming on a smartphone tends to be digital (with a commensurate loss of quality) although one or two smartphones have a ‘periscope’ zoom lens offering true optical zooming. The main camera will usually have the largest sensor and the most resolution. As my phone research progressed I happened upon a device which has certainly divided opinion, but which I realised was likely to be the only option for someone as controlling as I am. And that’s the Sony Xperia Pro-I.

Taking a look at the Pro-I optics, the phone offers a 1 inch 12MP main sensor paired with a 24 mm equivalent f2.0 or f4.0 Zeiss lens. There’s also a 50 mm equivalent camera with 12MP and a ½.9” sensor and an f2.4 aperture. The wide-angle camera has a 12 megapixel ½.5” sensor with a 16mm equivalent field of view at f2.2. But what of the massive 1” sensor Sony is claiming to use in this device’s main camera – it’s reasonable to assume that will push the image quality into previously uncharted territory. Or will it?

In reality the main lens on the Xperia Pro-I only covers about 60% of its 1” sensor (which incidentally is the sensor from the Sony RX100 vii). This means that the operational sensor size is broadly similar to that of current rivals such as the Galaxy S22 Ultra. Disappointing as that may sound, it’s important we remember that the Pro-I benefits from a large 2.4 micron pixel pitch, and therefore its image quality should be better than its rivals (even if it isn’t quite as good as its Sony 1” sensor camera siblings). It’s the phone’s main camera which I’ll be concentrating on today.

There’s also a front facing selfie camera which is nothing special, it’s an 8MP ¼” sensor at f2.0. If you’d rather use the main 24mm 1” sensor camera for your selfies you can either take a guess at the framing or else buy a dedicated Sony monitor which clips neatly onto the back of the Pro-I. This can then be attached to Sony’s selfie handle which is also acts as a small tripod and bluetooth controller for the phone (and other cameras in the Sony stable).

The Pro-1 also benefits from a 3.5mm headphone jack, micro SD storage (not present on several of its competitors) and high quality front facing audio.

Smart Phones Rely on Computational Photography

A glaring feature of smartphone photography is the (often overly) processed look of the pictures. The phone’s software will try to pull out as much detail as it can from skies, highlights, and shadows. The average consumer does tend to like that kind of a result, but a photographer might not. And camera phones are almost entirely biased towards average consumers. These ‘computational photography’ algorithms take a guess at the consumer’s tastes, creating a punchy result with an HDR flavour. It’s vital that software is utilised to create a pleasing result from a tiny sensor, given that the average smartphone user probably won’t be inclined to process their photographs afterwards. By and large, mobile phones do a good job of this. But the result may not be to your tastes.

What immediately attracted me to the Xperia Pro-I is the minimal use of computational processing. In fact the images look just like those we would expect to create from a proper camera without the visible HDR effects applied by its rivals. The Pro-I RAW files are what they say they are, unlike the more processed RAW files offered by some other high-end phones.

Then there is video – the Pro-I can shoot 4k at 120fps. Swoon. There’s also a dedicated shutter button, with a half press to confirm focus. If you’ve been thinking this device is just an over-priced ultra-phone, think again. OK, it might be a bit over priced – but it sets itself apart from the competition in so many ways. Sony is unashamed in naming this as a niche professional product, and openly admits that it isn’t a consumer focused device.

Key to the Pro-I is the level of control it hands to the user. This isn’t dissimilar to the interface you might find on a Sony Alpha camera. The Pro-I’s photography app offers as much control as you want, from a Basic mode for quick and convenient everyday snapping through to full Manual control. Not only that, the camera includes outstanding autofocus similar to that of its big camera counterparts, including face and eye tracking for both humans and animals.

In the Basic mode there is the expected portrait setting which will create an optional faux ‘bokeh’ at a level set by the user. In my opinion this is best ignored as the results can be hit and miss. This setting also tends to create very high levels of image noise in skies, particularly highlight areas. If you feel an urge to create faux depth of field then Lightroom or Photoshop is your best bet, albeit with a time investment.

Computational processing in the Pro-I’s Basic Mode is fairly tasteful and restrained resulting in highly detailed JPEGs which aren’t as over-sharpened as those from most camera phones. RAW files are of course flatter and softer, relying on the expertise or vision of the photographer when it comes to processing them – but they’re very good.

Sony Xperia Pro-I Image Quality Compared to ‘Proper Cameras’

The Pro-I is going to have its ISO capability and depth of field credentials compared to the Fujifilm X10 compact camera (2/3” sensor, 28-112mm f2.0-2.8 lens), the Sony ZV-1 compact camera (1” sensor, 24-70mm f1.8-2.8 lens), and the Sony A7C (full frame, with 28-70mm f4.0-5.6 lens). Clearly this won’t be a like for like comparison – but a real world test of how I would use these machines at my personal ‘ISO ceiling’ and their widest available apertures.

The sensor surface area used by the Pro-I’s main lens is fairly similar to the 2/3” sensors used in the Fuji X10. The sensor behind the Pro-I’s 50mm tele lens is smaller, so the quality difference will be clear in these comparisons.

The ZV-1 has the same 1” sensor as the RX100vii and the Pro-I (but as we know the Pro-I uses around 60% of this sensor). In order to see how the Pro-I stacks up against a camera which uses all of the 1 inch sensor, this test will be interesting.

One of my travel cameras is the venerable (yet quite small) full frame Sony A7C with its excellent kit lens. Travel cameras are almost always used with a kit lens because this will give a useful wide to slightly tele zoom range in a very lightweight package. The trade-off is a variable aperture. In the case of the A7C that’s f4-f5.6.

Bear in mind that the tiny Sony ZV-1 has a very good f1.8-f2.8 24-70mm (equivalent) zoom lens. In 35mm terms that’s two and a third stops faster than the A7C’s kit lens at the wide setting and two stops faster at the tele end. This means I can claw back a couple of stops on the ISO scale when using the ZV-1 - virtually negating the benefit of carrying the bigger and heavier full frame camera for travel and personal outings.

The wide test scene will show ISO performance at 800 and 1600 respectively using the Xperia Pro-I’s main 24mm camera. The shots taken at 50mm are more about showing the DOF differences, and how the Pro-I’s smaller sensor telephoto (50mm equivalent) lens performs. The higher resolution cameras (ZV-1 and A7C were down-sampled to 12MP, so the image sizes match). All images are unprocessed RAW files with my Lightroom default sharpening of 40 and noise reduction of 20 (click on each image to enlarge):

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

Telephoto scenes: below is a depth of field comparison at 50mm, which involved switching to the phone’s tele lens (which has an f2.4 aperture) – so expect some image degradation on the Pro-I. The A7C’s kit lens will be at f5.6 at 50mm, the two compact cameras will be at f2.8. The subject (a bag of almonds) was placed 4 feet from the background and 4 feet from the cameras.

As with the wide images, these were shot at ISO 800 (my ‘quality ceiling’) and ISO 1600 (my upper limit in most cases). The higher resolution camera photos were down-sampled to match the size of the Pro-I and X10.

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

Whilst the phone (main camera) and the X10 images appear very similar with respect to noise levels, the phone shows a little less noise than the Fujifilm X10 if pixel peeping the ISO800 images. The X10 images are more detailed though, due to its superior lens. The tele camera on the Pro-I has a smaller sensor than the X10 and is therefore more noisy than both the Pro-I’s main camera and the X10. Depth of field appears to be about the same on the phone and the X 10 in the wide shots. In the X10 telephoto images the X10 has slightly shallower DOF because the Pro-I tele camera has a smaller sensor. WINNER: at the wide setting the winner is the Xperia Pro-I. At the tele setting the X10 comes out on top.

The ZV-1 shows visibly cleaner images when compared to the phone after down-sampling to 12MP, and shallower depth of field at equal focal lengths. Given the Pro-I only uses 60% of its 1” sensor, this is about right. These differences are clearer still when we compare the tele photos. WINNER: Sony ZV-1

Comparing the phone to the full frame Sony A7C is a pointless exercise given how glaring the differences are. Instead I’m going to compare the Sony A7C to the little Sony ZV-1. This is not as unfair as it sounds given how fast the ZV-1 lens is (the A7 C kit lens is stunningly sharp though). Given the ability to leverage the fast lens on the ZV-1 and therefore keep ISO values low, out in the field there really isn’t much between the two cameras - and there is a huge weight advantage to the ZV-1. But when comparing like for like ISO values, as you’ll expect the A7C images will be cleaner. WINNER: Sony ZV-1 due to its very good image quality, fast lens, fantastic feature set and autofocus, and tiny size. I’ll be keeping my A7C for pro outings.

Will the Sony Xperia Pro-I Satisfy a Professional Photographer or Film-maker?

There’s no doubt the Xperia Pro-I is impressive. And I can of course make phone calls on it, engage in various forms of productivity, and browse the internet - something I keep forgetting.

This phone is aimed squarely at content creators (I’ll take a look at the video features in another article). I can say that at realistic ISO levels the stills images from this device are very good, particularly if you’re prepared to work the RAW files and stick to the main camera.

The big question is, am I going to leave my usual handbag cameras at home in favour of my new smartphone - in order to benefit from a notable size and weight reduction? For me, there is a strong case for having both a compact camera which is very small and portable alongside my new smartphone. If that falls to the Sony ZV-I this leads to a bearable total combined weight of around 510g.

If only the Xperia Pro-I was able to use all of its 1” sensor – that really would be a game changer. But it would also mean a large and bulky lens element which rather negates the purpose of a smartphone.

On a recent visit to a stately home in my village I took a few interior photographs with the Pro-I. If I’d been using one of my handbag cameras I would have been using a lightweight variable aperture kit lens and therefore much higher ISO values to those on the Pro-I. The phone is incredibly easy to hold still at very slow shutter speeds, greatly reducing the prospect of camera shake. The extra depth of field afforded by a small sensor can be very useful in situations like this and I think the images look good:

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

Can this smartphone replace a lightweight large sensor camera and kit lens? No, unless you’re prepared to take a noticeable hit in image quality. Can the Pro-I replace my ZV-1 compact camera (or other current generation 1” sensor cameras)? In some situations yes, if convenience and low weight is imperative. For casual recreational snapping (not to mention video) it’s hard to beat today’s flagship smartphones. And the Pro-I is arguably the closest you’re going to get to a real camera experience.

So far at least, I seem to be getting along with my new phone fairly well. It does have a tendency to get hot however. When I was taking photos around the garden on a warm but not baking (25°) day I’d taken a couple of dozen shots and received a heat warning. I gave the phone a brief rest in the shade before commencing and the warning went away. I suspect that if I’d been shooting some 4k video I might have had to stop altogether. A fast processor is great to have, but heat production is the downside.

Back to the real question. Could I do without my compact camera entirely and just use the phone for recreational image taking? No, the IQ and lens quality of my ZV-1 is just too good. They both have their place in my handbag, and to be fair there are days when I feel I can leave my ZV-1 at home. Compared to a compact camera like the X10 it’s a different story - I’d gladly reach for the Pro-I much of the time, if not all of the time - the convenience of it trumps what the Fuji has to offer.

There are so many myths and misunderstandings about the nature of photography brand ambassador roles. The general belief is that camera brands will indulge their ambassadors’ every photographic need or whim and will also pay those photographers to use and promote that equipment. With only a few exceptions I can think of, it isn’t like that at all. In today’s article I’m going to talk a little about my experiences across several years as a brand ambassador for Olympus UK. We parted company when I resigned at the end of 2016 and I confess to a sense of relief when I finally stepped away. Before getting down to the reasons why (and I was by no means the only one) it’s important to establish exactly what a brand representative is.

There are as many different camera brand ambassadors as there are photographers. If an ambassador is an employee of the brand then they’ll be salaried and that’s where their remuneration starts and ends. Then there are contracted brand ambassadors who agree to promote the brand’s equipment via educational seminars and material for an agreed rate and the provision of equipment for their needs. A third group, the independent ambassadors, perform a similar but less intensive function and aren’t tied to a contract (usually because they either use a range of equipment brands in their business, or they don’t want to be bound by a set of formalised conditions). When I represented Olympus I fell into the independent non-contracted category - I was a full-time photographer and had to balance my day to day work carefully.

In all of the above categories the photographer will be an already established user of that brand, which is important in order to gain the trust of his or her audience. I use the term ‘her’ with care. When I joined Olympus I was one of only two or three female ambassadors in the industry. Things have moved on a bit since then, but until fairly recently the industry was still in the dark ages.

There is another category – that of the well-known ‘influencers’ or photography bloggers who’ll be gifted some equipment by a brand on the understanding it will promptly be reviewed and promoted. This category is very different to the first examples I’ve mentioned. The influencer category is the least likely to be taken seriously because it can be argued they’ve been incentivised to write favourably.

As you can see, not all ambassadorial roles are equal. And not all are enduring, happy or productive. Brands often change over time as their marketing managers come and go whilst staff turnover rates may change as well. New management may bring with it a new culture which may impact the brand/ambassador relationship negatively. Cost cutting will normally result in a brand expecting maximum return from ambassadors whilst limiting the ambassador’s ability to fulfil his or her role. Brand marketing managers rarely seem to realise that when ill feeling creeps into an ambassador’s mindset, that ambassador is exponentially less likely to act for them.

Back in the day, being offered a role as a brand ambassador was arguably the ultimate mark of recognition and status. But does that sense of pride hold true today? I’ll answer that question further down.

Brand ambassador roles are often shrouded in mystique, so maybe it’s time to talk about the reality.

The Vital Role Photography Brand Ambassadors Play

At this point we need to ask a very important question. How do camera brands market their equipment? The answer is simple: via exquisite imagery and the endorsement of respected image makers. Without photographs, and a known name to back them up, any brand marketing campaign will fall flat. Without a credible seal of approval and the vital information shared by expert top tier users, no amount of technical data will do the job.

Between 2012 and the end of 2016 I acted for Olympus UK as a brand visionary and product ambassador. I was one of the first full-time professional photographers to adopt the Micro 4/3 format for all of my work. I had a lively blog and I was very active on photography forums, and my work was often in the media. I was also prominent on the industry awards circuit and I held the rare position of Fellow in the BIPP and SWPP. Given those credentials, it wasn’t long before I attracted the attention of the Olympus marketing department.

At the time Olympus was expanding its ambassador and visionary stable to cover several photographic genres. There was an ambassador for fashion photography, animal and wildlife photography (that was me), photojournalism, landscape photography etc. It felt like an exciting time, but the staff changes concurrent with this led to some instability and an overall poor understanding of how to manage the brand’s best assets. Marketing managers may well be photography enthusiasts but unless they’ve run a photography business they may be incapable of understanding how professional photographers work - and what it costs us to do what we do.

After all, the brand is profiting from that photographer’s name, their expertise, a great deal of their time and hard-earned credentials. This is often where the ambassadorial relationship can disintegrate. That very disintegration is something I’m seeing more and more now (Olympus isn’t the only offender). There is a tendency for a brand to fall back on the well worn line which usually revolves around ‘valuable publicity’. In reality, the photographer doesn’t benefit one jot from simply being aligned with a brand - no matter how many times that brand mentions the photographer’s name or publishes their photographs. The very suggestion that you’ll benefit passively from a brand association can be a sign of things to come.

A brand ambassador is (or should be) at the pinnacle of their career, so it’s implausible to suggest that absorbing a brand into an already established sphere of influence would contribute to the photographer’s ability to gain clients or increase their income. I have never had a client who has been remotely interested in whether or not I represent a camera maker. It’s also fair to say that at least some potential students or mentees have probably been turned off by it, fearing a seminar will be a selling exercise.

Given that the vanity aspect is unlikely to resonate with a well-established photographer, it may be the reason why some brands have started to target less well-known photographers who may be more susceptible to flattery. Very often these photographers may have very few industry credentials, but they may have a large social media following and therefore exposure to the brand’s target group. The lack of a well-known name however is likely to limit the amount of influence those photographers might have.

The “Something for Nothing” Photography Culture - the Death of the Brand Ambassador

Irrespective of where an ambassador lies on the industry prominence scale, the ’exposure’ offered by a brand will not include exposure to that photographer’s client group. The brand will be targeting camera buyers - both amateur and professional. They are not the people who’ll be looking to hire a photographer. Because of that, brand ambassadors need to be tangibly rewarded for the work they provide to a commercial entity – an organization where everybody in the chain of command from the boss to the cleaner will be remunerated.

Without our images, without the articles we write, without our published work, without our public appearances and the training seminars we run - a brand would have no hope of credibly establishing its name in the market. So why do so many brands increasingly expect their ambassadors and visionaries to work for little or nothing?

We now live in a culture where there are large numbers of competent amateur and hobbyist photographers who are more than happy to give their work away for free - even to a commercial entity who is quite literally exploiting them. Businesses are all too happy to take a photographer’s work (which has cost them time, money and overhead to produce be they amateur or professional) in exchange for a mention. And many amateur photographers are happy to hand their work over on that basis. To a professional, who understands costs, this practice is undoubtedly damaging to the industry and detrimental to those who depend on photography for their living. It creates a climate where professional photographers are treated in exactly the same way as the hobbyists who are so keen to see their name in print.

Marketers don’t always understand that lower quality visuals can be counter-productive if not damaging to brand perception. Yet that situation prevails as I write this. This is largely the method by which brands now populate their newsletters and social media streams, where this was once the province of a well supported ambassador corp.

Marketers also fail to understand that a review or endorsement from a largely unknown or unproven ambassador may not resonate enough with the target audience. I felt that Olympus fell into the ‘quantity vs quality’ trap that cost cutting often results in. The very premise of a known name acting for a brand is that of reputation - no established professional will risk the goodwill of their followers by endorsing products they don’t wholeheartedly believe in.

How has the dilution of the ambassador pool affected the brand/ambassador relationship? There is and should be an expectation that a brand will supply an ambassador with his or her equipment, but even that is becoming more unlikely. If a brand is taking on large numbers of visionaries then it becomes broadly uneconomic to provide them with much, or anything. The same can be said if the brand is struggling to hold its place in the market. Cost cutting comes into play and the brand’s most important assets are often the first to take a hit. It all too often results in ambassadors undertaking time intensive equipment reviews, endless social media posts promoting the brand, allowing the brand to piggyback their achievements, whilst receiving very little in return. An experienced business person (as any credible ambassador should be) is unlikely to view that as a relationship which can continue.

Photography Brand Ambassador Gripes - When Resentment Sets In

It’s important to differentiate between the normal ups and downs of accepting a public-facing role and poor treatment by a brand itself. With respect to the former, a role as a brand ambassador will bring you endless emails from amateur photographers wanting to talk about equipment. Your blog posts will be linked in photography fora around the globe, and your opinions picked apart often by amateurs with little understanding of their craft. Be prepared to be criticised, belittled, accused of being a brand shill, and occasionally that criticism will cross the line into insults and abuse. In other words, you’ll have to take rather a lot of you-know-what along the way. If you don’t have a particularly thick skin then being a brand ambassador is probably not for you. Of course all of that is no reflection on the brand you might represent (who may well treat you as a valued and respected colleague) but it does highlight the potential negatives you’ll encounter along the way.

My gripes with Olympus largely centred around the non-provision of equipment (and at times expenses). Repeated attempts and some arguments did result in the receipt of a used camera body, a battered flashgun requiring repair, and two used lenses. To be clear, I was grateful for those things and I did a very thorough job of reviewing and promoting them, but I wasn’t so happy about the battle I’d had to go through to get them. What became clear was a gradual blacklisting which arose when those concerns were viewed as complaints.

I wasn’t the only Olympus ambassador experiencing the same, some of whom had supported the brand even longer than I had. The blacklisting would extend to emails ignored and a general freezing out from communications. A notable occasion was when I won one of the most coveted titles in the photography industry - with an Olympus team in the audience at The Societies Photographer of the Year Awards in London. There was no acknowledgement and no mention of this achievement on the Olympus social media streams or blogs, when in fact the marketing value would arguably have been immense.

My decision to leave Olympus at the end of 2016 was burnished by the unreasonable contract I was presented with at our final meeting. The contract set out a raft of time and overhead intensive activities I would have to fulfil for the brand, with virtually nothing offered in exchange. There was no offer of equipment (beyond the possibility ‘where priorities allow’ of a 14 day loan for the purpose of review) and the possibility of some paid seminars. Sending equipment for two weeks to full-time review sites is normal - those sites gain high volumes of traffic and will draw their income from advertising, sponsorship and commission from affiliate links. But that isn’t how working photographers normally operate. To act for a brand whilst keeping our reputations intact, we have to be seen to use that equipment in our day to day work.

The contract also contained an exclusivity clause. To date I’d always been an independent non-contracted ambassador. That enabled me to choose the equipment which best suited my personal and professional needs. That was entirely Olympus for several areas of my work, but my backups and personal use equipment was drawn from several brands including Fuji. I was told that in signing the contract I could no longer recommend or review non-Olympus items. There’s nothing unusual in an exclusivity clause, but if the brand isn’t supplying your needs then it’s hardly something any given photographer will agree to.

I wasn’t the only Olympus ambassador to be handed a contract like it, and this led to what felt at the time like a mass exodus. Legal scrutiny derided the contracts as ‘unbelievable’. Some took to social media or their own blogs to offload visible anger and upset.

My withdrawal from Olympus brought with it a number of positive changes. I had time to reassess all aspects of my business. My website was pared back to reflect my customer work rather than my equipment. The emergence of new mirrorless contenders has meant that the last few years have been quite exciting and the advantages offered by Micro 4/3 equipment are now all but obviated. My portraiture camera bag has been reassigned to Sony. I now have only one Micro 4/3 camera, made by Panasonic.

I still occasionally chat on my blog about the cameras and lenses I use, but I’ve politely declined the brand alignment offers I’ve received since leaving Olympus. I’m not saying that I’ll never take on another ambassador role, it’s just that my approach will be much more considered.

This article is by no means a criticism of Olympus cameras and lenses - I used them for years and I loved my Micro 4/3 equipment back in the day. But for most photographic purposes there are better options now for a similar size and weight.

Things to Consider if You’re Offered a Brand Ambassador Role

• If you’re presented with a contract, ensure you have the opportunity to take it away with you so you can fully assimilate its contents. If it’s handed to you at a meeting don’t be pressured into signing it there and then. What matters is that a contract, if tested in court, would be deemed as ‘fair and reasonable’. If you can answer yes to that, then you’re good to go

• Make sure you have a clear understanding as to the breadth of your ambassadorial role. You’ll need to know how often the brand will expect you to mention, review, or blog about their equipment. In-person appearances are also a key part of being a brand ambassador or visionary. Make sure you have an understanding of where or when that’s likely to be. If you’re a full-time working photographer with an already overstretched schedule, is it feasible for you to take on anything which may impact your day-to-day work or your income? Whilst being a brand ambassador sounds glamorous, the reality can be stressful

• There is (and should be) a broad assumption that your equipment needs will be met by the brand. This seems to be a privilege reserved for some ambassadors and not others, so make sure this is clearly set out before you agree to anything

• Generally speaking a contracted brand ambassador exclusively uses one brand of cameras and lenses, or at least uses that equipment for the vast majority of their work. Some ambassadors use and promote equipment from a number of brands, aligned with their own needs and preferences. If that’s you, make sure that whichever brand approaches you understands that. If a contract is involved, then non-exclusive terms would need to be fixed

• Image rights is another matter which demands close scrutiny. Ensure you’re clear about the terms whenever your images are used rather than allowing blanket use ad-infinitum of any photograph you pass onwards

• It’s a reasonable expectation that any expenses you incur in promoting the brand will be covered

• An ambassadorial role may include travel both within your own country and overseas. Whenever a photographer is away from his or her working base then clearly they cannot serve their clients and that income is lost. On top of that, we have our day-to-day business overheads which exist irrespective of how we spending our time, and that’s another loss. Overseas trips will always result in the requirement for articles, blogs, and social media updates when we return. Therefore a brand ambassador needs to weigh up very carefully how they can justify every moment before committing to something which may bring with it a large workload

In the last few years I’ve seen one photographer after another fire the equipment brand they’ve been representing, for the reasons I’ve outlined in this article. Brands are managed by marketing departments and in my experience marketers care only about profit, but in a surprisingly short sighted way. Most marketers seem to approach a brand association caring only about how little they can spend, whilst extracting maximum gain. It’s little wonder things start to fall apart if that equation becomes visibly one sided.

I’m still frequently asked about my equipment of choice and my immediate response hasn’t changed: you must use what suits you, your style of working, your requirements, your ergonomics, and your budget. The needs of one photographer can be very different to that of the next. Therefore everything I’m about to say is based on my own preferences and I can’t speak for everyone. I’m a multi-format photographer. I own three different sensor size systems and all serve different purposes. They do have one thing in common though - compact size and low weight (at least when compared to a full frame DSLR system).

Key to this article has been my decision in 2018 to switch my professional equipment from Micro 4/3 to Sony full frame. As with all business decisions, there has to be a solid rationale behind it. Hobbyists have the luxury of buying what they want, but professional photographers make their decisions based on what will do the job as efficiently as possible. Ten years ago Micro Four Thirds was the only lightweight alternative to a DSLR system, so its popularity was understandable. But times have changed and you may be wondering if there is any need to stick with u43.

Casual photographers may not be particularly good at evaluating the differences between one system and another - and might therefore argue that his or her camera is much better at ‘something’ than it is. Emotional attachment runs high in the amateur ranks. A professional on the other hand may discover that differences between systems and the implementation of certain features are night and day - particularly if it means getting the shot and being paid, or having a low keeper rate and poor sales.

Professionals are rarely interested in the newest bodies, preferring to get the most from what we have providing it continues to satisfy our needs. This is why the cameras I mention below aren’t all the latest iterations, but are ideal ‘for my needs’ nonetheless. This conversation doesn’t cover video.

Is Micro Four Thirds a Good Option in 2022, or is Micro Four Thirds Dead?

The answer to that question is “it depends”. The best-known advantage of the Micro 4/3 system has always been its size and weight, but the emergence of viable competition has changed that greatly. For many early adopters the size and weight advantage has been largely mooted by a growing band of competitors. But camera choices aren’t always about size and weight - handling and feature sets are important too. However many of the features which made u43 exciting and unique once have also been largely matched and often exceeded in the newer mirrorless cameras, particularly Sony. Nor is price necessarily a factor, since the professional u43 bodies and lenses are far from cheap.

I think it was around about 2012 when I switched from Canon full frame DSLR systems to the Olympus OMD system (with later additions from Panasonic). I also became a UK brand ambassador for Olympus cameras (resigning at the end of 2016). Back in 2012, we really had quite limited choices. There were DSLR systems, compact cameras, bridge cameras, and the blossoming of Micro 4/3 and the beginning of an impressive lens ecosystem. Micro 4/3 lens development was at the heart of u43 growing in popularity and professional usability. But overall, it’s value lay with its compact size and modest weight. For any photographer with musculoskeletal problems or a heavy workload, this can mean the difference between continuing to earn a living or early retirement.

Adopting u43 brought a new found freedom. No longer did I dread my shoots, strapping braces to my arms and wrists to guard against strain and discomfort. No longer did I need a hot bath on returning home. Instead, I would remain fresh and energized. This led to a near constant stream of personal projects, and hence a boost to my awards tally. I could mostly work around the limitations of a smaller sensor, and rarely if ever felt compromised. It’s little wonder I applauded the system so enthusiastically.

The overall arguments I hear the most against Micro 4/3 would be that of image quality, followed by the rather insecure view that a small system wouldn’t ‘look professional enough’. There is no getting away from the fact that a 4/3 sensor is substantially smaller than a full frame sensor, and is a little smaller than an APS-C sensor. On the positive side, a smaller sensor size means a smaller image circle and hence the joy of smaller lenses. Micro 4/3 lenses are renowned for being superb – I can’t think of many bad ones. In addition IBIS (in body stabilization) can be implemented very well on smaller sensors.

At any given ISO value (assuming sensors of a similar generation) a larger sensor will offer less image noise and better dynamic range than a smaller sensor. It’s also true to say that a larger sensor, at any given aperture value, will offer shallower depth of field than a physically smaller sensor. With u43 vs full frame, this is approximately two stops (the difference between APS-C and u43 is around 2/3 of a stop). These are unavoidable facts, but it’s worth taking a look at how this can be overcome – at least in many if not most scenarios. Do remember though, that IQ and DOF cannot be considered in isolation to what matters arguably as much – and that is the other aspects of performance which might be vital to the work you do.

Some will argue that image noise can be taken care of via noise reduction software. To an extent that can be true, but it should never be a substitute for a starting point which is as clean as possible. It’s also an extra step in a workflow which, for a professional, is already somewhat time consuming. It’s also hard to avoid at least some loss of detail when using even the best NR reduction applications.

As a full-time portrait photographer who started out with Canon full frame cameras, I would spend the majority of my life using a 70 to 200 Canon L lens mostly at F4 and occasionally at F2.8. Lowlight scenarios might mean switching to a fast prime F1.8 lens, in order to get a workable shutter speed and to minimize noise. A very wide aperture on a full frame camera can tricky at times, depending on the focal length and the distance from the lens to the subject. Very shallow depth of field is rarely desirable since comparatively few clients are attracted to photographs where only their eyelashes are in focus. Furthermore, the smallest movement by the subject or the photographer can mean that the plane of sharp focus is lost. Used at a distance the effect becomes a little less perilous. Overall, shooting at f1.8 on a full frame body isn’t something I’d do very often.

In order to achieve the same shallow depth of field effects as full frame we would need to shoot our u43 system at approximately two stops wider in aperture. This would also mean that we would be able to shoot at a two stop lower ISO value, thus evening out image noise as well to create an image largely ‘equivalent’ to that of full frame. As we can see, in a lot of situations the IQ advantages of full frame can be negated.

Historically the in body stabilization (IBIS) of u43 was renowned for enabling hand held shooting at very slow shutter speeds (static scenes only) but that has now largely been met by some of u43’s mirrorless competitors and is no longer the benefit it once was.

With ‘equivalence’ in mind, as the Micro 4/3 lens ecosystem evolved, faster lenses became available and the full frame advantage became much less of a concern. Until comparatively recently though, a professionally specified DSLR would always best a mirrorless system when it comes to continuous autofocus and tracking.

The size and weight benefits of Micro 4/3 are glaring when it comes to the kind of telephoto zoom lenses which wildlife photographers will be interested in. Notable in this respect was the release of Panasonic’s Leica 100-400 lens - offering a jaw dropping field of view equivalent to 200-800 in full frame terms. The caveat is that to preserve the small size and weight a powerful telephoto zoom is likely to have a variable (and not particularly fast) maximum aperture. This is broadly the same with all sensor formats. This is an area where clawing back the depth of field and image noise advantages of a larger sensor isn’t possible, since fast telephoto lenses are a rarity for size, price and weight reasons.

I should mention that simply ‘using a super fast lens on a Micro 4/3 body to gain parity with full frame’ doesn’t always give you a size and weight advantage. Examples would be the F1.2 prime lenses which are now available in u43 format. These lenses are big, heavy, and very expensive. They’ll offer an equivalent aperture value of just over f2 in full frame terms. There are plenty of excellent, cheaper, smaller and lighter f1.8 full frame lenses out there, so in my opinion it makes little sense to use a Micro 4/3 camera with F1.2 optics. Unless of course you’re intent on using only one system and money is no object.

By 2014 I’d become fully invested Micro 4/3. My joints had been given a new lease of life, photographically speaking. And never ever did I have a client question why my camera was so small.

As the years rolled on we saw the emergence of mirrorless systems from virtually every camera manufacturer, in both full frame and APS-C formats. Whilst these cameras were fairly small and compact, the elephant in the room was always lens size. Whilst lens size and weight will be a limiting factor for many, we’ve seen more compact lens designs reaching the market.

As I write this in March 2022, my camera and lens kit bag looks very different. This largely reflects the advances in mirrorless technology across a number of brands and the benefits offered by each. I’ve been able to keep within tolerable size and weight boundaries for the majority of what I do - on par with my previous u43 setup. But that doesn’t mean that I’ve completely done away with Micro 4/3.

camerasize.com is a fantastic tool for comparing the bodies and lenses you might be interested in – do go and try the simulations, it’s incredibly helpful.

Let’s take a look at my most common shooting scenarios, and my rationale for becoming a ‘multi-format photographer’:

My Location Portrait & Pet Photography Equipment

I’ve never been a studio shooter and all of my work takes place on location. This can be anything from business portraits indoors and out, to dynamic family outings, to boisterous if not unruly pets.

Because my shoots are dynamic I need very fast and accurate autofocus. There’s no doubt that the single shot autofocus of any competent Micro 4/3 system is superlative. However one of the complaints about Micro 4/3 centred around generally poor continuous autofocus and autofocus tracking. Whilst that has improved over the years it still doesn’t match most of its competitors and pro grade u43 cameras remain expensive. Sony’s face and eye autofocus, and the adoption of animal eye autofocus, has been a game changer for me. Its accuracy is astounding and it makes my life so much easier, particularly when using wider aperture values.

Historically my go to Micro 4/3 lenses for portraiture would be the Olympus Pro 40-150 f2.8 and the little Oly 45mm f1.8. These lenses would give me an effective reach and DOF, in full frame terms, of 80-300 f5.6 and 90mm f2.8. This served me well, until I started to take on more pet photography, much of which occurs nowadays in dark and cluttered woodlands. The issue lay with my u43 zoom lenses which cap at f2.8 (giving the appearance of f5.6 in full frame terms). Messy backgrounds didn’t help, and I would often wish for slightly shallower depth of field and less image noise. Prime lenses are great, but dynamic subjects are often best photographed on the long end of a zoom.

My pet photography sessions are always a reminder of how much I have to crop at times – it’s hard to perfectly frame a very fast moving subject, or a nervous subject. My 42MP A7Riii has been a star in that regard.

My portrait kit now consists of:

Sony A7Riii full frame camera body
Tamron 70-180 f2.8
Tamron 28-75 f2.8
Sony 85mm f1.8

Panasonic GX8 u43 camera body
Olympus 45mm f1.8
Olympus 17mm f1.8

The Panasonic system is fantastic when I’m shooting inside client homes, it also acts as a backup camera. At F1.8 the depth of field looks like F2.8 in full frame terms, which is ideal. Another advantage is that u43 primes are usually very sharp wide open (whereas many full frame primes need to be stopped down a little in order to be at their best). At f1.8 I won’t have to increase my ISO value two stops in order to achieve a safe amount of depth (and a usable shutter speed) as I would on a full frame camera. I’m unlikely to be making massive enlargements or tightly cropping photographs taken in environments like that, so the 20 megapixel sensor on my Micro 4/3 camera won’t be a limiting factor either.

I could of course just leave the GX8 in the bag and stick the Sony 80 5F 1.8 onto my A7Riii and stop down very slightly - but I don’t always have time to keep swapping lenses and it’s easier to pick up the Panasonic. I could invest in another Sony camera to fulfil these duties, but running a full-time business is all about expenditure and I’ve been holding off on that as long as possible. The Panasonic is also my go-to camera for wildlife photography (more on that in a minute).

The crux of this is always maintaining a manageable size and weight. My Olympus EM1 and 40-150 lens came in at 580g and 880g respectively. My Sony A7Riii and Tamron 70-180 f2.8 weigh 657g and 810g.

It’s clear from this example and the photograph above that there is absolutely no benefit in sticking with a Micro 4/3 system (nor any appreciable cost benefit). The Olympus 40-150 lens does afford some additional reach, but the 42 megapixel sensor on the Sony camera means I can crop quite freely to overcome this – and leverage the marvellous resolution the rest of the time, not to mention the fabulous autofocus and video.

In terms of the prime lenses mentioned, the Panasonic GX8 and the Olympus 45 mm F1.8 weigh 487g and 116g respectively, vs Sony’s 657g and 372g. There’s clearly a weight saving here for u43, but not enough to be significant providing you can live with u43’s autofocus limitations.

By comparison, when I was a Canon user my 5DMkIII weighed 860g (without the battery grip) and my 70-200 f2.8L lens came in at nearly 1600g. The 24-70 f2.8L weighed about 950g. Ouch. Incidentally the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 lens for my Sony e-mount mirrorless camera weighs about 550g and is physically quite small. The Tamron pro lenses for Sony are absolutely stunning and I have certainly found them to be sharper than their Sony ‘G’ counterparts, and no visible loss of autofocus speed.

A Small Lightweight Camera for Street and Recreational Photography

Never overlook the importance of a camera for recreational outings. Ideally one which doesn’t scream ‘work’. I’m one of those people who always has to have a camera with her at all times. A walk around anywhere scenic would feel empty if I couldn’t take pictures. I’ve created many of my award-winning images on these outings and in fact my 2020 BIPP Fellowship in Social Documentary photography was created entirely with whichever little camera I had about my person – some were incredibly basic and quite old!

My recreational camera needs to fit in all of my everyday handbags without noticeably weighing me down. I also want terrific image quality and a really good sharp kit lens in the form of a standard zoom. Historically this fell to my Panasonic LX100ii (392g), but I wanted the flexibility of interchangeable lenses. My latest choice is the Fuji XT200 (370g) with the XC 15-45 kit lens (136g). Autofocus is good with this lens, with decent face and eye implementation. The lens is sharp at all settings. Teamed with the little Fuji 35mm f2 lens (130g) it’s a no brainer. The Fuji XT200 is an APS-C camera, but the image quality and ISO capability of its 24 megapixel Bayer sensor is surprisingly close to the output of my Sony A7Riii: Fuji XT200 vs Sony A7Riii High ISO Comparison

One of the smaller Micro 4/3 cameras and lenses would also be a good choice for recreational photography, but the image quality isn’t going to meet that of the Fuji XT200, even when allowing for ‘equivalent’ settings.

I should also mention that I also currently own a Canon 200D – this is a ‘micro-DLSR’ and it’s a great little camera (453g) despite its basic features. The kit lens is no slouch either. I use this camera for interiors and wide-angle photography. The Canon 10-18 f4-5.6 lens is one of the best wide angle zooms on the market (230g) and worth the cost of the system alone. The 200D also a really good v-logging camera.

You may be thinking of the Sony A7C as a potential recreational full frame camera, and it’s certainly something I’m considering getting. This is because I already have Sony full frame lenses and a compatible backup body makes sense. I’m a little concerned about the form factor, given that I didn’t get along particularly well with the Sony a6300. The A7C camera weighs approximately 509g and the kit 28-60 f4-5.6 lens weights approximately 164g. It offers the benefits of a modern and competent autofocus system and a 24 megapixel full frame sensor, albeit with a small viewfinder and less customisation. If I take the plunge I’ll report back on my feelings.

Compact Size and Weight for Wildlife Photography

Wildlife (and sports) photographers are almost always dependent on ultra telephoto lenses, fast frame rates, fast buffering, and competent continuous autofocus and/or tracking autofocus. Full frame lenses in this category, and indeed APS-C lenses as well, are generally huge, heavy, and expensive. I’m assuming a focal length of at least 400 mm in FX terms. For me, with my ageing and not particularly strong joints, a large sensor wildlife system really isn’t a possibility. This is where I need to accept some compromises in order to have a comfortably portable camera and lens with enough reach for small birds.

My pick is therefore a Micro 4/3 camera (my Panasonic GX8 still serves me well) and my Panasonic Leica 100-400 f4-6.3 lens (985g). This gives me an effective reach of 200 to 800 mm in FX terms. That’s ridiculously impressive and it’s so much fun – the ‘macro’ mode is quite good too. I can also comfortably carry this combination without suffering too much strain.

If I were to choose a ‘similar’ wildlife lens for my Sony full frame mirrorless camera I’d be looking at the Sony FE 200-600 f5.6-6.3 (2120g). This lens is huge and heavy and I’m not convinced that the image quality would satisfy me, likewise the focus. It’s also slightly more expensive than the Leica.

Sony users might be more likely to consider the very good Sony SE 100-400 f4.5-5.6 but this doesn’t offer the reach of the Leica 100-400. That said, I can of course flick my Sony A7Riii into ‘crop mode’ which would give me an apparent field of view of up to 600 mm, with approximately 18 megapixel resolution. This lens is nearly twice the price of the Leica lens and weighs approximately 1400g.

For me at least, a Micro 4/3 wildlife and bird photography set remains a very good option (and I know many photographers who feel the same way). However what we can’t do is claw back the ISO and depth of field deficit in the same way that we can in most other areas of photography – given that requires two stops in brighter aperture values. It’s something we’ll have to live with. We can claw back a stop of ISO and DOF by opting for one of the f4 telephoto primes for u43, but I’m not an ultra-telephoto prime kind of person.

The image above was generated at camerasize.com

My Panasonic GX8 is considered old technology in terms of features and autofocus, but it’s a beautiful performer nonetheless. According to my tests over the years its RAW image quality still hasn’t been noticeably surpassed by even the most recent 4/3 sensors, and it still does virtually everything I need it to do. It’s a camera I genuinely fell in love with when I bought it and I still use it with pride. I probably get more compliments on this camera than any other.

My wildlife work can be seen on my dedicated west sussex pet and animal photography website.

Conclusion

For me at least, switching my professional portrait photography cameras and lenses to Sony mirrorless has been very successful and hugely beneficial, with no appreciable weight penalty. I now have the very best of all worlds at my fingertips and there’s nothing I want for.

In 2022 I don’t think Micro 4/3 is dead, but I do think there are far fewer justifications in its favour now. The smaller u43 bodies and lenses are still a popular choice for travel photography, families and hobbyists. After all, not everybody is interested in pure image quality or ultra shallow depth of field so there might be no urge at all to create ‘equivalence’ with full frame. If we mostly ignore equivalence, we can certainly create a very compact and pleasing system.

U43 remains a good choice for wildlife photographers, in my view.

A Micro 4/3 system can also act as an occasional backup or second camera to a main professional system. Micro 4/3 as a main system though is a hard sell nowadays for professional portrait, wedding, event and social photographers given the emergence of mirrorless larger sensor systems of a similar size, weight, and in some cases price. Sports photographers are likely to want ultimate autofocus reliability, which will likely rule out u43 (at least for now).

Sensor resolution is (so far) a limiting factor in Micro 4/3’s progress. Cramming additional pixels onto a small sensor (with an already high pixel density) usually results in increased image noise, something most photographers will want to avoid. That isn’t an issue for most recreational photographers though. I also feel that several aspects of autofocus implementation remain disappointing and lag behind that of competitors.

Photographers are now completely spoiled for choice in a way which we weren’t 10 years ago, when almost everything felt like a compromise. We’ve never had it so good and it’s a great feeling. U43 was a game changer back in the day, but those advantages are harder to justify now. I will always think fondly on u43 because it’s the system which enabled me to keep on working through a period of physical deterioration. My Sony cameras and lenses have now taken up that baton, and with a number of advantages. At the end of the day though, it must always come down to what is right for you.

As a professional photographer, I’m always looking for ways to improve my time management skills. This often feels like a losing battle, partly because it requires so much self-discipline. This doesn’t always mean spending less time working (long hours are a given for virtually all business owners) but rather prioritizing how we spend those hours so we can achieve more in our working day.

If we were to properly scrutinise our business processes it’s very likely there are areas (or habits) which can be refined or even removed entirely. We grow more experienced over the years, we learn from our mistakes (hopefully) and we learn more about the things our clients value the most. A clear staged workflow will make our clients’ lives much easier and of course our own as well. A coherent business is an efficient business.

What does “business efficiency” mean in a practical sense?

It seems that most other businesses have no problem keeping a tight rein on their time, and charging accordingly for it. But for some reason photographers flinch at the mere thought of looking at a spreadsheet. In the past I’ve heard the odd utterance along the lines of “I’m an artist not an accountant”. All I can say to that is that you must be an accountant before you can profit from your art. The most successful photographers aren’t always the most talented photographers. A successful photographer is able to satisfy his or her customers’ requirements whilst fully understanding the process of profit generation.

Arguably profit is inextricably linked with a good understanding of marketing. Unless we can find our clients it’s unlikely they will find us. But even with plenty of clients, it’s all too easy to fall down at the many hurdles running a business can throw at us.

As well as being a professional photographer, I’m also an educator and speaker. I enjoy every moment of it. Well, almost. Whilst it’s always lovely to have a captive audience there’s often the nagging feeling that good advice can occasionally fall on deaf ears. The sad reality is that most new photography businesses will fail, very often due to a poor understanding of overheads and profit margins. Tutors and lecturers can give the best advice in the world but we can never force anybody to take it. If you expect your photography business to turn a profit then you have to behave as any other professional business person would behave, no matter how friendly you might be with your clients.

I remember when I got married many years ago. I was dealing with lots of different businesses, from florists to venues to hairdressers. And none of them, absolutely none, gave me time or goods I wasn’t being billed for - nor would it have crossed my mind to expect them to. Unless more photographers are prepared to adopt a business mindset then it can be very hard to offer a real world perspective on how to improve their income or their job satisfaction. If photography is your sole source of income, or a significant and much-needed source of income, then taking a casual approach to your work is the fastest route to failure.

With all that in mind, I’m going to touch on some of the areas where business efficiency is paramount and very often a lifesaver. There is nothing worse than feeling we’re losing control of our workload, with desk time often extending into the small hours. Even worse are the photographers who complain that their clients are unreasonable. Show me an unreasonable client and most of the time there is a photographer enabling them. This is one of the biggest complaints I hear from photographers, yet the solution is simple. Clear information and professional boundaries will stave off the kind of misunderstandings which can arise.

Because photography clients probably haven’t commissioned a photographer before we’ll need to make sure they understand the process and what our fees do and don’t cover. This information should be freely available on our website, at least in some form, and provided in more detail when a prospective client first contacts us. Reinforcing it in our literature or post consultation follow-up is equally important. If our clients have all the information they need then confusion is unlikely, particularly when we can direct them back to it.

When setting out to make our business more efficient, a useful exercise is to ask yourself what would make your working life easier. Make a list of those things and think about what you can do to tackle them. It may be as simple as firming up your policies or applying timescales within which your customers will need to respond.

The First Rule of Efficiency is the Provision of Information

A comprehensive set of Terms and Conditions is gold dust. This document must set out all of your policies from cancellations, attendance, copyright to ordering. Clients don’t always read what we send to them, what matters is that we’ve made the information accessible. Rather than spending too much of your time (and overhead) answering questions, it’s much easier to simply direct the client to your Terms.

Or perhaps you’d like more control over your workflow. An example of that might be arranging viewing sessions after a shoot in a way which is timely. All photographers build capacity into the month following a client session - there is capacity for editing and retouching, a viewing session and product design. Allowing those tasks to carry forward into periods which may be very busy (or when we might be absent) can make our workload unmanageable. There will of course be times when delays need to be accepted – we or our clients might be unwell or suffering a personal crisis. But outside of that we must make sure that scheduled work isn’t deferred or disrupted by tasks which should have been completed weeks before. Think about how this might be incorporated into your FAQ or business Terms.

The Second Basis of Efficiency is Time Management

There have been several occasions when I’ve browsed the websites of other portrait photographers only to be baffled by policies which can’t possibly be cost-effective (or even of any benefit at all). I’ve come across photographers who are prepared to travel 75 miles to their clients whilst making no charge over or above their standard session fee. Think for a moment what a 150 mile round trip will cost in fuel and time - or lost revenue if you could have taken a local customer that day instead. This is a straightforward example of where controlling our time equals efficiency.

The more complex and more damaging time/efficiency equations can reveal themselves if we apportion additional hours to an agreed service. I know what my fixed overheads per client will be and I also know that my session fee doesn’t come close to meeting that. Then there are the variable overheads per client such as the cost of printing and framing, travel etc. Photographers are one of the few (if not the only) professions who undertake many hours of work (travel, shooting, editing, retouching, proofing, and presenting) without being paid for it until the point at which the client buys our goods. Minimising those risks always comes back to ensuring we work with the right clients and we avoid pricing our products too low.

Every photographer is different in their level of input. At one end of the scale we have the ‘churn and burn’ snappers who offer a quick and cheerful service with little or no retouching and simple products such as a pack of loose prints. In order for a low input business model to be effective, the time and skill invested must be absolutely minimal and the client turnover high.

Then we have higher end photographers with an established brand and a very high level of input. A high value photographer will carefully plan every photo shoot, and will spend many hours afterwards during postproduction in order to create a signature set of images for each customer. A high input photographer will offer beautifully crafted products and every aspect of their service will be tailored for each client. Once again – the session fee doesn’t cover the fixed overheads per client, nor the variable overheads associated with the cost of our luxury products, nor the hours we spend shooting, travelling, editing and retouching. Put simply, the greater the time investment the more we have to rely on sales to meet those losses and to bring in the profit we need.

Incidentally “efficiency” should never mean subjecting your clients to any kind of hard sell. Ugh. Why would you even need to go down that route - after all your clients have come to you for the purpose of buying the kind of photographs you create. There should be no question that they don’t want to invest in your work. This conversation is reminiscent of one or two well-known high street studios whose selling methods became legendary (uncomfortably so) throughout the industry. This behaviour is not the province of a small boutique photography business, and it never will be.

The Value of a Project Timesheet

If you keep a timesheet (something I do for every project) you’ll soon start to see the hours racking up. There is no worse feeling than putting your heart and soul into a project when the weight of your overheads is hanging over you like a sledgehammer. The feeling will grow ever worse if you start applying additional hours to that project which are arguably over and above the provision of your standard service. The only way to tackle this is to have clear policies and very clear boundaries. Your customers need to understand what they will be getting for their session fee and what isn’t included.

Never take on a project which is likely to take more time than your quoted service allows for. The pre-booking consultation will help to inform you about whether additional time and therefore additional fees will be necessary.

Less is More – Photographic Quality vs Quantity

Where else can we build in ‘efficiency’? Very likely in the number of photographs we process and retouch and ultimately show the customer. Going back to our risky business model - remember we’re doing all of this work without any payment. It isn’t uncommon for a ‘high input’ photographer to tally up over 30 hours on just one client before we’ve even got to the ordering session!

Does it really make sense to show the customer dozens of images when many of them may be very similar and where all of them have taken time to edit and retouch? All we’re doing is making it harder for our clients to make their choices whilst making the viewing session unnecessarily long. I’m a great believer in a restrained approach to numbers. It’s better to show your client 20 distinct and well crafted photographs than 50 images where 30 of them are mediocre.

Introduce a Photography Project Final Calculation

If you’ve worked out your overheads correctly you’ll know how much of your yearly fixed overhead is apportioned per client. This is what it costs you to walk out of the door when you meet each customer. You also need to keep a tally of your variable overheads, such as travel costs, any tolls and other expenses. Your variable overheads will also include the cost of printing, framing, albums and courier charges.

At the end of each project you should be able to add a page to your customer file - and it’s a simple calculation. In the left hand column you’ll have your outgoings, starting with the fixed overhead per client. In the same column will be everything you’ve paid to your suppliers when you fulfilled your client’s order, as well as travel costs and any other expenses. The right-hand column will be your takings – that’s ‘money in’ and includes your session fee and the value of your client’s order.

It’s fairly obvious what these figures are going to tell you - it’s your project’s financial statement. Assuming you have at least turned a profit the next thing to do is look at your timesheet. You’ll be amazed at how many hours have accumulated when you add up the phone calls, the admin, the photo session, the editing, retouching, proofing, preparing for the viewing, the viewing itself and ultimately the product design. Now divide your profit by the number of hours you’ve notched up. If you’ve barely earned minimum wage it’s important to examine why that might be and if there’s anything you could have done differently.

Low Profit is as Bad as No Profit

Photographers are notorious for miscalculating what they need to charge in order to survive. Your basic target hourly rate (calculated as above) must at the very least meet this subsistence level. But it’s not the only thing you should factor in to your hourly figure. You should always include the value of your experience, your talent and your brand. Your brand is your ‘name’ and a style recognisable as yours. Part of your brand will be your professional achievements, awards, honours, your standing within the industry. After all, that’s why your clients chose you above other photographers they might have considered.

When we sell a framed wall piece for £700, we’re not selling the value of the wood which made the frame and the paper on which the photograph is printed. We’re selling our professional judgement and the years of expertise we need in order to produce a finished product which a client could not reasonably produce themselves to the same standard.

By adopting such a risky business model photographers have taken all of the risk out of our clients’ hands and we’ve placed it squarely in our own. After all, our clients have the option of walking away without paying a single bean for all of that effort. Thankfully that should never happen - by choosing the right clients we’ve made sure those clients will value the images we’ve created for them and the excellent workmanship of our producers.

Since we’re in the personal section of my website I’ll add a rare personal viewpoint (I’ll understand if you think I’m a grinch or a killjoy). If you’re after a photography post, this isn’t it, but I’ve added some new year business resolutions here: tidying your photography business for the year ahead

If you feel December and early January take a toll, then rest assured you’re not alone. I often feel out of sorts at this time of year and I’m happy to say why. Christmas means different things to different people, and it’s not all happy families and warm get-togethers. I sometimes fantasise that if I were dictator prima-donna I would encourage the populace to consider reining in something which I firmly believe is a source of consternation for most (and a source of outright misery for many). We’ve all seen articles about how to cope with the festive season but rarely does anyone dare to suggest that we opt out entirely.

Don’t get me wrong - I think people should be free to celebrate Christmas in the way they want to. But for others it can be hard to live up to the expectations of those around us. The politics of Christmas and gift-giving can be galling. Stepping back has been one of the best decisions I’ve ever made, albeit with the inevitable guilt trip. I fully appreciate that for those with younger children stepping away isn’t really an option. But as we grow older I think our choices become broader.

It’s fair to say that 2021 has been another very tough year for anyone trying to operate a small business throughout a global pandemic. The holiday period can be difficult at the best of times. If it’s also compounded by the loss of a business and perhaps even lost loved ones then it can be a thoroughly miserable time. I’ll be quite honest in saying it’s my least favourite time of the year and I find myself dreading it. I know an awful lot of people who feel the same way yet the Christmas tide and the pressures which come with it (often starting in October) are seen as part of life.

The past two years have been periods of considerable reflection here at LDP and in many respects an opportunity to rationalise and refine how I run my business. That should of course be an ongoing process. There’s no denying that a good clean out can create mental breathing space, and it’s something I recommend we all do each year. If you don’t have time for a full overhaul there are always business processes which can be examined and improved.

I don’t think I’ve ever fully grasped why this time of the year has to be so intense - almost to the point of madness. Do people even know what it is they’re celebrating? We live in a secular society and I’ve often felt that a version of Thanksgiving might feel more relatable. I think the tradition of Christmas has become something unrecognisable and in many ways destructive.

The majority of households will experience some measure of debt each December. There’ll be an escalation in alcohol related illness, domestic violence, depression and suicide. Inevitable perhaps, given that Christmas so efficiently highlights the differences between the haves and have-nots and whatever rifts might exist in the average family. People who would otherwise rarely feel lonely are likely to feel lonely now. Christmas is a period when we’re force-fed the notion that if we don’t have the bosom of a loving family on Christmas Day then we’re somehow a failure or an object of sympathy. I feel that is the worst legacy of Christmas. I have friends who work in the health services and this is always a difficult and pressured time of year for them. If only Christmas could be more optional, or just one day in November without the long blank coalescence into New Year.

My view is that if it’s the only time of the year when we’re likely to see our relatives then perhaps those relationships are more obligatory than real. I also struggle with gatherings and parties when they feel prescribed and enforced, often impersonal and even uncomfortable. Perhaps that’s my introverted side talking - I want there to be a purpose to my social interactions. I would also rather have time off when I choose to, when the weather is warmer and the days are longer. So for me, the holiday period needs to be productive in some way. This is the time when I clear out my cupboards, do my spring cleaning, and run through my business operating procedures to ensure everything is as efficient as it can be going into the New Year.

An Ongoing Personal Project – my long Relationship with Porsche

Moving on from my gripes about the holiday season, I have some recreational goals which have been drawn out and at times frustrating. I’ve always been a car enthusiast and I always have car related tasks to deal with. I also do quite a lot of automotive photography and I find the performance car world utterly fascinating. I’ve always owned German cars and Porsches are beautifully engineered – and reliable. With few exceptions they’re timeless in their looks, and they attract a down-to-earth mature crowd who I find much less judgemental than other supercar owners.

After several years of underusage thanks to a hot start problem, I’ve been working through a list of small but fiddly jobs on a classic Porsche I’ve owned for more years than I can count. My car is in near perfect condition, but there’s always something which could be improved. Kudos to Jez at Carrera Performance in West Sussex for sorting the hot start out, when nobody else could. These cars are solid but they do require expert care.

I’m so pleased I decided to keep Bambi, when in past years I sometimes come close to trading her in for a much newer version. What a mistake that would have been. It seems I’m a purist at heart - there is no other drive quite like an early mid-engine Porsche. My rare 986Z is as pared back as it gets. A gearstick, steering wheel, and three pedals. An analogue driving experience, a chassis which flexes with every turn, and a sleek nimble lightweight little body.

Bambi has a sister in the form of a 987.2 PDK Cayman. A little more refined and a little easier as a daily driver - and a sound investment. I took this picture of ‘Ashleigh’ recently:

There’s been a resurgence of interest in these early models and a notable gain in respect. Prices are climbing, so now is the time to get one - there really is no better way to soothe a midlife crisis.

One of the reasons I bought the car all those years ago (would you believe Bambi is 23 years old now!) was to break the workaholic cycle I often find myself in. Joining car enthusiast groups is a fantastic way of boosting your friendship circle. Even if you don’t know anybody, attending a meet means you’ll never be short of like-minded and interesting people to chat to. For me, that’s where the value in my car lies.

If you’re into car photography I’ve put some hints in this blog post: west sussex car photography tips

I feel the last two years in a world-wide pandemic has changed me to a degree - but hopefully in some good ways. I have a renewed appreciation for everything I have and for those I know and care for. I value my time more. I also have to accept that there are countless things I can’t control. Acceptance is a hard lesson to learn but is often liberating. As the years pass our self-confidence is often something which will ebb and flow, no matter how successful we might be. Taking control of the things which drag us down and accepting those we can’t influence is everything when it comes to our self-worth. Surprisingly, the simplest and smallest changes can often bring the greatest rewards.

On that note I’ll wish my clients and readers the very best for 2022, whatever direction life takes.

The sad reality of the pandemic is that many small businesses have been forced to close their doors. I know that’s the case for a great many photographers and I hope that in time some of those businesses will re-emerge and thrive. Change is inevitable, sometimes unwelcome, and sometimes change brings new horizons and new skills. It can be very hard to embrace change when it’s forced upon us, but humans are resourceful and I never cease to be inspired and motivated by what I’ve seen in the last two years.

Speaking more generally, being in business doesn’t mean that we should be static. In fact this is one of the reasons why many established photography businesses will fold. There’s no getting away from the fact that 80% of photography businesses will fail, usually in the first two years. That’s normally down to a poor understanding of profit and cost, a failure to properly identify who your clients are and a failure to effectively market your work to those clients. But being static can often be a much longer, slower death sentence.

What do I mean by a static business? Do I mean adopting all the latest fads and trends? No, absolutely not. I believe that a successful photographer has his or her own clearly identifiable style. That style will evolve over time, but it will always be something recognisable as ‘ours’. If we once painted like Constable it would seem very odd if we suddenly tried to paint like Mondrian. Our existing customers would be confused and we would have to find an entirely new client group, a new way of marketing and a new referral stream. Consistency is everything, but with incremental refreshing and the occasional rebrand - but still aligned with our own identifiable signature.

A simpler way of looking at it might be to ask ourselves “how can I adapt my business in order to remain profitable and rewarding?”

The New Year often brings a period of reflection, of both personal feelings and how we might feel about our photography business. I’m a huge believer in decluttering - it frees the mind like nothing else. I spent years bogged down by a chaotic workspace. I hadn’t realised how much it had affected my energy levels until I spent several weeks at the height of the pandemic redecorating my office and organizing every inch of it. The result is something professional and welcoming. A simple test is this - ask yourself whether you would be happy inviting clients into your office (be that a dedicated room or a zoned area in your living space).

Running a business can send us into gridlock because there’s so much we’re juggling at once. Simplifying our systems can make life so much easier. Here are some ideas to prep yourself for the coming season:

Refresh Your Photography Business Documentation

Take a look at your brochures, price lists, contracts and anything else you might routinely send to clients. It’s important we review them every few months, and update them particularly if any of our policies or products might have changed.

It may be that you’ve never got around to having much in the way of business documentation (a set of terms and conditions is of course mandatory from the get go). This might be a simple as adding an FAQ section to your website, or to your E brochure. Or perhaps designing an electronic leaflet with plenty of tips to send to your portrait clients before their session.

Give your website a once over every now and again. Do you need to rewrite any of it? Updating our successes and achievements is really important, as well as adding client testimonials. When you introduce new products it makes sense to write a blog post about them - this is all part of marketing your business.

Only Sell what you Love

This can be as simple as going through the products you offer and choosing only the ones you and your customers really connect with.

When we start out in business it’s tempting to go to a trade show and invest in product samples of as many options as possible. We might make the mistake of thinking we need to appeal to all tastes, rather than the tastes of our key client group. Overwhelming our clients with choice can be thoroughly unproductive. I’ve met photographers who offer 80 different frame options, when in fact 12 carefully curated frames are much more likely to help our clients make a decision. Why make life hard for you and your customers?

Increase your Session Fee and Product Prices

The pandemic has driven up the cost of living and the simple fact is that our suppliers are more expensive than they used to be. Photographers are no different to any other business - a 2022 price increase is vital if we’re to survive. A price audit is something we should all be doing at the beginning of every year since this is when most of our suppliers will hike up their fees. If we forget to, our already narrow profit margins will be whittled down to the point where we’ll no longer meet our operating costs.

On a positive note - long gone are the days (remember the last recession?) when clients might try to apply their own pricing to a photography quote rather than accepting the price photographers have to charge. Because all photographers are totally different in their style and skill level (and overheads), there is no such thing as price matching. The general mindset now, in all industries, is to expect prices to rise and customers will need to abandon any notion of haggling.

Think like a Photography Client

We have to remember that our clients have probably never commissioned a photographer before. It’s not like calling a plumber or a decorator, or taking the car to the garage. Almost no aspect of hiring a photographer is likely to be familiar or intuitive. For that reason we need to be able to guide our clients through the process seamlessly. That means making sure they have the right information at the right time. It means reinforcing expectations at every stage, ensuring our clients receive our terms of business early on, and ensuring clients always know what to expect. Good communication sets the groundwork for a happy client and photographer relationship.

For each new client I print out a checklist which sits in my ‘client’ tray on my desk. This lists the things I have to do during every step of the project - from sending an introductory email, collecting the session fee and confirming the date, sending through some hints and tips before the shoot, and briefing them about the viewing and ordering session. There’s also space for notes and anything else which may have been agreed. If a client phones I can grab this in seconds and refresh myself as to where we are and what needs doing next. It also means I’m never without a summarised communication trail - I also make a note of every phone call and what was discussed.

These are some of the small things we can do from time to time to help us feel organized. Running an efficient business means controlling every aspect of that business, rather than allowing your business to control you. Even worse is the feeling that your clients are controlling how you run your business. This is a rabbit hole many photographers can fall into, unnecessarily so. If that’s you then it can be as easy as introducing some new policies and a more businesslike mindset.

Since we’re in the Personal section of my website, I’m going to talk about a subject I truly love. I’ve been a car enthusiast for more years than I can remember. I went from being a biker in my late teens to dreaming about sports cars from my early 20s. Like most, the financial rigours of university life led to a succession of rather rough Ford Escorts until my late 20s saw something of a breakthrough.

This article is about my long-standing relationship with Porsche, my current cars, and the affection I have for Goodwood motor circuit (which isn’t far from where I live in West Sussex). To get things rolling I’ll start with some car and automotive photography hints and tips.

Automotive Photography in West Sussex

Great car photography locations are everywhere. The general rule is to make sure the environment you choose complements the car.

today’s tip

Older classic cars often look their best with a traditional or rustic backdrop, such as a country house or a street of older buildings. A more modern sports car on the other hand will probably look terrific amongst urban concrete or driving on a winding road or racetrack. Context and background are everything. Get out there and find some interesting spots to photograph your car!

An ideal place to start would be your local motor circuit. There are opportunities to capture a wide range of images and to work with speed and movement. Don’t be self-conscious - pretty much everybody who goes to these events will have a camera of some sort in their hands. Shouting about the day on social media or a personal webpage like this is a fantastic way to spread the word and help to promote the benefits of an enthusiastic group or community. Bear in mind that depending on where you are (racetracks are private property) your photos should ideally be limited to personal, artistic, newsworthy, or editorial use unless you have specific permission from the site holder.

If anybody you encounter takes exception to their inclusion in your field of view then arguably they would be better off staying at home. Much as I cringe at my picture being taken, when we attend events like this we have to understand that our cars and our mugs are going to end up all over the place - it’s all part of the fun. Providing someone isn’t harassing you then just accept that photography is a massive part of the day. As a long-term writer on privacy and photographers’ rights you might be interested in my article (it’s a few years old but there have been no material changes): Taking Pictures of People and Property

Back to the pictures - what sort of photo opportunities should you be looking for? Cars are fantastic things to photograph. You can move around them (observing any necessary safety protocols of course) until you find the best angle for the light you have and the background. Background is everything, and it’s the first thing you need to have a look at before pressing the shutter. At car events we can’t always do much about the quality of the light we find on the day, but we can try to minimise undesirable light by changing our shooting angle. An interesting background adds important narrative. Here are some typical options:

• Full-length side profile - the purpose is to document the shape and form of the car

• Vary your distance and position as you rotate yourself around the vehicle, capturing each angle on the quarters

• Close-ups and details - wheels, badges, grilles

• Interiors

• Driver interaction - in the pits, waiting in line to enter the track

• Environmental shots - these are wider images where the car/s are smaller in the scene. These photographs provide information and context, and creative compositions

• Motion - capturing a sensation of speed as the cars move around a track or road

A few simple tips can also help to really improve your results:

• Early in the morning or at the close of the day will almost always offer good light (I especially enjoy warm directional sun)

• Avoid shooting at eye level - do that for yourself and you’ll see that most cars just don’t look right

• It’s useful to have the wheels turn slightly towards you

• Shoot with the lowest ISO setting available - this is because car photographs tend to have slightly stronger postprocessing which can amplify image noise

• Turning the headlights on or depressing the brake pedal will usually add a little more impact to the photograph

• A polarising filter can be useful to minimise harsh reflections

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

Capturing Motion in Car Photography

I love capturing motion in car photography and this is something which takes a little bit of practice. By maintaining focus on our subject and using a relatively slow shutter speed we can keep the car sharp enough whilst introducing motion blur to the background. The short term for this is ‘panning’.

The general premise is this: the slower your subject, the slower your shutter speed. 1/100 sec is a good start with road-speed cars (probably 1/30 with slow moving cyclists or 1/60 for faster cyclists). When shooting cars speeding along a racetrack I’ll choose a shutter of anything from 1/100 to 1/200 depending on my purpose and lens choice. The slower the shutter speed the more careful you need to be about using a steady side to side movement with no upward or downward deviation. The slower the shutter speed, the harder it is to get the subject sharp – so expect a high failure rate. You can use whichever camera settings and modes you like, providing you understand them. It makes sense to use Tv mode and Auto ISO, or M mode with Auto ISO.

I use continuous autofocus and the centre focus point to lock onto the car (if you use back button focus, simply keep the button pressed) and follow the car as it goes past you, and burst mode. You won’t normally have to worry about messy backgrounds because these will be blurred out. If you want very shallow depth of field you’ll probably have to use an ND filter to get a wide enough aperture.

The longer the focal length (or the closer the subject) the harder it is to pan, so getting plenty of practice to understand your limitations is vital. For the motion shots in this article I was using a 28-75 mm lens on a full frame camera. At their nearest point the cars were approximately 30 feet away.

If panning with lens stabilization on, set the stabilisation mode to 2.

How much motion you want to capture is of course a matter of taste. You may want to preserve more of the context at the expense of speed, or you may want the drama of an intensely streaked and colourful background and the car standing out. I find the latter works brilliantly for supercars, older classic cars suit less extreme motion effects.

Mid-Engine Porsche - My Car Ownership Journey

Back in the 1990s a hot hatch was every lad’s dream, or in my case the dream of many a ‘ladette’ (as girls like me were referred to in those days, if we dared to show any technical traits). I have to say that the car I enjoyed owning the most was my mark II VW golf GTI, in metallic sage green with the distinctive red stripe and BBS alloys. It was fast (for its day), comfortable on long journeys, great fun to drive, and something of an icon. I then moved to the Mk IV which seemed disappointing and sanitized by comparison. Neither was particularly reliable – mostly electrical issues.

By then I was nearing 40 and I started leaning towards a more mature yet no less fun choice - and that’s when my love affair with Porsche began. Initially I had a hankering for an Audi TT. Thank goodness the crowd on Pistonheads talked me out of that one - I feel like I dodged a bullet! Not because they aren’t great cars, a TT is a lovely thing to own. But I wanted to spend my money wisely on a vehicle I might hang on to, and this is where Porsche is a fine (albeit more expensive) choice. A well chosen Porsche model will rarely show its age. They’re rock solid, reliable, and if you intend to keep it you may well end up with a collector’s piece rather than a car which simply feels old and dated.

I’m in my mid 50s now, and I’m very much a mid-engine aficionado. I’m fortunate enough to have gained two of them (although the grey Gen 2 Cayman pictured below belongs to David). Owning my first Porsche paved the way for a hobby like no other. Car ownership, particularly specialist cars, is a social and convivial world. There are endless clubs and groups where new friendships can be formed and information freely shared. But as my work as a full-time photographer started to leach every minute of free time, I entirely lost touch with my car focused communities. The years passed by in a blur of work-related martyrdom, with my Porsche becoming more and more of a garage ornament. She’s an excellent example of an early Boxster - but with a fascinating twist (more on that in a moment). Incidentally my work car is a black VW Tiguan Sport – he’s solid and dependable, quick enough, and super comfortable on long runs.

As the car which undeniably saved Porsche, there is no doubt that top-notch early examples of Boxsters are becoming scarce and prices are rising. Despite being launched in 1997 the original Boxster still has a marvellously current look to it, but with unmistakably classic lines.

Over the last few weeks I’ve returned to Goodwood, either just to meet up with someone for coffee or to go and watch a track day. The photographs in this post are from those outings - the recent Porsche Club GB track day being great fun. I realised how much I missed these excursions. After the isolation of lockdown it was fantastic to meet safely outdoors and enjoy some light hearted company, with a sound track of Porsche engines. Sharing tips and experiences can be priceless, and most car enthusiasts enjoy being helpful.

I don’t track ours but I love doing laps as a passenger. Below: Ashleigh on the left and Bambi on the right.

Bambi is arctic silver and she’s a late 1998 base 986. Many people think she’s a Cayman because she has a bespoke upper body shell and a hatch. She also has ballistics grade glass, this isn’t uncommon in South Africa where her upper body came from. This was designed a very long time ago by a Swiss company called Zeintec for the racing Boxsters. It was said to slightly predate the designs for the Cayman (hence no major objection from Porsche). The venture proved to be very short lived and only a few dozen of these upper bodies were made - and in only one part of the world. South Africa has long had a fine reputation for its exemplary GRP moulding and the top section and hatch for my car was custom-made and then flown to me in the UK. This is exactly what a 986 Cayman would have looked like, had Porsche decided to go down that route. And I wish they had. I’m often told it has a sleek classic look when compared to our (equally lovely) slightly curvier meteor grey 987 Cayman.

On a less positive note, I find every trip to the workshop traumatic. In fact it’s rare for me to get my car back from routine servicing or a minor repair without something being disturbed or even damaged by the technicians who work on her. Over the years this has been anything from noticeable scuffs, minor scratches, torn seals, or a part damaged while something nearby was being tended to. I’m not the only Porsche owner to suffer a sleepless night before a workshop visit, it’s disappointingly commonplace. I try to do as much of the more accessible jobs as I can myself, and I have to confess that the thought of anybody else even driving Bambi makes me a little queasy. Taking it in for attention is like watching someone manhandling your life partner. When you have a classic or cherished car you have an intimate relationship with it - you know every inch of your car so well. The cost of repairs is the same irrespective of your Porsche’s age or value.

I can’t see myself parting with Bambi, but I’d like to add a 981 to my collection as more of a daily driver. A bright colour will be in order as well - I’m loving the Viper Green Cayman in one of the photos above!

• indoor and outdoor social photography for weddings, family portraits, baby photography and pet portraits

• street photography

• low light situations where a very fast maximum aperture is needed

As far as my needs are concerned, I want a 50 mm equivalent prime (or similar) to cover the first and last bullet point. As most of you will realise, given my Fuji camera has an APS-C sized sensor with a x1.5 ‘crop factor’ I’ll need to search for a 35 mm lens in order to gain the 50 mm field of view I’m looking for.

I’m not a fan of 50 mm on the street (preferring something a little wider), so I’ll mostly use this kind of lens for other purposes. I’m a portrait photographer (I also cover a lot of pet photo shoots) where at least part of the session might be indoors or under cover. A 50 mm field if view is perfect for average sized rooms and group shots. A fast aperture creates the often desirable subject separation and also enables me to work using natural light (even when there’s comparatively little light). I intend to use my Fuji XT200 as both my ‘run and grab’ camera on professional shoots, and also as my personal use camera.

Every photographer is different and in fact our needs can differ wildly. Because I’m often capturing candid moments, a key requirement ‘for me’ would be fast and quiet autofocus. In fact that’s more important to my day to day work than exacting sharpness or build quality.

This conversation assumes that camera and lens have the most recent firmware. Your opinion on any new camera and lens combo is also likely to be governed by the other equipment you normally use, and how responsive it is. I know from long experience that no Fuji system I have ever owned or used will match the performance of my Sony, Panasonic, or even Canon setups.

When testing lenses we need to consider build quality, sharpness (particularly at the widest aperture values), autofocus speed and accuracy, eye and face autofocus, noises when focusing, colour, bokeh quality, chromatic aberration, distortion, and the presence of any anomalies. I’m not an experienced videographer so I’ll leave film tests for somebody else.

Like anyone, I did plenty of research on each of the options in this article. However research won’t always give you the whole picture and sometimes the only way to understand a piece of equipment is to try it. I have no desire to be contentious (I am after all a Fuji camera user and I have been for many years, though not as my main working system). But more than any other brand I have seen, I do think some Fuji photographers can be quite attached to their equipment and are reluctant to acknowledge any shortcomings. Suffice it to say that despite autofocus improvements across the board in the Fujifilm camera lineup (and firmware updates) autofocus speeds in general do lag behind their competitors.

We have to be realistic with very fast aperture lenses. We should expect some softness at the widest aperture values, across much of the frame, to a degree (the degree tends to vary with the price of the lens). We should also expect some chromatic aberration around high contrast areas (particularly at the corners and edges of the frame). All of my fast prime lenses exhibit these phenomena, as well as varying amounts of vignetting wide open. Therefore it’s the extent of these anomalies that we should assess, rather than if they’re merely present. It should also be said that the closer we are to our subject when using a fast aperture, the softer and hazier the resulting image is likely to be. Again, that isn’t abnormal. By and large, it’s the lower priced primes which are generally more prone to these issues.

How often are we likely to be shooting at the maximum aperture? In bright sunlight this may mean exceeding our camera’s maximum shutter speed (unless our camera has a fast electronic shutter, or unless we use neutral density filters of some sort). We’re most likely to be shooting wide open only in situations where we absolutely have to, or where maximum subject isolation is a creative decision. And to be honest, for most of us that isn’t going to happen very often - but it’s still nice to have the option. If we can determine this isn’t crucial, then our lens choices become more open.

Another thing to beware of is that the minimum focusing distance can vary from lens to lens. On a standard zoom lens (such as many kit lenses) the close focusing ability is often quite impressive (albeit at the wide end of the zoom scale). My Fuji 15-45 kit lens is good in that regard (around 13cm). The Fuji XF 35 mm F1.4 has a minimum focusing distance of approximately 28 cm. The XF/XC 35 mm F2 has a close focusing distance of around 35 cm. The Viltrox 33 mm F1.4 has a less useful 40 cm minimum focusing distance.

Having worked my way through three possibilities, my views on each of the lenses I tried are set out below. I’m only including photographs from the lens I decided to keep. They all offer very good image quality, but I was more interested in other aspects of their performance.

Fujifilm XF 35 mm F1.4 Lens

I’m not going to say too much about this one, and it should be said it’s a fairly old design. In many ways this lens proved to be an unmitigated disaster, in terms of the kind of work I would want to use it for. Whilst the autofocus is fast enough in ideal light, it was agonisingly slow (unusably so) in the kind of indoor light I often find myself in. The autofocus is also extremely noisy indoors (you’re less likely to be troubled by the noise outdoors where there are ambient background sounds).

There’s no doubt the lens offers nice rendering, very good build quality, and gorgeous looks - but it’s let down by frankly dire autofocus performance.

Viltrox 33 mm F1.4 Fuji X Mount

At this point I’m still thinking about an F1 .4 lens. My reasoning being that it can be useful at times to have the extra stop of light offered by an F1.4 lens vs an F2 (albeit with some caveats). In their advertising Viltrox describe this lens as having “fast and silent autofocus”.

The reviews I saw of the Viltrox optics were resoundingly positive, from build quality to focusing speed as well as sharpness. However there is nothing quite like getting a piece of equipment into your hands. This is notable when there are so few purchaser reviews, and rather a lot of photographers who have been sent the lens by the manufacturer (which can introduce a degree of bias). Now that I’ve had a chance to test it - does this lens live up to the hype?

The Viltrox 33 F1.4 lens is a little bigger and heavier than the Fuji XT 35 mm F1.4. It has an aperture ring on the lens body, but it’s clickless. I don’t like aperture rings at the best of times and I’m even less enamoured by the stepless nature of this one, but it’s nice and firm and I had no problems with it getting accidentally knocked out of position. We don’t have to control aperture via the lens ring of course, we can set the lens to A mode and control the aperture via the camera. If there’s a problem keeping the aperture ring in whichever position we’ve set it at I’d employ a piece of electrical tape (sorry if that’s sacrilege to many Fuji users).

My first impressions of the Viltrox 33 f1.4 were good. Build quality is excellent (but bear in mind it isn’t weather-sealed). It’s a good-looking lens too (more so if you like the blingy gold lettering).

I found there was slightly less chromatic aberration than with the Fuji 35mm F1.4, and I prefer the bokeh on the Viltrox. Edge softness wide open is broadly similar between the two lenses but the Viltrox appears sharper across the centre at all apertures. By F2.8 the Viltrox is stunningly sharp across the centre and pretty good in the corners. In terms of colour and contrast they are on par, but I’d say the Viltrox runs very slightly little warmer. In terms of autofocus speed there is no contest - in all situations the Viltrox outperforms the Fuji 35 F1.4 (interestingly I found the Fuji 35 mm F1.4 faster to focus in ideal light). But does that mean the Viltrox is ‘fast enough’ for its intended usage?

Unfortunately my answer to that is no (I couldn’t reliably use this for snappy candid portraiture, pet photography, street photography - at least not in the way I like to work). When acquiring focus it momentarily stutters back and forth (there is noise, but nothing on par with the Fuji 35mm F1.4) and this is the same irrespective of how good the light is. This happened with virtually every shot I took. I was surprised, given that this lens is marketed as having ‘fast and silent’ autofocus. I don’t mind a little bit of noise, but there’s no doubt that for the situations where I would use this lens, I would lose an awful lot of decisive moments. That rules it out for me, but it may not be a problem for others. This also seems to be at odds with some of the reviews I watched on YouTube where the autofocus appeared to be better than I had experienced - perhaps I had a faulty unit.

I was saddened at having to send this lens back, because it’s great in so many ways.

So here’s the bottom line. If you’re used to a very fast focusing system then this lens on a Fuji camera is not going to amaze you. But if you absolutely need F1.4, then I think you’ll enjoy the Viltrox. It’s a quality piece of kit, with gorgeous IQ. Depending on what you shoot you may find the autofocus acceptably fast, and it’s a better performer all round than the Fuji 35 F1.4. But if you want something smaller and lighter, affordable and sharp, hopefully faster to focus, then would the Fuji XC 35 F2 be a better choice? Let’s see ……

Fuji XC 35 mm F2.0

If you don’t need weather sealing then the XC version of this lens is for you (the XT variant is weather sealed and I believe both lenses are optically identical).

With a lightweight plastic construction the new Fuji XC 35 mm F2.0 is one of those lenses which represents fantastic value for money. It doesn’t come with a lens hood, but there are some very good third-party options (albeit still fairly expensive).

If you’ve read this far you’ll know that my priority is competent autofocus. This lens clearly beats the Fuji XT 35 mm F1.4 and its Viltrox cousin. It isn’t perfect though. In ideal light the autofocus is very fast but at times you do still see the forward then back pulse which will probably rule this out for video work. In dim light this is more pronounced however the lens doesn’t stutter like the others in this article, and it’s significantly quieter. The close focusing distance isn’t anything special so be aware of that if you’re failing to lock focus on a nearby target. Eye and face autofocus work well (providing your subject isn’t wearing glasses).

Autofocus aside, where the XC 35 mm F2.0 lens shines is the image quality. It’s sharp wide open, across the vast majority of the frame. Contrast and colour are excellent (unless you’re shooting at the widest aperture value and at the closest focusing distance, in which case you’ll see something of a soft focus effect - common to many fast primes under those circumstances). The quality of the bokeh is lovely and smooth. Whilst you may feel that you would prefer an F1.4 lens, in my experience shooting at F1.4 is a rarity - images are rarely tack sharp (particularly when close to our subject). That in itself is likely to limit use of an F1.4 lens a little more than you had hoped, and likewise any other aperture value to at least F2.8. Given the Fuji XC 35 lens is sharp even at F2, it’s clear this lens has some advantages.

Chromatic aberration is evident at wider aperture values, similar to the XF 35 F1.4 lens, although it’s marginally better.

Given the options available to me, the XC 35 is the lens I decided to keep purely on autofocus alone. I will say at this point that the autofocus is not on par with the 15-45 Fuji kit lens which came with my camera. If you need a lightweight standard prime for your Fuji camera which won’t break the bank, this one is a great choice in my opinion. I paid £169.00 for mine in November 2020 – a bargain.

Fuji XC 35 Image Samples

The images have not been processed, save for minor exposure adjustment on the photos of the writing. An unprocessed RAW file tends to look a little dull (for comparison I’ve included one picture which has been processed as I normally would in Adobe Lightroom). There have been no other corrections, so you can see what the out of camera RAW files look like, particularly with respect to depth of field and chromatic aberration. The latter is evident at the wider aperture values, particularly longitudinal CA. This creates colour shifts through the transitional out of focus areas, which gradually disappear as the lens is stopped down. Longitudinal CA won’t plague all of your wide aperture images, it’s high contrast borders which will be affected - hence the choice to use text to test the extent of it. Vignetting is all but absent in my test images.

Because the photographs of the writing were taken at fairly close range (close to the minimum focusing distance) the F2.0 image shows the slight haziness I mentioned earlier. The focus point is on the wording ’settings are consistent’. If I pulled back a bit then the softening at F2.0 wouldn’t be an issue, as demonstrated in the photograph of the crayons. The photos of the sheet of paper were taken at an angle to show the differences in depth of field at the various aperture values.

I’ve also included a couple of pictures taken with the little kit lens, the Fujifilm XC 15-45 mm F3.5-5.6 OIS PZ. I’m really impressed with this lens, it’s super sharp across the centre of the frame at all settings. As you might notice, this lens has lovely colour and contrast too – in fact in these images it beats the prime. The XC 35 shows a slightly cooler rendering. The 15-45 is also faster and more accurate with respect to autofocus. The kit lens also has image stabilisation, which makes a big difference in low light (these photographs weren’t subject to camera shake because I had stabilised the camera adequately when taking them).

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

If you notice some noise in the images, that’s because I was using natural light on a very dark winter day in southern England. My XT200 is fantastic in low light and the noise doesn’t impact detail either (another reason for my dislike of Fuji’s X-Trans sensors, where higher ISO images seem to have a measure of noise reduction applied in camera to the RAW files – let’s not go there).

The kit lens is used at an aperture of F5, because that’s the fastest aperture you’ll get at approximately a 50mm field of view. Using the XC 35 at F2.0 shows just how much background separation you can get - the crayons were approximately 4 feet from the background. Had I been using an F1.4 lens, the fireplace would have virtually disappeared. That isn’t a look I particularly like, I want at least some context in a scene. With shots like this, I feel the F2.8 aperture gives the nicest result.

Sigma 30mm f1.4 DC DN

Since we’re talking about wide aperture standard prime lenses, I thought I’d say a few words about one of the best primes I’ve ever owned. I purchased the Sigma 30mm f1.4 DC DN in the Sony e-mount fit. It’s an APS-C lens, which can also be used on my Sony full frame cameras (in crop mode). This is probably the sharpest lens I have. However by its nature it’s still subject to some of the characteristics I touched on earlier.

Autofocus on all of my Sony cameras is extremely fast with this lens. Very occasionally when photographing low contrast subjects in poor light it can hunt briefly or miss focus (but much less than the Fuji lenses I’ve already discussed). Other than that, focusing is near silent. Vignetting is extremely well controlled and edge-to-edge sharpness can be seen at all aperture values with only a small amount of edge softening wide open.

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

As you can see from the photograph of the text, when used at or close to the minimum focusing distance there is a slight haziness at F1.4. As I’ve mentioned, this is pretty normal at ultra wide apertures. But the photograph at F1.4 of the crayons demonstrates just how sharp this lens can be at its widest aperture, given a little breathing space between the subject. At F2 the lens is sharper still and sharp as a knife at F2.8.

You can also see on the text photographs that this lens exhibits virtually no longitudinal chromatic aberration. Instead, you’ll see the much more familiar transverse chromatic aberration (shown as purple fringing around high contrast areas). Transverse CA is extremely easy to correct for, but longitudinal CA can be a pain to get rid of.

Lastly, if you don’t have a fast lens yet for your XT200 and if you’re worried about high ISO noise - don’t. This little camera has absolutely stunning image quality. Amazing as this sounds, it’s not far behind the Sony A7Riii. Here’s a comparison between the Fuji XT200 and the Sony A7Riii.

I fully intend to use my Fuji XT200 professionally where the situation dictates. For the kind of work I do there’s no reason not to. The XT200 will be a handy and very portable backup to my main system, or a second camera with a small fast prime mounted for capturing more candid moments. I’m a portrait photographer so I don’t intend to use the XT200 for fast action or wet weather shooting. For virtually everything else, it’s great.

Given what I’ve said in the past with respect to my dislike of Fuji X-Trans sensor technology, I was absolutely delighted to see their superb Bayer array sensors gaining a little more airtime. The image quality from these is nothing short of sensational - in both ISO performance, dynamic range, and colour.

In general, we would expect to see around a stop in the noise differential at any given ISO value when comparing a recent full frame sensor with a same generation APS-C sensor. I like shooting with both formats. I enjoy the convenience of generally smaller and lighter APS-C cameras and lenses, making them really good choices for personal use and backups. I’ve never felt particularly compromised by the slightly lower ISO capability.

My Fuji XT200 was recently purchased to replace my much loved Panasonic LX100ii. The Panasonic was purely a personal use handbag camera and not something I would use when working. Moving to the Fuji means accepting a slightly larger size, but with a number of advantages which I recently set out in this blog post: Fuji XT200 Best Travel Cameras

Back to my ISO tests. I photographed a corner of my office because this particular scene gives me a range of tonal values to assess. The full frame Sony A7Riii needed a slight aperture adjustment to bring the depth of field in line with the APS-C sensor on the Fuji. This isn’t a test of lens sharpness by any means but I think the 15-45 Fuji kit lens does incredibly well. The Sony camera is fitted with the excellent Tamron 28-70 f2.8 pro lens. However I have noticed that images shot through the Tamron 28-79 f2.8 tend to be around half a stop under-exposed, so I had to adjust for that.

Whenever I carry out ISO tests using different cameras it’s important that the images are viewed at the same size, otherwise it isn’t a useful comparison. This means down-sampling images from camera which has the higher native resolution. I then take tight crops (again, at a consistent size) from a relevant section of the image. We would almost never make prints at that magnification, but it’s the accepted way of assessing noise in any given photograph. I see lots of people zooming in beyond this to 200% - a completely pointless exercise since at that level we’ve gone beyond normal pixel resolution and we would never print at such low quality.

The RAW images were imported into Adobe Lightroom for conversion and my default sharpening applied (amount 30, radius 0.7, detail 25, masking 10). My default noise reduction settings were also used (luminance 15, colour 25). Both sets of images were shot with daylight white balance, but I had to make a slight tweak to match the images in Lightroom. Matching the colour of all the images (at least as far as possible) is important - for some reason cooler toned images seem to show noise less than slightly warmer toned photographs. I also had to match the slight exposure differences between the two cameras. The XT200 renders a noticeably brighter file so these images were dropped very slightly to better match the A7Riii. Matching exposure is important – if we don’t do this it isn’t a like for like comparison since we can interpret noise differently if the tones don’t match up.

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

I think the conclusion we can draw from the photographs is clear. Both cameras show impressive high ISO performance. We would of course expect this from the Sony A7Riii, but the little Fuji has delighted me in this regard. There is very little difference between the two cameras in fact, perhaps half a stop. It’s fantastic to see this level of image quality available in entry-level cameras. There is enough detail from both sensors for us to apply more noise reduction if we wanted to in the higher ISO images, without an appreciable loss of quality.

The XT200 bests my Sony APS-C bodies in IQ and my recent Canon APS-C camera. The Fuji doesn’t have the same autofocus performance of those cameras, but for its intended purpose that isn’t too much of a compromise. I’m looking forward to seeing where Fuji goes with its Bayer sensor line in the future.

Since most professional photographers are normally using very well specified cameras in their jobs, it can be hard to find a satisfying smaller system for recreational use. However as the years have rolled on the number of small and portable options have grown in number and quality. In the past I’ve written about my buying decisions when it comes to a personal camera. It’s that time again, and I’ve just moved on from my much loved and well respected Panasonic LX100ii.

At this point I’ll reiterate that our camera decisions should be based on our own needs and preferences, and that can vary considerably from person to person. Therefore what might suit me very well may not be the best choice for the next person. Physical handling and access to our most used controls are perhaps the biggest part of that. There’s little point investing in a highly capable camera if you find it fiddly, or if you have to pause every time you need to change settings.

I tend to replace my cameras every couple of years, this minimises depreciation and the proceeds of one sale is used to enable the next. Selling my Panasonic LX100ii is a real wrench and something of a considered decision, because the LX100ii is one fantastic and incredibly powerful little camera. It has a high quality lens covering the traditional 24 to 70 range, with a fast maximum aperture of f1.7 to f2.8. The autofocus is blazingly quick and incredibly accurate in AF-S mode. It has a nice viewfinder, plenty of manual controls and custom buttons, 4K video (albeit cropped) and Panasonic’s associated 4K photo features, very close focusing capability and lovely build quality. And it’s small enough to easily slip into a coat pocket or any of my handbags. There really isn’t much to complain about. However over the years I’ve learnt more about my priorities and the situations where I’m most likely to want the best from my portable camera.

Relevant to this discussion is a recent event in my career. In September 2020 I was very proud to gain a second Fellowship distinction with the British Institute of Professional Photography, in the social documentary category. Broadly speaking social documentary includes elements of street photography, landscape photography, and travel photography. This Fellowship was photographed entirely with whichever compact camera I happened to have in my pocket, handbag, or car at the time. This included cameras such as the Panasonic GH1, Olympus OMD E-M5, Oly E-M10, Panasonic LX100, Panasonic LX100ii, Panasonic GM5, and Sony RX100ii. It was an entirely candid and spontaneous exploration of my local coastline and one where travelling light and blending in was a given. Some of the cameras I used were ancient by today’s standards (but competent enough for the task). What better way to celebrate this particular distinction, than purchasing a tool well suited to this kind of work.

The value in having a small camera I can carry about, on any day of the week, has been exemplified in many of the awards I’ve won over the years. I simply wouldn’t have got the vast majority of those photographs had I not had ‘something’ available to me at the time. Our choices have now broadened to the point where we would rarely be constrained by the limitations we might have experienced with smaller systems in the past. My decision-making process for replacing my Panasonic LX100ii with the Fujifilm XT200 is set out below.

Deciding Which Compact Mirrorless Camera System to Buy

As things stand in 2020, I’m certainly not short on options. Incidentally none of the options I considered include Micro 4/3 systems. Technology has moved on and Micro 4/3 is now but one of several small competent systems (I still own and love my Panasonic GX8). I spent several years as a brand ambassador for Olympus, and in that period we had little competition when it came to the size/quality equation. But times have changed, and I like to explore new options.

As somebody who shoots professionally with Sony, you might be wondering why it didn’t make sense for me to get something like a Sony a6400 as my handbag camera. After all, it’s a terrific little machine and would do double duty as a second camera or backup for work. Well, I sold my Sony a6300 for a number of reasons, and those reasons would apply equally to its successor. Despite high levels of customisation I found the dial and button configuration fiddly and the lack of a joystick is another factor. I just didn’t enjoy the handling. Because of the placement of the right command dial the aperture value would constantly change itself with the merest touch against my body. I had to assign a ‘lock’ to this dial, which would fix the value, but I’d have to go through the process of unlocking before I could change it. Another sticking point (for me) with Sony APS-C cameras is the viewfinder. This might sound strange, because these cameras have very good viewfinders – but on the axxxx range they don’t suit my particular pair of eyes. Despite having fairly good eyesight the icons and numbers are just too small and close together, I would experience eyestrain after a while. The Fuji XT200 has a fairly standard viewfinder, but I find it pleasant to use and it’s very easy to read.

Incidentally the viewfinder is one reason why I wasn’t going to consider the newly released full frame Sony compact A7C. The viewfinder, pared back controls, and lack of a joystick are off-putting for me (plus I don’t want to lug around full frame lenses).

I’ve had a love hate relationship with Fuji over the years. Having tested and reviewed some of Fuji’s X-Trans offerings my enchantment quickly dwindled to the point where I realised any Fuji camera with an X-Trans sensor would never cut it for me. My feelings are the same irrespective of which software I use for processing the RAW files, and I’m not about to become a JPEG shooter. There’s more on this here: Fuji X-Trans Processing Artefacts

Fuji’s feature sets are now satisfyingly comprehensive. The lenses have always been superb, and I’m delighted to say that Fuji’s phenomenal Bayer sensors are showing in their entry level systems. Fuji - thank you thank you thank you - no matter how competent the performance of your cameras became, X-Trans is a deal breaker for me. Hence my decision to purchase the Fuji XT200, and not the more comprehensive XT3/XT30.

In making this decision to switch from the Panasonic LX100ii to the Fuji XT200 there have been some losses but several gains. Over time we learn about our needs and priorities and I feel the trade-off is likely to be very worthwhile.

Am I Losing Out by Swapping my Panasonic LX100ii for the Fuji XT200?

The most obvious tradeoff is pocketability. That isn’t to say that the Fuji won’t fit into a large coat pocket, but it won’t fit into a hoodie pocket (or any of my evening bags for that matter). It is however light enough to carry around in my regular daytime tote or messenger bag. Overall, the difference in size and weight isn’t huge.

The next thing I’m giving up is a measure of customisation. The LX100ii has several customisable function buttons where I can assign the operations I use the most. The Fuji XT200 has two custom buttons on the back of the camera (the large dial on the top left of the camera can also be programmed). The Quick menu on the LCD is also customisable and my most used features are quick to change in this way (such as ISO, white balance etc). I’ve assigned the Q menu to one of the blank function buttons. Unfortunately there isn’t a way to set up a back button focus on this particular Fuji (focus lock is not the same as focus-on).

What about giving up the excellent Panasonic Leica f1.7 to f2.8 lens on the LX100ii? We know that as sensor size increases depth of field at any given aperture value will become shallower. We also know that as sensor size increases the amount of noise at any given ISO value should decrease. How does this affect my move from a 4/3 sensor (actually the LX100ii sensor is slightly smaller than four thirds due to its multi aspect feature) to an APS C sensor? In lens terms there is approximately a two stop difference between the Panasonic built in lens and my Fuji 15-45 kit lens. The increased sensor size on the Fuji will give me approximately one stop of shallow depth of field benefit at like aperture values, and around a stop in ISO advantage (my tests in fact indicated that it’s a little more than a one-stop advantage with the Fuji sensor). The benefit however is that I can change lenses on the XT200, swapping to a small and light fast prime. I’ve just ordered the legendary Fuji 35mm F1 .4 prime lens (I’ll report back on the autofocus performance).

There’s no doubt that the build quality of the LX100M2 is excellent. The build quality of the Fuji XT200 is nicer than expected, but it’s an entry-level camera with a cheaper price point than the Panasonic so I can’t expect the same level of ruggedness.

Panasonic LX100M2 vs Fuji XT200 | The Things I’ve Gained

The most obvious benefit in switching to the Fuji XT200 is the larger APS-C sensor. The sensor in the LX100M2 is very good indeed - but in resolution, noise, colour, and dynamic range it’s no match for Fuji’s utterly fantastic Bayer array technology. I would go so far as to say this is the best APS-C sensor I’ve seen (and I’ve reviewed some good ones). It has the same ‘velvetness’ I came to love from my Fuji X100 (MkI).

The Fuji XT200 has an absolutely stunning fully articulating LCD screen. If you like your screens, you’ll swoon over this one. It’s great for selfies as well, if you’re into that kind of thing. It’s also handy if you like to get down low when photographing nature or smaller subjects.

A biggie for me is Fuji’s inclusion of a joystick. As somebody who frequently needs to move her focus points around, this is fantastic to have. It isn’t a particularly tactile joystick, but it does the job quite well. Note that the LX100M2 doesn’t have a joystick or a movable LCD – and my Sony a6300 was fiddly when changing settings on the fly. Overall I find the Fuji XT200 quick and easy to use and navigate, with enough customisation to suit my personal use needs.

I find eye detection works better on the XT200 than my LX100ii (but it’s not on par with Sony). Overall the subject tracking on the XT200 is pretty good and is better than the Panasonic LX100ii.

Being able to switch out the lens is another benefit of the XT200 (budget allowing). Fuji has some great options for building a small lightweight travel kit. The consumer grade zooms offered by Fuji are generally superior when compared to their competitors, although they can be a little more expensive.

I’ve now got those gorgeous Fuji film simulations to enhance my videos (when I get around to learning video). Don’t expect the video features of the XT200 to meet that of some of its competitors though. As far as I can see there’s no focus tracking in video (aside from face and eye detection) which I think is a big oversight - hopefully that can be rectified in firmware. On the plus side the 4K video from the Fuji XT200 is very nice indeed, whereas the Panasonic LX100ii 4K video is cropped in camera.

Here are my first snaps from the XT200:

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

Fuji XT200 Image Quality, RAW

The RAW images have a lovely neutral rendering with slightly warmer shadows - colours are rich and accurate. The RAW files are fairly flat looking on import into Adobe Lightroom (and even flatter in Capture One Pro) but adding one of the Fuji profiles on import (instead of relying on the default Adobe profile) gives you a very pleasing starting point. Noise levels are very low indeed, even at high ISO values, as you can see when I pitted the XT200 against the Sony a7Riii.

My first outing was a dawn walk around my local woods. Autofocus is fast with the kit lens and extremely accurate, there were no missed shots. Very occasionally there’ll be a ‘double lock’ when focusing in dim areas, but overall it’s very good (though not as fast in AF-S as the incredibly speedy Panasonic LX100M2). Exposure is accurate, and a little brighter when compared to my other cameras (Panasonic GX8, Sony A7Riii, Canon 200D).

Despite the fact this camera is touted as an “entry-level” body, it has a reasonable level of complexity which I suspect will appeal only to the most technical of newcomers. I think the main target audience of this camera will simply put it into one of the auto modes and leave it there. That said, I can see more than a few professionals buying the XT200 for personal use and as a very competent backup for portraits and weddings. The menus are quite easy to navigate, and whilst this camera has a pared back feature set compared to its slightly bigger brothers, it’s by no means basic. Feature-richness is very much the strength of the Sony axxxx line, albeit with a trade-off in handling and direct manual controls.

Conclusion

If your priority is size and flexibility, then the LX100M2 will probably suit you better than anything else currently out there. But if you want a fantastic sensor, a class leading articulating LCD screen, very respectable performance, gorgeous looks, and a system you can grow into - then the XT200 represents phenomenal value for money.

I’m pretty blown away by my new XT200. It makes me want to go out and take pictures - I haven’t experienced that for a long time due to general tiredness and burnout. That’s how I want to feel when I buy a new personal use camera. My Panasonic LX100M2 did that for me (although it’s time for a change), my Sony a6300 didn’t, my Fuji XT20 didn’t either.

I’ve learned over the years that size is important to me, but I can make some minor compromises there if it means I’ll benefit in other areas.

A long time ago I studied biology and biochemistry (two years of which contained a good measure of microbiology and immunology) at university. I found my degree fascinating but I didn’t feel fulfilled when I subsequently worked in the pharmaceutical industry. The corporate world really wasn’t for me. Because of my background my view of the pandemic is likely to be more analytical than most.

There are no reliable long-term models to guide us, we’ve been plunged into the unknown. When our infection rates mushroomed the thought we might lose friends or loved ones has been a constant source of torment. Losing our livelihoods brought another dimension to a period of intense misery, introspection and at times loneliness. As is common during a crisis, we might look back at our lives and fervently wish we had done more of some things, and less of others.

That often brings with it a vow to make the most of each day, whatever it brings. All around me my neighbours embarked upon clearing out their sheds, tidying their gardens, replacing fences, and cultivating vegetables. There has always been a direct correlation between being productive and good mental health. It’s hard to worry and dwell on things if our mind or body is occupied. The old saying that busy hands are happy hands has never rung more true.

One of the benefits of running a business is that we accrue a range of skills in order to be effective. Aside from the art of photography we need fairly good design skills, processing and retouching skills, website building and maintenance skills, a measure of marketing knowledge, basic bookkeeping and writing skills. Many experienced photographers have been able to use that experience to branch outwards, perhaps by writing features and offering online training. If you’ve built, branded, and designed all your own websites then you may be well-placed to do the same for others. These are all potential lateral income streams whilst our main occupation is on hold. Never underestimate what you have to offer.

Making Use of Lockdown, Rationalising a Portrait Photography Business

Those offering essential services (such as plumbing, car maintenance etc) will be in demand as always, but will face the difficulties of safe working. Those of us offering an elective luxury service will be less in demand for a time. But most of us will need to completely rethink how we do things when we reopen, and for some time going forward. Some studios have re-opened on the 15th June, others are preferring to wait (perhaps until next year). However when momentum is lost and bookings are cancelled we know it may not be possible to simply restart where we left off. In that respect the lockdown has been a crucial period of planning, restructuring, and reflection.

Lockdown has probably been one of the busiest and most stressful periods for business owners. Not because we can engage in our usual day-to-day work, but because we need to implement so many changes if we’re to continue at all.

Lockdown forced me to completely reassess my business and to re-examine virtually every system within it. All photography businesses are different and it’s important that we try not to focus too much on what others are doing. I’m a location portrait photographer so I don’t have the worries associated with customers coming back into what may be a small studio with one entrance. Or a busy studio relying on a number of customers each week or each day. For the most part I’ll be able to continue working outdoors on location, assuming those I work with (and anyone else in the area) will observe the necessary distancing and other safety measures. But once I’ve taken the pictures, the aspects of my job which were always face-to-face must now happen remotely. We have to think how we can present our products, and guide customers through the image selection process.

The in person indoor elements of our work such as consultations and viewing sessions will be off-limits for a while. It’s hard to consult, direct, and hand around products with safe distancing and sanitization in mind. Particularly where our studios or offices are within our homes using one entrance. Figuring out new ways around this isn’t always straightforward (particularly if the client isn’t technology focused) but it has to be done. I write this as our infection curve has fallen, but I still know of very recent new cases within my social circle. We’re not out of the woods, and we may be at one of the most dangerous stages as we ease our restrictions.

The loss of face to face impact when a client first sees images of their family, their pets, or themselves is something we will miss greatly. Seeing and feeling products first hand is another important element which will be lost for a while. Our profit margins are based on the (considerable) time and overhead invested in each customer, as well as the cost of the products our clients choose to buy (these overheads are often hundreds of pounds). We base our forecasts on our customers making purchases which exceed our fixed and variable overheads and hence generate our profit margin. That is a far higher spend than many photographers realise. We now have to balance a potential lower spend with more tightly managed business costs. For that reason it can now make better business sense to presell product collections. In doing this the client benefits from preferential pricing, easy decision-making, and a beautifully curated set of products. The photographer has a more predictable income. I do think collections will be more important now than ever before.

The Misery of the Business ‘To Do’ List

As things stand, most of us have been spending even more time in our offices than ever. Early into lockdown I realised I needed to make my workspace a little more comfortable and visually pleasing. I also realised how long my ‘to do’ list was becoming. It can be hard to catch up on things during a normal working week and so the list grows ever longer over time. When the list exceeds our psychological threshold, we start to distance ourselves from it. And this is why lockdown has been a crucial (and productive) time for many. I decided I wanted to come out of this with a fresh outlook, more streamlined systems, with a more time efficient workflow. This gave me a purpose, a structure to each working day. And above all I firmly believe that staying busy is the very best way of avoiding or mitigating feelings of loneliness or anxiety.

In order to even start on my list I had to pick the tasks which I would find least arduous and which would show results fairly quickly. My thinking was that this would ease me into it and then build momentum for the other things I had to do.

Looking at our to-do list can be a grim exercise. I think once we go beyond seven or eight points we can start to feel overwhelmed. My to-do list had close to 160 entries. Unless I created a condensed version my brain would go into gridlock at the mere sight of it. My pared back lockdown to-do list looked something like this:

Working with Others at Home over Lockdown

Working throughout lockdown can be really tough, particularly for those with children and/or a partner or housemate who might be trying to work from home as well. Unless we live alone we also have to cope with more distractions, more noise, and the fact it’s harder to find quiet time. This means developing mental and emotional resilience, coping mechanisms, and learning to be more tolerant or considerate of others.

As somebody with super sensitive hearing I’ve always found it difficult to concentrate when there’s background noise. I live on a fairly dense road and throughout lockdown the warmer weather has brought with it a greater level of activity and recreation in the surrounding homes and streets. To help deal with that I’ve been scheduling the more crucial tasks to the earliest part of the day and the less demanding tasks from mid-afternoon onwards. During the noisiest periods of the day I’ll do some housework or filing.

I am forever thankful for my heat pump/inverter which I installed a few years ago. This means I can close my windows to mitigate outside noise and enjoy cool filtered air in the summer, and warm air in the winter (very cheaply, too). Inverters have come down in price and I would recommend them to anyone (because of their excellent environmental credentials you can also claim back the tax).

Getting up early hasn’t been a problem – my garden blackbird (Hoppy) has perfectly mimicked my neighbour’s telephone ringtone. I now get a ‘phone call’ at 4.30am and every few minutes thereafter. The lack of ambient noise and traffic during the early part of lockdown seems to have changed how and when the birds sing.

I don’t have a family to manage and I have the utmost admiration for businesspeople who do, and who are able to juggle so much. I do however have a partner with a very demanding managerial job, and staying out of each other’s way is part of the deal. I pass him some lunch somewhere in the day, then we meet up for a short after-dinner walk. Strange as it sounds, we have to discipline ourselves to stay in touch. It’s all too easy to end up like ships passing in the night given that our workspaces are at opposite ends of the house. Home working is likely to remain in place for many, if not for the foreseeable future in some industries.

In a small or average sized dwelling it isn’t easy to find an extra ‘office area’ for a housemate who is now working from home. Usually it means carving out an area in a bedroom or living room and accepting the disruption which might come with it. After all, the reason for doing this is to help them stay safe. In my home this meant re-deploying the dining room - a place where I previously held client meetings and consultations. It was a quiet retreat, with better noise proofing than the rest of the house. I now spend all of my time in my small upstairs office and a measure of jealousy has crept in. Seeing the dining room peppered with laptops, files, and piles of paper every time I walk into the kitchen is something I’ve had to get used to. Lockdown means our homes may not be as tidy as they once were. This in itself is a good reason why our own little corner needs to be as refined as possible, and was the driving force for my office tidy up.

Building Knowledge, Perspective and Interests

The new changes brought momentum to a desire for some new technology. After all, video calls are now all but essential - and I wanted to improve mine as they became more client facing. This tweaked my interest in movie making, something I’ve been wanting to learn for years. I spent several weeks sitting late into the night learning the basics of how to make a vlog or short tutorial. I still haven’t actually done one, but I no longer have any excuse for not even trying.

More importantly, lockdown has made many of us consider not just our futures, but where we are in the present. Self-examination often accompanies times of crisis or risk – and it can be a very good thing. In the midst of getting through each working day it’s easy to forget ourselves and how we feel about our lives. This can bring about radical change (such as a decision to leave our occupation entirely). Or it can bring about a long overdue shift in mindset.

In my long and belated researching of ‘video’ I delved more deeply into the wonders of YouTube and the fact that we can learn pretty much everything about anything there. I also learnt that many of the thoughts I’d built up in my mind over the years were simply wrong, and based on assumptions. What do I mean by that? Well, we often judge ourselves against our perception of others. And very often it is just that - a wonky perception. I can be prone to perfectionism (often the curse of children who had overly critical parents or siblings) and whilst that can drive us to excel it can also prevent us from moving forward productively and efficiently. We can become so preoccupied with every small detail of a project, that the project never actually gets off the ground.

It’s easy to look at YouTube videos and examine the workspaces of filmmakers, vloggers, and photographers. Psychology is such that we’ll often dwell on our perception of the glamorous 0.01%. As a result of this targeted scrutiny we might assume that we should have huge studios, lots of top end equipment, and glamorous lives. And some photographers and film makers do, though they’re in a very small minority. Most of the creatives I know and admire work from a fairly modest office, and they work long hours. Their office might be a corner of their studio, or a curtained area of their bedroom, or a zoned part of the living room. Where they tend to differ from most is the fact they’ve put themselves out there, without being held back too much with worries of how others might see them and judge them. Another important point is that a glamorous workspace, studio and presence doesn’t necessarily equate into profit, once the books are balanced at the end of the year.

On top of that we might feel nervous about trying something new. Some of the YouTubers I’ve been listening to have happily admitted that their first hundred attempts at videos were dire. But they published their work anyway, and their efforts were well received despite being rough around the edges. After all, it’s unrealistic to think we’ll be fantastic at something from day one! Others said it took them five years to even pluck up the courage to post a basic vlog (perfectionism again). Without exception, they realised that procrastination achieves nothing and simply reinforces self-doubt. From the moment we bite the bullet and “do it” life suddenly seems to become much easier. The YouTubers with the biggest audiences and best incomes tend to be those who offer well targeted content – not necessarily those with perfectly presented videos, expensive equipment, or large studios.

If we have experience in our field, and if we talk for as little as 5 or 10 minutes, then there’ll be someone who will find value in what we have said. Don’t be afraid to share your working experiences, or your feelings about running a business. Even the best-known or best decorated photographers and filmmakers will be open about the realities of life when asked. I spent a few years as a prolific blogger, educator and a brand ambassador for a very well-known camera manufacturer. An awful lot of people felt that my life was glamorous, even easy. That isn’t to say we don’t enjoy what we do, it’s just that the higher we climb the ladder the more pressure we’ll have to deal with. I felt too many people wanted a piece of me, and usually for free. After burning out I took a couple of years to go back to being a simple working photographer. I felt I’d lost sight of the things I wanted and valued.

My Photography Office Setup

Back to my office - my setup is simple and functional. I’m lucky in that I have a dedicated office. It’s very small, and here in the UK most homes have a ‘baby room’ which usually ends up being a study or storeroom. I think my office is approximately 9 ½ feet across and narrows to about 4 ½ feet due to the cavernous (and incredibly useful) built-in cupboard which sits over the stairs. Careful decisions about storage mean that there is now a place for everything. I like to keep paper copies of most things, within easy reach. The office is now tidy enough that I don’t feel glum when I walk into it each morning.

My Photography Office Must Have Items (I’m not affiliated with any of these suppliers):

• Storage boxes. I’m not a fan of piles of papers, open racks or ornaments on shelves. Things like that become dust magnets and I prefer that all of my bits and pieces have their own dedicated box. The boxes on my shelves are from The Holding Company

• A wire mini drawer unit. I like to be able to find items quickly, such as client details, orders, bills and so forth. The wire drawer unit was bought from Amazon

• Good quality speakers - I’m often watching videos, listening to podcasts, or simply playing my favourite music channels. I appreciate good sound and as far as office systems go I absolutely love the iconic Edifier ‘snails’. The sound from these things is legendary

• Portable Bluetooth speakers -If I’m working somewhere else in the house, or travelling, a high-quality Bluetooth speaker is essential. Having worked my way through so many Bluetooth speakers over the years the only ones which I’ve really liked are my Bose Revolve and Bose Soundlink Micro speakers. They can be paired in stereo mode via the Bose app (unfortunately there’s no Windows version)

• A good quality WebCam - I work from a desktop PC when I’m in my office, which means I need a separate WebCam for video calls. After a lot of research I chose the Logitech Streamcam which is great quality and offers 60fps. I’ve no interest in a 4K WebCam because a 4K workflow would be overkill

• Lighting for video calls - Skype and Zoom is a necessity now and we may even find ourselves recording lessons and videos for our business and students. Key to quality is lighting. We can’t all work next to a large window and often these tasks take place in the evening. Getting some light onto our faces crucial, and it doesn’t have to be big or expensive. But it does need to fit our space and our tolerance levels. You might have spotted my Westcott Ice Light 2 in the pictures. The other light I find invaluable is my Falconeyes F7

• Microphone - As with lighting, having good sound on a video call makes us appear much more professional. Some web cams have quite decent microphones built in, and my Logitech Streamcam is reasonably good in that regard. However a dedicated microphone is better. I use either my H1N or my Rode lavalier mic

• Pictures - Having something soothing or stimulating on the walls is a given for any creative workspace. The problem with me is that I get bored of things fairly quickly. To get around this I’ve invested in a pin board so I can print out photographs and swap them around periodically. The pin board has a painted frame in a similar style to those I sell to my clients. My pin board is from The Framed Noticeboard Company

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

View fullsize

My IT choices are detailed in this post: Choosing Computers for my Photography Business

Before I rebuilt (and pared back) my website, there were a number of blog posts describing the many and varied Goodwood Breakfast Club events. In fact a decade ago I rarely missed my early Sunday mornings at the motor circuit on the South Downs near Chichester. It was a chance to relax, meet friends, and display my car. As the years have rolled on free time seemed to evaporate and I realised I hadn’t been to the Breakfast Club for over three years. I didn’t take my car this time, she’s remained unused in the garage for the last six or seven years. I keep promising to drive her but somehow I also keep forgetting. No matter how large the object, if you don’t actually see it then it can be very easy to forget it even exists.

We enjoyed glorious summer weather for Goodwood Breakfast Club Classic Car Sunday. This is always a popular event, although without the heaving crowds we would normally see on Supercar Sunday. I love seeing the classics, I find them so much more interesting than their modern iterations. There were classic cars from every marque, from the unbelievably expensive to the more affordable. And all are loved and cherished by their owners. Despite the grandeur on display, my undisputed favourite with a little grey convertible Austin with a red interior - it’s the cutest thing I’ve ever seen. My second favourite was a black Ferrari Dino (no change there, it’s the one I hanker after).

As you might expect virtually everybody had a camera of some sort with them. You don’t need costly or high-tech equipment for an event like this. Photographs in these situations are about composition, and timing. Despite the fact I’m a portrait photographer by trade, I would soon go round the bend if I only ever photographed people. I need variety in my life. By always having a camera in my pocket or in my handbag I never miss opportunities which might unfold. That can be the chance to practice something useful such as composition or storytelling. Or it may be an opportunity to capture a pleasing landscape or coastal scene. In fact this is the way I’ve gained many of my competition winners over the last decade. Assuming you’re not faced with fast action or low light levels then basic equipment is absolutely fine.

tip of the day:

Think about your viewpoint - this means considering our height in relation to the height of our primary subjects. Some cars are quite low-slung and if we photograph them from a full standing position the result can be unflattering

Our subjects are the cars but we also have secondary subjects in the form of a great many human beings. These are in turn layered onto an interesting landscape. In other words, we have quite a lot to work with. But we do have constraints, in that people will be cutting back and forth across our field of view. This is where timing is important - we can’t get rid of the people, nor should we want to. But we can wait until the contents of our photograph are balanced. People visit these shows to admire the cars - so it makes sense that we would take pictures of them doing just that. This is one place where you’ll see the unspoken code of conduct which exists between car owners and observers - no touching. The crowds at Goodwood are car enthusiasts rather than simply passing members of the public.

On a personal outing like this I never want to feel that I’m working, so I just use a little pocket sized compact camera. In this case it’s my Panasonic LX100ii. I love this little camera, despite its size the Leica lens is impressive and the functionality is superb. Whenever I go somewhere interesting I find myself reaching for this over and above my much more expensive pieces of equipment. I owned its predecessor but I’m appreciating the small improvements offered by the Mkii.

Did I just say ‘backups‘? It’s a word you’re going to hear quite a lot in this article. It’s amazing how many business owners fail to even consider how they’ll manage if they have an IT failure. It should be a given that anyone operating a business will have backups of all their equipment, not just cameras and lenses. At the bare minimum one level of backup is mandatory. However if one of those items goes wrong you no longer have a backup whilst it’s being fixed. Cameras and lenses can be borrowed or hired easily – your IT system, not so. Your secondary/backup business machines certainly don’t need to be identical to your primary machine. They just need to fit your immediate needs if the main computer fails. Depending on how you’ve set up your business, two or three backups will be better still.

Desktop vs Laptop Computers for your Photography Business

Your starting point might revolve around whether your primary machine should be a desktop computer or a laptop. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. My choice is to have a powerful desktop machine in my office and laptops for everything else. It’s possible to build a desktop to a much higher specification than a laptop for significantly less outlay. Assuming you choose your specification wisely you’ll then have the ability to easily upgrade parts such as memory (RAM) and storage capability as time goes on. Because desktop computers are larger, with better airflow, and because they’re not moved around very often, they tend to last longer.

A laptop as a primary business machine can work perfectly well and you can run a top spec monitor or two from it (assuming your laptop’s power supply and GPU allow for this). However laptops in general don’t last as long as desktop machines, mostly because their parts are much smaller and exposed to higher heat levels over time. A laptop is also being moved more frequently and is more prone to bumps which can upset or even damage internal components. Then there is storage - you can have multiple hard drives in your desktop computer but only one or two in your laptop.

Clearly the main advantage of a laptop as your main business machine is portability, space-saving, and the fact it can do double duty for presentations, seminars and client viewing sessions. In which case, you can probably get by with having one less backup computer overall. Since my main business machine is a desktop computer it’s necessary that I have a laptop for the client-side tasks I’ve just mentioned. This also forces me into a third level of backup, should the laptop for client presentations go wrong. This does happen, in fact it’s happened to me more than once. And it always happens on the day when an important customer has just arrived for their viewing and ordering session. That BSOD is embarrassing to say the least. It’s even more embarrassing if you don’t have another laptop you can grab and hook up within moments.

Which Specification should I Choose for my Photography Business Computers?

This is always a difficult one to answer, particularly as our needs can change over time. But the starting point is always to assess exactly what you intend to do on that computer, and how you think your needs might evolve going forward. I have a tendency to over specify my main machine. After all, it’s an expensive purchase and I would expect it to last a number of years.

If you’re the kind of photographer who often comes home from a session with a few hundred high resolution files then you’re going to need a reasonably fast machine. It’s likely you’ll be running more than one application at the same time and you may even undertake some video editing as well. Some tasks rely more on the processor (CPU), others will involve your graphics card (GPU) and some tasks will be heavily memory (RAM) dependent.

If you need to work with several applications open at once, then RAM becomes the key determiner. As is the case if you work with a number of complex layers in Photoshop. For that reason I would say that 16Gig RAM would be the minimum I would advise (and I’d like the option to upgrade the memory later on - always check with the manufacturer of your computer as to the maximum RAM the motherboard can accept).

Storage speed and size is also a key consideration. It’s recommended that we have the operating system on its own separate solid-state drive where possible. In my main desktop machine my operating system sits on a 512Gig Samsung 970 EVO, and my applications are on a second similar SSD. My data (documents and photographs) are then arranged across three 2TB Firecuda HDDs. As the data drives fill up they can simply be unbolted, archived, and replaced with a fresh drive. I do mean fresh drives - simply lifting the data onto an external drive for archiving and then re-using the same drive for the following year’s work increases your risk of a drive failure. The importance of solid-state drives should never be underestimated - this makes accessing information so much faster and is the single biggest improvement you can make to an ageing computer. Thankfully SSDs are now becoming much more affordable.

Do I need the most powerful CPU for Photo Editing?

Well, that depends. If you’re also doing masses of video editing, 3-D rendering, and gaming then your CPU requirements will be much more stringent. But for most photographers the latest all singing processor is probably overkill. In fact the bottlenecks most photographers are likely to see are more likely to lie with memory (RAM) and drive speeds rather than CPU utilization.

Whilst video editing benefits from more cores, Adobe Lightroom behaves a little differently. Many of the processes in Lightroom are linear - they happen sequentially rather than all at once. A good example would be importing and moving from image to image, HDR, or making panoramas. These events rely more on the speed of a single core (rather than a processor with more cores but a lower maximum frequency). More complex filters and exporting on the other hand will involve all of your cores. I’m more than happy to run Lightroom on an i5 machine with a decent clock speed, but an i7 of the same generation or newer is a better choice for video work.

There’s quite a big difference between processors made for desktop computers and those made for laptops. If you’re looking for ultra performance then a desktop system is the way to go - you’ll also have more options and fewer thermal issues. Laptop CPUs with a ‘U’ designation are designed to be energy efficient and will be a bit slower than a laptop CPU with an ‘H’ designation. The first number in the model description will tell you which series the processor belongs to and hence how modern it is.

If you’re equipping a laptop, an ultra fast processor could be something of a double edged sword at times. That’s because laptops are getting smaller and thinner so there isn’t a lot of space inside them for good airflow. Powerful processors generate heat - the more powerful the processor, the more heat it gives off. When the temperature goes up, the fans kick in (often loudly) and your laptop may even shut down entirely if cooling becomes problematic.

Most of the well specified laptops I’ve seen and used of late have thermal problems or quirks, at least before some important tweaks have been made. In an attempt to mitigate this the manufacturers will usually ‘throttle’ the performance of the more powerful laptop CPUs. This means you’re not getting the processing speeds you’ve paid for. It also means your fans will kick in sooner and louder, which can be incredibly annoying. For this reason a less powerful processor can result in better performance in a laptop at times. This is because it will have slightly lower power requirements, it doesn’t run as hot, and the manufacturer of your laptop won’t have applied as much throttling. For that reason alone many buyers prefer an i5 to an i7 in laptops – the performance can be smoother and ultimately more stable as a result. On paper the performance difference between i5 and i7 (of the same generation) through benchmarking, can be from 9-20%, depending on the activity. But once those processors are under load, inside the small chassis of a laptop, the performance advantage can vanish, and the more powerful chip can start to fall behind as thermal throttling kicks in. Can anything be done to reduce thermal problems and throttling - to get the best from the more beefy chips? Read on …..

Is it Possible to Reduce Heat Output in a Laptop?

At this point you may be wondering if there is a way in which you can extract that extra performance from your i7 chip, or if you’re doomed to lower performance, fan noise and throttling. There are a couple of things you can do, if you’re fairly IT confident. The first recommendation I would make is to ensure your fans are free from dust. In terms of tweaks the first thing I would then suggest (and I do this with all my laptops where possible) is to undervolt the CPU (and preferably the GPU as well). Currently the best software for achieving this is either XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility) or Throttlestop. There are some great tutorials online. Do bear in mind that this applies to chips more recent than third-generation. Undervolting almost always offers an advantage when you perform before and after benchmarks and temperature checks.

If you’re still suffering from heat problems then re-pasting the CPU and GPU might be the next thing you’ve considered. In my experience sometimes this makes a difference and sometimes it doesn’t. I’d be more inclined to suggest that you first take a look at your power management settings within your operating system - and also the options your computer manufacturer might offer you in their own proprietary utilities for fan control. Simple tweaks can include clicking on the battery icon on the bottom task bar in Windows and leaning the battery performance slider towards ‘better battery’ when on battery power, and setting the slider in the middle when your laptop is plugged in. Delving further into the settings within your Windows power plan (accessed via Settings) can be helpful. Setting the cooling policy to ‘passive’ rather than ‘active’ can help to keep your fans quiet, as can disabling turbo boost by simply setting your ‘maximum processor state’ from 100% to 99%. This won’t affect performance in any noticeable way, but if you’re a gamer in your spare time you may want to temporarily switch to a high-performance power plan.

Disabling unwanted settings within Windows can also reduce background CPU utilisation. In fact any process which is thrashing the CPU behind the scenes will cause increased heat and fan noise. This can be as simple as Windows downloading an update, your antivirus software doing a scan, or else a process or service which is misbehaving and can be stopped or disabled.

And don’t put your laptop on your lap.

I have a 6 core i7 in my main desktop machine, because in a spacious well cooled environment I’m able to make the best of its capabilities - it’s not going to throttle. I also have a number of fans and a watercooled system. But I chose the i5 chip for two of my three laptops for the reasons already described.

Suffice it to say that all of this year’s i5 and i7 processors are impressive. It’s also true that a recent i5 processor is likely to be better than the previous year’s i7. This mostly comes down to the number of cores and the clock speeds. A quad core processor with a half decent clock speed is ideal for photo-editing – you don’t need to overspend. I still have my 2013 Sony VAIO laptop with its third generation i7, recently fitted 1TB Samsung Evo 860 Pro SSD, and 16 Gig DDR3 RAM and it absolutely flies. However for intensive video editing and rendering a higher core count becomes much more important.

Do I need a Powerful Graphics Processor?

My first question would be, do you do a lot of gaming? Because if you do, my answer would be yes – it’s essential. Your graphics processor needs even more consideration if you’re doing CAD, 3-D modelling etc. But if I’m just running Photoshop and Lightroom then you may not even need a dedicated (separate) GPU at all - an integrated (onboard) GPU such as a UHD 620 or MX150 would be just fine. Photoshop does use the GPU for some filters, but it really comes down to speed when rendering. Two of my laptops have the UHD 620, the other has an RTX2070, and my main desktop machine (three years old) has a GTX 1070 Strix.

A high-end GPU is unnecessary for photo-editing tasks (notwithstanding a need for hooking up high-resolution monitors). However, complex effects and video-editing benefits from a decent GPU, the starting point in my opinion being a GTX 1050 (I’m not referencing the AMD models as I’m not familiar enough with them). This is where VRAM becomes important (that’s the memory which is built into the graphics card itself). Video playback on a 4K monitor requires some GPU beef too.

Do I need a 4K Monitor for Photo Editing?

No, of course you don’t. What you need and what you want might be different things. A good quality, well calibrated monitor is a necessity for photo editing and that’s more important than resolution. There’s no doubt that you’ll see more detail on a large 4K display vs a standard FHD panel. That may be nice to have, but it’s not without caveats. Firstly, not every application scales as well as it should and the result of that is some of the elements on the screen will be small and hard to see at times. This is particularly relevant when it comes to the smaller displays, such as those on laptops. Another thing to bear in mind is a 4K display is power hungry, and if you hook it up to your computer you’ll need a decent GPU (graphics card) to get the best from it. Another observation is that the 4K displays on my laptops do cause overall performance to be slightly slower in graphical programmes. This is particularly noticeable when moving from image to image in Adobe Lightroom. Switching the resolution down to 1080p gives an obvious speed improvement for crucial tasks. You then have the option to switch back to 4K when display quality is more important than speed.

In my office my desktop computer is hooked up to a Dell Ultrasharp 27” Quad HD panel. This is sometimes referred to as a ‘1440’ display (a Full HD display will be termed ‘1080’). In my view this strikes a really nice balance between excellent quality and manageable scaling (I run it at 125%). My Microsoft Surface Pro 6 has a 3K display and it’s absolutely beautiful. Bear in mind that any high-resolution display is going to somewhat reduce battery life on your laptop.

Computers & Laptops for Photographers - Summary

It goes without saying that starting with a good motherboard makes sense – that’s where your flexibility and upgradeability lies.

For photo editing work in programs such as Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom you don’t need high-end processors or fancy graphics cards. A quad core processor with a reasonable clock speed is more than enough. On-board graphics is also perfectly fine, although a mid-range GPU like a GTX 1050 can speed up some tasks. RAM and storage access speeds are important. For that reason I’d recommend a minimum of 16Gig RAM (upgradable if possible) and your operating system on a solid-state drive.

Most video editing will benefit from a GPU such as a GTX 1050 and above (8Gig VRAM gives you plenty of headroom to prevent stuttering and freezing during playback, but 4Gig VRAM should suffice). It’s worth remembering that different video editing software packages will utilize the CPU (processor) in different ways. For example, Adobe Premiere uses the CPU entirely before a GPU-related task comes into play. And some software applications prefer Quadro cards to GTX cards. For video editing, CPU capability is a key consideration and this is where the number of cores becomes more important than it would for photo-editing. A competent video editing system might consist of a fast i7 CPU, a minimum of 32Gig of RAM, and a GTX 1070 video card. A full-time video editing studio will have needs (and budgets) far in excess of that.

Once again, laptop specifications can be quite different to desktop specifications because of size and thermal constraints. For ultimate output, a desktop offers the most options and longevity.

My Computer Ecosystem for Professional Photo Editing – Layers of Resilience

Key to my business is a powerful desktop computer which lives upstairs in my office - comprising 64Gig RAM, GTX 1070 Strix GPU, several solid-state and hybrid drives and a 27 inch QHD Dell Ultra sharp monitor. I had this custom built by Chillblast three years ago, and it’s a joy to work on.

Then, a first level backup machine. This laptop has to be capable enough for me to run my entire business from it should I have an issue with my primary computer. This is a Gigabyte Aero 15-X9. This laptop has a UHD (4K) display, an i7 8750H CPU, 32 Gig DDR4 RAM, RTX 2070 MaxQ GPU, 1TB SSD. It’s thin, fast, and can run hot. So the thermal tweaks I’ve mentioned already in this article are key. Note the 4k panel is matte, which is a rarity in laptops of that resolution.

Then comes my third computer (second backup). I chose the recently released Lenovo Thinkpad L390 Yoga: i5-8265U, 512Gig SSD, 16 Gig RAM, Intel UHD 620 graphics. I can scrimp on the GPU side of things and I can make a saving on the screen resolution since it’s FHD (it has a 13.3” screen - a higher resolution can be overkill). It’s likely I’ll throw this one into my bag if I’m going away on business.

The great thing about this little machine is that the parts aren’t soldered in place, as they usually are on the smaller laptops and ultrabooks (especially the 2 in 1 models). Hence I can repair it and replace bits and pieces when I want to upgrade. Best of all the motherboard will accept 32 Gig of RAM – a rarity in machines of this size and type. It also has a great port selection and can be folded back on itself into a tent position for viewing movies or for showing images or documents to clients. It can also be folded back fully to turn it into a fancy tablet. It comes with the excellent Lenovo pen for the artistically inclined.

Lastly there is a third laptop. That means I have a laptop as a backup to my main business machine and then two others as backups to that. I have had a situation (on two occasions) when two fairly new laptops have developed concurrent problems leaving me with nothing for client viewings and mobile productivity. This doesn’t happen very often, and usually at least one of those machines can be sorted out at the end of the day after work. But you’re stuffed when it does happen. That’s what prompted me to buy a third. There are so many options now that I felt it would be useful to have something even lighter and even more portable.

I chose the Microsoft Surface Pro 6 when it was on offer over the Easter weekend. It has an i5 processor, 3K display, 256Gig SSD, 8 Gig RAM and it came bundled with the detachable keyboard. It’s an amazingly useful little computer and thanks to its fanless design it’s absolutely silent. With a screen size of 12.3” I can carry it in most of my handbags and it’s pretty fast. The storage can be expanded by inserting a fast micro SSD card and leaving that in situ. Going up another level to a slightly larger SSD involved a price hike of several hundred pounds which I wasn’t prepared to consider. Microsoft can do that, because these machines have glued on parts and they are not upgradable by their owners. This is also one of the reasons why you’ll never hear me mention the word ‘Apple’.

One encumbrance with my little Surface Pro is the fact that the only ports it offers is one standard USB 3.0 and a micro display port. As such, I did need to invest in some dongles and adapters - and I have to make sure I don’t forget them when I’m on the road. I’m very surprised Microsoft couldn’t at least have included a USB-C port.

Incidentally, the speakers on laptop computers usually aren’t great. A quick and fun way to get great sound while still remaining portable is to invest in a good quality compact Bluetooth speaker. After spending weeks doing research I decided to invest in the Bose Revolve and the Bose Micro. Through using the Bose app these can be paired for stereo sound, and the quality is fantastic. In fact the Revolve is enough to fill a good sized room and is ideal for client presentations. At home, I’ll simply pull up my favourite music on a device then I’ll carry just the speaker around the house with me if I’m doing a bit of housework or DIY.

So that’s my computing rationale fully explained. If your interests lie with cameras and lenses there are some reviews here in the Personal section. I’ve also written an article on my dedicated animal portraiture website about my most used equipment for pet and wildlife photography.

I love all kinds of re-enactments, be they mediaeval or relatively modern. Authenticity is everything and the historical groups I’ve encountered do that very well indeed. Many of the Amberley events surround technology, particularly vehicles. Depending on the theme there might be days for steam locomotives, Land Rovers, military vehicles, vintage motorcycles, vintage cars and in fact anything else which represents a bygone era.

It’s unsurprising that virtually every visitor to these events will have a camera with them. It would be scandalous not to. In fact I always have a camera on me, pretty much wherever I go. I’ll keep a compact camera in my handbag and that’s how the majority of my recreational photographs have been captured. For that reason I favour mirrorless photography equipment for both my professional and personal life. These Amberley Museum event photographs may look controlled, but they’re not. I’m just walking around taking the snaps like any other tourist. But because I’m a professional portrait photographer I do have the advantage of knowing where to place myself to get a good angle, decent light, and an appropriate background. That’s what environmental portraiture is all about, and I do a great deal of it when it comes to family photography and even modern business photography.

It’s lovely when visitors to events show their pictures on social media or on a personal web page. It’s a great way to highlight important places - places which deserve a bit of promotion. Incidentally, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with taking lots of pictures at events like this and publishing them as I’ve just described. Participants fully expect to be photographed and in the age we live in they understand those photographs will likely appear on social media. The same applies to members of the public who attend events and gatherings – we’ll end up in someone’s photos. If we don’t like it, we really need to stay at home.

Lastly, you own the copyright to every picture you take (the subject of the photograph has no claim on your output). Permission of subjects isn’t required for any usage which would be described as personal, artistic, or newsworthy. Incidentally GDRP doesn’t affect the use of photography in this way, particularly since these photographs don’t contain the kind of data which would fall under those provisions.