Analyzing a "This Type of Camera Versus That" Discussion

 

I frequently see posts on various forums, discussing and sometimes arguing the relative merits of different types of cameras. Some people become very defensive about their favorites. It's interesting. It's even more interesting when the discussion stays civil, and some good points are brought out.

 

Even then, these discussions tend to become very long-winded, so I don't read a lot of them. For example, I'm reading a nice one, started by member tom.w.bn on Rangefinder Forum.

 

(Click Here) to read the discussion.

 

Now, my analysis of this particular discussion is that it has remained largely civil, at least in the first two of five pages I've read; I probably won't read the rest. I think the main points that interest me have been made in the first two pages. Here are the most important parts from my perspective:

 

1. When thinking about what type(s) of camera are best for you, it's important to ask where you get the majority of enjoyment from photography. Is it in the act of taking pictures, the satisfaction of seeing a wonderful shot achieved and in print? A combination? Perhaps the more rare satisfaction of seeing a perfectly-achieved image made in more challenging circumstances? This should be a controlling factor in deciding what camera style may be best for you.
2. One response by YYV_146 makes a very interesting point in comparing using a rangefinder camera versus a mirrorless camera with electronic viewfinder (EVF). The point is that looking through an optical rangefinder gives you a very accurate view of the world you're photographing, while looking through an EVF, which is an electronic representation directly from the camera sensor, gives you an accurate view of what the final image will look like. Two very different things.

For me, the act of taking photographs brings much more enjoyment than reviewing them, and especially more than post-processing them. I do love to see a perfect image, and I do value a great image from myself more if I know that it was particularly challenging to achieve. That said, I don't want it to be so challenging that I never get a good shot.

In different situations, different things matter to me. If I'm trying to document something, or have a high chance of getting a shot someone else will care about, I hedge my bets. For example, in shooting a musical act that I don't see often (e.g. rare opportunity) in low light, I'll reach for my Nikon D700. If it's a band I do see often, and I want to have more fun shooting, I'll perhaps grab my Leica M4-2 film rangefinder and load up some high speed film. This is part of the reason that I have not consolidated or focused on only one camera system.

 

So, which part of the photographic process brings you the most enjoyment? How does that affect which camera(s) you choose? I'm interested to hear.

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

Sacrilege! The M9 is Better Than the New M (240)?

 

Forest Art, by Reed A. George

Leica M9, Carl Zeiss Sonnar 50mm f1.5 Lens

 

Always on the lookout for new blogs, and especially those focused on Leica, I recently came across Prosophos.

 

Peter, the blog's host, is of the opinion that the image quality from Leica's CCD cameras, specifically the M9, is better than the new CMOS sensor in the M240. I am not necessarily of the same mind, but I do love my M9, and for very different reasons than I love my CMOS-based Nikon D700, for example.

 

(Click Here) to get started reading Peter's thoughts on the Leica CCD vs. CMOS topic.

 

Better and worse are very absolute terms. In art, absolute terms can be dangerous. To be fair, Peter is careful not to use them too much in his discussions.

 

I don't necessarily think either the M9 or M240 are better than each other. If you're shooting in the dark, or need to shoot video, the M240 is better. If you like the look of CCD images without AA filters, the M9 is better. If you're like me and still feel the weight of the investment you've made in the M9, guess which one is better?

 

One more thing, which I feel more strongly about, is the touting of all of the new features on the M240. Let's face it, folks, CMOS low light performance and video capability have been around for years now, and in a wide range of cameras, including other full-frame ones. Just not in Leica rangefinders. So, I'm not wowed by those features. And for me, the thought of an add-on electronic viewfinder (EVF) for a Leica rangefinder is just mixing two very different worlds. I'm completely at home with the add on EVF on my Micro 4/3 camera. Not so with the most pure of cameras in my opinion, the Leica rangefinder.

 

What would change my mind about the value of live view and add-on finders for the new M? Well, if I had a collection of R lenses, which can now be adapted and brought back to life, that would be a start. I'm not in that situation.

 

So, as always, different horses for different courses. And to end it positively, I still feel that my M9 is a camera that has no peer - not in my collection or anyone else's.

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

Do I Feel A Renewed Emphasis on Lumix Coming On?

Video Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNSZcTn2Pqo&sns=em

 

The newly-announced Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 certainly has my interest. The features that attract me most are:

 

1. Improved high iso performance, reportedly as good as, or maybe better than the Olympus OM-D, which has been the Micro 4/3 benchmark so far.
2. Focus peaking, to allow you to see when your manual focus setting is correct. Should be great for using legacy lenses with adapters.
3. Built-in electronic viewfinder (EVF) in a very compact body.
4. Silent shutter - I love that my smaller DMC-LX7 makes zero noise when I trip the shutter.

This year, I have been focused on two things - my Leica M9, and using some of the older film camera treasures in my closet. Both have been great fun, and I will continue at least through this year. Last year, I focused mainly on Panasonic and Micro 4/3. I am considering what to do next year. Current possibilities include more emphasis on film, and picking one camera from each of my favorite types (rangefinder, SLR, folder, etc.) and shooting with that set throughout the year. I'm undecided, but really kind of like the second idea. I have a few months to decide.

 

In any case, the DMC-GX7 is a welcome addition to the Lumix family. I will give it some time to see how people like it in real use before thinking about getting one.

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

 

 

Finally! The Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 is Announced and Looks Great!

 

Image Source:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/08/01/panasonic-reveals-lumix-dmc-gx7-enthusiast-mirrorless-camera

 

I have not been using my Micro 4/3 camera system much at all this year. Focusing more on Leica and film cameras, I just have not had the time to use it all. I did invest in a DMC-GX1 for a pittance earlier in the year, and took it along on a trip to Key West, Florida.

 

(Click Here) to see some shots I made with the GX1 on that trip.

 

The GX1 works very, very well in my hands. But, we Panasonic fans have been waiting for a next generation of GX cameras, bringing the sensors up to date with the state of the art, especially as it concerns high iso performance. Well, it's finally here, or at least announced.

 

(Click Here) to read about it on dpreview.com

 

What are the great features? Well, first, the GX7 reportedly has an all-new sensor with improved signal-to-noise performance. This means that it will indeed perform better at high iso settings (low light), with less noise. The maximum iso setting is now 25,600, though I would bet that the maximum useable setting is somewhat lower than that, if you don't want to deal with a lot of sensor noise. We'll see.

 

It also has in-body stabilization, which has been in Olympus cameras for some time, but never in a Lumix Micro 4/3 body. I hope this will work well with my older Micro 4/3 lenses that have stabilization built into the lens.

 

The next GX7 also has a built-in electronic viewfinder (EVF), rather than the accessory finders required for previous GX cameras.

 

Finally, the GX7 provides "focus peaking," which allows you to know when you're in focus when you're using manual focus.

 

These cameras will be in high demand for some time. They'll sell lots of them. I can't wait to see just how good the new sensor is.

 

There's more news from Panasonic as well. They have announced a new Pana-Leica "Nocticron" 42.5mm f1.2 super fast lens. This will be a wonderful portrait lens, taking advantage of the compact Micro 4/3 design, yet with a sufficiently fast maximum aperture to produce shallow depth of field, a common desire in portraiture. More on that later.

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

A Family Tradition - Oseichi Ryori - Japanese New Year's Breakfast

 

Japanese Oseichi Ryori, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

iso 160, f2.2, 1/60 sec.

 
My wife is Japanese. Living in Northern Virginia, we don't get all that many chances to celebrate Japanese culture. One opportunity we take every year is on New Year's morning. We order out traditional Japanese food, oseichi ryori. Now I'm kind of a conservative eater, especially at breakfast. But, I thoroughly enjoy welcoming the new year in with fresh seafood and Japanese sencha (green tea) one day per year.
 
I also always grab a camera and take a shot of this year's selection. That tends to be the DMC-LX5. For these shots, I used iAuto, where the camera sets EVERYTHING for you. Obviously, I also used macro focus. Not bad for complete point and shoot automation.

Japanese Oseichi Ryori, by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

iso 200, f2.2, 1/60 sec.

 

 
 

Ohashi (chop sticks), by Reed A. George

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

iso 80, f2, 1/100 sec.

 

I almost sprung for an upgrade to the LX5 over the holidays - the LX7 was obscenely cheap at less than $300. But, the additional nearly $200 to upgrade the accessory finder from the DMW-LVF1 to DMW-LVF2, necessary with the LX7, was just a little too much. I've got no complaints about the LX5, and the LX7 has a faster (f2) lens, but no advantage in sensor size. So, I held off.

 

Happy 2013!

 

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 

 

 

Sony RX1 Sample Pics

 

Sony RX1

Image Source: http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/48624/sony-cyber-shot-rx1-full-frame-compact-camera-first-sample-pictures

 
The new Sony RX1 is really interesting. A full-frame, 24MP Sony sensor, permanently matched to a non-interchangeable Carl Zeiss Sonnar 35mm f2 lens. Nearly $3,000 price tag. Wow.
 
Pocket Lint has posted a brief introduction, and more importantly, some sample images from this camera, including using it at iso 25,600. Not bad. Not bad at all.
 
(Click Here) to see the post on Pocket Lint.
 
What are my thoughts on this camera? Well, first off, you have to shoot it at arm's length, if you use the LCD to compose. On the positive side, since it's a fixed-lens, fixed focal length, you can use an optical finder mounted in the flash shoe. I don't know how easy it is to set hyperfocal distance on the RX1, but that could be a good solution for street photography. Otherwise, there's an accessory electronic finder. In either case, it really takes away from the nice size and shape of the camera.
 
If I were looking for a smaller back-up to my Leica M9, the RX1 would be interesting. The Leica X2 is as well. The X2 has an APS-C sized sensor, smaller than the full-frame sensor in the RX1. I'm sure the Leica can't do nearly as well at high iso.
 
Right now, my answer to this is the nice little Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5. Not in the same league of image quality, for sure. The LX5 is okay at iso 400, can be used up to 800 or maybe 1600, if you're not going to get hung up on noise. But, that's really pushing it. Otherwise, it's an amazingly well-equipped little camera, and with zoom and focus memory, hyperfocal settings, and silent shutter, it's an awesome street shooter.
 
I think I'll always need an eye-level finder, as opposed to composing on the LCD. I highly prefer an optical finder to electronic view finder (EVF), yet have used the EVF on my Micro 4/3 cameras extensively. With an optical finder, autofocus is a real problem; you don't know what you're focusing on. With either an optical or EVF, these compact cameras become signficantly less compact and streamlined.
 
So, for me, the perfect compact companion to the M9 does not yet exist. The RX1 is close. I probably shouldn't try one. If I found that manual and hyperfocus settings were easy, I may fall in love.
 
In any case, I'm happy to see new cameras that put supreme image quality at the top of their features. Nice job, Sony (and Zeiss).
 
 

Three Years of B&W Images from noizy's Lumix GF-1

 

"I Will Come for You," by noizy on mu-43.com

Image Source: http://500px.com/photo/15016967

 
I still have a Lumix DMC-GF1. When I bought my G3 bodies, I happily sold my trusty G1. I chose to keep the GF1, mainly because I really like the form factor. However, I have not used it since getting the G3s.
 
Member noizy on mu-43.com has shared an awesome selection of monochrome images shot with the GF1 over a three year period.
 
(Click Here) to see noizy's post on mu-43.com.
 
I really like the shape, size, and style of the GF1. However, I always use the accessory electronic viewfinder (EVF), which really breaks all of that in my opinion. I just can't be happy shooting from an LCD. The accessory EVF makes the GF1 really no smaller than the G3, which has the finder integrated. I thought it may be a great back-up body to carry on travel, but since it uses a different battery than the G3, I don't use it for that, either. I don't want to carry yet another charger. I really should sell the GF1.
 
I love it when someone just uses a camera, regardless of what else is out there in terms of new products. This is exactly what noizy has done here.
 
DMC-365.blogspot.com
 
 

Kirk Tuck (of Visual Science Lab) Talks Up The Electronic Viewfinder (EVF)

Image Source:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/05/kirks-take-electronic-viewfinders.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2FZSjz+%28The+Online+Photographer%29

Kirk Tuck has written a piece on The Online Photographer, with some witty-but-practical thoughts about how electronic viewfinders (EVFs) compare and contrast to optical viewfinders (OVFs).

(Click Here) to read Kirk's post on The Online Photographer.

Kirk talks up the following features of EVFs:

1. "Pre-chimping" (this term belongs to Kirk :) ). This means being able to see how the camera's settings and electronics will treat an image BEFORE you shoot it. Not possible with an OVF, it can be achieved with live view on an SLR, but not with the camera to your eye.
2. Focus Peaking - I am not familiar with what Kirk describes, about the camera highlighting items that are in focus in your image. I'm thinking Lumix cameras don't do this? Please comment if you can shed any light on this subject.
3. The ability to quickly check an exposure in the EVF after it's taken, without having to take the camera away from your eye.

I certainly appreciate number 3, even though it makes people think I'm crazy when I've got the camera to my eye reviewing an image, not necessarily pointing it at my subject any more. My wife has said - "Why are you taking pictures of the sidewalk?"

On the downside, Kirk talks about the delay of the EVF making it more difficult to "lead" a moving subject (or at least different from the OVF), having to turn "Gain Up" (something I think is the default setting in Panasonic cameras) to see your subject in a dark setting, such as when you're planning to use studio flash, and the fact that EVFs typically represent an image in higher contrast than the true image, making the quick-check less effective.

On that final point, Kirk suggests that raw shooters can set their jpeg settings to low contrast, so that the image in the EVF more closely approximates what will be in the raw file. Nice tip.

I agree with Kirk on many points here. I love the "gain up" behavior of the Lumix EVF, which allows me to see what's going on in a dark scene by increasing the gain in the EVF (bringing up the light levels). I would add that this also allows visualization of the depth of field, if you're using a lens that closes the aperture down before the shutter is released. This is the case with legacy lenses on adapters. This is a feature that makes EVFs a major advantage. Basically, even though the aperture is closed way down (reducing the light getting to the sensor), the EVF adjusts the gain to brighten the image going to your eye. So, you get enough light to see what's going on, and the lens is closed down, so you can see the true depth of field.

Contrast this to the old depth of field preview in an SLR (which makes the image in the OVF so dark you can't see anything), or the conventional rangefinder camera (which has no provision for depth of field preview).

That said, I still really love to look through an OVF. It just looks more "real." It makes me feel like I'm still there, present in the scene. The EVF doesn't do that.

I know that even though this is a Lumix blog, I've been referring to Fujifilm quite a lot. I bring it up here because I wonder just how well their hybrid viewfinder (which allows you to switch between EVF and OVF) gives the benefits and minimizes the disadvantages of both finders. I imagine the hybrid design is pretty well-covered by Fujifuilm with patent protection, but I'd sure like to see it appear on other cameras (especially Panasonic).

Thanks again, Kirk, for a thought-provoking piece!

DMC-365.blogspot.com

 
DMC-365.blogspot.com