Fate It Seems.........Is A Friend

So frustrated by my searching and seeing the bag prices going ever up, still with little idea if I am even on the right track, I emailed the best source for Domke Bags in Australia (Greg Smith at Photovideo Accessories), the company I have bought probably 8-10 bags off over the years (all except the very first and last Domkes actually).

I requested “anything like an F802 only taller and bigger”. maybe an F804, F832, F833, F812, J??? in that order, not expecting to have any luck.

“They are discontinued (804’s), but I have a single black one out the back” came the reply.

I am guessing the front pockets are the same as the F802, which makes the bag a couple of inches taller, as advertised. The optional base board is the same as the one for the F1x “Little bit bigger” bag, so I am expecting an F802 satchel, with the footprint of an F2 bag +1” all round.

It was full priced (not overpriced like some, just original ticket!). The F802’s are a very tempting $135au, but achieve little. This one is $279au, which to be honest is the outer limit I was expecting to pay for a bag, but after looking around, not too bad at all (Bumblebee was $200+ and not built like this).

Dimensions are noticeably bigger, especially in depth;

F802

36.83 x 7.62  x 30.48 cm

F804

38.1 x 16.51 x 31.75 cm

Under $300 for a bag I will likely have for the rest of my career? Seems reasonable.

Have I bought the wrong thing, have I let fate pull me along by the nose?

It has no padding, is a simple, old school design and big, really big.

Padding is fixed by using the good old Tenba insert, possibly even two! One will be too small to fill it, but that is also fine. I have other things to add in. The bag is also tall enough for me to line the bottom of with something soft like a thick scarf, rain jacket etc. Things like that add padding and come in handy occassionally. I may be able to source another insert if needed, but to be honest, I only need a little “shape” to make it work and I actually like some void space.

The added internal volume means I do not have to (but still can) bother with side packs, which make the F802 longer, more cumbersome. I know the big lens and camera will fit fine, the inner sleeve will take any laptop and the front pockets will handle the rest (The bag can apparently take 11x14” print boxes). I should even be able to take my 300mm on camera, which is a bonus I was not expecting. If I want to fill a single large bag with cables etc, this may also be it.

The other very real factor is, empty space does not weigh anything. A big bag with un-used space weighs much the same as a smaller one fully stuffed. The difference in work dynamic though is huge.

I know and trust the design, so no issue there. I am so used to the F802’s now, so this will be the same only different. Habits formed are life savers when you are in a hurry. I literally have a different place for my phone, keys, cards, batteries etc. in every bag, which is really not helpful when you are tired and in a hurry.

Black is fine. I dislike the yellow fading the straps can take on, but they can be re-dyed and the strap even replaced. That fading is also a sign of a bag well used and after 30+ years, my old F2 is still looking reasonable.

My only real issue is I now have a surplus of bags. The new Crumpler will be used as my school kit bag, the Filson and Porter may be cycled with it, but the 802? Probably my big event bag or even an alternate for the paper. Holding true to the thinking above, I should really just use the two Domke bags to keep things consistent.

At the end of the day, all of my bags past and present probably total the value of my dearest camera body. This is similar to buying a top end video camera then scrimping on mics. They need each other, simple as that and you are more likely to curse a too-small or uncomfotable bag, than your camera.

Two Jobs, Two Hats, Two Bags

So, in a couple of weeks, I start a second photographic job, working for the local news paper “The Examiner”.

“The Ex” as it is often called, has a very long and illustrious history, a history that it earned through good old fashioned graft with integrity.

News papers these days are stuggling to stay relevant, but like retailers, if they stick to what they do well, then enough will stay strong until things “settle”, and there is always room for at least one representative in this space.

The work will be similar to my school job, which is still my priority. It will be diverse, requiring adaptablility and creativity in equal measure and like any job, there will be an adjustment period.

The “shape” of the work however, will be quite different.

At the school, quantity is accepted, detail is supplied by them and even attention to editing is done for me. I can also indulge my creative tastes as long as I get the shots that are mandatory.

For the paper, captioning and relevance is key. An image without an accurate caption or connection to a story angle is effectively unusable, no matter how good it may be. I will be required to take more set-up images, something that would have horrified me a few years ago, but has lately become second nature.

Growth, adjustment, flexibility, humility and an open mind will be needed.

To smooth my road, I have decided to run two kits, each complete and (almost) exclusive of each job. The idea is to get into reliable, separate habits in each dynamic, without having to switch gear or share a single kit that will almost always need to be adjusted for different jobs. The last thing I want is to carry around too much or worse, leave something behind.

With the school I basically pick my kit, then choose my bag. No real harm is done if I miss something other than a mask, batteries, ID or memory cards, which I always have backups of in a little first packed emergency pack. For other jobs I tend to over pack, ready for anything. With two very different styles of work needed, I think it wise to work less reactively.

*

The news paper kit will be a “pro” kit, covering my maximum capabilities with minimum fuss.

EM1x mated to the 40-150 Pro with optional 1.4x TC. This gives me my best stills performance, good run and gun long lens video and weather sealing/ruggedness to a very high level.

A G9 with the 8-18 Leica. This will be my premium video camera, but will also be doing genuine dual duty with its recently discovered superior stills quality. The 8-18 will perform better on a Pana, will provide a solid 16-95 equiv range in FHD video and is also weather sealed. To me, the G9’s seem to be just a hair below the EM1x in build and features, about equal in image quality and an equally slight notch above the EM1 Mk2’s in all but stabilising and video AF. The big bonus with the G9 is the custom setting flexibility. I can mimic all of my other G9’s video feature sets in the five custom selections, then totally re-configure it for stills.

Two very different cameras will hopefully not be an issue as their roles are very specific and their similarities (the “nubbin”, physical hardness, size and more direct on body controls) are maybe more in line than I first realised.

I have the versatile, universal Camvate cage which can fit either the G9 or EM1x by simply changing out the stems.

Added to these will be my 25mm and 45mm primes. The 25mm fills the gap between the zooms and adds a decent close-up/small group portrait lens, the 45 adds a true “Bokeh” lens and I have two of these. I may add an EM10 to these to cut down on lens swapping, but that will likely be unnecessary.

The biggest filter thread is the tele at 72mm and the wide lens is 67, so a couple of 72mm ND, Cinebloom and polariser filters will cover both lenses with a step ring for the Leica.

The 300mm will likely get the most use in this kit for sports etc.

The OSMO pocket will add gimbal stabilising and hopefully the whole kit will be used.

Mics are less critical, so my neglected “little” mic kit will be employed comprising a Movo shotgun and LAV, Neewer and Rode shotguns and the Zoom H1n as separate recorder or interface. I can even split a pair of them into the Zoom for group interviews.

I will assign the TTL Godox flash kit (860 + 685 + controller) and a small Olympus fill-flash to this kit.

A small 5-in-1 white balance/mini reflector panel will round it out.

The whole lot (or what I would need at any one time) can just fit into the Domke F802 with optional pouches, but I have also just ordered a Crumpler Muli 8000 on clearance (see the Fate is a friend post). This bag is meant to be two inches longer and an inch deeper, so the slightly cramped Domke may have an alternate. The Domke excells with multiple small to medium sized items, but struggles, being a satchel, with “big rig” cameras. The EM1x with mounted tele is stretching the friendship a little, and cramps other gear. The Muli may also allow me to pack the 300mm which I struggle with in the Domke.

It also takes a laptop internally in a well padded compartment.

*

The school kit will change quite a lot, but will hopefully still be fully viable, afterall, this is the gear that got me here in the first place.

2x EM1 Mk2’s (one gripped), will be rotated or occasionally used together for sports and some hand held video. These will take long lenses, chosen from 45 or 75mm primes (low light/maximum Bokeh), 75-300 premium kit for reach or 40-150 kit lenses. These are all strong performers and compliment each other.

Ironically, lenses like the 75mm were often left behind because of the weight and bullk of the 40-150 Pro, but the slower aperture kit level zooms, which are strong in every other area except build and light gatheing need the fast primes for indoors etc. and allow for them to be carried, even with their own camera bodies.

Whenever these lenses get a run, nobody ever complains about the image quality and I am constantly surprised how hard it is to tell. The 40-150 performs better than it should in low light showing strong micro contrast, the 75-300 handles very bright light well and the 75mm is my go-to for indoor sports, strong Bokeh, sheer quality and candids. They have all been neglected lately simply because it is easier to just pack the pro lens. I can pack all three for the same bulk as the pro lens.

2x EM10 Mk2’s which will also be rotated. These are my preferred cameras for standard to wide angle lenses, simply because their screens tilt back, rather than rotate around for touch focus operation. If one dies, I will replace it with a similar camera if I can just for that. The main lens will be the kit 12-60 Panasonic or 17mm, but the 8-18 may be borrowed out of the paper kit or the 12-40 pro from the video kit if I know I will need their special capabilities. There is even a leftover 14-42 EZ.

2x EM5 Mk1’s will be used again in rotation for primes until they fall over. The sensors in these handle artificial lighting I feel much better than the EM10’s giving me less trouble with white balance and nice, tight high ISO “grain”. The 17, 45 and 75 all work well on them and I have batteries to burn here (6 at last count), which need to be cycled regulalrly. I am not expecting miracles here, but I will flog these until they stop going.

The red Pen Mini on a 60” strap can be used as a handy cross-body camera and a novelty for the younger kids. It is also my favourite from the hip street shooter with the 17mm.

Bags for this kit have been fun to organise and an opportunity to tidy up some long running issues. Rather than just get another F802, the easy fix, I have been looking at my many, many other bags.

I was tempted to get another 802 for my school kit, but while searching for the recommended Tenba insert, it occurred to me to try the insert I have in some other bags and it fit in many well enough, so I just went with the insert. I may still use the F802 if the Crumpler or something else works out better, so this may be moot.

The Filson Camera Field bag has been “fixed” by taking the 30+ year old hard base-board and newer insert liner from my ancient Domke F2 (now used to carry cables etc for my lights). The problems of sag and poor insert choices now gone, it has become a contender for school camera bag.

Love/hate personified. Hard to find a nicer “retro” look bag, but like many, it falls down on practicality. This is a prime example of a bag made for a kit (Leica M6 and two primes maybe), just not my kit. Maybe if I do a long term project some day, using a Pen F and three primes it will be ideal, but in a practical work world, it is really an enthusiasts bag.

My Tokyo Porter satchel, a very comfortable and roomy bag, and the classy Filson Medium Field are sharing a Tenba insert and the Domke F3x, Crumpler Light Delight, Turnstyle 10L and LP Pro Tactic 350 will all get a go as needed. The big body attached to big lens dynamic is gone from this outfit, and along with it, a lot of the issues these bags struggled with.

The Porter. An impulse buy on our first trip to Japan, this bag has returned there more than once as my best option. Like the Filson, if you want to mesh a day bag and camera bag it is ideal, but recently I have found it doubles up as a serious camera bag, using a Tenba insert. It has much the same dynamic as the F802, just with different pockets.

The F802 provides 2 to 4 large rectangular pockets and two “slip” pockets inside and out. The Porter has one enormous front pouch of similar capacity, better for single large, flat items and it has several useful small pockets inside. The main compartment also has a little more room than the F802 which allows for the insert and some other bits.

Video, which is more controlled and serious in this environment is handled by a dedicated G9 with rig, 12-40 Oly pro (24-200 f2.8eq in FHD) and 25mm antique Pen lens. I will take other lenses from the above kit as I need.

For support, my Zoom/Lewitt mic kit, dedicated lights and mods require their own storage solutions, but the camera and lenses go into the Neewer backpack with as much else as I can squeeze.

I have tentative plans to add a 35-100 Panasonic f2.8 lens, which would go a decent way to replacing the 40-150 Pro lens in these kits, while keeping the filter sizes under the magic 62mm, quality up and the bag strain low, but first I will see how this kit serves me.

Flash is handled by using none (fast primes and ON1 No Noise) or the YN kit. I cannot praise this kit enough. Recently I shot over 700 images with a single YN and single set of Eneloop pro batts, all with the flash in one hand, the camera and controller in the other. I needed to do this to avoid some horrible reflected flare from my environment, which put paid to my 1 stand-1 light idea (no room to move it), and it worked a treat.

I even managed several consecutive 1/1 power shots bounced off the ceiling, of an entire stairway at about 10mtrs and that was after a couple of hundred shots already. It just popped and popped, with me manually shifting from 1/16 to 1/4 power depending on the ceiling height, with no image falling out of processable parameters.

The event was a “Wigging It for Cancer” gala ball. An awesomely bad hair day all round.

A lovely left over is the Pen F, which I will reserve for personal and studio use. It has a gorgeous, clean high-res sensor which seems sharper than the earlier phase detect pixel ones, but it lacks any AF tracking, has mediocre low light performance and banding at high ISO’s in silent shutter mode, so for studio use or personal street/travel with primes it is perfect.

I will pilfer lenses, bags and accessories as I need for this one.

It helps to talk up loud some times, to express ideas and make plans, then put them out there.

Fate, Friend Or Foe

I tend to let fate force my hand, well guide my hand usually, force it occassionally.

Sometimes I just cannot get something to take, no matter how hard I push, then eventually a different answer emerges, often one I have not foreseen.

I find if I push and push, especiailly against the natural flow of things, I get where I intend, but often at a price.

Just let it come. Time will bring the answer.

Example; I resisted getting the RPG Zweihander for quite a while. I have to be honest resisting getting any games at all, but D100 RPG’s have become my one true (RPG) path, something I have far too much history with from the very start to now, so it follows I might want to expand here instead of contract. By putting it off, I avoided the early edition, entering the fray when the later edition revised print run was around and other support materiel had evolved.

Similarly I avoided the “pinkish” version one 35-100 Panasonic lenses, so now I can get the less odd looking second generation one.

I am trying to get a Manfrotto Bumblebee M-30 PL bag. It is resisting me. There seem to be none in Australia, are ridiculously overpriced overseas and with no ETA from local suppliers it just seems pointless. It looks perfect. It is slightly bigger than the F802, opens through the top, has nice pockets and looks (and reviews as) a very comfortable bag loaded. I just cannot get one.

Trust fate?

I would love a Domke F804 (gone), might grab another F802 (cheap), have brands I have not even looked deeply at and need to explore other ideas, so maybe I have just saved $200 (after spending $100 on a Crumpler that did not fix things). I am happy with this one though as a replacement for other less practical bags.

Lovely, just like the half dozen other bags I have about this size. At a pinch it would work, but I have several like this. Almost, but not quite.

Trust fate, see what happens.

The Great Deception Game

I may have come across a bit strong there, but it seems to me, and this is an opinion borne of over thirty years of playing this game, that picking a good camera bag can be hard, often frustrating work. It is not that the designers and sellers of bags are trying to be deliberatley misleading, but real, defined, qualifiable information can be tough to get.

It starts as fun, probably more so in the internet world, less fun but easier with natural limits the pre-internet age sufferred. Browsing the heavily “channelled” internet*, you can be taken along many pathways, down many alleys and into the odd dead end.

The big issue, the one that vexes me the most, is getting the actual capacity of a bag determined.

There are a few reasons.

1. Most bags quote unrealistic “broken down” and stacked (read; crammed) kit capacities.

2. Measurements do not seem to adhere to any fixed rule. Some bags have been quoted in all literature as internal measurement “X”, but prove to be well short of that.

3. Many bags do not quote external or internal measurements, just “measurements”.

4. Few designers/reviewers/retailers actually show you what fits in configurations that matter.

5. Inserts can make or break a bag. Too rigid and they limit options, too soft/short/few and they are nearly useless.

6. There are just too many bags and they are constantly changing.

7. There are nearly infinite combinations of gear available to put in them and never it seems, the gear you own!

8. No one configuration is perfect, which means often buying several bags, which may lead to several misses, wasting time and money. Ths can be unconducive to continuing the search for perfection over settling for “near enough”.

Here are a few examples.

Billingham and Domke bags often hold more than they look like they will, because they are not overly padded. Their inserts are soft, but those are flexible, removable or replaceable. My F802 is a real gear swallower and that goes for most Domke bags (watch the F-8 though, it is really a tiny clone of their bigger bags). I had a Billingham Hadley large, which was useful, a Hadley small that was handy, but only as a light street bag, but never really meshed with either of them.

Bags with heavy padding like ONA, some Lowe Pro, Crumpler and many, many more are often smaller than they look because they are so heavily padded. Padding can be a gear saving, but more often does not make a difference and the rigid, over sized, over stuffed end product can sometimes do more harm than good. I always liked the look of the ONA Brixton, until I finally found out it is much smaller in reality than several smaller bags I own.

Bags with dark interiors can look deceptively large and added to that, they can swallow dark gear, especially like things like M43 45mm f1.8’s.

Gear is seldom in a “ready to go” configuration. This is the big one. A pro level camera with a grip added or built in, attached to a decent sized work horse lens like a 70-200 f2.8 equivalent with hood on the right way around and maybe another with a standard zoom, are big in a variety of ways. Not having them at the ready is unrealistic. Pro photographers need things at hand, not “broken down”. Digital also has cleanliness issues, so unlike old press photogs who would leave lenses and cameras open to the elements, we do tend to cap everything, which just slows down the swapping process.

For myself, as eluded to in my bigger “Two bags” post (coming), an EM1x or Mk2 with grip and 40-150 f2.8 mounted with rigid metal hood and filter (no lens cap), second camera with wide angle mounted the same is SOP for me. I only have two bags that can take that combination in a practical fashion (not a back pack, not broken down, not caps on and hood reversed, actually ready to go).

The F802 Domke and the similar in use Tokyo Porter sling bag, which is not even a camera bag, can each manage it with a Tenba insert added, but are cramped and not ideal in other ways. Add anything else into the main compartment and all bets are off.

Smaller gear is not an issue, but smaller gear is not usually at the pro end of things. With lenses mounted on dedicated cameras, I can change from one to the other with a simple switch. Stuffing around with un-assembled gear in crowded bags is simply not on.

Video rigs can also be problematic. Screwing a handle or mount on, or even mounting the camera in the rig, while on-the-go is not practical, but giving this type of thing extra room, can mean leaving most everything else behind. Fragile mics and monitors just make things ridiculaous.

So, what makes a good bag?

Realistically, a bag should be chosen for the exact kit you intend to use and how you want to use it*. If you are a studio or portrait photographer, you can likely pack things down until you get where you need, but for most of us, who may need to arrive and concentrate on planning and shooting within seconds of arriving, should buy the bag for their gear as it is going to be used.

*Always have a “lung”, which is one more space than the minimum. This allows you to change things out as needed without having to put something down or double hand things. A large, empty outside pocket is ideal.

Bags that I like.

The Domke F802 satchel is ideal for long gear, large quantities of medium sized items like flash units, panels, a big laptop etc, but it is poor at holding large camera bodies when mounted on a lens.

Pretty much my news paper rig. The big difference is, the EM1 mk2 has no grip on it, which is a game changer.

Tight, but workable. It does however make getting to the middle sections a little difficult. Scrap that, it is too cramped, so deal with it and move on. Take the grip off and no issue.

The middle sections are for primes and/or a third camera with prime mounted, but the big rig blocks access and distends the bag so I cannot access these or put a laptop in it.

The F3x Domke is the original one camera, three lens bag, especially for bigger SLR’s (D800, 70-200 F4, 16-35 and 105 micro for example). It is near useless however with smaller mirrorless systems without an insert used. It has a couple of sizeable outer pockets and a body hugging shape.

Crumpler Light Delight 4000, bought for a really light job and it does just that. I wish it had a rear zip pocket, which I think is an oversight, but otherwise, this is a little cracker for a camera on the shoulder and one in the bag with accessories.

The Billingham Hadley series**. I have had the large and small, but should have bought the Pro and I would likely still have it. The large could take the problem child combo (above), but I found the big front pockets less usefull for gear than the ones on the F802 and it’s insert was over padded.

LowePro Pro Messenger (200?). Sold this a while ago, but I have fond memories of it being a sllightly more practical copy of the Think Tank Retrospectives. It was ironically too big at the time.

The Filson Camera Field bag** has gone from a disappointment to more of a winner with the inclusion of my Domke F2s’ rigid base panel and thin walled inserts. If the F802 Domke is used for my news paper kit, the Filson will likely become my main bag for the school kit. The big issue previously was a debilitating sag in the middle and a fixed four compartment configuration, partly alleviated by using a Billingham two section insert as well.

The big girl is too large for this bag and it’s annoying habit of sagging closed does not help. I have fixed the sag to some point, but there are other issues with inserts. The smaller lens, not to be under estimated, is a neat fit.

The insert is a new Domke one for an F2, liberated for this bag, but I still have issues with cramped condiitions and soft dividers. My ideal is to be able to switch cameras without looking, but that is not yet happening with this layout, things just tend to get squished and jumbled.

Think Tank Turnstyle 10L. This is my street bag. It holds a lot more than it looks like it could and surprises me still. One of the recent contenders was the Turnstyle 20L, but after a lot of research it looks to be just under sized for my needs. I did not even notice the large ipad pocket inside for the first few months. I use this as my “running” bag when shooting sports. It holds a flash, wide lens on a small camera, phone, notes, water and rolled up spray jacket. all things I might need, but not immediately, then I use one or two cameras and lenses on straps.

Bags that are not camera bags, but will take a Tenba insert or similar. These are many and varied (Timbuk 2 medium satchel, several Crumplers, Filson Field, some bespoke bits). These prove the point that too much padding and made to purpose is not necessary, all you need is some gear separation and a little rigidity or shape. My favourite is a green Tokyo Porter satchel, which has elements of the Domke F3/802 and TT Turnstyle.

A surprise packet, bought on one of our first trips to Japan is the real deal. Inside it right now, is the Tenba insert with the big lens and camera combo.

I cannot actually close it like this, but that is not a real issue as the bag is not weather sealed anyway (hah, hah). The front divided pocket can hold two ipads in each section and is so big, I lost my travel wallet in it for weeks once, not searching well enough each time! This thing hugs my hips even better than the F3x.

Crumpler Muli 8000. This was hoped to be the slightly bigger bag I need for my news kit. On paper it was a tad longer and deeper than the F802, has a padded laptop compartment and the usual Crumpler comfort and durability. It turns out, like so many other bags, it shrank in transit and is effectively identical to the F802 except shorter. It comes with some interesting dividers, but it clearly not aimed at bigger gear. I may use this for travel next time we go.

I had high hopes for this one and first impressions (well second after “it looks smaller than I assumed based on the actual quoted specs”) are positive. The usual Crumpler quality and comfort. It has not really added anything new, except maybe a nice bag with a laptop spot, although I am at odds with the strange and short dividers. The “beast” is sitting just a little higher than I would like. If it was all I had then maybe…….

Deep it may be, but not really any better than other options. It does not need another insert like the F802, which maybe makes it more efficient and it is really light but rigid feeling. It may become part of a rotation for the school kit (no fat cameras or tall lenses). In all fairness, the lower sides are actually a benefit for accessing other compartments. It does however only have one pocket.

Neewer Large backpack (also available under other names). This is the big event hauler. It takes video rigged cameras, big lenses on cameras, lots of cameras, you name it.

(Possible) Manfrotto Bumblebee M-30 PL. This is definitely a bigger bag than the Crumpler above, but also more expensive. If the Crumpler does not prove to be as big as I need, the M-30 may be grabbed.

(Possible). Mindshift Photo Cross 13. This one is bigger than the Turnstyle 20. Unlike the 20, it does not just look like a small bag bigger, but looks like a good, sleek backpack. I am concerned (as always), that my largest kit will not fit, so likely not worth the risk. A cross body bag appeals for comfort and safety.

(Possible) Domke F808. Not on my radar before, this is a slimmer, taller take on the F802. Not practical really, but a Domke I like the look of, so always a chance! It’s biggest issues are insert choices (not many) and no pockets on the front, although I could add two on the sides.

(Wishlist) Domke F804. This is one that has effectively slipped away. A giant F802, deeper and a little taller and longer, it would have been ideal, but I just cannot find one (edit; found one and bought it!).

*

Bags that I do not like (but still use for one reason or another).

The LowePro Pro Tactic 350aw mk1 is a constant pain. the idea is sound, but the execution poor. The bag is shallow, unable to take a big camera annywhere in its lower half and the two side access pockets, theoreticallty able to tae a lens and camera each are limied to smaller bodies and smaller lenses to work. Overall I only keep this for its “good foot rest on a plane” rigidity, otherwise I would have sold it. It is also very uncomfortable for an average male to wear.

The Domke F3x. Yep it makes an appearance on both lists, because without a lot of help, it is not at all usefull for a mirrorless user with the above criteria. It was designed for a different era and even with new inserts etc, it is a rough fit for me. Ironically, it is probably ideal with an EM1x, 8-18, 12-40 and 40-150, but not with two lenses mounted and another camera. I have a soft spot for it, proven by my decision to buy a special edition green rugged wear one in Japan while I was selling two others at home (I still miss the ballistic nylon one, it was well plush), but realistically, I have many better bags for my needs.

*

The search continues (got an F804!!!), or maybe I need to look outside the box. If I by a Panasonic 35-100 f2.8 as my on-body-always lens, then the longer, heavier 40-150 could be held back for jobs in both my kits as needed. The reality is, I only need a decent portrait/event lens at hand, so the 70-200 equiv would be fine and the slightly shorter range reduces the need for a 25mm in the bag. It would even mean I could take the 300 instead for genuinely long lens jobs.

*Is it just me or are Google searched becoming more and more “owned”.

**Realistically, Billingham and Filson bags have become so expensive, that real photographers are using them less, collectors or well heeled hobbyists more. I bought my Hadley large for $280 and sold it mint for $150. I shudder to think……. . Like the Billinghams, my two Filson bags cost under $300au a few years ago, about half current price.

Camera Choices Made Easy By Circumstances And Need

My long and very indulgent vacillations on what video camera to buy became very easy in the end.

I bought the video camera that did the best stills and video in a reasonable price bracket.

I bought a second G9.

the potential of the G9 exceeds my needs, but it is nice to know there is a little up my sleeve (10 bit 4:2:2 4k unlimited in V Log-L with firmware and a Ninja V). I do not know it well enough yet, but I feel that there is plenty to discover and much more to refine.

The BMPCC4k is the cleanest path to RAW video (a long way further than I need), the OM-1 has the best AF and stabilising (the EM1x is close), the GH6 is probably the best overall (but the G9 is close), but at the end of the day, for a little over $1000au ($1350au with the excellent 12-60 kit), it is hands down the best value. I have saved enough even against the cheapest other option to afford the Ninja V that would upgrade it and my Olympus cameras (The EM1x is also excellent with a Ninja, offering RAW video).

I will not rig out the second G9 like this, as it is more of a stills camera first, but it can be customised for all the same video options.

It also has, and this is important, the same quality and work flow as my current G9. Learn one, know both.

Use them together and the are identical in performance and results. Two cameras gives me effectively unlimited recording, because I can alternate the mandatory short “naps” as I on/off them with complimentary footage from another or even the same angle.

Add in accessory and battery compatibility and it is the “smart” choice.

So, when push came to shove, I went to what I know and trust.

Close Call

I have a big portrait shoot in a couple of weeks and it has given me a case of the jitters.

I intend to use my grey/black 1.8x2.1 Lastolite with the new magnetic bracket. This is big enought for pairs and even small groups, full length and wide shots.

What it lacks though is texture.

The Pewter and Walnut Lastolite is the one on my radar and it is available reasonably cheaply at the moment. It may even make it in time.

Added to cart, bought……….then cancelled.

It is still over $300au, which is a substantial amount for something that is only one of many ways of doing something that can be done by, well, nothing actually.

I have texture options with my four soft “pleather” 1.5m hanging rolls and a Kate 5x7, but the lastolite system is so very easy to work with. The question is (here we go again asking what “the question” actually is), do I have a need for another grey and a texture. The grey is different to my solid, as texture is the hardest thing to add without replacement, and the walnut is as good as a one use texture, because again, texture is the hardest thing to fix without replacement.

After ordering it, I went for a long walk and with buyers regret/hind sight at work, I googled “corportate portraits agin, for the hndredth time this month. Looking at a lot of images, it soon became clear that for corporates in particular, solid colour is the norm and to my eye, dark grey to light black is the strongest.

Light black you say? Black with a little light on it, tends to go dark grey.

$60 of fabric. Subtle texture and colour is not that hard to find if you hunt around. This is actually Donkey brown, but I also have a silver-grey.

My grey backdrop is fine. Perfect actually, I just needed to realise that….again. All I need to do is work out lighting and I am sorted. The Pewter is graded, slightly “shimmery” and very mildly textured. As I found previously, this is not that hare to do. My cheap vinyl furniture fabric is close enough, so before I go and spend enough money to buy a more needed lens, maybe I should sit back and relax.

My basic grey, with white balance tweaked a little.

Colour, which tends to run second to texture, is actually I think, more important. Even the choice of warm or cool grey can effect the skin tones of a subject, but colour is an easy fix. A simple masked brush-over for the background and it can be warmed up or cooled down, colour shifted or more or less saturated with little effort. Add some vignetting and I have a graduated grey-black with warm or cool tones. I have noticed that Rory Lewis, when using black or grey changes the colour to warmer or cooler tones regulalry.

Anyway, after going around in the same circles as before, I am back to where I started. The big grey/black, a smaller black/white and four texured rolls. The reality is, lighting and subject make the shot, the background is only “an opinion” added to it. I shy away from overly opinionated backdrops, preferring mild, nearly imperceptible textures and subtle colours.

A win is the Lastolite bracket which is great and even helps me hang metal bars for the rolls. It is very strong, rated at 5kg, but I think 10kg is possible. The fake leather rolls hung 2m from floor up to the bar are fine.

So, close call, but no harm done.

Big Portrait Gig

I somehow landed a gig shooting the CEO and Board of one of Australias’ largest companies. Interesting seeing as I am not pushing myself on any format other than word of mouth at the moment. Never underestimate the value of networking and referrals. There is a form of legitimacy that comes from a face to face recommendation, that no amount of web page glamour can replace and lets face it, most of us would take the easy road if given one from a trusted guide.

A month of pondering and now a week of testing (nothing too frantic, just conscientious and relentless).

I was after that “special something”, but am also mindful that these images just need to be functional and acceptable for a multiple of uses. No Chiaroscuro or split light, no risky business, just good flexible files with that “something” that makes them stand out a little and room to supply a variety of stylised, processed files.

The Oly files were nice enough, just lacking some “pop”, which I put down to lighting. So what was wrong? I have had some recent success with school ball photos, using only a pair of basic 42” brollies, but in more controlled circumstances, I just seem to be coming up………flat.

A dozen lighting tests later, it dawned on me. I always use my “lucky” EM10 mk2 at balls, a camera that has a warmer base tone than the EM1’s. It struggles in bright light, bad light and ugly light, it has less dynamic range and it is not built for heavy use (which it still gets), but with flash, it seems to sing.

This made two lines of thought collide. What about trying the G9?

Panasonic sensors are known for their skin tones, the G9 is as capable a camera as the EM1 series and I have already been impressed by its performance after just one day of messing around with it.

A little post added (as with the one above), but pretty much pre-set level. There seems to be a more vibrant, three dimensional feel (also the same lens). The blue was added with a mild white balance shift, but the skin tones held on nicely, almost Canon like.

This is the “Film Extra Shadow” base setting in C1.

Seems to be plenty of flexibility in there also.

Clean white, warm skin and a cool background. Worth looking into.

Camera Choice.

I don’t want to jinx it, but I have an orientation day with the local paper in Friday. The Examiner has a long and illustrious history, but like a lot of things laden with such a history, it is suffering by comparison these days. The photog staff is small, but capable and very experienced. I have known some of them for over thirty years. becoming one of them would at once feel odd and like a lost glove found and then worn.

They are looking for someone for a couple of days a week, which is perfect for my life style. The commitment to the school I have been working with for the last couple of years is strong, but flexible if needed. They are down to the last two candidates, so who knows.

This has come at a great time. I have been struggling to give the school my undivided attention and make ends meet, because the reality is, they only need a 9 month commitment and it is hard to find regular clients for a few months a year.

Gear?

I have a pretty good handle on what I need these days.

EM1 (something) + 40-150 Pro with 1.4 TC.

? possibly a G9 + 8-18 (video and stills).

EM10 or 5 + Prime (25 and/or 45)

OSMO kit and some small Mics

Godox flash

Domke F802 bag.

Late Autumn filler image. EM1, 8-18.

If I land the job, I may go for a second G9 as my second camera for this work, allowing the original to be used in its rig for video almost exclusively. I may also grab the 12-60 Leica or kit* as a replacement standard lens. The idea would be to have the second G9 set for stills, but with the custom settings set for video, same as my other G9.

The EM1x is also good for video, but harder to press into dual roles. That does not exclude the chance of getting another EM1x or EM1 mk2 or 3* and a 12-40/12-45/8-25 lens maybe. The reality is, as long as you shoot in 4k at capture, the video on the EM1x is very good, their 1080 would likely be fine for the paper and the AF and stabilisers are top notch. The EM1 mk3 is a hair behind in stabilising, but otherwise the same camera in a smaller body.

So, an EM1 mk3 with a new lens or similar and an EM1 mk2 as backup would work fine.

If I want to keep my kits separate, the Mk3 and 8-25 would be cleanest option, although the Mk2 and 12-40, are currently the best value.

For video, the G9 and 12-60 Leica or kit would be better in it’s own way also (dual stabilising up a notch with better AF also with brand matched systems). The 1080p and 4k options far out weigh the EM1’s 4k only. The other photogs at the paper have been using older model D500 Nikons, so my efforts should be technically equal or better and I will bet a lot simpler.

Too many choices!

Practicing what I preach, asking ”the right” question, I guess I need the best practical video for the paper (not highest quality, just fast and accurate, so either, but probably Oly for AF/stab. Secondly to replace my “lumpy” standard lens (12-60 Panas-either) and finally, have it all fit into an existing bag option, which is proving hard as usual. Non battery grip cameras can fit well with lens in bags like the F802 or LP Pro Tactic 350, but with grip and 40-150 Pro mounted, all bets are off*.

If you like to listen to little voices that drop hints or pose interesting questions, i.e. follow your instincts (and I do), then the Leica 8-18 has been impressing, the G9 quietly asking if it can be taken for a little run for stills and the overall balance of my kit I feel, needs more Pana for the different options if nothing else.

Adding a Pana into an Olympus kit would come with the usual issues of camera multi tasking and lets be clear, both of these are menu monsters, neither are even close in operation and neither are they similar in results. The G9 for me has been a video only camera, so setup was pretty straight forward. I just “undid” that for some stills and it took the better part of half an hour just getting the buttons back to a stills friendly configuration and take some shots (all my video settings are saved).

Will this add confusion for video and stills with just this camera alone without another brand sharing the bag?

Maybe, but I have coped up until now. The fact is, if a lens and camera are mated and used often, the habits formed seem to become agnostic. I use EM5 Mk1, EM10 Mk2, Pen F, Pen Mini, EM1 Mk2 and EM1x cameras side by side and each of those has different operational needs (often frustratingly so), so adding in a dual purpose Lumix may not be that hard in reality.

Lets have a play.

An ISO 6400 image, f4 at about 1/20th with the Leica wide angle. Compared to most of my Oly cameras, this seems to be quite “off” in WB, but it is a RAW file, so maybe we can fix it.

The slightest push to blue WB and there we have it, very pleasant (the green is close to exact). So, from worse than Oly at first sight to possibly better with the mildest of tweeks and the files seem to push around my work-flow faster than the Oly ones.

After a spin in ON1 No Noise, it comes up sharp, relatively noiseless and clean. This is close to EM1x performance from a camera a few years older and a notch below it. I always felt the G9 was a better camera than the EM1 Mk2 in sharpness and noise control and this confirms it to me.

I must admit the camera seems more complicated than my Olympus equivalents, with lots happening, lots to adjust to, but it was fast and accurate. The only issue was the screen resolution made the above file look a little softer than it actually was.

Adjustments, lots of adjustments.

Matching the Pana/Leica 8-18 to a G9 gives me a 16-95 pro lens in 1080p video, a properly matched Pana to Pana pairing for AF performance and corrections and a nice colour rendering (Panas’ tend to be cooler/brighter than Oly, so mixing them up gives you options). I have always liked the Leica 15 f1.7, but without a Pana camera it seemed a weak choice.

Lens wise, the 12-60** kit would give me a decent (better than decent) replacement for my “lumpy” 12-40. It lacks speed, but I have plenty of options there. Matched to the 75-300 Oly, I would have a decent “premium kit zoom kit” pairing for the school, covering 24-600 equiv. with plenty of fast primes to compliment them. If I split my kits as I want to, the school kit will change to this dynamic, which suits me fine as some of my lenses have been neglected lately, but never failed when used. I know what the school needs and sometimes using pro glass is over-kill.

The reality is, there is no better value around at the moment than the G9 and 12-60 kit for under $1400au. It is about the same as the G95 kit, or a EM10 Mk4 with equivalent lens. That is a lot of camera and lens for the price of a decent lens on its own. My slightly zoom-action-compromised 12-40 annoys me, but the reality is, it still works fine, especially on the video centric G9 rig, so for my school kit. It will keep on going as needed.

*The F802 bag is perfect as long as the camera is not gripped. No other bag I own works with grips except a back pack, which is problematic in itself. The Turnstyle 20L would likely work, or another F802, the bigger F833 Domke satchel, or even a generic “boxy” bag, but nothing I have now. If I stick to a non-gripped camera (G9, EM1 Mk2/3), then a second F802 would be perfect. Maybe black so I don’t pick the wrong one up.

**After a little research, the G9 with the excellent kit 12-60 can be had for as little as $1350au from an Australian retailer, the G9 with the Leica or EM1 Mk2 and 12-40 for around $2000 and the EM1 Mk3 with 12-45 f4 Pro for $2400au. I can get the EM1x for about $2500 body only, probably pushing price out a bit far and no lens.

Head; EM1 mk3 + 8-25 for $3000au. Most coverage, best “power”, most money.

Heart; EM1 Mk2 + 12-40. for $2000au Very good lens and camera combo, with minimum upheaval (really only depth added).

Gut; G9 + 12-60 kit for $1350au. Maximum give, minimum waste, biggest adjustment period.

Lens Habits

We all form habits in our working and home lives. Many of these habits revolve around thngs that work for us simply being repeated and things that don’t being discarded. Habits formed by realities.

Over the last couple of years, I have been flogging my gear and I have recently realised, my habits have changed as good results give me warm fuzzy feelings about some gear and less stellar performance has resulted in cold prickly feelings (although this has been less common, the warm fuzzies generally just winning out).

When I started out, my base kit was the following;

12-40, 45, 75-300. This was a handy kit covering the widest I felt I would need, to the longest, and a fast portrait prime to help balance out the slow 75-300. It was fine and got me to where I needed to be, but it did have its limitations, usually to do with sport, distance and winter light.

My kit now is the 8-18, 25, 40-150, 75. All but the wide angle are lenses I already owned, but their true utility was not discovered until repeated use produced consistently excelllent results.

The 8-18 was origionally bought to reduce my reliance on the 12-40, which had developed a “lump” in its zoom range and to pre-empt a predicted need for a wider lens, which turned out to be the case more often than I would have thought. What I was not expecting was a lens capable of producing something special, even adding a whole new look to my kit.

Great distorting control, beautiful colour and strong perfromance across the frame, this lens slots into my existing Olymus kit as an equal, but slightly diffferent partner. Apart from the Fuji 14 f2.8, I have rarely come across a wide angle with such a compelling case to be in my bag.

I tend to avoid the very widest settings unless needed, but even then, it is tolerable, even to me. If I had the luxury of time, I would have likely held out for the 8-25 Olympus, just for the extra range, but I am actually glad I did not have to choose, because there is something this something about this lens, something I would have missed out on.

As for build quality, this lens has been badly dropped twice (rare for my gear), and has come out scratched, but healthy, so A+ there. It’s performance has been impressive enough to have me looking at Panasonic more, maybe even enough to sway me to getting a second G9 with a kitted lens.

Issues? AF on the EM10’s is a little patchy, although not as bad with touch screen, which is very snappy even on the older EM5’s (and my preferred way of using it), the AF/MF switch needs some tape on it to reduce accidental actuation and………….nothing else I can think of.

*

The 25mm is still surprise to me. I have a complicated relationship with my 17mm, going from reluctant purchaser to outright groupie, all the while managing to ignore the “filler” 25. It turns out, this is my best portrait lens and my favourite video lens on the EM1x. It is superior to many other lenses I have ever owned and a great example of what makes M43 work for me, it just took me a while to get that.

It lacks the compostional power of the environment including 17, the flattering compression and characterful Bokeh of the 45 or the outright heroing of the subject the 75mm offers, but it is the champion of doing a little of all these things, with a comfortable working range and allpurpose ease of use they all lack.

This was a high ISO test shot, which shows off the lenses wide open sharpness and Bokeh. Very harmonious and creatively compelling. On the EM1x, this lens also seems to perform the best with touch AF and general handling.

Negatives? The lens is actually not a 50mm equivalent, more a 45mm, which is actually a benefit for me, but something to be aware of and it is not weather resistant, but I am also aware of that, so no real issue, just a shame.

*

The 40-150 Pro is a lens I sold off in my low period, a time when I was systematically shedding lenses as I moved towards a small travel-only kit. The 12-100 Pro was another casualty of that time and one I still regret selling in hindsight, but who knew where the future would take me.

Luckily, I managed to get it back for what I sold it for. The best thing I did all that year. This is my work horse. Any doubts that it can produce images as sharp and clean as my primes have been well and truly quashed. It is a brilliant low light option, long enough for most sports and versatile enough for most other tasks.

Tough light, no issue. This is my indoor sport, drama and classroom portrait lens.

This lens is also one of my most reliable AF performers. On any camera it seems to be one of the best I have. I remember using it with an EM5 mk1 for basketball and getting good results. The EM5 mk1 has fast aquisition, but no trackng at all, so I was relying on instant speed and accuracy only.

For extra versatility, the 1.4x teleconverter goes on this so seemlessly, I often forget it is on.

Issues? Nothing other than weight, which can be resolved by switching to the excellent 40-150 kit or 75-300 tele, both great lenses if light allows, and it has occasionally nervous Bokeh, but very occasionally and I have options.

*

The final lens and one I do not always use, but consider my “secret weapon” is the 75mm f1.8 (see Bokeh above). For rare occassions where I might need crazy soft Bokeh or even better low light perfromance, this one is added. It is quite simply my best M43 lens, but has to share a crowded space and is of limited utility due to it’s odd focal length (150mm equiv).

Sharp, brilliant, compressed goodness.

On a video camera it can become a 400 f1.8 at 1080p on the G9, something that I am dying to try.

Issues? Only the focal length and again a lack of weather proofing, which being a metal lens, means going from a cold outside to a warm room, can cause a lot of fogging. A lot.

*
I am sure my lens “habits” will change as time travels on, especially if travel comes back into the spotlight, but for the time being thsi is the kit.

My next camera is likely to be a second G9 with maybe the Leica 12-60 kitted. If that is the case, I will likley use that lens as my new standard for stills/video and leave the 12-40 on the rigged out G9 for video.

Further Thoughts On Properly Defining "The Question"

So, my search has been clarified with a little research, a little more retrospection and a re-defining of “the question”.

The question is realistically; Do I want to go down a true videographer pathway, or simply add depth to my existing stills kit, but in a video capable frame of mind.

The three realistic options now are;

Another Olymous EM1x in the sales, with room still for a Ninja V, but the whole Pro-res to DaVinci work flow is not really appealing. The EM1x is my preferred stills option, and depending on my future direction, possibly the only real option, but leaves the door open for better video if needed. In sales, they come in at $2000au, which is basically an EM1 mk3, with a built in grip, second charger and second battery for less than an EM1 mk3 body. I may even be able to score a good lens kit.

Gut choice; Increased depth, with a strong lean towards stills before possible further video upgrades. Realistically, I am a stills shooter with video as an option. This may be limited thinking, but if I loose an EM1 to long term use or bad luck, I would feel the gap. Video is limited to 4k, then downsized, which is an unneccesary drain on resources.

*

Nice place to think, unfortunately a long way away.

Another Panasonic G9, because to be honest, this is still the best value M43 camera on the market. As a stills camera it bests the EM5 MK3, EM1 Mk2, G95 etc on price and overall performance. It is also a good option to pick up a cheap standard lens (12-60 kit, or Leica, both great options, although the Leica for some reason is more often than not dearer in a kit than on its own?!). For $1500au or less (with kit lens), I could add a second G9, making an ideal second angle camera and have one that can be better set up as a decent stills option, something I would like to explore further.

Having two would also allow me to happily upgrade one or both to VLOG-L and get a cheaper off board recorder just for continuous recording if needed or even tag-team them. The EM1x could then be re-assigned back to mostly stills, cleaning up my processes and improving consistency. I can even rebuild my EM1x cage to fit it in a different configuration to the first one.

Heart choice: Logical depth for both formats, but especially video. I feel that embracing the G9 would pay off in video, where relegating it to a second camera role may dilute it’s usefulness overall. Another G9 cannot ever be a bad thing (I rate them above the EM1 mk2’s, closer to the EM1 mk3 in many ways and they are comparable to the BM in many real world scenarios-possibly even with nicer skin tones-YMMV). Even with a more than decent kit lens, it is still the cheapest option. Only the GH6 beats it overall, and in real terms only just at more than three times the price.

*

The BMCC4k. This one would be a massive boost to my video cabilities, opening the door to various RAW formats, but effectievly nothing is added for stills. It could however semi-free up my other cameras as stills cameras, or would it? The things it offers have to be balanced against what it does not do, meaning my existing options could still have their uses, but would I use them if there is a noticeable, unacceptable difference in quality? Realistically, would I mix a jpeg only stills camera into a RAW workflow?

Head choice; A strong, clean and logical video upgrade. An even stronger commitment to video in general, but a shift in balance and thinking. The nagging suspicion that the second I get it, it will be pressed into service is lingering and the “be taken more seriously” vibe also.

Ok.

The top two options do not unbalance my current video kit, but limit it to a certain level, a “pro-am” level. If 4k, 422, 10 bit Cine-D/Natural (opt. VLOG-L upgrade) from the G9, C4k, 8 bit, All-i, Flat profile from the EM1x/EM1 mk2’s and the OSMO’s 4k Cine-D are enough, then balance and relevance are retained. If not, then I am effectively starting again with the BMCC4k ans everything I have built up is wasted.

Is there sunshine behind the clouds of uncertainty?

The BMCC4k on the other hand, as good as it would be, especially for the money, would rise above the others for quality. I fear it would hog my video thinking, pushing the other cameras aside, then fall short in areas the others excel at.

But!

lf actually having a nobody-will-help-you-but-yourself video camera, a camera that will give me pro results (assuming that these are outside of the realm of my existing cameras), but better only if extra effort and skill are applied, then maybe it is a step in the right direction.

After using B-RAW/Pro-res in a variety of formats and a purely video-centric camera, would I pay even passing notice to the G9 and others? On the other hand, would a camera that cannot handle the weather, stabilise, or offer workable AF and is a video only-huge bag hog, be anything more than a part time option for a stills heavy hybrid shooter?

If an unbalanced kit is a risk, then more thought needs to be applied.

Have I said before how important balance is to my overly ordered mind?

The new dynamic would be a very simple BMCC4k primary, OSMO as gimbal camera and G9 as “B” camera, likely with the VLOG-L upgrade, so it has a decent chance of keeping up. A pair of specialist video cameras, effectively opposites to compliment each other and a decent support camera.

So, back to the question; Video aiming for pro level results or stills with video as a side line?

AAARRGGHH!

Before You Chase An Answer, First Look Closely At The Question

As the title suggests, I think when looking for future camera answers, I need to look at defining the question, before I look too hard for the answer.

Look very closely. Ok, maybe too close.

Do I need more resolution?

No.

720p is my main submission format, 1080p my preferred “backup”, as long as it is robust, sharp and clear. No-one at this stage wants or needs more, so premium quality yes, increased size no. Even when I shoot 4k on the EM1’s it is simply to get better 1080, because their 1080 sucks.

Do I need better dynamic range?

Probably.

Doesn’t everyone always, but having said that, you shoot to what you can get and no-one knows the difference. No camera has ever supplied infinite dynamic range, so you use what you have. I find this with stills also. You use the DR you have, making the negative space work for you or fix it with lights etc. Shoot in gloom, for the gloom. Want to capture the bright outside and dull inside together? Add lights, which would likely be needed anyway regardless of your DR capacity. Movies like “Children of Men” use the best camera gear, but no added light and documentary shooters like Mark Bone work it well even with entry level semi-pro gear.

Do I need better format choices?

Yes.

Plain and simple, some type of true LOG or RAW would be great. I process my stills from RAW and I know the difference. Natural on a Pana and Flat on an Olympus are good, but rely far too much on pre-shot precision and locked in choices. This also helps answer the above question.

Do I need better ISO performance?

Probably. Maybe. Not sure?

Fast glass does most jobs well enough. F1.8 at 1/50th does not push me too hard in most circumstances. It’s only when deeper DOF becomes an issue that it, well, it becomes an issue. ISO 1600, f1.8 at 1/50th is useable even in poor light and unlike stills, it is movement tolerant. Effectively video has about 4-5 stops more movement tolerance.

Better AF?

Not really which surprises me.

I have good solid AF in the OSMO and EM1’s and good AF in the G9 (better with Pana glass), but to be honest, over reliance on AF is probably indicative of poor technical skill. Would I like perfect AF in all my cameras? Of course, but I have it when I need it and I have yet to find an AF system that can read my mind. That’s right folks, AF cannot read your mind.

Better MF?

If possible, but I can get by.

I do have a screen now, a cheap Feelworld F7 which helps a lot and the G9 is pretty good as is, but a better screen on one camera would be nice, even though it would not help the others. With the Oly’s I will always use their screen for Touch AF, because it is good enough and the ergonomics are perfect.

Better Stabilising?

Not really.

The OSMO and to some extent all my M43 cameras are strong here. Very slight improvements in newer models aside, these are a boost in an area where technique, smart thinking and more practice can net vast improvements, new tech only minor ones. A Gimbal for the bigger cameras would be better than camera stab, but I would loose that “hand held” feel. The G9 has nealry perfect “locked” stab for interviews.

How about Bit rates and colour depth?

Maybe. This gets a little tricky.

The G9 has 10 bit, 422, Long GOP, the Oly can do 8 bit, 420 but in All-i. I would love both in one to be honest, but again, improvements in any of the above would likely be enough to bridge this for me. On a practical note, 4-800 mbs All-i is a huge load on a system, when in the end result you may not be able to translate the difference.

Recording time?

Maybe. Again a surprise on reflection.

A real bugbear I felt, but if I look at it logically, there are very few times when I need more than a continuous 30 mins and if I do, running two or more cameras allows me to stop-start one, with a second angle to cover the gap (and the G9 is always ready to go). Not ideal I suppose, but how many times do you actually look at long periods of unbroken footage without at least an angle change? The other thing is of course, “unlimited” is usually still battery life limited, which may not be much longer than this anyway.

So, what is really missing?

If I accept that each of my existing cameras can provide decent enough quality in their specialist areas, but if I want a better, more professional base format to shoot with, then one real improvement path I could make, is the BM Pocket Cinema 4k for B-RAW or Pro-res formats or the Ninja V on the EM1x for Pro-res only. The BMV Assist 3G with Pro-res and B-RAW is also tempting for a lot of practcal reasons (batteries, cards), but I am still not sure it works with all my cameras, or in 4k.

If ease of processing pathways is important, the BM’s are the best ones really, avoiding the whole Pro-res to DNG conversion thing (or I could learn another software package).

Another option, and one that is a small compromise, but still a solid improvement is the GH6, which adds full VLOG and Pro-res internally (still needs an expensive card or Ninja etc), dual ISO, even better 1080p options, 10 bit, 422 colour depth, All-i compression and improved AF and stabilising (for Panasonic) with no recording limit. This camera then becomes the replacement for all the others for video (except the OSMO), freeing up all of those for either backup video or stills and has good colour compatability with the G9.

There is also the very real benefit of very sharp 100mp hand held high res and native 26mp for stills. This would be an admission that video for me is part of a hybrid life, not a sign of a stills shooter becoming a full cinematographer.

I could also buy it in a kit, which fixes my standard lens problem and it still has compatibility with the Ninja etc.

So, after all of that, it turns out that the only camera that can actually lift my game and answer all my questions, is the GH6, with the BMCC4k as a good value alternate.

Go figure.

New Camera Clarity....I Wish.

In looking at new cameras, I have been reminded that there are often more paths to where you want to go, than just the most obvious.

First up, what do I have now?

• The EM1x has class leading stabilisation, All-i compression, very good C4k, solid touch screen AF, but it has poor 1080p, Limited LOG options, only 8-bit colour depth, is time limited and has mediocre video interface.

• The G9 can shoot 10 bit, 4k, 422, fast and slow frame rate effects, customises very well, and has excellent 10bit 1080p, but it is time limited, especially in 4k 60 (10 mins), and has limited LOG options without a firmware update.

• The OSMO has excellent quality 1080 and 4k 60, is a true gimbal and can go on a stick or underwater (with a housing), but only has one focal length, needs a lot of accessories to be fully realised and is battery, but not time limited.

• My other EM’s are like the EM1x but less so in most areas.

A little colour for the first day of winter.

Basically, between the above cameras, if I am prepared and careful, I have the right camera for most tasks, but it takes a village as no one camera is the answer all the time.

For hand held movement or unusual angles, the OSMO is the one. For hand held with that steady-cam look, lens choices and All-i compression for busy subjects, the EM1x or an EM1 mk2 is the best and for tripod or hand held work, with lower subject movement based video, the G9 can provide top tier performance with a ton of tricks.

If I want better video, do I actually need to buy another video camera with the above options?

What options are there to upgrade what I have rather than replace anything?

A new camera would improve some performance parameters, but not by a decent amount for the cost and cannot replace any one of the above entirely.

The Atomos Ninja V is the one stop shop upgrade option for all my cameras at once and cheaper than any of them. The other option is the Black Magic Video assist, but the Ninja is cheaper and a very good fit for the EM1x in particular.

What would a Ninja add?

For the EM1x, my favourite video camera to be honest, the Ninja would give me Pro-Res RAW and no recording limit. Looking at samples, this is as good as I would ever need, seriously good stuff, right up there with a Black Magic, but on a more practical camera. Superior AF and stabilising combined with better formatting and screen performance and higher and longer recording capacity.

The G9 and EM1 Mk2’s and even my humble EM10 mk2’s would all benefit, as would most future cameras, making my choices more flexible!

$3500au for a GH6 or similar now seems possibly short sighted and bad value. The Ninja would give me much of what they offer with what I have now.

Basically, I would go from three good enough, but limited video camera options, two with semi gimbal stabilising and good AF, to a half dozen very capable cameras and the ability to decide which is the one I want to use and how. It will also supply a storage solution that off-sets the cost of buying more high speed cards.

My ideal would be a cheap EM1x later, something that seemed short sighted video wise, but not so much now.

So, my three camera options have now become effectively 5.

1. The BM Compact Cinema or Studio 4k ($1800) would give me a perfect tripod camera. This is a specialist video option, with price as its best motivation. I feel it would more often than not be left behind, making my other cameras more useful but question why I bought it in the first place.

2. The GH6 ($3200au) would up my overall video performance and add some stills benefits. Again, this is a good replavcment for cmaeras I have, but then what do they do? The G9 becomes a useful “B” roll camera, but would likely be used in preference as a stills camera.

3. The OM-1 ($3100au) adds stills performance and fixes some annoyances in Oly video. My camera favourite as it takes out the Oly wrinkles and ups overall performance nicely.

4. The Ninja ($700au + SSD $150+) adds Pro-res RAW, superior screen and storage options and upgrades all my cameras. This also adds high speed storage.

5. The BM assist 3G 5-7” ($650-900au) adds much the same as the Ninja, but takes SD cards and has B-RAW. I have plenty of decent cards, so this one actually looks better on reflection and B-RAW is a better fit for DaVinci.

All add unlimited, high speed recording.

The Reality Of Noise

Digital noise is a limitation we, as photographers, have been fighting in one form or another for a very longtime.

There is no doubt that noise and film grain before it, can cripple an image, or at the very least force you into a look that may be at odds with your vision.

Excessive noise is probably the first thing that comes to mind for M43 shooters or at least those looking in from the outside. I must admit, I have never really been overly sensitive to it coming from 1980’2 to newer film, early digital, then mid to later full frame, Fuji APS-C, then finally into M43, all with Adobe Lightroom (except film). Noise was for much of the time, pretty much fully in line with my expectations. Nothing to worry about up to ISO 800-1600, take care up to 3200, use 6400 when a little desperate and ignore anything beyond as basically “unhelpful”.

M43 does have some advantages over larger formats, providing faster and longer lenses in smaller and cheaper packages (sometimes even providing lenses simply unavailable to FF shooters), as any lens is effectively double the actual focal length but still acts like it’s true focal length, improving the performance of applied stabilisers.

What happens though when a higher ISO is the only way to get the job done?

The three files above and the one below and their close-ups were taken with a M43 camera at ISO 12,800, processed first in Capture 1, then popped across to ON1 for a clean-up. Interestingly, one of the files needed very little work, one was a bit better and one cleaned up more noticeably, but was still useable.

My main concern is not visible noise, but other quality stealing factors like washed out colour and mushy detail. Even Bokeh is effected by noise. At first some more noise smooths Bokeh and noise reduction even helps, then it steals away the sharpness, which tends to blur Bokeh….if that’s a thing.

C1 seems to keep the colour strong, ON1 holds sharpness while removing noise to acceptable levels. I have used ON1 with Lightroom, but the M43 file that goes across is less clean, so the resulting file, although it looks very close at first, is the result of more aggressive processing.

Colour is a little cool and flat, but that is the horrible day here and I was not keen to mess with my samples too much.

The fact is, and I know this from real world use, this much noise disappears in many scenarios and is acceptable in most others. Printing in particular tends to even things out, as does small screen viewing (see the images above).

I also know that for real world use, an f1.8 to 2.8 lens and a decent shutter speed is achievable in most lighting conditions, which is where the M43 advantage kicks in.

The very rare times 12,800 is actually needed, it is not horrific by any means. I may even go higher.

Editing, Culling And Fresh Eyes

There is such a thing as being too close to something to be able to see it clearly.

I have started one of those tasks that is very much a punishment for being lay last holiday break. I an gonf through 2500+ images that have stacked up in my catalogue, that should really have been looked at before now, but to be honest, in some cases I am happy I have had to go back with fresh eyes.

One of the first things I noticed was the base quality of the files. The 17mm f1.8 lens took pretty much every single shot on a trip to Melbourne recently. This lens came out early in M43’s relatively short lifespan and reviews “back then” (several years ago) tended to be very math based. Charts for resolution, chromatic aberration, vignetting and contrast can often hide the true nature of a lens. I have noticed that lately, this lens more often than not comes up on M43 top ten lens lists, even making the top spot of one.

As a street lens, I feel the combination of the format, the characteristics of this lens and a choice of camera form factors, make this as good as it gets. There are specialist street cameras out there, but to be honest, I can match any of them, and have the versatility of drawing from a full system.

Next, cropping changes. Small, niggling suspicions that files are not strong enough, are addressed.

While culling three quarters of the files (the tough bit, but necessary), colour also gets re-assessed.

Often an overlooked file can re-surface, or a favourite re-processed with fresh eyes.

This one was lightened and brightened.

Some just reinforce their appeal.

The unique perspective and character of the 17mm.

The 17mm f1.8 was the only lens for this kit I bought semi-reluctantly. Basically, in the early days of M43, the options were few. This one was the only workable choice, but even then, it felt like a filler until something “better” came along. Well others did come, but I will not part with it now. Almost every image taken on the Melbourne trip was shot with this lens at f2.8.

Camera Choice Getting Harder Or Easier?

I am still tentatively looking at new camera options.

The Black Magic 4k have largely fallen away, not being considered generally practical enough, even though its value is by far the best. I feel I would fall back on the G9 or EM1x far too often to justify a great, but largely “dumb” video camera, with poor or no AF and no stabiliser. My logic may be flawed.Isn’t it better to have a few cameras that do different jobs than the same thing done differently?

• With a 4k BM I would have the ideal tripod/studio/pro grade camera,

• the G9 for general video and optional stills use with better than ok stabilising and AF options,

• the EM1x for solid semi-gimbal hand held movement with the best AF and finally,

• the OSMO for genuine gimbal smoothhness and many other creative options.

All offer similar quality 4k, which in most cases would be down sized to 1080 or smaller.

Ok. May have befuddled myself there. Having four specialists makes plenty of sense, seeing as I already have three of them.

An unrelated filler image from a recent insurance shoot.

The OM-1 is appealing more now as a stills and genuine video option. It has no limits in shooting time and no annoying breaks in its footage. It seem to be nearly faultless with video AF and has much sharper 1080p. For stills, I will give it to the Oly overall for AF and low light performance, but both it and the GH6 are excellent.

It looks to have some better video customisation options, something the other Oly’s are poor at, making on the go switching between roles difficult. AF for both shooting forms comes with the very real consideration that most of my lenses are Olympus.

On this, I could buy with the OM-1 and possibly a kitted 12-100, 12-45, the new 12-40, 8-25 or 20 f1.4. So many choices.

The GH6 on the other hand has better hand held high res (100mp with better subject movement control and sharpness), which gives me a surprising stills benefit and ties in well with my Pana/Leica wide angle. Olympus seems to be better at 50mp than 80mp. I do not use this much now, but for the odd group shot with genuine single face lift-outs, it might be handy. There is also the advantage of a few more pixels natively.

For video, it lifts the Pana into the same realm as the BM’s, offerring genuine LOG, 120 4k, in camera cooling, 10 bit in most formats and much better AF. I also like the synergy of the G9 as backup to the GH6 as primary.

Lens options for the GH6 are the unlikely 10-25 f1.4 video or the 12-60 Leica. Both appeal, but being Pana lenses, they may lack some AF compatibility with my Oly cameras, but offers better compatibility with the Panas and dual IS.

So where am I now?

My gut says the OM-1, because I like the 4k video, would usually use the stills functions more and have found the video focus and stabiliser on the EM-1x very solid, so slight improvements would be more than adequate. Having said that, for many of my real needs, the EM1x is plenty and it does not get a lot of work overall. This and all of my video cameras could also get an upgrade by adding the Ninja V (G9 becomes a true 4k beast, Oly’s get RAW etc).

My head says the BM 4k (studio or compact cinema?), for the value. For the same price as an older OM or GH camera, I would have a very good specialist 4k RAW video camera with better processsing options (with free Premium Da Vinci for life), which is perfectly calibrated to the camera and is real RAW. This is my preferred stills processing option. The OSMO, G9 and various EM-1’s are all valid options with strengths of their own. The BM would be the premium static camera and the pro video camera with an eye to upskilling into pro grade cameras.

Lenses are out of the picture, pushing the overall price up again, but I have saved enough to choose what I want or even look at some of the cinema specific ones. Accessories are also a consideration. Smallrig frames are up to three times the price of Pana ones (so I would likely skip one, using another camera), and Gimbals, a real consideration, push the camera closer to the others in overall cost, but again, this where the others come in. In it’s envisaged role, I think it would be best left as is (I favour the studio anyway), being relegated to the serious tripod camera.

My heart says the GH6. This camera continues my transition into a mixed Pana/Olympus system, gives me some new features and harmonises well with the G9 as both a backup stills and video camera. Dual ISO, more stills pixels, better hand held high res, a cooling fan, two record buttons and VLOG are on the plus side. My only concerns are the slight shortfall in AF compared to the OM-1, but it is still more capable than the G9 and likely equal to the OM’s I have. The EM1x could then be sidelined as a video camera.

Operation would be nearly identical to my G9 set-up and the video, even though it is overkill, is likely as good as the BM 4k in real terms. The lens options are also tempting. I have had wonderful results out of my Oly stable, but I must admit, the Leica/Pana 8-18 does have a special look that I appreciate. The handy premium 12-60 is the likely one, or the excellent 12-60 kit or even the 15 1.7, all available kitted with the camera.

*

The other more balanced (Head/Gut/Heart) and probably realistic option is to get another cheap G9 the Ninja V, making all my existing video cameras better. The second G9 would let me carry one as a second EM1 level stills camera with better video ready to go, which is harder with Oly cameras as they do not let you set video specific custom modes.

A G9 with a 12-60 kit lens (or maybe a specialist video lens as the 1080 cropping options effectively make it a dual lens) and the Ninja V would come in under the price of the BM4k with accessories and get rid of the one thing that annoys me - 30 minute time limits. I already have rig options, accessories and consistency of operation. I could even add a full gimbal with little fear of blowing out the budget advantage.

A Monster Calls

The ARTDNA 48” soft box arrived today hot on the heels of the 36'“. It does not at first seem that much larger, but in comparison to the other already decently sized one, it is a monster. It actually blocks out the ceiling light.

The 36” is a self assemble model with, 14 ribs inserted into the Bowens S-mount. To break it down requires some real dis-assembly, but unlike when you recieved it, the assembly is not too tedious and the diffuser panels do not need to be removed. Out of the bag, each rib has to be inserted, but after, they only need to be taken out of the Bowens mount.

14 ribs and 14 fiddly little clips, but only the first time.

The 48” is umbrella-like in assembly, that is you don’t have to insert all of the ribs. Unlike my other 120cm brolly soft boxes though, it is a shoot through from the Bowens S-mount, not a shoot from inside reflector. It is pre-made, assembled into working form by pushing down the stem from the inside. Rather than clipping in the diffuser, it simply velcros into place taking a few seconds, so easier overall than the 36”, but different.

A sturdy umbrella mechanism. The 36” is broken down by taking most of the ribs out of the Bowens mount under tension, this one just pops shut.

My main concern is its weight. The thing is huge and by its very nature, fairly front heavy. There is no way I would attach it to front of one of my cheaper COB lights, but a plastic Bowens bracket held it happily on an angle for an hour or so. The smaller one can just fit through a standard door assembled, the bigger one has no hope.

The big question for me is whether there is any real advantage in these over the reflector 48” soft box brollies I have. They are physically heavier and bigger by design, harder to assemble and generally dearer (not in this case, but generally), so they will have to offer something. There are easier to change on the fly, but that assumes they are assembled and the lights used will take them.

The 36” on the left has a nice brilliance to it (no processing applied, not even exposue). It is also about a stop brighter (1/16, f5.6, ISO 200 with a YN560 III). The bigger unit has a more neutral, softer look and more open shadows, similar to my 7’ white brolly (it is also a tie for unwieldiness). Apart from the lack of brilliance, this thing manages the magical one light portrait. Maybe with a hair light?

I prefer the colour and brighness of smaller one, but the larger one more pleasantly shapes Meg’s face. The difference in magnification is because the smaller one actually sticks out further, forcing me to move closer or catch its edge.

The Fantastic Capture 1 (oh, and Mr Fox)

I am on record saying that Capture 1, especially for a Micro Four Thirds user, has been a revelation. With Lightroom, an acceptable balance between sharpness and noise control was regularly unachievable past ISO 1600, but with C1, I cannot remember the last time I needed to use noise reduction, worried about import sharpening or clarity, unless I had pushed a file to stratospheric heights above ISO 6400 or under exposed badly. Then I will drop it into ON1 No Noise from C1, expecting premium results and usually getting them.

There was a transitional adjustment to be made, something that I have really only recently come to fully understand, but now I understand the best process pathways, my results are regulalry more to my liking.

Brilliance, the control I missed early on, is a whole other fish to Exposure control. LR relied on a natural (un-natural?) lushness to its colour and contrast and it looks good, very “Hollywood”, but comes at a cost. C1 comes with a more mature and honest base-line. I felt early on that it lacked any form of natural punch or glow, but on discovering the Brilliance slider, I not only found that punch, but a better way of controlling exposure also.

In the sets above the first, flatter original files are nicely boosted and cleaned up using a little added Brilliance control and the snap and glow comes out, colours benefitting most. It is almost as if the glow comes out from within the file rather than a global layer of brightness across it.

The third file has the same amount of Exposure applied, weakening contrast and colour. It is just lighter, not better. In Lightroom, my usual process would be boosting Whites, dropping out Blacks and adding Exposure overall. This would have the effect of boosting contrast more gently than just adding Exposure or Contrast. It took two or three sliders and the base line brightness of the file would not change fundamentally.

How do I use it?

I will apply Brightness to a dull or dark image before the Exposure, Contrast or Highlight/Whites sliders. The placement of it in C1 lower down the pecking order than most is annoying, but workable. If I use Exposure first, then Brightness used to balance. Brightness is one of those few festures I use in both a positive and negative context. Often though I tend to drop Exposure back to where it was and I find the Contrast slider too aggressive for normal files.

Dehaze is the next most useful to my work flow.

I found Dehaze in LR (possibly limited by the age of my computer curtailing LR upgrades) was a little crude and simplistic. Doing what it was designed for, it was fine when needed, but that made it an emergency measure like noise reduction, not something with a wider utility.

In C1, the Dehaze slider has become for me the little “snap” enhancer that many files appreciate and is rarely destructive. It can in extreme cases, even add a feeling of three-dimensionality.

In the first file below, C1 has retained decent balance between noise reduction and sharpness on import, so where to next? Add Contrast, Exposure, maybe Brightness? Perhaps Shadows lifted and Highlights dropped back?

In the middle file some Exposure was added, generally lightening, but also slightly washing out the file.

Dehaze was added to the right hand file and this is the secret. Once you have caressed a troublesome file, Dehaze puts back in the normal, the strength. This allows you to work a file a little more aggressively, knowing you have a wonder tool that can gently add back in what other things have erroded.

When do I use it?

Any time a file is a bit flat, I first apply the needed fixes, then use Dehaze to put back the needed contrast. Like Brightness, the Dehaze control seems to add from within, not just layer over the surface. It is especially good at fighting the “HDR” look that strong use of the Highlight or Shadow sliders can create.

The only down side is colour tends to intensify, with Olympus files anyway, often towards Magenta, but that is fixable. This is likely a response to the core colours in the files, so others may find different behaviour.

I also use it when the file is hazey, but I guess that is in the name and never if the actual image requires a hazey look.

Keep in mind, C1 reduces the need for many controls I used automatically in LR like Noise Reduction, Sharpeing (often locally applied), the Blue channel in Camera Calibration for better portrait colour and Clarity (again often locally applied with the brush tool).

So;

My Lightroom work flow was;

• Import with boosted Blue channel, some Sharpening and if the preset required it some Noise Reduction,

• deal with White Balance issues,

• locally apply with the brush tool, Sharpening, Noise reduction and Negative sharpenning into semi-soft areas,

• apply Clarity or Blacks were used for more “snap”, Highlights often recovered as able and I found them quite bright in LR.

My C1 basic workflow is;

• Import with base settings,

• pause before getting too excited,

• adjust Brilliance or less often Exposure and White Balance if needed, less often Shadows or Highlights ,

• use the brush or gradient filter etc if needed for localised Dodging, Sharpening/De-sharpening,

• add Dehaze to taste, less often Contrast or Clarity (these get more of a go in mono).

I almost never touch Noise Reduction or Sharpening, my two bug-bears in LR.

When you are processing over a thousand images like I did this weekend (school ball), having the files import basically “good enough to go”, means I can concentrate on minor improvements if needed. I spend more time removing pesky photo bombers than worrying about noise etc, which would have been my first thought with LR. I have effectively removed a couple of steps from my flow.

Different Roads, Different Tools

Mine is a life of diversity.

One day I will be asked to photograph large groups, the next, I will be covering sport, maybe later the same day a social event, some drama or an after hours excursion.

Diverse, fun, challenging.

The gear requirements are heav. II am not a true pro, but experienced and widely equipped. However, each year I learn a little more, making some things easier and sometimes focing wholesale changes on my gear and processes.

If I had to rank the difficulty of each style I need to employ, I would use two criteria;

Gear, which is obvious but needs to be looked at,

and,

process or the knowledge, experience and control needed.

I will rank them from 1 (easy-amateur) to 3 (serious commitment).

Sport Indoor (3/3). Fast medium teles, through to equally fast shorter lenses, f1.8 on MFT is fine, 2.8 on a full frame. Good ISO performance through the camera or post processing and good AF. My EM1 mk2’s are fine, the EM1x just a little better with ON1 No Noise if needed. EM1’s, 4x f1.8 primes, 40-150 and 12-40 f2.8’s.

The sport that defined my thinking, indoor swimming. Poor light and long distances.

Field Sport (2-3/2). Long glass, with faster shorter lenses as the action moves closer or the light goes f4 being the outer limit. The enemy is poorly lit night games which can even rival indoor sports for difficulty. Fast cameras are also a requirement. After a horror night game exerience at the local hockey centre, I discovered ON1 No Noise in combination with C1 and they literally changed my thinking on what is “low light”. I now use 6400 confidently and 12800 if needed, where once 3200 gave me the jitters. EM1’s 40-150 f2.8, 300 f4 or the 75-300 if the light is good and the action slower, 1.4x converter and something wider for half time.

Large Groups (1 or 3 with lights/1). If light is good, a basic camera and standard zoom lens are all you need. If shooting indoors, a faster lens is useful as long as you can get back far enough to use the wider aperture, or lots and lots of light. MFT gives me a 2 stop depth advantage, but I still struggle to light up large areas. The main thing is to be on top of the process, i.e. crowd control. Any camera, 12-40 f2.8 or f1.8 prime, 4+ flash units with silver reflectors and constant lights if needed.

Portraiture (1/3). This is one of the easiest gear wise, with any camera and a fast(ish) prime generally all that is needed, generally f2.8 on a full frame or 1.8 on MFT, with a basic kit lens being ok if flash is used in a studio, where depth of field is largely controlled by light, not aperture. Lighting can be cheap and easy or as crazy as you want. This is one of those areas though where experience and communication out shine gear. Any camera, any MFT f1.8 prime for available light or any lens if in a studio. 1-2 lights, with mods and reflectors, which could be as easy as 2x 33” brollies on cheap stands with cheap flash units and lots of experimentation.

Performances (3/3). Poor light, movement, distance, limited angles, all the good stuff. I usually use primes, but sometimes if the light is strong enough an f2.8 zoom can work or even my longest lens at f4. Any camera (EM1’s for movement), any longer fast lens.

On a well lit stage, most lenses can be used, even the 300 f4.

Field trips (2/3). These include any trip outside of the school, but not camps or sporting events. A pair of zooms, one wide, one long with a TC or longer slower zoom on a good light day and a camera and maybe a fast prime. 2x anything, but generally a basic camera for the wide and an EM1 for the tele, 8-18, 40-150 pro or 75-300/40-150 kit and a 45 f1.8.

Camps (2/2). These can be tricky and specific, but generally weather proofing is the main priority, then coverage. Again a pair of zooms, one wide, one long and a camera for each (avoid changng if possible) and maybe a fast prime for low light candids. 2x EM1’s 8-18, 40-150 pro and a 25 f1.8. I may take a flash, but will generally avoid lighting in favour of authenticity and have had need of the 300. The OSMO also comes in handy in its water proof housing.

Social events (2/1). These are usually a formal entrance area and some on the fly, so I use an EM1 and 17mm with flash for the mobile stuff and my “lucky” EM10 with the 12-40 for the flash kit. Formal kit; A specific EM10, 12-40, YN 560 with reversed brolly (and a second one ready for larger groups), an LED for fill and to help focus. The on the go kit, EM1 with Godox TTL flash and black foamy thing for bounce, a 17 and occassionally 75 for stage work. Lots of backups especially backups.

Video Interviews (2/2). This settled quickly through working and not being messed with. A single prime lens, the 25mm f1.8 (wide open) and the G9 or EM1x. I usually run the SSH-6 mic in close on its own stand if static or off camera if not and use a single light or natural light when able with a little LED for rim and a reflector for fill. G9 for set spaces or EM1x if less controlled for better focus, 25 f1.8, F1 and SSH-6

Freestyle video (2/3+). Hand held, follow focus, patchy sound, make it up as you go along. This is tough to master and the province of full time videographers, but it is also tons of fun. It also covers the creative side of set video production. Gimbals are recommended, so my OSMO and EM1x are the go to’s. I have had success with the caged EM1x and 25mm and the OSMO is a given, just needing better sound (which is coming).

Group/Event video (3/2). This one is different to interviews becasue you have more to contend with with sound, but usually stereo sound will work. Any lens needed will work, from 17 to 45, with the H5 running a pair of condenser mics or its XY or SSH capsule (as well). G9, any lens, H5 and XLR condenser mics, XY capsule, SSH capsule, lots of light, a backup rig of the EM1x and F1 for second angles or just backup and even a third camera for same.

Event video (3/2). As a rule I shoot stills unless specifically tasked otherwise, but occasionally I will try to cobble together a little video while shooting. My primary video camera for this is the OSMO, the secondary camera is either an EM1 in dual role or the G9 specifically. Always the OSMO, a mini tripod, sometimes the weatherproof housing and occasionally the G9 and 12-40.

My own travel and street (1/3). I generally stick to light weight and easy to use and gear that I trust completely. Needless to say, if not working in this space, I could pack my entire camera kit up into a small bag! Pen F, Pen Mini, 17, 40-150 kit, 45.

Sport Back And A Chance To Stretch My Legs

For those with no idea what you are looking at, this is Australia’s winter obsession, Australian Rules Football or “Footy”. It is an interesting sport to shoot. It moves faster than most, with long range, any direction kicking and fast hand work, criss-crossing the large field almost continuously, so long, then quickly not so long lenses are a must.

“The Ruck”, starting a play sequence after a goal or time period end.

I was lucky, having the boys and girls senior teams playing at the same time.

Faster glass is good. This shot was taken late in the afternoon in mid Autumn gloom (f4, 1/500, 3200). You need decent shutter speeds and reach, which can be expensive (yay for M43).

Solid wins to both teams have cemented them in as early contenders (the boys made the state final last year and I swear they are even taller this year!).

A “hand ball”, designed to stop rampant “chucking”. Getting lower increases drama.

Truly a game for anyone, the tall, the fast, the tough and the tenacious all get a go.

On the technical side, I use a 300 f4 on the EM1x for as much as I can, the EM1 mk2 and 40-150 for closer, both on straps, ready to go. Even at this level, the game can move too quickly for camera changes, so I have some very tight 300 (600mm eq) shots that I like, but fail to tell the story.

Next Camera?

So, a micro 43 user who is always looking for the next camera is suddenly spoilt for choice.

The condenders are;

Black Magic Cinema Pocket or Studio 4k. This one is the video only option and really only on the list because;

• It has RAW video.

• Is made and not surprisingly supported by Da Vinci (and comes with lifetime support).

• The Studio has a pro grade screen.

• The Studio interfaces with the schools Black magic multi command unit.

• It has a video specific sensor. Fewer pixels, equals better ISO performance.

• It has cinema grade colour and that special look.

• It is under $2000au.

but, it has no stabiliser or AF, nor is it a stills camera and it is huge, although I have other options.

The new OM Solutions OM-1 because;

• It is a slight improvement for stills performance across the board even compared to the EM1x. Noise and dynamic range looks to be even better, otherwise the same on paper.

• It has the best AF for stills and video, of the three.

• It has improvements for video to do what I need, getting rid of the pesky breaks in footage and (unconformed) improving 1080p.

• It has better lens compatibility for my kit (which is mostly Oly).

• I could buy it with one of several desirable lenses (12-100, 8-25, 12-40, 12-45 etc).

but, it is not the strongest video camera, but then again it is enough for my needs (good 1080 is the key).

The Panasonic GH6 because;

• It is fully featured as a video/stills hybrid especially for 1080p.

• It has a dual ISO sensor for better low light performance and dynamic range.

• It has the highest standard resolution for still capture and is the first to break the 20mp barrier.

• It is an improvement to the G9 and others without changing that Pana look.

but, although it is better for AF, it is still not perfect and it is overkill in video specs*. There is no way I would ever use the top end features (6k etc), so a lot of money for some better 1080p, without perfect performance otherwise.

Other options, for when I come back to earth are another G9 for $1000 with an Atomos Ninja V, which would upgrade the G9 to a continuous 4k 422 beast and the EM1x as well (one upgrade, several better cameras). This would come close to giving me a Cinema 4k in real terms, with AF, IS and better compatability with my existing kit.

A GH5, G95 or G7 for full time recording at 1080 or 4k, which is also fixed with the Atomos, so tough one.

An OM1 mk3 or EM1x on special.

Looking at my video capabilites I already have;

• 4k/30p 422 or 1080/180p 10 bit in several formats for short stints, with AF/IS, which is plenty for very high quality capture. The Ninja upgrades this to continuous capture.

• Even better AF and IS with the heavier EM1x with nice C4k 8 bit, that is sharp and exceeds my basic needs, which is to down res it to 1080p. The Ninja upgrades this to RAW.

• 4k/60p with true gimbal stab, versatile application and handling, including under water with the OSMO Pocket.

• There are also slo-mo, time lapse, on sensor shift and a few other bits to master.

Do I need a new camera?.

Better AF is tempting, but the EM1x with touch or for interviews is fine and the G9 is good enough also, but I usually use MF. My output os 1080p, nothing more.

*One reviewer, who shoots day long weddings, worked out he would need several thousand dollars worth of cards to run the camera at full res for a single day.