Video Processes Refined

My video processes have come a long way. From frantic a need to accessorise, I have shed much of the complication, falling back mostly on what the cameras I use have to offer out of the box.

There is a balance to my kit, being what I would call a B+ level kit, an enthusiast capable outfit, with moments of pro brilliance.

Cameras.

A hand held G9 works well, even for extended periods. I have now added a second as a stills camera, but to be honest they are now both doing dual duty. The customisation and useability of the cameras allows me to, with a single turn of the main dial, switch from fully stills to fully video configurations. The EM1’s cannot do this. The Olynpus cameras do have better stabiliseation for movement, but they lack the slo-mo quality, which is the better way to use it anyway.

I use 10 bit, 422, 1080p at 25, 50, or in 8 bit at 25-33% slo-mo (all custom settings). This is often exported at 720p, so my files are not excessive, but still good to have in reserve.

This means my pain-stakingly built rigs are being used less and less. The G9 specific one ironically gets used more with a tripod. It adds up to four cold shoes, so for mics, monitors and lights, it is useful, but for stable handling, I keep it basic, even go without often.

AF is also a surprise. The combination of 12-60 (either one) and G9, are capable and with the latest firmware seem to have reduced the “pulsing” effect. Combined with touch focus, the face detect or central area modes seem to be very reliable.

Natural colour mode, with still being tweeked settings seems to have some room for movement and I am starting to trust auto White Balance as being good enough to get me in the processing envelope. This has made exposure, controlled by the main rear dial (ISO), the only thing to deal with outside of composition and focus. I will be looking into other modes ssom, so this may change.

I have looked at RAW (Black Magic Pocket Cinema 4k), various LOG formats (firmware or off board recorder) and settings, but to be honest, if I get slightly muted Natural mode right in camera, then do a little post, for my needs I am happy and do not need anything else.

The OSMO is a nice match to the look of the G9 footage when graded, but straight out of camera has less I can change. It adds a real gimbal dynamic and a decent backup. If I was involved in a larger project, I would likely switch to Cinelike-D with both, but otherwise, as is, it is ok.

Sound.

Mics are either full a bore H5 with Lewitt condensers, SSH-6 shotgn or XY module, or a simple Neewer shotgun. For most footage, which will have a cover track applied, I will just use the built in mics to help with synching.

Lenses.

Now, this has actually just changed in part due to the writing of this article. I had basically settled on the Olympus 25mm for interviews*, using it’s shallow depth and wide open sharpness and the shorter focal length is ideal for on camera shotgun mounting and the 12-60 Leica to replace the 12-40 Oly for general shooting.

*I like the colour, dual stabilising, range and smooth action of this lens and already, combined with a few setting changes to Da Vinci, I am seeing changes for the better and a Leica 15mm is on the way to hopefully take this idea and further it.

Monitor.

The monitor is being used when I have the camera on a tripod, but it’s actually most useful when I am doing large group shots. Really helps being able to see all the faces.

So, to sum up the following have been simplified; rigs, stabilisers and handling, mics, lens choices, AF and lighting. This, with better processing has given me a fast and efficient work flow for through-put, but I still have to get the editing my own movie thing perfected.

Many things I was advised by the internet reviewers to not trust or avoid (formats, AF, hand holding) or use religiously (handles, monitors), I have actually found to be unnecessary or quite useable as is within realistic tolerances.

Cross Pollination Pain

I had a boys hockey match on my calendar today, but the weather was truly awefull so the team shot was postponed. I went anyway to try out a combination I had high hopes for.

The G9 and Olympus 40-150 Pro.

Odd night.

I experienced for the first time the “rippling” effect non DfD lenses can exhibit on a DfD camera. Sometimes it was like heat haze, sometimes more like an oncoming migraine.

I was convinced that most of my images were out of focus, which was a shame because the image quality was good, great even. ISO 6400 without any ON1 applied, was very useable.

Shot under barely adequate lights, the images were clean and bright looking and white balance was easily adjusted.

Turns out my keeper rate was actually close to 70-80%. The camera had a frustrating post shot lag that I overcame with a higher frame rate. Oddly, I generally do not use any type of drive for sports. I prefer to fire single shots, sometimes in sequence, but not bursts. Addictive as they are, bursts seem to me to lack control. Each image is a choice, an expression of skill and even t high frame rates, it is easy to miss-time a critical moment, miss focus errors or to see the action shifting. The EM1’s are reactive enough that I do not need to use continuous drives, but struggling to get the G9 to behave, I tried this and seemed to settle that aspect anyway.

AF was a handful. I settled on a custom setting of a 5 square cross, that annoyingly cannot be moved around the screen (?). Anything else proved too twitchy or just grabbed anything. I think the full screen option is ideal if there is nothing else in the way, but on a busy field, it just grabs shouders etc in the foreground. I did use several custom settings but settled on 2 I think.

Some sequences were spot on, others missed and refused to find focus, but frustratingly, some lost aquired focus for no logical reason, and refused to re-find it.

Groups were no issue.

Clean, close action was quite reliable……..

So, question is, could I use this if I had to?

It produced, over a half of hockey, enough files to be workable (30+ for one team, 40+ for the other), but it was not a reassuring or overly pleasant experience. Compared to the EM1x (with this lens), I felt detached from the process, sometimes shooting blind and expecting less than I actually got.

….even surprising sometimes.

This leaves me unsure. the Leica 50-200 would empower the G9’s to possibly match the EM1’s, but I doubt it would beat the EM1x, so I may get another top-end Oly (EM1x, EM1.3 or OM1) or stick to the “filler” plan of a 35-100 Pana so I can get some use of the Pana’s for indoor sport especially and take some of the load off the Oly cameras and lenses.

I have read that te G9’s, when properly supported by harmonious glass are actually better at some things anyway, like approaching subjects and busy groups.

More Sport, More Lessons Learned.

The perfect combo for football, one I went away from last week and the images were weaker, is my 300 on the EM1x and the 40-150 on a mk2. The 300 is on a black rapid strap, the EM1.2 on it’s own, both easily switched as needed. About 80% of the images are taken with the longer lens covering an arc from mid ground right across the main flow of play (the very far side is a little too far away), and is used even when the action is a little close for tight shots. The shorter one handles things in the near quarter, which provides a totally different feel. Generally you want the ball in shot, but sometimes, the players tell the story on their own.

Bit of old school black and white, takes me right back to my earliest days.

The gallery below is a mix of Womens basketball from the southern national league and state Netball. Both high calibre games, very fast and the usual lighting and angle constraints. Oddly, the 75mm which is ideal for Netball is too tight for the basketball, that has less room to move arounfd the court and more action happens in the “D”. Next time, the 45mm will be used for this and I will shoot from behind the basket, not the corner to reduce crowding.

Low Light Needs Full Frame?

Most shooters will follow this logic; low light photography means full frame cameras.

Bigger sensor, less noise. But is that really all the story?

First up, what is really needed?

For most photographers, “hell” is a fast and erratic subject in low light, sometimes ugly, low contrast light. The worst I have had to deal with is a forgotten back room of the local sports centre, probably last done up some time in the ‘80’s and often used for Ping Pong or Badminton. Even to my eyes, it was dim, you know that slightly surreal light that defies comfort, but for my camera it was not at all a pleasant experience (we are still in therapy, poor thing).

If a sport or performance is lit well enough for viewers to see normally, then ISO 32-6400 with an aperture of 1.8 to 2.8 should be able to provide a workable shutter speed of 1/500 of better. If the light is super dark for “creative” uses, then shooting for how it looks is best. In other words, no photographer would be asked to shoot sport in total darkness and drama may have some very dark moments for effect, but no-one expects daylight looking images from these.

A full frame camera can deliver very clean 3200 and more than useable 12800 with little effort, but relying on the fastest aperture lenses heavily reduces magnification. If needed, a lens with an f1.8+ aperture in particular is usually limited to 100mm or so. Because the better performing full frame cameras are currently limited to 20-24mp or so, cropping becomes the limiting factor. So sports like Basketball or Netball are limited to the near third of the court and still need cropping.

In M43, the two or so stops of ISO disadvantage can be mitigated somewhat thanks to the 2x magnification factor and deeper depth of field it provides. It is all in the lenses. By disadvantage, I mean ISO 32-6400 is still pro callibre, but may need work if underexposed, or to be blown up to very big sizes or cropped heavily, but the real difference is not that much these days. Sufficiency is on reach with all decent modern tools, only extremes are out of reach for some.

This, at 6400…

…..from this with minimal work (C1 and ON1 No Noise all at standard settings).

A 75mm lens in M43 for example, which has similar pricing and size to the inexpensive full frame equivalent is a different beast to the full frame version. It has the magnification of a full frame 150mm, with no sensor cropping. The M43 camera offers its full 20mp compared to the full frame that may be cropped down to maybe 10-12mp or so.

Flipping that, have a hunt and see how many f1.8 150mm lenses are out there for full frame cameras and their price.

Secondly, the full frame depth of field is retained, so the 75mm is acting like a 150 f2.8 lens for focus depth while gathering f1.8 light. The norm here for a full frame shooter is a pro 70-200 f2.8, but that comes at the price of 2 stops of light at the same depth of field. The difference reduces.

Wide open at f1.8 (2.8 equiv) allows me to cut out a subject, but get all of them in as well.

Thirdly, the greater magnification means the AF system is focussing tighter on the desired framing, not wider with more chance to grab the wrong subject (which can go unnoticed at the time). For some sports, I have to use a single point or a small row of 2-4 points to cut through a crowd. Face detect can work here, but again, it needs to be tight to keep, well, focussed.

So, no sensor cropping with a f1.8 medium tele with accurate focus and the depth of field of a 2.8 lens. The two stop ISO drop, if it actually matters at all, is mitigated somewhat*

Good enough quality for most uses and similar to what is coming out of the full frame cameras the other togs are using.

A fourth element, but one that the new raft of mirrorless lenses is reducing all the time, is the M43 lens design advantage. The format was choosen for a variety of reasons and the smaller, squarer format, reduces the need to make extraordinary focal lengths** was one of them. All of my lenses perform professionally wide open, even the cheaper ones, becasue all are asked to do something relatively easy. A good medium tele is a sweet spot for most makers, it just goes further with m43.

A final, but less relevant thing in this space is the advantage smaller sensors have with stabilising. Apart from Olympus’ advantage in tech, it is simply easier to stabilise a smaller sensor.

A shot taken with a hand held 600mm at a reasonably high ISO and low shutter speed. Not affordable, nor likely possible with full frame and really, who wants to be “that” guy lugging a huge lump of glass around a school concert. This was taken before No Noise came into my life, so even better is possible.

My standard for indoor sport is my 40-150 pro, but if the ISO’s are hovering around the 6400+ mark for 1/1000th, I will put the 75 or a 45mm on, netting either ISO 1600 or a faster shutter speedor a compromise between the two. I have never run out of options.

*ISO 6400 is very useable with M43 cameras and decent (not Adobe) processing. This handles most jobs fine. Past that, I can still compete thanks to the maths in m favour, but everyone is starting to see reduced quality.

**The Olympus 75 and 300mm and the Panasonic 200 f2.8 are all top of the line in their class, which is quite easy to achieve at these relatively conservative focal lengths. Rare and bulky 600mm lenses for full frames however are not realistic for most (the Nikon 400 2.8 at work is a monster), pushing their price up even further. You could actually buy 2x EM1xs’, the 40-150, 75, 8-18, 300, 200 with matched extenders for the price of the Canon 600 f4 and the bulk of it for the price of the camera needed. At the end of the day, either way you have a super fast 20mp camera with 600 f4 capable of pro results up to ISO 6400, just that one fits in a shoulder bag and costs 1/4 the price of the other.

Clear Wins And Soft Losses

I have made a few purchases and kit choices lately, so here are the wins and losses.

Wins.

A second G9. I loved the G9 on first sight, but it never felt like the right camera for stills. My all Oly lens kit, the price of the smaller EM1 mk2 with phase detect AF and the huge differences in interface put me off the G9, but as a video camera option last year it was and still is a no brainer. This is where the rot set in, well that and the addition of the excellent 8-18 Leica. My video centric set-up for my one G9 was fine, but when it came to fleshing out my kit, another just seemed logical. Closer in many ways to an EM1x than an EM1.2 for 1/3rd the price, with better video specs and a better than average kit lens opton, mad if I didn’t.

A 50% crop from a G9+12-60 Leica, ISO 6400 file. Minimal processing required (nothing done to this outside of C1 import settings). I have often had issues with the white balance of this space, EM1 mk2’s turning it a little green/yellow and I struggled to make the files look clean and bright. The G9 files need minimal fixing.

A single pass through ON1 No Noise, with no other tweaks made. This is a very tight crop and fully useable as is. M43 at high ISO, with movement, dodgy light, instictive capture speed, electronic shutter, then minimal processing? All good.

Leica 12-60. The 12-60 kit is great and for peanuts, probably a must buy, but leica lens matched with a G9 has been a revelation. I was worried it would be a compromise as the variable aperture 8-18 has occassionally felt like, but I had not matched that lens to a G9 and the diference is massive. ISO 6400 is sharp, colourful and clean and all perfromance handicaps disappear. Just magic.

Domke f804. A lucky find and one I would have regretted not getting. I really don’t need it, but I am so glad I had a chance to grab one when it popped up. A bit of practical history at work and a bag I feel will find more uses as time goes on.

Domke 217 case. The back saver I needed and a grat way of just staying organised.

Selens COB 150 lights. Quiet, powerful and cheap.

Zoom F1. This has made the Zoom kit eminently practical. The H5 and H1 are fine for most uses, but basically suck as on camera shotgun setups. The F1 gives me a decent pro shotgun/mid-side with the SSH-6, but also offers an XY capsule, LAV and others, all in a small and well damped rig. It also supplies a backup track. Backups are good ‘k.

Manfrotto 1.8x2.1 Black/Grey collapsible back drop and bracket. Got the portrait job of a life time and it literally paid for itself.

Soft fails.

Crumpler Muli 8000. Good but unnecessary. Lots of bags, many as good or better, just a drain on finances and solved nothing.

Neewer NL 140 lights. These are fine I guess, but they need a cable, can have tendency to blow a fuse and are very cheap feeling. They did not cost me much, but still, not my best purchase and they would have paid for a much better Selens COB with change.

12-60 kit. A great little lens for travel or as a sacrificial lamb in bad weather, but after grabbing the Leica, I could have passed on this one.

Hard fails.

Nothing yet, so my luck has been running with me.

Bag Follow-ups

The Crumpler Muli 8000 is a nice, sound, well made bag, but limited in it’s uses mainly because of the odd inserts and lack of pockets. Even using M43 gear, I find a two camera and three lens kit is its realistic limit. The big front pocket is decent, but that and the computer divider are basically all you have. I could add some pouches to the ends, but I have none that fit the horizontal straps.

This bag has highlighted for me how I have moved away from rigid bags in favour of flexible and soft body huggers.

Uses? A shall job grab bag that looks nice or maybe I will assign it to small portrait or studio kits.

Nice looking bag though.

The f804 is a winner in that it is the first bag I have bought in a long time that is actually exactly what it was advertised to be. It is big, the footprint quite deep, but I have options there when that is too much. If the base panel is removed or exchanged, I can soften it down, an insert can be used for some rigidity or added depth when used as it was meant to be.

The rear panel, used for carrying it on an extended suit case handle will be put to use soon, with the 217 Pro-roller. This was part of the reason I grabbed that bag.

Uses? The school kit, because I tend to use several cameras with a mix of zooms and primes (hate changing lenses in the field).

The big 217 case has arrived and like most of my Domke purchases, it has exceeded expectations, or more to the point, it actually met them.

Not deep enough to take a long lens standing, it can take every other bit of gear without issue.

Sme real wins, some mild losses, but nothing will be wasted.

New Kit Dynamic, Some Thoughts

Today I did my first big engagement for the school with my Panasonic-centric kit*.

In a word….awesome. The G9 is made for this environment. I loved the face detect accuracy and feed back, my custom layout, which included ISO on the back wheel and a few other touches was more instinctive and faster and the 12-60 Leica lens just rocks! As I oved from brightly lit outdoors to mixed light rooms, the thumb just rolled to adjust. For ISO performance, I put it up with the G9, which I put down to the sensor not having to house phase detect pixels. I noticed early on a big difference in sharpness to noise betweent eh G9 and EM1 mk2’s in Lightroom, but C1 bridged much of that gap. The EM1x matched the cleaner sensor with more powerful processing, but only matched it. AF paid the price, but for some tasks, the G9 still beats the EM1.2’s.

The G9 also handles the mixed lighting I have to deal with better, with white balance and ISO quality that generally means less processing. For the school, I shoot quality in bulk, so less processing is a boon.

The electronic shutter seems to be banding free up to ISO 3200 at least. I have not tried it everywhere or at higher ISO’s, but so far, all good.

Even the reversed zoom action is not a big deal. I feel I can get the hang of this by using only G9’s for the zoom lens work and primes on my EM5’s amd EM10’s for the school and limiting the Pro Oly cameras and zoom lenses to the paper, but it may just be one of those things that takes some adjusting to for each job.

Performance with Olympus lenses is surprisingly good. I shot a very speculative sequence with the 75mm in a poorly lit gym and it hit more than I expected wide open. Not sure I would expect better from an Oly camera. This was in face detect and with no specific AF considerations used, so more may be possible. This may put on hold my desire to get a long Pana lens for this kit (35-100 or 50-200).

It’s funny how your needs change. I would have once felt under done in a school shoot without my 40-150 Pro, but now the combination of a 75 prime and slower long lens (40-150, 75-300 kit) is enough. Ironically, I started with these two and felt they were enough, bought the big zoom back off a friend and quickly became dependant on it.

I have pressed the f804 into service for the school. At the school, especially because I use more cameras and with them prime lenses, the bigger bag gives me plenty of room to handle three mounted and ready to go. School shoots tend to be about reacting to and capturing every opportunity, the paper needs more method, less volume.

A beautiful morning in the school gardens.

The f802 is better it turns out for the paper, where I need fewer cameras, but ever changing choices of lenses and lighting. It has two extra external pockets (900 series pouch additions). The f804 is just roomier in the main compartment, but without pockets, it lacks options.

From the long haul 217 roller bag (best purchase this year), I pack the f802 as needed, with the bigger pocket even handling a 200 LED kit or rain coat.

*G9 for stills, G9 for video (both backups to the other), 1 of 2 EM10.2’s and 1 of 2 EM5’s with the 8-18, 12-60 Leicas, 45, 75, 40-150 kit and 75-300 kit lenses, all in a f804 Domke.

Saturday Sports Day

Only a few weeks in, or days really seeing as I only do two a week, I have scored a few Saturdays, which are sports days primarily. Friday tends to be a flurry of editorial, but Saturday is all about things done with balls.

I was allocated the bugbear of all, Netball. the reasons it is not loved by all are several.

The game has a natually stop-start nature, no flow like Basketball with movement of the ball prohibited and the ball carrier is also limited to a few seconds before disposal (not that top end players wait more than a split second).

Add to this generally poor indoor light, a small and reatively crowded court (7 players a side) with sometimes very little movement room around the edges. It is fast at this level only adding to these limits.

And finally, players may switch position every quarter, so their allocated bib may not match the pre-assigned player from quarter to quarter. This last is vital as we have to caption images correctly and my last game had look-alike sisters who played in similar but constantly changing spots, so you may find yourself trying to match action shots to old club team images. At this level, the players do have their names printed on the back, but even then, you need to get the shot, then get the back of the player in the same sequence. Some of the shots below could not be submitted, because I could not be sure.

Tactics?

M43 actually gives you a massive advantage here. My 150 f1.8 equiv 75mm, used wide open still means I need ISO 32-6400 at 1/1000th or so, but with C1 and ON1, that is not a problem and depth of field is nearly ideal, being f2.8 full frame equivalent. I can get the main player(s) razor sharp and some pleasantly softened support characters.

Stalikng one player can be the best way of guaranteeing one player, but you still need to get the others around them (or exclude them). This also requires a certain amount of time.

The EM1x and this lens are almost empathically fast to focus. I set a 1x3 tall AF point pre-set in vertical (I wish Olympus would allow a 2 wide, but they only offer 1 or 3), to cut through groups to the subject I want and it also seems to work ok in horizontal for longer shots.

Many of these are cropped, some quite heavily, but I have my full 20mp to play with. A full frame with the same lens at half the magnification would need to be 40mp+ to match that with a similar lens or you would need to use a longer, probably slower lens and loose the ISO advantage. It would also be focussing on a wider area, so less precise.

So all that taken into consideration, I had to shoot either end of a football match, with Netball in between and the transit time was about 10 minutes either way. I managed a quarter at each contact, which can be plenty. My big error was to try to do the football with only my shorter tele and the 1.4x (56-210 for 110-420 equiv). This proved a little short for only two quarters of the game, relying on all the action being on my side of the ground. Next time I will go back to what works, my 300 and 40-150 in tandem, so much for saving the back!

Practice will make me improve and I am already getting an eye for the editors preference (tight), but on a technical level, all is good.

The EM1x with an EM1 mk2 as my second camera, 12-40, 40-150, 75 (indoors) and 300mm kit is perfect and the lot can be transported in a single shoulder bag!

Last Bag Ever.....Seriously....Last One.....Promise.

I work two days a week at the local paper, three to five with the school, depending on my roster with the paper and then other stuff.

My kit was to be divided equally between the school and paper jobs.

Simple.

Not so simple it turns out. The paper can throw a lot at you in a day and my kit needs to be both all encompassing and surgically specialised, so for me there is no “one kit” option (not one I want to carry anyway). Added to this is the problem of where things can be left.

I cannot leave one kit in one location, because I just cannot predict what a week will bring. This means I need to lug a comprehensive kit back and forth between work places and home, including 2 laptops, all the accessories I may need, flash gear and lenses covering 16-600, both fast prime and zoom and cameras in depth. Thank heavens for M43.

There are things I have duplicates of that can stay in my locker at the paper like some small mics, flash kit, a spare rain jacket and chargers, but that is it.

On the way out the door to a job, I may only need one lens and one camera, but I cannot predict at the start of the day which ones I will need.

The other “Togs” can store their paper supplied gear in the office and have their own private gear should they need it. I can’t, so have chosen to use my own equipment, taking the load off the papers’ gear pool and simply because I prefer to use it (the idea of switching into a Nikon SLR mode for two days a week does not appeal).

So, the problem is, I need to tote a large amount of gear over about a kilometer from my car to the paper twice a week. Currently I am useing a Protactic 350 backpack, a bag I dislike, but it does have it’s uses and a Domke 802 or 804 shoulder bag, both full*. I then feed out of the backpack and carry the Domke. If I have two shifts together, I can leave some or all of it behind, but this is not a regular thing.

The solution.

When looking for the F804 at Photovideo.com.au, I noticed a Domke roller bag. These, like a lot of Domke bags have been discontinued, but at PV, there are a half dozen left at a good price. For a little over $200au, I have a medium sized rolling case that not only holds more than the Protactic (mainly because it is a lot deeper), but it also takes the F804 on the extended handle bars. I can get to work with shoulders free from aches, which will come later in the day.

This bag will be where the bulk of the papers’ kit will live, with bits plucked out as needed to expand my School and personal kits.

I expect the bag will also be useful for bigger private and school jobs where things like 7” diffusers and power chords are needed.

The front flap has room for both laptops inside or out and even a smaller bag like an F2 or F3x.

At the price, I cannot think of a better roller bag, so grab one while you can.

* 2 EM1 Mk2’s, EM1x, 8-18, 17, 25, 45, 75, 12-40, 40-150, 300, 1.4x, 2 Godox flash units and controller, Mac Air, Thinkpad (becasue I like to use one, the paper needs the other and it is sloooow) and assorted stuff and lunch.

The G9 and Leica Go On Holidays Pt3.

We left Hobart after two great days and the weather finally broke for the better.

Taken from a fast moving car. This is a typical scene from the highway between Hobart and Launceston, especially in the southern half.

An ancient gum tree in Ross. The Australian Eucalyptus is a “glowacious” tree as Brett Western would say.

The Leica is a great range for landscape work. The colour is quite different to that of the Olympus, less dense, brighter, with softer greens and blues. Swapping lenses between the systems allows for some quite nuanced colour control from warm and dense for all Olymous to fine and bright on all Lumix.

Winter details are held up to a fine degree.

Genuine landscape grade detail.

A final look at Bokeh

Background is nice, smooth enough, but with some coherent detail and has “snappy” forground edges.

Foreground blurring is also workable. This lens makes me want to use, not avoid Bokeh as a creative element.

All in all a great little mini break and a reassuring trial for he new gear.

The G9 is still a quagmire f options, especially with focussing. I stumbled across the custom AF patterns, then could not find out how to switch between them and I refuse to read the manual (I believe you should not have to), but for regular use I have its measure. It is odd that I customised the camera so quickly for video, but stills has been less easy, mostly because of focussing controls. This was thing giving me jitters for the paper, where speed and control are needed.

The G9 And Leica Go On Holidays Pt 2.

After a morning in Richmond, we travelled back to Hobart proper.

A last shot from Richmond

The Leica seems to add a snappiness.

Hobart, unlike my native Launceston has a harbour to rival most.

More snappy Leica love.

Modern art in an old setting.

This quite high contrast file was easily handled by the Leica and G9 sensor.

G9 And Leica 12-60 Go On Holidays Pt 1.

Unlike me lately, I took some holiday snaps over the last few days. The main reason was a bus drivers holiday in a way, shooting casually as an antidite to shooting seriously, but it was still relaxing and I need to get a handle on the G9’s for stills.

Stuck in traffic on a highway that always seems to be in fux. Every little blade of grass…………

Good signs early on. The view through the view finder is reassuring and pleasant, “snappy” even.

The historic town of Richmond just outside of Hobart was explored better today than previously. A polariser would have been good here to tame the cold blue glare a little, but the lens contrast and C1 managed to bring it back and to be honest, it looked like this.

More quaintness.

Only another few yards down the street,

and just around the corner. Fine detail is extreme, both from resolution and micro contrast. Happy days.

A nice Bokeh transition. It manages that Leica silky smooth and snappy sharp combination.

Bokeh again used to highlight the old head stone in the foreground, without alienating the newer ones (f4 at 40mm). A true story telling lens. Some lenses force a desire to consciously avoid Bokeh as a creative element, others, like this one, push you to use it (more on that later).

A wet day, sometimes a little frustrating, but a weather proof camera and lens was reassuring.

Big Changes In Kit Direction

With the arrival of the Leica 12-60, I have had a massive change of heart kit wise.

The first few days shooting for the paper have been slightly unsettling.

The work is fine, my processes sound enough, but I am feeling like I am still too far away from breaking through and finding my best self in this space. Total confidence in my processes at the school have turned into a slightly rudderless feeling with the paper.

I think I hit on it when writing about the G9. I have not yet fully connected with that camera for stills. For video it is ideal and streets ahead of the Olympus cameras in handling and features, but even there, I had years of familiarity and success with those cameras to compare to (credit to the G9 for standing out).

When pushed into a stills role, it had the double hit of being torn from it’s comfort zone (with me) and having to co-kit with an EM1. Too much difference, too little comfort.

I have decided, thanks mainly to the confidence inspiring Leica as my new standard lens, to only use Olympus cameras for the paper, taking the 12-40 back into the fold, where their strengths (familiarity, stabiliser and AF lens responsiveness) and their weakness (1080 video) can be balanced and use the two G9’s for the school. This allows me to get a handle on the Panas in a more comfortable and far less aggressive environment and use them as backups to each other in both rolls. Other complications like battery compatibilty are also reduced.

Effectively, the EM1 trio will be tasked with nursing me into my new role at the paper, the G9’s will get me nursing them into the more comfortable and less stressful world of school photography and videography.

I will still use the “lesser” Oly cameras for the school, but they are different enough even to an EM1, that they share basically the same dynamic with the G9’s and the news paper kit will still be pressed into service for big sports events, but these are only a handfull of days each year as opposed to every Saturday and more with the paper. Horses better aligned to their courses.

Paper; 2x EM1 Mk2’s (1 gripped, 1 optional video rig), EM1x (action), 8-18*, 12-40, 40-150, 17, 25, 45, 1.4x, Godox flash kit, OSMO and “small” mics. My only point of mild concern is a dislike for the fiddly Godox X1 controller, so this may be upgraded and the “lumpy” 12-40, but I will get over this or just get it fixed.

Searching for an image, I realised, I only went into 12mm territory in the first place for my first job at a different school (this anticipated shot specifically), then I went down the 8mm track for the same reasons. In my perfect world, 14mm (28mm FF), would likely be the widest I would ever need as I generally dislike the overtly wide angle look.

School; 2x G9’s (1 video rigged), 2x EM10’s, 2x EM5’s, 8-18*, 12-60, 12-60k, 45, 75, 75-300, 40-150k, YN flash units and all the other lighting and serious studio kit and sound kit. The Oly cameras like their primes, so they will be matched up.

Bold, italicised cameras and lenses are weatherproof.

I will possibly also add an Oly 8-25 to the papers’ kit so the 8-18 can stay in the school kit exclusively and replace the 12-40 as needed. This lens has several desirable features like it’s massive range, macro versatility and raw quality as well as sharing the same filter thread as the 40-150 Pro. The 12-40 would stay on as the only “one lens needed” option, the two others would be the “full range” kit, but it could also be used in the Pana kit for video.

I have toyed with the idea of a fisheye 8mm here because for newspaper work, fisheye lenses are more “intimate” than corrected super wides, but the damn thing is nearly as dear as the 8-25 zoom. Maybe a Laowa 7.5 or the Samyang 8mm?

Ongoing, I can see the schools’ kit being relatively coddled and settled, the papers’ having additions and replacements as the need arises. Part of the reason for the change is the gorgeous look of the new Leica and near new G9’s, which I am loath to inflict a journo’s lifestyle onto. The school shoots are more predictable and controlled.

*

*The 8-18 is swapped as needed until replaced (if needed). The reality is, I need a true super wide rarely for either, so it will likely just stay in the papers’ kit, then grabbed as needed for the school. I only really bought it for very occassional use, but pressed it into service in preference to the 12-40 with it’s “lumpy” zoom.

Realities And Hopes

I bought the 12-60 kit knowing that, barring manufacturing variances, it was a great “punch above it’s weight” option. I love these, lenses and sometimes cameras that not only justify their modest cost, but often hold their own against “better” gear.

The lens was kitted for next to nothing, so cheap in act that for Australian stock, I could not find a better priced G9, with or without lens.

The Leica came from a desire to replace the 12-40 Oly lens, which is functioning fine, but has a “lump” in its zoom, which just bothers me. The kit lens has tested well and is a “safe” bet for my school kit, but it lacks speed and that certain something that excites me.

It will be used plenty and is one of my best purchases in M43, but there was room I felt for a real pro-grade standard lens.

So, how did I go?

This lens has a metric F%^#ton of goodness in its tiny body. It feels sublime (soooo smooth and tight), is perfectly sized, feeling if anything, slightly better balanced than the 12-40 and the stabiliser and focus lift I was hoping for is clearly there.

I am now as confident with the G9 as I have been with the EM1x. Thanks to a couple of the better G9 bloggers out there (and there are more than you would imaging for just one camera), I have honed my settings and feel the camera is at about its best for stills and video.

Very nice and quickly aquired file. Through the eye finder, it just felt like it would be pretty.

Sharp like my 25, maybe even my 75. It actually produces similar files to the 12-40. This is at the relatively weak 60mm focal length, so I an only guess what the supposedly superior 40mm focal length may deliver!. Worthy of mention is the 1600 ISO which I did not even notice in processing.

This file has been poked and prodded and like those from my best camera and lens combinations (EM1x with 300 and 40-150), it gave back plenty.

If I were to sum up this lens, how would I?

Confidence building. The lack of connection I have felt with the G9’s has been closed slightly.

I was literally working out an Olympus based kit for the paper, simply to get back to what I know best while I find my feet, but I am swinging back to plan “A”, which is a mixed kit. The G9 used for standard and wide lenses (the Leicas) and Oly for long lenses.

Leica Love

As a young photographer, I always had a feeling of lust, awe even for Leica glass. Later, that migrated more to a genuine preference for Carl Zeiss, who it turned out, pre-date leica as the “lustful” brand.

My second* Leica arrived today and mere minutes later I have “quick and dirty” tested it.

Hand held, 1600 wide open at 12mm. The following four are the (slightly distorted by the shooting angle) corner shots with no processing applied.

This thing looks well aligned and seriously sharp.

At 40mm, same “perfect” technique. This is apparently the focal length that blows away some test charts.

Wide open at the long end, nice Bokeh.

A crop from above, it looks sharp enough

Like a lot of high end lenses, it takes sharpening well.

A very nice feeling lens, with silent focus, inperceptible stabilising and great sharpness through the range and across the frame.

So far, my Lumix experimanet has provided me with two excellent cameras and three equally excellent matched lenses for about $4500au.

Nice.

Look Ma, Two Hands!

Sometimes necessity is the mother of invention, or even desperate adaption.

I recently shot a gala ball and plans went south almost immediately. The remit was to cover the entry hall for casual arrivals, mingle, follow the groups into the main hall, do set shots against a pre-printed background then mingle some more.

I have done this sort of thing many times before for the school and my basic process was to shoot flash on camera with a black flagging foam, then use a brolly or two in studio mode for groups and couples who will come to me.

Previous success with the black flagged technique aside, I just needed to go one more step.

Problem:

What happens when the background is so shiny, it lights up like the sun and there is no room to move the lighting off angle enough to fix it?

You pack up the stands, brollies and strobes, determined to work something out later.

*

Too pressed for time to worry then and there, I slotted a flash on to my camera and played the usual dance of (flash) head twisting and flagging foam shifting for vertial and horizontal candid shots.

Suddenly people started asking for a formal shot, so I tried something, not sure why, but something between on camera and stand mounted flash.

Armed with a single flagged flash (YN560 IV) in my left hand, an EM1 and 17mm with flash controller mounted (YN560TX), all set to manual, I tried to fire the light onto the background at a good angle to avoid flare. Turns out the right angle was to bounce it off the ceiling from the middle of the entry way stairs!

This was so freeing!

Camera angle and flash angle were now two separate entities.

A one handed camera is no issue.

This one was bounced off the red floor to give these little devils the right feel. How would you do that with a camera mounted flash?

Even distances and high ceilings can be coped with, simply by raising the ISO, flash power and most importantly, pointing the flash up to the higher ceiling from a good three feet above the camera.

You can run an EM1, even in manual, one handed with a small prime like the 17mm. The 17 only needed to be set at f2-2.8 for plenty of depth for two rows (equivalent to f5.6 in full frame) and 1/60th at ISO 800 provided nice ambient light and plenty of power for the flash unit. Zooming is done with your feet. The flash was zoomed to 42 (I think), then set to 1/2 to 1/8th depending on location and off I went.

The devils own backcrop, flare central. You can get the feeling of it’s brightness in this one, but reducing exposure in post eliminated it. As it turns out, it was too small for its purpose, so angled shots to cope with the shallow passage way would have been likely anyway. Where I am standing (middle of the enntry stairs), was not ideal for a light stand and brolly! On the other side the organisers had a row of tables with wigs to be raffled, so no shifting that.

Shot after shot, with mild adjustments made as needed (it only took a few shots to get the different ceiling heights and wall distances down pat), and no shot was unuseable out of 700+!

The light was usually lovely like this. If not, look to the photographer, who made a few bad choices. No shadows on faces or walls, nothing unnatural about the light and plenty of brilliance without “flashy” hot spots. Basically portable butterfly lighting.

Ok, all very well, but what if you have no wall or ceiling?

I am going to try this, a slightly less convenient, but still one-man-band style trick.

Flash on camera, flagged if needed and pointed at a 60cm 5-in-1 reflector hand held at the desired angle.

Portable, large face soft box.

Another option is a 33” white brolly with a small holder for the flash, but that needs more room than the average camera bag could supply.

Bags, More Bags

The F804 Domke has been good. The size is an irrelevant necessity, but loaded weight is not.

I may take a smaller bag in for my new “lite” kit*.

The Crumpler may be pressed into service, the Domke F3x even, or possibly one of my non-camera bags.

I can go out either “fully loaded” or “fast and light”. Often when I need the long lens, I actually only need the long lens and when I go out without it, but get caught, the super sharp 75 is still capable of producing “extra reach” by cropping if necessary. It is also very fast focussing and allows me to carry the EM1 with the lens mounted on it removing my other major dislike of changing lenses all the time.

There is scope for this lens to be replaced by the 35-100 f2.8 Pana**, but there are some considerations there. The difference between 75 and 100 is negligible in controlled situations (but f1.8 to 2.8 is not), AF on an Oly is less than perfect (I would then leave the EM1 behind), it is weatherproof and has a wide cross-over with the 12-60 (in fact all three zooms have massive cross-over from 12-18 and 35-60).

Looking down the track, I can see the 40-150, 75 and 35-100 all in one place at one time, just never in a bag together. It’s my job, not my hobby, so I need to buy the tools that are needed.

It troubles me going out with only one camera. It does not seem to bother the other more experienced shooters. A near new G9 is likely more reliable than a 12 year old D500 with probably close to a 1,000,000 frame count, so I could get over it! Anyway, the EM1 would be back at the office.

Maybe not a redundant purchase.

*G9, 12-60, 8-18, 45 and 75. This kit actually removes the biggest issue I had in the past, my big Oly kit of gripped Em1 camera and 40-150 Pro, opening up bag options massively.

**this lens will likely be added as it adds good options to every kit I may use. It will up my travel kit, removing the need to carry two lenses, give me a better video tele, a lighter work tele and a point of difference.

Adjusting To The G9 For Stills

I like the G9 for stills, but I am also aware I am not fully in control of it yet. Here is what I can share now about the cameras positives and negatives.

Positives

(compared mostly to the work horse EM1 Mk2’s for context).

Physical controls.

The G9 has a wheel and “nubbin” control, which are both a bonus over the EM1 Mk2.

The wheel takes me back to Canon and with ISO or exposure comp assigned to it. I love this dynamic.

The nubbin is right in line with the later Canons and the EM1x (and EM1 Mk3 if I had one). For video it controls White Balance, in stills it is assigned to the AF area control.

The extra real estate of the G9 allows for specific controls for most functions (somewhere between Nikon on the left side and Canon on the right side), but these are also very different to the Olympus style (like the Canon/Nikon tension). I need to invest some serious time into this camera and assign it to specific tasks to get my head right with it. With the new and old Leicas’s it will be my main camera for the paper, Olympus saved for sports and action.

Touch functions.

I do not tend to use touch controls for anything other than AF/shoot on the Oly’s, but that is something I find indispensable. On the G9, almost every function can and often should (occassionally can only be), controlled by touch. Ironically, the camera often duplicates the physical controls with touch options, which can be too much.

Custom functions.

This is a game changer, especially for video. The customisation of the G9 surpasses the EM1 series for stills, but crucially, all video functions are available as well and the camera allows you to differentiate. Olympus has a hole in their game here, something the OM-1 seems to have addressed partly, but there is so much more available to the Pana user. This is like the difference between brush tool in Lightroom and C1. In C1 you can use basically any processing option, with any processing option. In Lightroom you are limited to a select few.

I can assign a set of video only, very specific settings to any function button, save it (up to 5 of them), then set the camera up for stills very differently. My 2 G9’s settled in very quickly to their video role and it was handy to duplicte these settings (by simply down loading them onto a card and transferring them!), then concentrate on a very different setup for stills. The video-centric one has been left at defaults for stills, the dual role one is an on-going journey.

Handling.

The camera feels more complete without a grip. I could add one, but do not feel the need. To be honest, I fell in love with this camera first time I held it a few years ago, but had mixed feelings about the view finder and full compatibility with Olympus lenses.

Video.

Stands to reason a camera bought for video would be good at it, but I am impressed by just how good it is. I also like the EM1’s 4k in FLAT profile, but the 1080p from the Pana, and the options this opens up (time lapse, slo-mo, dynamic cropping, 180 fps etc), are more than enough for my needs.

Image Quality.

The combination of the G9 and 75mm f1.8 has a nice image balance and extreme quality.

I will rate the IQ as closer to the EM1x/Pen F than the EM1 Mk2’s. The colour is neutral and mixes well with the slightly warmer Oly lenses. It seems to have the same super clear sharpness the Pen F displays, crisper than the EM1 Mk2, and with better noise control than either, possibly because, like the Pen F, it does not share the sensor with phase detection pixels.

I have had good luck with the electronic shutter at high ISO settings and the skin tones are stunning. White Balance can seem off in some RAW files (very yellow under indoor lights), but cleans up very well. Unlike the EM1 Mk2’s I find White Balance fixes are clean and logical.

Information.

The eye detect is clear, the AF point indicators also. The camera has a mountain of display options and is customisable.

*

Things I am not sure about yet.

Controls, touch screen, customisaton, information etc.

Just so much to learn, understand and set correctly. Sometimes this camera does my head in and I have needed to Google several functions. I cannot remember ever having to do that with Olympus.

I feel less “connected” to the G9 (at the moment). It is very capable, but I do not (yet) feel the immediacy I feel with the Oly cameras. It seem to me the EM’s are more workman like, the Panas are more amateur “tech over simplicity” oriented and much busier, almost like over grown compact cameras. I have on occassion just trusted the camera and generally that has been ok, but more than a bit unsettling none the less.

I changed it for stills shooting after one night of familiarity for the big portrait job and that was in hindsight both a great and equally, perilous move.

Power.

Battery life is a hair less than the EM1 Mk2, but batteries are cheap enough. The only two times this is really an issue are video and sporting events. It does not do the latter.

AF and stabilisation.

I do not trust the stabiliser or touch AF for video as much as I do the EM!x, or even the EM1 Mk2’s really, but with the Leica 12-60 coming, I hope this will get sorted. The 12-40 Pro Oly has performed very well on the G9, but not completely faultlessly, like with the EM1x. With later firmware and the Leica lens, most of the bugs seem to be ironed out.

The view finder.

Nothing really to complain about and it is better than the EM1 Mk2 on paper, but still adjusting.

To nutshell it;

The G9 is in many ways the superior camera both on paper and in use. It’s potential is greater with a feature range for a hybrid shooter that is unmatched by the equivalent Olympus or indeed many other cameras (and certainly nothing for the price).

The EM1’s generally (the “X” is special), are the better choice for “rubber meets the road” sports and action AF and are generally less complicated, so they are more intuitive than the Panas, although I am comparing years of Oly use to short months of Pana use. Shortfalls in video, a tiny lag in high ISO performance and a muddier/greener look from the Mk2 sensor are balanced with small size, familiar menues and their raw AF performance.

Somehow, I have muddled my way through to a decent split kit using two, mosty compatible brands, sharing one format, but handing it very differently.

The G9 (8-18, 12-60, 45, 75) will handle all close and indoor work with video and I will get on top of flash.

The EM1 (40-150) will be the sport and action/long lens camera.

These can work exclusively or be combined.

Lots Of Football

I have had a busy week.

New job and a tripple game football carnival on the weekend, which meant six straight hours on my feet, toteing lenses and cameras, then hours of processing (goodby Sunday).

High skill levels and plenty of passion.

Sometimes called “Aerial Ping Pong”, Australian rules has plenty of this.

How To Do A "Quick And Dirty" Lens Test

I have the new kit 12-60 panasonic lens, bought as a filler for my school work (mostly as a wide angle) and the Leica 12-60 is on the way. I bought this lens based on a previous test conducted at the shop I worked for, comparing several lenses with a wide element (15 Leica, 12-60, 14-140 and 12-35 Lumix, 12-100 and 12-40 Oly) and the 12-60 surprised. Only the 12-100/40’s and 15mm clearly beat the pack, the 12-35 was dissapointing for the money.

So, how do you calm the jitters and check that you have a good copy of a lens?

With zoom lenses, the reality is most have some slight optical inconsistency, but modern glass is seldom off kilter enough to be a real issue. For more on this the http://lensrentals.com blog has some great, but scary articles.

My tests, done “in the field” are simple checks to make sure the two most likely issues (three for SLR shooters*) are picked up quickly so you can either exchange the lens or more likely, just be aware of them.

De-centering.

When up to 20 elements of glass are layed down in the barrel of a new lens, there is a slim chance that they will have one or two not perfectly aligned. Designers take this into account and modern manufacturing tends to mean most of a batch are nearly idential, but batches may vary slightly, especially when a line is new.

My tests (EM5 Mk1, 12-60 kit) are done hand held, shifting the focus point onto the corner subject (the pillow on the empty chair).

Corner aligment at 12mm wide open (no post applied apart from C1 import and cropping).

Apart from colour shifts due to my non-scientific process, there seems little difference. If any corner is different at all, the lower left maybe slightly less controlled, but still falls within perfectly acceptible levels. If this was the best the lens could manage it would be fine. The fact some corners seem maybe even better is a win.

Now 60mm wide open

Again, no science applied here, but good and even performance.

Bokeh? Not really a big selling point for a slow M43 zoom lens, but the relality is, most photos have an element of Bokeh (it’s in the definition), and some of my favourite results have come from my slowest glass.

Background Bokeh at the long end is very pleasant. In reality, semi focussed Bokeh is possibly more imporrtant than “full blurr” Bokeh. With maximum blurring, post can easily be applied. When the background is included in an even semi coherent form, poor Bokeh behaviour is less fixable.

Foreground at the wide end is nicely smooth in rendering, making wide open use easier. Focus was on Daisys’ face at f3.5. “Invisible” transitions are ideal here, something the 17mm Oly is good at.

The best thing about the Bokeh is, when I tested the lens it went pretty much unnoticed.

*

Sharpness. I am used to even the cheapest M43 lenses being sharp enough for most tasks, but this lens has shown in my own previous tests and those done by many others, to be very close to the Leica in base sharpness. The question is, what “type” of sharpness is it**?

So, who decides to do a sharpness test at ISO 1600, hand held at 1/15th with a 13 year old camera? Apparently I do. The base image. The flat colour is down to the environment, the camera and ISO, but partly the lens with its “mild” colour rendering.

On the focus point (hair in front of the eye), sharpness is more than enough for publication even at big sizes. No post applied. Bokeh smoothness again shows up here.

Pushed a little with globally added Clarity and Sharpening. This is similar to my 40-150 kit. There is good micro contrast, decent base sharpness and control of other clarity reducing elements. Like the 40-150, it does not need much extra post applied. In Lightroom, I found some lenses struggled with the noise to sharpness balance, but C1 hits a decent level in both. The EM5 Mk1 has a “simple-sharp” sensor, an honest, pleasantly film-like look, but not as delicate as later models, so it may be the camera (especially at ISO 1600).

Other things?

As I tested, I looked for chromatic aberration, flare and glare and other obvious issues and found statlingly few. I was aware the Lumix lens is possibly even better than the Leica at handling flare and would believe it.

From my first day with it, when the sun was shining. Most of my lenses struggle with this one, a good excuse to avoid cleaning the window…... . For context, this was uncomfortable to my eye.

If I look at this lens in relation to it’s intended role, it will be better than fine.

As a wide angle filler, a good light “one lens” and studio/travel work horse, it has all the right characteristics. Would I use it for formal group shots of the school body, to cover jobs like my Telstra portrait shoot, street and travel portfolio work? Absolutely, but I have specialist options for each circumstance. If pushed it would be more than adequate. This lens has reminded me to use my “lesser” enses more. No-one but me knows the difference.

Why the Leica? Build, aperture choice (especially for video), slightly superior mechanics (again for video), the ability to cover the ranges in two kits. Basically that is it. This lens was the smart buy, something I am always happy to do. the Leica is the sensible buy, but always a higher risk to reward ratio.

*

Lens speed, the elephant in the room is always a consideration. Not much is enticing about employing it for low light action (this is when the full frame users start to pull ahead), but aside from that, it has few real weaknesses. At the wide end, it is fast enough and for the uses it will be put to and if used in the studio, speed is irrelevant.

Importantly, it works efficiently within the envelope of what it offers. There is nothing more frustrating than an already conservative lens that has to have special considerations applied. If it only offers f5.6, then f5.6 needs to be useful, otherwise it is actually an f8 lens. I have come across this before and it is a fail mark***.

Would I spend $600au on it? No, I would spring for a little more and get one of the many other standard lenses available like the Oly 12-45 f4, but for $100 in a kit, it is a steal. It’s even weather proof and dual stabilised.

*Calibration of lens to camera focal plane was a common concern with SLR cameras, something I struggled with regularly, but off the sensor focussing in mirrorless cameras has removed this as a consideration.

**To me sharpness comes in several forms based on sensor and lens, from simple/honest to complicted/delicate and results in lenses that do or do not like sharpening, contrast or clarity of different sorts applied. This is subjective, personal even, but a real observation from seeing many lenses and cameras.

***My Canon 17-40 f4L especially on a full frame camera had several “exceptons” including a performance dip in the mid range, effectively zero resolution in the corners wide open at the wide end some CA etc. This did not stop being one of the most popular lenses in the Canon range, but it needed to be used intelligently.