Portrait Photography Basics Part 1

Time for me to talk portrait photography again.

This has been a ground breaking year for me in this area. Starting the journey last year with some experimentation, building a home studio, re-converting that back to a study, because I realised I did not need or even want a fixed space, shooting the Telstra board, several drama casts and plenty of “home” shots, I have become reasonably confident in this space.

Confidence breeds creativity as it reduces clutter, confusion and redundancy and allows for healthy experimentation. At some point, you stop thinking about process, then get excited about possibilities and concentrate on your subject.

The point of this post is to show just how easy and cheap it is to achieve a good quality portrait.

So, first up, what do you need.

Camera and Lens

Anything will do, honestly. A basic and I mean basic entry level SLR, Mirrorless or even top end compact (has to have a basic hotshoe and preferably a 1” sensor or bigger), with a standard kit zoom can do wonders. The reason for this is you have control of the space, so you are using your kit in it’s comfort envelope, not stressing it.

Any lens used wisely with any camera can produce beautiful portraits, some less than perfect lenses even add a distinctive look. If you can stretch to it, a fast prime lens in the (full frame) 50-100mm range (25-70 in smaller sensor formats) can guarantee the best quality and some depth of field control, but probably more than in any field of professional photography, camera and lens selection mean less than most other considerations.

My top end portrait kit is the Olympus Pen F or Panasonic G9 with the 25mm or 45mm f1.8 Olys, Sigma 30 f1.4 or one of the 12 to X zooms. If I have room, the king is the 75mm f1.8, but it needs a good ten feet or more. At a pinch, an OM10 mk2 with a kit zoom works just fine.

The three shots above were taken with different focal lengths. The shortest lens (Oly 25/Sigma 30) adds intimacy and a slight 3d effect. The middle lens (Oly 45mm) is good for a stand-off shot with a feeling of “rightness”, seeing the world rough the same as the human eye. The longest (Oly 75mm) adds compression and tightness as well as maximum background blur if wanted.

Lighting

After a camera and lens have been sorted, lighting must be tackled. Lighting is main determining factor for adding “a” quality to, and determining “the” quality of your portraits. Nothing else is as important.

The rules here are;

• Enough light to give you control of the balance between artificial and natural.

• Control of your light direction, number of lights, colour and contrast.

• Shape or intensity of the type of light also called modification.

• Keep it simple as possible.

Enough can be as easy as one or two cheap manual flash units. If you only want to do single person portraits, then a single $100 speedlite flash is plenty. I use M43 kit so I gain a slight power advantage over a full frame user, but even if you have a large sensor camera, one light can work. As I will explain below, you usually want your light quite close to your subject, so enough power is easy to achieve.

My kit consists of a clutch of manual YungNuo 560 mk3 and 4’s, retailing for about $100au each. They have been dropped, hammered and have never failed. The on camera controller can be the cheap little TX560 or one of the units, so a bare minimum is 1 flash and 1 controller ($160au), but 2 flash units gives you peace of mind and options. With a half a dozen of these at hand I actually have too much light, but it’s nice to have options and depth.

Neewer, Godox and others make similar, so basically look for the best price and for this buy Manual only units not TTL. These are not brand specific, always give you the same light at the same settings and are generally half the price of their TTL equivalent. TTL is great for gun and gun or straight on camera flash but are a little twitchy in a studio, reacting to changing subjects etc. The main thing here is to get decent rechargeable batteries. Amazon basics or Eneloop are ideal. An even cheaper option is an entry level plug in to the wall studio light set, which usually comes with stands and brollies.

Naiural light is fine, when you can find it.

Control means simply the ability to determine the number of lights wanted, their power and the ability to place them where you need them. A couple of cheap stands like the 2m Neewer stainless or even the really cheap ones in starter kits are a start. If your subject is sitting, then 2 meters tall is plenty, but for standing, go for 2.6m.

I have a ton of these at hand, usually using a 2.6m for my backdrop, a pair of 2m for lights and a super light 1.8m for rim light. The basic rule is, they just need to be tall enough and strong enough, especially if you want to add weights to them for safety (I use 2kg K-Mart ankle weights).

2 lights is a good start, one is enough for many looks. More go into more creative and complicated territory. A key light is mandatory, but can be any strong source (the rule here is to make the part of the subject you want, to be brighter than the background, simple as that). The fill light can come from a number of sources including reflective surfaces, if needed at all. A third or fourth light are optional, but do provide options.

Often a determining factor for power is the lens aperture used (small apertures like those found on cheaper lenses like f5.6 can force you to use more power more often) and distance from light to subject. For maximum softness, you need the light source to be big and closer if possible so the second often looks after itself.

Shape or intensity of light is the creative key for lighting quality. This is the most daunting bit, but also the most creative side. First you need to decide on the look or looks you want to achieve. Do ypu wanrt sfot and open looking portraits, hard and contrasty or a generous mix of both? This will determine the modifiers needed. For 90% of your work, cheap white umbrellas are plenty. Even cheaper, a single light, brolly and a reflective surface will do. I have tested various modifiers and to be honest, a cheap 33” white brolly is effectively the same as a 4’ soft box if used properly.

You will need a primary light, called the key light. This can easily be natural light, like a window or even a room light, but relying on nature can be a trap. With just one artificial light you can mimic nature easily. The key light will determine the look you are after. Often these lights get a second name for the type of light they produce. Butterfly, Rembrandt, Split etc are all types of key light, but regardless, the key light determines what else you need.

The second light is called fill light, which removes sometimes bottomless shadows caused by the key light. Fill is always the weaker light, so any thing from a weaker flash setting to a stronger modifier or even a reflective surface can work. The rule of thumb is 2 stops of light less, but it varies.

The third is the rim or hair light. Purely optional and even the sun or ambient light can do this role, the rim light help separate the subject from their background,

Themost common use of a fourth light is for the background. This is a handy way to change background colour or even at a halo effect. It is even possible to make a grey background white with enough light.

The full house. The key light is a standard left hand 45 degrees to the side, 45 degrees ubove shoot through brolly. The fill is a lower reversed brolly shooting into the shadow side and the hair light is coming from the right side rear.

No introduced light here. The key is natural light through a door on the shady side of a building, no fill was used as the key was quite soft and there was no light to add, but the light behind added rim lighting.

My base kit is a pair of 42” white Godox brollies and a small soft box for optional rim lighting. I bought these first up and could have easily settled. cannot explain why I have 20+ other options at hand, but guaranteed, if I need a reliable core kit, these are my go-to’s. I use the main light with a brolly facing the subject, the light shooting through it, the “fill” light is the same, but reversed, which reduces the output by about 2 stops. The third light if used is fired through a small soft box. A lighter option for me is a single light and brolly, with maybe a small reflector for fill/rim.

As you can see, the bill so far does not need to be excessive. If you intend to be a natural light portraitist, then the lens needs to be a faster one like an f2.8 zoom or even a $200 f1.8 prime simply to control background blur and collect more light. This may be all you need with a reflector or diffuser panel for on the go fill.

Nothing but natural light.

If you want to use mostly artificial light, then a cheaper kit lens is fine, but $2-300 needs to be spent on lights and stands etc.

My “full noise” rig from a recent drama shoot. The continuous black allowed for full length shots, my key and fill were both reversed brollies, the left hand one a backed one, reflecting a little more light and set higher. The floor brolly was to help separate the subjects so they could be cut out in post and the rim light is a little 30” soft box nearest the camera right.

Stands, backdrop, lights, brollies etc came in at about $400au.

In part 2 we will look at technique and backgrounds.

New Screen Saver

Sometimes you find yourself standing in the middle of a field, surrounded by the wonders of (genetically modified) nature.

Bit of a before and after moment.

The Over The Shoulder Portrait

I have started to train our reporters to expect a series of over the shoulder portraits taken when they are interviewing.

Saya Sakakibara, an Olympian and Australian BMX champ. The usual staged shot was always an option, but not an attrative one. This was the chosen shot and I am happy about that.

Another of many pleasant and natural portraits. The 40-150 f4 is proving to be a champion at this also.

One of the main advantages of modern mirrorless cameras is silence. Paired with face detection and multi angle shooting, you have plenty of tools to get any type of natural portrait.

All the shots on this page were taken over the last couple of weeks.

The set portraits were taken, often because context and direct eye line were needed, but sometimes they were not and I can guarantee, that the set shots did not have anywhere near the natural feel of these.

This works for all levels of subject from young student athletes to hardened politicians, social advocates, performers or authors.

Wheels Of Fortune

Another chance to explore my thoguhts on pushing the envelope with sports shooting.

Competition day 1 at the National BMX champs today, after a couple of days of practice.

Having a bit of a moment, I went with my usual day kit (EM1 Mk2 with 40-150 f4), not the gripped one with the f2.8 model like yesterday, but no harm done as my kit(s) are all pretty capable.

The usual stuff, easily enough captured and sometimes even pretty cool.

Next I tried to look for a more dramatic look.

The top left hand image shows the amazing angles they achieve. Number 232 managed to win from here which was impressive.

On the way out, I got a few more on a different bend.

I only had a few minutes to grab these and flet there were many other angles to explore, but happy I went on a tangent.

Cannot forget the little spockets.

For me the winner of the day, or maybe the one above.

The Making Of Luck.

Sport photography has little to do with luck.

Sure you have to be lucky in the moment of capture, no matter how fleeting that is and sometimes you feel the luck is heading away from you at great speed, but when a good capture comes, you recognise it for what it is. Luck born of preparation and affirmative action.

A short lens in close. I was literally sprayed with sweat at one point (and the sweat cleaning crew were next to me), but the intimacy of the image with it’s 3d effect were worth the risk.

What do I mean by that?

To get good sports images (not great though, because I am not there yet), you need to push past safe, to head into the realm of edgy. Your subjects can lead the way here, the better and more exciting ones push their comfort envelope constantly, so it is encumbant on us to do the same.

They put it all on the line, so we should also.

Early in my career I was happy to just get a sharp shot, but now that is not enough. It has to have intimacy and a feeling of being close to missed, even near impossible for me, to feel satisfied. I want the same feeling of excitement I feel when taking an image to come through.

Shallow depth of field, low angles, shooting into the light, shooting too tight, pushing too close to the action and playing fancy with your angles, are all important elements if you want to go next level.

Getting a shot of the team huddle is mandatory and I got plenty, but if you can, a more intimate portrait can be had. Of over 60 images I submitted to the sports team on the night, this one was one of half a dozen chosen. Always worth the risk.

Always look for a stronger shot.

Not an amazing image, but a bit better for employing shallow depth of field (150mm f2.8 and I would have used wider if I could), which helped the front runner “pop”. Deeper focus depth was more than possible on this bright spring day and common sense would dictate you use it, but with safety comes mediocrity. Just because they are smaller, slower or lower grade than the top tier, does not mean you should take the pedal off the metal, because they are not.

So, sport photography has everything to with luck, but only after you push that luck as far as you can and employ decent technique.

This image really pushed the limits of my processing chain and not long after taking it I did move to the less light saturated side, but that extra bit of drama, the genuine threat of failure make it all the more compelling. Realistically, without the dramatic, almost dominant light, it is a fairly pedestrian image. I just realised also, that every player on court is in the frame more or less. Thanks must go to Capture 1 and ON1 No Noise for making this image possible (the original is pretty grim).

This not only applies to action shots. This portrait of Holyee Jackson, a rising star of BMX was taken over the journalists shoulder during an interview. This often nets me a more relaxed and real image, rather than the staged ones we usually do (and yes, I did).

There is no doubt more and better can be done, but that is the promised reward for extra effort.

Video, What Is Missing?

My video kit is pretty handy.

It is not pro, mainly because my recording formats are limited to Cine-D, HLG or Natural on the G9 (no upgrade code purchased), Cine-D also on the OSMO or Flat 4k on the Olympus EM’s. This is actually fine, as many have already proven that with care, even Natural mode on a G9 is actually plenty. I am not producing movies, just upper end hybrido-graphy captures.

The reality is, I rarely shoot footage that needs much tweaking, so Natural, Standard or Cine-D are enough “levels” of control.

The other more urgent consideration though is a 30 min maximum recording limit on all but one of my cameras. This is the killer.

Hard to argue with the value to performance ratio, but 30 minutes is very occasionally limiting.

To record a school production, I really just need one single camera that can go for a full section of a play or event without stopping. The G9 punches well above it’s weight with video*, but it is the one Panasonic with a record limit, probably to keep the overall range logical.

*Maximum 150mbs/4k/422/10 bit/60p-but is highly time limited at this level without an off camera recording option, but 30p is ok for up to 30 mins.

So what are options to;

1. Fix the time limit thing.

2. Add better codecs if possible.

3. Try not to add more complications or annoying exceptions.

Pimp My Existing Cameras

I can improve some of these with an off board recording unit like the Ninja-V or the Black Magic Video Assist. Both have advantages and dis-advantages (the BM’s win overall I feel especially for a DaVinci user, but neither is perfect).

The Ninja V has price and long term reliability on it’s side. They are time proven, but have some special needs I don’t like. They need an SSD, take only one NP battery, record in Pro-Res RAW (a hard fit for DaVinci) and lack some interface options the BM’s have.

The BM Assists can take up to 2 SD’s, 2 NP’s and record in B-RAW or Pro-Res depending on model and there is some choice. The screen is also potentially larger and always brighter, although it has a reputation for being a little magenta tinted and the interface options are better. It is dearer, depending on the one you pick, but overall the extras it offers make that work. This means a shift with one camera to a BRAW colour palette (or not), but with the core accent of the base camera.

With either of these I have the record limit fixed and option of a RAW format, but would probably just record as is with unlimited time and no other benefits. Expensive for what I would actually use. My ideal would be an external recorder that simply records the camera’s formats.

Add To The Already Over-Crowded Stable

I can buy another camera. As usual, there is a balance quotient at play here for me and I just committed to a second hand EM1x. I have plenty of options and only small things to fix, so no need to get too carried away.

G85/G7. On these, Panasonic removes the recording limit and for most uses they can act as a very good, Panasonic colour matched static “A” camera, freeing up the G9’s for movement, effects and alternate angles. It could also be a useful stills option for travel (like I need more!). In the mix at the right price.

BMPC4K gives me a full spec semi-pro movie camera with only a few niggles (battery and storage options, poor AF, limited stabilising and colour matching considerations), but it is fully compatible with DaVinci Resolve/BRAW (which it also upgrades for free). Unlike the BM Video Assist it is a one-off, so no upgrades of existing cameras or much flexibility. This means one “hero” camera and a bunch of others that need to be matched to it. Easiest direct line to most fixes, but I feel too complicated overall and a shift away from my existing kit.

BGH1 Panasonic. This adds a GH5s level camera (BMPC4K/GH5s sensor) in a little box camera, which is very versatile and colour matched to the G9’s, but is as dear as a GH6. It popped up on my radar recently, but price ruled it out as quickly. Too dear.

The GH6 Panasonic, sitting top og the Pana pile and offerring some stills benefits. Too dear-too much.

GH5s which is the BGH1 with stills capabilities. Too dear.

OSMO Pocket 2 or another version 1. The mk2 is the same basically as the OSMO I have with a zoom lens, the mk1 is half the price. This is a genuine contender.

A specialist pro-sumer video camera. The reality is, there are a wealth of good video cameras out there and they are cheap, light, high quality and versatile in comparison to many hybrids. Cameras like the Canon VIXIA HF G20 or Sony AX43 offer a true video camera experience (no hybrid compromises) at a good balance of quality to price.

Work Smarter With What I Have

This is the bit where I make my multiple options work for me. The record limit is only a limit to continuous single angle recording of productons, interviews or events.

If I used the OSMO Pocket as my primary static camera (up to 140 min record time at 1080p if the gimbal is not used), I can function well enough with the others. This means the entirety of a play could be recorded in one take. I have all the needed accessories like the 3.5 jack and tripod mount etc to make it work. Sound and alternate angles could be recorded separately, then the lot synched in post.

The OSMO is a very sound base for the master capture, being a close enough match to my Panasonic colour and it’s corrected 24mm lens with good depth of field even at f2 is probably ideal as the main camera. Even adding the OSMO pocket 2 as the main camera, the older one then as the gimbal cam, means I can record two angles with matched results for over an hour.

Using the gimbal and full 4k can limit recording time, but using one or the other is still workable. I think I can also plug it into my computer when recording for backup and power? Need to check that. Cine-D is a decent codec for this use, but the standard colour out of camera is impressive.

I can even put it at an extended angle (up to 3m) or attach it to a point close to the action and monitor it through my phone or even under water. I think on writing this, I have far too easily forgotten the potential of this little power house camera.

Another huge benefit of doing this is the OSMO is not getting enough use.

Lost Connections

I fear a time of change is upon me.

Change is inevitable and should be embraced, especially when it is self motivated, but sometimes, it is just a little sad and the reality is, some choices have no perfect answer. I have never left a job that was such a positive and perfect fit for me, but circumstances forced adaption.

I have had an odd last three years compared to most. While most of us are remembering or even healing from COVID, my recent history is actually filled with some of the fondest memories I have ever had in my working life, memories that will stay with me for a long time, but they will leave a feelng of loss and take some time to scar over.

No, I was not there that long, but celebrations of the schools heritage were highlights.

Working for the school in the semi-limbo of full acceptance by the staff and students, but never on anything more professionally, than a casual contract or “good faith” basis left me in a lop-sided relationship.

On one hand the school had an on-call, fully equipped, fully committed*, widely experienced and multi skilled still and video content creator who was happy to spend a sizeable chunk of his meagre earnings on the gear needed to do the job (only possible with my loyal wife’s support).

Long lenses and fast cameras are one arrow you need in your quiver, but were far too rarely called on.

From my end, I was earning basically the same as I would if I stayed at home and did nothing, contributed nothing to my superannuation, covered (or not) all of my own expenses and played dismissively with fate, knowing that if I had to take any time off, like five years ago when I got the flu (pre-COVID) with pneumnia complications and spent 2 weeks in hospital, then three months recovering, I again only had my wife Meg to fall back on for support. No sick leave, no compensation.

The school production of Schrek, something I felt privileged to be a part of.

When the paper offered me full time, it is no exaggeration to say, I was instantly 600-800% better off in wages, equipment, expenses and retirment savings. I do not even need all of these benefits, especially the gear, preferring to stick with my own and my work flow, which is already paid for, but I am still 3-4 times better off.

That does however do little to reduce the feeling of hollowness I feel leaving an institution I am so attached to. In many ways I feel like the child sent to the city to work in a soulless job, leaving the family farm I am spiritually connected to.

I wish I did not have to make any choice, but after several counter offers made by me to the school, even offerring to take a 50% cut from the paper’s offer, becasue I am really just needing something concrete for security, not a fotrune, they still had no wiggle room (the school is a not for profit organisation and my desired role just does not fit into their structure).

Year 10’s last year, kids who would be this coming years leavers.

My offer to stay in contact as much as possible looks to be a poor judgement call also.

I coverred a few engagements as I promised I would for the end of year and still have a couple to do, but the reality is, it was hard for me. Regular conversations with recently found friends quickly turned to ponderings on “what could have been”, or more precisely what should have been as many kindly reinforce what I feel, that the school and I were a good fit and the role had room for expansion.

Being connected in any way just seems to be too hard.

The toughest days recently were in the junior campus where “photo-man” has become an excited catch cry for the younger students, something I hoped to build on in the years to come and a relationship that a new, frop in shooter will find hard to develope.

I and others feel this long earned connection is too precious to loose, but it looks like that is exactly what is going to happen and more the distance I give myself, the better it may be for me. All in or all out. Anything else is an emotional trap.

Problem for me is I live literally over the road from the school, so blinkers on.

*Not coming from a working photography background, but one of retailing and teaching, meant I had a very small client base to build from. The reality is, the bulk of my contacts are photographers, not people in need of one and trying to build up a client base when you are committed to one client for the bulk of the year is problematic. More problematic though is three months without an income.

Great Night Out And Another Affirmation Of The M43 Format

Sometimes, even at a little provincial paper, we get some really cool gigs. Last night I was the shift photographer for the Tassie JackJumpers game, a national grade basketball fixture.

Held at the Launceston Silverdome between the New Zealand Breakers and Tasmanian JackJumpers (one of the worlds nastiest and insanely aggressive Ants), I was expecting the usual lighting equation of ISO 6400, 1/500th to 1/1000 at f2.8 or a little better at f1.8 with a fixed lens, which is ok, but far from ideal and during warm up, it looked to be the case.

Then they turned on the TV lights and things went from ok to very, very good.

Suddenly, I had ISO 1600-3200 at 1/1500 and f2.8, which in these conditions felt like daylight.

This meant I could use my Olympus 40-150 and 12-40 zooms, both of which are ideal for this game “shape” and stick with two bodies ready to go (theoretically, I could have even used f4 lenses).

Any nervousness that I would not be up to the extra speed of the game quickly went away when the action started. I realised that at this level, that action is very fast, but clean. High school sports tend to be a mess of kids chasing the ball, with the quality of clean action shots raising in proportion to the level. At this level of things allows you to follow a single player for a few seconds with an almost guarantee of a photo opportunity arising.

In two periods, I netted 200+ clean captures from about 800 taken (most useable, but redundant to my needs), all without high speed drive being employed. I have settled on 7 FPS which allows me to take single discreet shots, but if I know I want to take another, such as the moment the bails fly off in a bowled-out result, it is just quicker to get with the shutter button held down.

The two other photogs there, national guys, were shooting Nikon mirrorless and undoubtedly came away with technically bigger and possibly cleaner files, but I also guarantee their gear cost 2-3 times mine, which netted more than good enough results, likely identical at realistic sizes and I would put my results up against the last gen of top end SLR’s.

If the light was lower, I could have switched to the 25, 45 and 75mm lenses, with basically the same quality (and double the reach of full frame equivalents), but less depth of field and flexibility. Still, I have had success with that kit plenty of times so it is a realistic fix.

A print deadline which forcing me to miss half the game and the usual pressures of “getting the shots” melted away as the tight and hard fought game sucked me in. I remember the stupid grin I discovered I had on my face at one point. Really cool stuff.

The other shots you need to get are crowd, support staff and coach huddle and player face shots.

The small and quiet form factor or mirrorless, along with face detection allowed me to get a camera into the huddle at some quite unique angles.

This is especially helpful to get players who are injured or sidelined, and for later use. The north of the state only gets a couple of JackJumpers games a year, so we have to make the most of them for a full year of stories.

You cannot forget the behind the scenes people, like this floor cleaner, one of the busiest people in the game.

My kit for the night consisted of the EM1x with 40-150 f2.8 and EM1 Mk2 with grip and 12-40 f2.8. I did have fast primes handy, but they were not needed. I missed nothing I successfully framed (and got some real Hail-Mary’s). This affirmation empowered me to grab a used, mint condition EM1x from ebay (15,000 shutter count, ex Japan) for less than half the price of a new one. This is a good balance for me, even with the Black Friday sales looming.

Leftovers Again? Or The Gentle Art Of Belligerence

I have a small (make that embarrassingly large) kit made up of leftover cameras (7) and lenses (8) kicking around home for my own use, occassional school jobs and just becasue (old cameras are worthless, except to the owner). The problem is I guess, all the cameras and lenses are capable no matter how cheap or basic, some are even spectacular and I am stubborn about using everything i have, finding an ideal purpose for each and every item.

The shining lights are my second G9, once relegated to video rig use only, now classed as a “general hauler” matched with it’s Leica 12-60 and the other is the Pen F.

The Pen F is a killer camera with it’s quirks, but loads of character. It also comes with a “preciousness quotient” which is to say, it will not be a day to day hack camera. It is a fine art pro camera or serious enthusiasts tool, and it has some non-pro oddities.

Negatives are the sum of several minor quibbles.

• It has poor electronic shutter performance at higher ISO’s (banding), a manual shutter that makes a “flappy” mechanical sound, especially when fired vertically.

• The exp-comp control is a dedicated ring, but requires a two finger turn. This is a feature I use constantly, so I find it frustrating.

• It can be uncomfortable, but the expensive little grip helps.

• The on-off control annoys me for some reason and I have a habit of turning it off (can’t say why).

• It has only one door for the card and battery and it does not feel “long term”.

• No phase detect tracking focus.

• It is heavy, surprisingly heavy, especially for a camera with no weather sealing. The heft is reassuring, but this thing feels like it is as heavy as an EM1x in the hand (but isn’t).

• The back screen, probably meant to be optional only on this camera, is so flush with the camera, I find it hard to flip open. I guess the idea is to ignore it like it is not there, a bit like the Fuji X-Pro 3 where it actually isn’t, but the view finder is not the biggest or best they have made. Probably not a negative really :).

• The video, something I would not use on it is nice, but it has zero external sound options and no 4k (why even bother?).

Performance is otherwise similar to an EM10 mk2, except for the special sensor, JPEG abilities and bespoke build.

In many areas it is over built, in some it seems well under done. It is almost like the mandatory but designer-disliked digital bits were farmed out to the spare parts division, the rest lovingly given to semi-retired film camera elves to make.

The Pen F sensor is very different to the EM1’s. It has a no phase detect pixels, producing very sharp and delicate images (even for MFT), although the high ISO performance sits below the newer sensors. It performs to me, like a fully evolved EM5 mk1 sensor, which is not a bad thing at all.

An area the Pen F is different to most is in it’s handling of JPEG’s. With dedicated “film” looks, a bit like a Fuji, but more natural looking and with an enormous amount of tweaking possible, it was the hobbyists dream camera. Hidden a little by that, but logical I guess, the camera produces very good mono images from it’s RAW files also.

Good black and white conversions from digital are not as easy as you might assume. Contrast, especailly deep blacks, clean whites and strong micro contrast are missing in straight conversions, so you need to apply firm but delicate processing with a film users awareness of what is missing. Shooting film for 20+ years helps here.

Of these two images above (using the 30mm), I could accept either, but the mono is far more robust and to me more exciting as a genuine point of difference to the norm. The muted colour is interesting, but if I am going to shoot mono, this is the camera for the job. Even the noise becomes more grain-like, much like the old EM5 mk1 files.

Often with digital mono conversions, I feel the need to push the contrast and clarity sliders more than a little. With the Pen, I seem to respond to more “grown up” tones. In film parlance this is similar to the difference between a “hot “ film like FP4 with a sharp “S” curve (brilliant highlights, deep blacks, short trip between the two) vs a “cool” film like Tri-X with it’s smoother shadow and highlight roll-off, gentle whites and softer blacks. The camera also has 4 custom functions, so plenty of playing around to be had with a latent memory of your experiments.

Aside from the look and character (and I feel different head space) mono brings, it also removes most CA issues, all colour oddness, allows for haze and flare to be repaired and even ignores most banding. Black and white already has a different set of strengths and weaknesses, the Pen F seems to emphasise these.

A straight JPEG in Mono 2 (apparently Kodak Tri-X like) with +1 highlights and slight yellow filtering using the 15mm. I can add grain, different effects, different film looks, colour sensitivities and tones. Too many options. As a preview, a reminder even, it is good and in large super-fine JPEG, it is often enough.

Of course in digital you get both colour and mono if shooting RAW and a neat quirk is that the manual focus peaking reverts back to colour, so you even get a mono to colour preview option.

*

Lenses for the Pen F have always been assumed by me to be the 17mm and 45mm f1.8’s and the old half-frame Pen 25mm just for fun (and good results). The 17mm often came kitted with the Pen F and the 45 is the obvious partner, but I have two alternatives.

The two that I have put aside, have similar quirks (read annoying realities for day to day pro work), but can also produce that special something, as long as your job does not depend on it.

The Leica 15mm f1.7 is a tad harder/contrasier/cooler/crisper looking than the 17mm. The 17mm’s strengths lie in it’s handling of tough, even strong lighting situations and deep transition Bokeh (forgiving depth of field traansitions). The 15 is more about bringing out the best micro detail, glow, edge to edge sharpness and some modern 3D pop, although again the real differences are minimal.

The main reasons I dislike the 15mm for work are actually mechanical. The aperture ring, always active on a Panasonic camera, is far too light, the hood comes off every second time I pluck it from my bag and the AF on an Olympus (where the aperture ring thing goes away) is a half step behind in reliability.

The 17 makes an ideal day bag lens. It is simple, robust and reliable with a handy MF clutch for video.

The 15 is a better personal projects lens, where you have time to enjoy it’s gorgeous build and refinement and very stable imaging quality, without it’s all too touchy annoyances pissing you off.

The 15mm also feels just right in MF, which ironically is a stiff switch control. So more reliable and the also very light and smooth throw and direction are ideal. This is something that should have been perfect on the 17mm, but never sat as well. The Leica just seems to work. I use white peaking and accurately hit what I want often using my pinky to focus.

*

The second lens is the 30mm Sigma f1.4.

This is a transcendent lens in many ways. Super sharp wide open, even sharper stopped down a little with great separation, although the latter can be a little two dimensional looking. It is the portrait-Bokeh king and a lot of fun.

What is not so much fun is it’s wild and seemingly random CA and some interesting (which is a bad word here) flare combined with mixed AF performance over my range of cameras. Rather than just relegate it to studio work (also a Pen F happy place), I intend to use it for self motivted work.

Lovely separation, interestingly muted colour and sharp.

Even wide open, it is sharp, but there is the hint of CA oddness, something that goes away in black and white.

A much more stable image.

What both have in common is a look that should be best supported by the equally interesting Pen F.

I am especially excited about black and white with this combo as the main issues with the Sigma tend to go away in a black and white work space.

This was a tough image to get up in colour. Nearly impenetrable shadows that washed out to milky mush when lifted. The Dehaze slider, which usually fixes this, robbed the image of it’s delicateness. The Pen F and Sigma were both stretched, but in mono, it held together very well, showing off that f1.4 Bokeh.

Not a confidence inspiring colour capture.

MF with the Sigma is nice, with decent throw, a huge and smooth focussing ring, which also turns the right way, but at f2-1.4 I rely on AF. A shame I cannot use back button AF focussing on the Pen F.

If these were tools, they would be the tip of the spear, specialist ones. The ones that may break if handled badly or inappropriately, but are required for the very best results, like a super slim filleting knife or even a scalpel.

The third lens for this outfit is the 75mm, but that has other work to perform.

For My News Paper I Would Issue A Micro Four Thirds Kit.

An are own completely by Nikon and Canon for most of it’s modern life is the newspaper industry. Since SLR cameras have been practical, these two have been in a tussle for the attention of working pros of print media.

News print does not require ultimate quality, even today.

What it does need is a flexible, maleable file able to handle some tough image conditions, capable of good contrast, clean and accurate colours, good sharpness (even after heavy cropping) and a support system that allows for a massive variety of circumstances and subjects.

From a photographers perspective, that system should be a light and small as possible (rare), because nothing is more frustrating than an important bit of kit being left at the office or in the long distant car boot, due to excessive weight or size.

My kit;

• Super wide; 9mm or 8-18 if I know I will need it (often replaces the standard lens).

• Issued a 14-24, which is optically near perfect but a genuine, gale force rated paper weight weighing more than my equivalent zoom and camera.

• Standard lens; Can be a couple of light weight f1.8 primes or a 12-40/12-60 zoom.

• Issued a 24-70 f2.8 Nikkor that weighs as much as all of these together and is as long as my tele.

• Telephoto; Options in various forms ranging from the 75mm f1.8 for speed, 40-150 f4, f2.8 or 75-300 if long may be needed outdoors. I have even been known to take the kit 40-150. The f4 is the usual option, beng a perfect balance between performance and portability

• Issued a 70-200 f2.8, heavier than any of the Oly options, even the quite bulky f2.8 Pro.

• Sport; The one area a specialist bit of kit is mandatory, I have the above mentioned lenses and my 300 f4, which is plenty long for anything we cover. The f2.8 gets a lot of work here, sometimes with a TC as does the f4 and the fast primes are ideal for indoors.

• Issued a 400 f2.8. Ouch-no way unless I have no other option!

• Cameras; Include a G9 for standard lenses and video and an EM1 mk2 for longer lenses. I could cut this down to one body, but this saves changing lenses on the fly, gives me depth and specialist cameras best suited to task.

• Issued an aging D750. This is a full frame camera, with its advantages and disadvantages*

• Other bits include a flash (860 Godox), off camera controller, little LED light, Mic, small reflector and diffuser. My 2 stop depth of field advantage effectively make my flash units perform like Godox AD200’s and if I went to these, they would act like mono blocks.

• The same would go for the issued kit except the flash would be working harder, but maybe other elements could be skipped*.

The bag I usually carry is a fully packed F2 if primes are my lenses of choice or F802 for bigger zooms. I use primes only for guaranteed low light jobs or “light” editorial, zooms are the “big event” option. The f4 Pro floats between the two kits.

For sport, depending on the day, I usually carry the F804 or Lowe Pro Pro Tactic 350 with which ever big lenses are needed and either an EM1x on it’s own or a second EM1 mk2 for backup.

If I needed to carry the Nikon kit, I would likely alternate between the 14-24 or 24-70 with the 70-200. The F804 is the logical bag or maybe the F802.

So, apart from weight, which is the benefit, not the reason for my choice, why would MFT be a good fit for a paper?

Quality

Tons of quality in MFT, especially for low news print and web use, but I have proven to myself and others, fine art grade as well. To be honest there has been too much quality for most uses for ages, but the industry keeps pushing….. I have found after a lot of testing, that the ageing D750 (not the best choice for a paper, but the only one our small provicial will spring for), with any of my issued lenses is less sharp and contrasty than my MFT cameras (any) and my lenses (any). This is not hot air or blind loyalty, because belive me, I want to use the issued kit if I can, but I just cannot make myself regress back to this dated system, with the added handicaps of size and SLR limits.

In a nut shell, you want to be able to salvage, crop and adjust within reasonable limits, not be held back by low quality base lines. Using MFT, I rarely sweat the small stuff.

My 20mp beats the older 24mp I have at hand, simple as that and even that older camera is excess to our needs. Many paper shooters would prefer a 12mp ISO-proof camera (D700 Mk2 or A7s) than more pixels with limts. The above shot was also shot at ISO 1600 (in a rush), something I did not notice until I checked.

Lens Range

Super wide to very long are not an option for us. The inside of a crane cabin at 200 ft, a game of sport at distance are day to day stuff and these things need to be with us, not hypotheticals.

Super wide from MFT is no issue with lenses ranging form 8mm fish-eye to several zooms and a wide fully corrected prime.

Standard focal lenghts for most systems are a cast of thousands and MFT is no different. Where it does differ though is in offering weather proofing, manual focus clutch and video grade AF motors at affordable prices and even the crappiest are sharp.

MFT also offers some super fast and very wide range options here, even both at once (8-25 f4, 12-100 f4, 10-25 f1.7).

In Tele lenses, the true advantage of MFT comes through. Not only does the system offer a 2x reach benefit, but the offerings are many and consistently good.

Turning up to the cricket with my srelatively mall 300 f4 is good for me, but may be perceived as the “junior” option to the huge optics the other photographers use, but when I pulled out my 75-300 kit? The above is also a 50% crop from that lens, which provides the near perfect 500mm focal length.

When a super long lens is needed, I only have to carry a 300 f4 or even the 75-300 kit in good light, not the brutish but shorter 400 f2.8.

If the field is smaller, my 40-150’s (various) will do fine, giving me FF 300mm from 150 (or the Leica option of FF 400 from 200).

The far end of the court is fine with a 300mm f2.8 equivalent.

When long and fast is required for indoors, my 75 f1.8 gives me the equivalent of a 150mm on a full frame and my tiny 45 is a powerful 90mm. In fact I can go 18, 30, 35, 50, 90 and 150 at f1.8 and 60mm f1.4, all in a tiny bag.

Clarity, reach, speed and Bokeh to die for. All from a lens that sits in the palm of your hand and cost what a “normal” lens costs.

All focus closer than FF lenses of the same reach, meaning no dedicated macro is needed and the bulk are weather sealed to some extent. These are all new designs also, so no old clunkers left over from the 90’s (looking at you Canon).

All things are possible in FF, but at huge cost in weight, practicallity and budget. Anyone can reasonably afford the MFT options.

Flash and Low Light

MFT has a 2 stop depth of field advantage which translates to longer fast lenses with more depth of field wide open and/or more flash reach. Shooting small groups at 30-150mm using f1.8 (FF f3.4), ISO 800-1600 with bounced flash in large rooms is standard for me. This would be f2.8 at ISO 3200-6400 in FF. The advanyage of lower base noise in FF is mitigated in all practical terms by these MFT format advantages and good processing streams.

Relatively small and silent cameras, sporting tiny lenses allow for real life to be captured. After a minute or two of interviewing, this couple, celebrating their 70th anniversary,they were simply ignored me. The journalist was surprised to find out I had shot 50 odd stills and some video, all from the table edge, without noise or fuss.

Cameras, Build and Handling

The EM1x is a better built and designed camera than any similarly priced FF cameras. It is faster, tougher and generally better laid out for professionals, mimicking the Nikon D6 or 1D Canons. The G9 and other EM1’s are the same roughly as a 5D, D750 or D500 level cameras, so as good as I was issued, but newer, smarter. Being mirrorless, they do video better and the other advantages of mirrorless are too many to mention here, but lets just say, I would not happily go backwards.

Focussing

AF in the latest mirroless cameras, from the early adopted brands and the top tier of the later migrating mainsteam ones is top notch and has the potential to go further faster. MFT is a real player here, no issue. To be honest, the sheer speed and accuracy of the original EM1 mk5 was eye opening and a major deciding factor for me to switch even though sports shooting was a matter of predictive AF or MF single gabs, but the latest generations of tracking AF have removed any doubts.

Video

MFT is one of the top formats for video, which is a little less bothered by ISO performance. The other MFT advantages come in here, like the speed to length/size ratio and stabilising, so for many it is the only choice. For our needs, it is better than enough.

So, what would I issue?

The base kit could be drawn from so many options.

EM1x with 8-25, 40-150 f4’s, the 300 (maybe shared), with 17 or 25, 45 and 75 primes, a Godox flash, MKE 400 mic and small LED (16-600, video and low light covered). The lot coming in at about $12,000au or less than just a big full frame tele. If the photographer prefers, the 40-150 f2.8 could do the job of the f4 and 45/75mm’s, the EM1x could be an OM-1, or a pair of EM1 mk3’s. If a Ninja-V was handy, the EM1’s could be upgraded to pro quality footage as needed. This provides very serviceable 4k in FLAT format with amazing stabilisation.

If video is even a higher priority, a pair of Panasonic G9’s, 8-18 (or 9mm), 12-60, 15 , 42.5 1.7 and 50-200 or 200mm prime and teleconverter, giving a range of 16mm f2.8 to 600 f4, for about $10,000au per tog.

Or any number of other combinations including a hybrid like mine.

For me, I would likely go the Pana kit with the 9mm, 15, 12-60, 42.5 f1.7 and 50-200 and extender. This covers 18-600 with options.

Would there be any complaints outside of the usual of having to learn new gear (which is just as real even moving to the same brand in mirrorless)?

I feel that most qualms would fade away when the results come in, the real benefits are discovered and the general health and wellbeing of the togs is improved. Basically, when any prejudice against the smaller format fades away through use. There is plenty of substance to feel like you have the “real thing” (an EM1x feels as “real” as any camera I have owned including the F1n or EOS 1Ds Mk2 Canons and even a G9 feels as solid as a D750), excellent weather proofing, answers to all the tough questions and the reality is, with modern processing, even MFT is relatively light proof if ISO 12,800 is your comfortable limit.

A Lens Re-discovered and A New Partner Settles In

When I got the job with the paper, one of the things I felt I needed to address was my standard, workhorse mid range zoom with it’s “lumpy” zoom.

I had started to use lenses around this one and usually avoided it for anything other than video, where I appreciated its manual focus application (pull back ring) and the low need to zoom.

Recently I decided to just use it until it fell over as the replacement (a 12-60 f2.8-4 Leica) proved a magnificent performer, but was less easy to use for video, with less easy to apply MF and not a constant aperture (and it moves from f2.8 quite early in the range). As well as this the color balance I like with Pana cameras and Olympus lenses (and the opposite to the same extent). Panas have bright and light colours, Olympus are “meatier” and cooler, so the two mixed tend to hit a perfect neutral ground.

All shots taken from my day at work (A pump house re-development, a vigil for Cassius Turvey, tragically killed and a 70th wedding anniversary).

Always a well behaved lens, with excellent sharpness across the frame and pleasant, practical Bokeh.

It is very sharp, but also has a very pleasant rendering. Not hyper sharp, more smooth-sharp.

The funny thing is, the more I use it, the smoother the zoom action becomes. It is (touch wood) pretty much perfect at the moment, being used day in, day out.

Celebrating their 70th wedding anniversary, capturing this couple (combined age 186) in natural light at ISO 1600, the camera and lens combination is crisply sharp, but at the same time on a G9, delicate and gentle.

Now, every standard lens needs a longer partner.

The obvious choice and one I truly love, is the Oly f2.8 40-150 Pro. Hard to criticise this lens with a straight face, but it has one small issue. It is quite big and heavy for the MFT format. This lens requires a bag that is tall if the lens is mounted on a camera, ready to go. I have that bag, the f802 Domke, an and reliable friend, but sometimes the depth is too much for the rest of the kit on balance.

To fix this I bought the 40-150 f4. To be honest, most days I could get away with the 40-150 kit “junker”, but the IP53 weather sealing and constant f4 have been useful already. It also shares the same 62mm filter thread as the 12-40, for my many filters.

This is one of those lenses that makes you think creatively.

“Vigil”. Like the 12-40, it is sharp anywhere around the frame at any aperture and focal length, with pleasant Bokeh (the f2.8 can get nervous occassionally, the f4 less so), but leans slightly into the hard-sharp camp.

“Road to progress”. The longer lens is mounted on an Oly camera, but still retains a bright and pleasant feel.

The combination of the 12-40 on a G9 and 40-150 on an EM1 mk2 is nearly ideal. I have the 9, 17, 45 primes at hand, but the two zooms do the bulk of my day.

The Leica is proving to be the ideal all day lens for my school kit.

Getting By

I have transferred the bulk of my kit to work, intending to use it as I intended when bought, regardless of, almost in spite of, the huge Nikon kit I have been issued.

EM1.2 (long lenses and action)

G9 (video, wide and standard)

9, 12-40, 40-150 f4, 45 and 17mm make the core.

EM1x (300 or 75)

EM1.2 (Grip and strap, zooms or widest)

25, 75, 75-300 (a lazy luxury for bright light sports), 40-150 f2.8 and 300 make up the sports or event kit.

This leaves me with a decent enough kit for my own use and the occassional school job. This is in truth close to enough to work with is any one of the better tele lenses was added.

G9 (video and pro body)

Pen F (premium image quality, but some compromises in tracking AF etc)

2x EM10.2

2x EM5.1

Looking a little light on in telephoto lenses, the “home” kit has the pocket rocket 40-150 kit at hand. All images taken on a G9 at ISO 800-3200.

8-18 Leica, 12-60 kit, 12-60 Leica, 40-150 kit, 15 Leica, 30 Sigma and 45mm primes. With the 40-150 f2.8 bought home from work, I could function with just this and the bulk of my video gear is perfectly also.

The Sigma 30mm in it’s element (f2). This thing is sharp!

Let’s not forget the solid 45mm also. This lens has a beautiful gentle sharpness, ideal for portraiture and has fewer exceptions to consider than the quirky 30mm.

My intention over the Black Friday to Christmas sale period is to pick up another Em1x, then semi-retire the oldest Em1 mk2 to home and school use. The main reason for the “X” over other EM1’s is the durability (latch opening card and battery compartments) and imporved handling. It also comes with a second battery and charger and has the “grip” built in, so effectively $500+ of free accessories. The GH6 was on the radar, but for the difference I can afford the Ninja-V or similar to upgrade all the cameras.

I am looking forward to travelling next year.

The 9, 15, 45, 12-60 and 40-150 kit lenses cover a decent range for travel (18-300eq), weighing in at about 6-700g total. That’s five decent to exceptional lenses for about the weight of a full frame standard zoom lens, covering genuine extremes, fast options and optical quality (even with some weather sealing). With a Pen-F and EM10 mk2, the whole will come in at less than 2kg and fit in the Turnstyle 10.

Macro Landscape, A New Genre?

Maybe even macro wide-angle portraiture? The Leica 9mm is creating some cool shots.

A macro landscape. The lens was only about 2” from the flower stamen. Bokeh is lovely, something a super wide MFT lens would usually have little se for, but the distances this lens can be used at mean it is employed regulalrly.

A regular landscape, 9mm style. A very easy to use lens, exhibiting a natural look, effectively hiding it’s super wide coverage. The Fuji 14mm (20mm eq) was good at this to, but lacked the fast aperture, stupidly good close focus and weather proofing (and it was a little heavier).

Kit Thoughts A Few Months In.

So where am I now and how did I get here?

First full month full time at the paper under my belt and some patterns have emerged.

Over thinking these things is easy, but when you just need things to be right, they have a habit of coming together on their own.

My day kit, which is the new nylon F2 Domke packed for any given day, but with no particular specialist lean is;

• EM1 mk 2 (no grip) with the 40-150 f4 Pro mounted. This was to be a gripped EM1 and f2.8 lens, but that required a bigger bag for little extra benefit.

• G9 with Oly 12-40 f2.8 Pro. This was to be the same camera with the Leica 12-60, but I prefer the clutch MF option and fixed f2.8 for video especially and the older, slightly mechanically compromised Oly lens is less precious. Interestingly, the 12-40 has great AF performance and no “rippling”.

• Pana 9mm and 17 and 45mm Oly primes. This was the 8-18, 25 and 45. Both options work, except the super wide is rarely used and when it is, the extra speed helps. There was also a large overlap of little value, especially for the added weight (oh the poor suffering MFT user!). The 15mm Pana was in this space also, but the loose Aperture ring and looser hood just make this lovely lens a little annoying in the field. It is matched now with the Pen-F.

This covers 18-300mm (full frame equiv.), has speed in all the important places, is light and the two cameras play to their strengths.

Australian dance legend and writer Graeme Murphy at a local book launch. The tiny 45mm is the perfect “over the shoulder” portrait lens.

The 12-40 is the lens I have concerns about with it’s “lumpy” zoom, but you know what? It is one of my favourites optically, has the handy MF clutch for video and I like the consistent f2.8 aperture. If it falls over one day, then so be it, but it will have earned it’s replacement by then and it seems the zoom frees up with use, so who knows.

The 40-150 f4 is the real deal, performing at basically the same level as the f2.8 version except for very extreme lighting scenarios (where the 75mm is the better option anyway).

The 15mm is an optical treasure and one of those “perfect” focal lengths. I get annoyed by the loose aperture ring and even looser hood, but can live with them for the look I get. I particularly like the Leica-Olympus combination for dodgy indoor light and that pairing disables the aperture ring (that thing is really light).

Hard to argue with a lens that is this strong even wide open. There is some genuine Leica magic at work. Now replaced by the less fiddly 17mm Oly, nothing has changed much. Both great lenses.

The 9mm has changed everything for me. I can now leave the 8-18 at home and feel very safe in low light shooting super wide. With a fast f1.7 aperture, 2” close focus and sharp, sharp, sharp, this thng is a powerful tool. The Bokeh is also amazing.

Expansive coverage in limited space is 9mm territory.

If the above kit is going into a known low light situation, I will swap out the 40-150 for the 75mm, which to be honest could be my everyday lens also. If something longer may be needed in good light, I have been known to take the 75-300 “kit” instead.

Uncovering the great chicken dumping scandal was safely handled by the $450 Oly super zoom. This lens loves bright light, showing lovely colour and good contrast and is as sharp as needed. If it is too slow for the light, then I get a more “grown up” lens. It also shares with the unlikely 9mm, great Bokeh, if it is ever relevant.

For maximum priority jobs like the PM’s visit recently, I simply grab the other EM1 Mk2 with grip and strap and 40-150 f2.8 mounted (shedding the 40-150 f4), which leaves the bag for my G9 with 12-40 and the first EM1 Mk2 sporting the 9mm. Much quicker for fluid situations, but the added bulk is unnecessary for most jobs.

Speed and sublime sharpness, the f2.8 40-150 is king and worth the bulk when needed.

For video, there is the OSMO with or without it’s water proof housing, the G9 and the Sennheisser MKE 400 mic.

The Leica 15 is also the ideal fast lens to have on when switching between video and stills. Now in the “home” kit, it is the ideal video camera prime.

I always carry a little Oly flash for fill (the one that comes with the EM1’s) and the Andoer LED panel, but rarely take the Godox 860 or 685 out now as I simply do not use them and in my light weight kit, they stand out as overly-heavy pocket fillers. If flash is needed, I have a small backpack ready with both Godox and the little controller, which I intend to add a small stand and modifier to.

I am tempted to go all primes, dropping the 12-40 for the 30mm Sigma or Oly 25 and the 75 for the 40-150, but then I would have a clutch of top end zoom lenses sitting around doing nothing!

*

Saturdays and some other days are sports days. This requires a re-think.

The F804 Domke is now used, which takes the 300 f4, 40-150 f2.8 (with TC if needed), 25, 45, 75mm and 75-300. The EM1x and EM1 mk2 with grip can also fit in mounted, but for most sports, I only take one camera these days and leave behind the lenses I know I will not need.

For most field sports the 300mm is used, sometimes with a second body and 40-150 (any of my three can work depending on light). In good light, I can even get away with the 75-300, which is ideal if I need an odd focal length like 500mm to compose perfectly. I have not come across a situation where I need a longer lens, but the TC can be employed if I do.

For smaller fields like hockey, the 40-150 with or without the TC works well.

Indoors, I generally use the 75 and a shorter lens in tandem. If the lighting is good enough, I may use a zoom, but I generally chase quality over versatility and stick to f1.8 lenses.

*

This leaves me with a decent little kit for me and the now occassional school job. A G9, Pen F, a pair of EM10’s, the 2 old EM5 Mk1’s and Pen Mini, with the kit 12-60, Leica 12-60, and 8-18’s and the Oly 40-150 (kit) as the backbone with the Pana 15, Sigma 30 and Oly 45’s for speed. This gives me a personal/travel, video, fine art and semi-pro kit, with plenty of options in reserve.

It is a little lacking for sport, so a few bits from above come home.

The actual light was several steps darker than gloomy (see below), but the 30mm really helps bring things to life. Flare and CA, both colour blotch and veiling are it’s Achilles heel, but if avoided it’s all gravy.

This was the actual light, interesting but a challenge the 30mm was up to.

Lately the Sigma has made it’s way home because it is a funny critter, like a really sharp but sometimes fragile kitchen knife. One of the sharpest lenses I own it exhibits some strange behaviour and is a half step behind in AF consistency, so for work, the reliable 25 and 45mm Oly lenses appeal more. For me though, it is a bag of fun times waiting to happen!

So, many new lenses have come into my kit lately, but for work, I am leaning on tried and tested (and simpler) lenses like the 17, 25 and 45mm’s, leaving the less solid but more exciting options for home use (15, 30).

The specialist are as they should be, specialising, with the 75, 300 and 9mm’s becoming linch-pin power houses in their space.

My glut of 40-150 options is a plus in every way. All are good, but all offering something on balance.

Face Of Change

Politics is now in my daily life, but sometimes you get a look at the top end of town. I like our current PM. The camera tends to see the real person, no hiding, no smoke or mirrors. I studied our PM for over half an hour an at no time did he seem false, disingenuous, glib, robotic or disinterested. He was late, but that was likely due to spending time with people who need to be heard.

Our previous PM could be accused of lacking some of these.

Kit was different to usual.

Getting an hours notice to be an hour away, I quickly swapped out the 40-150 f4 for the f2.8 model with the mated EM1 mk2 I use for sport. This had nothing to do with lens focussing speed or sharpness, which I consider to be basically equal, but a possible need for a wider aperture if indoors. This allowed me to have the G9 ready with the 12-40, a lens I have rediscoverred an appreciation for. The EM1mk2 I use in my day bag was sporting the 9mm, which was the dual star of the show with the long lens.

Silent operation, multiple angle shooting (at one point I was actually holding the camera and lens in front of a TV cameramans’ stomach, directly below his rig, so sharing his angle without him even noticing), multiple cameras and therefore more lenses (18-300 covered, all with speed).

Fun, but tempered by the seriousness of the situation. The floods in this beautiful region of Tasmania have added just another layer of pain on a farming community that have been suffocating under multiple pressures for a while now. We can only hope as a whole, that visits like this make a real difference, now and in the future, becasue on-going effects of these disasters are often forgotten.

A Better Option

Work has issued me a decent Nikon kit. To put it in a fairer light, work has issued me the “dream” kit from ten years ago, but 10 years is a long time.

The D750 is a dated model and I think is maybe the weak link. Files from this camera and the 24-70 or 70-200 are not as good as my M43 files. No misplaced loyalty of blind bias here. I tested, I looked and I saw.

The 14-24 is still one of the best wide angle lenses on the market, but it is almost 8 (!) times the weight of my new crush, the Pana-Leica 9mm, two stops slower and wider than I need, oh and does not fit my cameras without an adapter so it comes with Nikon attached. This lens and camera combination are a serious decision point when going out. Taking it is like me packing my full kit twice!

The 24-70 AF-S disappoints. I am not sure if mine has a life as hard as the dents and scratches on its barrel would suggest, but regardless, this lens is not a patch on my 12-40 or 12-60 MFT standard lenses, not even the kit one. Bad CA, poor sharpness at the long end, mediocre overall. It may well be the camera, but something is not up to the standard I have come to expect.

The 70-200 AF-S is basically brand new. This was late replacement for my predecessors’ kit when his older lens was deemed un-repairable. I have tried this and the performance it offers is in the ball park of my 40-150 f2.8 or f4 lenses, but still the camera is the weak link.

The 400 f2.8, a lens I should be tickled pink to be in the same room as, is quite simply a weaker combination on the D750, than the 300 f4 on the EM1x. I have really tried to warm to it, but every test I do and the work of the other two photogs with theirs, just underwhelms by comparison. I am not taking a lens the size of an anti tank rocket launcher out, just to get same-same or not even as good results and a kit that limits me in movement and other camera lens option (I regularly shoot with the above and the EM1.2 and 40-150 on the other shoulder). Again we are back to the camera as possibly the weak link.

When asked whether I would like to go D850 or a Z6 mk2 as an upgrade (we can only hope), I initially said D850. This is I feel the best SLR on the market at the moment, but solves few issues and makes the assumption that the D750 is the weakest link in the kit.

Would I take out the whopping 400 and D850?

Simple answer is no, because it offers me nothing I cannot get now, while limiting me in other ways.

I had a thought though. If I go the Z6 mk2, a camera that is likely not going to improve AF performance on the SLR lenses, but may match the D750, then I could order it with the excellent little 24-70 f4 (remember the Z mount offers a stop less DOF than the normal full frame depth of field, due to its massive mouth-so three stops less than MFT), and the new AF-S 70-200 and 14-24 adapted across, then I may have a good day kit to take the strain off my own gear and retain the mirrorless advantage. From here I can even buy a fast prime (85), although a second body and primes (G9) would be logical for video.

I could then be the test bed for the team, the other two photogs getting D850’s. Z9’s would solve all our issues, but a small provincial paper on a limited budget will not stretch to them.

The tele and the wide angle beasts above would then be backups for the team as a whole, just not me so much.

I have a lot of time for the move Nikon has made with their Z mount, being very similar to, if diametrically opposite to the MFT philosophy, so a hybrid Z/MFT kit would be fine, even fun, but the truth is, Nikon is only just coming out of their transition period aches.

If I could buy a dream hypothetical all Z kit with Z9 as the basis, then great, sign me up, but this transition period is less than exciting. As an aside I would likely go Canon though. Their lens landscape growth is more advanced and I trust the cameras more, especially in all the tiers below “top dog”.

Finally, The Right Bag

The F2 arrived today.

The flash above is actually put into an end pocket, giving the G9 more room and I slip a couple of filters in its place.

With bags, I rarely know exactly what I am getting, so it was a nice process switching the whole kit from the F804 into this much smaller bag exactly as planned.

Rule 1 for my editorial day kit;

If it does not fit in the F2, it is not needed.

I have gone from skinny and tall (F802-retired), to deep and tall (F804-used for longer sports lenses), to deep and short (F2). I do feel I dodged a bullet going for this over the F3x, my kit filling the bigger F2 perfectly.

The main compartment takes a G9 with 12-40 (switched back to for video), an EM1 mk2 with 40-150 f4-nose down, then has room for three more lenses, some of which are fatter than the ones I had in the F804 with it’s skinny lens divider. The F802/804 dividers took thin lenses well, but even the squat little 9mm and Sigme 30mm pushed them. The 4 divided compartments in the F2 are both bigger and more flexible.

The two front pockets, originally designed for batteries and note pads, are now perfect for mobile phones and well, notepads and batteries. I really like the two pen holders! On the two bigger bags, these were full sized pockets, that tended to swallow up gear.

The inside lid holds my access card, spare bits and accessories.

The “front” end pocket, assuming I wear the bag on the right shoulder, is for my mics (Sennheisser MKE 400, phones and Boya LAV), the rear one takes the Godox flash if needed. These are smaller and flatter than the separate end or front pockets on the F800 series, which is ideal. Again, nothing migrates to the bottom.

So, it has less wasted height and fewer pockets but can still do the job.

As I had hoped, based on having an F3x in ballistic a few years ago, the Nylon is soft to the touch, soft light coloured nylon is used inside as well and it is rubber backed, so it is possibly more weather proof than the canvas Domke’s.

It all comes down to kit. Change your kit, change your bag, so the real story is what has changed in the bag itself.

The 40-150 f2.8 Pro has become the 40-150 f4 Pro, reducing size and weight by half (this is occassionally swapped out for the 75mm, which is a similar size and weight).

The 8-18 Leica is now a 9mm Leica, which is not only considerably faster, but so small and light, I already had a habit of losing it in the F804.

I am not using gripped or built-in grip cameras, the older EM1 mk2 and G9 doing everything I need. If I do take the EM1x or similar, it still fits well enough, just making access to other lenses less practical.

If flash is needed, the Godox 860 or 685 is packed with the remote controller.

My 176 Neewer LED is now a small Andoer 140, which is only slightly heavier than the battery for the 176.

I have the little 15 Leica and 30mm Sigma (or Oly 45mm) as options to the zooms, but otherwise, that is it.

So,

After a tying day chasing flood waters (300mm of rain in our area today), the bag showed a couple of decent characteristics.

• It is really water proof.

• It is a decent shape for bad weather handling.

Another Freaky Image

This 9mm Panasonic is a really cool bit of gear.

It has been a long time since a single little lens has given me something that I have never had before.

An Australian $5 note (about $3 U.S.).

My contribution the flood of Queen portraits.

Not sure when I can use something like this, but nice to know it is there.

I might do a series of flower-head landscapes.

Oh, and eye detect worked perfectly on this image.

Appreciation For "Odd" Focal Lengths.

Some habits are hard to break.

When MFT format was first introduced, Olympus generally produced lenses that made sense to full frame users (35, 50, 90mm equivalents etc), well up until they produced the slightly odd* 75mm (150mm equiv). Personally, I wished they had made a 50mm f1.8 and 100mm f2, the classic 100 and 200mm’s, but the performance of this lens was just too good to ignore. At the time it was better on paper and in results at least equal to my favourite Canon lens, the 135 f2L.

• 18mm and wider were once considered the “weird” wides, true perspective benders. These days, zooms going to 16mm are common, but these were once special application lenses and as rare as they were expensive.

• 20mm gets you past 90 degrees and was once seen as the extreme end, almost too much for many.

• 24mm is just short of 90 degres coverage, and was a little too wide for a range finder camera (Leica M series etc) to take without a separate view finder. Ths was the landscape shooters standard.

• 28mm is a nice even 75 degrees, but is actually the limit of a non electronic, built-in range finder camera’s focussing coverage.

• 35mm makes a decent semi wide standard, especially if you accept the 50mm as standard.

• 40 (42mm) is the mathematical standard standard for 35mm, being the actual measured diagonal of the 35mm film frame and is visually the most realistic, some say boring of focal lengths. This one is the longest lens that does not compress in any way. If you like the 40mm as I do, then the 35 and 50 can be skipped.

• 50-55mm the “nifty” 50 or as I sometimes call it the 50-50, because it has no real optical opinion, but leans ever so slightly towards tighter-more compressed. A hard lens to master, but powerful if you do.

• 58-60mm is the other side of the compressed-not compressed threshold, genuinely stepping into the “portrait” range. Once popular, it was also a common Nikon micro lens.

• 75-90 are the work horse portrait lenses, all pretty similar depending on your working range, waht was avaialble and tastes.

• 100-105mm was the classic macro lens length.

• 135 was the longest a non modified length a range finder camera could take.

• 180-200, basically the same depending on your brand of choice (Nikon liked 105 and 180, others went 100 and 200).

• 300 and longer were a matter of application and availability, with the 300 f2.8 being the holy grail of most.

There were exceptions, but generally, these were the standard “steps” available.

Panasonic and Sigma on the other hand, started to choose focal lenths that made more sense to them and the format, with no allegiance paid to past standards. The 15 (30mm), 20 (40mm), 30 (60mm) and 60 (120mm) all made plenty of sense to an outsider, but possibly confused ex-full frame converts. They are nice even numbers, but they have another, more immediate effect. They actually make more sense in a kit.

One of the first images taken with the 15mm. It felt “roomier” than the 17, while still easily avoiding distortion.

For me, a 30mm equiv is the perfect standard wide. I find 35mm very comfortable, but feel it needs a wider partner like a 10-12 (20-24mm), which still leaves room for something wider still and some indecision, where the 30mm is just wide enough to be matched to a wider lens (the 9mm) without the need for a filler and is slightly more versatile in this space. The 30mm effectively covers two focal lengths, 28 and 35mm which for me seems to be a decision point.

The 20 (40mm) is the “true standard”, or at least a 42mm equiv is and was once a common focal length. I had the first version of this lens, sold it and never replaced it, because the Oly 25mm I have is actually closer to a 22-23mm (45mm).

The 30 Sigma (60mm) is also a better standard portrait lens than the official standard 25 (50mm), getting completely away from any hint of wide distortion, but less compressed and distancing than a 75-90mm equivalent. I find my 25 (50mm) lens is better for a two person shot, but a 15-17 (30-34mm) is better again for groups. Again, like the 15 (30mm), this gives me better coverage and a more confident solution. I can jump from the 15 to the 30 then all the way up to the 75mm rather than run the 12, 17, 25, 45 and 75.

Proper portrait performance from the Sigma 30mm. Very slight compression, good DOF drop-off and a natural feel, but not so tight it forces the shooter to disengage with the subject. As a “one lens” option, I prefer the 25mm Oly, but in tandem with a wide lens, the 30mm makes more sense.

The rule with a primes kit is to skip at least every other focal length. You are not trying to cover all focal lengths, just represent each type of perspective. Think less place holders and more super wide, gentle wide, short compressed and long compressed perspectives as story telling tools. With these new lenses and their re-imagined focal lengths, it is possible to fudge 2 into the space of 6 lenses. Feet and angles do the rest.

9 (super wide), 15 (standard wide), 30 (standard portrait), 75 (long) (18, 30, 60, 150 equiv). Is this the perfect primes kit for my uses? In reality, I will use a tele zoom, because “zooming with your feet” is less practical with long lenses, but in lower light, the 75mm is a life saver.

The only slight issue is the AF speed of the Sigma, but for sport I still have the 25, 45, 75 combo. For general use, the Sigma is at least 90% as fast as the better Oly lenses and basically the same performance as the Oly lenses on the G9.

I have some great zooms, but it seems now, I also have a workable primes kit.

*I say slightly odd, because the full frame equivalent was the more random seeming 135mm. This was the longest lens early range finder style cameras could practically take without special focussing attachments (28mm was the widest), so it was a matter of necessity, not some divine plan.

9mm Of Goodness

The tiny and I mean tiny, 9mm lens arrived today. The shiping box it came in felt empty, the little box it was packed in was tiny and the lens itself……tiny.

This thing is perfect as a replacement for my already handily sized and priced 8-18. It is wide enough to handle most needs, fast enough to solve low light tight group shots and the close focus is ridiculous.

Weird huh!

To be clear, the 8-18 has done nothing wrong, but having a huge overlap with the 12-60, it is too big and slow (f4 aperture at the long end), to share a bag with the other zoom. Basically I am carrying a zoom, only to use the widest end occassionally. It’s wide front end limits insert and filter choices and the range, although good, lacks a constant f2.8 aperture or enough range to nullify the need for the 12-60 (the 8-25 Oly would have just).

The 8-18 lens has been relegated to the home, travel and landscape kit.

Stupidly close focussing with pleasant Bokeh. Not characteristics you would associate with a super wide angle.

Lovely Bokeh at normal distances wide open. This is a 9mm that can still produce nice subject separation.

Off centre performance is even and good wide open (crop from above). I have not tested the extreme corners, but it looks good so far and that Bokeh is impressive.

My ideal is to use this, the 15mm and the Sigme 30mm on the Panasonic camera, then a 45 and the 40-150 f4 on the Olympus. The 12-60 may be swapped out for the mid range primes in good light or used as a one lens solution, but the 9mm, lighter even than the Sennheisser mic I bought the other day, will be a permanent fixture.

The bag keeps getting lighter and smaller, but more capable.