The Wedding

On our first trip to Japan, we visited the Meiji Temple in Tokyo, one of the biggest and most important monuments in Japan.

Like most, it is a working temple.

This wedding shoot unfolded in front of an audience of hundreds, as they drifted through the temple.

Proud brother?

Future Star.

I have shot a few weddings, but this one puts anything we do here to shame. A team of half a dozen handle everything from dressing to weather mitigation and all angles are covered.

The head photographer did not even seem to shoot, just coordinate.

The temple is in a massive park/wood near Shibuya station.

The Semi Professional Balancing Act (Or Listen To The Music, Not The Noise)

I consider myself a semi professional.

Odd thing to say from someone who earns their entire income from one source pool, but the reality is, I have never taken the one big step that would make me, to the common wisdom, fully professional.

That big step?

Spend a lot of money on perceived “top end” gear.

I like to think my gear is the very best “pro adjacent” equipment available and for all intents and purposes is professional in results and up to my personal expectations.

For travel, street, studio and events, I am there no issue, but for sport and other pursuits, I may seem a little under done.

The key to me is to identify what is important and what is just not, then target the fixes needed.

This image came from a heavily cropped M43 20mp image, poorly processed in C1 (my first month of using it and I missed the “Brightness” slider). If I knew it was going to be effectively 40’ wide I may have had a litter or two of kittens! Others, outside of my control decided to use it in this role and never questioned the credentials of the file.

It is not uncommon for clients to ask for “X” number of pixels, RAW over jpeg, Brand “Y” or video in 4 to 8k. Never lie to them, but a little education can go a long way. If you must, supply what they ask for as best you can, but try to stop your eyes rolling the first time the quality is dropped at some point and allow them to see for themselves, that often these big values have little real effect.

My stills kit is pro level M43 Olympus and Panasonic, just not full frame. To these two brands and Fuji in APS-C, these are their pro cameras and lenses, their best foot forward. The issue is often one of perception, Canon, Nikon and Sony are in the habit of “demoting” their smaller sensor cameras to retain the status of their full frames (Canon does not ever mark a crop sensor lens with a red “L” ring, even if it is effectively the same design as the full frame version). This has always been their habit and it does nobody any good.

I can embellish my credentials with numbers like 80mp, 60 frames a second, 6k RAW video etc, but these are just as irrelevant as many other perceived needs and a poor measure of me as a person or photographer/videographer.

I know from experience that full frame makes little or no difference in real terms, but standing next to a shooter with a FF Nikon 600 f4 with my equivalent M43 300 f4 can be humbling, even when I know that I do just fine thanks. I also know that many full frame, high pixel shooters, shoot smaller sizes regulalrly. Some even use crop mode.

Oh and after a day on my feet, I am a little happier.

Nice to able to run up and down the field edge with a 600 f4 and 300 f2.8 in hand!

The reality is, I do not earn enough to afford the top end Nikon or Canon equivalents and if I bought them, I would have to work very hard just to justify their purchase and see some real results advances. I would most of all, have to specialise*.

Specialising in a small market, can be a road to oblivion, with a decent number of practitioners sharing limited opportunities or in some cases having to actually create a perceived need to fill.

My M43 kit allows me to be a 90 to 95%-er at most things, when probably 75% is enough, becasue no chain of events is perfect. I am a jack-of-all trades, which is actually ok and diversity adds skills that can be shared across the board.

Don’t get me wrong, there are actually advantages to the system as well. More reach, easier sensor size to design lenses and stabilisers for, smaller, lighter, cheaper, more flash power (useable wide apertures), more depth of field leading to some genuine class leading results in these.

Landscapes, wildlife, sport, studio, reportage, portraiture, travel, video, street. All are specifically catered to and each can add to the other. Doing that with full frame would be expensive, for me prohibitively so and in some cases (street, travel), they would be preferred kit anyway.

The same is true with video.

The S5 has the same sensor as its bigger and more expensive brethren, but tops out short of their full specs. It does however have the ability to upgrade as needed, which is important. I feel it is best to pay for enough now, with a growth doorway available, rather than go top end in a field that (a) you may not go further with or (b) may not find a customer for.

The S5 is my enabler for top end 1080 with 4k as an option. Going 6k etc is just too much, but getting less than semi-professional grade 120/1080 is also a deal breaker. Even my G9’s and EM1x’s in M43 format, pushed sideways into the video role are capable of great things.

I am very aware that well exposed and balanced Natural profile footage with a light touch in processing, from a slightly dated, not made to purpose G9 impresses many and satisfies most. It gives you the end result needed without some steps, that can be skipped if you are proficient.

*

Sound is in balance with that. My best sound is 32 bit WAV (optionally RAW) from a pair of Lewitt 040 condensers into an H5 Zoom, or the F1 with my SSH-6 shotgun capsule. Not the best available, but in balance with my video output, which is to say high end amateur or semi pro. Even the quick fix of the MKE 400 is plenty for many.

A Sennheisser MKE 600, used by the TV crews I am around often, into a Zoom F3 or F6 would be the next step, but that more than triples the price, doubles the bulk and is overkill for my needs. In some areas, where a shotgun mic is not the best choice, I can even do better.

Like my stills kit, my video and sound kit is a decent B+ in most areas with a myriad of problem solving options, all within a decently realistic budget. If I make any part better, the rest are out of balance. I learned this lesson years ago when I ran good stereo gear. Everytime I upgraded one part, the rest had to follow.

From an amateur or starter kit, to “best value in class” is a decent and smart step, the researching of which is a great learning process. The step up to best available is a rule of diminishing returns, often with an audience of one (you that is).

Use 32 bit Float sound from a $2000 mic, with 6k 4:4:4 video, or shooting full frame 45mp RAW and your output potential will often, probably always, be lost at some point in the chain and rarely be apppreciated by the average client.

Record poor 720i with camera only sound or shoot poorly exposed 8-bit jpegs and you will be able to see where you fell short, most of the time, but again, some clients will not know the difference unless you show them.

Old camera, kit lens. No need for more.

The middle path is, in my opinion, the best balance with reasonable capabilities.

Under buying against reason is not, but over buying is just as silly. If balanced, most of your kit will be used most of the time, sometimes it will be stretched, then skill can get you the rest of the way.

Professional means reliable and capable and skill is the one timeless, no compromise “tool” at your disposal.

It is very easy to get caught up in one specialised field and feel you need more (currently talking myself out of an F3 Zoom Float recorder), but before the “must have” monster gets a hold, ask your self two things;

Who will notice/know other than you?

and,

is overall balance retained?

Looking at the F3 for example, the F1 is easy to use, the bird in the hand and takes a module or 3.5 jack mic. the F3 needs XLR mics, of which I have two, but the H5 can handle these. It also lacks gain controls.

Self noise is the term that gets you when researching sound. There is always a measure that becomes obsessive and “noise” of some type is often the culprit.

I dealt with noise in one form or another most of my life. Analaogue tapes were rife with it, but the sound was good when you were not looking for the flaws, only heard between the music. Digital noise is defining the “quality” of modern cameras, but we used to embrace film grain as a creative tool.

Even the universe generates self noise. Noise is natural, a total lack of it is unnatural, clinical. Listen to the music, not the noise.

Often the answer to an issue you are having is not more or better gear.

Maybe the solution is to come at the problem from a different angle, maybe it is already sorted and usually, just getting on with the job will clarify what you really need. Overcoming obstacles is the mark of a professional. Sometimes that is gear, sometimes it is how you use it.

Travel well.

*A specialist sports shooter in full frame would be using a Nikon (or Canon/Sony equiv) Z9 with 600 f4 or 400 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 with a wide and possibly standard zoom and flash unit. About $25,000.

A Specialist landscape shooter would be using the best wide angle, high pixel count full frame for about $6000 minimum, but if they shoot wild life also, the above kit comes into play.

An EM1x, 300 f4, 40-150 f2.8 and 8-18 and flash come in at about $9,000 and are still over the top for some tasks.

A Special Place To Start The Journey Of Golden Light.

The Koishikawa Korakuen Gardens near the Tokyo Dome is a paradise in the middle of a bustling city. This could be said of most temples and gardens, but this one in particular was special and was the launching point for our “golden hour” walk to the Ginza district.

This was one of our brave days, where we chose to get lost and see where we ended up.

The steep hills running down to a river was new to us then and are still unique now.

100m from a highway.

As many reviewers say, you really do forget you are in a city of 30 million people.

Built around one large and two smaller lakes, with a feeding river, the gardens are a genuine nature haven attracting Cranes, Herons and King Fishers.

With the benefit of hind sight, we probably set out on this journey too late in the day, but were rewarded by beautiful light from beginning to end.

Every garden in Japan has a feel, a theme. This one had many.

The walk after this is one of our favourite memories of the early trips, slightly diluting the walk around these gardens, that would otherwise have been as powerful.

Many paths.

We may not have even risked the longer walk if not for the calming effect of this space.

Faces Of A Lost Place

The old Tokyo Fish Markets are gone now. We were lucky to see them a few times as they were, which is to say run down, well worn work spaces filled with real people.

Here are some of their faces from the first trip in 2015.

Catharsis

So, the long awaited process of going through my many files from seven, pre COVID trips to Japan has been started. Going old school, I have assigned a diary to the process, which was only semi organised until now.

A long journey, but one I cannot put off any longer.

Some initial thoughts.

Capture 1 is handling the files with a delicacy and surety that Lightroom lacked, especially at the time. My skills and expectations have changed, but the process is majorly different.

This file is a little soft (mild double imaging of moving subjects) and my processing at the time concentrated too much on that at the expense of the overall file. This version has a very mild global fixes and a minimal amount of brush sharpenning over the central girls face.

Artificial colour, tone and harshness are gone. The Hollywood OTT colours have given way to more delicate and realistic tones. A few previously “pushed” files may suffer in the short term, but just like my overall journey over the past few years, I will adjust and appreciate a more realistic representation.

All the images from this wet day in Kyoto have represented to me the coldness, hardness of the light. Just opening them up in C1 has bought new feelings of excitement. From one image I liked, I now have a full set.

The old Adobe balancing act of noise vs sharpness, which took several processing steps to address (oh it is all coming back to me!), particularly from noisy shadows and the overly “simplistic” look of EM5 mk1 files is giving way to a cleaner, sharper and more mature look.

The 17, 25, 45 and 75mm primes as well as the 75-300 went on this trip with a pair of EM5 mk1’s and all shone brightly.

The files seem reborn and I am a little sad I have not seen them like this before. I am also more than a little sad the EM5’s did not get more of a life with C1, which may well have fundamentally changed how I shot and processed with them.

I am excited by the potential, my eyes opening to more files I gave up on, some that I missed and a few that will be different for sure.

My “Reservoir Dogs” shot. The version I have been uploading from my blog files is colder, harder and less balanced overall. I used the brush tool a lot to avoid global issues, especially in shadow noise and I clearly remember being a little addicted to over the top colour, often applied just to see what would happen.

Starting methodically with the 2015, files in order, I have culled 4000 downloads to about 1000 with internet potential, some already visited, some not. From here the much more stringent question of print level quality comes into play and from there I will decide on (from the prints) which ones I will include in the book or books.

The original was frustrating, leaning towards cool and odd colour. This has been slightly warmed and that is all. The soft/sharp dynamic seems to be more pronounced and cleaner. There is a slight hint of Magenta in the file that I could remove, but when both C1 and LR agreed that it should be there will accept it as a true representation (often the windows had a slight cast).

Aster the initial reduction, I am expecting a roughly 10% keeper rate at each level, so from the above 1000 about 100 will get printed as my long term portfolio, 10 will make it to a book with about 100 needed maximum.

Feels about right. I have had these kicking around for years and only a handfull of each group have the visual endurance to go further.

Our first and still best visit to this quirky cemetary outside Kyoto. The stone statues only date back to the 1970’s, some even have head phones on! From just this one short visit I have a series of images that excite me. It is like revisiting the country and reshooting with different cameras.

The surprise to me though is a few of the contenders are not the ones I expected. I will have to go slow and be open minded or I may miss files. I may even relook at the original files once I have gone through just to make sure I do not miss any more.

Japan has so many interesting sights, many just mundane places. Osaka rail station.

Is it possible I may even develope a mind set I have since lost, just by trawling through these again. Maybe we should all go back to old projects and not only re-process them with newer techniques, but at the same time learn from them, discover something we have lost.

An old favourite, I think now it fails to make the grade.

We are going again later in the year so I am on a kind of time limit of at least needing to know what I have already, possibly reinventing my processes from here on with that in mind, allowing a full stop to be firmly set.

It rained so much on this Spring trip. Hiroshima, Kyoto, most of Tokyo were “umbrella” days, giving the trip a theme and probably shifting our outlook of Japan. On a differnet trip, we sufferred a heat wave, so like anywhere when is as important as where.

A photographer reborn? A lot of “re’s” above so something is stirring from the past.

The Twins, But So Very Different

My two favourite lenses are on the surface very similar, but scratch the surface and they are actuall very different.

The Olympus 17mm f1.8 was the lens that had to be. My most used “standard” lens in 35mm photography was something in the 35-40mm range, with many tools applied to address that need.

The Canon 35 f2, 35 f1.4L, several 24mm’s on APS-C, a Voightlander 40mm f2, Fuji 23 and 27mm, Sony 20mm etc. When it came to M43, the Panasonic 20mm mk1 was an early favourite, but suffered from slow AF on an Olympus (early issues) and equally poor manual focus. The Olympus 17 f2.8 was considered generally poor so I dodged it, but turns out it had excellent 3 dimensionality. The Panasonic 14mm was nice, but a little wide and fly by wire MF. I had two of these as they were free with most early Panasonic cameras, but let them go for far too little and the Sigma 19mm never impressed, especially at only f2.8 (but I got the three Sigmas for a steal in a set so another regretted sell off).

At the time the only realistic contender was the Olympus 17mm f1.8, a lens that had mixed reviews early on, but was otherwise mechanically stable and decently priced.

Nothing to complain about here.

Early reluctance aside, it won me over the old fashioned way by taking very nice images, to become one of my “desert island” lenses. It is not perfect, no lens is, but it is predictable and good at what it was designed for. More importantly it has character.

After it was bought and used on several trips away, the Leica 15mm came out. A little wider, a bit dearer and second cab off the rank, it was tried (the benefit of working in a shop), but failed to be substantially better than the 17mm. Plenty of reviews put it a little ahead, but for $700 odd (at the time the price of the 12-40 f2.8 zoom), there was always something better to spend my money on and it really felt like duplication of a favourite, especially a lens that constantly came through for me.

One of the features of this lens is its ability to tame strong light, something I am often drawn to with my street shooting. It glows, but does not blow out.

It has a brilliance and warmth that reminds me of film. Early images with the EM5 mk1’s were something special, but as I upgraded cameras, even adding Panasonics into the mix, it has never failed to impress.

A surprise was its strength with landscapes. This thing is razor sharp and has long transition Bokeh, which means pushing depth of field a little is very easy.

The lens has both high sharpness and a gentle smoothness that helps reduce the super sharp digital look. It is “organic” looking.

Hand held landscapes at less than optimal apertures (f1.8-4) still give good results with coherent backgrounds.

It never occurs to me to worry too much about focus with any aperture f2.8 or smaller at anything but very close focussing distances.

Even wide open, background inclusion is smooth and natural.

The Oly wide open is often a surprise. The metadata says f1.8, but the look of the image defies that. The point of focus is assumed to be the man in the middle, but look at the girl in the red skirt left side background. Girl I said, because I can be pretty sure even with a massive depth of field drop off. The Olympus is ideal for smoothing the transition of in and out of focus areas helping form story telling images.

So, why get the Leica anyway?

I bought the Leica when I startted earning again to scratch an itch, deepen my options in an important space for me and allow me to assign one lens to my work kit and keep the other for myself. The 15/30mm equivalent focal length is odd, but as logical as anything else I guess and definitely does not feel closer to a 14 (28mm) in use.

The catch was which one for which job?

The Leica originally went into the day bag with the G9, but the touchy aperture ring, something you cannot disable on a Pana camera, was annoying as was the all too easily detached hood. I was already adjusting to a different driving, phone, processing and dual brand camera dynamic and this was just an easily fixed frustration, quickly dealt with.

It took some lovely images, but things settled when I switched to the Olympus.

The 15L was then matched to my Pen F for something very special. Both share a crisp, delicate, cool palette, something akin to Kodachrome 64.

That snappy sharp to soft transition, so characteristic of the Leica and so very different to the Oly. The Leica is not sharper than the Oly, but uses its “draw” to give you that impression by creating more sharpness contrast.

Recently I have put the Leica back in my EM1.2 based work bag to make a better spread with the 9 Leica and 25 Oly (which is actually closer to a 23mm). The Oly cameras ignore the aperture ring which is ideal. The hood is fixed with a tiny bit of duct tape. The extra coverage balanced by the very well controlled 3D pop of the lens and its ability to handle iffy light appeals at the moment. We will see. I also like the Olympus sensor and Panasonic lens tones combined.

The Oly 17 is now again on the Pen F, its natural home.

For now.

The Leica shines at clean separation, making it effectively a wide portrait lens (the 9mm is the same).

The Leica has a cooler colour palette than the Oly 17 with gentle greens and blues**, and has more attainable 3D “pop”. It is also better at adding some life to dull light situations and seems to mesh very well with the EM10 mk2’s in artificial light. The 17mm, if it has one flaw, is a little lack lustre when the light is muddy and murky, in contrast to its excellent handling of strong light.

It also struggles to offer modern fast drop-off Bokeh, the Leica is a very contemporary exponent here. The 17mm is the ideal street lens allowing you to miss focus a little without any obvious signs, the Leica is better at heroing the subject at the expense of the background, just don’t miss.

The Leica acting as a wide-portrait lens. Lovely skin tones, sweet Bokeh and gentle, natural colours.

Clear separation of foreground and back. The Olympus would make this transition less obvious, more inclusive and more organic. Both good options, just different.

The Oly lens showing it’s more forgiving nature. I usually set it at f2 to 4 and about 5 feet on the manual focussing ring.

The other thing the Leica adds is a delicacy, sometimes even a thinness. The Oly lens makes an image look organic and natural, heavy with inherent colour. The Leica adds a brilliant crispness, without being heavy handed.

The Oly lens is so forgiving, shots like this are instinctively grabbed, with no real fear of an unworkable miss. The reason I have so many favourite images taken with this lens is because it gets them for me, simple as that. I can theorise that the Leica would have rendered a sharp curtain, then less clear background elements.

The Leica tends to tame lift poor light. In strong light it is fine, but in mixed, soft or flat light, it shines.

They are to my eye identical in central sharpness, but different in rendering. I use either wide open, but with different expectations.

I am going by feel here as much as science. I have tried to prove my feelings by comparing Bokeh etc, but find it harder to make fact than hypothesis. Regardless, the Oly is my ideal street lens, made to purpose with its long draw Bokeh, true manual focus, safe colour and strong light handling with added organic depth, the Leica is a solid exponent of a modern wide-portrait and poor light fixer.

*Four zooms, two primes.

**This is the Panasonic look and adds options with a mix of Panasonic and Olympus sensors. The 17mm is warmer and richer in colour.

Many Hats

I find myself wearing many hats at the moment.

Editorial

(the day job)

This is about coverage and creativity on the fly, often actually trouble shooting. I use a pair of EM1.2’s with a 9L, 15L, 12-40, 45, 40-150 f4. If I need to do some longer distance including some sport without a chance to access my sports bag, the 75-300 often does the job and the 25 and 75 Oly are swapped out for the zooms if I know I am going into very low light. Domke F2.

No filters other than protect, a flash or LED light, often with a light weight modifier, or 5-in-1 and that’s it (I am about to add a small studio kit bag for the car boot with a second flash, Smallrig soft box and stand). If video became more of a thing, I would swap out one EM1.2 for a G9. The zooms and 9mm are also weather proof.

The special something the 15mm Leica offers.

Sports

(the cool bit of the day job)

An EM1x with a primary tele lens (75, 40-150 f2.8 or f4 or 300 f4) as the back bone with sometimes a second body (EM1x or EM1.2 depending on the sport) with another of the above, the 8-18 wide, 12-40 or a fast prime. Basketball or Netball for example is often the 75 and 25 in poor light, 12-40 and 40-150 in good. Pro Tactic 350 back pack or Pro Runner 10 and Black Rapid Strap.

Amazing what can be accomplished with the “bottom end” of my pro kit (Em1.2 and 40-150 f4),

or the top (EM1x and 300, shot indoors).

Street

(the enduring passion)

Pen F (screen inverted so it feels like shooting film), 17 and 45. If two lenses are needed, sometimes the little Pen Mini or an old EM5 mk1 is used. Many bags as suits the trip and location.

A whole weekend with just a single camera and the 17mm was freeing and allowed for a good holiday in its own right (being a bus drivers holiday otherwise). I never felt, as we wandered around, that I was missing out without a multi lens, multi camera kit.

Travel

(the other passion)

A pair of OM10’s with the Pana 12-60 and Oly 40-150 kit and maybe some or all of the above street kit, depending on the trip. The travel kit covers daylight, scenic and general shooting with a good range for weight ratio, then the Street kit does low light. I also add a 58mm 10 stop ND and Polariser for scenic and special effects. The OSMO may also get a trip away next time over seas. Many bags as suits the trip.

Quality is never an issue with these kit grade lenses and their negligible weight is a blessing on long walks.

Videography

(the new horizon)

The S5 is the core of this, the OSMO, a G9 and the backup EM1x are options with differing capabilities. my lens collection is wide and varied, all designed to give me different looks and coverage, but most hovering around the standard range, like the Leica 12-60, Sigma 30, Lumix (FF) 50 etc. Lots of filters (ND, Softening), various rigs and cages, COB lights, mics etc. The Domke Roller, Neewer back pack and several other bags and cases.

Studio Portraits

(the desired career)

Frustrated from lack of opportunity, not options or ideas, this is easy and fun. Apart from lights, back drops, stands etc, which are in abundance at several levels from light and easy to OTT when needed, this pretty straight forward, as it is the least gear stessing environment. Usually a G9 or EM10, 12-40 Leica/kit, 45 and 75mm, and even kit lenses are fine (you control the light and depth of field is largely irrelevant). This is a business I intend to grow. The S5 will likely get a go here to out of curiosity, but it is not really needed. Domke F840

For studio work, lenses and cameras are pushed to the back of the cue, with lighting and technique taking centre stage.

Weddings

(the occassional gig)

This kit is picked per job, rare as they are at the moment. Usually something between my editorial, street and studio options, with video if needed, like a G9, EM1x and S5 or similar. Filson Field Camera bag, Black Rapid Strap.

Drama

(a bit of fun)

This is often done with basically the Sports kit with video added if required. The 40-150 f2.8 and 75mm get a lot of work, the 8-18 also. Pro Tactic 350 pack or Domke F802.

Nature and Landscape

(where it began)

For this and I wish there was more of it, I tend to raid my Sports kit (longest and widest lenses), sometimes the Travel kit for light weight options. The lens I miss here is the 12-100 f4, but moving on as I realise I would still use longer and wider, the 8-18, 300 with T/C and 40-150 f4 forming the core with filters for the wide and all are weather sealed, so the super zoom would actually be excess.

An EM1x and G9 for cameras (11 batteries all up for extended periods away) and I am ready. Macro is lacking here it may seem, but the 8-18 is ok, the 300 amazing for insects and the 40-150 useful. Might get the Oly 30mm macro one day, but if I need, the 12-40, 25 and 9 are all real options.

If I am not after wild life, just landscapes, the 75-300 is taken with the wide. It just takes lovely images without fuss and can work ok as a good light wildlife lens. If travelling super light for and for landscapes only, an EM1.2 (7 batts) the 9L (macro), 12-60 and 40-150 kit lenses would go (18-300) and all but the kit tele is weather sealed. One Planet Pack or day pack, modified Lowe Pro Inverse 100 waist bag.

Events

(the necessity)

Events are likely a thing of the past for me without contact with the school, but are easy enough. If I take what I need from the studio kit, a fast lens or two with an on camera flash I am sorted. EM10’s like this work, an EM1x if light is an issue, the 12-40 or 12-60 for the studio shoots and 17, 25, 45 and 75’s for walk arounds when bounce flash is used. Sometimes the whole event can be covered by the 12-40. Domke F804 and other bags as needed.

Keeping it simple and adaptable is the key. A pair of stands, 2 brollies and 3-4 YN 560 flash units work fine even for big groups (brollies are very versatile and efficient), backgrounds are often avoided unless requested using the room lights and natural darkness as my “ambient” background. One of my favourite techniques is a long hall with chandeliers or side lights, a regal chair or two and some shallow depth from a lower angle, balanced with warm light gels. This is gorgeous and refined with minimal effort.

Where is all this gear kept?

I leave the editorial bag at work overnight unless I am off for several days, the sports kit goes in on the relevant days and I am putting together a small prtable studio rig. The rest is either at home or in the car packed as video, event/studio, street or travel kits. There is always an emergency mini studio in the car.

The Sony Train And What Do You Really Need?

Sony is everywhere at the moment. Every job I do has another photographer there with a Sony Axx and G master or Sigma ART prime on. They are still killing it with focus, have some very good glass (a bit OTT, but all credit to them and they have certainly addressed the glaring weakness from their early day) and their low light performance is the one to beat.

Sure, they are clinically perfect, in both a good and bad sense, but hey.

For the new generation of shooters, this is the Sony era, everyone else seems to be playing catch up.

I guess the big questions are still to be answered.

Question 1; Can AF ever read you mind?

AF is never used on major film productions, because even if you could (you actually can) programme an AF system to do what a human can do, it is still easier to use an experienced human to focus for you. Transitions? At what speed, what focus steps, how smooth? Human does instinctively and organically what the computer is told to do. The big pole is a miss by a computer is obvious, because it is confused often resulting in an over correct, where a human miss is subtle, gentle and can be fixed the same way.

Same difference I guess, but we are soon to reach that point when the human is the quant choice, not the automatic option. We are not however, there yet and the human touch will never be irrelevant, just rarer as computers offer “easier” fixes than muscle memory.

AF right now, no matter how good cannot read your mind or creative processes and even on the rare occassions it can make do, it is only replacing some small effort on the users part.

Question 2; Other than in run and gun trouble shooting situations, would you ever use a super high ISO setting rather than better lighting?

We once had to work with a very small range of low ISO settings for even decent quality (40-200 in my life time, 1600 being nasty). This range has expanded massively, but ask any pro and they will use the best ISO, not the highest when they have any choice in the matter. Expanding our options is always good, but at some point enough is actually enough.

Documentary and news shooters even subscribe to this, but often they have to compromise. Sure workable (not pretty) ISO 800,000 is great when you need it. Do you need it? Would you ever compromise the quality of your footage/stills unless you had to? Video only needs 1/50th of a second, stills maybe 1/350th does most things, so there is an achievable outer limit.

Once clean ISO 6400-12,800 is achieved, you are capable of handling most situations.

Question 3; How much lens is too much?

I touched on this recently. Super shallow depth and creamy Bokeh is a thing, possibly and over used thing and it is often not needed, nor even practical. In the past, the f1.4 lens was a must for low light, because ISO’s were limited, but now that is almost a thing of the past, that only leaves very shallow depth of field for creative purposes or bragging rights*.

An extreme situation handled by an f1.8 lens.

To be honest, if your background is that unworkable and ugly, then you probably need to use one of the many excellent background replacement tools available, control your lighting, or just go with f1.8 to 2.8 and better technique. Any lens can render a soft background if you apply good technique. One of my favourite lenses for soft Bokeh is a f6.7 zoom!

Question 4; How much resolution do you actually need?

Seriously, what are your end user expectations and what do you need to get there? Internet use, book or brochure printing? Even fine art has a limit usually imposed on it by a factor not camera related, so before you go and produce really massive files, only to have them down sized by up to 90% for web or print uses, think about your real needs. A high res, poorly executed image is of less use than a sharp, clean and clear lower res one.

I am in the habit now of just sending clients web sized images with the masters filed away for other uses. Rarely do they ever ask for anything bigger. My highest pressure pro shoot, the Telstra Board portraits ended up being printed as passport sized images in their annual report. This is also a f2.8 M43 file (see Q3)

The same with video. Anything over 1080p or 4k is for hypothetical future proofing***, something that is likely not a real issue for most footage that ends up at 720 or 1080 for web use. Pet projects, record keeping and sales to Netflix aside, the end viewing medium is likely 1080, maybe 4k and likely the watcher will not be able to tell the difference anyway, especially if it is upscaled.

I always find it funny how the high res crowd are also addicted to softening filters for that true movie camera look, which is often just less digitally perfect.

Like most things, quality is not necessarily best measured as quantity and larger quantities can introduce issues of their own like the need for ridiculously highly corrected lenses just to break even.

*

Most of the issues being addressed at the moment are only issues if you let them be.

1. Good practices have always been enough in the past and tech should not be a lazy replacement for them. How did we survive up to now? Good technique, knowing our gear and avoiding known pit falls.

2. Other things matter, like having proper lens coverage**, good colour, practiced technique, a relevant subject, being quiet, nimble, empathic, having happy shoulders for working long periods, not drawing attention to yourself or being “that” person.

3. F1.8 does basically the same job as f1.4 for creative blurring etc, if you know how to use it and for low light makes so little difference it comes more down to a lens by lens comparison or software choice. Save yourself the cost, bulk and hassle of the brutish lens and go with the other guy. They not only do the job, but sometimes have even better AF, handling or other benefits and often the slightly slower prime and a Pro f2.8 zoom cost the same as one or two “super” primes. Ask yourself honestly how often you will use f1.4 and does every lens have to be that fast?

4. Getting off the more, more, more train helps you grow personally, rather than your kit increasing, with a corresponding reduction in savings. I have seen far too many young shooters tote a massive kit of gear to a job that does not need it, and I wonder how many jobs they have to do to break even? Should two A7r4’s, a trio of 35/50/85 G master lenses, really be a pair of A7 mk3’s, a 24-70 and 85 f1.8, saving you $1000’s and offering a better range?

5. Software will be or is already the fix for many current problems. The recent NASA negative retrieval exercise that bought an astronaut out of an inky shadow is only a taste of the future.

6. Finally, it sometimes helps to just stop worrying. Cheaper kit is cheaper to replace, easier to carry and the whole thing can be replaced easily, allowing you to concentrate on better work.

A 75mm f1.8 acting as a 150mm f3.4 on full frame. Regardless, f1.8 was enough. F1.4 would have added a half stop fatser shutter speed or half stop lower ISO and even softer background, but may also have lost a part of the subject. In other words, even If I could, I would not have used wider.

*A local shooter at a Mayoral swearing in ceremony recently showed me his Nikkor 0.95 lens, that he intended to use when he did the studio lit portraits in a small room? A 50mm f1.8 would have easily done that, but oh, the wanker value!

In a presser yesterday at a small graduation ceremony, photographer “X” was so tied to his G Master 50mm, that he spent far too long shuffling people around a small room until they all fit in his shot. A Pro 24-70 would have been ideal, but the super fast prime, which I bet he did not shoot at F1.4 when his group needed to go three deep to fit the shot, was a hindrance (I also wonder how big the images will ever need to be from a rushed group shot). As an aside, I got the same shot over his shoulder with a tiny M43 17 f1.8 at 1.8 (ff f3.4) with room to crop!

**I rarely use my 8-18, but when large groups may come into play, it is handy. Having a set of super sharp, super fast primes at the expense of more width or length just does not make sense. Look at the older shooters who run a pair or three zooms and a select fast prime or two as options. This comes from a long history of just working and cannot be more relevant than now.

I bought the wide lens along just in case for this shoot. Group shots were a last minute thing, then they got bigger and bigger on a crowded stage, but 16mm eq covered it. No other lens I own solves as many problems as this one from so little use, but when it is needed, there is no other option. Another fast prime instead? No way.

***Nothing shot from the later 20th century to now is unwatchable, but you can tell the generational differences and changing styles. We seem at the moment to have a fixation on video resolution without a true understanding of the realities of change and viewer perceptions. Things will change regardless of our attempts to arrest it. Our footage in 20 years will look dated no matter what we do, because preferences and tastes change, techniques evolve and quality (not just resolution) increases. Shoot 8k if you feel you need to, but nobody but you will know and none will request these massive files “as is”. Ironically, future software will likely allow for massive upressing anyway.

The Power Of The Crop

I am not a huge fan of massive pixel counts, but the ability to crop heavily makes all the difference. My 300mm on the EM1x seems to be happy with about 1/4 of the frame used (about 1200mm in full frame).

Bad Day Turned Good.

I had a horror day planned today.

A full day for two, about eleven jobs on a Saturday, was unrealistic for just one when the other tog came down with COVID.

We culled, shifted, adjusted until it became four sporting events and two editorial shoots with a small easement for processing. I was still expecting a late one and for something to go wrong.

Sporting events can be a mixed bag, but today I got lucky.

Adult grade athletics with pole vaulting, hurdles and more.

Every event had clear numbering, good and accurate sources for identifying the people that belonged to them and the events were more photogenic than some.

A couple of quick editorial jobs, requiring different gear and another frame of mind. Gotta love diversity.

A demonstration of robotic remote surgery. They peeled a tomato later on.

Then some football.

I did muck this one up a little, taking only my 600mm, forgetting that I usually go two camera and lenses, but the long lens only meant I got some really tight images.

Funny thing is, my favourite sport to watch and play is Cricket, which I don’t much like photographing it especially in a hurry, but my least favourite sport to watch after horse racing, AFL (I just have no interest), is one of the best to photograph.

Two games of Cricket and day done.

The Limit?

So it had to happen. I may have found my limit for gear stress.

Turning up to a local soccer match, state league, but at an older ground, I found out just how low the light can get and the game still go on. Please keep in mind, the images I have uploaded are significantly lighter than actual field on the night.

ISO 6400 is ok and ISO 12,800 is possible for the odd shot, but really needs ON1 for every file. 300mm eq F2.8 is also ok, especially for a smaller soccer pitch, but 1/500th is a little slow and even then I was a tad under exposing (I lost a few potentially good ones). My 75 f1.8 would have been fine, but a little short when pressed for time.

I got away with it, but only just. To be honest I was surprised how low it was. The players seemed fully adjusted, but I wonder if is possible there is worse to come? The hockey ground is also poor, but I think the artificial pitch bounces more light back up.

A blurry ball is a guarantee, but with timing, subject movement can be tolerable, even cool.

To be honest, the tight, mono noise was not a big deal to me and the files are sharp, but I am getting touchy about my images, even for the paper.

Interestingly, the files printed on news print brilliantly.

Full Frame, Of Mind

The S5 has been sitting around waiting for some love. To be honest so have a lot of my cameras, but this is different.

The S5 represents several things.

Opportunity. All the possibilities that a better video (and stills) camera can offer.

Hope. Hope that the reality meets the expectation.

Fear. Fear that the M43 kit I love and use may be under threat and that the imagined potential is not real.

Pressure. Pressure to use it, even justify it. I have M43 cameras that dont get used enough, but this was a glove thrown down. The GH5.2 would have been the “softest” challenge made, the GH6 probably middle and the S5 a genuine “let’s do this”, even if it was the cheapest*.

Regret. Regret that I did not go M43 in a GH6 or GH5.2 to block out all the above.

Apathy. No great driving force or project to chase to help me just get on with it, which comes mainly down to work, work, work.

The 50mm S is lovely.

Tons of quality, even when pushed.

Nice Bokeh.

The 50mm Pentax adds options, especially for video. There is also the Super 35 TTArtisan and others.

The kit zoom is decent enough, offering wide angle macro as a bonus.

ISO 1000 is actually a low ISO for this camera.

It is different, but in a good way.

The differences for stills are a “bigger” and deeper looking file with more crop-ability, lower noise and better dynamic range. The negatives are the extra care that needs to be taken with steadiness and shallow depth that still catches me (and I am already over the super bokeh thing).

Same, same backwards, which is what I always say about M43.

This is just a reminder to me that again having both systems is a benefit. I also like the balance of this combination, with a M43 heavy system and the S5 as a “lung” when needed.

The extra shallow depth of field, higher ISO capability and thanks to that and a more movie-centric design, give generally better video, so make this useful to fix those specific things, but M43 is still my preferred option for most other things because of it’s better AF, stabilising, deeper depth of field and double reach. I just find M43 cameras easier and more fun to use.

The reverse would be too much size, weight and cost for the return with M43 relegated to just being the “little” option. I did this and the urge to follow the M43 path was too strong.

*The S5 with two lenses cost less than the GH6 body only and only slightly dearer than the GH5.2 with one.

Stocktake Time

Sometimes to relieve GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome), the best thing you can do is go and look at old or even more recent reviews of your current gear.

This has triggered me to look at my kit, the future, possible upgrade paths and things that really need some well earned appreciation.

Cameras

I will spare you the “any camera you have is the right camera” rhetoric, but I will say that the time of cameras getting demonstrably better every generation is well past. Any camera made in the last ten years is good enough, but some are better at some things than others and none are perfect.

For example, my best performers (EM1x) are dearer and bigger than the others, my favourites to use (G9’s) do not play perfectly with some lenses and my sentimental favourites (EM5 mk1) are tracking AF limited and aging, but as a team, they are more than capable.

Remember also, that any camera capale of producing a sharp and clear 8mp image can still out resolve a 4k screen and can print to a decent size. With this in mind, often the best value cameras are the ones you own, not the ones you want.

2x G9.

The G9 is my favourite camera. A near perfect ergonomic blend of Canon and Nikon. I use a pair of EM1.2’s for the paper and they are more than fine, but the G9’s just handle so much better, so are reserved for commercial, hybrid and studio work. The G9 is a bigger camera with more dials and buttons than the EM1.2 and sometimes I get lost in the menus, but at the end of the day, a properly set up G9 is the best stills and video camera hybrid.

The AF with a non Panasonic tele lens can be twitchy and the stabiliser is not as good as the EM1x with movement, but is at least equal for semi-static work. I also like the image quality technically as much as the EM1x, but emotionally, maybe more.

The portrait kings, with only the “toy” EM10 mk2’s coming close.

Status; A new G9 would be interesting, even a GH6, but until something really rocks my world, the G9 is nearly the perfect camera. There may even be another firmware upgrade or two and a tele lens to round out their capabilities.

Ignore the tape, it is only covering slightly lifting rubber on that hand grip, but has become quite comfortable.

2x EM1.2.

The workhorse EM1.2’s always surprise. I have felt these are under some pressure, but realistically, they are still quite new for pro cameras, are close to as good as anything else I have and have surely paid for themselves. The lack of the thumb nubbin lever is really the only negative, but I adapt. Some of the early negatives I read about and observed with the Mk2’s like greenish colour casts and slight softness, effectively disappeared when I switched from Adobe to C1. Lesson learned.

In the early days of the EM1.2 I felt they were a compromise on the quality I got from the Pen F and EM5’s, having better AF at the cost of a compromised sensor, but with C1, all that went away. The G9’s and EM1x’s are better in low light by about a stop, but that is it.

Status; I will likely get an EM1.3, EM5 mk3 or maybe an OM-1 if one dies, or use a G9 if video comes back into the frame at the paper. My G9 for wide, EM1.2 for longer lenses kit worked ok, but the G9 is bigger than an EM1 and the two battery thing was annoying.

2x EM1x.

The “X’s” are my sports cameras and they play very happily in that space. I also really like the handling, clean layout and ironically for an M43 lover, the size. Performance exceeds my needs and skills.

Pushed into a different space, enjoying the more flexible dynamic range the X’s offer.

Status; I bought a second one this last end of year because it is simply the best camera I have used and still holds up against the OM-1 and EM1.3.

Pen F.

Love this camera, but use it far too little. Travel, landscape and studio are it’s true lanes, none of which are getting much of a go at the moment, but I hope to change that.

The sensor in this camera is a very differnet beast. Sharper, harder and truer than the other cameras, it is less capable in low light, although the noise is film like. This is the fully realised evolution of the EM5 Mk1 sensor, before the phase detect version took over.

Status; A classic I use not close to enough, but still love. No way or need to replace it.

S5.

This full frame camera was bought for video primarily, but stills are an option. I deliberately bought the Mk1 on sale instead of the Mk2 which was released the day after, because it was more than enough for my needs and by far the best value available when compared to the GH5.2 and GH6 on sale at the same time. This camera feels like a standard V8 compared to the turbo 4 cylinder M43 cameras I have and was the straightest path to pro grade video I could take.

The S5, with a running mate G9, which is how I need to look at it.

Status; The S5 changed the capabilites of my kit in key areas, offerring the fixes for video I needed and a doorway to full frame, but to be honest, I doubt I will get too carried away here. Maybe a Mk2 and a couple more primes or a kit tele, but nothing much else.

2x OM10.2.

These little winners are my light travel and event cameras (2 bodies, the kit 12-60 and 40-150 and 2 small primes weight about 1kg). The silver one in particular is my lucky flash camera, meshing really well with artificial light, especially with select lenses.

Status; No need to upgrade or change these until one or both die, but they owe me nothing (I bought both cheap on clearance) and they get an amateur grade working life. If I did need to replace one, a OM10.4 would likely be it, because the sensor is close to the one used in the Pen F (two birds…..).

The mixed bag of “hobby” cameras, all more than capable.

1-2x Pen Mini mk2.

One belongs to my wife, one is mine. These are the older 16mp sensor also and I love their files. Just my opinion, but for me the 16mp sensors put out by Fuji, Olympus/Panasonic and Nikon were a real sweet spot. These are hip level street cameras and I truly hope they will get another trip overseas.

Status; see EM5 mk1 below.

1-4x EM5.1.

A bit tired, but much loved and still used for personal stuff. The first cameras I have ever used until they died and I will miss the sensor when the last one falls over.

A file that defies technical criticism, from a 13 year old camera.

Status; Use them until there is nothing left, then lovingly shelve them. These are still capable machines for many tasks and the files have a certain something. Unfortunately, they are getting a little old to pick up as second hand deals, so their end is imminent.

Cannot forget the cameras that got me here.

As you can see there is a pattern. The Olympus cameras do the hard yards and thankless paper work. The Panasonics are more for love projects and the “spares” are used to reduce the load on others and personal stuff.

Cameras that fall in and out of favour when looking ahead are legion.

EM10.4 (pen F lite), EM5.3 (EM1.2 lite), OM-5 (EM1.3 lite), OM-1(latest and greatest), EM1.3 or a cheap EM1.2 (known beast at the right price), GH85 (a decent video option), G7 (also a good 4k video “B” cam), GH5.2 (live streaming, 400 bit All-i), GH6 (Super M43), S5.2 or a cheap S5 (fleshing out full frame), maybe a Sigma FP (with Lumix S lenses). All are great, some ideal, so I have options and intend to keep an eye out for best bargains.

Quality that still impresses me from M43 is a common thing.

Looking at my kit in a job specific way.

Landscape. No need to improve. I have plenty of quality and high res that is never used.

The kit 12-60 Panasonic.

Sport. Two EM1x’s and EM1.2’s as backups are tons. Nothing needed here. Maybe a Panasonic long lens to increase my options. I already had a 35-100 miss-fire, but may try again.

Can you use a hand held 600 f4 in a humid, dark and crowded environment?

Editorial. My day bag is the most heavily used kit, with two well used, ut healthy enough EM1.2’s. I will replace these with the best buy available when I need, or maybe demote an Em1x or add a G9 if video becomes a thing again.

The 12-40 on an EM1.2, light as was, channeling Rosie the Riveter.

Travel. Never a latest and greatest thing, I take pride in getting my images from “hobby” level kit. Two EM10’s the Pens and even my last EM5’s are fine.

A kit tele on a basic camera.

Street. Any camera, the less “pro” looking the better. The little Pen Mini on a 60” strap for wide and maybe an EM10 or 5 with the kit 40-150 or 45 for long.

A product of organisation and reaction speed, not a super camera.

My next trip to Japan will be with the Pen F, Pen mini and my last reliable EM5 mk1. Lenses will be the 9, 15, 25, 45 and 75 primes.

Flash Or No Flash

Something the paper is bringing out in me is the need for and ability to use flash. Not controlled, interesting and creative flash, just “get it done” flash.

Modern cameras are pretty good at getting by without flash, but flash can never the less often do a better and cleaner job in tough light. The usual order is nothing > a reflector > an LED > a flash > multiple flashes > with mods.

The big issue is often the need to push and pull a file, which is just a lot of pixel binning. Flash eliminates at least one of these.

Warmth, brilliance and 3D “pop”.

In the shot above, a ND filter was employed to help the flash units (2x Good TTL units) cover the space at f1.8. Without the filter I would have been using 1/2000th or higher, really pushing the flash units. High speed flash is a big drain on power, the longer the distance and higher the shutter speed, the greater the drain as the unit has to fire multiple times to cover the shutter movement. Add in TTL pre-fire and it gets tough quick. The ND filter allows you to use a speed under sync (1/250th) with an aperture of f1.8 for shallow depth.

Both units were bare head, set to 35mm (FF) coverage and are just out of frame to the left or behind (not sure that one did anything). Overall exposure was about -1 EV, the flash units at +0.7 EV.

A shot before I remembered to turn silent shutter off (which disables flash). Apart from the shadows over capped faces etc, it lacks the “pop” of the one above. Also though I did shoot the top image a little lower angled and with a wider aperture.

The fact is, flash units in a M43 camera bag have the distinction of often being the heaviest individual items packed, but their utility is hard to argue with. To be honest, judicious use of flash is sometimes the difference between anyone else with a camera and a pro.

Limbo

First world whinge here, so bare with or turn away now.

The last three years, the COVID years, were actually three of my favourite annuals in my working life.

I worked flexibly and happily for the school, was appreciated, felt like part of the family and grew into the space with enthusiasm. Unfortunately, it did not pay much nor consistently, but to be done well (as far as I was concerned), it needed a full committment, curtailing my ability to earn in other ways. I would often get three small jobs a day, sometimes with only a day or two’s notice, so planning ahead was not really an option.

Add to this, the entire burden of expenses, long term security and upkeep fell to me, and financially I was probably better off unemployed.

My bad I guess as I came to the school straight from a camera shop, so had no client base formed. When it was active it was all pervading, when not (3 months a year), it was a void for earnings and even contact, but continued to be a financial drain with software subscriptions, insurance and licensing.

I pushed for a small increase in both security and income, in return promising a disproportionately large increase in content creation and involvement, but to no avail. The school is a not-for-profit and has limited options, so their wheel keeps spinning, spitting out well meaning photographers as it goes. Shame.

I accepted two days a week at the local paper in an attempt to make the whole thing viable.

A respected and ancient institution, it paid at the other end of the scale, including transport, a decent computer and even gear (two of which I do not use). This shared arrangement may have worked to a point, but we never find out, as I was offered, actually pressured to accept full time when another tog left, breaking the connection to the school.

Time to clean house and prepare for the future.

There are good things, such as a heightened awareness of social issues, contacts and decent income for my future, but there is also a massive feeling now of living a single dimensional, lop sided life.

To address this, I have signed up to a couple of charities and social organisation’s as a volunteer photographer, videographer and general helper. Balance feels restored, when it actually happens.

Ther problem is, when I went up to full time, the “machine” gobbled me up in a single day, with, in all fairness, a fair amount of flexibility to accommodate my commitment to the school over their final term (as promised). Working effectively two jobs was not much fun, even worse than doing just one I have mixed feelings about.

In reverse, three months have elapsed since I requested a dispensation and I am fed up. It is odd that if I quit, this would all have been behind me months ago, but partially quitting is taking forever.

Rant over.

Tranquil nature scene showing the cycle of life etc………..

Looking on the bright side.

Working for the school was lovely, a bit too “idilic”, as a private school environment can be sheltered and naive. I had committed fully, much to my own detriment, but really, they are lucky kids, they do not need me.

Being out in the real world has been good for me, opening my eyes and in hindsight, my current dynamic of part time work with the paper and part time self motivated volunteering with the Migrant Resource Centre among others is a better balance.

I did a single job for the MRC the other day, a Bollywood dance afternoon all comers welcome and it was cathartic, life affirming. I have made the right move spiritually and personally, now I just need the paper to sort things.

Another cool thing is, they look like they will actually use all the gear and skills the paper won’t, so a perfect balance in that regard also.

Patience is needed.

Wasting Time

I had a late job last night based on a loose appointment, not confirmed, but one that I thought I should go to anyway just in case.

No show, which is fine (coverred the next day and the following weekend). It was my call and the journalist concerned was sick so no way of following up. I had a camera, some nice light and the cities near empty Civic Square to explore.

“Red Tops”.

“Public Garden Harvest”.

“Fire Fingers”

The other bonus was the next morning I still had my camera with me.

An intriguing composition.

Old mate the crane, soon to go with the pending completion of the new build.

Belt And Bracers

Looking for the dual hand grip from the Smallrig shoulder kit, but on its own, it looked like I would be paying something close to the full rigs, so I decided to buy the whole thing. My preferred Smallrig supplier is (ebay seller) smallrig188 who supplies from Australia and is often best or near best price, with impeccable service.

Turns out there was a discount on this rig, so it was the same price as buying the arms alone!

From here I have a lot of options as well as the ability to fully rig out two cameras and with the flick of a lock, switch from one to the other.

My ideal I feel will be the chest brace with side handles, possibly pointing up, but I know from experience, that sometimes the logic does not translate to reality, so having both (or a hybrid) to try will reveal best practice.

It is also handy to have more ways to mount other items. The S5 with it’s small HDMI requires a protective clamp, which replaces the side handle. The above rig allows for both.

The Best Rig Option

I have been looking at maybe adding a follow focus and possibly a shoulder rig or something to the S5.

Being full frame, the stabilising is not as powerful as the M43 cameras and the follow focus thing has been of interest. For the follow focus you need rails, so it makes sense to look at the two in tandem and it is often cheaper.

The problem is, I do not want a shoulder rig. I don’t shoot like that. My comfort zone for hand held low angle video with a right side (camera) handle and left focussing hand in tandem and the option of a left hand handle for movements.

This works well with the G9 and EM1’s, but the S5 is a slightly less reliable platform, a result of a bigger sensor, longer lenses and slightly different ergonomics.

The solution just popped up while I was looking for USB cable guards. The Smallrig 3183 chest pad gives me a third contact point, something that should fix the slight wobbles I have* and the 30cm rails allow for a follow focus option later.

From here, I will also have the option of a top or under handle with a weighted and braced base and even the shoulder rig later for more options, but probably not.

*I have shot 2-4 min hand held interviews with a G9, but there is a slight drift (very Netflix I guess). This should arrest that on two angles, leaving only in-out body movements, which are easier to correct.

The Art Of Overkill.

I have been around a lot of photographers lately and some trends seem to be emerging.

Photography has always been a game of overcoming limitations, but sometimes you need to look at those limitations in context.

Shooting in low light has tended to reduce quality, but had several ways of being mitigated. You could use a larger film stock or sensor (bigger, more expensive cameras with shallower depth of field and lower magnification), a faster lens (also shallower depth of field) or faster film/ISO (lower quality).

So why at a time when we can comfortably say all of these have been addressed, do we feel the need to use all of these fixes at once?

Example 1. I recently shot a job at an airport in the main foyer. The light was ok, interesting with decent levels and the mix of natural and artificial was workable. I used my 40-150 f4 which has proven to take perfectly good files for fine art prints, let alone news grade or internet use. A hired shooter, someone I have encountered before, was switching between three G Master primes on a Sony A7r mk4. These cover the ends of a basic zoom (35/50/85), all at f1.4. In a previous conversation the shooter said he wanted to use two cameras, but could not yet afford another A7r mk4.

My thought, screaming internally, but not voiced, went something like this; “you don’t need edge to edge sharpness wide open nor even wide open for this light, which also brings you super shallow depth of field, which you also don’t need it as some context is appropriate even necessary, nor do you need the massive pixel count the camera offers, so why use any of this instead of a convenient zoom on a 24mp camera?

I know for a fact this presser was only going to go online. None of the gear used was going to be needed for the extreme use it was designed for. A $16,000au + kit to do what a kit lens and base camera could achieve? Even my M43 gear was overkill and I was not using my best stuff. You can buy and use what you want, but what information stream made this shooter feel he needed that kit for that job?

Example 2. Another newspaper shooter sitting next to me at an indoor AFL training camp, was sporting a single camera and lens combination worth more than my entire working day kit, but still complaining her lens was not long enough. The light was poor and I was lamenting leaving my 75 f1.8 at home, but got by with my f2.8 zoom. The other togs’ R3 and 85 f1.2L combination was too short, too good at low light handling for news paper work, but still with a DOF cost if used to purpose, but still did not offer a pixel benefit for cropping.

It was unbalanced for the job, but still cost 4x the actual kit needed and the massive lens was a pretty big deal to lug around “just in case”. My 45mm f1.8, the lens I would use for the same reason weighs as much as my car key. If I had that Canon kit, the 85 f1.8 would have been more than adequate and allow me to carry other options.

Low light be damned.

Sensor Size

The industry it seems, has done a real job on us and younger shooters in particular are right in the cross hairs. The relentless push toward full frame, something that was diluted when early DSLR’s ruled has become really cemented in mirrorless, right when it does not need to be. The industry is offerring both increased quality and more quantity at the same time.

Fuji and Olympus have taken another path, but Panasonic has caved and Fuji does medium format. Again, “crop frame” sensors, the name alone dooming them, have been pushed aside for the fallacy that is “full frame” or nothing.

Here is a better look at the real difference;

Lenses

The push for full frame brings with it a need to improve lenses for better edge to edge sharpness, otherwise why use the sensor size (and contrary 3:2 shape) or the pixel count? Some of this glass is getting massive, expensive and impractical and often in the face of the one actual benefit of full frame, lower noise and naturally shallower depth. The Nikon Z series even robs you of another stop of depth of field thanks to their super wide lens mount.

Shallow dept of field, often called Bokeh, but which actually refers to all depth of field transitions not just the super shallow ones, has its creative limits. Full frame f1.2 looks nice occasionally, but wears thin and is not overly practical in the commercial world. If you really need it, the average modile phone can fake it.

Super fast apertures are also not needed for low light with modern cameras and software, all factors considered.

F1.8 on a full frame 50mm. The same can be achieved with a 45mm on M43, or even shallower with a 56mm f1.4.

Most modern f1.8 prime lenses are near perfection and much easier to make, so you have to ask yourself, what are you actually getting that big, expensive lens for? Is it the rarely used performance parameters, the added prestige, a way of spending your obvious over abundance of funds or a need to have something that makes you feel like you stand out? A whole clutch of them? Overkill. Personally, I did not see a need even in M43 for their f1.2 lenses, let alone a full frame equivalent.

Pixels

More pixels have also been pushed for better quality like bigger film stock used to be, which was never a good measure. Not only is it very hard to prove the benefits of more pixels to the uneducated (i.e. the vast majority of people who will look at your images), but more pixels alone do not guarantee better colour, sharpness or more character, just bigger files. The potential actually has few relevant pathways of realisation. Ironically, when we needed more quality for massive prints, it was so very hard to achieve, but now that we have it easily, nobody needs it.

A decent crop off a low grade lens and older M43 20mp sensor.

ISO

There seems to be zero tolerance for high ISO performance issues these days. The fact is, most modern cameras get you most of the way, then software gets you the rest. Perfectly clean any-ISO performance is the ideal, but until that day, we can get the job done with what we have. What are we actually after? Absolute technical perfection, and if so, to what end?

A huge crop (about 10% of the original) from a middle-high ISO image off a medium pixel count, smaller sensor camera. The sensor, from an EM1 mk2 is a generation or two older than is state of the art, but C1 and ON1 No Noise combined for decent results.

The ends then, nullifies the means.

Internet posts and prints have limits, limits we have been exceeding in real terms for a long time. Very big prints can be made from very big files, but rarely need to be. The only time you can genuinely see the difference is when you get too close. The only real measure of massive pixel counts would be a huge, very hig resolution screen.

Viewing at 400% on a screen, standing feet away from a bill board etc will show some differences (and sometimes they will not, more often showing the limits of the medium), but only the obsessed do that and only when a direct comparison can be made as an exercise is for it’s own sake.

A 50% crop from a 20mp EM1 mk2 file, poorly processed in C1 (my first month), then shot on a cheap phone at dusk!

More, more, more, but with little accounting for real needs.

A Cameras Best Feature And It's Close Friend

I have a different shooting style to the other photographers. Part of that is from a different learning process, part of it is technical.

The single best feature my cameras offer me is silence.

Photography started with silence and after a long, long time of clacks, whizzes and burrs, it is returning to silence.

Animation like this, which was very representative of the person, would have been hard to replicate artificially.

The general process, especially with TV present, is that the interview is conducted with the photographer waiting till the end, then a shot or two is taken. It is a process, tried and true, but limited in options and to be honest, a little dated.

With a silent camera, it is possible to get that natural, empathic and genuine shot while the interview is in progress, even with sensitive TV mics near by. It is even possible to get an image that the subject will like.

Occassionally, I have noticed more clued in subjects, such as performers, politicians etc, can also play in this space, bringing their best to the process, which is good for all.

The second most useful feature, directly tied to the application of this is the responsive back screen that allows that silence to be used at angles previously not exploited.

The subject here was in casual conversation with our journalist, which allowed me to shoot low without being obvious.

Other benefit of no give away sounds, is no startled children, no wary or skittish animals and no breaking of the existing flow.

There are however some down sides that must be taken into account.

Depending on the camera, no flash will fire, sometimes banding is introduced under artificial lighting, especially at high ISO settings and sometimes, a lack of sound can be seen as sneaky.

Fill flash was employed here, the only image that made some gentle noise and of course the flash. I took plenty of silent ones first, then chanced this one, which was admittedly the best, but it broke the spell.

The flash thing is rarely a problem, the banding issue is getting better and there are sometimes ways around it and the sneakiness is fixed by simply being up front and pleasant (unless sneaky is called for).