Although every visit to Kyoto and surrounds brings forward new sights and sounds, the same places tend to get swept up while we are busy doing other things.
Alien towers from the train station roof.
Our favourite cemetary/temple
Arashiama traffic
Fushimi Inari shrine
Please indulge me here, lots of images of just regular people being themselves.
I am really responding happily to the many files that C1 is delivering to me in a more pleasant way than previous incarnations. Many of these images were previously done in black and white as I felt it handled the files better.
All of these were shot on a walk through then back again along the Osaka food trail on a stinking hot day.
All files taken with the Pen F and 17mm Olympus in manual “zone” focus, usually at f5.6, but some were f1.8, or 2.8, ‘cos I’m a twit.
This is well trod ground with me so if it sounds familiar, it is. The reality is though, as I go back through old files, theories solidify into fact and that is something worth sharing.
Features and benefits were drummed into me in my early retail days.
Features are what they seem, an actual thing that stands out in a product, place or situation.
A lens has a fast aperture; feature.
It is auto focus; feature.
It is small; feature.
Benefits are the actual positive or beneficial effects of those features, which a salesman will use as the selling point. Just saying it has something means little, explaining how that helps you is the key.
The lens allows you to exploit low light situations or use shallow depth of field; benefit.
The lens focusses fast and accurately; benefit
The lens can be put in a pocket; benefit.
The next level though is the hidden benefit, something you need a deeper understanding of the item to know, becasue it is not on the packet.
A lens has the feature of a fast aperture with the benefits mentioned above. Great, all lenses on that format will have that feature and its benefits, but are they all the same?
The Olympus 17mm, a lens I believe the designers made specifically for fly-by street shooting, has a hidden benefit. It has what I will call “long draw” or slow transition Bokeh. This means that the benefit has a second benefit, one that mitigates the negatives of the feature when its benefit is not a benefit…….. if that makes sense.
You can exploit the low light gather benefit of the f1.8 aperture, but you do not have to be overly concerned that the shallow depth of field benefit is a problem, has teeth even.
This image was shot at f2.8, with manual focus set to about 1m. The woman in front is the best point of focus (I assume), but the man on the left and woman on the right are also workable elelements. The woman in particular is not in focus fully, but she is still a part of the story and the point where the plane of best focus transitions, is very organically applied. In other words, all elements work in harmony, nothing jangles and the technical “process” is well hidden. Even the girl in the immediate background is coherent, but natural looking. I feel that even at f1.8, this would still have worked.
The image below is one of my favourite examples of the Panasonic Leica 15mm’s ability to do exactly the opposite. The Leica is a little wider, so logic would dictate that its background transition would be less dramatic, but it is actually a better lens for “snapping” the main plane of focus out from the background.
The tree children look like they have been literally cut out and layered onto a background image. The background is not totally out of focus, but it is clearly not on the same plane as the front. This makes the Leica an ideal wide portrait lens, so it havs become part of my editorial day kit, but for wide open street shooting, it is too twitchy. When I look at image made by this lens, i first see the sharp, then the soft, then come back to the sharp again often startled by its rendering. This does not happen with the 17mm.
Many modern lenses are designed for fast transition “creamy” Bokeh as a benefit. This is a benefit most of the time, but sometimes, especially when you are trying to tell a story, add context or include layers, it tends to be finicky and unforgiving.
This image, one of the best I have to illustrate this effect (benefit), was taken wide open in dark dreary light. The woman in the middle is pleasantly renderred and seems the central point of the image. The actual point of focus is the back of the mans Kimono (see how sharp his shoulder is), which wide open should render the woman quite out of focus.
All lenses have a personality, which is by definition neither a feature or benefit, just an accent towards things done beter or worse. Getting to know your gear allows you to use these personailty traits to your advantage.
Another immediately before. The lens was set at 1m f1.8, putting the man in perfect focus, the woman about a metre out. The people in the background are still easily identifiable. The thing I often see with this lens, is how delicate fine details are even if they are a little out.
Want a natural, organic, smooth street image without twitchy Bokeh?
The 17mm Olympus is as good as you will find. Use zone focussing (which its old school depth scale can help with) and a wide-ish aperture and you are good to go. The combination of long transition Bokeh and warm natural, slightly dense colours give the image a gentle, old fashioned look.
This image was taken at f2,
as was this,
but intriguingly, so was this.
Want a semi wide angle lens with the ability to hero the central subject(s) against a messy background with that modern look?
Grab the Leica 15mm which gives you that “poppy” 3d look, bright colours and a lightness of tone, all adding to the illusion of being sharper than the Oly, which it is not.
Other differences? I would grab the Leica with flat light, where it adds an almost Fuji like ability to handle dullness with aplomb, the Oly on the other hand loves to tame strong light.
The 17mm at f1.8 (God only nows why I shot a whole series at f1.8 in mid day sun, but I did). I dabbed a little sharpness on the clock, but otherwise as shot.
And later at f8 when I got on top of it. Both work as urban landscapes, which should not be possible.
The loop around Kamakura brings you back to the more substantial temple area.
One of my favourite street corners. Corners in Japan are like the corner shots of old. Each one has a private business, Familymart, Seven Eleven or similar.
It seems we only glanced off the bigger temple this trip, which is not surprising as the place was a bit of a Tardis of a town.
Kamakura as an odd place.
The oddest bit is the beach front.
Starting with the signage warning of eagles taking your small dog if you are not watchful (looking skyward revealed several sizeable predators “play” fighting), to pushbikes and mopeds toting long boards in custom side brackets. The strip is channelling Hawaii, the Riviera and in patches, even Tasmania.
This one is is on the short list. The irony, contradiction and purely Japanese feel of the image combined with near perfect figure placement are working for me. Interestingly, I remember taking it eight years ago and being excited at the time, but it failed to catch my eye after.
The strip is channelling Hawaii, the Riviera and in patches, even southern Victoria or Tasmania.
Tsunami shelter, life guard station or toilet block?
From the beach, you then head back into town.
The combination of .dng EM5.1 files and Capture 1 is offering up some surprises.
Shadows are a mystery waiting to be investigated.
Underexposed (a habit I had from shooting Canon, where you tender to under bake to protect fragile highlights), this file might strike fear into the early M43 shooter at ISO 800.
Clean as a whistle and highlights are reasonable well protected (for an essentially white sky).
More?
ISO 800 and f2.5. Not sure why. Even early days I knew ISO’s above 800 and wide open were both options, but maybe just forgetting to change settings after being inside.
Again clean and sharp. The shadows are effectively ISO 6400 or higher.
The .dng files seem to change the curve on the EM5 files to more of a Canon palette, which is to say, little is to be feared in deep shadows, but highlights seem to have a limit.
I have moved reluctantly into 2016 Japan files. Reluctantly becasue I have enjoyed the rediscovery of the older files, so moving on is a little like leaving a place and also becasue I am reminded that for some reason, I culled the 2016 files quite heavily. This in retrospect was a huge error as I am constantly finding old files that are coming to life with Capture 1.
Moving on.
One of our favourite places in Japan is the little seaside town of Kamakura, about an hour by local train from Tokyo.
Part beach culture, religious mecca and wildlife odyssey, Kamakura tends to be a mish-mash of disjointed memory packets, that need to be deliberately re-connected afterwards.
After our first trip there in 2016, I actually had remembered it as two places.
From the train staion you head parallel to the sea, along the hillside to the big Buddha statue and temple. This is I think the biggest metal Buddha in Japan.
from here, you head down the hill through a quaint shopping strip, past a couple more temples (always more temples), towards the beach.
Back when I started the Japan trips, I made a choice to do .dng copies of my files to future proof them*, then on some dark day, I culled the non .dng files from my system. This logic prevailed for the first three trips (2015-16).
The files from the first trips are nice. They seem to be a little over sharpened, but I can reduce that, but they respond well to any processing needed.
The magenta cast early EM5.1 files could have seems gone (could be C1) and the shadows come back from near blackness.
Highlights respond slowly, but do recover.
The images I seem to be responding most to are garden and landscape shots. They just seem to be more “fine art” than I previously perceived them to be.
This is a heavy crop and can go right down to fine detail. I remember the spot was dark even for a gloomy day.
All these images were shot hand held, using EM5 Mk1’s, with 17, 25, 45, 75 or 75-300 lenses with no filtering.
This not my usual landscape routine, if I pretend for a moment I still have one.
Ed. I have just started processing RAW files from these cameras, and it looks like C1 treats them close to the same, so ignore this :).
The new look Japan files have been haunting me a little.
Their new found found brilliance and clarity is embraced whole heartedly, but there is another look that has been jumping out at me.
Another of the “three” set.
Sometimes, with the smallest push, they look a little film like.
Kodachrome to be precise.
This one has a strong early film look.
They are cleaner and sharper than Kodachrome (fixable), but the colour palette leans that way and with a little added contrast and maybe some reduced saturation, they are really taking me there.
Darker files in particular are responding like film and are screaming to be handled gently.
I know that the memory can play tricks, but I am willing to trust my instincts and visual memory here and I do have a secret weapon.
I have access to a sizeable library of books printed in the pre-digital era or later, but with a pre-digital mind set, that were taken more often than not with Kodachrome.
My concern is, these are EM5 mk1 files, which are literally a dying breed. The only camera I have that seems to have a similar look is the Pen F and I have heard that the sensor in the EM10 mk4 is similar, but the processors are newer.
Did something dumb today.
Asked by the sports editor to get some images of the state Junior Track Team, I proposed a not totally original, but also not thoroughly planned idea of sitting backwards on the trial bike, with my 9mm, going for some dramatic images.
To add to the variables, lighting was intermittent with only about 20% of the overheads on and the odd natural sky light, so the subjects tended to go bright/dark quite quickly (30km an hour quickly).
With the 9mm, able to focus down to 3cms, I actually had to be careful how close I got.
The sweet spot was 1/250th at ISO 1600, roughly f1.8 to 2.8.
Professionals all, the distances did not bother the riders especially at these relatively sedate (for them) speeds, but holding on, staying balanced, changing settings and getting the shot all came down to nerves and muscle memory for this newbie (me that is).
Keep in mind, the oldest rider is 16 and the youngest 14.
Being more sensible and using the 75mm wide open also worked.
Back to the 15 and 9mm’s for some statics.
Then long again.
My “ride”.
AFL football at the highest level is a joy to photograph. Unfortunately for full enjoyment I would need to have a personal interest in it, because identifying the players, who are only numbered on the back, often tend to look similar and move really quickly can be tough.
many times you get the shot you want, then have to chase the numbers on the back of players running in three or four different directions.
All of the above are passable images, but they all failed the submission folder, because at least one players name was an uncertainty on the night (many have been confirmed since).
The curse for me is, the sports I like to shoot are not the ones I have an interest in.
The other little niggle, and this is one as old as news papers, is that in print, horizontal rules. You may be lucky to get one or two long verticals a page and the problem is, AFL is a “tall” sport.
Players pushing 2m on average, leaping regularly and high means a lot of wasted real estate to the sides if shot horizontally.
Most of the ones above have been cropped to vertical, so over half the frame is wasted. Shame only one or two may get used so only a few get supplied.
So, all this will go away when we go fully digital?* Unfrotunately for us, no. The powers that be, likely not photographers, decided that a uniform 16:9 ratio is the best for web. This effectively means no more marking images.
*Currently we make content first for print, then flesh it out for digital, but the looming cloud is doing only digital at our end with a separate print editorial team making a paper from that.
The first trip images are still being explored. To be honest, I am finding (re-finding?) so many, that I am wondering how I am going to cull effectively.
I seem to have taken my best primes (17, 25, 45, 75 and the 75-300 as long work horse). This is not surprising and apart from the 12-40, may have been the bulk of my options at the time. A very workable kit, but now I think I would go with less (17, 45, 40-150 kit).
Of the lenses listed above, the cheapest was the biggest and longest, the 75-300. I have had two of theses, selling one, missing it and grabbing another and paid roughly $400au each time. Bargain.
The files are EM5 mk1 .dng files. They are responding to Capture 1 better in some ways than newer files, with massive shadow recovery, but strangely reduced highlight recovery. The highlights come back, but they are about as responsive as large super fine jpegs (an Olympus thing).
This has always been a favourite, but never like this. The 75-300 is a killer lens, especially in the shorter half of the range, but even I am surprised at the brilliance and clarity of some re-worked files.
I am also surprised how often I used it, especially considering the cool, dark, wet trip we had.
I had fast primes aplenty, but the slow super zoom stayed on even in tricky light.
This lens has very stable and pleasant image making properties, including nice Bokeh.
Too long really for this type of street grab, it never the less took plenty.
It seems I even chanced it in the dark arcades.
In its natural state, compressing a whole street into one plane.
More compression.
Some thoughts.
I seem to be drawn to yellow.
The 75-300 used to fill a lot of roles.
The .dng files may behave differently to straight RAW files from the EM5 mk1’s (in C1 anyway), but are a nice starting point.
I feel I missed a chance with the EM5 mk1’s and C1. What a combination they may have made.
I missed an obvious video rig accessory when I bought the chest and shoulder rigs. I forgot quick release plates.
I grabbed a pair of Neewer ones, something they do well and cheaply and I know they will be compatible with my mechanical Gimbal and Tripod head plates (both Neewer). They do not line up perfectly with the Smallrig base plates, but are near enough and sit tightly.
I now have four head plates that are fully interchangeable with four accessories.
The big rig, probably only going to be used occasionally, but the handles might come in handy.
The matching Neewer quick release plates have joined the dots. They are a good size and cosmetic match, but the screws do not align perfectly. On the shoulder rig I managed to get two to align (just), but with the chest rig there is only one. Seems firm enough.
The Shoulder rig has some added weights from the Neewer Gimbal as I do not need the two heaviest ones. It just felt a little “floaty”, so the added heft anchors it better.
Possibly the LCD mount, but there are other options. The G9 has a top handle and a screen mount on the front of that.
The chest rig is simpler and most likely more often used as it is basically configured to aid how I actually shoot (hand held). I added the optional Ronin handle I bought a while back. This and the cameras own handle make a good balanced pair. Seems everything Smallrig ends up being useful.
There seems to be a red theme running through these accessories that matches the details on the Pana cameras. Irrelevant but nice.
All three video rigs have a plate, from the S5 in its cage, G9 in its and the universal Camvate one for the EM1x. There is a fourth plate for maybe the OSMO or the second G9.
Running two formats again has been less vexing than I suspected it would be.
I bought the S5 not because it was the better format, but because it was the better value video choice at the time, in the context of my existing kit and needs. The 3:2 format, something I am not a huge fan of for stills even though I have used it since the 1980’s, is closer to the 16:8 ideal.
High ISO performance is exceptional and all the other little niggles I had like limited recording time and formats, dynamic range etc were all effortlessly sorted. The other option would have been the GH5mk2 and another couple of fast primes or the Pana f1.7 zoom, but the S5 kit was cheaper even than that.
These were video issues fixed by a video-centric camera.
I feared that full frame fever would catch hold again across the board, but it really hasn’t. I tend to forget I have it for stills.
For video, the S5 forms the nucleus of my more pro-end kit. It is the best supported and my first stop for serious projects, but the other cameras I have available* are still fully capable in their own spaces.
For stills though, and this is the curious bit, I still actually prefer M43. This is not a specific camera thing, because the S5 feels like a G9 in many respects, but in use, I find M43 a more practical format, capable of doing any job I need.
Quality.
This old pearl, likely the number one reason people avoid the format, was ironically the thing that attracted me in the first place.
Sick of soft/sharp Canon files from 5D mk2’s, I was attracted to the bright and clear M43 files and that was out of their earlier generation EM5’s. I also tried Fuji and Sony, but both were behind in key areas at that point. In its early days m43 was giant killing. I still remember the Steve Huff comparison of the D3s to a lowly M43 EP-2 with equivalent lens in his 20mm Panasonic review. Daylight to the little tacker.
I laboured and stressed over this for a year or so, but time and time again, the little EM5 mk1, with my clutch of 14, 20, 45 and 75mm lenses were sharper, more accurate and brighter looking to this jaded Canon user when compared to some heavy and expensive old favourites (i.e. the Canon equivalents 24EF, 35L, 85 USM and 135L).
Granted high ISO is behind when compared to the modern bigger sensors (although other factors help mitigate this) and new mirrorless cameras from the big guns are bridging some of the other factors like mirrorless accuracy and speed, but I am more than happy to shoot for fine art with this format. It generally out resolves fine art paper.
An ISO 6400 image at f2.8, which if printed would be good to quite large sizes.
3D pop.
I can get it and surprisingly easily. Some of my M43 lenses are very good at this, even the semi wide ones. They tend to fall into two camps, both equally useful.
The fast transition lenses (the Leica’s, Oly 12-40, 25 and 75 as well as the f1.2’s) are ideal for highlighting a single subject plane, while the others tend to be longer transition (the 17 is a paragon here), which is perfect when you want a more forgiving and organic file.
This clean snappiness is from the wide angle 15mm at too long a distance to be likely, but still it is there.
This shot is another example of the clean separation the little Leica 15mm provides. I first saw this from early Leica, Zeiss-Contax and Zenza-Bronica glass with film, the ability to draw the eye to the sharp plane of focus, then let you drift back to the soft supporting elements, then back again.
Depth of field.
M43 offers the same tools for shallow depth, they are just applied at magnifications twice as long as their full frame equivalents. The advantage of this is that shallow depth is not as twitchy. I can and do use f1.8 lenses wide open all the time, just like a full frame shooter uses f2.8 which was not even a habit I had when shooting full frame/35mm for twenty five plus years.
About 100mm at f4 using the proper principals of shallow depth rendering.
This gives me effectively a two stop advantage in light gathering, without forcing a strong creative imperative on my images.
Even at f2.5, it has decent subject cut out. Now apply the math. The full frame equivalent would have to be twice as close, or be cropped by half again or be a much bigger and more expensive lens. It would also have to use f2.8 at ISO 6400 rather than 1600 at f1.8, to provide the same DOF if needed. If a higher pixel count camera was used like a 45mp Z9, thus evening out the pixel count when cropped, pixel density would be much the same as the un-cropped 20mp M43 file and if done regularly the bigger sensors extra unused real estate would be wasted.
M43 gives you slightly over two stops more depth of field with the same effective focal length at the same focussing distance. So, a 15mm lens is still a 15mm lens, but it magnifies like a full frame 30mm.
The 45mm wide open, showing the benefits of story telling depth of field. Blurring the background out completely would look nice on one level, but then becomes a portrait of a single figure only with no context other than blur. You can always add more blur, but not reduce it. Notice also how the blurring is in layers.
This is ideal for landscapes.
Easily achieved at a relatively moderate aperture, hand held, no tripod, in fact little technical effort made. I cannot remember a time when I felt I actually needed more than F8 (about f18 in full frame) for front to back sharpness. The laws of lens refraction being what they are, there is actually a slight advantage to M43 here.
Shape.
Yep, the actual shape of the file. M43 is a good fit for print, with plenty of quality to go 3:2 or even wider if desired. Full frame 3:2 ratio on the other hand tends to need cropping more often than not. Of the 30 odd templates we use at the paper, only a handful of inserts actually accept the 35mm format natively (yesterday I did a “Behind The Lens” article with eleven shots from a Tokyo garden. Only a two needed any cropping on our templates. The reality is a single image or matched pair stretching from side to side are a better fit in 4:3 ratio.
Square is well served and wider is much the same, as the extra included height in 4:3 is as relevant as it is in 3:2. It is just included, not excluded. I especially like 4:3 in verticals, finding 3:2 too skinny.
Flash.
This is a mixed bag.
On one hand the depth of field advantage effectively makes flash units 2 stops more powerful, turning speed-lites into heavy duty models, then these into mono blocks. My YN560’s act like AD 200 Godox units.
On the flip side, wide aperture shooting in daylight using high speed sync can be more taxing on the units, generally needing wider apertures, then higher shutter speeds to achieve. I fix this with a ND filter.
*
There are a couple of patterns forming here.
More blur can be added, but not taken away, meaning deeper depth of field can be reduced in processing, but not increased and a squarer shape can be cropped, but a thinner one cannot be expanded. This means in a nutshell, more flexibility.
My take away.
M43 can offer a more flexible, forgiving and logical format for stills photography and empower you at much reduced cost. Do not discount it based on perceived short comings or prejudices until you have tried it and if you do try it, make sure you use it properly.
The key is in the lenses, but they do not have to be ridiculously big or expensive super optics. Part of the magic is the quality of the glass, even at the cheaper end. The 9, 15, 25, 45 and 75 are all top tier, can fit into a small bag and go anywhere (covering 18-150 equiv).
The 10-25 and 25-50 f1.7 zooms are near perfection optically, similar in size and cost to f2.8 full frame zoom, cover more range and are hybrid stills/video specialists. My 300 f4 can match it with any equivalent super tele out there at a third the cost and size. The list goes on.
It is important when looking at the systems in comparison to full frame to think more like motor bikes compared to cars rather than small cars vs bigger ones.
When comparing to APSC crop sensor cameras, the same math applies, just in half increments.
*2x G9’s (10 bit 4:2:2, 4k/60), EM1x (C4K), OSMO Pocket (4K/60), most of which are in video configuration as we speak.
My street photography lacks a formula. It is purely an instinctive thing and I am fine with that. I see a form or the idea of one, then shoot.
Looking back though, I do see some patterns emerging.
Seems “The Triple” is a thing.
Three elements of interest in one frame.
They can be three people all acting differently.
Sometimes all doing the same thing.
Sometimes the people are not all people.
The dynamic seems to go something like this;
The point of interest.
This is the obvious eye catcher, often the person nearest the camera or most central (but not always). At the time this may have been what triggered the shot, or the element that completed the idea and provided the pivot point. I am often moving when I take these, so the “shape” is fluid.
The distraction. This is the element that either supports or contrasts with the primary elements.
The discovery.
This is the bit what brings the rule of three into play. This is the person or interaction that surprises or sneaks up on you. The third element is what makes it all work.
Usually the individual elements are mundane, only working because of the full story.
So, how often does this happen?
All of the images above were taken on one day in Harajuku on our first trip to Japan, so yes, I think it is a “thing”.
I love a street image with layers. One hit wonders are strong at first, but almost instantly dismissed. The layers do not have to be deep and meaningful messages, because the subjects all deserve some consideration as they are.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.