Gear And That GAS Thing.

GAS, or gear aquisition syndrome.

It is a thing I guess, but I feel, even though my gear stocks are ridiculous at the moment, that it is a thing of my past.

When I got the job with the school a while ago, I was actually windng down, dropping gear and minimalising. Too effectively unfortunately as a lens that would have been realy handy over the last few years, the 12-100 f4, was cast aside too cheaply to be replaced in good conscience and I still miss it.

My needs at that point came down to a little landscape (easily done) and street/travel (same). The school allowed me to shoot in several other fields and my “skeleton crew” got me through, but realistically I knew it was not up to it. I ran scared of very low light sport, indoor horror shows etc, (although I did not realise how close I was to being fine), so I invested in some more specialised gear, explored new software and grew.

I have usually only bought gear recently that I want within the envelope of what I need it, not gear I just wanted without other justification. Examples of this are purchases addressing the need for faster/longer, faster/wider, better AF, lighter weight, weather sealing or actual replacements for the potentially faulty, within which I purchase the best option.

To be totally honest, I went through a stage of hating buying new gear. I would look for fault, talk myself into seeing problems that were not there and generally be unkind to myself and my purchases. Buying to get the job done actually cured that. A mercenary need for tools to do the job helped me move on from a need for precious jewels in a hobbyists kit.

This was possible with an EM1.2, Lightroom (I used C1, but regardless) and a semi kit grade 75-300 zoom, taken in perfect light outdoors at a small pool.

But this one, taken indoors required more speed, with similar reach, better processing and (less so), a slightly newer and faster camera.

This required f2.8 with some reach, C1 and ON1 No Noise and an EM1x or I would have fallen 3-5 ISO settings short of decent.

The reality is, a working professional cannot turn up to mixed events without expecting the need of a wide angle, something long, both fast and curve balls like “no flash allowed” or “can you shoot silently?”. I play these scenarios out in my head and am confident that I can handle most monsters that may assail me.

Ironically, covering top end events can mean better lighting. When the JackJumpers play, they bring with them several suns.

The state junior cycling team training however get a half moon of light in the same venue.

So, when shooting long or wide, you need speed.

Best purchases have been an EM1x, the S5, the G9’s, 300 f4, re-aquiring my 40-150 f2.8, then a lighter and equally sure footed 40-150 f4, the 9mm which revolutionised my wide angle perspective, a Domke F2 Ballistic (only made practical with a couple of the above purchases), a second M1 Macbook Air for work allowing me to retire an ancient desk top and ipad, ON1 No Noise, the MKE 400, Smallrig RA-D55 diffuser and more.

Soft purchases, bought with a need in mind, but probably a little too pro-actively were the OSMO, a second EM1x, the Sigma 30 f1.4, Leica 12-60 (to replace the 12-40, which is still going), the Leica 8-18 that I rarely use now I have the 9mm, a couple of bags that have found other uses and some video lights, possibly to be pressed into service for stills.

*The one truly indulgent purchase was the Leica 15mm, but it has freed up my kits and is a little gem.

The need to address stress inducers can also lead to exciting new paths. I have learned a lot about studio light, flash in general and video has become my new frontier.

Crossing The Line

Shibuya crossing where over 3000 people may cross at any one time isone of those Tokyo landmarks. It is a contributor to the relative myth of Tokyo’s tightly compressed modern madness, something that is easily found if you go looking for it (6am weekdays at train stations is another), but is on the whole, contrary to reality.

A wedding must do.

A popular place to meet, but you must stand out.

Just a side street away.

Big brother wears a suit?

Later the same day, rush hour, pissing down. Channelling “Blade Runner” I guess.

Bits And Bobs

Some random stuff that pops up, but has no place to go.

Generations

The problem with the youth of today is they spend too much time on their phones…….

…when they could spend it looking anywhere else it seems.

Then And Now

Re-processing some old favourites, I am really becoming aware of the way I respond to a file when using different software.

The image below has been used before for depth of field and Bokeh posts and I have been quite used to it, but still had some ability to look at it fresh with C1 and process to taste, assuming the Lightroom version would be similar.

A quick couple of slider moves and the C1 version was done. The warmth was natural to the file I saw and the background colour came out with a little saturation and highlight recovery. I also noticed the chin hair for the first time in this version.

The Lightroom version is darker than the original (as C1 produced it), cooler and less delicate. I suspected the files were different, but I thought there was only one. Turns out these are different files, taken seconds apart, which explains the watch and glasses being slightly out.

The C1 files done to my eye and quickly.

The LR file, after a lot of work from memory. These were the sorts of files that bought out the shadow sharpness/noise balancing act, something that is a thing of the past for me now.

I guess the lesson here is to be aware we all evolve, so be aware of you in your past in comparison with your current self. You now can learn much from you before.

Reading The Signs (Or When Google Translate Fails).

Read the signs in Japan. The unexpected can happen.

‘Nuf said.

Understanding Bokeh And It's Various Uses

This is not a post based on the twitchy, defensive nature many M43 shooters are assumed to have regarding Bokeh.

I was there at the beginning, I got it and I embraced it, but what I did not do is let the obsessive shallow depth at all costs movement change my way of seeing the world or my understanding of what the term Bokeh actually means.

Wide open works for some subjects, no arguement.

Photo Techniques editor Mike Johnson and contributor John Kennerdell bought to light a very real Japanese perspective on a technical reality of photography, art and human vision. The Japanese have given the nearly unavoidable effect of a sharpest plane of best focus and the transition to the out of focus parts of the same image and it’s characteristics.

That term was Bo_ke, anglicised to Bokeh (Bo as in bone, ke as in kettle with the h added for pronunciation, which clearly failed as Bow-kerr seems the common mongreliseation). If you don’t believe me ask a Japanese, it is their word after all.

A sharp and clear deliniation of the main subject always looks good and is often seen as “professional”, but look at what is not sharp that could have been. It is an image of two carts, nothing more, using a pleasant technique to hold the image together. Another way would be to include some context. The reality is our eyes do the same thing as you scan across the frame and adjust, but the photo cannot adapt. You need to choose up front. Remember your images have lost forever what you do not include.

Bokeh is a term used to describe the quality (subjective) of out of focus transitions, but not the quantity of it, nor does it provide a ranking system from good to bad. It just is.

Within the Bokeh umbrella, there are many sub-terms of blurring like Ni-Sen (cross-eyed), something my 300 f4 exhibits. Having Bokeh is a statement of reality, not a measure.

Shallow depth can tell a story, the qualities of the out of focus areas and their transition becoming important elements of the overall effect, because sharp or not, they are still a part of the image.

Funny thing is, the 17mm is often cited as having poor Bokeh, which is not only fundamentally incorrect as a statement like saying weather is bad without qualifying what weather it is, but also misleading, because it ignores the various applications of different forms of Bokeh.

The above taken with a pre-focussed 17mm wide open, has no clear point of in-out sharpness transition, which is why it works on some level (I hope). It is a natural transition, invisible. I think the demonstrative man, an unlikely top left main subject may be it? The inability of the viewer to see that plane of sharp focus clearly allows the effect to be ignored completely. You just follow the lines from the soft foreground hand up to the man. Another point of interest is the 17mm is not rated highly for it’s corner sharpness wide open, so what happened?

Looking back through my earlier Japan files, I have noticed I am responding to both deep depth of field images as well as shallow ones. The interesting thing is, I linger longer over the deeper ones.

The shallow depth of field images are like a catch phrase or a one-liner. The deeper depth files are more of a sentence, even a paragraph. What they are doing is to allow the eye to wander without being blocked from exploration by obvious technical elements.

I think that if you feel you can sum up an image in a single glance, it has power, but a shallow effect. If you need to explore, even change your mind about what it contains, it has more staying power.

Looking at powerful and influential older images, their power often comes from inclusion, not exclusion. Excessively shallow depth of field makes a single subject the hero of the image as it makes all supporting elements an often pretty blur.

I guess this is a plea of sorts.

the habit of over using Bokeh is a little addictive. I get it and have suffered from it. It came from the availablility of both smaller formats, which had natively more depth of field than older, larger formats, removing one of the biggest bains of early photographers, and wide aperture lenses that actually worked as the paint on the barrel promised.

Extra depth in transition is useful when you need to render near and far subjects, with little light and no tripod.

All that was added, was another arrow to the creative quiver, not an excuse to ignore the other techniques that may be harder (including more means more effort is needed to do it well), possibly more relevant, but most likely will stand the test of time better.

Does Bokeh rendering matter in real life?

It does because it is real, but it can also be subtle.

The most useful aspect of the 17mm for me is I can set the lens manually at about 5ft (marked on the handy distance scale), use f2.8 and get most things in focus. The one thing better than fast AF, which it has, is fixed focus with a deep and forgiving sharpness range. If I shoot wide open I use AF, because often even the misses are useable.

I have, as I have written here recently, two work horse lenses that define my kit on a givern day. The Leica 15mm f1.7 and Olympus 17mm f1.8 semi wide standard lenses. Between them they do the lions share of my personal and travel images. I even travelled to Melbourne recently for a long weekend with only the 17mm, a very freeing experience.

If I had to choose, the Olympus would be the keeper hands down, because it offers a more useful practical application, which for its main use, street and travel, is what I want. This is not the current trend, is possibly even considered old fashioned.

I sometimes actually have trouble telling if the lens is set tof1.8, 2.8 or 5.6 when reviewing.

The Leica can seem sharper and to have more “modern” rendering, but that is part of the illusion of fast transition Bokeh. This wide angle lens has similar properties to many longer lenses, which is to say, it creates a strong sharp/soft effect, all together less useful for street photography. I use it in my work bag, because making the subject “pop” is a cheap and easy trick for eye catching news print images.

The thing is, I want different effects from different lenses, not the same look from all. If you compare the Olympus 75 and 17mm lenses, the former is technically perfect and a very strong proponent of a modern Bokeh rendering lens. It is long and fast enough to effortlessly render shallow depth and the quality of the Bokeh is very pleasant.

Sharp front to back, but not using a particularly small aperture.

Arguably the 75 is a one trick pony, except that when stopped down it is also razor sharp and well corrected, offering a sharp-compression lens.

Lovely “Bokeh balls” and creamy rendering of the 75mm. Easy to use, great for effect, easy to over use and at the other end of the story telling stick.

The 17mm on paper looks much weaker, lacks “Bokeh” by common understanding and seems all together less “snappy”. This is actually ideal, because it is the other way of looking at the world.

For me, someone who bought it semi reluctantly, it was seen at the time possibly a necessary compromise*, but now it is the perfect companion and I think of it as being of equal quality to the other primes, just different.

I have a hero maker lens and a story teller.

The sharpness is gentle, natural and forgiving. The actual aperture is almost irrelevant as the transition sits well regardless.

Why have two lenses with the same look, when each can be a specialist in its chosen role?

The more I use the two lenses, the more I am appreciating the 17mm’s old fashioned and more natural rendering. It also has a unique ability to tame strong light, but that is another story.

Thanks Olympus for listening to your own little voice and ignoring the trend of the time.

The other thing that may be a long term boon, is the video application of the lens. This long transition Bokeh is not only useful, but also may add up to a less digital look of the footage. I think this may need some further investigtion.

*When released, technical reviews were mixed, many testing areas irrelevant for most uses like wide aperture corners or fixable CA, but over time it became so well liked by actual users, it tops several must buy lists for this format and has very few detractors. When the new super lens, the Olympus 17mm f1.2 came out, it still stood up favourably, but again showed its role as being different to the new Bokeh master.

Hiroshima Revisited

In 2016, we returned to Hiroshima and had a very different experience.

The cold, rainy Spring of the year before made way for a gentle late Summer, early Autumn feel.

On the first trip, Hiroshima seemed small, emotive and introverted. Thar seemed to fit our pre conceptions. Next time around we discoverred a warm, bright and alive town, full of happy and content people.

A city literally risen from the ashes, tall and proud.

All these images were taken with the 17 or 45, so I guess I was travelling light.

The 17mm showing that ability to blend the foreground and background naturally at f2.8. I believ f2.8 is the sweet spot for most M43 prime lenses. The 15mm leica in this same situation would have made the foreground woman “pop” a little more, made the colour a little lighter and brighter and blurred the background out, none of which are inherently bad, just different. The 17mm is my preferred lens for this type of shooting.

This was the trip I started to fall deeply for both lenses. Lightroom and nasty light on the first trip left me feeling confident with my gear, but not overly taken with the overall results. They seemed cold, hard and if pushed tended towards gritty and rough.

Remembering I had only committed to Olympus completely a year or so before, the whole thing had an element of discovery to it.

This trip let the quality of the gear and my deeper understanding of it start to blossom.

Reprocessing with Capture 1 from .dng files is awakening a new and even deeper appreciation.

Kyoto Habits

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

Osaka Heat

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.

The Olympus 17mm. Features, Benefits And Overall Personality.

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.

Postcards From Kamakura 3

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.

Postcards From Kamakura 2

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.

Shadow Game

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.

Postcards From Kamakura 1

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.

The .dng Reality?

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 :).

Channelling Film

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.

Going Backwards, But With Intent.

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 Action (Or The Vertically Challenged)

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 Wonderful 75-300

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.