Category Archives: Photography

My thoughts on a variety of photo taking.

Sony A7iii Eye Auto Focus, Mid Day Full Sun Landscapes, Back Screen Mirroring, Size.

Without hesitation or qualifiers these features of the Sony A7iii are great for my photography.  The top photo is of my youngest daughter right after Christmas dinner.  I took this as a series of about 6 holding the eye auto focus button and just pushed the shutter button.  I saw in the viewfinder that the eye auto focus was working.  The flash was set to TTL and the camera was just on Auto.  I had on the Sony G 24-105 f4 lens.  The camera set itself to her right eye, the Sony steady shot and OSS lens kept this shot in perfect focus.  Brilliant.  Did the Sony work better than I could have expected from my older cameras, yes.  Did it work better than what my iPhone could have done, yes.  My other cameras like the D750 or D5500 would have been able to focus on this eye if I had put the focus point on it or if I had shifted the camera focus point to where the eye was, but this would have been done by me and not the cameras.  The iPhone XS Max or Sony HX80 would have found the face but not the eye.  So bravo Sony.  Without a doubt this is a big advancement forward and you have executed it well.

_DSC0982
This is my older daughter at the same dinner with the Sony A7iii finding her eye the same as the first photo.

The eye auto focus on the Sony A7iii also works in a group of people.

_DSC0947
In this shot the Sony picked the closest eye to it and grabbed it with perfect focus.  

The Sony A7iii is also easier to get mid day full sun shots with proper exposure.  It is not possible to completely change the subjects to what they would look like if you had been shooting early in the day or late in the afternoon, but the Sony did allow for turning down the exposure enough not to blow all the highlights.

I went to this same location just before we went on vacation to Europe in 2017.  I shot tests with my Nikon D5500, iPhone X, Minolta 600si with Kodak Gold 200.  In 2017 I only was able to get the shots I liked with the film.  The Nikon and the iPhone both overexposed.  I could have improved my results back then if I had bracket my shots on the Nikon, but I didn’t.  Film has more highlight tolerance than digital so the film was able to give very good results.

But the Sony A7iii shots above with the Zeiss 50mm f1.8 was as good as the film I shot in 2017.  At this point I would be willing to say that the Sony very easily gives good mid day full sun shots better than the Nikon D5500.  If I had used the Nikon D750 and also used the highlight setting I would say the results would have been similar to the Sony or the Kodak.

DSC00213
Also Sony A7iii shot at mid day full sun.  

The Sony A7iii’s back screen moves like an iPhone or my Sony compact.  It is fast and looks just like the viewfinder.  This is an improvement over the DSLR’s which on the Nikons were laggy and not quick to focus.  I find that I use the back screen a lot more than with the D750.  The D5500 was a full on touch screen and I frequently used it when shooting landscape.  I would touch the place to focus and it would set up the shot and fire away.  This ability is sadly not on the Sony A7iii.

Size – The Sony A7iii is smaller than the previous full frame digital I had the Nikon D750.  Not much, but overall about half a pound or .43 kilo.  And the 24-105 lens on the front of the Sony is just enough shorter than the Nikon D750 with 24-120 to make it noticeable.  So a win for the A7.

Conclusions – The eye auto focus is absolutely an outright advance for technology.  It is easy to use and works well.  This is a feature I expect to be standard on most cameras in a year or two.  Mid day full sun shots on the other hand is a bit better than the Nikons but surprisingly not much better than on Sony’s low cost compact HX80.  If the HX80 had been able to output raw I think it would be as good at mid day full sun shots as the A7.  And then there is film.  Film does not blow highlights easily like digital.  But film needs to be developed and you normally want to use the full roll before developing it.  But I will say that from what I know this is a win over the Nikon D5500.  Back screen on the Sony is much faster than the Nikons.  So I use it more.  Too bad it is not touch like the D5500.  Size is smaller with the A7iii over the D750 especially noticeable when using the kit lenses.  Not so much with a prime 50mm.

If you the reader think I am struggling with my conclusions it is because I am.  I have no struggle with eye auto focus.  A great new feature.  But for mid day full sun to me the Sony has proved to be better than the two older Nikon DSLRs but not reliably better than film.  I have gone to some of my favorite places where I have shot photos over the last number of years and would say that Kodak Ektar gives a better average shot than the Sony.  The back screen on the Sony moves just like a mirrorless should, fast.  But certainly not as useful as a full touch screen.  Then finally size.  The Sony is smaller than the Nikon D750 but the D750 has a grip that fits my hand better.  I do find the Sony and D750 with prime lenses about the same.  The Sony is lighter but the Nikon is fine.  But eye auto focus is a great feature to have.  If I was going to be sent to a place where I could have only one interchangeable lens camera for a year I would be tempted to pick a Sony A7iii over a DSLR.  Because it is great at both stills and video.  But if I also had my iPhone XS Max along with me I would take the D750.  Why.  I think the D750 is more durable and less likely to break.  The sensor is way back behind the mirror so I will be less likely to get buggered up.  And at this point shooting video with an iPhone is more fun.  And the results are fine.

DSLR vs Mirrorless – Nikon D760 Rumors

Today I saw the first rumors of the update of the Nikon D750 that will likely come next year.  Is that a wise move by Nikon, and is the DSLR dead?  My answer to those two questions is yes and then no.  But let me put in a qualifier on if it is a wise move by Nikon.  It is a wise move if Nikon improves the auto focus in live view so that it is at least on par with the current Nikon Z6.  If the back screen gets a bump up in speed then it becomes much more useful.

Over the last six years I have taken under ten videos with my cameras that were not smartphones.  The new iPhone XS Max which I have had now for about two months takes excellent video including 4K up to 60fps.  Apple has an easy to use video editor called iMovie that is free and works well.  And I don’t have to learn all the stuff that goes with bigger cameras like my Sony A7iii like “log” “lut” “gamma” “grading” and so on.  I have shot some test videos with my Sony A7iii.  It is far harder to use than the light iPhone XS Max which I put on a small tripod type holder.  The iPhone XS max also has a far better screen to use with the camera than the Sony.  My point is that one of the Key mirrorless advantages is lost on me.  Better video than a DSLR.

IMG_0149
Shot with an iPhone XS Max.  

The key advantage for me of an EVF is to improve exposure.  Seeing zebras and the histogram in the viewfinder helps.  I mostly use the zebras and adjust exposure compensation using them as a guide.  But with improved live view on a D760 you could see that information on the back screen.  Is that as good as the viewfinder, no, but it would help.  A big advantage of the OVF is it is always on and does not use power.  Plus the D750 I had this year had a much clearer optical viewfinder than the Sony electronic viewfinder I now have.

The rumors I read say the new camera will have a new 36 mega pixel back lighted sensor.  The optical viewfinder will be with a prism and 100% coverage.  The back screen will be flippy and full touch enabled.  Two SD card slots.  (I have also read rumors saying the sensor will stick with 24 mega pixels and the back screen will not be flippy.)  Price between $2,295 and $2,495.

000005330010
Shot with Minolta 600si with 24mm 2.8 lens

Even though I wanted the weight to be less when I had the 750 that was only with the 24-120mm f4 lens that was 27oz.  The D750 was fine with the 50mm f1.4.  Now after owning the Sony A7iii for 2 1/2 months I would say I prefer the D750 and lighter lens to the Sony A7iii and lighter lens.  The 750 is a bit heavier but has a much better grip than the Sony.  And the Nikon buttons and co-ordination with the menu on the D750 was much better (actually much much better) than the A7iii.  And if the new 760 comes with the touch screen like I used on the Nikon D5500 then the Nikon D760 will have a far far superior control and handling setup than the Sony.

The other giant benefit of the D760 is that I assume it will come with an F-mount.  That means Nikon’s giant catalog of F-mounts will be able to be used on the new camera.  That means all kinds of specialty lenses but also much better values like the 50mm f1.4 for approx $400 instead of $1,500 on the Sony.

000005330034

For the last couple of years uncounted people with podcasts, videos, and blogs have hailed the coming of mirrorless to replace the old mirror system in SLR’s.  I never really saw the reason for getting rid of the mirror.  I have had an Olympus OM2n body I bought in 1980.  In 38 years of use I have had exactly zero problems with the mirror.  And the old Oly has just a magnificent viewfinder with a very simple optical focus aid.  I would hope the new D760 would come with a similar manual focus aid or at least be possible to add one.  I really like focusing manually, but find it harder to do with viewfinders that have no help to let you know when you are at focus.

With these rumored features.

  • Full frame new 36 mega pixel back lit sensor
  • Improved live view focus to at least Z6 level
  • Weight and size no bigger than the D750
  • F-mount not Z mount
  • Price between $2,295 and $2,495

I think Nikon would have a real winner.  Of course something extra like a little electronic screen in the viewfinder with a histogram would be really nice too.

The Minolta 600si And Why You Should Buy One

I have been on a film use slump.  I have a closet full of film and I just have not been shooting film for the last six months.  Why, I bought a full frame Nikon D750 and two lenses in May six months ago and spent the whole summer and September using-testing it.  Then I sold the D750 and lenses and bought a Sony A7iii.  And I have been testing it for the last two months.  Yesterday after writing the previous post about how it was hard to love the Sony, today I thought, “Use a camera you really do love and have some fun”.  So I got out my original Minolta 600si that was loaded with Portra 400 and got out my best, but heaviest tripod and started shooting.  At first I did not get out the tripod out of laziness.  I have learned in the last few years that if you want to get the best flower and plant shots a tripod helps.  When you are doing close ups it is always best to have the camera rock steady.

macro of 4th of july
All of the photos in this post are from the first two rolls I put through my first Minolta 600si when I got the camera.  The film is slightly expired Fuji 400 Superia and the lens that came with the camera at Sigma 50mm 2.8 macro.  All of these were shot hand held.

One of the great benefits of shooting film over digital is that you have to wait to get it processed and cannot edit it immediately.  What I mean is that you can have an enjoyable shoot and then keep enjoying yourself.  You do not have to feel obligated to edit what you just shot.  With film if you are using a good quality not long expired film likely all of the shots will come out.  Maybe some need tweaking a bit but I almost never have ruined shots any more.

Purple Haze

The above shot was the fourth shot I took with this camera and when I saw it I just went, “Wow”!  Keep in mind this was consumer grade film from Wal Mart that was given to me for free and the processing was with a just OK lab.

When I get my film back from the lab scanned it usually is mostly processed and edited when I get it.  Sure I Lightroom it a bit if needed, but way more often than when using a digital SLR the film shots come out right from the get go.  And they are already in jpeg, plus I have the negatives or positives and a CD scan as back ups.

Back to why I love the Minolta 600si.  This thing was designed and made as an anti menu statement.  All controls are easy to use and this is a modern camera, auto focus with more than one point, adjustable metering with spot, center, and matrix, auto film load, advance, and rewind, top LCD giving you setting information, front and back adjustment wheel, even high speed sync on the flash.

Minolta 600si
top view of 600si

All functions are obvious marked simple switches, dials, or marked buttons.  Things that are individual marked controls are AF mode (Continuous, Auto, Single), Auto focus area (simple marked switch with picture grams ), Exposure (spot, center, matrix), exposure and flash exposure compensation dials, just like todays full frame digitals the front control dial is for shutter setting and the rear dial for f-stop, there is a mode dial with program, A, M, S, and drive switch with double exposure, bracket, single, multiple, and timer.  In the manual it points out that if you have all the switches so they are either vertical or horizontal you are set on full auto and you can just point and shoot.  Full Manual is also very easy to activate.

Riding train

Red rose bud

Picture of Barbara on skyway
The 600si easily shifts from people to macro if you have the right lens.  What it cannot do is give neutral color if the film tends to go a little green like Fuji can.

Having individual switches and dials for adjustments means you just make one direct movement to change the setting.

IMG_0160

If you want to adjust AF area you just move the setting lever.  Same with metering.  Spot, center, or matrix meter setting you look at the dial and either move it or not.  On the Nikon D750 or Sony A7iii you push the metering button and then change the setting.  With the Nikon D5500 you need to bring up the back touch screen.  Touch the place for setting, and then touch the setting you want.  It is certainly true that the digital cameras have more settings.  If you need those extra settings then the 600si won’t do for you.  Very likely you do not need them.

Auto focus mode.

IMG_0163

Same deal.  Look at the knob and set to what you need.  One movement.  No menu screen.

Or look at the way the 600si handles drive.

IMG_0162

Simple and direct.  The indicator switch can be set to double exposure, bracket, single shot, multiple shots, and timer.  The Sony A7iii is about ten times this complex.  It has all the settings for this, but you have to remember where they are in the drive settings.  The Nikons are also much more complicated but much easier to learn than the Sony.

The 600si also has a built in flash.  I think this is a significant feature.  The Nikon D5500 and D750 do too.  But the Sony A7iii left it off.  Why?  They included it on my tiny compact camera and include it on the crop sensor bodies.  It is much better to use a full size flash, but the built ins are very good for fill in.

IMG_0164

You will also notice the Minolta has a double dial for exposure compensation and flash compensation.  And the Minolta does high speed flash.  And very handily it has built in motor drive for loading, advancing, and rewinding film plus auto film speed.

Conclusions – To me the Minolta 600si is for the film shooter who wants automation plus manual.  So this camera is good for landscape, people, and wildlife.  Landscape is usually easy and all manual settings usually work fine.  But for people and wildlife it helps to have some automatic features.  As a bonus, with an adaptor you can get the AF lenses from this camera to work on the Sony A7 bodies almost as though they were native lenses.  I have found the auto focus and exposure work very well.  Not so much with the TTL flash.  These camera bodies sell for about $35 on eBay.  Make sure you get a good one and maybe pay a bit more.  The batteries are not common, but for sale on the internet at reasonable prices.  I have found the batteries are good for a year or two.  The manual states 15 rolls of film.  I think it is about double that.  I would suspect it depends on how much you use the built in flash.  I bought a very capable high speed sync Minolta flash on eBay for $35.  And I bought the 24mm f2.8 macro lens you see in the picture above on eBay for $80.  The lens is a Sigma/Quantaray.

If you buy one of these in good working condition you will be able to learn to use it in a day.  The manual is on the internet.  It is simple, simple, simple to use.  I would guess you can get a whole kit with one body and three lenses for $150.  A stunning deal.  I already have $4,600 into my Sony A7iii with only two lenses.

What Is Your Photo Style – Van Eyck or Monet?

Digital cameras today can give you very sharp clear images like the paintings of Jan Van Eyck.  Of course you can use fast lenses to soften focus and give you some bokeh, but sometimes Claude Monet and his style of soft images might be a better choice.

86780017
Shot with Olympus OM2n 50mm f1.8 Kodak Ultramax film

Both the top photo and the above rose are similar subjects but the look is entirely different.  In my opinion it is easier to get the softer image of Monet using older lenses and film.

Christmas cookies-3
Shot with Sony A7iii and Zeiss 55mm f1.8
88800004
Shot with Olympus OM2n and 50mm f1.8 Olympus lens.  Film is Ektar

Which of these photos do you like best.  I like them both.  The Sony did an excellent job of balancing exposure and white balance and the film shot is the best one I have been able to get of this miniature Christmas tree with a lighted Christmas tree in the background.  I think in the case of these two shots the tools used were needed for this result.  I think to get the top shot with the Olympus camera you would need Portra 400 and the camera on a tripod.  Plus you would need a flash with a cap over it to diffuse the light, which I don’t have.  The Olympus does have TTL flash so that would be similar to the Sony.  The Oly does not have steady shot so to get this shot hand held might be hard.

I tried getting the bottom film photo with several digital cameras.  I was not able to get anything this good with the newer stuff.  My point here is that to get good photos you need a variety of tools and you need to keep shooting.  Keep trying and you will get some results you like.  I am not telling you to spray and pray.  What I am saying is to set up photos often and you will get some results you like.

Black and white adds a layer of mystery to draw you in.

IMG_0149
Enter a caption

Both of these shot with iPhone XS Max.  IMG_0150

Do you like the black and white or color best?  Of these two I prefer the black and white because it removes us more from reality than the color.  The color shot is more like a Xerox of the scene.  I like the black and white pulling us closer to the photo to see if the white spot is the moon or just a light.  And the black and white adds a bit of sidewalk and street to pull us in.  But I prefer color on the stained glass window.  And I like color on the yellow street sign.  Would these two pictures have been better with film.  No doubt in my mind that both the color and black and white would have been better with film.  Film adds a layer of distance between you and the objects.  There is the analog chemical film process to make the image, and then the film image is scanned to make it a digital of the film.  What is very nice is that the scanning is a Xerox of the image the film created.  So all of what the film renders of the scene comes out in the scan.  Using film and then doing a high quality scan is a great combination that adds the film’s rendering and then when you digitize it you can do some editing digitally instead of working in a darkroom.  The best of both Worlds.

If you want clear clean sharp renders of the scene then digital is the best way to do it.  But on the other hand if you want to create an impressionist version of the scene I suggest film and then scanning.  Old lenses also help to give the impressionist look.  Plus throw in some black and white.  Every time I shoot a roll of black and white I always think that I should shoot some more black and white.  I generally do not get that same feeling when shooting black and white digitally.

Using The Sony A7iii In Auto Mode

Back about 1 1/2 years ago I bought my fourth in a line of Sony compact cameras going back to a Sony Mavica in 1999.  The new addition was the Sony HX 80.  When I got it that model was just out and cost me all of $380 at Best Buy.  I had always liked using and the results out of my previous Sony compacts and this was a good one too.  I was looking forward to having an electronic viewfinder, steady shot vibration reduction, and the ability to optically zoom from 24-720mm equivalents.  For the price and size of this camera I got very good results including really amazing long lens shots of birds in flight and distant mountain tops.  One of the big benefits of this camera was the small size, and one of the problems of this camera was the small buttons and small electronic view finder.

Christmas cookies-22

Soon I figured out that it was just simpler and better to set the camera to Auto when the exposure seemed not too wide and then I would use A mode and adjust the exposure setting using the zebras on the back screen or in the viewfinder.  Sony’s “intelligent Auto”. worked well and was able to detect most scenes and to find people’s faces.  And that is how I used the camera until I sold it about 8 weeks ago.  My 2 1/2 month old Sony A7iii is a highly capable camera that gives excellent stills and video.  It is hard to adjust and change settings quickly on it most of the time.  I am sure after I have it for a year it will be easier.  So after grousing about how hard it was yesterday when we expected family to come over for a Christmas cookie decorating event I decided that I would try setting the A7iii to Auto and seeing how well it did.

Christmas cookies-18

For all of these shots it was always in Auto and I used my 55mm Zeiss f1.8 prime lens.  Also used was a Godox flash in some of them.  I set the flash on TTL and did not adjust it at all.

Christmas cookies-15

As it turns out I think the Sony did a splendid job.  When there was a face in the scene it picked it out right away.  It did a good job of auto white balance, exposure, speed, and so on.  Do I plan to just let the camera do the thinking for me in the future, no, I like trying different settings to get the best result possible.

Christmas cookies-13

Color.  I am finding the best results at this point to be just setting the camera to export raw only and editing that in Lightroom CC Classic.  I have also used Lightroom CC and there is little difference between those two.  I prefer the organizational ability of LR Classic to putting everything on line like CC wants you to.  The Sony does seem to put out raws that need little editing.  For these shots I mostly tried Adobe auto to see if that improved it.  In about half the shots it did.  And then I mostly added either Adobe Standard profile or Sony Standard profile.  Plus maybe a little clarity or dehaze.

Christmas cookies-8

All these shots were hand held and this lens does not have VR, but the camera body does.  The A7iii was able to get focus quickly and snap off the shot rapidly.  I seems to work with the Godox flash easily.  I did have a cover over the flash head that quieted down the light blast a bit.

Christmas cookies-7

I am surprised at how well the A7iii was able to automatically adjust for backlight and skin tones and come up with a good result.  We have had cookie decorating parties in this same spot for about 15 years and the Sony did the best job on exposure of any camera I have used so far.  A year ago though I did shoot some Fuji 200 speed film using my Minolta and I will now insert in a few of those shots.

837300248373000383720021

The above film pictures I did use a flash but forgot to tilt the head up so in some cases there is glare on the faces.  But the colors are good.

806000018060000980600010806100188061002080610024

The above six shots were also Fuji 200 (Walmart film) but shot about a week later and with my manual focus Olympus OM2n.  All of them except the top one were just nature light through a window.  The top one I think the color is a bit affected by a little incandescent light.  The bottom five photos are all excellent with the beautiful bokeh you get from the Zuiko lens and the just popping colors on the gingerbread house and the painting.  I love some of the sharp focus rolling into off focus from wide open glass and the inexpensive Fuji film just does a great job.  There is a little of the Fuji green tinge in the shots though.  I did shoot about a roll or so of film yesterday and when I get it developed I will post the results along with the Sony photos for comparison.

I like both the Sony shots and the film shots.  The Sony shots are technically excellent.  Clear, start, exposed right, clean.  Even though the lens I used on the Sony is very highly rated it Just is not rolling in and out of focus like the old Zuiko.  Plus the film adds some softness to the look.  I find the look of the bottom five shots where the focus rolls in and out and some of the color is just vibrant and other times soft to be beautiful in a way the Sony photos are not.  And that is the reason I think film still has a place in 2018.  If all we had was digital our photos would look mostly like we were Xeroxing the World.  More art is needed with the Xeroxing.

 

Sony A7iii Complexity of Operation

The Sony A7iii is capable of very good photographs with native E mount glass or adapted Sony A mount glass.

DSC00729
Shot with Sony A7iii with Sony Zeiss 55mm f1.8
DSC00730
Shot with Sony A7iii and Sigma 50mm f2.8 macro and Sony LA EA4 adapter

Both of these shots were made to jpeg – fine only and the only edit I did was to import to Apple Photos on my MacBook Pro and hit enhance.  I used auto focus on both and the adapted lens focused perfectly.  The colors here are very accurate.  I used the Sony “standard” setting for jpeg color.

DSC00731
Shot with Sony A7iii and Sony Zeiss f1.8 manual focus

Then I put back on the native Sony Zeiss lens and tried to get a decent shot of this metal Christmas scene.  This is not a good picture, but I am using it to illustrate a point.  I tired the auto focus in wide and it got a bit confused.  So I figured this was a good time to try the manual focus again.  Manual focus for close up shots is really better than auto focus.  So I aimed the camera at where I wanted to focus and slightly turned the focus ring on the Zeiss.  The camera zoomed in and showed me focus peaking.  That made it pretty easy to set focus where I wanted to.  Of course this is a very very complex way to do this. My old Olympus OM2n has manual focus only and you get a very easy to use split focus in the viewfinder.  When the images come together it is in focus.  The Sony is almost as good in regular light and I am sure is much better in low light.  If you zoom into the above photo you can see that it is quite sharp.  And I can tell you the jpeg colors are accurate.

So this afternoon I thought I would take another pass through the menus to try and improve my knowledge of the many settings that are in them.  I put in about an hour before it becomes just too much.  There are far more Sony settings than my last camera.  And from the enthusiasm of the tutorial I was using it seems like I should commit many of them to memory.  But many of the settings interfere with other settings and the number of possibilities is very large.  The Nikon system is far simpler.  I would guess that after a year with this camera body I will still not know most of them.  Adding to the complexity is the fact that only a few of the buttons are labeled.  That means you have to remember where you put the focus settings before you then have to remember which of the settings you have to use.  This system would be much better with a simplified menu that could be controlled by a touch screen.  Since Sony makes smart phones I know they can make touch screens.  And I do know that the back screen in my camera is a partial touch screen.  But I have to go back and read the manual to figure out how it works.

IMG_0078
Shot with iPhone XS max

This rainbow turned up outside our house a little after I took the pictures of the Christmas figures with the Sony.  I went outside with the Sony to get a shot of the rainbow, but it was still raining.  And I am not quite sure exactly how weather proof the Sony and Sony lens are.  They are supposed to be OK with some rain, but I am still not sure how much.  The iPhone on the other hand is quite capable of just about any amount of rain with no damage.  As was my Nikon D750.  So the iPhone got this rainbow shot.  The above is smart HDR, and below is just a single shot.

IMG_0076

If you look at these two shots on my detailed monitor I am not sure the HDR added anything.  The clouds are not blown with either.

Unlike the Sony the iPhone XS max with the standard apple camera app is easy to understand after a bit of effort.  And the Adobe iPhone camera app is pretty darn simple too.  Adobe has really come a long way to improving this iPhone app over the last year.  A year ago their HDR was terrible, unusable.  Now it works well.  But then Apple has just blown the doors off computational photography with their smart HDR which much of the time really adds something to the finished image with no effort.  I have only had the new iPhone two weeks and I think I am pretty expert at using it.  With the Sony I am OK with the stuff that is basic but World’s away from getting all the complicated things to work.

So here is a message to Sony from me about their A7 line of cameras.  Cut about half of the menu items.  Make the back screen a full touch screen.  And make sure you buy and use an iPhone for a while to see how simple making good photos can be.  And a couple more things.  1.  Why is there no pop up small built in flash.  You fit one on my last inexpensive compact Sony HX 80 so I know you can do it on the A7 bodies.  That type of flash comes in very handy and if it works as well as the Sony HX 80 built in flash that would be great.  2.  Identify the main buttons.  Put labels on them.  3.  A7s should be possible to operate with one hand, they are not.

Keep It Simple When It Comes To Tech

I just spent 5-10 minutes trying to get my bluetooth speaker to attach to my iPhone so I could listen to some music.  Every time I turned the speaker on it was pulling music from some device somewhere in the house but not the one I wanted it to.  After a few failed attempts I gave up.  I did not feel like fishing out a wire and the dongle that adapts the iPhone to an old style phone plug so I could just use a wire.

Earlier today I wanted to scan a document to email to someone.  I loaded the HP printer scanner and then realized that my new MacBook Pro does not have the software for that scanner loaded into it.  And since that HP is about four years old there are no updated drivers that work with the latest Mac software.  So I had to go get one of my old Windows laptops that I knew had that software in it so I could run the scanner.

An hour later I tried to make a new folder on one of my external drives so I could store some data on it.  Guess what, the new MacBook does not have the software on it to get full use of the Seagate drive like the old MacBook does.  So I had to fire up the old MacBook to see what the name of the software is and go to the Seagate web page to get the driver.

DSC00317
Taken with Sony A7iii with old cheap (very cheap) Minolta 30-70 lens

Don’t get the idea I don’t like tech, I do, but I like stuff that is simple to get to work right and lasts a while.  Bluetooth usually works OK, but can be a PIA.  Wires are simple and always work.  Software drivers and getting software to work in the system you want it to work in can be easy, hard, or impossible.  That older HP combo printer scanner is likely not going to work as a network scanner unless wire it into the network or wire it directly to the computer I want to send the scan to.  It works fine and is not that old.

My point here is that if you take photos today that you want to enjoy a few years from now you had better be very careful how you save the files.  If you take high quality photos and want the quality to be the same in the future you have to be especially careful to make sure that no software changes your files.

  • To make sure your file exists and is readable in the future you need to save some copies.  This is what I do.  I put the files on a plug in drive.  I then back it up on a second drive locally.  (In the future I am only going to use drives formatted for Mac as I do not trust that the driver for the drive will be updated in future years.)  I keep copies in either Apple Photos or Adobe Lightroom CC or both.  Usually the raw in LR and the jpeg in Apple Photos.  I also have a third back up drive I update about once every six weeks that I store in my motorhome safe.  Then as a final measure I keep a copy in drop box.  Drop box is the only on line service I have found and used that does not screw around with the size of your files when you load and download them.  Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Flikr do.  Oh I almost forgot Flickr.  I have a lot of my files on Flikr and some on Google Photos.  And I sometimes make photo books or have prints made.
  • I have had significant problems in the past loosing large numbers of my photos.  I used to back everything up to one hard drive.  It failed.  I lost several years of full sized files and my only copies were on Apple Photos.  Just last month I went to update a file from 2017 in my main back up drive.  The whole year of 2017 was missing.  In this case I had a back up copy of the back up copy on another drive.  Some of the files did not want to be copied and I had to play with this for a couple hours.  So at this point in time I am hyper careful.
  • I have had several on line back up systems change dramatically for the worse.  I used iPhoto and Aperture on Mac.  I liked both of them.  But then Apple discontinued both and substituted Apple Photos.  Apple Photos is still not nearly as effective at editing files as the previous system except using on line.  Apple’s system of on line photos is pretty good now most of the time.  I used Google Picasa to edit thousands of work photos.  It was the best quick edit and file organizer you could get at any price and Picasa was free.  Then Google canceled it.  Adobe Lightroom on the other hand has improved.  I use both Lightroom CC Classic and Lightroom CC.  Both work well.  The on line CC system keeps adding features and you can use it fairly well in conjunction with the CC Classic.  Flickr used to be free.  Now you have to pay to use it.  All of these systems have at one time or another played with the size of the files except drop box and Adobe Lightroom CC Classic.
  • I would say my files are now very secure.  But I am tired of it taking so much effort. Plus I have no illusion that raw files will work ten years from now.  By then your raw files will be from an obsolete camera and you will be using a many generation newer OS.  The best you can hope for is jpegs will still work.  I think jpegs are mostly safe.
20830027
Taken on a 1980 Olympus OM2n with 28mm f2.8 and new Kodak Ektachrome

Here is how I did it 14 years ago.  I bought film or the people that developed it sent me free film.  I would send it off to Seattle Film Lab.  At the time I used my Olympus OM2n and a couple of Olympus pocket film cameras.  When I finished a couple of rolls or even just one roll, I would send it to Seattle Film Lab in a prepaid mailer.  They would develop it and send the negatives, prints, a CD of the scans, plus a free roll of film.  That would take about a week.  The thing is Seattle Film Lab would edit the photos before I got them. I rarely edited what I was sent back.  When I went on vacation I would use slide film so I could project the shots on a screen in full resolution.  I used Kodak Kodachrome in those days.  You couldn’t edit slides.  You either got them right or you did not.  I made photo albums.  I saved the negatives, CD in files in a file cabinet.  My prints from 2004 look just fine and have not faded.  The CD’s I got back then still work.  And if I had not sold my projector I could use slides.  The only thing that endangered your back up files was your house being destroyed.  So if needed today you save a copy of scans in a location not in your house.

I do not plan to go back to just using film.  But anyone that tells you getting great photos is easier or cheaper today is contradicting what I have learned.  iPhones or good Androids take great photos and video and are easy to use.  They give better results than old pocket film cameras.  But big digital cameras with big lenses and big files are very expensive, need careful care, go out of date in about 3 years, and storing the files is complicated.  If you don’t already try both higher end digital and film and use what you like the best.  I waver back and forth.