Category Archives: Photography

My thoughts on a variety of photo taking.

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.

Sony A7iii After 6 Weeks & compared to Nikon D750 & D5500

I have now had my Sony A7iii a little over six weeks and it is time to post some additional  thoughts about it and also in comparison to my previous Nikon DSLRs the D5500 and D750.  All three of these interchangeable lens cameras have the same mega pixel count, 24.

IMG_1470
From left to right Olympus OM2n, Voigtlander Prominent, Minolta 600si, Sony A7iii

And to my eye from a users perspective and not a scientific test, all three will give about the same quality photo using the same quality lens.

So why did I switch to Sony if the image quality was about the same.  There are two main reasons.  1.  Try and get the size and weight down from the D750.  2.  EVF.  I like being able to set exposure using zebras or the histogram before taking the shot.  After about six years using DSLRs I wanted to see if I could be better at getting the exposure right in varied conditions.

  1.  For the most part I did get a size reduction on the Sony compared to the D750.  But you still have the problem with the lens size and weight.  D750 Nikon 29.5 oz, 50mm f1.4 9.8 oz 24-120mm f4 25 oz, Sony A7iii 22.9 oz 50mm f1.4 27.5 oz 24-105 f4 23.4 oz.  So you can see the problem with those two full frames.  The Nikon D5500 is way smaller and lighter.  I did choose the Sony – Zeiss 55mm f1.8 that is exactly the same weight as the Nikon but only f1.8 and not f1.4.  Also, the Sony Zeiss is well over twice the price of the Nikon 50mm f1.4.
  2. EVF.  The Electronic view finder makes it much easier to nail exposure.  I don’t have to bother bracketing any more.  The Sony finder and back screen allow easy exposure settings.  I don’t have any problems with lag in the EVF.  It is not as crystal clear as the Nikon D750 OVF.  Both the Sony A7 and Nikon D750 viewfinders are far superior to the Nikon D5500’s.  The D5500 has a smaller size view.  I don’t really know why.  My near 40 year old Olympus OM2n has a huge bright viewfinder and it is a smaller body than the D5500.
DSC00202
Taken with Sony A7iii and 55mm f1.8

I am 71 years old and am strong but have a slight bit of arthritis in my right thumb.  When I would start out with the D750 and the 24-120mm lens it took a while before it became comfortable to hold.  And when walking with that setup it is pretty big.  I bought a Peak strap to go with it and that helped a lot, but I still many times would wish for a smaller camera set up.  So now I have the Sony A7iii with one 55mm lens that is light.  Plus I have five adapted lenses that are Minolta.  The A7 & native 55mm f1.8 makes a great package.  The adapted lenses do not perform as well as they did with the Minolta film bodies.  They work, but some of the photo magic is just not there with them.  I do not have a good wide to medium zoom.  And if I buy the 24-105 Sony f4 then the A7iii and lens will be right back up there in size and weight with what I have with the 750 & 24-120.

DSC00646
This is the Sony A7iii with an adapted 50mm f2.8 macro Sigma lens.  This particular adapted lens works well.  

Handling – Lots of writers have complained about the menus.  I have had 4 Sony compact cameras over the last 15 years and the menus are all about the same.  But no doubt the Sony menu is longer than Nikon’s DSLR menu.  Once I set up the programable buttons I did not use the menu much.  I am a big fan of touch screens.  The one on the Nikon D5500 is great.  Neither the A7iii or the D750 have touch screens.  Yes the Sony has a very limited touch screen, but not enough for me to use it.

Both Nikons have well set up dials and buttons that are easy to learn and use.  The single dial and buttons are very easy to use one handed with the D5500 as it is so light and comfortable to hold.  I do prefer both a front and back dial.  The D750 has front and back dials.  These are the ones to adjust exposure and shutter speed.  The D750 is also relatively easy to use one handed if you have something like a 50mm lens on it.  A big zoom, not so much.  The buttons on the D5500 and D750 are resistant to being accidentally hit and changed when using the camera.

The Sony is a different story.  It’s weight is about 6 oz more than the D5500 and about 7 oz less than the D750.  The D5500 and D750 have better grips for my size hand than the Sony.  The Sony grip however is the least desirable of these three.  But the Sony has an additional issue that makes this worse.  And that is that you many times want to adjust the camera while in your right hand.  Adjustments to the back or front dial or buttons is much harder than either Nikon.  It is much easier to accidentally move one of the setting buttons or dials on the Sony.  I did just that last time I was out shooting.  I took at least 2 dozen shots before realizing it.

I also have 5 film SLR cameras I use all the time.  2 Olympus OM2n’s.  This is the gold standard of handling.  Perfect size with only a few simple controls.  2 Minolta 600si cameras.  Just a little bigger than the Olympus and slightly larger.  A wonderful camera for handling and use.  Simple excellent quick to use controls for manual or auto use.  I like this a little less than the Oly.  Mostly because the Oly looks and feels better.  The Minolta is plastic and not the Nikon nubby kind.  Auto film load and rewind.  3.  Voigtlander Prominent from the early 50’s.  Same size as the Oly and the Leica M3 by the way.  Funny about those coincidences.  The Voight is beautiful with just gorgeous lenses.  But it is hard to use.  Much harder than the Sony.

Color – Lightroom works hand in hand with Nikon files put out by the three DSLRs I have owned in the last ten years.  Ever since Lightroom started their new system earlier in 2018 I just only take raw and make my adjustments.  Both LR CC Classic and LR CC work very well with Nikon.  In tough lighting situations the Nikon files can require some work to get them to look right.  Of course you can fix a lot of that by “chimping” and looking at the histogram after you take the shots.  In general it is easy to use Nikon colors with LR.  Not so with Sony.  Sony  (and keep in mind this is only my personal use and experience and I am just a user and no expert.) raws and Jpegs do not for me have nearly as much differentiation as the Nikons.  Raw with Nikon is flat and obviously not processed.  Sony when I shoot raw + jpeg the files come out looking much more similar.  And if you get my Sony A7iii near the ocean or a large body of water it swings the raw files towards blue.  I am forced to spend a lot of time getting the color to look how I like it.  Much more so than my Nikons, Apple iPhone, or my Sony HX 80 compact.  The last one really confuses me.  Going towards the blue side must be part of the AWB and the camera looks for water and it’s computer must make an adjustment.

South rim trail-00563
Both of these went towards the blue.  These look pretty good now, but it took some work in LR to get them so.  

South rim trail-00575

The Sony does a very good job for me with jpeg on flowers.  I take lots of plant pictures.  I worked at getting good at that with the Nikons.  The Sony does just as good a job on raw but better for me on jpeg.  I also find that even though I have begun to think the Sony jpegs are a little “weird” I am getting the “Ektar” look that I love using that Kodak film.  Part of that has to do with the really spectacular Sony Zeiss 55mm lens.

DSC00671
These two were from a local hike the other day.  They are just OK photos but they have punch to their color like Ektar gives.  These two are with an adapted 24mm Sigma 2.8 macro lens.  

DSC00678

So for me specifically I have things I like about the Sony color and things I do not.  I guess I will call this a tie.

Video – The Sony has much much better video ability than either Nikon.  The ease of use on the A7iii is significantly better.  In the past I disliked the results I got from the Nikon DSLRs and so used my iPhone for video.  I have heard that the Nikon Z6 & 7 have much improved video.  So if you have to have Nikon get one of those for video.

Price – The Sony with lenses is far more expensive than the Nikon D750 or Nikon D5500.  Back when the Nikon was introduced it’s price was about the same as the Sony.  And Nikon’s new Z6 is about the same as the Sony A7iii.  Right now you can buy a Nikon D5600 and two zoom lenses for $700.  And today you can get the D750 with the 24-120 for $1,800.  The Sony A7iii with Sony 24-105mm is going to run you $3,300.

Bottom Line – If you want to buy one of these cameras you should do so knowing you are getting a great image maker.  If you shoot mostly, almost all still photography get one of the Nikons at todays prices.  Even at a big discount the D5600 is 1/3 of the D750 cost.  For most people the D5600 is a much better buy.  The only really huge improvement in the D750 is the viewfinder (I agree with Ken Rockwell who said the same thing.)  Other than that the smaller Nikon is much easier to carry and has a touch screen.  If you take video and don’t want to use your phone for that then you should get the Sony or maybe the Nikon Z6.

The Sony and Nikon cameras I have owned over the years have both been very reliable.  The Nikons seem a bit tougher but I have not had problems with my Sony’s.  For me I am going to stick with this Sony through the end of 2019 at least.  I may buy one or two more lenses for it.  But I am worn out from all the new cameras in 2018.  Time to use the gear I have.  Unless Olympus makes a full frame mirrorless the size of my old Oly OM2n.  I would buy one of those.  And I am going to shoot film too.  I love the new Kodak Ektachrome.  I think it might be the best slide film I have ever used.

 

Why I Chose A Sony A7iii over Nikon Z7 – Z6

Up until now my experience with digital cameras that were not attached to smartphones has been 4 Sony’s and 3 Nikons.  All have been reliable.  The Sony’s up until now have all been compacts.  The Nikons have been two crop sensor and one full frame DSLR.

DSC00451
Shot with Sony A7iii and Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro lens

Over the last year I have wanted to step up to a full frame digital sensor as that is what I have been using for many years with film photography and I just like the perspective and subject isolation you get with 35mm.  And I have been thinking about going mirrorless full frame to get reduced size and EVF to facilitate exposure.

Last spring Nikon offered me a deal I could not pass up on a D750 full frame DSLR.  I bought it with the 24-120mm f4 and a 50mm f1.4G lens.  I have to say that the images out of this rig were excellent.  Nikon sold me the 24-120mm lens for $500 and that is a bargain.

DSC_0729
Nikon D750 with 24-120 f4 lens shot at 24mm

The above shot was with the 24-120 and shot at 24mm.  When you look at this at full resolution it is a great shot except for the top corners.  But for me the combo of the D750 and 24-120 was just too big.  Plus my experience with the last Sony compact with the EVF and my iPhone and using the Adobe camera app got me used to seeing exposure and over exposure in real time.

So I figured I would look at Sony and Nikon as that is what I have good experience with.  I went to the camera store with the intention to buy a Nikon Z7 or Z6 and changed my mind while in the camera store.  Why?  1.  I have a number of legacy Sony-Minolta lenses that I thought would adapt really well on the A7iii.  2.  The A7iii was $2,000 and Z7 was $3,000+.  3.  I liked the fact that the Sony was on it’s third generation of A series cameras and figured they had the bug ironed out.  4.  I have had recent experience with the Sony HX 80 compact and the menu system is very similar to the A7iii’s.  I did not have a problem with the HX menu.

DSC00452
A7iii with Sigma lens

I bought the Sony A7iii and figured if regretted I could always sell it and buy something else.  I also bought the Sony – Zeiss 50mm f1.8 lens and the Sony LA 4 adaptor.  The Zeiss f1.8 lens is a small, light, very high quality standard lens.  It also costs $1,000.  In my opinion sharper than the Nikon 50mm f1.4.  And it cost $375.

Zeiss 5 star-00445
Sony A7iii with Zeiss 55mm f1.8

Most of my older Sony-Minolta AF lenses work as well as I thought they would.  The 50mm f2.8 Macro which has been one of my favorite lenses.  Gives very sharp, colorful, good bokeh results.

DSC00455
Shot with Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro 
Minolta 70-210-00523
Shot with Minolta 70-210mm f4.5-5.6 a low cost lens

The medium tele Minolta works pretty well.  I like the bokeh and it is light and easy to use.  It is 1/4 the size of the Nikon 24-120mm f4 and about 1/3 the weight.  Plus I paid $32 for it.

Minolta 70-210-00164
Shot with Sigma 24mm f2.8 Macro

And above is using the Sigma 24mm 2.8 Macro I paid $80 for a couple of years ago.  I have several more that worked well too.

The Sony autofocus adaptor worked quite well with all of the autofocus lenses.  Although using the Sony with a very sharp digital sensor did show some of the weaknesses in bokeh a couple of the lenses have that was covered up more using film.  Film has more grain usually and tend to smudge the bokeh a bit.

Here are two more from the Sony and the Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro.  These have been cropped quite a bit and the details in the full size image are great.

DSC00374

DSC00375

OVF compared to EVF.  I like OVF better but EVF offers more information.  Being able to see the histogram and zebras before taking the shot makes it worth it.  The mirrorless is also far better for taking shots using the back screen.  The Sony is much more responsive than a DSLR back screen.

Videos are far better.  with the mirrorless than the DSLR.  Video was so bad on the DSLR cameras that I almost never used it.  The Sony A7iii is extremely easy to use.  Although the adapted lenses would not be good for autofocus.  The camera would make too much noise using the old lenses.  I have tried the Zeiss and it is silent.

I do miss the 24-120 but not the weight and size.  Sony makes a 24-105 f4.  I have given some thought to buying it, but I don’t want to get back to lugging a heavy camera around.  Using the adaptor and the 24mm prime I already have is less than half the weight and size of the Sony 24-105.  But not a zoom.  I think I will stick with what I have for a while before doing anything more with additional new lenses.

Do I regret not getting the Nikon.  I do not regret not getting 45 mega pixels at all.  My computer set up is just not ready for lots of big still files.  And I have not had a problem getting used to the Sony menu system.  I set up buttons for almost all functions and hardly use the menus.  But I would have to say that the Nikon EVF is quite a bit better and I would like to have that.  I do not love the Sony position of the front and back selector wheels.  The D750 was better.

IMG_1471

Far left is Olympus OM2n, the Voightlander Prominent, Minolta 600si, then the A7iii.  Of the four I prefer the Oly.  I put a a leather ever ready case around it and it becomes very easy to take and carry with you.  I also have an ever ready case for the Voightlander.  The 1953 leather is looking a bit worn, but still very serviceable.  The Sony A7iii above has the Zeiss 55mm lens on it which is a small lens.  But it is easy to see from this picture that what we think of as a small lens in 2018 is much larger than the other three.  Much bigger than the Zeiss and the Sony is not an easy camera to tote around.  I am giving some thought to getting the Zeiss 35mm f2.8 or the Sony FE 28 f2 which are even smaller than the 55mm.  But since I have a closet full of film I can just use some of it with the smaller SLR’s.

Final comment.  Olympus is the only one of the larger camera companies that have not come out with a full frame camera.  If they were to make a smaller full frame and smaller lenses I think it would sell.  Maybe even to me.

 

Camerageddon = 2018 – Might Be The Biggest Year Of Change Ever In The Photo – Video Industry

This year has had one significant introduction after another in new camera bodies, systems, and film.  Sony has introduced the A7riii and A7iii.  Both mostly great and maybe the greatest full frame mirrorless cameras of today.  Nikon has put forward the A7 & A6 full frame mirrorless designs with new lenses.  So far to me this looks like the biggest contender of the Sony’s.  Canon EOSR.  A great camera, except, no ibis and big crop on video at 4K.  Both Nikon and Canon have only one data card slot.  This is a big omission.  Fuji XT3.  Another great camera, but crop sensor and no ibis.  Fuji again with the R version of their medium format camera.  This looks like a great landscape camera but lacks features that are in the full frames.  Panasonic now is talking about their S line for full frame mirrorless, but full specs are not available.  And then Zeiss and their ZX1.  Complete specs are not available and neither is the price.  As I said in my previous post I love this ZX1 concept.  I want one.  But I want one based on specs that I imagine but are not confirmed yet along with the price.

summer trip 2018-1064
Nikon D5500 – Using Lightroom to get B&W

I would like to buy a new full frame mirrorless camera.  I currently have a Nikon D750 DSLR and would like something smaller and lighter plus has an electronic viewfinder.  Of the ones above that we actually know the specs and price of I would say the Sony’s and the Nikon’s are the closest to what I want.  But here is the thing, I am not sure I like either enough more than the Nikon D750 to switch.  I like have tried the A7riii and did not like the way it felt in my hand and thought the menu-control system to be difficult.  I do like the dual SD cards.  The Nikon Z7’s are just now getting shipped to their buyers.  So far I have heard good feedback.  But I don’t really want to switch to XQD cards.  My three computers all have SD card readers but not XQD.  So dongle time would be the case with the Nikons.  And I like the dual card slots I have on the D750.  I don’t like the fact that Nikon is charging a lot more for a 50mm f1.8 than and F mount 50mm f1.4.  Actually I don’t like that a lot.

000005330020
Kodak Tmax 100 with Minolta 600si and 50mm f1.4

Or for that mater Nikon charging 50% more for the Z mount 35mm f1.8 than the F mount f1.8.  Even the 24-70 f4 is more than I recently paid for the F mount 24-120 f4.

And neither the Sony’s or the Nikon’s have settings adjustments for the all important aperture, shutter speed, and ISO dials.  Ones I can see at a glance like Zeiss and Fuji.  The Sony and Nikon do have quick change on aperture and and shutter speed but not in the elegant way Zeiss and Fuji do.

And then the Fuji XT3.  What a great camera with dedicated settings for aperture, shutter speed, ISO, and exposure compensation.  And it is a beautiful camera, far more so than the Sonys.  And a bit prettier than the Nikons.  Plus it is cheaper than any of the full frames.  But no 35mm sensor.  What were they thinking???  The whole World is going back to the best image size ever invented full frame 35mm and they stick with crop size? And no ibis to top it off.  But I have to say the simplicity of the Fuji and quality of materials, and the smaller size have great appeal.

IMG_1026
Shot with iPhone X and it’s wide lens

I have no experience with Canon cameras except that several of my friends and relatives have and like them.  Most prominently my professional TV and Movie cameraman son who is about ready to go back to a Canon DSLR after having a Sony A7S for two years.  His reason, “Canon has better colors”.  And this is a person who uses $100,000 camera rigs in his work.  So maybe when the Canon R is in the stores I will take a closer look.  Right now I don’t like the one card slot of the Canon or the no ibis.  Plus it is big unlike the Fuji.  But Canon has an extremely good reputation so maybe more on it later.

summer trip 2018-1001
Shot with Nikon D750 and converted to B&W with Lightroom

Like Canon I have no experience with Panasonic.  Their two full frame bodies look quite good, but no final specs or prices yet.  So more to come on these two later.

Kodak Ektrachrome is finally shipping.  After the unexpected Zeiss ZX1 this Kodak announcement was the most exciting of the German show.  I like shooting with film.  I like the look of the results I get from my old SLR cameras (4 of them with lots of lenses) and one very nice Voightlander rangefinder with a set of 3 lenses.  On our summer trip this year I did not shoot as much film as I had planned as I bought the D750 just before the trip and was still experimenting with it.  But one of the rolls I shot was Kodak Tmax 100.  I used my Minolta 600si for this film and all of the shots turned out.  I was being lazy and did not use any filters for the whole roll, which was a mistake.  I should have used a yellow, orange, or red for daylight shots.

000005330003

flagged film photos-000005330034

Both of these above shots were from this roll of Tmax.  The second shot was a lean out the moving train shot with 100 speed film and an unstabilized lens.  The camera was set to auto focus and worked perfectly.  It has 3 auto focus points and not 500 like modern cameras.

flagged film photos-000005320013

flagged film photos-000005320020

flagged film photos-000005320021

The above 3 shots are from Portra 400 film that was about a year expired.  All were shot on a 40 year old Olympus OM2n and 50mm f1.8.  One of the best film SLRs ever made.

flagged film photos-000005320029flagged film photos-000005320030flagged film photos-000005320032

And the above three were from inexpensive Kodak Gold 200 that was expired two years. I used my second Olympus OM2n to shoot these.  The Kodak Gold really did it’s job, but if I had it to do over again would have shot with fresh film.  Keep in mind these were shot with a very simple old meter in the Oly and then put through medium priced developing and only mid range scanning (3000 x 2000).

So I am thrilled to be able to get Kodak Ektachrome fresh again.  I fully expect that Kodak’s new formulation will be better than the old Kodak Ektachrome.  This film is being made in the United States in Rochester New York and is shipping from the factory now.  The new Ektachrome is the “natural” formulation and not the old “vivid” formulation as per an interview I watched yesterday from a Kodak spokesperson.  Why am I thrilled?  Slide film has punch you cannot get from negative film.  And you can project slide film on a screen without electronics.  One downside is reduced dynamic range.  As you can see from the three color photos above, the Kodak Gold has tremendous dynamic range.  I have already called one of the local camera shops to get an estimate as to when they are getting the film.  Guess is second week in Oct.

My Pick For The Most Significant New Camera Introduced This Year So Far

Back in April of this year I wrote a post saying that all of the big camera makers were going to copy cell phones in their ability to capture, edit, and upload easily and quickly.  So just after Photokina in Germany last week Zeiss is the first significant company in the photo industry that starts the trend.

Zeiss ZX1 front-

Zeiss has not made cameras for over ten years, but has worked closely with many camera companies like Sony extensively.  All four of my Sony compact cameras I have owned over the last 15 years have had lenses from Zeiss.  Many of Sony’s best E-mount (A7 and 6000 series) glass comes from Zeiss.  Even the lenses in the glasses I am wearing today were made by Zeiss.

Key points of the Zeiss ZX1

  • Full frame digital camera with a little over 36 mega pixels.  Supposedly Sony makes the sensor for this camera.
  • Small, lightweight, easy to use camera with a fixed 35mm lens.  According to the company introduction they have purposely kept the controls of this camera and settings down to a minimum.  The emphasis is on using it to create great photos and video and little time setting it up.
  • ISO, shutter speed, and f-stop are all set by dedicated controls.  Aperture is on the lens, and the other two on the top plate.
  • This camera comes fitted with Adobe Lightroom CC to edit your work using the camera’s back screen.  Your photos and video can then be sent to Adobe wirelessly or a computer or any other device using wifi.
  • You can post to social media directly from the camera wirelessly.
  • The camera comes with half a tera byte of storage internally.  So no media cards needed.  And backs up through wifi as you work or when wifi is available.
  • Modernist sleek form that goes towards the future and not retro in any way.

Zeiss ZX1 2

I love this concept.  The camera is to come out the first part of next year.  Prices yet to be revealed.  If I love the camera or not will have to wait until I see the complete details, price, performance, and hold on my hands and use it just a little.  But right now I really want, the concept and camera if it is at a price I am willing to pay.

So why do I say this is the most significant camera introduced this year?  Because it goes beyond simply going from DSLR to mirrorless, it gets back to expanding the industry of making cameras instead of just turning over most of it to cell phones.  This camera fits right on top of the best call phones.  It works just like an iPhone or high end Android but just the camera part.  Because of it’s simplicity most people can use it.  And most people are never going to buy or use a Nikon Z7 or Canon DSLR or Sony A7riii.  The Nikon, Canon, and Sony are just too big, heavy, and complex for casual shooters of both stills and video to want.  Zeiss has done what Nikon, Canon, Sony, and other big camera makes have not been able to do, they combined a big high end sensor with editing an internal storage, and wifi ability with simplicity.  Sony could have easily done this camera but did not.  They are still wedded to their impossible complex menu systems that twists your brain into frenzy looking for things.  Nikon is moving this direction but it will take a while.  Fuji is the closest to the ZX1 but this is a radical redesign from their heritage soaked designs.  Fuji has simple controls but in a traditional way.  The Zeiss does it in a futuristic way.  And Canon can but will likely take a while.  To me the only other company that is close to this camera is some of the Leica models like the TL.

So tell me what you think in comments.