Following the black and white film image is a color one from a Leaf Afi 7 medium format camera.

Cherie.

This photograph was made as part of my second book project, the one on studio lighting. I did it in my small studio with a Leaf 40 megapixel medium format camera and a Schneider 180mm f2.8 MF lens. It was a beast of a camera to shoot since it was manual focus (and hard to nail focus) and ate through batteries like crazy. But when I went back to examine the original files in detail the color and resolution were really, really great. Which made post processing flesh tones much easier when compared to the 35mm type digital cameras of the day (2009). Now, while the resolution of the sensor has been eclipsed, I find that I still like the look of the files from this camera since they were a legit 16 bit raw image with lots and lots of latitude. The image is still competitive with current camera output. And the lens.....let's just say few, if any, makers have come out with anything better.

Interesting to think that this combination cost somewhere north of $40,000 at the time and now you can buy into a more capable 100 MP camera for around $10,000. That seems like progress to me....

Just posting a favorite, old photo from the Hasselblad film days. No, it's not a fake frame edge....

B. Reading in the sunlight.

Hasselblad film camera

80mm Lens.

One of the things I was thankful for this year was my dog. I call her "Studio Dog" to preserve her anonymity but she really has a different name. She's pretty amazing.

I think the nice thing about dogs is their chipper attitude and their ability to be affectionate and positive no matter how grumpy or overwhelmed I might be feeling. She turned 11 years old this year and I hope she goes on barking and chasing squirrels for years to come.

I asked her what she wanted for Christmas this year and she licked my hand. She's already given me my Christmas present; she was there for me every day this past year, bringing a big smile to my face and adding a very happy presence that made our home a cheerier place.

All I want for Christmas is what I've already got. A Happy Family. 

The second most incredible lens I have ever used.

Many years ago I saved up some cash and bought a Zeiss Planar 110mm f2.0 lens for my focal plane shooting Hasselblad, a 203FE. I loved that lens but never quite figured out how to really leverage the advantage of f2.0 on a 6x6 cm frame. But the lens had character. Lots and lots of character. And when you stopped down to f2.8, or even better, f4.0, it was monster sharp. And it was the fastest lens made for that entire system. It might sound funny but at the time I owned the lens I think I still had a lot to learn about the subtleties of photography/portraiture and I probably didn't appreciate the lens enough.

For many years it held a place in my brain as the sharpest and finest lens I'd ever owned.

About a month ago I took a chance and bought another lens that was a little outside my comfort zone. I don't necessarily mean that in a financial sense (although the price tag did give me pause) but rather I thought I might once again be buying a lens for which I hadn't quite developed the chops to exploit well at my current level of photographic comprehension.

I wanted a great lens to use with my new Lumix S1R bodies. Something that would show off the quality and resolution of the 47.5 megapixel sensor. Since I seem to shoot a lot of photographs around the 50mm focal length I hemmed and hawed between buying the Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art lens and the much more expensive Panasonic Lumix 50mm f1.4 Pro S lens. The Sigma has consistently gotten rave reviews from technicians and artists alike so I wondered if the difference in cost between these two lenses was unmoored from any correspondence to quality differences. In the end I decided to take the gamble and go with the largely enigmatic Panasonic.

I've shot with it out in the street and also at rehearsals for various plays and musicals but until yesterday I'd never shot it in a more controlled way; with flash, a tripod and a non-moving subject. But that's what was on the menu for yesterday's shoot. I was commissioned to photograph the lead partner in a Downtown accounting firm. We'd be mixing the light pouring in from floor to ceiling windows with directional light from flash and I'd spend the entire afternoon moving from one interesting interior space  to another, finally capturing 12 different scenarios, multiplied by dozens of gestures, expressions and poses.

The Sigma 85mm f1.4 Art lens got a good workout, as did the 35mm Art lens but I tried to lean most often on the 50mm since it was tight enough for a good environmental portrait but loose enough to give me a lot of atmosphere and ambiance. I'd discussed a style with the art director and agency art buyer and it consisted of shooting between f2.0 and f2.8 to get the most dissolved background possible. The effect was perfect with the 85mm and I'll admit that I pushed the boundaries occasionally by using the 50mm S Pro all the way open at f1.4, in addition to f2.0 and f2.8.

I could tell we were getting good stuff by chimping a bit, and punching in on the review images to see how my focus was hitting, but nothing really prepared me for my post processing session today. I went through something like 500+ raw image files from a 24 megapixel S1 and the two longer lenses just floored me. But as sharp as the 85mm was the 50mm is in a whole different class.

It's literally the first lens I've shot with that, when the focus is exactly on the money, even at f1.4 the Adobe Lightroom image from raw is too sharp. The default is set to an amount of 40 with a radius of 1 and I needed to bring the amount slider down to 15 in order not to have the image be so sharp that the detail of my subject's skin, pores and hair was outright distracting. Again, this was at f1.4!

At f2.0 and 2.8, when I punched into 100% in Lightroom the images were so analytic and revealing that I wasn't quite sure how to handle them. I did play around with negative settings on the clarity slider as well as adding noise reduction to the files to take the edge off.

It was an amazing effect. I can't recall having a lens that was so sharp I might need to reduce the contrast of my typical lighting and develop a Lightroom preset to match.

Don't get me wrong: the files weren't overly sharpened by the camera and the final results weren't harsh..., it was more the effect someone would get from needing eyeglasses for years but not having them and then finally getting proper glasses and seeing the world with clarity for the first time. It would be a bit jarring. A bit revealing.

So, these attributes of the new lens are interesting to me. I don't see the difference as profoundly when I've handheld the lens, even in good light, but with the flash and a tripod in play I think I may have actually over-optimized my "shot discipline." The lens is pretty darn miraculous and I can hardly wait to do more and more with it.

The Sigma 85mm is a pretty good match as well. I guess 2020 is the year I go ultimately sharp. Some of my portrait subjects might not like that but isn't a situation like this just crying out for a makeover in Portrait Professional software?

I am still pretty amazed. I just went out to the office to take one more look to make sure I wasn't inadvertently shifting over into hyperbole, but no. The files are amazing and endlessly detailed. A very 3D look. I am very impressed. I guess Panasonic gave me some good value for the price.

Which five cameras would I recommend to seriously serious photographers. And why.

On a boat in Venice. Minox or Leica M. 

As a grizzled and weathered survivor in the field of photography I often get asked by young, aspiring professional photographers which camera (or camera system) they should buy. I spew all the usual, commonplace drivel about choosing the correct camera for their interest/style/niche of photography. But it's actually a pretty easy thing to make the case that there are multiple systems, each with their own tradeoffs and compromises, that will do the job, interchangeably, for the vast majority of jobs photographers come across in day-to-day work. And there is a strong case to be made for renting highly specialized cameras when the need arises for something outside the usual boundary lines of performance.

For example, most of a photographer's work might be the creation of portraits for the web. Occasionally they might be asked to do a campaign in which the images will be used very, very large, and will be printed in four color across an enormous span. I won't use the example of a "billboard" because if by "billboard" you mean the ones along the side of highways, sitting 50 feet in the air which we all drive by at 55 MPH (or 90 in Texas....) you could easily use an iPhone photograph and have resolution to spare. I mean something that might be printed 8x10 feet tall and presented in a convention center where viewer could walk up and ostensibly put a loupe on the print and look for detail. Or at least put a nose on it.

In a scenario like this it would make sense to rent something like a Phase One 150 megapixel camera or a Fuji 100 megapixel camera to do the job exactly right. But those may be cameras that don't make economic sense to buy for a business that can effectively use the output of a 24 megapixel sensor most of the time without breaking a sweat.

If you are going to do good work and also work within a reasonable budget then there are about five cameras that make pretty good business sense for rank and file photographers. The more affluent among them might want to choose more elegant and expensive cameras but at a certain point this will just reflect personal taste more than anything else.

So, what do I recommend to people and why? It all depends on my mood but there are certain cameras that deliver more than enough performance to get the jobs done and they aren't always the most obvious ones on the dealer's shelves.

You might expect me to suggest that one only look to the full frame cameras to satisfy the rigors of professional work but that's not the case. The first two cameras I'll suggest are exactly counter to the common assumption that bigger is always better. And I'm melding the first two cameras together to serve as one because, if you are making choices within this format I'll assume that you'll go for one or the other.

My first choice (not necessarily in order of preference!) would be either the Olympus EM-1 mk 2 or the Panasonic G9. My experiences are mostly with the G9 but since the cameras share the same basic sensor and deliver nearly equivalent results it really doesn't matter which one you finally choose. What you'll end up with is a state of the art micro 4:3 camera that can free range across both maker's lens lines, picking and choosing the optics that work best for you. Contrary to popular belief the abilities of the smaller format are, within the envelope of most commercial jobs, not nearly as far apart in imaging quality as we are generally led to believe.

Both cameras have absolutely killer image stabilizations systems and most of the pro series lenses in each line up are superb. I routinely matched the Olympus 12-100mm f4.0 Pro lens with the Panasonic G9 camera body for images that were breathtaking. I've used  the G9s, and before that, GH5s for landscapes, portraits and live theater documentation with nearly perfect results. In fact, a quick hop through my "absolute favorites" folder showed me that a huge proportion of images I've shot and liked in the last four years were done with cameras like these. Yes, you'll need to use faster and sharper lenses to get the same kind of limited depth of field that you could get with less expensive lens options in bigger formats. But the trade off is.....not much. You'll spend more on Olympus's fast, Pro lenses but not nearly as much as I just dropped  on one 50mm f1.4 for the Lumix FF cameras!

The G9 is weather sealed, robust, has a great EVF and, as I wrote above, basically defines the top of the  charts for image stabilization. A very recent firmware update greatly enhances its already great 4K video chops and even battery life is near the top of the heap for mirrorless cameras. You can piece together a great two lens starter system with zooms from either maker and you'll save both space and money doing so compared with any of the full frame selections.

My second choice would be the Fuji X-T3. The sensor in the X-T3 is great and a close competitor to full frame but the thing that drives the Fuji system is the great selection of both zoom and prime lenses. The body is priced more like an entry level camera but the still and video features are on par with the very best of the larger sensor competitors. I'd get mine with a battery grip to add some handling surface and also to supplement the smaller than comfortable battery capacity. The finder is superb but the one caveat is that you'll only get image stabilization via a handful of Fuji lenses. If you are a long zoom lens fan you'll be well accommodated with the superb (and well stabilized) 50-140mm f2.8 lens. While the unstablized 16-55mm f2.8 is wonderful you might also look at the 16-80 f4.0 which has the most current and effective stabilization in the system. Once you have the wide to standard and medium to long zoom lenses sorted you can galavant through the lens catalog and backfill with wonderful, small prime lenses to your heart's content. You will love the Fuji color. And the Fuji 4K video. Both are as advertised: super good.

A secondary benefit of the X-T3 is the smaller form factor and lower weight compared to full frame systems. It might be the best travel system for people who are on and off planes too much....

My third suggestion to many people is the Nikon Z6. I happen to think that 24 megapixels is the sweet spot for so many uses. While the Z7 offers nearly 50 megapixels of resolution it isn't as good a video camera as the Z6 and I'd wager that the Z6 is also the better low light camera. But what you get with either camera is a great still imaging tool in a small and facile body that gets raves for handling and ergonomics. Nikon knows how to do neutral color correctly and judging from the lenses I've played with for their Z system they will soon have a decent selection of dedicated lenses that out perform their previous lenses and take advantage of the new, bigger lens mount.

Since the system is perceived as lagging in terms of lenses and accessories you'll find good deals on kits through the rest of the year. There's no one feature that stands out for either camera; I think the system's strength is that they get an "A" or "A-" for all aspects of their new cameras and the balance of features, handling and on sensor performance create a strong argument for the system's adaptation by beginners or transition from the venerable F system by long term loyalists. With nice lenses (so far), a very nice EVF and wonderful haptics I think the system will do well and provide a great foundation for anyone working for money in the field of photography.

A new firmware upgrade brings bunch of new capabilities for video shooters too. Don't just reflexively buy a Sony as a result of peer pressure and online sales manipulation by large review sites. The Nikon Z is, in my mind, the equal of the Sony A7x system in everything except lenses....And Nikon might fix that situation more quickly than we expect.

My fourth suggestion is the "easy way out/ nobody ever got fired for recommending IBM computers" route. Just tell the person who asks for your advice to go ahead and buy the Sony A7III. As I've said above, the sensors across most camera lines, at 24 megapixel, are all better than most people will need and totally up to the task of making professional images across a wide range of disciplines. I'd skip the 60 megapixel version (the A7R4) because I think they went a step too far and it suffers from higher noise at high and low ISOs, and a measureable drop in dynamic range versus their lower resolution (42-47.5) competitors.

The bigger pixel wells of the A7III will make more attractive images and provide better high ISO performance. Lately, Sony is playing like Ford Motors in 1966. General Motors is the sales leader and analogous to what Canon is in the camera world. Canon pumps out a lot of "Chevy Novas" and "Chevy Biscaynes" and every once in a while they try their luck with a (1DXx) huge Suburban. Sony is busy pumping out Mustangs and Thunderbirds along with a fleet of APS-C Mavericks and pre-Fiestas.

All of Sony's product line drives well on the spec sheets which leads millions to buy their products because, with the demise of bricks and mortar retailers where you could test drive the handling of the cameras, all most consumers have left is the spec sheet and the mail order venue. In my opinion this lack of pre-sale/hands-on trial is what keeps Sony's engine running. If you could handle one right next to a Nikon Z7 or a (big-boned Lumix S1) fewer people would be sporting ugly Sony camera straps attached to so many cameras that are so physically uncomfortable to use...and handle. Too many sharp edges. Too little bulk to hold comfortably. Lackluster control surfaces and poor menus. But there it is...

But the reason I would recommend them to my friends who are heavy into left-brained thinking is precisely the fact that these cameras tic so many boxes on the old, linear thinking check list. These are the guys who want to know: how much horsepower??! etc. etc. and the Sony's deliver the numbers.

Of the full frame Sony line the A7III is the most civilized. The sensor delivers at least as well as virtually the same sensor in the Nikon Z6. The battery has been vastly improved over previous models. The raw files are finally 14 bit (fine print applies) and the video is still 8 bit but decent. The Sony line has some really good lenses but you'll want to be sure to test yours out before the return period expires since the folks who test them at Lensrentals.com say that some of the Sony lenses they've tested have some bigger variances in image quality/performances from one product to the next....

Nowadays it makes just as much sense for really serious photographers to just default to buying Sigma Art lenses for the E Sonys. They are more solidly built and seem to outperform many of the Sonys.

Sony has buzz right now. It's hard to go wrong with a recommendation. But just remember that since this person has asked (and received ) your recommendation they'll be circling back to you in a panic, trying to decipher the menus. Bone up on the manual, just in case.

Finally, I'm going off the reservation with a quirky recommendation for the Canon 5Dmk3/4 as my fifth entry. This is the defacto recommendation for anyone in your sphere who is a traditionalist, or female wedding photographer/children's portrait photographer. Don't know why but if you polled all the retail (portraits, weddings, bar mitzvahs, engagements) photographers from coast to coast you would most likely find that the vast majority are shooting their work with Canon 5 series DSLRs and once they learn how to operate that one system, it's the camera habitat that becomes their safety blanket and security zone for a long time.

And, for lots of logical reasons this makes sense. The camera and the form factor are time tested. There is no real associated risk to using a type of camera that comes with a long history of success and reliability. It works well with flash. The sensor isn't the world leader for high ISO but it's not bad and the colors in the files are well loved by customer and shooter.

Looking in the bags of many wedding and portrait photographers shows me that once you adapt this system you enter into a cult in which there is a not-so-secret required kit that consists of: One camera body. One 24-105mm L series zoom, and one 70-200mm L series zoom. There is also an ancient technology 50mm f1.4 lens which is routinely used at its widest aperture to deliver images in which there is one tiny and thin slice of sharpness surrounded by oceans of "bokeh" (by which they mean "stuff that is out of focus.").

It's the ultimate safe choice. It's the most ubiquitous toolset in the retail end of the profession and one that delivers, weekend after weekend. The biggest plus beyond its tenure? Pretty much the same amazing battery life found in most DSLRs.

The curious will seek out the cameras I've listed above this one. The incurious and fearful (or obsessively practical) are all in for the Canon 5D series and just the exact lenses that they've previously seen on someone's video "tutorial." Sorry, no substitutions.

So why am I not recommending the Lumix S1 or S1R? I think it's too hard to convey exactly what the value proposition is to all but a small handful of users. And so many people are so price sensitive that they'll gladly sacrifice some aspect of the S1 series I think is brilliant just in order to save the one time cost of a couple hundred bucks. Convincing most people otherwise is just hard work. And since I don't sell cameras for Panasonic I just don't have the bandwidth.....

This was written as a counterpoint to my earlier column on using iPhones as cameras. 

More later. Happy Holidays.

I was comparing some different images from different cameras this afternoon and came across one I really liked from a camera I've long since abandoned. I hate it when that happens.

Rebecca.

Camera: Sony A7rii.

Lens: Rokinon 85mm f1.4

Sometimes stuff just works...

A fun photo. Playing around at the edge of the shooting envelope...

Jen. The choreographer for Zach's production of "Christmas Carol." 

Lighting? Crappy. All available, top lit, florescent fixtures from the 1970's positioned three stories up in the black ceiling.  Exposure? Super-crappy. I needed f1.4 at 1/250th with ISO 4000 to get a useable image (faster shutter speed needed for moving parts!). Color? Ultimately bad. Jangly greenish florescent color in older fixtures with loud ballasts that caused random but frequent banding and exposure swings from frame to frame. 

With all the things lined up against this shot why did I want to shoot it and why am I happy to show it here? I wanted to shoot it to get a different documentation of an early rehearsal in the short life of a big musical production. I wanted to see just how much I could squeeze out of a Fuji X-H1 with a 56mm f`1.2 mounted on it. And I wanted to see how close I could get the color to something pleasing from a grand soup of stinky color. 

Why am I happy to show it here? Because I love Jen's gesture. I love humorous effect of the bodies flying out of frame in the top two corners. I love the bedding textures and I love the objects sliding off into focus oblivion on the far, back wall. So, I'm just sharing an image from what Ming Thein would call, "The Edge of the Envelope." 

Prepping and Packing for what will Probably Be the Last Job of the Year.

It's hard to believe that 2019 is almost over! It's been a tumultuous year for me. I spent the first five months of the year helping my father handle dementia and a steady physical decline. I took care of all his financial affairs, kept him current everywhere, got him to all doctor appointments, took afternoons off to go to San Antonio to get him to his barber for hair cuts (even at 91 he wanted to look "proper."). Spent all the holidays and Sundays with him and then lost him at the end of May.

I've spent the rest of the year handling his estate which felt like deja vu since I'd done the same for my mother's estate the year before. Needless to say my photography (both kinds: commercial and personal) certainly took a back seat all year long. If I'm truthful with myself it was really the last 18 months that I felt sidelined.  I'm even a bit amazed that I was able to keep the blog going along.

But slowly, and with stops and starts, I've been building back my interest and my intention to do photography both for a living and as my passion. This year I booked and completed a mere 50 jobs or assignments for clients. About half the number (or less) than I shoot in a more typical year. It's reflected in the billing and it's reflected in the amount of free time I know have to sit and wonder how so much slipped by so quickly.

So, I have a job booked for tomorrow, in the afternoon. I'm working with the in-house marketing team at a financial services company to photograph one of their top tier customers at the company's headquarters in a new building in downtown Austin. We've got four hours booked which should be more than enough time to get a nice range of environmental portraits done. And maybe a more formal shot or two as well.

The marketing people really like the style I've been doing over the last few years of having the subject well lit and in focus while letting the background quickly slide out of focus down long open spaces. I've started placing objects like chairs and taller furniture off in the background specifically with the idea of having the objects go completely out of focus while adding soft shapes and colors in what might otherwise be a bland expanse of background.

There are two critical lighting tools but both are light and easy to pack. One is a flash and flash trigger combination which, in conjunction with a nice, soft, white umbrella will add direction and a clean color rendering for my main subject. The second is an arm that holds a collapsible reflector to a light stand. I use this to float a diffuser or reflector over the head of my subject in order to block any existing top light that might be littering the scene on location. This helps to kill bad color casts and negates the effects of an unwanted, direct light coming in from a direction that's counterproductive to my main lighting design. That's pretty much all I'm packing as far as lighting goes. Maybe I'll stick an extra shoe mount flash in the case to use if I need some sort of additional fill light.

The style depends on getting the background far enough out of focus to cut out the clutter and busy-ness of most spaces while having a very sharply articulated subject in the foreground. Older lenses weren't always sharp enough wide open to be used at or near fully open apertures for this kind of work but the lenses I plan on using tomorrow have been tested and, even at f1.4, whatever is in focus is sharp and detailed.

I'm packing into a new Think Tank Airport Security roller case. I'm bringing two Lumix S1 bodies (chosen because I want to shoot RAW but don't want the burden of files that are 4X larger, like those I get out of the S1Rs. The lenses I intend to use are the 50mm and 85mm but I'm bringing along the 35mm for shots that work in compositionally in tighter spaces, as well as the 24-105mm kit lens; just in case I either need more reach or everything goes to hell with all the primes and I need to use the kit lens as a back-up.

So, two S1s with battery grips attached. Two XQD 128 GB cards (one in each camera), a couple of V90 SD cards for back-up files, the four lenses (Sigma 35mm and 85mm Art lenses, 50mm f1.4 S Pro Lumix lens and the Lumix kit lens) a couple of flashes with radio triggers and the three light stands, an umbrella and a circular diffuser.

Everything fits in one rolling case and one stand bag so there's no need for the big cart or extra baggage.

It's the last job of the year and I'm trying to anticipate everything I'll need to do to make good art on location. It should be a satisfying way to end a year of personal turmoil, loss and too much responsibility...

I can't think of anything else I need to pack beyond a good attitude and a smile.

I'm not ready to give up on this profession. Not by a long shot. Let's see what we can do in 2020!

I've been mulling over a concept that reviewers of the Leica Q2 keep mentioning. And how it applies to my cameras.

I photographed this at the Blanton Museum. When I wrote about the photo a while back I mentioned that at 100% magnification you can clearly see the weave of the sweater the person in the frame is 

wearing. Down to the threads. Part of the coolness of a 47 megapixel camera and 

a really, really good 50mm lens.

I'm not really price sensitive when it comes to cameras; but I'm thinking you've guessed that by now. If Leica made their Q2 with lenses other than the 28mm I might consider buying one and trying to convince myself that I'd finally be able to do great art with it. What focal length lens would I like? Nothing exotic. How about a 40mm or a 50mm? And I'd be happy enough if it was an f2.0 and satisfyingly sharp when used wide open. But alas. They haven't offered an alternate configuration. I'd be happy to co-brand one with them as the Visual Science Lab Normal Limited Edition...

But the concept I keep hearing from everyone (Leica and reviewers) is that the sensor in the Q2 is so good, and the 28mm lens on the front is so exquisite, that one could consider the camera as an all purpose, multi-focal length, imaging tool because the combination of the high resolving sensor and the equally detailed performance of the lens means you can do a bunch of serious cropping in order to get just the angle of view you want with no fuss. So, if you want a normal focal length look you could crop down to an APS-C style crop and you would get yourself a Leica 42mm lens for free. Or at least for no extra charge. Sure, you'll only have about 23.5 megapixels left to work with but I think most of us would agree that it's enough for just about anything you may desire. And those would be Red Dot/Leica pixels into the bargain. 

While I like the idea of a flexibility in lens selection (and being able to take only one lens along with me) I don't particularly care for the idea that I'll be composing in a very wide frame and having to use my limited powers of visual conservation to derive, at the time of shooting, exactly how I might be cropping. If I have an EVF at my disposal I'd like to see the crop while I compose the shot. 

I know that some of you can look at a hugely wide image in a finder and decide, unerringly, just exactly how you'll crop it in the future, and that you can do so without recomputing even an inch of variance after the fact. But I can't. I want to see the frame lines, the boundaries, the edges of the imagined frame. That's probably why the Leica Q2 is not on my short list of drool-worthy cameras....

But the idea of being able to fine tune focal lengths centered around one lens started me thinking and the concept keeps circling back around in my brain and taunting me. 

On Sunday night I went to a working performance of graduating senior drama and performance students at Zach Theatre's Nowlin rehearsal space. The space is huge and great for dance and movement. It can also hold a fairly big crowd of parents and friends. But where the space falls down is in the lighting. Since it's a rehearsal space and not a performing space the lighting is just barely utilitarian for the purpose. Buzzy, flickery florescent lights set high, high, high up on the ceiling about 30 feet up. No side lighting at all, and a black curtain spread across the back wall. I was volunteering for this one; just for the fun of seeing all the new talent, and the joy of playing with two new lenses. Lenses that I will quickly admit were not well thought out for this particular situation....

I'd packed two S1R bodies, the Sigma 35mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.4 Art lenses, and not much else. I didn't know we'd have an audience of any size but when I arrived the space was set up with at least 100 folding chairs. There wasn't a fixed stage and I couldn't get closer to the talent than the first row of audience seating. Hmmm. 

I'd be fine with ensemble shots, set up, multiple actor scenes, and anything with two or more people involved but there was a whole program full of individuals who would be doing dramatic readings, singing solos, dancing and standing in a wide sea of black drape. If I had been shooting this as a stage show I certainly would have brought along the 70-200mm lens for tight, individual shots. At 200mm I'd have a shot at making mid-torso to top of head shots too. But I came less prepared than usual and immediately felt photographically under-equipped.

Until the Leica/One camera/One lens concept floated back into my consciousness. 

I had 47.5 megapixel cameras in my hands as well as fast, state-of-the-art lenses. I didn't need to worry about getting sharp images from either lens and, if I used them at f1.4, or even at f2.0, I could keep the ISOs low enough to make certain I was getting optimum image quality in the files. 

Then I found the Ext. Teleconverter Mode in the camera menu. I could easily toggle between a full view and a 1.4X crop. This would give me (with the 35mm lens) both a normal 35mm and a bit tighter 50mm look without much loss of quality. And, to make me more comfortable the frame would be accurately depicted across the entire EVF. With the 85mm lens I would also be able to get (and properly view) a second focal length of about 120mm which would get me into the compositional zone I wanted. 

To use the crop/teleconverter mode I would have to set my camera to the "medium" file size setting and "make do" with a "paltry" 23.5 megapixels. Woe is me.... (sarcasm implied).

So, with two lenses I got four different focal lengths: 35, 50, 85 and 120. The files were all much more than adequate and they tightened up well in post production. 

All of this craziness got me thinking about another assignment that's coming up on Thursday. I'll be shooting lifestyle portraits on location at a high tech company that offices in a beautiful building downtown. This might also be a "two lens X2" shoot. I'm planning on taking the Panasonic 50mm f1.4 S Pro and the Sigma 85mm Art lens and using the flexibility of the teleconverter mode on the camera to give me more options. There is even a "zoom" option that will allow me to use every length between the normal angle of view and the maximum (1.4X) crop. Now, rather than looking for new, precise focal lengths, like a 100mm portrait lens (a nice length) I can take advantage of the very high performing and very fast lenses I already own. 

In the instance of the lifestyle shoot on Thursday you might wonder why it's so important to see the "crop". Well, I'll have an art director and client in tow on that shoot and would only like to show them the actual crop rather than showing them a full frame version made at the widest angle and then asking them to use their imaginations. Funny how that doesn't work in most advertising situations.....

The one caveat to working this way is that the teleconverter option is only available for Jpegs. If I decide that I have to shoot in raw then were back to traditional camera and lens use and I'll incorporate the 70-200mm if I need something longer than the 50mm and 85mm. I'll bring them all with me and see what works best. 

Now, off to call Leica and see if they want to sponsor my VSL limited edition Q2 with a 50mm Summicron on the front. I'll need to approve the special denim fabric "leather" and add my arcane signature somewhere before we finalize everything. But I need to let them know that I can be a bit showy and might want to have more than one Red Dot on the camera body. And I might want the dots a bit bigger.....

This is what Studio Dog thought of the idea when I mentioned it to her:

I've heard and read so much about iPhones that I thought I'd take mine for a walk. It's good but....... (spoiler: still going need real cameras for the good stuff...).

Everybody tells me the Lumix S1R and the 50 S Pro are too heavy to carry around on walks so I took them seriously and decided I'd stroll as the other 95% do and just take along my iPhone. It's an XR and it's supposed to have a great camera and lens. I thought I'd give it a whirl and see if it's really The Astronaut and not the Rocket... (secrets of space travel). To see if I could buy into all the iPhone excitement and use my ever present phone in lieu of a $3700 camera and a $2300 lens. 

I started by documenting my departure from the house. As you can see from the driveway, it's all Subaru all the time. Mine is the one on the left. I had to get the bigger one so I can fit in all my photo junk and haul it around. I've had the vehicle for almost a year and have yet to go "off road" or to drive on ice and/or snow. So much for all wheel drive.

I did the usual Sunday walk. I parked on the south side of the river that bisects downtown Austin and walked over the bridge that you've already seen too often in blog posts. I did take some images of familiar buildings and venues so I could make real comparisons.

I have to give the phone credit for at least three things I like about shooting with it, speaking technically: I like that it does a very cool, automatic, multiple frame HDR file that just looks nice and "open" without looking stupid. I like that the phone seems to always nail exposure. And I like even better that the color balance seems to be pretty exact no matter what the shooting conditions are. 

Culturally, I like that I can stop and take photos of anything and anyone and no one bats an eye or gives me a second look. You could probably photograph in the middle of a nuclear submarine and the authorities would think you just needed something catchy for your Instagram feed. 

On a non-photographic note, I did love having the video capability be totally dumbed down and instantly accessible. And it looks good too. I did a slow motion clip of an escalator in a hotel and basically, all I had to do was select "video" and push the button. Nice. 

As a camera for documentation and quick snapshots the iPhone XR is perfectly fine. I hate only having the wide angle lens on it and wish I had the same selection of lenses that the newer iPhone 11 Pro boasts but after my afternoon of shooting I'm not ready to believe that I can ditch all the traditional camera gear I own and make myself happy with the results of even the best phone right now. And I'll tell you why: When you blow up the tiny pixels from the tiny sensor the images seem to fall apart pretty quickly. They hold together well enough for Instagram, on a phone screen, but they do get noisy when you push the exposure a little; and that's from frames taken in the best light. I also miss long, fast lenses and the aerobic exercise of carrying them all around 😆

While I was out and around I saw some funny signage. The one just above is probably my favorite. It's an ad for the second best taco chain in town, Torchy's (the best chain taco place is TacoDeli; by a good margin....). But I have to say that Torchy's does a good job with their pleasantly irreverent signage.

Le Politique. 

As an aside, I'd always wondered about a restaurant on 2nd St. called, Le Politique. I finally tried it this past week with an old friend who came in from out of town. On a Thursday at lunch time the place was almost empty. The food was good, the service was great, and the atmosphere most congenial for a slow, talky lunch; but the main dining rooms were nearly empty. Made even more obvious because it's such a large space. I also tried their attached Parisian-style bakery on Sunday and their pricy pastries are actually quite good. You forget what you spent on them after the second or third bite.... but really! $5.00 for a chocolate croissant (take out)???

Nice Holiday spirit in the windows at ToyJoy on Second St. I personally love the avocado ornament (above) and wouldn't mind having another set of Rock'Em, Sock'Em Robots. (just below).

Some seriously mixed up signage.

Which is it? Coffee or Wine?

Or hot wine in a coffee cup?

Thick on dynamic range. Thin on post process-ability.

A good thing about wide angle lenses is their ability to get in the whole span of this mural, just off Congress Ave. I appreciated the iPhone for that since I so rarely carry around anything shorter than a 35mm.

All three days of Fall in Austin. 

WTF? A culture in conflict. The happy hour patrons want so badly to sit outside at the bars and cafes but are too soft to handle the cooler weather. The W Hotel had three or four of these "bar tent" set ups for their patrons. I am instantly reminded of bird cages or terrariums. For humans 

hell bent on being part of the sidewalk society. Sad. Tragic. Funny. 

Near the end of my walk I bought an apple pastry from Le Publique, along with a boring and bitter cup of drip coffee and enjoyed half of my mid-afternoon repast in the shadows of the former Seaholm power plant. The other half I poured out....

So, here's the TLBREW (too long but read every word): Phone cameras are nice and easy to use but as soon as you move from viewing the results on another phone or on an iPad you start to notice the weak spots and limitations of the tiny sensors. It's nice to have a "take everywhere" appliance but I think counting on a phone camera as a sole art tool is premature. Keep your camera. Appreciate the added potential. Even if you never exploit it you'll at least know you could have....

Differences of opinion stoically tolerated. Have at it: