Wednesday Morning in the Sauna we call Austin.

 

Someone left off the aerators that we use to chill the pool from Sunday until Tuesday. When we arrived at the pool for Tuesday's workout the water temperature had creeped up to either a high 85 or a low 86° and it was like swimming through warm soup. Since everything in life is a comparison to something else that Tuesday morning practice was even worse for me because I'd swum a couple miles the day before at the spring-fed, Deep Eddy Pool and the water temperature there was a crisp 70°. That 16° difference adds up. 

I slept in this morning and decided to skip the regular pool and head back over to Deep Eddy. The fresh water comes from deep in the aquifer and we're in the middle of a drought. That means re-filling the pool takes more time. The pool officially opens at 8 am but when I got there at 9:15 it was still filling up and city of Austin pool policy is that no one is allowed in for lap swimming until the pool is sufficiently filled and the lane lines are put back in. We were finally allowed in to swim at about 9:45. It was frustrating but I didn't have anything pressing scheduled so I stayed around and grabbed a lane when allowed. 

The water was glorious. No chemicals. No chlorine. Just spring water. The lap side of the pool is 33 yards across and there are 12 lanes. I try to get a lane in the deep water when I can. It's psychological but the deeper lanes "feel" faster and on a day when the pool gets refilled the water temperature seems layered. After a good, long swim it's fun to dive down to the deepest parts; about 18 feet, and feel the water get colder and colder as you descend. Just for kicks I did one length completely underwater. Near the very end I thought my lungs were going to explode. But the thrill of actually getting it done was more exciting now than when we used to routinely do stuff like that twenty years ago....

If you live in San Francisco or New York City don't read this next paragraph...

When I left the house this morning I half way planned to go do a walk after the swim. A walk means carrying a camera. I pulled a Leica SL2 and the Sigma 65mm lens off the coffee table --- I'd been playing around with the menus last night --- and I put it in the car. The camera travels in the footwell on the passenger's side so if I stop suddenly it won't fall off a seat and get damaged or turn into a dangerous, airborne projectile. When I got to the big parking lot at the pool I covered the camera with a bucket hat (high security) then walked around to the hatchback and pieced together the swim gear I needed for the morning swim. I spent some time trying to find my swim pass. I had too much on my mind. About halfway through my swim I started trying to remember if I'd locked my car. I guess I could have gotten out to check but I figured if the fates were against me they would have already arranged for the camera to vanish. I finished the swim. Took a shower and headed out to see what might have transpired. 

Yep. I forgot to lock the car. But nope, no one messed with it and the camera was still right there in the footwell. I'm glad not to have lost the camera and lens. Even more glad not to have lost my wallet, credit cards and my watch. It was my first real blush with what some people might call a "senior" moment but I'll probably remember to always lock up the car for months to come. 

After the cold swim and the miraculous breath holding adventure I headed to downtown and made a beeline to Torchy's Tacos for a breakfast taco and some coffee. It was mid-morning. No lines, no waiting. The taco seemed better than usual. The coffee less so. 

The camera was a prop this morning, for the most part. The sky was overcast and the humidity was closing on on 100%. I shot a few cursory images but dumped most of them on import to Lightroom. 

It was good to walk after a hard, cold swim. Gets the bigger leg muscles into play. I guess today was a break from routine. Sometimes you go out and nothing happens. Might be a sign to try a new location. Or a new city. Or a new country. Currently working on it.

Re: yesterday's post about image stabilization. 

I wasn't trying to convince anyone to give up on cameras that have image stabilization built-in. And I certainly wasn't trying to convince anyone that I.S. was a tool of Satan or a pathway to imaging evil but some of the responses had a defensive feel to them. I have cameras with image stabilization inside. I use the feature when I use those cameras. Everyone finds their own path. Well, not everyone. Sometimes people stumble around in the dark and fall over a cliff. I'm hoping that didn't happen to anyone here.

Yes. I will use I.S. in the future. As I have in the past. Would my photography dry up without it? Not hardly. I'd just have to work a bit harder in situations closer to the edge of the envelope. 

How do I like that Sigma 65? It's nice. Quite nice. A weird focal length but all focal lengths except for the 50mm take some getting used to. I just need to work on the 65mm a bit more. Seems to work best when shooting in the square format.

French doors repaired, primed and ready for a coat of paint. New refrigerator ordered and on schedule for delivery this coming Monday. Kid's arm is repairing itself nicely and the kid can drive himself again. Father relieved of chauffeur duties --- for now. 

Spouse happy. 

Life is good.

The Sigma fp and image stabilization. My take.

 Panasonic shocked the small format film-maker's world a few years back. They had successfully made the  GH5 camera with very good in-body image stabilization and then a little while later released a version they called the GH5S with a lower resolution sensor and.....no image stabilization. The usual forum dwellers were shocked, dismayed and furious. They just couldn't understand that most camera design is a mess of compromises and that having a moving sensor is one of those "features" that could actually cause a drop in video image quality and reliability. Many people, new to photography, had  only known cameras with image stabilization or cameras made to be used with lenses that were stabilized. Amateurs shunned the GH5S but professional film-makers rushed to buy them as almost everyone using a camera for handheld video were using their cameras in conjunction with gimbals. And sliders were another popular stabilizing tool for camera movement. 

In creating cameras for still imaging the moving sensor is less of a problem but all added complexity diminishes reliability and adds to the cost of making the camera. And there are a number of photographers still who believe that I.S. can cause imaging artifacts in situations which would benefit most from the added feature. 

I'm not going to take sides on the pros or cons of the camera technology because several of the cameras (five or them?) I routinely use don't have image stabilization (per se) and I find them to be exceptionally good cameras which deliver great results for me. As long as I use them correctly. So let's talk about adapting to a working methodology in which we make the assumption that we don't need or won't be able to access image stabilization. 

I first came to grips with the idea of shooting without I.S. when I bought a pair of Leica SL cameras. It is a heavy and robust mirrorless camera which is built to take a lot of abuse but doesn't have all the bells and whistles of other more feature laden cameras. I wondered how I would fare with a "crippled" modern camera after having shot with I.S. enabled cameras for a number of years prior.

There are several things that come to mind in using those Leica cameras and the Sigma fp. First, and especially in the case of the Leicas, the camera has a lot of mass. It's built with a selection of dense materials and most of the lenses for it are large and also have a good deal of mass. This works to provide more stability to the system than a lighter camera. A dense object at rest...etc.

When I shoot with these cameras I am mostly using lenses in the range of 24-100mm. I tend to use the old formula for dealing with camera motion and try to set a shutter speed that's twice the focal length of the lens I've chosen. This is for stopping photographer induced camera motion NOT subject motion. So, if I'm using a 50mm lens (quite likely) I try not to set a shutter speed lower than 1/100th of a second. In reality, something like 1/125th. This goes a long way toward preventing the effects of camera shake from intruding into the photograph. 

In a normal, sunny, exterior day I tend to set even higher shutter speeds since I have that option at my fingertips. I also make good use of the Auto-ISO functionality by setting a high minimum shutter speed when the lighting is good. When I ventured out last weekend I probably set the Auto-ISO shutter speed minimum to 1/320th of a second and set the camera to choose between ISO 50 and ISO 400. With my regular choice of apertures I found the camera stayed in the sweet spot of shooting around ISO 100 with shutter speed vacillating between the 1/320th and 1/1,000th. And photo lore among professional photographers (not verified...) is that at any shutter speed over 1/320th, with a normal range of lenses, renders the advantages of I.S. moot. 

On this blog site you've seen hundreds of handheld samples with tons of detail and with good sharpness. All from cameras set up as I've described it above. 

The Sigma fp is an exceptional camera with which to shoot without needing I.S. The secret is the very high performance of the imaging sensor at very high ISOs. The fp delivers files for me at ISO 12,500 or even 25,000 that look as good (noise wise) as ISO 3200 files from a Leica SL or 1600 from a Leica SL2. 

Comparing the fp with my favorite SL, and being conservative, I'd say that the fp is easily two stops cleaner (less shadow noise) than the Leica. This means I can bump up my ISO by two stops with no loss of image quality. If I opt to give those two stops to the shutter speed settings then I am essentially getting two stops more of vibration reduction in my handholding of the camera.

Looking at old files from the first decade of this century I can say that the Sigma fp is as good at ISO 12500 as my full frame Nikon D800 camera was at 800 ISO. In effect, this difference gives me four stops of implied image stabilization in comparison. And at the time the D800 was in heavy use that camera and many other popular models did not have in-body image stabilization either. 

So, vastly improved ISO performance goes a long way to substituting for in-body image stabilization.  And that's my main workaround for cameras that don't feature in-body vibration reduction. 

But let's go a little further. Most systems that aren't featuring in-body correction of photographer frailty have lenses that are stabilized. For the Sigma fp I have the option of using two different zoom lenses that  feature I.S.  The Leica 24-90 Vario-Elmarit and the Panasonic 24-105mm S lens. Both add at least three stops of stabilization to the mix. I also have the Sigma Art series 70mm Macro lens which has lens based stabilization. 

Like many others I do prefer to shoot more often with single focal length lenses than with zooms. Especially for personal work. But even there I find working with non-stabilized cameras easy. Most of the optics we tend to buy these days are highly corrected and usable at every aperture. I find myself shooting lots of stuff at f2.8 and sometimes even faster apertures. The wider apertures allow for faster shutter speeds which is an instant substitute for I.S. 

Taken altogether a camera like the Sigma fp doesn't need to apologize for a lack of sensor based I.S. In fact, I would argue that, as with the GH5S, the lack of it enables a more stable platform, delivers a product with greater reliability, and compensates when compared to other cameras, with stellar high ISO capabilities. The unmoving sensor also is the basis of the electronic only shutter so you've basically eliminated two points of mechanical complexity and that can only serve to make the camera much more reliable over time.

The one downside I can think of from the absence of the feature is the view on the LCD with longer lenses. The lowered stability of the image in the finder, multiplied/magnified by longer focal lengths, makes accurate handheld composition harder. The images get jittery.  But....my only "long" lens is the Panasonic 70-200mm f4.0 S-Pro which as its own built in stabilization. Problem solved. 

Finally, the wider you like to shoot (lens wise) the less need there is for artificial image stabilization. Select your shutter speeds wisely, practice good form and you can work miracles without that crutch. 

Finally, finally, finally. I was happy for Mike Johnston when I read he just bought the Sigma fp, lens and hood. I think he's going to have a blast with it and, in some measure, this post was written in response to the folks who critiqued his lack of editorial continuity for once proclaiming to want or need I.S. and now buying a camera in spite of image stabilization not being one of the features. The camera world constantly changes. And we are allowed also to change our personal priorities. I think Mike can do the math. If he hasn't already he will quickly discover the joys of a camera that delivers stellar ISO performance and absolutely no self-inflicted mechanical vibration. It's a game changer...not a deal-breaker.

A few more samples from the Sigma fp before moving on to something else....

All of the color images were done with the Sigma fp and the Panasonic 50mm f1.8 L mount lens.

 

Squeezing the maximum joy out of a Sigma fp when out "street shooting."

Damn good looking hat. Just so chic.

If you've read the blog for a while you probably know that I bought a Sigma fp very early in 2020 and have used it on and off since then. To date I have racked up about 14,000 frames. That doesn't seem like a lot over the course of 2.8 years but you have to take into consideration that I mostly use the Leica SL2 and a couple of SLs for my primary business cameras. They are the ones that rack up the frame counts. The Sigma is one of those eccentric "art" cameras that makes no sense to purchase but once purchased digs its hooks into you with wonderfully different looking files and its overwhelming difference from most other full frame cameras on the market. There are a number of video features that one could use to bolster a capricious and impulsive purchase but for me the singular look of it (design aesthetic), coupled with the really wonderful images it can produce are arguments enough to drop about $1500 for the cameras. If you want to get all logical about your purchase you could also mention that the sensor is one of the standout stars of high ISO performance. It's at least as good as the ones in the Lumix S5 or the Leica SL2-S in that regard. 

Over the last week my friend, Michael Johnston has been using an fp that's been modified to shoot only black and white and he's found that, much to his surprise, he loves the way the camera handles, thinks the layout of the menus makes sense and has even found peace with the big chimney finder loupe that substitutes for an EVF. A few comments left on some of his recent Sigma fp posts have criticized the handling of the camera and, of course, I disagree with that. I think it handles well. 

After reading one such comment I decided this afternoon to take the fp and one lens out with me to try and understand just what is behind the handling complaints. I seem to mould myself to most cameras pretty quickly and get along with their interfaces without much angsty-ness but today I tried to ignore my own sense of "camera comfort" and  to look through the lens as if for the first time. And at the end I have some suggestions for getting the most fun out of the camera.

I have to say that what draws me to the fp and its ecosystem is precisely what most people dislike. In its barest form it's just a brick. There's no grip. There's no practical EVF finder. And in that form it's not the most comfortable camera to hold. The AF is basic contrast detect so it's a bit slower than a camera with PDAF and won't do wondrous and heroic focus tracking. In fact, in my experience it's like a sullen teenager when asked to follow something moving through the frame. But really, it's not a camera for someone who wants a "do everything" camera that's complete and ready to go right out of the box. I am pleased by the fact that in S-AF it focuses with great accuracy and as quickly as I ever need it.

The things I like about the camera are: Its solid build. It's effective cooling system. It's use of the L mount for lenses. That its raw files are .DNG. That it has a wonderful array of image profiles. But mostly that it's a small, small brick that is uniquely customizable. I find its operation straightforward and its menus logical, although with each firmware update more and more subsets are added to the original menu; but I guess it's incumbent on us to either keep up with or to ignore the firmware updates altogether. 

If you are a hybrid shooter who dabbles in both video and still photography there are other advantages to this camera but I'm just concentrating here on using it as a still photographer's tool so I'll ignore the ability to shoot raw video, etc. 

If you are willing to use a tripod with this camera you might have a fun time experimenting with the lower ISO settings. All the settings under ISO 100 are more or less computational. You can select, in third EV increments, ISOs all the way down to 6 (six) but the way these settings work is by shooting and combining multiple frames. The camera takes full advantage of its electronic shutter in a couple ways like this. But you'll have to be comfortable on a tripod to take advantage of the things on offer. The benefit of the lower ISO settings is discernible in the areas of lower noise and increased dynamic range. Plus, they allow a photographer to use wider apertures on fast lenses without having to remember to bring along a neutral density filter. At ISO 6 it's darn easy to use something like your Noctilux lens at its most extreme aperture outside in strong light. And the files will look better than you can imagine if you've been shooting with less capable systems. 

Granted, if there's anything that moves in the frame you're pretty much out of luck....unless you can convince your friends or clients that you did that weird ass artifact thing intentionally; as art. 

When I bought the camera I had a long history of disparaging the affectation showcased by several serious photographers using the "Manny Ortiz" shooting style. Watch one of his videos on YouTube. He holds his camera vertically with one hand, far away from his face, and composes and shoots by watching the screen on the back. I think he's a pretty decent photographer but damn....that hold and that willful disregard for using the EVF on his cameras drives me a bit nuts. So as soon as I bought the fp I ordered the big chimney finder that fits on the back of the camera and makes the LCD traditionally usable as a faux EVF. But, I guess it is actually an EVF since the images shown are electronic and the loupe and screen together are a "view finder." 

Of course, just like my recent foray into retail to buy a refrigerator, the Sigma LVF-11 was backordered for months. I cobbled some Hoodman Loupes onto the camera to make do but I was very happy when the Sigma product arrived. I tried the "Manny Ortiz" viewing method before the chimney finder arrived but I felt like such a fraud when doing so. Works for Manny but it just feels wrong for a photographer of my generation. Reverse ageism rears its ugly head. 

The nice thing about the Sigma hood is that all the buttons and controls on the camera are still accessible and having the hood on the camera short circuits the ill-considered urge to use the touch screen. Yes, I mostly dislike touchscreens as well. Nose-to-screen intersections have a nasty way of changing focusing points and other stuff which slows down the process of actually taking photographs. You know.....the reason we have the cameras. 

When I went out today I tried to make the experience as efficient as possible. I decided to forgo using a strap on the camera because when I do the camera always hangs down in an odd fashion and looks and feels clumsy. Instead I used a small Osprey bag that I've recruited into service as a small camera bag. I lengthened the strap so I could use the seemingly popular, "across the chest" method of carrying it. Into the bag I tossed, in the main, central pocket, the camera festooned with the big finder and a small, 90mm f2.8 Sigma lens. The Contemporary i-Series. 

A quick aside about the lens. It's magnificent. Super sharp. Contrasty. And it's all these things while wide open. Stop it down and it's on par with the Leica 90mm f2.0 APO Summicron I borrowed. And it's small, lightweight and .... small. The one thing is does which the Leica lens doesn't is vignetting when shot wide open and at f4.0. It's optical and not mechanical so it's easily remedied in post processing but I thought to mention it in case someone does the same comparison and would be aghast at my lack of thoroughness. 

That lens, or the 24mm f3.5 or the 45mm f2.8 Sigmas are all wonderful lenses and all of them are small and light. They are, to my mind, the perfect companions for the diminutive fp body and help to offset the added bulk of the LVF-11 hood. 

Here's how to squeeze some joy from this camera:

Buy and use the LVF-11 hood. Putting the hood on the camera turns it into an eye-level camera and that's something most of us are familiar with and happy to shoot with. The rear screen on the camera is bright, sharp and about 2 megapixels of resolution which, when spread across 3+ inches and magnified by the loupe gives you a great image on which to focus and compose. It's a really nice look. And immersive. 

Use a small and light shoulder bag instead of a strap. I like to be ready to shoot at a moment's notice so I didn't keep the camera in the bag. Instead I held it in my right hand for almost all of my walk. With the small 90mm lens on it the weight isn't a burden. Get a wrist strap if you must. After two hours of walking and camera use no cramping or pain ensued. The shoulder bag is for times when you know you won't be using the camera and want to give yourself a break. Or when you go into your favorite coffee shop and need hands free to order and hold your magic liquid of supreme happiness. During that process the camera can ride along comfortably until you are ready to re-engage with photography and disengage from coffee swilling. 

The bag is also useful for carrying extra batteries, one's wallet and phone, a big, wicked Kabar lock-blade pocket knife, some hand sanitizer, an extra face mask and a copy of that book of Wallace Stevens poetry you've been promising yourself you'd read....

I recently decided I would like using a small shoulder bag when I got caught out in our first big, long rain of the year and I was at the furthest point of my walk from the safely and waterproof comfort of my car. On that day I made due with a trusty bucket hat as a protective shield for my camera and lens but now...the bag has resurfaced as a practical precaution. 

On the fp it's important for you to discover or remember that you've got to customize the camera for your own hands. It's really important. Early on I tried to make do with the Smallrig video cage that's made for the camera but it was too unwieldy and made access to the top plate switches difficult. I eventually bought the Sigma combined hand grip and bottom plate and loved the accessory. The Sigma HG-21 is about $100. Just 1/3 the price of a single Leica SL2 battery... And it makes the fp a pleasure to hold and to shoot.

When I shoot on the street I like to use the camera in aperture priority and with auto-ISO. In this set up the aperture is set on the lens while the exposure compensation is set with the rear dial on the camera. Easy to remember and easy as pie to use. If you are shooting with a manual focus lens and you'd like focus magnification all you have to do is push the button that's right in the middle of the rear dial. It stays in magnification mode until you press the button again. You can couple that with focus peaking if you'd like. 

It's as straight forward as using an old film camera once you've set it up the way you'd like it. Now you just bring the camera up to your eye, press the shutter button half way down to wake the camera from its power saving mode, half press the shutter button to enable focusing and then push all the way down to take the photo. Pretty darn easy. Need to make the image lighter or darker? The rear dial is your friend. 

There's a quick menu with a dedicated button on the back of the camera for rapid modifications to the system. And if you want to dive in and take advantage of all the Jpeg functionality (highlight and shadow curve modifications, HDR, slower ISOs, etc.) you have also have lots of controls in the menu. 

The way I use the camera is almost like a point and shoot camera but the files are leagues better. 

There are one or two downsides to the camera. It always uses an electronic shutter. There is no mechanical shutter. This means that working with electronic flash is just pretty much off the table. Unless you want to work at 1/30th of a second and longer sync times with Jpeg files or 1/15th of a second with .DNG files. You might also encounter rolling shutter (jello wobble) if you pan the camera aggressively while shooting. But really, this is a different camera than one of the more pedestrian "do everything" cameras. If you need to use flash a lot you should think of this camera as your non-flash camera and alternately buy and use a more traditional, flash friendly system for those times when the limitations of this camera get in the way. 

For a person who wants to use all kinds of features and only wants one single, solitary, lonely, isolated, Swiss Army Knife camera for all time, this is not the one to choose. But if you crave a different approach from most other photographers and can swing this camera as a secondary camera it's pretty wonderful. I guess the best case scenario would be for someone who already owns and uses a more full featured L mount system camera like a Leica SL(x) or Panasonic S1 series, or S5 camera. The fp might make sense; or at least assuage your need for some diversity in your tool kit by adding it as a secondary or back up unit. 

The only other caveat that affects me about the fp is the battery life. It's fine. But not fine enough. I want a battery that lasts for at least half a day. When I shoot with the fp I carry a couple of extras. And that's fine. They are pretty small and light themselves. A bonus is that generics are available for about $20 each while a very good Sigma branded battery can be had for around $40 each. A bargain. 

The camera, even with the hood attached is smaller than it looks in most photographs. Sigma should have more images on their website of people actually holding the camera to give a better indication of its actual size. And while numbers are okay I understand it better if someone tells me: "This camera with a small lens weighs less than half of what your SL2 does without any lens at all on it..." 

Buy the camera. Don't buy the camera. But resist buying into the inaccurate orthodoxy that it is somehow awkward or difficult to use for daily shooting, street shooting or video creation. It's not. It's like most other well designed cameras --- you have to use it for a couple of days or weeks to train your hands and their muscle memory to a new camera configuration. Once you do that it makes conventional photography with the fp as easy as swimming a slow 50 yard freestyle. Here are some photos from the hour or so I took out of the day to do some walking and photographing. I'd say my camera was different than all of the other cameras out on the main street today but mine was the only ONLY real camera out there. The other choices were phone cam or none. Sad times for photography. Happy times for a Sigma fp user. 

yummy diagonals.

handles reds beautifully and look at all the detail in the cloth around the neckline.

Sharpness galore.

The Michael Johnston Effect...

Verticals and horizontals equally easy.

f2.8. Background tree bokeh syndrome.

How good is the high ISO in this camera/

This photograph was taken in a dark living room 

at ISO 10,000.  I'm still looking for the noise.....

Nice Birks   

A nice plus for using higher resolution cameras for work. Counter-intuitive but...more control over depth of field. And....refrigeration.

 This cutting edge electric motor is about two feet in diameter. We were out on a factory location and the client asked me to take a really great, impromptu product shot of a newly assembled motor. It's the kind of shot that wants to be sharp from front to back and, as you probably know, there are a number of ways to achieve this. If you have the time and control, as in a studio setting, you could certainly try in-camera focus stacking but I've always found that some problematic artifacts show up and take a long time to fix in post. I've never had luck doing discrete products against white with in-camera stacking. I'm also no a big fan of stacking in post with add-on software. I know it works well with some programs but when you are on location with and art director and client in tow, and stack of things to photograph during one visit, there is a certain satisfaction in getting as good a file as possible, in one shot, to share with them and get quick approvals on. Explaining how things might work in post sucks. It falls into the same category as trying to explain why V-Log files are flat and desaturated in video but why they might look great once they've been color graded...

If we agree that most files are fine, usable and industry standard at 24 megapixels we can use that as a final delivery target for product shots. When I need more depth of field my in the field solution is to go to the edges of what I think a lens will handle before pernicious diffraction takes hold (small apertures) and then back out away from the object until I can see that I've achieved focus at both the near and far points of the product. Shooting with a 47 megapixel camera I can give up about 50% of the frame data and still have enough detail and resolution for a full 24 megapixel final file. Done this way there is no heroic post-processing needed and I can zoom in and show clients on the spot just how the final image will look. 

To my mind this is a better solution for fast moving work than most others. Were I shooting product in the studio where we have much more control, and we are trying to make the ne plus ultra of final, single shots I'm sure a multi-frame stacking process might add some pizzazz to the final product. But in the middle of a production, factory floor, using portable flashes and some white foam core as a background I think my all in one shot solution is more efficient. 

For this example I was using the Leica SL2 and the Leica 24-90mm Vario-Elmarit zoom lens. I'm okay with using that zoom at medium focal lengths all the way out to f11.5. The files can be sharpened up well in post. I'll even stretch to f16 is needed. But the real secret is backing away from the product so it's smaller in the frame and that gives you more depth of field from front to back. 

Just thinking about that this morning instead of:

My 16 year old Kitchenaid refrigerator dying in the kitchen. 

The carpenter repairing some water damage on one of our french doors to the outside.

The supply chain issues that are keeping me from getting the perfect refrigerator right now; today. 

And the return of heat and enhanced humidity after our brief brush with that rare thing called rain. 

Heading out to look at new fridges once the carpenter finishes up. Then to negotiate, hard, for "enhanced" delivery. 

I know all you tough, highly independent types will suggest I just hunt down the right fridge and strap it to the roof of my car, then get the wife to help me haul it in and set it up. That's not going to happen....

But damn. In the old days you'd pick one out and arrange for delivery the same afternoon. It would get installed and you'd have your coffee ice cream chilling out 24 hours later. Not in these times. Not by a long shot.

My final version of Jaston in black and white. And a color file to compare with.

 

I've been working on dialing in my skills at converting from files shot in Raw/Color to black and white images that work well in print and online. I photographed Jaston for this image originally as a color file. I brought it into Photoshop and corrected all the stuff I wanted to "fix" while in the color space. They I used the black and white sub-menu in the adjustments menu to convert the image to black and white. Since the final use of the image will be a very large wall print at a University alumni center I decided to try the "zoom" control in Adobe PhotoShop's "Neural Filters" panel.

You can enlarge the image with "zoom" while letting the "AI" program calculate new detail, sharpness and noise reduction. I was able to take a cropped 47.5 megapixel image and res it up to about 9200 pixels on the long side. The original crop was to about 6000 pixel so it's a bit more than a 50% linear increase.

I thought it worked really well. 

Someone at the school had the idea to do a very stylized version of the images on this "wall of fame" and I got called in by the artist to try and work within their style but to also get an image that was closer to his idea of what his image should look like. 

Here's a sample of one version that we might send along. The other choice is to send the image as above (no texture or color treatment) and let them apply their post processing changes to the image to match the other works. 

I will say that the SL2 and the Sigma 90mm f2.8 are a very nice combination for all manner of portrait work. And, I hope this series puts to bed the rumor that I am only capable of making nice portraits of beautiful young women... 

Original color sample below:

Nostalgia. Not all it's cracked up to be. Looking at the Canon FTb QL.

A shutter noise like the pounding of metal garbage can lids and minor explosions.

I had such great memories about my early film days in general and the Canon cameras I used in particular. At the time the cameras seemed almost magical. Robust, quick to operate and satisfying to have in one's hands. Then came all the ensuing years of AF film SLRs which atrophied many peoples' abilities to manual focus lenses at all. After that came digital cameras with quieter shutters, endless potential frames, instant feedback, higher sharpness and ample resolution. But I never thought about those progressive changes until I confronted them last week. My nostalgia got head-butted by reality. 

I'd ordered an inexpensive 1970's era, manual SLR mostly just to get the lens that came bundled with it. I like the lens a lot. It's a Canon 50mm f1.4 FD lens and it's tons of fun to shoot with. The colors and tonalities of the files it creates are different from contemporary lenses and fuel a healthy nostalgia for one version of how images looked back in earlier times. With a good adapter the lens becomes more or less transparent to use. Almost.

But not so with the camera body. Oh...I've forgotten so much.

The FTb QL was a very popular SLR for Canon. It was the step-up camera from the very, very rudimentary Canon TX. While the TX topped out at 1/500th of a second the shutter in the FTb soared all the way up to 1/1000th of a second. The model I just received was the second version of the FTb which had a badge on the front reading, "QL." That stood for quick load. It has a mechanism that allowed one to put the film leader over a sprocket and then a spring loaded plate came down to hold the film in place while the back of the camera was closed. On the TX you have to finagle the end of the film into a slot, hold the film with one finger while you wound a bit on and gingerly closed the back, then said a little prayer to the camera gods asking that the film would not slip out of the slot and fail to go through the camera. A failing you generally discovered when you started wondering if Kodak had really started to put 50 or 60 exposures on a roll instead of the usual 36.... The QL function saved a lot of newbies a lot of embarrassment and ego-shattering failure...at least when it came to getting the film installed. 

The FTb, like most bigger cameras of the time, was built like an absolute tank. Not a Russian tank, the pentaprisms don't tend to fly off,  but more like one of those really cool Swedish tanks. Solid metal everywhere and all the weight that goes with it. 

I would call all of these earlier cameras semi-automatic because, with a matched, branded lens you could actually meter an exposure. And the exposure was pretty much in the ball park ... if you aimed it at the right target. In my mind, at least back then, a fully manual camera was something like a Leica M4 or M3, or a non-metered prism Nikon F. You had to figure out your exposures on your own with one of those non-metered bodies. With the FTb you could set the ASA (now ISO), watch a needle move in the finder and try to match up the needle with a lollipop/indicator that was hooked up to the aperture to that needle. If everything lined up you were probably going to get somewhere in the ballpark with your film shots. 

These old cameras charge the shutter when you use the film wind lever to move the film to the next frame. In fact, when you wind on to the next frame a whole series of things happen. The shutter curtain returns to its ready position, the mirror spring is tensioned and the camera waits breathlessly for your next move. 

And you can do all these things for days, months and years without ever needing a battery. No need to plug in a USB 3 cable. No auxiliary battery pack needed. In fact, the only thing the small, mercury battery ever did was to make the meter work. That's it. And now, since mercury batteries were outlawed in most countries about 40 years ago you'll need to find a silver oxide replacement and recalibrate your metering system for the camera. It's easier just to either memorize the most useful, general exposures for the film you like best or to buy and learn to use an external light meter. 

I thought for a while (a day or two) that I'd enjoy buying a dozen rolls of film and trying my hand at the craft as I had practiced it in my youth. I checked on the price of Tri-X film and almost fell off my chair. It's between $12 and $14 a roll, depending on the snootiness of your retailer, and that doesn't include processing or printing. Here in Austin, done right, I'd have to drop about $25 just to buy, process and contact print one roll of film. To revisit the darkroom I ended up working in would mean re-buying a Leica V35 enlarger, sodium vapor safelights, a couple thousand dollars worth of plumbing, etc. I started to realize the folly of even thinking about it especially since I'm very happy making black and white images with my digital cameras, along with a little nudge from Lightroom.

But the final blow to my own nostalgia came when I operated the film wind lever, pulled the camera up to my eye, tried to frame something through the dark and dingy viewfinderfinder and then, with much anticipation, fired off the shutter. I had completely forgotten just how loud, how harsh and how kinetic those old cameras were in actual use. There's no way I'd put up with that now. In fact, I should probably go and have my hearing checked after having clicked off the shutter ten or twenty times in a short session of cameras induced time travel. 

It reminded me that doctors in the 1970s were still working with re-useable syringe needles back then. Cars belched smoke with abandon and without the benefit of catalytic converters, people smoked in airplanes and hospitals, and railed against having to use seatbelts in their automobiles. I'll now add loud, busy cameras to that list. 

It was fun back then because I didn't know any better but from my perch here in the future I can only feel pity for the photographers of that age. Who, of course, were busy pitying those older photographers carrying around Graflex cameras and flashbulbs, and those few were just glad not to be coating their own plates. And those plate coaters were happy not to stand over a steaming mercury bath to finish out their work. And accelerate their mortality...

Be careful what you wish for...you might get it. It might be attached to that cool lens you thought you wanted it. Almost sounds like the lyrics in "For the Roses" by Elvis Costello...

So there is my modern day assessment of the Canon FTb and its ilk. Take it with a grain of salt.

Wrapping my brain around just how cool I thought 1/1,000th of a second on 

a shutter speed dial seemed back in the middle of the 1970s. 

A massive move forward. The quick load mechanism.

And in several places on the camera are little signs instructing the user in how to

take advantage of these modern engineering breakthroughs. 

Anybody need a decent FTb body? Let me know....

 

Variation on Jaston #3.

 

Jaston Williams. In Studio. August 2022.

Variation on Jaston #2.

Jaston Williams. In Studio. August 2022.

 

Variation on Jaston.

 

Jaston Williams. In studio. August 2022.

Another morning in paradise. A walk to the bank.

Some mornings the light looks delicious. When I have checks to deposit at my bank, and I have the time to forgo electronic banking, I like to park on the edge of our downtown and walk to the center where my bank has their offices. It's old fashioned but I like handing my deposit slip across the counter to a teller, discuss the weather and get a receipt. It's another excuse to walk instead of doing things the easy way. 

It was warm and as humid as ever this morning. But the light was really sweet. Not too intense but not gloomy either. I photographed a few little scenes until I got to the spot above and then I realized that I really liked the giant chimney in the foreground and the cloudy speckled sky in the background so I stopped and comped up a shot. As I was started to shoot a woman walked through the small patch of sunlight that was illuminating a small part of a wall. It was just right. 

I liked the square of light just in the right spot so I walked closer and tried a few variations. I liked all of them. It only takes a day or two of rain in Austin for all the green to stand up straighter and look refreshed. The clouds were right out of "landscape photograph central casting." 

I traveled light today. No big camera and no big lens. Just a diminutive Leica CL and the quirky looking TTArtisan 17mm lens. After walking around with bigger, heavier cameras I was barely cognizant of the CL's presence. But I like the way it renders photographs. It can be really nice. 

I moved on after I got a decent vertical, got coffee at a newly opened coffee shop and then wended my way back home to answer some e-mails and also to send a folder of theater images to a creative director in Switzerland. I was in such a good mood by the time I wrapped up my morning chores that I bought a new pair of my favorite Summer pants on REI.com. They were on sale. How could I resist? 

MJ is playing with a monochrome version of the Sigma fp over at theonlinephotographer and I'm very interested to see how he likes the camera and the 45mm lens he's using. I never thought about it before but it might be the perfect black and white camera. Mods or not. Worth taking a look at...