I think my favorite skill for portraiture is to slow down and connect with my subject in some way that transcends the process of photographing.

 

©Kirk Tuck, All Rights Reserved.

Nifty Fifty lens and the Leica SL camera. A good match. Nice color/create black and whites.

 

My only hesitation with the Leica 24-90mm Vario Elmarit solved.

Love the 24-90mm lens. It's a perfect range of focal lengths and it would be hard to fault the optical performance. I use the lens a lot and over the course of owning it for a year my only complaint has been the issues caused by the weight of the lens when using it on a tripod in a "portrait" orientation. I can screw down the tripod screw like gang-busters and from time to time still get the dreaded droop. The weight of the lens and camera cause the assemblage to twist downward. Gravity is a bitch. 

I was thinking about this recently and thought how great it would be if someone made a product specifically for my Leica lens that gave me a traditional lens/tripod collar. At the end of a fun day of photography I was uploading files to Lightroom and I plugged in a search on B&H Photo's website. And there it was. A Novoflex tripod collar for "selected" Leica SL lenses. Two lenses fit the bill; the 24/90 and the 90/280. I hit the "buy" button with enthusiasm. I hoped it would be a good purchase. Especially since I have portrait shoots booked for both this week and next. 

It arrived this morning at 11:48. The product is spare, minimal and works perfectly with my lens of choice. I've been playing with it for a while and it changes the way I can work with the lens on a tripod. I know a lot of people who like to handhold their lenses when they make portraits but I'm more comfortable letting the tripod to the hard work. And, unlike a lot of my peers, I prefer to use continuous light sources instead of flash so the ability to comfortably use a tripod vectors into my working style. 

From a theoretical angle I like the "idea" that we're taking weight off the lens mount at the camera and also at the lens. Even though I am sure both are designed to handle the weight I'm of the opinion that the further we stay from the edges of an operational envelope the longer the gear will stay in tolerance. I am now officially smitten with the new accessory and the potential it opens up for me with the lens.

It's been a busy Sunday. I delivered the Canon FTb film camera with a 50mm lens to one of my young swim coaches this morning. He asked me what I do for a living one morning at practice and when he found out that I'm a photographer he told me about his desire to work with an actual film camera. He was born in 1999, into the age of "full digital" so it's all new and interesting to him. I needed someone to hand off the camera and lens to and he just happened to speak up at the right time. A welcome reduction of inventory for me and a no cost introduction to film for him. 

I left the pool and headed over to the Clarksville neighborhood to have coffee with my friend and former assistant and video partner, Chris. He sold his house here in Austin for more money than he ever dreamed possible and he and his wife are moving to the Pacific NW. I'll miss Chris. He was an inventive artist and ready to take deep dives into whatever interested him. We worked on still photography projects together and he partnered with me on several successful video projects for restaurants. I even used him as talent once.

He forgot to pack one thing for the move out of town and so he left it in my care. I now have his O'Connor Ultimate 1030D  cinema tripod and fluid head here in my office. Should be fun to play with for a while. It's a beast. 

 

International Self Portrait with a Camera in the Frame Day.

 

Darn contrast detect AF. I was just trying to get that lens in focus...

Attempted photo with a (tentatively) Michael Johnston approved Sigma fp camera and a Panasonic 50mm f1.8 lens. 

Having fun in two ways. First, using the old Canon 50mm f1.4 at f11 and secondly, playing around with file conversions to black and white.

 

I found a much wanted accessory today. I hope it arrives before my next studio portrait shoot.

 

The Leica 24-90mm f2.8-4.0 Vario Elmarit zoom lens (what a mouthful!) is a wild compromise for most photographers; myself included. For nearly a year and a half it was the only zoom and one of the only lenses of any kind that were available for the fledgling SL camera (model 601). Photographers who wanted a high performing, Leica zoom lens for that first mirrorless, full frame Leica camera didn't have any other choices. 

The lens is very large relative to competitive products. It's quite heavy. It has a variable maximum aperture and it currently costs just under $5800 US dollars. When it comes to what we might call "standard" zoom lenses it's by far the most expensive. 

So, with all these factors mitigating against its adoption by photographers why does it continue to sell? Why do photographers continue to select it for projects? What the heck are these people thinking?

Speaking for myself I bought the lens because I tested one and found it to be sharper and higher performing than any other zoom lens I'd ever shot. It's sharp and contrasty when used wide open. It adds about three stops of vibration reduction with it's in-lens I.S. It's very color neutral. It's capable, when used with the right imaging sensor, of unbeatable color discrimination and it has no real optical shortcomings. At least none that have become apparent to me. Plus, it's right in the sweet spot of the focal length range I use all the time in my work. Both commercial and personal. 

The only time I really want a longer focal length than 90mm is when I'm photographing live theater productions and the 70-200mm Panasonic S-Pro handles that really well (and it's an "L" native lens).

When I use the 24-90mm I'm constantly impressed by what it delivers in terms of imaging. 

But there has been one leg of compromise that sometimes causes me to reject the Leica zoom and default to a much lighter lens. It's the weight. When you mount a camera with this lens on a tripod and put the system into a vertical orientation the whole construction starts to droop down. The weight causes the camera to twist on the tripod head platform. Even with my stoutest tripod head it's a problem. And since I like doing formal portraits in the vertical orientation it's frustrates me.  Plus, from an industrial engineering point of view I'd love to take most of that front heavy weight off the lens mounts; both on the camera and on the lens.

I love the convenience of a zoom for flexible framing on the fly but I want the lens and camera to continue pointing where I want them to point. Ending up pointing at the floor is not...okay. 

I've pretty much relegated the lens to handheld work or landscape-oriented work on a tripod and have defaulted to using small primes like the Sigma 90mm f2.8 for portraits that needed to be in "portrait" mode. And that defeats the purpose, for me, of having such a high performing zoom lens. I've often wished that Leica would make a tripod collar for this lens like the one they have on their even bigger and even more expensive 90-280mm Apo zoom lens. But they don't. 

Happily a friend from Switzerland who also shoots with the same combination of cameras and lenses  emailed to see if I was aware of a product from Novoflex. A tripod collar for the two venerable Leica zooms. Since the 90-280 is already equipped with one it seems pretty obvious to me that this product was intended mostly for the 24-90mm. I presumed the product would be too niche for Amazon.com but the folks at B&H had one in stock and it's coming my way shortly. It's pricy at $235 but if it works as advertised (and I have assurances from my friend that it does....) it will be worth every cent for me. I'll be reviewing the tripod collar after I use it on an assignment to photograph two attorneys at their offices next week. 

My advice to Leica: If you plan to do a 24-90mm type II (an update) consider incorporating a removable tripod collar into the design. Just about everyone who buys the lens from you will appreciate it. And we'll get a lot more use out of our investment as well. 

There is a tripod collar on the longer Panasonic zoom and it works great. I love having it there. I'm thinking that any lens that weighs more than two pounds needs one. 

Studio Light. Black and white. 135mm Zeiss lens on Contax RTSIII. Copied from a print.

©Kirk Tuck. 

I'm restarting an old project. I'm approaching well known people in Austin with the intention of making black and white portraits of them. The short term goal is to do a continuing show of the images on a dedicated website but the longer term intention is to produce a show of prints for one of the two photo-oriented galleries here in Austin that I like. We'll see how it goes. It's helpful to write out an intention because there seems to be more momentum behind a project that way. More stick-to-it-tiveness.

My first subject will likely be our former state senator, Kirk Watson. I have known him for decades and he's a fun and interesting character. It might be fun to compare a comtemporary image with the portrait I did of him at his law offices many, many years ago. Back then I photographed on color transparency film using a Hasselblad camera and a 150mm lens. This time around the portrait will probably be done with a Leica SL2 and the 24-90mm zoom. 

Incidentally, Kirk Watson is running a campaign to be mayor of Austin. It would be a reprise of his successful stewardship of the city back in the 1990s. 

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.