Post #6000. That's a lot of typing. And photographing. But here we go again...

A relic of the 1990s. When station wagons were BIG!!!

First let's talk about something current. How about yesterday's introduction of the GFX Fuji RF 100? I'm not a beta tester so I haven't had one in my hands but I've experienced (first hand) several models from the X100 line, including the first one and the second to the current one, and I've owned a GFX 50Sii and a couple of the Fuji lenses for that "medium format" system. I never fell in love with either of them. The small camera was too light, too menu conflicted and, in the end, too fidgety to deliver a confident, long term use as a daily driver camera. The big camera felt plasticky and fragile. It shut down if it got hotter outside than pool water. The lenses were huge and added profound weight to an underweight body --- which would seem to make sense until you think about the concept of balance. And again, I would circle back to...plasticky. If the stars all lined up right you could take some pretty great photographs with the camera but nothing you really couldn't do just as well with a 47 megapixel SL2. And the difference in handling between the two was so huge that, if you switched back and forth between the two cameras you'd decide pretty quickly that "medium format" was still a work in progress.

Why do I keep writing "medium format" in quotation marks? Hmmm. Could it be that it's because it's not the medium format sensor size we were hoping to have from the get go? Most film-based medium format photographers remember the format with great nostalgia because the "sensor" (film size) was generally 6x6cm up to 6x9cm with a few photographers making do with 6x4.5cm cameras. All of the formats were profoundly bigger than 35mm and much bigger than the 44x33mm sensors in all the Fuji medium format cameras as well as in the Hasselblad X2D. It's just not the same thing. It's not the same look. It's a compromise between 35mm and the larger formats. And I understand the reasoning; a full size sensor based on film formats would be too expensive for a consumer camera. The makers couldn't price the cameras low enough to sell. And the lenses to cover the bigger formats would also be much bigger and much more expensive. They'd also be slow to focus and have small maximum apertures...

Not my cup of tea. Especially not for real money.

But let's focus on the new GFX RF 100 in particular. Here you have a smaller, lighter, fixed lens "medium format" camera which lacks many of the features that people moving up from 35mm format digital cameras have become used to. These include very high top shutter speeds (1/16,000th?), no in-body or in-lens image stabilization, no hybrid, faux rangefinder optical finder (as in all of the X100 Pro and X-Pro, X-Pro2 and X-Pro3 cameras, no fast shooting rates, and it's all assembled into a lightweight package with one fixed, 28mm equivalent lens. Oh, and the 28mm lens is an f4.0. Wanna know the difference between "mini-medium format" and 35mm formats? It's the difference between a 28mm lens and a 35mm lens. That's about it.

All of a sudden many people on the internet are gushing about a "brand new feature" on the new Fuji that's setting the photography world on fire. It's the ability to turn a physical dial on the camera and change between different aspect ratios. You can select 3:2, 1:1, 4:3, 16:9 etc. Does this sound familiar? It should. It's been on mirrorless cameras from many camera makers since the dawn of mirrorless. Really? You had no idea?  Here, read this article on Michael Johnston's TheOnlinePhotographer from twelve years ago. Yes!!! Twelve years ago: https://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2012/01/kirk-4.html

I wrote it. It's all about ..... giving us back the freedom to choose aspect ratios. My five year old Leica SL2 gives you six different aspect ratio choices. The Sigma fp? How about all six aspect ratios that the Leica SL2 offers plus an ultra-wide format. In fact, if you want nearly the same resolution in a much smaller package than the "MF" Fuji you could look at a Sigma fpL packaged with a Thypoch 28mm f1.4 and the EVF finder for the Sigma, and for a thousand dollars less you might have a more manageable, flexible camera.

So, obviously, I'm not running down to the corner camera store to plop down my $5,000 and take delivery of what is, basically, a snapshot camera with a huge resolution number. But there must be some good features of the Fuji; right? Sure... It's smaller and lighter than interchangeable lens "medium format" cameras so, if you are traveling or need to go light it can be a good option. It has a leaf shutter instead of a focal plain shutter -- or complete dependance on an electronic shutter -- so in theory you can use it with a flash up to 1/4,000th of a second. Nice for syncing in bright light. But, so much bright light syncing is done in service of portrait and fashion photography and, as old fashioned as this may sound, a 28mm lens is NOT the optimal focal length for that kind of work.

In practice I think the camera will have the Leica Q3 as its biggest, most direct competition. Both have a fixed lens with about the same coverage/angle of view. Both have enormous resolution. Both are an all in one solution that eliminates the pain of choice (if it is to be your only camera...). Both are smaller than their brand's mainstream, interchangeable lens cameras. Both use EVFs as a primary, eye level finder. And the Fuji one ups the Leica by delivering two memory card slots. But is then let down by having no image stabilization. Neither camera is a wonderful selection if you like creative depth of field control as the lenses are short and, in the case of the Fuji, quite slow. Then there is pricing. The Q3 is currently priced around $6300 USD. The Fuji is around $5,000. Neither is optimal as an "only" camera unless you never work professionally and just love the wide angle look.

But to be fair, both cameras are set up with selectable frame sizes. If you want a tighter shot with either camera you can turn a dial or, in the case of the Leica, push a function button, and crop into the frame to get a 35, 50, 75, 90, etc. frame. Sure, it's a just a crop of the sensor but about 95% of us are not adept at visualizing a future crop without frame lines to help us. The other five percent love to say that they just imagine the final image parameters and crop after the fact, no doubt using the Excel spreadsheet implanted in their frontal lobes, but I don't really believe them. I think they just don't care...  :-)   I know I appreciate the guidance of frame lines in the finder to help me visualize the end result --- and I'm sure  you do too. 

I guess, as a travel camera either of these would work well, if you are willing to use the in-camera cropping feature when you need tighter frames. Chris Nichols mentioned in his review that one of the aspect ratios you can find in the Fuji is a vertical one added gratuitously for content creators who love vertical videos. You can select the vertical aspect ratio and still use your camera in a horizontal orientation but Chris suggested that if you use the same aspect ratio available in a horizontal orientation and then turn your camera sideways you get a much more detailed file.... you are using much more of the frame...

Both cameras can do video. Neither camera is a delight for video.

So, would I rush out and buy the new Fuji? Nope, not right now. I'd wait until a legion of influenced buyers snap them up and then finally come to grips with the limitations of a single, fixed lens camera with no I.S. and a slow lens and subsequently dump the cameras onto the used market. When the prices drop under $3,000 I might grab one. Can't happen? The much better spec'd GFX 50Sii was on the market for less than a year before the bottom fell out of the pricing. Want a used one now? Bring $2,000 to the table and you can nab a mint one.... 

Silly enough, but the issue for me in adding one to my current collection of work cameras (SL2s and such) would be the confusion of having to go back and forth between a logical and clean menu and a more ... challenging one. And then there is the whole issue of... "how many battery types do you want to buy and maintain". 

yeah. The sound of medium format snapshot cameras sounds great at first but does it make a lot of sense for you? If you are a careful landscape shooter don't you want more control over focal lengths? Sure you can crop but the inherent benefit of this camera is its huge resolution. You start to lose that when you crop. Sure, it's smaller and lighter than any of the interchangeable lens, mini-MF cameras but you also lose features. In the end it's a personal choice. If you have the money it's probably a fun experiment. If you are doing fun photography on a budget there are some many more effective ways to spend money --- or to save money. 

Finally, I remember all the guys who had Fuji film rangefinder MF cameras back in the day. I had the 670. It was a 6x7cm camera. Took about ten frames on a roll of 120 film. I thought it was going to be the catalyst to make me a star photographer. The fixed lens on that camera was just so limiting. I quickly sold it onward to someone else and I never returned to try their 6x9 or 6x4.5cm rangefinder (true rangefinder) film cameras. I suggest, at least for myself, that it will be the same story here. 

All of this spirited writing is no doubt moot. If past performance is anticipatory of Fuji's future delivery schedule most of us won't be able to get our hands on this camera for at least a year. Maybe more. And by then I'm certain some other shiny photography product will have captured our attention. Look! Squirrel!!!

Cameras, in general, as health tools... You know I like cameras and you know I like walking. I find that having a camera over my shoulder gives me permission to go all over the place, take time to explore new stuff and meet new people. Walking is super beneficial to one's overall health. Walking enhances balance which helps to prevent falls in older photographers. And other people. Spending a good part of the day focusing out past the distance between your glasses and you computer screen is actually very beneficial to your eye health and causes the muscles that move your eyeballs around to get more exercise. Ditto bright light and the action of your irises. Focusing at lots of different distances is also better for your eye health. 

Walking is load bearing exercise which slows down bone loss and muscle loss. Daily walkers have more regular gastrointestinal "throughput" which is correlated to less inflammation and an assortment of bad lower G.I. diseases. Regular walking promotes regularity...  People who walk every day, for longer distances, have healthier cardiovascular systems. All these things are good. Especially when you consider that walking, for the most part, is absolutely free. People at any economic demographic can walk to their heart's content. No tax on walking. 

But most of us seem to need a reason, other than self-preservation and imputed good looks, to lace up the shoes and get out the door. Americans especially so. We've had the work ethic so thoroughly pounded into our psyches that walking for no "good reason" (profit, advancement, promotion) seems wasteful or too indulgent. You could spend that time chained to your desk working on that report for the next quarter. Or clicking in to a Zoom call to hear your boss drone on and on while enjoying the sound of his or her own voice. Nope, walking isn't necessarily immediately goal oriented. And few, if any people will pay you to do it. That's where the camera comes in. 

If I walk without a camera I think I should have a destination in mind and a reason for going there. If I put a camera over my shoulder I am somewhat convinced that my walk will encourage my creativity, sharpen my photographer's eye, and may even yield images that I can show off to potential clients. At worst I'll use the images to get "likes" on Instagram. I can convince myself that a new lenses needs to be tested "in the field" before I can use it for work. There's a walk. 

I can consider that my ambling around photographing old and new buildings is a process of preserving the "story of Austin" in my own small way. It's all fun and games. Which I would not be having if I spent the same time watching "Severance" or televised sports. 

Today I walked our usual three mile loop through the hills with "wonderful spouse." I don't take a camera on our early morning walks because I have something else to help rationalize my walk. Relationship happiness. Plus, I think my neighbors would be suspicious if I stopped to photograph their houses. It's that kind of neighborhood. Someone might try to run me over with their Bentley. But since I didn't take a camera on that walk I conspired to take a walk in the afternoon so my favorite camera of the day would get some strap time.

I love my M240 cameras. They are slow to use. The lack of an adjustable diopter vexes me. The wide angle frame lines in the camera are fraught with frustration peril --- and yet, the camera is fun. It's the added friction that makes it fun. An easy to use camera? What's the fun in that? I have AF cameras for work but it's the slow paced imaging that I enjoy as a hobby. 

So, today, I went in a different direction than yesterday's controlled studio shoot. No AF. No eye and face AF. No perfect live view. Just a crusty rangefinder camera and a relatively cheap Voigtlander 35mm f1.4. A Zeiss bright line finder in the hotshoe. No extra baggage. 

Lately I've been wearing my single camera on a tan leather neck strap (a super cheap Small Rig strap - no adjustments) and instead of trying to conceal it under my arm, or around on my back, or in a small bag I've been wearing it front and center. It's hanging right down under my sternum like a 1970's tourist's camera. In fact, I've copped the persona of being a "tourist in my own town." I figure that there's no sense in pretending that I can snipe away with a 35mm lens and no one will notice me stopping, framing and focusing from time to time if I can just hide the camera for the other 95% of the time. Silly. 

Nope. I wear the camera front and center and signal my intention to everyone around me that I'm a tourist, I am fascinated with this new and different city and I'm spending my tourist time walking around documenting my trip for posterity and that slide show I'll be giving back home. No hiding. No physical obfuscation. No ninja action. 

Most people totally ignore me and my camera. They just aren't interested in photography anymore. I could be sad about the sunsetting of our chosen artistic pursuit but I'm really not. We have become more special and more rare than ever before. No one notices us. If they do it's out of politeness. Today I stopped to photograph a fun store front. People stopped on either side of me, on the sidewalk, patiently waiting until I took my photograph. Not wanting to walk in front of the camera and "spoil my shot." 

I always smile and thank them for their courtesy. It's actually nice of them to be aware and helpful. Though many times I would love for them to walk through my photograph so I could include them. The old days of other old guys walking up and wanting to talk about cameras are gone. But there are younger guys who are still interested. 

This afternoon I had just walked through the shady covered passageway between a mostly outdoor restaurant and a tony hotel. I stopped to photograph a mannequin wearing sunglasses and a sun dress. I moved on into the sunshine when I heard someone behind me say, "Excuse me. Excuse me sir, can I ask  what you  are shooting with?" It was a guy about 35 years old. He was genuinely curious about which camera I was using. I stopped and we talked for about fifteen minutes. He also shoots with Leicas and there is an implicit camaraderie between M camera users. I showed him my M240 and he told me he had just bought an M11D. His gateway "drug" was a new version of the M6 film camera. He's come to like digital a lot better. He bought the camera with the "steel rim" 35mm Summilux but upgraded a few months later to the 35mm APO Summicron. I asked him where his camera was and he made some lame excuse. It was back in his hotel room less than a block away. But there we were on S. Congress Ave. surrounded by fun visual stuff, busloads of bridesmaids pouring into the streets to get drunk and act wild. I sent him back to his close by hotel room to strap on his camera. It's almost mandatory. He re-emerged ready to embrace the fun chaos. 

He had recently been in Trinadad and explained that it was a bit different than resolutely middle class and relatively safe Austin. A bit more petty theft there. Made him nervous about carrying around $18,000 worth of camera and lens. I gave him some good natured ribbing and he reminded himself that all of the gear was insured. We exchanged Instagram contacts and shook hands, both moving off to do that solitary photographer thing that works so well....

Having a camera in my hands or around my neck makes me more adventurous and less reticent to go discover stuff. I walked into the courtyard of the Austin Motel today and climbed the steps up to the common area in front of the three king sized suites that overlook the pool. I'd always wanted a few shots of their pool. And I heard a rumor that this motel and the Hotel San Jose might soon be acquired by the Marriott Corporation. They'll certainly have bigger plans for both properties that just being ultra cool places to stay and hang out in while on S. Congress Ave. I wanted that pool shot for posterity. I have no hesitation in going where it seems like you aren't supposed to. After all, I walked by the velvet rope in the Hermitage in St. Petersburg to get a pre-show preview (personally guided) of a show of great art recovered from the Nazis. The velvet ropes were enough to convince all Russian museum goers that there should be no entrance.  I figured I'd only be in St. Petersburg that one year and what did I have to lose. Turns out I might have been back a couple more times... but who is counting? 

At any rate I saw most of the show before a curator and an armed guard ushered me back into the public spaces. But my free ticket in and out was my "American Tourist Camera." and a profound display of confusion and cluelessness. I do believe that with a nice business suit, a clipboard and a camera I could walk into the NSA and play with their computers and no one would blink. At least for a little while. 

The reality (and this is a good thing for photographers) is that no one is really paying attention to you. Everyone is completely focused on their own problems, their own existence, their own relationships and their own desires. We're a side issue almost all the time. How do I know? I've been sliding through cocktail parties, high level corporate meetings and presidential grip and grin situations so often, and for so many years that I've learned how to become nearly invisible and, at one glance, not a danger to anyone. It's a talent distilled from decades of practice. 

Today I walked for the fun of it. And the M camera around my neck made it more fun. It gave me the equivalent feel of a treasure hunt. A hunt for fun images. 

This is the 6,000th blog I've constructed for the Visual Science Lab. When I started out the blog I was working hard to pay a mortgage, save for a kid's college, desperately trying to put any left over money into a retirement account, and worried that I was working too much, drinking too much coffee and sleeping way too little. The blog was initially conjured up to sell books which I'd been writing "in my spare time" (joke implied). For one reason or another I've found a comfortable regimen. I seem to like writing stuff down. It's like having a huge and amply illustrated diary. One you don't mind sharing with friends. 

I've written for magazines, publishers (five books and counting), and even corporate speeches and technical content. I spent years writing ad copy and TV scripts as part of my job (creative director) at an ad agency. I've won gold Addy Awards for my work. But the fun stuff is right here in a the blog. Because I don't really care about embedded systems, the first set of multicore processor wafers, or integrated software systems, or predictive analytics. I really like photography. And cameras. And photographers. And all the other stuff that goes with picture making. I'd write if no one was reading --- and sometimes it seems that way. I haven't mastered the art of seeming to be interested enough in something to write in a way that generates lots and lots of comments. But there it is. People still keep coming back to read stuff. Pretty amazing. 

I've always had a wish list of cameras and lenses that I dreamed of owning. The list is very small today. ..

I have one thing on my wish list; at least when it come to gear. That would be the perfect 50mm AF lens to use on all my SL cameras and my Panasonic S5. At one end of the spectrum is the Leica SL 50mm APO Summicron. It's supposed to be perfect but it costs $5,000. At the other end of the spectrum is the Sigma 50mm f2.0 Contemporary lens. It's also close to perfect (if you can believe reviews) but it's only $639 USD. That's it. That's all I'm looking at right now. Strangely, starting with the Leica SL and continuing through the Leica M240s I've found that my cameras are already better than I am as a practitioner. Nothing left to add to the camera side. The lens side could be endless but after 40+ years of photography I know pretty well that the 50mm lens is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for me. 

Anyway, happy 6,000th post!!! Below are the photos I liked from my walk through this afternoon. I can already feel my eyes getting sharper....

the Austin Motel  used to be a dive. Now it's been renovated, re-imagined and cool-ified. 

I'd stay there and usually I'm more of a Four Seasons hotel fan...

It's no longer a true motel. Nobody drives there. They arrive from the airport by Uber. 

Part of a pop up show for Harry Styles fashion stuff. 

And my more literal readers are screaming: "Why are they wearing sunglasses? They don't have eyes!!!! 

Is the M240 sharp enough? Is the 35mm f1.4 VM sharp enough?

For the web? Oh hell yes.

Caution, this building is falling over backwards. It could have been "corrected" but the author thought this was a better representation.

but it's only a 24 megapixel sensor. Can you blow it up?

Look at the frame just below. It's a 100% crop...

furniture for party lounging.

The End.