It's Saturday. It was 64° when I left the house for our swim workout. The water was perfect. The swimming was fun. Here's a reminder of a fun event coming up in Austin, Texas:

On October 25th we'll be treated to the annual "Day of the Dead" parade and festival in downtown Austin. Lots of fun! Here are the details: ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT AUSTIN'S DIA DE LOS MUERTOS EVENT !!! 

Here are some photographs I made a few years ago... Always a fun subject to document... 

OT: A strategy for staying in good physical condition: Exercise More.

 

Hydrostatic Pressure. That's why swimming is the best exercise in the world. Resistance in every direction. New studies show that swimming fast interval training actually thwarts sarcopenia. Swimming every day improves balance and reflex reactions that can save seniors from falls. The constant pressure on all parts of the body from just being in water makes one's heart work a bit harder and helps to build cardiovascular endurance. And with water pressure in every direction it's an all muscle workout instead of just working one set or the other...

And for those folks who don't want to chew on kale all day long in a valiant attempt to maintain or lose body weight I have to say that there were no fat swimmers in our workout this morning. Eat what you want. Swim more. 

Long fast swimming also helps older swimmers sleep better. A long career of swimming daily can turn back the clock too. Or at least slow it way down. You don't have to do it with total focus but three hours of swimming a week is going to make a huge difference. 

It's all choices. 

Today was backstroke day. Our coach on Thursdays is getting her inspiration over at the UT swim program and decided that every Thursday for six weeks we'd work on drills and sets that would improve technique in one stroke at a time. Last Thursday was breaststroke day. The next day everyone has sore triceps and calf muscles. Two weeks ago was butterfly day. Everyone slept well that night. 

Backstroke is a weird stroke for me. It's all about having a good and flexible kick. And fast arm turnover. No gliding as one does in freestyle. Your head shouldn't move but your body should rotate in order to get a deep catch with each arm. Sitting here nursing sore core (abs) muscles. But it's that kind of sore that means you'll look good later. 

Looking forward to a mixed up workout tomorrow. And by mixed up I mean a nice combination of all four strokes and multiple distances. 

With Michael Phelp's former coach, Bob Bowman now heading up the UT Austin swim program Olympians and incredible swimmers from all over the world are coming to Austin to train. Fast swimmers everywhere. I joke occasionally about Austin being the center of the universe but when it comes to competitive swimming it seems to be coming true. Fun times for Austin swimmers!!!

Sculpture in situ. Chicago Art Institute. Fun with focus.

 

Not sure this would have worked as well as a monochrome (black and white) image...

 Calder. Flamingo. Chicago. 

According to James... There is no profound difference in image quality between competing brands. Included Leica SL, Sony and Canon. Here's how he came to this conclusion...

For a change of pace I'm going to write something today that might piss off Leica aficionados; well, at least those who photograph with the SL series of cameras and lenses. But, it's based on some very in-depth work by my friend, James who is an accomplished photographer, videographer and brilliant post production expert. And he has NO dog in the hunt, no reason for dissembling or putting a thumb on the scales of one camera system or the other. His views about three of the better cameras in the universal camera-scape come from an exhaustive, one month long assignment to do post production on over 600 raw images from three photographers all shooting for the same client; albeit in slightly different locations but of almost identical subjects and in almost identical lighting conditions. Take it all with the necessary grain of salt...

Way back on August 9th, in the blistering heat of the Summer, three different photographers were commissioned to make advertising photos of one large, connected real estate development project. I was one of them. We were each given different shot lists but most of the images were lifestyle shots in and around neighborhoods as well as images of lots of the development's amenities (pools, a small lake, schools, community centers, etc.). We each had human models to work with. All three photographers were pros with lots of experience. One was using a Canon R5, one a Sony A7Rv and I was using a Leica SL2 camera. We each photographed in our cameras' raw modes and we each used the premium available standard zoom lenses for our respective systems. I was using the well regarded Leica 24-90mm zoom. 

When we finished shooting we transferred our raw images over to a large ad agency which, during contract negotiations, said they wanted to do the post processing of the images in-house. For whatever reason the in-house idea fell through and a couple weeks after the shoot I got a call asking if I could submit a bid on doing post processing on images from all three photographers. 

I was already committed to retiring, didn't feel like working on someone else's photos and declined the job --- but I like everyone at the agency, they are good people to work with, and my friend, James, is a much better post processor/retoucher/color grader than I will ever be so I recommended him for the project. He bid on it and won the bid. He spent 30 days taking out fire hydrants from front yards, retouching out dead patches of grass, straightening up the perspective on houses, adding humans to some shots via A.I., getting all the color between three different originating cameras and lenses to match up for consistency and much more. He worked on some of the files at 200 or 300% because he is beyond detail oriented and meticulous. He wrapped up and delivered his part of the project on the first few days of October and the client was happy. James was happy. And I was happy that they were happy.

James and I met up for coffee last week. We were sitting in the shade on a nice café patio enjoying a coolish breeze and watching the local talent hard at work on laptops at the surrounding tables. We chatted about all kinds of stuff and then James kind of hemmed and hawed and started out like this: 

"Now, before I say this I want you to know that I'm not trying to rile you up or insult you. Really. I just wanted to tell you what I saw during my month long, daily dive into the files from the three cameras and three photographers on that last project."

I nodded, wondering where he was going with this --- that it required such a long/strong disclaimer. After all we've been having these friendly discussions for ... decades. And I'd never been disclaimered before. 

he continued: 

"I have to tell you, I've spent nearly 100 hours doing pretty high end post processing on the files from the  BLANK project and I was kinda surprised at what I saw. When I zeroed out the color differences between the files from the different cameras and matched up the general contrasts I have to tell you that I really didn't see any difference in overall image quality between any of the three cameras. They are all sharp everywhere in the frames when you guys shot above f5.6. When y'all shot wide open every one of the lenses had some artifacts in the corners and a bit of chromatic aberration around the edges as well. If I take away the exif information from the files I'd have a hard time sorting between them. I mean, eventually I could see difference in composing styles and a preference to shoot slightly darker or slightly light but there's really no discernible difference between any of the three cameras or their lenses. There just isn't." 

Since James had no reason other than transmitting information about the cameras to bring this all up I had to believe his findings. There are a couple of caveats which, actually might accrue more advantages to the Sony or Canon than to the SL2. Both of those cameras have newer sensors and might do a better job in lower light but we were all shooting in bright light. Both of the non-Leica cameras were used with 24-70mm f2.8 lenses and it may be that the difference in focal range makes a slight difference. And finally, none of us were using tripods which means that operator glitches could make differences in the results. An example might be that being at least 35 years old than either of my photographer compatriots my ability to handhold my rig might not be quite as perfect. Finally, the SL2 is a contrast detect AF system while both the Canon and Sony are at the very top of the PD-AF game and so, with moving subjects (human models, dogs, etc.) there might be a discernible difference there. But clearly I am reaching for some sort of excuse. 

What this basically boils down to is that all cameras are really good now. And I think we've all known that for a while. Leica doesn't have a technical advantage if we are doing a competition that's basically all about lens performance and sensor performance. There are other parameters to consider but we've been over them and over them. After the point of technical equivalence is reached everything else is subjective. 

So, if you want to elevate Leica SL cameras and lenses I guess the takeaway is that you'd better be more interested in the some of the "soft" features of those cameras instead of believing that they'll deliver a higher quality product. A better experience while shooting? Maybe. A nicer menu? Sure. But a good pro should be able to pick up any of these cameras (and by extension, a Nikon Z camera and lens) and do a great job satisfying a client. 

Just thought I'd pass this along as a "thought exercise" for both Leica users and non-Leica users. But please note, this "study" only applied to the SL series. We'll have to go shoot a competitive project with the M series and Q series cameras until we've exhausted our fan boy adherence to our favorite systems. 

James squashing my dreams.... of camera perfection.

Ready for a little robotic surgery? 

B. In ancient times. On slide film. Scanned. Obviously.

The perfect child. Early digital times. Kodak SLR/n camera with adapted 

Hasselblad 150mm f2.8 F Zeiss Lens.

Blue sky and puffy clouds. 

we effectively survived the first weekend of the Austin City Limits

Music Festival where a couple of hundred thousand people each 

pay a fortune to sit in the dirt and listen to four different 

bands in the same space at the same time....

More next week....

Last week I swam six days in a row. I'm tired. 

We start again tomorrow. But, on the upside, I'll be in 

great shape for the Christmas Holiday

swim suit season.... :-)

 

The Rumors about the Leica M EV-1 are arriving fast and furiously. Is it the next great thing in the M world or a wholesale betrayal by the brand?

This is NOT a photograph of the M EV-1 Camera. 

It's an older film model. But one can assume the overall body 

style will be much the same...

The very first Leica M camera was announced in 1954 and became widely available in 1955. In an evolution from previous Leica rangefinder cameras the rangefinder and the frame lines were incorporated into one window from the two separate window versions. The distance between the two rangefinder windows was much bigger which allowed for greater focusing accuracy and was a logical improvement that allowed for good focus with faster and longer lenses. That model was the M3. Named the "3" because the viewfinder switched between three bright line frame lines automatically when the appropriate lenses were attached.  That was 70 years ago. And for most of those 70 years the basic design of M series bodies was largely unchanged. The design exception being the M5 cameras which are love em or hate em body designs... And, of course, the shift from film to digital sensors.

The current top line Leica rangefinder is the 60 megapixel M11 series with 60 megapixels of resolution but even this current body is visibly closely related to the original M3 in overall design and operational details. 

The current M11 uses a .73 magnification viewfinder while the M3 offered a .91 magnification viewfinder. Maybe that's why, among film photographers, the M3, at 70 years old, is still a sought after choice for use with classic 50mm lenses... So close to the photographers unaided vision.

The M11 is a 60 megapixel camera using the same classic, triangulation based, mechanical, rangefinder focusing mechanism as nearly all previous M cameras (exception are scientific bodies which are meant to be used with adapters and have no rangefinders). To many Leica enthusiasts the rangefinder focusing is the main reason to use these cameras but....

What the popularity of the Q series cameras showed Leica is that adding an EVF to the mix instead of a traditional rangefinder resulted in the most profitable line of camera models in the company's recent history. The Q series of cameras has been the gateway drug into the system wide catalog but a huge number of enthusiasts have been so happy with the Q camera's implementation of a "modern" viewfinder that they've stayed with their Qs and have felt no need to upgrade to a classic M rangefinder. 

What a number of Leica users have wished for since the introduction of the original Q camera has been for an M camera body that features the ability to interchange lenses (and almost all M series lenses made in the last 70 years are interchangeable with all of the latest Leica M cameras; digital or film) while being able to take advantage of a built in electronic viewfinder. (Add on EV finders have been available at least since the M240...).

And there are a number of advantages to an EVF starting with being able to see the full view of any attached lens, no matter how wide or long without the need for auxiliary optical finders or add-on EVF modules. An EVF means that one is focusing and viewing through the taking lens so there is no parallax -- which can be an issue for optical rangefinder cameras since the focusing and viewing window is located at a different place than the taking lens. The finder sees a slightly different, offset view. No parallax is especially great when taking close ups! And, one can finely preview the images they will get by using the EVF.

The benefit for Leica is that an EVF module is a global commodity part, mostly made by Epson, and can be incorporated into a camera at a much, much lower cost and with much less skilled manual assembly than a mechanical precision rangefinder instrument. Lots cheaper. And because the finder is solid state instead of depending on moving mechanical and optical parts, it is more reliable and doesn't require re-calibration from time to time. Not as subject to failure from shock or environmental extremes.  And cheaper. Lots cheaper to make. 

With all of this in mind the web is right now on fire with rumors and pre-previews of what everyone is calling the Leica M EV-1. Rumor mills were calling the impending camera an M11-V but I'm now convinced the the new M EV-1 nomenclature will be closer to the final name. And some of the bigger names in the Leica influencer community are taking serious notice. 

Other than the fact that the new camera will use an EVF no details or confirmation has been divulged by Leica or other sources. Most pre-preview-reviewers are claiming that because of cost savings from the change from mechanical to silicon tech the camera will debut for about $2500 less than an M11 (original/optical) camera. That would peg the price of the new EVF M to about $7500. I think that's optimistic but I guess we'll see soon enough since everyone is predicting the big announcement by the end of October. Just in time to pre-order for my 70th birthday! Maybe I should wait for the Safari Edition....

Does anyone need this new camera? Well, people who wear glasses and have an issue seeing the full finder on a current M Leica would certainly be a ready market. Same with people who want to use their current Leica M lenses but are having vision issues (usually arriving with advancing age) focusing a traditional rangefinder. And then there are rangefinder fans who will find the EVF very useful when using very short focal lengths or focal lengths longer than 50mm (which have a smaller frame line in the optical finder and so are harder to compose with). 

In all honesty, will I rush out an actually buy one? Probably not. I'm currently pretty happy with the M cameras I own but I am more interested in the Leica Q3-43 with its APO corrected 43mm lens, the 60 megapixel sensor, the image stabilization, and the autofocus. It's more squarely aimed at the way I would like to photograph and makes for a nice partnering with the basic, 28mm Q2. 

Let's be frank here. There is no logical reason to spend the money buying Leica cameras and lenses if you are looking at the usage for everyday, normal photography. Fuji, Sony, Nikon and Canon make perfectly good cameras that equal the technical specs of even the best Leicas. Same with the lenses. If you are a rational person who likes to make budgets and buy things based on equivalences buying Leica gear makes no sense at all. But... if you think certain intangibles are meaningful to YOU and you have the ability to afford something different then you might find value in the industrial design, the menus, the interfaces and even the visual character of the Leica lenses. You won't necessarily get BETTER but you will get DIFFERENT. And some people like that. 

Stay tuned. I have a blog post coming which I wrote after my friend, sometime video producer partner and seriously skilled post production guru told me about the results he saw after spending a full month doing very complex post production on images from a series of shoots. The post production was on images created by three different photographers. One shooting with a Canon R5, one shooting with a Sony A7R5, and me shooting with a Leica SL2. Each photographer using the premium standard zoom lenses for the respective systems. His observations made me stop and think. More to come.

 For now I guess Leica nerds are are waiting for signs from Wetzlar re: the M EV1. More sure to follow.