Why I like photographers. And what I am shortlisting, camera-wise, on my wish list.

 The camera in my hands is the Panasonic Lumix S5. It's a great, smaller, full frame camera. It takes all the lenses offered in the L mount system. It's been replaced by a newer model... The S5ii. If I were buying a camera right now, today, it would be the S5ii. But why?

Before I get into year another essay about a camera I thought I'd talk about the first section of my headline; "why I like photographers." 

First of all, let's get this out of the way... I tend to have a flawed writing style for conventional blogs. I use a lot of determinative sentences and my writing makes it seem like I'm constantly putting out unarguable, declarative statements of fact. Not that I really mean to. I'm always flexible enough to imagine: "What if the other guy is right?"

But over the years many folks have written in to let me know that just because I say something is so, with a firm clackety-clack, on the keyboard doesn't make it so. I guess I'll try to get over that but who knows if I ever will? It's not like I'm disposed to head out to some writer's workshop and reform my entire approach to my (non-profit) blog site... I'll just depend on the several world class writers that frequent VSL to give me a kind but firm swat on the typing hands when needed. 

I have a book that keeps popping up on my bedside table begging me to re-read one or more of its essays before I nod off to sleep. I've had the book for at least 15 years and when I first bought it I was put off by the writer's style of writing. It seemed to me to be overly fussy. Now I realize that what I took for "fussiness" was really a focus on making the words the writer had written present his thoughts in crystal clear exactness. Thoughts which are as opinionated in their own way as mine. At any rate the book has withstood my growth as a reader, my tendency to look for more sensational writing, my desire to cloud my brain with technical stuff instead of philosophy, and more than one emergency regarding spilled coffee. 

The book is entitled: Why People Photograph. It was written by an English major/professor turned photographer turned back again to a writer. And an able guide to thinking about photography in ways far different than I used to. The book was published in 1994 by Aperture. Its form is a series of essays about photography, writing, and art.

After swim practice this morning I remembered that after this afternoon's calming and benevolent cup of coffee I'd be down to the very bottom of the coffee supply in the house. Sure, we have a jar of instant somewhere but I've heard that it should just be used for emergencies. Even read somewhere that in a number of countries having to drink instant coffee is a routine punishment for petty crimes such as shoplifting or speeding. 

I figured it was time to head up the street and two blocks to the right to visit my local coffee shop and coffee roaster. They have a Columbian medium roast coffee that will bring tears to your eyes. Unless, of course, you've surpassed that level of coffee connoisseur-ship  and can now only drink Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee or perfectly roasted Kona. 

Sometimes, mostly in the mornings, the shop can get busy and there is a wait for one of the coffee professionals to get enough of a break in the action to head over and bundle coffee for me. So I take a book. That way I can look studious and I don't have to talk to anyone ---- if I don't want to. The book I've been re-reading is the above mentioned. 

I had a bit of a wait today. But it was worth it. For every twelve pounds of coffee one buys at Trianon Coffee one gets a free pound. Since I was buying coffee for myself and for my adult child, whom I have ruined for cheap coffee, I had time to read one essay while waiting and smelling the heady perfume of fresh coffee everywhere. Sad for people who only drink lattes and cappuccinos. The different blends are so much fun to try.

I nursed a small cup of Costa Rican coffee and turned to the first essay in the book, entitled: "Colleagues." 

And in a moment I came across something that Robert Adams wrote that seemed aimed directly at me today. Exactly at this point in my life. I'll copy it here:

     "I have to admit that there is another reason I like photographers -- they don't tempt me to envy. The profession is short on dignity. Nearly everyone has fallen down, been the target of condescension (the stereotypical image of a photographer being that of a mildly contemptible, self-indulgent dilettante( been harassed by security guards and dropped expensive equipment. Almost all photographers have incurred large expenses in the pursuit of tiny audiences, finding that the wonder they'd hoped to share is something few want to receive. Nothing is so clarifying, for instance, as to stand through the opening of an exhibition to which only officials have come.

     Experiences like that do encourage defiance, however. Why quite while you are losing?"

--Robert Adams. 

Bleak but, in a way, satisfying. No one gets out of this "gallery" alive so why not tilt at all the windmills you want to? And it speaks to a commonality between all artists, and I would assume, most writers...

Now. On to the ruminations about  cameras.

I've been saying for a while, as have many other better and worse pundits, that all cameras are good enough for our purposes now. And by this we mean that current cameras which are in our use profiles, and have similar specifications, are easily better in their potential than in our actual use. But we're always on the prowl for that "perfect" compromise which we imagine will buy us super high performance, all the haptics any person could wish for and incredible "value" (cheap bastards!) all in one tidy and prestigious package. We further hope, that when finding this unicorn camera it can be wedded with equally good lenses, also offered at bargain prices. 

For the moment I think I've figured out which camera that might be for people like myself (maybe five years ago...) who want a wonderful photographic tool that is also equally gifted at making professional looking video. It's got to be the Panasonic Lumix S5mk2. (See that declarative sentence??? Just setting myself up for grief...). 

Gerald Undone, one of my favorite (video leaning) imaging machine reviewers (on Youtube) recently reviewed the camera here: Gerald's S5ii Review and basically/literally said that the S5ii might be the best value in a camera.... ever. If you go to his channel I think he also has a supplemental review up now of the S5iiX which is a more video-centric version of the same basic camera. I agree with everything he's said about the glorious little machine...

So, here, in this inexpensive camera, you get the same processor that Leica just designed into the new Q3 and which will probably drive the new Leica SL cameras when they arrive. It's a much faster and more potent image processor than existed in any previous Panasonic or Leica camera so it will drive the AF quicker, the frame read/write quicker, and potentially do a better job processing images at speed. And, since nearly every sensor in the camera world is a Sony the main differentiator between camera brands is the quality of their color science which is determined, in part, by sheer data throughput of the dedicated processors. The more data the camera can process the more control, detail and color discrimination it can apply to your files!!!

As I mentioned, the camera serves up lenses from the L mount alliance so you have, conveniently, a great range of world classes lenses to choose from which all should work seamlessly with this camera. Wanna make yourself happy and piss off just about everyone? Put a $5500 50mm APO Summicron lens on the from of your $2,000 Lumix camera and go out for a session. 

The camera has its own cooling fan so you will have no fears of it "Canon-ing" or "Sony-frying" and coming to an ignominious, thermally-driven, full stop just as your actor hits her mark in your video production. Or while standing in 104° desert heat waiting for the light to get perfect. It just won't go there. 

For you viewing sissys there is a swivel screen on the back. Yeah, I know it's easier to get those low angle shots and for that I'd prefer a one axis tilt screen instead. No one really, really needs a screen to swing out from the side. (Another one of those "all or nothing" sentences...sorry). 

The camera has two SD UHS11 slots, a big HDMI plug, lots of options for audio, etc. But at its most basic it's got everything I want in a straight up photographic camera including a state of the art sensor, incredibly good high ISO performance, wide dynamic range and a truly professional menu system. One that even a professional photographer can understand. Add in a more detailed EVF than its predecessor and PD-AF focusing and you're ready to go. 

Any downsides? No red dot (kidding, just kidding). Not that I can think of.  Maybe the 8 frames per second with full focusing is too slow for you.... funny to write that. Even funnier to think about the need for a thousand quick frames of a stationary object... 

I have too many cameras right now to think of buying one but it's on the radar and if I go off the rails sometime soon and get antsy to do a full scale sloughing of gear I might saunter over and pick one up. How could I go wrong. 

So, in the week that the Q3 hits my thoughts have been elsewhere. Why? Because I think for most of us the S5ii makes a hell of a lot more sense. Especially if you already own most of the Sigma i-Contemporary lens catalog and all in L mount configurations. Now I just need to figure out what my rationale is for buying one.

Or, I could turn to the next page in the Robert Adams book and feel smugly smarter and more comfortable with my role as a photographer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Adams_(photographer)

Yeah. He's a landscape photographer. So what?

Click through my links and buy a Lamborghini. 

Portrait of Fadya posted because I'm tired of seeing generative A.I. stuff. And I want to see "real" photographs...

 

Photography was a lot more fun when we really had to work at it to make it special. I loved the process of photographing Fadya. It was fun to arrange a session, sit and chat, take frames when the spirit moved us and to make as nice an image in post production as I could without "cheating." 

My tribute to Tina Turner. In video.

 I shot this video for inclusion in a fund-raising program for Zach Theatre back during the early days of Covid. I have always liked Tina Turner's performances and was saddened by her passing. 

enjoy: https://vimeo.com/462396471?share=copy

After lunch and a nap and walk around the lake I realized that I wanted to be in an airport in Europe and wanted to find a young woman to photograph there in the terminal...

 

So I hopped on a plane, flew for 13 hours, made one stop, ate bad baked chicken in economy class and finally arrived at my nondescript European airport. I was there for just a few seconds when a very attractive women in a demure, gray blouse walked up to me and asked me to take her photograph. I did so, realized that the goal of my trip had been attained and caught the next flight back to Austin where I post processed the image for my audience here.

OR.....

I opened the PS beta, typed in a few lines and hit "generate." And, without leaving my office got my "photo" of the young lady. Of course this new set of tools will have no effect whatsoever on commercial photography or, in fact, any part of the creative services industry. 

Anybody want to buy a box full of cameras and lenses? 

Ground control to Major Tuck. Can you hear me Major Tuck? ... Oh the heck with Photoshop silliness, let's swim. Some thoughts about Fuji X100V versus Q2 in the bottom half of the post.

 

I started with a blank slate and asked Photoshop's "generative fill" to construct an outer space scene and then to create and drop in a wholly fictional photograph of a brilliant, creative and very serious photographer to the mix. This is what came out. I tried the other options but the ones where the human subject had octopus tentacles were just a bit creepy for me. 

Dear readers, I know that I can use generative fill to extend the edges of the canvas with more space, filled with details that are amazingly indistinguishable from the existing backgrounds. And that there are many other uses for G.F. that could enhance production efficiency. I'd rather dwell on the nonsense aspect which I feel will become the future of most imaging. Your mileage will vary with your personal degree of seriousness. 

It's been an interesting week or so. I've given away about 60% of my lighting equipment to photographers who are just exiting schools and starting down their own paths into imaging. I find myself still in possession of more than enough equipment to do the kinds of jobs I have routinely done through the years.  But the good feelings that come from helping someone on the same journey are nice. They take the sting out of winding down my more vigorous schedule into something that's more a blend of work and play than "all work." The realization though that I still have enough gear to keep working is unsettling since it means I was way overstocked.

I feel like I've survived the cycle of the Leica Q3 product introduction without succumbing to yet another impulsive purchase. In the process I've discovered the stages of product intoxification. One moves from discovery to rampant research to figuring out where in one's personal gear mix the product will best fit, followed by a plan to get rid of older stuff to make room for the newer stuff, followed by the rationalization of just how great the new product will make all of your photographic experiences going forward, followed by the search for reviews, followed by the search for vendors and then the final realization that, if you have not pre-ordered by now you can probably give up any thought of acquiring the product before next year.... 

At which point you de-escalate the whole process, going in reverse until you end up convincing yourself that you are perfectly happy with all the stuff you already have and you start to ignore the 200th breathless YouTube pre-pre-pre review from someone who brushed up against the camera purely by chance, decided a quick video would get some clicks, and who will never in this life time actually come out of pocket and purchase one.

At this point you calm down and realize that all your gear is so much better than most of your ideas for photographs that adding any new or old tools wouldn't matter to the end results in the least. And you become resigned (for now) to the stasis in your gear cabinet. Maybe assuaging your need to buy by picking up yet another (much less expensive) lens that you know you don't really need and probably won't get much use from. 

At this point, if you are at all wise, you shut down the computer, turn off the smart phone and head to the pool to swim laps until the avaricious impulses recede and finally dissipate. And you start thinking about shopping for new swim goggles (about $25....).

And, speaking of pool time, we had a special Monday swim practice this morning to celebrate Memorial Day. Coach Coleman wrote some great sets and most people dribbled in late to join those more compulsive of us who arrived early and jumped in to start swimming just as the clocks hit the top of the hour. I won't bore you with the details but I will say that I truly feel as though I earned that post swim cup of single origin Columbian coffee and that huge, warm, sybaritic chocolate croissant. Or Petit Pain au  Chocolat. Damn, it was good. Forgot to bring one home for B. I hope she skips reading this post. Oh, who am I kidding? She gave up reading the blog a decade ago.... She has to live with the author. She already gets her ration of silly ideas.

Today was my first day to show off my new swimming pool shoes. My Summer Crocs. Love them or hate them, I don't care. They are perfect for getting to the car from the house, the car to the pool, and back again. And the colors are superb. Here! Just look!!! You know you want some. These are the "all terrain" version. Stronger soles on the bottom. 

Superb, yes? Can't wait to see how good they look with a conservative business suit... 

Someone left me a comment yesterday asking "Why the Leica Q2 instead of the Fuji X100V?" and I thought I'd take a few minutes to answer. It's a sensible question. 

I bought two of the Fuji X100V cameras back in late 2020. Seems like a dream now since no one is able to get the cameras from any of the usual vendors, and that's been the case for at least a year now. I bought one in black and one in chrome and thought I'd really love them. The idea of the camera is right on target but there are a few little niggles that bugged me. The shutter sounds a bit tinny when it goes off. The overall quality of the materials the camera is constructed of is pedestrian. Not worse than most cameras but the body feels light, inconsequential, almost bendable with too much finger pressure. I also felt the EVF view was subpar. And the controls finicky.

I had not used a Q camera before buying the X100v but can now say that they represent two entirely different levels of build quality. That being said, neither of them is particularly comfortable to hold and use unless you festoon each of them with thumb grips that fit into the hot shoes and, at least with the Q2, also a front hand grip. Equal "con" points for unadorned use directly out of their respective boxes. 

The Jpeg and raw files out of each are very nice but the Leica's near doubling of resolution shows up. Especially in conjunction with its much better lens. But again, there too is a bit of a trade off since I'd rather have the 35mm angle of view be the base than a 28mm. 

A win for the Fuji is the depth of image customization provided in Jpeg. The film modes that come with the camera are good and some from external sources are even better. Love the Tri-X look. But head to head the combination of a better lens and a higher res sensor, coupled with the full frame look, makes the Q2 a better choice if you mostly work with raw files and have spent a few moments to create your own set of image profiles or "looks." They are just "deeper" files.

Is the  Q2 worth the extra money? No. You can do gorgeous images with an X100V if you have a modicum of talent and you aren't overly concerned with subjective stuff like the "feel" of a camera or the complexity of its software. If you have to crop a Leica image to match the focal length look of the Fuji you are close to parity in terms of resolution. So if you are a 35mm shooter you are ending up paying a lot more for the same basic angles of view. But, if you absolutely love the 28mm (because you can't decide what you want in the frame at the time of exposure) and you find yourself shooting with it all the time then you'll want the 28mm. And, if so, you'll enjoy the Leica more.

One area in which the Leica spanks the Fuji is when working out in the street with the camera using manual focusing and using hyperfocal distance techniques. Or "zone" focusing. The Leica manual focusing feature is nicely calibrated, repeatable and has wonderful hand feel on the focusing ring. You can set an aperture (f8 anyone?), set a focus distance (10 feet anyone?) and teach yourself quickly how to get sharp images without spending a lot of time worrying and fussing over exact focus. Or where the AF focusing points are set.  With the Fuji.... not so much. You get a shitty little distance scale in the finder or on the LCD but it's vague and slow to use. It would be one of my last choices for a workflow based around manual focusing.

If I had all the money in the world, no kids to put through school, no pension fund failures, no remaining mortgage and no car payments, I wouldn't hesitate to buy the Leica. If any of those pre-conditions were existing I would never be able to justify the expense ---- which is probably why it was just last year that I finally bought my first Leica Q camera --- even though I wanted one since the original was launched in 2015. It's all relative. If you're having trouble making the monthly nut then spending $6000 on a discretionary/hobby purchase is imprudent at best. If you're no longer flying commercial and you are on a first name basis with the pilot of your Gulfstream it's a completely different calculation. Buy a couple in case you lose one somewhere along the line. Or you used one to tip your pizza delivery guy. (made your personal chef grimace there, right?).

It's a bit of a moot point right now as the Fujis seem unattainable while the Q2s show "in stock" at several merchant sites. Depends also on what your intended use is. For me either of the cameras would be secondary cameras used for fun and walking around with. Neither of them are flexible enough to be "only" cameras for someone who is used to a wide range of focal lengths and capabilities. Bravo to you if you are an artist and can hone in on a single lens camera for your primary tool --- I'm jealous.

And that's my two cents worth. 

The slippery slope just got coated with teflon and greased with Polytetrafluroethylene. We call it....A.I.

 I opened PhotoShop to work on some portraits I shot last week. Some nice headshots for an exec I've always gotten along with. When I opened the program Adobe invited me to download a beta of PhotoShop that contains a thing called "Generative fill." Like most of the other generative A.I. programs out there it uses text descriptions to make up backgrounds, extend frames and do images from the mystical vapors.

I tried it. I pulled a test image I made a while back when I was working out at a tech company and needed a stand in. (Thank you! Mr. Self Timer). 

The frame was me against a gray seamless backdrop. I selected myself and then typed in: put a mountain landscape in the background of the image, behind the main subject.  I pressed "generate" and ten seconds later I had three different versions of the image to choose from. My total elapsed time? Five minutes; most of it spent looking for an image of myself to play around with. 

This is the first trial, first time "out of the box" with no instructions or tutorials. Will this change the face of photography? I believe that we're standing on the very top of a roller coaster just waiting to start the ever accelerating downward plunge. Remember this though. If you do photography for fun you don't have to care, don't have to participate and don't have to change the way you've always enjoyed doing things. 

But this blog is the property of a commercial photographer who writes about business stuff as well as fun stuff. To not acknowledge this would be like stuffing cotton balls in my ears, putting black duct tape over my eyes and plunging my head deep into the sand. This stuff is here now. Not "maybe next year." 

Fire up your beta copy and check it out. But keep both feet firmly on the ground. 

All the best, Kirk

Added on Sunday morning: https://apple.news/ACb96kuZTQJeBn2h9K08ymQ

Just a quick note about color shading. And a camera that allows you to correct unwanted color shading for up to 10 individual lenses.

this is an image with no unwanted color shading. The Sigma 65mm and the Leica SL2 are both members of the L mount Alliance and lens information is automatically transferred to the camera. Corrections for most major lens aberrations are made at the time of exposure.

Some of us who like to dive into unneeded complexity in our photo lives seem hellbent on adapting old lenses (which are often called "legacy" lenses), or inappropriate lenses, to whatever camera we feel like shooting in the moment. If we were rational we'd just select the newest lens from the same camera company and same generation as our cameras and take advantage of the built-in corrections for distortion, fall off, vignetting, chromatic aberrations and COLOR SHADING.

Color Shading is the tendency for non-telecentric lens designs to have color shifts across their frames. It usually shows up as a shift in color at the corners, or corners and edges, of the frame and sometimes coincides with vignetting. But sometimes color shading comes alone...

The biggest culprit isn't really some sinister, planned thing, it's more of a mismatch between lenses  designed for use with film cameras which are pressed into service onto digital cameras. Although just about any sort of lens can exhibit some color shading which, if left uncorrected, can be an issue. This color shading shows up more often in wider angle lenses and is usually absent as lenses crest 50mm focal lengths and longer (for the 35mm format). 

I won't get into the physics cuz I'm just a photographer but it has to do with designing lenses for digital tech where all the light rays need to be perpendicular to the sensor plane versus the way they designed lenses for film. Since film didn't have "depth" (pixel wells) wide angle lenses for non-SLR cameras (Leica and Zeiss rangefinder lenses) could be designed to sit much closer to the film plane and let the rays that needed to hit the edges (corners and sides of the frame) arrive at the furthest areas at a shallower angle instead of head on. The angle of the light rays from lenses designed this way are attenuated because not all the light is used efficiently at the edges of the sensors. To combat this in current Leica rangefinder (M Series) cameras the camera makers use much thinner filter stacks in front of the digital sensors. They can also try to design progressive "light pipes" across the frame to better deliver the angled light rays to their peripheral targets. But it's always a bit of a compromise. If you buy Leica M cameras and use them exclusively with Leica M lenses then, in addition to the customize filter stacks, there is a catalog of profiles and corrections in the camera's memory that allows the system to fine tune the response of the camera and lens together to correct most faults. It's a software augmentation.

Where it all falls apart is when you use "designed for film" rangefinder lenses on mainstream digital bodies from other makers. Or third party "designed for film" lenses on Leica SL cameras. These cameras do have a fairly extensive catalog of Leica M series lens settings but nothing for third party lenses; like the Zeiss lenses I'm using...

So, when I first shot the 28mm and 35mm ZM lenses on a Leica SL2 body I got colors that shifted in the corners. The shift was also non-linear. I could work on removing it in PhotoShop but it was almost impossible in images where important and extensive detail was placed near the sides or corners of the frames. 

I could get closer if I "cheated' and used a Leica M lens profile from the menu that was a near enough match for the ZM lens I was using but it was hit and miss. 

A few weeks ago I touched on the fact that the Sigma fp camera, and I'm pretty sure the fpL also, has a feature that allows you to go into the lens compensation menu, choose: "color shading" and make a correction for up to ten individual lenses. You set up the camera and lens to face a monochrome target ( I used a big, white foamcore sheet tacked to the wall. Light it so it's uniform from side to side and corner to corner. They you push the "AEL" button on the camera while in the color shading sub-sub menu and it makes a measurement and writes it to the camera. You can select a slot for the info for each of your lenses and label them. I started with the 28mm. It's lens #1. The feature also allows you to describe the lens at each slot and label it. My top slot reads: "28mm f2.8", and in smaller type: "ZM 28mm f2.8." 

I compared the before and after tests and the feature in the camera works very, very well. The corners on all my tests were as neutral and shift free as I could ask for. Being set up already I decided it would be a good time to test and calibrate all my favorite wide lenses that featured older, film-oriented designs. I did the 28, the 35mm, the 40mm and even tossed in the CZ 50mm f1.4 ZF just for grins. I don't know of another camera that offers this degrees of lens optimization but I'm happy to have it in the Sigma fp. 

Now that I've optimized the camera to work well with these lenses I'll probably end  up using it a lot more for day to day work. It's small, light, has amazing color and now boasts the highest degree of optimization between these interesting lenses and the sensor of any camera I own. 

It took all of five minutes to "fix" four different lenses. And I still have six more slots to fill up. Fun with cameras.