Ming Thein

Deconstructed photography, part two: compact camera masterclass

December 17, 2012 by Ming Thein

Imprint. Iphone 4

In part one, we deconstructed the essence of photography, and identified the critical qualities required for a good general-purpose camera. What about the candidates?

On this basis, we have a few potential candidates, in alphabetical order with specs and particular standout qualities:
– Canon G15 – 12MP, 1/1.7″, 28-140/1.8-2.8 – optical finder, zoom range, external controls
– Canon S110 – 12MP, 1/1.7″, 24-120/2.0-5.9 (!) – compactness
– Fuji FinePix X10 – 12MP, 2/3″, 28-112/2.0-2.8 – mechanical zoom, optical finder
– Fuji FinePix XF1 – 12MP, 2/3″, 25-100/1.8-4.9 – mechanical zoom, compactness, JPEG quality
– Leica D-Lux 6 – 10MP variable-aspect, 1/1.7″, 24-90/1.4(!)-2.3 – variable aspect ratios, lens speed, macro, extended warranty and Lightroom (over the LX7)
– Nikon P7700 – 12MP, 1/1.7″, 28-200/2.0-4.0 – telephoto reach, external controls
– Olympus XZ2 – 12MP, 1/1.7″, 28-112/1.8-2.5 – a safe middle of the road choice
– Panasonic LX7 – 10MP variable-aspect, 1/1.7″, 24-90/1.4(!)-2.3 – variable aspect ratios, lens speed, macro
– Sony RX100 – 20MP (!), 1″, 28-100/1.8-4.9 – low light use/ resolution/ dynamic range/ overall image quality, speed, video
– The Ricoh GR-Digital IV is a possible too, if you don’t mind a fixed 28mm lens – 10MP, 1/1.7″, 28/1.9 – steath, compactness, street/ hyperfocal photography, configurability

Church reflection, Melaka. RX100

Of these, I think the G15, X10, XZ2 and P7700 are probably on the large side of what you might want to carry, that said, they are loaded with external controls, and the most tactile of the group. The smaller cameras are more button-and-menu-driven, though they all have control dials whose functions can be assigned to your preferences. The X10 and XF1 are the only two cameras here with physical zoom rings; a neat touch that improves responsiveness (especially since the rings are linked to power-on). Almost all of them are based around the same sensor, and offer fast lenses at the wide end; the LX7 and DL6 are really fast (f1.4); others are consistently fast throughout. The more compact cameras (S110, XF1, RX100) trade off lens speed at the long end.

If you’re expecting me to pick a winner, you’re going to be disappointed. All are similar enough and offer sufficient control, image quality and responsiveness that any one will do for the majority of situations. Yet, they are also different enough in control philosophy and particular feature speciality that if you particularly need any one of these features, your choice may be skewed. If not, pick the one that feels best to you, the one your brand loyalty dictates, the one whose design you prefer – whatever. It doesn’t matter. You just need to like the camera enough to use it, and it should be intuitive enough that you will actually do so. Lower end cameras will work just fine, too – I’ve had great results with the ultracompact Canon SD780 IS and superzoom Panasonic TZ3.

May arches. RX100

Let’s get something straight upfront though: there are things you can do, and things you can’t. It’s important to know what falls into each category so you a) don’t waste your time attempting to shoot in a particular way then being disappointed by the results, and b) can play to the strengths of your equipment.

Strengths:
– Stealth
– Compressed perspectives
– Getting everything in focus/ hyperfocal photography
– Low key photography (in low light)
– Moderate to high contrast images
– Long exposures, with a relatively lightweight tripod, or IS system: the leaf shutters used in compacts have almost zero vibration, and hand shake can be eliminated almost entirely when paired with the self timer.
– Odd points of view, when used with a swivel screen

Don’t waste your time:
– Getting any sort of shallow depth of field. Only close up, with a distant background, maximum aperture and whatever lets you focus the closest. Otherwise, forget it.
– Tracking moving objects
– Very low light
– Manual focus – why bother?
– Working with thick gloves in cold environments

Two old ladies framed, Melaka. RX100

For the most part, there are few limitations. Most of the troubling ones can be worked around; the depth of field control one I consider to be more a compositional thing the photographer needs to learn around rather than a limitation of the camera. More problematic is the inability to track moving objects; AF-C is my preferred setting for street photography and reportage scenarios because it counters the effect of subject motion. That said, if you’re using a compact, you could either prefocus at the desired spot and release as your subject passes it, you can pan, or you can rely on the extended depth of field for a given field of view to cover you. Any one of these three approaches will work just fine. In very low light situations, a mini-pod can save you; alternatively, there’s self-timer and IS. But by far the best method is simply to shoot a low key image, or embrace the grain.

Tranquility. RX100

There are only a few key settings for general photography, in my mind; all of the cameras on the list above will be able to cope.

Program mode. 99.9% of the time, you will be at a focal length/ aperture/ distance combination that means everything in your scene will be in focus anyway; aperture control is meaningless. I’d rather have the camera able to shift exposure automatically to prevent overexposure/ underexposure rather than miss a shot.

Auto ISO. If you set the right limits for maximum ISO (probably around 800-1600 for the smaller-sensored cameras, and 3200 for the RX100) and minimum shutter speed (not always an option), combined with P mode, you’ll avoid missing shots because of insufficient shutter speed or exposure – but at the same time, not have to use an ISO higher than strictly necessary to maintain image quality. Yes, it appears that we’re basically transferring control of exposure over to the camera – but unless you really need to freeze motion or add it (panning, soft water etc.) then I cannot actually think of a situation in which you need to set these parameters manually.

A night out. RX100

Spot or center-weighted meter. The main reason I’m not an advocate for matrix metering on compacts is that it both tends to be a bit unpredictable, as well simultaneously critical due to the limited dynamic range of small sensors. Nothing screams unnatural in an image more than a blown highlight with a harsh edge transition; taking control of your meter by understanding how it responds to certain situations will help immensely to avoid this. If you use the spot meter, then add between 1/2 and 1 stop to bring the highlights up to the point just before they clip; if you’re using centerweight, then make sure you have a good mix of tonal ranges within the central spot. In either case, the priority is to ensure that the subject is exposed correctly; it’s also almost always the place where you want to focus, so having a spot meter linked to the focus point and exposure lock with a half press of the shutter is ideal – fortunately, this is also almost always the way compact cameras are set up to behave by default.

Exposure compensation easily reached. Regardless of whether you’re using spot or center-weighted meter, you’re inevitably going to need to use exposure compensation at some point – all meters are thrown out by very bright or very dark objects. Better that you either have a dedicated command dial for this, or better yet, a physical dial with the increments permanently marked.

Tokyo nights. RX100

Single point AF. As much as I’d love to turn over focus selection to the camera, I find that far too often it doesn’t focus on what I want it to, or it picks faces when I don’t want it to, or it finds faces in random geometric arrangements. Whilst this technology has come a long way, it’s still not perfect and can’t determine distance accurately – so the subject picked is almost always the most contrasty one, not the nearest. Just use the center AF point for focusing and metering, then recompose once both are locked.

Prefocus. A common myth is that compacts have huge shutter lag: they don’t. If anything, they have less shutter lag than most DSLRs because there’s no mirror to get out of the way before the exposure. The confusion comes when people include focus acquisition time in the mix; this is not right because you can seldom compare situations in a consistent manner. Prefocus shutter release lag for say the Nikon D4 – arguably one of the fastest cameras out there – is 42ms. By comparison, the RX100’s prefocus lag is just 13ms – so short that it takes your finger longer to physically move to depress the button by that additional fraction. Prefocusing thus obviously reduces overall response time, meaning fewer missed shots. You have to shoot a bit differently with a compact and a moving subject: with a DSLR, I’ll use AF-C and track my subject until it hits the point I want relative to the rest of the composition, then release. With a compact, I’ll frame and prefocus first, wait statically with the final framing intact, then shoot when the subject hits the point I want.

Duplicity. RX100

Stabilizer on. Small cameras held at arms’ length (and not braced against one’s face) are not the most stable of shooting platforms; without a stabilizer, you’ll probably need 1/2x focal length – or higher with higher resolution cameras – to maintain a pixel-sharp image. You can probably claw back around 3 stops with the best of the stabilization systems, of which Panasonic is currently king. Make sure it’s set to the mode which is always active so you can frame more precisely, too – some cameras only activate the stabilizer when shooting to save power.

RAW (with exceptions). Other than the Fujis – whose JPEG files, especially with DR400 set – are amazing – there are gains to be made by shooting RAW and postprocessing for all of the above cameras. The gap is smaller for the Sony RX100, but still noticeable. Note that some cameras like the LX7 add in-camera processing to remove CA and distortion; whilst you might get more detail and dynamic range in RAW, you’re going to be trading off automated lens corrections.

Crossing. RX100

Burst mode. I don’t spray away at 10fps on my RX100 all the time, but I do have it set to CL and 4fps in case I need to shoot a sequence of something interesting; it’s the same way I have my DSLRs and OM-D set up. In lower light, keeping your finger down can partially alleviate any camera shake caused by the depressing motion.

Flash off. Unless you’re triggering remote speedlights, are shooting social images in a dark place, or perhaps trying something with rear-sync, then avoid the small built-in unit. It’s just going to look horrible, not to mention lack power to fill in daylight beyond a meter or so.

Highlight warning in playback, with zoom-to-focus-point. I find this particular combination of review settings useful because it lets me quickly assess if I nailed the shot or not: is it critically sharp (magnification amount for this will differ from camera to camera)? Are there any overexposed areas? Critical underexposure? The latter is especially important when you have both only the LCD to use in daylight to evaluate images, as well as limited dynamic range.

In front but not driving. RX100

Have a spare battery handy. Continuous live view drains batteries very quickly. Even the best of cameras will only manage perhaps 3 hours of continuous running time with the LCD on, which is probably about 200-250 images or thereabouts. If you are careful and turn the camera off between exposures and minimize your chimping, you might eke this out to about 5-600 shots; for me, this is bare minimum for a full day of shooting. A spare battery is therefore a must have, and allows you to keep going even when the main one is being charged.

I want to talk a bit about RAW, processing and sufficiency. Although I’ve been repeatedly revisiting the whole idea of postprocessing recently – first with film, then with medium format, and as a question in and of itself – I know I haven’t taken a position either way yet, but I don’t think not processing is an option for most compacts, with the exception of the Fuji X10 and XF1. This is because none of them have the native tonal qualities that are desirable in a photograph – namely smooth highlight and shadow transitions with reasonably punchy midtones – straight out of the camera. The files certainly have the potential to be that way, but they do require work post-capture; perhaps a bit more than a good file from a larger sensor camera. However, I wouldn’t be too worried about image quality: a good 12MP file that’s critically sharp at the pixel level will print just fine to A3 and perhaps one size beyond; needless to say it’s more than enough for web viewing. It’s often important to take a quick reality check in the pursuit of megapixels: when was the last time you printed larger than A3?

Imagined patterns.

In the end though, it all comes back down to the pictures, and the ideas encapsulated and communicated therein. The camera is merely a box, a tool; why should it be over-promoted to seemingly also be the endgame? My personal journey for creative evolution has taken me in a different direction: an increased focus on the purity of the idea, and continued liberation from equipment requirements. I want something that can capture what I see in a variety of perspectives; something that is unobtrusive, stealthy and doesn’t attract attention; something that’s flexible enough for most situations I might randomly encounter, but doesn’t require a great commitment in bulk or weight, preferably I shouldn’t even know it’s there. I don’t mind if it imposes some limitations on the way I shoot or the way I meter; these might turn out to be good things which provide small creative nudges in the right direction. As good as Micro Four Thirds is, by the time you load up on a lens or two, you still know you’re carrying a camera – and I would still take the OM-D for serious personal work – but for experimentation, and the kind of ligthbulb moments of experimentation that happen when you’re not planning them, it seems that for now a serious compact or two is the way to go. And the best thing of all is that if (and probably when) I get bored of it, it’s not going to be too painful to swap it for a new one and start the process all over again. MT

The various cameras mentioned in this article are available here at their respective links from Amazon: Canon G15, Canon S110, Fuji FinePix X10, Fuji FinePix XF1, Leica D-Lux 6, Nikon P7700, Olympus XZ2, Panasonic LX7, Sony RX100, Ricoh GR-Digital IV.

____________

Visit our Teaching Store to up your photographic game – including Photoshop Workflow DVDs and customized Email School of Photography; or go mobile with the Photography Compendium for iPad. You can also get your gear from B&H and Amazon. Prices are the same as normal, however a small portion of your purchase value is referred back to me. Thanks!

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Filed Under: Articles, On Photography Tagged With: article, being different, compact cameras, deconstructing, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, modern photography, opinion, photography, point and shoot, psychology, thein

A little gift…

December 16, 2012 by Ming Thein

In the holiday spirit, I’m giving my readers a little gift – for this week only, from 17-24th December, all of the short videos on my iPad App are now just $1.99 (down from $5.99). So, if you’ve wanted an introduction to masking or basic retouching, or been curious how my ACR workflow looks, now’s the time to indulge. 🙂 Happy Holidays! MT

Ming Thein’s Photography Compendium for iPad is available here from the App Store.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: 2012 holiday special video price, ipad app, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, thein

Deconstructed photography, part one: identifying the essentials

December 15, 2012 by Ming Thein

None of the images in this article have any clues as to the camera used, but I feel that they’re strong images nevertheless; if you’re curious you can click through to the image’s flickr hosting page and scroll down to the bottom right; EXIF data is there. Try to ask yourself first though: are there any giveaways that mean it could only have been shot with one particular format or piece of equipment?

This is the first article in a two-part series about photography today, with the ultimate objective – as always – of making a great image, but this time taking full advantage of all the technology at our disposal. After spending some time with medium format in a quest to get another one of those creative spurts brought on by a major change in equipment, I’ve pretty much made a complete U turn and am contemplating a Nikon P7700 instead. Allow me to explain; excuse the somewhat roundabout logic, but I think it will make sense once we reach the end.

We need to backtrack a bit to take into account some fundamental viewer psychology. In the increasingly huge sea of images that are being produced today, what stands out are those that look different from the rest. And for the most part, that difference is obtained by turning something up to 11, rather than nailing the fundamentals of what makes an outstanding image. Commonly seen ‘techniques’ include: oversaturation, HDR, fake cross-processing-hipstagram-effects, over-contrasty black and white conversions, ultrawide perspectives, supertele perspectives, walls of nothing but bokeh…I think you can see where this list is going. In short: if one aspect of the image has to shout to cover the deficiencies of the other portions, then this cannot be a good image in the first place because it fundamentally has those has deficiencies to begin with.

Yet the very reason why these types of images stand out will erode as there are more of them in circulation: they will no longer look different from the rest of the pack. This brings us back to a focus on the fundamental things that make an image work; I’ve said this so many times I wouldn’t be surprised if somebody decides to engrave it on my tombstone (or perhaps I should get a tattoo of it) – light, subject, composition; then, the idea. The idea can come first and override the other three if it’s strong enough, or it can be the underlying reason for their execution. Images with all four properties will endure time and transcend the medium: a strong image in this way will still be arresting whether it was shot with an iPhone or a medium format back.

In that case, why isn’t it the focus of every aspiring photographer to nail the fundamental structure of an image before worrying about the number of pixels or number of stops of dynamic range it has, or the maximum speed of their lens? Simply because it’s much more difficult to do so. On the other hand, photographic technology has some so far in recent times that there are few reasons why we should continue to bother with the technicalities of it all, so long as you know how to control the fundamental parameters that affect the audience’s perception of the image: in a way, it’s taking the Apple design approach to photography. We identify the fundamentals, throw away what isn’t important, and spend a lot more time focusing on what does matter. But at the same time, we avoid things that can be gimmicky or difficult to execute with the aim of providing the average photographer with a nice set of fundamental skills that will serve in the majority of situations.

Although I suspect most photographers already shoot this way – aim, focus, compose to varying degrees of precision and consideration, perhaps compensate exposure, then shoot – a lot of them hide behind the pretence of a lot of complex-looking settings and adjustments that are seldom used outside fully automatic mode, and more often than not just confuse and get in the way when an accidental button press delivers behaviour other than expected.

What I’m saying is that perhaps we should consider the possibility that for the vast majority of situations, it’s not a bad idea to acknowledge and embrace that. Why do I need to manually set my exposure if the camera’s meter can get it right? Why does it matter what white balance is or the exact Kelvin temperature of a scene if the camera’s automatic white balance can cope? Why do we need to pick the focus point if most of the time, the camera is right, and the rest of the time, extended depth of field covers the errors? Why spend time processing RAW files individually if the JPEGs are excellent, or even better?* Let technology do the work, and forget about all of those settings that don’t matter – don’t even bother including them. Why should there be an option for dynamic range 100%, 200% and 400% when clearly we want 400% for 99% of situations? We shouldn’t even need custom functions if the camera behaves in a sensible and consistent manner.

*See my recent Fuji FinePix XF1 review.

Since it’s unlikely that I’ll ever be approached by a camera maker and offered both a blank sheet of paper and some deep funds, we’ll have to make do with what we’ve got. And in the marketing-driven world of photographic products, we actually have to go to either extreme of the product spectrum to find what we’re looking for: a camera which has solid, reliable automatic functions, no frills, and the basics like exposure compensation and spot metering. It would be nice to have a range of perspectives easily to hand too, though for novices perhaps it’s safer to go with a fixed lens and forgo the temptation to compose with the zoom. Add a good sensor, speed and responsiveness into the mix, and we’re done. I used to be hung up about having an optical viewfinder for stability and visual nuance, but that’s changed with improvements in stabilisation systems, and even more so with increased LCD resolutions more accurately displaying focus at the sensor plane and the added flexibility to shoot from other vantages where the camera doesn’t have to be at your eye. Depth of field control is a nice to have, but not critical; it’s just another way to isolate your subject – but there are many ways of doing that, and it’s not the most pictorially powerful anyway. Too many people rely on extreme bokeh to make an image that looks different; we don’t need super-fast lenses for common applications anymore now that even small sensors are capable of delivering good results at ISO 1600**. Finally, being a pack mule for your equipment isn’t fun: the less we can get away with carrying, the better.

**In the early days of photography, photographers struggled to get more depth of field rather than less – perhaps it was a case of art imitating life (perception), art (photography) imitating art (painting). Yes, we have that additional tool, but don’t overuse it: there is such a thing as too little depth of field. Note that this is different from good/ bad quality of bokeh; another axis of variables, if you will.

What does this mean in real terms? If you add everything up, for the majority of photographers, we’re looking at a prosumer compact, possibly with a larger sensor, possibly not. These cameras are designed to be automated; the manual controls are just put in mostly to appease the marketers and obsessive photographers who like to twiddle their aperture dials, oblivious of the fact that with a 20mm real focal length, there will be no visible difference in depth of field at f5.6 or f8 with a subject that’s 30m away, or that no matter what focusing mode you use, it’ll still be too slow to track action. I am not saying that all photographers should abandon control; if anything, the opposite. I certainly won’t be replacing my full-frame DSLR and lenses with a compact for client-critical work anytime soon, if ever. What I’m saying is that for casual photography, we should focus on mastering control of the elements that matter, which conveniently are also those that can easily be taken care of even with the most basic of cameras. For most uses, those are limited to a few critical things: light (exposure compensation), composition (perspective, positioning, focus) and subject (timing). The rest are secondary or specialised.

Compacts have some big advantages that often get overlooked:
– They’re small and discrete, easily portable and don’t attract attention;
– They cover focusing errors through extended depth of field;
– They might have limited dynamic range compared to larger sensor cameras, but that can actually be helpful from a pictorial/ artistic point of view by emphasizing contrast and differences in light;
– You can carry a lot of perspectives in a small size, without too many optical compromises – 28-200 isn’t unheard of, and I believe there’s a Canon that even covers 24-1200m (!!);
– They focus close, once again allowing perspectives that might not otherwise be possible;
– Extended depth of field + unusual perspectives = compositions not easily achievable with a larger sensored camera, e.g. highly compressed images with everything in focus
– They’re very easily positionable; lenses can be poked through holes in fences or walls, held high or low etc. – especially the swivel screen models
– Sensor and stabilizer technology has come a long way. With the D800E, I might need ISO 6400 to shoot at f8, 35mm and get enough shutter speed to handhold without shake; even with VR. Let’s assume the stabilizer advantage evens out. I could shoot at 17mm and f4 on the OM-D and have the same perspective and DOF, but I’d be using ISO 1600 for the same shutter speed; on say the Panasonic LX7, I could be at a larger aperture than f2 (unfortunately there isn’t one at this focal length) and two stops better again, at ISO 400. We’re looking at some form of equivalence here: sure, the D800E image will have more detail, but that won’t really come through in typical print or display sizes for the majority of photographers***. Perceptually, they’d look pretty similar at a 12×18″/ A3 print; I’d much rather carry the LX7, thanks.
– AF speed has come a long way – for static subjects, we’ve pretty much got as much speed as we need. For moving ones, until we get phase detection sites onto our compact sensors, they’re all equally useless and you’re going to have to find a DSLR.
– Buffer and usability isn’t really an issue anymore; it hasn’t been for compacts since about 2009. My Sony RX100 will shoot 20MP, 14-bit RAW + JPEG fine images at 10fps for 10 frames.
– Price: even the best of the compacts will cost significantly less than a midrange DSLR or mirrorless camera and a decent zoom. Again taking the example of the Sony RX100 – we’re looking at about US$700 +/-, which compares very favorably to even a Nikon D3200 and AFS 16-85/3.5-5.6 VR at approximately US$1,200 – and that doesn’t even come close to the Sony’s f1.8 wide end. And if you get bored of it, it’s not going to cost too much to trade it in for the latest and greatest. (New cameras can be a source of inspiration in themselves, but that’s another topic for another article.)

You’ll note that I’ve excluded Micro Four Thirds and the other CSCs from this list, mainly because there are compact and good all-in-one lens solutions that make the cameras pocketable. If you don’t mind a bit more bulk and a prime lens, then these are great options too – for not much more size, you get a lot more image quality. But there’s no way you’re going to put even an E-PM2 and the smallest 14/2.5 prime lens into your pocket without risking arrest on public decency laws.

***We’re talking sufficiency here, not ultimate image quality.

Let’s boil this down a bit further: what do we really need in a compact?
– Responsiveness: everything from AF speed to menu operation and navigability, shot-to-shot speed, image review etc. Speed is the priority;
– Fast AF. I can’t emphasize this one enough;
– A fast lens: it’s much easier to make fast, decent zooms that cover a smaller image circle than a larger one; f2 or better on the wide end, and ideally something fairly close on the long end (though that will tend to be compromised as the lens’ reach increases);
– A decent range of perspectives: wide/moderate wide to moderate telephoto; enough to get a clear difference in perspective. Personally, 28-85 is fine for me, though I don’t have any complaints about a bit wider or a bit longer; compact sensors tend to be 4:3 rather than 3:2, and since the focal length posted follows the diagonal of the sensor, you’re going to need a bit more width to get the same horizontal field of view;
– A good LCD. Forget the optical finder, it’s going to be a tiny tunnel. I’d rather have a nice, bright, sharp 3″+ LCD. Bonus points for something with an antireflective coating that’s also visible in daylight, and a tilt/ swivel screen;
– RAW support, or outstanding JPEGs;
– A good image stabilisation system;
– Easily accessed exposure compensation, preferably on a separate dial;
– A sensible auto-ISO mode, ideally allowing setting of minimum shutter speed, if not linked to the focal length used;
– A solid meter, or spot metering, or preferably both;
– Fast image review, with a quick way to check critical focus;
– Finally, tactility matters. Something that feels nice to use will simply be used more often; it’s in the quality of the materials, the feel of the controls/ switches/ buttons/ knobs/ dials; the grippiness of the rubber; the solidity of the build.

In part two, we’ll consider the current candidates and field a bit of a compact camera masterclass.

____________

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Filed Under: Articles, On Photography Tagged With: article, being different, deconstructing, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, modern photography, opinion, photography, psychology, thein

Understanding autofocus, and tips for all cameras

December 13, 2012 by Ming Thein

Levitation (and prefocus). Nikon D700, 85/1.4 G

A side effect of the ever-increasing resolution of today’s cameras is that autofocus must necessarily get more precise, too. The Nikon D800/ D800E issues have shown that even a small misalignment or miscalibration in the focusing system can basically cripple the camera into resolving at a far lower level of performance than it would be capable of under ideal circumstances. Short of using manual focus and magnified live view for everything – I would still recommend doing this for critical work, and I do it when working under any controlled lighting situation since I’m more likely to have the time and be using a tripod – it is therefore highly beneficial to pay closer attention to exactly what is going on when the camera acquires focus.

A situation where fast, reactive autofocus can help. Nikon D700, 300/4 D

For DSLRs, SLTs and some mirrorless cameras (the Nikon 1s and Sony NEX-5R and NEX-6), a phase detection system is used. This involves taking some of the light from the subject area, passing it through a beamsplitter and comparing the difference in phase of the output; a CCD is used to measure light intensity as a function of position, and the lens is moved until light from both arms of the beamsplitter is coincident upon a single point. This entire module constitutes the AF sensor array that’s either located at the bottom of the mirror box (DSLRs) or embedded in certain specific photosite locations (mirrorless cameras). If you select a specific AF point, then the camera uses only the sensors corresponding to the location of that point; if you let the camera pick, it will usually sample all points to find which is the closest subject covered by the AF sensor array, and focus on that.

En masse. Nikon D3, 70-300VR

Phase detect autofocus is fast and generally does not require racking the lens back and forth – otherwise known as ‘hunting’ – because the sensor is able to tell whether the light is positively or negatively out of phase, and thus in which direction to move the lens in order to correct this and bring the light coincident, thus achieving focusing. The precision of focus depends on several factors: firstly, the resolution of the AF sensor; secondly, the alignment of all secondary optics involved in transferring the light to the AF sensor – specifically, the main and submirror assemblies; any microlenses involved; thirdly, the alignment of the AF and imaging sensors (both must be perfectly perpendicular to the lens mount); fourthly, any calibration data the system requires to establish a perfect zero or null position; and finally, the ability of the lens’ focusing groups to move precisely in small increments that maintain perfect alignment with the optical axis.

Turning on the inside. Nikon D800E, 28-300VR

Focusing with wide angle lenses is generally less precise with this method because the differences in phase are a lot less; to complicate things, the lens itself may have optical limitations in its design, introducing field curvature, coma etc – all of which can send potentially misleading data to the AF sensor, resulting in incorrect focus. It also doesn’t help that subjects tend to be a lot smaller, and not filling the AF boxes completely. (It’s also worth noting at this point that the AF boxes themselves are an indication of where the sensor grid lies, but there’s no documentation covering precisely where the active areas are located. For greater precision, perhaps the sensors should be crosses instead of boxes.)

Precisely a fast as a speeding bullet. Nikon D3, 24-70

For moving subjects, phase detect systems either continuously change the focus distance, depending on the instantaneous phase information received at the AF sensor, or alternatively employ a predictive algorithm and multiple focusing points in order to track the subject. The most sophisticated systems also employ information from the metering sensor in order to track the subject by color. None of these systems are infallible, and can be fooled by objects of a similar color or larger size coming between the camera and subject – for instance if your subject happens to duck behind something. Although the level of processing power and sophistication of these systems has significantly increased over the past years; I have yet to see any autofocus system that can 100% reliably track an erratically moving subject – especially if it leaves the area of the frame covered by the autofocus sensor array.

Cyclist, Nepal. Nikon D700, 24/1.4

I’m sure you can now see why the challenge of achieving perfect focus gets more and more difficult as sensor resolution increases: if any one of these is out of tolerance by a very small margin, you’re not going to have a sharp image.

Most mirrorless/ CSC cameras, compact fixed-lens cameras and DSLRs in live view all use a much simpler method of focusing – contrast detection. This involves moving the focus point of the lens back and forth to test which direction delivers the highest contrast. The camera will then iterate this process until highest contrast is achieved; although hunting has been minimized with the new generation of contrast detect cameras; it is still necessary to rack focus back and forth simply because there is no way for the camera to know which direction in which to move the lens. Because of this contrast detect autofocus will always be slower than well-implemented phase detect autofocus, with all other things being equal. However, it will also be more accurate simply because the imaging sensor is used to determine the point of optimal focus, and there are far fewer potential issues with tolerances and alignment of components.

Point of view. Canon IXUS 100 IS

It is also worth noting that the size of the sensor actually plays an important part in determining just how fast contrast-detect autofocus systems can be; this is because larger sensors have shallower depth of field for a given field of view and aperture, requiring more movement of the focusing groups within the lens in order to determine where the point of highest contrast (and correct focus distance) lies. This is especially noticeable when comparing a compact camera to a DSLR; compounding this is the fact that small sensor cameras require much shorter real focal lengths to achieve the same angle of view; this results in extended depth of field for a given angle of view, requiring less focus precision because any potential errors can be covered up by increased depth of field. The slow focusing of DSLRs in live view mode is not due to the lens’ focusing motor speed; the same combination often is capable of delivering blazingly fast results when used with the regular phase-detect system.

The instant of terror when you’re base jumping and not sure if your chute is going to open or not. Nikon D200, AI 500/4 P

There’s one added method that used to be common in older cameras, but is now only to be found on some of the Ricoh compacts: active phase detect. This uses an infrared beam to light the subject, and the reflected light is measured by two phase detection sensors on the front of the camera to assist the contrast detect system. It can greatly speed things up, but range is limited because it requires active illumination from the camera – and the power of these secondary lights is always limited.

Now that you have some understanding of how autofocus systems work, let’s talk about some tips to maximize the accuracy and speed of your camera.

Through the flood. Nikon D80, 17-55/2.8

All cameras

Don’t let the camera pick the focus point for you. Unless you are shooting and erratically moving subject which you cannot follow manually selecting the focus point; always shoot in single point mode and pick your focus point carefully to be over your subject. Many cameras also weight the metering in favor of the focus point; it is therefore important to ensure that it corresponds with your subject – it is almost always what you would want to have correctly metered anyway.
Make sure your subject is larger than your focus point. If it isn’t; you need to either move closer (this also becomes a compositional issue) or focus on something at the same distance which presents a larger target.

Phase-detect cameras (DSLRs, Sony NEX-5R, NEX-6, Nikon 1)

The camera will always focus on the closest object underneath the focusing point. It may sometimes be fooled by a higher contrast structure – for example, a barcode instead of a blank piece of paper immediately behind it – but in general it will pick the closest subject providing it completely covers the focusing point.
High-contrast subjects (again, like barcodes) make ideal autofocus targets. It is also worth noting that some autofocus points are sensitive to detail in one direction only; i.e. horizontally or vertically, and not both directions. (Cross type points are sensitive to detail in both directions; but these are generally only found at the center point, or distributed around the AF-sensor arry only on high end cameras.) It is therefore important to find a suitable target for your camera – a QR code rather than a barcode, I suppose.
Use continuous autofocus, unless you are shooting a static object with the camera on a tripod. This is because any small motion of either you or the subject can be enough to move the plane of focus away from the intended point; this is especially critical with fast, shallow depth of field lenses. With continuous autofocus, the camera is always focusing right up to the point of image capture. The one exception to this, is slow, or wide angle lenses. Smaller format cameras are a bit less sensitive to this issue because they have more depth of field for a given angle of view, which tends to compensate for any errors in the focusing system.
Try to avoid focusing at the center and recomposing your image where possible, because there are potential issues with field curvature – especially at the edges and corners of wide angle lenses. Use the autofocus point that is either directly over your subject or closest to it in order to minimize any potential issues with the lens’ design.
Assign a button to locking focus (AF-L) to use in conjunction with continuous autofocus; this saves you having to switch to single autofocus with static subjects. Alternatively, decouple focusing from the shutter button by assigning an AF-ON button that activates focusing when pressed; I don’t use this method as it requires you to press two buttons to shoot; I prefer to minimize the number of controls that must be attended to especially in fast-moving situations.

Panning in the rain. Apple iPhone 4.

Contrast detect systems (DSLRs in live view, compacts, CSCs, mirrorless cameras)

Once again, do not let the camera pick the focus point for you; select it yourself. If anything, cameras that use contrast detect systems tend to be far more flexible in where you can put your focusing point; this is because they use the entire area of the imaging sensor.
Avoid continuous autofocus. This seems counterintuitive in light of my advice for phase detect cameras, however this is because continuous autofocus on a contrast detect system is constantly hunting back and forth around the point where expects to subject to be; imagine a car trying to follow a curve that the driver can’t see until it’s almost immediately in front of him – the path (here, the focusing distance) will be erratic and not match the curve exactly. This tends to result in a very low hit rate. It also helps that contrast detect cameras tend to either have an alternate system to deal with moving objects (in the case of DSLRs); or employ much smaller sensors that are very forgiving of minor focusing errors or changes in subject position due to their extended depth of field.
If you have to use continuous autofocus because your subject is moving; there are two other alternatives. The first option is to set your camera to maximum contrast (for obvious reasons) – the live view image is usually a preview of your current camera settings and will match the JPEG output. If you’re shooting raw; your file will not be affected by in camera processing. The second option is an old trick using the days of manual focus photography; it’s called ‘trap focusing’. First, decide on your composition and where your subject must go in order to complete it; ensure your shutter speed is high enough to prevent motion blur of the subject; finally, choose single autofocus and prefocus the camera at that position, releasing the shutter when the subject is in the intended position. One added advantage of this technique – especially for compact cameras – is that it significantly reduces the shutter lag to the point where it is very easy to release the camera at the precise moment you intend. Note that if you cannot get a high enough shutter speed; then you will need to pan through with the subject in order to only blur the background out and keep the subject sharp; this is a combination of panning and trap focusing techniques and works best when the subject is moving across your field of view; it is pretty useless if the subject is coming towards you.
Some cameras have a continuous pre-focus or full-time autofocus option that is always adjusting the lens based on whatever subject happens to be under the focusing point at the time. This is generally a good option if you absolutely must reduce shutter lag and are unable to pre-focus. However, note that the system can also be fooled, most notably by moving the camera around rapidly – especially if you are not pointing it at anything in particular. It is also an enormous drain on (usually already short) battery life because the lens’ focusing groups are constantly in motion so long as the camera is switched on.

It is worth practicing all of these techniques until they become second nature; you’ll be surprised by both the increase in your keeper rate, as well as the improvement in acuity and sharpness at the individual pixel level. It is just one of the many elements of shot discipline; which is critical in achieving the highest possible image quality from your camera. You’ll also be surprised at just how much more responsive your camera has seemingly become. MT

____________

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Filed Under: Articles, On Photography Tagged With: article, autofocus, autofocus tips, how to, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, photography, thein

Photoessay: Tokyo reflections

December 12, 2012 by Ming Thein

One more from the Tokyo series. It never ceases to amaze me how clean everything is – combine that with strong, directional light, and you’ve got the making of images with instant depth. Reflections are wonderful things; they’re visual metaphors for something that might or might not be there in reality. Shot with a Sony RX100. Enjoy! MT

____________

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Filed Under: On Photography Tagged With: japan, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, photoessay, reflections, sony rx100, thein, tokyo

The burden of choice

December 11, 2012 by Ming Thein

A benefit (or curse, depending on how you look at it) of the modern photography era is that we now have a huge amount of choice when it comes to equipment. A lot of it is pretty affordable, too; especially stuff that might be one or two generations behind the latest and greatest. Does it perform any worse than when it was new? Does it have any less potential? No. That still lies with the photographer.

That said, I’m as guilty as the next guy of collecting – nay, hoarding – cameras and lenses. The tactile experience of taking a photo matters to me; it should be just as enjoyable as the result. Nice equipment is a pleasure to use – ergonomic cameras, well-thought out controls, nice materials, bright finders etc. are a pleasure. I don’t like fighting my equipment – nobody sees that struggle in the final image, and it’s just frustrating. A camera that’s enjoyable to use makes you want to go out and use it, which in turn encourages you to experiment, and that – ultimately – can make your images better. It is NOT the same as collecting equipment in the mistaken belief that it will correct some fundamental deficiencies in your own skillset.

The upshot of all of this is two things: firstly, I’ve used a lot of gear over the years (see the CAMERAPEDIA! for concise opinions on everything I’ve used), and the amount that’s filling my dryboxes has steadily increased since I started doing this full time and could write off gear as a business expense. Actually, it’s gotten to the point that I had a sale last month just to clear the clutter. I’ve still got lenses and cameras I seldom use, which both make me feel guilty and like I should be out and shooting even more than I already am.

However, I digress severely. A couple of people emailed me recently asking how I pick what to use on any given day – this is not a straightforward question to answer, and it’s made more difficult by both a combination of lots of gear, a heightened awareness of image quality, and knowing that you have some very specific gear for very specific situations, some of which you might encounter during the day. It’s really about balancing compromises: you know that you’re going to encounter some situations that could benefit from a very small portion of your equipment; do you bring it along or not?

The immediate instinct of most people is to bring whatever they’ve got, just in case. I’ve done this before: in 2008/9, I went on a two week trip to Japan with a D3, D90 and pro zooms to cover 14-300mm. Without gaps. The thing that struck me was a) I really wasn’t enjoying myself by day three because of the weight; and b) at the end, I was only carrying one lens and getting much stronger images out of that. Moral of the story: the less gear you carry, the more you focus on making the most of what you’ve got. Although I’ve tried to follow that philosophy for all future trips and assignments, there are exceptions. And of course the more you shoot, the more things you see – I can count no end of the frames I’ve seen that would suit the FOV or perspective of lenses I wasn’t carrying at the time, especially more so in recent memory.

I guess it’s a very different feeling from carrying everything and wanting to try every lens in every situation to get a bunch of similar but consistently weak images; it’s more about seeing so many different potential frames that you simply do not have the time to shoot everything – to get that feeling like you’ve shot the place conclusively and captured all there is to possibly capture. You go away feeling that there are still more opportunities and possibilities you have’t yet explored or shot.

My solution to this is to focus on the essence: how can I say what I want to say in as few frames as possible? This might mean isolating a single key element and excluding every distraction to the point of abstraction, or including everything as context. But usually, anything in between just feels a little weak and compromised. I find that whilst this certainly helps me to focus, it doesn’t really do anything to appease the feeling of anxiety that I’m missing out on something. In fact, I’m finding that if anything, having more choice isn’t helping. My wife will tell you that I go through the same anxious thought process before every trip whilst deciding what to bring; in fact, it starts weeks before. I will make a list and then change it repeatedly, and in the end bring nothing resembling what I originally intended to pack.

Let’s take the last Japan workshop trip as an example. I initially wanted to go with the M9-P and perhaps GRDIII as a backup; then the RX100 came along, and I was toying with the idea of the OM-D; but if I was to bring the OM-D, should I pick up a 12-35/2.8 for an all-in-one solution? Or do I use the 60/2.8 instead of the 45/1.8? Or bring both? Should I pack the 100-300 for some very compressed perspectives, too? Would I even use it? What about the grip? And then to make things more complicated, I got the D600 and two pancake primes – the 28/2.8 Voigtlander and then 45/2.8P Nikon. The latter might be a bit short for my normal uses, but I could certainly make do. And the size was very attractive indeed, with no compromises in image quality. But how useable would manual focus be on the D600? And why not use a 50/1.8G instead of the 45/2.8P, which would give me AF and another stop? To top it off, I’d have to consider what my students might be shooting – which turned out to be a mix of DSLR, M9, M-Monochrom and compact.

In the end, they all entailed compromises; FX would have meant either size and weight or suboptimal manual focus and slower lenses; rangefinder would mean poor low light ability; M4/3 would mean not sharing a common platform with my students, and as much as I’d love to just shoot with a compact for myself – and did on the days I wasn’t teaching – it wouldn’t really let me teach the things I’d wanted to teach (or try out rare second hand lenses in Tokyo, but that’s another separate matter altogether). I went with the OM-D, 12/2, 20/1.7 (I didn’t use it), 45/1.8 and RX100. I felt like I could perhaps have gotten another 20 or so good images if I’d had the 100-300 too, but I certainly didn’t miss carrying it around, and leaving it behind in the hotel room would almost certainly mean that I’d see something at the precise time I didn’t have it – Murphy’s law and all.

Going on assignment is different, however. In these situations, I know specifically what kinds of images I need to capture, and in what style; more often than not, I have a shot list which I need to deliver, and there will have been a pre-shoot reccie trip to determine the angles, setup and focal lengths required. In short, I pack everything I might possibly need, and a spare or two – you simply cannot afford to have things fail when on assignment. And you never know when a client might ask you to try something different, or add in something extra, so it’s always best to be prepared. For commercial/ corporate style work, I pack the D800E, D600, speedlights, umbrellas/ stands/ diffusers/ modifiers, and the full suite of Zeiss lenses from 21 to 100mm; for macro work, it’s the same except except I’ll have the 60, 85 PCE and 100 macro lenses; for architecture, I bias wide and leave behind the speedlights. A tripod is a must in every situation. The only time when this setup differs fundamentally is when I’ve got to shoot a reportage job: depending on the range and light quality I’m likely to encounter, I might pack anything from the M9 to the OM-D and 100-300mm. But I’ll always have a minimal amount of gear in a waist pouch and two bodies ready to go – one with a wide and one with a tele – that way, you’re never caught unprepared, and you can move quickly.

The last situation I haven’t covered is when I’m shooting solely for myself. This is actually the easiest scenario: I simply take whatever I feel like using on the day, safe in the knowledge that I’m under no pressure to get any particular shots; this leaves me free to focus on purely creative work. I’ll usually take either the newest thing in the arsenal – something I’m least familiar with, so I can push its creative potential and see what I can do with it – or I’ll take the most compact and sufficient thing, just in case I happen to see something – this particularly on the days where photography isn’t my priority, but you just never know. These days, that’s the Sony RX100. I might even take out the F2T if I’m feeling particularly slow and contemplative, and the weather is being cooperative.

Bottom line: there is such a thing as too much choice. For amateurs, I think the best thing to do is apply a little forethought to the kind of situations you might encounter and the resulting type of shots you want to capture; this then translates into the kind of equipment you’ll need. Carry no more, because being a mule isn’t fun – nor is it good for your back. For the more advanced shooters – assuming you’re not on assignment with a shot list – it’s probably beneficial to creative development to focus on changing one or two parameters only – pick one or two primes, or a single format, etc.; I find this forces me out of my comfort zone and into experimental mode, especially if it’s something I’m not familiar with. (Depending on your self-discipline, you might want to carry a more familiar backup, too.) It’s possible that the pictorial results might be a disaster, but then again, they could also be a wild success – you never know until you try. But I do know that if you spend too long trying to decide what to bring out, the light is going to fade and you’re not going to get any pictures at all. MT

____________

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: article, burden of choice, gear selection, how to choose equipment, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, opinion, thein

Less is more

December 9, 2012 by Ming Thein

Too many options can be a confusing thing. Leica M8, 21/1.4

This article started out as an exploration of the liberating experience when shooting with the compact point-and-shoot camera. It then morphed into a small dissertation upon the use of the Sony RX100 is a street and travel camera; in the end I landed up rewriting the whole thing because I think there is a larger topic at hand here which is probably of more use to the photographer at large.

In previous articles, I have dealt with subjects such as using just one lens for a trip and shooting with compact cameras professionally. The August competition was the compact challenge which required participants to shoot solely with a fixed-lens, small-sensor point-and-shoot camera. I have also talked about points of sufficiency, and knowing precisely how much resolution or how much told you need for the job at hand. What I want to cover in today’s article, is something a concept spanning all of these subjects, and perhaps a little bit more.

Ninja coffee. Leica M8, 21/1.4

Let’s throw the entire photographic rulebook and all of its associated dogma out of the window for moment. What really matters when you’re making an image? (I recently dealt with this too in a two-part article here, and here on what makes an outstanding image.) What is it that you audience sees when they look at your photograph? It certainly isn’t the camera, in so far as in that it created the image and the lens and format used enforce both perspective and depth of field properties; going beyond that, the View of a photograph sees light first. In fact, that’s pre-much all they see because without light of some sort, it is impossible to make a any photograph. Thus, the sole function of the camera is reduced to a light capturing, measuring and visualization device. Beyond this, it is all fluff and gravy.

Color coordinated car. Leica M8, Zeiss ZM 2.8/21

Suppose for a minute that a photographer has no preference for any particular focal length, is able to see compositions everywhere they go, and utilize perspectives correctly. In short, they could use any camera and any lens/ field of view combination and still produce strong compositions. Let us continue to assume, that the same photographer also has the ability to recognize interesting light. He or she should also have some modicum of technical capability – perhaps the minimum required to understand the basics of exposure and mechanics of taking a photograph. Last, but not least, they should also be able to recognize interesting subjects. In short: we want a photographer who knows how to see, aim the camera, and press a button.

I don’t think this is a very difficult set of criteria to fill; I’m sure there are many, many people out there who would have no problems in meeting the brief. Now, notice how much the camera has been decoupled from this entire process; in fact, not just decoupled, but completely relegated to being almost unimportant. Photography is about writing like to create images. If the mind of the author is clear, and his command of the language strong, then the type pen and paper employed simply do not matter.

Perfect spacing. Leica M8, 50/1.4 ASPH

In practical terms, what does this actually mean for photographers? Once a photographer has mastered the use of light, composition and perspective, identifying subjects, and I suppose the degree of postprocessing, it means that they are able to create magnificent images regardless of the equipment to hand. I remember personally going through this moment of liberation – a kind of ‘eureka!’ – after which I realized the camera really does not matter; any focal length or format is fair game. Light and composition take center stage, and all else is secondary.

Many of you have probably noticed a high level of consistency in the look and feel of the images I present on the site, regardless of whatever camera was used to capture them. I have actually been criticized for this in the past, with the prosecution claiming that I do not allow the natural qualities of the camera/ lens I am using or testing to shine through in the final image. I beg to differ; I believe that the ability to produce exactly what you envisioned in your mind at the time of pressing the shutter button means that your artistic vision is not compromised or tempered by the equipment. This is not to say that you may not choose to use a particular piece of equipment because of its artistic qualities; however, one needs to know exactly what these qualities are, and how their use affects the final pictorial impression of the final image.

Questions or directives? Leica M8, 21/1.4 ASPH

I think this liberation came about for me around the end of 2008, or perhaps early 2009. I was shooting with a Nikon D3 at the time in Japan; I carried lenses providing continuous coverage from 14 to 300 mm. Needless to say, this was an extremely heavy way to travel. By the end of the trip, I was leaving everything except my 24-70 zoom in the hotel room and just walking around with one camera and one lens. After a couple of hours, I realized that rather than seeing compositions which I was unable to execute because I wasn’t carrying the right lenses, I was now seeing only the ones I could; a little while after that, I was seeing potential shots everywhere I went.

The second phase came later in 2009. I spent a couple of weeks with the Leica M8.2 whilst writing a review for the magazine I served as editor of at the time; I was only given one lens – a 35/2 (45mm due to the M8’s crop factor). Being completely unfamiliar with the operation of a rangefinder; I stuck to that one lens just to try to familiarize myself with that way of working and seeing. Guess what: I liked it so much, and found the small size and unintimidating nature the camera so liberating, but I landed up selling my D3, and most of my Nikon lenses in order to fund the exact same combination for my personal use. I was never able to afford more than one or two lenses at any given time, given the price of Leica glass, and my humble occupation at the time.

Looking for company. Leica M8, Zeiss ZM 2.1/28

This austerity by necessity actually forced me to focus on improving the quality of my images through the strength of the compositions; more importantly, I learned the skill of previsualization of both composition and perspective even before bringing the camera to my eye. The were occasions, for instance social gatherings, where I felt the need for a smaller one nondescript camera. I landed up purchasing the smallest Canon point-and-shoot I could find. That IXUS SD780IS landed up following me everywhere, riding shotgun in a pocket – simply because it was so small and unobtrusive. However, I don’t think it was the camera or its size that did this; rather it was me applying the previsualization techniques learned with the Leica M8 to the smaller format. I was getting images I liked, and which were compositionally strong – regardless of the format or type of camera. For the first time in my work, the camera became transparent.

Now, rather than buying something because the spec sheet looked good, or because it came with bragging rights, I bought equipment because it allowed me to achieve the specific look or feel I desired. Coupled with my postprocessing experience, I now felt completely in control of my images; I could create and share exactly what I saw in my mind’s eye.

Rushing for the train. Canon IXUS 100 IS

Let’s take a step back and deconstruct my experiences along the road to compositional liberation into something which any photographer might find useful and actionable:

1. You have to begin with a reasonable degree of understanding of the technical skills for both capture and post processing. However, remember that these are merely tools, not an end in themselves.

2. Force yourself to shoot for an extended period of time with what you would perceive to be a limited set of equipment. This may be one zoom, or one prime; the point is that it conditions your mind into recognizing what you can capture and ignoring all of the things that you can’t.

The ladder. Canon IXUS 100 IS

3. The ultimate distillation of this is using prime lenses, shooting a good number of frames with each. By using nothing except a single perspective on extended basis, your mind is trained to pre-visualize the angle of view before you look through the viewfinder. You know when you have mastered a particular focal length or field of view when you start seeing compositions everywhere, and you can execute these with the proper perspective and relative prominence of foreground and background. It’s even better if you can do this with the lens stopped down; by eliminating shallow depth of field as a compositional crutch, you are forced to fully think about and utilize all of the space in your frame. You cannot simply fill it with a merely pleasant-looking but non-contextual wall of blur. This of course leads to developing full control of composition, even in the out of focus areas of your frame.

Canterbury Cathedral. Canon IXUS 100 IS

If you are able to shoot with a compact camera or perhaps a camera phone, and achieve the exact composition you intended, you have come full circle. Image quality, is of course the subject of a completely different discussion. Although many photographers believe that they could manage with much less equipment, or much simpler equipment than they currently have, almost none of them put it into practice. Even I find it difficult to select which get bring on a trip; I am sometimes drawn into the trap of bringing something ‘just in case’ rather than picking a practical selection and concentrating on working with it. It requires a strong and conscious effort to avoid this. (Once again, if I am on assignment then I have the opposite philosophy; this is because you have to be prepared for contingencies, and failure to plan and deliver because of oversight is simply unprofessional.)

A little urban abstract. Sony RX100

Unfortunately, the fastest – and perhaps only – way to truly experience this liberation, is to go through the process. (If any of you have managed by other means, I would love to hear from you in the comments.) But I think it is important to at least try it if you’re serious about taking a photography to the next level; in my article on the stages of evolution of a photographer, you’ll remember that the most difficult thing to achieve is the ability to visualize your image first, and then execute it as intended. Strength of the idea and how obvious it is to your audience is paramount. MT

____________

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Service. Sony RX100

Filed Under: Articles, On Photography Tagged With: article, compact, compact camera, essay, less is more, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, minimalism, opinion, photography, thein

My end-2012 picks – or a Christmas gift list for photographers

December 8, 2012 by Ming Thein

Assuming you have photographer friends whom you’d like to buy a little something for over the festive season, this list is for you. It’s also for you if you just want to indulge yourself; go ahead, there’s nothing wrong with that. I suppose if you were really cunning, you could send one or many items from here to other people as heavy hints (and no, I’m not doing that).

On a more serious note, the list represents some of what I think are the best products of the year – both major purchases and minor ones. Not all will be useful for everybody, but they’re only here because they’re good. Some may surprise you, others may not.

In the interests of full disclosure, the links in the text below take you to the product page on Amazon with a small referral fee credited to me for each purchase. It doesn’t cost you any more, but it does help keep the site running. Thanks in advance for your support!

Compacts
This year’s king of the hill has to be the Sony RX100 – one incredible amount of sensor crammed into that tiny body. Amazingly, despite the increase in resolution, I think pixel-level performance is actually better than the Nikon 1s. For JPEG only shooters – people who don’t do any postprocessing, i.e. your average non-photogrpaher family member or friend – then the Fuji XF1 is superb. If you like lots of external dials and controls, the Canon G15 is a surprisingly nice-feeling package; it isn’t as compact nor is the lens as fast as the Panasonic LX7, but then again it has a bit more reach, too. The nearly-as-good LX5 predecessor is now heavily discounted at $249 and excellent value for money. I’m going to lump the large sensor compacts in here too: of these, I like the Leica X2 and I’ve been impressed by the image samples from the Sigma DP1M and DP2M; however, I’ve not shot with them so I have no idea if they’re still as maddeningly slow as the originals.

CSCs
Without question, the latest generation of Olympus cameras deserves mention – the OM-D being my pick, of course. I would skip the E-PL5 unless you really need that swivel LCD and just get the E-PM2; same sensor at a lower size and price point. Now that the prices are absurdly low, the Nikon V1 actually becomes interesting: it’s small, fast, has an EVF, and a pretty decent kit lens. Plus if you get bored of it, there are fast primes. The Panasonic GH3 is now shipping in some parts of the world; I haven’t handled one, but it looks like a beast. I wouldn’t actually buy it though; at this size and price, you’ve got plenty of interesting DSLR options. You’ll notice the conspicuous absence of the Fuji X mount and Sony NEX cameras; truth is I haven’t spent enough time with either to form an opinion. There are things I like, and things I don’t, which mean that I can’t make an objective recommendation either way.

DSLRs
My first pick for something that will both do everything and live a long life is probably going to be a surprise – it’s still the Nikon D700; unless you need more resolution, then buy the D800E (don’t bother with the regular D800 unless you shoot a lot of fabrics); if weight is a concern, the D600 (but this would be my last choice because of ergonomics). If you’re a birder or wildlife shooter, don’t rule out the D7000 – yes, it’s probably going to be replaced in the next year or so, but until then, prices are great, and it’s not going to take any worse pictures after. In fact, most of the time it’s all the camera most people need. For those on a bit of a budget, the D3200 is also worth a look: the sensor in that is excellent, and the camera (aside from weather sealing) is pretty much where the pro bodies were just a few years ago. It’s price – $50 less than the RX100, including the surprisingly competent kit lens – is also food for thought. I won’t comment on other systems out of lack of familiarity with the current offerings.

Lenses
In the M4/3 world, my nod has to go to the Olympus 45/1.8, the Olympus 60/2.8 Macro and the Olympus 75/1.8; the Panasonic 100-300 is an interesting option if you need reach. And as a stocking stuffer or bit of fun, how can we forget that crazy Olympus 15/8 Body Cap? For DSLR systems, with few exceptions you can’t go wrong with any of the Carl Zeiss ZF.2 or ZE lenses; my picks are the 2.8/21, 2/28, 2/35, 2/50 Makro-Planar and 2/100 Makro-Planar. I’m sure the new 2/135 APO and 1.4/55 Distagon are both awesome, it’s just that neither are available yet. Similarly, for M-mount shooters: take a look at the Zeiss 2/50 Planar. It’ll surprise you. Otherwise, the Leica 35/1.4 ASPH FLE is a superlative lens, as are the usual other Summilux suspects. For Nikon shooters, I actually like the new f1.8 G releases – the 28/1.8G, 50/1.8G and 85/1.8G are all superb, even wide open on a D800E. I picked up a 24-120/4 VR a couple of days ago, and it’s too soon to come to a decisive conclusion, but all early indications point to this being an excellent lens. If you’re thinking of the new 70-200/4 VR, I’m on the fence on this one: it’s optically superb, but it isn’t much lighter, smaller or cheaper than the 70-200/2.8 VRII. I’d probably just go for the big one.

Accessories
You can never have too many memory cards: the Sandisk Extreme HD SD cards are a good tradeoff between speed and price. Extreme Pros are faster, but they’re also significantly costlier. If you’re a Leica shooter, you’re out of luck though – it seems that these cards still cause errors even with the latest firmware. Go for the Transcend Class 10 cards instead. I’ve got a new favorite bag: the not-very-sexy-sounding Kata LPS-216DL. It swallows a surprisingly large amount of stuff without looking like it won’t pass luggage screening. There is of course the old favorite too – the Billingham Hadley Pro. A couple of other things I can’t do without are a good assortment of flashguns – the Nikon SB900 is perfect, no need the SB910 – and batteries to power them. Sanyo Eneloops are my choice because they don’t suffer from serious self-discharge issues. The Maha C801D quick charger is also handy because it’ll top off between one and eight batteries in about fifteen minutes. Not forgetting tripods, I’m a big fan of the Gitzo 1542T Traveller; it’s small, light and very sturdy. For studio work, there’s the larger 5562T Systematic. Their heads are utter rubbish though, so look elsewhere; the Manfrotto 468MG Hydrostat series are the best ballheads I’ve used to date; however I’m preferring the precision of a geared head these days; here, try the Manfrotto 410.

Computers
I’m not going to recommend either of the Retina MacBook Pros or the new iMac; none of those is upgradeable, and the retina experience isn’t that great for non-retina native apps. Not to mention if you plan to do any serious retouching, you might miss stuff even at 100% – but your clients on non-retina computers won’t. Look at the 2.3 i7 Mac Mini instead for power (and ease of teardown/ upgrade later) and the 11″ MacBook Air for portability. That said, it really is powerful enough to be your primary computer even if you’re a reasonably prolific shooter – you’ll just need some external storage to go with it. WD makes 2TB portable drives that are USB 3.0-powered and let you take a backup wherever you go. For heavier needs, get their 6TB array. Finally, you can’t beat a tablet for editing – in this case, the Wacom Intuos 5 – but don’t bother with touch or wireless, they’re just gimmicks. I’d add Photoshop CS6 to the list, but I’m guessing most of you already have it.

Books
There were a few notable releases for me this year – Vivian Maier’s two posthumous books (Street Photographer and Out of The Shadows) being particular highlights; I really wanted to get Kubrick’s Light and Shadows this year, but it looks as though it won’t be available til 2013 (unless you want a collector’s edition). I know it’s not strictly photographic, but Modernist Cuisine has some awesome food photography work in it. And if you’re a foodie, then the actual content is a bonus. Susan Sontag on Photography is not new but still a worthwhile read, too. I also rather liked Kevin Erskine’s Supercell and Reza’s War+Peace (not a new book, but new to me this year). If you want to learn about light and form…take a look at any of the complete Da Vinci anthologies – pay specific attention to his portrait poses. Finally, something random – not photographic at all, but I do appreciate the illustration: The Geometry of Pasta.

Curveballs
Something vintage and indestructible – I see plenty of clean Nikon F2s and F3s (and even F5s) on Ebay going for a song. It’s a shame. Uniqlo has a whole range of camera-related T-shirts; the irony being that I don’t actually have any of the cameras on the shirts (Fuji X100, Ricoh GR-Digital, Sinar, Pentax Q…I drew the line at buying the Canon one and went for Hokkaido Butter instead). I also rather like these polar bears, but I suppose that’s more of a personal thing. Happy shopping! MT

____________

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Filed Under: Off topic Tagged With: christmas wishlist, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, thein

Lens review: The Voigtlander Color-Skopar 28/2.8 AI-P SLII

December 7, 2012 by Ming Thein

The small, light Nikon D600 got me thinking about full frame as a viable alternative for a lightweight travel kit again – the D700 and f1.4 primes was smaller than a D3 and pro zooms, but certainly nowhere near as convenient as Micro Four Thirds. Of course, M4/3 doesn’t give you anywhere near the same control over depth of field, and you lose out at least a stop or more in high ISO performance. The OM-D might give you back a couple of stops of hand-holdability thanks to its excellent stabilizer, but there’s nothing you can do about depth of field control short of using the manual focus Voigtlander f0.95 lenses – they certainly fit the bill, but they’re also large, heavy and somewhat defeat the point of a small, light body.

Shadows

This is where the pancake primes and full frame come in: a D600 body and two primes make for a very light but also very competent travel kit. And if you shoot film, it makes even more sense. (And naturally, being a 28mm lens, I was curious to try it out.) The 28/2.8 has ridden shotgun in my waist pouch when I go out with the F2T and 58/1.2 Noct; sometimes you just need something wider, and it’s a handy option to have without paying too high a weight/ size penalty.

Untitled

The lens is just 24.5mm long (in Nikon F guise; it’s also available in EF mount, which is slightly larger as it has to accommodate the electronic diaphragm components) and weighs a scant 180g; it actually feels reasonably hefty as the entire lens is metal – probably anodized aluminium – and is very well constructed. It’s actually so short that it’s tricky to mount without turning the focusing or aperture rings, as the only portion of the lens that doesn’t rotate is the tiny 3mm wide section in the middle that holds the depth of field scale and index mark. It would have been great to have a locking button on the aperture ring like the ZF.2 lenses, but I suppose Cosina reserves that function for its more expensive siblings.

Urban monk

Being an AI-P spec lens, the 28/2.8 has a chip to communicate aperture and distance information to the camera; you set the lens to f22 on a Nikon body and control the aperture using the command dials as normal. It will mount and provide full metering and electronic compatibility on any Nikon body. Focusing is manual, of course; would have been nice if there was a way to AF couple the lens – a built-in motor would probably have been impossible, but screwdriver focus might have been within feasible limits. That said, you always have the built-in rangefinder and in-focus confirmation dot (or beep on Canons) to help with determining focus, and the manual focus action is nicely damped and perfectly weighted – they certainly got the feel right with this lens. Since the lens is relatively slow and wide, it isn’t always easy to judge focus by the viewfinder alone – and Nikon’s modern focusing screens don’t help much, either. Most of the time, I could get achieve focus with the viewfinder alone, but on the edges it helps to use the dot: the lens suffers from moderate field curvature.

Shifty

The 28/2.8 is a 6-group, 7-element design; Voigtlander does not provide a block diagram or any details about the optical design, but from the way it performs and the fact that it can focus as close as 22cm from the sensor plane – yielding surprisingly high magnification – I suspect that the lens is a retrofocal but non-telecentric design to achieve this. As mentioned earlier, it displays moderate field curvature, some coma at the edges and chromatic aberration until f8 or so. (I tested the lens on the Nikon D600.) There’s also a tiny bit of purple bleeding at high contrast edges.

Through the looking glass

Sharpness is not a problem: the center is excellent at all apertures, with the border and edges lagging until about f5.6 or so; this is partially due to field curvature, and partially due to coma. Note that if you’re going to use wide apertures with this lens, you will need to use focus assist over the subject – not center focus and recompose. Edge sharpness is not too bad, but the corners never get critically sharp due to radial coma/ smearing; you always feel that things have been ‘stretched out’ a little. No problem; just make sure your subjects are within the central portion of the image circle.

Umbrellas

Not having a huge number of elements, color rendition and contrast are excellent; images are rendered with a slightly warm hue, high saturation and macrocontrast. Microcontrast still isn’t as fine as the Zeiss lenses, but it’s certainly on par with Nikon’s regular AF offerings. This would be a good lens for low contrast scenes, but care must be taken if you’re shooting around noon in the tropics – you’re going to get things blocking up to black or overexposing if you don’t pay attention to your blinking highlights warning. It makes a rather good lens for black and white work, too.

The morning after the night before

I consider myself a bit of a 28mm aficionado; perhaps fetishist is a better word. I find that it’s the widest I can go and still maintain a relatively natural look to the images without the usual wideangle geometric distortion; I feel that the focal length also matches my instinctive field of view quite well. This means that in my time I’ve owned and shot with a huge number of 28mm lenses and 28mm equivalents; the two I currently own – the Nikon AFS 28/1.8G and Zeiss ZF.2 2/28 Distagon are reviewed on their respective links, too. Aside from that, I’ve also got the Zeiss ZM 2.8/28 Biogon for my Leica M9-P, the 28/1.8 equivalent on the RX100, the iPhone 4, and an Olympus 15/8 body cap.

Texture

So the natural question would be where does the Voigtlander 28/2.8 fit in – both in the grand hierarchy of 28mm lenses, as well as as a tool; I actually think it has a pretty well-defined niche. The Nikon 28/1.8 G is large but light, has autofocus and pretty good optics; the Zeiss 2/28 Distagon has stellar optics and a unique pictorial rendering, but is manual focus and surprisingly heavy for its size. Both have roughly the same maximum aperture and T stop. The Voigtlander is a tiny slip of a lens that’s capable of excellent results in the center, and decent results at the edges – these optical characteristics suggest it would serve as a good documentary lens (there is some distortion of straight lines which rules it out for architecture), but moreover an option where you a) need something light and small, and b) are unlikely to run out of light – though relatively low light work is still possible thanks to the high-ISO abilities of the current batch of full frame cameras. In short: this is a great lightweight travel lens, especially if paired with something a bit longer – perhaps the 40/2 or 45/2.8P. Now, if only somebody would make a decent focusing screen for the D600…MT

A big thank you to Eric Goh at Fotoman Marketing, the Malaysian distributor for Voigtlander lenses for the extended loan of the review sample.

The lens is available here from B&H in Canon and Nikon mounts.

____________

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Filed Under: Gearhead: Reviews Tagged With: 28 2.8, ai-p, d600, gearhead, lens review, ming, ming thein, mingthein.com, nikon, thein, voigtlander

Announcing 2013 USA workshop tour dates!

December 6, 2012 by Ming Thein

Swallowed by the city. Tokyo, October 2012.

I’m very excited to (finally) announce the dates for my 2013 USA workshop tour!

The Outstanding Images Tour

San Francisco
By popular demand, I’m going to doing two sessions:
Session 1: Thursday 28 to Saturday 30 March 2013 (a couple of places due to reshuffling dates)
Session 2: Monday 1 to Wednesday 3 April 2013 (one place)

New York City
~~Friday 5 to Sunday 7 April 2013 (full)~~
New date by popular demand: Monday 8 to Wednesday 10 April 2013 (a go if we have 5 or more participants)

The format will be similar to my previous 3-day workshops in Hong Kong and Tokyo but instead chasing a particular topic, we’ll be focusing on improving photographic fundamentals – seeing the scene, finding light, timing, composition, balance, perspective, style etc. – all of the tools that can apply to any shooting situation, against the background of travel and street photography with specific forays into related technique. The first two days will be hands-on photography, with the third day focused on review, critique and post processing. It will put into practice the content of the ‘What Makes an Outstanding Image?’ essay.

It will not be easy. Expect to be challenged, and have your creative vision opened to subjects and techniques you might not have considered before. Expect to go away as a better photographer – all of my past students have.

You don’t need to be an advanced photographer or pro to participate. All you need to make the most of the workshops is a determination to improve your images, and a basic working knowledge of exposure and operation of your camera. The sessions will be intensive and challenging, but also extremely rewarding; the more you put in, the more you get out. The sole equipment requirements for the session are a camera – even a compact will do – a laptop with Photoshop, and an editing tablet (I recommend Wacom).

Each workshop session is limited to just 10 paid participants to ensure everybody gets as much of possible out of the sessions. Places are reserved on a first-come-first-served basis. Please note that a refundable* 50% deposit will be required to confirm participation, with the balance due one month before the workshop date.

The price for a full three days of exclusive tuition is just US$2,200 per person. I’m pleased to offer an early bird special for US$2,000 per person if you confirm within the next week.

If you’d like to book a spot, or have any questions, please contact me.

Looking forward to meeting everybody in the USA!

____________

Testimonials and feedback from recent workshop attendees:

Azhari (Nov 2012 Melaka Workshop): Truly a work of a master! Love them all. Glad i attended this workshop and had the opportunity to see how the master did it. Thank you very much Ming.

Doyle Shafer (Oct 2012 Tokyo Workshop): It was a challenging and interesting workshop. I would have never forced myself to see Tokyo in different ways. To be honest I was happy with my photography for the most part and had little interest in branching out. But as I mentioned earlier, after the workshop it’s like seeing The Matrix for what it really is: some basic “code” and infinite possibility. Now when I walk through Ginza it’s going to take me much longer than before the workshop. It’s funny because I used to think that place was kind of dry and boring! It’s all still sinking in, but my photography has already tightened up quite a bit. And I won’t even get into post processing…that rocked my world like when we did layering in Ginza @. @

Erwin Kindangen (Oct 2012 Tokyo Workshop): I had a great time there and my photography definitely improved after the workshop. It taught me how to “see” scenes and what scene would actually make a good photo and not just randomly shooting at people. Plus the basic wizardry of Photoshop at the end of the workshop definitely ties it all up. In the meantime, I’ll keep perfecting what I’ve learnt before I jump to the next workshop (I hope there will be a follow up).

Andrew Yaw (Sep 2012 Finding Light workshop, Kuala Lumpur): It was an awesome day out. Second round of beating from the master after the ‘Making light workshop’ . This workshop changed my perspectives on street photography. Looking at not only the life around you but also the architecture, reflections, natural frames and much more. I have never walked around KL that much before. I plan to do it again alone this weekend. Who says you need to travel far to take pictures? The challenges were all interesting and some tough to train us into seeing things in ways never before. It really sort of reminded me of the “Wax on, Wax off” training technique in ‘Karate kid’. Lol. Really, for me it was. Especially the part where we had to shoot with our 2 second timer on and stage the subjects on a particular part of the frame. Epic fail at 1st. After a while though you slowly learn how to anticipate the subject’s movement and then.. ‘click’. Success! and then again and again. It was a full on day with tons of learning and perceiving. Ended the day at 8 PM after a slight debriefing and chattering in a cafe. Thanks Ming for a great day out. Can’t wait for the next one. Have a great time in Japan.

Andrew Yaw, (Sep 2012 Making Light workshop, Kuala Lumpur): Excellent workshop! Great teachings from honing the basics of photography to managing light in a controlled environment followed by hands on guidance while shooting the model for the day. The day ended with a bonus. The shared knowledge of the art of printing which is a totally different ball game. Went home feeling overwhelmed with awesome knowledge and information. Thank you Ming for sharing so much of your knowledge to all of us! Can’t wait for the next workshop!

Ciao Pui (Sep 2012 Making Light workshop, Kuala Lumpur): What a great day! Between the inspiring morning session studying Ming’s jaw-dropping photos and an amazing afternoon shoot with the gorgeous (and funny) Aliza, what Ming didn’t mention was the mouth-watering Malaysian Beef noodles lunch he took us to across the street at the road-side stall! I’ve been reading this blog for months, but I didn’t realized how much more I could learn in person until I took his recent workshops. For example, I’d have missed out on the important training where he raised both arms (see pic #13) waving them vigorously while shouting “Light on, light off” to perfect my shooting methods. Ok, just kidding about the above. On a serious note, the man is a machine! He got in way before everyone else (I know because I arrived an hour early). Then he spent the whole day teaching, instructing, demoing, shooting, working with model, showing his equipment, while tirelessly and patiently answering every questions the workshop participants had, not to mention the 2-hour impromptu print demo/admiration session after the workshop. Great value, great company, great images. I would take his workshops again. Highly recommended.

*No questions asked up to 1 month before the workshop, at which point full payment is due. After the T-1 month point, then refunds are only if I have to cancel or at my discretion under extraordinary circumstances.

____________

If you enjoyed this post, please consider supporting me via Paypal ([email protected]). Visit our Teaching Store to up your photographic game – including Photoshop Workflow DVDs and customized Email School of Photography; or go mobile with the Photography Compendium for iPad. You can also get your gear from Amazon.comhere. Prices are the same as normal, however a small portion of your purchase value is referred back to me. Thanks!

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!