Three « 360Photography

RSS

Posts Tagged ‘Three’

Luminar vs Lightroom: Three Reasons Luminar is Better (and Two Reasons It’s Not)

24 Feb

The post Luminar vs Lightroom: Three Reasons Luminar is Better (and Two Reasons It’s Not) appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

Are you struggling to decide whether you should be working in Luminar vs Lightroom? Do you want to know how these two post-processing powerhouses match up?

You’ve come to the right place.

Luminar vs Lightroom

Because this article will give you three ways Luminar excels over Lightroom, followed by two areas where Lightroom dominates.

And it’ll help you decide which option is best for your needs.

Let’s dive right in, starting with the biggest reason to choose Luminar:

1. Luminar offers one-click features for quick edits

When dealing with the question of Luminar vs Lightroom, I always recommend you take a look at the biggest feature Luminar offers:

One-click editing.

You see, Luminar offers a modern approach to editing, where you tap a few buttons and the software does most of the editing for you. This is ideal for photographers who don’t feel comfortable doing advanced edits in a program like Lightroom, or who simply don’t have time to carefully edit every photo.

These one-click options include the Orton Effect (which gives your photos a soft glow), to the Sunrays tool (which adds surprisingly realistic sun rays to your photos), to the Fog tool (which adds, well, fog).

Luminar vs Lightroom: Three Reasons Luminar is Better (and Two Reasons It's Not)

Even more impressive, some of Luminar’s best editing features are powered by artificial intelligence.

For instance, Luminar’s AI Enhance tool offers an AI Accent slider that often looks quite good; it makes your photo pop with some carefully applied color and tonal adjustments, among others.

And the Luminar AI Sky Replacement is nothing short of amazing. With a couple of clicks, you can take a boring sky and turn it into something eye-catching (an edit that could previously only be pulled off by a Photoshop expert).

Luminar vs Lightroom AI sky replacement tool

So if quick editing is your thing, then Luminar is a great choice.

2. Luminar offers useful layer-based editing

If you’ve ever used Photoshop, then you’ll know that one of its most powerful features is layer-based edits.

Because with layers, you can stack edits on top of one another, selectively delete edits, mask out certain edits, and more.

And while Lightroom doesn’t offer layer-based editing…

…Luminar does.

In Luminar, you can make adjustments on different layers. Then you can selectively apply these adjustments by masking out different areas of the layer, ensuring that only part of the photo is enhanced by a slider or corrected by a tool.

Luminar vs Lightroom layer editing

You can also use Luminar’s Luminosity Mask tool to selectively adjust areas of your photos based on their underlying brightness.

Now, Lightroom does offer some similar features, though they don’t technically use layers. Features such as the Adjustment Brush.

But these aren’t quite as useful as true layer-based editing, not least because you can only apply some edits via the Adjustment Brush, whereas Luminar allows for almost every slider to be separated into a different layer and masked out (if you so choose).

Personally, I’m a huge fan of layer-based editing, and I love that Skylum included it in their software.

On the other hand, layer-based editing can be a bit complex for newcomers. Fortunately, as discussed in the section above, Luminar also has a handle on basic editing tools.

So you have a choice:

Do more complex, layer-based editing.

Or work with the one-click edits.

(Or both!)

Very cool.

3. The Luminar editing interface is incredibly easy to work with

Here’s the third big area where Luminar dominates Lightroom in the Luminar vs Lightroom question:

The Luminar interface is streamlined, simple, and ridiculously easy to use.

Open up Luminar, and you can immediately tell that it’s great for beginners. There’s a toolbar at the top that lets you access basic options, no matter the module you’re in, and the tool panels on the right are simple and uncluttered.

To do some quick editing, all you have to do is tap the Looks icon at the top, and a handy image carousel pops up:

Luminar vs Lightroom interface

Lightroom, on the other hand, is far less sleek, and a little bit messy.

Take a look at the Lightroom interface:

Luminar vs Lightroom: Three Reasons Luminar is Better (and Two Reasons It's Not)

Sure, it’s workable, but it’s not exactly simple, and it can feel overwhelming at times. There’s a huge number of editing panels, quite a few modules, and many sliders.

So while a professional probably wouldn’t balk at the Lightroom display, a beginner may feel far too out of their depth.

Which is why Luminar is worth a look.

4. Lightroom offers far superior image organization options

Now it’s time to look at areas where Lightroom excels over Luminar, starting with Lightroom’s digital asset management capabilities.

You see, Lightroom is carefully designed to catalog, group, and label your photos. It has ultra-useful collection options and a huge number of ways to filter your images (in case you’re after an elusive image buried somewhere deep in your catalog).

image organization Luminar vs Lightroom

I love Lightroom’s organization features, and I still use my Lightroom catalogs to keep track of all my images, even when I’m doing editing in Luminar.

You see, Luminar’s photo organization options are far less powerful compared to Lightroom’s. Luminar does offer a Library feature, which gives you the option to group your photos into Albums.

But Albums don’t offer much in the way of functionality; for instance, you can’t group one album under another, nor can you sort them into a meaningful hierarchy.

Hence, when it comes to Luminar vs Lightroom in photo organization capabilities, Lightroom is the winner. Hands down.

Lightroom features a set of powerful, complex tools for precise editing

One other gripe that I have with Luminar compared to Lightroom:

It’s just not as precise.

Even though Lightroom has a complex interface, there’s a lot of options within that interface. Whereas Luminar’s editing tools are often a bit too simple.

For instance, look at Lightroom’s Split Toning panel:

Luminar vs Lightroom: Three Reasons Luminar is Better (and Two Reasons It's Not)

You can drag around a point on the color display, and your photo will respond.

Then compare this to Luminar’s Split Toning tool, where you’re stuck dragging sliders in a far less helpful way:

Luminar vs Lightroom luminar split toning

The same is true of Lightroom’s HSL/Color editing panel. You have basic HSL options, which allow you to modify colors according to hue:

Luminar vs Lightroom: Three Reasons Luminar is Better (and Two Reasons It's Not)

But then you also have a more targeted color adjustment tool, where you can click and drag to edit particular colors of your photos.

This is in contrast to Luminar’s Color tool, where you have the basic HSL options, and that’s all:

Luminar vs Lightroom Luminar color tool

Now, for a beginner, this may not be a big deal. You may not be interested in more complex editing tools.

But more experienced editors want this sort of thing, and so you should be aware that you can’t find it in Luminar.

Luminar vs Lightroom: Conclusion

Lightroom and Luminar are both excellent for post-processing, just in different ways.

Luminar offers fantastic one-click editing, along with powerful AI options.

Whereas Lightroom features superior image organizational features and complex editing tools.

So which is better, Luminar vs Lightroom?

In the end, the choice is yours!

The post Luminar vs Lightroom: Three Reasons Luminar is Better (and Two Reasons It’s Not) appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Leica announces three limited-edition Summicron M lenses

17 Feb

Leica has released new versions of three of its existing M lenses, giving users a choice of a silver option of the normal 75mm, and two limited edition lenses to match the green M10-P ‘Safari’. The silver anodized APO-Summicron-M 75mm f/2 ASPH will be a standard production model to give all M users an alternative to the black paint version that is currently available. Leica UK will charge a £200 premium for the silver model though it seems to be the same price as the black version in the USA. The Miami Leica store has this model marked as a limited edition of 300 units worldwide but still lists it as the same price as the black model. That may be a mistake.

The Safari green Summicron-M 28mm f/2 ASPH and APO-Summicron-M 90mm f/2 ASPH lenses will be limited editions, with Leica producing 500 units of the first and 250 of the second. These two lenses join the Summicron-M 50mm f/2 to form a set of three that match the M10-P ‘Safari’ camera that is finished in the same green paint.

The original Leica M1 in Olive for the armed forces

All these cameras were marked with the word Bundeseigentum – Federal Property

Leica says these green models follow in the footsteps of the original Leica M1 which was produced in Olive for the German Armed forces in the early 1960s. Those cameras were all marked ‘Bundeseigentum’ to denote that they were the property of the German government and now fetch a good price as, according to Dutch dealer Schouten, there were only 208 units made. The original M1 Olive cameras only had the standard-issue lenses for the time though, so no matching green paint in those days.

The three new lenses will start shipping at the end of February.

APO-Summicron-M 75 f/2 ASPH. silver anodized: £3,500/$ 4395
Summicron-M 28 f/2 ASPH. Edition ‘Safari’: £3,800/$ 4895
APO-Summicron-M 90 f/2 ASPH. Edition ‘Safari’: £4,000/$ 5095

For more information see the Leica website.

Press release:

Leica Camera introduces three new M-lens variations

Wetzlar, February 14, 2020. Leica Camera is delighted to present three new lenses for the Leica M-System: the silver anodised APO-Summicron-M 75 f/2 ASPH. as well as two limited editions, the Summicron-M 28 f/2 ASPH. and APO-Summicron-M 90 f/2 ASPH. which both come in an olive-green ‘Safari’ finish. The technical specifications of the three new lenses are identical to those of their serially produced counterparts.

The APO-Summicron-M 75 f/2 ASPH. is known as one of the most high-performing lenses for the Leica M-System and is particularly suitable for portrait photography. The new lens variation features an anodised finish and in contrast to the black-paint variant, the feet markings on the distance scale as well as the focal length engravings are inlaid in red, while all other engravings feature black inlays, emphasising the sophisticated design of the Leica M.

Leica is also releasing two limited editions, the Summicron-M 28 f/2 ASPH. and APO-Summicron-M 90 f/2 ASPH. with a special, olive-green paint finish. Both ‘Safari’-edition lenses feature red-inlaid feet markings on the distance scale and red focal length markings, while all other engravings are inlaid in white, creating a stylish juxtaposition with the olive-green lens.

The exceptionally hard-wearing, olive-green paint has a long-standing tradition at Leica. The first Leica cameras to be treated with this superior-quality enamel finish were designed for military use in 1960. Shortly after, the cameras became widely renowned as robust tools that could withstand even the most extreme conditions and what had started with the Leica M1 ‘Olive’ for the German Armed Forces went on to become an enduring success story. While the Leica M3 and M4 in olive-green were still manufactured exclusively for military use, a growing demand among private customers prompted Leica to release the first market version – the Leica R3 ‘Safari’ – in 1977. This was followed by the M6 TTL ‘Safari’ in 2000, the M8.2 ‘Safari’ in 2008, the M-P (Typ 240) ‘Safari’ of 2015 and, most recently, the M10-P Edition ‘Safari’ in 2019. Today, the olive-green cameras are highly sought-after by collectors and Leica enthusiasts alike.

Aside from the Leica Summicron-M 50 f/2, released in 2019, the new Summicron-M 28 f/2 ASPH. and APO-Summicron-M 90 f/2 ASPH. are the only M lenses to perfectly match the olive-green Leica M10-P Edition ‘Safari’, making the lenses a desirable addition to any Leica M Camera. Only 500 units will be available of the Summicron-M 28 f/2 ASPH. Edition ‘Safari’; the APO-Summicron-M 90 f/2 ASPH. Edition ‘Safari’ is limited to 250 units.
You can download high-res images here; all three lenses are available from end of February.

RRP:

APO-Summicron-M 75 f/2 ASPH. silver anodised: £3,500
Summicron-M 28 f/2 ASPH. Edition ‘Safari’: £3,800
APO-Summicron-M 90 f/2 ASPH. Edition ‘Safari’: £4,000

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Tamron reveals it has three new, unannounced mirrorless lenses planned for 2020

11 Feb

The relevant section (the teal section, middle-right) of the above graphic has been altered to include the translated text.

Buried within Tamron’s full-year financial report was a little detail that hints at Tamron revealing three new, unannounced lenses for mirrorless cameras in 2020.

The new information can be seen in the above graphic within the presentation that shows Tamron has five models planned for 2020, two of which have already been announced: the 20mm F2.8 lens for Sony E-mount cameras (Adorama, B&H) and a compact 70–180mm F2.8 lens for Sony E-mount cameras that’s currently in development.

It’s unknown what the three new lenses will be, but Sony Alpha Rumors is reporting all three will be E-mount lenses.

Other details in the report include a statement claiming Tamron expects ‘the sales of own-brand [mirrorless lens] models is expected to increase the sales compare to the previous year’ and confirmation its 17–28mm F2.8 lens should no longer be backordered by the end of February.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

‘It should cost…’ The three main ways you’re wrong about camera prices

22 Jan

Every time a camera is launched, our comment section is flooded with comments saying ‘it’s too expensive,’ irrespective of what the price is set at. Are all the camera makers utterly out-of-touch with reality, or is there something else going on?

I’m going to explain the three main misunderstandings that I see prompting these comments. I’m not advocating for higher prices, nor trying to suggest that manufacturers never get it wrong, but just trying to highlight why cameras are priced the way they are.

A new model is always going to cost more than the outgoing one

Prices decline with time. No matter what your pricing strategy, an older product (particularly in a fairly fast-moving marking like electronics) cannot demand as high a price at the end of their lifecycle as they can at the beginning.

This may sound obvious, but the consequence is that a new model will always look expensive compared with the model it replaces.

The D780 was launched at the same price as the D750, so is cheaper in real terms. But heavy discounting of the D750 makes the new camera look very pricey.

This is the error we most often see: ‘How can they charge $ 2200, when I can buy the old model for $ 1400?’

To which the response is: ‘How can they not?’ If you offer your new model at the price of the outgoing one, then what does its price look like, at end-of-life? Do you then have to match that price with the next generation model? That approach would end up with you giving cameras away within a couple of product generations, which isn’t exactly a winning strategy in an already contracting industry.


Prices decline with time, so new cameras tend to be released at around the same cost that the old one was launched at.	The alternative (launching to match the current market prices) is a pell-mell race to the bottom.

So cameras tend to be released at around the same prices that the preceding model was launched at. After all, camera makers are companies: they exist to make as much profit as they can. Their job is to maximize the amount of money they generate from each product.

The main exception to matching the previous model’s launch price is if the new model has been stripped-down to hit a lower price point or re-positioned to attract a different audience.

Case study: The stripped-down mass-market special

Sony’s a6000 was launched for $ 799 with a kit zoom: around $ 200 lower than the existing NEX-6 model. It gained a couple of additional features and updates but also saw a drop in viewfinder resolution and had less substantial feeling construction: distinct hints that it wasn’t a like-for-like replacement model.

Sony’s insistence on assigning similar names to all its models doesn’t help, but the pricing alone makes it easier to recognize the a6300 as more of an NEX-6 replacement than an a6000 update. Sure enough, both the a6000 and a6300 continued alongside one another for the next few years: one targeting the ‘price conscious’ consumer, the other offering better build, an NEX-6 level viewfinder and 4K video, for people who were comfortable to spend a bit more.

Manufacturers will occasional try to re-position a particular model, making it cheaper or more expensive, perhaps trying to make room for a new model.

Case study: two models in the place of one

Panasonic’s GX8 had a significantly higher spec and was launched for $ 200 more than the preceding GX7. This created the space for a less expensive GX85 to sit underneath. Looking at the launch prices suggests that Panasonic thought there were two different types of customer buying the GX7: some that wanted a small, mid-priced model and some who wanted something more ambitious, and were willing to pay for it.

However, the next model refresh saw the GX9 launched back at the same price as the GX7 (and called the GX7 III in some markets). ‘This isn’t a GX8 replacement at all’ complained some would-be buyers. The pricing indicated that they were probably partly right.

The lesson in all of this is that you can better interpret a manufacturer’s intentions by comparing the price of a new model to the launch price of the outgoing model, not its depressed end-of-life price.

Case study: getting the price wrong

Manufacturers don’t always get their pricing right, of course. Nikon entered the prime-lens APS-C compact market in 2013 with the Coolpix A, an attractive camera with a 28mm equivalent F2.8 lens. Perhaps emboldened by Fujifilm’s success selling its X100 models for $ 1299, Nikon priced its camera at $ 1099.

Around a month later, Ricoh launched an APS-C version of its much-loved GR, also with a 28mm equiv F2.8 lens, for $ 799. The Coolpix A was a pretty good camera (though we preferred the GR), but without the retro appeal, hybrid viewfinder and burgeoning reputation of the Fujifilm, or the establish fan-base of the GR, that $ 1099 price tag looked awkward.

Without access to sales data, we can’t know for certain how many units were sold at full price but by the second half of 2014, the price had collapsed to just $ 580. A lot of people got a bargain at that discounted price, but it’s noticeable that Nikon hasn’t shown any further interest in that niche.

Of course, sometimes manufacturers will keep old models on the market at a newly lowered price (the Sony a7 II and a7R II, for instance). This makes life a little more complex but should really just focus your attention on what really matters: ‘does the new model offer enough compelling improvements to overlook the older model?’

Your country probably isn’t being ripped-off, even if the US launch price seems cheaper

The RX100 VI was launched for $ 1298 in the US and the equivalent of $ 1450 in Europe. But that’s not the whole story.

The other complaint we regularly see is that the launch price in country ‘X’ is higher than a direct conversion of the US dollar price. There are two main reasons for this.

The first is that US prices tend to be quoted without sales tax, whereas most other countries tend to include sales tax/VAT/GST in consumer-facing communications. As a results, US prices tend to look less expensive simply because the price quoted isn’t the price most people are legally expected to pay. Your local tax level may be more expensive, but that’s more likely to do with your country’s history, style of government and degree of healthcare provision and social support: none of which can be blamed on camera makers.

The second factor is that price competition varies greatly between countries. US prices tend to stay at or near the Manufacturer’s Recommended Sales Price until the manufacturer chooses to adjust it. Countries with more competition between retailers tend to see prices quickly fall away from the initial asking price: early adopters end up paying full price, but anyone buying a few months (or sometimes weeks) later, will get a much better deal.

Case study: why are cameras more expensive in Europe?

Sony’s RX100 VI had an initial MSRP of $ 1298 in the US and €1299 in Europe. This looks bad: €1299 was worth $ 1450 in July 2019. Outrageous, right?

But, if I went to buy one today, I’d end up paying $ 1429 after tax in the US ($ 1298 plus my 10.1% local sales tax rate). If I lived in Germany and bought the same model from a large internet retailer, I’d have to pay €1180, including VAT, which is equivalent to $ 1315.

So, although the launch price in your country may look outrageous, compared with the US price, that doesn’t mean you’ll get ripped-off. The last two times I’ve looked at buying cameras in the US and UK, I found the year-old model I was shopping for to be less expensive in the UK, even with higher local taxes. I’ll concede that this was before the pound plummeted following the Brexit vote: but again, that’s not really the fault of camera makers.

Some things are supposed to look expensive

Marketers have all manner of theories about how to price their goods, and different strategies for maximizing the amount of profit they can make from a specific product. Very few of these have much to do with the costs involved in developing, manufacturing, distributing and supporting that product. Most strategies set the price high enough to make this money back, but there are exceptions even to that.

So there’s little point looking at a product and saying ‘they’ve removed ‘x,’ so it should be cheaper,’ or expecting the price to relate in any way to your estimation of the costs involved.

For instance, a premium pricing strategy holds that it’s sometimes beneficial to price your goods so highly that you end up selling fewer than you could, but at greater profit: the high price and resulting scarcity in itself contributes to the perceived value of the product.

A premium pricing strategy holds that the high price in itself contributes to the perceived value of the product

‘That’s silly,’ you might think: ‘that wouldn’t work on me.’ But it does. Like it or not, you respond to pricing. Read through the comment section of the launch of any Leica product: you’ll see an audience dramatically polarized between ‘it’s not worth that’ and ‘if you could afford it, you’d understand.’ The same goes for luxury items, whether they be Range Rovers or Rolex watches: if they weren’t expensive, they wouldn’t have the same cachet.

This discussion is almost entirely divorced from whether the products themselves are any good (to the degree that any assessment can be entirely rational and dispassionate), it’s primarily a reflection of differing personal responses to the price.

Perceived value is entirely personal and both responses are equally right and wrong: a premium product isn’t worth its exaggerated price to the person who doesn’t care about prestige, scarcity, brand history and reputation or the degree to which something is hand-built, but it is worth it for someone to whom those factors contribute to the item feeling special, or more meaningful.

Is it worth it?

Which ultimately brings us to the question that’s really at stake: not ‘is it too expensive?’ but ‘does it appear to represent good value to me?‘

Again, manufacturers are for-profit companies. They aren’t aiming to offer the product you want at a price you want to pay: they’re trying to price it at the maximum amount you’re willing to pay.

In other words: it’s always going to be a bit more expensive than you’d like.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

The Autel Evo II will come in three modular models, including two with 8K video

15 Jan

Early last month, a forthcoming EVO II from Autel Robotics was revealed through an FCC filing. The portable follow up to the EVO officially launched at last week’s CES 2020 show. Drone and tech pundit OriginaldoBo made a prediction a week before the conference that this year, industry-dominating company DJI was not going to be the star of CES. Now we know why. Autel has introduced the very first 8K folding drone. The EVO II comes in 3 variants offering up 3 separate camera modules.

The standard Autel EVO II has an 8K, 48MP camera with a 1/2″ CMOS sensor. It can capture content at resolutions up to 8,000×6,000 pixels for photos, meaning you could print an image as large as 100 inches wide. Video resolution will max out at 7720×4320 pixels. It also features lossless, in-camera zoom up to 4x. Its weight at takeoff is 1,127 grams (about 2.5 pounds).
The EVO II Pro features a 20MP camera with a 1″ CMOS sensor, an adjustable aperture (ranging from f/2.8 to f/11), HDR, an ISO range of 100-12,800, and the ability to capture 6K video. The weight of EVO II Pro at takeoff is 1,174 grams (about 2.6 pounds).
The EVO II Dual boasts both a FLIR Boson sensor, with a thermal resolution up to 640×512, plus the same 8K camera that comes with the standard model. Takeoff weight for the EVO II Dual 320 is 1,157 grams (2.55 pounds) and 1,192 grams (2.62 pounds) for the EVO II Dual 640.

All 3 cameras have a maximum bitrate of 120Mbps. They will also feature 10-bit color depth. Autel’s states on its official site that it will continue to update specs, as they become available, but they have not specified whether there is an H.264 or H.265 codec. Information on frame rates is also notably absent at the time of this writing. Each variant of the EVO II is modular. You can upgrade, downgrade, and switch out camera systems without having to purchase a new drone.

The EVO II has a maximum flight time of 40 minutes and a transmission range of 9 km (5.6 miles). While most users will not need to fly this far, Autel states that a longer range ‘also means a stronger signal.’ It can operate at a maximum speed of 45 miles per hour (20.1 m/s). 12 AI-powered computer vision sensors give it omnidirectional obstacle avoidance that can also be disabled if the user wants full, uninterrupted control. 8GB of onboard storage is available with the option of adding an external microSD card up to 256GB.

What drone enthusiasts and professionals, especially, will appreciate is that Autel does not equip its drones with geofencing. While the feature, found in all contemporary DJI models, prevents drones from flying into restricted areas, including controlled airspace, it can also create a major inconvenience if a pilot secures permission to fly in a designated area and is unable to unlock the zone as planned.

The EVO II is currently in production. The EVO II is $ 1,495 and the EVO II Pro is $ 1,795. Those interested in purchasing an EVO II Dual will need to contact Autel for pricing. Availability and shipping dates will be announced soon, according to Autel’s official site.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Venus Optics adds Canon RF, Nikon Z mount options to three of its most popular lenses

04 Dec

Venus Optics has announced it’s adding Canon RF and Nikon Z variants to three of its existing Laowa lenses.

The Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D, 25mm F2.8 2.5-5X Ultra Macro and 100mm F2.8 2X Ultra Macro have all been altered so they can now work on Canon and Nikon’s full-frame mirrorless systems. Aside from the mount alterations, the lenses remain unchanged from their counterparts.

You can find our previous coverage of the lenses below:

Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D
Laowa 25mm F2.8 2.5-5X Ultra Macro
Laowa 100mm F2.8 2X Ultra Macro

The new Canon RF and Nikon Z mount versions of the Laowa 12mm F2.8 Zero-D ($ 949), 25mm F2.8 2.5-5X Ultra Macro ($ 399) and 100mm F2.8 2X Ultra Macro ($ 449) are available to purchase on the Venus Optics website.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Olympus updates its lens roadmap with three new lenses due out in 2020

28 Nov

Olympus has released an updated version of its M.Zuiko Digital lens roadmap that adds three new lenses to its Micro Four Thirds System lineup.

In addition to its previously-announced lenses, the new roadmap confirms three new lenses: the ED 12-45mm F4.0 Pro standard zoom lens, ED 100-400mm F5.0-6.3 IS super-telephoto zoom lens and ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO lens super-telephoto zoom lens.

A product image from Olympus showing off the impending ED 150-400mm F4.5 TC1.25x IS PRO super-telephoto zoom lens.

Olympus doesn’t elaborate further on any of the new lenses other than saying the detailed specifications will be ‘officially announced in 2020.’ Olympus also says an ‘additional PRO telephoto zoom lens of an unspecified focal length will also join the M.Zuiko family,’ although no timeframe is given for its release.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

These are the three winners (and their photos) of the inaugural Leica Women Foto Project Award

25 Oct

Winning photographs of the inaugural Leica Women Foto Project Award

Editor’s note: Do note that some images in this slideshow will be considered not safe for work (NSFW), as a few images depict nudity. Proceed at your own discretion if in a sensitive work environment.

Earlier this year, Leica Camera launched the Leica Women Foto Project to facilitate diversity and inclusion in photography. This past week, they announced the three winners of the inaugural Leica Women Foto Project Award. Selected from a pool of 600 submissions across the U.S., photographers Debi Cornwall, Yana Paskova, and Eva Woolridge were chosen by a panel of five industry-leading judges. Each winner received $ 10,000 and a Leica Q2 camera to pursue a personal project that tells a story through the female viewpoint.

‘The Leica Women Foto Project is a keystone program for Leica Camera USA as we expand opportunities to amplify visual stories told through the lenses of underrepresented perspectives. The overwhelming response of hundreds of USA-based submissions in just our first year alone is indicative of the ongoing need for platforms that invite conversations that provoke new ways of seeing,’ says Kiran Karnani, Director of Marketing for Leica Camera North America. ‘We welcome Debi, Yana, and Eva to the Leica family of storytellers and we look forward to the continued evolution of their impactful stories.’

Debi Cornwall

Debi Cornwall was chosen for her series Necessary Fictions which explores the role of American military intervention in a mysterious country called ‘Atropia.’ Cornwall travelled to ten military training centers across the U.S., constructed to resemble Iraqi and Afghan villages, to stage the photos in her series. By documenting these mock villages, battle scenarios, and ‘cultural role-players,’ used to train military personnel, Cornwall’s aim was to invite critical inquiry among viewers about a society in which war has become the rule rather than the exception.

Yana Paskova

Bulgarian-born, Brooklyn-bred photojournalist and writer Yana Paskova created her winning series, Where Women Rule, based on her experience as a political asylum immigrant. Her aim with this project was to bridge humans’ understanding of each other. She describes the series as ‘a visual and sociological look at what happens when cultural norms of gender are amended or removed — via the all-female societies across the world, where women gather for shelter or in matriarchy — leaving us with new notions of femininity and masculinity, human bonds, family, and the fluid boundaries of identity.’

Eva Woolridge

Eva Woolridge, a self-proclaimed African-American and Chinese-American queer woman, brought her personal struggles with fertility to life in her project The Size of a Grapefruit. The series is an artistic representation of the traumatic experiences that ensued following her diagnosis of a dermoid cyst, which was the size of a grapefruit, and the resulting removal of her right ovary. Woolridge feels the removal could have been prevented had medical professionals been more proactive during early consultations. She hopes to shed more light on racial bias against black women seeking medical treatment, worldwide, by continuing the series with her prize money.

All three women will showcase photographs from their respective winning series in a joint exhibit at Leica Gallery Boston starting March 5th through April 26th, 2020. Visitors will be able to view the journey of their personal projects.

Fawzia and Nabil H.

Winner: Fawzia and Nabil H., by Debi Cornwall, from the Necessary Fictions series

About this photo/series: These are Iraqi role players photographed at the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms, California. Describing the series, Cornwall states ‘In Necessary Fictions, I photograph the mysterious country of ‘Atropia.’ Though fictional, Atropia actually exists: mock Afghan and Iraqi villages have been constructed on military bases across the United States to host immersive, realistic military training exercises for troops preparing to deploy. On ten such sites around the country, I document mock villages, battle scenarios, and ‘cultural role-players,’ civilian Afghans and Iraqis, many who have fled war only to recreate it, in costume, in the service of the U.S. military.’

Insurgent

Winner: Insurgent, by Debi Cornwall, from the Necessary Fictions series

About this photo/series: In Cornwall’s own words: ‘In a mobile studio I set up on site, I also make portraits with soldiers. They pose in front of a camouflage backdrop, appearing mortally wounded.’

For this body of work, Cornwall explored ‘how fiction and reality blur within the post-9/11 fantasy-industrial complex.’ Reflecting on her experience after visiting mock war sets on 10 different U.S. military bases, she says that ‘despite the constant military conflicts since September 11, war has receded in the American consciousness. War has become white noise, the almost-invisible backdrop of our roiling sociopolitical moment, even as our civic life has become increasingly militarized at home. Meanwhile, entire industries have emerged to support the forever wars, both real and imagined.’

Dara Lam Village

Winner: Dara Lam Village, by Debi Cornwall, from the Necessary Fictions series

About this photo/series: ‘My goal is to examine how fictions are deployed and embraced, and to invite critical inquiry among military and civilian viewers alike about a society in which war has become the rule rather than the exception.’ This image was captured in Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) in Ft. Polk, Louisiana.

Smoke Bomb

Winner: Smoke Bomb, by Debi Cornwall, from the Necessary Fictions series

About this photo/series: A smoke bomb is detonated in a mock exercise meant to train military recruits by replicating real-life combat scenarios on one of the 10 U.S. bases that Cornwall documented.

Widows of Varanasi

Winner: Widows of Varanasi #4, by Yana Paskova, from the Where Women Rule series

About this photo/series: In Paskova’s own words: ‘Where do women rule and where are they a commodity? How do women develop in a near absence of men or patriarchy? My project aims to be a visual and sociological look at what happens when cultural norms of gender are amended or removed — via the all-female societies across the world, where women gather for shelter or in matriarchy — leading us to new notions of femininity and masculinity, human bonds, family and the fluid boundaries of identity.’

Widows of Varanasi

Winner: Widows of Varanasi #10, by Yana Paskova, from the Where Women Rule series

About this photo/series: ‘Not in recent history have communities where women seek shelter, independence or support, been more relevant to our cultural climate and growth.’

Widows of Varanasi

Winner: Widows of Varanasi #7, by Yana Paskova, from the Where Women Rule series

About this photo/series: ‘I aim to discover the intersect of these women’s stories as individuals and as a collective amidst arresting visual landscapes, with special attention to perseverance in the face of rejection and confidence in shedding convention.’

Widows of Varanasi

Winner: Widows of Varanasi #9, by Yana Paskova, from the Where Women Rule series

About this photo/series: ‘My intent for this project’s findings is that they serve as an immersive experience not just for consumers of visual culture, but also as a research and educational tool — hopefully starting with the youngest minds, where developing the concept of equality matters most.’

Widows of Varanasi

Winner: Widows of Varanasi #9, by Yana Paskova, from the Where Women Rule series

About this photo/series: ‘Ultimately, I’d like to build connections between humans that overcome the limiting societal constructs of gender and geography.’

Inspection

Winner: Inspection, by Eva Woolridge, from The Size of a Grapefruit series

About this photo: In Woolridge’s own words, ‘this image represents my need to take initiative and research ovarian cysts following the surgery. My male surgeon didn’t give me information on how one ovary would affect my hormones, whether or not I could have kids, or why it even developed. I was left to process and research on my own.’

Denial

Winner: Denial, by Eva Woolridge, from The Size of a Grapefruit series

About this photo: In her own words, ‘this represents my denial in experiencing pain in my lower abdominal by putting it off as bad cramps, food positioning, and bloating, without listening to my body’s red flags. Black women are often dismissed by medical professionals when they address a reproductive concern. I had experienced signs of an ovarian cyst about two weeks before my emergency surgery, however was unfamiliar of them prior, and stayed quiet to not make a fuss.’

Empowered

Winner: Empowered, by Eva Woolridge, from The Size of a Grapefruit series

About this photo: ‘This image represents the growth, confidence and power I gained after this cycle of healing was complete. Exactly a year later, I had used photography to spotlight a quiet issue plaguing other people with ovaries. The golden metallic grapefruit slice represents the one sliver of an ovary I have left, that shines bright with beauty and strength.’

Empty

Winner: Empty, by Eva Woolridge, from The Size of a Grapefruit series

About this photo: ‘This represents the weight this surgical trauma had left me. Once my ovary was removed, I went through severe depression, isolation, and confusion from the betrayal of my body. My personality dimmed, I was forced to process and learn of this condition alone.’

Reflection

Winner: Reflection, by Eva Woolridge, from The Size of a Grapefruit series

About this photo: ‘As an advocate for reproductive health, during my two months of healing, I had to ask myself who I was now with one ovary. Was I less of a woman? Could I be a mother in the future? How many other women experienced this trauma? Were they given preventative resources and information to avoid, or were they caught off guard too? And my biggest question is how can I heal from this while spreading awareness to others?’

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Sigma’s three new EF-M mount lenses and mount conversion service now have release dates

04 Oct

Back in July, Sigma announced it was working to bring three of its DC DN lenses to Canon’s APS-C EF-M mount. Now, we have an official release date for the 16mm F1.4, 30mm F1.4 and 56mm F1.4 lenses.

In a statement on Sigma Global’s website (translated), Sigma says the lenses will be released on October 18th. An additional mount conversion service will also be offered for those who own the MFT or E mount versions of these lenses who would like them adapted for Canon’s M mount. To start the conversion process, Sigma requests you contact your nearest authorized Sigma service center starting October 19.

Based on the information provided on Sigma Global’s website, the Canon M mount versions of the 16mm F1.4, 30mm F1.4 and 56mm F1.4 lenses will cost the same as the other mount options — $ 399, $ 289 and $ 429, respectively. Sigma also offers kits with all three lenses for both E mount and MFT cameras, so it’s not a stretch to imagine the same kit will be offered for the M mount versions as well.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Tamron firmware update adds support for Nikon’s FTZ adapter to three of its lenses

05 Sep

Tamron has released firmware updates for three of its F mount lenses to add support for Nikon’s FTZ adapter.

Back in November 2018, Tamron announced firmware updates (1, 2) for half a dozen lenses that added support for Nikon’s F to Z mount adapter. Now, three additional lenses gain support: the Tamron SP 85mm F/1.8 Di VC USD (Model F016), 70-210mm F/4 Di VC USD (Model A034) and 100-400mm F/4.5-6.3 Di VC USD (Model A035).

No additional changes are mentioned in the firmware update, but regardless of whether or not you have a Nikon Z6 or Z7 camera, it’s probably in your best interest to download and install the firmware updates via Tamron’s TAP-in Utility, which works with the Tamron TAP-in console to update compatible Tamron lenses.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized