360Photography

Category: Uncategorized

  • The Beginning of Photography: The Drama of 1839

    The drama of ‘39

    ‘The Open Door’ William Henry Fox Talbot. About 1843. Print from paper negative.

    On January 6, 1839, François Arago, Secretary of the French Academy of Sciences, announced Daguerre’s invention and spoke of his accomplishment publicly, although he said nothing of the specific methods involved.

    By the middle of January, news of Daguerre’s invention had spread everywhere. Today, when imaging is so common and taken for granted, it’s hard to imagine how amazing the idea of taking a picture was in 1839. It created immediate headlines around the world.

    Francois Arago painted by Charles Steuben, 1832.

    The actual techniques used remained secret, however, since the French government had not yet officially bought the invention from Daguerre. The secrecy led to some suspicion that this was a trick or fake, and just like today, a few people ‘proved’ it was impossible. Most believed, though. This was an era when revolutionary new technology became available almost every year.

    Who is this Arago of whom you speak?

    For we photography types, Dominique François Jean Arago is just the guy who announced Daguerre’s invention, but in fact he was way more than that. He was born in a tiny village, graduated from a small college in 30 months, passed the examinations to enter the Ecole Polytechnique, got bored there, and went to work at the Paris Observatory. In 1806 he led an expedition to measure the Paris Meridian (which was used both to measure the size of the earth and to determine the length of a meter), became a prisoner of war, and on his release became the youngest member of the French Academy of Sciences at age 23.

    Despite having left the Ecole Polytechnique as a student, he returned as the Chair of Analytic Geometry at age 27. He did work in magnetism and optics, confirming Fresnel’s wave theory of light and making important discoveries in the polarization and emission of light.

    This is part of the reason he was so taken with Daguerre’s discovery; to Arago, photography was ‘the freezing or capture of light waves’. He may have gotten a bit too excited, though, as he really didn’t have the authority to make the purchase he promised Daguerre.

    The chaos begins in England

    The announcement of Daguerre’s achievement wasn’t published in England until January 19th – the telegraph wasn’t in use yet so dispatches went by rail and boat.

    Let’s do an Aside!

    Speaking of telegraphs, Samuel Morse, generally considered the inventor of the ‘modern’ telegraph, was in France trying to sell his telegraph system in 1838 and was introduced to Daguerre. Daguerre showed Morse his cameras, Morse demonstrated his telegraph to Daguerre, and they had an inventor-bromance-at-first-sight. Daguerre gave Morse a copy of his photographic instructions in the summer of 1839 before Morse returned to America.

    Morse hadn’t sold his telegraph yet, so he supported himself by opening the first photography studio in the United States and teaching others photography*. Most of the early American photographers including Samuel Broadbent, Albert Southworth, Matthew Brady, Albert Sands, and Jerimiah Gurney were taught by Morse.

    Samuel Morse, taken about 1840. The Morse family claimed the image was taken by Daguerre but this is unlikely, since the image is not a Daguerreotype.

    But wait! There’s more! Why was Morse in France? Because the Germans, who were his original sales target, already had a crude telegraph in place, invented by their own Carl Steinheil. In 1840, Steinheil became the first German to use Daguerre’s methods and made some clear improvements to them; making negatives and then printing positives from them. He became more interested in photography than the telegraph, and eventually founded the Steinheil optical company which made cameras, lenses, and telescopes until the 1970s.

    So, the two great advances of the 1840s, photography and the telegraph, are quite intertwined.

    Back to England

    William Henry Fox Talbot, he of too many names and too many interests (he had set aside his development of photography to work on an archeology book), heard of Daguerre’s invention as soon as it hit the English papers. His reaction was immediate, arrogant, and overblown — which would characterize most of his reactions for the rest of his life. After reading of Daguerre’s camera, he wrote (in typical Talbot dramatic fashion) that he was “placed in an unusual dilemma, scarcely to be paralleled in the Annals of Science”.

    Talbot wanted both public credit and financial gain for his work on photography. Having no idea if Daguerre’s methods differed from his own, he immediately tried to establish precedence as the first inventor, filing patents for ‘making permanent images using a camera obscura’ (the only thing he knew Daguerre used). He rushed samples of his ‘photogenic drawings’ to the Royal Institute in London where they were exhibited on January 25th, only weeks after Daguerre’s announcement. He provided documentation that they had been taken as early as 1835, hoping that would make his images the earliest. (They weren’t).

    Then he wrote letters to Arago and other academic societies stating that he would file disputes regarding the priority of Daguerre and presented a paper with the catchy title of “Some Account of the Art of Photogenic Drawing, or, the Process by which Natural Objects May Be Made to Delineate Themselves without the Aid of the Artist’s Pencil”. Once he learned that Daguerre made positive images on silver plates, Talbot filed more patents: for images made on paper, for making negative images, and for printing positive images from negative images.

    Talbot Wasn’t All Bad

    You may have gotten the impression I don’t much like Fox Talbot, probably because I don’t like Fox Talbot much. I will actually taunt him a second time later in this article. But he was an intelligent man, a polymath and linguist who did work in mathematics, chemistry, botany, Egyptology, and art history. He published 6 books and almost 60 scholarly articles and was one of the premier translators of Assyrian cuneiform. He discovered Talbot’s Law, which determines the frequency at which interrupted images appear continuous, something Edison used when developing cinematography. And, of course, the calotype and photogravure are Talbot’s inventions. So, I give the man his due; he did good science. He was just an insufferable jerk about it.

    Hershel does science for the win…

    Sir John Hershel, an acquaintance of Talbot’s and one of the premier scientists of the day, read of Daguerre’s achievements and then of Fox Talbot’s exhibition at the royal society in late January of 1839. With basically no other knowledge than ‘photographs had been’ made he wrote in his journal:

    Since hearing of Daguerre’s secret and that Fox Talbot has something of the same kind, obviously, there are three requisites:

    1. Very susceptible paper
    2. Very perfect camera obscura
    3. Better means of arresting the further actions of light.

    Within a few days he had sensitized paper with silver salts and made images — in fact he was exhibiting his own photographs within weeks. He was aware that both Daguerre and Talbot could not permanently fix their images, which slowly deteriorated over time. He knew that hyposulphite of soda (sodium thiosulfate) dissolved silver salts, so he used this to fix his images permanently. Rather than take out patents, he notified Daguerre and Talbot of this, and they both adapted “hypo” (as it has since been known to photographers) as their fixative. It remained in use for over a century.

    Sir John Herschel looking quite back-to-the-futureish, etching from portrait by Evert Duyckinick, 1873.

    Hershel also found Talbot’s terms ‘photogenic drawing’, ‘reversed copy’ and ‘re-reversed copy’ rather cumbersome and coined the terms ‘photography’, ‘negative’, and ‘positive’. Hershel also experimented with non-silver chemicals in an attempt to make the photographic process less expensive. He found he could create a similar light sensitive process using iron citrate and potassium ferricyanide which resulted in bright blue images: the Cyanotype. The low cost of this process (and the fact that Hershel didn’t patent) made it popular for photography for a while, especially for scientific images, like those botanist Anna Atkins made. Cyanotypes later became the engineering printer of the times; the blueprint.

    …and pours some gasoline on the fire

    Trying to calm the furor over in England, Arago invited Hershel, Talbot, and other English scientists to come to Paris to view Daguerre’s work. Talbot was too busy filing patents and refining his technique, but Hershel went. Much to Talbot’s dismay, Hershel wrote publicly:

    . . . compared to these masterpieces of Daguerre, Monsieur Talbot produces nothing but vague, foggy things. There is as much difference between these two products as there is between the moon and the sun.

    Probably not realizing that Talbot was taking all this very personally, rather than scientifically, Hershel wrote directly to Talbot in a letter:

    It is hardly too much to call them miraculous. . . every gradation of light and shade is given with a softness and fidelity which sets all painting at an immeasurable distance. His [exposure] times are also very short. In a bright day three minutes suffice.

    There is no question Hershel’s description was accurate. The difference between a Daguerrotype (below) and Talbot’s images of the time (the image at the top of this article) is dramatic.

    Daguerrotype of the Clark Sisters, circa mid 1840s. Photographer unknown. Image in public domain via Library of Congress.

    Talbot, who initially required 30 minutes, at least, to expose an image, must have tossed his breakfast after reading Hershel’s letter. But Talbot was a stubborn man and just continued to insist his way was the right way. It was the right way, of course, but it would be a few years before that became apparent. Largely because of Talbot.

    Daguerre’s triumph

    At this point, May of 1839, Daguerre was still waiting for the French Government to actually pay for his invention. Arago wanted to make it “a gift to the world” but Daguerre wasn’t that altruistic. He didn’t wait idly, however. He’d taken a rather broad interpretation of Argo’s definition of the world and decided that meant France. Plus he was aware of Tablot’s actions so he quietly had an agent take out patents on his invention in England.

    Daguerre also arranged for his brother-in-law, Alphonse Giroux, to produce a wooden camera with lens supplied by Chevalier and a complete set of chemicals for his process. Each bore on its side a metal label “No apparatus is guaranteed unless it bears the signature of M. Daguerre and the seal of M. Giroux”. Giroux and Daguerre already were mass-producing these before the official announcement of his process and were selling them minutes after the announcement was made.

    The most recent auction sale of an original Giroux camera, image from Westlicht Photographia Auction, 2010. If you find one at a garage sale, grab it. They sell for about $ 1 million in reasonable condition.

    On July 19th, the French Government finally passed a bill giving Daguerre a lifetime pension in return for his process (and a smaller pension for Isidore Niepce). On August 19th the details of the process were made public at a joint meeting of the French Academies of Science and Fine Arts. The event generated more excitement than a Talking Heads reunion tour: people arrived three hours early to find the hall already full and crowds lining the street. Within days every optician and chemist in Paris (and elsewhere for that matter) had sold out of lenses, silver nitrate, silver plates, and everything else needed to create photographs.

    The effects of the release were huge. Photographers were soon swarming over every bit of photogenic real estate in Paris, making image after image (real estate because the early Daguerrotypes required exposure times too long for portraits). Many were making artistic images, but just like today, others quickly became more enamored with their equipment’s resolution. A lament written at the time (which may be apocryphal) would be perfectly at home on a DPR forum today.

    Our young men should spend more time considering the composition and merit of their images, and less time with magnifying glasses counting how many bricks and shingles they can resolve.

    Daguerre retired almost immediately to Bryn-Sur-Marne where he wrote a 79-page book on his process that was immediately translated into a dozen languages. He continued quiet experimentation in photography until his death in 1851.

    The exposure times shortened quickly as chemical processes were refined. Within a year Daguerrists, as they were called, had set up portrait studios in every major city of the world. Even smaller cities were visited by traveling Daguerrists. For the first time an image of a family member could be made easily and then kept forever.

    Hippolyte and Hercules

    If you remember from the last article, two members of the “greatest names in photography” team, Antoine Hercules Florence and Hippolyte Bayard had also developed photographic techniques at this time. Hercules, a Frenchman living in Brazil, had only delayed and incomplete knowledge of the events in Paris. When he did become aware, though, he was the perfect gentleman stating only that his techniques were not nearly as advanced as those of Daguerre and making no claims for himself.

    Hippolyte Bayard had approached Arago in 1839, presenting his own techniques which created positive images, like Daguerrotypes, but used less expensive paper, like Talbot’s process. Arago feared Bayard’s claims would interfere with his plan to release the Daguerrotype process “as a gift to the world”, asked Bayard to remain quiet, and inferred that he, too, would get some form of government pension. This didn’t happen and Bayard ended up demonstrating his technique to the French Institute in exchange for enough money to buy some chemicals.

    Portrait of a Drowned Man. Hippolyte Bayard, 1840.

    Bayard, who loved him some drama, used his technique to create the first staged photograph: “Self Portrait As a Drowned Man” which he exhibited at the French Institute with the following caption:

    The corpse which you see here is that of M. Bayard, inventor of the process that has just been shown to you. As far as I know this indefatigable experimenter has been occupied for about three years with his discovery. The Government which has been only too generous to Monsieur Daguerre, has said it can do nothing for Monsieur Bayard, and the poor wretch has drowned himself. Oh the vagaries of human life…!

    Hippolyte got his stuff together after a bit, though, and went on to have a most successful photographic career. Shooting Daguerreotypes.

    Talbot snatches defeat from victory

    Back in England Talbot continued to work on his process, making a huge discovery: the principle of developing a latent image. He found that if he bathed his silver iodide papers in a solution of gallic acid and silver nitrate after a brief exposure, the latent image (invisible at first) would “develop” and become visible. He then “fixed” his negatives in hypo and printed positives as he always had. This both shortened exposure times and improved image quality significantly.

    It is this process, the Calotype, that became the forerunner of film photography. Calotype images were markedly improved over Talbot’s early work. They still didn’t provide the superb detail of a Daguerreotype, but they had one huge advantage: one could make multiple prints and create mass media.

    Talbot patented his invention in England, but charged such high patent fees (up to £800) that almost no one in England used the process. A group of opticians, chemists, and photographers began a long series of legal battles attempting to overturn Talbot’s patents. But the more they tried, the more stubborn he became, and the patent wars raged on for nearly a decade.

    However, Talbot, being quite the Anglophile, had patented his process in England and Wales, not bothering to patent it in Scotland and other countries. Daguerre, if you remember, had patented his invention in England, but not elsewhere.

    Papal Palace at Avignon. Charles Nègre. Print from a paper negative, 1852.

    Largely for this reason, England lagged behind the rest of the world in photography for quite a while, while Scotland and France became centers of photography. Scottish photographers, for example, could use either the Calotype or the Daguerrotype processes without paying any royalties; photographers in England had to pay royalties for either process.

    A number of French photographers took advantage of the situation and began using Talbot’s process. It probably didn’t help Talbot’s mood much that Frenchmen made two dramatic improvements to his technique. The first, waxing the paper used in the process, increased the photographic detail significantly. Édouard Baldus, Gustave Le Gray, Henri Le Secq, and Charles Nègre were printing superb images using this process in the 1840s. In France. But no one did in England.

    The second improvement, the albumen process, was developed by Louis Désiré Blanquart-Evrard, who published and made it freely available in 1847. This used albumen from egg whites to bind photographic chemicals to paper, creating a glossy surface and allowing thousands of positive prints to be made from a single negative. (Talbot’s technique allowed for, at most, a few hundred).

    The Hypaethral Temple, Philae. Albumen print by Francis Frith, 1857.

    With these advances, Calotypes became THE photographic method used by explorers, archeologists, and others publishing their photographs or documenting their travels in book form; they just didn’t print the books in England. As for Talbot himself, he made hundreds of Calotypes and published some of them in a series of booklets entitled “The Pencil of Nature”, which was the first published photography book. It came out as ‘fascicles’ of twenty-four plates each, but it was not a commercial success and was terminated after the first six fascicles were released.

    The real father of photography?

    While Talbot was vigorously defending his English patents, another Englishman, Frederick Scott Archer, developed a new technique in 1848. The collodion (or wet plate) process, used glass coated with a gelatin to hold the silver chemicals. Archer did not patent, publishing his technique so that others could use it freely. The collodion (or wet plate) technique was relatively inexpensive, exposed quickly, and the glass plate negative was easier to print from.

    Talbot, being Talbot, sued wet-plate photographers on the grounds that this technique was just like his own. British photographers rallied to the case and brought reams of evidence that Talbot was not the true inventor (much of the evidence was later found to be false and fabricated). The jury found that Talbot’s patents were valid, but only for his exact process. Anyone who varied from his published methods even slightly was not guilty of patent violation, and by that time all photography varied from Talbott’s original methods.

    Talbot had finally lost the war, and England had finally joined the rest of the photography world. Archer’s wet plate technique itself advanced photography greatly, but the fact that it led to the breaking of Talbot’s patents particularly advanced the art in England.

    Frederick Scott Archer, unfortunately, benefitted not at all and died penniless in 1857. After his death, Punch magazine asked for donations for the family:

    The inventor of Collodion has died, leaving his invention, unpatented, to enrich thousands, and his family unapportioned to the battle of life. Now, one expects a photographer to be almost as sensitive as the Collodion to which Mr. Scott Archer helped him. . . you, photographers, set up Gratitude in your little glass temples of the sun, and sacrifice, according to your means, in memory of the benefactor . . . answers must not be Negatives.

    About £767 were raised for Archer’s family; a fair amount of money at the time. About as much as Talbot charged for one license to use the Calotype process.

    The collodion process wasn’t perfect. Collodion (nitrocellulose), which is made from gun cotton dissolved in ether and alcohol, has an annoying tendency to explode, for one thing. Preparation of the plates and photographic technique using them was difficult. But the images obtained were better than Calotypes and created negatives that could print thousands of copies, unlike Daguerrotypes.

    Direct positive images would continue to be made, not only Daguerrotypes, but less expensive Tintypes and Other types. Because of their fine detail, positives were a favorite for portraits for quite a while. But the negative-image-to-positive print process would become the standard for most photographic work.

    So, who was the real Father of Photography? It would make a good paternity suit. Niepce created the first permanent images using a camera. Daguerre perfected the technique that allowed it to become mainstream (and was the only one to benefit financially). Talbot’s different technique allowed multiple copies of images to be mass produced, and the negative-image to positive-print is the basis for all photography from the 1800s until digital.

    But, I think no matter who you credit with fathering photography, Frederick Scott Archer, who freed photography so that anyone of reasonable means could afford to take photographs and whose discoveries led directly to the development of film, is the one who raised the child.

    * Morse wasn’t the ONLY Daguerreotypist in America in 1839. Dauerre had contracted with Francois Gouraud to introduce and sell Giroux’s ‘official’ cameras in the U. S. and he arrived in the Fall of 1839. Another man, D. W. Seager took and exhibited a Daguerreotype in September of 1839, soon after he returned to New York from Europe.

    Resources:

    • Bankston, John: Louis Daguerre and the Daugerrotype. Mitchell Lane. Delaware.
    • Daniel, Malcolm: The Daguerreian Age in France. Metropolitan Museum of Art, October, 2020.
    • Daniel, Malcolm: William Henry Fox Talbot and the Invention of Photography. Metropolitan Museum of Art, October, 2020.
    • Gustavson, Todd: A History of Photography from Daguerrotype to Digital. Sterling, 2009.
    • Marien, Mary W: Photography. A Cultural History. 3rd ed. Prentice Hall. 2011
    • Newhall, Beaumont: The History of Photography. Museum of Modern Art, New York. 2009
    • Osterman, Mark and Romer, Grant: History of the Evolution of Photography. In: Peres, Michael (Ed.): The Focal Encyclopedia of Photography, 4th, ed. Elsevier, 2007.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • From the T90 to the EOS R3 – a visual tour of Canon’s high-end cameras (photo gallery)

    $ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_9463821952″,”galleryId”:”9463821952″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”isMobile”:false}) });

    Canon was a pioneer of electronic, multi-mode cameras, and some of the design decisions that the company made way back in the 1980s persist even now, in its high-end EF and RF cameras. From the T90 to the new EOS R3, high-end Canon cameras share a remarkable amount of DNA.

    In this gallery, we’re taking a closer look at several Canon cameras, from the 1980s to the present day, to explore how the company’s approach to ergonomics has evolved (and when it hasn’t) over the years.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Samsung shares new promotional video for its pixel-packed 200MP HP1 mobile image sensor

    Samsung has published a new promotional video detailing the features of its new ISOCELL HP1 mobile image sensor.

    In the three-minute video, Samsung Sensor Design Team member Minho Kwon shares the various technologies the HP1 sensor brings to mobile image. Specifically, he addresses the 0.64?m pixel size of the sensor, as well as its various pixel-binning modes, including the 4–1 pixel binning (to give an equivalent pixel size of 1.28?m) used when recording 8K video, as well as 16-to-1 pixel binning (to give an equivalent pixel size of 2.56?m) used in low-light environment for still images.

    Minho Kwon also details Samsung’s Smart ISO technology, a dual-gain mode that intelligently switches between gain levels to achieve the maximum detail in both light and dark environments.

    No new information is presented in the video, but it’s a great look into a pixel-packed sensor we’ll likely see inside next year’s flagship smartphones.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • GoPro announces Hero10 Black with new chip, better performance and improved usability

    Precisely one year ago, GoPro announced the Hero9 Black action camera. Today, GoPro has announced its successor, the Hero10 Black. While GoPro’s latest action camera looks familiar, a new GP2 chip inside results in significantly improved performance.

    With its GP2 chip, the Hero10 Black features double the performance frame rates compared to 2020’s Hero9 Black. The increased processing power has other benefits. The Hero10 can upload a video to your phone or the cloud 30 percent faster than the Hero9. The Hero10 can plug directly into your smartphone for even faster uploads through GoPro’s Quik app, something not possible on the Hero9. The Hero9 introduced a front screen, although it was limited by poor framerate. Thanks to the GP2, the front display now runs at 30 frames per second despite being the same display.

    Increased processing power gets more out of the 23.6MP image sensor. The Hero9 allowed users to pull 12MP still images from 4K 4:3 video. The Hero10 instead grabs 19.6MP stills from 5.3K 4:3 video. The Hero9 was limited to 5K 16:9 video, where the Hero10 records 5.3K 16:9 video, resulting in an additional megapixel when grabbing stills.

    The GP2 chip helps with video framerates as well, which is perhaps the biggest boost offered by the increased processing power. The Hero10 Black records 5.3K/60p, 4K/120p and 2.7K/240p video. The Hero9 recorded 5K/30p, 4K/60p and FHD video at 240 frames per second.

    Video is not only higher quality and faster, but it’s also more stable thanks to the inclusion of new HyperSmooth 4.0 stabilization software. The GoPro Hero10 includes three levels for its stabilization: off, standard, and boost. Boost results in cropping but promises the most stable footage possible. Standard doesn’t crop but won’t be quite as smooth as the boost setting.

    The Hero10 uses the same batteries as the Hero9, but with higher-res video at faster frame rates, it does drain faster, per The Verge. During hands-on time, reviewer Becca Farsace investigated GoPro’s claims of improved tone mapping and noise reduction from the GP2 chip. Farsace found that low-light performance is improved.

    While the GoPro Hero10 Black is available now for $ 499 ($ 399 with an annual GoPro subscription), some new features are being added on November 16, including Max lens mod support, additional resolutions, 24fps at all resolutions and GoPro’s SuperView lens at 5.3K at 30, 25 and 24fps. For more information, visit GoPro.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Xiaomi’s new 11T Pro offers 120W charging, 108MP camera module and more

    Chinese smartphone manufacturer Xiaomi has announced the 11T and 11T Pro, the first two devices in a new lineup from the company that sits just below its Mi 11 and Mi 11 Pro devices in both price and features.

    Xiaomi 11T Pro

    The new Xiaomi 11T Pro is powered by a Snapdragon 888 5G chipset, compared to the 888+ used in the Mi 11 Pro. The front features 6.67” flat 120Hz AMOLED display (1080 x 2400 pixels) that’s capable of 1,000 nits peak brightness and can display HDR10+ content. The device runs on MIUI 12.5, which is based on Android 11.

    On the rear of the camera is a triple camera array, headlined by a 1/1.52″ 108MP sensor (0.7µm, 9–1 pixel binning) that’s likely Samsung’s ISOCELL HM2, based on the specifications. In front of that sensor is a 26mm (equiv) F1.8 lens. The other two cameras onboard are an 8MP ultrawide module with a 120-degree field of view and a 5MP telephoto/macro lens with a 50mm (equiv.) focal length. None of the cameras have optical image stabilization, unfortunately, which the more expensive Mi 11 lineup features.

    Video capabilities include 8K30p recording as well as 4K60p and 1080p recording at up to 960 fps. HDR10+ recording is possible and a gyro-based electronic image stabilization (EIS) should keep footage at least somewhat stable at 4K resolution and below (no EIS on 8K recording). The ‘punch hole’ selfie camera on the front of the device uses a 16MP 1/3.06″ sensor with 1.0µm pixels. In addition to 16MP stills, it also offers 1080p recording at 30fps.

    In addition to 5G connectivity, the device features Wi-Fi (802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6), Bluetooth 5.2, GPS and NFC support. A single USB-C port on the bottom of the device supports 120W charging, which can power the device’s 5000mAh Li-Po battery to 72% in 10 minutes and 100% in 17 minutes, according to Oppo. A side-mounted fingerprint sensor can be used to unlock the device in addition to the usual passcode locks.

    The Xiaomi 11T Pro is expected to ship later this month in black, blue and white colorways and start at €650 (~$ 770) for the 128GB/8GB RAM model while the 256GB/12GB RAM model retails for €750 (885).

    Xiaomi 11T

    The Xiaomi 11T is practically identical to the more powerful 11T Pro, with the only noticeable specification difference being the chipset inside. Instead of the Snapdragon 888 5G used in the 11T Pro, the 11T uses a custom Dimensity 1200-Ultra chipset. This less powerful chipset means you won’t be getting 8K video capabilities with the 11T, as it tops out with 4K60p recording. All other camera-related specifications remain the same.

    The only other difference we noted is that the fast charging on the 11T is limited to 67W instead of 120W, which means you’ll be able to get to 100% battery in 36 minutes instead of the 17 minutes on the 11T Pro. It’s worth noting though that fast charging will wear down the battery’s life span faster, so the slower charging speeds might actually be more beneficial in the end.

    The Xiaomi 11T Pro is available in black, blue and white colorways and starts at €650 (~$ 770) for the 128GB/8GB RAM model while the 256GB/12GB RAM model retails for €750 (885). The 11T will start at €500 (~$ 590) for the 128GB/8GB RAM model. Both models are expected to ship to much of Europe by the end of the month and are avialable to purchase through authorized Ziaomi retailers, including AliExpress, Amazon, Goboo and Mi.com.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • PSA: Apple warns that high-powered motorcycles can damage autofocus, image stabilization in iPhones

    Apple has published a new support document on its website warning users that cameras on their iPhone devices can be damaged when attached to high-powered motorcycles due to the ‘high amplitude vibrations’ of their engines.

    In the document, Apple specifically points to the optical image stabilization (OIS) and closed-loop autofocus (AF) technologies inside its latest iPhone device and notes both of these are susceptible to performance degradation over time when exposed to the ‘extended high-amplitude vibrations,’ such as those put through the device when it’s attached, via a mount, to a motorcycle. Specifically, Apple notes the OIS systems inside the iPhone 6 Plus and later and the AF systems in the iPhone XS and later are the modules affected by these issues.

    ‘High-power or high-volume motorcycle engines generate intense high-amplitude vibrations, which are transmitted through the chassis and handlebars,’ says Apple. ‘It is not recommended to attach your iPhone to motorcycles with high-power or high-volume engines due to the amplitude of the vibration in certain frequency ranges that they generate.’

    Even smaller motorized vehicles, ‘such as mopeds and scooters,’ can lead to problems, despite ‘comparatively lower-amplitude vibrations,’ according to Apple. To lessen the risk of damage on these devices, Apple suggests using a vibration dampening mount and ‘avoid regular use for prolonged periods.’

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Canon teases September 14 launch event, calls is ‘the most exciting announcement of the year’

    It looks like September 14, 2021 is going to be a busy day. First, Apple announced it will be hosting a livestream event. Now, Canon has announced that it too will be hosting a livestreamed event on YouTube at 12pm CEST (+2 UTC).

    Canon doesn’t say what we can expect to see at the event, but the animated graphic in the teaser video shows an illustration of an RF camera mount. Make of that what you will.

    You can click through on the video to set a reminder on YouTube to be notified when the event goes live.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Hands-on with the new Fujifilm XF33mm F1.4 R LM WR

    Introduction

    Fujifilm’s XF 33mm F1.4 R LM WR is the latest in a series of primes from the company that offer modern alternatives to some of the first optics in the X-mount system. I say ‘offer alternatives’ rather than replace, because the company says the 33mm won’t replace the nine-year-old XF 35mm F1.4 R and instead both will be available alongside one another.

    Although Fujifilm also announced a 23mm F1.4 sister lens alongside the 33mm, it’s the longer lens that will become available first. It’s expected to arrive later this month at a price of $ 799.

    What is the 33mm F1.4 (concept)

    The lens is significantly larger and more complex than the original XF 35mm F1.4 (one of the first trio of lenses that launched the X-mount system). It features 15 elements in 10 groups, including 3 ED and 2 aspherical elements, making it much more complex than the 8 element, 6 group design of the 35mm, that just featured a single aspherical element.

    This added complexity nearly doubles the weight, meaning the 33mm F1.4 weighs 360g (12.7oz) rather than 187g (6.6oz), it also sees the length increase by about 50%, with the 33mm being 73.5mm (2.9″) long, up from 50.4mm (2″).

    Optical design

    Fujifilm says the 33mm’s design is focused on delivering sharpness by minimizing aberrations. Distortion and other aberrations are corrected optically and the design of the focus group is symmetrical, so that any aberration introduced as light enters the group is corrected as it leaves, according to the company.

    The focus group is placed behind the aperture blades, allowing it to be smaller, and the use of a linear motor (as denoted ‘LM’ in the name) should result in smoother, faster focusing than in the older 35mm lens.

    33mm F1.4 (details)

    The lens has few external controls: just aperture and focus rings. As usual, the aperture ring has an ‘A’ position that lets the camera control the aperture value, with a choice of whether the value is then set automatically or using the command dials.

    At the back of the lens you’ll find a small rubber seal around the outer lip, to help deliver on the promise of the ‘WR’ weather resistance, and there is extensive sealing around the other joins in the case to prevent moisture ingress around the control rings.

    Side-by-side with the 35mm F1.4 R

    The 33mm is appreciably larger than the older 35mm, which is probably what’s prompted Fujifilm to keep both options in its lineup.

    Focus breathing has been minimized on the new lens, and its lack of snap-back focus ring (as featured on some of the primes released previously) is said to be so that the response of the focus ring can be adjusted to give a linear response for repeatable focus pulls in video.

    The new 33mm features 9 aperture blades, rather than the 7 of the 35mm, and, while the minimum focus distance has increased from 28cm (11″) to 30cm (11.8″), its designers say sharpness should be better maintained at close focus distances.

    23mm F1.4

    Alongside the 33mm F1.4, Fujifilm also announced the XF23mm F1.4 R LM WR, which will replace the earlier XF23mm F1.4 R. We don’t have the new LM WR version of the 23mm lens, yet, but it will very closely resemble the 33mm F1.4 shown on the left here (only 4.3mm / 0.17″ longer), so we’ve lined the new 33mm up against the outgoing 23mm F1.4 R.

    The design of the new 23mm very closely resembles that of the 33mm F1.4, with 15 elements in 10 groups, three aspherical and two ED elements. This again makes it much more optically complex than its existing counterpart, which featured 9 elements in 6 groups with a single aspheric. Again there’s a shift from 7 aperture blades to 9, and the move to the use of a linear motors, which should speed up focus.

    XF23mm F1.4 R LM WR vs XF23mm F1.4 R

    The 23mm F1.4 R LM WR doesn’t have the snap-back focus ring of its predecessor but again it’s been optimized for reduced focus breathing and the option of linear focus response, making it a more attractive lens for videographers.

    Sharpness is improved over the old lens, as it the minimum focus distance, which drops from 28cm (11″) to 19cm (7.5″), which sees the maximum magnification increase from 0.1x to 0.2x.

    The XF23mm F1.4 R LM WR will be available in November at a recommend price of $ 899, a $ 100 premium over the list price of the existing, non-weather-sealed model.

    Wrap-up

    The new LM WR 23mm and 33mm F1.4s join the XF18mm F1.4 R LM WR launched earlier in 2021, forming a trio of primes that update some of the earliest lenses in Fujifilm’s X-mount range.

    The X-mount celebrates its tenth birthday in 2022 and, with Fujifilm having opened the mount up to more third-party lens makers, it’s good to see the company go back and update some of the key options in its lineup. The updated lens all promise significant increases in speed and sharpness, handling and behavior that works better for video, and the addition of weather sealing.

    It’s almost certainly not a coincidence that Fujifilm is launching a line of lenses that it claims will be able to resolve higher frequencies than its existing models could. All three lenses would clearly make a lot of sense if Fujifilm were to introduce a higher-resolution X-series body in the future.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Slideshow: A bewildered roadrunner at the US—Mexico border took hom the grand prize in this year’s Bird Photographer of the Year competition

    Bird Photographer of the Year 2021 winners

    Winners of the 2021 Bird Photographer of the Year awards were announced today. Over 22,000 images were submitted from around the globe. Mexican photographer Alejandro Prieto took home the £5,000 grand prize for his image of a roadrunner standing next to the 3,000km-long US–Mexico border.

    ‘The border wall crosses deserts, mountains, and even mangroves. It is not just desert, and is in fact very biodiverse with more than 1,500 animal and plants species threatened by the wall,’ says Prieto. ‘I have watched many different animals reach the wall before turning around and heading back.’

    The Bird Photographer of the Year awards also gives back. The organization donated £8,000 to Birds on the Brink. They fund grass-roots bird conservation projects around the world. All 2021 winners can be viewed on the competition’s main website.

    Gold Award Winner and Bird Photographer of the Year: ‘Blocked’ by Alejandro Prieto (Mexico)

    About this Image: The 3,000km-long US–Mexico border traverses and straddles some of the continent’s most biologically diverse regions. It is home to uniquely adapted mammals, reptiles, birds and plants, some of which are found nowhere else on the planet. Numerous species will be affected if the US government decides to build a wall along the border with Mexico. Border infrastructure not only physically blocks the movement of wildlife but it also destroys and fragments habitats.

    Many desert animals are, to a degree, nomadic wanderers and a wall would sever habitat connectivity and prevent them moving freely from one place to another. In this photograph, a Greater Roadrunner approaches the border wall at Naco, Arizona, with what almost looks like a sense of bewilderment.

    Gear and Specs: Nikon D850 with Nikkor 70–200mm f/2.8 lens. Focal length 112mm, 1/320 second, f/14, ISO 200.

    Gold Award Winner, Best Portrait: ‘Underwater Portrait’ by Felipe Foncueva (Spain)

    About this Image: This underwater image of a Brown Pelican was taken off the Pacific coast of Costa Rica, near the mouth of the T.rcoles River, where there are small fishing villages. Groups of pelicans await the return of fishermen and take advantage of the scraps they throw into the sea.

    Looking at this image, I am struck by the similarity between the way the pouch beneath the pelican’s bill functions and the throat of a feeding baleen whale. At first glance you could be forgiven for thinking you are looking at a marine mammal rather than a bird!

    Gear and Specs: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV with Canon 8–15mm f/4 Focal length 15mm; 1/10th, f/9, ISO 200.

    Silver Award Winner, Best Portrait: ‘Sing Heartily’ by Maofeng Shen (China)

    About this Image: June marks the start of the breeding season for Demoiselle Cranes on the vast grasslands of Keshiketeng in Inner Mongolia. It is a blessing to witness the arrival of these beautiful birds, and a privilege to have documented their nesting behaviour. In order to capture wonderful, intimate moments of breeding behaviour without causing disturbance, I did a lot of homework.

    I drove more than 800km to the vast prairie of Keshiketeng two days before I planned to photograph and did my groundwork. I got up at 3am on 29 June 2018 and rushed to the location of the breeding cranes. In order not to disturb their peaceful life, I had previously set up my equipment in the long grass and lay down, disguised on the ground.

    In the morning light, the figures of the Demoiselle Crane family of four gradually appeared out of the gloom. Just as they were leisurely foraging for food, suddenly the distant sound of shepherds herding sheep could be heard. It seemed as if the sound was enough to inspire the pair of adults to call, as they stood back to back. This evocative sound cut through the silent sky for a brief moment, then everything quietened down again. I enjoyed the company of the crane family for the next four hours.

    Gear and Specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II with Canon 600mm f/4 lens, 1/640 second, f/6.3, ISO 400.

    Bronze Award Winner, Best Portrait: ‘Night Hunter’ by Jonas Classon (Sweden)

    About this Image: Poised for attack and staring intently, this Great Grey Owl has fixed its penetrating gaze on a vole in a Swedish forest. On the night of a full moon, I photographed the owl as it raised its deadly taloned foot, with my car headlights adding a little more illumination to the scene. When I looked at the photo afterwards it gave me goosebumps.

    Gear and Specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II with Canon 200–400mm f/4 lens. Focal length 300mm, 1/160 second, f/4, ISO 3200.

    Silver Award Winner, Birds in the Environment: ‘Claiming the Forest Floor’ by Joshua Galicki (United States)

    About this Image: This image shows a male Ovenbird singing on top of a fallen log. The bird is staking its claim to a breeding territory shortly after arriving from a lengthy migration to the northeast United States from wintering grounds in Central America. Ovenbirds are quite small – 15cm or so in length – and unlike most other New World warblers, prefer to forage on the forest floor among the leaf litter. I have observed and studied North American songbirds for years and care deeply for all of my subjects.

    This shot was taken with a non- intrusive remote set-up to capture the expanse of the Ovenbird’s environment. The camera and lens were camouflaged next to the bird’s favourite singing log and the shutter was remotely triggered. No bait or tape lure were used for this shot, nor was any stress placed on the bird. As a result, this is an image of an Ovenbird behaving naturally.

    Gear and Specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark III with Canon 24–70mm f/4 lens. Focal length 24mm, 1/500 second, f/8, ISO 6,400.

    Bronze Award Winner, Birds in the Environment: ‘Yellow-billed Oxpecker with Cape Buffalo’ by Barbara Fleming (United States)

    About this Image: Yellow-billed Oxpeckers chatter constantly as they fly in and out of a Cape Buffalo herd, landing wherever they can to rest and feed. They spend almost their entire lives around large mammals, to the point where even courtship and mating take place in their company. Oxpeckers feed on ticks and other insects, although they also have a predilection for the mammal blood.

    In this image both oxpecker and buffalo were in motion, moving in different directions and at different distances from the lens. This added to the challenge of capturing this symbiotic pair, but enhanced the satisfaction at achieving my goal. The image was darkened in post-processing.

    Gear and Specs: Nikon D4S with Nikkor 500mm f/4 lens and 1.4x teleconverter. Focal length 700mm, 1/1,600 second, f/8, ISO 1,600.

    Gold Award Winner, Attention to Detail: ‘Disappearing’ by Rafael Armada (Spain)

    About this Image: Reflections are one of the details I like most in nature because light undergoes incredible transformations when it interacts with water. In a way, it is nature playing with us, with our forms and with the forms that we see. In this photograph, the same water that creates the reflection strikes with force to destroy it, in a sense to overthrow the King. The King is still standing; he knows his reign is not over… not yet. But it will end the day that water no longer creates reflections in the sand.

    Gear and Specs: Canon EOS-1D X Mark II with Canon EF 100–400mm f/4.5–5.6 II lens. Focal length 100mm, 1/30 second, f/14, ISO 100.

    Silver Award Winner, Attention to Detail: ‘Growing Up’ by Raymond Hennessy (United States)

    About this Image: Great Northern Divers (known as Common Loons in North America) and their chicks take to the water soon after the chicks hatch. The size difference between adult and youngster is evident in this image and shows just how much growing is left for this tiny chick: it is dwarfed by the large bill of the adult next to it. I took this photo as the pair floated incredibly close to my kayak in the soft afternoon light.

    Gear and Specs: Nikon D4S with Nikkor 500mm f/4 lens. Focal length 500mm, 1/640 second, f/4, ISO 400.

    Gold Award Winner, Bird Behavior: ‘Floral Bathtub’ by Mousam Ray (India)

    About this Image: This image was taken at North Bengal Agricultural University in Cooch Behar, West Bengal. To set the scene, here in India autumn days (when the photo was taken) are typically hot and humid – sporadic rains interspersed with sweltering heat – while the nights are cold. I was keen to capture images of Crimson Sunbirds drinking nectar from banana flowers. Typically, these flowers point towards the ground, but in some ornamental species they point skywards and some of their outer petals open up like cups, holding water from rain or dew.

    Late one evening, a female Crimson Sunbird suddenly arrived and started sipping nectar. Her thirst quenched, she then started bathing in the water stored in this banana flower petal. It’s quite common to find birds refreshing themselves in the evening, visiting puddles and pools, dipping their heads and wetting their wings and body. However, it was a unique experience to see this sunbird immersing herself upside down in water contained in an ornamental flower petal, like a lady in a bathtub. Her relaxed and indulgent manner, lit by the glow of sunset, was truly a sight to behold.

    Gear and Specs: Nikon D500 with Nikkor 300mm f/4 and 1.4x teleconverter. Focal length 420mm, 1/4,000 second, f/7.1, ISO 1,600.

    Silver Award Winner, Bird Behavior: ‘The Face of Death’ by Massimiliano Apollo (Italy)

    About this Image: After many years of frequenting these rice fields in northern Italy, I finally managed to capture what is for me the perfect shot! In late summer, prior to migrating south, the region’s Purple Herons try to feed as much as possible and take advantage of the abundance of prey present in the rice fields.

    I had long dreamt of a shot like this, one that would allow me to see the expressions of the two subjects – predator and prey. I can also say with some satisfaction that this shot is completely wild and no form of baiting was employed – just a lot of patience, perseverance and, why not, a little luck!

    Gear and Specs: Sony A9 II with Canon 600mm f/4 lens and 1.4x teleconverter. Focal length 840mm, 1/2,000 second, f/6.3, ISO 3200.

    Bronze Award Winner, Bird Behavior: ‘Entangled’ by Julie Halliday (Falkland Islands)

    About this Image: In the past, the Imperial Shag went by the name of King Cormorant. This subantarctic and Antarctic species breeds in dense colonies, and on the Falkland Islands it favours gentle cliff-top slopes, often mixing with Southern Rockhopper Penguins and Black-browed Albatrosses.

    Imperial Shags use various displays to reinforce pair-bonds, ranging from head-wagging, gargling and kinking their necks, to making throat-clicking noises and nibbling or biting the tips of the bill. This pair allowed a close approach, and as one came in to land, they went through a ritual courtship greeting.

    Gear and Specs: Canon EOS 5D Mark III with Canon 70–200mm f/2.8 II lens and 2x teleconverter. Focal length 400mm; 1/1,600 second; f/5.6; ISO 250.

    Gold Award Winner, Birds in Flight: ‘Thirsty’ by Tzahi Finkelstein (Israel)

    About this Image: Common Swifts live their lives on the wing and are a challenge to capture in flight. With a diet of flying insects, they need to drink from time to time, and even that behavior is performed on the wing. I had had this image – of a swift skimming over water – in my mind for a long time.

    I finally found a suitable place to attempt it, and to get the photo I had to sit in water wearing a wetsuit, shrouded by a portable hide, every day for three weeks. Eventually, I got this photo on the final day – the day after the birds had all gone.

    Gear and Specs: Nikon D500 with Nikkor 300mm f/4 PF lens. Focal length 300mm, 1/4,000 second, f/7.1, ISO 1,800.

    Silver Award Winner, Birds in Flight: ‘The Art of Motion’ by Nicolas Reusens (Spain)

    About this Image: This image is one of my favorite shots from my last trip to Ecuador. Using a complicated set-up, I was able to trigger two sets of flashes during a single exposure, using a shutter speed of 1/25 second. I then tried to introduce a sense of movement into the image by adding continuous lighting to the scene. After three days of photographic attempts to get a single picture with an intense atmosphere, this is what I achieved. I hope it was worth it!

    Gear and Specs: Canon R6 with Laowa 100mm f/2.8 Macro lens. Focal length 100mm, 1/25 second, f/13, ISO 200.

    Bronze Award Winner, Birds in Flight: ‘First Come, First Served’ by Hannes Lochner (South Africa)

    About this Image: This image captures the moment when two Southern Yellow-billed Hornbills chase after the same insect in a mid-air competition. In hornbill society, there appears to be no such thing as a fair fight, and the slower of the two birds played dirty by grabbing the tail feathers of the other. In spite of this cheating, the attempt failed, so maybe there is some justice after all in the world of hornbills!

    Gear and Specs: Nikon D850 with Nikkor 70–200mm f/2.8 lens. Focal length 120mm, 1/5,000 second, f/4, ISO 200.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • In-depth tripod review: Leofoto ‘Summit’ LM-364C

    The fully extended Leofoto LM-364C with a compact (non-Leofoto) gimbal, full-frame camera, and 500mm prime lens.

    Leofoto LM-364C
    Leofoto.com | $ 580

    Leofoto is a brand of Laitu Photographic, a manufacturer that has been making tripods, heads and accessories since 2014, both under their own name and for other brands. The early products from the Leofoto brand were clearly ‘inspired’ by the designs and appearances of successful products from other companies. However, they have recently developed some of their own innovative gear, as well as a broad catalog of photographic accessories; from plates and clamps to straps and camera cages. The quality of this new gear is intended to compete at the same level as some of the best in the market, as well, and that is what we’re here to evaluate.

    Compared to others | First impressions | Use in the field | Test results | Conclusion

    Specs and what’s included

    • Maximum height of 145 cm (57.1″)
    • Minimum height of 9 cm (3.5″)
    • Folds to 53 cm (20.8″) with 14 cm (5.5″) diameter
    • Weighs 1.92 kg (4.23 lbs) with flat platform
    • 30kg (66 lbs) load limit
    • Three leg angles (23° / 56° / 87°)
    • Four leg sections (36mm top leg diameter 32.5 / 28 / 25mm)
    • 70mm platform side-clamped with release button
    • Large weight hook under platform
    • Bubble level included on apex
    • Removable 42mm mushroom feet on standard 3/8″ thread
    • Includes padded bag, tools, instructions, 26mm spikes, 75mm video bowl

    The Leofoto LM ‘Summit’ series are all modular apex, systematic tripods, like the older and larger ‘Mountain’ series, and come in 32, 36, and 40mm top tube sizes. Within the Summit series, there are three, four, and five-section leg options, as well as regular and long versions. Recently, Leofoto even added an entirely olive green version of the LM-364CL.

    In addition to the LM range, Leofoto also makes the LS ‘Ranger’ series, which share the same leg options, but top them with a compact apex for a slimmer, lighter package. This series includes the CEX models, with a built-in leveling half ball on the slim apex. (Ranger shown on top, Summit below.)

    The top platform on the LM-364C can be replaced with the generously included 75mm bowl insert to accept large video heads or appropriately-sized leveling half-balls. Leofoto also offers carbon-fiber quick columns, geared columns, and horizontal columns to fit this 70mm central opening. Whether these accessories are readily available in your part of the world can still be uncertain, though Leofoto is gaining distributors in many regions.

    To get really low, and still be level, the Leofoto LB-75S leveler fits into the LM-series apex.

    Compared to others

    This tripod was tested and compared with its modular apex peers. Left to right; ProMediaGear TR344, Really Right Stuff TVC-34, Sirui SR-3204, FLM CP34-L4 II, Leofoto LM-364C, Gitzo GT3543LS.

    The Leofoto LM-364C was tested and compared alongside tripods in the same class of ‘Series 3′ (33-36mm top leg tube diameter) “Systematic’ (modular apex with removable platform) type, in terms of size and utility, including products from Sirui, Really Right Stuff, ProMediaGear, Gitzo and FLM.

    All of these tripods were used in four seasons of sand, snow, mud, rain, and salt water; set up in the bog-like Atlantic salt marshes and the wind-swept Appalachian mountains. They have been loaded with gimbal heads, ball heads, geared and pano-heads, and up to 4kg (8.8lb) lenses attached to cameras ranging from APS-C to medium-format, shooting anything from long-exposure landscapes to extreme telephoto birds-in-flight. The only test they did not go through was being rough-handled at the airport, thanks to pandemic travel restrictions.

    Height comparison

    Below is a relative height comparison between the Leofoto LM-364C and a 6 foot (1.83m) photographer.

    High Mid Low

    Back to top

    First impressions

    The Leofoto Summit LM-364C standing tall on thick legs with a leveling aid inserted into the 70mm opening of the modular apex.

    The 36mm top tubes of the LM-364C are the second largest in this group, and the aluminum parts are impressively finished for the price, with a well machined apex and nice rubber grips on the leg locks. The wide range of Leofoto accessories available for these ‘systematic’ tripods increases their utility and appeal, and the fit and finish of these extras is equally good. In terms of materials and construction, the initial impression of Leofoto gear is quite good.

    However, the proof is in the details. When fully extended but not yet locked, the leg tubes wiggle a bit more than expected, as if they aren’t a very tight fit inside each other, or the loosened locks allow too much play. Once the locks are tightened, of course, this flex disappears and the legs are rigid. This is still different from the feel of every other tripod in this group, and points to a less-precise mating of the tubes and locks.

    The flat platform that comes initially installed is a thick and well-finished aluminum plug with deep sides, a large weight hook underneath, firm plastic disk on top, and a set screw to prevent a head from unscrewing off of it. This platform can be easily swapped out due to the clamping spider and repositionable locking lever, similar to the Gitzo method. However, unlike Gitzo, Leofoto put a pull-out safety button prominently on one side, so it’s possible that a loose platform could come out with an accidental knock of that button. That said, any responsible user should insure the platform is tightened down before moving or using any of these tripods.

    On occasion, the flat Leofoto Summit platform was swapped for the LB-75S platform leveler, or the included 75mm video bowl and a Leofoto YB-75SP leveling half ball. Both of these extras are as well made as the tripod itself, and very smooth and easy to level. Due to their standard sizes of 75mm for the half ball, and 70mm for the insert diameter and interior ridges, these accessories can be used in the apexes of four of the other tripods in this group, and worked equally well on those legs.

    The spring-loaded, ratcheting leg angle locks are easy to pull from the front or push from the back, and ratchet back in pretty well. However, when it gets really cold, the grease on the angle locks firms up and they don’t really snap back in like they do in the warmer months, or in the studio. Adjusting the angle of each leg is still easy and quick, but required a nudge sometimes.

    Back to top

    Use in the field

    Packed up, the LM-364C is about average in weight, but stays nicely tucked into its padded, ‘horn-type’ bag for longer trips. While the overall packed size is on the larger end of the group, its leg tubes are also the second widest, so there is a lot of tripod being carried around. One minor annoyance is that, like the Gitzo, there is no hard stop under the apex when folding the legs inward, so without a center column, they can be pushed to extreme angles. This made repacking the legs a bit more cumbersome compared to some others.

    In use with heavy loads of long lenses and gimbals, medium-format cameras and geared heads, or even complicated panoramic heads, the hefty Leofoto never felt insubstantial or not up to the task. The stabilizing effect of those wider-than-average leg tubes was apparent, and the LM-364C only exhibited a few minor hiccups of sliding leg locks or slow angle locks while supporting whatever was the gear of the day. Considering how large the heads and lenses on top usually were, it was rarely noticed that the Leofoto is the shortest, fully deployed, set of legs in the group (by 1cm).

    The Leofoto leg locks are nicely wrapped in firm, grippy rubber, and are easy to grasp all at once and unlock. They require just a quarter turn to unlock, and the legs come out quite easily, but on more than a few occasions, the legs seemed locked after a quick turn, but then started a slow, sliding compression once weight or pressure was put on them.
    The included rubber mushroom-style feet worked well on many different surfaces, and while the included spikes were easy enough to install, they seemed short and a little insubstantial. They still did their job on ice and some softer surfaces. Leofoto makes a range of other feet available, including titanium rock claws, which seem both excessive and fun to try out at the seashore.

    One thing to note, the apex of the LM-364C only has a single 3/8” threaded hole for accessory attachment, similar to the Gitzo ‘Easy-Link,’ rather than the typical 1/4” seen on most accessories and other tripods (while the ProMediaGear has both sizes). This just means that a reducer bushing will be needed to attach that ‘magic arm’ or clamp to hold a phone, battery pack or other small device. Naturally, Leofoto offers 3/8” threaded accessories specifically designed to use the anti-twist holes next to this attachment point.

    Maintenance

    Cleaning the legs of the LM-364C requires pulling off the one-piece shim with a lot more force than any other tripod, and it felt like this thin, plastic part was going to break. It did not, but it is still a little unsettling to do this for each leg section. The lack of rubber seals in the locks is also apparent.

    Availability of extra shims is unpredictable in different regions, and no mention of spare parts was found anywhere from Leofoto, Laitu, or their distributors.

    Back to top

    Test results

    Vibrations can make even the sharpest lens turn out mushy, blurred photos, and can ruin long exposures. In the typical use cases for this class of tripod, reducing the effects of vibration is extremely important, since longer focal lengths and higher resolutions magnify the effects of any movement, and environmental vibrations like wind and water will have an increasing effect on larger legs and gear. Camera vibration can be mechanically minimized with mirror lockup, electronic shutters, and a remote shutter release, while adding weight to the bottom of the tripod (with the weight hook or a tripod stone bag) can help stabilize the whole setup. However, not all sources of vibration can be eliminated, so we tested whether the tripod will dampen them or transmit and reflect them to the camera.

    The tripod legs were fully extended, and our vibration analyzer for heavy-duty tripods (an iPad on a 3.2 kg (7 lb) cantilevered weight) was mounted directly to the flat platform’s 3/8″ threaded bolt with a long lens plate. An industrial solenoid valve with a plastic hammer was used as a source of vibration (a knock to the bottom of one leg). The resulting graph of all three accelerometers shows both the resistance of the tripod to the initial shock, as well as the rate of decay for residual vibration within the tripod.

    Leofoto LM-364C vibration resistance test results – click for larger graph

    *Note that this graph is relative only to this class of tripods. The weight and test equipment was adjusted to provide a conclusive result for this size of tripod.

    In the vibration testing, the Leofoto LM-364C showed the full advantage of its 36mm top tubes and solid construction, providing a good amount of resistance to the initial shock, and then a very quick dampening of any residual vibrations. This puts the ‘Summit series’ Leofoto in the upper half of this competitive group for direct vibration resistance, only edged out by the Gitzo and RRS. There is nothing to complain about here.

    Back to top

    Conclusion

    With Leofoto gear in general, you get a lot for the price paid, but in some cases, that ‘value’ is coming from the innovations and designs of others. When it comes to their tripods, they are generic enough that it’s the performance that matters, and the LM-364C holds up quite well. This ‘Summit’ tripod provides a nice balance between size, weight and modularity, while remaining solidly in the middle of this demanding pack of competitors when it comes to performance.

    The low price for this size and type of tripod is the real attraction, and after a thorough review and long testing period, there were only a few minor issues with the fit of all the parts. If you spend a lot of time using your tripod, this is a still a good choice and will be a satisfying companion in many instances. The wide range of options in the ‘Summit’ and related ‘Ranger’ series, with similar legs and materials, mean there is probably a good personal fit in the Leofoto tripod line for most needs.

    One ongoing concern is after-sale support and availability of spare parts for a tripod of this type, which is intended to be maintained and used for a very long time to come. Admittedly, this can also be a concern for some other brands in this comparison if you are outside of North America.

    What we like

    • Very affordable price for stout 36mm legs
    • Very good vibration resistance
    • Uses standard apex and foot sizes
    • Comes with video bowl, bag and spikes
    • Lots of related tripod choices and accessories

    What we don’t like

    • Leg tubes and locks don’t fit precisely
    • No rubber seals inside leg locks
    • Hard to get replacement parts

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)