360Photography

Category: Uncategorized

  • Juggling with one hand: Leica M10 shooting experience

    A slightly blurry jet-lagged elevator selfie, which – yes – I could have taken on an iPhone. At least I didn’t add a fake film rebate…

    Rangefinders are weird. The idea that superimposing a small ghostly image in the middle of a tunnel-type optical viewfinder is in any way superior to focusing with an SLR, (let alone using autofocus) is frankly bizarre, in this day and age.

    In the digital world, a lot of people use the word ‘rangefinder’ rather lazily, to mean anything with a viewfinder positioned on the upper left of its back, but real rangefinders are uncommon. So uncommon, in fact, that Leica (the company which arguably perfected the technology) has made only ten substantially new cameras of this type since the mid 1950s.1

    Grabbed quickly on my way back to my hotel on the new 35mm Summilux, this F2 snapshot isn’t pin sharp but by the time I’d nailed focus, the dog had moved.

    I’ve always had a soft spot for the M-series, but if I’m being honest, their appeal has always been at least as much romantic as practical. They’re finely constructed, some of my favorite photographers used them, and they look beautiful. More so the film models, admittedly, but the M10 still retains a lot of the same aesthetic appeal as my all-time camera crush, the M6. Maybe I’m just shallow.

    I also collect vinyl. Not because I believe it sounds better than CD or MP3 (it doesn’t), but because I’ve always been a pops and crackles kind of guy, and when it comes down to it, I don’t trust music that doesn’t weigh something. If that makes me a hipster, I’ll save you the bother of leaving a snarky comment and just admit it now.2

    Speaking of music, I’ve heard it said that if you write a song on a banjo, and the song works, then it’s probably a good song. The point of course being that because the banjo is so simple, and so limited an instrument compared to (say) the electric guitar, it forces the composer to focus on the essentials of structure and melody.

    One of relatively few examples of successful zone focusing from my trip. I estimated subject distance at a little over 6 feet (one an a bit me’s) and shot waist-level on the 35mm Summilux at F5.6 to give a small margin for focus error. 

    I can’t play the banjo, but I feel much the same way about shooting with a rangefinder, compared to (say) a modern DSLR. It’s a substantially less versatile tool, which forces me to slow down and think more about the photographs I take (and what kind of photographs I take). A day of shooting with the M10 can be very rewarding for this reason, but it can also be hugely frustrating. I’ve been spoiled by zoom lenses, autofocus and multi-zone metering for the better part of 20 years. At this point, shooting with a rangefinder, even a relatively sophisticated digital rangefinder like the M10, can feel a bit like trying to juggle with only one hand, and frequently did, on this trip.

    “Who needs autofocus when you’ve got zone focusing?”

    ‘Who needs autofocus when you’ve got zone focusing?’ That’s a comment I just read on the Internet. Who needs autofocus, you ask? I do, apparently, judging by the miserable hit-rate I achieved during my first experiments with zone focusing. To my credit, I did get better, but accurately estimating distance by eye is tricky, and takes practice.

    A less successful example of zone focus, also taken with the 35mm Summilux. I like this shot, and on film I’d probably call it acceptably sharp, but it’s not sharp enough for a DPReview sample gallery. My distance estimate was a bit off (the wall behind my subject is where the plane of focus has ended up) and it looks like a touch of camera-shake has crept in, too. 

    Here’s a tip though – using their own height as a reference, most people can estimate distance roughly by imagining themselves lying down, and asking ‘How many me’s away is that person/thing?’

    Try it now – it’s OK, I’ll wait.

    See what I mean? Fortunately, I’m a simple, easy-to-visualize, boringly average, already-engraved-on-the-focus-ring 6ft in height, and that’s about the right distance away for a lot of candid street portraits. Shooting in this way, I’d position the focus ring at 6ft, set a conservative aperture of around F5.6-8 to account for some slop, and bingo – things would usually end up more or less in focus.

    Note my use of the word ‘usually’ and the term ‘more or less’…

    Nailed it. A successfully zone-focused F4 shot, taken in the same indoor market as the previous image. The small size and unobtrusive appearance of the M10 (once the ostentatious red dot has been taped over) tends not to draw much attention. 

    The last time I shot with a rangefinder for any length of time I was using an M3, usually loaded with black and white film. Truly accurate focus didn’t bother me much, back then. Aside from anything else, being a 3-dimensional medium, film is very forgiving of minor focus errors. Not so the perfectly flat sensors inside digital cameras. And let me tell you, 10 years’ subsequent training as a professional pixel-peeper (try saying that when you’ve been moderating comments all day) is hard to shake. 

    Working with the M10, one of the first things I had to get over was the learned fallacy that a shot is only worth keeping if the subject is exactly in focus. Maybe one day I’ll be able to judge distance and framing with 100% accuracy when shooting from the waist, but I’m certainly not there yet. Until then, and for the sake of my own sanity, I’m trying to to concentrate a little more on caring a bit less. 

    Small and discreet

    The M10 is small and discreet enough that often, you can snap quick moments without getting in anyone’s way or attracting too much attention. But in order to do this, you’ve got to be quick. You can’t standing there dumbly for ages like a second-rate living statue, fiddling with focus or exposure with the camera to your eye, or fretting over exact framing.

    Often during my shooting, if the light was reasonably consistent I’d check accurate exposure using the built-in meter from time to time, but keep aperture, shutter speed and ISO locked. At this point, with the lens set to the hyperfocal distance for whatever aperture, taking a picture became a simple matter of raising the camera to my eye, and pressing the button. 

    One thing I’ve greatly enjoyed doing with the M10 is shooting with some classic lenses. This F4 portrait of my friend and frequent tour-guide Emi was shot on my 1950s Nikon 5cm F1.4 S.C., (still my all-time best junk shop find). While it’s not in the same league as more modern optical designs, it’s lovely for portraits. Just be aware of curvature of field…

    The transition to pre-setting exposure and focus wasn’t natural, (I’m a control freak, I suppose), but I found shooting like this with a 28mm Elmarit at F8, and either focusing hyperfocally or guestimating focus using the ‘how many me’s?’ method to be quite freeing. It certainly made me much more agile.

    In fact, sacrilegious as this might sound to some readers, I think that the M10 is at its best when used essentially as a point and shoot camera – for street photography at any rate.  

    Taken at F8 (possibly F11…) on the 28mm F2.8 Elmarit, this shot is one of a sequence of images taken at the lens’s hyperfocal distance. Used in this way, the M10 basically becomes a point-and-shoot camera. 

    Speaking of 28mm, while I’m normally more of a 35mm fan, I found myself reaching into my bag for the wideangle frequently when shooting with the M10. Partly for the luxury of a bit more depth of field when shooting street scenes, and partly because I enjoyed being able to live inside the entire area of the M10’s viewfinder. Although slightly improved compared to the Typ 240, it’s still hard to see all four of the the 28mm framelines in a single glance, but given that the finder itself covers roughly a 28mm field of view, for the most part you can just ignore the framelines completely.

    Another hyperfocal shot taken with the Elmarit 28mm, I waited as this group of people descended the staircase, and took a series of images. This one is my favorite. 

    When the M10 is used like this, photography becomes a very immersive experience. The finder is brighter and more natural than an SLR’s ground-glass projection, and much more immediate than even the best electronic viewfinder. The 28mm F2.8 Elmarit is tiny, too, and without a hood attached, it does not occlude the finder. Even the premium 35mm F1.4 Summilux is a small lens by DSLR standards. Having that kind of quality in a compact, unobtrusive full-frame package happens to be one of the few unequivocal arguments in favor of rangefinder cameras in the 21st Century, and one that is made loudly (and justifiably) by Leica fans today.

    One of the reasons I enjoyed shooting with the M10 so much when traveling is that I’m getting old, and I really don’t like having a lot of weight hanging around my neck when I’m out and about. I walked almost 70 miles in 3 days in Tokyo and Kyoto, and that would have been miserable with a full-frame DSLR and equivalent lens outfit. My back hurts enough already.

    Some observations:

    1. When I was in Kyoto, the M10 got pretty soaked, repeatedly, and continued to work perfectly. Your experience may vary.
    2. Battery life is fine. It’s not something you need to worry about. You can easily get 500 shots on a single charge if you’re not using live view all the time.
    3. Connecting a Leica rangefinder to my phone to view and upload images felt very odd, somehow, but worked well enough.
    4. If nothing else, I sincerely wish the M10 had some kind of horizon level guide. I swear I have one leg longer than the other.
    5. The M10’s long startup time had less practical effect on my photography than I expected, but I did miss a few shots.
    6. Aspherics aren’t everything. The Minolta M-Rokkor 40mm F2 is a superb little lens, if you can live with the inaccurate frame-lines in the M10’s viewfinder.

    Someone commented on my gallery of samples recently to the effect that ‘in Japan you can’t miss’, but I assure you, you can miss. And I know that because I did miss – a lot.

    Several times I raised the M10 to my eye and tried to take a shot, forgetting the camera was turned off, and in the ~1.5 seconds it takes to power up, the scene had changed and the moment had passed. One day, it seemed as if I had the wrong lens mounted the entire day. Every time I switched lenses I’d see a shot that would have worked perfectly with the previous lens, and by the time I’d changed back, once again the moment had gone.

    On a murky day in Kyoto3 I apparently forgot everything I’d ever learned about metering, and had to push each of my Raw files by at least +1EV in Lightroom to even see what it was I had tried to capture. A humbling experience, to say the least. 

    Rangefinder focusing is tricky, but newer Leica lenses (like the 35mm F1.4 Summilux) have impressively little curvature of field. What this means in practical terms is that provided your subject doesn’t move, it is possible – with practise – to focus and recompose, even at wide apertures. This portrait (which I’ve cropped a little) was shot in a moving train at F2.8.

    Despite offering automatic exposure, live view and all the rest, the M10 doesn’t make life easy for a photographer who’s not used to rangefinder shooting. It definitely provides the smoothest operational experience of any digital M-series I’ve used to date (although our sample does have a habit of crashing from time to time during image review) but the simple fact of the matter is that as I said in the first sentence of this article, rangefinders are weird.

    “I would have come back from Japan with more in-focus, correctly-framed shots had I traveled with a DSLR”

    Off-center focusing is tricky (there’s a reason why a lot of well-known shallow dof images captured on Leicas have their main subject positioned in the center of the frame) and when shooting using the optical finder, framing might charitably be described as ‘approximate’ 4. Off-the-curtain center-weighted metering takes some mastering, too.

    Without question, I would have come back from Japan with more in-focus, correctly-framed shots had I traveled with a DSLR. I’m not afraid to admit it. But at the end of the day, would I have had as much fun? I doubt it – and I certainly wouldn’t have thought as much about my process. 

    $ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_6037658348″,”galleryId”:”6037658348″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”standalone”:false,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”startInCommentsView”:false,”isMobile”:false}) });

    1 I’m being pretty strict about omitting sub-variants in that total. The M6 spawned a bazillion special editions for example, most of which I can only assume still languish unused in dentists’ safes, and given that it’s essentially just a (slightly) modernised M3, I’m hesitant to call the fully-mechanical M-A a ‘substantially new camera’. An argument could be made that the Monochroms deserve their own appellation but I’ll leave that to the pedants to decide.

    2 Although I would like to lobby for a general Internet policy whereby terms can only be used as insults when the thrower of the insult understands what the term means, and – ideally – when the term itself actually means something to start with. Who’s with me?

    3 This article was actually called ‘The Kyoto Photo-call’ for about five minutes, before Allison made me change it.

    4 Personally, I find shooting with anything longer than 50mm on a rangefinder to be very frustrating, for this reason.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Fujifilm GFX 50S added to our studio test scene

    Our latest test scene simulates both daylight and low-light shooting. Pressing the ‘lighting’ buttons at the top of the widget switches between the two. The daylight scene is manually white balanced to give neutral grays, but the camera is left in its Auto setting for the low-light tests. Raw files are manually corrected. We offer three different viewing sizes: ‘Full’, ‘Print’, and ‘Comp’, with the latter two offering ‘normalized’ comparisons by using matched viewing sizes. The ‘Comp’ option chooses the largest-available resolution common to the cameras being compared.

    $ (document).ready(function() { ImageComparisonWidget({“containerId”:”reviewImageComparisonWidget-9354923″,”widgetId”:480,”initialStateId”:null}) })

    The GFX 50S’s resolution capture is, as you might expect, impressive. That said, the Canon EOS 5D SR, shot with the relatively lowly 85mm F1.8 lens is able to do a similar job. All four cameras, with good prime lenses on are exhibiting moiré$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-3455–1483316096”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(3455); }); }) in the finest detail in the scene.

    In terms of high ISO noise$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-3448–639071291”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(3448); }); }), the GFX 50S performs fairly similarly to the Pentax 645Z and, as sensor size alone would lead you to expect: better than the Canon EOS 5DS R. However, because Sony’s a7R II sensor uses a more modern BSI design, it’s able to be more efficient, which means it’s able to close the gap to the bigger sensor cameras. 

    The GFX 50S’s JPEGs are every bit as pleasant as they are in the company’s smaller cameras. Color response$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-3450-1730714412”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(3450); }); }) is bright and punchy, with both skies and skintones well represented. And, of course, the Film Simulation modes mean there are a selection of good-looking options available. Default sharpening$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-3451-1453109520”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(3451); }); }) is quite strong but is effective at emphasizing fine detail in the scene: taking the level of apparent detail ahead of its rivals, without adding too much in the way of haloing at high contrast edges$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-3452-1793342050”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(3452); }); }).

    Similarly, noise reduction$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-3453-1547554799”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(3453); }); }) does a good job of balancing the retention of detail with the suppression of noise. We’re not sure many people are looking to buy a medium format camera to shoot JPEG but they’re very usable even at the camera’s highest setting$ (document).ready(function() { $ (“#icl-3454-1348031583”).click(function() { ImageComparisonWidgetLink(3454); }); }). Which just makes it seem more peculiar that Fujifilm limits the camera to a relatively modest ISO 12,800.

    Dynamic Range

    Looking at our ISO Invariance tests, we can see that an image shot at ISO 100 and pushed six stops looks noisier than one with the same exposure, shot at ISO 6400. This shows that the sensor is still contributing a little noise to its images (enough that you’ll see it, if you multiply it 64 times!). However, the 5EV push of an ISO 200 shot looks a lot like the ISO 6400 image, which suggests it’s a very good sensor.

    However, the exposure latitude test, where we lift the shadows in images shot at progressively lower exposures shows that its performance is only slightly better than that of the D810, despite receiving more total light (double the exposure time and half the light per square cm, captured on a sensor with more square cm of area). Now consider the fact that the D810 has an ISO 64 mode, which would allow you to use a 2/3EV brighter exposure before the sensor clips. We expect this will give a real-world result similar to when we pitted the Pentax 645Z against the Nikon.

    However, Fujifilm does claim to have increased the ‘Photic Saturation Point’ (by which we assume they mean ‘full well capacity’), by 1/3EV so we’ll need to conduct a full expose-to-the-right side-by-side test to be sure.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Broncolor ‘How To’ site details how to replicate lighting setups and more

    Broncolor, maker of photography lighting equipment, has launched a ‘How To’ section on its website, including some helpful diagrams detailing the lighting setups used to create a variety of sample photographs. The tutorials cover many shooting scenarios, including portraits, outdoor scenes and product photography. Both written and video guides are offered.

    The how-to content on Broncolor’s website is provided free of charge. There is, for example, a 20-part video how-to series detailing lighting with topics like ‘Cutlery,’ ‘White on White,’ ‘Still Life,’ and ‘Baseball swing,’ among others. Photographers seeking details on using specific lighting products can find guides under the site’s ‘Use this Light Shaper’ section, and there’s also a two-part ‘Eye school’ section detailing types of lighting. 

    The full array of how-to content can be found here.

    Via: DIYPhotography

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Lumee Duo is an iPhone case with built-in illumination

    The LuMee Duo is an iPhone case that, thanks to rubber edges and a solid shell, offers protection for your device. But it also comes with a feature that many mobile photographers will appreciate: Integrated LEDs on the front and back. They offer a brighter and softer illumination than the phone’s built-in LED flash, making it an interesting option for those who frequently take smartphone images in dim light conditions.

    The LEDs are dimmable, and Lumee also claims they reduce the red-eye effect in flash photos. The case comes with a built-in battery that provides power for up to two hours and for 36 hours at the lowest brightness. The Lumee is available for iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 6s and iPhone 6s Plus, and comes in Black Matte, Gold Matte and Rose Matte.

    The Lumee Duo launched initially in December in the USA and Canada, but is now available on Apple.com and at Apple stores in 15 additional countries, including Australia, China, Germany, Japan and the UK. Depending on phone model prices range from $ 40 to $ 70. More information is available on Lumee.com.

    Press Release:

    LuMee Duo iPhone Cases Featuring Double Sided Lighting Now Available In Over 15 Countries

    Available Now on Apple.com and in Apple Stores in Europe, Middle East, Australia and Asia

    PARK CITY, Utah, March 13, 2017 /PRNewswire/ — LuMee LLC, creator of the innovative line of patented illuminated smartphone cases, today announced that its revolutionary case for iPhone photographers – the LuMee Duo™ – is now available in select Apple stores around the world. The LuMee Duo is a first-of-its-kind smartphone case with integrated front and back LEDs, providing professional quality lighting for all photos and videos taken on an iPhone.

    The LuMee Duo, initially launched in December exclusively at Apple stores, Apple.com and LuMee.com in the USA and Canada, is now available on Apple.com and at Apple stores in Australia, Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Macao, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom. The product is available for iPhone 7, iPhone 7 Plus, iPhone 6s, and iPhone 6s Plus, and comes in Black Matte, Gold Matte and Rose Matte.

    “We’re so excited for the LuMee Duo to allow consumers in these markets to create photography that illuminates the culture, aesthetics and creativity that are unique to their perspective,” said Allan Shoemake, Creative Director and inventor of the original LuMee case. “This is a must-have case for anyone who enjoys taking beautiful photographs. With the LuMee Duo, there are no limits to the amazing images you can take in virtually any situation.”

    The LuMee Duo offers a sleek new design with a tough outer shell and rubber edges for increased phone protection. Its adjustable dimmer allows photographers to customize their light preference for each photo and its soft illumination eliminates redeye often caused by flash and harsh lighting.

    About LuMee LLC:
    LuMee® is one of the fastest-growing consumer electronics accessories and lighting companies in the world, with a line of smartphone cases that enable users to capture professional quality images and create optimal conditions for video chatting. Co-founder & partner Allan Shoemake, a professional photographer who has taken pictures of many U.S. presidents and celebrities, devised the concept as a way to improve mobile phone lighting in his own life. Now, the company is revolutionizing the way mobile photographers of all skill levels are able to shoot images on their smartphone. For more information, visit LuMee.com.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Ask the staff: electronic or optical viewfinder?

    Fujifilm’s X100 series, together with its X-Pro series, are the only models on the market to offer both an electronic and optical hybrid viewfinder. Is it the best of both worlds, or would you just rather have one over the other?

    Believe it or not, as a team, we don’t all agree on everything. So at any given time, each of us thinks the rest of us are wrong about something subjective that you can’t really be wrong about (we’re all human). That takes us to the task at hand: all the great recent electronic viewfinders (Leica SL, Panasonic GH5, Fujifilm GFX 50S…well, some of us think that one’s just okay) got us on the topic of which type of viewfinder we prefer.

    Optical or electronic? There’s no wrong answer. (Or is there?)

    Richard Butler

    For me, I’m less concerned about the technology behind a viewfinder than the quality of it. A good optical viewfinder can be a lovely thing: giving you a sense of being ‘in the scene’ that even the best EVF can’t match. A good optical viewfinder can also be excellent when shooting in very low light: its responsiveness and resolution don’t suddenly drop, for instance. However, on most cameras, you don’t get a good optical viewfinder. APS-C sensors tend to mean small, pokey little viewfinders and most focus screens for modern cameras aren’t very good for manual focus. So, if an EVF means I can have a smaller camera with a larger viewfinder, the ability to preview the effect of my settings and the ability to shoot video, then that makes up for many of the shortcomings. It’s impossible to separate the viewfinder type from the style of camera it allows and, with the quality of the latest EVFs, the style of camera I like most usually means it comes with an EVF.

    Dan Bracaglia

    Photo courtesy Stan Horaczek

    Depending on the situation, I could go either way on the OVF versus EVF question. If forced to pick one, I’d choose OVF because I find shooting through an optical finder offers a more pleasant and rewarding experience than using an EVF. I also personally find it easier to compose images through an optical finder.

    That said, EVFs make properly exposing images much easier, and in a commercial application in which getting the shot is mission critical, I could make an argument that EVFs are superior. That said, it would be cool if more cameras offered both, like on the Fujifilm X100 series.

    Dale Baskin

    I can’t believe I’m about to say this, but I now lean toward using EVFs. I wouldn’t have said that a couple years ago because, until recently, EVFs on still cameras basically sucked. Today’s best EVFs still won’t fool my brain into believing that I’m looking at an OVF, but in many respects they better reflect the way I tend to shoot with digital. I love the ability to overlay real-time information such as histograms, focus peaking, and zebras, as well as being able to preview exposure adjustments as they’re made. (I may be showing some of my video bias here as well.)

    Are EVFs good for everything? No. I still wouldn’t choose them for photographing sports or in situations that require rapid-fire burst shooting, but I suspect EVFs will get there at some point. Of course, the best of both worlds is a hybrid OVF along the lines of those on the Fujifilm X100 series. I love having a perfect optical image overlaid with the useful tools an EVF provides. It’s kind of like the peanut butter cup of the camera world – the two just go well together!

    Sam Spencer

    Optical. Optical optical optical.

    Don’t get me wrong, there have been some nice EVFs. The GX8, particularly, holds a soft spot in my heart.

    At the end of the day, however, I prefer an optical viewfinder over any EVF. With an EVF, no matter how fast the camera is, the light has to enter the lens, hit the sensor, get processed, reduced, rendered, and THEN makes it to the eye. There has been a lot of work to make this ‘lag’ imperceptible, but it will never be completely eliminated. I find when I’m using an EVF I struggle timing candid shots properly, usually resulting in half closed eyes or an awkward expression. Also, with motorsports there is a lot of panning, which can be difficult through an EVF.

    Ideally, I’d own a D750 and X100F to get the best of both worlds, especially because AF-C through the X100F’s OVF works way better than it has before…

    Carey Rose

    I’ve grown to love electronic viewfinders, but if I had to choose, I’d pick an optical viewfinder any day. It’s the combination of low blackout on higher-end cameras, how I’m easily able to follow subjects during bursts, and just the immediacy of seeing things as they happen that chiefly appeals to me. Whether I’m shooting sports, an event, a wedding or even just a dog playing fetch, the experience of using an optical viewfinder is just easier for me, and being able to clearly see a scene in really low light is invaluable. There’s a lot to be said for being able to preview your results with an electronic unit, but I still enjoy that brief ‘moment of discovery’ when I see an image on the back of the camera. Plus, a good optical viewfinder almost by definition goes along with a good phase-detect-only autofocus system, which I still prefer, despite the camera used in the above photo.

    Wenmei Hill

    I am strongly, adamantly in favor of…both. I shoot differently depending on whether I’m using an electronic or optical viewfinder. With an EVF, I let the camera control more – I’m comfortable shooting in aperture or shutter priority and using exposure comp to adjust what I see in the viewfinder. I experiment more with presets and creative modes because I can see the effects immediately, and I like an EVF with focus peaking if I’m focusing manually. With an optical viewfinder, however, I’m more hands-on with the controls. I pay attention to what I’m doing with the camera and feel connected to the scene in a way I don’t with an EVF. If I had to choose one, I’d choose an optical viewfinder because it feels more natural and immediate to me.

    Allison Johnson

    Electronic. I like the ‘being there’ feeling of an optical viewfinder, but almost any camera with an EVF also allows for a easily legible level gauge, which is a must for me (plus any camera that lets you put a level gauge in the EVF will also let you put a ton of other information in there as well). I have a problem where I’m drawn to shots where a level horizon is critical, but I’m also useless at nailing a level shot without that gauge. So even though I like the experience of an OVF better, I tend to get more keepers with an EVF.

    What about you?

    So, dear readers, what do you prefer and why? Let us know in the comments, and happy shooting.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Hasselblad Foundation awards $110,000 prize to Dutch portrait photographer

    $ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_8867908717″,”galleryId”:”8867908717″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”standalone”:false,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”startInCommentsView”:false,”isMobile”:false}) });

    The Hasselblad Foundation has announced that Rineke Dijkstra is the winner of its 2017 International Award in Photography and the 1,000,000 Swedish Krona (approx. $ 110,000/€100,000) prize that goes with the award. The Dutch photographer specializes in portraiture and was recognized by the jury for her concentration on human themes in her photography in a time when portraiture is being watered down in some areas.

    ‘At a moment when the portrait image dissipates itself in an economy of narcissism and fractal celebrity, Rineke Dijkstra reminds us of the photographic portrait’s public potential,’ said Duncan Forbes, Chair of the Jury.

    Dijkstra’s long-term projects depict people going through transitions and different stages of life, and members of the jury compared it to the portraits typical of Dutch painters in the 17th century.

    The prize will be awarded in October at the Hasselblad Center in Gothenburg, and the center will house an exhibition of her work.

    For more information see the Hasselblad Foundation website.

    Press release

    Rineke Dijkstra
    Hasselblad Award Winner 2017

    The Hasselblad Foundation is pleased to announce that Dutch artist Rineke Dijkstra is the recipient of the 2017 Hasselblad Foundation International Award in Photography to the sum of SEK 1,000,000 (approx. EUR 100,000). The award ceremony will take place in Gothenburg, Sweden, on October 9, 2017. A symposium will be held on October 10 in honor of Rineke Dijkstra, followed by the opening of an exhibition of her work at the Hasselblad Center, as well as the launch of the book Rineke Dijkstra – Hasselblad Award 2017.

    The Foundation’s citation regarding the Hasselblad Award Winner 2017, Rineke Dijkstra:

    “Rineke Dijkstra is one of the most significant contemporary artists working in photographic portraiture. Her large-scale photographs focus on the thematics of identity, typically capturing her subjects at moments of transition or vulnerability. Working in series, Rineke Dijkstra’s images recall the visual acuity of seventeenth-century Dutch portraiture, offering intimate portrayals of her sitters whilst also suggesting the situated aspects of their being. Rineke Dijkstra’s investigations in portraiture also include video. Her fixed-camera video studies yield images that appear to be moving photographs, revolutionizing our understanding of the fluid boundary between the still and moving image.”

    The Hasselblad Award Jury that submitted its nomination to the Hasselblad Foundation’s Board of Directors, consisted of:

    Duncan Forbes, Chair
    Curator and writer based in London and Los Angeles, and Visiting Research Fellow at the Institute for Modern and Contemporary Culture, University of Westminster, London

    Jennifer Blessing
    Senior Curator, Photography, Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York

    Simon Njami
    Curator and Writer, Paris

    Esther Ruelfs
    Head of Photography and New Media Department, Museum für Kunst und Gewerbe
    Hamburg

    Mark Sealy
    Curator and Director, Autograph ABP, London

    “Rineke Dijkstra’s photographs and films speak brilliantly to the intricacy of the portrait image: its embodiment in time; its capacity to reveal history; the contingency of the act of exchange between sitter, photographer and spectator; and, ultimately, photography’s revelation of the self. At a moment when the portrait image dissipates itself in an economy of narcissism and fractal celebrity, Rineke Dijkstra reminds us of the photographic portrait’s public potential,” notes Duncan Forbes, Chair of the Jury for the Hasselblad Award 2017.

    “Rineke Dijkstra has developed an impressive body of work focusing exclusively on portraiture. Her close studies of the transformation of young people into adults are captivating. Furthermore, we are proud that Rineke Dijkstra is the first Dutch recipient of the Hasselblad Award,” states Christina Backman, Managing Director of the Hasselblad Foundation.

    About Rineke Dijkstra
    Over the past thirty years, Rineke Dijkstra has been established as one of the most prominent and internationally acclaimed artists working within the genre of photography and video portraiture. Her large-scale photographs and films often focus on children, adolescents, and young adults, offering subtle explorations of the formation and representation of identity. Rineke Dijkstra pursues an existential photography, but one that encourages us to focus on the exchange between photographer and subject and the relationship between viewer and viewed.

    Among her earliest work from the early 1990s is a series of photographs depicting mothers and their newborn children moments after the delivery, as well as portraits of bullfighters directly after leaving the ring. In these works, Rineke Dijkstra aimed at capturing contradictory emotions – exhaustion, joy, fear, relief – experienced simultaneously in extreme circumstances. In the series Beach Portraits (1992–2002), she portrayed children and teenagers on beaches in Eastern and Western Europe, and the USA. As they are standing in front of her large format camera, she poignantly reflects their vulnerability and self-awareness during a period of transition from children to adolescents.

    A notable characteristic of Rineke Dijkstra’s oeuvre is her long-term projects, photographing the same people over several years, witnessing the changes as well as the distinctive traits in their personalities. The most noted and still ongoing of these projects started in 1994, when Rineke Dijkstra encountered and photographed a six-year-old Bosnian girl named Almerisa Sehric in a Dutch refugee center for asylum-seekers. She has continued to photograph Almerisa every few years, documenting her transition into a teenager, then a young adult becoming a part of Dutch culture, and eventually becoming a mother.

    Portraying an individual and her personal journey from being a refugee to being part of a new society, this body of work has been highly relevant for more than twenty years. It continues to resonate in the current political climate, contrasting the way in which asylum seekers and migrants are often merely described as numbers.

    The series Olivier (2000–03) visualizes another kind of physical and psychological development, namely that of a young man becoming a soldier – from his enlistment with the French Foreign Legion through his years of service. Similarly Rineke Dijkstra has photographed new initiates to the Israeli army, such as the female soldier Shany, whom she photographed on her first induction day in uniform, until after she quit the army (2002–2003).

    Since the mid-1990s, Rineke Dijkstra has expanded her unique modes of portraiture to video, offering sensitive studies of young people. Video works such as The Buzz Club, Liverpool, UK/Mystery World, Zaandam, NL (1996–97), and The Krazyhouse (Megan, Simon, Nicky, Philip, Dee), Liverpool, UK (2009), show teenagers from local clubs dancing to their favorite music in multi-channel video installations. The two video works I See A Woman Crying (Weeping Woman), and Ruth Drawing Picasso, both made in 2009 at Tate Liverpool, focus on children’s attentive response to artworks. In more recent video works from 2014, Rineke Dijkstra has filmed girls rehearsing at a Russian gymnastics school or auditioning for the prestigious Vaganova Ballet Academy in St. Petersburg, portraying humanity in beauty, and perfection.

    Rineke Dijkstra was born in 1959 in Sittard, the Netherlands. She lives and works in Amsterdam, where she was educated at the Gerrit Rietveld Academy. A large retrospective of Rineke Dijkstra’s work was shown at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York and San Francisco Museum of Modern Art in 2012. She has had major solo exhibitions at the Museum für Moderne Kunst, Frankfurt am Main (2013), the Stedelijk Museum (2012), the Jeu de Paume (2004), and the Art Institute of Chicago (2001). Her works have also been shown at Tate Liverpool (2010) and Bonniers Konsthall, Stockholm (2011). Her publications include Portraits, edited by Hripsimé Visser and Urs Stahel (München: Schirmer/Mosel, 2004) and Menschenbilder, edited by Ute Eskildsen (Göttingen: Steidl, 1998). Coinciding with the exhibition at the Hasselblad Center, a retrospective of Rineke Dijkstra’s work will be held at Louisiana, Museum of Modern Art, Humlebæk, in the autumn of 2017. Both exhibitions make up the first larger presentation of Rineke Dijkstra’s work in Scandinavia.

    About the Hasselblad Foundation
    The Hasselblad Foundation was established in 1979 under the terms of the last will and testament of Erna and Victor Hasselblad. The purpose of the Foundation is to promote scientific education and research in photography and the natural sciences. The Foundation’s annual international award for outstanding achievements in photography, awarded in 2017 to Rineke Dijkstra, is considered one of the most prestigious photography awards worldwide.

    The Foundation holds a photography collection focusing on Hasselblad Award Winners and Nordic photographers. The Hasselblad Center is the Foundation’s exhibition space, situated in the Gothenburg Museum of Art. Further stipends for studies and residencies are awarded each year, and the Foundation itself is actively engaged in the field of academic and artistic research through the publication of books, the organization of symposiums, and other public events.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Leica M10 in Japan: Updated samples gallery

    The Leica M10 is our favorite digital M-series camera yet, and we’ve been itching to get our hands on it again, ever since we had to return an early pre-production unit to Leica. Fortunately, another camera arrived just in time for a recent trip to Japan.

    We spent a few days with it in Yokohama, Tokyo, Kyoto and Kanazowa, and we’ve updated our gallery of samples. A shooting experience article is on the way, but in the meantime, check out our expanded gallery, including a few shots taken with a couple of very nice vintage lenses…

    View our updated Leica M10 samples gallery

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Take a look at the first video cage for the Panasonic GH5

    Polish video accessory-maker 8Sinn claims to have made the first video cage for the Panasonic GH5. For $ 550 you get the cage, top handle pro, 15mm rod clamp and a Metabones Support. To give you a quick run through all of its components and assembly, our friends at Photo Gear News have put together the above video. 

    You can learn more at 8Sinn’s website.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • Olympus working on 8K video for Micro Four Thirds

    In an interview with French publication Focus Numerique senior representatives from Olympus have revealed a number of interesting insights about what consumers can expect from the Japanese manufacturer in the future, for example Micro Four Third image sensor that support 8K video. 

    General Manager of Olympus Product Planning, Mr. Akira Watanabe, said: “we can assure you that there is no problem in developing sensors at 33 million pixels for filming in 8K. We started the 4/3? saga with a sensor at 5 Mpx In 2003. Now the same sensor is at 20 Mpx with a much higher image quality especially for the management of electronic noise.”

    In the same interview Mr. Watanabe suggests that Olympus might be working on its own version of a Bluetooth-based app, the likes of which Samsung pioneered and has recently been implemented by Nikon. He also thinks that Olympus will be able to offer a handheld high-resolution image mode in the future. It’s impossible to know how close Olympus is to bringing those new features and technologies to market but for users and fans of the brand it’s certainly reassuring to know they are in development.

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

  • In memoriam: Olympus brings down the curtain on the Four Thirds system

    It probably shouldn’t be a surprise but it’s still a little sad to see it in print: the latest catalogue from four-thirds.org states that production of Olympus’s Zuiko Digital line of Four Thirds lenses has been discontinued.

    It’s been six and a half years since the launch of the last Four Thirds mount camera, so it’s understandable that Olympus has decided to move on, but we thought we’d look back at Four Thirds: what it meant and where it led.

    The first Four Thirds camera: the Olympus E-1. Built around a 5MP Kodak CCD, the E-1 arrived around two years after Olympus first announced a collaboration with Kodak.

    Where it all started

    In 1999, Olympus engineer Katsuhiro Takada selected the 4/3″-type sensor as being the optimal size to allow smaller cameras capable of high quality images. Olympus developed the lens mount and communication protocols and was joined by other makers including Kodak, Fujifilm and Panasonic. The Four Thirds system website was launched fourteen years ago tomorrow.

    Four Thirds was the first ILC system specifically designed for digital. This not only meant a wholly new lens system, providing the focal lengths that make sense for the sensor size (at a time when most camera companies were making do with selling film lenses mounted on smaller sensors), but also adopting a policy of making telecentric designs, which project light straight onto the sensor, rather than at increasingly challenging angles, towards the edge of the sensor.

    Panasonic’s first Four Thirds camera: the still beautiful DMC-L1.

    Unfortunately, the telecentric lens designs often ended up being relatively large, meaning that the system didn’t end up being significantly smaller than APS-C cameras. Unfortunately, the decision to use 4/3″-type sensors also meant that the viewfinders in most of the models were even smaller than those that still plague most low-end APS-C DSLRs.

    My personal favorite. The Olympus E-620 was the Four Thirds camera that, to my mind, offered the best balance of size and capability.

    While the Four Thirds system is no longer with us, it’s worth giving credit for the innovations it played host to. For a start, it was the first interchangeable lens system to offer live view. It wasn’t the slickest of implementations: seemingly unsure whether live view was supposed to offer an immediate digital preview (with phase detection still available) or provide the precision of contrast detect AF and live view magnification, the E-330 offered both. And was duly given short shrift by DPReview founder Phil Askey in his review.

    It may be out of production, but the Olympus US website says the 90-250mm F2.8 is still in stock. It’ll cost you $ 5999.99

    The system evolves

    However, the most significant development to come out of Four Thirds, though, was its successor, Micro Four Thirds, the world’s first mirrorless interchangeable lens camera system (indeed the system for which the term was coined). Micro Four Thirds persisted with the Four Thirds type sensor but by abandoning the mirror box (and the telecentric design philosophy) was able to fully deliver on the size benefits that had originally been promised.

    Without a mirror to move out of the way, live view came into its own and a whole new class of camera was born.

    Lessons from the Four Thirds system led directly to the creation of the world’s first mirrorless system: Micro Four Thirds. And between Panasonic’s GH5 and Olympus’s E-M1 II, a lot of interesting things doing on, 18 years after the sensor size was chosen.

    Credit should be given to Olympus for working to provide cameras (specifically the E-M1s) that were designed to continue to give good performance for those users who’d bought the highest-end Four Thirds lenses.

    Long live Four Thirds

    The history of photography is full of defunct systems and obsolete mounts. Even though the curtain has come down on Four Thirds, you can still buy a camera that will make good use of its lenses. The king is dead…

    Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)