Should « 360Photography

RSS

Posts Tagged ‘Should’

Adobe Camera Raw vs. Canon Digital Photo Professional: Which should you use and why?

10 Sep

If you’re like many photographers, the first thing you do upon taking a brand-new camera out of its package is to set aside the included software download info (or, with older cameras, the CD or DVD), opting instead for a third-party option like Adobe’s Camera Raw or Lightroom. But is that a smart move in our newly-normal, more cost-conscious world, or could you get by just as well with your camera’s bundled software?

Canon Digital Photo Professional version 4.12’s user interface.

That’s a question we’ve wanted to answer for a while now, and one which I’ll discuss in a new series of articles comparing the user interfaces, performance and image quality of the manufacturer’s apps with those of their much-vaunted Adobe rival. In the interests of keeping things to a readable length, I’m limiting myself only to image editing, and won’t address features like image management, tethering or printing.

The ground rules

In this article, I’m comparing Adobe Camera Raw 12.4 alongside Adobe Bridge 10.1.1 versus Canon Digital Photo Professional 4.12.60.0, all of which are their current versions. My computer is a 2018-vintage Dell XPS 15 9570 laptop running Windows 10 version 1909.

To ensure neither Adobe nor Canon had any advantage out of the gate, I’ve aimed to reproduce, as closely as possible, the look of already-processed images from our galleries, without any prior knowledge as to the recipes behind them. I’ve chosen images from the EOS R for use in this comparison, for reasons we’ll come to in a moment.

Adobe Camera Raw version 12.4’s user interface.

To avoid getting too far into the weeds, sharpness and noise reduction were left at their defaults, while lens corrections were enabled for both apps with the exception of distortion correction, so as to make for easier comparison to our reference shots from the gallery.

Images processed in ACR were saved at JPEG quality 11, just as used in our galleries. For DPP, I saved at JPEG quality 8, producing near-identical file sizes.

The main differences

Of course, the most immediately obvious differences between ACR and DPP are their camera support and pricetag. You already paid for DPP when you bought your Canon DSLR, so it’s effectively free. While it only supports Raws shot by the company’s own cameras, you can expect full Raw support for almost every Canon camera to be available more or less immediately upon release.

Click or tap for the full-sized ACR version; here for DPP version

By contrast, ACR comes with a recurring subscription fee. While it supports a vast range of cameras from many manufacturers – even a couple of older Canon models that DPP no longer recognizes – that support can take some time to arrive after the release of new cameras. It’s also sometimes more limited than that in first-party software. For example, Adobe doesn’t yet offer ‘camera matching’ profiles for any Canon camera released since September 2018. (That’s why I selected the EOS R for my comparisons here.)

Camera Raw’s UI is more modern

Overall, DPP’s user interface feels more dated than that of ACR, and occasionally more obtuse and frustrating. Both applications support modern features like 4K displays, touch-screens and pen control, although I did notice a few minor glitches in DPP’s 4K support.

But where Adobe’s controls are grouped together in clearly-named, collapsible sections within a single panel, DPP’s span no less than nine different tabs, each identified only by a small icon. And many of DPP’s sliders for contrast, tone, saturation etc. jump in large steps, unlike ACR’s which move smoothly and precisely when dragged. For finer-grained adjustments, you must either type in values directly or click tiny arrow buttons.

Click or tap for the full-sized ACR version; here for DPP version

And the locations of DPP’s controls aren’t always logical, nor are their names always intuitive. For example, even if you’ve tweaked multiple images at once, the large Save button at the top of the screen won’t process them together. Instead, you have to find a Batch Process command hidden within the File menu.

ACR is also much faster to use

But the biggest difference between ACR and DPP, operationally speaking, is in their performance. Compared to its Adobe rival, Canon’s app feels glacially slow to use.

When you move sliders in ACR, the preview image updates in real time to show your change before you’ve even released the mouse button, even when using a 4K display. But DPP’s previews frequently take anywhere from a couple of seconds to 10 seconds or more to update after releasing the mouse button. Worse still, the preview often updates in multiple passes, initially showing results that, misleadingly, differ significantly from the final pass.

Click or tap for the full-sized ACR version; here for DPP version

Things are no better when it comes to final output performance, either. Processing all six comparison images for this article in ACR took just 16 seconds, start to finish. DPP required longer than that to process a single image, making it 6-7 times slower than its Adobe rival. Processing all six images in DPP took a full 108 seconds – and that’s even with it configured to take advantage of my graphics processor, which it wasn’t by default.

The settings chosen for a given image do impact on performance somewhat, but they don’t come close to explaining DPP’s modest performance. Even with all six images reverted to out-of-camera settings and with all lens corrections disabled, DPP still needed 81 seconds to complete its work.

ACR makes lighter work of shadow / highlight control

Although most of their basic controls are broadly similar, ACR offers a few extra tools that DPP lacks. Both applications give you a one-click auto control to get basic settings in the ballpark, plus slider control over brightness, contrast, shadows, highlights, saturation and tone. But ACR adds sliders for vibrance, texture, clarity, dehazing and blacks/whites.

Click or tap for the full-sized ACR version; here for DPP version

I particularly missed these last two, and while DPP’s dynamic range control helps make up for their absence, I found it less intuitive to use. Even with it, I had to resort to finely tweaking curves to try to hold onto the brightest highlights and deepest shadows, using the keyboard arrows to more finely position the points than I could with a mouse or touchpad.

Both applications are capable of great results with a little effort

ACR’s one-click auto control tended to hold onto highlights and open up shadows much better than did DPP. But in return, Canon’s auto control yielded more realistic colors, although it sometimes felt too muted in foliage. Adobe’s results, meanwhile, tended decidedly towards the contrasty and garish, especially in foliage and skin tones.

Click or tap for the full-sized ACR version; here for DPP version

At default settings, DPP tended to control noise a little better than did ACR, although that advantage came at the expense of the finest image detail. In fact, even with its noise reduction sliders zeroed out completely, DPP showed similarly low levels of noise to ACR with both luminance / color noise reduction sliders set at around level 25-30.

Crop of lower-right corner of above image

But you really have to pixel-peep to notice these subtle differences. The effects of lens correction were much more noticeable, and both applications did a great job of automatically taming lens defects like chromatic aberration and vignetting.

Overall, I felt that neither ACR or DPP had a huge edge over the other in terms of basic editing. However, I found ACR quite a bit easier to work with, and spent several times as long working to get similarly-pleasing results from DPP.

Final thoughts

Although it’s capable of images just as good as those from ACR with a little effort, I personally found DPP’s interface and performance issues quite off-putting. If you’re on a shoestring budget, it could make sense as an alternative to paying the Adobe tax every month, freeing up cash for other gear at the expense of some convenience. But if you can afford it, I recommend spending the extra on Camera Raw for a much faster, more intuitive editing experience.

Canon Digital Photo Professional

Pros	Cons
Available free with your camera Excellent support for Canon’s cameras from launch day Realistic color with minimal effort Tames noise well Good lens corrections	Poor performance Unreliable image preview Only supports Canon cameras Dated, clunky user interface Doesn’t do as well with highlights/shadows Denoising robs some fine detail even if “disabled”

Adobe Camera Raw

Pros	Cons
Clean, clear and modern interface Supports a vast range of cameras from many brands Great performance Allows fine-grained adjustments with accurate real-time preview Great image quality Extracts more fine detail than DPP with minimal fuss Does a great job with highlights/shadows	Recurring subscription fee with no perpetual license option Camera support can take a while to arrive or lack support for more obscure features One-click auto control produces overly contrasty, saturated results Tends to leave more noise in images by default

Editor’s note: We’re aiming to have more of these comparisons between manufacturer software and third-party alternatives in the coming weeks. Either through our feedback form or in the comments below, let us know what you want to see us test to make these articles more valuable for you. Thanks!

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Opinion: Businesses, especially corporations, should pay to use your photos

14 Aug

There are thousands of photos of this particular musician online, which is why I couldn’t command as much as I would have liked for this image. The publisher who purchased a similar photograph had plenty of options.

In spite of the fact that we’re in the midst of a global pandemic, I’ve managed to sell three photos recently without putting forth any effort. All were discovered from my uploads to Instagram or Flickr. Brands and companies are always looking for fresh content and will continue to seek out images that complement their messaging. This is why it’s important to know your worth. Or, in this case, the worth of the images you create.

Would you ever work for free? If the answer is a resounding ‘no’, and it should be, then it doesn’t make sense to allow those with financial means to display your images in exchange for ‘credit’. After talking with other photographers who receive similar requests, and negotiating on my own behalf, I’ve arrived at figures that I believe are fair for an organization to pay if they want to amplify their message with your unique talents.

The first time someone requested to purchase a photo of mine, I was pleasantly surprised. It came in the form of a comment from a well-known hotel rewards program. What I can only assume was a social media manager for the hotel chain’s official Instagram account reached out and asked for permission to repost a photo from my feed. After the initial afterglow wore off, I was a bit taken aback.

At minimum, you should charge $ 250 for your image if it’s going to be printed. $ 500 is more of a fair price.

The rewards program in question is tied to an international chain of hotels that holds a current net worth exceeding $ 20 billion dollars. While I don’t know the exact figure of their marketing budget, I imagine it has to be millions of dollars annually. As a photographer, I have invested tens of thousands of hours, over the years, into my craft. I expect to be compensated accordingly.

To give you a rough idea of my expenses, currently, as a professional drone photographer, I spend $ 2,000 a year, at the bare minimum, on a new drone and a few extra batteries. Insuring each drone costs at least $ 500 on an annual basis and I typically have three in my arsenal. I also invest in accessories including memory cards, additional propellers, and neutral density filters – which easily tack on several hundred more dollars each year. I should mention that these costs are on the lower end compared to most professional photographers.

Brands are more than willing to pay ‘influencers’ to promote their products and services. They shouldn’t hesitate to compensate you for your work. Source: Mediakix

Brands don’t have any qualms about paying influencers to promote their goods and services. So why should anyone expect photographers to give away their hard work and vision for free? It doesn’t make much sense but some people, especially those starting out, are so enticed by the concept of gaining exposure or credibility that they enthusiastically say yes.

My friend Dino Kuznik, who has been approached by the likes of Tesla and an another major auto manufacturer, not only demands top dollar for his work, he also makes it a point to contact brands and insist they remove his photos if they’ve posted them without his permission. He also recommends that creatives use this licensing calculator to arrive at an appropriate fee, especially if providing a high-resolution file is required. If you don’t negotiate properly, or have terms clearly laid out in a contract, you could lose out on compensation.

Brands don’t have any qualms about paying influencers to promote their goods and services. So why should anyone expect photographers to give away their hard work for free?

‘Imagine coming to Times Square and seeing your photo on a billboard screen and realizing a company has been using it for a big campaign. But you couldn’t do anything about it [because you didn’t bother with a written agreement]. Now, if there was a contract, you could probably get a considerable amount because of the breach of contract/damages/etc,’ Kuznik explains. Typically, the client or company will provide the terms including a schedule detailing how, where, and when the image will be used. If the terms seem ambiguous, ask for clarification. Otherwise you may not have any legal recourse.

If a brand wishes to license your image, they should provide a contract explicitly stating how it intends to use it for promotional purposes. Unless you are directly hired for a campaign or are paid a hefty amount for an image, you should retain the rights to use your work in any manner and at any time gong forward.

It’s wise, outside of calculating a fair price, to thoroughly research a brand before agreeing to an amount for the rights to use your image. Find out what type of advertising they’re running, if any, and what the company is worth – if that information is available. So, what should you charge if someone approaches you to request a photo of yours for their own marketing or branding purposes? Well, that depends on a variety of factors.

Kuznik was approached by an auto manufacturer (unnamed due to a non-disclosure agreement), to create a 3×3 grid of curated photos for Instagram. Because it’s a major automotive company, it compensates photographers on the higher end of the pay scale for their work. Kuznik had another engagement that prevented him from taking on the assignment but, had he made the trip, he would have been paid between $ 7,000 – $ 10,000.

Tesla offered photographer Dino Kuznik $ 400 per image for Instagram and Twitter use. He negotiated the use of one of their vehicles for a road trip instead.

Tesla offered him a rate of $ 400 per photo, strictly to be featured on its Instagram and Twitter accounts. Kuznik thought that was a bit low for a company of that magnitude. Instead, he negotiated a deal where he could borrow one of their cars for eight days. Between not needing to purchase gas or pay a car rental fee, it was worth his while to get free access to a Tesla for a road trip.

My last three sales have been for either strict Instagram use or for a small outdoor exhibition, the latter given that we’re in the midst of a major pandemic. Here is what I charged:

I sold a photo I took of artist Jamie XX at a music festival several years back to a major publishing house in New Zealand. The photographer that sent me in her place never signs contracts, so the copyright remained in my name instead of the organizer’s. I agreed to $ 100 for the following reasons: there are close to 7,000 other images of the artist on Flickr, the platform where my image was discovered, and the contract expressed the wish to use it one time only on the publisher’s Instagram account.
A small, local construction company purchased a drone photo of one of their buildings for $ 200. They will only use it on their website. I had taken the photo for fun and had allowed a friend to repost it to their account, otherwise I would have charged $ 250–$ 300.
An international exhibition asked for permission to display a photo of mine and include it in a brochure that would be distributed to 1,000+ visitors. I gave the organizers the option of $ 250 for the display photo and brochure or $ 100 for rights to only display it from June 18th – 27th. The exhibition chose the latter since COVID has impacted its business.

Research a brand before agreeing to an amount for the rights to use your image. Find out what type of advertising they’re running, if any, and what the company is worth.

Social media and photography platforms are wonderful tools for building your portfolio and generating leads. There are times where it makes sense to partner with certain accounts and share your content instead of selling it for profit. An example is an Instagram takeover I did for Awesome Mitten. Since I sell aerial photography prints of destinations around Michigan to people who live in the state, it made sense to promote some of my offerings to potential customers during the Holiday season. My efforts generated a dozen-plus sales.

There are times when it makes sense to use hashtags or share your images on relevant social accounts. This regional promotion made sense for my business.

It’s important to keep in mind that this is passive income for me. I charge significantly more to perform on-site aerial photography and videography work for clients. I also sell my images to stock photo services and as art prints. Speaking of print, any publication should pay you $ 250, minimum, to print an image. Depending on circulation, you could get up to $ 1,500 per photo. The purpose of writing this article is to remind creatives that they shouldn’t give away their work in exchange for credit when approached by a business, brand or individual.

On a final note, it’s imperative to develop your own signature style. Make it a point to actively look for new subjects, lesser known locales, and unique perspectives. While I enjoyed capturing musical artists performing live when starting out with photography, a lot of my images looked similar to those of my peers. I quickly hit my creative apex and found a new passion with drone photography. Consistently honing your craft and experimenting with new techniques and technology will help you attract the attention of those who have the means to support your endeavors, and allow you to command top dollar for your work.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

6 Portrait Lighting Patterns Every Photographer Should Know

25 Jul

The post 6 Portrait Lighting Patterns Every Photographer Should Know appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Darlene Hildebrandt.

In classical portraiture there are several things you need to control and think about to make a flattering portrait of your subjects, including: lighting ratio, lighting pattern, facial view, and angle of view. I suggest you get to know these basics inside out, and as with most things, then you can break the rules. But if you can nail this one thing you’ll be well on your way to great people photos. In this article we’re going to look at lighting pattern: what is it, why it’s important, and how to use it. Perhaps in another future article, if you enjoy this one, I’ll talk about the other aspects of good portraiture.

Lighting pattern I’d define as, how light and shadow play across the face to create different shapes. What shape is the shadow on the face, in simple terms. There are four common portrait lighting patterns, they are:

Split lighting
Loop lighting
Rembrandt lighting
Butterfly lighting

There are also Broad and Short lighting which are more of a style, and can be used with most of the patterns above. Let’s look at each of them individually.

1. Split Lighting

Split lighting is exactly as the name implies – it splits the face exactly into equal halves with one side being in the light, and the other in shadow. It is often used to create dramatic images for things such as a portrait of a musician or an artist. Split lighting tends to be a more masculine pattern and as such is usually more appropriate or applicable on men than it is for women. Keep in mind however, there are no hard and fast rules, so I suggest you use the information I provide here as a starting point or guideline. Until you learn this and can do it in your sleep, default to the guideline whenever you’re not sure.

split lighting by Darlene Hildebrandt.png

To achieve split lighting simply put the light source 90 degrees to the left or right of the subject, and possibly even slightly behind their head. Where you place the light in relation to the subject will depend on the person’s face. Watch how the light falls on them and adjust accordingly. In true split lighting, the eye on the shadow side of the face does pick up light in the eye only. If by rotating their face a bit more light falls on their cheek, it’s possible their face just isn’t ideal for split lighting.

NOTE: any lighting pattern can be created on any facial view (frontal view showing both ears, or ¾ face, or even profile). Just keep in mind that your light source must follow the face to maintain the lighting pattern. If they turn their head the pattern will change. So you can use that to your advantage to easily adjust the patten just by them rotating their head a little.

What the heck is a “catchlight”?

Notice in this photo above that the baby’s eyes have a reflection of the actual light source in them. It shows up as a little white spot, but if we look closer we can actually see the shape of the light I used in this portrait.

See how the bright spot is actually hexagon with a dark centre? That’s the light I used which was a small hexagon shaped soft box on my Canon speedlight.

This is what is known as the “catchlight”. Without the eye of the subject catching this light, the eyes will appear dark, dead and lifeless. You need to ensure that at least one eye has a catchlight to give the subject life. Notice it also lightens the iris and brightens the eye overall. This also adds to the feeling of life and gives them a sparkle.

2. Loop Lighting

Loop lighting is made by creating a small shadow of the subjects noses on their cheeks. To create loop lighting, the light source must be slightly higher than eye level and about 30-45 degrees from the camera (depends on the person, you have to learn how to read people’s faces).

Look at this image to see where the shadows fall, and on their left sides you can see a small shadow of their noses. In loop lighting the shadow of the nose and that of the cheek do NOT touch. Keep the shadow small and slightly downward pointing, but be aware of having your light source too high which will create odd shadows and cause loss of the catchlights. Loop light is probably the most common or popular lighting pattern as it is easy to create and flatters most people.

loop lighting by Darlene Hildebrandt.png

In this diagram the black backdrop represents the bank of trees behind them. The sun is coming over the trees but they are completely in the shade. A white reflector is used at camera left to bounce light back into the subjects’ faces. The reflector may or may not be in the sun but you can still pick up light even if it’s not. Just play with the angles, by changing the placement of the reflector you can change the lighting pattern. For Loop lighting it will need to be somewhere around 30-45 degrees from the camera. It also needs to be slightly above their eye level so the shadow or loop of their nose angles down towards the corner of the mouth. That is one mistake I often see beginners make with reflectors is to place them down low and angle it up. That lights up the bottom of your subject’s nose and does not create a flattering pattern.

3. Rembrandt Lighting

Rembrandt lighting is so named because the Rembrandt the painter often used this pattern of light in his paintings, as you can see in his self portrait here. Rembrandt lighting is identified by the triangle of light on the cheek. Unlike loop lighting where the shadow of the nose and cheek do not touch, in Rembrandt lighting they do meet which, creates that trapped little triangle of light in the middle. To create proper Rembrandt lighting make sure the eye on the shadow side of the face has light in it and has a catch light, otherwise the eye will be “dead” and not have a nice sparkle. Rembrandt lighting is more dramatic, so like split lighting it creates more mood and a darker feel to your image. Use it appropriately.

Rembrandt lighting by Darlene Hildebrandt.png

To create Rembrandt lighting the subject must turn slightly away from the light. The light must be above the top of their head so that the shadow from their nose falls down towards the cheek. Not every person’s face is ideal for creating Rembrandt lighting. If they have high or prominent cheek bones it will probably work. If they have a small nose or flat bridge of the nose, it may be difficult to achieve. Again, keep in mind you don’t have to make exactly this pattern or another, just so long as the person is flattered, and the mood you want is created – then the lighting is working. If you are using window light and the window goes down to the floor, you may have to block off the bottom portion with a gobo or card, to achieve this type of lighting.

4. Butterfly Lighting

Butterfly lighting is aptly named for the butterfly shaped shadow that is created under the nose by placing the main light source above and directly behind the camera. The photographer is basically shooting underneath the light source for this pattern. It is most often used for glamour style shots and to create shadows under the cheeks and chin. It is also flattering for older subjects as it emphasizes wrinkles less than side lighting.

butterfly lighting by Darlene Hildebrandt-1.png

Butterfly lighting is created by having the light source directly behind the camera and slightly above eye or head level of the subject (depends on the person). It is sometimes supplemented by placing a reflector directly under their chin, with the subject themselves even holding it! This pattern flatters subjects with defined or prominent cheek bones and a slim face. Someone with a round, wide face would look better with loop or even split to slim their face. This pattern is tougher to create using windowlight or a reflector alone. Often a harder light source like the sun or a flash is needed to produce the more defined shadow under the nose.

5. Broad Lighting

Broad lighting is not so much a particular pattern, but a style of lighting. Any of the following patterns of light can be either broad or short: loop, Rembrandt, split.

Broad lighting is when the subject’s face is slightly turned away from centre, and the side of the face which is toward the camera (is broader) is in the light. This produces a larger area of light on the face, and a shadow side which appears smaller. Broad lighting is sometimes used for “high key” portraits. This type of lighting makes a person’s face look broader or wider (hence the name) and can be used on someone with a very slim face to widen it. Most people however want to look slimmer, not wider so this type of lighting would not be appropriate for someone who is heavier or round faced.

broad lighting by Darlene Hildebrandt.png

To create broad lighting the face is turned away from the light source. Notice how the side of the face that is towards the camera has the most light on it and the shadows are falling on the far side of the face, furthest from the camera. Simply put broad lighting illuminates the largest part of the face showing.

6. Short Lighting

Short lighting is the opposite of broad lighting. As you can see by the example here, short lighting puts the side turned towards the camera (that which appears larger) in more shadow. It is often used for low key, or darker portraits. It puts more of the face in shadow, is more sculpting, add 3D qualities, and is slimming and flattering for most people.

short lighting by Darlene Hildebrandt.png

In short lighting, the face is turned towards the light source this time. Notice how the part of the face that is turned away from the camera has the most light on it and the shadows are falling on the near side of the face, closet to the camera. Simply put short lighting has shadows on the largest part of the face showing.

Putting it all together

Once you learn how to recognize and create each of the different lighting patterns you can then start to learn how and when to apply them. By studying your subject’s face you will learn which lighting pattern will be best for them, and for the type of portrait and mood desired. Someone with a very round face that wants to appear slimmer in a grad portrait, will be lit very differently than someone that wants a promo shot for their band that makes them appear mean or angry. Once you know all the patterns, how to recognize and master quality of light, direction of light and ratio (we’ll discuss that in a future article) then you will be well equipped to handle the challenge.

Of course it is much easier to change the lighting pattern if you can move the light source. However if the main light source is the sun, or a window – it’s a bit tougher to do that. So what you will need to do instead of moving the light, is to have the subject rotate in respect to the light to change the direction it falls on them. Or change your camera position. Or change their position. So basically move the things you can move in relation to the light, if you cannot move the light source itself.

Practice Exercise

Corral yourself a subject (as in a real live person, not your dog) and practice creating each of the lighting patterns we just discussed including:

butterfly lighting
loop lighting
Rembrandt lighting
split lighting

Remember to show both broad lighting and short lighting – for each of the different patterns, where applicable. Don’t worry about any other aspect (ratio, fill light, etc) for now, just concentrate getting the patterns down pat first. Use light from a window, a floor lamp with a bare bulb (take the shade off) or the sun – but try and use a light source that you can see what’s happening (I’d suggest that you do not try using flash until you’ve got more experience, it’s harder to learn with because you can’t see it until after the photo is taken) This also works best to start out with the subject facing the camera directly, no turning except to create the broad and short.

Show us your results please and share any challenges or problems you encountered. I’ll try and help you solve them so you and others can learn from it, and get better for next time.

If you’re on Pinterest – here’s a graphic to save this tutorial.

6 Portrait Lighting Patterns Every Photographer Should Know

The post 6 Portrait Lighting Patterns Every Photographer Should Know appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Darlene Hildebrandt.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Video: Explaining why you SHOULD overexpose the highlights in certain photos

27 Jun

It’s a general rule of thumb in photography — digital photography in particular — that you shouldn’t overexpose your highlights, as it can result in the loss of detail. Like all rules, however, this rule not only can be broken but should be broken in certain situations, argues Pye Jirsa of SLR Lounge.

In a five-minute video shared on the SLR Lounge YouTube Channel, Pye explains why you should blow out your highlights in certain situations if it means being able to capture a more powerful image. Specifically, he shows how a ‘perfectly imperfect’ bridal portrait can yield a more natural and authentic feel by overexposing the background in favor of capturing a more technically proper exposure, which Pye explains results in a much more ‘sterile’ feel.

As with all ‘rules’ in photography, very few, if any are hard rules that can’t be broken. But before you start throwing caution to the wind, it helps to know why the rules should be tossed to the side every once in a while on the account of artistic interpretation.

In addition to the video, Pye also shared a detailed breakdown of his thoughts in an article on SLR Lounge. You can find more tutorials from Pye and others on the SLR Lounge YouTube Channel.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Fujifilm X-T4 vs X-H1: should you upgrade or hunt for a bargain?

31 May

Introduction

Fujifilm seems to be hinting that the X-H1 wasn’t a one-off. But in a reality that’s still waiting for an X-H2, and given the X-T4 isn’t conceptually very distant from the original X-H1, it’s reasonable that some X-H1 owners might consider upgrading to Fujifilm’s newest image stabilized stills and video camera.

Alternatively, there do seem to be a few unsold X-H1s still available if you dig around.

So what does two years (and nine days) of progress look like, for Fujifilm’s most video-centric models? Is it worth the upgrade or is now the time to bag yourself a bargain?

Stabilization

Image stabilization is pretty much the defining feature of both cameras. The X-H1 was Fujifilm’s first attempt at in-body stabilization and is built on a larger system than the fully electromagnetic design used in the X-T4.

Initially Fujifilm used the optical stabilization systems to provide pitch and yaw correction when an OIS lens was attached to the X-H1, leaving the in-body system handling translational movements and roll. However, with firmware 2.00, this was changed to use optical and in-body stabilization simultaneously to correct pitch and yaw, which saw a huge increase in the rated correction with some OIS lenses.

The X-T4 builds on this, with the new system typically a roughly 1EV higher rating than the X-H1 can, with either a prime or zoom lens attached. Unless you regularly shoot at extreme shutter speeds, this is most likely to mean that more shots are steady, which is a benefit that’s sometimes difficult to appreciate, since it’s difficult to notice an increased absence of shaken shots.

	Prime lenses*	OIS zooms
X-H1	5.5 EV	5.0-5.5EV
X-T4	6.5 EV	5.5-6.5EV**

* Excluding the 80mm F2.8 Macro, 90mm F2 and 200mm F2, which are rated around 0.5EV lower
** Zooms rated as 5.0EV on the X-H1 are rated at 5.5 or 6.0EV on the X-T4. Zooms rated 5.5 on the X-H1 are all measured at 6.5EV on the X-T4.

Video stabilization

In video, both cameras are somewhat prone to slightly ‘grabby’ motion if you try to pan slowly, as they aren’t always good at distinguishing between shake and intentional movement. This issue was partially addressed on the X-H1’s with firmware 2.00 and is now very similar to that of the X-T4 in this regard.

The difference that is likely to be noticeable is that the X-T4’s IS system is quieter than that of the X-H1, which can sometimes make its presence felt if you capture audio internally.

The X-T4 also has a ‘Boost IS’ mode, which attempts to correct all movement, helping to give more steady results for hand-holding what are supposed to be ‘locked-off’ shots.

Headline video specs

The X-H1 boasted a strong video spec relative to the time it was released, but the X-T4 significantly exceeds it.

The biggest change is that the X-T4 can capture 10-bit footage internally, whereas all the X-H1’s modes are 8-bit. This difference is most noticeable when shooting Log footage. Log gamma distributes the available data values relatively evenly between the brightness levels you’ve captured, to retain as much flexibility as possible when you color grade the footage. Having 1024 values (that’s the ’10-bit’ part) to encode your capture, rather than 256, gives you scope for more adjustment before posterization starts to appear.

The other obvious spec change is that the X-T4 can shoot 60p 4K footage, whereas the X-H1 tops-out at 30p. 60p can convey fast motion more effectively than slower frame rates, and can be slowed-down to give a 1/2 or 2/5ths speed slow-motion effect.

The X-T4 also gains an All-I compression option, which saves full data about each frame, rather than just the differences, maintaining better quality, especially in scenes with lots of movement. This includes a 400 Mbps H.265 option that’s just one of the higher bitrate modes offered by the X-T4, above and beyond the 200 Mbps H.264 capture of the X-H1.

Finally, the X-T4 has a means of monitoring audio, which the X-H1 body lacks. The newer camera comes supplied with a USB adaptor dongle for attaching headphones, whereas X-H1 owners need to buy a battery grip to gain this function.

Uncropped video

One of the biggest changes in video capability might not be obvious from the spec sheet. The X-H1 uses a 1.17x cropped region to shoot its 4K footage, while the X-T4 uses the full width (there’s a similar crop to the X-T4’s 60p mode, but the X-H1 can’t shoot 60p).

This may not sound like a big deal, but it means that a 16mm lens on an X-H1 ends up behaving more like a 29mm equivalent lens than a 24mm equivalent. It makes it more difficult to find genuinely wide-angle options.

By contrast, the X-T4’s 4K uses an angle of view that’s much closer to the one in stills mode (the shift from 3:2 to video aspect ratio narrows things a little), meaning that the lenses designed to be wide for stills remain wide for video. In turn, this means less lens swapping and less need to buy wider lenses just for video shooting.

Better video interface

Fujifilm has been progressively improving its video interface since the introduction of the X-H1. Both cameras have an onscreen interface that can be controlled with the touchscreen, joystick or rear command dial, but the X-T4’s variant is larger, to make touchscreen operation easier. The X-T4 also lets use use the camera’s command dials to set exposure while in Movie Optimized Control mode. That may not sound like a big change, but it makes everything that bit quicker to use.

The X-T4 also lets you resize the AF point in video, allowing you to be more precise about which object you’re tapping to pull focus to.

In addition, the X-T4 gains a view assist mode that gives a Rec709-like preview when you’re shooting Log footage, making it much easier to visualize what the final result will look like.

But perhaps the biggest productivity benefit of the X-T4 over the X-H1 for anyone shooting both stills and video is the provision of a dedicated switch for jumping between the two modes. In part because it’s easier to operate quickly, without accidentally selecting the wrong drive mode, but also because it allows the complete separation of the stills and video menus, so that you only encounter stills-related settings in stills mode, and vice versa. This frees up space in both, allowing separate tabs for timecode and mic setup, rather than everything being bundled into a solitary video tab.

Battery life

Another big difference that will be pertinent to both stills and video shooters is battery life. The X-H1 uses the older NP-W126S battery, which has a capacity of 8.7Wh. The X-T4 has a larger NP-W235 battery which offers 15.8Wh.

As those numbers imply, this makes a big difference. The X-H1 is rated for 310 shots per charge if shot using its rear LCD and 300 through its viewfinder. The X-T3, meanwhile, is rated at 500 shots per charge, despite having a higher-resolution rear screen. And, while it’s common to get many, many more shots than this, depending on your usage, we’d generally expect this roughly 5:3 ratio to indicate better endurance from the X-T4 for most people’s usage.

Another notable difference is that, while the X-H1 can be charged over its (Micro B Superspeed) USB port, the X-T4 can be charged or operated using power to its Type C USB socket.

Battery grip

The other power-related difference between the two cameras is the role played by the accessory battery grip.

On the X-T4, the grip provides room for two additional batteries, adds some portrait orientation controls and beefs-up the front grip of the camera. This extends battery life and provides a more solid foundation for portrait-orientation shooting, but isn’t needed to expand the camera’s core capability.

It’s a different story with the X-H1. In addition to those other benefits an add-on grip usually provides, the VPB-XH1 adds a headphone socket as the only way of gaining audio monitoring on the X-H1, and boosts the shooting rate of the camera from 8 fps to 11 fps when using its mechanical shutter.

Stills shooting

On the stills shooting side of things, the X-T4 gains two generations of improvement in AF speed, eye-AF and focus tracking performance. This may not sound like a lot, in the light of our recent X-T4 review, but much of what counted against the X-T4 was that some of its peers have got so good. Side-by-side with its forebear, the X-T4 is significantly improved.

Beyond the improved algorithms, the X-T4 also benefits from having phase detection AF elements spread across its entire sensor, allowing depth-aware focus almost anywhere in the scene. By contrast (hah!) the X-H1’s phase detection is restricted to a central square covering just over a third of the width of the sensor.

The X-T4 also shoots faster than the X-H1: 15 fps with its mechanical shutter and 20 in e-shutter mode, as opposed to 8 fps and 14 fps for the older model. The X-H1 could up its game to 11 fps, mechanical, if used with the battery grip, but it won’t match the hit rate of the X-T4.

Handling/design

The one area in which the X-H1 isn’t outdone is in terms of handling, mostly because there are distinct differences in their outward design.

The older X-H1 has a more pronounced grip, making it more comfortable to hold with larger lenses. It also has a top-plate settings LCD, which some photographers really love. This comes at the expense of the X-T4’s dedicated exposure compensation dial, instead demanding you press a button or assign the feature to a command dial.

The X-H1 has an extremely sensitive shutter button that, again, some users love (and which can be adjusted, for a fee, if you don’t), mounted on a downward sloping platform, whereas the X-T4 has a vertically-facing shutter button with threading for a cable release.

Both cameras have AF-On buttons on the back, for those that like to ‘back-button focus’ but the X-T4’s is more prominent, whereas the X-H1’s sits next to a raised AEL button (the functions of these two buttons can be swapped, though, so it’s mainly the risk of accidentally pressing the wrong button that differentiates the two approaches).

Rear screens

One of the most divisive differences between the two cameras is the arrangement of their rear screens. The X-H1 (right, in the picture above) has a 1.04M dot (720 x 640) display mounted on a two-axis cradle, while the X-T4 has a 1.62M dot (900 x 600) panel on a fully articulating hinge.

The X-H1’s arrangement is excellent for photography, and can be tilted up towards the user both in the landscape and portrait orientation, while remaining on-axis with the lens. This is great for composing oddly-angled images with the camera positioned above or below your usual shooting position.

The X-T4’s fully articulated screen tends to be the preferred option for videographers or vloggers. Its position away from the axis of the lens demands better spatial awareness when aligning off-angle shots, but it also has the benefit that the screen can be folded in towards the camera for protection.

Overall

It’s impressive is how far Fujifilm has progressed in two years. And I don’t, personally, think that’s because of any shortcoming on the part of the X-H1.

There’s a sense in some quarters that the X-H1 was prematurely abandoned by Fujifilm when, as the last model of its generation, it didn’t get all the features introduced with the X-T3. But comparing its v2.00 IS behavior and performance to its original state, you could almost argue it got a taste of X-T4 tech, over a year early.

Overall, the X-T4 pushes things forwards in almost every respect, even if it’s not necessarily meant as a like-for-like replacement. And it does so with a list price $ 200 lower than the X-H1 at launch.

If you can find an X-H1, it’s still a fine camera, especially if it’s at an appropriately good price. But the X-T4 is more capable in almost every respect and to a degree that will be an appreciable improvement across a wide range of photographic and videographic situations.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Tamron’s 70-180mm F2.8 lens should ship in mid-May for $1,199

07 Apr

Last October, Tamron revealed it was working on a compact 70–180mm F2.8 telephoto lens for full-frame Sony E-mount camera systems. Now, we officially have availability and pricing information for the 70–180mm F2.8 Di III VXD.

As promised, the lens is small despite its focal length range, measuring in at 149mm (5.9″) long and 81mm (3.2″) diameter, with a weight of 810g (28.6oz). The lens is constructed of 19 elements in 14 groups, including one molded aspherical element, one hybrid aspherical lens, one ‘eXtra Low Dispersion’ (XLD) element, five Low Dispersion (LD) elements and fluorine coatings. The lens is ‘moisture-resistant,’ but Tamron doesn’t elaborate on what exactly it can endure.

An illustration of the optical construction of the lens.

Autofocus is driven by Tamron’s ‘Voice-coil eXtreme-torque Drive’ (VXD) linear focus motor. At 70mm, the minimum focusing distance is just 27cm (10.6″) in manual focus and the aperture diaphragm features a nine-blade design. As with other lenses in Tamron’s lineup, the 70–180mm F2.8 features a 68mm front filter thread.

$ (document).ready(function() { SampleGalleryV2({“containerId”:”embeddedSampleGallery_3412747143″,”galleryId”:”3412747143″,”isEmbeddedWidget”:true,”selectedImageIndex”:0,”isMobile”:false}) });

The 70–180mm F2.8 Di III VXD lens will be available in the U.S. on May 14, 2020 for $ 1,199. However, Tamron notes that due to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic the release date could be bumped back.

Tamron Announces the Launch of Lightest and Most Compact Large Aperture Telephoto Zoom Lens in Its Class for Sony Full-Frame Mirrorless Cameras

Third model in Tamron’s series of fast F/2.8 zoom lenses for Sony full-frame mirrorless cameras delivers quiet, fast focus and superb performance

April 6, 2020, Commack, NY – Tamron announces the launch date of the 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD (Model A056), a large aperture telephoto zoom lens for Sony E-mount full-frame mirrorless cameras that is the lightest and most compact in its class. The lens will be available in the U.S. on May 14^th at $ 1199. However, due to the spread of COVID-19, the release date or the product supply schedule could be delayed.

The 70-180mm F/2.8 features a compact and lightweight design with a 67mm filter diameter, the same as Tamron’s highly esteemed 17-28mm F/2.8 (Model A046) and the 28-75mm F/2.8 (Model A036). The optical construction includes several special lens elements that contribute to the lens’s overall superb imaging performance. Its very short 33.5” MOD (Minimum Object Distance) expands overall versatility. The lens utilizes Tamron’s newly developed VXD (Voice-coil eXtreme-torque Drive) linear motor focus mechanism that produces an autofocus drive that’s quieter and quicker than ever before. Additionally, a floating system is used to achieve excellent optical performance at all shooting distances. By simultaneously operating two VXD units via electronic control, the system produces clear and sharp images of all objects near and far. Other features that support a great shooting experience include Moisture-Resistant Construction for added weather protection and Fluorine Coating for easy maintenance. In addition, the 70-180mm F/2.8 is fully compatible with various camera-specific features including Fast Hybrid AF and Eye AF. Developed under the concept of “making large aperture zoom lenses user-friendly,” the 70-180mm F/2.8 provides users with complete portrait-to-telephoto lens range coverage. This new model joins the 17-28mm F/2.8 Di III RXD and the 28-75mm F/2.8 Di III RXD to complete Tamron’s fast zoom lens trinity for full-frame mirrorless cameras.

PRODUCT HIGHLIGHTS

1. Compact size maximizes the mobility advantages of mirrorless cameras

A true marvel of portability and utility, the 70-180mm F/2.8 incorporates an innovative zoom mechanism and 180mm telephoto power. It was possible to maintain extreme light weight and compactness even while attaining a fast F/2.8 aperture across the entire zoom range by leveraging camera-based image stabilization. It is small: filter diameter 67mm, maximum diameter 81mm, length 5.9” at the 70mm setting, and also light weight: 28.6 oz. The super-compact size helps make handheld shooting a breeze. As part of our constant, ongoing effort to achieve both high image quality and supreme compactness, Tamron went to great lengths to create this product in answer to demands of the new generation of digital cameras.

2. Newly developed VXD linear motor focus mechanism delivers high-speed and high precision autofocus performance

Tamron developed its first-ever linear motor AF drive focus mechanism, VXD (Voice-coil eXtreme-torque Drive), especially for the 70-180mm F/2.8. While operating faster than ever before, the drive also maintains positional accuracy down to 0.005mm (0.0002”), less than one tenth the width of a human hair! This provides unprecedented fast and precise AF performance. A floating system that uses two high-speed, high-precision VXD units with advanced electronic control is also used. This innovative design produces clear and beautiful images of all objects from near to far and at the same time helps reduce size and weight. In addition, its exceptional quietness enables low noise shooting in silent settings. Active athletes and moving vehicles are among the subjects commonly photographed with telephoto zoom lenses. The enhanced, highly responsive focus features of the 70-180mm F/2.8 enable following a subject’s movements to provide users with a whisper-quiet, high-precision shooting experience, not just for still images but also video.

3. Superior design for uncompromised image quality

The 70-180mm F/2.8 has an optical construction of 19 elements in 14 groups. It includes a total of six XLD (eXtra Low Dispersion) and LD (Low Dispersion) lens elements combined, and three GM (Glass Molded Aspherical) and hybrid aspherical lens elements combined. Special lens elements are generously and optimally arranged to correct chromatic aberration and maintain very high-resolution performance from edge-to-edge. This model also features BBAR-G2 (Broad-Band Anti-Reflection Generation 2) Coating, which minimizes ghosting and flare and produces stunning, clear images with brilliant, sharp subject detail. Furthermore, excellent high image quality across the entire zoom range is enhanced by camera-based distortion and shading correction. Additionally, the bokeh effect obtained using the fast F/2.8 aperture delivers beautifully smooth and soft transition from the subject to the background. The images created with this lens are emblematic of Tamron’s pursuit to combine supreme compactness with superb image quality.

4. 67mm filter diameter for system convenience

The 70-180mm F/2.8 features the same 67mm filter diameter as Tamron’s other lenses for full-frame mirrorless cameras including the 17-28mm F/2.8 (Model A046), a fast ultra-wideangle zoom, and the 28-75mm F/2.8 (Model A036), a fast standard zoom, as well as the close-focusing prime lens series (20mm, 24mm and 35mm). This uniformity significantly reduces cost and trouble when working with PL, ND and other filters. Even the front lens caps are the same size, eliminating the hassle of sorting caps when switching lenses. These features combine to produce a highly convenient and mobile system that adds more fun to photography.

5. Close focusing to a mere 33.5 inches

The new 70-180mm F/2.8 lens has a MOD of 33.5” throughout the entire zoom range. This is astonishingly close for a large aperture telephoto zoom lens. The short MOD paves the way for impressive telephoto shooting at a maximum magnification ratio of 1:4.6 at the 180mm telephoto end. Moreover, a floating component equipped with two VXD linear focus mechanisms maintains high image quality while effectively controlling aberrations so that the 70-180mm F/2.8 ensures great image quality even at close-up. To effectively suppress optical aberrations, this lens features a floating mechanism that ensures great image quality at distances as short as 33.5”.

Note: At the 70mm setting only, it is possible to shoot closer than the specified MOD of 33.5” (as close as 10.6”) when manual focus (MF) is set on the camera. However, results may be less than optimal since image quality decreases in peripheral areas. For more details, please visit this website: https://www.tamron.jp/en/support/guide/closeup.html

6. Moisture-Resistant Construction, Fluorine Coating, and Zoom Lock switch

Seals are located at the lens mount area and other critical locations to deter infiltration of moisture and/or rain drops and afford Moisture-Resistant Construction. This feature provides an additional layer of protection when shooting outdoors under adverse weather conditions. Also, the front surface of the lens element is coated with a protective fluorine compound that has excellent water- and oil-repellant qualities. The lens surface is easier to wipe clean and is less vulnerable to the damaging effects of dirt, moisture or oily fingerprints, allowing for much easier maintenance. Additionally, the conventional Zoom Lock switch prevents unwanted barrel extension during transportation.

7. Compatible with main camera-specific features and functions

Tamron’s new 70-180mm F/2.8 is compatible with many of the advanced features that are specific to certain mirrorless cameras. This includes the following:

– Fast Hybrid AF

– Eye AF

– Direct Manual Focus (DMF)

– In-camera lens correction (shading, chromatic aberration, distortion)

– Camera-based lens unit firmware updates

* Features vary by camera. Please consult your camera’s instruction manual for details. (As of January, 2020.)

8. Tamron’s ‘Dream Team’ of large aperture zooms for full-size mirrorless cameras

Tamron’s 17-28mm F/2.8 Di III RXD (Model A046) ultra-wideangle zoom and the 28-75mm F/2.8 Di III RXD (Model A036) standard zoom lens earn high marks for user-friendliness and high image quality among large aperture zoom lenses for both E-Mount and FE-Mount Sony mirrorless cameras. Now, the 70-180mm F/2.8 Di III VXD (Model A056) telephoto zoom lens joins the lineup to complete the Dream Team Trinity of high-speed zoom lenses for full-size mirrorless cameras. A key advantage of this series is their portability. The three models altogether weigh surprisingly little, just 62.8 oz. Featuring light weight, compact size, a fast F/2.8 aperture and superb image quality, Tamron’s Dream Team is easy to carry, easy to deploy and easy to enjoy.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

Everything a Beginner Should Know to Improve Their Street Photography

24 Mar

The post Everything a Beginner Should Know to Improve Their Street Photography appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by James Maher.

Everything a Beginner Should Know to Improve Their Street Photography Featured Image

Street photography may seem simple on the surface, just a lot of waiting around looking for an interesting moment to happen. However, the reality is that it is one of the most difficult forms of photography. Particularly at the beginning, it can be very hard to improve in street photography.

The best moments don’t occur very often, and when they do, you have to be aware enough to see it quickly. You have to be brave enough to capture it, and your camera has to be set right.

A lot has to go right, but when it does, that’s when the magic happens. There is a specific set of tips that are important to learn early on that will make all of this much easier and, eventually, second nature.

Fear and timidness

Improve Street Photography — 1/150th at F8, ISO 1600

Fear and timidness are two of the toughest obstacles to overcome for new street photographers. If you don’t feel this way, then skip to the next tip! But most people have a lot of difficulty with this aspect at first. It takes time to overcome, but the less timid you can become, the faster you will be at capturing the best moments.

No matter how tasteful your photography is, street photography is a little creepy! We’re kind of stalking people on the street a bit. But it’s important to know that we’re doing this for a reason. We like people and we want to create interesting photos of our society.

The fear aspect will get better with time – the more you shoot, the easier it will get. But it can help early on to capture some street portraits to get you comfortable. You will quickly realize how many people will be flattered by what you are doing.

Another important thing to know is how to deal with a situation if you are caught.

I just like to smile and be honest. I tell the person that I was photographing the area and the people and culture, and I thought they looked great! Flattery can get you a long way.

If the person seems uncomfortable after you speak to them, offer to delete the shot. You don’t have to, of course, but it’s the right thing to do.

And always be careful about who you photograph. Sometimes, a photograph is just not worth the chance of getting yourself in trouble.

General camera settings

Street Photography Camera Settings — 1/350th at F5.6, ISO 1600

I typically prefer to shoot on Aperture or Shutter Priority settings. Since you are usually going back and forth between different levels of light, this allows you to focus on the scene itself instead of going back and forth on your camera settings. In steady lighting conditions, Manual Mode works very well, though.

Raise your ISO up! I typically use ISO 400 if I am in pure sunlight, ISO 800 in light shade, ISO 1600 in dark shade, and ISO 3200-6400 for dusk into night.

Raising the ISO allows you to have a faster shutter speed to freeze motion. It also gives you more depth of field to make sure you capture the focus correctly, or if you have multiple subjects at different depths.

On Aperture Priority, f/8 is usually my ideal setting whenever possible. It allows enough depth of field but also enough light to enter the camera. And as it gets darker, I will go down with the aperture.

Finally, I always try to keep my shutter speed above 1/250th of a second to freeze motion in people. The key on Aperture Priority is to pay attention to your shutter speed as the lighting gets darker, to make sure that it does not dip too far below 1/250th.

Prime lenses

Prime lenses are made for street photography. They are smaller, lighter, and less noticeable. Also, the act of using a single focal length will make you much faster and more intuitive with the camera. Using one is a key way to improve your street photography.

Zooming constantly will just slow you down and keep you off balance when a moment occurs. With a prime, you are ready when something happens.

I prefer a 35mm and 50mm focal length depending on what I am shooting. Both are wide enough to capture complicated shots that mix foreground and background, and they allow you to get close and intimate with your subjects.

Acting

When some people think of street photographers, they think of the photographers that jump out in people’s faces to take a photograph. It just does not have to be done in that way to get great, candid, close shots. I find the opposite approach to work much better.

I prefer to act like I am just looking around at something above or behind the subject I want to capture, and I carefully get myself in position. They just think I’m probably a tourist looking around, and while they notice me, they continue in their own world without realizing I’m photographing them.

I also take very quick shots where nobody notices. That way, you don’t have to do any acting in these situations. But, acting comes in handy very often.

Finally, you don’t always have to walk around while photographing. Pick an area with foot traffic and wait around. Doing this allows your subjects to enter your personal space instead of entering their space. It also allows you to get very close and nuanced photographs with much less chance of people noticing what you are doing.

Emotion and gesture

One of the keys to creating interesting street photography is showing emotion and feeling in your images. One of the best ways to do that is to capture those emotions and feelings in your subjects.

Pay attention to the looks in peoples’ eyes or the gestures in their bodies. Try to see who is walking around wearing their emotions on their sleeves, so to speak.

I would rather photograph a non-descript person with incredible emotion over the flashiest person just walking down the street emotionless.

Getting closer

This is a general tip for improving most photography, but it is especially difficult for street photography. The closer you get, the more intimate your moments will feel.

But you don’t have to put so much pressure on yourself at first. Start from further back and over time, work to get closer and closer. This is a process that can take a little time to get comfortable with.

Spontaneity and intuition

Everything a Beginner Should Know to Improve Their Street Photography — 1/250th at F9, ISO 3200

At some point, you need to become fast with your camera to capture some of those split-second moments. Embrace your intuition and work to become spontaneous and fast with the camera.

You will miss a lot of photographs this way and come back with a lot of bad ones (why editing is so important), but the special photographs will be special.

If you feel that there is the potential for a great photograph in your gut, just stop thinking and go for it. The worst that can happen is you will delete the photograph later on.

Imperfection

Unlike some other forms of photography, perfection is not celebrated as much in street photography. We’re looking for real and unplanned moments, and these moments are not perfect.

Sometimes the best way to improve your street photography is to just loosen up.

What matters is that the photograph is interesting and it looks good. Everything else is gravy. If the photograph has those qualities, who cares if it’s skewed, a little blurry, highlights are blown out, or if there’s an element in the way. That’s the real world.

Sometimes these aspects will ruin your photograph, of course, but just as often they’ll ground the moment in reality.

Photograph in busy and quiet places

As you are learning and getting comfortable, it’s very important to practice in busy places with a lot of foot traffic. This gives you many chances for great photographs and it’s easier to work in a candid way as well. This is how to work out the kinks and develop your technical skills and overall awareness.

But it is equally important to photograph in slower and quieter areas too.

These areas can be just as interesting and even more so than the busiest areas. It can take some time to get used to photographing here and figuring out what makes a good photograph, but you will be much better off for trying.

Conclusion – take photos for yourself

Street photography is about taking something that is internal, capturing it in the real world, and then showing those ideas in your work.

It’s not worth taking photographs that you think other people will find interesting. Ultimately, your work can only become so good that way.

Shoot what you think is the most interesting and forget about everyone else. Over time this is how you will develop a strong and distinct voice.

And most importantly, get out there and shoot as often as you can. That is the real way to improve your street photography.

Do you have any other tips to improve street photography that you’d like to share? Please do so in the comments, along with any street photos you’d like to share.

The post Everything a Beginner Should Know to Improve Their Street Photography appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by James Maher.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

Fujifilm X-T4 vs X-T3: Which should I buy – and is it worth upgrading?

20 Mar

X-T4 versus X-T3

Fujifilm says the X-T4 is intended as a sister model to the X-T3 rather than a direct replacement, but there are enough differences between the two that some users might wish to upgrade. And there may be people looking at the X series afresh, wanting to know which is the better choice.

The more I’ve used the X-T4, the more I believe some stills-only photographers will appreciate it

Initially I wrote that the majority of benefits would be experienced by video shooters but the more I’ve used it, the more I believe some stills-only photographers will appreciate the newer model.

But, of course, the X-T3 has been on the market long enough that its price has dropped, so anyone looking to buy for the first time might be tempted to save a fair chunk of money by going for the unstabilized camera. So what are the differences that matter?

Stabilization

Image stabilization will be the decisive factor for some photographers, but not all. Given Fujifilm’s lens lineup is primarily built around stabilized zooms and fast primes (the same approach that’s worked well for Nikon and Canon’s DSLR systems), many photographers are likely to conclude they don’t need a stabilized camera body.

Some kinds of photography, such as macro work, could benefit from it but for many stills shooters it’s likely to be a feature that’s nice to have, but not necessarily essential.

For many stills shooters IS is likely to be a feature that’s nice to have, but not necessarily essential

Stabilization is probably a feature that offers the most benefit to videographers. Unlike lens IS, in-body IS can correct for camera roll, and in our experience so far, it’s sufficiently effective to allow the X-T4 to be used without a tripod or gimbal. This pairs nicely with the excellent video spec shared by both cameras.

For really ambitious video work, the X-T3 mounted on a gimbal is arguably the more powerful combination (especially now Fujifilm has added the ability to control the camera from the gimbal), but for ad hoc video shooting, the X-T4’s stabilization is a major benefit.

Battery life

Battery life is another big differentiator between the two cameras. The X-T3 could already be charged and operated by connecting a power bank to its USB-C port, so it was easy enough to keep topped-up, such that its battery capacity wasn’t a major limitation for most users.

Video shooters, who need to know their battery won’t cut out mid-shot, and photographers who need to travel light and not carry an external battery, will be the main beneficiaries of the X-T4’s larger capacity W235 battery.

The X-T4 delivers a 600 shot rating if behaving like the X-T3’s default mode, or 500 with a better user experience

Interestingly, the X-T3 achieved its pretty respectable 390 shots-per-charge rating by dropping the brightness and refresh rate of its screen after 12 seconds of inactivity: a behavior the X-T4 calls ‘Economy’ mode. A like-for-like comparison would be that the X-T4 delivers a 600 shot rating if compared to the X-T3’s default mode, or 500 while providing a better user experience.

Improved autofocus

The X-T4’s autofocus improves over the X-T3’s in terms of both performance and usability.

The difference in performance is immediately apparent in tracking mode, with a single AF reticule sticking much more tenaciously than the ‘cloud’ of AF points did in the past. We’ve not been able to fully test this yet, as we’re told full production X-T4s won’t be available for a while, but it’s a very promising sign: Fujifilm’s autofocus has generally been very good at assessing subject distance, the main shortcoming has been the ability to stay locked onto the correct subject (hence us generally recommending using a focus zone, rather than tracking mode). Concerns about AF drive speed on some lenses persist, but we’re looking forward to testing an X-T4 with the likes of the 50-140mm F2.8 LM.

The X-T4’s autofocus improves over the X-T3’s in terms of both performance and usability

Meanwhile the X-T4’s face and eye detection systems have been improved, particularly in terms of how they’re operated. Like the X-Pro3, the X-T4’s face detection works pretty well and lets you drop out of face detection mode simply by operating the AF joystick. This means you can leave the camera in face detection mode most of the time, if you wish. The Face Selection mode is also pretty effective, letting you use the joystick to choose between faces or press it inwards to drop back to your underlying AF mode.

Sadly, like the X-Pro3, you can’t leave the camera in Face Selection mode: you can only access it by applying it to a custom button and the camera exits the mode every time you power it off.

Improved stills processing options

The X-T4 includes the additional processing options introduced with the X-Pro3, including Color Chrome Effect Blue, Classic Negative film simulation and the Clarity parameter. On top of this it adds the Eterna Bleach Bypass film sim and more fine-grained control of the camera’s response curves.

The X-T4 also gains the option to re-process Raw files as 8 or 16-bit TIFF files, for situations in which you intend to post-process your images, but prefer the in-camera color and detail rendering to anything you can get from a Raw converter.

Your position may differ, but personally I tend to feel that once I’ve got Provia, Astia, Eterna and Acros I’ve got all the options I need. So, while these new options will add some value to the new camera, they wouldn’t sway my own buying decision.

Movie shooting differences

The X-T4’s base movie shooting spec is very similar to that of the X-T3. It’s a testament to how good the T3’s video capture was that it’s still one of the most video capable hybrid cameras on the market, so long after its launch. With internal 10-bit and 60p capture, it’s still probably the most powerful 4K shooter this side of Panasonic’s latest GH models.

The X-T4’s ‘Movie Optimized Control’ is an appreciable improvement that makes it quicker to adjust settings

There are improvements, though, even beyond the provision of a fully-articulated screen and in-body stabilization. For a start, the ‘Movie Silent Control’ function, that lets you use the touchscreen to change settings without interrupting your footage – and, crucially, lets you set distinct exposure settings for movie and stills shooting – has been improved. The X-T4’s ‘Movie Optimized Control’ mode lets you adjust exposure using the camera’s front and rear dials, in addition to the touchscreen. It’s an appreciable improvement that makes it quicker to adjust settings when shooting in changing light.

The other small change that makes a big difference is the Log Preview Assist mode. This doesn’t go as far as Panasonic’s mode, which lets you import LUTs onto your camera but, more like Sony’s implementation, gives a loosely graded preview, which makes it much easier to check your shots in both preview and playback modes.

Greater movie/stills separation

We’ve seen some posts decrying the removal of a dedicated metering switch from the X-T4, but we suspect many users will end up finding the stills/video switch that replaces it more valuable, even (perhaps especially) die-hard stills-only shooters.

While many stills shooters are likely to prefer the X-T3’s two-axis screen, since it stays in line with the camera’s optical axis for both landscape and portrait orientation shooting, travel photographers and the generally clumsy may appreciate the ability to fold the screen so that it faces in towards the camera, leaving it protected from scratches when thrown into a bag.

Users who don’t ever plan to shoot video need never encounter the pages of video setup options

The other benefit for all types of shooters is that distinct movie and stills modes allow the menus to be be more focused on the settings they need. Users who don’t ever plan to shoot video need never encounter the pages of video setup options, and movie shooters can more easily find the options they want, with audio and timecode options broken out into their own menu tabs.

What about the X-H1?

Of course the X-T4 isn’t the first Fujifilm camera to offer in-body stabilization. The X-H1 was a stabilized sister model to the X-T2 and, like the X-T4, appeared to offer most to video shooters. With the last of the X-H1s still available new at knock-down prices, how does it stack up?

Looking back (and it’s not really that far), it’s impressive how far the X-T4 brings us, compared with the X-H1. The underlying still image quality hasn’t changed radically, but just about everything else has continued to creep forward.

It’s impressive how far the X-T4 brings us, compared with the X-H1

The X-T4’s IS is rated as being significantly more effective (though we’re not able to formally test that, yet), and the autofocus is significantly better, not least in that the phase-detection capability extends across the whole sensor, rather than being confined to a central square.

On the video side, the X-T3 and 4 both offer full-width 4K video, which makes it easier to shoot wide-angle than the X-H1’s 1.18x cropped version. They also offer 10-bit internal capture, which is especially valuable for Log shooting. Both of the newer cameras also include the ability to shoot 4K/60p, either to represent fast action or to allow for 50% or 40% slow-mo playback, and both can continue recording for around twice the time the X-H1 can.

We tended to find the X-H1’s shutter button over-sensitive but this and the camera’s quiet shutter had their fans. For us the X-T4’s shutter is quiet enough, and now comes with the added reassurance of a 300,000 lifespan rating.

Upgrades to the X-T3

The question hanging over a much of this article is whether Fujifilm will implement any of the X-T4’s features in the X-T3.

Having established a reputation for providing feature additions and improvements (onto often already well-specced cameras with good performance), Fujifilm has now put itself in a position where its users have come to expect to continue to receive the benefits of its ongoing R&D in their cameras, for free.

There’s an argument to be made that Fujifilm has already provided X-T3 users with an reasonable level of post-launch support

The X-T3 is now 18 months old, so is probably getting towards the end of its life cycle, yet its feature set remains competitive. It’s received a series of updates improving its performance and making small feature additions throughout its life so far. At which point, there’s an argument to be made that Fujifilm has already provided users with an appropriate level of post-launch support. Obviously it would be nice if the company decided to make add some of the additional features it’s developed for the X-T4. But whether it’s a reasonable expectation is another matter.

It’s likely to hinge on whether Fujifilm really does plan to maintain the X-T3 and X-T4 concurrently. Sony clearly believes there’s room for both its a6400 and a6600 models which, aside from battery size and image stabilization, have feature parity, but Fujifilm may decide not to upgrade the X-T3 up to X-T4 level in order to make the X-T4 more attractive.

Should I upgrade?

Ultimately, the choice of whether to upgrade from the X-T3 to the X-T4 depends on your specific needs. Given how competitive the X-T3 is, we believe both could happily co-exist – it’s still an excellent camera, offering tremendous capability for both stills and video shooters. Paired with a $ 500 DJI Ronin SC, it’s still one of the best video cameras under $ 2000. For those reasons many users might quite legitimately follow Dan’s advice, and settle for a bit.

But the X-T4 does have a lot going for it. Image stabilization, a bigger battery, improved autofocus and a host of performance and handling tweaks that will really add up for some photographers. I’m certainly looking forward to getting a change to test a full production version.

Until we get a chance to test the fine detail, we hope this article helps you assess whether it’s an upgrade you need to make, or whether it’s better to save your money for an extra lens or perhaps even the conjectured X-H2.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

Comments Off

Posted in Uncategorized

5 Reasons You Should Use Mirrorless in 2020

10 Mar

The post 5 Reasons You Should Use Mirrorless in 2020 appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

Are you struggling to decide between DSLRs and mirrorless cameras? Do you want to know which is best for your needs? You’ve come to the right place. In this article, I’m going to give you the main reasons you may want to use mirrorless in 2020 over DSLRs.

And, if at the end of this article, some (or all) of those reasons speak to you, then mirrorless is probably the way to go.

If not, then I recommend you stick with DSLRs, because they really can produce amazing images.

Make sense?

Let’s get started.

1. Mirrorless cameras offer a live exposure preview

For me, this is the absolute best thing about mirrorless photography and the main reason why I bought my first mirrorless body.

You see, on a DSLR, when you look through the viewfinder, you see the actual scene before you (through your camera’s lens).

But if you look through the electronic viewfinder of mirrorless cameras, then you don’t see the scene in real life. Instead, you get a feed from the camera’s sensor, which incorporates exposure information.

See the area where you look through on the camera below? There’s a small OLED or LCD screen, which allows you to see a preview of the shot.

The feed isn’t perfect. It doesn’t always show you an accurate representation of the final image, especially if you’re shooting long exposure with changing light.

But it’s really, really good. And it’s extremely useful for those situations where you need to capture shots on the fly, because you have an immediate understanding of where your camera’s exposure is and where it needs to be. Just a few twists of your camera’s dial and – voila! – you’ve got a good exposure.

Note that there are also downsides to using these electronic viewfinders. They vary a lot in terms of quality, and even the best EVFs are nowhere near optical (DSLR) viewfinders in terms of clarity.

Plus, there will be some situations where you’ll want to work without exposure simulation, and this often means diving into your camera’s menu in order to figure out how to turn the feature off.

But if you’re the type of person who wants to know the resulting exposure before you hit the shutter button, then mirrorless is a great choice.

2. You can fit a mirrorless body in your pocket

I’m serious.

With some of the smaller mirrorless cameras, you can mount the lens on the body and stick it in your pocket, no problem.

You do need to use a small lens, but it’s still pretty impressive, and it’s another reason to use mirrorless in 2020.

In other words:

Mirrorless cameras tend to be much smaller than their DSLR counterparts.

In fact, the small size was considered the original groundbreaking advantage of mirrorless, and is still pretty great, even though DSLRs like the Canon SL3 and Nikon D3500 are really quite small.

That’s why mirrorless cameras are great for travel and casual shooting. Plus, you can take them into events without anybody noticing you’ve got a high-powered camera. This is also key for street photography, where you generally want to avoid attention.

Oh, and if you really want to take the small form factor to the next level, check out Micro Four Thirds cameras and lenses. Their compact size will blow you away.

Here’s an example of the size variation you can find with mirrorless bodies, from the large Olympus OM-D E-M1X, all the way down to the compact E-M10 Mark III:

3. You can see in black and white as you shoot

Another reason to use mirrorless in 2020 is black and white photography. If you’ve ever wanted to shoot in black and white, but you felt it’d be too hard a medium to master…

…get a mirrorless camera.

Because if you use a mirrorless body with a viewfinder, you’ll be able to program it to display in black and white.

And, as long as you’ve got the viewfinder to your eye, you’ll see in black and white.

This means that you have an immediate boost in your black and white potential. Instead of struggling to see in black and white (which is half the battle of the b&w genre), you’ll be able to understand the black and white medium straight out of the gate.

You’ll see how different colors are rendered in black and white. You’ll see how black and white photos change as the light changes.

And you’ll become a much better black and white photographer.

In fact, even if you switch back to a DSLR, you’ll retain your black and white skills. Because your understanding of black and white will exist on a much deeper level.

Cool, right?

4. Mirrorless cameras offer true silent shooting modes

If you’re a street photographer or an event photographer, then I’m guessing that you’d love the opportunity to shoot without making a sound.

It prevents you from disturbing the silence in a wedding ceremony. And it prevents people from noticing that you’re photographing them on the streets.

Now, DSLRs often offer silent shooting modes.

But if you’ve ever tried one of these, they’re just…bad.

Sure, they make things quieter than the “thunk, thunk, thunk” you get from normal shooting. But they still leave the shutter quite audible, and I certainly wouldn’t feel comfortable using them in a quiet room.

Enter mirrorless silent modes.

See, mirrorless cameras generally offer two broad types of shooting:

Shooting with the mechanical shutter (which is what causes the loud noise you get from a DSLR).
And shooting with the electronic shutter.

Fortunately, shooting with an electronic shutter is literally silent. You can hit the shutter button and no one (probably not even you) will hear it.

It’s perfect for street photography, and it’s amazing for event photography.

So that once you’ve used a true silent shutter, you’ll struggle to ever go back to a DSLR!

5. Mirrorless cameras come with all sorts of cool bonus features

When I got my first mirrorless camera, here’s one of the things I was most excited about:

The extra features that came with it. This is another reason to use mirrorless in 2020.

Sure, I was happy with the smaller size and the live preview, and those were the main reasons that I bought it in the first place.

But the extra features…

…well, I couldn’t wait to try them out.

I’m talking about things like focus peaking, which allows you to see, in advance, which areas of your shot are going to be in focus. It’s not perfect, but it gives you an approximation of the necessary depth of field, plus it’s just really cool.

I’m also talking about the manual focusing guide, which lets you select an autofocus point, then tells you when you’ve nailed it with manual focus.

This last feature has been a huge help for ensuring I get my point of focus right; it acts as a check on my manual focusing in landscape, architectural, and macro photography.

Now, not all mirrorless cameras offer these features. And there are some bonuses, such as Olympus’s Pro Capture option, that you’ll only find in a select few mirrorless bodies.

(Pro Capture, by the way, causes the camera to start firing at up to 60 frames per second when you press the shutter button halfway down, but then saves around a dozen shots from before you finally hit the shutter button, as well as dozens of frames after you hit the shutter.)

So before you buy a DSLR, check out the features hidden in different mirrorless camera menus. I bet there are some awesome ones that are worth a look.

5 Reasons You Should Use a Mirrorless in 2020: Conclusion

Now that you’ve finished this article, you should know all about mirrorless cameras, and whether you should think about purchasing one.

Because here’s the thing:

Mirrorless systems aren’t for everyone. There are reasons to use mirrorless in 2020, and there are reasons to shoot with DSLRs (and there are even reasons to shoot film!).

Now I’d like to know your opinion:

Why do you shoot mirrorless? Are there any reasons for shooting mirrorless that I missed? And if you shoot with a DSLR, why? Let us know in the comments!

The post 5 Reasons You Should Use Mirrorless in 2020 appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

Digital Photography School

Comments Off

Posted in Photography

5 Reasons You Should Still Use a DSLR in 2020

06 Mar

The post 5 Reasons You Should Still Use a DSLR in 2020 appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

5 Reasons You Should Still Use a DSLR in 2020 Feature Graphic

In recent years, mirrorless cameras have come to dominate much of the photography market. So much so that, if you’re a DSLR shooter, you may feel like you’re lagging behind. You may feel like you’re using old, antiquated equipment. You may start saving up for that brand-new mirrorless kit. But should you still use a DSLR in 2020?

Here’s the thing:

While mirrorless cameras may be all the rage these days, there’s a lot to be said for DSLRs.

5 Reasons You Should Still Use a DSLR in 2020 – Nikon D6

And while there are a lot of benefits to going mirrorless, for some photographers, mirrorless bodies and lenses would be an unnecessary step sideways.

Or, even worse, a step backward.

That’s what this article is all about. I’m going to give you five reasons why you might want to still use a DSLR in 2020.

And you’ll come away knowing whether a DSLR still makes sense for your shooting needs, even in this increasingly mirrorless age.

1. DSLRs are much easier to work with in low light

If you’ve spent some time reading about DSLRs versus mirrorless cameras, then you’ll be familiar with the optical viewfinder and electronic viewfinder comparisons.

On the one hand, optical viewfinders are much clearer than electronic viewfinders, and they feel more real.

5 Reasons You Should Still Use a DSLR in 2020 — This Nikon DSLR features an optical viewfinder, which gives you a crisp and lifelike view through the lens.

On the other hand, electronic viewfinders give you a live preview of your image before you even take it, one that allows you to assess exposure from the moment you put the camera up to your eye. You also get other cool benefits, such as focus peaking (where you can see in-focus areas through the viewfinder), as well as the ability to “see” in black and white.

But there’s another key optical viewfinder benefit:

They look way better in low light.

When you’re shooting in darker situations, looking through an optical viewfinder is very similar to looking with your naked eye.

But looking through an electronic viewfinder is like looking through an old, poor-quality display. There’s noise everywhere, and this makes it tough to tell whether you’ve nailed focus and exposure.

Of course, it’s possible to look past these flaws, and you can still shoot mirrorless in low light. But it’s frustrating to look through a viewfinder and see a poor-quality image, so if you’re a frequent low-light shooter, you might want to consider sticking with a DSLR instead.

Now, EVFs are improving all the time, and there may reach a point in the future where the quality in low light comes close to that of OVFs. But right now, OVFs are dominating EVFs in the low-light arena.

2. You can shoot all day with a DSLR on a single battery

Another reason to still use a DSLR in 2020 is that DSLRs have much longer-lasting batteries compared to mirrorless cameras.

And if you’re the type of photographer who likes to shoot all day without stopping, or someone who goes into areas without access to electricity for days on end, you’re going to struggle with a mirrorless body.

Most mirrorless bodies are rated at around 250-400 shots, though you can get a substantial amount of additional life out of them if you make an effort to conserve battery. Even so, mirrorless battery life pales in comparison to DSLRs, which frequently feature capabilities from around 800 shots to 1500 shots and beyond.

5 Reasons You Should Still Use a DSLR in 2020 – Nikon D850 — This Nikon D850 has a battery life of 1840 high-resolution shots, which is much more than that of mirrorless competitors.

When I got my first mirrorless camera, I thought I was ready to handle the limited battery life. In a sense, I was: I had three original batteries, plus two chargers.

But even if you have the batteries to last a day or two, it’s frustrating to have to remember to charge them after every shoot. It’s also frustrating to change batteries during shoots, especially when working in the freezing cold or in bad weather.

So if battery life is a big deal to you, then you may want to stick with your DSLR.

3. DSLRs feel much better in your hand

I’ve used a number of mirrorless cameras, and I’ve also used a number of DSLRs.

And the DSLRs are far, far better when it comes to ergonomics.

You see, mirrorless cameras are much more compact than DSLRs on average. But in order to achieve the smaller form-factor, manufacturers have flattened body grips.

Sure, there are some mirrorless cameras that retain a DSLR-like feel, but many of the mid-level options from Sony and Fujifilm, not to mention the entry-level, no-viewfinder cameras from most manufacturers, have very limited grips.

And this makes them very tough to use for street photographers (who often shoot one-handed), as well as casual walkaround photographers. Plus, anyone who holds a camera for hours on end wants it to feel comfortable, not just usable.

In a lot of cases, mirrorless bodies just…aren’t.

Check out this DSLR, which shows the extent to which a deep body grip defines its shape:

So before you grab a new mirrorless body, make sure to head into your local camera shop and actually try it out. Hold it in your hand.

And ask yourself:

How would I feel after hours in the field?

If the answer is something along the lines of “Not good,” then you may want to still use your DSLR in 2020.

4. DSLRs allow you to comfortably view the scene with both eyes open

I’ve already talked about the difference between electronic viewfinders and optical viewfinders.

But there’s a practical consequence that comes with using an electronic viewfinder that I haven’t mentioned:

It’s tough to shoot with both eyes open.

Now, if you’re a landscape or portrait photographer, you may think this is silly. Why would you ever need to use both eyes while shooting?

But if you’re an action photographer, someone who shoots sports or even street photos, then you may like to shoot with both eyes open. This allows you to anticipate movement. It allows you to see what’s going to move into the frame before it happens.

And it can really take your images to the next level.

Unfortunately, it’s hard to use both eyes when shooting mirrorless. This is because there’s a feeling of disconnect between the electronic viewfinder and the optical viewfinder. Plus, even the best EVFs have some kind of lag; while this may be irrelevant if using one eye to shoot, it creates a level of disjointedness when working with both eyes.

This is one of the reasons why, by the way, plenty of sports photographers are still opting for a camera like the Nikon D5/6 or the Canon 1D X Mark II/III over mirrorless options like the Sony a9 II or the Olympus OM-D E-M1X. While the latter two cameras offer incredible specs, it’s just too difficult to use them with both eyes open.

5 Reasons You Should Still Use a DSLR in 2020 - Canon EOS 1D X Mark III — The Canon 1D X Mark III is a sought-after sports camera by professionals.

5. DSLRs offer a better lens selection

Here’s your final reason to still use a DSLR in 2020 over mirrorless:

The lens selection.

Now, there are plenty of great lenses for mirrorless systems. But the range just isn’t as expansive as the DSLR lens lineup that’s offered by Canon or Nikon.

Fortunately, there are adapters that allow you to use DSLR lenses on mirrorless bodies. But these can cost a substantial amount of money, and for some lineups, they’re just not ideal.

Some shooters won’t care about the limited lens offerings; if you’re a portrait photographer, for instance, you’ll probably be just fine with the lens lineup offered by any of the major mirrorless manufacturers. This is because portrait-type lenses are often developed first, as part of a “standard” prime and zoom series.

But if you photograph with more specialized equipment – a set of super-telephoto lenses, for instance, or a long macro lens – you’ll struggle to get the glass you need to really capture your images.

Note, also that switching from a Canon DSLR to a mirrorless system like Fujifilm, will cost a significant sum of money. You’ll need to buy a mirrorless camera, yes, but you’ll also need to replace your entire lens lineup. And while you can sell your DSLR lenses on the used market, they likely won’t get you close to the cash you need for a well-rounded Fuji system.

So make sure you keep this in mind before switching to mirrorless.