Pre-focusing for action photography

Every year in the town where I live, they put on a motorcycle street race event. It's always over a long weekend (Labour Day here in NZ), and it's always a great day out. Especially if we get a warm spring day.

Fortunately, the weather Gods were smiling on the event this year, and the weather couldn't have been better. So I decided that I was going to attend this year and use the chance to get in a full day of photography - a very rare occasion nowadays. 

Catch me if you can. Sony A7iii with Sony G Master 100-400mm.  f/5.6 @ 1/2500, ISO 400

In my previous post I talked about scoring a bunch of Minolta lenses from a friend (thanks again Stew) to use for the event. Specifically the Minolta 100-400mm f/4.5-6.7 Apo and a Sigma 180mm f/3.5 macro. I was looking forward to using these on my also borrowed Sony a99.

I have shot this event several times over the years, with a lot of different gear, so I knew that lenses in the vicinity of 200mm would be about right if I wanted to get close to the action. In fact there are places around the track where you can get so close as to almost reach out and touch the riders as they hurtle past at 100mph. I kid you not! I, however, like to keep a slightly safer distance from the action as it unfolds. So the 100-400mm and even the 180mm macro were going to be about perfect for the whole day.

The observant among you (I'm sure that's everyone who reads this blog) will have noticed by now that the opening image in this post was not taken with the a99 in combination with the two lenses I've just discussed. It was taken with much newer gear that I also had a chance to 'play' with. More on that later.

Knee-scraping action. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

It may, at first glance, seem unusual to take a macro lens to a motorsport event. Macro lenses are for close up photos of bugs and flowers - aren't they? Well yes, they are. But they can also be used as a 'normal' lens. And they also tend to be reasonably fast, and reasonably sharp. For a 180mm focal length, that's a pretty slick combination.

The one thing they maybe aren't, however, is extremely fast focusing. And neither is the 10 year old Sony a99. 6 FPS (frames per second) isn't what you would call blazingly fast. And its continuous autofocus isn't anything spectacular either. It's a fantastic landscape camera. But for fast sports action shooting - not so much.

But then again, I knew this wasn't going to be a problem. Because my favourite technique for shooting these extremely fast action sports is rather old-school. It's known as pre-focusing, and was used by all the sports photographers before this snazzy thing called autofocus tracking was invented. And it's pretty easy to do.

Bascially, just put your camera into manual focus (yes, I know, manual focusing is scary - but bear with me), 'pre-focus' on an area that you know your subject is going to move through, and then fire a burst of images as they move through the pre-focused zone. All in manual focus. Simple. And very effective.

All concentration. Sony a99 with Minolta 100-400mm Apo. f/6.3 @ 1/800th, ISO 640

There's really only one drawback using this method. You have to take a lot of images to make sure you get the sharp frame you are after. Unfortunately this dramatically increases the processing you need to go through afterwards. And I mean dramatically. For example, to get a decent 'hit rate' using this method, I took over 3500 images on the day. That's not a typo. 3500 images! And of that, around 80% are out of focus and will needed to be deleted. I'll probably end up throwing away 3000 images. But at least I'll be left with about 500 sharp ones.

Despite the tedious post-processing that this technique requires, I'm very happy with the results. If you don't have the latest and greatest gear, or a camera system that isn't optimised for fast action autofocusing, then this really should be your go-to technique.

Of course there is a better way. And it's not going to please the 'gear doesn't matter' brigade. Because for some types of photography (in fact for most types) the gear does matter. This was made abundantly clear to me later on in the afternoon.

Out in front. Sony A7iii with Sony G Master 100-400mm. f/5.6 @ 1/1600th, ISO 400

My mate Stewart turned up in the late afternoon to see how I was getting on. We chatted for a while, I told him that I was using the pro-focus technique, and he asked me if I would like to try using his Sony A7iii with Sony 100-400 G Master lens for a while?

Who am I to turn down an offer like that! So of course I said yes - thinking that I would fumble my way through, making a terrible hash of trying to follow and capture the action. OMG - was I wrong!

You can always hear the roar of the bikes approaching before you see them so you have some time to prepare. Stewart told me he had the camera set to focus tracking with a wide autofocus area, so all I needed to do was point and shoot. Yeah - right!

And yeah, he was right! As the first riders came screaming around the bend, I held the camera up to my eye, the focus points instantly locked onto the front rider, and they all lit up green. Click-click-click, the shutter fired in blazingly quick succession, and I had a series of tack-sharp images. All of them!

Need for Speed. Sony A7iii with Sony G Master 100-400mm. f/5.6 @ 1/2000th, ISO 400

I almost couldn't believe the speed and accuracy of the autofocus on the A7iii, paired with the Sony G Master 100-400mm teleophoto. It was mad, crazy, unbelievably fast. And the results were so much sharper than anything I got with the Minolta 100-400mm or Sigma 180mm. Period! I've never used anything quite this fast and accurate before. It was scary good - and exhilarating - I'm not gonna lie. 

It also happens to be over NZ$7k worth of kit! So yeah, there's that.

If you can afford it, and if you need it, then absolutely go for it. If I was doing this for a living it would be a no-brainer.

And for the rest of us mere mortals? Well, there's always the pre-focusing technique. Which does work. It just requires a lot more computer time in order to find the 'keepers' from the rest. 

Oh well. I'd better get back to post-processing then, I guess?

Alive and kicking

It's been 6 months since I last posted on this blog! Why so long?

Well, as my last post described I had a bit of gear trouble, which took a couple of months to work through. My Sony a57's sensor was out of alignment, resulting in blurry images no matter what I did (unless the camera was focused to infinity). The camera store was really good about working this out with me (thanks Greg and the team at Photo & Video in Christchurch). They tried to find me another a57 (or equivalent) to replace the faulty camera - since it wasn't really worth repairing the sensor alignment issue.

Anyhoo - long story short - they couldn't find me a replacement, so I took my Olympus E-M1 back (with two Panasonic kit lenses). I dived back into micro four thirds, and even started a new Wordpress blog about it. So I may not have been writing about photography on this blog, but I have been writing on another.

So why this new post here? What gives?

Greymouth Street Races 2022. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

A few reasons spring to mind -

A) it's about damn time I wrote something on this blog!

B) the Wordpress experiment didn't go all that well. I didn't really enjoy Wordpress as a platform.

C) things are starting to happen again in my photography sphere, and I want to write about them.

and D) it's about damn time I wrote something on this blog!

First things first, you'll notice that the above image, of last weekends (as I write this) street races, wasn't taken on my Olympus E-M1. I still have the Sony a99. And I still enjoy using it. And I still have access to some fantastic lenses for it. So no - I still haven't given up on using the Sony A-mount system. Things have, in fact, got even more muddy in those waters recently. Let me explain....

No.74. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1250th, ISO 200

Stewart - my photographer friend who I can borrow all this Sony gear from (hi Stew), called me recently and asked if I was still interested in using the Sony A-Mount gear. He has moved over fully to Sony E-Mount now, and was wondering whether I wanted his A-Mount gear!

That would be a YES!

We left it at that, but with the Greymouth Street Races coming up, I had an excuse to spend a full day on photography (a rarity). I got back in touch with Stewart and asked if he might have any telephoto lenses I could borrow for the a99. A couple of days before the event Stew turned up at my house with a bag full of lenses and proceeded to hand them to me. Two stood out as useful - a Minolta 100-400mm APO f4.5/6.7 and a Sigma 180mm f3.5 macro. But he also 'gave' me a Minolta 100mm macro (fungi photography here I come!), a Minolta 28-75mm f2.8D (gorgeous), and a beautiful Minolta 85mm f1.4.

See what I mean about being able to get good glass for the Sony A-Mount system! There's no way I could afford to get the equivalent lenses for my Olympus - or any other system, for that matter. I feel very blessed, and very spoilt. But I can't lie, I'm also now a little confused.

No.99. Sony a99 with Minolta 100-400mm APO. f/6.3 @ 1/800th, ISO 640

I've written before on this blog about how much I enjoy using the Sony a99. It's a full-frame beast of a camera, with a tonne of great features, and is a joy to use. But, (there's that but) I've also said that it isn't a camera body that I could base a system around, given that it's had a lot of professional use and is certainly nearing the end of its rated lifespan. So I would need to get another, lighter used a99, or similar, to seriously consider it as my new system going forward.

And there in lies the rub.

For some reason, Sony users here in New Zealand who have mint condition a99's, expect ridiculous prices for them. Far more (and I mean FAR more) than I would expect to have to pay for one. I know they are a good camera, but come on people...

And it doesn't stop their either. I would also consider getting an a77 - their top A-mount APSC body, if not for the fact that it too tends to fetch crazy-stupid prices on the secondhand market. What is it with these Sony users?

No.54. Sony a99 with Sigma 180mm macro. f/4 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200 

I guess I'll just have to bide my time and wait for something to come along at the right price? I'm sure it will? 

And even though the Sony A-Mount is a 'dead-end' (discontinued a year ago by Sony), for me it's practically the ideal camera system. I love the weight and feel of a traditional DSLR, but I also really love the 'new' technology that includes electronic viewfinders. The Sony SLT (single lens translucent) technology has both.

I think at this point I'd be crazy not to be thinking about going down the Sony A-Mount route. With my Olympus E-M1, I have the camera body and two Panasonic kit lenses. That's it. With the Sony A-Mount, I have the full-frame a99 (admittedly on its last legs), a Minolta 28-75mm f/2.8D, Minolta 24-105mm f/3.5-4.5D, Minolta 16mm f/2.8 fisheye, Minolta 50mm f/2.8 macro, Minolta 100mm f/2.8 macro, Sigma 180mm f/3.5 macro, Minolta 100-400mm f/4.5-6.7 Apo, and last, but by no means least, a Minolta 85mm f1.4. See what I mean.

If I sell my Olympus E-M1 kit, I still won't have enough for a used a77 or a99. Not without selling some other gear, or subsidising the purchase some other way. Like getting money from doing some photography. Which I will be doing shortly 😄

BTW - my next post will be about my day spent using the a99 and various lenses to actually take the street race images that accompany this post. It was an enlightening experience. But that's a story for next time...

More Landscapes with the Sony a99

I'm really starting to enjoy using the Sony SLT cameras - in particular the a99 (my a57 is on its way). So when my wife said she had an appointment on Wednesday night and I needed to be out of the house, I didn't need telling twice!

The day was gloriously fine and hot, the clouds were puffy and white, and the chances of a colourful sunset looked very promising. In the weekend I had gone to Motukiekie Beach along the coast road (see post here) but the sunset never eventuated. Still got some great shots though. On the way to Motukiekie, I almost stopped at the beach before there, at Rapahoe. At low tide you can get some fantastic reflections in the wet sand and some great views of the coast. So that was my destination this time around..

Rapahoe Beach jetty posts. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G. f/11 @ 1/13th, ISO 50

I got to the beach fairly early - at 7.30pm. Sunset was another hour away, and the setting sun was very bright. It also seemed to always be pointed directly into the lens from where I wanted to shoot from!

Recently (within the last year or so), some old jetty posts have become uncovered on the beach, and I had been meaning to photograph them for a while. I've been going to Rapahoe beach for about twenty years to take photos, so these recently(ish) uncovered old jetty posts are a very exciting and welcome addition. On my previous visits, I seem to have timed it all wrong - with the posts either completely submerged in the high tide, or left high and dry during low tide. This time, however, I was in luck. I arrived on the out-going tide, with two hours to go before low tide. Perfect timing. Now I just had to wait for the perfect light 😊

Rapahoe Bridge. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G. f/8 @ 1/20th, ISO 100 + polariser

Since I had some time to kill before the main attraction, I decided to head away from the sun, down the beach, towards a bridge I have photographed before. The light was racking down the beach and through the bridge beautifully and the polariser on the lens really made the white clouds 'pop'. The colours coming out of the Sony a99 24mp full-frame sensor are just gorgeous, and the files are incredibly robust. Both shadow and highlight detail recovery is amazing as long as you have a well-exposed image.

Old jetty posts, Rapahoe Beach. Sony a99 with 17-35mm f/3.5 G. f/11 @ 1/6th sec, ISO 50

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - the a99 is a joy to shoot landscape images with. The articulating LCD screen is clear, bright, and can be placed in the perfect position no matter your shooting scenario. For most of my landscape images - shot in 'landscape' orientation on a tripod, I lift the LCD screen up, out, and over - angled towards me on the top of the camera's viewfinder - for almost a top-down medium-format hasselblady type of shooting experience. Just wonderful. The articulation of the a99 screen has defined for me what a rear screen is capable of, and it will be very difficult to go back to one that is less flexible. Might just have to save my pennies for an a99 on my own! Yes, it really is that good.

Rapahoe Beach Sunset. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G. f/11 @ 1/8th sec, ISO 50

The above image is very similar in composition to the first image in this post. But what a difference an hour makes in terms of the lighting! There was still quite a lot of strong side-lighting coming from the setting sun to the right, but the sensor has captured plenty of detail. I was able to selectively darken the right side of the image to match the left side, with a gradient adjustment in lightroom. Once again, the richness of colour and detail coming off the 24MP sensor at ISO 50 is astounding. And I'm finding that, very much like the Fuji's X-Trans sensor, the sensor in the Sony a99 gives a very 'filmic' look. It's not overly digital feeling. The images have a subtle softness to them (although they are plenty sharp and crisp enough) that doesn't scream 'digital'. And I like it - a lot.

Rapahoe Jetty Posts, Sunset. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm G. f/11 @ 2 secs, ISO 50.

This final image sums up the night, and the Sony a99, perfectly. It sums up the night because it has a beautiful calm, stillness to the image - which is exactly how I felt while I was there. It was a great night shooting, and has gone a long way to reviving my landscape juices...

It sums up the a99 because it's an image that I wasn't convinced I was going to get away with. And yet the a99's sensor has handled it brilliantly. To get any definition in the sunset area of the sky, I had to under-expose by two stops. As a result, the posts were completely silhouetted in the viewfinder, and in the RAW image as it appeared in Lightroom. I had basically resigned myself to a silhouette image, with the whole left-side of the composition in complete darkness. But I also took the image to see what would happen, and how much latitude I did actually have in post-processing.

I started moving the Shadows slider to the right, to open up the shadow areas, and the colours and detail of the posts magically started to appear. This in itself is fantastic. But at ISO 50, it is also so 'clean' and noise-free.

Yes, if you can't tell, I am thoroughly enjoying using the Sony a99 as a landscape camera. I also think that the amazing glass of the Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G is in no small way a contributing factor to the wonderful images it is producing. I am looking forward to getting my a57 as well, but I am also preparing myself for a little bit of a let-down, since it is certainly not in the a99's league. 

But I knew this, and I can't afford an a99 (yet). But I am plotting... and hoping... and dreaming... that an a99ii might be somewhere in my future. We can but dream.

Landscapes with the Sony a99

My Olympus camera gear is off to Photo & Video in Christchurch to be appraised for a trade-in, and I'm now almost 100% sure that my next system will be Sony. Wow!

Spiney rock formation, Motukiekie Beach.
Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/16 @ 1/6th, ISO 50. + Polariser

To mentally prepare myself for the transition, I decided to go out this weekend (as I write this) with the Sony a99 full-frame SLT camera and Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 lens to take some landscape photos. We have had some gorgeous sunsets here on the West Coast recently, and I was hoping the same would be true of this evening. 

Alas, it wasn't to be, with no clouds in the sky and no real colour to speak of. Just flat open skies all along the horizon. Oh well, never mind. At least sunset coincided with low tide (both happened at 8.30pm), so I was able to get right out among the rocks and take some interesting rockscapes.

Motukiekie Rockscape. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/11 @ 1/6th, ISO 50 + Polariser

I've said it before, and I'll say it again... the a99 is a joy to use for landscape photography. Yes, it's bigger and heavier than my Olympus E-M1 was (even with grip attached), and the Minolta 17-35mm lens is no lightweight either. But it's also one of the lighter DSLR-style full-frame cameras you can get, and it really wasn't an issue carrying it - along with a couple other lenses, in my Crumpler messenger-style camera bag. I would, however, like to get a camera backpack to use instead of the Messenger bag, especially if I'm going on a longer walk with my camera gear.

But for this trip, the messenger bag worked fine (Crumpler's 6 Million Dollar Home), and I even took my lighter Manfrotto travel tripod instead of my heavier Slik that I usually take when using the full-frame camera. The Manfrotto actually worked fine, and I always felt the camera had a stable platform. It might have been different on a windy day, but fortunately this evening there wasn't a breath of wind to worry about.

Motukiekie Rockscape 2
Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm

Unfortunately this meant that the mosquitos were out in force! Little blood-sucking vermin. They really do ruin a great evening out photographing! For some reason they really love the taste of me, and I always get swarmed whenever they are around (must be my animal magnetism 😂). Very unpleasant. 

I try not to hang-around in the one spot for too long so that they don't all get the chance to converge. This can mean that I don't take my time composing an image as long as I should, because I just want to keep moving and get away from the little buggers! But fortunately the Sony a99 is very quick to set-up, and the vari-angle LCD screen makes it a breeze to see your image no matter how you have the camera positioned. It really is the best rotating  LCD screen I've ever used. Unfortunately I don't think that the a57's back panel LCD screen is as flexible!? Shame.

Because the a99 has most of its important functions mapped to a button or dial on the body of the camera, changing settings is also very quick. The 'Function' button also acts as a 'quick' menu, allowing you to change settings on the fly. I usually shoot most of my images in Apeture priority, so I have the aperture value set to change with the front dial on the camera, while exposure compensation is mapped to the rear dial. I let the camera take care of the shutter speed, and the ISO was set to the smallest native ISO the a99 shoots - an impressive 50 ISO. It's amazing to be able to shoot at these lower ISO's on a digital camera, since I'm used to a native ISO 200 on my Olympus E-M1. ISO 50 on the Sony a99 is very clean, and impressively 'smooth'.

Motukiekie low tide. Sony a99 with 17-35mm. f/11 @ 1/2sec, ISO 50 + Polariser (35mm fov)

The 24MP files that come off of this Sony full-frame sensor are just drop-dead gorgeous! Not to mention the dynamic range that the sensor can capture. DXO puts it on par with the likes of the Nikon D3x and the (much) newer Canon EOS R6. That's pretty impressive for a 10 year old camera! 

In the image above, I have actually processed it to look more like a silhouette - darkening the highlights and shadows. I wanted a more dramatic look to the image, although in reality, the sensor has captured much more detail in the shadows. And at ISO 50 it's very clean, noise-free detail.

Motukiekie low tide silhouette. Sony a99 with 17-35mm. f/11 @ 5 secs, ISO 50 + polariser

Again , more detail was captured in the shadows than is showing up here. In fact, I can see more detail in the image when it is opened in Photoshop. The internet compression isn't doing this image any favours. It does have the 'mood' I was going for though, and the colours are very faithfully reproduced. This is pretty much exactly what I saw with my own eyes when I was there.

Unfortunately, as mentioned above, the sunset never really kicked-off, and with no clouds to catch the colour that was there, the photo doesn't have the kind of impact I was after. Just imagine the same scene with big orange clouds reflected in that mirror-like reflection of the water. Would have been epic! Oh well, there's always next time I guess.

Motukiekie beach sunset. Sony a99 with 17-35mm. f/11 @ 8 secs, ISO 50 + polariser

This was my last shot of the night, taken quickly as I trudged my way back to the car to head home. I was tired, had the images I thought I was going to get for the evening, and simply looked behind me as I was walking along the beach. I begrudgingly got all my gear back out in the semi-dark because I thought it was 'kinda nice', and took one shot. Turns out it's probably my favourite shot of the night. Lol

I am still struggling with motivation to go out and take landscape photos of my local area, even though I enjoyed myself once I was there (apart from those damn mosquitoes). I am still hoping that an injection of 'new' gear will help in this regard, and I am looking forward to getting the a57 and reviewing the camera and lenses that I have. If nothing else, reviewing gear actually gets me out photographing and making images. And if they turn out anything like the photos I took at Motukiekie Beach with the a99, then that's got to be a good thing...

Messing around with macro

I've been on holiday for most of the start of January 2022 (yay!), spending time in Christchurch, house (and dog) sitting for my sister-in-law and her family. Since we were staying for a while, we took a lot of stuff with us (the golf clubs and trundler came), so I decided not to take both the Olympus and Sony camera systems I'm currently using.

I would have opted for the Sony a99 and 50mm macro - since I'm trying to make macro my new thing - but I also knew that I was going to get the opportunity to shoot a family portrait while we were over in Christchurch (of said sister-in-law's family). So I opted for the Olympus E-M1 with 12-35mm f2.8 instead.

Oh Bee-have! Olympus E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/4 @ 1/320th, ISO 200

The Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm has no psuedo-macro features like those found on the Olympus 12-50mm EZ lens, and it's closest focusing distance is only 25cm. So not a fantastic macro performer. All the photos you see in this post, taken on the 12-35mm, are severe crops from the original shot, so that the subject (the 2cm bee) can fill-the-frame. This means that the original 12 megapixel file gets reduced to only around 1 megapixel with the final crop. Not ideal. But good enough when viewed on-line. 

Hard at Work. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8. f/5 @ 1/640th, ISO 400

And I must say, that overall I'm very pleased with the final results (despite the small file size). I spent a very pleasant hour in a park in Rangiora, chasing bees around the flower gardens, and came away with some half-decent images. The E-M1 was quick to focus, using the central focusing point in single-autofocus mode, and simply firing away with reasonable shutter speeds, hoping to freeze the action (boy do bees move fast).

The original capture of the above crop is shown on the left, to give an indication of how much cropping has taken place. And yes, it is a lot. I'm not going to be printing any of these at  A3 (or probably even at A4) sizes anytime soon.

This is certainly one of the down-sides to using a smaller micro four thirds sensor with a 'standard' lens and trying to come up with decent 'macro' looking images. Really you're just hoping for an exceptionally sharp result that you can then blow up to exorbitant proportions and pass-off as a macro image.

Having said all that, as I commented earlier, I am reasonably happy with the results. The Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 is a very sharp lens, so if you nail focus you can expect some very good results. And the benefit of using a smaller micro four thirds sensor when close-focusing is the greater depth of field you get with smaller apertures. f/4 on the E-M1 gives an equivalent dof of f/8 with full-frame, but allows for the extra light, and faster shutter speeds. So that's a win.

'As busy as a....' Olympus E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/5 @ 1/1000th, ISO 400

To get the bee as sharp as possible from such a big enlargement, I've opted for some selective sharpening techniques (just on the in-focus areas of the bee itself). It's a simple technique, but I find it very effective. And the best thing about it is that it is infinitely controllable, and selective.

Duplicate the original image in Photoshop (Ctrl+J), and then apply a High Pass Filter on the duplicate layer (Filter/Other/High Pass) with a radius of about 2. The image with turn grey, with a faint embossed outline. This is what you want. The magic happens in the next two steps.

In the blending mode for the grey layer, choose either Hard Light or Vivid Light. Then add a layer mask and fill the mask with black. This effectively hides the sharpening that you've applied with the blending mode. Choose a soft brush, make sure that the colour is white, and then paint over the areas where you want to reveal the sharpening. You can build this sharpening up gradually over different areas by lowering the opacity of the brush, and you can also lower the opacity of the layer if you feel that the final result is still too strong? And there you go - a nice sharp bee without adding any sharpness or artifacts to the background.

Time for a rest. Sony a99 with Minolta 50mm macro. f/5 @ 1/640th, ISO 400

My final image was taken just recently, once we got back from our trip to Christchurch and were on a local bush walk. This time I did decide to take the Sony a99 and dedicated 50mm macro instead. 

The difference in file size is day and night. Because I was able to use the dedicated macro lens, and get in fairly close to the dragonfly, there is almost no cropping required from the original file. I could print this A3 no problem.

Unfortunately, it's a bit of a grab shot, and I used autofocus, which locked on to the dragonfly's back and didn't quite nail critical focus on the head. In that regards, it's a failure as a macro image. Using the 50mm macro on the full-frame camera has meant that I had to get in very close to the insect - too close for it's comfort - and it flew away fairly quickly. A 100mm macro would afford a little more 'breathing' space, and that's certainly what I would opt for if I was to get a dedicated macro lens for my E-M1 (the 60mm Olympus macro is a 120mm full-frame equivalent field of view).

Still, it's an ok image - especially when viewed on-line - and it's still all a learning curve for me and macro. I'm getting the feeling that you have to shoot A LOT of images just to nail one or two keepers, especially when small flying insects are involved!?

All-in-all some OK early attempts, and lots of learning for the future. That's got to be worth my while wouldn't you say?

Possible gear for macro

In my last post I discussed my recently discovered enthusiasm for fungi (and therefore macro) photography. I also mentioned that I had briefly dabbled in this very genre last year - first with the Sony a99 and then with my Olympus OM-D E-M1.

Fungi photography with the Olympus OM-D E-M1

I still have both systems available to me, so now that I have decided to pursue this style of photography a bit more seriously in 2022, I have a few decisions to make around the type of gear I will need going forward.

First option is to stick with my micro four thirds system, and add to it, to cover macro photography. To do this 'seriously', I would be looking at purchasing the Olympus 60mm f2.8 macro lens.

By all accounts (I've never even held one), the M Zuiko 60mm macro lens is a stellar lens, offering waterproofing and 1:1 magnification. It certainly looks the part - is apparently tack sharp (I don't doubt it) - and would balance perfectly on my E-M1.

Olympus do offer a 30mm f3.5 macro lens as well, but it's not weather sealed, doesn't go to 1:1 magnification - and is a 60mm equivalent full-frame focal length, which isn't as conducive to shooting skittery insects (since you have to get physically closer with the lens). On the positive side, it's a bit cheaper than the 60mm ($450NZ for the 30mm and $600NZ for the 60mm) - but that seems to me to be the only real positive. I'd rather spend the extra for the 60mm (120mm full frame focal length equivalent) than 'settle' for the 30mm and wish I had the 60mm, especially if I am really serious about pursuing macro fungi photography.

The second option is to move to the Sony A-mount system, since I already have access to a 50mm macro for Sony A-mount (it's actually a Minolta AF lens), as well as a few other lenses. The Sony a99 I have at the moment is being borrowed from a friend, together with the 50mm macro, a fisheye, standard zoom and wide angle zoom - so I've got the lenses pretty well covered. I will have to give the a99 back at some stage, but I'm pretty sure I can keep the 50mm macro long-term, since I know the guy I borrowed it from also has a 100mm macro that he uses instead.

If I sold my E-M1 with all accessories and lenses, I could possibly get about $1k (maybe). With that sort of money I could pick up a used Sony SLT 65v or a55 and have a decent chunk of change left over for spare batteries and other accessories if required.

This option has some appeal, not withstanding the fact that the dedicated 50mm macro would get me up and running straight away with a macro lens. If I sold my Olympus gear, I would actually end up in the black, even after purchasing a Sony body. Whereas if I have to wait to be able to afford an Olympus 60mm lens - even secondhand (if one comes up for sale) - it will probably be 2024 before I can actually afford one! Damn...

There is, however, a third option. I already have the a-mount 50mm macro lens - why don't I just adapt it to fit the Olympus E-M1? A mount adapter like the one shown here, will cost me around $45NZ - and viola, a dedicated macro lens for my E-M1.

Yes, this means that the macro lens will be manual focus only - but that's par for the course with macro photography anyway. So no great loss there. And, when fitted to my micro four thirds camera, the Minolta 50mm macro lens becomes a 100mm macro lens focal length equivalent - again great news for a comfortable distance to subject when shooting. So option three is sounding like a win-win.

It also means that I can continue to use my E-M1, which has a whole host of advantages when using it for macro photography. There is greater depth of field when using the smaller sensor - which is helpful for keeping very small areas in sharp focus at lower apertures. It has crazy-good in-body image stabilisation - again very helpful when shooting insects handheld. The body is weather sealed (excellent when out in damp forest conditions), it's very light-weight and portable (never a bad thing), has focus peaking and manual focus magnification aids - and also has built-in focus bracketing and focus stacking - in camera! This camera was built for macro photography! Are you serious!!!! Option three baby! I love option three!

In all seriousness, sticking with the Olympus E-M1 and adapting the Minolta 50mm macro to it does seem like the perfect solution - at least until I can afford that 60mm M Zuiko. For $45NZ I'll be up and running with an excellent macro system, and I may even find that I don't need the 60mm Olympus lens at all?

It will also mean that I can use the Mecablitz flashgun I have for the Olympus in an off-camera wireless flash setup, or I could keep it even simpler and use the Godox LED cube (pictured opposite). Or both.

I've looked into purchasing the a-mount to micro 4/3 adapter from a local retailer, and they can have one for me by the end of February. In the meantime, I still have the Sony a99 and 50mm Minolta macro lens, and I'll  use that combination until the adapter for the E-M1 arrives. That will give me a month to see if I really am serious about this macro-fungi thing - and a month to fall in love with the Sony A-Mount system and change my mind about staying with Olympus! 😉  Me - change my mind? Never!

1000 steps Lockdown Challenge

Like a good portion of the world's population, here in New Zealand we are currently in Lockdown (as I write this) due to the Delta variant of COVID-19. It may be a few weeks more until regulations are relaxed enough for the general population to start mixing and mingling again. Until then, we stay in our 'bubbles', work from home, and go out only to get groceries, or exercise in our own local area.

Shipwreck at Sunset. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/11 @ 3secs, ISO 400 with ND64

Under the guise of 'exercise', I decided that this time around I would complete a challenge that was circulating a year ago, during the first COVID worldwide Lockdown. Called the '1000 Steps Challenge', it's pretty self-explanatory. Take 1000 steps from your front door, and wherever you end up at the end of those 1000 steps is where you take a photo from. Simple.

At the end of 1000 steps. Photo: Joanna Lorimer, iPhone SE

My wife and I walk around our neighborhood almost daily, so I had a pretty good idea where I might end up after 1000 steps. There is an old shipwreck that emerges on our local beach depending on the weather, tides and time of year. I've seen it from a distance the last few weeks, so I knew that enough of it had emerged to make a good photo. And, if my calculations were right (they were), it would take me about 1000 steps to get there. All I needed were the right weather conditions (outgoing tide and a clear evening) and the challenge was on!

In my last post I wrote about getting my OM-D E-M1 back from repair. I was very excited, and very keen to start shooting with it, using my newly acquired Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f2.8 Power OIS. So that's what I took along with me on the photo walk challenge, right?

Nope. I decided, instead, to use the Sony a99 that I still have 'on-loan' from a friend (thanks Stew). I took this for a couple of reasons. First, I loaned it with the intended purpose of trying it out, and I haven't yet done so. I've only really used it a couple of times. So I thought it was time to actually start getting to grips with the a99 in a real 'out-in-the-field' type landscape test.

And second, I thought that I might like to go quite wide (turns out I was wrong), and use the Minolta 17-35mm f3.5 G lens on the a99, at the wider 17mm end. Since the a99 uses a full frame digital sensor, I was going to be able to utilise the full 17mm ultra-wide focal length of the lens. It's also considered a very sharp, premium landscape lens for the Sony/Minolta system. What landscape photographer in their right mind wouldn't want to try that kind of combination out?

So that's what I decided to take with me to complete the 1000 Steps Lockdown Challenge. And I'm glad that I did, although I didn't end up shooting at the ultra-wide 17mm end of the lens. In fact, due to the level of the outgoing tide, I shot almost exclusively at the 35mm end of the lens - something I could have easily done with my E-M1. Oh well, nevermind....

Abandoned Ship. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm f3.5 G. f/11 @ 1.3secs, ISO 400. ND64

How did the Sony a99 and Minolta 17-35mm f3.5G combination perform? In a word, outstandingly. It is, as I've already suggested, a fantastic landscape photography kit. I'd be more than happy to lug it around with me to capture all of my landscape photography. It's a superbly capable system, that captures detailed images, with some features that I really appreciate.

First the lens. The Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 G was one of Minolta's premium pro-level 'G' lenses. Something I guess Sony continued with their 'G' master range of premium lenses.

As a pro level lens, the 17-35mm has; a constant aperture of f/3.5, uses internal focusing, has aspherical lenses and uses anomalous dispersion (AD) glass elements to control distortion (somewhat), comes with a large (plastic) petal lens hood, and is solidly constructed. Autofocus on the a99 is decently fast - certainly more than fast enough for an ultra-wide landscape lens, and seems very accurate from the images I have taken with it so far. The lens also has a focus hold button, which can be re-programmed to a depth of field button if you would prefer. Filter size is 77mm - fairly large, but fortunately a filter size that I have a decent selection of filters for. The front element does not rotate when focusing, making it ideal for using polarisers or filter systems. All very positive.

Are there things I don't like about the lens? Well, for a start, it's definitely a full-frame lens. Not that it won't work in APS-C camera bodies, because it certainly will. But why would you, when on an APS-C camera it has a fairly limited 25.5 to 52.5mm focal range (in full frame terms)? I would never consider using this on an APS-C camera as a general carry-around lens. Because of the limited focal range just mentioned, and because of the other negative factor of this lens - its weight.

At 600grams the 17-35mm is a bit of a chunky-monkey. Which is not really surprising considering it's large front element, metal construction and solid build. It's also not weather sealed, which is a bit of a glaring omission for a lens that was most likely targeted at landscape photographers. For an extra few dollars in manufacturing costs, I can't for the life of me understand why Minolta didn't weather-seal this lens? Especially since it was rather pricey when it was first released (over $2200US in today's dollars).

It is also said to have very soft corners at all focal lengths wide-open at f3.5. I say 'said to have', because I haven't tested this myself. As a landscape lens, I don't imagine I'll ever shoot it wide open. And at f/8 to f/11, where I would most often likely to be with this lens, the corners look plenty sharp enough for me.

The other area where the lens is often reported to have a few 'issues' is in flaring and ghosting. With a 77mm filter thread, there's a lot of real estate on that front element, so it may not be surprising that flare can be an issue with the lens.

Having said that, the image opposite (and several others on the night) was obviously taken directly into the sun (something I really don't do all that often) and stopped down to f/22 to produce the starburst. I'm actually pleasantly surprised at the results. And these were taken with no lens hood attached. Yes, there is a little ghosting in the image - but this is a pretty extreme example, and I think it actually handled ghosting extremely well. And as for flaring? Again, not so much. I'm more than happy with the results, shooting directly into the sun - again, not something I do often.

These results may, or may not have anything to do with Minolta apparently updating the front element coatings on later models of this lens. Earlier models are said to have an orange tint, while later coatings were more bluish? My copy of the lens actually looks more orange than blue, but it's also difficult to tell. But be that as it may, I'm not unhappy with either flare or ghosting from the results I've seen using this lens thus far. On the whole, I'd give the lens 4 out of 5 stars (on full frame).

Skeletal remains. Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/11 @ 2.5 secs. ISO 200 ND64

And finally, thoughts on the Sony a99.

I've talked a little about it before here, but basically it's a beast of a camera, with a beautiful 24.3MP full-frame sensor housed in a very rugged (and weather-sealed) magnesium alloy body. It is part of Sony's SLT line, which stands for Single Lens Transparent. Unlike traditional SLR digital cameras that use a prism mirror and optical viewfinder for viewing, the Sony SLT system has a semi-transparent pellicle mirror and electronic viewfinder. The semi-transparent fixed mirror diverts a portion of the incoming light to a phase-detection autofocus sensor, with the remaining light passing through to strike the digital image sensor placed directly behind. The image sensor then feeds a signal to the electronic viewfinder, so that changes in exposure can be seen 'real time' through the viewfinder.

Unlike many 'traditionalists', I actually prefer an electronic viewfinder. The amount of information it can relay, and the benefits of seeing the exposure change while composing the image, more than outweigh any perceived negative viewing experience from an optical viewfinder.

The other visual aid that I love (and I mean LOVE) on the a99 is its amazingly flexible articulating screen. There's almost no angle that this thing can't put itself in, and is certainly the most adjustable rear LCD screen I've ever used. I wish the rear screen on my OM-D E-M1 was this adjustable.

I also appreciate the ISO range of the a99, from ISO 50 all the way up to 25600. Again, I wish the E-M1 sensor was as sensitive, instead of the lowest native ISO 200.

Button placement is excellent on the a99, with a plethora of switches, dials and navigational aids placed in very convenient places. Minolta placed a lot of control of their cameras on the outside, at the photographer's fingertips, and Sony have carried this tradition on in their SLT range. I prefer this approach to camera design. Nikon also has this design philosophy with their DSLR's. Canon not so much... 

Battery life is decent, although with any modern digital camera, I'd carry a couple of spares with me as a matter of course. And, as befitting a flagship model, the a99 has dual card slots (SD), shoots at 10fps, a top shutter speed of 1/8000th (and down to bulb), 1200 zone evaluative metering (as well as spot), and a host of other features. Oh, and yeah, it shoots Full HD video (don't care).

What lurks beneath? Sony a99 with Minolta 17-35mm. f/11 @ 1.3secs, ISO 400. ND64 

So what's not to like? Well a few 'niggly' things stop me from falling completely head-over-heals for the Sony a99. First is the size and weight. At 733 grams, body-only, it might not be the heaviest camera ever made, but it's far from the lightest either. Add the Minolta 17-35mm lens and you are looking at 1,333 grams. Add a battery, lens hood and filter and you're probably looking at 1.5kgs. Not the end of the world, I admit. But when compared to micro four thirds there is a noticeable weight difference.

Second is the autofocus spread of the a99. It's not that great. There are 19 focus points, and even though Sony calls it a 'wide' focusing area, in reality they are all very centrally located. It's certainly nowhere near as impressive as the latest mirrorless focus offerings, where almost 100% of the viewing area is selectable. Place your subject roughly central and it won't be an issue. But forget selecting focus at the edges of the frame.

And finally, the system as a whole just feels a little bit 'clunky'. Turn the camera on, and the lens clicks, whirs and bangs into life. The same thing happens with older Minolta autofocus film cameras, since the focus motor is built into the body of the camera and comes to life every time you turn the camera on. Focus isn't what you would call deadly quick either, and it certainly isn't silent. It just feels a little 'old-school'. Which I guess, since it was simply ported across from the Minolta camera technology, is exactly what it is.

Would anything that I've mentioned above stop me from using, and enjoying the Sony a99? Of course not! At the end of the day, when you get home and download the RAW images on the computer, what you really should care about are the images it can produce. And as I hope you can see from the photos above, the images it can produce are just beautiful.

It may be a bit 'old-school', it may be a bit clunky, and it may be a bit on the 'heavy' side (please, no fat-shaming here). But everytime I use the Sony a99, I enjoy the experience immensely. In fact, I may have to stop using it. Because I think I might almost be at the point of seriously questioning my choice of camera system! 

In Memoriam of the Sony A-mount

Alas, poor Sony A-mount, I knew you well (kind of). 

Sony has recently discontinued all of their A-mount products, quietly deleting them from their website. This includes their SLT line of cameras (a-99, a-77 etc), as well as all A-mount lenses. It's a shame, but also no great surprise, since their interest in the A-mount had waned considerably over recent years.

And let's face it, Sony aren't the only culprits. The world has 'gone mirrorless'. All SLR technology is going the way of the Dodo, and I wouldn't be surprised if Nikon, and then Canon, quickly follow Sony's lead and officially end production of all DSLR's. Nikon have the new 'Z' mount for their mirrorless system, and Canon are concentrating on boosting their RF lens lineup - so their can't be much (if any) R&D being put into their 'traditional' DSLR systems anymore? Canon have already stated that there will be no 5D MkV - putting an end to their incredibly popular 5-series full frame DLSR line. Surely that does not bode well for their other DSLR products either? 

I'm not lamenting the fact, other than for pure nostalgic reasons. I've been an advocate for mirrorless systems for a long time, and am thrilled that both Nikon and Canon have finally 'got in the game' seriously. It is the future, and always was the future. We can look forward with great excitement - whilst also shedding a small tear for the past.

Not that the past is going anywhere in a hurry. The used market will remain buoyant for another 20 years at least, with DLSR cameras and lenses that photographers will be more than happy to trade, collect and use. We may even see something similar with what happened to film cameras? There may be a ten year (or so) period where, because of the new technology,  DLSR's will be seen as largely worthless and available at ridiculously low prices. Followed by a resurgence in popularity (and price) as those who were raised on mirrorless 'discover' these old gems and start using them again. Maybe? Just a thought.

Surmising aside, when I heard that Sony had discontinued their A-mount products, I did come over all nostalgic-like. I have owned, and used, several Sony A-mount cameras over the years, and they were always very solid - and in some cases outstanding - performers. Case-in-point, the flagship full frame Sony a-99, which I just happen to have 'on loan' from a friend at the moment. An amazingly capable full frame DLSR - built like a tank and a joy to use.

And then, of course, there's the extra nostalgic tug of Sony's association with Minolta - a camera company that I truly loved. The A-mount was, of course, actually a re-branded Minolta M-mount, with all of Minolta's AF lenses being fully compatible with Sony DSLR's. With Sony's discontinuation of all things A-mount, all vestiges of the old Minolta camera company are now truly dead. And that really does sadden me.

Yet as I said earlier, I have moved on to mirrorless, currently with the Olympus OM-D EM1. But since I had the Sony a-99 kicking around, and with my thoughts freshly on the news of the A-mount demise, I decided to pay homage to the A-mount (and Minolta) and take the a-99 out for one final spin.

Coal Creek Falls. Sony a-99 with Minolta 17-35mm. 1/5th sec @ f8, ISO 64. Polarising filter

It was a very dull, overcast morning, so I decided to once again head out to my local waterfall. It's Autumn here in NZ as I write this, and the fungi are out in full force. Since I had a Minolta 17-35mm ultra-wide, and a Minolta 50mm macro as my two lenses, what better place to visit than the native bush.

Growth. Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. 1/5th sec @ f5.6, ISO 64

I'm not all that used to using a macro lens, so it took a while to figure out the process.. Eventually I realised that if I set the camera up on the tripod, and then manually focused, I could get better results than using the AF. Manually focus was a breeze, since the a-99 has a 'peaking' feature which automatically activates when you switch to manual focus. The 'in-focus' areas are indicated with a bright red outline so you can clearly and confidently set your focus. This feature isn't unique to the Sony's (it's also available on my Olympus EM1), but it's still nice to see it on the a-99.

 

Fungus stack. Sony a-99 with 50mm macro. 1 sec @ f22, ISO 800 

I said earlier that the fungus would be out in force this time of year, and I wasn't disappointed. They were everywhere, in all shapes and sizes, and I could have spent all day photographing them. It was a lot of fun, and not my normal subject matter. I enjoyed using the macro lens, and as already stated, the a-99 made this process very easy. 

Not only was peaking for sharpness helpful, but the fully articulating 3" screen was also greatly appreciated. It's one of the best designs I've ever used for screen articulation - being able to be positioned at almost any angle. It meant that I could place the camera and tripod very low to the ground, but raise and angle the LCD screen so that I could easily compose the shot without having to lie down on the wet forest floor. If I did a lot of forest fungi photography, I would seriously consider the Sony a-99 as my main camera for its articulated screen alone.

Button Fungi. Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. 1/2sec @ f16. ISO 800

While I appreciated many of the features available on the a-99, and did thoroughly enjoy my morning out with it, there was one thing I was very aware of that I didn't enjoy - the size (and weight). I know people harp on about this as the main factor many switch from a DLSR to Mirrorless - but I guess there's a reason for this. In the end, it's true. And it's not just the camera body, it's all the other associated products like lenses and tripods, that go together to add on the weight.

As a fully professional DLSR, you would expect the full frame a-99 to be built like a tank. And it is. The fully magnesium alloy body weighs in at around 733 grams, which is actually one of the lighter full-frame body weights. The Canon 5D MkIV, for example, weighs 890 grams, while the Nikon D850 is a whopping 915 grams. And this is without battery and lenses mounted. In comparison, my Olympus OM-D EM1 weighs 497 grams, including the battery. And the lenses offer even a greater weight saving.

Between two ferns. Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. 1/5th sec @ f/16. ISO 800

Since I was taking the a-99, and knew I would have to position it in some fairly precarious angles, I also decided I needed my largest (and most heaviest) tripod. After a morning of lugging the camera and tripod and lenses around the forest, I must admit I was wishing I had my Olympus gear instead. And I do plan to go back and take some more fungi images with my Olympus gear. Next time to try out the 'psuedo' macro on the 12-50mm f3.5/6.3 EZ lens.

Depth of field test. Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. Left: f/11. Right f/4

For most of the morning, since I was shooting with a macro lens, I set a fairly small aperture so I could get as much depth of field as possible. Around f/11 to f/16 was the norm, and sometimes even going up to f/22. This helped to keep most things in the image in sharp focus.

But there were also times when I played around with a narrower depth of field for a little more creative effect. The above example shows how aperture value can greatly effect the look and feel of an image when you are close-focusing with a macro lens.

Fly Agaric (amanita muscaria). Sony a-99 with Minolta 50mm macro. 1/13th sec @ f/5.6. ISO 400

Despite what I said earlier in regards to the weight of the a-99, plus lenses, plus tripod, I did enjoy my morning out shooting fungi in the forest with the camera. It has several features that make it ideal for this type of photography - not to mention the beautiful 24mp images that it produces. But then again, even that feels a little 'overkill' for me - though I realise that's almost blasphemous to say in this age of full-frame high-megapixel camera worship.

But for me, at least, it's true. I've said so on this blog over and over again. I don't need 20+ megapixels, and I strongly suspect you don't either. 12mp is probably more than enough for most use-cases, and yes, that includes large billboards.

So as I said right at the beginning of this post, I'm not lamenting the demise of Sony's A-mount. Although I realise that maybe some will. But probably not many. Most have probably already moved on to Sony E-mount, or Nikon Z, or Canon RF, or (perish the thought) micro four thirds.

And for those who do still want to stay with A-mount, maybe it's actually good news? Maybe the prices on the secondhand market will come down as people sell off their 'outdated' gear - just as they did in the days of film switching to digital?

Whatever happens, I'm glad we have the Sony/Minolta A-mount equipment that we can use for many, many years to come. No, there won't be any new releases. But that a-99, or a-77, or a-300 and associated lenses that you have will still work for the foreseeable future, and may even be serviceable by the right camera technician. So enjoy them while you can. And thanks, Sony, for the great products that bear the A-mount name. It was/is a great system.