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! 

Olympus OM-D E-M1 fixed

Horray! My E-M1 is back from being repaired, and is fully functional once again! Yay!!! I'm super excited to have it back (can you tell?).

Homeward bound. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8.  f/6.3 @ 1/640th, ISO 200

I'm even more excited to have it back so that I can now, finally, use it with the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 lens that I purchased recently. The lens arrived while my camera was away getting repaired, so I haven't been able to shoot with it yet. But that all changed yesterday (as I write this), when we made an emergency trip back home to Greymouth from Christchurch. 

Emergency trip you say? Yes, I do. Let me explain...

My wife and I had traveled to Christchurch the previous weekend, to meet our beautiful new baby grand daughter, Arabella. I had planned to stay for a week (and had taken the week off from work), while my wife was going to stay on a bit longer to help our daughter and her partner with looking after their two-and-a-half year old as well as the new baby.

But then COVID hit New Zealand again. And we went into a nation-wide Lockdown. The Delta variant of the virus was picked up in Auckland, but the people had traveled extensively, so the whole of New Zealand went into Lockdown.

Southern Alps Panorama. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/800th, ISO 200

Initially, the South Island where we live, was placed into Lockdown for three days (until midnight Friday), with a 48hr window of opportunity from the Tuesday when Lockdown began for people who were away from their places of residence (that would be my wife and I visiting in Christchurch), to get back home.

Adding to the urgency (if that wasn't enough), was the fact that it also happens to be winter in New Zealand. The roads that we needed to travel on to make it back home are often closed due to snow and ice. A quick check of the long-range forecast indicated that more snow was indeed likely over the next few days, so we had a very narrow window of opportunity to return home - or remain in Lockdown at our daughters in Christchurch! Most people think that this is only the beginning of a larger, extended Lockdown period. So we made the decision to pack-up immediately and both head home.

Canterbury hills dusting. E-M1 with Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8. f/6.3 @ 1/320th, ISO 200

In one sense, this is very bad timing. I still had three days to go of my time with our new grand daughter, and my wife was intending on staying longer. But in another sense (getting back to my camera), the timing was perfect. I had an email from Greg at Photo and Video on Monday afternoon telling me that the camera was back from repair, and was I still around to collect it. Of course I jumped in the car and went straight there, delighted that it had been repaired and I just happened to be in Christchurch to collect it. And the very next day, the country went into Lockdown. If I'd decided to wait until the next day to collect it, then it would have been too late.

One-lane Bridge ahead. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/200th, ISO 200

Of course I would of rather had the camera, been in Christchurch for another few days, came back when originally intended, and not been in Lockdown! But going into Lockdown knowing that my repaired camera was in Christchurch, just sitting there, and couldn't get to me, would have been torture! Fortunately that's not the case.

The repair slip from A&E Electronics states that they 'dismantled removed and replaced rear encoder dial', which is exactly what I thought they would do. Total cost of repair - $250.87. Photo & Video split the costs with me (which they didn't have to do) so I payed $125.00 NZ for a repaired rear dial on an E-M1. Fingers crossed that it stays repaired, and that I have no more issues with it.

I am thrilled that I have it back. I am delighted that it's now repaired. And I do love using it. But now there's that little niggle....

Lake Pearson, Winter. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/320th, ISO 200 

I had assumed that I would get to try out the Panasonic Lumix lens in Christchurch, with portraits of my grandson and grand daughter, at the f2.8 range. Which it would have been brilliant for. But again, the best laid plans...

Instead, I got to use it on the trip home to the West Coast, through Canterbury, and some stunningly beautiful evening landscapes. And I ain't complaining! On a good day (which fortunately this was) the landscape in winter is simply spectacular. The light isn't too harsh, the white mountains are crisp and clear against the blue sky, and the views are gorgeous.

I think the photo above - 'Lake Pearson, Winter' is my favourite from the trip. I love the play of light and shadow through the hills, the way the lake glows blue from the sky, and of course the white dusting of snow on the surrounding hills, perfectly lit by the early evening light.

Alpine glow. OM-D E-M1 with Panasonic 45-150mm. f/6.3 @ 1/250th, ISO 200

Most of the images shot on the trip home were taken with the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8. For one, I wanted to test the lens out for the first time. And two, the scenery fits the wider 24mm end of the lenses focal length. But for some - as in the image above - I needed to zoom in closer on the distant mountains to achieve the composition I was after. For this, I used the only lens that I kept when I was selling lenses to buy the 12-35mm - the Panasonic 45-150mm f/4-5.6. With the 12-35mm and the 45-150mm I have an excellent combination of small, light (relatively speaking) lenses with a focal range from 24 to 300mm (basically). I would like to get the 35-100mm f2.8 Panasonic Lumix at a later date, as it's the prefect compliment to the 12-35mm. But that's probably a lot later down the track. If I stick with micro four thirds?

It's too early to give a definitive answer on whether I like the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 or not, and whether it was worth selling almost all my other lenses for. Early indication of IQ is very promising, although I don't think I enjoy using it as much as I enjoyed the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 pro. But as I said, it's very early days.

Now that I have my E-M1 back from repair (woo-hoo), and some time to really try out the 12-35mm f2.8 (thanks to Lockdown), expect a further analysis of this lens soon. Thanks for reading, and stay safe everyone.

Oh, and by-the-way... Happy World Photography Day! 📸

The limitation of 6 megapixels

I am still waiting to hear back from the camera store about my E-M1 repair (what, me impatient? Never!). I am really hoping that it coincides with our upcoming trip to Christchurch to meet our new grandchild because a) it would be very convenient to pick it up then, and b) I really want a camera to photograph the new edition to our family! And to make matters worse (or better I guess, depending on how you care to look at it), my Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 G lens has now arrived. Yay! Except I don't have a camera to try it out with. Aarrgghh!

Greymouth wharf from Cobden. Nikon D70 with Nikkor 18-55mm. f/8 @ 1/400th, ISO 200

In the meantime, though, I am still using my wife's Nikon D70. And I'm still enjoying shooting with it. I used the camera for a few years when I switched to digital in the mid 90s, so when I pick it up now a certain amount of muscle memory kicks in, and I find it very intuitive to use. Yes, there are a couple of things that 'annoy' me (exposure compensation +/- is flipped around from what I am used to now), but overall the shooting experience is still very enjoyable. And the images still hold-up, even at 6 megapixels. With one exception... cropping.

White Heron. D70 with 18-55mm. f/5.6 @ 1/640th, ISO 200

Most weekends, my wife and I like to go for at least an hours walk together. This usually involves taking a stroll through our local Cobden Lagoon - an estuary that is home to numerous bird life. If we are lucky, one of those birds will be a beautiful white heron.

I usually take my camera on these walks, on the off-chance that something catches my eye, and I'll wan't to take a photograph of it. Most of the time the camera stays draped over my shoulder (or carried in my hand) and I never use it. But sometimes I get lucky, and a white heron (or some other worthy subject) presents itself.

That's what happened last weekend on our walk. We spotted it from across the other side of the lagoon, and from where it was wading I could tell it was very close to a bridge that we would cross eventually. Actually, it's the same bridge from which I captured the image 'Swan River' from my last post.

As we made our way over to the other side of the lagoon, and approached the bridge, I spotted the Heron again - in almost exactly the same position as when we had first seen him. He had hardly moved at all. And because we were slightly elevated up on the bridge, he seemed not to really even notice that we were there. Or if he did, he didn't seem to mind. He was only about 15 meters from us, probably the closest I have ever managed to get to a heron. And would you believe it - all I had was a standard 18-55mm lens!

The smaller image of the white heron, seen above, is the uncropped image - as close as I was able to get with the full 55mm end of the lens. As you can see, even though this was the closest I have ever got, the bird is still relatively small in the frame.

The larger image is cropped from the original. And while the bird is now a bit more prominent, it's still not filling the frame! But this was as close as I could physically get. So I knew I would have to crop in on the image later if I was going to get anything even half-way decent.

And in doing so, we run up against the D70s limiting factor - the 6MP sensor if you need to crop heavily into your image.

Curious Horses. Nikon D70 with Nikkor 18-55mm. f/5.6 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

Unfortunately, it didn't only happen once, but twice, on this particular walk. Heading home from the lagoon, we passed a paddock with some horses that I hadn't seen in there before. The lighter coloured horse especially caught my eye, and I went over to take a photo.

This scenario was even worse than the heron, since as you can see from the uncropped image at right, the horses were even further away from me, and they weren't that keen to get any closer!

So once again, I took the shot anyway - at the 55mm end of the lens (around an 80mm full-frame equivalent focal length) - knowing that I would have to crop out a lot of the image to feature my subject.

In both images, I've probably only kept around a third of the image, cropping out two-thirds. That's left me with file sizes of around 1MB - not great in terms of resolution. Enough for a sharp 5x7 print, but probably not much more.

Does that mean that the D70 is no good as a camera? No, of course it doesn't! If you don't crop the 6MP files, then you can easily print up to A3 sizes. But, if you do need to crop - heavily - then resolution (and print sizes) will suffer. Dat's a fac u'all.

Bus Barn. Nikon D70 with Nikkor 18-55mm. f/5.6 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

So what to do? Well, if I was going to be shooting a lot with the D70 (I'm not), then I would invest in a zoom lens. Something like the Nikkor 75-300mm. Then I wouldn't have had any problem filling the frame with the heron, or the horses, and I wouldn't have had to crop-in later. Thereby taking advantage of all those 6 million wonderful pixels! Easy....

And to be honest, the same should be true no matter how many megapixels your camera has. Yes, it will be easier to do a super close crop of a bird from a 50 megapixel sensor and still be able to get a decent A4 print. But should you? There is a reason why bird, wildlife and sports photographers carry around those massive 600mm lenses with them (and newsflash, it's not just to look professional). They need to get as close to their subject as possible, and fill-the-frame so they don't have to crop later on. This gives them the absolute best IQ they can get. I'm sure there is certainly some cropping going on later in post. But they certainly don't all own 100 megapixel cameras and shoot with standard lenses, thinking that they'll just crop-in super tight later on! And neither should you or I. 

I'm not advocating that we all shoot with 6 megapixel cameras and resolution be damned! Of course not. But... we also probably don't need as many megapixels as we think we do either - and we certainly shouldn't be going out with the intention of cropping out two-thirds of every photo we shoot because we couldn't/didn't get close enough. Wildlife photographer's know they will be shooting nervous animals, from a long way off, so they invest in super telephoto lenses. Comes with the territory I'm afraid. 

I'm not a wildlife photographer, and never intend to be. I do know, however, that on the odd occassion, I will want to take a telephoto image or three. That's why the only lens I kept when I was selling all the others to get the 12-35mm f2.8, was my Lumix 45-150mm. A while that's not super-telephoto by any stretch, it does equate to 300mm focal length on a full-frame system. And boy, could I have used a 300mm lens last weekend when I was photographing a white heron and some horses. Maybe next time...