Minolta Dynax / Maxxum / Alpha 7 - The ultimate film camera?

Canon F1. One of my earliest objects of desire...

There have been many (many, many, many) cameras I have lusted over in my 35+ years as a passionate photographer. As a Canon film shooter in the 1980s I dreamed of owning an F1 - and was lucky enough to own a T90 (it's a long story). A friend of mine had an autofocus Nikon F801 which I lusted after. And of course there were the flagships - the Canon EOS 1 and Nikon F4, that were always way beyond my meager budget.

But times they are a changing (thanks Bob), and most of these film cameras - even the top professional ones, can be had for peanuts today (at least that used to be the case). I've now owned many of the cameras on my wish list, including the aforementioned EOS 1 and F4. And yes, they are every bit as amazing as I knew they would be.

I also took my time moving over to digital, waiting until 2006. By then, digital cameras had been around for a few years, and we had seen the introduction of the 'affordable' Canon 300D (Rebel). Followed by the Nikon D70, the camera I ended up 'converting' to digital with.

Even as early as 2003 film cameras were quickly loosing their value, yet it would be a few more years before digital images truly surpassed those taken on film. I used those few years, in the early 2000s, to pick up some very good film gear for very reasonable prices. The system that I settled on, before switching to the Nikon D70, was Minolta. Specifically the Minolta Dynax 600si Classic. A brilliant camera, and a joy to use.

Minolta Alpha/Maxxum/Dynax 7

But as brilliant as the 600si was, the camera that I really wanted - the one that I really lusted after, was the Minolta Dynax 7. It was, to me, the ultimate expression of what a film camera of the 21st century could (and should) be. Beautifully designed, gorgeous to look at, and absolutely jam-packed with as much technology as you could cram into a camera without it actually being digital; the Minolta 7 was the height of film camera tech. But even back then, it came with a hefty price tag. 

And as I've already said, it was as close as you could get to shooting digital, without actually 'going' digital. Which, of course, everyone was. Much like the recent mirrorless vs DLSR debate (where mirrorless is obviously the future), it was obvious that film cameras were 'old tech' - even one as sophisticated as the Dynax 7. You would have been crazy to invest heavily in a film camera in the early 2000s. So I didn't. I moved over to Nikon, and never regretted the decision - even when Minolta released their digital version of the Dynax 7 (the aptly named 7D) a few years later.

What's that? A rear lcd screen on a film camera!? Yep.

I love using digital cameras, and was hooked from the moment I got the Nikon D70. The Olympus E-M1 I use now is a superb image making tool, as are all the cameras being released in the digital era.

But I will always have a special desire for film cameras. I wrote an opinion piece for an analog website a long time ago stating that; digital might be the 'heart' of photography, but film is the 'soul'. A bit pretentious maybe, but for someone 'raised' on film photography, it's in my blood (and, dare I say it, soul). 

I know, however, that there are photographers who couldn't wait to be rid of film, and have absolutely no intention of ever using it again. Not me. For me, it's a time capsule linking me back to my youth, and connecting me to the passion I felt when I first picked up a camera all those 35+ years ago. I'm not a film user because of some hipster, retro aesthetic that it can give my images. Far from it. Although if that's why you like film, then good for you. Have at it. Personally, it's more about the toys - the cameras themselves - and the possibility of fulfilling youthful dreams of actually owning and using these amazing cameras.

Which brings me back to the Minolta Alpha/Maxxum/Dynax 7. And which, from now on, I will refer to only as the Dynax 7 - since that is what it was called in Europe. Maxxum was used for the American market, and Alpha was the Asian designation (don't ask me why, and don't get me started).

Dynax 7 cutaway from Minolta brochure

So why am I writing a blog post about a camera I wished I'd owned 20 years ago? Well, long story short, a very good friend of mine has just given me a Minolta Dynax 7 as a gift (thanks Stew)! To say that I am blown away is something of an understatement. 

I knew he had found one at a local Op Shop (Thrift Store for my American friends) in a bulk load of cameras last year, and while it looked in good condition, it didn't actually work (broken shutter). We both had a good look at it to see if we could revive it, but both pronounced it dead. I commented to him at the time that it was a camera I had always wanted, and it was a shame this one was broken. He took it away with him, and to be honest, I didn't think any more of it. Until yesterday when Stew handed me the camera with a 28-105 lens attached and told me it was a gift! Mind blown.

Stewart is a professional photographer, and has been a Minolta shooter (now Sony) for as long as he has been using a camera. But he is also one of those photographer's who was very happy to see the end of film. So he is very happy to pass the Dynax 7 on to someone who will appreciate it, and actually use it. Which I most certainly will.

While one of his Sony camera's was away getting repaired, Stew sent the Dynax 7 in with it to see if it was salvageable (without pouring too much money into it). Turns out it was, and the service center managed to get the shutter mechanism working again. So now the Dynax 7 is working. Yay!

Stew also has quite a collection of old Minolta lenses - some rather exotic - which I am also fortunate enough to be able to avail myself of. Not only do I have a Dynax 7 with aforementioned 28-105mm Power Zoom, but also the use of a 50mm macro, a 16mm fisheye, and a 17-35mm which actually came with the Dynax 7 he found at the Op Shop. Quite an impressive kit - and I can't wait to use it all! 

There's one problem initially though - I don't have any film for it! I've recently sold off all my film stock, figuring that my film camera days were behind me. Damn! Now I wish I'd kept at least a couple of black and white rolls back, just on the off-chance that someone would give me my dream camera! Go figure....

I will get some film for it. And I will go out and shoot with it. Maybe with Stewart one day soon? He's just purchased a new Sony A7R 4 61MP beast, and I know he'll be itching to get out and use it when it arrives. I feel a road-trip coming on 😄 
 

I will definitely write more about my experiences with the Dynax 7, once I get around to shooting with it. There is so much ground to cover with this camera and the incredible technology Minolta built into it, that I'm sure it will span several posts and months of shooting. Can not wait. It's going to be so much fun!

Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6 lens review

As a landscape photographer, I have a tendency to shoot all my images at the wide-angle end of the focal range. When I'm photographing at a lake, a waterfall, a beach, or a sunset, I'm usually trying to fit a decent amount of the scene into the frame. As such, my Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 lens will spend 95% of its life firmly attached to my camera (until such time as I can afford a 7-14mm f/4).

But what about the other 5% of the time? Well, that's for when I need a bit more 'reach'. Something a little more in the telephoto end of the range. And it's why I kept my Panasonic 45-150mm f/4-5.6 when I was selling everything else.

Waiting for Dinner. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/5.6 @ 1/500th, ISO 800 

If you are looking for a lightweight, well-constructed, reasonably priced, and very sharp telephoto lens for your micro four thirds system, then look no more!. The Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph. Power O.I.S. lens (to give its full title), fits the bill perfectly.

How small and how light? At only 210 grams and 73mm (at the wide end - 110mm when extended for full telephoto), the lens is small and light enough to always have in your camera bag. Even the filter size for the front is a tiny 52mm, saving you money over larger - more expensive - filters.

With a focal range of 90 to 300mm in 35mm camera full-frame terms, this lens is the epitome of the 'smaller' and lighter' promise of micro four thirds - without compromising on quality.

To keep the weight down, Panasonic have used quite a bit of plastic in its construction, but there's also metal where it counts (such as the lens mount). And as stated, they haven't skimped on optical quality. The lens uses 12 elements in 9 groups. Two of these are aspherical lenses, and one is an UHR (ultra-high refractive index) lens. This means that image distortion is minimised, resulting in clearer, sharper images. Add to this Panasonic's Power O.I.S. (optical image stabilisation) built into the lens, and you have a very fully-featured lens.

Finally, the lens can often be found for as little as $300.00NZ new (as of September 2021), and obviously even cheaper on the used market. This is outstandingly good value for a lens with such an impressive focal range. And to top it off, Panasonic even throws in a lens hood, even at this price. Kudos Panasonic (and are you listening Olympus!?).

At the beginning of this review, I mentioned that my 'need' for a telephoto lens was somewhat limited. But there's no reason it should be that way - even predominantly as a landscape photographer. Because I'm not just a landscape photographer. None of us are really. We are parents who take photos of our children, grandparents who take photos of our grandkids, and passionate creative types who take photos at all types of events. Chances are, then, that a telephoto lens is going to come in quite handy on most (if not all) of those occasions.

Greenstone Speedway, Sunset. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO 200

And then, of course, there is landscape photography. Which is not a genre unique to only wide-angle lenses. Telephoto images can be very effective when shooting the landscape. To be honest, I probably don't use mine enough in the landscape - to the detriment of my images.

The above image - Greenstone Speedway, Sunset - was shot recently with the Panasonic 45-150mm lens, and it's one of my favourite images of this year. It's also a shot that I couldn't have taken with the wide angle, since it was impossible to get close enough to the subject to achieve this composition.

So, since I'm planning on using the lens a lot more for 'serious' landscape work, I thought I'd better test it out a little to see if it was up to the task. If you've read my previous post, where I reviewed my Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8, you'll know my 'testing' methodology. Which is to say, I don't use test charts, brick walls, or studio environments. I actually go outside, find a landscape, set the camera up on a tripod, and have at it! Then I look at the results in Lightroom at 100%, and see if I'm happy or not. Job's a good'n.

It may be difficult to tell from a web-file on this blog, so let me tell you what I can see full-screen in Lightroom (and you'll just have to take my word for it).

Above are 100% crops of a photo taken of the Greymouth Wharf. The wharf itself was probably about 500 feet away from me (across the other side of the Grey River). For all these images, the lens was extended to the full 150mm telephoto end (a 300mm full-frame field of view). Not usually the most optimal settings for image sharpness - wide open and at full zoom.

Nevertheless, at these settings (f/5.6 @ 150mm) the lens is already very sharp! That's pretty impressive - and I must admit I was surprised. I thought for sure that f/5.6 would be only acceptable, and that it would be even sharper stopped down to f/7.1 or f/8. But this wasn't the case - not with my copy of the lens at least. At f/6.3, at f/7.1, and at f/8, there was no discernible increase in sharpness. That is to say, they were all just as sharp as each other! This is very impressive. I even checked to make sure that I somehow hadn't mixed up the files.

I hadn't. f/5.6 is excellent, as is f/6.3 and up to f/10. It's from f/11 and above that the lens actually gets softer - and this is to be expected. 

Cobden Tiphead, Sunset. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/7.1 @ 1/200th, ISO 200

The optical performance of the Panasonic Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6, even wide open at the extreme telephoto range, has blown me away. It's sharp - plenty sharp - and is optically an exceptional performer. It focuses quickly on my E-M1 (although it does hunt for focus a little in lower light), feels solid and well built, has a metal lens mount, and produces superb images. For very little money. Seriously - what's not to like!?

If you are looking at specializing in wildlife, bird or sports photography, then of course you are going to want to invest in a little more serious telephoto gear. Something like the Lumix 100-400mm Leica f/4-6.3 or the Olympus 150-400mm f/4.5 Pro. And notice I said 'invest', since neither of these options could be reasonably called cheap (or lightweight).

Greymouth Wharf. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm lens. f/7.1 @ 1/500th, ISO 200

But for the rest of us, fortunately, there's the exceptional Panasonic Lumix G 45-150mm f/4-5.6. I'm so glad I kept this lens when deciding what to sell so I could afford the 12-35mm f/2.8. For the price, it's an amazingly good lens. I'm pretty sure I'll be making a lot more use of it for my images going forward.

An easy 5 out of 5 stars and very highly recommended if you are looking for an affordable telephoto lens for your micro four thirds system. If you are choosing between this and the Olympus 40-150mm f/4-5.6, I would say go for the Panasonic. They are both optically excellent, but I think the Panasonic has it over the Olympus in terms of build quality (Olympus has a plastic lens mount). Just saying...

Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 lens review

What is the single biggest factor in creating quality images with your camera? Is it how many megapixels you have? How about image stabilisation? What about a sturdy carbon-fiber tripod? Or is it holding your breath while taking the photo?

Not surprisingly, it's none of those. Although you'd be forgiven for thinking it wasn't at least one of the above, considering the marketing hype these features get (ok, maybe not the last one). Instead, what will any seasoned photographer worth their salt (excuse the pun) tell you to invest in before buying the latest camera body? It's glass - of course.

Lake Pearson, Canterbury. Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8.  f/6.3 @ 1/250th, ISO 200

Good glass - top quality optics, will dictate more than anything else, the quality of your final images. A pro-level camera body with a cheap plastic lens will struggle all day against a basic camera body paired with a pro optic. And it really is a difference you can tell when looking at your photos. Camera bodies will come and go - that's a given. But good glass - quality lenses - will hold their value, and probably last a lifetime if looked after.

And in terms of a quality optic for the micro four thirds system, they don't come much better than the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Asph with Power O.I.S.

If you are a travel, documentary or wedding photographer, this is quite simply a must-have lens. Period. The 12-35mm zoom range, at a constant and bright f/2.8, relates to the 'classic' 24-70mm f2.8 lens that has a place in every professional photographers' camera bag. This covers wide angle to standard telephoto; ideal for landscapes and portraits - and everything in-between.

Because it is part of Panasonic's premium 'X' range of lenses, designed for professional use, it features solid metal construction (with a little plastic and rubber thrown in to save some weight) and rugged weather-sealing. This gives the lens a solid heft, without being too heavy. At 305 grams and 73.8mm in height (extending out to around 94mm when zoomed out), it's a compact design, although it's probably more at home on an Olympus E-M1 or Panasonic GH4 than on an Olympus Pen or Panasonic GX80.

The lens is constructed of 14 elements in 9 groups, and includes 4 aspherical lenses, 1 UED and 1 UHR lens to minimise aberrations and ensure superb resolution. This is also helped by a special nano surface coating on the lenses to help reduce ghosting and flare. That's a lot of optical 'tech' in one lens. But what it means 'in reality' is superb image quality. And that's what really matters.

The  G X Vario 12-35mm f2.8 also features Panasonic's Power O.I.S (optical image stabilisation), although I have this turned off on the lens in preference for the in-body image stabilsation of my E-M1. If, however, you have one of the latest Panasonic bodies, I do believe this lens can take advantage of dual-I.S. - meaning the lens and camera stabilisation will work together for super-power image stabilisation! Apparently.

Cobden Estuary. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 X.  f/5.6 @ 1/500th, ISO 200

It's no secret that I sold all my other micro four thirds lenses (bar one) to purchase this lens to pair with my OM-D E-M1. That's called 'putting your money where your mouth is'. Yes, the quality of the glass you put on the front of your camera really does make all the difference. Why didn't I get the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro instead? Simple - economics. I found the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 at an amazingly good price (second hand), while the Olympus was a little more expensive. I have owned the 12-40mm before, and it's an outstandingly good lens. But optically, I'm pretty sure there wouldn't be much between the two.

Having now got the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8, I also needed to do my own testing with the lens - to establish the optimal settings for my use-case (namely landscape photography). To do this, I simply take the camera out, and shoot with it! No test charts, no brick walls, no controlled studio environments. I actually take the lens outside and test it by taking photos, and then looking at them to see what I think. Revolutionary - I know.

100% crops of the 'Cobden Estuary' image above.

The resulting images aren't beautiful portfolio worthy landscape shots. But they serve a purpose. To get the shots I needed, I placed the camera on a tripod, set the lens to its widest 12mm (24mm in full-frame terms), let the camera autofocus half-way into the scene, and then went through the full aperture range. Easy.

In doing so, what have I determined is my 'optimal' f/stop when using the Lumix G X vario 12-35mm on my Olympus OM-D E-M1? It may be hard (or impossible) to tell from the crops shown above, but it looks to me like somewhere between f/5.6 to f/8 is the lenses sharpest setting across the entire image. Actually, a very close inspection in Lightroom of the full range of f/stops would suggest that f/7.1 gives me ultimate image sharpness.

Seems like an odd f-number for ultimate sharpness, but there you have it. In fact, somewhere in the deep, dark recesses of my mind I seem to recall watching a Youtube video where another landscape photographer who uses an E-M1 Mk2 said that f/7.1 on his Olympus lens gave ultimate sharpness as well. Might be an Olympus camera thing?

Across the Estuary to Greymouth.  E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 X. f/5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO 200

Oddly enough, I've been shooting a lot at f/6.3 lately - also for no apparent reason - and getting very sharp images. I just need to bump that up one-third of an f-stop, to f/7.1, and I'm there - optimal sharpness.

Just for laughs, I also had a close look at how these apertures performed at infinity, by shooting out towards the Greymouth wharf - focusing again half-way into the scene. And once again, same result. Between f/5.6 and f/8 (so that would be f/7.1) was the sharpest.

This is probably also hard to see from this image on the blog - you'll just have to take my word for it. What I would say, from testing all apertures at 12mm, is that central sharpness is good at f/2.8 - best at f/7.1 - and then begins to fall back to just good again by f/11. The very high f-stops of f/16 to f/22 are to be avoided at all costs - and aren't necessary with micro four thirds anyway due to the extra depth of field achieved with the smaller sensor. 

I would also note, zooming in to the buildings in the distance at 12mm, that there is a tiny amount of barrel distortion noticeable. Not surprising at the widest end of the lens, and probably something that would get corrected automatically on a Panasonic body (but not on an Olympus). It's easily fixed in Lightroom, and I didn't even notice it until I zoomed right in and pixel peeped. But certainly something to be aware of if you are also going to use this lens on your Olympus camera body that won't automatically correct the distortion.

Ultimate sharpness? E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm @ f/5.6

Finally, a word about using this lens for video. Dunno. I'm not a video guy. I will use this lens 99.99% of the time for stills shooting. Sorry.

But... from what I've seen on-line, and read in reviews, this lens is also considered a must-have for shooting video in the Panasonic eco-system. So if you are looking at this lens for video work, you won't be disappointed (by all accounts). 

So, do I recommend the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Asp lens if you are a micro four thirds user? You're damn tootin' I do! It's a superb lens, in practically all respects, and just might be the only lens you will ever need? It's certainly worth looking at on the used market, where a mark 1 version of this lens (which is the one I have) goes for around $500.00NZ. That's crazy good value for a lens that sells for $1500.00NZ new (for the mark 2 version).

The difference between the mark 1 and the mark 2? The mark 2 is now 'freeze-proof' rated to -10, while the mark 1 isn't. And there is a slight O.I.S. update in the mark 2 as well. Other than that, and a re-designed look (all black in the mark 2 as opposed the black and grey on the mark 1), they are optically the same. If you have the money and want the reassurance of a warranty, then obviously opt for the mark 2. But, if you're on a budget, a good used mark 1 is the way to go.

If you have only ever used a mid-range kit lens on your camera, whatever system you shoot with, then you should seriously consider 'upgrading' to a pro-level lens. Forget about that new camera body that's just been released. You really don't need an extra 2 megapixels. Invest, instead, in glass. And then you will really notice an improvement in your images. Guaranteed.

The Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f2.8 Asph is an easy 4.5 out of 5 stars on my Olympus OM-D E-M1. Pair it with a Panasonic GH5 and it would be hard not to give it a perfect 5. Just get one already!

'Action' landscape photography at Punakaiki

We are slowly coming out of Lockdown here in New Zealand. Auckland is still at complete level 4 Lockdown, but the rest of the country has moved to 'Delta' level 2. At level 2, you can start to travel a little further afield, and businesses can re-open (while still maintain strict social distancing and mask-wearing). I'm still working from home, and probably will be for at least another two weeks. The weather has also been rotten this week - wind, rain, thunder and lightning - the works. My wife and I have got a touch of cabin fever.

So when we discovered that Saturday looked promising weather-wise, we decided to pack a lunch and head out for the day. Yay! But where to go?

The Chimney Pot. OM-D E-M1 with Panansonic 12-35mm f/2.8.  f/5.6 @ 1/1000th, ISO 200

A quick check of the tides, and I knew exactly where I wanted to go. High tide was scheduled for 1.00pm, and it was likely going to be very dramatic. The country had been issued with a high-waves warning earlier on in the week, and from our home we can hear, and see, the waves as they crash into Cobden tiphead. With tides, and waves that dramatic, there's really only one place to head to if you're a photographer - Punakaiki and the Pancake Rock Blowholes.

Yours truly ready to capture the action. Photo: Joanna Lorimer. Nikon D70 with Nikkor 18-55mm

The Pancake Rock Blowholes at Punakaiki, are a very famous tourist destination. The 'pancake' rocks are formations that began 30 million years ago, when lime-rich fragments of dead marine creatures were deposited on the sea bed. These were then covered by layers of soft mud. Thousands of years of rain, wind and sea spray have etched the softer siltstone into horizontal grooves, which look like giant layers of pancakes.

Earthquakes have raised them from the seabed to the level we can see today, as well as creating a maze of underground passages and open caverns facing the sea. When there's a big swell and a high tide, the ocean surges into these caverns and water is forced through the passages. Huge geysers of spray can then burst spectacularly skyward - under the right conditions. The sorts of conditions we were likely to have on this very day...

Pancake Rocks Blowholes, Punakaiki. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/1250th, ISO 200

We were not disappointed. I've lived on the West Coast for most of my life, and have visited - and photographed - the Pancake Rocks Blowholes dozens of times. I've never seen them this good. They were, as the young kids say, 'Epic'! In fact, they were so good, and so powerful, that the spray from the really big geysers was reaching the viewing platform and drenching everyone. Very exciting - but not great for camera gear and lenses.

For the hour or so that we were there photographing the blowholes, I adopted a 'burst and hide' style of shooting. I would wait for the really big blows (you could hear them coming), shoot a rapid-fire high speed burst of about a dozen images, then quickly point my camera down and into my chest as I turned my back to the spray! It helped to keep most of the salt spray off of the camera, but I would still need to wipe the front of the lens every 10 minutes or so. Note to self - use a UV filter over the lens next time.

Surge Pool. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/640th, ISO 200

Fortunately, both the Olympus OM-D E-M1 and the Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 are weather-sealed and can take some pretty serious punishment from the elements. But salt water is salt water, and probably not great for lens coatings or metal, weather-sealing or not. I was, as mentioned, trying to be careful and not get my gear drenched.

Having said that, it was pretty difficult to keep anything dry with all the spray from the sea floating around. As someone who wears glasses 100% of the time, it didn't take long between wipes until the lenses of your glasses (and camera) were needing a wipe-down again. Annoyingly, the really big geysers seemed to happen every time I stopped to wipe clear my glasses and lens. I must have missed at least half a dozen really big blows while wiping glass clear of water spots. But as maddening as that was, I knew if I was patient, it would only be a matter of time before another big gush came around.

Thar she blows! Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/1600th, ISO 200

This is the big one! The biggest geyser I have ever seen come from the Pancake Rock Blowholes. And as impressive as it looks in the photograph, it's ten times more impressive being there and seeing it happen. The sheer volume and power of the water is - in a word - awesome!

As I said earlier, I've photographed the blowholes dozens of times. And I've captured some pretty decent geysers in my time. Or at least I thought I had. Until today. 

I really don't think it could get any more impressive than this. The photograph above of the biggest geyser I've ever seen at the Pancake Rocks Blowholes, is a 'bucket list' photo for me. It's one of those "if I never take another shot of this in my life I'd be happy" kind of photo. It's the 'action' shot of the blowholes that I've always wanted. And now, I've finally got it.

Does getting the image fill me with a sense of accomplishment. Heck yeah! Of course it does. The above image is probably a 30+ year image in the making. I smile every time I look at it. Why wouldn't I?

The aftermath. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/6.3 @ 1/1600th, ISO 200

Does that mean I will stop going to Punakaiki to photograph the blowholes? No, not at all. I will still head to the blowholes if the weather and photography gods line-up again. And who knows, maybe there's an even bigger geyser in store for me in the future? 

But I doubt it. And as I said, if I never get the same conditions ever again in my lifetime, I can die happy, knowing I got 'my' image of the blowholes on a good day.

I also couldn't think of better gear to capture it with either. The Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8 is creating beautifully crisp, detailed, sharp and vibrant images - with very impressive edge-to-edge sharpness at the apertures I'm shooting with (around f/5.6 to f/8 mostly). And the Olympus E-M1 is blazing fast, wonderfully responsive, fantastic to shoot with, and the RAW files are a joy to process. I've only had this combination for a few weeks, and it has already netted me a 'bucket-list' shot. What more could I ask for? 

My 'dream' kit in 2021

I belong to several Facebook groups to do with buying and selling camera gear (surprise, surprise). Mostly it is people looking to upgrade, sell the occasional lens, or change systems. I've used it myself from time to time. It's actually how I found, and purchased, my Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 recently.

Most of the time I just flick through the posts quickly, especially if I'm not looking to buy or sell anything. But one recent post made me stop in my tracks, and almost made my eyes water! And it also got me thinking (and dreaming).

Someone was selling their entire Sony kit - for $16,000NZ! No, that's not a typo. $16k! That price is enough to make anyone stop and look more closely.

To be fair, this wasn't just some scam artist trying to dupe an unsuspecting newbie into paying way too much for outdated gear. This was a legit seller, with a LOT of quality Sony camera gear, who was hoping to sell it all as a package deal. And I'm sure it was good value, even at sixteen grand NZ. I didn't dive too deeply into exactly what he had in the package, but there were at least two Sony A7R III camera bodies, probably with grips, and about five or six G series lenses to go with it. As well as flashes and other accessories. And it all seemed very lightly used. I think one of the bodies had only done around 15000 shutter actuation's. That's nothing.

But, as much of a bargain as it may have been, it got me thinking about someone's ability to drop $16k on a camera system. Obviously it was being pitched at a professional photographer. And I assume (although I don't know for sure) that the guy selling it was a professional themselves. Although maybe not? I've known a few hobbyists in my time who had the ability to drop some serious cash on photography gear. And good on them, if they can afford to do so.

For me, however, that kind of money to spend on photography gear is dream territory. Although I'm sure if I added up all that I had spent on photography over the last 35+ years, that figure would also make my eyes water! But I have certainly never had the ability to spend that kind of amount all in one go. And I'm sure I never will. And yet, from time to time, I think we all play the 'what if' game in our minds. And this Facebook post, with the seller asking $16,000NZ for his Sony gear, got me thinking - and dreaming - about 'what if'? What if I had $16k to drop on photography gear. What would I get, in 2021?

Of course the very first question I would need to ask myself is "Should I stay, or should I go" (apologies to The Clash).

To be honest, I didn't really have to think about this for too long. I think I'd stay. Which might, for some, be a surprising answer. After all, if you had $16,000 wouldn't it be the perfect opportunity to 'start again' and buy into a completely new system?

And the answer is, of course, 'yes'. It would be a perfect time to buy into a new system. If you were unhappy with your 'old' one. Thing is, I'm not unhappy with my Olympus/Panasonic micro four thirds system at all. Just the opposite in fact. I still maintain that it is an amazing, incredible, fully featured and mid-blowingly capable image-capturing system. So why would I want to change?

But what about the future of micro four thirds - I hear you ask. Yep. Very good question. The future is certainly uncertain (to quote an obscure Rowan Atkinson skit). And yet, my honest (although perhaps somewhat flippant) reply would actually be - I don't care.

I'm not sure how long JIP (Japan Industrial Partners) is going to keep the micro four thirds Olympus camera system going for? Nobody really does. Will they produce another iteration of OM-D models? Will there be an E-M1 mk4, or E-M5 mk4? Or an entirely new E-M'something'? Will we ever see an E-M1x Mk2? I honestly don't know. 

And what of Panasonic? We know the GH6 is coming, which is a good sign. But if Olympus folds, will there be a GH7? Or a G10? Or any new lenses? Again, I simply don't know. We do know that Sony seems to still be developing micro four thirds sensor technology, which is a very positive sign. But this is Sony. So we also know that the development could cease at any time if it no longer becomes profitable. And fair enough.

But in the end, as I stated earlier, I just don't care. And why not? Well, quite simply, even if all production of micro four thirds stopped tomorrow (and it won't), there would be enough product - and probably enough spare parts - in existence already to see me through to the end of my photography days. I'm no spring chicken. I realistically only have about another 20 years of good photography left in me. If that. And barring accidents, I look after my gear. So I reckon, based on current technology, any new camera I purchased in 2021 would probably have twenty years of use in it - easily. I have, and use, a Nikon D70 - which was released in 2004. That's 17 years ago. And it's still going strong. And still produces great results. I have no doubt that the current technology would see me through to the end of my photographic journey.

Having just said all that... if I was 20 years old and just starting out in my photography career, then my decision would be completely different. If I was serious about a photography career, had my whole life ahead of me, and wanted to invest heavily into a system, it would not be micro four thirds. I would look, instead, at the Nikon Z (or Canon R) mirrorless system.

But I'm not (20 years old), so I'm very happy to stick with micro four thirds. And would still suggest that a hobbyist or amateur photographer give it serious consideration in 2021 as well. Despite what I've postulated above, I still think there's life left in the old girl yet 😉

Okay, enough already. If I had $16,000NZ to spend today, on photography gear, what would I get? Not allowing for discounts (but I'd want something taken off  - or included - if I was dropping $16k), and given my bias towards landscape photography, the list would go something like this:

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mk3 bodies x2  $6,194.00

Olympus HLD 9 Power Battery Grip $498.00

Extra BLH-1 Olympus battery x2 $240.00

M.Zuiko 8-25mm ED F4 Pro lens $1,750.00

M.Zuiko 12-40mm ED F2.8 Pro lens $1,400.00

M.Zuiko 40-150mm EZ F2.8 Pro lens $1,800.00

Olympus MC-20 2x Teleconverter $785.00

M.Zuiko 8mm ED F1.8 Fisheye Pro lens $1,500.00

M.Zuiko 60mm F2.8 Macro lens $600.00

Olympus FL-700R Flash $650.00

Filters and Camera Bag $600.00

For a grand total of $16,000NZ (approx)

Prices in NZ dollars, rounded up, as at 8.09.21

I'm not going to go into great detail about why I've chosen what I have, a lot of it is probably self-explanatory. I will, however, clarify a couple of things...

First, I went for two E-M1 Mk3 bodies and one grip for flexibility over going for the E-M1x with built-in grip that can't be detached. If I want to travel 'light' I would simply use the E-M1's sans-grip. That's not an option with the E-M1x. I could have gone with an E-M1 Mk3 plus grip, and an E-M1x body for basically the same cost, but decided that two identical back-up bodies would be a better idea.

The lenses are probably all obvious. I opted for the 8-25mm f4 over the 7-14mm f2.8 as my landscape lens because a) I don't need f/2.8 for landscapes, and b) the 8-25mm allows for using filters, whereas the 7-14mm doesn't. And I think that the range of the 8-25mm is far more versatile as well.

The fisheye, and to some extent the macro, are in the list just because I can. They are very 'specialty' lenses that I wouldn't use very often, but are achievable within budget - so why not. I'm obviously not really a 'prime' guy, but these specialty lenses are an exception to the rule. I also don't feel the need to wait for the 100mm macro Pro version that OMD Solutions are said to be releasing soon. As already stated, I'm not really a macro shooter, so the 60mm will be more than sufficient for my needs.

So there you have it. My 'dream' kit. And as you can see, even purchasing all new, you can get a lot of gear for your money if you go with a micro four thirds system. And I didn't even look at any Panasonic lenses - even though it's what I shoot with at the moment.

I know that this has been a long post already - and thank you if you are still reading this. If you are, bare with me a little longer. I thought it might also be interesting, as a comparison, to see what $16kNZ would get you if you bought into the Nikon Z system that I mentioned above.

Nikon Z6 Mirrorless bodies x2 $6,380.00

Nikon MB-N10 Battery grip $450.00

Extra Nikon Z6 battery x2 $240.00

Nikon XQD Memory Card 64GB x2 $680.00

Nikkor Z 14-30mm F4 S lens $2,185.00

Nikkor Z 24-70mm F4 S lens $1,685.00

Nikkor X 70-200mm F2.8 VR S lens $4,300.00

For a grand total of $16,000NZ (approx)

Prices in NZ dollars, rounded up, as at 8.09.21

I have tried, as much as possible, to find like-for-like in the two systems. And as you can see, $16,000 buys you a lot less if you opt for a full frame Z series Nikon. I have even chosen the first generation Z6, as opposed to the latest model Z6 II. You could also save yourself some money by using the F series adapter and using the older 'F' mount lenses, instead of going for the Z mounts. But if you are 'investing' in the system long-term, why would you? Just get the Z mount lenses in the first place.

While the above may seem a bit futile (I haven't got $16,000 to spend on photography gear after all) and pointless, it's still quite fun. No harm in dreaming - right? It may also be interesting to look back on this post in a few years time - say 2025 - and re-visit it, to see if my 'wishlist' may have changed?

What would be on your wishlist if you suddenly found $16,000 to spend on photography (and you can't say 'a world trip', it has to be on actual gear)? Go on, dream a little...

Photo walk No.3 during Lockdown

Could it happen three times in a row? Could we have a lovely, calm, still evening to go out walking and photographing here on the West Coast during Lockdown? You betcha we could!

Wednesday and Thursday evenings had been beautiful, with wonderful light and not a breath of wind (see my last two posts). When it looked like Friday would be the same, I was delighted. And also a little anxious. I wanted to honour the conditions of the Level 3 Lockdown here in New Zealand at the moment (no travelling outside your local area), which meant sticking to the same locations that I had shot the previous two nights. Would I come up with anything new to photograph? Or would I wander around bored and come away with nothing?

Oh well, at least I would get some exercise I guess? I really wasn't 'feeling' it in terms of photographic inspiration. But, the sky looked like it might cloud-up and get some interesting colour (the last two evenings had been absolutely cloudless), so I grabbed my E-M1, both my lenses this time, and headed out the door. With no great expectations.

Greymouth Wharf. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8. f/8 @ 1/1600th, ISO 1600 

Perhaps I should go out shooting with no expectations more often? Because the images I came home with from the third night's outing are, in my estimation, the best of the three nights. And, one or two of them may be some of the best photos I've taken this year! And all because I pushed myself to explore an area that I've somehow never been to before.

My normal walk takes me down to the Cobden lagoon and estuary, overlooking the Greymouth wharf across the Grey River. I have captured several images of this area over the last few nights, taken from the roadside that I walk along. The estuary is situated next to the Greenstone Park Speedway - a heavily fenced-off area that, to be honest, I don't ever pay much attention to. But on my third trip out in as many days, I was desperate for a different viewpoint. So I had a closer look at the speedway area.

Estuary looking back towards Cobden. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm. f/8 @ 1/800th, ISO 1600

On closer inspection, I noticed a gravel road leading down alongside the speedway and estuary. I'm sure I must have seen it before, but I can't say that I've ever ventured down it? It just seemed like an innocuous dirt road leading off to nowhere much. Why I didn't put two and two together I'll never know. But I'm very glad that I was - a.) desperate enough to look for new locations, and - b.) curious enough to take a chance and walk down a gravel road.

Turns out the gravel road does actually lead to somewhere 😂 Whooda thunk it! It leads, not surprisingly, to around behind the estuary and speedway, to a small beach area. For someone who has lived in this area for over twenty years, but who had never gone down this road, it was like walking through the closet and into Narnia! My excitement at finding somewhere completely new to explore, in an environment that I had assumed I knew intimately, was almost overwhelming. Especially on a night where I thought that I couldn't possibly come up with any new photographs.

Blaketown Tiphead Golden Sunset. E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/250th, ISO 200

Getting around in-behind the estuary not only gave me an unobstructed view of the Greymouth wharf, it also offered a different viewpoint of the Blaketown Tiphead. For the last few nights I had photographed looking across to Blaketown, with the setting sun at a 45 degree angle. But from this vantage, I was able to have the sun setting directly behind the tiphead, allowing the opprtunity for more of a silhouette.

And before you cry 'foul' and tell me to lay off the saturation slider in Lightroom, that's exactly what it looked like! It really was that intense and that spectacular. Honest!

Speedway commentary booth. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/500th, ISO 200

When I first arrived at the beach area behind the speedway, I immediately noticed the commentary booth sitting up above the foliage, with clouds gathering behind it. I knew that if the sky coloured up, and the clouds caught the light, I would get some fantastic images of the booth silhouetted against a wonderful sunset sky. I had to wait for about an hour for it to happen, but when it did, I wasn't disappointed.

Catching the light. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/100th, ISO 400

I love the colour, the drama, and the simplicity of these last images of the commentary booth against the sunset. I was very excited while I was taking them, and I'm still very excited now as I look at them. I pre-visualized the images, waited for the right conditions, and then executed the images in exactly the way I had planned. I spent about 30 minutes, and took around 60 photos of this one subject - observing the light as it changed, the clouds as they moved, and the composition as I refined it. It was a thoroughly enjoyable and totally reinvigorating evenings shooting. And to think, it came from an initial feeling of apathy and disinterest.

Three nights, walking around the same location during Lockdown, produced three very different sets of images (mostly). Now the rain has come for the week (not surprisingly), and I probably won't get out to shoot again for a while. But when I do, I will have a new location to go back to and re-explore - together with familiar locations that never seem to disappoint.

BTW - just a quick update on the E-M1. Now that the rear control dial has been fixed, it functions perfectly. Very responsive, and very accurate. Exactly how I remember it to be. Happy, happy, joy, joy 😁

Photo walk No.2 during Lockdown

Spring has sprung here in New Zealand. Yay!

On the West Coast, that often means wet weather - unfortunately. But, as luck would have it, the first week of Spring has instead brought some wonderful sunny days. And with it, comes a chance to get out and stretch the legs, in my local neigbourhood, during Lockdown.

'Spicy' revisted. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6. f/5.6 @ 1/640th, ISO 400

We are very fortunate to have some rather picturesque places within walking distance of our home. These include; a beach, farms, an estuary/lagoon area and tiphead. So there is no shortage of interesting subjects to photograph.

Having said that, when you are confined to a reasonably local area - one that you've walked almost daily for several years - familiarity can breed a little contempt. To 'spice' things up (excuse the pun from the image above), I decided on my second night's walk around the same area, to just use my telephoto lens. I kept the Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph Mega OIS lens when I sold all my others, because although I don't use one all that often, I do find a telephoto handy to have. It's also very small, and very light-weight for a telephoto, so takes up hardly any space in the camera bag.

Going around the same area, in the same evening light, you can't help but sometimes be attracted to the same images. I couldn't help myself as I walked past this public rest area again on the second evening. I just had to stop and take the exact same image as the previous night (see last post), but this time with the telephoto lens. If nothing else, I thought it would make for an interesting comparison between the two lenses.

And interesting it is! For while I gave a glowing review of the Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 and said how super sharp and clear the images were that I got from it - I actually think the image I took with the 45-150mm is actually sharper! 

Waiting for a Wave. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/200th, ISO 1600

My overall impression of this small, light, cheap telephoto zoom lens is that it is, indeed, very sharp - even wide open at f/5.6 and 150mm (300mm equivalent on full-frame). Just like its Olympus sibling (the M.Zuiko 40-150mm f/4-5.6) that I have raved about in the past, the Panasonic Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6 punches way above its weight, and has the capability of producing seriously great images.

Of course it doesn't compete with the truly pro glass of the Olympus 40-150mm f2.8 Pro or the Panasonic Lumix 35-100mm f2.8. But at a fraction of the weight, size and cost of these pro lenses, the Lumix 45-150mm f/4-5.6 is a no-brainer if you need a 'good' telephoto lens for the odd occasion when you need one. Pro wildlife or bird photographers look elsewhere. But for the rest of us, the Lumix or Olympus cheap telephotos are well worth owning.

Spring is in the air. OM-D E-M1 with Panasonic 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/320th, ISO 800

Telephotos are great for getting a bit closer to the action if you're a sports and/or wildlife shooter. But they are also a great option for portraiture and landscapes. Their narrow field of view, compression of elements within an image, and their ability to 'isolate' a subject, are all helpful ways of telling a particular story. And they can also be used to zoom in on unsuspecting subjects if you are in 'stealth' mode. 😄

The photo above, of the couple watching the sea crashing against the rocks, was obviously taken from behind, but also from a fairly long distance away. They were completely unaware of my presence, allowing me to wait with my camera poised to capture just the right moment. I probably stayed for about 10 minutes taking a series of images, as the sea crashed around them and they enjoyed the view. The telephoto lens has compressed the elements within the image, to make it look like the sea is crashing around them a lot closer than it actually was. From the photo it looks like they are in serious danger of getting wet! But in reality, the waves were a good 15 to 20 meters away from them and well out of harms way.

Spring sunset silhouette. OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/8 @ 1/320th, ISO 800

The photo above was taken at exactly the same time as the photo of the couple watching the sea spray. Three young women turned up to also watch the sunset, and as they were getting ready to walk down along the rocks, I noticed that they made a prefect silhouette against the setting sun. I fired off two shots before they moved further down the rocks and the effect was gone.

Once again, the telephoto lens has allowed me to grab the shot from a good distance away, with my subjects completely unaware they were being photographed. I don't always shoot this way - I guess it feels a little bit 'creepy' or a bit paparazzi? But in both scenarios above, none of the people in the photos can be identified, none were photographed in a 'compromising' situation, and the final result is - I hope - very tastefully done. No one - as they say - was harmed in the making of these photos.

Heading out to fish. Olympus OM-D E-M1 with Lumix 40-150mm. f/8 @ 1/80th, ISO 1600

Many photographers who think of landscape images, think only in terms of wide angle lenses. But a telephoto lens is an invaluable part of every landscape photographers kit. As mentioned above, it can help isolate, compress, and simplify a scene - all exceptionally useful techniques when shooting landscapes. A wide-angle (or ultra-wide angle) that tries to include a massive vista can often lead to unimpressive images. Whereas if you isolate, frame, and capture a smaller portion - maybe just the one area of light as it caresses the peak of an impressive mountain - then you will often come away with a much stronger composition. Indeed there are many mountain landscape photographers who would say that their telephoto lens is their most used optic.

Blaketown Tiphead Shipwreck Monument. E-M1 with Lumix 45-150mm. f/5.6 @ 1/60th, ISO 800

Whether you use a telephoto lens a little, or a lot, it's always a good idea to have one in your camera bag. The Panasonic Lumix G Vario 45-150mm f/4-5.6 Asph Mega OIS (to give it its full name) is an excellent choice for someone on a budget, but who still wants a well made (metal mount), sharp and lightweight lens. When I was selling all my lenses to purchase the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8, the Lumix 45-150mm was the only lens I decided to keep. And I'm very glad that I did.

As a landscape photographer, who wants to travel light, I don't need the heavier, more expensive 'pro' versions of this lens. I'd mostly shoot them at around f/5.6 to f/8 anyway. And at those apertures, the cheap, light and inexpensive (relatively speaking) Panansonic 40-150mm f/4-5.6 is probably about 95% as sharp as them anyway!

What I do occasionally wish for, however, is a little longer reach. Something like the Olympus 75-300mm f/4.8-6.7 or Panasonic 100-300mm f/4-5.6. At 300mm on the long end, that equates to a whopping 600mm angle-of-view on a full-frame system! If I was a bird or wildlife photographer on a budget, I'd definitely have one of those. But I'm not, so they will have to wait. My use-case for a lens with that sort of reach is even more limited than with the telephoto I already own! 

On the other hand, my sister-in-law actually owns the Olympus 75-300mm, so I may get to 'play' with it one day and do a quick review? Could be fun to take to a wildlife park - once we get out of Lockdown, of course.

Photo walk during Lockdown

In my last post I talked about taking the Sony a99 and Minolta 17-35mm f/3.5 lens out for a landscape shoot during Lockdown. I enjoyed using it, and it takes some beautiful images, but I still think it isn't a very 'portable' setup.

Greymouth wharf from Cobden lagoon. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/60th, ISO 200

For that, I turn to my own camera gear - and the Olympus OM-D micro four thirds system. For me (and yes, it is very subjective), it offers the perfect balance of size vs image quality. And by that I mean excellent size, and excellent image quality. Many view anything less than full-frame to be a compromise, at least image-wise. I disagree. Strongly.

Sure, if you're a 'measurebator' or 'pixel peeper', then you won't be caught dead with anything less than full-frame (or maybe even digital medium format). But, on the other hand, if you're a photographer who enjoys the creativity of capturing an image, then you'll use any number of tools to achieve your vision. None are better than the other. They are simply different.

'Spicy'. E-M1 with Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/80th, ISO 200 + Polariser

This isn't another way of saying that 'gear doesn't matter'. I've argued many times elsewhere that I find this an incredibly trite and blatantly untrue statement. Of course gear matters. Give a sports photographer at the Olympics a pinhole camera and ask them to cover the games with this one piece of gear. See how far that gets you - or them for that matter. It's all about having the right tool for the job. And in that regard, of course the gear matters.

But... conversely, the gear also doesn't matter as much as many photographers pretend (or hope) that it does. Yes, certain situations might call for specific functions. But beyond that, for most photographers, it really doesn't matter if the camera is full frame, medium format, or micro four thirds. Especially when you consider most peoples' use-cases.

Sundown, Cobden Tiphead. OM-D E-M1 with Lumixs 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/1250th, ISO 400

Ok, rant over. Suffice to say that when I use the Olympus OM-D E-M1 (which is considered by many an 'old' camera), I'm using an incredibly responsive, superbly designed and highly capable camera/computer that captures stunning images. Match that with a professional optic like the Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 12-35mm f/2.8 Aspherical Power OIS (to give it its full name) and the only thing that's holding it back is me.

I firmly believe that pound for pound, and dollar for dollar, nothing comes close to micro four thirds. I've used practically every system, every sensor size, and a plethora of body and lens combinations over the last 36 years of being involved in this fantastic hobby/profession. And when I consider all the systems and weigh up the cost, the features, the functionality and the image quality, my Olympus micro four thirds system stands together with the best of them.

How can I be so bold? Well, in this instance, I believe that a picture paints a thousand words... and speaks volumes for the capabilities of the E-M1 specifically, and micro four thirds generally.

Blaketown Tiphead Sunset. E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f/2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/160th, ISO 400

All the images I took, walking around my neighbourhood to try out the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G, are simply stunning.

Yeah, ok, that sounds a bit self-congratulatory. 'Look at me. Big shot photographer'. But that's not really what I mean, or what I'm trying to say. What I really mean is that the photos from this camera and lens combination really 'pop'. There's a certain quality to them that elevate them a step above your normal everyday snapshot - even though ostensibly that's exactly what they are. Admittedly taken in some quite nice light.

There's a sharpness to all of them, although they're not 'over' sharp. And a clarity to them, although they don't look overly 'digital' (to me at least). The colours are exceptionally captured, yet also true-to-life. And the files are robust and easy to work with in post-processing. What's not to like?

Greymouth wharf from Cobden lagoon at dusk. E-M1 with 12-35mm f/2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/20th, ISO 1600

Most of this, of course, is due to the superb capabilities of the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 G lens. It is a professionally designated lens, and as such offers professional quality results. It's a solid lens without being heavy (maybe 'dense' is a better description), balances perfectly on the professional E-M1 body, and performs flawlessly. Zooming is very smooth and well dampened, while autofocus is snappy, quiet and accurate.

It comes equipped with Panasonic's Power OIS (Optical Image Stabilisation), although it won't work in conjunction with the E-M1's image stabilisation, so I have turned it off on the lens. Olympus's in-body 5-axis image stabilisation is far superior to the one in the lens, so should be used in preference.

Not much more can be (or needs to be) said about this fantastic lens. I ummed and arred about getting it for a while, and even after buying it (secondhand) I wondered if I'd done the right thing selling most of my other lenses just to get this one. But that was before I had seen the images it produces. Now, after only using it twice, I don't think I've done the wrong thing at all. I did the same thing the last time I owned an E-M1 - selling all my lenses just to get the Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 Pro. I never regretted that decision either. Camera bodies, as they say, come and go. But good glass lasts. And this is very good glass.

Of course all pro-level 24-70mm f2.8 lenses, from all the other manufacturers, are exceptionally good optically. But the Panasonic Lumix 12-35mm f2.8 G is all these things, at half the size, half the weight - and at half the price! DSLR photographers love to gloss over this fact, or find comparison's where this doesn't quite work. But in actuality, the truth of the size/price/weight savings comparison with APS-C and full frame is real. And the benefits of micro four thirds are obvious to anyone who has seriously made the switch.

Swan Lagoon.  E-M1 with Lumix 12-35mm f2.8G. f/5.6 @ 1/8th sec (hand held), ISO 1600

In my last post, after I had used the Sony a99 and Minolta 17-35mm f3.5 on a landscape shoot, I summed up by saying that I was seriously rethinking my choice of system. I think that might have just been the euphoria of getting out and taking some photos after being in Lockdown.

In reality, a simple walk around my local neighbourhood, taking some 'snaphots' in the early evening light, has proved to me without doubt what an amazingly special camera system the Olympus/Panasonic micro four thirds is. Return to full frame? Humpfh!!! What was I thinking!?