The film journey continues...

I have run a roll of Fuji Superia 200 colour film through my Minolta Dynax 7 over the last couple of weeks, but haven't processed it yet. I will probably wait until I have a few to develop all at once, since I will dev-only and then scan the negs myself.

Since my last post talking about getting back into film this year, I have purchased a few more items to add to my Minolta and Canon film kits. One is a Minolta 75-300mm f4.5/5.6 D lens. Yes, I know I already have the 70-210mm f4.5/5.6. But it was a great price ($40.00NZ), and I wanted to see if it was worth getting the extra reach over the 70-210mm.

I have also branched out and made my very first purchase on AliExpress! As a hobbyist getting back into film, I shudder at the prices being asked for film here in New Zealand. One roll of standard Kodak Gold 200 is about $40.00NZ in camera stores - $40.00!!! Bugger that. So after a quick look an AliExpress, I purchased 5 rolls of Lucky Black and White 400 film for just under $48.00NZ delivered. That's basically five rolls for the price of one! 

I'll see how it goes shooting and developing it, but at that price, you can't really go wrong?

And speaking of what can go wrong.... you know that Canon EOS 5 I purchased (see last post) for $35.00? Turns out there was a very good reason for it going so cheaply. Yep, it doesn't work. Pop a fresh battery in, turn it on, and press the shutter... and nothing (except a very weird electronic grinding noise). Oh well, it was worth a shot I guess. Although having said that, these EOS 5's seem fairly dodgy, reliability-wise. All sorts of things can go wrong with them (a very weak command dial for a start). So that's it with me and the EOS 5. I'm done with them.

That's not it for me and Canon though. Far from it! Canon and me go way back with film. In fact, when I think of film photography, I really think in terms of Canon. My first camera was a Canon T70, followed by the Canon T90, and then a procession of Canon EOS cameras (100, 10, 50, 30, 1), until I changed to digital in the early 2000s and switched to Nikon. I only really shot film on Canon cameras, so to not have a Canon now that I'm giving film a serious look again would be sacrilegious!

The EOS 300v is one of the last film cameras Canon produced (the 300x was the last), and is jam-packed with modern features and up-to-date autofocus from the digital era. It's a bit of a plastic-fantastic (although it does have a metal lens mount), and because it's not a trendy, all mechanical, traditional-looking film camera, it tends to be ignored by the hipster film community. Suits me. I'm old, and so are my eyes. I need all the help I can get. So modern auto-focus with modern EF lenses will do me nicely thank you. 

It's also a bit of a love it or loath it looking camera. And actually, I quite like the look of it. If you are going to go modern, then by Jove's go all-out!

At the moment I have an early production 35-70mm EF to go with it, but I hope to rectify that in the not too distant future. It will take all Canon EF lenses (including L Pro glass), although of all the brands, Canon's EF lenses seem to retain their value the most. So it might take a while to get some truly decent glass for it.

Fun in the Snow, Arthur's Pass. Kodak Gold 200.

I thought I would finish this post with a photo shot on film - taken about 20 years ago! I don't remember what camera I used, it could have been any number of different options - but to me it brings back so many memories, and has the unmistakeable 'look' of film.

For our kids 21st, my wife and I put together photo albums of their life for them (up to 21yrs obviously). We looked through boxes and boxes of negatives and prints to fill the albums, and probably 95% of the images we used were shot on film. Yes, that's partly because digital only really became viable around 20 years ago, so a lot of their early life was documented on film. But it also had to do with how easy it was to go through them and choose the images we wanted to use. We didn't have to find x,y or z old hard-drive and go through hundreds (if not thousands) of files to find images. We literally picked up a box and flicked through the prints.

Archiving of memories is very important. And I think it could be argued quite seriously that the best way to archive images is with film. How many of us have 'lost' photos to corrupt cards/drives/computers? And how many will continue to do so? Every digital photographer will tell you it's a matter of when, not if. Sure, you can 'loose' film negatives. But baring fire (heaven forbid), if they are kept in a box in the dark, they will last forever. And will print up as good as the day they were taken. Worth thinking about...

2025 - The Year of Film!?

I love black and white photography. Always have. It's what I cut my teeth on when I first started learning all about photography (way back when). It's classic, the images often have a timeless feeling and there's something 'evocative' about monochrome that color doesn't match.

Perhaps that's why I enjoyed shooting the Fujifilm cameras and playing around with the film recipes so much? At least half of the recipes I programmed into the cameras were black and white (mostly trying to replicate Acros - my favorite b&w film). And shooting with all these 'film stocks' on a digital camera was a heap of fun (and a huge rabbit-hole it turns out).

Aailyah. Lumix S5 with Panasonic S 50mm f1.8. 1/60th sec @ f2.8, ISO 100. 

Shooting black and white with digital is a simple matter of choosing a monochrome profile instead of color. Then, if you shoot RAW, you get a b&w image in the viewfinder (if you're shooting with a mirrorless system), but the RAW image still has the color information attached if you change your mind.

You can also choose to shoot in RAW + JPEG, in which case the jpeg will have the b&w profile 'burnt' into the file, while the RAW will still retain the color. The best of both worlds. 

I don't shoot Fujifilm cameras anymore, having moved to the Panasonic Lumix S5 full-frame camera. But when I did shoot with Fujifilm, I would often only shoot in JPEG - meaning that the resulting image would only be monochrome. No color info - no going back. It was a bit like shooting film, but with digital. 

Some are very happy with this work flow - creating 'pretend' film images on digital. Heck, you can even add grain to the image at the point of capture to further enhance the film look. 

Say 'Cheese'. Lumix S5 with Panasonic S 50mm f1.8. 1/60th sec @ f2.8, ISO 100.

The portraits in this post were all taken on the Lumix S5 using the Monochrome S profile. The S5 has a variety of monochrome profiles you can choose, with the 'S' profile seeming to give the best rendition of skin colors. But since they were all shot in RAW, they were infinitely 'tweakable' in post-processing anyway. And as much as I do like the final look, there is a part of this jaded old photographer that thinks to himself "If you want the film look to your images, just damn well shoot film"!

Storytime with Grammy. Lumix S5 with S 50mm f1.8. 1/60th sec @ 4.5, ISO 1000.

So that's exactly what I've decided to do in 2025. Shoot some film.

Early last year, a very good friend gifted me a Minolta Dynax 7 film camera body (thanks Stew) and I've meant to shoot it ever since. The time for thinking is over, and it's time to get doing! 

First step was to actually get some film for it. Given all I've said in this post so far, I was only going to be looking at monochrome film - for two reasons. Firstly for all the reasons I've given in this post 😁(didn't I just say that?), and second - the cost. B&W film is cheaper to buy and, if you have your own processing tanks and chemicals (which I do), cheaper to develop. Much cheaper. 

I brought some Rollei APX 25, 100 and 400 ISO film, and then actually scored some cheap expired color film online, just for giggles. Don't know when I'll use the color (especially since one of them is a slide film which is horrendously expensive to develop), but it's there just in case.

I then decided to get a 'standard' lens for the Dynax 7, and I knew just which one to get; The Minolta 35-70mm f/4 macro. It's a lens I've owned before and used with Sony A-mount digital cameras. It's a great performer, very sharp wide open, with a constant f/4 aperture.

The 35-70mm f/4's come up reasonably regularly, and are a fairly cheap price for such a good lens. The one I bid on was actually attached to a Dynax 7xi, so I got another film body as a back-up to the Dynax 7.

When Stewart gifted me the Dynax 7 it came with a 50mm f2.8 macro lens, so I decided my new film kit would be complete with a telephoto lens. Enter the Minolta 70-210mm f/4.5-5.6. I had actually purchased a 70-210mm f/4 'beercan' but had to send it back because it wouldn't focus to infinity! Damn... I might get another one later, but for the meantime the f/4.5-5.6 will do.

With the Minolta in the bag I thought I was now sorted for a film kit. Turns out I was wrong! Since I was looking through all the listings for film cameras on our New Zealand auction site (TradeMe), I was seeing other cameras that were catching my attention. I had my eye on a Canon EOS5 body that looked like it might go cheaply, so I put in a 'low' bid and left it at that. And yes, I won it (for the princely sum of $35.00NZ).

Film cameras (and film) have experienced something of a resurgence in the last 5 years, which has seen the prices go up considerably. Film itself is eye-wateringly expensive (which does give pause when looking at getting back into shooting film), while old film cameras that used to be given away (or thrown out), are now going for more that older digital camera bodies. Crazy...

But there are still bargains to be had (can't complain about $35.00NZ for a Canon EOS5) if you look out for them and are patient. Strangely enough, it's the older, more manual film cameras that are the most popular. The more 'modern' looking film cameras tend to go for cheaper prices. Suits me.

I'm looking forward to getting a bit more 'hands on', a bit more 'tactile' with my photography this year. Not in a hipster, 'look-at-me-aren't-I-cool' sort of way (I'm middle aged, bald and fat - hipster I ain't) - more in a photography as 'craft' kind of vibe. I'll let you know how it goes....

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...

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?

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!

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.  

Okarito Weekend Part 4 - Landscapes

In this last part of my Okarito weekend postings I want to look at landscapes and discuss using the Sony A100 in a bit more detail.

The A100 was Sony's first DSLR after acquiring Konica/Minolta in 2005, and was released one year later in 2006. That makes it a pretty old camera by today's super-techno standards, so it's got to be a pretty horrible image-maker, right?

Well, no, as it turns out. It's a 10MP, anti-shake, anti-dust, 2.5" lcd, 40 segment metering, 3fps, solid performer - albeit with a few design quirks.

Okarito Lagoon Sunrise. Sony A100 with Zeiss 24-70mm on f5.6 @ 500th

The body itself is rather plasticky - but it's a solid and durable plastic, so that's really not a complaint. The lens mount is metal, and the buttons and dials have a very positive and secure feel to them still - even though this is now an 8 year old camera. The camera has good heft when in the hand, although it does feel a little on the light side when paired with the Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 lens. The camera weighs 638 g with battery, while the Zeiss is a whopping 955 g, so the combination is a little front-heavy. But you forget all that when you look at the images taken with this combination on the computer. The files from the A100 are rich, smooth (at the low ISO's) and plenty detailed enough.

3 Mile Lagoon, Okarito. Sony A100 with Minolta 100-200 on f5.6 @ 800th

On Saturday evening Stewart and I decided to head off to the Okarito Trig Station Lookout to catch sunset. It had been a beautiful day, but with no guarantees of a decent sunset as we made our way up the hill with tripods and camera gear in hand. We were told that it was an easy 30 minute walk up to the top, but I found the climb fairly hard-going and had to stop several times before reaching the lookout. I can remember thinking at about the half-way stage of the climb that 'this better be worth it'... but I needn't have worried. It was definitely worth it! We were treated to some magic evening light and almost couldn't believe our luck.

Okarito from Trig Station Lookout. Sony A100 with Minolta 100-200 on f5.6 @ 320th

To our left was a fantastic view of Okarito which framed up nicely with my Minolta 100-200mm lens. This is the view that most people who take the track up to the lookout are expecting to see and while it was certainly worth photographing, the really stunning view this evening came from our right, out towards 3 Mile Lagoon. Again, the 100-200mm gave me a great view of the light as it swept over the landscape and I can't believe the sharp, contrasty, beautiful images I'm capturing with this lens! It's a cracking lens and was unbelievable value (I got it as part of a film camera kit for about $40.00NZ).

3 Mile Lagoon. Sony A100 with Zeiss 24-70mm on f5.6 @ 320th

It was an amazing evening of shooting, and the A100 performed faultlessly.  I make sure to shoot at the lower ISO's with it (from 100 to 400), and I watch my shutter speeds (and the Steady Shot graph in the viewfinder) to make sure my shots will be crisp hand-held. And so far, so good. In fact, I'm rightly impressed.

What don't I like about the A100? The function dial on the top left of the camera is a bit clunky to use. I'd rather these were menu-driven like the A200 that came after it. And I'd prefer two control wheels so that I could assign exposure compensation to a wheel rather than a button. But other than that, I'm very happy with the A100 and how it performs. It's just a great image-making tool.

No, it doesn't have live-view (don't care), an articulated lcd screen (don't care), it doesn't shoot video (definitely don't care), and isn't GPS or touch screen enabled (still don't care). What it does do is take beautiful photos. And it does it well.

I don't care that it's 8 year old technology. And in fact, I'll soon be using a Konica/Minolta 7D -  a 6MP 10 year old camera! And I'm really looking forward to it!

Oh yeah - one final thought on the A100. It goes forever! I had one battery, fully charged, for a whole weekend of shooting and it still had juice in it when I got home on Sunday afternoon. A single charge is good for well over a thousand images during a weekends shooting. Sony is well known for making cameras with exceptional battery life and I'm happy to report that the A100 is no exception.

Okarito Weekend Part 3 - White Heron

Last post I wrote how my main objective of my photography weekend to Okarito was to capture images of the iconic Boat Shed. But there is something else that is also iconic and has become synonymous with the Okarito Lagoon - the Kotuku (White Heron).

The lagoon is a breeding ground for the White Heron, so it has become a very popular tourist attraction. I was hoping that I could take my Sigma 75-500mm lens for a spin and capture some useable images of these magnificent birds, since this is something else that I don't really have in my image library.

Kotuku stretching. Sony A100 with Sigma 75-500

Saturday was a no-go, and I didn't really get to see any Heron up close. Stewart and I kayaked out into the lagoon but the cloud cover came over and made it less that ideal. They also don't really let you get too close when you're on their 'turf', and I came away disappointed.

But on Sunday morning, as we were shooting the Boat Shed, I noticed a Heron fly overhead and settle on the edge of the lagoon to feed. I took my opportunity, put the Sigma 75-500mm lens on a monopod, and went over to see if I could take some half-decent bird photos.

Heron Feeding. Sony A100 with Sigma 75-500mm on f8 @ 2000th

I'm not much of a bird photographer - by my own admission. I don't have the patience, the skill, or the gear to really pull it off. But most of all, I don't really have the passion for it. I enjoy taking a great bird photo if I happen to get 'lucky' and I'm at the right place at the right time, but I don't go looking for it.

Yet having said all that, when I found myself at Okarito with a White Heron in my sights and a 75-500mm attached to the camera, I'd be lying if I said the adrenaline didn't start pumping and the hopes were high for a great shot!

Heron Feeding 2. Sony A100 with Sigma 75-500mm on f11 @ 2000th

Did I get a great shot? No - I don't think I did. But I did have fun. And I learnt a thing or two about using the 75-500mm Sigma. First, the monopod was a very good idea. I left 'Steady Shot' on the A100 'On', since there was obviously still some movement happening even though it was on a monopod. I bumped the ISO up as much as I dared (ISO800), and also made sure the aperture was enough to give me an overall sharp image. I started at f8, then moved to f11 as the light got even brighter. Checking the final images (I shot about 300), the ones shot at f11 are noticeably sharper than those taken at f8. Guess I know where the lenses 'sweet spot' is now :-)

Heron Feeding 3. Sony A100 with Sigma 75-500mm on f11 @ 2500th

The four shots here are my 'keepers' from over 300 taken on the morning. Probably not a very high 'hit' rate, and I'm not really in love with any of them (except perhaps the first image, although at f8 it's not as tack sharp as I would like). I suppose that means I know what I'll be doing again next year?

Bird photography - or should I say 'great' bird photography, is hard. Really hard. But I knew that. Before going back to okarito next year I think I'll brush up on my bird photography skills down at a local lagoon. We occasionally get Heron there too, so who knows. Perhaps there's hope for me yet?

Okarito Weekend Part 2 - The Boat Shed

One of the main reasons I was desperate to get back down to Okarito was to capture the iconic Boat Shed - perhaps the most photogenic building on the West Coast.

Okarito Boat Shed. Sony A100 with Minolta 16mm on f8 @ 250th

I had tried, and failed, to capture this building only once before (a few years earlier ) but had unfortunately come back with blurred images when I foolishly decided to hand-hold in low light. I was determined not to make the same mistake again, so had bought along my heaviest tripod and a monopod, just in case. Ironically I needed neither, as sunrise at 6.30 in november gave us enough light to hand-hold comfortably (go figure).

Okarito Boat Shed Sunrise. Sony A100 with Minolta 16mm on f8 @ 160th

The Boat Shed (now an information shed) sits on the lagoon and can be shot from various angles depending on the tide and time of year. We were fortunate in that this year there hasn't been a big variance in tidal movement, so the building was approachable at all times of the day. We were also fortunate with some beautiful sunrise/early morning light on both mornings we were there.

Since it is such an iconic building, and has been shot by so many photographers, I wanted to try something 'different' for a few of my images.  I borrowed Stew's 16mm fisheye to shoot with on the first morning and even though the 'crop' factor on the A100 meant that it was really a 24mm lens, shooting straight on to the building also produced a slight 'fisheye' effect.

Boatshed Sunrise, Okarito. Sony A100 with Minolta 24-105mm on f8 @ 160th

Moving around the edge of the lagoon as the sun rose gave a completely different perspective on the boat shed, lit by the sunrise against the dark surroundings. By this time I had switched to the Minolta 24-105mm so I could use the zoom range on the lens, since I was standing on the edge of the lagoon and couldn't 'zoom' with my feet. Same morning, same light, but completely different feel to the image.

Boatshed Sunrise 2. Sony A100 with Zeiss 24-70mm on f8 @ 400th

We came back on the Sunday morning for sunrise again, so this time instead of going to the left of the building, I went to the right. I had also managed to grab Stew's Zeiss 24-70mm f2.8 'monster' lens - and boy is it a beauty! But boy is it heavy! After half an hour of shooting with the Zeiss attached to the A100 I knew I'd taken a few photos. But of course, the image quality speaks for itself and I'd quite happily carry that lens around if it meant coming back with superb images.

Having said that, I did experience a few 'glitches' with the Zeiss where it would 'lock up' on the A100 and not allow me to take any photos until I wiggled the lens mount? But I'm fairly sure this was just a couple of dirty contacts and nothing that wouldn't come right with a good clean.

I obviously took a lot more photos of the Okarito Boat Shed than I've shown here - but these are indicative - and I'm very happy with the images I managed to come away with of this beautiful building. I will be back next year, and can only hope for more of the same beautiful weather next time.

Two quick shots with Minolta lenses

Just a quick post because I haven't really been out shooting yet, but managed a couple of quick shots over the weekend.

Spring has been very wet and wild here on the West Coast, with lots of storms and unpredictable weather. That also means a chance for fantastic sunsets in the evening if the storm clears in time. And fortunately, it has been. Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to get out and capture it.

Spring Sunset. Sony a100 with Minolta 100-200mm f4.5

Best I could do was put the Minolta 100-200mm telephoto on the camera, hold it over the fence in my back yard, and shoot the sunset from there. Yes, this is the view from my back yard. Not bad eh!?

The light was getting quite low, so I bumped the ISO up to 400, set the aperture to f5.6, and concentrated on taking the shot at the optimum 'Steady Shot' setting in the viewfinder. The final result is plenty sharp enough.

On Saturday the weather was better than expected, with lots of sun. Our dog just loves to 'sunbathe' in any patch of warmth, and I couldn't resist snapping her up on our bed.

Sun Dog. Sony a100 with Minolta 35-70mm f4

Jessie is our 'baby', and the whole family adores her. She's been a fairly expensive addition to the family - requiring knee surgery when she was one year old (she turned two this weekend) - but we wouldn't be without her.

To be honest, I don't take many shots of her at all. I suppose I shy away from the 'cuteness' factor with my photos, but I will probably regret that later on? Anyway, I took her photo this weekend because I was keen to try out the Minolta 35-70mm f4 zoom. It's a lens I had with my a200 a couple of years back, and it's such a stellar performer. Maybe the 35-70mm isn't a hugely versatile focal range (about a 50 to 105mm in 35mm terms), but the addition of a fairly handy 'macro' function at the 70mm end, together with great sharpness, makes this lens an absolute keeper as far as I'm concerned. No, it's not f1.8 - but f4 across the whole zoom range is still fairly respectable. And it did this portrait of Jessie justice.

I've gone back to processing my RAW images in Aperture - I just like it more than Lightroom, even if Adobe have the 'better' processing engine (apparently). I also processed the photo of Jessie in DXO's filmpack software straight in Aperture. I chose Fuji Astia 100 and bumped up the film grain ever so slightly.

So just a couple of quick shots, with a couple of quick lenses. Hopefully I'll get out more now that daylight savings is here and the days will get longer and warmer. Bring on a long and productive summer!

Sony A200 re-visted

Went over to Christchurch for PK last weekend (see last post) and had a great time away. Took lots of photos at the event, and will post some of my favorites soon.

On a slightly different note, I had a look around a few camera stores when I was over there - just window shopping, drooling over the latest models etc. What was the camera that I was the most excited/taken by? The Sony a77. Got to play with a Sony a99 too - which was also very nice, but way beyond my price range (mind you, so is the a77).

Of course on the trip home this got me thinking about my gear, and my direction in terms of upgrades or cameras I might afford in the future. Was I excited about possibly one day owning a Canon7D, a Nikon 7100, or a Sony a77 (hey, that's a lot of sevens)? I had held - and briefly used - a Canon 7D, and I must say I was somewhat underwhelmed. The Nikon 7100 looks like a nice camera - might be a possibility, although i saw a few Nikon's in the stores in Christchurch and didn't even bother to pick one up. What I made a bee-line for, and what got my pulse racing just a little bit, was the big Sony cameras.

A couple of years ago I owned a Sony a200, which I blogged about at the time. I really enjoyed using the camera, and raved about the images I got with it and the Minolta 35-70mm f4 that I purchased for it.

Ultimately, I chose to stay with my Canon system, since I had the 5D full frame at that stage and was shooting weddings etc. But a part of me was definitely sad to see the a200 go and I have often wondered whether I shouldn't have decided to change to Sony instead.

Well, last weekend in Christchurch was all the inspiration I needed to make the change, and I've decided to do just that... 'go to Sony'. I have minimal investment in gear at the moment anyway - owning a Canon20D, kit lens and 50mm f1.8, so a switch at this time wouldn't be too daunting. In fact, I might even make on the deal, since Sony a200 bodies are fairly numerous and going reasonably cheaply second hand - and classic Minolta AF lenses have always been amazing value on the used market.

My suspicions were confirmed this weekend when I bid for, and ended up winning, a Minolta Maxxum 7000 film camera with two Minolta AF lenses for $85.00NZ! The first lens is the one I was after, the Minolta 35-70mm f4 macro - the same lens that I used with my last a200. It's such a compact, reasonably fast (constant f4) and insanely sharp piece of glass that, even though it's a bit on the 'long' side as an everyday walkabout lens (52-105mm equivalent), I still wanted to own and use the lens - and it's just so darn cheap! Throw away the Maxxum 7000 film body, just keep the lenses, and I'm still only paying about $45 for each lens! That's amazing.

The second lens that comes with the film camera is another oddball classic Minolta AF lens - the 100-200mm f4.5. This 'mini beercan' also has rave reviews for sharpness, and a constant f4.5 aperture. The range equates to a 150-300mm lens on an a200 - not a bad telephoto zoom range, in such a small and compact lens design. They just don't make lenses like this anymore, and sometimes you've gotta ask yourself - why not?

There are a few a200's that I am watching online at the moment - all come with at least the standard Sony 18-70mm kit lens - quite a good lens by all accounts. So if I can snag one of these (after selling my Canon gear), my journey into the Sony camera system will be complete.

Then the dream of owning one of those sexy a77's Sony cameras can begin to become a reality...