Playing with aspect ratios on the S5.

For most of my photography 'career' I've been a fairly traditional shooter. By that I mean I don't tend to make much use of the technology that is built into todays cameras. There aren't all that many settings that I change or play around with on a regular basis. Growing up a film shooter, I tend to just focus on aperture, shutter speed and composition. I don't even really move my ISO around that much (mostly using the lowest native ISO setting the camera has).

Rapahoe Pier Structure. Lumix S5 with S20-60mm. f/8 @ 1/100th, ISO 100

Now having just said all that, I'm also not a luddite! I use image stabilisation as a matter of course, and will change the ISO if and when I need to. When I owned Fuji I spent endless hours playing around with film simulations. And of course, I shoot in RAW so I can get the best out of my images during post-processing. But usually, that's about it.

I've said on numerous occasions that I'm not a video guy, and would be more than happy if camera releases came in two flavors - with, or without video. My S5, although now 'old' by digital camera standards, has video features that I will never use. It is, in fact, by all accounts, still an amazing camera for video shooters - being predominantly designed with video shooters in mind (according to the hip on-line hybrid content creators). I don't care. Didn't buy it for its video capabilities - obviously. Because it is also - for all its video centric capabilities - a damn fine 'camera' for photography. Who'd have guessed?

Magick is Real. Lumix S5 with 20-60mm. f/8 @ 1/50th, ISO 100

In terms of photography-centric features, the S5 has a few that interest me slightly - and that I will 'play around with' from time to time. One of those is the high-res mode, which takes the 24MP sensor and turns it into a 60+MP monster! This does have some limitations - the camera must be on a tripod, and the scene you are photographing must largely be static (landscapes and not portraits). 

Do I really need 60+MP images to deal with? I suspect the answer is no. In fact I know that the answer is no. But hey, fun to 'play' with - right?

And maybe going out with your camera to 'play' with settings you don't normally shoot with, can be a door back into shooting with your camera a bit more? A bit of a spark to kick-start the creative juices again?

That's how it was for me the other evening when I found myself at a local beach and I decide to play around with aspect ratios.

Rapahoe Xpan. Lumix S5 with 20-60mm. f/8 @ 1/60th, ISO 100. 65:24 aspect ratio

I was watching a review of the S5 on youtube the other night (as you do), and the reviewer mentioned that the camera could shoot in the 65:24 'Xpan' ratio. I kind of knew this already, but hadn't given it much thought. But as I stood in front of a dilapidated pier structure at Rapahoe Beach, stretching out across the sand, I suddenly remembered about the panoramic aspect ratio of the Xpan. This, I thought to myself, would make a perfect subject for it. And I was right.

I really like the above image, and the subject works perfectly in this aspect ratio. Once I switched the camera's aspect ratio over to 65:24 and could 'see' in this format, it was a hell of a lot of fun trying to compose using the wide field of view.

Not that I don't think the subject doesn't work in the S5's native 3:2 aspect ratio - see the first image in this post. But it's undeniably 'fun' and then undeniably challenging, to compose for a totally different field of view.

Something fishy. Lumix S5 with 20-60mm. f/5.6 @ 1/50th, ISO 100. 1:1. Mono conversion

Once I had started exploring the possibilities of other aspect ratios, I started looking for compositions that would fit a particular framing. As an ex-medium format film shooter, I have a love-hate relationship with the 1:1 square format. When I was using medium format almost exclusively, I often struggled with composing in the square format. But every now and again I'll come across a subject and I'll 'see' it as a square image.

I saw the above image of the washed-up fish on the beach not only as a square 1:1 composition, but also as a monochrome photo. I have also added a little film grain when I processed the final image in Camera RAW, to give that familiar film-look. Might not be everyone's cup-of-tea, but I like it.

Standing Tall. Lumix S5 with 20-60mm. f/8 @ 1/80th, ISO 100. 1:1 aspect ratio

Of course the square format also works well for colour. The above image reminds me of the colour rendition of Kodak Ektar 100 medium format film. Has that 'look' with the overall green and blue hues. It's actually very faithful to the scene, and I love the colours coming from the S5's sensor. Even the RAW files look pretty good and don't need a lot of punch added in post.

All in a Row. Lumix S5 with 20-60mm. f/9 @ 1/40th, ISO 100

I had a lot of fun shooting in various different aspect ratios during the evening, and it did inspire me to keep shooting and find some interesting compositions. But, because I shoot in RAW mode, the aspect ratio I chose to use in-camera isn't set in stone like it would be if I was shooting jpeg. All of the images imported into Lightroom as a normal 3:2 ratio that makes use of the whole image sensor. The aspect ratio is a crop attached in the metedata. So it can be changed or removed at any stage.

So what's the point in shooting with different aspect ratios if you can just crop later on in post? Good question, and I've asked this myself. And I guess there's two parts to the answer. First, as mentioned above, if you are shooting in jpeg mode, then the aspect ratio (crop) is locked in to your final image. So any final jpeg images straight from camera will be as you saw it through the viewfinder.

Second, it's that 'play' aspect - and also the pre-visualisation - that happens when you are composing with the actual crop through the viewfinder. It's a bit like shooting monochrome on a digital camera. If you shoot RAW, then the monochrome setting is just attached metadata - the colour information is still retained in the original file. But the great thing is that you 'see' in monochrome through the viewfinder. I can't stress enough what a massive help this is when learning to shoot black and white images. Suddenly it's not 'theory' anymore, but actual visual feedback.

Have you shot in different aspect ratios in your camera? Do you even know where to go to change them? If you haven't, then go ahead and have a play. It's a lot of fun. It can also be a very helpful compositional aid. And if you shoot in RAW mode, then no harm - no foul. You can always undo what your clever camera has done.

Sony SLT a57 review

Despite what I have written recently about my desire to move to a full-frame sensor, my journey with the Sony APS-C a57 A-mount camera system continues.

Call it the ravings of a delusion mad-man (I have just recently had Covid) or the sad musings of a hopeless GAS (Gear Aquisition Syndrome) addict if you like. I don't mind. It's probably both.

Yet despite my recent obsession with full frame, I have also concurrently been growing and developing my skills (and accessories) with the a57 DSLT.

It has come with me on my last two landscape outings (I've made myself leave the a99 at home), and I have - for the most part - enjoyed using it as a landscape camera. The camera has a lot of things going for it that I like, and a few that I don't like.

I have owned, and used, probably hundreds of different cameras over the last 35+ years. So I don't need to spend months getting to 'know' a system before giving my thoughts on it. I know what I like, and don't like, about a camera after shooting with it a couple of times. So what follows is my review of the Sony a57 - from my perspective. What I mean by that is simple - but deserves to be stated. I'm not a fast action sports, wildlife, product or portrait photographer - I'm a landscape photographer (mainly). So that will be where I place all of the emphasis on my thoughts and opinions. I don't shoot video, so I'm not even going to mention its video capabilities. And I don't need 20fps. So if you want to know what the a57 is like for sports photography, you may need to look elsewhere. Nuff said.

Cobden Beach Sunset. Sony a57 with SAL18250mm. f/11 @ 1/8th sec, ISO 100

Having got that out of the way and off my chest, what do I think of the Sony a57 as a landscape camera? Well mostly, it's positive. Mostly the a57 and me get along just fine out in the field, and it is creating some very fine landscape images. So yes, generally, my experiences and feelings towards the camera have been good.

It is an all polycarbonate body, that isn't weather-sealed - so in one respect that's a tick against it for a landscape photographer. And if you are the kind of landscape photographer who loves to be out in howling gales, getting you and your gear completely battered by the elements, then no, the a57 probably isn't for you.

I'm not that guy. I don't actively look to shoot in bad weather. In fact I actively avoid it. You don't have to shoot in the pouring rain to get moody and atmospheric landscapes. So I don't. I have occasionally been caught in a downpour when out photographing, so I put my gear away. I'm pretty sure that the a57, even though not weather-sealed, could handle exposure to a quick downpour. So no, I'm not bothered by it's all polycarbonate non-weather sealed body. Your mileage may vary.

Rapahoe Beach, West Coast. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/11 @ 1/3rd sec, ISO 100. Grad ND filter

What I do appreciate about the Sony a57's polycarbonate body is that it is relatively light (yet with a decent heft) and relatively small. In fact, it's something of a 'goldilocks' camera for me in terms of its weight and size. It's bigger than the a55 that preceded it, fits perfectly in my hand without the need for an extra grip, and has excellent fit and finish. Nothing creaks or flexes (that shouldn't creak or flex) and all the buttons are in logical places.

My one gripe, maybe, around button placement, is to do with the positioning of the exposure compensation and ISO buttons directly behind the shutter button. They can require a bit of finger-gymnastics to reach, especially if you keep the camera up to your eye and want to do it by 'feel'.

And yet I say 'maybe' because it's really only a gripe when using the camera hand-held. When the camera is on a tripod - which it will be for 90% of my landscape shooting - then the issue goes away. It's also not an issue when shooting in manual mode, which I am also doing 90% of the time now. In full manual I set the appropriate ISO and then leave it, and of course don't use the exposure compensation button at all. Exposure is controlled instead by varying the shutter speed from the excellently placed front dial.

Rapahoe Beach, low tide. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/8 @ 2.5secs, ISO 100. Grad ND filter

So yes, I'm very happy with the overall handling of the Sony a57 when out in the field. Especially for a more 'enthusiast' mid-level camera.

Except... for the articulating LCD screen. At 920,000 dots it's clear enough, and seems reasonably colour accurate (enough for me anyways). And it is an articulated screen. But therein lies the 'slight' problem. Because it articulates downwards, and not sideways (see the image of the camera on my tripod above). Since the screen angles down, the tightening mechanism on the universal ball head I'm using gets in the way of the full articulation. I've got around this by reverse-mounting the camera to the ball head, so that I now tighten the mount from the front of the camera. This works, but it means I've had to re-learn which way around to use the ball head. A minor annoyance, but an annoyance nonetheless.

Also, a quick word on the 1.4million dot evf. No, it's not the most modern out there. And yes, it's an RGB sequential device and not OLED. Some people have complained of  'tearing' of the image as they look around the display. But I haven't noticed this at all. And I find the viewfinder big, bright and perfectly fine to use. So no, no issues there.

Golden Hour, Cobden Beach. Sony a57 with SAL18250mm. f/11 @ 1/100th, ISO 100

At the end of the day, what do we really care about though? That's right IQ (image quality). And really, the Sony a57 doesn't disappoint here either. Some will say that it's 'only' 16MP - and APS-C at that. But it's an excellent 16MP Sony sensor, with very good dynamic range, and the resulting RAW images have a decent latitude for post-processing. I'm very pleased that the native ISO is 100 (as opposed to 200 on my Olympus cameras) - it just feels right shooting at ISO 100. The files are clean (noise free) at base ISO, and 'useable' up to 3200 or even 6400. For what I do, which at the moment at least is 99% web-based, the 16MP sensor in the Sony a57 is MORE than enough.

I don't crop hard on the computer - preferring to do all my cropping in-camera (or at least as much as I can). So quite frankly, more than 16Mp is probably a waste. And yes, I do understand the irony of that statement given my last few posts.

Would I prefer it had the 24MP full-frame glorious sensor in the a99? Yes, of course I would. But do I need a 24Mp full frame sensor? No, I do not... 

Rapahoe inlet. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/11 @ 30 seconds, ISO 100. Grad ND filter

As befits a 21st century camera, the a57 is packed with whiz-bang techno stuff that I will never ever use. Panoramic sweep mode (in 2D and 3D - whatever that means), auto portrait framing, clear image zoom (apparently), numerous creative colour modes (for jpeg-only), lens correction - the list goes on.

The technology that I will use comes in the form of in-body image stabilisation (Sony call it 'Steady Shot') and full-time phase detection AF (due to the translucent mirror technology). Most of the time, if I'm using a tripod, the Steady Shot will be (should be) turned off. You don't need to stabilise a camera on a tripod. But I like the fact that image stabilisation is built into the body itself. This means that every lens you attach - even old Minolta lenses - are image stabilised.

The phase detect AF seems reliable and quick - certainly quick enough for landscapes. I'm also sure that it's quick enough for most other forms of photography too - with the exception of motorsport? The only other complaint I have with the a57 (although 'complaint' might be too strong a word - maybe 'niggle' is better) is with the AF points. There are 15 of them, in the same pattern as in the a99, which doesn't offer a very wide coverage. It's certainly not edge-to-edge like I'm used to with the Olympus system. There's no 'touch' to focus (it's not a touchscreen at all), and so AF is somewhat limited to the central portion of the image. Having said that, the same is true of the a99 as well, so it's not just an a57 issue. And again, manual focusing will get around this issue, especially for landscape work.

Rapahoe bonfire. Sony a57 with SAL18250.  f/11 @ 4 secs, ISO 100

Fortunately, manual focusing implementation is very good on the a57, as it is now with most modern digital cameras. The a57 has image magnification and focus peaking to aid in manual focusing, so nailing focus over the entire image area couldn't be easier.

Really, what's not to like? Battery life is very good (around 550 shots per charge using the lcd screen), the menu system makes sense and is easy to navigate, handling is (mostly) excellent, and IQ is stellar for a 16MP camera.

Overall, the Sony a57 makes for an excellent landscape photography camera and is a joy to use. I also get the feeling that I have yet to see it reach its full potential. My first few weeks with the camera have seen me use it exclusively with the SAL75300 and SAL18250 lenses - both of which aren't stellar performers. The 18-250 is ok, especially at the wide end for landscapes. But I have yet to try it with the Minolta 17-35mm f3.5 G lens that I've had paired with the a99. I may find that using this lens on the a57 bumps the IQ up a notch or two? It will be interesting to see...

First landscapes with the Sony a57

Having gone out the previous night with my 'new' (new for me, but second-hand) Sony a57 to photograph some birds (see last post), I thought it only fair that I go out again the next night, to put it through its landscape paces. It is, after all, mainly what I use my camera gear for.

I thought I would go back to Rapahoe Beach, to the spot where I had last tested out the a99 (see the images here). I love the images I get out of the Sony a99 - just gorgeous. So I thought "what the heck", why not put the a57 up against some serious competition and see how it fares!?

Rapahoe Pier structure. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/11 @ 1/3 sec, ISO 100

What do you reckon? Didn't do too badly now, did it? In fact, lets get right down to it - it did fantastically! 

Now I'm not going to lie to you (honest). Obviously the images from the full-frame 24MP a99, shot at ISO 50 with the Minolta 17-35mm G lens are cleaner, clearer and sharper. They just are. In fact they are some of the most impressive files out of a camera that I think I've ever seen.

But honestly, who wouldn't be happy with the above image, taken with a 16MP APS-C camera and lens combination that all-up cost me $395.00 NZ! These are great results at ISO 100. The camera can achieve an 11-stop dynamic range (the a99 has almost 13 stops - 12.8 to be exact), which is plenty to be able to retain detail in both the shadows and the highlights of a well-exposed image - even in tricky landscape lighting scenarios.

Beachwood, Rapahoe. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/11 @ 1/13th, ISO 100

Case-in-point is the image above. There is obviously very strong side lighting on the right from the setting sun, but I wanted to retain detail in the highlights, so I exposed for the sky and let the shadows darken. As you can see, they were recoverable in post, and the camera sensor has handled the extreme dynamic range in the scene very well. Again, perhaps it's not as 'clean' as a file from the a99 might have been - but 'again', it's a fifth of the price of the a99 (and that's not counting the Minolta lens).

Meandering. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/11 @ 1 sec, ISO 100 

I'm doing something with the a57 that I've never really done with any other camera before. Shooting in full manual. Perhaps that's a shocking thing for someone who has been a photographer for over 35 years to say, but it's also true. For practically all of my photography career, since owning my very first film camera (the Canon T70), I've shot - whenever possible - in Aperture priority mode. It's ingrained in me. It's just the way I think photographically. I've trained myself to think in apertures, and that's how I approach every scene. My first consideration - what aperture do I want. Dial that in, and let the camera do the rest.

I've tried to adapt to full manual a few times - when I used digital cameras with optical viewfinders. But I always found it a complete faff, and eventually ended up where I wanted to be if I had been shooting in aperture priority anyway (for the most part).

But with mirrorless, and an evf (electronic viewfinder), I've found that shooting manual is actually now a fast and viable option. Shooting in full manual on the a57 is a breeze. And still centers around dialing in the aperture first.

Ripples in motion. Sony a57 with SAL 18250. f/11 @ 1/6th sec, ISO 100

Setting the aperture manually on the a57 is a two-step process unfortunately, since it has no rear control dial. So you press the AEL button and spin the front control wheel to choose your aperture. Once set, you then also use the front control wheel to choose your shutter speed, and next to that is the ISO button. So the exposure triangle is 'somewhat' at your fingertips.

So why does this make it any better for full manual control? Actually it doesn't. What makes it 'better' is seeing the exposure changes in the evf! With the aperture locked in, and the ISO chosen, all that remains is to toggle the front wheel that controls the shutter speed, and the scene lightens or darkens accordingly! When it was a purely optical viewfinder, you would have to change your exposure value a bit, take another shot, and 'chimp' to see how close you got. If not, then rinse and repeat until you did. By then, the light had probably changed, and you would have to repeat the process all over again! Aarrgghhh.

But with the evf, all of that 'guess' work goes away. You actually get to see what's happening. And for me, this has been somewhat revelational! Yeah, I know, I'm a bit slow on the uptake...

Rapahoe Beach at Sunset. Sony a57 with SAL18250. f/11 @ 5 secs, ISO 100

Long story short, I actually enjoyed shooting in full manual. For the first time ever! Probably helped by the fact that I was working on a tripod (as I am mostly with landscapes) and the apeture never left f/11 nor did the ISO leave 100. So all I had to worry about was the shutter speeds. Which also wasn't a concern, since I was on a tripod. So yeah, we'll see how long full manual control lasts....

Were there things I didn't like with the a57? Of course...

For a start, I find the focus area to be too small. I want more focus points further out towards the edges. But to be fair, this is also a complaint I have with the Sony a99 too - so it's not just an issue with the a57.

Also, the flip down screen is just plain annoying. I'd much prefer if it just slid down like the one on my Olympus OM-D E-M1 did. Or better still, give me the full articulation of the Sony a99. That thing is the bomb! The screen on the a57, hinged as it is at the bottom, gets stopped by my tripod mount, so doesn't really flip out on an angle to aid when viewing on the tripod. I've figured a work-around, where I now mount the camera on the tripod 'back to front' so the locking mechanism is now operated from the front of the camera. But I'm not crazy about this.

Another rear control wheel would be great, so changing the aperture wasn't a two-step process. Not a deal-breaker, but a nice-to-have.

And lastly... yeah, ok - I wish it had the 24MP sensor of the a99 and went down to ISO 50 (or even 64), for a cleaner image. That would be nice. But not, like, essential...

So really, what I'm saying, is that I wish it was an a99?! Maybe, I guess. I've been a bit spoiled by having one at the same time as I got the a57. And let's face it, any APS-C camera would pale in comparison to the full-frame, full-metal, full-control awesomeness that is the a99.

And yet it can still take some fantastic images. As seen above. I did have a fantastic time out with my new a57. And I thoroughly expect to have many more.

More Landscapes with the Sony a99

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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