I had a fun day flashing back to 2008 in my favorite camera store today. Bought another Nikon classic for a fraction of the price I paid for the same model a decade ago....

Nikon D700. Old School. No Drool. 

As I mentioned in a post this morning I've gotten into some sort of thought-loop about older cameras from the glory days of digital. More specifically I've become convinced that the move to higher resolution with ever smaller pixels versus lower resolution with big fat pixels is not an improvement but a compromise or trade off. 

Before you rush to vilify me for what might seem to you to be an obvious blind spot in this whole thought process please be aware that while I did own this camera once before (the year after it hit the market I bought one new) I have also owned and worked with both the Sony A7Rii and the Nikon D810 so I am not a complete stranger to either side of the pixel size discussion.

I found this D700 lounging in the used case over at Precision-Camera.com. I bought it along with two extra batteries. I always buy extra batteries. I've got a 50mm f1.8 on the front and I'll start reacquainting myself with it tomorrow after swim practice. Should be an interesting diversion...

I had forgotten how big, heavy and loud these cameras are. But I guess there are compromises everywhere.

Curious to find if you, gentle reader, have a similar eccentric favorite. Let me know.

What is it about the huge pixel size cameras that makes me want them? Instead of the high resolution/tiny pixel cameras I've owned?

Shot with a Nikon D2Hs many years ago.

I've been digging through my archive of digital files lately and appreciating the search options available in programs like Adobe's Lightroom. Over the past few days I've been researching the work I did in the past with big pixel cameras. Cameras like the Nikon D700, the Kodak DCS 760, the Kodak DCS SRL/n and the Nikon D2Hs. All of these have pixel sizes that are at least twice as large as the high resolution cameras we are served up today. 8 microns across instead of 4 or 3.8 or 2.5. It's obvious that the higher res cameras can resolve a lot more detail and can be blown up to larger sizes in a way that's more convincing (for highly detailed subject matter) but are there image qualities that the bigger pixels give that smaller geometry pixels have taken away? 

Once I started looking I started seeing that in portrait work in particular the smaller file, bigger sensor-ed cameras of yesteryear had a look that I really, really loved. It's hard to put into words exactly but it's a feel of there being a natural and defined edge between tones. Not a hard edge that comes from over-sharpening but a natural looking edge that more closely resembles the look of the acutance in film files. A look that may just appeal to people who cut their teeth on the older film technology.

At any rate I'm sourcing some of the cameras that I abruptly discarded in the mindless pursuit of endless consumerism to see if they still hold sway in the way I see them reflected in the work I'm looking at. With well over half a million images in my libraries there is a lot of material with which to do direct comparisons. I'm not saying one technology is clearly superior over the other but there may be visual differences that trigger different responses from viewers across the spectrum.

I'm jumping down another rabbit hole so I guess we'll see. Beats talking about cars again...

A morning of info-purging and space management. Mostly the space in my brain.

From Esther's Follies in Austin, Texas

Jobs these days seem more focused and people-oriented around my studio these days but it wasn't always so. In the early part of the century my business was that of a photographic generalist, I would make headshots one day, images of semiconductor image dies the next day and maybe circuit boards or finished high tech products the following day. There was more of a flow then to the work instead of the stop and start of the bigger but fewer projects we handle now. 

Those were the days when all of our archiving was done on CD-roms. Tons and tons of CD-roms. The CDs eventually gave way to DVDs as the camera files grew larger and DVD technologies and reliability improved. In a given week, while working with CDs, I or my assistant might burn up to 30 or more disks in order to do a 3X redundant back-up of a project. More if we were returning from a multi-day annual report shoot carrying envelopes packed with CF memory cards.

It was time consuming but having come from film we understood that digital file storage at the time was much more fragile and transient and we had yet to really experience the ever accelerating rise and quick fall of stat-up businesses. Most of our clients were venerable "blue chips" and we had every expectation that they'd be around for the long haul and might expect us to be able to access photograph from a decade or so past. 

At some point we woke up and realized that even clients like IBM and Motorola were not immune to the ravages of the markets. One of my biggest clients, Motorola, started bleeding resources like something had opened one of their arteries and in a short time span they spun off their body parts (different product sectors) like crazy. Our big piñata was the semiconductor sector and it was sold off as Freescale which was then taken private, then relaunched as a new public company and then bought by NXP who may or may not end up selling the very diminished and debt laden remainders to Qualcomm. Each successive owner downsized the company and cut expenses. We've gone from working for them once or twice a week to once or twice a year. 

So, when I looked through my archives I found over 100 pounds of CDs and DVDs with old photos of microprocessor products long since obsoleted from the market, headshots against boring backgrounds of people long retired and even CDs of candid photos from holiday parties. The 100 pound archive/anchor is just images created before 2005. All of these went into the trash this morning and the process has just started but man oh man does it ever feel good to rid my brain of the task of keeping a running, sub-conscious inventory of all that stuff. The sense of closure for the previous decade is euphoric. 

We did a similar "cleansing" last year with old 35mm negatives. Mostly headshots against early century backgrounds like our "Dell Blue" headshots and our "Motorola Gray" headshots. Images that were uninspired at their time of creation and even more so today.

So, we're down to two cameras we work with and a jumble of drives. I no longer look at this profession as one in which we save images beyond three years. I'm thinking more like a consultant whose work has value in the moment or a carpenter who builds a project and then walks away. Keeping "forever" archives is like a permanent babysitting job with no pay off. 

We've amended our paperwork to limit the time we save and keep client files to three years. Don't like that? Don't work with me. Or learn how to save the files we send you. 

Unless all your work is done at the highest level you'll surely generate a fair amount of crap along the way. Nothing says you are required to keep the stuff that's starting to smell.

Start at the Blanton Museum for the Ellesworth Kelly then head down Second to the Convention Center and back on Sixth. Camera in hand. Intelligent Auto engaged.

The main gallery at the Blanton Museum. 

With all the hoopla the Blanton is putting on about Ellsworth Kelly you would have thought he was a famous photographer, but no, just a painter and stained glass window designer... But I figured I'd go and check out the new show anyway. (kidding. just kidding). Right on the UT campus is a new permanent installation of a Kelly "chapel" with remarkably cool, stained glass windows. About one hundred yards away, tucked into the main gallery on the first floor of the museum proper is an robust show of Kelly's two dimensional work and a smaller collection of his 3-D "Totems." The work is good and the installation is fun. If you like to take photographs

If you are planning on being a real freelance photographer have you decided on which car you'll sleep in?

a shot at Esther's Follies from midway back in the audience.

Panasonic GH5 + Olympus 40-150mm Pro. ISO 1600.

There is a joke that's always going around Austin, Texas. It goes something like this:

What do you call a musician who has just broken up with his girlfriend?  

--- Homeless.

And there is a joke we photographers tell when we get together for (discounted) beer at the end of a long and impoverished week of working as freelancers. It goes like this:

How is photographer different than an extra large pizza with all the toppings?

--- You could actually feed a family of four with the Pizza....

As you may have noticed in a recent post I called the kind of business we do, "freelance photography." What I and my colleagues think this means is that we are not connected, in a business sense, to any company or association as employees and are not indentured servants. That we are non-exclusive. That we'll work for anyone who meets our criteria and who can write the right check. A regular commenter made the point that labels can have a certain amount of negative power, especially in the minds of the clients who hire us. He suggested that "freelancer" conjures up an image of the starving artist who lives in a crappy apartment and drives a 15 year old Corolla. He also suggest that a freelancer fears his clients and is willing to roll over and show his belly the minute a clients starts to negotiate.

I'm pretty sure his observation was meant as mostly a tongue-in-cheek response with a bit of truth larded into the meat of it.

But it got me thinking about the way photographers and most of the general public see people working in our gigantic "tent" profession. Perceptions run the gamut from the idea that every photograph is, at heart, a wedding photography who might also do some other, more specialized photo work when they are not grappling with and bowing down to bridezillas. Others imagine most photographers being creepy guys with dark glasses who have promoted themselves from driving ice cream trucks through neighborhoods to shooting "glamour" and other forms of hard and soft core porn.

Then there are "moms with cameras" and "soccer moms", all of whom shoot exclusively with Canon 5Dx cameras and the ever present 70-200mm zoom with the lens shade stuck on backwards. And we can't forget the pot bellied, blue collar male tech workers who shoot kids sports. And wears baggy, shiny athletic shorts.

But the common thread that unites the public imagination about each of these stereotypes is that they don't make real money,  are moonlighting from a "real" job, or spend their daytime hours making up loose ends with a shift or two at Starbucks. Or, if you are from the Boston area, as a "barista" at Dunkin Donuts.

I did not know that our industry was in such dire straits when I joined its ranks more than 30 years ago. And since I'm sure the economics of our industry have declined even more since the time I arrived I am predicting that the majority of freelancers will no longer be living in crappy apartments but have moved, by necessity, to their cars.

This tidbit allows me to take my focus off cameras for a while and concentrate on another part of the gear equation. To wit, if you are going to make the choice to live in your car in order to save on rent (and how else will any of us ever be able to afford a Leica SL and lenses?) then what car should we choose?

Most will probably have to stick with the car they are already making payments on but I believe in dreaming big so I'll pretend that I don't have a car payment or a car and I'd rather have both than to shell out the $4,000 per month that the average two bedroom, one bath apartment rents for in downtown Austin. And I can't imagine the cost to live in the pricey parts of Austin.

On first blush I'd probably want to go with something like a Chevrolet Suburban because of the interior space. But there's the issue of fuel economy to think about. Still, a white one (to reflect the Texas sun during the day) with blacked out windows (for privacy during the evening and overnight) certainly has its appeal. But a quick check at Car Max clearly puts even used ones far outside the budget constraints of most of our peers.

My next best choice would have to be a smaller SUV. Something like a Toyota Rav 4 or a Honda CRV but, again, a quick check shows that, dammit!, these models hold their value really well and probably the most $$$ most of us freelancers can scrape together would only cover a maroon Pontiac Aztec. That would work for older, more established photographers because you fold down the back seats and stretch out a bit to sleep after a day on your feet chasing brides and bagging donuts.

But our commenter is probably right in that most entry level shooters will have to make due with the 15 year old Toyota Corolla they got in school. Except for the ones who went to state schools ---- they'll probably have to settle for 15 year old Hyundais. But, in due time they'll be able to tell their kids about the golden age of sleeping in cars because, with the relentless downward spiral in the freelancing industry it's only a matter of time when the average photo industry worker will be sleeping in a DIY lean-to in the park and riding their Walmart bicycle to the next job...

At some point I was in the same economic boat as the rest of the freelancers. Sleeping in my AMC Gremlin and begging for film money on the main drag. But then, one day, after reading an inspirational business blog, I became a Photographer/Consultant/Studio Owner. It was as easy as reprinting my business cards (or writing in my new title with a Sharpie) and now I've got it made in the shade.

I've got two cars but I rarely have to sleep in them. I have a real office and it has air conditioning!!! We live in a house in the middle of the posh Westlake Hills area with indoor plumbing and a dog; one that we've never had to look at as livestock. Once I took the word "freelancer" off my card we were off and running. Ma and I haven't had to sell plasma in years! And we even got to send the boy off to a four year college in a nicer state.

But I feel like I have the moxie to start over again if I have to. But this time around I wouldn't settle for anything less than a Chevy Impala with bench seats. Comfortable enough to sleep two and a dog.
With enough room in the trunk for cameras.

Tip to the wise: You can always store unused cameras at the pawn shop. Just remember to get them back before the next wedding.

There's a big spectrum in our industry. Re-define yourself and enjoy unlimited success...

They laughed when I sat down to play the piano. Until I started to play.

grain of salt?

Can we talk about the business of freelance photography and the need to be picky about the jobs you accept?

To hear it from some "experts" in our industry all that matters is nailing down a job, assignment, project or purchase order for anything with a check attached, but the reality is that clients will let you work nearly for free, against your best interests, and on poor terms for as long as you want. And it probably won't be a long or happy tenure in the business as you must make enough money to turn a healthy profit (or why else be in the business?) and you must honestly enjoy what you do for your living. Right?

I've had two recent potential clients approach me, offer projects and request bids. One was a full day photographing people in a retail location and the second was a three part request that would have me shooting in industrial environments here in Austin and in northern Mexico, as well as acting as a supervisor or consultant for a second photographer in a different country. 

After receiving the bid request from the industrial concern I did a little digging

A quick, three paragraph "review" of the Panasonic G9. Well, more like a few observations.

An image from a previous SXSW. Shot with a traditional DSLR. Shown here just for fun. 
©2012 Kirk Tuck

I played with a Panasonic G9 yesterday. It was a glancing and shallow appraisal, but I did come away with three or four thoughts about the new camera. The first is that the new body is really grippy. By this I mean that it seems to fit into my hands more or less perfectly. The actual grip is bigger and more pronounced than the one on the GH5 and it allows for worry-free one-handed shooting; you just feel as though you'll never drop the camera. That's a good thing. The G9 is also moderately big. It's bigger than a typical Canon Rebel or one of the Nikon 3xxx series entry level cameras. This is also a plus because it makes the camera easier to operate; the controls are bigger and better spaced and the top panel, pooh-poohed as extraneous by many, is quick and easy to read and a nice addition to rear panel only shooting. I adore Panasonic for not screwing around with new batteries on every new generation of cameras and that's a huge plus as well. 

On the other hand I have to say I was negatively amazed at

Coming back to 1 inch sensor cameras can be fun....and a revelation. Especially if you are shooting in bright sun! Panasonic FZ2500. Not sharp? Hah!

I got tired of sitting in the studio retouching and writing letters to insurance companies and, when the sun came out last week, I took off a few hours to walk around Austin with my ancient Panasonic FZ2500 super-zoom camera. It's really pretty wonderful. We're long past the point where there is any hesitation about its sharpness or the competence of its lens. The image stabilization is great, the exposures are accurate, the color is wonderful. The camera is big and bulky but not heavy. It's pretty cool to be able to sling a 20 megapixel over your shoulder (that doesn't feel burdensome) and have, at your fingertips, a 24 to 450mm lens that delivers good detail. 

It's a good camera for lazy still photographers who would rather wear polyester than carry an old fashion camera bag with a collection of heavy lenses; it's an even better choice for videographers who work in good light. The 1080p video is sharp and juicy. The three steps of ND are highly useful. And there is so much more. I have a selective memory; when the camera is not in my hands I tend to forget just how much I like it. When I pick it up my interest is renewed. Click to view em big. 

See: What I bought today (down below at the end of the blog post) for a good laugh!

I've been mucking around with a Nikon D2XS lately and it's a blast from my sentimental past. But I'm already tired of just using the 50mm lens I bought. I wandered into Precision Camera today and looked at some ancient zoom lenses to stick on the front. I bought one but when I put it on the front of my camera it would not autofocus. I took it back and they were appropriately chagrined, but I thought well, if I'm not going to have AF I should just buy an even older zoom that doesn't have auto focus to begin with. I ended up buying an ancient 35-70mm f3.5 ai and it's a beast. Just a beast. I can hardly wait to take it out and put it through its paces..... About the cost of a really nice lunch....

One Camera. One Lens. And a bunch of perfectly smoked ribs...

I've got this friend who is a genius. Yes, he's a photographer who was profiled in Communication Arts Magazine, he's shot for McDonalds, Quaker, Canon and ESPN. He's photographed for National Geographic too. But I call him a genius for the way he cooks ribs. His name is Will Van Overbeek and his homemade smoke pit would give Aaron Franklin's pit a run for the money, that is if Will barbecued for money.... He only cooks for his friends. I am lucky to count myself among the ranks having known Will since the early 1970's.

We talked recently and we were sharing stories about losing parents and dealing with both the grief of loss and the unending minutia of settling a parent's estate. Last Friday I got a call from Will announcing his intention to fire up the pit and make me medicinal, healing ribs. I accepted the invitation in a nanosecond. 

We were at his house yesterday evening, sitting around the picnic table in the backyard and having a feast of fresh corn muffins, smoked ribs with homemade (as opposed to "house made", a term I can't stand!!!) barbecue sauce, pinto beans with avocado and Mexican white cheese, and a spicy slaw. I brought a couple bottles of Chilean Malbec others brought lagers and amber ales. It was amazing. Will doesn't cook politically correct mini-portions. We stuffed ourselves with perfect pork and there was enough left over for our hosts to send all the guests home with goodie bags of outrageously good left overs, complete with small jars of (precious and mysterious) homemade sauce.

The combination of great food, great conversation and the warm camaraderie was amazingly curative, I woke up this morning feeling more positive and alive than I have in weeks --- maybe months.... I ate my take home ration for lunch today. My blood pressure dropped by ten points, my bank account glowed happily and my hair turned one stop less gray. I'm waiting for Will to retire from his job as a full time photographer (yes! there are still some of these out in the wild) so I can convince him to open a BBQ restaurant where I'll always be able to access this supreme, platinum level of rib euphoria. We'll see...

But more importantly, what camera and lens might one take to a social event dealing with BBQ consumption and red wine oversampling? Seems logical to me that one would limit oneself to just one camera and one lens. It should be something easy to operate and simple. Maybe it would be a good idea to select a combination that's more or less weather (or wine) resistant. 

I chose one of my recent, all time favorite combinations: The Panasonic G85 and the Sigma 30mm f1.4 Art lens for micro four-thirds. 

my starter plate.

I have a few other cameras and I like them all but when it comes to easy handling, small size, great features and like-ability there are no other cameras in my studio that I like as well. Sure, I am happy to shoot all day long with Panasonic GH5's but I'm thrilled shooting all day long with the G85. 

The different choice for me, this time, is my new appreciation for the Sigma 30mm f1.4 dc dn "Contemporary" lens. It's relatively small and light, has a focal length that makes me so very happy, and is sharp, sharp, sharp. Since I put it on the camera a week ago I've been loathe to pull it back off. 

Mary made us crispy, crunchy corn muffins. Choose with jalapeños or without.

The aforementioned spicy slaw. 

No Texas picnic is complete without fresh avocado...

I sliced the radishes while we were hanging out in the kitchen talking about our college kids.

Huge thanks to Will and Mary for an evening with great friends, great food and a reprieve from worrying that I've missed some critical step in the administration of life. 

So, where else to we take our little camera and lens combo? Well, how about a first, exploratory visit to this year's SXSW?

Signage inside the convention center.

I did something so out of character today. I gave up the need for constant and overwhelming control of my camera settings and decided to set the dial on the G85 to "*IA" which stands for (I think) intelligent automatic. The camera decides where to place the focusing squares, what exposure to set and what music to play on my earbuds.  (just kidding about the earbuds...). 

What this means to me is all I have to be responsible for is seeing something and then pointing the camera in the right direction. It worked surprisingly well. In fact, I preferred the camera's exposure decisions more often than I might have preferred my own. 

The problem with yesterday's walk through the heart of Austin's downtown and the home of SXSW is that no one seems to have shown up this year for the conference/concerts. At least not yet...

Usually, at the start of the second week, the unofficial start of the "real show" the streets, coffee shops and cafes are packed to the gills and people are queuing up the length of football fields to get into the sought after venues. Not so this year, in fact sidewalk traffic was about par for a first clear, cool day of Spring. Pedi-cab operators were lounging at intersections with no fares in sight. Seats at Medici coffee shop in the middle of Congress Ave. were widely available and the expected throng of millennial and their moms, captivated by iPhone screens while ambulatory, were conspicuous in their absence. 

It's no secret that SXSW peaked a few years back and has become a less and less popular event. One more or less abandoned by many of their traditional (and highly profitable) corporate sponsors. No big, breathless showcases that I could see for the likes of Samsung or Google. No throng of swag dispensers ranging through the street giving away insulated can holders, pens that light up or free passes to a venue serving dead pizzas. It was just wide open side walks as far as the eye could see. And as far as the camera could shoot. I gave it a couple of hours but the expression of disappointment on my camera rig's face confirmed that the lack of interesting targets had soured us both on the undertaking. Still, even when the fish are not biting it's fun to travel light. One small lens, one small body and a clean pair of bifocals. Maybe today will be more visually productive (sounds like a doctor's description of a hacking cough...). 

One can see the crowds swirling around this car display on a blocked off, downtown street. 

You couldn't swing an obsolete Nikon around without hitting someone? 

When in doubt (bored by lack of street life) snap a hew pics of historic buildings in the late afternoon. 

Why, in a brand new Mercedes SUV, fully festooned with Blue Tooth, would one need to break the law and operate their motor vehicle with a cellphone in hand? Why? Just Why?

Again. Beware the thronging crowds on Austin's popular 2nd Street...

This is how an event melts into an inconsequential footnote...

Random Notes Bouncing Around My Brain. Saturday Evening.

Swimming Pool. Lisbon.

A lot of cameras have come into the market lately; most are iterations of existing models with various added features or specialized feature sets. It's nice that almost everyone is busy iterating new models but there is little, newly launched, that propels me from my chair at the dining room table to my office computer to engage in pre-ordering much of anything. 

Sony announced the new A7iii and it looks great. Key features are improved video chops and the new battery. Both are nice, and welcome, but hardly a big enough jolt to move existing A7ii buyers to  rush to the camera store. The "nerd" feature of the new model is a sensor that is purported to have wider dynamic range and I'm sure there are a few people out there who feel that this would be welcome for their work. For me? Heck, I'm not using up all the dynamic range I've got right now. As a first time buyer into the Sony system the new A7iii would be a smart acquisition. You get ample resolution from a full frame sensor as well as a myriad of little improvements that should make photography more fun. But in the end it's the same resolution as the A7ii, the same color family, the same EVF resolution, the same rear screen resolution, and pretty much the same stabilization parameters too. If all you want a camera for is to generate a nice, big file you might be a thousand bucks ahead to just source the previous generation (A7ii) and learn to put a couple of extra batteries in your pocket...

My thoughts about the A7Riii are about the same. A bit more dynamic range, a bit faster throughput but mostly the same imaging performance one can already achieve with the A7Rii. Already have the A7Rii? Save your money and wait for the next generation after the iii and you'll probably feel smarter. As always, if there's something unique for you in the new model (can't think of what it really might be....) and you have the cash then go for it. 

My question for the moment is: Where is Sony going with the A6x00 series cameras. While the A6500 and A6300 are very capable image generators and both are very good at AF and video do we really need to keep iterating all that imaging goodness in a body design that is so tortured? It was novel to make a camera with such great output as tiny as possible five or six years ago but I think we've learned our lessons. If you want to have a camera body that's comfortable to hold and use you need to make it big enough to fill the average user's hands, to provide enough square centimeterage 

of surface area for good controls and enough mass to help make the camera stable. Not to mention that a bigger body gets you a bigger, better battery and much better thermal management. I'd love to see an APS-C version Sony mirrorless in the A7 body style; or even bigger. The APS-C sensor is a logical choice for great video capture and a bigger body (a la the Panasonic GH5) would allow for twin UHS-ii card slots and the ability to run the camera in the sun without shutting down or compromising imaging performance. 

I'll sign the petition for a "pro" style body that uses the newest Sony A7xx battery and the faster cards. That, and a much bigger EVF window/magnification. Let's make sure when they get around to producing it (inevitable) they remember to put that headphone jack on the side....

I won't go into the A9 because it's just a stupid camera for the kind of work I do. To pay more for less capability than an A7Riii in every regard but speed is just amazingly stupid for anyone not requiring some zany speed metric for some highly specialized task. It's not sports. No one needs 20 fps to track most any sport. I conjecture that they make this camera just to torment Nikon. 

Nikon. In my mind, for my potential use, Nikon only makes two cameras. But both of them are still very useful and bright arguments for sticking with the lens system or for staying with DSLRs. Conservative but capable. I'm thinking mostly of the D850 and the D750. I've owned the D750 (the most recalled camera in recent history) as well as the predecessor to the D850; the D810. After playing and working with a D850 for the last few days I can honestly say that when it comes to sheer image quality it's probably the best all around camera you can buy in 2018. And considering the competition that is saying a lot. If I shot high end products or fashion all day long this is probably the camera I would own. The files are amazing when wrung out to their maximum potential. 

I was even impressed by its the overall look of the video files. But even as I was playing around and shooting test shots with the camera I could not help wondering how much better the camera could have been with a super high resolution EVF installed in the place of the traditional eye level prism finder. Wanna go into the photography business with one camera and one lens? Buy a D850 and the Nikon 24-120mm f4.0. Then put your credit card away and go shoot. 

If you haven't had the religious conversion to the power of the EVFs yet and you don't need endless resolution then the D750 is the perfect all around compromise of: traditional DSLR, sweet spot resolution, great handling and very nice, mature color. The one I owned went back for service once too often for me but I have many friends who love theirs and have made kilo-bucks in the past four years shooting them. I've seen them new for around $1700 but if you are on a budget and must go Nikon be advised that D610s use the same basic sensor, have the same color response and are dropping in price toward the $1200 mark, new. 

If you enjoy studying the history of photography you might want to buy a Nikon for your historical collection. If they don't come out with a convincing APS-C or full frame mirrorless camera in the next 12 months ----- they are toast. Not right away but ----- toast all the same. 

Canon. Canon is such an enigma to me right now. Some great lenses. Some good lenses. Some mediocre lenses. A lot of good, nice handling and mature bodies (the 5D series, the pro bodies), some great AF technology and an interesting approach to sensor tech. Less low end DR. Shadows that recover into pointillist noise patterns. But when I walk out of my door and embrace the wide open world of photography it's the female segment of the market that is remarkably almost all Canon.  Every woman photographer I meet seems to be driving a 5D2, 5D3 or 5D4, nearly without exception. I get it. The color is pleasing and easy to work with in post production. The 24-105 + the 70-200mm combo is universally embraced and there's nothing else to buy (except for the A.I. powered new Canon flash). 

Seems the gear nuts are unable to embrace the Canon multi-verse because of the dynamic range controversy but the non-gear nuts are happy with tried and true technology that just works. I've shot with Canon cameras and they are, for the most part, great. Just think how much greater they'd be if Canon delivered a model with a really nice EVF. Since they've been introducing rank consumer models with APS-C sensors and EVFs I conjecture that it's only a matter of time before they begin to join the worship services already in progress over in the sanctuary of EVF-ness for full frame. They need only look to Sony for guidance....

If Nikon and Canon were the only two choices in solid cameras today it would be interesting to think about choosing one over the other. The Canons are fun to shoot and pleasant while the Nikon's are the precocious lab rats of the two. It all comes down to mindset ----- and the (perceived) need for super wide dynamic range. Confession: surging nostalgia for the Canon 5Dmk2+100mm f2.0, but equally balanced by the same kind of Nostalgia for the D610+85mm f1.8. 

Wouldn't it be a more interesting photo environment if both Nikon and Canon started introducing a choice in new camera lines? A D850 for traditionalist and a D850EVF for cognoscenti?

Olympus. It's time for Olympus to make some interesting "special edition" EM-1mk2s. Let's talk. 

I have a feeling we're going to be living at 20 megapixels in m4:3rd-land for some time to come so "new and improved" is going to have to come from features and style. I would love to see an EM-1 mkV that had a permanently attached battery grip, beautifully integrated into the overall design, that added all the capabilities that videographers who also moonlight as photographers would want. That would include space for a full size HDMI port, headphone jack, mic jacks, and a battery outside the core body of the camera in order to isolate the good stuff (sensor) from heat. I would also love to see a menu that you could choose in order to optimize for video. That would be separate from the Klingon language menus now being used for their mostly still photography control. 

Where Olympus is totally rocking it right now is in the lens department. I have experienced it first hand in the 12-100mm Pro and the 40-150mm Pro and I continue to be impressed and awed. I've been playing around with the Rokinon 50mm f1.2 for cropped cameras but it's just not quite there when used wide open. If anything the Rokinon has become my emotional brain's prime ally in the quest to buy the Olympus 45mm f1.2 Pro lens, which would be quickly followed by the 25mm Pro and the 17mm Pro. 

I teeter on the abyss of plunging back into the Olympus camp via an EM-1 mk2 just for the dual I.S. I'd get with the 12-100mm. I can't imagine it could be even better than it is right now.....

Which leads me to thoughts about Panasonic. The GH5 (classic) impressed me last weekend when I shot for a radiology practice. Batteries that last all morning long and then half of the afternoon. A perfect EVF finder. A great, flippy screen. And, at the end of the project, a great set of big raw files that are jam-packed with detail and perfect color. These guys get color science in a big way. 

My only regret was that there was not more video to be done. It's that camera's ultimate wheelhouse. 

I know they just introduced the G9 and it's fast and perky but what would I really like to see in the next generation of GH cameras? Um. The only thing I can think of would be the high res mode. Everything else about the GH5 is perfect for its format. 

But what about the GH5S? This camera is ultimately interesting to me but only as a curiosity. It's so obvious where the designer's inspiration came from. This is the micro-four-thirds version of a Sony A7S or A7Sii. Lower pixel count in exchange for higher ISO performance. But I think the performance improvement mostly pans out only in the video area and so it becomes only a specialty camera and not an everyday user. My friend James has one but every time he heads out to shoot something he seems to default to the GH5. It may be a compromise but life is made up of compromises and he seems to feel most comfortable with the classic... 

I'll wait for the G90. A rangefinder styled version of the G9. 

And that leads us to the eccentric system. Fuji. Like Olympus I think Fuji does lenses really, really well. They seem to have their fingers on the pulse of what higher end consumers would like in lenses and they tend to deliver it. I want to like Fuji but I'm a little afraid of them. You see, I was one of their early, unintentional beta testers. I worked with a couple of Fuji S2 cameras for while. When they worked they worked well and the color and tonality of the files was really great for the time. The S3 was good as well. But the S2 had two faults; it had two different sets of batteries and their individual exhaustion rate was never synchronized. Those cameras corrupted more CF cards than any camera in the history of my camera use experience. To this day I don't trust the bodies. 

And, in fact, I'm not sure I trust the camera body designers. I saved up all my money from returnable bottle deposits and from begging on street corners just to buy the original Fuji X-Pro-1 when it came out. I rushed to the store with my bags of nickles and quarters and dimes, I asked to see the demo model and pulled it up to my aging eyes. Blurry finder. I asked the salesperson to help me find the diopter adjustment knob only to be told that this particular camera did NOT have an adjustable eyepiece diopter. After that I've never been able to take Fuji cameras seriously as "user" cameras. Just not contenders....

I understand that they've improved by leaps and bounds. And, of course, the lenses... So I tried once again and bought a X-100T. That was a nightmare of a camera and one I could not understand, tolerate or appreciate. It's tainted my perspective ever since and that's sad because I've heard such great things about the XT-2 and even the X-H1. You go ahead and buy one. I'll go with the theory of "thrice burned means I am an idiot."

Great color. Great lenses. Nice styling, but I keep checking under the bed for monsters...

I think the overlooked Fuji camera right now is the EX-3. A nice body style with a reasonable price and the same sensor as the top of the line cameras. At around $1299 with the good 18-55mm what is there not to like? If I was to test the Fuji waters yet again it would be this camera that I'd pick up and put through its paces. Ah, here in the EX-3 is the Fuji gateway drug.

Who have I left out? Well, there's Leica but I won't go there. I believe they make insanely good lenses and that they used to make insanely good film bodies. I tested several Leica M series digital bodies and I'll have to say that the translation from film to digital didn't do Leica any favors. For the price of an M digital body and a standard lens you could pretty much equip an entire studio using other brands. When I make my next million I might reward myself with an M10 (or by then, M22) but maybe I'll just keep the money in the bank... 

Finally, there's Pentax. They lost me, existentially, when they came out with a camera that had a grip that lit up. Really! A light show on the handgrip. Amazingly tacky. Trump level tacky. In fact, had they come out with gilded version I think we could be hawking a bunch right now on Pennsylvania Ave. While the newest K1 mk2 might be an exemplary full frame body with the heft and density of a classic I falter when I look through their inventory of full frame compatible, designed for digital, lenses. 

Wouldn't it be great if the K1 Mk2 was similar to the Sony A7 series in that one could use just about anyone's lenses on the front of it? If I was an artist instead of a commercial user I'd love to try the K1-2 with a single, hand selected lens. Perhaps the perfect 50mm. It's a camera whose ethos cries out for a tiny handful of prime focal length lenses. As such it's a "pass" for most working stiffs.

So, where do I see the whole industry moving? 2018 has started out with a cough and a wheeze when it comes to sales. Maybe it's because we finally like and are satisfied with all the stuff we just bought. Maybe it's because official unemployment numbers dropped to something like 4.1% and everyone is too busy working to give a shit about cameras anymore. Maybe photography has become boring. Everyone is heading over to YouTube to glaze out on videos. Maybe, just as it's too much trouble to read it's also too much trouble to look at still images. Maybe it's like the Matrix where everyone is hooking in and endless video feeds them their reality. I think the malaise is because we've collectively decided to stop shooting literal and start shooting figuratively, shoot surreally, shoot impressionistically. Shoot ideas instead of proofs of technical process. All of which means that hyper detail, hyper sharpness and perfect focus are becoming much less important than having an interpretive style. And maybe we don't need new cameras if we're going to actively mess stuff up and post process the crap out of it. Maybe that's the short term future.

editor personal notes: Sorry to be out of touch this week. Taking care of a parent's entire existence seems to be a full time job. I've diversified investment accounts that no one has paid attention to in perhaps a decade this week. I've arranged for physical therapy and then, with feedback from my father, cancelled it as well. I've made claims on half a dozen insurance policies for my late mom's estate. I'm trying to clear out a house that's packed with 38 years of memories and memorabilia. I'm working with my parent's CPA on this year's taxes (while working with my CPA on my taxes!). And all the while I'm trying to visit and have meals with my dad at the memory care facility an hour and half from my home, at least twice a week. Throw in a few swim practices and something has to give. Last week the blog got short shrift. The week before it was just lack of sleep. Who knows what next week will bring?

Thanks for waiting and thanks for coming back. We'll keep writing. It's good practice for thinking. 

If you know where photograph is headed drop a line and let me know. I'm pretty sure cameras will follow along if we are smart enough to identify the trends...