Category Archives: Hardware

Stuff

Another EVF SLR

Cameras

From Samsung, unsurprisingly.

Samsung is rolling out its NX10 mirrorless DSLR any day now – much the same concept as the Panasonic G1/GH1 but with the larger APS-C sensor and using superior rear LCD screen technology. Boy, if anyone knows about LCDs it’s Samsung as they are one of the largest manufacturers of these in all sizes.

Sadly it’s still modeled, like the Panny twins, after the conventional DSLR silhouette, with that silly prism hump, but that will not last long, I am sure. Overall it seems about as small as the G1.

I can only applaud. It’s another nail in the coffin of the flapping mirror/pentaprism design which has seen its day in the sun. The user gains compactness and a quieter tool with less weight. So the tool gets used more as a result.

Can a full size sensor variant with no prism hump be far behind?

Now Sammy, where’s the British Racing Green version, please?

Software aberration correction

Micro Four-Thirds

A view of the future.

The traditional approach to optical design has always been to try and correct aberrations in the glass. As apertures get larger and focal lengths get shorter, this gets ever harder to do, so you end up with ridiculously oversized lenses, their bulk further compounded by the need to clear flapping mirrors through the use of ever more complex retrofocus designs.

Some of the results of these design dictates can be seen in gargantuan lenses for full frame DSLRs, best illustrated by showing their weight and bulk. Some examples (weight in ozs, dimensions in inches – length x diameter, volume in cubic inches):

  • Canon 14mm f/2.8 L II: 20 ozs, 3.7″ x 3.2″, 29.7 cu. in.
  • Canon 24mm f/1.4 L: 20 ozs, 3.4″ x 3.7″, 36.5 cu. in.
  • Canon 35mm f/1.4 L: 20 ozs. 3.4″ x 3.1″, 25.7 cu. in.
  • Nikon 14mm f/2.8 ED: 24 ozs, 3.8″ x 3.4″, 34.5 cu. in.

Things get worse when you get into wide zooms:

  • Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 L: 22 ozs, 4.4″ x 3.5″, 42.3 cu. in.
  • Canon 17-40mm f/4 L: 18 ozs, 3.8″ x 3.3″, 32.5 cu. in.
  • Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 EF-S:35 ozs, 5.2″ x 3.9″, 62.1 cu. in.
  • Nikon 17-35mm f/2,8 EF-S: 27 ozs, 4.2″ x 3.3″, 35.9 cu. in.

Without doubt these are some of the finest optics made but take two or three of these in your shoulder bag and you won’t be snapping away for too long before exhaustion sets in.

The other design alternative, of course, dictates smaller sensors which bring with them shorter focal lengths and less bulk. But take that thinking all the way and you get what Panasonic has done with its lens range for its micro-four thirds range of cameras – the G1/GH1 and GF1.

That approach, simply stated, is one of “Get the optics to be as sharp as possible and hang the aberration corrections. Fix all uncorrected defects using software”.

I was thinking how best to illustrate this (the preview of the imported file in Lightroom already has the aberration corrections applied) when it struck me that PTLens has the ability of showing corrected as well as uncorrected images – by comparing JPGs (automatically corrected in Lightroom or Silkypics) with RAW (uncorrected) originals generated in the camera; seconds later I had exported an image taken with the G1 and the 14-45mm kit lens at 17mm (34mm equivalent on full frame) and show the results below. Mouse over the image to see the uncorrected original (Note: The mouse over effect works fine on my Mac with Safari and Google Chrome but not with Firefox or Camino, so please use one of the first two browsers if you have difficulty seeing the images below on a Mac. If you use Windows, please let me know what works so I can post that information here).

The effect of software correction in the Panasonic kit lens at 17mm – mouse over for the uncorrected RAW file.

You can see the remarkable amount of software correction applied quite clearly with software removing severe pincushion distortion. Now these lenses are not as fast as the monsters profiled above, but look at the trade offs in terms of size:

  • Panasonic 7-14mm f/4: 11 ozs, 3″ x 3″, 21.2 cu. in.
  • Panasonic 20mm f/1.7: 3.5 ozs, 1″ x 2.5″, 4.9 cu. in.
  • Panasonic 14-45mm f/3.5-f/5.6: 7 ozs, 3.4″ x 2.4″, 15.4 cu. in.
  • Panasonic 45-200mm, f/4-5.6: 13 ozs, 4″ x 3″, 28.3 cu. in.

These are enormous differences – even greater when the lower weight of the body is added in – and means that you can carry a G1 and a three zoom lens outfit all day without tiring. Weight of the three zooms with the G1 body? 38.5 ounces. By comparison, a Canon 5D body without lens weighs 31.5 ounces. And your 35mm full frame-equivalent focal length range for the G1 kit is an astounding 14-400mm!

My point here is twofold. First, the future of lens design lies with software, not glass. Second, the only good camera is the one you have with you and I can assure you it’s a whole lot easier to take the G1 and a couple of lenses on a hike than it is to take a full frame DSLR similarly equipped.

For comparison, here’s a snap using the overrated Canon 24-105mm L lens on a 5D body – I say ‘overrated’ because it is a nightmare for architectural photography. The approach adopted by Canon/Adobe Lightroom is to leave the extreme barrel distortion at 24mm uncorrected, necessitating a round trip through PTLens or the like to straighten things up. The imported image in Lightroom shows extreme curvature of lines parallel to the edges at 24mm..

The effect of software correction in the Canon 24-105mm L lens at 24mm – mouse over for the uncorrected RAW file.

Panasonic’s approach is, I believe, the future of lens design and I expect all leading manufacturers to embrace this methodology during the coming decade.

Falling lives

Cameras

Shorter and shorter.

I used my Leica M3 for some 35 years. It had everything I needed in a street snapper, being small, quiet, sharp and fast. Add a lens or two and you had enough to travel the world. I mostly used it with the 35mm Summaron with those ghastly viewfinder ‘spectacles’.

My M3

My Rollei 3.5F made it through 10 years. Truth be told, I seldom did it justice, never getting comfortable with the reversed waist level image (you were always looking up at people’s chins) but the large negative was nice and the camera even quieter than the Leica.

My Rollei 3.5F

It’s successor was possibly the most accomplished medium format film camera ever, the Rollei 6003 Pro. The designers obviously took pictures and the choice of shutter or aperture priority automation was better executed than anything before or since. The lenses were to die for and the controls near perfect. Too bad it weighed several tons. Five years.

My Rollei 6003 Pro

One other attempt at medium format came and went in a year. The Pentax 6×7 was so loud that there was basically no environment in which I cared to use it.

It made the sound of a gun when the button was pressed

By contrast, the diminutive Pentax ME Super with its sweet 40mm Pancake lens was a dream and served me well on the streets of a tough New York during most of the decade of the 1980s when I lived there. It started as a ‘steal me, I don’t care’ substitute for the Leica and ended up my daily snapper. I left it behind in New York when I moved to Los Angeles. Street snappers were safe there as no one walked.

ME Super with pancake in place – as good as 35mm SLRs got

But my all time favorite of the film years was my Leica M2, which I bought in very sad shape in 1993. I got a dozen very hard years out of it and it always made me regret having bought the M3 back in 1971 when I really should have got the M2. The 35/50/90mm viewfinder was just what the doctor ordered and no bespectacled bulky 35mm lenses were needed, just the wonderful 35mm and 90mm Asph Summicrons. Parting with that one really hurt when I sold it.

My Leica M2 with the 35mm Asph Summicron

My general drift here, however, is that there are no more 5, 10 or 15 year cameras. The rate of change in technology is so startlingly high right now that if you were to tell me that I would be using my Panasonic G1 as my “go to” tool of choice five years hence I would laugh myself silly.

No sooner do I write that, though, than I am given pause by the superb Canon 5D. I see no earthly reason to upgrade to the Mark II as the images seem every bit as perfect as anything from medium format film and maybe it will just enjoy a double digit anniversary here. Provided it doesn’t blow and die for lack of digispares. I have recycled a couple of the poorer lenses made by Canon for this body but the rest soldier on as sharp as the day I bought them and newer arrivals preserve backward compatibility so far.

Life’s too short for brand loyalty. I wonder what the Panasonic G2 will bring? Or the Samsung XYZ3? If it works for me you will find it around my neck or, more likely, in my pocket.

“Rich sod” I hear you thinking. Nothing could be further from the truth. My M3, bought in 1971, was the results of My years in retail. The Rollei 3.5F was a real beater which cost very little. Now, film Leicas and Rolleis are super collectible, of course. Pretty much everything else was from trading gear, and I never bought new until digital came along. The reasons are simple. ‘Used’ and ‘digital’ equals ‘obsolete’, as in parts are not available no matter how competent the camera, and repairing them makes little economic sense. Further, digital gear is so much cheaper than the machines of old that it has become very affordable. That $650 G1 would have cost some $100 in 1971 currency when I got that Leica M3. It never ceases to amuse me that the proceeds of my M2, M3 and a small handful of lenses paid for everything I use today. Like with investing, timing the exit right makes a big difference. And loyalty is for dog lovers.

iTablet/iSlate/iWhatever

Computing

Any day now.

That P. T. Barnum of the digital age, Steve Jobs, knows how to milk free publicity. Before being fired from Apple in May, 1985, he joked that Apple was a ship that leaked from the top. He had not yet learned the power of silence.

Then, upon rejoining Apple just over ten years later, he knew better. The less you said the more they wrote and speculated about the next Great Thing, and while I have no idea how much this strategy garnered in free publicity for the iPhone, you can bet the amount was huge. I doubt there was a more anticipated introduction of a consumer gadget in the history of consumer gadgets.

The next Great Thing, the touchscreen iTablet, will likely be introduced on January 27, 2010 and there are so many indicia of the device’s imminent arrival that it’s hardly a long shot prediction.

iSlate/iTablet – artist’s rendering.

Books, magazines and newspapers getting readied, games being redesigned for larger screen resolution, components procured, a meeting hall booked for a January Apple special, leaks from parts suppliers in Taiwan and China and, most recently, disclosure that the iSlate.com domain has been registered in Apple’s name for a couple of years. iSlate sounds pretty neat to me. A nice throwback to the days of Moses delivering the Ten Commandments.

This device is unlikely to be as earth shattering as the iPhone because it will be perceived as costlier, for one. Consumers still naively believe that the iPhone costs $100-$200 when the all in 2 year contract cost is closer to $2,000. But it’s tempting to speculate what the iSlate will cost. My guess is that the $599 number bruited about is unrealistic. The iPhone, with its miniscule screen, would cost that at retail absent the telco’s subsidy.

If the iSlate really is to have a 7-10″ touchscreen in glorious color, 3G, wifi and a long life battery, $1300 is more like it, and that would dictate lower margins than Apple’s existing MacBook Pro. Still, Apple did mention at their last earnings call that they anticipate falling gross margins going forward and it’s unclear whether this reflects an attempt at increased market share (not consonant with their traditional thinking) or, maybe, a lower than usual margin on the iSlate. So I’m guessing $999. That will make it less than the blockbuster expected, the economies of the west still being in recovery from a brush with death, and the effect on the stock will not be a happy one.

This will, I believe, be a “buy the rumor, sell the news” type of investment opportunity.

But I think the device’s relevance to educated consumers (who constitute a small minority of cell phone users, let’s face it) will be great. It will become the news delivery tool of choice for those who prefer not to waste their time on the pap passing for news on the networks or on cable – I’m reminded of the old saying that the front page of any major newspaper has more news than a 30 minute network news broadcast. It will become a powerful marketing tool for those seeking to display pictures, models, sketches, ideas on the fly. Engineers, design professionals, doctors and investment gurus will love it. You will watch movies and play games on it. And it will be a wonderful tool for the display of photographs, maybe with limited processing tools included. Imagine using such a tool in the studio as a preview device connected to your DSLR in live view mode with an art director peering at the screen over your shoulder.

And for a company which never lets form take a back seat to function, you can bet that the iSlate/iTablet/iWhatever will look absolutely fabulous. I can’t wait to see what it’s all about. The introduction date is January 27, 2010.

Disclosure: I am long AAPL call options. If you think this blog is a source of investment advice, I can get you a deal on a bridge in Brooklyn.

Like the old days – not!

Cameras

A body and two lenses.

You would sling the camera over your neck with the short lens on the body. The other lens, the medium length one, went in the shoulder bag. And that little outfit would be all you needed to go around the world.

Back in 1973 it consisted of a Leica, 35mm and 90mm lenses. Changing from one to the other was second nature and you never messed with the silliness of lens caps – just another impediment to a swift lens change.

And I found myself reliving that experience the other day only this time everything was automatic, the lenses were zooms covering 28mm through 400mm (!) and my camera could take 600+ RAW images at a sitting at a level of quality and capability which leaves that lovely Leica in the museum where it belongs.

Lost in thought.

Lonely guy.

Copper sunset.

All pictures on the Panasonic G1 with the 14-45mm and 45-200mm lenses.

In a year or two it will all be in an even smaller package and the results even less dependent on technical skill. That seems right to me. Anything that gets in the way of the picture is a bad thing. Which means automation is a good thing – for what I want to accomplish.