Category: Equipment

Equipment for photographers.

Link: Manufacturers Were Unprepared for the Point And Shoot Camera Revival

Petapixel, back in August: Manufacturers Were Unprepared for the Point And Shoot Camera Revival

As a result, 2019 saw the last major point-and-shoot releases from Canon, Nikon, and Panasonic. While Sony’s latest photography-first point-and-shoot, the RX100 VII, also released in 2019, newer pocket-sized models like the ZV-1 II and ZV-1F have shifted towards focusing on vlogging and content creation.

I have been complaining about the lack of availability of both the Fujifilm X100VI that is literally unobtainium and something to replace my defective G7X MkII (Canon is out of stock everywhere and whoever answers the Canon forums gaslight readers by telling them to check their retailers, while they can’t even replace camera they refuse to repair).

I really don’t enjoy smart phone as camera. In the beginning it was the quality, then at one point it ended being good enough, and I enjoyed it for a bit. But I’m over this. Don’t get me wrong the best camera is the one I have with me, and likely I have a phone, but that doesn’t mean I enjoy using it or that it inspires me. Also now with “computational photography” they add plenty of software to make them look better, sometime just turning the photo to goop like I have seen on some cheap Android smartphones.

We’ll see what the future brings.

The future of the elusive 65:24 format

Jonas Dyhr Rask talks about The future of the elusive 65:24 format.

65x24mm is the panoramic format of the Fujifilm TX-1 / Hasselblad X-Pan film camera. It is a very wide aspect ratio which can be made to work to stunning results.

But can we do that with a modern digital camera?

Also A look at/through the X-Pan which show us genuine shots with the TX-1 / X-Pan.

Here is an attempt with a casual shot with my Ricoh GR Digital II. The ground and the sky are cropped out to letterbox the 65:24 aspect ratio in post from the DNG file (Darktable has the aspect ratio in its presets).

A wide shot of a commercial parking lot. To left is an A&W, to the right a thrift store. The wide format crop is meant to illustrate the 65:24 aspect ratio.
Parking Lot, Montréal – Shot with a Ricoh Digital GR II, cropped

Previously: Fujifilm TX-1 long term review, Hasselblad X-Pan

Link: Pakon F235

Dante Stella tell us about the Kodak / Pakon F235 Plus high-speed film scanner:

First, it is designed for speed. An F235 Plus, for example, will do 800 frames an hour at 3000×2000 resolution (yes, that’s 33 rolls per hour, or a roll or 24 frames about every two minutes). With Digital ICE turned on, it still does 400 frames an hour.

Color correction. Kodak basically owns the world of color correction, and this machine nails the colors 99.5% of the time.

In sum, this is an exiting piece of equipment made accessible, sadly, by the collapse of commercial film processing.

I mentioned this previously as an alternative to the Frontier. Fujifilm vs Kodak. It’s sad nobody produce these and that the know how has disappeared, but then would they exist new at $2000 a piece? The used refurbished market from these seems to be the way to buy what cost much more initially.

The 2017 followup article: The Kodak/Pakon F235 Plus, revisited.

Previously: The magic of Fuji Frontier SP-3000

The Fujifilm X100VI delays

Apparently it’s still hard to get a Fujifilm X100VI.

In an April 2024 interview, Fujifilm admits that they make 15,000 units a month, which is twice as much as for the previous model, and that they are looking at increasing it. Also the rumor has that they have a 500,000 order backlog. That number is unconfirmed, but with some light math, we can guesstimate it would take over 33 month to fulfill!

This backlog has people that really want one, people that ordered from multiple retailer as to jump the queue, people that are still undecided, and scalpers.

It seems that today the only way to get one is:

  • Place an order and wait an unknown amount of time (tbf I haven’t inquired one of my local retailer yet).
  • Buy it from an Amazon or eBay blessed scalper for twice the price (they are part of the problem, so no way).
  • Buy used from a disappointed user, but then it’s likely still more than buying new.
  • Be an influencer.
Amazon listing for Fujifilm X100VI. Shows two buying options at $3119.99 and $3589.95.
Fujifilm X100VI Amazon Scalpers, September 2024

At that point I have to forego the trying it out phase, and have to place an order if I want one. With a little luck the X100VII will be announced and either it will be cheaper or I will have to move up to the next level.

Meanwhile, it’s not like I don’t have any camera to shoot. My X-Pro1 still works (I got it repaired a few years ago) and the X-T3 as well. Not forgetting that the Olympus E-P1 still works, unlike the G7X MkII that can’t be replaced, and the 5DMkII is still in order. Lately, I also have been using an original Ricoh GR Digital 2 (the small sensor from 2007). And I have a stash of film in the freezer with both 35mm and medium format. Maybe I don’t need a new camera after all…

Previously: Fujifilm once struggled to sell cameras…, Fujifilm upgrades

Olympus E-P1 woes

I already talked about my Canon G7X Mk II giving up the ghost. Turns out that Canon repair policy is a flat rate USD650 and you get a replacement except there are none available and people in the Canon forums say they end up not having a camera… and the Mark III is unobtainium everywhere I looked. “Check with you re-sellers” Canon said. Aha. That doesn’t feel like good customer service. Rumors are that Canon is quietly discontinuing P&S, leading me think that I should get a Sony (ZV-1 II) as this is a camera I bought for video.

Anyway.

Olympus E-P1 camera

I pulled out of my bag my old Olympus E-P1. I bought this m4/3 camera back in 2010 to supplement my Canon 5D MkII, and mostly replaced using it with a Fujifilm X-Pro1. I used it a lot when we crossed the country on a train as it was the convenient camera suitable in that situation. I still had my 5D MkII in the bag though.

Turning it back on, the IS1 icon on the screen is red. Not good.

If the image stabilizer icon blinks in red on the monitor, it indicates a failure of the image
stabilizer function. If you take a picture as is, the composition may be off. Consult your
Olympus Authorized Service Center

It’s probably not worth it to take it in. I’ll have to live without IBIS, which should be fine. I can keep shooting with it. Like a lot of other cameras, I think what I dislike the most is the lack of viewfinder, and it’s probably my biggest regret.

Link: Fujifilm TX-1 long term review

Gale Lee wrote a Fujifilm TX-1 long term review for Casual Photophile.

The Fujifilm TX-1 (also known as the Hasselblad XPan) is a camera defined by a single design directive: take true panoramic images using 35mm film without wasting a millimeter of material, and everything about it— from its design to its physical engineering— flows from that goal.

and

The Fujifilm TX-1 (also known as the Hasselblad XPan) is a camera defined by a single design directive: take true panoramic images using 35mm film without wasting a millimeter of material, and everything about it— from its design to its physical engineering— flows from that goal.

Last year, I linked about the Hasselblad X-Pan which is the rebadged version of the Fujifilm, and talked about rangefinders. The Fujifilm TX-1 remains on top of my list of camera to try, this is why each time somebody write about it I wished I had one.

And what Gale tells us is that this camera is a tool a tool that may work for you, but maybe not. What make the TX-1 is the 1:2.70 aspect ratio and the fact that this is camera that you can shoot hand held, like street photography, but not only. It can be challenging to use but, once you are able to control, the results are… wow.

Back in the early 2000s I considered getting one, but its price, and the fact that the 24x65mm frame would be difficult (read expensive) to scan, I sort of chickened out. I’m pretty sure it’s more expensive now than it was back then.

This made me think on what kind of specs would I need to have similar quality panoramic format camera, but digital. Cropping is easy but in that aspect ratio the loss of pixels is significant. And then there is framing, I don’t know which camera allow setting a custom aspect ratio; back when I used an Olympus E-P1, I shot a lot in 16:9 aspect ratio. This scale down on the 12 megapixel.

NONS instant cameras

I just learned about the NONS SL42, a SLR for Instax Mini film. It’s a US$399 camera, currently out of stock. It has an passive EF mount, a light meter and shoots Instax Mini film.

After reading a few reviews from Emulsive and Phoblographer, this feel it might be a winner. The camera has its quirks, but then the Fujifilm Instax also do, differently.

So why a NONS instead of the Fujifilm cameras? Controls, controls, CONTROLS!

The Fujifilm Instax camera only have auto exposure, some with “creative” modes. Also their lens isn’t very fast, stopped down at f/12.7. With the NONS you get to have much faster and interchangeable lenses. The passive EF allow Canon EF lenses (wide open only) and, with adapter rings, you can use Nikon F, Pentax K, Contax CY and M42 lenses. These adapted lenses offer a tremendous quality for an affordable price on the used market, and with the faster aperture the possibilities are broader..

You can read an interview of the team on phoblographer.com about the design of the SL42. It explain that the number 42 isn’t about the answer to life, universe and everything, but rather because the original plan was to release a camera with a M42 mount, the screw lens mount one used on original Pentax SLR and that other camera makers adopted. It also explain why the switch to EF mount, which is the mechanical mount that presented the best versatility in term of further adaptations, and the story behind the NFE (NONS Format Extender).

I was getting excited. It’s out of stock ; turns out it’s no longer made.

The good news is that NONS decided to followup with the SL645 and SL660 cameras. While the SL645 still take Instax Mini, the SL660 takes Instax Square. At US$499 and US$599 respectively they are a bit more pricey. These new models seems to improve a lot. You pick one over the other depending on the format you want to shoot. There is even a back for Instax Square to use on an Hasselblad CM.

The idea of a more sophisticated camera that supports Instax film isn’t new.

When the Polaroid was created, the goal was to offer instant pictures at a time where even 1 hour photo was a pipe dream. So much that today the term “Polaroid” is still commonly associated with instant photography, even though the company died and later was reborn. The process was used in various areas, from identity pictures, to test shots for exposure in the studio, to document reproduction or slide show preparation. The idea of using a Polaroid on an Hasselblad isn’t some sort of sacrilegious practice, it actually was part of the workflow. Setup the shoot, test the exposure with a Polaroid back and then once everything is fine go one with using the regular film.

Instax becoming popular, the choice of Fujifilm cameras is definitely in the space of consumer: inexpensive and all automated. So alternative started to appear. For example the 2016 MINT InstantFlex TL70 is a dedicated TLR that shoot Instax Mini and comes at US$399. Also Lomography has a range of Instax cameras supporting the Lomographic style, as well as Lomo Graflok, a back for large format. While relegated into a corner product category of what I would call novelty, they represent an incredible venue for creativity associated to the medium of instant photography, and fill the niche of photographers looking for a more flexible tool.

Kodak, Kodak, film cameras

When I wasn’t looking, 2 different model of film cameras where released under the Kodak brand. Just to be clear these are inexpensive and marginally better than the disposable counterparts, and Kodak is just a brand on top of it. This is not the Ricoh Pentax 17 at CAD$680.

From 2022, the Kodak Ektar H35 Half Frame Camera is manufactured by Retopro. It’s 35mm film half-frame camera, with a 22mm acrylic lens, f/9.5 fixed aperture, and 1/100 sec fixed speed and a flash. The frame is vertical in the natural camera orientation as the film transport is horizontal. About CAD$80. Comes in various colours in a design reminicent of older Kodak camera.

In 2023, a follow up Kodak Ektar H35N still made by Retopro, brought the lens to a fixed f/8 aperture with one of the element made of glass, and now has a bulb shutter speed and a tripod mount, and can perform multiple exposures. Still has a flash. About CAD$100. Comes in various colours with a slightly different design.

From 2024, the Kodak i60, manufactured by Meta Imaging Solutions is a 35mm film camera with a 31mm acrylic lens, f/10 fixed aperture with a minimum focusing distance of 1 meter and 1/125 sec fixed speed, and a flash. Really feels like a disposable camera you can refill. About CAD$80 as well. Comes in various colours in design directly inspired by the Instamatic 100 from 1963. Reading Kodak own website saying it uses “135mm film”, I want to scream. Beside the design it looks like all the others on Kodak website.

All in all it seems like competition to Lomography, both in quality and and price, albeit with maybe Lomography trying to provide more “fun”.

Rangefinder

The Leica M is the de facto digital rangefinder camera.

Rangefinder

What’s a rangefinder? It’s a viewfinder where a moving part is coupled with the lens focusing to triangulate the parallax. That moving part is projecting the image taken offset the viewfinder, and move when the lens focusing moves. If the two images coincide, the triangulation is focused on the subject, indicating the lens is now in focus. Still not following? You can read about rangefinder cameras on wikipedia.

The rangefinder is a great device to be able to focus precisely without having a through the lens viewfinder like on a reflex camera. It allowed a more compact camera design than a reflex camera, are there is no need for a mirror box, while still allowing precise focus. This was long before auto focus systems. Which is at the heart of the Leica M, mostly unchanged from the 50s design, at least in principle.

Some quite unique cameras like the ultra wide Fujifilm TX-1 or Hasselblad X-Pan were rangefinder cameras. This was a good solution that a reflex design couldn’t allow easily. There were also some medium format rangefinder like the Mamiya 7 that allowed much more compact design.

On of the design constraint of a rangefinder is that the field of view of the viewfinder is fixed, and while some camera can change the frame lines depending of the focal length of the lens, it can’t got wider than it is, and the longer the lens, the smaller the frame is. In general lens shorter than 28mm were less accurate to frame do to the frame line being outside the field of view.

So now that we have mirrorless, through the lens (auto) focusing, what’s the point of a rangefinder camera? The rangefinder is a precision device much more fragile of complex to manufacture, that may need readjustment over time. Part of the design of the rangefinder is that the viewfinder is offset from the lens, and usually also offers a wider field of view. This leads to a style of shooting that is particular to it.

I once shot a couple of rolls on a Leica M7 in 2011 and I loved it. The feeling, the results, I can’t really describe it though. You can still buy a Leica M6 new for little under CAD$8000 (body only).

Digital rangefinder camera

In 2004, Epson did make the R-D1. It was a digital rangefinder camera, the first one. While still being able to use Leica M lenses, it sold for a fraction of the price of Leica flagship M7 rangefinder film camera, as it was based on the much cheaper Cosina R bodies. This camera wasn’t perfect, but filed a niche. I think one of the biggest limitations was that it was an APS-C sensor, thus had a 1.5x crop factor. The 35mm lens you were fond of on a Leica suddenly became like a 50mm. If you loved wide angle, then it became a bigger issue, wider angle lenses, even non-Leica, where much more expensive. Full frame sensors weren’t a thing at the time. When Leica released the M8, it had the same issue, at a much higher price; albeit with the APS-H sensor, the crop was only 1.33x. With the discontinuation of the Epson R-D1, Leica M became the only game in town.

Fujifilm X

In 2010 Fujifilm introduced the Fujifilm X100 and a year later the Fujifilm X-Pro1. The former introduced Fujifilm hybrid viewfinder, which led to a lot of people wrongly calling it a rangefinder camera, which is inaccurate. Rangefinder style is probably a better moniker.

What did the X100 offer? The optical viewfinder allow shooting more like with a rangefinder camera, with overlaid frame lines (parallax corrected as bonus) in a wider view than the lens offered ; as well as other indicator that a digital display can offer. The focusing was done using an auto focus system like on most digital camera, through the lens. The hybrid part allowed to switch, as needed, to a completely electronic viewfinder. Best of both world.

The X-Pro1 brought this viewfinder to an interchangeable lens system, based on an APS-C sensor, that the whole Fujifilm X is now based on, with more traditional body designs. I bought one sight unseen. I love it and is saddened by the fact that the X-Pro3 is no longer available, and that the X-100 VI (the 6th generation) isn’t available yet.

Pixii

In 2018 we started hearing about the Pixii. A French made rangefinder digital camera. I noticed it again recently in my meanderings, I then realised I had never followed up on it ; I actually had forgotten about it, maybe because I thought it was a vapor ware, or something. The camera is real. At about USD$3000, it is priced less than half of the Leica M that goes for USD$8000.

It is definitely a rangefinder camera, with a digital overlay. That’s awesome. The image quality seems to be good according to reviewers. Pixii even offer the DCP profile for colour, and how to use them in Rawtherapee which it to be outlined as not other camera vendor care outside of the Adobe monopoly or their sub-optimal application.

What else?

It seems that in the 2023 model (A2572) some of the controls require a companion proprietary phone app, a bit like the Leica M-10D. This raises a lot of red flags as it mean the camera will be much less usable without it, which mean that if Pixii ever discontinue the app, or the phone gatekeeper do, you are SOL. It’s a bad industry trend.

The other point is the fixed storage, where you buy your camera like a phone with a fixed memory capacity. This is nuts. Not only you pay an unnecessary premium (USD$270 for going from 16G to 64GB, while a 128GB SDXC goes for USD$20, or a higher speed for USD$120), but what happens to having separate cards? If you need more storage, connect the camera to your computer they say. What happens if your flash storage die? Like a MacBook, you throw it away? For example the Leica T has some internal storage that is apparently a microSD that you can upgrade if you open the camera, and it is in addition to an external slot. I clearly remember the outrage when a major brand camera didn’t come with dual card slot. So I don’t get how not having one would even get considered… It feels like they designed it like a smartphone.

The last point, and it’s even more fundamental. It’s the sensor size. There is nothing wrong with an APS-C sensors, they can deliver quality even in low light, and Fujifilm proved it. It’s great with a dedicated lens lineup, but the M-mount lenses come from film, and are designed for a full frame system that is the Leica M since the Leica M9. If you have a set of prime lenses for your shooting style, the Pixii will need a different set to compensate for the 1.5x crop factor.

Macfilos has a review of the camera. They say:

The Pixii is, in some ways, the most modern rangefinder camera imaginable. There was no legacy to consider when designing the body.

Ahem, M-mount lenses are a significant legacy. Even more that they are designed for a full frame sensor (or a 24×36 frame on 35 mm film).

About the app:

*It is technically possible to use the Pixii almost completely without the app (see the comments section), but it is the opinion of the reviewer that this makes little sense as the whole concept of the camera is based on connectivity.

I’m still of the belief this is a planned obsolescence item. Software does suddenly stop working. Software from trillion dollar corporation do. Software from smaller outlet do. Mobile app store do remove apps for many reasons. If that ties important feature, this turn your camera into a brick. The Panasonic Lumix S9 might also suffer from this.

Now I’d love to take it for a spin, being able to say how it feels as a camera. The shortcomings on paper that I mention are not fatal as an image capturing device.

Update 2 August 2024: Added that the M8 had a 1.33x crop.