Equipment – Shutterbugging dot Net

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. 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.

Link: Epson R-D1 — the world’s first digital rangefinder camera

Macfilos remembers Epson R-D1 — the world’s first digital rangefinder camera:

The Epson R-D1 is definitely a ground-breaking camera. The world’s first digital rangefinder camera with M-Mount and an APS-C CCD sensor with 6.1 Megapixel resolution was released in 2004.

It was before Leica did even release the M8. And much less expensive.

Fujifilm upgrades

Pondering an upgrade, even though I haven’t shot much lately, actually since the pandemic started in 2020. I must actually be suffering from GAS at that point. So let’s keep it at nerding over camera.

First, rumor has that the Fujifilm X-Pro4 will not be for this year — it’s just a rumor. I wanted to upgrade on that front as I still enjoy using my X-Pro1. This is why somewhat I am looking at the X100 VI as a compacter solution in that form factor. The catch is that it only is available for pre-orders, and my local camera store doesn’t have any to demo. Not sure what to do. Let’s keep at lusting.

Also, the XT-50 was just announced, which isn’t a path I’m gonna take anyway.

I could be considering the X-S20 as an addition mostly because it has the tilt-screen which mean that it has a bit what I’m looking for video, ever since my G7X MkII decided to stop working. Not that the X-T3 is not capable, but the tilt-screen remains a game changer and I like to keep a photography camera at the ready.

RIP my Canon G7X Mark II

It was already a bit finicky last summer. But this time it really is: my Canon G7X Mark II is dead.

This is a camera I bought mostly for video vlogging and others. It was my work horse for the few videos I uploaded on YouTube, but I didn’t use it much for photography, even though it’s very capable as I always preferred my Fuji X or the phone as convenience.

The symptoms. I have a freshly charged battery.

– Press the power on button
– The lens extends as the Canon logo appear on the screen. So there is power and the screen works.
– At that point after the green activity led blinks, the screen shuts off, while the lens stay extended.
– The zoom control do nothing, nor do the shutter. The mode dial don’t seem to change anything.
– The power switch doesn’t do anything either so I can’t turn off and retract the lens.
– The only button that does anything is the playback button. Pressing it, retracts the lens and enables playback, showing the pictures on the card. I even got the clock setup as the battery was drained for long enough. Another confirmation the screen works. Including touch, as was as the control wheel.
– Pressing the video record button or the shutter triggers the lens extension. But then the screen turns black, like if nothing came from the camera sensor, and switches off.
– The only way to switch the camera off is to press playback and then the power button act normally to retract the lens.

Has anyone any idea?

Some samples I took with it (pardon Penny’s cuteness):

KVB Piusstraße U-Bahn station, Cologne, Germany

Passenger reading a magazine, on a flight somewhere between Montréal and London.

And one of the first pictures I took with it:

I might as well just replace it. Shall I get the G7X MkIII ? I’d like to avoid Sony.

I’m not excluding taking a crack at fixing it as it could be a benign problem. I don’t think it’s worth getting it serviced otherwise given the cost.

Hasselblad X-Pan

Beau Photo tells us Hasselblad “The Holy Grail” XPan – Is it worth it?:

I’ve shot with the XPan numerous times, and each time I would put my clown mask on and tell myself that this camera will be mine someday. After a year of using this camera, I believe the XPan is worth it.

I remember more than 20 years ago hearing about the Hasselblad XPan, or its Japanese original, the Fujifilm TX-1 (the Hasselblad is actually just a rebadged Fujifilm). It was expensive, its lenses were expensive.

But what is it? It is a rangefinder film camera that could shoot in panoramic format, 24x65mm on a 35mm film (135) as well as the standard 24x36mm. It was pretty much the only option for panoramic photography without using a rotating lens like the Horizon or Widelux cameras, or without getting an expensive Mamiya 7 with the adapter to use 135 film instead of the 6×7 120 film frames.

I remember reading an article where the photographer used the XPan to cover a bicycle race. And vertically framed pictures showed us how unique this camera could be.

Too bad it is even more expensive now.

The future is mirrorless

There, I said it. The future of interchangeable lens cameras is mirrorless.

Let’s see why.

The SLR design date back from the film days. A design that allow precise framing using through the lens viewfinder, but that has a somewhat complex mechanical design, increasing cost and size. Today, the film being replaced by an electronic sensor, an instant image can be obtained through the lens. An electronic viewfinder will also be through the lens, with all the advantage of the SLR design, and more. Without the need for that complex and bulky mirror box, the camera can be designed to be more compact.

There are a few reasons why DLSR exists and are still somewhat the de-facto design: trade offs.

The first trade off is that you have to change the lens mount to benefit from a more compact design. This made moving from the older film camera to the digital one is not as easy unless you threw away your investments in glass. This was a perfectly valid point in the last decade, and since the move has happened, the problem persists, even for those that started with a DSLR.

The second trade off is the performance of the autofocus system. DSLR use a phase detection system with sensor located in the mirror box. Something that appear to be problematic on a mirrorless camera, and phase detection AF is more performant than the contrast detection system commonly used by mirrorless cameras. Manufacturers have worked out technology to improve the situation a lot. A small category of users that needs it really needs it still, but we are getting there.

But it is time to make the jump.

The market

Currently only 4 vendors still offer DSLR. Canon, Nikon, Ricoh-Pentax and Leica. Sony hasn’t released a DSLR in a while and given their Î± lineup (mirrorless), I don’t think they will, Olympus has made the switch to M4/3 a while ago already, Panasonic has been mirrorless only as well also with the M4/3 system, Leica is mostly betting on mirrorless and Fujifilm has been kicking it with the X- series, improving at each generation and the GFX medium format.

In August Canon announced the EOS R, their full frame mirrorless system, while they have a EOS M series that feature an APS-C sensor. They just announced new lenses for that system, so it might stay for a little while. And it is much more affordable as well.

Weeks prior to that, Nikon had just announced the Nikon Z, their full frame mirrorless system, after discontinuing the Nikon 1 which wasn’t really a sensible proposal with its miniature sensor.

As for Ricoh-Pentax life is tough. The Pentax K 01 wasn’t really a success, nor was the Pentax Q that disappeared as quickly as it appeared. And now that it is Photokina, it doesn’t seem that Ricoh had anything to announce in that product line.

If anything, the growth on the market for Sony as proven that mirrorless full frame can be a viable option. Sony is clearly the market leader for full frame and Canon, Nikon and Panasonic wants to try to catch up.

Is full frame the future? I don’t think it will be the only but it will be dominant. Panasonic just announced a full frame mirrorless, sharing the lens mount with the Leica SL, while still continuing with the M4/3, and Sigma who barely has presence in the camera body market has announced they were developing a body for the L-mount. I’m confident that Fujifilm can continue with the X-series without moving away from APS-C, with a more compact system that nails the image quality including in low light, at a price lower than the current full frame lineup. Sony will probably keep some of their APS-C mirrorless until they can bring down the price of the Î± series down enough.

The medium format has a future too for demanding users, but the price is steep. For example, the Fujifilm GFX 50, a “medium” format sensor mirrorless starts at about US$5,000.

The future

I predict that within 5 years, neither Canon nor Nikon will be pushing DSLR, except maybe in a few niche segments like top of the line sports. The Leica S might survive as Leica just announced the S3 just 10 years after the previous iteration but this camera is already in a very niche segment given it’s price. And some of the manufacturers won’t be left unscathed.

SLR mount for a mirrorless, does it make sense?

There is a lot of chatter lately about Canon and Nikon tardiness in the mirrorless world. On one side, Canon seeked feedback from their user about what they want in a pro mirrorless camera. On the other side, Nikon is announcing a full frame mirrorless camera with a new lens mount dubbed “Z-mount”. In both sides there is one topic that seems to come back into the discussion: the camera should be directly compatible with the SLR mount (EF for Canon, F for Nikon). While it is clearly understandable why users would want that, let’s explain on why it is not a good idea, and why the mount adapter is the best compromise — compromise that Canon made for the EOS-M.

A lens mount is defined by a certain number of attributes ; flange distance is the one that matters here.

The flange distance or register distance is the distance between the lens mount ring on the camera body and the focal plane (the surface of the sensor or the film). It is a fixed dimension for the lens mount.

On an SLR camera, you have the mirror box between the lens and the sensor, defining a minimum flange distance, while a mirrorless doesn’t have the mirror box. This is why in general a mirrorless camera has a much shorter flange distance even with a similar sensor size.

For example, Sony E-Mount is 18mm while Sony A-Mount (former Minolta SLR) is 44.5mm, as Canon EF-M is 18mm while Canon EF and EF-S are 44mm. In both cases the flange on SLR mount is more than twice as large as on the mirrorless.

What would a DSLR mount do on a mirrorless system? It would increase the thickness of the body in way that the camera wouldn’t be that much more compact. The real example is Pentax mirrorless Pentax K-01. With a flange distance of 45.46mm for the K-Mount, the camera is bulkier than it should with a thickness (depth) of 59mm. In comparison, the Canon EOS-M100 is 35mm thick (deep) as it uses the EF-M mount, designed for mirrorless.

That’s why using a DSLR mount for a mirrorless system, meant to be more compact, isn’t a good design choice. Offering an adapter that support all the features of their DSLR mount is, on the other hand, the best compromise that a camera maker can do, almost equivalent to the practicality of using native mount, but the advantage of the size: the extra bulk only comes if you need it.

Dear Canon

Dear Canon,

You just announced the 6D MkII to update the aging 6D. Nice. Flip screen, dual pixel AF (which mean fast auto-focus in live view mode including video), you got in with the programme. No 4K video, WHAT?

When you released the 5D MkII in 2009, you put the video mode and led the industry and it was so good that it was used to film major TV features. You improved it and spread it through the whole range of EOS DSLR including the entry level Rebels. The 80D is one of YouTube content producers favourite, with a great auto-focus, the flip screen, while still only 1080p.

I know the 6D MkII is a camera for photographers and is definitely not targeted at those that make a living out if it, no doubt about that. But not differently than the 80D. So why not offering 4K for video? I’m sure you are eager to sell one of these EOS Cinema, or more 5D MkIV or 1D that are so much more expensive, but people might actually go with the similarly priced Sony, that has adapters for EF lenses and do 4K. You should disrupt yourself, otherwise you will be disrupted. You could have a very attractive camera for video creators that can’t really or don’t really need an EOS Cinema.

Also let’s talk about the EOS-M or the G series (the G7X MkII in particular), I really hope you next iteration will have 4K. Even Nikon has a 4K compact camera in the same range of the G7X MkII, for less money. Sony has the RX100M5. Even the M4 and its problem did 4K.

And I’ll be honest, had you put 4K on the 6D MkII, you’d have my pre-order right here. Instead maybe I’ll stick to Fuji X series.

Ode to the iPhone

“The best camera is the one you have with you” — Chase Jarvis

For a long time I disliked point and shoot cameras in the era of film. Often clunky to use, poor performance or quality, this dislike trumped the reason to have them: not missing a shot. I probably missed a lot. Still, I bought an Olympus mju-2 (aka Stylus Epic) to have something in my pocket. This is a film camera, one that was the best compromise, one I could shoot slide film with, and that had a fast prime sharp 35mm f2.8 lens. This was before cell-phone had cameras.

Cell-phone cameras where horrible for a while. My Motorola clamshell phone camera was awful. This was before the original iPhone, which was the first to actually gather interest as being, at the time, decent. I didn’t get one.

In 2010, I got a Nexus One, liked the phone as a communication device, had a camera with nothing to rave about. I started using Instagram which had been released for Android. Then in 2012, I got a Samsung Galaxy Note (long story short, I won it): better camera, hated the phablet and the software. Still using Instagram. Later, in late 2013, I upgraded to the Nexus 4. Better camera, using it more, still posting Instagram. But it didn’t come close to the older 2012 iPhone 4S that my partner used. Each time I used it I fell it was so much nicer.

Taken with the Nexus 4, processed in Instagram:

Later on, I got a Sony Xperia Z3c. I had a nice camera, but due to the reason I had this device I didn’t have the proper software than made the camera better. Distortion, lesser ISO performance, this made it unsatisfying, even if as is it was better than the Nexus 4.

As you can see the Sony Xperia Z3c camera has a visible pincushion:

Looking for a proper replacement communication device, and not considering an Android that wasn’t Google, I got an iPhone SE. It was cheaper than the Google flagship Pixel.

Why do I love it?

Like any other phone, I always have it on me. It is in my pocket, on my desk, etc. This camera, has great software: it is pleasant to use and generate good quality pictures. Better than any previous phones I have had. Quality and user experience is what make it shine ; it is a camera that is more reactive.

In 2016 I spend most of the year, commuting to work, not carrying a camera but my phone. I took few pictures with it, despite plenty of opportunities.

In April 2017, I went for two weeks to Cologne in Germany. I did lug my photo back pack with the Fuji X-Pro1 and three lenses. I ended up using the iPhone mostly to take snaps, when previously I would have used the bigger camera, I even used it to take some moves and timelapses. I used the Fuji on a few walkabout and even then I used the iPhone as a second camera, more often than before. And I felt that my yield of keepers is higher with this phone than ever. And I end up using Instagram more.

This iPhone beats hand down lots of compact cameras: quality, reactivity, lens.

Same subject, day, night. iPhone SE processed in Instagram:

Making movies

Today every camera can do movies. 1080p is the “standard”, 4k is one that few reach. Canon needs expensive DSLR for that. But the iPhone, it can do it. I’ll be honest, I don’t feel the need for 4k, but two things: 4k is where things are at right now, and 4k allow zooming for a 1080p output, which is what most people will target anyway.

The iPhone has incredible quality for a small camera. It can do slo-mo, time lapse, shoot 1080p at either 30 or 60fps, 4k at 30fps, slo-mo 1080p at 120fps, 240fps if you go down to 720p. In short, you have choice. Even with the front facing camera, which makes it practical for vlogging.

Last but not least, it comes with iMovie. “Shot, edited and upoaded on iPhone”. That’s right you have all the workflow in one device.

This is not to say an Android phone could be as good. Just that so far the one I had weren’t and, and as a communication device they get
obsoleted too quickly. Even the Pixel, that dollar for dollar, cost as much as an iPhone 7.

Smartphone have clearly evolved as a photographic and movie making tool. They are capable of doing things no one expected a few years ago. And they are clearly eating into the compact camera market.

And now the conclusion

The iPhone SE really made me tilt over using the smartphone as a photographic tool more often. I felt successfully creative with it. Not that it is a big innovation, it is just that as a whole it works better. Gear doesn’t make the photographer, but gear that you are not comfortable with (that frustrate your) is ultimately hindering your process. Ultimately I will not abandon my other cameras, but I’ll be more inclined to leave it home for circumstances where I believe the iPhone will work.