A Fall Tree

This photo was taken with a Panasonic GF1 with and the Panasonic 45-200mm lens. It's a great lens as far as resolving ability, but has big problems with contrast. You have to stop down to F8 or smaller to really get good contrast across the frame. The lens is so good, though, that the limitations of the sensor are all the more glaring. Again, it's such a tough situation to be in. I love the lenses, but hate the sensors. With APS-C, I love the sensors, hate the lenses.

From fō-tō-gră-fē Photographs

The Death of Marketing

I was reading a recent rumor on the upcoming Panasonic GX1 and it got me thinking, as sometimes happens. Panasonic is obviously leaking this information to the enthusiast websites and has used a very special set of code words that seem to be increasing in popularity in the camera world "excellent-looking JPEG images."

This has become code for "it looks identical to your old camera and you really have no reason to buy." Truly, I feel bad for these marketing wonks. They're trying their best with a piece of hardware that would underwhelm just about anyone. And since they are lying, this means that they know that what they are lying about is important enough to lie about. Therefore, by process of elimination and the distributive property, we can assume that the people who don't know that it is important are the people running the company. Helloooo Olympus!

What the title of this post means is that, with the advent of the internet, marketing to the hard core has died. It no longer works. Obviously, pretty pictures and fancy slogans will always work for the general populace, but for those who are truly dedicated to the market, marketing no longer works. The enthusiasts see right through everything that is said. Even if a new enthusiast is fooled, they are only ever fooled once.

I think that this is one of the big reasons why Apple has done so well. They have NEVER, not once, tried to fool their core market. They have always been honest if secretive. And they have been this way since the very beginning, so I don't find it at all surprising that they built up a small but intensely loyal following throughout the 1980's and 90's.

Obviously, marketing is still important, but if a company is always honest with their core, the company will always have cheerleaders. To use Apple again, how many websites are out there which are dedicated exclusively to Apple gear? I think that countless is a good word. Now try to count the number of websites dedicated to Microsoft, Panasonic, Toshiba, Lenovo, Olympus, Samsung, and their ilk. You might, might, need your toes.

Moreover, if a company is always honest, the marketers' job is much easier. They can focus on image, personality, and the true characteristics of the products without having to try to cover up the problems. Because even when they do, we the enthusiasts see through them as though they were made of glass.

Canon Launches New Cinema Cameras (UPDATE)

I have to admit, I wasn't expecting Canon to go this big. They would have really blown my mind if they had gone full-bore RED competitor, which they didn't, but they have definitely gone bigger than Panasonic.

Still, I find this whole thing puzzling. The reason why the 5D was such a big deal was precisely because it was very different from traditional cinema cameras. Why release cameras that are more like traditional cinema cameras?

I guess that Canon sees a market ripe for competition. With the 5D, I now consider cheap cinema cameras to basically be DSLR's, and the $10-$20k price range is mid-range. In this price bracket, there's not much. There's Sony... and, who else? The cheapest RED camera is $25k, and that was groundbreaking when it came out. So I certainly see possibility here. They could easily undercut stagnant market leaders such as Panasonic and JVC. They can also out-spec the others. Lenses are obviously a closed system, but the batteries are standard Canon batteries. Storage is standard CompactFlash. In a world of proprietary/new EVERYTHING, this is fantastic news.

With a price of around $16,000, the new C300 is undoubtedly exciting for many film crews. If the technical specs hold up in the world of actual production, the cameras won't be quite as flexible as ARRI or RED, but with a price of one-fifth the cost of some of their cameras, who cares?

Here is a video demo of the camera's abilities. I have little experience with digital cinema, but he shoots straight into the sky on a number of occasions and the dynamic range holds up. That's pretty kick-ass. The video is 1080p. There is a link to a 720p version on the Vimeo site that loads faster and plays smoother on slower systems.


Mobius - 1080p HQ from Vincent Laforet on Vimeo.


UPDATE: I SPOKE TOO SOON! Canon has in fact announced a cinema-oriented camera that will sport a DSLR body. This makes much more sense to me, considering the revolution triggered by the 5D. If images are to be believed, it will be a large-bodied SLR with unknown mechanicals. Canon has released little info other than that they are making it.

If it is a large-body camera, I seriously doubt that this is the successor to the 5D. I imagine that this is more likely aimed at a rising demographic: semi-pro film makers. The popularity of the 5D and never-ending stream of hacks for the Panasonic GH2 reveal a market that is very interested in being the best damned cinema people in their neighborhoods.

Perchance Canon Does Good?

Tomorrow, Canon will announce... something. Whatever it is, the focus is on Hollywood and Martin Scorsese will be on hand to be impressive for the audience.

The 1D-X showed that Canon had finally become aware of the significance of the 5D Mark-II vis-a-vis Hollywood. They should have been aware of this two weeks after the launch of the 5D MkII, but better late than never, I suppose.

This is undoubtedly a big announcement. It means that Canon is going to be officially moving into Hollywood and pro-level productions. And while I doubt the most discerning cinephiles in Hollywood will produce their films on Canons (instead more likely opting for RED or ARRI cameras), that hasn't stopped people from using 5D's exclusively for ease of use or budgetary reasons. For example, the recent film Inkubus was filmed entirely on 5D cameras.

If I were to take a guess, and I will, I imagine that this will not be a 5D Mark-III, no matter how much I would like that. Instead, it will be an assortment of Canon brand film making accessories, hardware, lenses, and a digital camcorder sort of device similar to Panasonic's GH2-sensored AG-AF100.

While I applaud Canon for finally making the leap, this isn't terribly interesting. Canon is only doing what people had told them to do years ago. This is not intelligence, it is no longer being dumb.

This announcement, unless they throw a curve ball of a new mirrorless system or something, isn't of great interest to me seeing as I produce very few videos: a YouTube rant now and then at most. Still, since I am already in with Canon, cine lenses might prove interesting if the mount is compatible. Also, this will further allow me to fantasize about winning best picture. I do that sometimes.

Something About Canon

I have recently been writing an immense amount on Sony and Micro 4/3, but have written almost nothing about Canon. This is funny since I'm heavily a Canon user. I think that I am only one example of a vast number of enthusiasts, though, who have little emotional interest in Canon. True, when it counts, I bust out my Canon set, but I would prefer other cameras.

The EOS 1D-X is a suitable flagship camera, and considering the escalating megapixel wars, I have all the confidence in the world that it will not be the only one. I would imagine that a 1D-Xs is in the offing, even though Canon would never, ever admit that for fear of hurting sales of the 1D-X. Because remember, kiddies, it's not about serving your customers, it's about fleecing them for as much money as possible.

I'm sorry for the obvious disdain, but camera companies, more so than any other industry that I can think of, make ripping off customers part of their overarching business model. Maybe the pharmaceutical companies. Good God, Canon! You don't want to be compared to Pfizer!

The EOS 1D-X is outside of my price range. Not because I can't specifically afford it, but because it is impossible for me to justify the expense of it when cheaper cameras can do pretty much everything that I want. What the 1D-X indicates, though, is the sensor that will likely be in the upcoming 5D Mark III, and that has me very excited.

I want to like Sony. Truly, I rather much want to make the switch entirely, ditch all of my Canon and Micro 4/3 gear and fully invest in a Sony combo. But that damned translucent mirror and its significant light loss is too much for me. I love to shoot in challenging environments like parties, dinners out, and nights on the boardwalk. All of these situations require large apertures, which, while pretty and dramatic, result in most of my shots being thrown out for poor focus, or they require high-ISO. Half-a-stop worth of light might seem small, but for me, every photon counts.

This is critically important in a decision about whether to abandon Micro 4/3. As far as dynamic range and color is concerned, as long as Panasonic gets off of its ass and makes better sensors, the only severe limitation of the smaller sensor is inferior noise characteristics. Assuming similar sensor designs, m4/3 would be about one full stop inferior to APS-C cameras. But here's the rub, not only does the Sony mirror lop off half-a-stop's worth of light, Micro 4/3 is the only smaller-format system with no less than FIVE lenses that have a maximum aperture of f/2 or lower. Include legacy 4/3 lenses and that brings the total above ten. This completely negates the advantages of having the larger sensor.

But back to Canon. The reason why Canon has lost my interest is because they have done nothing to break the mold. They are the mold. They are also just plain mold. I think that Canon could capture some hearts with an APS-H EOS 7D successor, but I doubt that they will do that because that would require doing something bold. Boldness is obviously not in Canon's DNA, seeing as they accidentally reinvented the movie industry with the 5D... and then did nothing with it.

It is unfortunate, because Canon has some mind-blowing telephoto lenses. Their wide-angle offerings suck, but their medium and long telephoto are easily the best in the industry. Now that I think about this state of affairs, how the hell has one company not managed to get everything at least partially right? It's not that hard! Good lenses, fair prices, innovate on the bodies. WTF?

Fuji X10 Looks Great!

Dials! Glorious dials!

I have oft-repeated that I find the 4/3 format to be the best compromise between sensor size and focal-length. I don't really count lens size as a full benefit since very small lenses can be made for 4/3 or APS-C, as Pentax has shown very well with its series of pancake lenses. Perhaps small telephoto lenses is a better true benefit. Regardless...

Even though I find 4/3 a good trade-off, sometimes the image quality difference is noticeable enough to make me yearn for APS-C. In fact, I find myself dropping my GF1 in favor of my Canon increasingly often. It was this reality that made me all the more surprised about the choice of Nikon to make the 1-Series cameras with a small, 1" sensor. This was obviously done to protect their DSLR business, which is stupid. If you don't compete with yourself, someone else will, and you will then go out of business.

Leaving Nikon alone, the nature of sensor design was what always kept me from point-&-shoot cameras. Why spend $400 on a camera when I could buy another lens that will hold its value longer? Aside from the startling amount of detail available from the Olympus XZ-1, P&S is an enthusiast's no-man's-land.

The new Fuji X10 is making me rethink that position. Holy crap does it look good. It will have the largest compact sensor by far, and the sample images that I have seen, comparing JPEG to JPEG, appear nearly as good as the Nikon V1 and J1. That is very impressive. Obviously, it doesn't fully transcend the limitations of its small sensor, but it does well. Also, and perhaps most importantly, the camera is, at least to me, even sexier than the X100. I just wanna' touch it. Like, in a bad way.

I look forward to Fuji's promised new system of large-sensored cameras. More so than other companies, Fuji seems to get it.

Panasonic GX1 Revealed And My Love For Fuji

First off on this fine, fall day: Panasonic's upcoming GX1 has been leaked to the interpipes. Color me disappointed. Not crushingly so, mind you, but still pretty darn disappointed.

The layout is very similar to the GF1, just more compact and with metal buttons. And at least they have a dedicated WB button, unlike certain other cameras that I can think of. *cough*Olympus!*cough*

 We can discern a great deal from the images provided. First and foremost, it is smaller than the GF1. I'm upset by this because for me, the GF1 was about as small as I could go and maintain usability. Granted, I have pretty big hands, but most of the serious photogs whom I know, regardless of hand size, felt similarly. It was one of the big things keeping me far away from Sony's first NEX cameras and even the very good NEX-5n. They're just so small that I find myself fumbling for buttons. If I ever dared slap on a big lens, the situation would be exacerbated to the point of comedy. My GF1 already looks positively silly with my Olympus 50-200mm on front.

The flash is enormous. I'm assuming this is to compensate for lens shadow on wide-angle lenses.

Second and not quite as apparent is the philosophy that this camera evinces. Panasonic is still chasing this phantom photographer that I contend does not exist. Their camera, while seemingly aimed at enthusiasts, continues to progress in the wrong direction. This is not a camera that point-&-shoot (P&S) buyers will want. It will be too complex, too large, and too expensive. Enthusiasts would rather have higher quality that smaller size. If every enthusiast on Earth could afford a gargantuan medium-format camera or a Nikon D3X, every enthusiast on Earth would have one. It's that simple.

Really? A dedicate iAuto button? Why take it off of the dial? Give me MORE dials, not fewer!

I know that I keep harping on this, but Panasonic and Olympus are not doing much to keep me from making the jump over to Sony. Truly, what keeps me from doing it, aside from the lack of lenses for Sony, is that I am waiting to see what Fuji does. That doesn't bode well for Panasonic when the thing keeping me away from another company is a third company's possible products.

That said, I do like the looks of these new X-Series lenses. They are intended as good video/photo hybrid lenses, and since I do shoot a fair amount of video with my GF1, this seems nice. Depending on the MTF results, I may buy one or both, but that is a big "if." Panasonic needs to produce something that isn't an "if."

What got me thinking about this recently was a Halloween party that I hosted a couple of nights ago. Light was decent, but about what one would expect for house lighting at night. I took over three-hundred photos with my GF1 and only about half were in decent focus, or fired quickly enough, or were properly exposed (I was using aperture priority). I switched over to an old Canon EOS 20D with the 60mm Macro lens attached and immediately started getting better shots. I took just over forty with that camera and 80% were acceptable from a technical standpoint.

The lenses for Micro 4/3 are enticing, but the cameras need to step it up. They need lower prices, higher quality, and a greater focus on those who are actually buying them: wackos like me who care enough to freaking blog about it. And the company that has captured that more than any other, recently, is Fuji. Whoda' thunk it? The X100 is great, but critically broken in too many ways for me to consider it. I see it as Fuji camera version 0.9. That sucker is still in beta. But it, and especially the scrumptious X10, reveal someone at Fuji, who has actual operational power, to contain the soul of a true photog. The X10, clad in its leather case, reminds me so much of the Pentax K1000 that I used to play with as a kid.

I don't think that I could ever buy a P&S after having had the flexibility of larger cameras, but boy, that camera makes me want to. It also shows most clearly where I suspect the P&S market is going to go. The release of the newest batch of flagship smartphones all have cameras on display that would have shamed P&S cameras from not that long ago. The new iPhone 4S is mind-blowing. It will not be long before every cell phone being sold as a completely serviceable camera module installed. That will kill the market for cameras below $200, shrink the market for cameras under $300, but possibly grow the market for cameras above that.

Whether the market grows or shrinks depends on how many people decide that it's not worth it to carry a larger camera and stop, and how many people decide that these cell phones just don't quite manage it and thus upgrade. This means the P&S cameras will have to start offering serious performance advantages. This reality is, I'm sure, the wellspring from which Panasonic's recent strategic moves are coming. And while their actions seem logical on the surface, I suspect that they don't make much sense with further investigation.

One doesn't have to go any further than price to see the error. Panasonic's cheapest camera is the GF3, which will set you back $600 with the 14mm lens. In the world of P&S cameras, that would make it the most expensive camera on the market by $100. And if potential buyers then investigate other lenses, they will suffer immediate stick-shock and turn away. I venture so far as to say that P&S buyers who simply want "a camera" will never buy a camera that requires investment in "a system."

This new era of high-end P&S will need to cater to various elements of the enthusiast market. Fuji has gone retro, Canon and Nikon have technical, and Sony pushes modern design. Panasonic should target the pro who wants a back-up camera and make their cameras as pro-oriented as possible with a sub-$1,000 price. And what do pros want? They want the ability to take photos of a party and not throw away 70% of the shots. That's a hard task for any camera company, I understand, but they need to do this, else they will fail.

So, here's hoping the GH3 really wows us in some significant way.