Month: April 2015

For the big names, they can never win.  Just look at the things Apple get critiqued for.

http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/02/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-1/

I have two CCD cameras, a Leica and a CCD PhaseOne back for my Hasselblad.  I like the muted subtle look of the colours.  The sharpness of the image and the more film like dynamic range.  Out of camera the images can look more pleasing, plus the noise is far more organic.

CMOS though is winning as a technology and has many advantages, not least the high ISO performance, high dynamic range allowing you to post process the images in more directions.

I have heard many people say they will refuse to upgrade to the latest Leica rangefinder because its CMOS, so was very interested to find the article I have linked to about comparing a Leica M9 (CCD) and a Leica M (240-CMOS).

I think the article finally puts to rest the CCD/CMOS is better then CMOS/CCD and that the firmware and post processing is more important.

One of the big complaints about the latest Leica and its something true about Leica in general is that when it first came out the white balance was poor and skin tones and red was not right.  After the camera had been out about a year in the field Leica finally got it right with a new firmware release.  Its something that is quite common for Leica.  I think it was this colour issue that put more people off the new camera then its new CMOS sensor.

A few weeks ago I finally got my hand on a Fuji X100T, at first I was less then impressed until I realised that the battery was very low and Fuji’s when low on power and/or have the power save features selected do limit some features.

On Tuesday this week I had another play, thanks to the local Lincoln London Camera Exchange.  This time I was much more impressed, after setting the power mode correctly and ensuring that there was a fully charged battery I managed to give it a good test.

I liked the way the optical viewfinder works and the speed of performance is now more then fast enough.

I am still torn in the direction I should take with my compact.  I might just in the end buy a better small bag for my Leica and use it with a 24mm, 28mm, or 35mm lens.  If not that then its something like the Leica X, Ricoh GR, or Fuji X100.

Still in usability the the Fuji is a great little of camera, the only concern I have is with the X-Trans sensor, and the option that if I want a compact, then go completely left of field and buy a Olympus OM-10, which is as small as most good quality compacts.

Now that the spring is finally here and the clocks have changed to British Summer Time, there is no excuse for not going for a walk on these lighter evenings and taking a camera with you.

While not a fantastic picture, I like this because it reminds me of the warmer evenings to come, with the blue sky and late evening sun kissing the church’s tower.

I’ll be going for a lot more walks now and if the weather is anything like the last few days, definitely taking a camera and shooting a few shots.

 

I have been researching what I want from my next computer and I have been considering recently image quality.

The computer is our view into our photography. But what is the limitations of editing high high quality images. The computer or the monitor?

Looking at the software I use, it is recommended that the memory of the graphic’s card is at least 512 MB. Modern inbuilt Intel graphics and discrete graphics all have at least this.

The other limitation is down to the lookup tables built into the hardware. Laptops generally have 8 bit screens, but external high end monitors have 10 bit hardware, meaning higher quality images and better editing without the possibility of banding becoming an issue.

This means that for general work a basic laptop will do the job, but for detailed colour work you will need to plug it into a high end monitor; for more intensive work then a machine with at least 8 GB of RAM and 512 MB of video RAM, 12 GB of RAM plus 512 MB of video RAM for photoshop.

So for general work a MacBook Air with 8 GB will do the job but for more extreme work at Mac Mini with 16 Gb, or a MacBook Pro or Mac Pro/iMac is required.

To many of us pixel peep. If you really want to review picture quality make a print and hand it round.

The top picture is from a Leica X Vario, the second bottom picture from a Leica M (240. The top camera was generally hammered and dismissed on the internet. The middle picture is from the Leica X a well rated if expensive compact.

I have been showing these pictures round to see what people prefer. In theory the most modern camera should win but in fact is was the oldest. Which possibly shows that something else is more important then how modern the camera is.

It can truly be said that we have never had it so good. The most modern cameras may make life easier and pictures easier to take but when it comes to image quality the improvements are now very small. Its more important to choose a camera that suites you and the sort of pictures you take, and most important of all, one you enjoy using.