High resolution stitched images

Leica M8 Voigtlander 28mm f/2 Ultron

By combining images together using the Photomerge function in Photoshop, I'm able to get very high resolution images from cameras that have lower pixel counts. The reason I have been able to use m4/3 for the last couple of years for my landscape stock work has to a large extent been as a result of this.

Leica M8 Voigtlander 28mm f/2 Ultron

The M8 has an image size of only 10MP (28MB) and since many of the libraries I contribute to have a 48MB minimum, this is a much more satisfactory alternative than interpolation.

I often only use 3 or 4 images with the intention of making the final result look like any other image. i.e not a panoramic shape. By doing this I usually get a file of between 50 & 70MB from the M8, equivalent to an image taken with an 18-25MP camera.

Leica M8 Voigtlander 28mm f/2 Ultron

Because there's no upsizing or interpolation taking place, the file is of very high quality and the increased resolution is genuine. As you can see in these examples I've shown the out of camera jpgs at the top, and the final stitched image at the bottom, which I've put together from the raw files and edited and adjusted in Photoshop.

Yesterday I shot a few with the Nikon D7000 and 24mm f/2.8D lens.

Nikon D7000 24mm f/2.8D 

This produced images of around 100MB or the equivalent of a 35MP camera.

Nikon D7000 24mm f/2.8D 

Nikon D7000 24mm f/2.8D 

A few thing to take care of with this -

Its important to leave a good overlap.

Its vital to keep the same exposure and focus point for all images.

You have to be comfortable with the transform tools in Photoshop as all images need some warping and straightening.

This process can slightly soften the image so some sharpening needs to be added.

Lenses from 35mm or 35mm equivalent upwards give the best results. There's often too much distortion with lenses wider than this.

If you are quick and there's not too much movement you can include people and action in the shots.

Leica X1

K-5 in sunshine - X1 and A55 gone

Since buying the Pentax K-5 a week ago, I finally got to use it outdoors in sunshine! It didn't last long but it was a opportunity at last to see how it performed.





I used two lenses. The 35mm f/2.4 which was impressive (see later) and the 18-55mm kit zoom which was OK. The 18-55mm is certainly not a great lens, but the results were reasonable if stopped down. I've been using it indoors quite a lot, either hand held at high ISO's where the results are quite noisy or on a tripod at low ISO's and narrow apertures, where it performed well. This was the first opportunity to use it in the situation where I would use it most, outdoors hand held. At f/3.5 to f.5.6 the edges were a bit soft and there's a fair amount of CA and fringing. Things get a bit better at f/8 and f/11. I'm not sure whether to keep this lens, as I found it somewhat disappointing. Using it indoors on a tripod for some still life shots, it didn't seem too bad, and I described it as a decent lens. Now I'm not so sure.





The performance of the 35mm f/2.4 was much better. This is a really good lens. Sharp across the frame and at all apertures. Its relatively inexpensive for a Pentax prime lens, but I didn't detect any compromise on the image quality.


I've decided to go with prime lenses at the moment with the Pentax. I've got a 15mm f/4 and 70mm f/2.4 arriving today.





The Sony A55, the camera that took this amazing image, has been sold on ebay. I haven't had it very long and if you read my posts on it you will be aware that I was pretty impressed. It would be fairer to say that I was very impressed with the technology but had some reservations about the body construction. In my predictions the other day, I suggested Sony might go to town with this technology and produce a top of the range camera with it, even possibly full-frame. This is a bit fanciful, but I do hope that Sony don't just leave these features in cameras like the A55 and the A580. I did actually consider the latter camera before deciding on the K-5, but went with the Pentax because of the construction. This may sound strange coming from someone who uses m4/3, but one of the things about the Panasonic G series and the Olympus Pens is they are pretty sturdy. I have some concerns about the lenses but the bodies are very well put together. 


My hope is that Sony, with the A77 or A99 or whatever they are going to call it, can house the translucent mirror technology in a heavier duty body. The sweep panorama and high-speed bursts, which I loved, felt like they were shaking the A55 to bits! The articulated screen, which again I liked seemed very flimsy and there was the overheating, caused by the image stabilisation on the video, which has to be sorted out. This is a brilliant feature, allowing stable hand held video, but to have it sabotaged by this problem is a bit slack on Sony's part. Didn't they actually test this? So as I indicated I have put the inexpensive Sony primes I bought away in a cupboard, in the hope that Sony will come up with a more robust camera in the near future. Rumours abound that this is coming soon, we will see.





My Leica X1 also now has a new owner. Again a very nice camera but one I've been using less and less, and currently not at all. I found it very useful at weddings, since it was very quiet and produced great images in low light. However since I no longer do that, its been used as a backup camera. I've been carrying it around with me, but haven't been using it. I have found the slow auto focus somewhat restricting, though the gentleman who bought it informs me a new firmware upgrade is on the way. Perhaps the most frustrating thing about it was the inability to lock the exposure. It would have made a great camera for multi image panoramas, but apart from using it in full manual there was no way to lock the exposure. Since the manual focusing aid wasn't that great, this would involve using the AF, then switching it into MF to take the Panorama. It was a long winded and fiddly procedure and I didn't do it very often. Its a great camera for those who want to take the occasional picture, but I became more and more frustrated with it. I certainly find the Leica M9 with its manual focus rangefinder focusing much quicker to work with. 


I do have a certain tolerance for putting up with less than straightforward camera handling, if the image quality is something I can't get anywhere else and at the time I bought it the X1 produced incredible results in a small package. Since buying it the Panasonic GH2 has appeared and has made it redundant. Using a 20mm f/1.7 on the GH2 at ISO 1600 produces better files than the slower 24mm f.2.8 at ISO 3200 on the X1, so its low light advantage has gone. The Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 Nokton is a sharper and faster lens, so its advantage for outdoors landscape work has also gone. 


The arrival of the Panasonic GH2 and the Pentax K-5 has put a lot of my gear out of work. I had got into the crazy situation of having 9 cameras all providing me with different things. With  these recent additions I can handle everything with 3. 


Its the nature of the digital revolution it seems, for gear to evolve faster than before, and the cycle of new products appearing with improved features seems to be getting shorter. Is it an infinite improvement curve or are we approaching any kind of limit? I was using a Fuji S2 Pro back in 2003, and in 8 years there's been a slow steady improvement. I've gone from 6MP to 16MP using an APS-C sensor with greatly improved low-light capability but looking at images on the screen the Fuji pictures still hold up. There is a often an expectation that things move faster than they do. You often see predictions something like, "Camera phones will produce image quality equal to a D3X in a few years time" Well, they probably won't, but if they do imagine what the D3X equivalent will produce. 


Its an odd situation that with more and more of my pictures selling for web use, my cameras are capable of producing higher and higher resolutions. What will happen to magazine and book production in the future is certainly uncertain. I used to think that printed media would always have a place, but I certainly find myself reading more and more from my computer screen. It then becomes a situation about exactly where is this increased resolution useful. I guess we could get to a situation where resolution becomes so high that you only need one lens on a camera and you just crop into the picture to get what else you need, but I hope that isn't the case. I'm certainly no technophobe but I do like the idea of cameras and lenses. I'd hate to think that the future was about small all in one boxes shooting holographic stills and 3-D movies with no effort.


In a comment to one of my recent posts John M Flores wrote about the GH2:- "Hopefully it will become an intuitive and capable photographic and video tool, but right now it feels more like an electronic device."  I do have some sympathy with that comment and I certainly like a camera to look like a camera. I prefer dials to buttons, and I do appreciate a bit of metal and leather. (!!!)  It would be sad if we lost that and all cameras looked like some of the ultra modern electronic boxes that now dominate the compact camera market.


David

Leicas by Panasonic

Shot with a Panasonic GH1 fitted with my Olympus Zuiko 50mm f2 macro. One of the problems of a pin-sharp macro lens is that it shows all the dust!. 

Changing Gear

DSLR





The somewhat flippant references to the Panasonic L10 yesterday may have given the impression that I regard it as somewhat of a throwaway camera, just to be used as a prop. This is far from the truth. Somewhat surprisingly, I have found myself liking the camera more and more. In the image above with the lens attached it looks a bit of a monster, but the whole outfit is only a few grams heavier than a Canon 7D body with no battery grip or lens fitted. 


The Travor grip for the L10 is a little strange. It doesn't use the cameras battery, but has its own which pushes up into the battery compartment, replacing the Panasonic battery. The rest of the grip is empty and consequently the whole thing is very light. This makes adding the grip only marginally heavier than the camera plus its own battery. However its very powerful and has improved the AF speed of the camera dramatically. This is now a very fast focusing camera. In addition the live view is very good. All this in a 3-year old model.


I'm perfectly happy to use this as my DSLR for a while, since at the moment there is nothing on the horizon that I would need a higher performance camera for, and with the current economic situation in the UK it may remain like that for a while. Since I had the lens already the whole thing has cost me about £150 which shows what kinds of bargains are available if you shop around S/H. 


It really isn't great for low light. ISO 800 & 1600 are very noisy. Using the Olympus 50mm f2 helps but for indoor hand held work its going to need a flashgun. I rarely use one of these so I'll consider getting one if and when the need arises.


This does mean that I will no longer be keeping any of my Canon gear. Some will possibly go to my colleague B, the rest is destined for ebay. Since my final wedding its all just sitting there unused, with no likelihood of ever being picked up again.


LEICA





I've decided to switch a few things around here. As a relative newcomer to Leica (18 months) I've been experimenting to a certain extent. Rangefinder photography is a different way of working and I've been trying out different les combinations to see what I like. Because of the dust spot problem I want to keep lens changing to a minimum. Much as I love the results from the Zeiss 50mm f2, Its really quite limiting using one lens, despite me trying to convince myself that it isn't! Now that I've found somewhere that can clean the sensor I'm going to go with a two lens system. I'm pretty impressed with the Voigtlander 75mm f1.8 and am going to add a Voigtlander 35mm f1.4. I had a Voigtlander 40mm f1.4, which was my first m-mount lens. I used it originally on m4/3, but when I got my M8 it didn't match up with any framelines, so I was guessing the framing with it, and consequently sold it, even though it was a very sharp lens.








35mm is just about my favourite focal length and the Voigtlander is a light and fast lens. I'll be putting the rest of my m-mount lenses onto ebay. Some like the Leica 90mm f2.5 I've hardly used at all, which is a shame because its a lovely lens, but Leica's seem to lend themselves to the mid-range. The Zeiss 21mm and 50mm lenses are also destined for new homes. Again I shall be sorry to see them go but I really have too many lenses sitting around hardly being used and unfortunately both of these fit into that catergory.





I shall of course be keeping the X1, particularly in the light of my low light noise tests. However since I have bought the Voigtlander zoom finder I shall be selling the X1 finder and the case I never use.


MICRO FOUR THIRDS


Firstly I must thank the 43rumors site for the link to the review I did of the Voigtlander 75mm. Its much appreciated. This is a site I spend a lot a time on personally, getting all hot and bothered about the upcoming delights of 4/3 and m4/3, and it was nice of them to point out my posts on their site.


There's also a good hands-on with a Panasonic GH2 at http://blog.uniquephoto.com/wp/2010/10/31/hands-on-with-the-new-panasonic-lumix-gh2/ I'm very envious as they have a silver-grey one!!

Its an excellent read and has some great pictures of a female boxer. Its again a very positive review, much like the Luminous Landscape one.


I very much see m4/3 as the cornerstone of my future equipment use. As you will know if you've read any of this blog over the past year or so, I'm a very strong advocate for the system and it is by far my most used gear. I love the size, weight and ergonomics of the system, and in the case of my Olympus E-P2 the aesthetics and design. 





Just over a year ago I posted this:-
http://soundimageplus.blogspot.com/2009/10/g-series-pro.html 
At that time my idea of using m4/3 for all my work may have been premature and more influenced by my desire to stop using using big heavy DSLR systems. However now I very much see this as a possibility. The wedding photography requirements obviously had a big influence on my decision to continue with my Canon DSLR system. Its not really fair to use a families big day to experiment and prove a point to myself. While both B and I used m4/3 cameras almost exclusively for video, we used m4/3 very much as backup cameras for stills. We were very pleased with the results however. If the reports, reviews and experiences of people using the Panasonic GH2 are to believed then this is the camera that seems poised to push m4/3 into a different area. I've already seen one wedding photographer state that he's going to ditch his DSLR's and work with three GH2's. 


The one concern is obviously durability. I've had no problems with any of my m4/3 cameras but I do know that they exist. I am personally very careful and protective with my cameras. But its not gone unnoticed thats there's a lot of plastic involved. To be honest I'm more concerned about the lenses rather than the cameras. Using 4/3 lenses, as I do, takes a certain amount of the concerns away, as these are a good deal more robust & I'm going to be looking to get a few more of these. 


In terms of my immediate plans, I shall be concentrating on my stock / library work. Its the financial backbone of how I make my living, and despite my fears as to what impact the economic situation will have on my picture sales, there is no sign of any slowing down as yet.


If commissioned work does turn up, then all well and good, but I'm not currently actively seeking it. In terms of what I do m4/3 suits me very well, both for handling and for image quality. My plan here is to use the GH2, when I can finally get my hands on one, as my main camera and the E-P2 as an alternative. I was planning to sell my GH1 when the GH2 arrives but the price of new GH1's has dropped dramatically recently. Currently £399 or less in UK stores. This makes a S/H price of about £275-300 max. and considering I've dropped mine and "scuffed it up" I'd be looking at something less than that. I think its time to bite the bullet and do the video hack. Since it seems Panasonic have put a stop to their firmware being hackable (Though never underestimate the ingenuity of of the hackers!) my GH1 may be the only opportunity for me to try that. Having seen some of the results it is something I'd like to do. Video is not one of my great priorities, and as someone who still hasn't made much of an attempt to learn FInal Cut Pro after having it for 6 months, not something I have much expertise in editing, but it would be nice to have a dedicated video camera. My intention is to use the GH2 very much for stills, so it would make sense to have something separate, and I'd rather use it like that than sell it for around £200.


On the lens front I'll be using my two 4/3 lenses, the Leica 14-150mm zoom and Olympus 50mm f2 macro together with my Olympus 9-18mm zoom (which I like more and more) and Panasonic 20mm f1.7. Whether I keep my Olympus 14-42mm kit zoom remains to be seen. It looks great on the camera, but I don't use it much. I'm thinking about an Olympus 11-22mm 4/3 lens as a possibility but haven't decided as yet. I do also have the Voigtlander 25mm f0.95 on order as mu ultimate low light lens.


So thats it. More chopping and changing but more focused on what I want to use rather than what I think I should use. Now wheres that container ship with all those GH2's??


D

High ISO Noise Test

In answer to the question - Do I WANT to keep a DSLR? The answer is a resounding NO!!
The answer to the question - SHOULD I keep a DSLR? The answer is - Maybe.


Why?


Two reasons -
Firstly - For commercial and commissioned jobs for new clients will I be taken seriously if I don't turn up with one?
Secondly - High ISO performance.


The first is an issue that I will address at some future time but I decided to have a look at the second reason with the cameras I have already. I have not included the 550D as the 7D is so similar in terms of results.





Ignoring the fact that these are taken with different lenses, with different ratios, the following was an indication of how each camera performs. I used the fastest lens I have for each system, all wide open. From f/1.7 on the GH1 to f/2.8 on the X1. The Leica only goes up to ISO 2500 so the ISO 3200 example from that camera was slightly underexposed and lightened in Photoshop to "simulate" ISO 3200.











As ever clicking on these images leads to a larger sample on flickr.


There's a clear winner and looser here, and the winner isn't the 7D! To my eyes the Leica X1 is the cleanest, the sharpest and the most pleasant to view. The worst is obviously the Olympus E-P2. The GH1 isn't bad, but what you can't see is the banding that affects the rest of the image. I hope (and pray!) that the GH2 finally fixes this problem. The Leica M9 is not great but I could have got a better result using raw. (These are all jpgs.) 


I knew the X1 was good in low light but I didn't think it was this good. Its a shame its a fixed-lens camera that is somewhat slow to operate. Any bets as to whether this is the basis of the sensor that turns up in the M10?


Its an unscientific test, but bears out much of what I've thought for some time. That a DSLR isn't necessarily superior for high ISO performance. Certainly as regards APS-C sensors. Full-frame sensors like the D3, D3S, D700, 5D MkII, 1DS Mk III etc. are better, but I'm not going to be getting any of those. 


So in terms of high ISO noise performance I believe that I can work without without a DSLR. 
However I think a bit of "pimp your Panny" is required before I can address the other issue!!


D

Voigtlander 15-35 Zoom Finder

Its Voigtlander week!!

With the proliferation of mirrorless cameras and large sensor compacts, the optical viewfinder, once restricted to rangefinder cameras and lenses has made a comeback. The Olympus E-P1 and the Leica X1 are two cameras that offer optical viewfinders as accessories. The Leica with its fixed lens and the Olympus as an option paired with the 17mm f2.8 pancake.

Most are OK but there are problems of getting the framing right. Many optical viewfinders are optimised for short distances e.g. 1 metre. However when you change your focusing distance the focal length of the lens changes. A lens that is 50mm when focused on a distant subject gradually shortens the closer you focus. A fixed optical viewfinder is therefore only really accurate at one point of focus. This is after all one of the advantages of the SLR with the mirror feeding the correct information into the viewfinder, so that you clearly see the differences in framing as you change the focus.

Rangefinder users have found ways to cope with optical viewfinders. On the Leica M9 any lens wider than a 28mm lens has to have a separate viewfinder since the camera doesn't have internal framelines for it. I have a separate viewfinder for my Zeiss 21mm, which is an approximation of what the camera will record. Since its set for close work I usually get more in the taken picture than the viewfinder would indicate.

This is all pretty complicated and using these optical finders involves a certain amount of guesswork. If you like wide angles and Leicas you could end up with quite a few viewfinders rattling around your pocket or camera bag. They are easily lost, and considering their cost, this is not good. The viewfinder for my Zeiss 21mm costs an unbelievable £340!!

The X1 optical viewfinder costs £240

Even the optical viewfinder for the Olympus 17mm, when bought on its own costs £100

Some Leica viewfinders cost in excess of £500. All of this seems pretty excessive when you consider that there's not really much to them.

Now fortunately there's the Voigtlander 15-35 Zoom viewfinder. 

http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih7pyl6w.html

The 15-35 is the range of lenses that it will cover (In 35mm or FF terms) It works for Leicas, including the X1 and for m4/3 cameras. Mine cost me £382. 

This is a great piece of kit. Not only does it cover a range of lenses, but due to its variable zooming feature you can set up an accurate representation of the picture the camera will take.

This may not necessarily correspond with the preset lens numbers, but you are getting something close to wysiwyg (what you see is what you get) It works for my Leica + Zeiss 21mm, It works for my X1, which has a 35mm equivalent lens. (much better than the Leica viewfinder incidentally) and it works for m4/3. For the latter I find it incredibly useful in low light, as there's none of that degrading of the EVF or screen. Incidentally when set to its maximum - 35mm it covers the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 pancake, which is useful. 

Obviously its only for wide-angles, and doesn't work for telephotos or standard lenses, but it does get rid of the need to carry around lots of different finders. Its a strange looking thing, but very light and well-made. There are two types available. One - Type A - has markings for full-frame, 1.3x crop (for Leica M8) and 1.5x crop (APS-C sensors) The other - Type B - has markings for full-frame, 1.3x crop. (Leica M8) and 2x crop (m4/3). There's some confusion on the internet about whether the type B works on full-frame. Don't worry - it does. If you have say an APS-C and m4/3 camera you can use either. All you have to know is the 35mm / full-frame equivalent of your lens and it will work fine on both cameras.

This finder has received very enthusiastic reviews and rightly so. It really is a godsend to those of us that use wide-angle lenses on cameras without built in viewfinders. Since I can get the cost of it back by selling my existing viewfinders and end up with a superior product I'm well pleased. 

Useful little company Voigtlander.

Above - 2 shots using the 15-35 Zoom finder.


Flickr set here :- 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/45203414@N06/sets/72157625127557405/

D

Current camera situation.

I hate selling cameras. Coming from someone who changes them on a regular basis, that may seem surprising. But most have their virtues and like many photographers I like to pretend that its the pictures that are the important thing and the camera is just a tool, but in reality I'm very fond of the "tools" as well.


Currently sitting on the shelf are:-


CANON 7D





Despite all my ambivalence towards DSLR's and Canon in particular, its an excellent camera. Bought in the summer to handle the last remaining wedding bookings, it is an excellent "tool". That is really how I see it. I have the greatest admiration for Canon and what they can put into a camera for a reasonable price, but its not a camera I want to pickup and take out. Whether or not enough commercial work comes up where it gets some regular use I can't say and I'm not actively seeking that at the moment. I would like to use it more and there is some industrial video work to be completed soon and I will probably use it for that. Whether or not I keep it afterwards is open to question. 


CANON 550D





Very much the same comments as per the 7D. There is a possibility that this may "move sideways" and end up with my colleague B, who is currently doing a lot of video work and shooting more and more stills, so could give it more use. Though again its not a camera I have any great desire to pick up and use it is a seriously good camera. Fantastic spec. for the price, and if you can live with the build quality, a tremendous camera for almost every kind of work. I can't think of another DSLR that does what it does for the price.


LEICA M9





My "treasure". Peerless image quality and a joy to use. Looking at the pictures I have taken with it on the screen still produces that "wow" moment. The only drawback is my "kid gloves" attitude to it. Having dropped and damaged my M8 earlier this year, I'm very conscious of what I'm holding in my hands. The current Leica special editions, the Titanium and Ostrich leather M9's pose an interesting question. Will anyone ever actually take a picture with them?


The sensor cleaning has meant that I'm using my full range of lenses with it again, and so far the dust spots are under control. Destined to be around for a long time.


LEICA X1





My carry everywhere compact camera. Its so small and light that this goes with me everywhere and is also my backup camera on all my landscape trips. Not the quickest but again incredible image quality and superb in low light. My only concern is that it isn't the most user friendly camera around. The Fuji X100 looks a lot better thought out, though like everybody else I've yet to see what its image quality is like. I would only consider it if it at least equalled the X1 in this regard, which isn't easy.


PANASONIC GH1





Soon to be replaced by the GH2. It may go off to ebay, or after my clumsiness in dropping it and reducing the resale value, may stay around as a video camera within the company, if we can ever pluck up the courage to do the hack. That really depends on what the GH2 video output is like. 


A camera thats had a lot of use. It and its companion that belongs to B, have done the bulk of our video work, for which its far more user friendly than the Canons. As is well documented here, I'm an enormous m4/3 fan. Sometimes this enthusiasm leads me to overlook some of its shortcomings, but I keep coming back to use it time and time again.


OLYMPUS E-P2





If the 7D is a camera I bought with my head, the E-P2 is one I bought with my heart. I'm constantly frustrated by the fiddly controls and menus, and in many ways the GH1 is a better camera to use and probably has the slight edge when it comes to picture quality. But love can be blind!! Maybe I should just put it in a glass case & look at it!! Fitted out with its leather case and strap it looks to me like everything a camera should. If I could only ever have one camera, this would be it. Will only ever be replaced if Olympus release an E-P3 which looks at least as good. 


So thats the current list. I haven't actually sold a camera for a while and apart from the GH2 there's not a lot on the horizon to tempt me. The Fuji X100 and Sigma SD-1 look interesting, but won't be around until next year. So at the moment I'm pretty happy with what I've got. However those who read this on a regular basis will know thats no guarantee of anything.


Words - D
Images - D & A

Retro

What is it about the retro look that fascinates so many of us? The attention that the newly announced Fuji X100 is getting is surprising. The Olympus Pens are very popular and Leica is having something of a resurgence. 


Its not universal though. A wonderful comment on a forum recently "What is it about a bit of leather and metal that gets you people so hot and bothered?" What indeed?





As far as I'm concerned there are lots of reasons. Its history and memory to a certain extent. A reminder of those first cameras that I used. Its old black and white films and remembering back to times when the world looked and felt duller and something with a bit of leather and metal seemed a passport to excitement. Its a sense of solidity and days when things were made to last, though often this is a complete myth. Its a reaction against plastic, uniformity and the colour black. Its also a perverse delight in complexity and having to learn how to use something that isn't immediately obvious. For some reason I'm much more inclined to use a camera that doesn't give me great results easily and has to be worked with. I like the process, I like the challenge and the satisfaction of working to achieve great results is somehow better than having them handed to you. I'm suspicious of easy. If something doesn't require any effort or a learning curve, what is it worth? Where's the achievement? I like metal, chrome and yes I like leather! They are all tactile materials, nice to handle. We are surrounded by plastic, artificial hybrid material, which of cause has lots of advantages, but somehow feels soulless. Its a Shelby Cobra rather than a Nissan GT-R.





Having said all that my E-P2 of course is crammed full of electronics and functions. My Leicas are simpler but still far from the mechanical simplicity of old. I want to take advantage of technology but I want it in a package that I can pretend reminds me of a mythical simpler world. It never was like that, but I can still attempt the fantasy. Ahh there's nothing like nostalgia.


So I went out yesterday with my E-P2, Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Biogon, 90mm f/2.5 Summarit-M and my X1. I was of cause complaining at various points. "Why didn't I bring my AF lenses?" "I wish I had my zoom" "Why is this thing so slow?" Yes reality is often the antidote to impractical romanticism. The fact that I had forgotten to charge my Olympus battery and it died on me, was another reminder that the retro look and the 2010 retro reality are somewhat different. These days its the look we admire while still wanting all the comforts and conveniences of the microchip world. While I think the red monster pictured above is one of the most beautiful artefacts ever created by the hand of man, I'd probably be too chicken to ever drive one and even if I did get some forward motion going would probably be asking "Where's the heater" after 5 minutes.

Last Wedding

On Friday I shot my last commercial wedding. Driving home it felt like a huge weight had been lifted from my shoulders, and I realised just how stressful the whole thing was. To full time Wedding Photographers, you have my unqualified respect. To anyone who is considering doing this as a job, all I can say is that this is the hardest photographic work I have ever done, the most concentrated and the most nerve wracking. 


Firstly its hard physically. You are on your feet for the majority of the time. This can be 6 hours +.
You're carrying a fair amount of equipment, which even if you don't use it, is hanging round your neck. 


Secondly - its the responsibility of it all. There's no second chance. You are recording a piece of unrepeatable social history. This is one of the most important days of many peoples lives and you have one go at it. You can't mess up, you can't be ill. I've done these on various forms of medication, with a bad back, with chronic stomach ache. My co-photographer B did one a few days after a bout of swine flu! 


I would have a knot in my stomach for days before each wedding, the morning of which I would emerge from the duvet with a swarm of wildebeest running around in there. Butterflies is far too mild! Once there I was able to kick in to "pro mode" and appear "in charge" and full of confidence and unflappability.  Not quite what was going on inside.


You may conclude from this that I probably wasn't cut out to be a wedding photographer, and you're probably right. However it does have its rewards. It's almost the ultimate social documentary photography. You are recording a historic event, the joining of two families which will have implications for generations to come. You could be photographing the parents of the first astronaut to land on Mars, a future Olympic gold medallist, the scientist who found a cure for cancer. The destiny of these two families will never be the same. 


Weddings are also celebrations and you are a part of that. People are for the most part happy and also in these suspicious times, happy to be photographed. 





For this final wedding as a team the two of us got a bit carried away. 2700 + images between us! Part of the reason for this was the bride and groom. Certainly the nicest couple I think we have photographed and a good end to our photographic journey. It was also a nice place to work. The whole place, a hotel, had room for us to move freely. There was a friendly relaxed registrar who didn't impose draconian conditions on us and the people there were relaxed and uninhibited which helped us get some great shots. It was also the first time that I was working together with another photographer. B is usually in charge of the video, but as this was a stills only wedding for us, he had his first opportunity to work as a full-time photographer instead of grabbing the odd snap from behind his GH1. I could almost be tempted to carry on doing photography only together, as it worked so well, but I feel that my aching back and nervous system will persuade me to remain as a "retired" wedding photographer. 


In terms of the practicalities I used a Canon 7D. Part of the reason for so many pictures is the speed of this thing. Just touching the shutter button results in a burst of 3 or 4 shots. Handy to avoid closed eyes but a bit disconcerting to someone used to more sedate behaviour from his cameras. I only used two lenses. Both primes. A 28mm f/1.8 which I used for the vast majority of pictures and an 85mm f/1.8. I also used my Leica X1 for shots when quietness was required. B used the Canon 550D with 50mm f/1.8 mostly and his GH1 fitted with either the 20mm f/1.7 pancake or the Nikon 50mm f/1.2 MF lens which I had for so long but now resides elsewhere. See http://soundimageplus.blogspot.com/2010/09/panasonic-gh2-blurring-of-boundaries.html





So its been an interesting 18 months that I've been doing this. The wedding work has been a small part of what I (we) do, and to a certain extent it was an experiment to see how we would react to it. I think that we can say that we have a done a good job and I'm certainly very proud of the photographs and video that we have shot. Whether B will carry on I don't know. Another member of the family has been with us on previous occasions and the two of them might wish to carry on, but certainly I'm calling it a day. Its too hard on both my body and my nerves and in terms of financial reward has not been very successful. 


Photographing a wedding is one of those things all serious photographers should do, as its something that we are all linked with in the eyes of everyone else. Almost every time I tell people I'm a photogapher, the first question back is "Do you do weddings?" so its something we are permanently associated with. If it does nothing else, it will demonstrate the level of skill and professionalism that the vast majority of wedding photographers bring to their craft. Next time you hear people complaining that they charge too much or that they are just "hacks" imagine yourself in their position, with the responsibility of recording "THE Day" for posterity.
From one who has been there, albeit briefly, I certainly applaud the efforts of these often underestimated members of the photographic profession.


D