Monday, July 24, 2017

40-150 f2.8 and high res mode EM1ii

Wind picked up as storm was blowing in - so we see artifacts and blurring in the high res image that isn't there with a single exposure. Again, don't compare till you click to see them at full res.

Pay attention to the amount of detail in the roof shingles, in the plant below the window, and the detail in the blind, and lack of grain in the high res image.

Of course, I don't need to persuade you, only satisfy myself. It takes a few minutes to load the 80 MP raw file, sharpen it, reduce it to a more manageable size and save it. No one, even Olympus, is trying to tell you there is a full 80 megapixels of information in these files. - more like 40 mp.

We saw the same thing with images from Foveon cameras. They had full information at every pixel and initially tried to persuade us this was equivalent to a bayer pattern sensor of 3 times the size - it wasn't - but the images were unusually good for their native size - each pixel full colour, no bayer algorithm guessing at colours and detail.

You don't get the normal aliasing moire in patterned details, noise is significantly lower, resolution is more than half again better than standard shooting mode - not bad for a minor effort on our part - using a tripod - which I'd do anyway for my landscape and industrial work, and a little delay in processing the image.

I'll set up an action in Photoshop for any high res images I'm interested in working on.

High Res Mode Test - 8-18 mm. Panasonic

Be sure to click on the images to see them at original resolution so you can compare - in the blog as is they are sig. reduced in size and you won't see the difference.

Sunday, July 23, 2017

Olympus em1ii

Can you believe it - I own a Fuji 50s and am about to replace it with the Olympus - huh?

Well, it's like this - I'd always liked the idea of the small camera and even had a Panasonic gh2 that I liked very much but felt image quality lacked.

Recently with using the rx10 I was amazed at the image quality with a very small sensor and had to wonder about modern 20 mp micro four thirds.

I read mixed reviews of the high res mode - only with primes, more often than not not offering anything more than native single shot quality.

I'll be offering evidence soon but can tell you that high res with the Panasonic 8-18 and with the Olympus 40-150 are fantastic and this is going to be great.

Is with this camera is simply amazing. In single focus I have made some great shots of the dog - even indoors - which previous cameras have frankly sucked at.

Today at the off leash park I struggled mostly because as son as I lay down to get a low angle Sophie would bolt towards me and be within five feet by the time I got camera and telephoto to my eye  - hardly the cameras fault but I did have some success as she ran towards me standing so there's hope.

You might ask why buy the 40-150 2.8 when it weighs exactly the same as my canon 70-200 f4.

Well, I was using my Pentax lenses with the Fuji and this 40-150 will cover my 120, 200, and 300 and even gets close to the 75 so that's one lens instead of four.

A lot is made of lens equivalence - double both focal length and f stop to get an idea of what the lens does in full frame terms.

But remember that exposure and matching shutter speed are based on the actual f stop, not some equivalent number so my 2.8 40-150 will need half the ISO compared to my canon lens.

Still, I'd be kidding myself if I thought that even with high res mode I'd be able to print as big.

Know what -my printer only does 17X22 and my garage stores half a dozen large canvas prints -too big to hang in the house. I even bought a pack of 8.5X11 paper so I can make hand holdable prints.

is it possible this micro four thirds will disappoint? Possibly, but it will be fine for now and I'm definitely having fun. Someone who does need 40X60 inch prints can buy my 50s and be happy with it.

Back with images to support this position in the next few days.

Tuesday, July 04, 2017


Shot this with the Velvet 56 - the idea being that with an f 1.6 macro lens with flare, one could concentrate on shape and tone almost entirely. Photographed on my north facing back deck so that the soft north light (I was in the shade) would come from behind the object.

Sunday, July 02, 2017

Waterton Driftwood

Sometimes there's a large selection of driftwood on the eastern shore of Middle Waterton Lake but the pickings were slim this year. I did find this interesting bug eaten stump half buried and was able to rest it against some other logs. I shot two images, one wide open to blur the background, and a second stopped down for maximum depth of field in the main subject, then blended them together.

Camera was the Fuji GFX 50S with Pentax 120 macro lens via Fotodiox Adapter.

Wednesday, May 10, 2017

Near Full Moon

The fun of having a 600 mm. lens equiv. in a modestly sized and affordable package.  Even 600 mm. needs a crop to about one quarter size.

Friday, May 05, 2017

Friday, April 28, 2017

Sony RX10iii

 Early Spring - not a lot of green yet.  Shot at 60 mm. which with a 2.8X crop factor is equiv. to about 175 mm., ISO 250, 1/500 at f4. this will print very nicely to 13X19.  A fun camera to use, and with results I can be happy with. Yesterday I shot with the Fuji GFX, today with the Rx10iii - horses for courses. For best assessment of the crop, click on it to see at 100%

Thursday, April 27, 2017


From the Military Museums, Calgary

Monday, April 24, 2017


I'm not a street photographer but then, this wasn't the street. Camera is Sony RX10iii, purchased as an all-in-one travel camera. ISO 4000. Haven't printed it yet though 'grain' pattern isn't objectionable and sharpness is excellent. Sure had fun. A heavy and fairly large camera, but nice to operate.

 OK, now I've had a chance to print the image and I'm most impressed. I reduced noise a little in Lightroom and it makes a very good 13X19.

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

More Experience with Fuji GFX

First, understand where I'm coming from - 99% of my work is on tripod, 99% of my subjects only move in the wind, not by themselves, and image quality is important to me and sometimes I'm required to make big prints. My standard for quality printing is 300 pixels per inch which even with 51.4 MP is only28 inches on the long side, not that huge a print. Of course larger prints get viewed from further away so really big prints look just fine thank you.

All cameras have flaws - that's what makes deciding on what to buy so difficult, and of course, if we wait long enough, something better will come along, often just after you purchase the camera of your dreams.

The Pentax 645 has been my working camera for the last three years and it has worked very well, mostly. Shutter shake limited the use of long lenses, sp. the 200 and 300.

Fuji electronic first curtain fixes this entirely.

I used it in live view almost all the time, and the lcd does tilt upwards, but not when the camera is vertical.

Between the rotating viewfinder (unique to the GFX, and the tilt and swinging LCD, the Fuji is fantastic.

IN using live view, I need to magnify - that's easy, but I also often need to do a focus blend, and that often involves the nearest part of the subject at one of the image edges. Getting the magnified spot to the corner is painfully slow, and once it gets moving, it likes to continue drifting past where you wanted to stop if it isn't exactly on the edge.

the Fuji GFX is much faster to move focus spot, uses either the joy stick (great) or double touch to magnify - awesome. This makes taking every photograph easier.

I can't comment on autofocus as I have no native lenses yet - not even sure I'll rush into getting any. The Pentax lenses are remarkably good, and even the 35 that I had some concerns about is better than most good zooms.

The Pentax sometimes lied about exposure, the histogram not reflecting reality - a but in the firmware I suspect, no such issue with the Fuji and swiping to bring up the histogram is so nice so my exposures are noticeably more accurate.

Of course, reviewing images on a camera with a good touch screen is great, and checking focus by quickly enlarging and moving round the image very helpful.

For the work I do, the camera is great, with no significant flaws. That might not be your mileage.

I wouldn't try to photograph the dog at the off-leash park with it - and for the amount I'd save on not buying a full set of Fuji lenses, I could easily afford almost any other sports oriented camera for those tasks.

Battery life is excellent. So far, I've never even got close to losing power though eventually I'll get a back up battery to be safe.

What are the problems with using the Pentax lenses - well, I don't miss auto focus - as I always used them in manual mode on the Pentax anyway. I do miss the camera not recording the focal length of the lens as I need that information when stitching. Fortunately I usually remember, and am looking at the voice recording facility of the camera to jog my memory.

People make a lot of the shallow depth of field of larger than full frame formats. That's true, but the difference in magnification between full frame 35 and the Fuji GFX isn't that much and so far hasn't been an issue - I focus blend where I did before.

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

More Ships Screw

I think I prefer the upper image in colour, the lower in black and white (the image from the last post)

Ships Screw - Military Museums Calgary

ZFuji GFX 50s, 200 mm. lens, two image stitch.

Friday, April 07, 2017

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Fotodiox Pentax 645 to Fuji G Mount Adapter

First I got my camera, no lenses available, but I have a full set of Pentax lenses and Fotodiox announced availability of their adapter at the same time. I ordered one, picked up my camera, and waited. It took about a week which is not unreasonable crossing international borders and clearing customs.

When the adapter arrived, I was delighted to note that the shoe has the necessary grooves for Arca Swiss clamps - very handy for my lighter tripods.

The shoe was slightly loose on the body of the adapter (hollow tube) with lens mounts. I tightened them but noticed that after one day, the screws were loose again, and this was all that is holding the camera and lens to the tripod (though the shoe). I was concerned.

I used some loctite on the screws and that seemed to help, but did notice some vibration through the shoe and to the lens and camera body. I planned to use a block of wood to fill the gap between the L shaped shoe and the tube of the adapter.

Over the weekend I cleaned up the garage and got access to my tools so today I made a suitable block in maple and epoxied it into place. I got a tiny bit of epoxy on the lens release lever and wiped it off and all seemed to be well.

After 10 minutes I couldn't budge the release lever - I really didn't think the small amount of epoxy I got on it would cause problems as it was entirely external, but nothing budged the lever.

I elected to remove the lens mount ring (four small phillips screws), and that went smoothly and I was able to take the ring off.

I couldn't believe how much epoxy got into and around the long arm of the release lever, well away from where I was working - seems that the epoxy used to hold in the wooden block wicked in between the ring and the tube and then around the lever. It hadn't been the tiny amount I spilled.

A lot of scraping and I was able to get the lever working just fine again thank you, and went to remount the lens ring. Of the 4 screws, 3 had stripped - I can only think that in pushing downwards to get the phillips screwdriver to grip the small screws, this damaged the aluminium - sigh.

SO now I've removed the ring, inspected it and see that there is a fairly large bearing surface between tube and ring, and that the springs located around the ring are inboard of where any glue would go. So, with little to lose, and the lens going to fall of the tube taking the ring with it, I elected to glue and bolt the ring.

I cleaned the ring with alcohol to improve bonding, made up some more epoxy and carefully replaced the ring. I dipped each of the four wiped bolts into epoxy and then screwed down the ring (as best I could with the stripped threads in the tube), and the adapter is now sitting with a wine bottle weight on the lens making sure I don't create a maligned lens ring. Oh, yes, and the lens release lever is working just fine now thank you and has some electricians tape over it so light can't enter the tube and onto the sensor.

Don't know if I can ever fully trust the adapter from here on out, but think I will try to locate some bigger bolts, after all this thing has to hold my 300 mm. lens off of it. Fortunately the 300 is a f5.6 lens and is quite light for what it is.

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Rink Melting

Fuji GFX, 75 mm. Pentax on Fotodiox adapter. Nothing exciting, just a chance to get out.

Saturday, March 25, 2017

Hoops in Sepia

Took the colour image and opened the shadows on the left, darkened the highlighted steel band in the foreground, used layers, solid colour layer, blending set to colour, and toned down and I think I like this more than the colour image.

With my retirement from family practice (doing two days a week mental health), my office closed and I brought home the white boards and magnets I had used to display images in the exam rooms. Found a spot in the kitchen to mount the colour version of this, which then led to the conversion. Lot to be said for seeing your work day after day.

Thursday, March 23, 2017


Fuji GFX, 120, Pentax 120 macro. I now have the angle viewfinder attachment. It's nice, but perhaps not essential. I was working fine using the hoodman loupe for viewing in bright sunlight, and it does get in the way a bit, and sticks out well beyond the back of the camera - a mixed blessing - no nose prints on the lcd screen, but a tad awkward in the camera bag.

I'll make use of it, but might suggest you hold off on this expensive accessory unless you know you need it.

Elbow Falls Wall

Fuji GFX 50s, 120 mm. Pentax macro, 5 images to average the water, Akvis Enhancer to bring out the textures of the rock wall, slightly toned.

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Liking A Camera - the Fuji GFX 50s

DPReview has just published an article saying, in essence, hold on, medium format isn't all it's claimed to be, and perhaps you should consider sticking with a smaller format. They point out things like depth of field and availability of much faster lenses in full frame vs. medium format, and comparative resolution and noise to conclude there isn't much advantage.

I come at the decision to the Fuji from the other direction. I was already shooting medium format after having worked with the Nikon D800e. I much preferred the work flow and camera operation of the Pentax. I detested live view focus stopped down, and never could forgive Nikon for their backwards threaded lenses and rear caps. You'll note that this has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the image, which is excellent.

But, how well a camera works in hand is very important to a working photographer. The more you use the camera, the more workflow and intuitiveness become of primary importance vs. a 10% or even 20% difference in absolute noise or resolution.

I'm finding the Fuji remarkably comfortable to use. The magnified view by pressing the rear dial falls exactly to where I want it. I found out this morning that I can make self timer stay on after turning the camera off - well done giving me a choice. Also, I'd been using the rear dial or fingering the screen to magnify made images in playback to check focus - turns out that again, a press of the rear dial goes straight to full magnified view, and back - so again I have a choice - do I want to zoom in on an image or jump to max. for checking focus.

The quick menu has a button on the rear grip, and although there are complaints on the net about accidentally pressing it - that has not been a problem for me and I much prefer this access combined with the touch screen for changing settings.

This, combined with the electronic first curtain, and the tilting lcd when in vertical framing makes this the best camera I have used so far. That the images are of superb quality using my Pentax lenses makes the whole thing fly.

Sunday, March 19, 2017

Blur Tool In Photoshop

Photoshop has a  number of blur tools available, and while the example above takes things pretty far, used more subtly the tools can be very helpful.

I find that field blur (in Blur Gallery) within the Filters Menu is the most natural look, also giving me some control over where the blur is most strongly applied.

That said, I always duplicate the image layer and apply blurring to the copy layer, then apply a black or white mask (usually black) and then paint back in the degree of effect exactly where I want it.

Occasionally, field blur will produce an unatractive blur and adding some gaussian blur will lower the contrast of the blurred area.

Very occasionally I'll blur the entire image, then paint back in sharpness as I did here with the face of the brass figure.

By the way, the image of the barrel hoops used just a tad of field blur in the upper left and right corners. The area was already out of focus but still a bit distracting and I helped it a long a tad. That's the kind of subtle blur that I think is more useful more often and subtle enough to not disturb.

Elbow Canyon

Fuji GFX 50s More Impressions

I almost returned the Fuji, thinking that something like the A7Rii would be almost the same quality with a lot more versatility, but wandering around the back yard taking snaps, I couldn't believe how easy the camera was to use with a manual focus lens that didn't even have the f stops connected or automatic. The back dial falls right to thumb and pressing immediately goes into magnified view for quick and accurate focus, aided with focus peaking if you want. I've had focus peaking before but this was better, more accurate, more selective, more useful.

I was out today, making a series of vertical images on tripod, and having the LCD tilt while the camera is vertical is so darn nice. The 300 is so much sharper on the Fuji, presumably because of the electronic first curtain.

I do find it annoying that the self timer cancels when the camera is turned of or turns itself off - but a remote would solve that problem and be better anyway.

From wandering around the back yard - have been meaning to shoot these hoops for a year now.

Thursday, March 16, 2017

Big Hill Springs Road

Ice formations had almost all gone and what was left didn't photograph well. This image I saw on the road into the park.

Fuji GFX 50s Low Light Focusing

Was curious to see just how much light it takes to do the focusing so set up in the basement, some daylight coming in, on a very dull day. Focused on the upper unpainted hinge at f3.5 without any difficulty. Light level was such that the exposure was ISO 100, f 11 and 20 seconds exposure.

I know from experience that the vast majority (98+%) of the images I make are at less than 30 seconds so I conclude that focusing will not be a deal breaker.

I just tried focusing at f11 (a lot less light - actually less than 1/8 as much light) and the screen goes a little grainy but not bad, and focusing even with the greater depth of field and slow cycling of the image, and the noise was not a problem. I used a magnifying glass on the magnified image and that really didn't work at this low level and large depth of field. I opened the lens again to 3.5 and retried focusing the magnified image with my magnifying glass in hand - and that worked fine and felt more secure than without the magnifying glass - slightly noisy screen notwithstanding.

Bottom line: I don't think manual focusing will be an issue under 30 seconds, f4 for the focusing and ISO 100. No idea what it would be like for photographing star trails  - not something I've ever done.

OF course, the image recorded isn't noisy, just the screen and viewfinder, and only under this low light.

Can't tell about autofocus as none of my lenses are autofocus on the adapter anyway and even those that are for the Pentax, are almost always focused manually in the kind of work I do.

I hope that the 32-64 lens turns out to be sharp, and that in a year or so they will add something like a 64-128, and a 128-256 or thereabouts high quality zooms. Pentax has an old 80-160 which is reputed to be very good, and a 150-300 which isn't, more's the pity as on full frame, my 70-200 is my most used lens.

Fuji GFX 50s

For the last three years I have been happily using my Pentax 645Z, with a collection of used lenses (other than buying the 25 mm.) and have largely been happy with the arrangement. The corners of the 25 weren't perfect but for what it is, pretty decent, and very wide. I tended use the 35 more often, and I have the 75, 120 (my favourite lens) 200 and 300.

I did have two issues. Shutter shake from faster than 1 second to slower than 1/250 made use of the 300 very problematic, solved on the fast end by raising the ISO, and at the low end by shooting in dark places. A neutral density filter was an option but outdoors and with any wind and this long lens, I feared camera movement anyway.

Then I heard about the upcoming Fuji GFX - it had electronic first curtain (the Pentax doesn't) and the tilt and swing LCD would be very nice (why do manufacturers think we don't take vertical pictures?) and that lifting and swinging viewfinder extension, well that would be the cream on the cake.

I put my name down, and have had the camera for a week now. I ordered the just announced Pentax 645 to Fuji G adapter from Fotodiox and it arrived on Tuesday this week, so I can take pictures for the last two days.

My observations so far:


The 300 is a very sharp lens and works perfectly with the Fuji
The 120 is great and will remain my most used lens
The 75 seems to be fine but awaits more serious testing
The 35 isn't great with significant softening in the corners even though excellent over more than half the image.

The camera feels very nice and use is fairly intuitive. There's a my menu but so far I don't see that i can add card formatting to it - the single biggest use - on every shoot - damn.

The LCD screen is very nice, and tilts and swings, even better it's a good touch screen with good response and easy tapping to enlarge for focusing. One of the frustrations I had with the pentax was enlarging to focus, then very very slowly scrolling over to the corner where the thing I needed to focus on happened to be, especially when doing focus blending. With the Fuji I scoot around the image at will. If I want to enlarge the centre, I just press in on the rear dial - awesome.

I'm not wild about the small exposure scale on the far left of the viewfinder. It isn't always visible with my glasses and is quite small.

One thing I quickly came up against is that the refresh rate on the viewfinder and LCD slows dramatically in low light, making magnified focusing hand held impractical, and even tripod focusing less than ideal. This could turn out to be a deal breaker.

With the entirely mechanical Fotodiox adapter, you lose lens information and f stop. The latter isn't an issue if you happen to be looking down on the camera so can set the f stop by eye, but if the camera is at eye level, you can't see the f stops and will have to remember how many clicks to what f stop. I'll make a chart and learn - on the 35 it was five clicks to f11. For the kind of work I do, it doesn't seem to be a big issue to open the lens to focus, close to shoot.

Looks like if I keep the camera,  I will need to get the 32-64 lens. Testing the Fuji lenses for use with focus bracketing will need to be ok, and I'd be surprised if it wasn't a lot sharper in the corners than the Pentax 35. I should say though that checking sharpness at 100% on screen isn't really fair. I made a corner print from what would be a 50 inch wide print and it's very respectable. So maybe I'm being a bit harsh on the 35 - I'd never had any issues with it in real photography.

The importance of sharpness is inversely proportional to how interesting the image is. Test images are the most boring so need to be near perfect, boring landscapes in poor light, not well composed and not that interesting in the first place need to be bloody marvelous and I've been happy with images made on micro 4/3 because it was an interesting photograph.

So, do I need something like the Fuj GFX 50s - hell no, do I really like most of it, sure do, can I justify it - probably not - but it's cheaper than a sports car, or a mistress, or going to Iceland. Now, if I could take this camera to Iceland...

Sunday, January 29, 2017