What I would like to see in Sony's new flagship camera...

I always liked the idea of the Sony a77 SLT camera. I became a convert to the cult of the electronic viewfinder when the Olympus EP2 hit the market along with the very good VF-2 electronic viewfinder accessory. When I first tested an a77 I was infatuated with their built in version of the EVF.  It's quite good.  I also like the Sony a77 menu, the button placement and the feel of the body.

It took a bit of time to get used to using the EVF all the time. Especially for action. But as I've used the camera I've gotten comfortable with it.  I'd say it takes a month of daily use before the camera system becomes as transparent as the traditional style of camera that we've become used to over years and years of use.

Some things could use improvement. I wish the EVF didn't get noisy in low light, like when I use the camera to make portraits and I'm using weak, 100 watt modeling lights in my big strobes.  And I wish the finder had absolutely zero time lag from frame to frame. I wish the files were less noisy at 3200 ISO.  But to my mind none of these things are "deal stoppers."  Not for a minute.  Because what the camera does well it does very well.

Above is a reduced size file from the a77 and its 16-50mm lens. I shot it at 100 ISO yesterday afternoon while I was looking around for a path to a railroad track bridge.  The sky looked cool and it was a quick shot.  Just a scribble in my visual notebook.  But I've looked at the shot two or three times today while sitting at my computer doing post processing and I've decided I like it.  A lot.

The a77 does most things very well.  The exposure straight out of camera (using autoexposure and matrix metering) is much more accurate much more of the time than my Canon 5Dmk2 ever was. Maybe it's the fact that I can correct it as I see the image come up for pre-chimping in the finder.  After a few months of using the camera those corrections have become subconscious.  They are now part of the flow.

I use the camera in manual and in aperture priority.  I know which wheels make which magic.

And now that I've come to understand the camera the files are getting better and better. I like shooting at ISO 50-200 because the files are very detailed and have a delicious dynamic range.  As good as any camera I've used and much better than most.  In fact, the performance at lower ISO's and the great EVF are the two things that have kept me from running out and buying an OMD EM-5 even though the gear maniac part of my brain is begging me to raid the cookie jar and just do it.

Lately I've been thinking just the opposite thoughts.  I've been wondering whether my admiration for the micro four thirds cameras was the result of my  brain being wired to take advantage of EVFs in a way that is different and more inspiring than working with regular OVF (optical view finders).  After working with my EP3 and some good lenses today, alongside my a77's I've almost convinced myself to slim down my m4:3 collection in order to get ready for the Sony flagship camera that's rumored to be announced right before PhotoKina in September.  For all the insanely literal readers: please note that I said, "ALMOST."

The reason is that the better EVF in the Sony makes making the images feel more direct.

So, here we are in late July and I'm thinking about what Sony might do.  Judging by my inside sources I'm pretty certain that Sony is on the cusp of introducing their next generation full frame camera.  When I spoke with a U.S. Sony employee in a position to know, earlier this Summer, he would only say that they were in final development and couldn't decide between a 36 megapixel sensor and a vastly improved (over the a900 and a850) 24 megapixel sensor.  He wouldn't or couldn't divulge anything else.

If Sony is listening here's what I want:

I want this camera to be a full frame camera.  I think we're going to get that. I don't have anything against the smaller format cameras but I do think there are optical differences that I like. Most people want a full frame camera to better use wide angle lenses but I don't think that's an issue here as there are very few good wide angle lenses in Sony's line up at the moment.  I want full frame to do portraits with the pretty little 85mm 2.8 lens which I've named "the wasp."  It's small and light but it packs a sting it's so sharp.  And I'm interested to see just how good the performance of the 70-200 might be on a new and improved body.

I would like for Sony to ignore the people who are opinionated about finders and basically say that we'll pry their fingers off the OVF cameras only after they've expired. I'm certain that if 95% of these people tried an EVF for a week they would never want to go back.  The information on the screen and the real time feedback loop is just too rich to ignore.  The camera should have a fixed mirror like the other SLT cameras. I want the EVF and you will too.  Maybe in this iteration we'll see an even faster refresh rate and higher screen resolution.  In a pinch I'll happily settle for the same EVF that's in the a77 over a traditional (no matter how awesome) optical viewfinder.

I can't stress this next point strongly enough. I want Sony to use the same NPH-500 battery they've used in the a900, a850, a77 and a65 cameras. A customer is much happier if they only have to stock one battery type and one charger type.  I have six.  I don't want to change again just for the pleasure of adding financial ingots to their coffers.  Some people feel they need more juice?  They should get a grip.  Sony should make one and put a big battery in it and sell it for a decent price to all those people who think they need to fire off 5000 shots in a row without taking a breath or changing the power source.

I read on a forum that some people are already angry with Sony over the rumor that the camera will have two SD slots and won't make use of either compact flash cards or XQD cards.  To this I say, "Bravo."  I personally like SD cards.  They are fast enough, very resilient and amazingly cheap these days.  I'll gladly exchange a faster write speed for ten times the storage....  Put me down as "Yes" for two SD cards as long as their use can be programmed.  I'd love to have the ability to do raw on one card and Jpegs on the other.  Or to do redundant back-up.  Or to put stills on one card and video on the other.  Finally, I'd like setting that allows me to put two cards in the slots and then start shooting to the first card and when it fills up to automatically switch to the second card without having to stop.

Hey Sony, if you are having problems deciding on a sensor here's what I think:  24 megapixels is just fine as long as they are "kick ass" megapixels.  Throttle back on pixel envy and give us a really clean imaging sensor at 24 that gives us richly detailed images with  high dynamic range at low ISOs while also giving us a really nice, really clean file all the way up to at least 6400.  I'm sure you guys can make a nice 36 meg sensor but I'm going to bet that a ultra-sweet 24 meg sensor makes more sense and gives you more generous engineering parameters within which to succeed.  As the pixels get smaller the detail seems to get crunchier.  I want detail that's more natural.

You guys are really, really good at making pro video cameras.  Can we please have three additions to the video basket of goodies in the new FF camera?  You have to ask?  Really?  Okay, here you go:  First, you need to let us have manual control of the microphone sound levels. We might ask for it and never use it but that's not your concern.  I really want to see the little graphical bars shoot over to one side of the meter when my actor coughs, burps or screams.  But seriously, I want to make sure my audio is recorded at the right levels.  We can rehearse and set it but we can't set it if you don't put it on the menu.  While you are at it would you please enable manual level controls on the a77 via firmware? I'm sure the capability is sleeping somewhere in the camera's guts...

Next I really want you to put in a headphone jack. I want to put on a pair of enclosed headphones and hear what I'm getting when I record audio with my video.  Better yet, I can run the headphones to the sound guy and he can listen for problems.  But if I don't get a headphone jack I'm right back to using an outboard mixer and that adds $400+ to the system purchase price and a major pain in the butt when it comes to the video production experience.

Finally, in the video arena, it would be really cool if you could output uncompressed or raw video via HDMI or a Thunderbolt connection.  Then we can buy a couple of these cameras and head out the door to make the movie from my novel before the book even comes out. This camera should make film makers cry tears of joy...

Save yourselves a bit of money.  You can make the camera out of polycarbonate over a metal frame. I don't need macho metal everywhere and neither does anyone else. As long as you can weather seal the beast lab tests will probably prove that metal transfers more shock to the inner guts than "plastic" and that plastic wears even better than metal.  Want to make Nikon and Canon pros cry? Consider making the outer shell out of carbon fiber.  Really.  It's the one material that men will choose over just about anything but titanium.  And most of them wouldn't know the difference in performance if it was writ large in 20 point type.  It would give you guys something to beat on in the advertising.

Steal a page from Nikon's book when it comes to lens compatibility.  Let us use our groovy/cool DT lenses on the body in a crop mode. I like that 16-50 a lot and I'd like to be able to use it across sensor sizes.  I promise I'll buy a real wide angle to put on the big camera but I'd like the system to be all terrain in a pinch.

Now, be real heros and price this thing at $2499 US.  Launch it the minute Photokina closes and start stocking them up now so that everyone on the short lists can get shooting in the first month after the announcement.

I know you guys think you can market like gangbusters but I have one last suggestion for you.  Take couple hundred of these cameras and put them in the hands of pros who are already shooting your a77 products.  An honest blog review with real world samples trumps everything you can put in an ad.  Really.  If you get people to use the camera and you have a place to share their experiences you'll quickly have a raging success or....you'll discover what you did totally wrong and stop the bleeding before it wreaks havoc on the rest of your product line.

Jet black.  Carbon fiber covered with sexy black rubber grippy stuff.  The envy of every cinematic  DP. Low Light champion (within reason).  If you want to make a dent in the market share barrel it's time to come out swinging with your "A" game.

And since we're talking marketing it's good to remember that having the right lenses for the job is a big part of the cache of a system.  You've got some big blanks that need filling and it's time to stop depending on Tamron and Sigma to pull the weight for you.  Here's what you need to announce along with the camera:

A 15mm Zeiss wide angle lens.  Make it perfect.  Now you own 15mm.  Next up you've got to have at least one tilt/shift lens.  Don't get crazy and go too wide until you have the 24mm focal length covered.  That's the sweet spot for discriminating architectural photographers.  Once you've got that one nailed it's time to also think about a 35mm tilt/shift.  It's a great focal length for a lot of stuff that requires perspective control.

How about giving us an updated 20mm prime?  If you want to turn heads let's make it an f2.0 and let's make it right.  We could also use a nice 200mm f2 for those interior sporty moments.

And if you want to make Olympus OMD users cry make the lens hoods really, really wonderful and put them in the boxes for free.

I made Ian at Precision Camera create an "a99" waiting list and put me on the top.  I'll buy one.  It's a whole new camera universe.  Carbon fiber.  That would be cool...

Sunday edit:  It's' coming quicker than we all thought.  According to actual people in the know the camera will be called the a99.  It will be announced next week. I missed the guess on sensors, it will be a 36 megapixel camera and it will most definitely be a fixed mirror SLT design.  Get this: 12 FPS in raw.  Sadly, no carbon fiber...  ISO 100-4,000 (rational thinking prevails..)

The price will either be $2799 US or 2999 US.  Just thought you'd want the update.

Why fast lenses on small cameras are different from long lenses on big cameras.

No digital trickery in the depth of field in this shot.  Just the normal fall off that occurs when you use a 150-180mm f4 lens on a six centimeter by six centimeter square camera at its closest focusing distance. Look at the eyes and then look at the ears. Sharp versus smooth and effortless unsharpness.  And acres of imaging area for detail and high definition.  Is it any wonder that people still buy and use bigger cameras?  Some times "good enough" isn't good enough.

All the different formats have different looks and some of it is predicated on two major considerations:  1. Can you make the focus fall off in a beautiful way while keeping what you want sharp very sharp?  And, is there enough finesse to the high value curve (shoulder) to give you a rich tonality all the way up into the highlights while keeping the shadow detail?

I've shot with a bunch of digital MF cameras and the DR is very, very good.  Now we need to get the manufacturers to work on the curves.  I still think black and white film is a very viable alternative to the "everything digital" mindset.  Not for everything but especially for  portraits of beautiful young woman.  Every time I see this print I want to go to the pool.  That's where I first met Jennifer.

What's in my bag today? And which bag is it?

I'm getting ready to walk out the door and spend the day shooting some roadway projects. Doesn't sound exciting but it's good, clean fun and it's alway a fun challenge to make something we see all the time look interesting and cool.  I'll be shooting bridges, flyovers, pedestrian overpasses, some buildings and a lot of big interchanges. My goal (as always) is to come back with more good stuff than the client can use.  If I don't get everything at the right times today I can go back tomorrow, after swim practice and get the straggler photos.

When I was starting out in the business I always wondered what the other photographers were taking out in their bags with them on assignment. Sometimes I'd meet another photographer who had more time in the trenches and I'd ask them.  I thought I'd share what I'm heading out with and why.

I'm taking two camera bodies.  They are identical Sony a77's.  I always take two cameras.  I'd hate to be 50 miles from the studio and have a camera fail and have to drive back to the office for another one.  In tight scheduling situations, those with models and clients and location permits it would be a incredibly stupid to go out without a back up camera.  Today it would be just a major annoyance.  You don't need two identical bodies but when you are out in the sun all day it's one less thing to think about when both the bodies work in exactly the same way and with the same menus.

I like the a77s for this kind of work because the files are huge and detailed, the ISO 50 is gorgeous and I might even have a use for mild, in-camera HDR (yes Andy, HDR....).  The EVF is convenient for chimping or pre-chimping in full sun and I might find something out there that lends itself to video.

I'm taking three lenses (four if you count the 50mm 1.4 "lenscap" I keep on one of the cameras).  The one I anticipate getting the most use out of is the 16-50mm 2.8 Sony DT lens which is my current "most favorite lens in the world."  It's very sharp, auto corrects geometrical distortion in Lightroom and is the most useful set of focal lengths for stuff like this.

I'm taking along a Sigma 10-20mm 4-5.6 lens for those times when I want drama in the flyover spans and lots of puffy clouds.  It's not the lens with the best geometrical correction I've ever seen but it's great if you aren't shooting brick walls and charts.  Even wide open the center 2/3rds of the frame is sharp, sharp, sharp.  Finally, I'm packing the 70-200 2.8 G Sony lens.  Not because I think I'll use it alot but because if I don't pack it I'll keep stumbling across shots that would look incredible with a bit of compression and I'll kick myself for not having the right tool at hand.

Each camera is packing 16 gigabytes of SD memory with about 200 gigs in the little card pouch.
The bag also contains a Sony flash, off camera cable, extra set of double "A" batteries for the flash and two extra camera batteries.  We may go long....

The final addition to the camera bag is a handful of circular polarizing filters to make the sky get all dark and dramatic and make the clouds pop out.  We're shooting advertising here, folks.  We need as much pop as we can get.

Not shown are water bottles, sunscreen and a nice hat.  YBMV (your bag may vary).

The bag is a Domke F2 bag in distressed black.  Honestly distressed as it's seen at least a decade and a half of this kind of work.  Hope you're having a fun and productive day.

Edit:  Follow Up.  The shoot was fun and kind of like a scavenger hunt. The most used lens was the 16-50mm, followed by the longer zoom. It was hot and humid and several shots required hiking in 95(f) with long pants and "no-snake" boots to get to railroad tracks, etc.  But I'm not complaining, it may partially be the discomfort and physicality that keeps the cube dwellers and soccer parents from switching careers.  Or maybe it's the tenuous twists and turns of the business....At any rate, the Sony a77 was just what the creative director ordered. Big and sharp.

A celebration of silliness. Jill Blackwood stars in Zach Scott's Presentation of Xanadu.

http://www.zachtheatre.org/show/xanadu

Zachary Scott Theatre never does anything halfway. When they do a campy musical they pull out all the stops and rev up the camp. This week the Theatre opens their version of Xanadu.  This isn't your 1980's movie version either. This is a magnificent spoof-musical that made me laugh so much the image stabilization in my cameras was working overtime. 

Last night my trusty video producer, Ben Tuck, and I headed over to Zachary Scott Theatre to do some work.  Ben was there scouting locations for a video project. He was also shooting some general "B" roll during the dress rehearsal.  I was there to shoot images for the local newspaper and for Zach Scott's marketing department. I ended up with about 1855 images but many of those are similar shots with different gestures and expressions. That's why shooting people, portraits and events is so frame intensive...you might like one sort of expression and the art director might prefer another.  You shoot both.  And while you're shooting you get the expression in front of you because it might be the best one, until the next one happens and you get that one because it's even better (and on and on).

While I covered all the actors in the show I decided I'd show only Jill Blackwood in this set of blog selections.  Jill is wonderful on stage and her singing and incredible action made the show for me.  In this role she is the team leader of the original Greek muses who ends up falling in love with a mortal artist.  A big, Mount Olympus No-No.  I love the way Zach's Xanadu is propped, lit and costumed.  

Ben shot his video with a Sony a57 with the kit 18-55mm lens and his Gitzo tripod with Manfrotto fluid head.  I shot with two Sony a77s.  I used one with the 16-50mm lens (which, along with the cheap 85mm, is my current favorite optic).  On the other camera I shot with both the 85mm 2.8 and the 70-200mm G 2.8 lens.  The lighting on this production was fairly bright, with lots of follow spots on Jill, so I was able to keep the ISO in the range of 400 to 800.

Everything I shot was handheld. Everything you see here is straight out of camera with no PhotoShop chicanery or lily-gilding.  

I love the musical and all the 1980's music has gone from nostalgic to kitsch and now is just flat out funny.  Yes, I'll line up for tickets.

One more thing.  Shooting theatre with a big, bright, detailed EVF is the only way to go.  Believe me, I've done it both ways....

Fine Tuning medical images, pre-post.

I don't know what you do for a living but my job is different every time I leave the studio. A few months ago we did a job for a medical imaging practice here in Austin. Like most of my jobs it was fun, it moved fast and I learned lots of new things about other people's jobs.  Our project was to go to several clinics and photograph the staff and "patients" (model released employees of the practice) doing their jobs, making scans, making patients feel comfortable and mixing science with a human touch.

At the time my cameras were relatively new to me and this was a good job in which to push the limits of mixing available light with gentle boosts from small, battery powered LED panels.  I shot the job above with a Sony a77 camera and the 16-50mm lens.  The lens is the finest 24-75mm equivalent lens I've ever used.  In the center area it is very sharp even at its maximum aperture.  The Sony a77 gets a few knocks from every reviewer for what we perceive to be too much noise at ISO's from 800 and up.  And I'll admit that when I first started using the cameras, especially for low light theater work, the files did seem plagued with noise.  Nothing like the noise in previous generations of digital cameras but again, nothing like the clean files in cameras like the Nikon D3 and the Canon 5D either.

Before the job started I took a day to shoot some tests at 800, 1600 and 3200.  I took the files into Lightroom 4.x and started playing around with exposure, noise reduction and sharpening and I was able to make a start on fine tuning my approach to shooting at higher ISO's with these cameras.

My first exercise was to think rationally about what the files would actually be used for and then see how they looked in that application instead of just opening the files up at 100% on a big monitor and obsessing about the "grain."  The file above is about 900 pixels wide.  If you click on the image a couple times you'll see it at 2,000 pixels. In either of these sizes the noise issue is immaterial to me.  If you blow the file up you'll see more noise but you'll be looking at an enormous image. Not something most of my clients need for websites, small "rack" brochures and as 8.5 by 11 inch magazine ad issues.

When I dug into the files I discovered something else.  If the files are exposed to the right of the histogram (the files look bright but not blown...) the noise drops way down. The brighter the exposure in the camera the lower the noise levels in post processing. Given that the a77 has one of the widest dynamic ranges (in the top ten at DXO) and a longer characteristic curve in the highlights than many competitors I am able to pull good, solid highlight color detail out of files that appear to be blown out in the EVF or the camera histogram.  I fear over-exposure less with this camera than I did with previous generations of cameras I have owned.  And that makes this a bit more like what we used to do in the film/darkroom paradigm.  With Tri-X we'd routinely rate the film (expose the film) at ISO 200 or 250 and then compensate in the development in order to match the tones we wanted to see in a print.

With good technique I can use ISO 800 with the Sony a77 and have a nice file that response well to nuanced noise reduction without throwing away too much sharpness.

But there's more. I've learned to handle shooting my files the same way we did when we used to shoot with transparency film. I've learned that I can't just let the shadows fall wherever they want to fall and then depend on the shadow recovery slider in Lightroom or PhotoShop to save my ass. When a shadow is too dark and I know it needs to be open, even by only half a stop or three quarters of a stop I grab a light or a reflector and I fill it.  Limiting the range of light values ensures that I'll be able to get a usable file with much less noise in the shadows.  No matter what camera you're shooting boosting the shadows, either in post or in camera with something like a DRO setting, adds noise and decreases the appearance of delineated detail in lifted shadow areas.  Even the new miracle cameras (see: Nikon D800, Canon 5Dmk3 and Olympus OMD EM5) will give you cleaner and more open shadows with less noise if you take the time to toss in a fill reflector or a light to bring up the levels of the shadows.  Just because you can fix most of it in post doesn't mean you should.

When I can depend on a light source to help me boost exposures in the shadow areas I can dependably get clean a77 files at 1600 ISO as well. The handiest light I own, the one that's far easier to use than flash, is the Fotodiox 312AS LED panel.  These are small and light, put out ample light for low light available light situations and they have the added benefit of continuously changeable color temperature between 3200 and 5600K.  They also have a continuously variable power control.  With two camcorder batteries attached I can use the panel for nearly two hours of continuous run time.  If I'm careful to turn off the lights as soon as we get the shot I can use them for a full day when making images like the one above.  At 1/3 the cost of a single SB-XXX flash from Nikon or similar flash from Canon I think these lights are "no-brainers."  And since they are battery powered there's no scramble to run cables or find working outlets.

In the image above I was crouched into a corner to shoot. The camera was set at ISO 800 and the room was mostly lit by two overhead florescent fixtures.  The part of the measuring machine closest to me, the big, white ring, was in shadow and I knew it would either go too dark or I'd be forced to bring up the exposure on the part in post by nearly a stop and a half, which would add a lot of noise to the newly opened shadow area.  And the correction would also shift the higher tones. There's no free lunch.

I added one of the LED panels to my left.  There wasn't room for a lightstand so I balance the panel on the edge of a shelf. Using the permanent live view on the camera and looking through the EVF I fine-tuned the color temperature control until any sort of color cast difference between the room lighting and the LED light vanished.  Then I used the "volume" control to get the exact amount of fill that would be needed to lift the shadows without adding a second shadow anywhere obvious.

I also wanted to lift the value of the light on the face of the technician in the green suit so I put a second LED light just to the far side of the "patient" and just out of frame.  I "gobo'ed" that light with some black wrap (thick, black aluminum foil) so I didn't get too much spill on the rest of the scene.  That gave me light on the tech's face without messing up the nice series of contrasts through the rest of the image.

It took far less time to set this up than to write about it.  But essentially what I'm trying to say in all this is that good technique can be critical, even in the times of endless post processing, to make an image sing in just the way it needs to.  Taking time to add light instead of depending on lifting the shadows in software is an example.  We've done shoots light this for decades and have always depended on the ability to light in order to control the nuances of shadow and highlights.

Just because we've popularized microwave cooking doesn't mean that there's no place left for the sauté pans or the oven. Lighting to taste.  Season to taste.

I used the cameras at the opposite end of their ISO range this morning. Beautiful portraits in a conference room with a perfectly exposed exterior of trees and greenery.  ISO 50 is gorgeous.

Accelerating in the Web-O-Sphere.

©2012 Lane Orsak.  "Kirk at Work."

A little over a month ago, June 9th to be exact, we reached what I thought was a fun milestone: The VisualScienceLab blog had just clocked its 6 millionth pageview. It took a while to get there. Almost four years.  Well, pageviews fly when you're having fun; VSL will celebrate the 7 millionth pageview today!

I thought I'd take a second to reaffirm what VSL is all about. I've been involved in photo education and in the business of commercial and advertising photography for a long time.  I've seen trends come and go.  I've seen "truths" about the market and about gear be embraced and discarded over and over again.  But for most of us the love of a good image endures.

VSL is my medium for discussing the trends and gear that affect us right now. Today. Most of the time the essays and ensuing discussions can be good, clean fun. Sometimes we'll have honest differences and perceptions (and that's what the "Comments" are for...) but most of the time we'll discuss the relevant (to me) issues of the day, speak the truth about doing this nutty artform for a living, and occasionally wade into the raucous swamp of the hobby's craziness.

I have made a lot of good virtual and real friends along the way and I hope to keep up the conversation with you (or, in Texas, "y'all") for some time to come.

If you haven't signed up as a "follower" you might consider it. It doesn't affect anything other than my ego. No junk mail from me will follow.  But it lets me know that you appreciate the time and energy it takes to write and share.

I'd love to read more comments (even if I disagree with them) so sharpen your virtual pencils and let it fly.  Thank you very much for reading. Thank you for clicking on the Amazon links when you feel the lure of good gear calling your name.  It doesn't cost you more and it earns me a small commission which I generally use to buy more gear to play with and review.

Whether you shoot film or digital or both or even with (gulp) your phone I am happy you are here.  Unless you're a jerk.  And then all bets are off.

a

What are you willing to give up for more performance?

Performance has many metrics.  Sharper. Faster. Brighter. More resolution. More snap. More speed and more endurance.  And it seems inevitable that for every push forward in one of the performance metrics something somewhere has to be sacrificed.  For instance, if you want a faster lens you'll need to accept the trade-off that you will have a bigger, heavier lens.  If you want a full 35mm framed digital camera you'll pay a higher price and have less depth of field.  If you want bigger image files you'll need more storage and perhaps a computing system with a faster processor.

The trick is to narrow down your choices and figure out what you really want (need?) and what you're willing to give up to get it.  If I wanted the ultimate in photographic resolution would I be willing to give up part of my retirement fund or to go massively into debt to buy a Phase One 180 eighty megapixel digital system with incredibly expensive glass to go with it?  It would mean doing without lots of other things and the trade off might only have temporary benefits that might get lost in several quick generations of new camera/sensor designs.  What would I be willing to trade?

Recently I confronted two "wants" in two different fields that are strangely linked by one strong addiction.  I wanted to swim faster and I wanted to be able to handhold my cameras at longer exposures at least as well as I did in my "fresh and happy" twenties.  I also wanted to reduce my hereditary propensity for anxiety and all its nasty symptoms.  What was I willing to give up that would accrue me advantages in all three areas? What beloved ritual/habit/addiction would I be willing to abandon in order to become faster, steadier and calmer?

About four months ago I realized that I had some anxiety when I tried to go faster in the pool.  Increased anxiety manifested itself as tighter muscles (which cause a certain amount of physical resistance) and more difficulty effortlessly breathing as well as an elevated heart rate which slows down recovery between sets.  Even as a college swimmer I was plagued with a certain amount of performance anxiety that could degrade my overall speed and endurance.  Around this time I also realized that I was slowing down.

In my other world, photography, I noticed that I had developed more shake in my hands and body and that I wasn't able to hold a camera as still as I had before.  While image stabilization worked fine not every camera and lens I want to shoot with has image stabilization built in. (Hello.  Hasselblad...).  Often I like to shoot on the edge of what might be possible.  I like to get lucky shooting candid, available light portraits with medium telephotos like the 85mm 1.4 lenses; handheld.  Wide open.  The longer lenses magnify any sort of operational shortcomings and not being able to hold a camera still is a big operational shortcoming.

I made the (for me) momentous decision to stop drinking caffeinated coffee.  Yes.  You read that correctly.  Kirk Tuck no longer drinks super strong, deep black, potent caffeinated coffee.  The physical transition was quick enough, a few days of crabbiness (but I'd been so crabby on caffeine that no one really noticed a change...) some mild headaches and of course the standard bleeding from the eyes and ears and the grand mal seizures (just kidding about the last two symptoms..) but the psychological addiction was harder to shake (ha. ha.)  I've read about addiction and overcoming addiction and I realized that I couldn't do this halfway.  I couldn't vacillate.  I mean, look at what I had at risk: Faster swimming, better photographs, more patience.

After the first two weeks I noticed that my swimming improved.  Slowly at first and then more radically.  People I had never been able to hang with in workout suddenly came into my sights.  I no longer feared sets of 200's and 400's.  My butterfly stroke endurance increased by leaps and bounds.  But most important to me, my performance anxiety faded and then snuffed itself out altogether. I became both faster and much more relaxed in the water.  During this time I was also able to concentrate more on the mechanics of my freestyle stroke.  I watched an amazing swimmer named Kristen and began to copy her longer and more aggressive arm extension at the front end of her freestyle stroke, her perfectly delineated forearm catch and the decisive and powerful hip roll that kept it all rhythmic and flowing.  Just this weekend my times for 50 and 100 yard repeats dropped again.  I was muscle sore at the end of yesterday's workout but that was because the increase in my speed and endurance added another 1,000 yards to my usual workout.  My fellow swimmers and coach noted and commented and that was nice.

But I know most of you don't really care about swimming and that's okay.  In the realm of photography I started to notice that, in the first few weeks after my caffeine abstinence, my calmness (bordering on drowsiness) was yielding a diverse menu of positive results.  My grip and hold on cameras gets steadier and steadier.  At this point I feel as though I've regressed to my early thirties.  A 50mm 1.4 is generally sharp for me down to a 1/30th of a second when I am mindful of the process.  The bigger reward is more patience.  More proclivity to wait for the right moment instead of hurrying through a shoot or a scene or a moment.

A surprising side benefit of eliminating the liquid speed and slowing down my brain is a calmness in other work situations. The best example is my recent portfolio show where I was able to be less guarded and more affable.  I wasn't overly worried about the outcome and it translated into a better engagement with all the people I met and showed to. In all honesty, it was my first non-anxious portfolio show of my entire career. (that's sad just to read).

So, what did I really give up?  The psycho-chemical effects were easy to give up.  After two weeks all of the cravings were gone, physically, but I realize that I'd been drinking juiced up coffee religiously and with reckless abandon for the better part of thirty five years with very, very few breaks.  The culture of coffee was interwoven in everything I did.  I made extra time to get to shoots so I could drop by the coffee house and get a big cup of hot speed.  On the way to track meets and swimming meets and other events with my son, Ben, the coffee cup was a constant companion.  And I can't remember business meetings that didn't somehow revolve around the intoxicating elixir.  Locations were sometimes determined by their proximity to the best coffee in town.  And a bad shot (of espresso) could ruin my morning.

But I quickly learned that if I could get over my visceral repulsion to decaf that the meetings would still go on.  I've saved over $7,000 in the last three months on coffee purchases (just kidding, my habit was maybe $5 a day) and that's enough to buy a new camera and a couple cool lenses.

The biggest benefit is that fact that I now sleep like a baby, don't yell at bad drivers, and I can handhold a camera steadier than I've been able to in at least twenty years.  If that's not worth giving up an anxiolytic substance I always have my ace in the hole:  The best set of 100 freestyles I've swum in nearly a decade.  All for free.

What would you give up for better performance?

a

Auto Focus Micro Adjustment and the Sony a77

I couldn't really adjust for this lens but that's okay, 

I know from recent experience that it's "wicked sharp."

As I work more and more with the Sony a77 I find lots of things to like about the camera and very few disappointments. One of the reasons I chose to go with the a77's as my primary shooting cameras ( in addition to the brilliant EVF and really nicely implemented video) was the Auto Focus Micro Adjustment control.  I've been pre-occupied with other camera controls in my quest to really master the camera and I left lens adjustments to last.

But recently I've been working nearly wide open with the 50mm 1.4 lens and I noticed that it would routinely back focus. This led me to jump into the menu and get busy.  I also noticed that my 70-200mm G lens (a whopping $2000) wasn't as sharp as my previous Canon and Nikon zooms so I thought I'd take a crack at that one as well.  In the end I tried every Sony lens I owned on both bodies and now, after hours of being really compulsive and fastidious, I am even happier with my little Sony system than before.

When I first accessed the control the ability to adjust was greyed out on the menu. I finally decided to push the "clear" button and a message came up telling me that 30 lenses had already been registered and that I would lose all those settings if I continued.  Since I'd been using the camera with this control deactivated anyway I decided that it would be "no skin off my nose" to go forward.  I pushed clear.  Now I could make adjustments to any of the Sony branded lenses I put on the camera and it would save up to thirty lenses of my choice.  Do I think the camera was used before me? Decidedly not. I think the camera comes that way by default.

I actually kept notes as I worked.  The 50mm needed a "minus 8" correction.  The 70-200 needed a "minus 6" correction and the 50mm 1.8 DT lens needed a -3 correction.  Most of the lenses were right on.  The little 85mm 2.8 shocked me.  I've always used it to shoot portraits and nothing with sharp lines or edges. When I blew up my test file with the LensAlign it was so sharp wide open that I was temporarily giddy.

I tested all my lenses at 2.8.  I figured most gaussian lens designs will have a bit of focus shift from wide open to 2.8 and that trying to get them just right at 1.4 was perhaps a futile endeavor.  Happily, once I adjusted the 50mm 1.4 at 2.8 I went back and checked it wide open and was happy to find the same correction needed.  At least the lens is consistent.

I tested eight lenses and I did this on two bodies and there were mild differences between bodies.  I almost messed up the test entirely as I had inadvertantly set the focus mode to local which allows the camera to choose between a little cross of squares.  When I aimed at the target I would get different readings each time and when I tested at different distances I needed different numerical values as well.  Once I realized my mistake and set the  camera to center spot AF everything fell right into place.

The 70-200mm is now very sharp wide open and wickedly sharp one stop down.  I took the time to re-test at every marked focal length and found that, once you've set the right value, it tends to be the same for all.

In addition to the stellar performance of the 85mm 2.8 I was also amazed at just how sharp the 16-50mm 2.8 lens is.  It's the sharpest wide to short tele high speed zoom I've ever played with. I can go out shooting now with a sense of assurance that I'm getting the ultimate performance for myself and my clients.  And it was a bonding experience for me and my camera.