Diamonds
I’ve been receiving a lot of email lately. This in itself is not unusual, but it appears that something I quietly bought has stirred the pot somewhat. You see, I’m now a Fuji user (again; I owned the first original X100 in Malaysia, and an X20 and XF1 and XQ1 since). The Fuji fanboys have always said I was biased and paid by the other companies not to use Fuji; the other fanboys have now started emailing me saying I sold out. Sorry guys, the simple truth is nothing so exciting. I bought an X-T1 at retail from my usual dealer in KL with my own money. Two things changed: firstly, ACR in its very latest iteration appears to have changed something in the soup to make X-trans file workflow at least acceptable, if not perfect; secondly, the fast compact normal conundrum demanded a solution.
Stairs
We have no end of choices when it comes to compacts. We have fewer choices with large sensor compacts, though this has been continually improving to the current embarrassment of riches, with even Sony squeezing full frame into what I’d consider ‘compact enough’. And we’ve even got interchangeable lens system options that are often smaller than their fixed-lens counterparts, like the Panasonic GM1 and GM5. And then there are the fixed-fast-zoom-1″ (or M4/3, in the LX100 and D Lux 109) cameras such as the RX100III, Canon G series, etc. I haven’t even gotten to the really interesting speciality stuff like the fixed-lens wides (Ricoh GR and Coolpix A – now dirt cheap) or the curveballs (Sigma Merrills and Quattros).
Ignoring, or being ignored?
There’s good and bad here: for the most part, the matched lens-sensor combinations are really good, exceeding what you’d expect at a system synergy level compared to interchangeables. This is because the lens is obviously designed for the sensor, and usually has a rear element that’s extremely close to the sensor both out of size considerations and to correct for telecentricity – especially at the corners. The bad is that the zooms are always compromised in some way because size or speed is a priority (or worse, both) and there are optical compromises; or the makers try to cram in the kitchen sink (for example, the Sony RX10) and do a very good job…except the camera lands up being DSLR-sized. None of these are really problems for the casual snap shooter or hobbyist because they probably lack the experience with the really good stuff anyway; but for serious photographers, it can be frustrating.
Surprise
Firstly, we must abandon the idea of being happy with a Swiss Army Knife: there are too many tradeoffs (that said, if Panasonic had used the 1″ sensor from the FZ1000 in the LX100, I think they’d have a real winner). There is simply no way that a compact ‘universal’ can do the same things a larger, more specialised tool can. So, we look for a scalpel, or a single size screwdriver with a forged blade. It won’t do everything, but what it does do…it will do well. I’d personally rather have a camera with a very well defined shooting envelope in which I am completely happy with the results rather than something which I’m never quite satisfied with.
On the wide end, we have no end of choices – even for the 21 or 28mm lover; there’s the GR, Coolpix A, DP1 Merrill and DP1 Quattro, and the Ricoh GW3 21mm converter which can be adapted to fit all, and is surprisingly very good. All options have excellent optics – again, matched lenses are especially beneficial at the wide end – mostly embarrassing their DSLR equivalents. I’ve pretty much given up on using 28mm lenses on my DSLR because the GR is just more convenient, and doesn’t give up much (if at all) in the way of image quality. Clients have certainly never complained about those files. If you like 35mm, then it’s just down to the depth of your pockets – take your pick between the X100T and the RX1R.
A little glow
I’ve always wanted something a bit longer, though. It matches the way my eyes see especially when abstracting things out from the background. Too wide and you lose the ability to stack elements; too short and your perspective becomes too dominant. And depending on your use of foreground and background, a ~50mm lens can be made to ‘read’ like either a wide or a tele. But when you get into the mid or tele ranges, the options shrink dramatically. Granted, a longer lens is less flexible than a wider one, and would probably need IS and/or a viewfinder for stability; but seriously guys, how hard can it be to have a 45 or 50mm large-sensor compact? We had plenty of these in the film days; it was much cheaper and easier to make a good fast normal than a good wide. We really only have two fixed-lens choices: a Sigma DP2, or the X100S/T and TC. The Sigmas are out simply because of the slow workflow, and the cameras have such a small shooting envelope and requires a degree of care to shoot that precludes it from being in the ‘fun’ category of camera; if I want to be that serious, I’ll use the Otus or 45 PCE. This leaves us with the X100 variants and TC. The X100T has refined the original X100 into something that’s extremely responsive and very flexible (the original one was so slow as to be unusable) – and I honestly considered this as an option. However, the price put me off; adding the 50mm TC put me off even more. Firstly, the size ballooned to the point that I was not far off a D750 and 40/45 pancake. Hmmm.
Nonthreatening urban canyon
I need to back up a bit: why a ‘fun’ category normal in the first place? Firstly, my personal needs aren’t the same as most people’s. I could use any of my current cameras with the appropriate lens on the front – say a D810/55 Otus, or 645Z/55 SDM – but those aren’t exactly good social or family cameras, and believe it or not, there are actually times when I want to carry something that isn’t that heavy or obtrusive because I’m going out to do something else other than photography – but there might be a small chance I see something. So the image quality has to be good enough, just in case – most of these images were made when I had no intention of photographing. The camera should be therefore small and unobtrusive, and it certainly can’t be frustrating in operation. If Ricoh would make say a 55mm GR with EVF, I’d be happy. Or even a 2x TC for the current one, for that matter. Stability might be an issue, but then I’d probably be tempted to get an external finder. Needless to say, the wide end is taken care of; but often you want something a bit longer for the change in perspective – we don’t need hundreds of millimetres for compression, and that would increase size to silly levels anyway, but certainly more than 35. And honestly, there’s very little you can’t photograph with a good wide/normal combination. (You could probably even get away with just the normal and a little creative handheld stitching, for that matter.)
Rush
Given the defined requirements – which I think are specific enough to narrow things down, and probably match a lot of people’s primary requirements (assuming quality pixels, you really don’t need >12MP unless you’re printing seriously or seriously large). Our lack of fixed-lens choices puts us back into interchangeables – small DSLRs or mirrorless. Up to this point, my solution has been to throw the 45/2.8P manual focus pancake or AFS 50/1.8 G onto one of the DSLR bodies. It’s smaller, but not small. They are ‘bag cameras’ rather than ‘coat pocket’ cameras.
This leaves us with very basic small DSLRs like the Canon SL1/EOS 100D and Nikon D3300; I really liked the former with the 40/2.8 pancake, but the viewfinder was rather off-putting, and any lens options other than the 40 and 24 pancakes made size balloon. I thus looked at the range of mirrorless options. Basically, pick your sensor size/ glass, and then pick your body according to the functions you need. I’m happy with a basic body because I just want a spot meter, RAW and an EVF; most bodies have this anyway. Glass isn’t that much of a problem either, because all of the mirrorless systems were designed recently from the ground up, and don’t have any really poor lenses. The lens-sensor synergy is at work again, and in some cases, produces results that sing. You even have AF Zeiss options for the Sony and Fuji cameras.
Parent and child
Although the GM5 was tempting, that sensor is getting a bit long in the tooth and starting to show it; and again, we are limited by lens choices. The Olympus 25/1.8 is really the only choice for a fast normal of moderate size (I owned a 20/1.7 and it was just too close to a 35mm EFOV for my liking). I guess there is such a thing as too small: ergonomically, the body just didn’t quite feel right to me when held to my face to use the EVF. I landed up poking myself in the eye, which meant back to arms’ length – this is a no-go for stability and longer lenses.
I suppose people are wondering why I didn’t just buy an A7II or A7R and call it a day. Firstly, price. These two cameras are expensive enough – with lenses – that we’re looking at something that must be put into service beyond just fun (again, for me, anyway). And I don’t see either of them displacing my D800/810/750 just yet – perhaps a future iteration. And my evaluation of the A7R gave less than satisfactory results in shutter vibration and tonal compression, especially across large areas of smooth transition such as skies. I took a serious look at the A6000, but honestly – and this is entirely personal – didn’t really like the haptics. A pretty good sensor and excellent feature set at a very impressive price, though. If it’s comfortable in your hands, I think it’s probably a bit of a bargain especially at current sale prices.
Slant
This really only leaves one option, doesn’t it? I’ve always liked the X-T1’s ergonomics; my one main objection to Fuji in the past has been workflow; either batch via a third party converter and still have to bring files into PS to finish, or suffer a terrible ACR impressionist water-colour mess. It appears that this is no longer the case – whilst Iridient still does a better job than ACR, the latest version – 8.7 at time of writing – appears to have made quite decent improvements. The ACR/X-trans weak point has always been color bleeding and rendering hard edges – this now appears to be gone, and high ISO performance is decent, too. Not as good as the out of camera JPEGs, but there’s more detail and no strange colours. Bottom line: it’s workable, and good. My benchmark for APS-C image quality at a system (lens-sensor pairing, workflow) level is still the GR; I now have a workflow that lets me get within spitting distance now with the Fuji/ACR combination. And that’s a good thing, because the Zeiss 1.8/32 Touit is proving to be a very nice lens indeed… MT
Coda: The images in this article were shot with a mix of normal lenses; there may have been one or two with a 28, too. I can be very happy on a casual walk with something light and flexible. And this frequently what we need for a reboot of the photographic brain, especially when you do it for a living. Also, I’m sure plenty are going to ask a) am I going to review the X-T1, and b) why Zeiss lenses. The answer is once I’ve shot with it enough, and spent enough time evaluating workflow under a wide range of conditions. Zeiss – because for this camera I’m really only interested in one focal length, and of the options I’ve tried so far, I rather like the microcontrast and rendering of the Zeiss.
__________________
Take your photography to the next level: 2015 Masterclasses now open for booking in Prague (9-14 Mar 2015) and Lucerne (17-22 Mar 2015)
__________________
Limited edition Ultraprints of these images and others are available from mingthein.gallery
__________________
Visit the Teaching Store to up your photographic game – including workshop and Photoshop Workflow videos and the customized Email School of Photography; or go mobile with the Photography Compendium for iPad. You can also get your gear from B&H and Amazon. Prices are the same as normal, however a small portion of your purchase value is referred back to me. Thanks!
Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!
Images and content copyright Ming Thein | mingthein.com 2012 onwards. All rights reserved
Filed under: Articles, Gearhead: Reviews, On Photography