Category: Photography

I was recently asked to provide advice for a teenager with a $600 budget for a camera to take pictures of horses at horse nerd events. This girl is not interested in photography as a gadget fondling activity, but she needs a lens with a reasonably long reach. It’s the same situation as a soccer parent. There used to a category called bridge camera, in which a single high-quality lens was mated to a reasonably large sensor. Olympus was a pioneer in this area with the beautiful E-10 back in 2000, which had a 35-140mm/2-2.4 (35mm equivalent) lens and a camera built around it. I wrote a review of the E-10 in 2001. This category flourished for a while, but seems to have died in favor of absurdly long-range zooms in front of tiny mobile phone-sized sensors (i.e., probably worse image quality than an iPhone 16 for most images because Apple’s camera software is superior to what the camera companies themselves have made) or massive overkill on both sensor size (“full-frame” or at least four-thirds) and system complexity (interchangeable lenses for people who want just one lens). The problem with a sensor that is too big is that it forces the lenses to be too big and heavy. The problem with a sensor that is too small is that image quality is compromised, especially in lower light conditions.

Here’s what I wrote…

There is no point in carrying a camera with a less than “1 inch” sensor (nowhere near one inch in size!). Most of the cheap point and shoot cameras have sensors that are the same size as mobile phones so the image quality isn’t any better than on a phone. The compact cameras that offer insane telephoto limits, e.g., 3000mm, have these tiny sensors and, therefore, a tiny lens will yield a high 35mm equivalent focal length.

Your friend needs at least a 200mm equivalent telephoto. The best current camera that meets these specs is the Sony RX10 IV, but it costs $1700 (35mm equivalent: 25-600/2.4-4). The original RX10 (original review), which doesn’t have as long a telephoto reach, is available for $469 used in excellent condition from MPB, which is a reputable company. So your friend should probably get this. When it is time to move on, the camera can likely be sold for at least $400 (It was $1300 when originally sold).

You can see that the latest cameras with 1″ sensors and the same equivalent focal length have very small apertures extended (f/16 vs. f/8 for the RX10). From https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-zs100-tz100

At f/16, the sensor won’t be getting much light so the ISO has to be cranked way up unless it is very sunny out.

I can’t figure out why the 25-year-old Olympus concept is carried on by just one company (Sony). Why isn’t the market crowded with $600 1″-sensor bridge cameras wrapped around high quality 24-200mm lenses? They could be branded “SoccerCams”. Is it because the average consumer can’t be educated into realizing that sensor size is relevant? A camera with a reasonable size sensor will never be able to offer “83x optical zoom” the way the Nikon P950 does (can it be that the 1/2.3″ sensor, mobile phone size, of this camera actually produces great pictures somehow?).

Maybe this is just another data point to support the rule “If Philip likes the idea it will be a business disaster”?

Separately, at least once every year I have to publicly beg Apple to make a camera or two! So let this post be the 2025 request. A Sony RX10-spec camera with iPhone software and interfaces for direct uploading to social media would be amazing. Also, perhaps, a pocket-sized one-inch sensor camera like the Sony RX100 (latest version has a somewhat crazy 24-200mm lens that is f/16 maximum aperture at 200mm; maybe a very high quality 24-105 would be better).

One of the casualties of our move to Florida was a knob that locks down the quick-release plate on my old Arca-Swiss B1 ball head ($350 in pre-Biden dollars! Adjusted for inflation back to 1995, that’s equivalent to 740 Bidies today).

To my delight, I learned that Arca Swiss still exists and a lot of the good old film stuff can still be repaired by Precision Camera Works, the legendary Chicago-based shop that moved to the Austin, Texas area during coronapanic (2021). They can fix the Fuji G617, which might be my favorite film camera (a 4-shot point and shoot on 120 film. Here’s the full set of stuff PCW works on, mostly names that will bring tears to the eyes of older photographers:

One worrisome page on the site advertises an apprenticeship. I wonder if the shop is really just the one guy, Bob Watkins, who has been doing this since 1976. It is tough to imagine a young American with a sufficiently high IQ to do the work who’d be interested in doing this kind of work. Our nation’s average IQ is falling (probably also conscientiousness, which is heritable) and smarter Americans aren’t usually interested in working with their hands.

So if you have a beloved old film camera don’t delay on sending it in for an overhaul (“CLA” for “clean, lubricate, and adjust”).

What if you want to go in the opposite direction entirely? You’d think that a good full-height tripod that holds a phone and can’t hold a traditional camera would exist, but I haven’t found one. As a consumer, you’re supposed to cobble together and tighten down the following items:

• legset
• ball head
• phone clamp

A Hong Kong company called Ulanzi seems to be the solution. The winning combo seems to be their ST-27 phone clamp, which has an Arca Swiss base, and their U-80L ball head, which is rated to a ridiculous 22 lbs. Just over 50 Bidies right now. What about the legset? Maybe the Slik CF-634 4-section carbon fiber tripod is ideal because it extends almost to eye level (factoring in the ball head) and folds down to 19 inches, which means it will have a chance of fitting in a roll-aboard suitcase. This is a straight copy of the Gitzo, I think, at less than half the price. (Gitzo has a rich French heritage, but they were acquired by the same company that owns Manfrotto and now the tripods are made either in Italy or China. Slik started in Japan, but maybe everything is now made in Thailand while still designed in Japan?)

Note that the replacement for the ball head that kicked off this thread seems to be the Z1+, which is only $422 and can purportedly hold 60 kg! Maybe the good old days weren’t so great…

Arca Swiss still makes 8×10 film view cameras! Imagine someone from Gen Z having the patience to deal with 8×10 sheet film!

Today is the 60th anniversary of the Mercury 8 mission, which orbited the Earth six times while photos were made with a Hasselblad camera. A good time to remind iPhone owners what a camera used to look like! From the Hasselblad Manual by Wildi:

Loading the film is as simple as using Instagram:

Related:

• Hasselblad in Space

Apple released some new products today. Who is excited about them and why?

Aside from being able to talk on the phone, check email, and receive text messages, my main interest in a mobile phone is the camera capability.

“Apple’s iPhone 14 and 14 Pro: Imaging tech examined” (DPReview):

The Pro models gain larger sensors for their main cameras, jumping from 12MP Type 1/1.7 (7.5×5.7mm) to 48MP Type 1/1.28 (9.8×7.3mm) quad-pixel chips. The aperture is reduced from F1.5 to F1.79 but this is brighter in equivalent terms than before: the sensor is nearly twice the size, which more than makes up for the ~0.3EV slower F-number.

The camera will primarily deliver 12MP images by combining quartets of pixels to give the 2.44μm pixels discussed in Apple’s presentation, but can also deliver 48MP ProRaw files, from the individual 1.22μm photosites.

There’s a larger sensor, too for the non-Pro iPhone 14 and 14 Plus. These receive main cameras with comparable specs to those in last year’s iPhone 13 Pro. Specifically this means 12MP Type 1/1.7 (7.6×5.7mm)

My dream is a chunky phone with a Four Thirds System sensor (17x13mm). The iPhone 14 Pro models are thus approximately one third of the way to my dream, as measured by sensor area.

When would this matter? Here’s an iPhone 13 Pro evening photo from one of the new waterfront neighborhoods of Oslo:

If you download this and zoom in you’ll see how fuzzy the faces are. That’s the limit of what clever hardware and software can do to try to patch up the deficiencies caused by using a tiny sensor in low light.

Compare to this image taken at 2 pm (daylight savings time):

Readers: Aside from this sensor size increase, which is simply catch-up to the better Android phones, what is new and interesting from Apple?

Related:

• “Apple’s iPhone 14 and iPhone 14 Plus Bring Enhanced Cameras” (PetaPixel): “The dual-camera system upgrades and features on the iPhone 14 include a new Main camera with a larger ƒ/1.5 aperture and 1.9 µm pixels, enabling photo and video improvements in all lighting scenarios for better detail and motion freezing, less noise, faster exposure times, and sensor-shift optical image stabilization. … There is a new Action mode for smooth-looking video that adjusts to significant shakes, motion, and vibrations, including when video is being captured in the middle of the action.”
• speaking of Android, the co-creator Andy Rubin provides a good example of the risks of being married in California; from the Daily Mail: Former Google exec who ‘got $90M severance’ amid sexual coercion probe ‘ran sex ring which lent out women he paid to own for orgies and filmed them,’ claims estranged wife … Andy Rubin is being sued by his estranged wife Rie, who seeks to have the couple’s prenuptial agreement voided in a complaint unsealed on Tuesday … ‘This is a family law dispute involving a wife who regrets her decision to execute a prenuptial agreement,’ said Rubin’s lawyer, adding suit is full of ‘false claims’ … Rie, who is also seeking a divorce from Rubin in family court, is demanding a jury trial and asking that the prenuptial agreement she signed be voided, thus allowing her to collect on the $350 million her estranged husband earned during their marriage.