Living Standards

If any of you have watched The Nanny, you'll know that in one of the episodes, Fran says "I have grown accustomed to a certain standard of living and I am not prepared to go back." This is how I feel about Canon's infinitely useful EF 24-105mm f4 L IS USM lens. This is not your average camera lens. This is what people get when they need gear that can go anywhere and do anything. This is what you use when you need your gear to work for you, not the other way around.

Canon made this lens as an entry-level L series lens. If you've been using lesser quality lenses, this gives you a taste of what you've been missing out on. Being an "L" series lens, it comes with a leather bag, a hood, an o-ring around the camera mount, and fluorite front glass. It is also quite heavy with a metal body and contains ultra high quality glass. It is weather sealed, meaning that you can take it out in the rain and it won't be ruined. It is unique in that it is the only "L" lens to be part of a kit; it comes with the Canon EOS 5D Mk III. In fact, the one I got came in a white box with no markings from a guy who already had one.

The macro function is quite useful and the image stabilization works like a charm in low light settings. If I'm still enough, I can take a crisp photo at 1/10 shutter speed, something I'm rarely able to do with an non-IS lens. The only point off is the ergonomics, but trust me, you will get used to it quickly because it will be the only lens on your camera after you buy it.

After using this lens for a couple of jobs and lots of personal work, I can safely say that this lens is the greatest lens to have ever graced my pictures since my 50mm f1.8 (which I still use). It is dead sharp throughout the zoom range and has beautiful bokeh, even when stopped up.

Zoomed out to 105mm at f4 produces excellent bokeh in macro shots.

The greatest thing about this lens is its range. A 24-105mm zoom is perfect for most gigs, because it provides both a wide enough view for group shots while being able to zoom in on a bride walking up the isle.

I could go on forever about this lens, but you get the gist of what I'm saying. For the price, this lens is an awesome zoom that can be used for virtually any kind of shot.

My Thoughts on the 7D

It's been quite awhile since I've posted but I haven't been sitting idly. Over the past month I've purchased (at a great price), a Canon EOS 7D and a Canon 24-105mm f4L IS USM lens. Both pieces of equipment are excellently made. Today, I'll be reviewing just the 7D. Compared to my old T3i, the 7D feels like an actual tool, and the versatility of the 24-105 is unmatched by any lens in its price range.

So why would I purchase a digital camera when I specialize in film? Versatility. When I shoot a wedding, I take about 300 pictures depending on the length of the event. Due to changing lighting, experimental use of flash, and the need for 3200 ISO, it is impossible to use film. That's where a high quality digital camera comes into play.

My last digital camera, a Canon Rebel T3i, was -adequate- for weddings. The problem with this camera is that while the pictures from it look great at ISOs below 2400, anything above that looks like junk. In fact, a low light picture at 6400 ISO is unusable. If you keep it in shutter priority or aperture priority, the camera's brain can figure out what needs to be done to get a good picture. The program and auto functions are next to useless and can yield terrible results if you aren't paying attention to the settings, which, if you have the camera in program or auto, you probably aren't. Another point off the T3i is the camera's poor low light autofocus. Anything below moderate indoor lighting will stump the camera.

It's not that the camera was poorly designed. It's that it wasn't designed to make money. It's not a tool to base a business off of. It is designed and priced to be used by people that are new to DSLRs. In fact, the camera, by default, will tell you what each mode is and what it's for when you click the wheel to it. For example, if you put it onto Av, it tells you on the display that Av is for aperture priority.

The 7D is quite different. For one, it's bigger and heavier. Its frame is made out of magnesium rather than plastic. It also includes a HUGELY useful feature- the Quick Control dial. This dial serves multiple purposes: in manual mode, it controls the aperture, and in the various program modes, it controls over/under exposure. Another welcome change is that the camera takes CF cards rather than SD cards. This means that read and write times are faster and that in turn helps the camera achieve an impressive 8 FPS burst rate with a decently sized buffer (4 frames at 8 FPS and more than I've tried to take at 5 FPS).

Perhaps the biggest, most important feature that it has is that it has only one full auto setting. Just the green square. No Action, Landscape, or Portrait settings are available. Why? Because this camera is aimed at people who won't ever use those. Instead, Canon gives you three custom modes. The autofocus system is quite intelligent and it has many more autofocus points than the T3i. A feature that it keeps from the Rebel series though, is the on-camera flash. This is sadly absent on the 6D, 5D Mk III, and 1D. It is very convenient and yields great results when used as a fill flash.

I could go on about how wonderful the 7D is, but I'll end it here. To conclude, the 7D, now that it's been replaced by the 7D Mk II, is a perfect value for people that need more than a Rebel camera but less than a 5D.

Coming next, a review of the venerable and infinitely useful 24-105.

One Generation's Trash is Another's Treasure

So the other day, I started doing research on instant camera film and came across the Impossible Project, an instant film manufacturer that makes film for Polaroid cameras. Although it's a little expensive and I don't plan on getting any to play around with anytime soon, I bounced some ideas off my mother about using an instant camera to take a few of my friend's engagement photos.

She then asked why they would bring back instant film to begin with.

She was right though. Instant film is expensive, low quality, vulnerable to UV radiation, and most of all, the colors are splotchy and tonal ranges are usually not all that great. This is an outdated format that was never more than a gimmick for family photos or at most, the tool of a pre-digital photographer that needed a proof shot.

However, as I explained to her, all of the things that you don't like about these cameras are all of the things that I want in my pictures

As I explained to her the Lomography movement and all of the hipsters, artists, and film photography people embracing it, she began to understand the artistic quality that instant cameras posses. It's almost tongue-in-cheek with a vintage air but not quite; in other words: art. These cameras: Polaroids, Holgas, Dianas, and Lomos, take photos that are more than the sum of their parts.

When you go on Instagram, almost everyone is taking pictures with normal cameras, sometimes even great cameras, and putting a filter over the image to make it look old. Why? Because there is something to be had in an old looking image. It brings a feeling of nostalgia and timelessness. But, why make a good looking image look old when you can have a camera that will take the real thing? This is where the Lomography movement comes in and this is also why the Holga, a camera that I describe as "so bad it's good," costs $30 shipped when it only costs about $2 to make. When demand rises, prices rise as well.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with this. This new movement is probably why there's so many new films on the market like CineStill or Red Bird. If anything, this helped save a dying art and create new interest in something that was previously getting its tombstone cut. I mean, if Ilford introduced their B&W disposable camera 10 years ago, they would've been laughed at.

Professional quality film photography isn't going anywhere. It won't go away in 10, 20, or maybe even 30 years from now, but it definitely will change. Most people nowadays, when looking at high quality pictures, regard film grain and digital noise to be the same thing. They're similar, but I've never seen sensor noise that I thought was attractive. Eventually though, camera makers will figure out how to get the resolution and quality of their digital sensors to match and exceed film. But, when that happens, the Lomo movement will keep film alive.

P.S. In 150 years, digital photography as we know it will be where film is now.

Medium Format is Best Format

So today, I will be talking about the format that has bridged consumer and pro applications, become the standard format of Instagram pictures, been parodied by countless apps to replicate it's look, been used in both $10 and $10,000 cameras, and takes only a measly 12 pictures per roll (20 if you have the money for it, or decide to not go with a 6x6 frame), 120 format film.

Love the tonal range that Velvia 100f shows.

This particular kind of film was developed by Kodak for their Brownie cameras in 1901, and has proven to be a real workhorse throughout the years, beginning life out as a consumer/amateur film and growing into a professional and artist's format in recent times. This film is used by many portrait photographers because of it's ridiculously high resolution compared to 135 film. Seriously, you could fit about 2.75 35mm frames inside a 6x6 medium format frame. This is the film that the Canon EOS 5DSR is trying to take market from. This is the format of the $40,000 Hasselblad digital back that only the most serious and successful of photographers can purchase.

But it's right here. A film that can rival a $40k digital sensor can be had for $3 if you just need 12 pictures.

It's not even funny how great this film looks when printed on 8x10. You can make wall sized posters with this stuff and you won't have to squint to see the image. This format is the only one (other than large format, which I'll get into when I have the cash) that I like shooting slides on, just because of the feeling you get when that perfectly exposed 6x6 slide is shown up to the light.

So, getting back, this film is not easily worked with. Most stores won't scan or develop it which means that you're sending it out or doing it yourself. However, I love using this stuff because of how fine the gran is and how contrasty the pictures tend to be, especially when printed on black and white. My favorite medium format films are: Fuji Velvia 100f, Kodak Ektar 100, and after a recent roll I printed, Fuji Neopan Acros 100.

An example of what Neopan Acros can looks like on 120 at 8x10. The limitation here is my enlarger and my scanner. The grain is barely discernible, even through a grain focuser.

The only limitations of this format are in my opinion: It's difficulty processing as opposed to 35mm, the price of the cameras that will shoot it (aside from Holgas), and the fact that the cameras that shoot it can't even get close to the framerates of Canon's EOS 3 or A2. This is a portrait format though. It's not supposed to be shot through in 20 seconds, it's supposed to be savored and worked slowly through the camera with a photographer that meters and composes every shot with the greatest attention to detail.

This is a pro's film.

Warped

All right, so for today you're getting a short rant on my hatred of weak metal film reels.

Last night I was in my darkroom winding some TMax 400 into my metal film reel and I was noticing that around the middle of the reel, the film would get messed up and I would have to take it out and start over again (mind you, in total darkness). After several attempts to get it to come out normally I said "screw it" and finished winding the film into the reel. Upon development, I unwound my film from the metal reel and found that I had lost about 5 frames to the negatives touching; this is unacceptable. I looked at the reel itself and found that it was bent out of shape and I quickly and easily bent it back to how it was supposed to be (it wasn't a lot, just barely enough to see).

If you look closely, you can see the undeveloped film in the middle of the strip.

I buy metal reels because they DON'T break! The plastic reels are nice because they hold your hand through winding the film on but the plastic is brittle and they break easily. I figured that the metal reels wouldn't do things like that. I mean, my medium format reel doesn't, so why would the 35mm reel be any different.

Not my reel, but the one I have looks exactly like this one.

The funny part is, I store my 35mm reel inside the tank, so I don't know how it got screwed up...

Not All Films Are Equal

So today, I'm talking about the kind of film I put through my cameras.

I've shot many different kinds of films so I'll break it down into what I like, by the type.

The films I like for color prints are Ektar 100 and Xtra 400. Ektar is my go-to film for nature photography. It saturates the colors like slide film does and has incredibly fine grain.

(This is where I'll upload a shot with Ektar. My scanner isn't being nice right now)

Xtra 400 is also decent, however, the colors it produces are somewhat cold and most photos need to be edited before printing (I don't print color so everything has to be done in GIMP), although this could be the printer's. The best part about it though is that Walgreen's carries it and the grain profile is quite attractive and, if used correctly, can produce beautiful results.

An example of Xtra 400's color range.

The film I like for slides is Fuji Provia 100f. It's freaking beautiful. This is my favorite film for landscapes and portraits because when you underexpose it, you get colors that are a hair muddy but still contrasty, when you properly expose it you get a wide range of colors that "pop" out of the image, and when you over expose it, you get get decent contrast that doesn't completely wash out. Taking pictures of backlit subjects can be done with this film, and it does a decent job of getting the overexposed parts a nice white while keeping the colors of properly exposed portions intact.

This was underexposed by about a stop. Gotta love the sharpness of my Mamiya's lenses!

Finally, my favorite films for black and white are Kodak TMax 100, 400, and P3200. TMax 100 is a damn sharp film and is great for close-ups because of the amount of detail the film can maintain. The only drawback is the slow speed, which makes it an outdoor and studio film.

TMax 100's virtually invisible grain at 8x10.

TMax 400 is also a great film but unlike TMax 100, it's not as fine (although it's a lot better than 400 TX). The faster speed does make it more usable in the real world and I've heard that pushing it to 800 gives great results, although I have yet to try this.

(I took some pictures yesterday with a roll of TMax 400. I just need to process them.)


P3200 is not a film for regular photography. It is the film you use when you are working in super low light or making pure art. The film produces really heavy grain that looks cool when printed out. One thing to note though is that it is not true 3200 ISO film. It is 800 speed film that can be ideally pushed up to 3200. Ilford makes a true 3200 ISO film that I want to try though.

The grain at 8x10 is large enough on this film to easily point out.

My "Family" of Gear

So as with most photographers, I have several different cameras I use and enjoy.

[Before I get into this, I should say that I do "own" a Canon EOS 7D but I haven't actually received it yet.]

And suddenly, my AV-1 is tiny!

 My first camera that I use for just about everything is my Canon EOS A2. It is the most modern film camera I own and it works pretty much like a new Canon but it takes film. The perks about this camera is that it takes any EF lens I can find, it has a 5 FPS shutter, a decent autofocus system and a built-in IR assist beam. This is the camera that I use when I want to take pictures of a model or take pictures at a sports game with film. It just rocks. The downsides are that the batteries are not easily found (2CR5) and the camera is too big for street photography. If you whip this thing out in the middle of the sidewalk on a busy day (and don't take this sentence out of context), you'll have people giving you weird looks, staring, and questioning your motives.

My second camera is a Canon AV-1. It is the smallest of the bunch but also the most well made. It is an older camera from the late 70s and lacks a few key features, the biggest being that it does not have manual shutter speed selection (it's big brother, the AE-1, did). Looking past it's shortcomings, it's a very capable camera that is always reliable and meters every shot perfectly. It's so small, the FD 50mm 1.8 that I use on it dwarfs the camera!

Finally, my biggest camera is a Mamiya C220 TLR. It is a medium format camera and can take 120 or 220 film. It's a great landscape camera but it also works well for candid and portrait photography. The glass I use on it is two 80mm f2.8 Mamiya-Sekor lenses that are tack sharp, contrasty, and have awesome bokeh. In fact, when doing portraits, I prefer to use this camera rather than my SLRs because of the quality of the lenses on this camera. Another pro of this camera is that it is lightweight and that it doesn't take batteries. The cons are that it doesn't have a built in meter and it lacks parallax correction.

So, those are my toys cameras. Up next, I'll be explaining my films.