In The Picture

Breakthrough cameras of 2011 – Part 3

Canon SX220 - does just about everything, costs next to nothing

The last bracket of cameras I haven’t chosen for their breakthrough technology, but for breakthrough practicality. In a previous post, I described the search for the perfect go-anywhere-catch-any-scene-fits-in-your pocket-doesn’t-cost-a-fortune camera, and said it's a lot like the search for the perfect woman: neither one exists. In both cases, it’s a matter of finding a model you can happily live with.

Canon popped out two new models that looked interesting: the IXUS 310 HS and 510 HS, respectively with 8x and 12x zoom lenses. For reasons only Canon can explain but cannot, these cameras are called Elph 310 and 510 in the US of A. The 310 is attractive because it’s really quite small, and getting an 8x zoom lens into this little body is quite a trick.

 

Slick as it is, 8x zoom isn’t quite enough for travel camera, so the IXUS 510HS looks a better bet. It’s another sleek design but pretty much the same size as the SX220 which costs over $100 less ($250 at online shops), and has full MASP controls - the IXUS range is all auto. The HS sensor is most likely the same. The SX220 delivers far more than you’d expect at its price point, and offers a superb combination of IQ, versatility and portability. So it ends up being my pick.

The body of the SX 220 HS is just a fraction smaller than the smallest of the EVIL cameras, the Sony NEX C3. The problem with the Sony and other EVILs is the big lenses: by the time you put even a modest a zoom lens on one of these bodies, they’ll no longer fit into your pocket. Interchangeable lenses are terrific except on a go anywhere camera, and this is where the Canon scores with an 18-260mm lens that collapses into the little body.

Even expensive DSLR zoom lenses are compromised from a design point of view, usually showing some distortion at the wide end and losing sharpness at the long end, and then there’s Image Stabilisation of varying effectiveness. You’d expect a 14x 18-260mm tele zoom in a $250 digicam to show all these problems and then some. Frankly, Canon has worked wonders with this lens and the new High Sensitivity 12 mp backlit CMOS sensor. IQ is better than with the Canon S95 I owned for a short and disappointing time.

There’s a touch of barrel distortion at the wide end, and some purple fringing on occasion, but it’s sharp right across the long zoom range. Even at 260mm, it returns pretty sharp images, and the IS works better than it has any right to given its small size and weight (bigger cameras are easier to hold steady).

As always, please click on any image to see a larger file.

These two shots were taken with the zoom lens fully extended. Image Stabilisation also helps with low light shooting, which is OK to ISO 800 and even 1600 in emergencies - as in the shot below which is remarkable for this class of camera.

The SX 220 has full manual controls, and a lovely 460k screen, and the usual simple Canon controls and menues plus a host of special modes. The camera starts in a instant, and focusing is pretty snappy. Shot to shot times are a bit more tardy but choosing continuous shooting mode is one way to get around that problem. 2.5 frames/sec isn’t all that fast but it’s fast enough to catch some action.

The range of the lens is f/3.1 - 5.9 so it gets a bit slow at the tele end (as do most tele zooms). One thing missing is a RAW shooting option, which will disappoint some. I'm happy with the JPEGs the Canon turns out. Another weak spot is a battery that's barely good enough for 200 shots. Curiously the SX230 uses the same battery as my old IXUS 960IS, so I have a spare already. 

Build quality is a mixed bag as well – strong metal body but flimsy lens closure (the blinds that cover it) and covers for the connectors and flash. The flash spoils the show by popping up when you turn the camera on – Canon, what is this stupid feature doing on a camera like this? And why not give the camera a shape that fits better into hands? I use fingers on top and thumbs on the bottom to hold it. Battery life is poor, with 200 shots max.

These grumbles soon fade when you look at the images the camera produces. Yes, you can get creative as well. Also check the image gallery – the link is in the right hand margin.

The SX 220 won DPReview's travel camera shoot-out recently (the SX230 with the GPS bump actually but they're identical every other way), sharing top honours with Nikon's S9100. The Nikon is another full auto machine so it didn't make my shortlist.

DP Review said: ‘Images from the SX230 are amongst the sharpest and most consistently well-exposed of the cameras in this group test. … considering the breadth of its zoom range, sharpness is impressively uniform.’ They added: ‘The new sensor and processor deliver excellent image quality in just about any situation we tested the camera in, and when you add excellent optical quality and video performance into the mix, the SX230 HS is a very compelling camera.’ http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q311travelzoomgrouptest/page3.as

Kim

 

The Gods smile on Gillard the Drone

The Golden Slipper

I made no bones about our current government’s incompetence in a previous post http://briard.typepad.com/get_the_picture/2011/10/an-open-letter-to-our-government.html . None of that has changed: the carbon tax was a PR disaster, the mining tax was so watered down that it left mountains of money on the table, and the refugee policy debacle made the keystone cops look smart. Abbott has made the most of the slip-ups and has repeatedly called for a fresh election.

Yesterday, someone in the Labour Party was awake for a change. Actually, more likely is that either Anthony Albanese or Kevin Rudd had seen an opportunity and worked on it behind the scenes. The story unfolded when speaker Harry Jenkins resigned from his post yesterday to return back to the Labour benches to participate in policy debates and vote.

In normal circumstances, this would hardly rate a headline but Gillard rules by a majority of one courtesy of 2 independents, and that doesn’t leave much margin for error. A single defection or by-election could bring down the government. In our downunder version of the Westminster system, the convention is that the government of the day supplies the speaker and loses one vote, and the opposition supplies the deputy speaker. So yesterday, deputy speaker Peter Slipper was a shoe-in unless Labour put up its own candidate.

Photo courtesy of the Sydney Morning Herald

Checkmate for Abbott

Labour did no such thing, despite Abbott’s lapdog Christopher Pine running around the house rubbing up against the legs of various Labour MPs. Slipper accepted the position (which pays an extra 60 grand a year), and Abbott was frothing at the mouth with outrage. He was stumped: he couldn’t even fire Slipper since he’d just resigned from Queensland’s permanently confused National/Liberal coalition.

‘Slippery Pete’ is best known for a series of minor misdemeanors, and the NLP had let slip that he would lose pre-selection for his Sunshine Coast seat to Mal Brough before the next election. According to the Sydney Morning Herald, the LNP state executive was due to meet last night to bring forward the ballot for preselection, or to give Pete the pink slip. This was to go ahead despite Abbott pleading with the LNP to drop this foolish idea.

Someone in the Labour Party must’ve slipped a note to Pete saying, ‘Harry Jenkins is getting frustrated – the speaker’s job might be up for grabs soon, and we won’t stand in your way.’ That’s how Peter slipped into the speaker’s chair on the last day of sitting. Suddenly, Gillard had a majority of 2, and Abbott’s chances of bringing the government undone have been diminished.

Abbott’s outrage

If Gillard is thick, Abbott is thicker. He’d been clearly outmaneuvered, simple as that. Anyone following these events could see that, and everyone knew that Abbott would’ve done exactly the same thing given half a chance. In fact, he immediately made fresh overtures to Rob Oakshot behind the scenes to get him to change his allegiance to Labour. 

Honest John Howard had changed the balance in the Senate in 1996 when he offered the late and widely reviled Labour Senator Mal Colston the deputy presidency. So Abbott would’ve done well to just cop it, shrug his shoulders, say 'shit happens' and hide behind the engaging smile he reserves for such occasions. Instead, he had to come out throwing wild punches, denouncing the government’s actions as squalid and sordid, and claiming that the ‘Sussex Street death squad’ had struck again.

That did two things: give Gillard a chance to gloat, and put the spotlight on Abbott so that everyone could see the big fool’s cap on his head. And the opposition added insult to injury by calling Peter Slipper names – a rat, a traitor and so on. Slippery Pete must be laughing all the back to the Sunshine Coast, knowing he will be in the Parliament’s box seat for the foreseeable future, ruling the roost, throwing out querulous Liberals whenever he fancies.

Kim

Ivan and Beth and the old Beetle

Down at Balmoral, we have colorful local identities like Ivan and Beth Hodge. In summer, they're often seen having a picnic lunch somewhere near the Rotunda in the shade of the ancient fig trees, with friends or with family. Children and grand children - they all live across the road. Here they are at the Christmas Carols last year. (As always, click on any image here to see a larger file).

When they were much younger, newly married in 1961, they bought a Volkswagen Beetle in London for 439 British pounds. They drove it across Europe and Asia to Calcutta where they boarded a ship that took them and their car to Auckland, New Zealand.

Thirty five years later, Ivan and Beth, now in their sixties, decided to relive these memories and retrace their original journey. They shipped their old Beetle back to London in 1996, and drove halfway across the world again. Here's the Beetle today, another 15 years later.

Good as new, as you can see. No wonder people fell in love with these things.

These days, Ivan and Beth arrange an annual Fest of Marching Girls supported by the local Fire Brigade Brass band, to celebrate their long life together - last year was their 50th wedding anniversary. They had their 51st just a week ago, but the weather was much kinder on their 50th so I've posted the photos from that occasion.

I think Ivan is enjoying every minute of this but I could be wrong

The marching girls and the band in the rotunda

Marching

Enjoying themselves? Looks like it.

They're not flirting, are they?

Red leader

Enjoying a quiet moment backstage

There was a big crowd, and there were BBQs and picnics, and it was a glorious day. We all hope that Ivan and Beth will be around here for many more wedding anniversaries.

Kim

 

 

Occupy Wall Street – Gotham City strikes back

Barack Obama became president of the USA on a promise to break a system that was rotten to the core. Sadly, Barack Obama is part of the elite that has ruled America for a long time. That’s why the cops in New York are arresting the protestors outside of Wall Street instead of the crooks inside. As always, the cops are too dumb to understand that they are part of the 99%, not part of the 1% whose rule they so fervently uphold.

The cops are like the cleaners of corporate boardrooms who pay more tax than the guys they’re cleaning up after. Like billionaire Michael Bloomberg, the Mayor of New York, who waited until the middle of the night to order the Occupy Wall Street protestors in Zuccotti Park removed. The mayor of Gotham City co-ordinated the action across the country, with help from Homeland Security, the FBI and other federal police agencies.

In the real Gotham City, there’s no Batman and no Robin. The city is an open sewer of greed, crime and corruption, disguised by towering monuments to mammon – from the skyscrapers to the giant flag and bronze bull outside the New York Stock Exchange Wall with its imposing Parthenon front.

The law enforcement agencies keep the oligarchy that rules America in power. Removing the Occupy Wall St protestors was a co-ordinated action across the country, supported by Homeland Security, the FBI and federal police agencies. We saw the power elite’s true colours during Hurricane Katrina, when the people of New Orleans suffered while Bush and his agencies sat on their hands. We saw whom Obama was protecting in Copenhagen, where he trashed all the promises he’d made about taking action on global warming.

Barack Obama was much more responsive when Wall Street needed help. The bankers lost trillions in a feeding frenzy of uncontrolled greed, and he bailed them out with his people’s money. 99% bailing out 1%. He was convincing, wasn’t he, before the last election? He was going to change all that crime and grime and corruption. He didn’t do anything. He didn’t even repeal Bush’s tax cuts for the rich.

He even put the same firemen back in charge who started the fire and watched as it consumed the savings of pensioners and the treasure chests of entire countries. He put the same system back together that had spun out of control and crashed, and the same people were soon rolling in money again. ‘Staff at Goldman Sachs staff can look forward to the biggest bonus payouts in the firm's 140-year history,’ announced an article in the Observer in September 2009, just 12 months after the GFC hit.

‘Nothing’s changed for the common guy,’ a Virginia real estate agent told the Washington Post around about that time. ‘I feel like I’ve been punked.’ Frank Rich writes about the GFC augmenting the ‘sinking sensation that the American game is rigged — that, as the president typically put it a month after his inauguration, the system is in hock to “the interests of powerful lobbyists or the wealthiest few” who have “run Washington far too long.” He promised to smite them.’ http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=127549.0

Of course the game is rigged. In a country where someone can’t run for President unless they have a billion dollars behind them, in a country where the entire mainstream press is embedded, in a country that constantly wages war against the world, and in a country where the government is beholden to a powerful elite, what else do you expect?

Kim

Breakthrough cameras of 2011 - PART 2

Nikon 1

In its promo material for the J1 and V1, Nikon claims ‘outstanding system performance, high-speed dual image processors, state-of-the-art focal-plane phase detection auto focus and the fastest data transfer rates.’ It continues with ‘superior image quality, tone reproduction, advanced noise reduction, amazing 10 fps speed in autofocus and 60 fps in manual mode ... even fast moving action is rendered with amazing clarity—thanks to an incredible 73 point AF array continuously working to ensure everything is sharp and clear.’

Nikon also claims the world’s fastest hybrid AF system for the 1, faster than its flagship D3S. This comes from combining phase detection and contrast detection AF on the new sensor, and the new EXPEED 3 image processing firmware. The 1 handles data throughput at the blazing speed of 600 mp/sec, which Nikon claims is another record. The phase-detection AF system can also track moving subjects during video shooting. Another aspect of the new sensor that the electronic shutter is completely silent while shooting on the J1 -the V1 has a mechanical shutter.

The Nikon 1 blends stills and video nicely. For example, you can take a still photo during slow motion video recording by simply pressing the shutter, and both will be in focus. A feature called Motion snapshot (MSS) lets you take a second of slow motion video and a photo at the same time. Nikon calls this the ‘Living picture’. 1 offers 1080p full HD video capture at 30 or 60 fps, and adds double slow motion modes of 400fps and 1200fps.

That’s a lot of firsts in one small package. Thom Hogan sees the 1 system as a test bed for new Nikon technology such as sensors that might get rid of the old mirror in future DSLRs. If phase detect AF on the sensor is so fast, you don’t need pellicle mirrors.

Great technology, poor marketing

Thom may well be right because the Nikon 1 system makes much less sense from a marketing point of view. It’s a complete system, with a bunch of lenses, a multi-accessory port for accessories like a speed-light, a microphone and a GPS unit. So what’s wrong with it? On one hand it panders to the consumer market, on the other to pro shooters looking for a compact camera. The two models underscore the 1’s split persona, but there are more serious flaws under the skin.

The V1 is more expensive than a D5100, which makes no sense. You can't just just throw a new product out there without giving thought to where it fits with your existing line-up. There’s more: no articulated screen,  no inbuilt flash, no conventional control dials, PASM modes that are buried in the main shooting menu, and a jog switch on the back to change the exposure. Manual focus is set via the rear contril dial -what were they drinking? After 4 years in development, these are pretty rough edges.

A more obvious problem is that the 1’s sensor is too small and the C mount lenses too big. Nikon does have a knack for getting better results out of a given sensor than anyone else, as it has proved vis-vis Sony for some time. And so it proves again with V1 testers reporting better than expected image quality, and the DxOMark results backing them up.

To be fair, the current M43 sensor employed by Olympus and Panasonic counts poor dynamic range and colour depth among its flaws. Still, that the Nikon V1 sensor at half the size of the M43 is competitive in overall terms is a surprise.

A smaller sensor makes smaller lenses possible, which is the whole point of the M43 design. We’ve seen what happens when you stick an APS-C sensor into a tiny body – viz Sony NEX – and the large lenses look like Dolly Parton’s oversize boobs on her tiny frame.

The 1 system lenses are hardly smaller than the M43 lenses, and the body is bigger than the Olympus PENs, so where’s the advantage of choosing a smaller sensor? Why did Nikon not go with the M43 sensor, and the M43 lens mount? The M43 coalition offers a huge range of lenses courtesy of Olympus, Panasonic, Voigtlander and Leica http://www.four-thirds.org/en/microft/lense.html .

Needless to say, the Nikon 1 system is compatible with Nikon lenses, if nothing else, via the usual huge adaptor. That oddball sensor size throws a big spanner into the works. Just trying to convert DX lenses to the new FOV is giving me a headache. Here is the new body with adaptor and the 24-120 FX lens I think, which would end up giving an FOV of 120 – 320mm in 35mm terms. Would you actually want to do that?

 

In the PC world, we’ve had Open Systems for decades. It means lots of choice with anything from motherboards to disk drives and screens. It’s a whole lot easier for camera makers. The M43 coalition is open in a modest kind of way: the lenses are interchangeable between Panasonic and Olympus bodies. Nikon could’ve opened up the M43 market, offering Nikon lenses to Panny and Oly users, and offering its own customers more choice.

What was Nikon afraid of? Its customers buying M.Zuiko lenses? Competition is good for progress – the more competition, the better for us consumers. We love open systems, we don’t want more closed proprietary systems. I bet when Canon flashes its compact camera system early next year, it will have a unique sensor and unique lens mount again. Nikon could’ve left Canon out there on its own. A big chance missed. I’ll get off my soapbox now.

Small sensors make shallow Depth Of Field impossible, as the lenses need to be wider to compensate. It’s hard enough with M43 cameras and fast lenses, but Nikon hasn’t produced any fast lenses for its 1 system, and no fast primes. So forget shooting portraits with smooth as butter bokeh. And that blazing internal transfer speed doesn't translate to fast shooting either - shot to shot takes 2 seconds, and so does waking from stand-by mode.

Steve Huff talks about some of these things at some length here: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/11/14/the-nikon-v1-camera-review-the-camera-i-expected-to-hate/ .

Kirk Tuck is also testing the V1 and comparing it to the Oly E-PL3 and Fuji x10 http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011_10_29_archive.html (part 1)

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2011_10_30_archive.html (part 2)

So the Nikon 1 system is a flawed gem, mixing serious advances with surprising rough edges - especially for a late-comer to this market. It looks like the Nikon team worked in complete isolation these last four years, instead of learning from the mistakes made by Panny and Oly and Sony et al.   

Pentax Q

Yes, it's a breaktrough camera because its design concept is unique so far - the smallest camera with interchangeable lenses ever made. The Q made no sense on first sight, and it still doesn’t. What’s the point of having interchangeable lenses on a digicam body with a typical, tiny digicam sensor? Yes, the Q-mount lenses are small but you’re not going to get great image quality out of a system like this, are you? So why not just buy a Canon IXUS 1100 HS/ Elph 510 HS with a 12x zoom lens?

Yet there’s something appealing about this idea of a miniature EVIL camera – much like a miniature train set. If you’re looking for novelty or fun gadgets, the Pentax Q makes a lot more sense. Mike Johnston from The Online Photographer talked about playfulness. ‘Almost as if we are all starting to get just a bit tired of serious, utilitarian, cookie-cutter black-blob DSLRs and the everlasting pursuit of clinical perfection, and just want to have a little fun.’

This new toy set is about as playful as it gets. As Mike points out, some of the lenses are even labelled ‘Toy’. ‘The "Toy Lens Wide" (35mm-e) and "Toy Lens Telephoto" (100mm-e) are both designed with aberrations deliberately left in, like a toy camera, or a Lensbaby, or a Lomo. Each is only going to cost $79.95 (!!). They're just for fun, in other words.’ There’s even a shoe-mounted toy optical viewfinder, but it only includes guide marks for the 47mm kit lens, and comes with a not so playful $250 price tag.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/06/qsystem.html

Thom Hogan, not known for his ready sense of humour, called the Pentax Q ‘over-the-top bizarre. Bizarre enough that Pentax will sell a few to people who are more interested in being able to pull a mini-mini-SLR out of their pocket to impress others ("Name's Bond. Thom Bond"). Meanwhile, the rest of us will be taking better pictures with an Olympus XZ-1 for half the price.’

Most of us had similar reactions, especially when we saw the projected price of $800 for a basic kit with a prime lens. Yes, the Q has an alloy body and it’s well-built but even the folks who like this new system think that’s 300 dollars too many. Still, we’re all missing the point: A new market has emerged, a market that is young and smart and well-heeled, a market that will devour gadgets that are super cool and stylish and avant-garde.

Price is not the big issue here – novelty is. We saw this with the Micro 43 cameras from Olympus and Panasonic: instead of improving the sensor and firmware, they focused on making the bodies smaller or cuter. Sony and Samsung did the same, shrinking their bodies to an anorexic extent. Why? They figured out that this market wants ‘small’ stuff, and Pentax decided to be the smallest game in town.

Kirk Tuck made an interesting point in his review of the Nikon V1. He’s a pro shooter and he says that Oly E-PL2 and Nikon V1 and similar cameras are all good enough for the kind of photography people (including Kirk) buy these things for. Good enough for casual shooting. So is the Canon SX220 I always carry with me. Not perfect but good enough.

Maybe the camera business has gone the way the watch business did many years ago: at a certain point, all new watches kept perfect time so the emphasis shifted to how they looked, how much they cost, how cute they were, how well they matched your outfits. The Pentax Q is pretty Qute alright.

Kim

Part 1 - http://briard.typepad.com/get_the_picture/2011/11/breaktrough-cameras-of-2011.html

Breakthrough cameras of 2011

PART 1 - Sony SLT a77/a65 and Fujifilm X100/x10

Sony’s pair of pellicle-mirrored DSLRs deserve a place on any list because Sony solved a long-standing problem in SLR design with an ingenious semi-transparent mirror. Sony calls it translucent, an error picked up by Mike Johnston of The Online Photographer among others. Translucent materials transmit light diffusely which is not desirable in a camera. http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2011/09/sonys-big-risks.html

Canon released a camera with a pellicle mirror back in 1965, but the EOS 1N RS didn’t take on. In order to make the pellicle mirror design work, Sony produced a superb EVF or Electronic View Finder. The optical viewfinder we’re all so attached to always shows us the same bright, wide open image. The EVF deployed in the a77 and a65 is a 2.4mp 'TruFinder' design actually shows you the shot you’re about to take, ‘giving a much smoother, more life-like shooting experience.’ So says http://www.dpreview.com/previews/sonyslt/.

The upside for the new Sonys is very fast shutter speeds and continuous shooting – 12 fps with the a77, 10 with the a65 – and better video. Shutter lag is a claimed 20msecs. Then there’s the new first curtain mode, which captures images without first closing and then opening the shutter curtain, essentially going from live view to image capture with very little pause. And both cameras offer AVCHD progressive video capture, capable of Full HD 1080p at 60 frames per second.

The a65 is the sleeper here. It does without the a77's magnesium alloy construction, new AF sensor, top-plate LCD, rear control dial and multi-hinged screen, but we’re talking $900, not $1500. That means the a65 offers the a77's stand-out features just above the price of Nikon D5100 and Canon 600D. Looks like the two big guys had better pull their fingers out.

Fuji X100 – flawed genius

A serious retro camera in the style of the seventies fixed lens compact rangefinders, the ones Olympus used to do so well. This is Fujifilm’s digital interpretation, a serious camera with a serious price on the wrong side of a grand. A Leica at half the price. Serious image quality, and some serious flaws. Why do I keep repeating how serious this is? Because I’m having a go at all those people who at present find everything ‘amazing’.

Ken Rockwell, erstwhile Nikon guru and never one to hold back, has gone ape-shit over the X100. ‘The images I get from my Fuji X100 are nothing short of amazing ... The X100's ability to tame difficult light ... is amazing. The amazing hybrid optical finder offers instant-replay of each shot ... ‘ http://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/x100.htm

The sensor is APS-C size, same as Nikon DX. The fixed lens is normal at 23mm (35 in DX speak) and fast at f/2. The mechanics are traditional and well-done. The hybrid viewfinder is a breakthrough, combining an optical viewfinder with 90% coverage and an electronic viewfinder with 100% coverage. You switch between the two with a front lever. Both viewfinders provide exposure info, distance scale, DOF scale, histogram, electronic level and exposure compensation info, which can all be enabled or disabled.

Courtesy of Luminous Landscape http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/fujifilm_x100_test_report.shtml

The rest of the design is flawed, and summed up here in great detail http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/fuji_x100_follow_up.shtml The author concludes: ‘All I can suggest to Fujifilm as well as most other camera makers is – please take a little more time in sweating the details on new products. It may be the big things that please us and cause us to buy your products, but it's the little things that can then drive us crazy once we are owners.’

Fujifilm x10

A little brother for the X100 already! And at nearly half the price. Squarely aimed at the enthusiast Canon G12 and Nikon P7100, but might appeal to the EVIL brigade as well, at least to those who don’t want more than one lens. Retro body, well built, bigger sensor, fast f/2-2.8 lens with a real zoom ring combined with the On/Off switch, and an optical viewfinder with dioptre adjustment. The x10 looks like it's built for photographers.

  The sensor is about twice the size of current digicam sensors, and image quality should be better. The lens has a 7.1 to 28.4mm focal range, equivalent to 28 – 112mm in 35mm film terms, or 18-75mm in Nikon DX speak. The lens has three aspheric elements and two ED elements plus optical stabilization. Of course there’s a RAW option, but there are also Film Simulation Modes for famous Fuji films like Velvia, Provia and Astia. There’s also a manual pop-up flash with a range of 7 meters, and an electronic horizon levelling gauge to convince us of the camera’s serious intent.

On the downside, there’s no focus indication in the OVF, and manual focus is a pain due to the very low gearing. There’s no focus peaking either and no articulated screen, but we’re being picky. Steve Huff writes good real-world reviews, and he says: ‘When compared to cameras like the Canon G12 and other advanced P&S cameras, the X10 wins on usability, image quality and build and feel. No contest.’ http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2011/11/08/the-fuji-x10-digital-camera-review-a-look-at-the-baby-brother-of-the-x100/

Sadly, this Fuji is also plagued by logic issues and a poor user interface. These things can be fixed but, so far, Fuji has shown no inclination to act on the barrage of criticism that hit big brother X100 from all sides. We don’t even know if the folks at Fujifilm are listening. Or speak our language.

Kim

Part 2 - http://briard.typepad.com/get_the_picture/2011/11/breakthrough-cameras-of-2011-part-2.html

Australian International Concours d'Elegance

The 2011 event was held in Melbourne's Royal Exhibition Building

We didn't make it to this year's event but, last year, Sydney hosted the event on a glorious spring day at the old Cardinal's Place on the hill at Manly. And we were there. As always, click on any image to see a larger file.

These days, it's the international school of management.

Here's the old James Bond Aston Martin.

And here's an old Aston racer I've never seen before.

The legendary and still gorgeous 1966 Lamborghini Miura

And the equally gorgeous Lamborghini Murcielago

The old gullwing Mercedes 300SL from 1954 - this one's the cabrio so it has no wings.

And here's the new one - German engineering at its brute-force and ugly best.

The classic 280SL of the sixties has much cleaner lines.

For real style, there's the fifties 220S cabrio four-seater. Very rare.

A rare Facel Vega - ugly French supercar from the sixties with Chrysler V8, from memory.

The super classic Jaguar SS100. That's more like it.

All photos taken with a Nikon D5000 and the trusty 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G ED lens. In perfect weather.

Kim

 

Occupy Wall Street, challenging the system

And they're not going away

People ask: what are they hoping to achieve? What do they want? What’s going to change? ‘We are the 99 percent,’ is the chant of the protestors. The other 1% have accumulated more wealth than all of the 99%. That’s what they want to change.

Photo courtesy of Der Spiegel

A decade ago, Bush and his cronies deregulated the finance industry, blurring the distinction between commercial banks, investment banks like Morgan Stanley and insurance companies like AIG. The Bushies also removed the SEC’s teeth and claws, rendering the industry regulator impotent, and encouraging the development of speculative financial instruments.

They also reduced the capital banks had to put up as security for the commercial papers they issued, which flushed the market with enormous sums of money looking to be invested. And finally, they gave special tax concessions to the biggest entrepreneurs so that the guys in board rooms of America paid less tax than the cleaners who cleaned up after them.

The shadow banking system

I’m working my way through Extreme Money, a meaty book by financial analyst Satyajit Das. He sums the run-up to the GFC up this way: ‘Debt now bought more debt, as the same underlying loan was leveraged and re-leveraged in a seemingly endless spiral of borrowing. At each stage, the banks charged fees and earned margins from the money they lent ... ‘

The system constantly increased leverage and risk to maintain high returns. ‘Techniques of staggering complexity, incomprehensible to outsiders, created more debt and ever greater levels of leverage, frequently disguised.’ The complexity was deliberate and made it impossible for most investors to understand what they were buying or assess the risks.

These kinds of investments in Mortage-Backed Securities (MBS) and Collateralised Debt Obligations (CDO) were very hard to track, as they were off-balance sheet so to speak, and this gave companies a way to hide huge risk exposures as well as huge losses. In Japan, this is known as tobashi, which means ‘make fly away’. Camera maker Olympus at presents stands accused of having spirited away money and hid large losses in this manner http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/8745be6a-09af-11e1-a2bb-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1d5ZArPV2

Securities? You must be joking!

The system wasn’t just incomprehensible to outsiders – Alan Greenspan issued no warning that it might crash, and Bernanke said the sub-prime mortgage crisis could easily be contained, when asked by Congress in 2007 if it was a threat to the wider US economy. Moody’s and S&P kept sticking AAA labels on boxes full of toxic DCOs and commercial papers leveraged umpteen times over, and sliced and diced a dozen different ways.

The people who said the system was going to crash were guys like Satyajit Das, UWS professor of economics Stephen Keane, British economist Ann Pettifour, and Warren Buffet who warned more than once that the shadow banking system of derivatives and hedge funds and other obscure vehicles was worth over $50 trillion and completely unregulated.

Everybody Knows

Everybody knows that the dice are loaded

Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed

Everybody knows the war is over

Everybody knows that the good guys lost

Everybody knows the fight was fixed

The poor stay poor and the rich get rich

So sings Leonard Cohen.

The guys who cooked up the CDOs they sold to unsuspecting victims knew what was going to happen and bet on the market crashing. They made money on the way up, and more money on the way down. We poor suckers lost money on the way down, and then lost more money bailing out those institutions who were too dumb to hedge their bets. AIG for example –  the company reinsured huge amounts of dodgy securities against loss but never covered its exposure. The bailout cost US tax payers $180 billion.

A Congressional Oversight Panel (COP), chaired by Harvard professor Elizabeth Warren, concluded: ‘The AIG rescue demonstrated that Treasury and the Federal Reserve would commit taxpayers to pay any price and bear any burden to prevent the collapse of America’s largest financial institutions.’

Economists have been talking about the socialisation of debt – funny how capitalists don’t mind a bit of socialism when it comes wrapped in money. In plain English it means the government gives them some of the tax money we pay. So we lose twice: our pension funds and holdings of stocks shrank by a third or more three years ago, and since then we’re paying more tax to prop up the very institutions that robbed us. Or in the case of Europe, to prop up whole countries who swallowed the toxic securities cooked up by Wall Street and are now suffer from life-threatening cases of blood poisoning.

The bottom line:

The question is not: why are these people on the streets, but where the hell are the rest of you? Nothing has changed. No one has gone to jail. They’re richer and we’re poorer. They can screw us all again tomorrow, and it'll will still be legal. And Obama, the president we thought was one of us, hasn’t lifted a finger. He’s put the same guys back at the helm who let the ship smash on the rocks in the first place: Bernanke and Geithner. 

Photo courtesy of Der Spiegel

That’s why the protestors are out there, because they’ve been had. Obama is part of the system, just like Clinton was, that's why the police are arresting the protestors and not the bankers. The system is Pepsi and Coke - which is your poison? If you’re part of the oligarchy, you’re looked after. If you’re not, you can go to hell.

Kim

Samsung NX200 – getting there by stealth

Olympus, Panasonic and Sony are getting all the attention

While Samsung has quietly refined its cameras. I was impressed with the NX10 I tested eighteen months ago, and Samsung has quietly pushed ahead and developed this line. The NX100 followed Panasonic in leaning toward the fashion market, but the NX200 is a no-nonsense return to basics. And it’s as compact as EVIL cameras get without going to Sony’s anorexic extremes.

Photo courtesy of Serious Compacts

Samsung has developed its own new 20mp APS-C sensor, and a bunch of lenses that now make up a pretty complete system.

I haven’t got my hands on one of these yet, but there’s a good review posted at Serious Compacts http://www.seriouscompacts.com/f41/samsung-nx200-quick-review-4765/

Meanwhile, Panasonic has returned to basics as well, serving up the GX1. It looks more like the popular GF1 than the bent-out-of-shape GF3, and it uses Panasonic’s new 16mp sensor.

There’s a preview here http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/GX1/GX1A.HTM

The new sensor doesn’t really address the bogey of M43 cameras – the poor dynamic range.

Yes, it’s a slight improvement on the new Oly PEN and the not so new Panny GF2, but it’s a long way behind Sony and Nikon.

The new Samsung NX200 sensor has not yet been tested yet by DXOMark, but it should be pretty close to Sony’s numbers. Samsung is deadlu serious, that's clear, and very capable.

Kim

One more wedding - with a nasty twist

Only in America ... we sincerely hope

New York-based equity research analyst Todd J. Remis claims that H&H Photographers failed to document the last 15 minutes of his wedding to Milena Grzibovska. He’s also unhappy that they supplied a wedding video that two hours long, instead of a six hour video of the wedding and the reception.

Remis is suing H&H for the $4,000 it cost for the photography, and he wants another $48,000 to fly his friends to New York and re-stage the wedding so it can be re-shot in its full glory. And here’s the part where you start to rub your eyes to make sure you’re reading this right: The wedding took place in 2003 and the couple has long since divorced, the bride is back in her native Latvia, and Remis doesn’t know where she lives.

H & H Photographers. Copyright the New York Times Company

You think this is a joke, don’t you? Justice Doris Ling-Cohan of the State Supreme Court in Manhattan was amused but didn’t dismiss the ludicrous case. H&H co-founder Curt Fried, who fled persecution by the Nazis in 1939 as a teenager, is having a hard time of this. He and his son have already spent $50,000 in legal fees. Most wedding photographers won’t have that kind of money lying around, that’s for sure, and neither do these men who run a small photography business in an attic in the Bronx.

Remis has been unemployed since 2008 (GFC?) – is he doing this to get his hands on some spare cash? Or is he sitting at home crying over lost video segments of the last dance and the bouquet throw? Or is he just sick in the head?

Here's the full story

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/nyregion/suit-against-photographer-seeks-re-creation-of-wedding-after-divorce.html?_r=1