a different P&S user formula

[ruben]

In my last thread about the convenience of buying a G-10, I came to the conclusion that in my opinion the upgrading from my present powershot A590is would not justify the tears and bleeding of the price of the G-10

Nevertheless, like many other folks, I feel not "done" with my digi tiny camera.

So since some days ago I am considering a different idea which seems to have good chances for success:

Not satysfied with one camera ? buy a second and different one to complement the former. Not to exchange for the former, but to go along the former.

Using two cameras or more is such an old custom that it will be enough just to recall it. The problem seems to be that with the high tech of digis we become more and more greedy in our demmands, as well as the manufacturers become more and more stupid in following "the market".

Thus for example I have bought the best and most expensive shade in order to see the image in the LCD screen under the sun, only to discover that I can see something instead of nothing, and that something may help to place the central focusing square on place with the help of some intuition.

So producing cameras without a viewfinder is the most dumb moda of our manufacturers and nothing else. Yet in this case they have displayed an unprecedented nerve.

Therefore having myself an otherwise nice camera with an unmarked "optical" finder (an exercise reminding me framing a picture with the bright lines-less Kiev viewfinder, although in the case of the Kiev the image was quite closer to the negative final one than in the case of the "optical" parallaxed and circumcised "tunel finders" of today) requires as a must a second camera with at least an electronic viewfinder.

But why a second camera? Because the tiny dimensions of the first make it irreplaceable.

In my genre, street photography, the tiny digi with all its might has opened to me a whole world of new possibilities, possibilities that interconnected to the ultra compact size deliver to me a great deal.

But within these new fields, I want more. I must a decent viewfinder able to autofocus the camera when under the sun.

Street photography is a lot of catching the opportunity. Not only, but a lot. It reminds me in this sense news photography. Here the photographer must go back to the paper with the picture. In street photography no one is going to fire you, but you also must catch the picture when the opportunity arises.

Now, there is a second advance of great convenience for me: the P&S with giant zooming power, 28~500. May I reveal that many of the pics in my gallery are crops represeting some 20% of the full frame ?

Of course, the computer screen is so forgiving, perhaps more forgiving than Tri-X. But this is not going to be the case for prints, and some times this should not be the case for the computer screen either.

So what I am thinking about is to purchase an "compact slr like" p&s, the SX10.

In previous talks I have been advised to go instead for a dslr, let's say the Canon t1i (500 D), which has a superbrigt LCD monitor, a real pentamirror viewfinder, RAW, and is not bigger than nor weighter than the SX10. But this "not bigger,nor weighter" applyies for the body only....

Basing myself on the tiny A590 is, I do believe Canon is able to produce a respectable camera (SX10) for its price, answering my basic upgrading/complementary needs.

So I imagine myself walking like now, with the a590is wristed to my right hand, while the second digi will be strapped and a bit hidden beneath my left arm.

The "compact slr like" will not be as quick to manipulate as the tiny baby, but here too the tiny baby will help by not becoming a brick in my way.

What do you think ?

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[M4streetshooter]

I think you should get a DP1 and some
new walking shoes....then wear the soles
out as you make images....
Works for me....
Shooter

 

[FrankS]

I'm totally lost, sorry.

Back to original topic: Ruben, what is your point about 2 digi cameras? What does the second do that the first does not?

 

[ruben]

The Powershot A590 is a highly compact camera with a zoom range of 35~140, with an "optical" finder not much usable to focus. Thus, the camera is useless, or at least the user is unable to accurately focus it, under the sun, like with any other compact digi without an electronic viewfinder.

The Powershot SX 10 is of the size and weight of about the Rebel last dslr body only, but with a zoom and what a zoom: 28~560 (!) and an electronic viewfinder, with AF markings. This is a highly usable camera to focus under the sun, almost like any film camera.

Both cameras represent unprecedent achievements of the digital camera manufacturing, the A590 for its ultra compact size, the SX 10 for the zoom range, unexistant to-day in any other lens.

In the next ten or twenty years it is feasible that all thas is included within the Powershot SX10, will be within a camera of the size of the A590. This seems to be the hystoric vector. But for the next years I don't think we will have it.

In my humble opinion and experience, the tiny ultracompact "spy" digis are of unprecedented convenience for street photography, if we further take into account the relief from the need to elevate the camera to eye level every time we want a shot.

According to the laws of physics and optics, I would obtain a better image if using my shoes I walk near the subject instead of extending the zoom, and whenever I would like to photograph a tree I do it.

According to the minimal experience of any street or news photographer, when you must grab a shot of humans, most of the chances they will be gone while you use your shoes to cover the distance, instead of extending your zoom. This has been a classic way, for which even Politzer award wining photogs used two cameras, each one with different focal length - 35mm and 135mm, for example. So basic that I feel ashamed to recall it.

The fact that HCB, or anybody else tended to use a single lens or a single camera, is of great hystoric interest. It implyies the ability to manipulate the camera, including change lenses at high hand speed. This technical ability has gone with the land of every photographer enjoying the freedom to photograph at will, hundred of thousands of times. But it also reflects the lens range, which compared to our days, was rather poor. Hence the repeated cliche about the shoe soils.

But the first law of photography and life itself, is do whatever suits you - never blind follow any rule out of a self slavory fear to be original and free. And I would dare to say - break every possible law and boundary and bring back something new.

Thanks Frank for your kind attention.
Ruben

 

[Al Kaplan]

Well, the classic pair back in the day was/is a 35 and an 85 or 90. I've always liked working in close though, and for years I used a 19mm Canon on my Leica for the bulk of my shooting. More recently it's been a 15mm Heliar. You learn to work with the distortion rather than fighting it. It's amazing what you can do with a single extreme wide angle lens!

As for "changing lenses at high speed" I got pretty adept at grabbing a lens in each hand, the cameras suspended from neck or shoulders on straps, depressing the release lock buttons with my knuckles, and switching the two lenses between bodies. This is handy when one body runs out of film but you still need to continue using the lens. When things slow down you can change film.

 

[ruben]

The US news photog which was awarded with the Politzer for grabing that family throwing themselves out of a burning building, (failing short of the firemen hands) used the 35~135 primes combo.

http://alt.tnt.tv/specials/moi/photo_boston.html

If that wasn't exactly the mode of his times - perhaps a Politzer is waiting for me too.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[btgc]

I'm tending to think that action will be gone while one manipulates zoom lens by pressing buttons on body. Probably SLR with manual lens would work better for instant zoom-catch work.

For me, only case when zoom lenses have worked decisively, were cases when I knew what's going on and have set lens at spot before action started. Same for primes, they just are simpler.

Ruben, aren't you tempted by Panasonic or Ricoh digi P&S's with prime lenses?

Al, you have lived in amazing times!

 

[ruben]

I'm tending to think that action will be gone while one manipulates zoom lens by pressing buttons on body. Probably SLR with manual lens would work better for instant zoom-catch work.
.....

Dear btgc,

We know each other from long ago and have mutual symphaty, which never went stained by any of us. In case you can, I urge you to buy a Canon Powershot A590 IS. Its low price is far from reflecting its high potential.

You should know that many times in my working week I go to my job by bicicle. At those times, my Powershot is within a pouch pending from my meck. The following pic was conceived when I was waiting for the green light at a cross road, and clicked 30 meters afterwards while riding forwards, and one meter close to the subject:

It was done on the move, with a bit of paning, several crazy cars behind me, and the smile of the subject. Within this short period of time I had to take out the camera from my pouch, activate the "on" button, and shoot while looking at the LCD monitor.

Once you have your camera pre-set, my Powershot is not less quick than any film camera, with the following manipulation speed advantages:

a) Given you are not under the sun, you are released from the need to raise the camera to eyelevel

b) The zooming is by battery power, you just press a button and the zoom starts to move. Half depressing the shutter release button and you have focus.

c) The automatic exposure modes are of much wider capabilities than those of a film camera since the ISO changes according to the exposure and preset needs. You are gaining a lot of time here too.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[newspaperguy]

Ruben, you are provacative as always.

FWIW -

I recently supplemented my fine little Canon A590IS with a Canon G-5.

While "only" 5 meg, it produces exceptional images, and the
flip out and twist LCD screen works well for street shooting.
Plus, the G5 'looks' more like a 'real' camera on the job.

Taking Jeff Spirer's advice (See: http://photo.net/equipment/canon/g5/ ),

I've added a 35mm finder to the accessory shoe, (I use it mostly at w/a)

I am very happy with my new "digital rangefinder" although I still carry
the A590IS in a belt pouch.

 

[btgc]

Ruben, I must admit you are amazing me with your love to photography, as I never have imagined taking shots while driving bicycle. I hardly do it when driving car. So if you manage to zoom and shoot from two-wheeled vehicle, I'll recall my statements and just follow thread.

As for digital compact - I were given small old Nikon P&S with optical VF, which makes it usable in bright light, so probably I need to give it a try on street.
Changing ISO without swapping film is really nice feature of digital world, if that ISO range is usable.

 

[ruben]

......

Changing ISO without swapping film is really nice feature of digital world, if that ISO range is usable

....

Well, here there is small trap. People have passed through a kind of change in their tolerances for grain, when this is related to digital cameras.

In this respect, we here at RFF and some other photogs at other spots, are used to grain as the anavoidable result of high iso film. But the digital broad majority doesn't accept it. Perhaps this is good as it may prompt the manufacturers to improve this.

True the digital grain at digital iso 800 and 1600 looks rather like film grain at iso 3200 and 6400 respectively, or worse. But it is still nothing else than grain and not an unacceptable abomination, like the desintegrated image resulting from using the "digital zoom" feature, beyond the 1.6x factor.

Changing ISO within the camera is not only a great digital advance, but furthermore the camera does it automatically, according to the exposure need, given that you have previously given the camera the necessary permission, i,e, in my case - choosing the P program and then the "HI" feature allowing the camera to adjust beyond the ISO 80~200 range. Btw, in this setting the camera will always pursue the lowest possible ISO, including within 80~200 range, but you have allowed it also to traspass it, when needed.

I would like to refer you to an image of mine done using digital iso 1600 and the A590 IS, of course. Perhaps it is no more than an excess or narcisim, but I really love this image, and ask myself if had it been sharper wouldn't have worsened it. Hereby:

 

[btgc]

Thank you Ruben for excursion onto dark side of digital cameras. As I recall they call it digital noise, while film has grain - though I can be wrong. I'm aware of trend to have grain-and-noise-free images of pure digital generation, and probably I'd be same if started from digital.

While I can live without grainless images, I must agree that digital noise is not good. Those lilac areas certainly aren't appealing instead of nice, pronounced film grain. I'm still hoping large sensors will become more common on compact cameras and thus also cheaper than now.

When thinking about Auto-ISO I'm little confused. Like aperture and speed have impact on final image, so does ISO. So leaving it under control of automatics is making me wishing there could be intervals to be chosen - say, like I can set shutter bias mode and choose "from 1/250 up to max speed" or restrict apertures to "wide/medium/small" ranges for specific effect so same for ISO would be "low/medium/high ISO" intervals, because each has different impact on final image.

Fully Auto-ISO is somehow not very useful, though I'm sure there are implementations of idea I mentioned, I'm just too disconnected from digital world so I can't know for sure. Probably you can give idea how Auto-ISO works in A590?

 

[ruben]

I think you should get a DP1 and some
new walking shoes....then wear the soles
out as you make images....
Works for me....
Shooter

I assume that what works for you will not necessary work for the rest of humanity, nor even for you yourself if being in a radically different environment, or due to the changes of age and its implications, and the way you are able to manage those implications.

I wish you happiness, and whenever you like to send me digital cameras in exchange of weared soles, don't be shy to contact me.

Cheers,
Ruben

 

[ruben]

..........

When thinking about Auto-ISO I'm little confused. Like aperture and speed have impact on final image, so does ISO. So leaving it under control of automatics is making me wishing there could be intervals to be chosen - say, like I can set shutter bias mode and choose "from 1/250 up to max speed" or restrict apertures to "wide/medium/small" ranges for specific effect so same for ISO would be "low/medium/high ISO" intervals, because each has different impact on final image.

Fully Auto-ISO is somehow not very useful, though I'm sure there are implementations of idea I mentioned, I'm just too disconnected from digital world so I can't know for sure. Probably you can give idea how Auto-ISO works in A590?

In contrast to film cameras, when you choose any automatic program in the digital A590IS, two dramatic things happen. First the camera will inform you about its veredict for the incoming image after your half depress the shutter release. The second thing is that before or after getting this info, you can change many of the settings, in relation to the incoming picture only, or in relation to the specific program in general.

These fine grain changes include ISO specification, aperture, speed, (all these without affecting the same EV), exposure compensation, way of metering the exposure, type of color or BW, type of flash or no flash, etc.

Discharging all this box of instruments over your head may sound cumbersome and confusing, but in practice it is not. Within a short time you learn to use one or two different programs (btw, absolute manual mode does exist and still shows you the correct exposure) and the changes you introduce for each image become one or two, or none.

The optics and aperture implications are radically different than with film cameras, and I am not sure, or on the contrary I am sure I don't understand it very much beyond the fact that 2.8 is wider than f/8. Because the differences in depht of field are quite minor. Still any image focused at close range will produce a strong shallow depht of field like in film, but beyond that close range image situation, everything else seems to be in mild sharp focus.

As for the ISO changes, most of the programs require you to choose beforehand, or specify "auto". Here "auto" will mean between ISO 80 and 200. In case the ISO 200 limit will not be enough for a "normal' exposure, the camera will lower the speed and red warn you need a tripod.

But the "P" program and the "Auto" program, offer you an additional alternative, to choose "auto" and afterwards to choose "HI". Here when ISO 200 will not be enough the camera will feel free to raise ISO up to 800 by small slices like 325 etc. (something like the electro yashicas for their shutter speed, with the electros having the upper hand in fine slicing).

As for the apertures, basically each program works with a tendency either to aperture priority, or to speed priority. The A590 still carryies the veteran Canon Rebel programs "Av" and "Tv" (aperture priority and speed priority accordingly). But in the realm of digital advances, as they do not include ISO auto adaptation, they are in my opinion of secondary convenience.

For further simplification, the A590 IS mantains the settings you left it when you turn it off. Of course that setting change made easy, has been of central concern to the camera designers.

As for the Image Stabilization feature (IS), I have the personal feeling that most of the times it works and sometimes not. According to specifications it is supposed to allow you two or three stops stabilization below the rule of 1:1.
When it works it produces remarkable results, such as shooting at a focal length of 140 at a speed of 1/40 and still allowing you to get away with a sharp image.

Cheers,
Ruben