Tech Talk

As people around the world criticise or write off the newly-announced Apple iPad that they have yet to touch, I’m starting to envision how it might turn out to be the dream machine for photojournalists on the move.

Apple iPad

A photojournalist needs a memory card reader, a laptop and a 3G modem in order to transmit pictures to the newsroom. Of course, he needs software to add captions, size images and FTP them back to the office.

For a start, Apple makes it friendly for photographers. The inclusion of an optional iPad camera connector and an iPad SD card reader allows you to import your photos using the camera’s USB cable and from an SD card respectively. In fact, if you have an Eye-Fi SD card, you can even directly import the pictures via WiFi.

The iPad's camera connector and SD card reader

In the past, I have experimented using my then Palm smartphone to transmit pictures using Idruna Software’s Pocket Phojo. But the high cost of Pocket Phojo and the small screen of the phone made me dump the idea.

With the iPad, it is a different story. The big 9.7-inch multitouch screen allows the photojournalist to easily edit his pictures on his lap wherever he goes. Editing using the conventional touchpad of laptops can be strenuous for the photographer’s wrist. Of course, it remains to be seen whether the virtual keyboard on the iPad will be intuitive enough for captioning.

The iPad’s weight, at 1.5 pounds (or 680g), will certainly delight photojournalists as it significantly reduces the weight of their camera bags. Even the lightest laptop in the market, the Sony VAIO X, weighs about 780g but costs twice as much.

Plus, there are already free iPhone photo apps like Photoshop.com to allow you to crop and adjust the colour of your pictures. So, you probably can use it for the iPad to do simple cropping and file the pictures using another free app called PhotoManager (which is available in Japanese only).

I think it’s a matter of time before an iPad app, which mimics the functions of Photo Mechanic where you can crop, size, adjust colours, add captions and FTP your pictures, will be released.

If such an app is released on the iPad, I think the iPad will be the perfect machine for the photojournalist!

That’s not the end of it. You can already do remote capture with onOne Software’s DSLR Camera Remote on your iPhone. Just transfer this to the iPad and you get an even bigger picture of what you are shooting remotely.

The iPad is also a perfect machine to view pictures when you shooting tethered if photo equipment manufacturers like Nikon, Canon, or PhaseOne, release such an app.

Finally, the iPad will be a great device to show off your portfolio to future prospective employees wherever you go!

Now, when can I lay my hands on the iPad again?

Tags: ipad, photography, photoshop.com

If you have read my review of the Canon EOS 7D, you would have gathered that this is one superb DSLR with amazing image quality.

And just how amazing is the video quality? Well, the test video I shot (pardon the shakiness at times; I should have used a tripod) should give you a pretty good idea.

The biggest impediment when it comes to shooting video with a DSLR is the handling. You’re bound to have some camera shake when you zoom in or out with the lens, unlike the smooth mechanised lens elements of a camcorder.

Nonetheless, the video quality of the 7D is smooth, sharp and crisp. You just a tripod and some editing. Add a soundtrack to cover up the ambient and lens-mechanism noise it picks up, and you will have a decent video clip, like the one below!

Tags: Canon, DSLR, EOS 7D, Video

The Micro Four Thirds (MFT) system, which eliminates the pentaprism and reflex mirror but retains the use of interchangeable lens, is steadily making inroads within the photography community. MFT cameras, like the Olympus PEN E-P1 and the Panasonic GF1, are selling like hotcakes in many countries.

However, another system that can possibly rival the MFT has arrived.

Ricoh has decided that changing lenses still creates too many opportunities for dust and dirt to become friends with the image sensors. So, it has decided to come up with the GXR system that consists of a body and camera units. Each camera unit comprises the lens, the image sensor and the image processor. So, you attach the camera unit to the body via a slide-in mount system.

Ricoh claims that the GXR is the smallest and lightest digital camera with the ability to change lens (and image sensor).

Thus, you are not merely changing lenses but changing the image sensor as well. While this means dust or dirt specks on your photos will be a thing of the past, I wonder if such an arrangement makes any practical sense.

I love Ricoh’s digital compact cameras, like its GX200. But Ricoh’s pricing has always been on the high side. With an image sensor tied to a lens, I reckon each camera unit is going to cost substantially more. And if you drop a camera unit, you not only lose your lens, but your image sensor and image processor as well.

Conversely, since the GXR body itself already has features such as a built-in flash, hot shoe with accessory port to mount an optional electronic viewfinder and even Auto-Focus assist, there is no need to buy a new body to get an image sensor upgrade. New camera units will probably have new image sensors with a bigger megapixel count. Thus, there is no need to continuously upgrade the bodies.

Ultimately, only time (and the price) will tell if the GXR can beat the MFT.

Tags: GXR, Micro Four Thirds, Ricoh

The pointless megapixel war among digital camera manufacturers is over!

Yes, you know it’s over when last week, in an almost unprecedented move, Canon released its PowerShot G11 with a reduced megapixel count of 10 megapixels, compared to the 14.7 megapixels of its predecessor. The new image sensor of the G11 is supposed to be of higher sensitivity, improving noise performance by two stops over the G10.

Canon PowerShot G11

Canon is not alone in this paradigm shift. Several of its competitors are coming up with innovative features to entice smarter consumers, rather than using the age-old megapixel myth that’s not working anymore.

For example, Sony’s upcoming Cyber-shot TX1 and WX1 will use a new image CMOS 10.2-megapixel sensor, Exmor R, which is supposed to be twice as sensitive compared to conventional image sensors.

Sony Cyber-shot TX1

Fujifilm also surprised everyone when it announced the world’s first consumer 3D digital camera with its FinePix Real 3D W1, which utilises two lenses and two image sensors to give you 3D still and moving images.

Fujifilm Finepix Real 3D W1

Nikon kept the good news rolling with its S1000pj that comes with a built-in projector. So instead of everyone crowding behind a tiny LCD screen struggling to look at the pictures , everyone can now enjoy the images on any wall at any party!

Nikon Coolpix S1000pj

Samsung has also announced that it will soon release the 2View ST550 and ST500, both of which tout a front and rear LCD that allows you to shoot self-portraits with absolute ease.

Samsung 2View ST550

These are exciting times. I prefer a fight in features over a futile battle in megapixel count any day. The megapixel race has done nothing to improve the photography market other than taking up more hard disk space and making hard disk manufacturers happy.

With more innovative features being released into the market, camera makers have to keep up and come up with more creative traits of their own in order to compete. This can only be good for the consumers.

But now, consumers will have another battle on their hands trying to discern whether these latest features  - such as face, smile or scene recognition – are genuine enhancements or pure marketing gimmicks. Some of these features, like face detection, have even made it into the DSLR (digital single-reflex) camera realm. I definitely wouldn’t mind having “gimmicks” like 3D imaging or image projection in my DSLRs.

Marketing gimmicks or real features aside, the camera must ultimately be able to perform well in all aspects, like handling, hardiness, user interface and image quality. All the additional features will fall flat on their face if the camera is difficult to handle, if buttons are on the wrong place, or worse, if image quality is poor.

So, while I welcome the new age in innovation with new digital cameras, I sincerely hope it will not be a creative letdown.

Recently, a close friend of mine asked me to email her a list of “good and cheap” DSLR (digital single-reflex) cameras as she needed to draft quotations for a purchase order.

I sent her my recommendations but I couldn’t help asking her why her company, an SME (small-medium enterprise), needed to buy a DSLR.

“My boss thinks that if we have a good DSLR, we don’t have to hire a photographer,” she said.

“So, the camera has become the photographer, like the medium is the message (quoting Marshall McLuhan from Media Studies 101)?” I asked incredulously. She nodded and laughed.

But this is no laughing matter for people who earn a living from taking pictures.

The notion of “the bigger the camera, the better the pictures” has been around for the longest time. I always hear people around me lamenting that the “mickey mouse” camera (aka digital compact camera) they have means they cannot take good pictures.

On online forums, every time a nice photograph is posted, the first response typically is “Which camera did you use?”. I have also seen professional photographers telling prospective clients that they will get better pictures from them because of their “bigger cameras”. I’ve even heard of a guy who wouldn’t hire a wedding photographer who has a “lousier” DSLR than his own Canon 5D MKII.

Technology has been changing the landscape of photography since its humble beginning from Daguerreotype plates to 35mm film. Photographic equipment has become more compact and easier to handle through the years.

However, the digital image sensor is different. It has become very easy for anyone to take a photograph, as Alfred Chow succinctly expressed in response to my previous blog post that “technology is so good that the average Joe can take as good pictures as the professional”.

Even World Press Photo winner Julian Wainwright admitted that his award-winning pictures would not have been possible if not for technological advances.

These days, camera manufacturers include all sorts of fancy functions like face and smile detection in their cameras to entice consumers to part with their cash. This probably creates the perception that all everyone needs to do is press the shutter release and the camera will do the rest.

Yes, today’s digital camera is able to quickly and automatically lock on to a focus, accurately adjust the shutter speed and aperture, and give you spot-on auto white balance.

But what about intuition, situational awareness, picture composition, sense of where light is falling or fading, and the ability to add extra lights in different scenarios? These are the things that even the most advanced camera cannot comprehend, at least until camera cyborgs with human-like artificial intelligence becomes reality.

Give a high-end DSLR to a novice, and while he might give you a properly exposed picture (as long as he knows how to set the camera to auto), he would never be able to give you what a Magnum photographer (like Alex Majoli) can.

To me, it is better to have a good photographer with a lousy camera than a lousy photographer with a good camera.

Tags: DSLR, photography, technology

I recently purchased a compact digital camera as a backup for my company-issued DSLR.

Truth be told, I was also inspired by how premium photo agency VII photographer, Gary Knight, turned his PowerShot G10 (see video below) into a street-photography camera using a hot shoe viewfinder and customising the lens at 35mm focal length.

I have always been impressed by the street photography work of legends like Henri Cartier Bresson and Robert Doisneau. So naturally, I thought the modification would be great for me.

Now, the problem was to find the hot shoe viewfinder. I headed to the usual photography equipment haunts like Peninsula Plaza and Funan IT Mall. Whenever I enquired about a hot shoe viewfinder, I was greeted with weird looks from the salesperson.

Half of them didn’t know what it is; the other half simply replied: “We don’t have it”, with their minds probably wondering if they were speaking to a dinosaur. One even asked: “Why do you need such a thing? Using the LCD is much easier to see.”

After an afternoon of searching, only one shop said it could order one for me from overseas but it would take time. In the end, I didn’t place the order as the shop owner I was speaking to about the viewfinder went away.

Has the photography world progressed so rapidly that a small photography accessory is so difficult to find from your local camera store?

I’m beginning to wonder that in five years’ time, will a salesperson give me a perplexed look when I ask for Kodak T-Max black-and-white film or Fujichrome Velvia slide film? Will he laugh if I ask for a film picker? Perhaps I won’t be able to find even CF cards anymore then!

I know that digitisation has changed the photography landscape. But it would be wrong to discard some of the good things of yesteryear, such as a hot shoe viewfinder that allows you to concentrate on composing the shot instead of looking at a battery-hogging LCD.

Photography will always remain an interpretation of light. The tools might change but the rules of engagement remain. It is still up to the person to make sense of the light around him in order to capture the image and convey the message.

Now, can anyone let me know where I can find a Voightlander 35mm hot shoe viewfinder?

After weeks of rumours and leaked specifications circulating around the Internet, the Canon EOS 500D is finally unveiled to the world.

This consumer-targeted digital single-lens reflex (DSLR) camera has a whopping 15.0-megapixel CMOS sensor utilising Canon’s latest DIGIC 4 image processor, allowing you to record full high-definition (HD) video and delivering improved Live View capability via a big three-inch display.

I was among the few lucky local journalists to have an early hands-on with the only available EOS 500D in Singapore. However, I left the launch hoping that this latest DSLR will not trigger another megapixel race.

Despite many articles explaining that a higher megapixel count doesn’t necessarily translate to better image quality, the megapixel myth persists.

I had a conversation with a colleague recently and he was talking about this camera having 10 megapixels and that, to him, means the camera is definitely good. So, I told him about the megapixel myth. His reply: “More megapixels doesn’t mean better quality? Then, what’s the point? I thought it should be like a car – the higher engine capacity, the more power the car?”

It was then I realised that for the lay person, the megapixel factor has become the first point of reference. For example, every time I went on an assignment with my company-issued Canon 1D MK II, I was asked how many megapixels my “big camera” has. When I said eight megapixels, a few unimpressed quipped: “Even my small digital camera has 10 megapixels!”

I think the megapixel myth has to do with advertising and marketing. However, you can’t blame the marketers. They can’t really tout noiseless images as a factor, can they? Half the people out there don’t even understand ISO settings, let alone noise in digital images.

Megapixel is a number and it is thus easily understood and remembered. It’s a dream word and number for marketers seeking to differentiate their products in the current flood of digital cameras. However, when engineers have to squeeze in more megapixels just to please the marketing department, it can result in cameras that produce horrid images with awful noise.

It is the onus of consumers to educate themselves more about photography and focus less on a camera’s specifications. Once you understand the inner workings of photography, all the camera’s specifications will make sense to you.

And when you go to the camera shop next time, see the sales person’s face crumble as you ask about features such as startup/shutdown time, accurate colour reproduction, noiseless images, fast auto-focusing, intuitive controls and weather-proof capabilities.

Let’s work together to debunk the megapixel myth!

Tags: DSLR

“Digital is cheapening photography … ” I hear it all the time from older photographers, and some younger ones even.

“Look, now even PR can take photos themselves,” one veteran photographer said, pointing to a PR guy using a entry-level DSLR (digital single lens reflex camera) taking photos of the event we, the press photographers, were covering. “Sooner or later, we will all be out of a job,” he continued. I just smiled and got on with my job.

I’m certainly not going to rebuff the opinions of these veterans, whose photojournalistic careers span longer than I have lived so far, but I have my reservations.

I can see that digital has undeniably made photography more accessible to the masses by lowering the costs of photography. During the film days, it took tons of rolls of processed film (and money, in other words) to know your mistakes before you could correct them through trial and error. These days, you get instant feedback from the LCD screen on the back of the camera after you release the shutter, and you immediately change your settings to get your shots right.

But does this convenience translate into photography becoming a no-brainer, a lost art, or a vanishing trade?

I was wondering of the relevance of being a professional photographer myself for some time. I was even thinking of turning my back on photography! However, these thoughts dissipated last year while interviewing award-winning photojournalist John Stanmeyer, co-founder of the premium photojournalism agency, VII.

After I posted THE digital photography question to John, I received something almost to the degree of a tirade from him. I couldn’t remember much of what he said but I could remember that he was trying very hard not to strangle me!

I couldn’t bear to go back to the audio recording (or tirade) again but what I did remember him saying was: “Why all the pessimism? The tools we have today makes photography more exciting than ever before!” For someone who witnessed the best and worst of the human condition through his lenses, any “belittling” of photography is probably bewildering.

At that point, I realised the fault doesn’t fall on digitalisation or the tools, it falls on the human wielding the tools.

The tools of photography will change and evolve, thus the human wielding the tools must also adapt and evolve accordingly. Sticking to nostalgia is counter-intuitive and self-defeating. Instead of wallowing in self-pity, why not look for ways and means to experiment, innovate and be more creative?  Your new technique might not work, might even be subjected to ridicule or comments like being “too arty-farty”, but those who never make mistakes are those who never try.

Yes, it’s certainly hard to make a living out of photography now than ever before, but you just have to keep on trying. To quit, like 7-time Tour De France winner Lance Armstrong said: “Pain is temporary. Quitting lasts forever.”

As I walked to my car after John’s interview, I asked myself: “Do I want to quit?” Well, I think you already know the answer.