Last spring, as sometimes happens; I developed an” itch” to
buy some new photo gear.

Now logically I really didn’t need anything new. I
actually could stand to sell something as I have several DSLRs I no longer
really use, and should probably place on EBay (anyone want a lightly used
D2x?). I have most of the lenses I want, and need, and the few I lust for seem
awfully expensive too me in these times of a weak dollar. I looked around the
web scouting for a decently priced used or refurbished D3x, but unfortunately
for me, they seem to be holding their value quite nicely.

So I waited. Because I felt as though that nothing I wanted
that I justify on price.

That’s when my lovely wife Cathy saved the day. She came to
me one evening and mentioned that our 16-year old son, Gus was showing an
interest in video and still photography and wanted to know what camera we might buy him.

Aha, I thought, the answer to my dilemma! I quickly and
generously offered to give Gus my Lumix LX3, which I explained to my wife, is a wonderful camera for a budding photographer/videographer

In truth, I had been eying up the new Olympus ZX1. I have
had a variety of Olympus cameras over the
years, and have had very positive experiences. I went on the B+H site and
ordered one with an extra battery. It was delivered in the usual B+H fashion,
the next day. I was particularly excited about the “Zuiko” branded lens, the
first on any of their compact cameras.

I kept it for two days. Now as readers know I shoot a
variety of equipment and am pretty adaptable, but compared to the  LX3, the controls of the ZX1 were poorly worked out, and much more “menu driven”. Maybe I never understood the camera, but things like changing the ISO, or bringing up the histogram on the display, seemed infinitely harder on the Olympus.

I packed the camera back up, and obtained a return authorization from B+H, at the same time ordering the upgrade to the LX3 the Panasonic Lumix LX5.

Compared to shooting the Olympus,
working with the LX5 is like falling off a log.

All of the familiar controls are there on the body of the
camera. One thing I really missed one the ZX1 was the switch for the aspect
ratio of the image, which on the Lumix cameras resides on the lens barrel. The
little stubby joystick controller on the LX3 was replaced by a clickable
control wheel on the LX5 making the controls more like the G- series
Panasonics. I do miss the switch on the LX 3 that puts it into picture review
mode; I like this better than the push button on the LX5.

As most of you know, the Leica Summicron–branded lens has
been upgraded in the new camera. It retains the former lens wide end at 24mm
f2.0 but now zooms out to 35 mm equivalent 90mm at f3.3. These are optically
beautiful lenses with out the silly long zoom capabilities that compromise the
optics of other compact cameras.

Some words about accessories. I was hoping that they would
be common for both cameras but to my chagrin found out that battery of the LX5 is new, and that the LX3’s filter adapter doesn’t work on the longer-extending LX5 lens. Oh well.

Then there’s the optional electronic viewfinder. I purchased
one shortly after buying the camera. I initially loved it. To me the LX5s
compatibility with this little gem might justify upgrading to the newer camera

Though not as big and bright as the EVf built in to my GH1, it was
more than adequate and allowed me to shoot with the camera properly braced against my face like one should. It allows you to see all of the camera data,
and particularly for me, the live histogram so useful in small-sensored cameras with limited dynamic range. I loved that it would pivot upwords.

Then one morning, it would no longer focus. I called B+H but
it was beyond their 14 day return period. They suggested I call Panasonic. When
I finally got through to them they were unsure just where I should send the
viewfinder for service. Several hours later they called me and suggested an Elgin, Illinois
repair center. I boxed it up, and sent it off.

Maybe a week later, it arrived back at my door. I unboxed it
and placed on the camera… only to discover that it still wouldn’t focus.

That’s when I found the note in the box stating that the Elgin facility couldn’t help me and that I needed to send
the viewfinder to a facility in Washington State.

Now in the past, I have had pretty good luck with Panasonic service (they fixed pretty quickly, my dysfunctional 45-200mm Lumix lens) but clearly they have a problem here.
Anyway, I’ll send it off again and we’ll see what happens.

On to image quality- In general I do think the LX5 a bit
better than the LX3, particularly at High ISOs. I think it’s even better still,
even in Raw, now that I have downloaded and installed firmware 2.0. Noise and dynamic range are claimed to be improved by Panasonic (maybe the latter because of the former). To me the image quality it’s a modest improvement at best, I
probably wouldn’t upgrade for the imaging improvement alone if I hadn’t given away my LX3.

Oh and by the way, the LX5 has 720p HD video but can now
shoot in the “AVCHD Lite” format as well as Motion Jpg. Firmware 2.0 has brought enhancements to this, particularly in terms of the functionality of the Optical Image Stabilization system with video.

It should be said, that there is no free lunch regarding
small sensors, even if they are as good as the LX5. I just shot a campaign event for a friend using my D700, D7000, and when I tired of carrying around the big stuff, the LX5. I shot raw and for the most part exposed carefully.

Yet on reviewing the images, there is a huge chasm, between the quality of the Nikon
files, and those of the LX5. Viewed at 100% even at ISO 100 there is luminance
noise present. This is typically less visible in prints but still on the
computer the difference is stark.

Nonetheless the Panasonic images will be very useful for my
friend’s campaign website and for modest prints.

I guess I’m just spoiled.

Because of these limitations, the LX5 and its competitors
are not great landscape tools. They are useful for event photography,
particularly if you want to keep a low profile. I will often come to an event with
my LX 5 in one suit coat pocket, and an Olympus FL-36 flash in the other. The
two are completely compatible and allow one to create some very pleasing bounce
flash photography.

Final thoughts: the LX5 is a fine upgrade of the LX 3 and is
a very useful enthusiast’s compact camera. Its image quality is somewhat
limited like all cameras of its type but nonetheless it can create nice images
in settings that other small cameras would flounder. The design and control
features make it a joy to use and quick to learn.

If you task it appropriately, and shoot it well, you will be
very pleased with the results.

Nescopeck Creek in March ( Olympus E 510, Zuiko 14-42mm f 3.5)

 

It is exactly one calendar year since I decided to sign on to WordPress and start writing a blog.

In a year, we have gone from having no audience, to a burgeoning group of  visitors who seem to stop in regularly to see what’s new.

In a  year, we have had almost 18,000 visitors to this site. Trust me, compared to well established sites, these numbers aren’t really impressive, but they are a beginning. And we’ve been growing every month.

 We’ve had 60 posts, or roughly 5 a month.

 Of late, professional responsibilities have prevented me from more frequent postings; but in the next several months I hope that things will calm down a bit, and I will have more time to devote to writing, which I truly enjoy.

I’ve noticed a couple of patterns in terms of site traffic..

The most frequently visited posts are those related to photography, particularly, equipment reviews. Needless to say, those will continue to be featured. The big problem for me is that at this stage I have no one loaning me equipment… I review what I have purchased.

Near as I can tell, the most popular post of the year was my article on the Nikon D 7000 which continues to attract visitors.

I plan to spend time in the next several weeks searching the WordPress site for a new blog format which will improve the usability and appearance of Henry Smith’s Cottage. Bear with me.

And please keep commenting on what is published… I have truly enjoyed interacting with those of you who kindly share your thoughts.

I really enjoy the challenge of holding the attention of those of you who have visited my internet home.

I hope you will keep stopping by.

 

When I posted “A Rebate Tale”,  I was concerned that the topic would be:

#1 Too dull.

#2 To seemingly selfish.

I did actually post the story to be a warning so that could avoid the modestly annoying situation I find my self in.

I was unprepared for the response that this post has received.

I did post a link to several photography forums that I am known to frequent.

I  subsequently had the single day record for the largest number of visitors to the blog .

And the robust readership continues several days later.

The responses which occurred in the forums were varied. Some people ridiculed me for not being careful enough and failing to fully understand the terms of the rebate.

Others told me of their similar predicament regarding the Nikon D-7000, and the Epson rebate.

Still others mocked me, for moving from pro-level Nikon bodies to what some see is an “advanced amateur” body (I continue to believe that a “pro” camera is any camera you can make money with).

Most interestingly, there was a theme among some posters that the whole issue of product rebates should be viewed with suspicion, if not outright distrust as many rebates legitimaty applied for, are never realized by the consumer.

I had a fascinating post on the site from Helen Oster who is the “Adorama Camera Customer Service Ambassador”. She works for a (the biggest?) competitor to B+H Photo, where I purchased the merchandise in question. She suggested that I contact Henry Posner, who is her opposite number at B+H. What a classy thing to do.

Henry was waiting for me. He already knew who I was and understood my predicament. Apparently he has the ability to scan the web for mentions of his employer and to intervene when necessary to protect the fine reputation B+H enjoys. And he found my little blog from two mentions in text, of his store. It’s a little scary.

We had an extremely pleasant conversation. He offered to check with his camera buyer to get read on when I might see the Nikon delivered (two weeks, as it turned out). He also extended he window when I may return the printer. He explained that the rebate business has been at times a problem, as companies like Epson often use outside contractors to process their rebate applications. The quality (and motivation) of those contractors affects how many rebates are issued (my summation, not Henry’s exact words).

I also talked the person in charge of rebate issues at Epson. She told me that all that needed was the invoice from B+H with the Camera and the printer shown as purchased. She reminded me that Epson has no way to track other manufacturers serial numbers, or UPC codes anyway.

I don’t trust this. Apparently the “contractors” processing claims tend to be stringent about applications or they kick them out. I also know that having the physical UPC code cut from the box prevents multiple rebates on the same purchase. I’m not going to bite on this one.

If I do get to apply for that refund, the application will be letter-perfect, with all the requirements met. It will be sent certified mail, return receipt requested.

Meanwhile, but the box is still sitting here. It’s getting a bit dusty now, but remains otherwise untouched.

Unlike me this year, it may be taking a trip back to NYC for the holidays.

  

 Sometimes an image will surprise you in small but delightful ways.

   Sometimes it will be the inclusion of an unnoticed detail in a corner of the image that adds interest to the eye.

  When shooting on the water, it can be a feature under the surface, unseen through the viewfinder, but revealed courtesy of the polarizing filter you thoughtfully placed on the lens.

   In my case recently, it was blue light.

  I was camping with my daughter Brigid, a sort of last attempt to bond before she escapes to college life. We paddled our kayaks to an island in the Saranac Lake chain of upstate New York.

  Truth be told, she wasn’t real happy about this. Her brother escaped “dad duty” as he had brought two friends with him on our trip up north, and there weren’t enough kayaks. His time will come.

  I was going one way or another, and I’d like to think if anything, Brigid went to make sure that I didn’t capsize and drown.

 This particular trip is lovely.  You “put in” at a state sponsored site on the Saranac River and paddle through a series of ”ponds” prior to emerging into the vast waters of Lower Saranac lake. This is a large convoluted body of water, connected to the Middle Saranac Lake again by the Saranac River which reappears at the southwestern end of the lake. Multiple islands erupt from the lake floor. They vary in size from single rocks harboring a small pad of soil and a few conifers, to multiple acre-sized landforms covered in White Pine and northern hardwoods. This makes Lower Saranac a pleasant, visually interesting, largely sheltered place to paddle, though we did encounter fairly fresh winds and chop over the open sections we had to traverse.

   As they were loaded with gear, the ‘yaks rode lower in the water than usual, and it was somewhat difficult to “beach” them on the steep and slippery gneiss shoreline on the island we had chosen. Once secured, we unloaded and set up camp.

The NYS DEC maintain this area nicely. There are nice wide open tenting areas. There is even a privy available (definitely necessary, as these are busy sites)

Each site has a concrete fireplace, correctly designed to provide reflected heat for the cool Adirondack nights (thirty to forty degree nights would not be uncommon).

  I removed my Panasonic GH1 and two lenses from the dry bag where they resided for the trip over and waited for the light to get interesting.

  I had thought about taking some video, especially if the lake’s loons cooperated by calling prominently, but they were quiet that night. A few of their mournful cries were audible, but only in the distance. We contented ourselves with the warbling of wood thrushes, the chittering of the islands sole red squirel, and the occasional sound of passing powerboat.

   Periodically, dark clouds appeared, threatening rain. Happily it held off until much later, when we were finally zipped into the tent for the night.

  At dusk, the temperature dropped and fire seemed like a nice idea. I gathered wood and using the bark from a birch log we found already at the site, started one fairly easily.

  I spent a lot of time in the hour around sunset, shooting from various vantage points before returning to the campsite for good.

   There, Brigid and I sat around the fire as the light faded. The glow of the fireplace was evocative. I had no tripod on the trip ( yes, I know, big faux pas) so I was forced to set the camera at ISO 1600 (not the GH1’s best strength) to get reasonable shutter speeds.

   I asked Brigid to stay very still, and shot several frames with her in the foreground, counting on the image stabilization to keep things sharp. It was important to if anything, over-expose a bit (with a fire as the bright point it doesn’t matter so much), to avoid shadow noise. I looked at the image on the LCD in camp, it looked OK, and I put the equipment away for the night.

   I shot a few more images in the morning before we left the next morning but the sky was cloudy and the light mostly unremarkable. Still… there were moments.

   When I got back to my computer and was able to view the images in Photoshop, I noticed something I hadn’t seen in camp. In sharp contrast to reds and oranges of the firelight, was a soft blue glow evident through the trees at the shoreline, the fading blue of the night sky reflected in the water of the lake. I played with raw image a bit, pushing the exposure to a point that enhanced this effect (but only a bit). I was surprised and impressed with the camera’s dynamic range and metering which had allowed all of this to be recorded.

I like this picture. It reminds me of the numerous, and largely anonymous campfire scenes one sees for sale at souvenir shops throughout the Adirondacks.

  More importantly, it will always remind me of a very pleasant memory of time spent with my daughter before she embarks on a new phase of her young life.

BTW Brigid, Happy 18th.

Even if you have a couple of digital SLRs, there is always a need for a small but capable camera; one that can be carried with you for unexpected photographic opportunities that crop up when you least expect it.

In the beginning of the digital photography era, digital cameras tended to be compact and fairly expensive, and aimed at photo enthusiasts. Though there were simple point-and –shoot models, there was a good selection of robustly built cameras with full controls and features such as the Nikon Coolpix 990 that I purchased in 2000 for around $900.00. The 990 was made of magnesium, and had controls and features not dissimilar to serious bodies like the F100 pro SLR. It had an unusual twisting body, a fine Nikkor lens with a modest zoom range, and features such as threads for filters. At three megapixels, it had resolution equal or superior to the hyper-expensive DSLRs of the time. To a person familiar with more serious Nikons, the 990 had obvious kinship, and was easy to pick up and use. Ditto the Canon G series (there is still a G 11 avaialble) and the Olympus C series (I owned a C-5050), which were serious compacts available for the users of their film SLRs. All these cameras had relatively large 1 1/8 inch imagers with around 3 million large pixels.

Now before I get too nostalgic, let me say, that these imagers were useful only for relatively small prints, and had very limited low light capabilities. The bodies however were serious, as rugged and controllable enough for pro use.  I saw a lot of photojournalists with Nikon F-5s in hand, but a 990 in their bag.

Serious compact cameras continued to evolve and improve though 2004, but a year earlier, Canon dropped a bomb, a budget digital SLR with an APC sized imager which was far larger than even the 2/3 inch imagers of the best compacts of the time. At about the same money as a Nikon 990, it was hugely more capable with fast autofocus, interchangeable lenses, six megapixels, and wonderful (for the time) high ISO capabilities. It sold like hotcakes. It was followed in 2004 by the even more capable Nikon D-70 with more performance, and a better standard lens. Suddenly, everyone wanted a DSLR. The market for the serious compact dried up and the genre disappeared.

In the years since, serious amateurs gravitated to interchangeable lens SLRs.  More casual photographers were offered a selection of products designed it seemed, by marketing departments with two main attributes: more megapixels, and more zoom capability.

This has resulted in offerings with tiny imagers sporting as much 14 megapixels with 400mm equivalent zoom lenses in plastic bodies the size of an Altoids box, for 3-400 bucks. Serious shooters understand that to be sold at that price point, imagers and lenses with such accelerated specs are unlikely to perform well.

An exception to this was the Fuji F series cameras which sported fine lenses, metal bodies and a unique large 6 MP sensor with unprecedented low light capabilities for small cameras. Still, they were compacts, with limited controls, limited to capturing only compressed jpgs… albeit high quality jpgs.

I used the F series for several years and captured a lot of images with them. The high quality of the lens and sensor was far more capable, than higher MP compacts. I still keep one in my pocket when needed.

Enter Panasonic. In 2008 they introduced the third of their LX series, logically called the LX 3, and serious shooters took notice. Finally, here was a pocket sized camera clearly designed for the serious amateurs and pros.

The LX 3 has several significant advantages over the Fujis. First, it shoots raw format, essentially allowing access to the unmodified data directly from the imager, without any input from the cameras processor. Raw files are unlike jpg files, where things like sharpness, white balance and contrast are “baked in” to the file and are more difficult to modify without image degradation. When I can, I shoot raw files exclusively.

The LX3 has a very rugged metal body, with a flash shoe compatible with my diminutive Olympus FL-30 flash. For an indoor event, I can stow each in a suit coat pocket, and shoot excellent quality flash images without the burden of a camera bag.

Panasonic reversed the trends of compact cameras in two ways. First, they increased the imager size, but reduced the official pixel count to a reasonable 10 MP. For high ISO shooting, it runs neck and neck with my Fuji F-31, which is still an industry standard.

The imager is actually larger than 10 mp. It allows the user to choose three aspect ratios, from a widescreen 16:9 to a square-ish 4:3 with out losing much in the way of pixels, and thus resolution.

Panasonic also used extraordinarily good judgment with the lens choice, specifying a fast f 2.0, 24-60mm equivalent imaged-stabilized Leica Summicron lens. To my eye, the lens is optically excellent, though issues of distortion are corrected digitally.

It also can capture 1280×720 HD video.

There is a large high resolution LCD on the back. Controls are cleverly designed to allow a shocking amount of manual control for a compact. Like the Lumix G series I have written about elsewhere here, there is a real time on-screen histogram, which is very helpful to judge exposure prior to tripping the shutter.

One downfall is the lack of a viewfinder, unfortunately pro forma for compact cameras these days. Panasonic mitigates this somewhat with a simple optical viewfinder, offered as an accessory, which slides into the flash shoe. It is locked into the 24mm focal length but allows you to aim the camera, stabilized properly against your face. It works, but to use it at longer focal lengths, it takes some getting used to.

Now I must say, that compared to the velvety smooth images produced by larger sensor cameras, particularly my D-700, the Panasonic imager is relatively noisy, even at ISO 100. SLRs tend to spoil you for smaller imagers. Small cameras are not the best choice for landscape work.  Still and all, in the hands of a clever photographer who understands its capabilities, features, and limitations, it can create wonderful images where other compacts would fail.

On the Panasonic internet forums, there is a lot of speculation on the LX3’s successor. I for one could care less.

If you can’t take good images with this camera, it’s not Panasonic’s fault.

9/28 11 Read my review of Panasonic’s update, the LX 5, here.